Fabrication of PVA/ZnO fibrous composite polymer as a novel sorbent for arsenic removal: design and a systematic study

  • Ghasem Sargazi
  • Ahmad Khajeh Ebrahimi
  • Daryoush Afzali
  • Arastoo Badoei-dalfard
  • Saeid Malekabadi
  • Zahra Karami
Original Paper


PVA/ZnO nanofibrous composite polymer was synthesized as a novel sorbent via electrospinning method at ambient conditions. Physicochemical characteristics of the samples were analyzed using XRD, SEM, EDS, TGA/DSC, and BET techniques. Efficiency of the composite samples for arsenic removal [i.e., As (III) and As (V) anions] was studied under different conditions using RSM optimization approach. Experimental results of adsorption tests indicated that the synthesized PVA/ZnO polymer with the maximum removal of 97% is a highly efficient sorbent for arsenic comparable with other sorbents studied for arsenic removal. The effect of some cations on arsenic removal was also studied in this research. Results showed that the tested ions do not cause a significant reduction in the removal rate. PVA/ZnO composite polymer, which is highly biocompatible, can be considered as a new adsorbent for removal of arsenic from contaminated water.


PVA/ZnO polymer Arsenic removal Efficient sorbents Process optimization Water decontamination 



The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support for this work from the Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman (Iran).


