| Literature DB >> 35972610 |
Habib Ullah1,2, Lu Lun3, Audil Rashid4, Noor Zada5, Baoliang Chen6,7, Asfandyar Shahab8, Ping Li9,10, Muhammad Ubaid Ali9,10, Siyi Lin11, Ming Hung Wong12.
Abstract
Selenium (Se) is an essential metalloid and is categorized as emerging anthropogenic contaminant released to the environment. The rise of Se release into the environment has raised concern about its bioaccumulation, toxicity, and potential to cause serious damages to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem. Therefore, it is extremely important to monitor Se level in environment on a regular basis. Understanding Se release, anthropogenic sources, and environmental behavior is critical for developing an effective Se containment strategy. The ongoing efforts of Se remediation have mostly emphasized monitoring and remediation as an independent topics of research. However, our paper has integrated both by explaining the attributes of monitoring on effective scale followed by a candid review of widespread technological options available with specific focus on Se removal from environmental media. Another novel approach demonstrated in the article is the presentation of an overwhelming evidence of limitations that various researchers are confronted with to overcome achieving effective remediation. Furthermore, we followed a holistic approach to discuss ways to remediate Se for cleaner environment especially related to introducing weak magnetic field for ZVI reactivity enhancement. We linked this phenomenal process to electrokinetics and presented convincing facts in support of Se remediation, which has led to emerge 'membrane technology', as another viable option for remediation. Hence, an interesting, innovative and future oriented review is presented, which will undoubtedly seek attention from global researchers.Entities:
Keywords: Bioremediation; Contamination; Remediation technology; Selenium; Waste water
Year: 2022 PMID: 35972610 PMCID: PMC9379879 DOI: 10.1007/s10653-022-01354-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Geochem Health ISSN: 0269-4042 Impact factor: 4.898
Fig. 1Speciation diagrams of selenite [SeO32−, Se(IV)] and selenate [SeO42−, Se(VI)] as a function of pH; conditions: zero ionic strength at 25 °C, and 1 bar pressure. Reproduced with the permission of Sharma et al., (2018)
Selected physicochemical characteristics and natural isotopic abundance of Se; Source: Adapted from Pons et al. (2020); Kieliszek, (2019); Fordyce (2013) and Ullah et al., (2018a, b, c)
| Name of element | Selenium | Natural isotopes of Se | Abundance (in %) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chemical representation | Se | 80Se | 49.60 |
| Position in the periodic table | VIA | 78Se | 23.77 |
| Atomic number | 34 | 76Se | 9.36 |
| Density | 4.808 g cm−3 | 77Se | 7.63 |
| Atomic mass | 78.97 | 74Se | 0.88 |
| Electronic configuration | [Ar] 3d104s24p4 | 82Se | 8.73 |
| Boiling point | 685 °C | ||
| Melting point | 220 °C | ||
| Oxidation states | − II, 0, IV, VI | ||
| Vapor pressure | 1 mmHg @ 356 °C | ||
| Electron affinity | − 4.3 Ev | ||
| Ionization potential | 9.75 Ev |
Fig. 2Characteristics and appearance of selenium
Fig. 3Global annual selenium refinery production for different countries across the world (1996–2020). Adapted and Reproduced with permission from ‘(Ullah et al., 2018a, b, c)’
Fig. 4Global selenium cycle in nature. Reproduced with the permission of ‘(Nancharaiah & Lens, 2015a, b)
Techniques used for bioremediating selenium from the environment using different microbes
| Microbe spp. | Region/Isolation place | Bioremediation function | Resistance mechanism | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| coal mine drainage impacted wetland (Central Pennsylvania) | Selenite and selenate reduction | Aerobic reduction of selenite and selenate | (Sabuda et al., | |
| Punjab, India | Selenite reduction | Selenite reduction under aerobic conditions producing elemental Se | (Bajaj et al., | |
