| Literature DB >> 31788729 |
Paweł Muszyński1, Marzena S Brodowska2, Tadeusz Paszko1.
Abstract
The article presents the behavior of phenoxy acids in water, the levels in aquatic ecosystems, and their transformations in the water environment. Phenoxy acids are highly soluble in water and weakly absorbed in soil. These highly mobile compounds are readily transported to surface and groundwater. Monitoring studies conducted in Europe and in other parts of the world indicate that the predominant phenoxy acids in the aquatic environment are mecoprop, 4-chloro-2-methylphenoxyacetic acid (MCPA), dichlorprop, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), and their metabolites which are chlorophenol derivatives. In water, the concentrations of phenoxy acids are effectively lowered by hydrolysis, biodegradation, and photodegradation, and a key role is played by microbial decomposition. This process is determined by the qualitative and quantitative composition of microorganisms, oxygen levels in water, and the properties and concentrations of phenoxy acids. In shallow and highly insolated waters, phenoxy acids can be decomposed mainly by photodegradation whose efficiency is determined by the form of the degraded compound. Numerous studies are underway on the use of advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) to remove phenoxy acids. The efficiency of phenoxy acid degradation using AOPs varies depending on the choice of oxidizing system and the conditions optimizing the oxidation process. Most often, methods combining UV radiation with other reagents are used to oxidize phenoxy acids. It has been found that this solution is more effective compared with the oxidation process carried out using only UV.Entities:
Keywords: Herbicides; Phenoxy acids; Photocatalytic degradation; Photodegradation; Water; Water biodegradation
Year: 2019 PMID: 31788729 PMCID: PMC6994553 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-06510-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 4.223
Fig. 1Structure of phenoxyalkane acids (based on Zertal et al. 2004)
Summary of the groundwater and river water monitoring for phenoxy acids and in EU countries
| Chemical | Limit of detection [μg L−1] | Frequency of detection [%] | Max concentration [μg L−1] | Average concentration [μg L−1] | 90th percentile [%] | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groundwater (number of samples 164) | ||||||
| Mecoprop | 0.2 | 13.4 | 0.785 | 0.007 | 1 | Loos et al. ( |
| MCPA | 0.1 | 7.9 | 0.036 | 0 | 0 | |
| Dichlorprop | 0.1 | 4.9 | 3.199 | 0.036 | 0 | |
| 2,4-D | 0.1 | 3.7 | 0.012 | 0 | 0 | |
| River water (number of samples 122) | ||||||
| Mecoprop | 0.1 | 43 | 0.194 | 0.015 | 0.054 | Loos et al. ( |
| 2,4-D | 0.1 | 52 | 1.221 | 0.022 | 0.035 | |
Summary of DT50 values for esters of phenoxy acids
| Ester of phenoxy acid | Medium water type | pH | Temperature [°C] | DT50 | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methyl ester of 2,4-D | Redistilled water | 6 | 28 | 44 dni (calculated) | Zepp et al. ( |
| Methyl ester of 2,4-D | Redistilled water | 9 | 28 | 1.1 h (calculated) | Zepp et al. ( |
