| Literature DB >> 24620852 |
Zhengsuo Chen, Hongbo Deng, Can Chen, Ying Yang, Heng Xu1.
Abstract
Dyes released into the environment have been posing a serious threat to natural ecosystems and aquatic life due to presence of heat, light, chemical and other exposures stable. In this study, the Pleurotus ostreatus (a macro-fungus) was used as a new biosorbent to study the biosorption of hazardous malachite green (MG) from aqueous solutions. The effective disposal of P. ostreatus is a meaningful work for environmental protection and maximum utilization of agricultural residues.The operational parameters such as biosorbent dose, pH, and ionic strength were investigated in a series of batch studies at 25°C. Freundlich isotherm model was described well for the biosorption equilibrium data. The biosorption process followed the pseudo-second-order kinetic model. Taguchi method was used to simplify the experimental number for determining the significance of factors and the optimum levels of experimental factors for MG biosorption. Biosorbent dose and initial MG concentration had significant influences on the percent removal and biosorption capacity. The highest percent removal reached 89.58% and the largest biosorption capacity reached 32.33 mg/g. The Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) showed that the functional groups such as, carboxyl, hydroxyl, amino and phosphonate groups on the biosorbent surface could be the potential adsorption sites for MG biosorption. P. ostreatus can be considered as an alternative biosorbent for the removal of dyes from aqueous solutions.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24620852 PMCID: PMC3995665 DOI: 10.1186/2052-336X-12-63
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Health Sci Eng
Models equations of biosorption isotherms and kinetics studies
| Langmuir isotherms model | where | |
| Freundlich isotherm model | where | |
| Temkin isotherm model | where | |
| Pseudo-first-order model | In( | where |
| Pseudo-second-order model | where | |
| Intraparticle diffusion model | where |
The results of Taguchi method experiment (L (3 ) orthogonal array experiment design)
| 1 | 7 | 5 | 0.15 | 80 | 82.63 | 22.035 |
| 2 | 7 | 6 | 0.2 | 100 | 82.34 | 20.586 |
| 3 | 7 | 7 | 0.25 | 120 | 82.87 | 19.889 |
| 4 | 8 | 5 | 0.2 | 120 | 81.55 | 24.465 |
| 5 | 8 | 6 | 0.25 | 80 | 89.58 | 14.333 |
| 6 | 8 | 7 | 0.15 | 100 | 81.51 | 27.171 |
| 7 | 9 | 5 | 0.25 | 100 | 85.57 | 17.134 |
| 8 | 9 | 6 | 0.15 | 120 | 80.82 | 32.329 |
| 9 | 9 | 7 | 0.2 | 80 | 85.95 | 17.191 |
A: pH; B: contact time (h); C: biosorbent dose (g); D: initial MG concentration (m/l). The results were the mean of three parallel ones.
Figure 1FTIR spectrum of biosorbent (before-biosorption and after-biosorption).
Figure 2Effect of biosorbent dose on the MG biosorption.
Figure 3Effect of solution pH on the biosorption of MG.
Figure 4Effect of Na and Ca on percent removal.
Isotherm constants for MG biosorption
| 111.11 | 125 | 125 | ||
| | 0.00222 | 0.00204 | 0.00200 | |
| | 0.910 | 0.972 | 0.906 | |
| 0.324 | 0.336 | 0.326 | ||
| | 1.114 | 1.111 | 1.107 | |
| | 0.996 | 0.998 | 0.997 | |
| 0.0693 | 0.0687 | 0.684 | ||
| | 10.11 | 10.63 | 10.49 | |
| 0.956 | 0.953 | 0.951 |
Figure 5Biosorption at different contact time and different initial MG concentrations.