| Punjab, India | Selenite reduction | Selenite reduction under aerobic conditions producing elemental Se | – | |
| California, USA | Selenite reduction | Se(VI) reduction to precipitate insoluble Se0 particles | (Yee et al., | |
| Coal mines in Asansol, India | Detoxification of selenite | Synthesis of stable Se0 nanoparticles | (Dhanjal & Cameotra, | |
| Costa Rica, USA | Reduction of selenite | Selenite reduction to nano-Se | (Avendaño et al., | |
| Reduction of selenite | Selenite reduction, eco-friendly synthesis of Se nanoparticles | (Fernández-Llamosas et al., | ||
| Se-polluted soil, Italy | Reduction of selenite | Reduction of selenite | (Lampis et al., | |
| Herbivorous insect ( | Reduction of selenite | Tolerance and reduction of selenite | (Wang et al., | |
| China | Reduction of selenite | Reduction of selenite | (Xia et al., |
Fig. 5Various types of phytore-mediation of selenium occurring in plants. Passage and probable fates of selenium in plants. Adapted with the permission of Usmani et al. (2018)
The following list indicates different plants that have been applied for Se phytoremediation
| Name of plant spp. | Family | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Poaceae | (Kök et al., | |
| A | (Ohlbaum et al., | |
| (Ohlbaum et al., | ||
| Poaceae | (Yasin et al., | |
| Pontederiaceae | (Pal & Rai, | |
| Fabaceae | (Dixit et al., | |
| (Dhankher et al., | ||
| (Yasin et al., | ||
| Liliaceae | (Yadav, | |
| (Lindblom et al., | ||
| Asteraceae | (Liu et al., | |
| Salicaceae | (Winkel et al., | |
| Plantaginaceae | (Hasanuzzaman et al., | |
| Lemnaceae | – | |
| Malvaceae | – | |
| Myrtaceae | – | |
| Characeae | (Hasanuzzaman et al., | |
| Cyperaceae | (Pilon-Smits et al., | |
| Pteridaceae | (Feng & Wei, | |
| Juncaceae | (Hasanuzzaman et al., | |
| Salviniaceae | (Pilon‐Smits et al., | |
| Convolvulaceae | (Sabogal & Borkowski, | |
| Typhaceae | (Jeke et al., |
Reaction pathways for remediation of Se applying HOFs
| Products | Reaction | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Ferrous ions formation | Fe0 → 2H2O + | (Arienzo et al., |
| Ferric ions formation | 4Fe+2 + O2 + 4H3O + → 4Fe+3 + 6H2O | (Hansen et al., |
| HFOs formation | Fe+3 + 3H2O → Fe (OH)3 + 3H+ Fe+2 + 2H2O → Fe (OH)2 + 2H+ | (Arienzo et al., |
| Selenium adsorption | Fe (OH)3 + SeO3−2 + H+ → Fe (OH)2 + CSeO3− + H2O | (Gutiérrez et al., |
Examples of adsorption, biosorption and reduction processes to remove excess water Se
| Approach applied | Agent used | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Adsorption | Cu-Al2O3/ceramic particles | Wu et al., ( |
| Nano-zero-valent iron (nZVI), magnetite (Fe3O4), ferric chloride (FeCl3) and granular activated carbon (GAC) | Okonji et al., ( | |
| Goethite (α-FeOOH) and hematite (α-Fe2O3) | Yue et al., (( | |
| Hydrogen-terminated diamond [H-Ter-D] (0 0 1) surface | Liu et al., ( | |
| Hematite-coated magnetic nanoparticle (MNP@hematite) | Ma et al., ( | |
| Polymer–clay composites | Bleiman & Mishael, ( | |
| Lepidocrocite (γ-FeOOH) nanoflakes and lepidocrocite decorated on multilayered graphene (γ-FeOOH-MLG | Jadhav et al., ( | |
| Biochar produced from wheat straw impregnated by Fe(NO3)3 (0.8, 4 and 10% w/v) and pyrolyzed at 200 °C | Godlewska et al., ( | |
| Composites and oxides activated alumina | ||
| Granular-activated carbon | Wasewar et al., ( | |
| Intercalated layered soluble hydroxides | Ma et al., ( | |
| Tire-derived-carbon supported with magnetic iron oxide nanoparticle adsorbents | Ying et al., ( | |
| Biofilm model developed in a H2-based membrane biofilm reactor (MBfR) | Chen et al., ( | |
| Naturally occurring metal oxides (hematite, manganese dioxide (β-MnO2) α and ϒ-alumina oxides) | Xu et al., ( | |
| Biosorption | Dried biomass of baker’s yeast, | Khakpour et al., ( |
| Fe-biochar from two algal sources; “ | Johansson et al., ( | |
| Rajamohan & Rajasimman, ( | ||
| Badr et al., ( | ||
