| Literature DB >> 26194625 |
Karen Johnson1, Graham Purvis2, Elisa Lopez-Capel3, Caroline Peacock4, Neil Gray2, Thomas Wagner2, Christian März2, Leon Bowen5, Jesus Ojeda6, Nina Finlay1, Steve Robertson1, Fred Worrall7, Chris Greenwell7.
Abstract
Minerals stabilizeEntities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26194625 PMCID: PMC4518293 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms8628
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1SEM, TEM and FIB images of birnessite coating.
(a) Scanning electron micrograph showing intact birnessite coating on sand grains. (b) Focused ion beam image of birnessite coating showing light and dark laminae at both μm and nm scale. (c) FIB image showing close-up of vugs within birnessite coating, apparently partially infilled with lighter (in colour) precipitates. (d) Transmission electron micrograph of birnessite coating showing both 7 and 10 Å poorly crystalline birnessite (akin to δMnO2). Images a–c are all in back-scattered mode showing atomic contrast.
Figure 2Micro-FTIR images of birnessite coating.
(a) Micro-FTIR spectroscopy image and spectra of the surface of an intact birnessite coating (washed repeatedly in de-ionized water) showing presence of organic carbon (at three separate points representing low, medium and high OC concentrations). (b) Micro-FTIR spectroscopy image and spectra of a (different) surface of an intact birnessite coating (washed repeatedly with 1 M NaOH) showing presence of organic carbon (at 3 separate points representing low, medium and high OC concentrations) at lower concentrations than when washed in de-ionized water. Red-yellow colours show higher concentration of OC and green-blue colours show lower concentration of OC. In the spectra, the blue band shows the C-H stretch between 3,000 and 2,800 cm−1 and also labelled are the C=C (1,650 cm−1) and carbonyl (1,750 cm−1) peaks as well as the νsym COO- (1,400 cm−1) and νasym COO- (1,595 cm−1 in (a) and 1,565 cm−1 in (b)) peaks.
Fluorescence spectroscopy data for DOC and Mn-OCDOC.
| DOC (from peaty water) | 223:454 (30) | 342:450 (16) |
| Mn-OCDOC | 213:413 (30) | 296:410 (16) |
DOC, dissolved organic carbon; Excitation:emission wavelengths (nm, with maximum intensity in adsorption units in brackets) of Peak A (fulvic-like) and Peak C (humic-like) for both the original peaty water DOC and the Mn-OCDOC. n=3 and s.d. values <2 nm and <0.5 adsorption units.
Figure 3TGA-DSC data on birnessite coating.
(a) Carbon dioxide evolution with temperature and synthesized deconvolution components (see Methods section for more details) for bulk Mn-OC showing thermally labile Mn-OC (in pink), thermally refractory Mn-OC (in blue) and inorganic carbon (in purple; TIC is 0.5%w/wC). (b) Differential scanning calorimetry (black) curve showing labelled CO2 evolution at 270 and 600 °C (exotherms) and CO3 2− breakdown at 712 °C (endotherm); m/z 44 curve (green); m/z 18 curve (blue) and thermogravimetric weight loss (red).
Figure 4XPS C1s data on thermally treated bulk birnessite coating.
Normalized and mean (n=9) XPS scans of the high-resolution C1s spectra of bulk birnessite coating both as received (MnOAR Bulk) and thermally treated by burning to 550 °C for 8 h (MnO550 Bulk), de-convoluted using synthetic component fitting (see Methods section). There are three main components evident in the bulk birnessite coating, and there are two main components evident in the bulk birnessite coating that has been burned to 550 °C. The most probable chemical assignments for these components are described in Table 2. The pie chart shows the proportion of hydrocarbon that is aromatic or aliphatic in character in each of the ‘as received' and ‘thermally treated' bulk coating. The inset shows N1s scan. Note ‘aromatic' in pie chart actually represents alkene/aromatic peak at ∼285 eV.
