4.4 Article

Cr(VI) removal from aqueous solution by thermophilic denitrifying bacterium Chelatococcus daeguensis TAD1 in the presence of single and multiple heavy metals

期刊

JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY
卷 54, 期 9, 页码 602-610

出版社

MICROBIOLOGICAL SOCIETY KOREA
DOI: 10.1007/s12275-016-5295-5

关键词

thermophilic denitrifying bacterium; Cr(VI) removal; aqueous solution; heavy metals; cellulose acetate microspheres

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51378217, U1360101]
  2. Guangdong Provincial Department of Science and Technology [014B050505004, 2015B020236001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cr(VI) pollution is increasing continuously as a result of ongoing industrialization. In this study, we investigated the thermophilic denitrifying bacterium Chelatococcus daeguensis TAD1, isolated from the biofilm of a biotrickling filter used in nitrogen oxides (NOx) removal, with respect to its ability to remove Cr(VI) from an aqueous solution. TAD1 was capable of reducing Cr(VI) from an initial concentration of 10 mg/L to non-detectable levels over a pH range of 7-9 and at a temperature range of 30-50 degrees C. TAD1 simultaneously removed both Cr(VI) and NO3--N at 50 degrees C, when the pH was 7 and the initial Cr(VI) concentration was 15 mg/L. The reduction of Cr(VI) to Cr(III) correlated with the growth metabolic activity of TAD1. The presence of other heavy metals (Cu, Zn, and Ni) inhibited the ability of TAD1 to remove Cr(VI). The metals each individually inhibited Cr(VI) removal, and the extent of inhibition increased in a cooperative manner in the presence of a combination of the metals. The addition of biodegradable cellulose acetate microspheres (an adsorption material) weakened the toxicity of the heavy metals; in their presence, the Cr(VI) removal efficiency returned to a high level. The feasibility and applicability of simultaneous nitrate removal and Cr(VI) reduction by strain TAD1 is promising, and may be an effective biological method for the clean-up of wastewater.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据