| Literature DB >> 35018167 |
Thuan Van Tran1,2, Duyen Thi Cam Nguyen1, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar3, Azam Taufik Mohd Din4, Aishah Abdul Jalil2,5, Dai-Viet N Vo1,4.
Abstract
Water contamination is an environmental burden for the next generations, calling for advanced methods such as adsorption to remove pollutants. For instance, unwanted biowaste and invasive plants can be converted into biosorbents for environmental remediation. This would partly solve the negative effects of invasive plants, estimated at 120 billion dollars in the USA. Here we review the distribution, impact, and use of invasive plants for water treatment, with emphasis on the preparation of biosorbents and removal of pollutants such as cadmium, lead, copper, zinc, nickel, mercury, chromate, synthetic dyes, and fossil fuels. Those biosorbents can remove 90-99% heavy metals from aqueous solutions. High adsorption capacities of 476.190 mg/g for synthetic dyes and 211 g/g for diesel oils have been observed. We also discuss the regeneration of these biosorbents.Entities:
Keywords: Biosorbents; Heavy metal ions; Invasive plants; Oil removal; Synthetic dyes; Water treatment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35018167 PMCID: PMC8734550 DOI: 10.1007/s10311-021-01377-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Chem Lett ISSN: 1610-3653 Impact factor: 13.615
Fig. 1Conversion of biomass from harmful invasive plants into beneficial biosorbents for environmental remediation. The biosorbent preparation experiences some stages such as collecting, cleaning, drying, and treatment. Biosorbents derived from invasive plants can be used to remove heavy metals, organic dyes, and oils. This development remedies wastewaters and contributes to the prevention of powerful invasion of exotic plants
Fig. 2Invasive plants including Lantana camara (a), Bidens pilosa (b), Chromolaena odorata (c), Eichhornia crassipes (d), Mimosa pigra (e), Opuntia stricta (f), and their geographical distribution in national conservation parks in Vietnam (g)
Fig. 3Proportion of exotic plants by growth forms—forb, grass, liana, shrub, and tree—that are controlled in restoration sites including a Chaparral, b Desert, c Savanna, d Temperature coniferous forest, e temperature deciduous forest, f Temperature grassland, g Tropical dry forest, and h Tropical rain forest. Accordingly, the distribution of major exotic species in various restoration sites was insignificantly different. Mean ± standard deviation of five biomes could be shown: 46.0 ± 5.8% grass, 24.1 ± 9.0% forb, 14.6 ± 7.1% shrub, 12.1 ± 3.5% tree, and 3.2 ± 3.1% liana. Reproduced with the permission of Wiley Online Library from reference (Weidlich et al. 2020)
Fig. 4Mechanism of biological invasion of plants in new habitats. Biological invasion disrupts interactions of indigenous species. (i) Nutrient regime is the first indication of new invasive transportation. (ii) Invasive plants tend to proliferate well in their regions, directly affect local species interactions. (iii) To consolidate colonization, they secrete allelochemicals into ambient environment, thereby exerting detrimental physiological effects on the growth and reproduction of native species. (iv) Naturalization signs a profound change in the distribution of plant, soil, and microbe. (v) With many strong functional traits, invasive plants spread various landscapes to complete a biological invasion and initiate a new cycle
Fig. 5Preparation of biosorbents from invasive plants. Many invasive plant parts can be collected, including flowers, leaves, roots, etc., for the next processing stage. Drying procedure of invasive biomass can be carried out under solar light to remove moisture. To enhance surface area and surface chemistry, the dried samples are ground and treated by chemical agents such as acid, or alkali
Adsorption performance of biosorbents from invasive plants for the treatment of heavy metal ions
| Plant | Part | Biosorbent features | Target metals | pH | Adsorption results | Adsorption mechanism | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leaf | Particle size: 750 μm | Cd(II) | 5.5 | 27.9 mg/g | Electrostatic attraction, chemical reaction | (Ammari | |
