Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 28, pp 28654–28666 | Cite as

Kinetics, isotherm, and optimization of the hexavalent chromium removal from aqueous solution by a magnetic nanobiosorbent

  • Majid Daneshvar
  • Mohammad Raouf Hosseini
Research Article
  • 88 Downloads

Abstract

Sorption is the most effective approach to the treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD) and wastewaters, but the removal of the adsorbents from water has always been a challenging problem which may be resolved by using magnetic separation. In this work, a magnetic bioadsorbent was prepared using low cost and high-performance sources and applied in Cr(VI) removal from a synthetic solution. Initially, magnetite nanoparticles were synthesized from iron boring scraps by chemical co-precipitation method. Results of dynamic light scattering (DLS) and vibrating sample magnetometry (VSM) analyses showed that the synthesized nanoparticles were around 40 nm in size and had a significant magnetization. Then, the magnetite nanoparticles were attached to the dead and alkaline activated biomass of Aspergillus niger. Central composite design (CCD) was applied to determine the optimal condition of Cr(VI) adsorption on the produced magnetic nanobiocomposite. The maximum chromium removal (~ 92%) was achieved at pH 5.8, Cr concentration 23.4 mg/l, adsorbent dose 3.72 g/l, agitation rate 300 rpm, and duration 11 min. Kinetic studies showed that regardless of temperature, the process was controlled by mass transfer and intraparticle diffusion with an equilibrium constant of 0.74 mg/g min1/2 at 40 °C. Also, the adsorption isotherms followed the Temkin model, which indicated the physical adsorption of Cr(VI) on the produced sorbent. Therefore, the magnetic nanobiocomposite has a perfect ability to be used as the chromium adsorbent and can be collected by a low external magnetic field.

Graphical abstract

Synthesis of the magnetic nanobiosorbent and its application in the removal of Cr(VI) from wastewaters.

Keywords

Adsorption Fungus Hexavalent chromium Kinetics Magnetite nanoparticles Optimization 

Supplementary material

11356_2018_2878_MOESM1_ESM.docx (33 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 33 kb)