XPS C1s data for birnessite coating.
| 285.2 | 284.9 | 284.3 | 284.3 | C(=C,-H) | Alkene and aromatic |
| 286.1 | 286.5 | ND | ND | C(-C,-H,-N) | Aliphatic |
| 287.2 | Peak hidden | ND | ND | C(-N,-O) | Amides |
| 288.6 | 288.3 | 288.9 | 288.9 | C(-O,=O) | Carboxylate and CO3 2− |
ND, not determined; The mean (n=9) binding energy positions of the synthetic components, fitted to C1s spectra. The potential chemical state assignments for these components for MnOAR Bulk (bulk birnessite coating as received), MnO550 Bulk (bulk birnessite coating thermally treated to 550 °C) and MnO1000 Bulk (bulk birnessite coating thermally treated to 1,000 °C) are based on multiple lines of evidence, obtained from high-resolution C1s (shown above and in Figs 4 and 5 and Supplementary Fig. 1) and N1s (inset in Fig. 4) and Ca 2p scans (see Supplementary Fig. 2), and FTIR spectroscopy (see Fig. 2). The bonding environment in all the samples is more complex than represented here, and the complex chemical environment will contain many overlapping Gaussian components. To simplify the deconvolution analysis, the minimum number of components were fitted to the scans and the component assignment interpretation represents the principal chemical state (see Methods section). The changes in component positions between the MnOAR and thermally treated MnO550 and MnO1000 are primarily the result of the removal of thermally labile organic material during thermal treatment.
*Data not presented in Fig. 4 (see Supplementary Fig. 1)
†Thermal treatment to 550 °C that removes N (N1s data presented as inset in Fig. 4) suggests a C-N contribution to this component
‡FTIR spectroscopy and N1s high-resolution scan supports amide rather than C-O interpretation
§Ca2p high-resolution scans (see Supplementary Fig. 2) and decomposition of carbonate at 712 °C (see Fig. 3) supports a carboxylate rather than a carbonate interpretation.
Figure 5XPS C1s data comparing surface and bulk birnessite coating.
Normalized and mean (n=9) XPS scans of the high resolution C1s spectra of bulk birnessite coating (MnOAR Bulk) and the surface birnessite coating (MnOAR Surface, intact on the sand grain), both as received, de-convoluted using synthetic component fitting (see Methods section). There are three main components evident in the bulk birnessite coating, and there are four main components evident in the surface birnessite coating. The most probable chemical assignments for these components are described in Table 2. The pie chart shows the proportion of hydrocarbon that is aromatic or aliphatic in character in each of the ‘as received bulk' and ‘as received surface' coating. Note ‘aromatic' in pie chart represents alkene/aromatic peak at ∼285 eV and mean components are not Gaussian. Inset shows N1s scan.
Figure 6Hypothesized reaction mechanism between DOC and birnessite.
Hypothesized reaction mechanism for conversion of DOC by birnessite coatings both at the surface ((a) points 1–3) and in the bulk material ((b) points 1–2). The dashed arrows represent phenol–birnessite interactions resulting in phenoxy radical formation52. The original DOC molecule is oxidized (via the breaking of aromatic bonds6) at point 3 resulting in the release of LMW molecules into solution as the birnessite surface is subjected to backwashing in the WTW. The alkene/aromatic:aliphatic ratio (XPS signature) of the resulting smaller molecule DOCx attached to the birnessite surface is shown in pie-chart a. Once DOCx becomes trapped (shown in (b)) the reactions between phenols and the birnessite surface are likely to result in a build up of phenoxy radicals as these are less likely to be washed away at depth in the bulk material. The notably different XPS signature of the bulk material is shown in pie-chart (b).
Figure 7Reaction scheme between birnessite and phenol groups.
Surface complex formation between birnessite and phenol groups in DOC52. In the above reaction scheme the protonation state of the birnessite surface functional groups (as Mn(III/IV)OH2+2/3 or MnOH(III/IV)−1/3), the phenol ion (as ArOH or ArO−) and reaction intermediates are ignored. However, because the pKa of poorly crystalline hexagonal birnessite is ∼2 (ref. 26), while the pKa of most phenolic –OH groups is greater than 9 (ref. 52), then at pH∼9 in the WTW system, the majority of the birnessite surface groups will be present as negatively charged Mn(III/IV)OH−1/3, while phenol ions will be present as both ArOH or ArO−.