| Stem | Treated with H2O2 and NaOH | Cd(II) | 3.5 | 0.028–5.97 mg/g at 24 °C | Monolayer chemisorption | (Bakyayita et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with NaOH, particle size: 2000 μm | Cd(II) | 5 | 12.4 mg/g at 25 °C | Ionic exchange, electrostatic interaction, complexation | (Saraswat and Rai | |
| Whole | Not reported | Cd(II) | 4.84 | 12.60 mg/g | Ionic exchange | (Mahamadi and Nharingo | |
| Stem | Particle size: < 160 μm, surface area: 1.741 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.5 | Cd(II) | 6.5 | 18.31 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interaction, ionic sorbent–sorbate interaction | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: < 160 μm, surface area: 1.612 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.29 | Cd(II) | 7.5 | 25.24 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interaction, ionic sorbent–sorbate interaction | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with CaCl2, particle size: 10–16 mesh; surface area: 0.3 m2/g | Cd(II) | 3 | 121.4 mg/g at 20 °C | Ionic exchange, complexation, coordination, and micro-precipitation | (Cazón et al. | |
| Rhizome | Treated by HCl and NaOH, particle size: 800–1000 μm, surface area: 9.98 m2/g for biosorbent treated with HCl, and 11.65 m2/g for biosorbent treated with NaOH | Pb(II) | 7–8.5 | 76.12 mg/g for biosorbent treated with HCl, and 88.08 mg/g for biosorbent treated with NaOH | Electrostatic interaction, reduction, and anionic adsorption | (Shooto | |
| Stem | Treated with H2O2 and NaOH | Pb(II) | 4.5 | 0.732–1.231 mg/g at 24 °C | Monolayer chemisorption | (Bakyayita et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with HNO3, particle size: 2.5 mm | Pb(II) | 4.84 | 26.32 mg/g for Pb(II) | Ionic exchange | (Mahamadi and Nharingo | |
| Whole | Particle size: 40–60 mesh | Pb(II) | 5.0 | 2.236 mg/g at 26 °C | Chemisorption or chemical adsorption | (Guo et al. | |
| Seedpod | Particle size: 100 mesh | Pb(II) | 6.0 | 40.322 mg/g at 28 °C | Chemisorption, ionic exchange | (Jayaram and Prasad | |
| Seedpod | Particle size: 75–150 μm | Pb(II) | 6.0 | 1.4 mg/g at 27 °C | Monolayer chemisorption | (Gautam et al. | |
| Seed | Particle size: 75–150 μm | Pb(II) | 6.0 | 5.6 mg/g at 25 °C | Monolayer chemisorption | (Gautam et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 500 μm | Pb(II) | 5.0 | 76 mg/g at 25 °C | Chelation | (Hannachi and Hafidh | |
| Whole | Particle size: < 125 μm | Cr(VI) | 2.0 | 17.71 mg/g, at 20 °C | Monolayer chemisorption, ion exchange, chelation | (Wang and Qin | |
| Rhizome | Treated by HCl and NaOH, particle size: 800–1000 μm, surface area: 9.98 m2/g for biosorbent treated with HCl, and 11.65 m2/g for biosorbent treated with NaOH | Cr(VI) | 1.0 | Electrostatic interaction, reduction and anionic adsorption (fraction of Cr(VI) is reduced to Cr(III) by electrons donating functional groups on the biomaterial surface) | (Shooto | ||
| Whole | Treated with NaOH, particle size: 2000 μm | Cr(VI) | 2.0 | 5.6 mg/g at 25 °C | Ion exchange, electrostatic interaction, complexation | (Saraswat and Rai | |
| Stem | Particle size: 60 mesh | Cr(VI) | 1.0 | 89.22 mg/g at 308 K, 99.9% of Cr(VI) removal | ( | (Song et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: < 250 μm | Cr(VI) | 5.0 | 21.32 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interactions, reduction and chelation or complexation with the functional groups of adsorbents | (Mahmoud et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: < 250 μm | Cr(VI) | 4.0 | 15.5 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interactions, reduction and chelation or complexation | (Mahmoud et al. | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 500 μm; surface area: 0.99 m2/g | Cr(VI) | 7.0 | 62.5 mg/g at 24 °C | Adsorption-coupled reduction | (Kuppusamy et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 125–250 μm | Cr(VI) | 2.0 | 196.1 mg/g at 20 °C | Ionic exchange, surface complexation and electrostatic attraction | (Bermúdez et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: < 125 μm | Zn(II) | 4.0 | 18.57 mg/g at 20 °C | Monolayer chemisorption, ion exchange, chelation | (Wang and Qin | |
