4.7 Article

Oxidation of microcystin-LR by copper (II) coupled with ascorbic acid: Kinetic modeling towards generation of H2O2

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 333, 期 -, 页码 443-450

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2017.09.166

关键词

Microcystins; Ascorbic acid; Hydroxyl radical; Kinetic model; Hepatotoxicity

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation, China [51508174]
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [LY18E080036]
  3. China Scholarship Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxidation of microcystin-LR (MCLR) by copper (II) coupled with ascorbic acid (H(2)A) in the presence of oxygen was investigated in this study. The combination of Cu(II) with H(2)A in situ generates H2O2 by reducing dissolved oxygen and subsequently produces reactive species through the reaction of Cu(I) and H2O2. A kinetic model was established to successfully describe the kinetics and mechanism for generation of H2O2, and the second-order rate constant between Cu(II) and HA-at neutral pH was determined to be 3.0 x 10(3) M-1 s(-1). Furthermore, quenching tests and electron spin resonance (ESR) analysis were used to identify the primary reactive species, and results indicated that HO center dot is the primary reactive species and responsible for MCLR degradation. Batch experiments were further conducted to evaluate the effect of Cu(II) and H(2)A dosage, solution pH and Cl- concentration on the degradation of MCLR during the Cu(II)/H(2)A system. The MCLR degradation increased with the increasing Cu(II) and H(2)A dosages, while decreased with the increasing solution pH. However, addition of Cl-could significantly inhibit the degradation of MCLR. Meanwhile, a possible degradation pathway of MCLR in the Cu(II)/H(2)A system was proposed. And the toxicity assessment by PP2A test showed that MCLR was readily degraded and the oxidation by-products are not hepatotoxins. Therefore, the Cu(II)/H(2)A process could be considered as a potential technology to remove MCLR in algae-laden water.

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