| Literature DB >> 36098071 |
Ravi Katiyar1,2, Chiu-Wen Chen2,3, Reeta Rani Singhania2,3,4, Mei-Ling Tsai5, Ganesh D Saratale6, Ashok Pandey4,7,8, Cheng-Di Dong2,3, Anil Kumar Patel2,3,4,9.
Abstract
The increased antibiotic consumption and their improper management led to serious antibiotic pollution and its exposure to the environment develops multidrug resistance in microbes against antibiotics. The entry rate of antibiotics to the environment is much higher than its exclusion; therefore, efficient removal is a high priority to reduce the harmful impact of antibiotics on human health and the environment. Recent developments in cost-effective and efficient biochar preparation are noticeable for their effective removal. Moreover, biochar engineering advancements enhanced biochar remediation performance several folds more than in its pristine forms. Biochar engineering provides several new interactions and bonding abilities with antibiotic pollutants to increase remediation efficiency. Especially heteroatoms-doping significantly increased catalysis of biochar. The main focus of this review is to underline the crucial role of biochar in the abatement of emerging antibiotic pollutants. A detailed analysis of both native and engineered biochar is provided in this article for antibiotic remediation. There has also been discussion of how biochar properties relate to feedstock, production conditions and manufacturing technologies, and engineering techniques. It is possible to produce biochar with different surface functionalities by varying the feedstock or by modifying the pristine biochar with different chemicals and preparing composites. Subsequently, the interaction of biochar with antibiotic pollutants was compared and reviewed. Depending on the surface functionalities of biochar, they offer different types of interactions e.g., π-π stacking, electrostatic, and H-bonding to adsorb on the biochar surface. This review demonstrates how biochar and related composites have optimized for maximum removal performance by regulating key parameters. Furthermore, future research directions and opportunities for biochar research are discussed.Entities:
Keywords: Biochar; adsorption; antibiotics; biodegradation; bioremediation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36098071 PMCID: PMC9481080 DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2022.2108564
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioengineered ISSN: 2165-5979 Impact factor: 6.832
Application of various pristine biochar for antibiotic removal, adsorption mechanisms and their efficiencies.
| Feedstocks | Pyrolysis Temp. (oC) | Targeted Antibiotic | Max. Adsorption [mg/g) | Sorption Mechanism | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Municipal sewage sludge | 800 | Tetracycline | 100 | Graphitic C and N species were proved to be the catalytic sites | [ |
| Pine Sawdust | 650 | Sulfamethoxazole | 13.83 | Hydrophobic interaction | [ |
| Bamboo | 550 | sulfamethoxazole | π – π electron donor–acceptor interactions | [ | |
| Swine Manure | 700 | Tetracycline | 109.5 | H-bonding, π- π electron donor––acceptor interaction | [ |
| Rice straw | 700 | Tetracycline | 132.7 | H-bonding, π- π electron donor–acceptor interaction | [ |
| Peanut shells | 450 | Doxycycline hydrochloride | 52.37 | Strong complexation, electrostatic interactions | [ |
| Eucalyptus sawdust | 500 | Dimetridazole | 200.00 | Physisorption, chemisorption | [ |
| Eucalyptus sawdust | 500 | Metronidazole | 167.50 | Physisorption, chemisorption | [ |
| Chitosan/biochar | 450 | Ciprofloxacin | 80.29 | π- π electron donor-acceptor interaction, H- bonding | [ |
| Coconut Shells | 500 | Tetracycline | 94.2 | Hydrogen bonding, π – π EDA | [ |
| Fe/Zn | 600 | Tetracycline | 102.00 | Electrostatic interaction, π – π electron donor––acceptor interaction | [ |
| Wasted Sludge | 500 | Tetracycline adsorption | 183.01 | Electrostatic attraction, π – π stacking, pore filling, silicate bonding, chelating & ion exchange | [ |
| Rice Straw | 700 | Tetracycline | 153.7 | Adsorption | [ |
| Rice husk | 500 | Tetracycline | 55.9 | Calcination of Co[NO3]2 treated BCs | [ |
| Camphor leaves | 650 | Ciprofloxacin | 449.4 | Intense π-π stacking interaction, electrostatic interaction & cation exchange interaction | [ |
| Bamboo | 600 | Ciprofloxacin and Norfloxacin | 245.6/ 293.2 | Hydrophobic surface interactions, π-π electron donor––acceptor interaction, and electrostatic attraction | [ |
Figure 1.Schematic of pristine/modified biochar morphology, properties, and interactions for the removal/degradation of various antibiotics.