Kinetic parameters for the removal of MG (temperature = 25°C, stirring rate = 180 rpm, pH = 8)
| 20 | 4.843 | 0.019 | 1.369 | 0.949 | 0.0412 | 4.926 | 0.999 |
| 40 | 9.595 | 0.021 | 1.301 | 0.912 | 0.0809 | 9.709 | 1.000 |
| 60 | 13.604 | 0.472 | 2.300 | 0.989 | 0.0620 | 13.699 | 1.000 |
| 80 | 17.238 | 0.019 | 1.141 | 0.953 | 0.0570 | 17.544 | 1.000 |
| 120 | 24.437 | 0.017 | 0.171 | 0.979 | 0.4000 | 25.000 | 1.000 |
Figure 6The pseudo-second-order model for MG biosorption at different initial concentrations.
Figure 7Intraparticle diffusion model for MG biosorption at different initial concentrations.
Intraparticle diffusion kinetic model (temperature = 25°C, stirring rate = 180 rpm, pH = 8)
| 20 | 0.2671 | 2.6139 | 0.9957 | 0.0350 | 4.3082 | 0.9485 |
| 40 | 0.3453 | 6.9650 | 0.9878 | 0.0246 | 9.2227 | 0.9467 |
| 60 | 0.2233 | 11.7936 | 0.9263 | 0.0327 | 13.0999 | 0.9697 |
| 80 | 0.2041 | 15.4443 | 0.9902 | 0.0282 | 16.8133 | 0.9444 |
| 120 | 0.0187 | 24.2324 | 0.8735 | 0.0063 | 24.3425 | 0.9753 |
Range analysis of the experiment
| Percent remove (%) | ||||
| K1 | 82.62 | 83.25 | 81.65 | 86.06 |
| K2 | 84.21 | 84.25 | 83.18 | 83.14 |
| K3 | 84.11 | 83.45 | 86.01 | 81.75 |
| R | 1.60 | 1.00 | 4.35 | 4.31 |
| Biosorption capacity (mg/g) | ||||
| K1 | 20.837 | 21.204 | 27.178 | 17.853 |
| K2 | 21.989 | 22.416 | 20.747 | 21.623 |
| K3 | 22.211 | 21.417 | 17.112 | 25.561 |
| R | 1.374 | 1.212 | 10.066 | 7.708 |
A: pH; B: contact time; C: biosorbent dose; D: initial MG concentration. (The levels were showed in Table 2); K: average value of each level; R: range of K1, K2 and K3.
ANOVA for percent removal and biosorption capacity in the L (3 ) orthogonal array experiment
| Percent removal | ||||||
| A | 4.82 × 10-4 | 2 | 2.41 × 10-4 | 2.849 | F0.05(2,2) = 19.0 | |
| B | 1.68 × 10-4 | 2 | 8.40 × 10-5 | 0.996 | F0.10(2,2) = 9.0 | |
| C | 29.00 × 10-4 | 2 | 14.50 × 10-4 | 17.160 | * | |
| D | 29.01 × 10-4 | 2 | 14.51 × 10-4 | 17.163 | * | |
| Error | 1.69 × 10-4 | 2 | | | | |
| Total | 66.20 × 10-4 | 10 | | | | |
| Biosorption capacity | | |||||
| A | 3.267 | 2 | 1.634 | 1 | F0.05(2,2) = 19.0 | |
| B | 2.511 | 2 | 1.256 | 0.769 | F0.10(2,2) = 9.0 | |
| C | 155.903 | 2 | 77.951 | 47.716 | ** | |
| D | 89.127 | 2 | 44.564 | 27.279 | ** | |
| Error | 3.267 | 2 | | | | |
| Total | 254.076 | 10 | ||||
SSDa: Sum of Squares of Deviations; DOFb: Degree of Freedom.
A: pH; B: contact time; C: biosorbent dose; D: initial MG concentration. The levels were showed in Table 1. Significance levels at 95% and 90% confidence interval, F0. 05 (2, 2) = 19, F0. 10 (2, 2) = 9.
'*’ indicate the experiment factor was significant effect on the results; '**’ indicate the experiment factor was particularly significant effect on the results.