| 2-Butoxyethyl ester of 2,4-D | Redistilled water | 6 | 28 | 26 dni (calculated) | Zepp et al. ( |
| 2-Butoxyethyl ester of 2,4-D | Redistilled water | 9 | 28 | 0.6 h (calculated) | Zepp et al. ( |
| 2-Ethylhexyl ester of 2,4-D | Sterile water | 5 | 25 | 99.7 dni | Concha et al. ( |
| 2-Ethylhexyl ester of 2,4-D | Sterile water | 7 | 25 | 48.3 dni | Concha et al. ( |
| 2-Ethylhexyl ester of 2,4-D | Sterile water | 9 | 25 | 52.2 dni | Concha et al. ( |
| 2-Ethylhexyl ester of MCPA | Sterile buffer solution | 5 | n.r. | No hydrolysis | US EPA ( |
| 2-Ethylhexyl ester of MCPA | Sterile buffer solution | 7 | n.r. | No hydrolysis | US EPA ( |
| 2-Ethylhexyl ester of MCPA | Sterile buffer solution | 9 | n.r. | < 117 h | US EPA ( |
n.r. not reported
Fig. 2Direct photolysis processes of the protonated and deprotonated forms of MCPA (Vione 2015)
Summary of 2,4-D removal by advanced oxidation processes
| Process | Permanent conditions | Changing conditions | Time | Removal | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UV/H2O2 | [2,4-D] = 50 mg L−1, pH = 3.5 | UV lamp 150 W | 120 min | 100% | Jafari and Marofi ( |
| UV lamp 400 W | 15 min | 100% | Jafari and Marofi ( | ||
| UV/H2O2/micro-aeration | [2,4-D] = 100 μg L−1, pH = 7 [H2O2] = 10 mg L−1, air flow = 25 L min−1 UV lamp 30 W intensity 843.9 μW cm−2 for | [H2O2] = 10 mg L−1 | 60 min | > 63% | Chu et al. ( |
| [H2O2] = 20 mg L−1 | 90 min | > 95.6% | Chu et al. ( | ||
| [H2O2] = 50 mg L−1 | 60 min | > 97.2% | Chu et al. ( | ||
| UV/H2O2/Fe2+ | [2,4-D] = 1 mM, pH = 2.8 [H2O2] = 1 mM, Two UV lamps intensity 1.5 10−6 Einstein L−1 s−1 | [Fe2+] = 0.1 mM | 60 min | 77% | Kwan and Chu ( |
| UV/H2O2/Fe3+ | [Fe3+] = 0.1 mM | 60 min | 82% | Kwan and Chu ( | |
| UV/H2O2/Fe2+(oxalate) | [2,4-D] = 1 mM, pH = 2.8 [H2O2] = 1 mM, [oxalate] = 0.3 mM Two UV lamps intensity 1.5 10−6 Einstein L−1 s−1 | [Fe2+] = 0.1 mM | 60 min | 77.9% | Kwan and Chu ( |
| UV/H2O2/Fe3+(oxalate) | [Fe3+] = 0.1 mM | 60 min | 73.6% | Kwan and Chu ( | |
| UV/H2O2/Fe3+(oxalate) | [2,4-D] = 0.136 mM, pH = 5 [Fe3+] = 0.054 mM, [oxalate] = 0.54 mM UV lamp intensity 3.64 10−8 Einstein cm−2 s−1 | H2O2/2,4-D = 7, T = 25 °C | 180 min | 16.4% | Schenone et al. ( |
| H2O2/2,4-D = 50, T = 25 °C | 180 min | 83% | Schenone et al. ( | ||
H2O2/2,4-D = 7, T = 50 °C | 180 min | 63.8% | Schenone et al. ( | ||
| H2O2/2,4-D = 50, T = 50 °C | 180 min | 95.6% | Schenone et al. ( | ||
| UV/TiO2 | [2,4-D] = 45 μM, pH = 4.3 UV lamp | – | 120 min | 100% | Giri et al. ( |
| UV/TiO2 | [2,4-D] = 40 ppm UV Lamp 4400 μW cm−2 for | – | 120 min | 77% | Rangel-Vasquez et al. ( |
| UV/TiO2-SnO2 | 0.1; 0.3; 1, 3 or 5 mol% of tin | 120 min | 65–93% | Rangel-Vasquez et al. ( | |
| UV/TiO2/activated carbon system | [2,4-D] = 50 mg L−1, pH = 7, T = 25 °C V = 30 mL mass of TiO2 = 5 mg mass of carbon = 5 mg low-pressure Hg lamp 15 W Intensity 1.027 10−4 Einstein m−2 s−1 for | Untreated carbon | 60 min | 59–80% | Rivera-Utrilla et al. ( |
| Carbon oxidation with O3 for 30 min | 60 min | 70% | Rivera-Utrilla et al. ( | ||
| Carbon oxidation with O3 for 120 min | 60 min | 70% | Rivera-Utrilla et al. ( |
Fig. 3Photocatalytic degradation pathways of MCPA proposed by Topalov et al. (2001)