  1. 1.
    Zhao X-M, Yao L-A, Ma Q-L, Zhou G-J, Wang L, Fang Q-L, Xu Z-C (2018) Distribution and ecological risk assessment of cadmium in water and sediment in Longjiang River, China: implication on water quality management after pollution accident. Chemosphere 194:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hoover J, Gonzales M, Shuey C, Barney Y, Lewis J (2017) Elevated arsenic and uranium concentrations in unregulated water sources on the Navajo Nation, USA. Expo Health 9:113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang Y-Y, Mu Y-X, He C-T, Fu H-L, Wang X-S, Gong F-Y, Yang Z-Y (2018) Cadmium and lead accumulations and agronomic quality of a newly bred pollution-safe cultivar (PSC) of water spinach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:1–11Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hering JG, Katsoyiannis IA, Theoduloz GA, Berg M, Hug SJ (2017) Arsenic removal from drinking water: experiences with technologies and constraints in practice. American Society of Civil EngineersGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang L, Qin X, Tang J, Liu W, Yang H (2017) Review of arsenic geochemical characteristics and its significance on arsenic pollution studies in karst groundwater, Southwest China. Appl Geochem 77:80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pous N, Casentini B, Rossetti S, Fazi S, Puig S, Aulenta F (2015) Anaerobic arsenite oxidation with an electrode serving as the sole electron acceptor: a novel approach to the bioremediation of arsenic-polluted groundwater. J Hazard Mater 283:617–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ray PZ, Shipley HJ (2015) Inorganic nano-adsorbents for the removal of heavy metals and arsenic: a review. RSC Adv 5:29885–29907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ameer SS, Engström K, Hossain MB, Concha G, Vahter M, Broberg K (2017) Arsenic exposure from drinking water is associated with decreased gene expression and increased DNA methylation in peripheral blood. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 321:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang X, Pu W, Zhang X, Ren Y, Huang J (2015) Water-soluble ions and trace elements in surface snow and their potential source regions across northeastern China. Atmos Environ 114:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abdul KSM, Jayasinghe SS, Chandana EP, Jayasumana C, De Silva PMC (2015) Arsenic and human health effects: a review. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 40:828–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ciminelli VS, Gasparon M, Ng JC, Silva GC, Caldeira CL (2017) Dietary arsenic exposure in Brazil: the contribution of rice and beans. Chemosphere 168:996–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Otter P, Malakar P, Jana BB, Grischek T, Benz F, Goldmaier A, Feistel U, Jana J, Lahiri S, Alvarez JA (2017) Arsenic removal from groundwater by solar driven inline-electrolytic induced co-precipitation and filtration—a long term field test conducted in West Bengal. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14:1167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee C-G, Alvarez PJ, Nam A, Park S-J, Do T, Choi U-S, Lee S-H (2017) Arsenic (V) removal using an amine-doped acrylic ion exchange fiber: kinetic, equilibrium, and regeneration studies. J Hazard Mater 325:223–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmidt S-A, Gukelberger E, Hermann M, Fiedler F, Großmann B, Hoinkis J, Ghosh A, Chatterjee D, Bundschuh J (2017) Corrigendum to” Pilot study on arsenic removal from groundwater using a small-scale reverse osmosis system-Towards sustainable drinking water production’’ [J. Hazard. Mater. 318 (2016) 671–678], J Hazard Mater 324:797–797Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fazi S, Amalfitano S, Casentini B, Davolos D, Pietrangeli B, Crognale S, Lotti F, Rossetti S (2016) Arsenic removal from naturally contaminated waters: a review of methods combining chemical and biological treatments. Rend Lincei 27:51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hu X, Ding Z, Zimmerman AR, Wang S, Gao B (2015) Batch and column sorption of arsenic onto iron-impregnated biochar synthesized through hydrolysis. Water Res 68:206–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lata S, Samadder S (2016) Removal of arsenic from water using nano adsorbents and challenges: a review. J Environ Manag 166:387–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ahmed MJK, Ahmaruzzaman M (2016) A review on potential usage of industrial waste materials for binding heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions. J Water Process Eng 10:39–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Menhage-Bena R, Kazemian H, Ghazi-Khansari M, Hosseini M, Shahtaheri S (2004) Evaluation of some natural zeolites and their relevant synthetic types as sorbents for removal of arsenic from drinking water. Iran J Public Health 33:36–44Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lin S, Yang H, Na Z, Lin K (2018) A novel biodegradable arsenic adsorbent by immobilization of iron oxyhydroxide (FeOOH) on the root powder of long-root Eichhornia crassipes. Chemosphere 192:258–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Barman A (2015) Review on biocompatibility of ZnO nano particles. In: Gupta S, Bag S, Ganguly K, Sarkar I, Biswas P (eds) Advancements of medical electronics. Springer, New York, pp 343–352Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Díez-Pascual AM (2017) Biodegradable food packaging nanocomposites based on ZnO-reinforced polyhydroxyalkanoates. In: Grumezescu AM (ed) Food packaging. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 185–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rebia RA, Rozet S, Tamada Y, Tanaka T (2018) Biodegradable PHBH/PVA blend nanofibers: fabrication, characterization, in vitro degradation, and in vitro biocompatibility. Polym Degrad Stab 154:124–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chatterjee S, De S (2017) Adsorptive removal of arsenic from groundwater using chemically treated iron ore slime incorporated mixed matrix hollow fiber membrane. Sep Purif Technol 179:357–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Malik D, Jain C, Yadav AK (2017) Removal of heavy metals from emerging cellulosic low-cost adsorbents: a review. Appl Water Sci 7:2113–2136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Emo B, Eberlin CT, Hixon KR, Kalaf EAG, Laktas JM, Sell SA (2017) A study on the potential of doped electrospun polystyrene fibers in arsenic filtration. J Environ Chem Eng 5:232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cheng W, Hu L, Li J (2017) Nanostructured copper (II)-manganese (II)-binary oxide: a novel adsorbent for enhanced arsenic removal from drinking water. In: Ashraf MA, Aqma WS (eds) Environmental conservation, clean water, air & soil (CleanWAS), p 156Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Marino T, Russo F, Rezzouk L, Bouzid A, Figoli A (2017) PES-kaolin mixed matrix membranes for arsenic removal from water. Membranes 7:57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sen T, Nomura S, Nishioka H, Sen T (2017) Synthesis and arsenic adsorption characteristics of a novel magnetic adsorbent. J Environ Conserv Eng 46:156–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Luo J, Meng X, Crittenden J, Qu J, Hu C, Liu H, Peng P (2018) Arsenic adsorption on α-MnO2 nanofibers and the significance of (1 0 0) facet as compared with (1 1 0). Chem Eng J 331:492–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sargazi G, Afzali D, Mostafavi A (2018) A novel synthesis of a new thorium (IV) metal organic framework nanostructure with well controllable procedure through ultrasound assisted reverse micelle method. Ultrason Sonochem 41:234–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sargazi G, Afzali D, Mostafavi A, Ebrahimipour SY (2018) Synthesis of CS/PVA biodegradable composite nanofibers as a microporous material with well controllable procedure through electrospinning. J Polym Environ 26(5):1804–1817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sargazi G, Afzali D, Mostafavi A, Ebrahimipour SY (2017) Ultrasound-assisted facile synthesis of a new tantalum (V) metal-organic framework nanostructure: design, characterization, systematic study, and CO2 adsorption performance. J Solid State Chem 250:32–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang L, Topham PD, Mykhaylyk OO, Yu H, Ryan AJ, Fairclough JPA, Bras W (2015) Self-assembly-driven electrospinning: the transition from fibers to intact beaded morphologies. Macromol Rapid Commun 36:1437–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shang Y, Hua C, Xu W, Hu X, Wang Y, Zhou Y, Zhang Y, Li X, Cao A (2016) Meter-long spiral carbon nanotube fibers show ultrauniformity and flexibility. Nano Lett 16:1768–1775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Augustine R, Malik HN, Singhal DK, Mukherjee A, Malakar D, Kalarikkal N, Thomas S (2014) Electrospun polycaprolactone/ZnO nanocomposite membranes as biomaterials with antibacterial and cell adhesion properties. J Polym Res 21:347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zanjani JSM, Okan BS, Letofsky-Papst I, Yildiz M, Menceloglu YZ (2015) Rational design and direct fabrication of multi-walled hollow electrospun fibers with controllable structure and surface properties. Eur Polym J 62:66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhao Y, Wang GC, Lu TM (2000) Characterization of amorphous and crystalline rough surface—principles and applications. Elsevier Science, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang L, Aboagye A, Kelkar A, Lai C, Fong H (2014) A review: carbon nanofibers from electrospun polyacrylonitrile and their applications. J Mater Sci 49:463–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    An S, Liou M, Song KY, Jo HS, Lee MW, Al-Deyab SS, Yarin AL, Yoon SS (2015) Highly flexible transparent self-healing composite based on electrospun core–shell nanofibers produced by coaxial electrospinning for anti-corrosion and electrical insulation. Nanoscale 7:17778–17785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sargazi G, Afzali D, Mostafavi A (2018) An efficient and controllable ultrasonic-assisted microwave route for flower-like Ta(V)–MOF nanostructures: preparation, fractional factorial design, DFT calculations, and high-performance N2 adsorption. J Porous Mater 25(6):1723–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Xu X, Lin L, Papelis C, Xu P (2018) Sorption of arsenic from desalination concentrate onto drinking water treatment solids: operating conditions and kinetics. Water 10:96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Refaey Y, Jansen B, De Voogt P, Parsons JR, Abdel-Hamid E-S, Abdel-Aziz E-H, Kalbitz K (2017) Influence of organo-metal interactions on regeneration of exhausted clay mineral sorbents in soil columns loaded with heavy metals. Pedosphere 27:579–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lin S, Lu D, Liu Z (2012) Removal of arsenic contaminants with magnetic γ-Fe2O3 nanoparticles. Chem Eng J 211:46–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Goswami A, Raul P, Purkait M (2012) Arsenic adsorption using copper (II) oxide nanoparticles. Chem Eng Res Des 90:1387–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cheng W, Xu J, Wang Y, Wu F, Xu X, Li J (2015) Dispersion–precipitation synthesis of nanosized magnetic iron oxide for efficient removal of arsenite in water. J Colloid Interface Sci 445:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chandra V, Park J, Chun Y, Lee JW, Hwang I-C, Kim KS (2010) Water-dispersible magnetite-reduced graphene oxide composites for arsenic removal. ACS Nano 4:3979–3986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Zhang G, Ren Z, Zhang X, Chen J (2013) Nanostructured iron (III)-copper (II) binary oxide: a novel adsorbent for enhanced arsenic removal from aqueous solutions. Water Res 47:4022–4031CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ghasem Sargazi
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ahmad Khajeh Ebrahimi
    • 2
  • Daryoush Afzali
    • 3
    • 4
  • Arastoo Badoei-dalfard
    • 5
  • Saeid Malekabadi
    • 5
  • Zahra Karami
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Nanotechnology Engineering, Mineral Industries Research CenterShahid Bahonar University of KermanKermanIran
  2. 2.School of Chemistry, College of ScienceUniversity of TehranTehranIran
  3. 3.Department of NanotechnologyGraduate University of Advanced TechnologyKermanIran
  4. 4.Department of Environment, Institute of Science and High Technology and Environmental SciencesGraduate University of Advance TechnologyKermanIran
  5. 5.Department of Biology, Faculty of SciencesShahid Bahonar University of KermanKermanIran

Personalised recommendations