| Whole | Surface area: 1.027 m2/g, pore volume: 9.035 cm3/g, point of zero charge: 5.0, and particle size: 150–330 μm | Zn(II) | 8.0 | 208 mg/g at 30 °C | Electrostatic attraction | (Ramesh et al. | |
| Flower | Surface area: 0.76 m2/g, and particle size: 400 μm | Zn(II) | 2.0 | 13.86 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interactions | (Dhouibi et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with NaOH, and particle size: 2000 μm | Zn(II) | 6.0 | 9.3 mg/g at 25 °C | Ion exchange, electrostatic interaction, complexation | (Saraswat and Rai | |
| Whole | Treated with CaCl2 Size: 10–16 mesh, surface area: 0.3 m2/g | Zn(II) | 4.0 | 100.0 mg/g at 20 °C | Ionic exchange, complexation, coordination, and micro-precipitation | (Cazón et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 150–330 μm; surface area: 1.027 m2/g, pore volume: 9.035 cm3/g, point of zero charge: 5.0 | Cu(II) | 6.0 | 500 mg/g at 30 °C | Electrostatic attraction | (Ramesh et al. | |
| Flower | Particle size: 400 μm, surface area: 0.76 m2/g | Cu(II) | 4.0 | 24.53 mg/g at room temperature | Electrostatic interactions | (Dhouibi et al. | |
| Leaf | Treated with NaOH, particle size: 180–355 μm, point of zero charge: 7.34 | Cu(II) | 5.0 | 11.64 mg/g at 310 K | Monolayer chemisorption, film diffusion | (Hanafiah et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with 10% EDTA | Co(II) | 5.0 | 20.0 mg/g at 28 °C, 100% of Co(II) was removed the industrial samples | Electrostatic interactions caused by carboxyl, hydroxyl, amino, or sulfonic groups on biosorbent | (Acosta-Rodríguez et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: < 160 μm, surface area: 1.741 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.5 | Co(II) | 6.5 | 24.52 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interaction, ionic sorbent–sorbate interaction | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: < 160 μm, surface area: 1.612 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.29 | Co(II) | 7.5 | 33.02 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interaction, ionic sorbent–sorbate interaction | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: < 125 μm | Ni(II) | 4.0 | 9.73 mg/g at 20 °C | Monolayer chemisorption, ion exchange, chelation | (Wang and Qin | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 40–50 mesh | Se(IV) | 2.0 | 110.5 mg/g at 25 °C, optimized by response surface methodology | Not reported | (Badr et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with CaCl2, particle size: 10–16 mesh | Hg(II) | 7.0 | 161.2 mmol/g at 20 °C | Electrostatic attraction | (Plaza et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 5000–1000 μm | Cs(I) | 146.19 mg/g | Ionic exchange through carboxyl, sulfate, amine groups were involved in the adsorption process | (Hu et al. | ||
| Whole | Particle size: 5000–1000 μm | Sr(II) | 190.13 mg/g | Ionic exchange | (Hu et al. |
Fig. 6Proposed mechanism for the adsorption of lead heavy metal ions over Sargassum muticum (Japanese wireweed) biosorbent. Here, several functional groups, e.g., amine, carboxyl, and hydroxyl, on the surface of the biosorbent are attributable to the protein or peptide residues of invasive plants. They may play a vital role in the chelation of heavy metals with N and O atoms on surface functional groups. The sequestration of heavy metals over biosorbents can also be induced by electrostatic interactions. Reprinted with the permission of Elsevier from the reference (Hannachi and Hafidh 2020)
Fig. 7Synthesis of Acorus calamus rhizome biosorbents. Here, the rhizomes were firstly washed, pretreated, dried, and ground. Subsequently, HCl or NaOH solution was immersed to treat the surface of rhizomes powder. Reprinted with the permission of Elsevier from the reference (Shooto 2020)
