4.0 Article

Isotherms and kinetic modelling of mycoremediation of hexavalent chromium contaminated wastewater

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.clet.2021.100192

关键词

Aspergillus terricola; Isotherm; Kinetic; Chromium; Adsorption

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study utilized fungal biomass for the biosorption of hexavalent chromium, revealing the importance of understanding the surface chemistry and morphology of the biomass. By analyzing isotherm and kinetic models, it was determined that the accuracy of modeling depends on the number of parameters in the equations. The mechanistic studies highlighted the film diffusion mechanism as the dominant factor in biosorption, with a maximum adsorption capacity of 87.3 mg.g(-1) demonstrated by Aspergillus terricola biomass.
Fungal biomass, Aspergillus terricola, was synthesized and employed for the biosorption of aqueous hexavalent chromium via batch technique. Insight into the nature of the surface chemistry and morphology of the fungal biomass was obtained via infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analyses, respectively. Also, the effect of selected process variables on the Aspergillus terricola biosorption capacity was elucidated. By employing isotherm and kinetic of varying parametric equations, the study investigated the effect of the number of parameters in a given model equation on their modelling performance. Marczewki-Jaroniec (4-parameter) and Fractal-like Pseudo-first order (3-parameter) model emerged as the best fit for isotherm and kinetics studies, respectively. The finding demonstrated the dependence of modelling accuracy on the inherent number of parameters of a given model. Meanwhile, the result of the mechanistic studies highlighted the superiority of the film diffusion mechanism during the hexavalent chromium biosorption, with a Langmuir maximum adsorption capacity (q(max)) of 87.3 mg. g(-1). Notably, the biosorption efficacy of Aspergillus terricola biomass was succinctly demonstrated in the study.

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

4.0
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