| citrus peels (bare), Ca-alginate gel beads, and Ca-alginate-citrus peels composite beads (Ca-alginate@citrus) | Dev et al., ( | |
| Reduction | Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), (a high-molecular-weight biopolymer) | Zhang et al., ( |
| Lusa et al., ( | ||
| Ni–Fe Bimetallic nanoparticle | Jegadeesan & Arumugam, ( | |
| Fe (nanocomposite of nZVI@D201) | Shan et al., ( | |
| Zero-valent iron (ZVI), coupled with weak magnetic field (WMF) | Liang et al., ( |
Fig. 6Adsorption kinetics of Se(IV) by MNP@hematite (a) and MNP core (b) at 25 °C. Initial solution pH 7.0, adsorbent dosage 0.1 g/L. Reproduced with the permission of Ma et al. (2018)
Summary on the benefits and drawbacks of different remediation techniques for selenium
| Remediation approach | Se species | Benefits | Drawbacks | Mechanism | Comments | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Physical | Membrane technology | Inorganic Se | Employability on a large scale | Being expensive | Both lab-scale and full-scale membranes were made by covering PVDF membranes with PAA, followed by ion exchange of ferrous ions, and finally reduction to zero-valent iron nanoparticles | The use of nano-filtration (NF) and iron-functionalized membranes results in a selenium content of less than 10 g/L |
| Phytoremediation | Total Se | Green technology | Implementation constraints | Phyto-extraction and phyto-volatilization | Phytoremediation is an effective and feasible approach to get rid of Se from Se-contaminated environment | |
| Biological | Biological processes | Inorganic Se | High removal efficiency | Slow process and requiring acidic condition | – | Widely implemented in industries |
| Bioremediation | Inorganic Se | Environment friendly; Biofilms can both detoxify and sequester selenium | Requires longer remediation time | Based on the transformation of poisonous, water-soluble Se oxyanions into elemental, water-insoluble Se oxyanions Se | Biofilms, or microbe communities, play an important role in biotransformation of elements into less harmful chemical forms | |
| Chemical | Coagulation/Flocculation | Inorganic Se | Removal of other toxic metals besides selenium | Less effective in simultaneous removal of both selenium | High coagulant dosages and a weakly acidic pH can promote the production of hydroxide flocs with more positive adsorption sites and a higher zeta potential, making them more desirable for the removal of Se | It is possible to attain a Se(IV) removal effectiveness of over 98 percent….In the removal of Se, Fe-based coagulants were far more effective than Al-based coagulants |
| Chemical precipitation | Inorganic Se | High removal efficiency | Slow process and requiring acidic condition | Using sulfide ions to precipitate selenium | Sodium sulfide can be used to successfully precipitate precious ions from weak acidic solutions | |
| Co-precipitation | Inorganic Se | Economical and fast paced | Poor efficiency | During crystal development, the trace element became immobilized in the material | – | |
| Reduction techniques | Inorganic Se | Defects in the nZVI particle shell greatly boost selenium diffusion and increase nZVI's ability for selenium sequestration | Chemical reduction of Se(IV) to Se(0) | Increasing evidence suggests that nZVI can successfully treat and eliminate selenium | ||
| Electrocoagulation (EC) | Inorganic Se | Wide range applicability | Power consumption | Iron (Fe) and aluminum (Al) sacrificial electrodes were used in a batch reactor under galvanostatic conditions | The use of Fe electrodes as soluble anode in electrocoagulation constitutes a better option than Al electrodes for the electrochemical sedimentation of colloidal Se(0) | |
| Adsorption | Total Se | Economic and simple to employ | Finding a proper absorbent | – | Different process variables, such as pH, temperature, contact time, starting concentration, adsorbent dose, and so on, all play a role in determining adsorbent capacity | |