Fig. 8Setting up the continuous fixed bed column (a), and the regeneration experiments of H2SO4 modified Lantana camara biosorbent for the removal of Cr(VI) anions (b). Here, 0.4 N NaOH was used as an eluent solvent for desorbing Cr(VI) at the rate of 4 mL/min. The high regeneration efficiency could be still obtained after three cycles, and the final cycle gave an efficiency of about 30%. Reprinted with the permission of Elsevier from the reference (Nithya et al. 2020)
Fig. 9Proposed mechanism for the adsorption of organic dyes over the biosorbent. Here, the presence of functional groups, e.g., amine, carboxyl, and hydroxyl, on the surface of biosorbent may take main responsibility for the hydrogen bonding, electrostatic, and n–π interactions with organic dye molecules. Reprinted with the permission of Elsevier from the reference (Hannachi and Hafidh 2020)
Adsorption performance of biosorbents from invasive plants for the treatment of organic dyes
| Plant | Part | Biosorbent features | Target dyes | pH | Uptake capacity | Adsorption mechanism | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whole | Particle size: 100–500 μm, point of zero charge: 5.45 | Methylene blue | 1–11 | 142.87 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic interaction, hydrogen bonding, hydrophobic–hydrophobic interaction | (Atouani et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 500 μm | Methylene blue | 5.0 | 92 mg/g at 25 °C | Electrostatic attractions, hydrogen bonding, n − π electron donor–acceptor interactions | (Hannachi and Hafidh | |
| Stem | Treated with oxalic acid, particle size: 250–350 μm | Methylene blue | 4.84 | Raw and modified biosorbents: 23.25–111.12 mg/g, respectively, at 30 °C | Film diffusion, ionic exchange, chemical interaction | (Banerjee et al. | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 150–600 μm, point of zero charge: 7.6 | Methylene blue | 10.0 | 18.867 mg/g at 27 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Bansal et al. | |
| Seedpod | Particle size: 250–400 μm | Methylene blue | 6.0 | 8.36 mg/g at 21 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Ammar et al. | |
| Whole | Not reported | Methylene blue | 11.0 | 117.93 mg/g at 35 °C | Monolayer chemisorption, π–π stacking interactions, mesopore-filling, intra-particle diffusion | (Liu et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with boiling distilled water, particle size: 125–150 μm | Methylene blue | 8.46 | 27.40 mg/g at 26 °C, optimized by response surface methodology | Monolayer chemisorption | (Su et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: 120 μm, surface area: 1.741 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.5 | Methylene blue | 11.0 | 258.76 mg/g at 25 °C | Not reported | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: 120 μm, surface area: 1.612 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.29 | Methylene blue | 11.0 | 185.59 mg/g at 25 °C | Not reported | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Flower spike | Not reported | Methylene blue | Not reported | 34.48 mg/g at 25 °C | Monolayer chemisorption | (Jia et al. | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 500 μm, surface area: 0.99 m2/g | Methylene blue | 10.0 | 119.05 mg/g at 24 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Kuppusamy et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: < 250 μm | Crystal violet | 2–11 | 17.70 mg/g at 23 °C | Not reported | (Dabagh et al. | |
| Bark | Treated with acetone and sulfuric acid and removed tannins, surface area: 4.867 m2/g | Crystal violet | 10.0 | 280 mg/g at 30 °C | Not reported | (Silva et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 150–300 μm, point of zero charge: 5.6 | Crystal violet | 8.0 | 84.13 mg/g at 20 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Suyamboo and Srikrishnaperumal | |
