4.7 Article

Removal of Cr(VI) by surfactant modified Auricularia auricula spent substrate: biosorption condition and mechanism

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 21, 页码 17626-17641

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-9326-5

关键词

Auricularia auricula spent substrate (AASS); Cr(VI); Didodecyldimethylammonium bromide(DDAB) modification; Biosorption condition; Biosorption mechanism

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province, China [D201402, D2016001]
  2. research project of the Post-doctoral Mobile Station Ecology, Northeast Agricultural University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Auricularia auricula spent substrate (AASS) modified by didodecyldimethylammonium bromide(DDAB) was used as adsorbent to remove Cr(VI) from aqueous solution. Based on a single-factor experiment and response surface methodology, the optimal conditions were adsorbent dosage of 1.5 g/L, pH value of 4.0, initial Cr(VI) concentration of 19 mg/L, temperature of 25 degrees C, biosorption time of 120 min, rotational speed of 150 r/min, respectively, under which biosorption capacity could reach 12.16 mg/g compared with unmodified AASS (6.058 mg/g). DDAB modification could enlarge the specific surface area and porous diameter of the adsorbents, and supply hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups capable of adsorbing at the interfaces. In addition, DDAB increased ionic exchange and complex formation demonstrated by variations of elemental contents, shifts of carboxyl, amine groups, hydroxyl, alkyl chains, and phosphate groups as well as the crystal structure of the Cr-O compounds. Variations of peaks and energy in XPS analysis also testified the reduction of Cr(VI) to Cr(III).The biosorption behavior of modified AASS was in line with Langmuir and Freundlich isotherm equation. The final regeneration efficiency was 62.33% after three biosorption-desorption cycles. Apparently, DDBA is a eximious modifier and DDBA-modified AASS was very efficient for Cr(VI) removal.-.

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

4.7
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