| Literature DB >> 30004438 |
Xiaojuan You1, Enzhong Li2, Jiayang Liu3, Songhua Li4.
Abstract
The present study investigated the adsorptive and enzymatic removal of aniline blue dye (AB) from aqueous solution using waxy riceprocessing waste (RW), peanut shell (PS), microbial waste of Aspergillus niger (MW) as low cost adsorbents, and laccase (Lac) as a biocatalyst. Commercial activated carbon (AC) was also employed to compare the adsorption performance with the three adsorbents. Dye removal was examined under various parameters in batch experiments. It was found that dye removal by RW and Lac was 89⁻94% noticeably better than that by MW and PS (20⁻70%). In any cases, AC produced the highest dye removal among the tested materials. The kinetics, isotherms, and thermodynamics were then analyzed to elucidate the adsorption process by the four adsorbents. The pseudo-second order kinetic was superior to the pseudo first order kinetic model in describing adsorption for all adsorbents. The Langmuir model fitted the adsorption process very well, indicating monolayer coverage of dyes on a solid surface. A thermodynamic analysis of enthalpy (ΔH°), entropy (ΔS°), and Gibbs free energy (ΔG°) classified the adsorption as a nonspontaneous and endothermic process. The results reveal diverse natural materials (e.g., processing waste RW) as novel substitutes for traditional activated carbon, as well as laccase as a green catalyst for the treatment of dye wastewater.Entities:
Keywords: adsorbent; adsorption; aniline blue; dye removal; laccase
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30004438 PMCID: PMC6100329 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23071606
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1The chemical structure of aniline blue.
Figure 2Wavelength scanning of aniline blue solution (50 mg/L) before and after laccase (0.2 U/mL) degradation for 10 min.
Figure 3Dye removal under various conditions: adsorbent dose or laccase activity (a); contact time (b); dye concentration (c); temperature (d); NaCl concentration (e).
Figure 4Pseudo first order kinetic (a) and pseudo second order kinetic models (b); Film diffusion (c) and intraparticle diffusion models (d).
Parameters for pseudo first-order and pseudo second-order models.
| Adsorbent | Pseudo First Order Kinetic Model | Pseudo Second Order Kinetic Model | Experimental | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RW | 0.001 | 7.12 | 0.003 | 11.88 | 11.08 |
| MW | 0.012 | 6.09 | 0.016 | 11.74 | 11.25 |
| PS | 0.007 | 4.03 | 0.014 | 17.21 | 17.91 |
| AC | 0.09 | 0.91 | 0.12 | 24.45 | 24.52 |
q(cal) is the equilibrium adsorption capacity by calculation; q(exp) is the equilibrium adsorption capacity by experiment.
Figure 5Langmuir (a) and Freundlich model (b) of adsorption.
Parameters for the Langmuir and Freundlich models.
| Adsorbent | Langmuir | Freundlich | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 1 |
|
| ||
| RW | 18.55 | 0.21 | 0.98 | 0.38 | 4.79 | 0.967 |
| MW | 17.67 | 0.06 | 0.993 | 0.28 | 4.20 | 0.969 |
| PS | 52.91 | 0.023 | 0.997 | 0.46 | 3.89 | 0.941 |
| AC | 294.12 | 0.07 | 0.993 | 0.60 | 22.89 | 0.978 |
Figure 6Plot of ΔG° vs. temperature.
Thermodynamic parameters for AB adsorption.
| Adsorbent | ΔH° (kJ·mol−1) | ΔS° (J·mol−1·K−1) |
|---|---|---|
| RW | 44.29 | 142.58 |
| MW | 15.92 | 39.52 |
| PS | 5.03 | 13.65 |
| AC | 27.43 | 122.56 |