| Literature DB >> 35520508 |
Fu-Qiang An1, Hu-Fei Li1, Xu-Dong Guo2, Bao-Jiao Gao1, Tuo-Ping Hu1, Jian-Feng Gao1.
Abstract
Traditional bulk polymerization imprinted technology and existing surface imprinted technology have some congenital defects. Therefore, it is necessary to design more efficient surface imprinted technology. In this paper, novel surface imprinting technology with higher imprinting efficiency is well designed. It fully realizes the synchronization of polymer crosslinking and template imprinting. Then the surface imprinted polymers (SIPs) are synthesized using metal ions as a template. The physicochemical characteristics of the SIPs are characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) studies, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and elemental analysis. The adsorption performances and recognition selectivity of the SIPs towards the template are investigated by a batch method. The experimental results show that the SIPs possess excellent adsorption ability and selectivity towards the template. The selectivity coefficients of the SIPs prepared in this study are higher than those of IIPs prepared by other imprinting methods. The adsorption process could be well described by the Lagergren-first-order model and Langmuir monolayer chemical adsorption. The SIPs have good chemical stability and reusability. Consecutive adsorption-desorption experiments show that the exhausted SIPs could be effectively regenerated, and the regenerated SIPs could be reused without a significant reduction in adsorption capacity or selectivity coefficient. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 35520508 PMCID: PMC9059818 DOI: 10.1039/c8ra09948k
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 3.361
Fig. 1The schematic diagram of the surface imprinted method designed in this study.
Fig. 2The preparation process of metal ion-SIPs.
The pore structure parameters of D301 and Cd–SIP
| Sample |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| D301 | 202.3 | 0.059 | 121 |
| D301- | 197.6 | 0.052 | 113 |
| Cd–SIP | 192.2 | 0.049 | 110 |
Fig. 3FTIR spectra of D301, D301-g-PGMA and Cd–SIP.
Fig. 4Kinetics adsorption curves of SIPs and NIP. Initial concentration: 1 mmol L−1; adsorbent dosage: 0.05 g; volume of solution: 200 ml; temperature: 303 K; pH: 6; number of repetitions: 3.
The linear regression data of different models
| Adsorption model | Parameters | Cd–SIP | Pb–SIP | Cu–SIP | Zn–SIP | NIP | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cd( | Pb( | Cu( | Zn( | Cd( | Pb( | Cu( | Zn( | ||
| Lagergren-first-order |
| 2.27 | 2.20 | 2.16 | 2.12 | 0.50 | 0.47 | 0.44 | 0.43 |
|
| 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.12 | |
|
| 0.9991 | 0.9992 | 0.9991 | 0.9992 | 0.9991 | 0.9984 | 0.9979 | 0.9986 | |
| Pseudo-second-order |
| 2.76 | 2.63 | 2.54 | 2.45 | 0.62 | 0.57 | 0.53 | 0.49 |
|
| 0.047 | 0.046 | 0.046 | 0.044 | 0.194 | 0.189 | 0.186 | 0.181 | |
|
| 0.9974 | 0.9962 | 0.9954 | 0.9967 | 0.9948 | 0.9936 | 0.9954 | 0.9948 | |
| Elovich equation |
| 0.77 | 0.70 | 0.66 | 0.61 | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.16 | 0.17 |
|
| 1.66 | 1.69 | 1.69 | 1.69 | 7.30 | 7.40 | 7.60 | 9.16 | |
|
| 0.9995 | 0.9993 | 0.9994 | 0.9992 | 0.9991 | 0.9994 | 0.9991 | 0.9992 | |
Fig. 5Adsorption isotherm of Cd–SIP towards Cd(ii). Adsorbent dosage: 0.05 g; volume of solution: 200 ml; temperature: 303 K; adsorption time: 40 min; pH: 6; number of repetitions: 3.
The fitting parameters and correlation coefficients of different equations
| Model | Parameter | Cd( |
|---|---|---|
| Langmuir |
| 6.43 |
|
| 1.17 | |
|
| 0.9993 | |
| Freundlich |
| 3.34 |
|
| 2.72 | |
|
| 0.9842 | |
| Sips |
| 6.15 |
|
| 1.31 | |
|
| 1.09 | |
|
| 0.9994 |
Fig. 6The influence of pH on the adsorption capacity. Initial concentration: 1 mmol L−1; adsorbent dosage: 0.05 g; volume of solution: 200 ml; temperature: 303 K; adsorption time: 40 min; number of repetitions: 3.
Distribution coefficient and selectivity coefficient data
| Cation | Cd–SIP | Pb–SIP | Cu( | Zn( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Cd( | 4.88 | — | 0.30 | 16.8 | 0.08 | 59.9 | 0.12 | 38.0 |
| Pb( | 0.17 | 29.3 | 5.09 | — | 0.12 | 39.5 | 0.17 | 28.2 |
| Cu( | 0.21 | 81.3 | 23.2 | 19.8 | 4.89 | — | 0.30 | 15.6 |
| Zn( | 0.35 | 14.0 | 0.26 | 19.8 | 0.26 | 19.2 | 4.70 | — |
The recognition selectivity comparison of different ionic imprinted materialsa
| Imprinted method | Template | Competitive ion |
| Adsorption capacity (mmol g−1) | Regenerative property (Reused times) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Cu( | Zn( | 3.29 | 0.92 | 4 |
|
| B | Cd( | Pb( | 2.76 | 0.95 | — |
|
| B | Cd( | Cu( | 3.82 | 0.95 | — |
|
| B | Cd( | Zn( | 1.15 | 0.95 | — |
|
| C | Pb( | Cd( | 14.4 | 0.23 | 5 |
|
| C | Cd( | Cu( | 7.76 | 0.12 | 5 |
|
| C | Cd( | Zn( | 4.63 | 0.12 | 5 |
|
| C | Cd( | Cu( | 0.9 | 0.71 | — |
|
| C | Cd( | Pb( | 1.2 | 0.71 | — |
|
| C | Cd( | Zn( | 1.4 | 0.71 | — |
|
| D | Pb( | Zn( | 9.2 | 1.45 | — |
|
| E | Cd( | Cu( | 81.3 | 2.23 | 10 | This study |
| E | Cu( | Cd( | 59.9 | 2.10 | 10 | This study |
| E | Cu( | Pb( | 39.5 | 2.10 | 10 | This study |
| E | Cd( | Pb( | 29.3 | 2.23 | 10 | This study |
| E | Pb( | Cd( | 16.8 | 2.15 | 10 | This study |
A is the bulk polymerization method; B is the emulsion polymerization method; C is the “grafting polymerization synchronized with crosslinking/imprinting” method; D is the “pre-grafting polymerization and post-crosslinking/imprinting” method; E is the novel surface imprinted technique designed in this study.
Fig. 7Adsorption–desorption cycle of IIPs.