| Stem | Point of zero charge: 9 | Crystal violet | 10.1 | 476.190 mg/g at 25 °C, regeneration: eleven cycles, first: 98.3% and final > 90%, ethanol as eluent solvent | hydrogen bonding | (Naderi et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: 120 μm, surface area: 1.741 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.5 | Malachite green | 11.0 | 117.32 mg/g at 25 °C | Not reported | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Stem | Particle size: 120 μm, surface area: 1.612 m2/g, point of zero charge: 6.29 | Malachite green | 11.0 | 64.37 mg/g at 25 °C | Not reported | (Tounsadi et al. | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 1250–2000 μm | Malachite green | 8.0 | 75.27 mg/g at 35 °C | Chemical interactions | (Guechi and Hamdaoui | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 500 μm, surface area: 0.99 m2/g | Malachite green | 2.0 | 116.28 mg/g at 24 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Kuppusamy et al. | |
| Stem | Treated with oxalic acid, particle size: 250–350 μm | Rhodamine B | 4.84 | 34.24 mg/g at 30 °C | Film diffusion, ionic exchange, chemical interaction | (Banerjee et al. | |
| Peel | Particle size: 85–75 mesh, point of zero charge: 5.8 | Rhodamine B | 7.0 | 3.0 mg/g at 30 °C | Liquid-film, intra-particle diffusions | (Khan et al. | |
| Chestnut shell | Treated with 0.2 M NaOH, surface area: 1.127 m2/g, pore volume: 0.0067 cm3/g, pore radius: 1.09 nm | Rhodamine B | 8.0 | 136.46 mg/g, and 90.36% removal, regeneration study: five consecutive cycle, methanol as a green eluent | Electrostatic attraction, van der Waals force, H-bonding, and π–π stacking | (Qaiyum et al. | |
| Whole | Particle size: 44 mesh, surface area: 123 m2/g, pore volume: 0.07 cm3/g, point of zero charge: 6.2 | Alizarin red S | 2.0 | 0.507 mg/g, sixth regeneration cycle, the adsorption remained at 70.2%, desorption by 0.1 M NaOH | Electrostatic attraction | (Gautam et al. | |
| Whole | Treated with HCl, particle size: 1000–2000 μm | Acid orange 7 | 7.0 | 35.69 mg/g at 20 °C | Not reported | (Azarpira and Balarak | |
| Root | Particle size: 2–20 mesh, surface area: 8.07 m2/g | Red reactive dye | 2.0 | 43.28 mg/g at 30 °C, 95% of dye removal for 110 min | Monolayer chemisorption | (Rigueto et al. | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 500 μm, surface area: 0.99 m2/g | Acridine orange | 2.0 | 126.58 mg/g at 24 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Kuppusamy et al. | |
| Leaf | Particle size: 500 μm, surface area: 0.99 m2/g | Eriochrome black T | 2.0 | 94.34 mg/g at 24 °C | Electrostatic interaction | (Kuppusamy et al. |
Fig. 10Photographs of a Mature cattail stalk, and b Cattail tufts. Scanning electron microscope microphotographical images of c Cattail tuft, d Longitudinal section of cattail fiber, e Cross section of cattail fiber, and f Cross section of the cattail fiber. Cattail fibers have a down-like structure, including root, stem, seed, and several fibers. They possess four-dimensional open spaces with an average length of 7.9 ± 1.2 mm. With exceptionally hydrophobic and oleophilic features, cattail fibers could adsorb up to 12–26 g oils (engine, vegetable and used oils) per gram of fibers. Reproduced with the permission of Taylor & Francis from reference (Cao et al. 2016)
Adsorption performance of biosorbents from invasive plants for the treatment of oils
| Plant | Part | Material features | Oil type | Adsorption capacity (g/g) | Refs. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diameter (μm) | Length (μm) | Wax Content (%) | |||||
| Stem | 100–800 | 300–2500 | Not reported | Kerosene, | 46.1 | (Fiore et al. | |
| Stem | 100–800 | 300–2500 | Not reported | Virgin naphtha | 50.5 | (Fiore et al. | |
| Stem | 100–800 | 300–2500 | Not reported | Pump oil, | 61.0 | (Fiore et al. | |
| Stem | 100–800 | 300–2500 | Not reported | Crude oil | 51.7 | (Fiore et al. | |
| Seed | 30.4 | Not reported | 1.8–3 | Rapeseed oil | 41.7 | (Zheng et al. | |
| Seed | 30.4 | Not reported | 1.8–3 | Paraffin oil | 37.6 | (Zheng et al. | |
| Fruit | 10–17 | 7900 | 11.5 | Engine oil | 13.4 | (Cao et al. | |
| Fruit | 10–17 | 7900 | 11.5 | Vegetable oil | 14.6 | (Cao et al. | |
| Stem | 3.94 | 6500 | 0.52 | Engine oil | 19.29 | (Viju and Thilagavathi | |
| Stem | 3.94 | 6500 | 0.52 | Crude oil | 22.39 | (Viju and Thilagavathi | |
| Seed | 24 | 2700 | 2–3 | Engine oil | 126 | (Panahi et al. | |
| Seed | 3–12 | 4000 | 4–9 | Diesel | 211 | (Likon et al. | |