Adsorption of antibiotics through modified biochar.
| Feedstock | Modification Method | Biochar used (g/L) | Antibiotics | Pyrolysis Temp. (°C), time (h); N2 flow; heating rate (L min−1) | Removal efficiency | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tea residue powder | Fe-BCK0.5-VB6 | 20 | TC | 700°C, 2 h, 10°C-min−1 | 90.89 | [ |
| Cassava | KOH | 0.1 | OTC | 500°C | 65.5–96.2 | [ |
| Date Palm Leave | Vit. B6 alginate | 02 | TC | 500°C, 1 h, 100 ml/min | 91–98.3 | [ |
| Waste Tea Residue | Fe3O4@T-BC | 0.5 | TC | 500°C, 2 h | 99.86 | [ |
| Raw Bamboo | Ball milling | 10 | SNM | 300, 450 and 600°C, 1.5 h, | 80 | [ |
| Hydrochar | Fe2O3 | 20 | TC | 300–700°C, 2 h, 1 L min−1 | 20 | [ |
| Date palm waste | Zeolite | 5.6 | CTC | 600°C | 30.42 | [ |
| Swine Manure | H3PO4 | 0.2 | TC | 700°C | 60.9 | [ |
| Rice straw | H3PO4 | 0.2 | TC | 700°C | 92 | [ |
| Shredded cotton stalks | H2O | – | SMX | 350°C | 68 | [ |
| Grapefruit peel | GPCB-20 | 9–10 | TC | 600°C, 1 h, 5°C-min−1 | 37.92 | [ |
| Vinasse | Fe/Mn | – | PEF | 800°C | [ | |
| Date palm waste | Zeolite | – | CTC | 600°C | 30.42 | [ |
| Bagasse | Ball milled | 10 | SMX | 300, 450 and 600°C, 1.5 h, | 33.4–83.3 | [ |
| Vinasse | Fe/Mn | – | PEF | 800°C | [ | |
| hickory chips | Ball milled -BB | 10 | SPY | 300, 450 and 600°C, 1.5 h, | 39.8–89.6 | [ |
| Camphor leaves | ZnO nanoparticle | 0.5 | CIP | 650°C, 2 h | >75 | [ |
| Shredded cotton stalks | H2O | – | SMX | 350°C | 49 | [ |
| Bermuda grass | IA-BCs, π π EDA | 20 | SMX | 800°C, 2 h, 2 L/min | 62–64 | [ |
| Date palm waste | Zeolite | – | CTC | 600°C | 30.42 | [ |
| Sawdust | Co/Fe | – | CFT | 500°C | 99.23 | [ |
Tetracycline (TC]; Sulfonamides (SNM); Sulfamethoxazole-SMX; Sulfapyridine (SPY); Iron FeCl3; activated biochar (IA-BCs); Tetracycline-TC, Trimethoprim-TMP, Erythromycin-ERY, Clarithromycin-CLA, Ampicillin-AMP, Ofloxacin-OFL, Sulfamethoxazole-SMX; Chlortetracycline-CTC; Ciprofloxacin-CIP; Tylosin-Tyl; Oxytetracycline -OTC; Norfloxacin -NOR; Levofloxacin-LEV; Doxycycline hydrochloride-DOX; pefloxacin (PEF)
Figure 2.Representation of various modification methods on biochar surface to enhance the adsorption properties for antibiotic pollutants.
| Tetracycline-TC | Sulfonamides -SNM | Erythromycin-ERY |
|---|---|---|
| Sulfamethoxazole-SMX | Sulfapyridine-SPY | Clarithromycin-CLA |
| Activated biochar -IA-BCs | Trimethoprim-TMP | Ampicillin-AMP |
| Ofloxacin-OFL | Sulfamethoxazole-SMX | Chlortetracycline-CTC |
| Ciprofloxacin-CIP | Tylosin-Tyl | Oxytetracycline -OTC |
| Norfloxacin -NOR | Levofloxacin-LEV | Doxycycline hydrochloride-DOX |
| Pefloxacin -PEF | Peroxymonosulfate (PMS) | Lignocellulosic biomass-LCB |