References

  1. Ahluwalia SS, Goyal D (2007) Microbial and plant derived biomass for removal of heavy metals from wastewater. Bioresour Technol 98:2243–2257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen S, Mckay G, Khader K (1989) Intraparticle diffusion of a basic dye during adsorption onto sphagnum peat. Environ Pollut 56:39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amini M, Younesi H, Bahramifar N (2009) Statistical modeling and optimization of the cadmium biosorption process in an aqueous solution using Aspergillus niger. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 337:67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Daraei H, Mittal A, Noorisepehr M, Mittal J (2015) Separation of chromium from water samples using eggshell powder as a low-cost sorbent: kinetic and thermodynamic studies. Desalin Water Treat 53:214–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ding C, Cheng W, Sun Y, Wang X (2015) Novel fungus-Fe3O4 bio-nanocomposites as high performance adsorbents for the removal of radionuclides. J Hazard Mater 295:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dodrill B, Cryotronics LS (1999) Magnetic media measurements with a VSM. Lake Shore Cryotronics, Westerville, p 575Google Scholar
  7. Farooq U, Kozinski JA, Khan MA, Athar M (2010) Biosorption of heavy metal ions using wheat based biosorbents—a review of the recent literature. Bioresour Technol 101:5043–5053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fatahian S, Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Pouladian M, Yousefi M, Amiri GR, Noori A (2012) Biodistribution and toxicity assessment of radiolabeled and DMSA coated ferrite nanoparticles in mice. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 293:915–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fathima A, Aravindhan R, Rao JR, Nair BU (2015) Biomass of Termitomyces clypeatus for chromium (III) removal from chrome tanning wastewater. Clean Techn Environ Policy 17:541–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fu F, Wang Q (2011) Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review. J Environ Manag 92:407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guan X, Chang J, Chen Y, Fan H (2015) A magnetically-separable Fe3O4 nanoparticle surface grafted with polyacrylic acid for chromium (III) removal from tannery effluents. RSC Adv 5:50126–50136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hlihor RM, Figueiredo H, Tavares T, Gavrilescu M (2017) Biosorption potential of dead and living Arthrobacter viscosus biomass in the removal of Cr (VI): batch and column studies. Process Saf Environ Prot 108:44–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Iconaru SL, Guégan R, Popa CL, Motelica-Heino M, Ciobanu CS, Predoi D (2016) Magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticles as adsorbents for As and Cu removal. Appl Clay Sci 134:128–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kapoor A, Viraraghavan T, Cullimore DR (1999) Removal of heavy metals using the fungus Aspergillus niger. Bioresour Technol 70:95–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kurt BZ, Uckaya F, Durmus Z (2017) Chitosan and carboxymethyl cellulose based magnetic nanocomposites for application of peroxidase purification. Int J Biol Macromol 96:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lefèvre CT, Bazylinski DA (2013) Ecology, diversity, and evolution of magnetotactic bacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 77:497–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li J, Cai F, Lv H, Sun J (2013) Selective competitive biosorption of Au (III) and Cu (II) in binary systems by Magnetospirillum gryphiswaldense. Sep Sci Technol 48:960–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li Q, Kartikowati CW, Horie S, Ogi T, Iwaki T, Okuyama K (2017) Correlation between particle size/domain structure and magnetic properties of highly crystalline Fe3O4 nanoparticles. Sci Rep 7:9894–9900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lv Z, Liang C, Cui J, Zhang Y, Xu S (2015) A facile route for the synthesis of mesoporous melamine-formaldehyde resins for hexavalent chromium removal. RSC Adv 5:18213–18217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mondal NK, Samanta A, Dutta S, Chattoraj S (2017) Optimization of Cr (VI) biosorption onto Aspergillus niger using 3-level Box-Behnken design: equilibrium, kinetic, thermodynamic and regeneration studies. J Genet Eng Biotechnol 15:151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nourbakhsh M, Sag Y, Özer D, Aksu Z, Kutsal T, Caglar A (1994) A comparative study of various biosorbents for removal of chromium (VI) ions from industrial waste waters. Process Biochem 29:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Owlad M, Aroua MK, Daud WAW, Baroutian S (2009) Removal of hexavalent chromium-contaminated water and wastewater: a review. Water Air Soil Pollut 200:59–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paul S, Bera D, Chattopadhyay P, Ray L (2006) Biosorption of Pb (II) by Bacillus cereus M116 immobilized in calcium alginate gel. J Hazard Subst Res 5:1–13Google Scholar
  24. Petcharoen K, Sirivat A (2012) Synthesis and characterization of magnetite nanoparticles via the chemical co-precipitation method. Mater Sci Eng B 177:421–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prasenjit B, Sumathi S (2005) Uptake of chromium by Aspergillus foetidus. J Mater Cycles Waste 7:88–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Preethi J, Prabhu SM, Meenakshi S (2017) Effective adsorption of hexavalent chromium using biopolymer assisted oxyhydroxide materials from aqueous solution. React Funct Polym 117:16–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rajput S, Pittman CU, Mohan D (2016) Magnetic magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticle synthesis and applications for lead (Pb2+) and chromium (Cr6+) removal from water. J Colloid Interface Sci 468:334–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ramos RL, Jacome LB, Barron JM, Rubio LF, Coronado RG (2002) Adsorption of zinc (II) from an aqueous solution onto activated carbon. J Hazard Mater 90:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rezaei H (2016) Biosorption of chromium by using Spirulina sp. Arab J Chem 9:846–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosales-Landeros C, Barrera-Díaz CE, Bilyeu B, Guerrero VV, Núnez FU (2013) A review on Cr (VI) adsorption using inorganic materials. Am J Anal Chem 4:8–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Salam MA (2017) Preparation and characterization of chitin/magnetite/multiwalled carbon nanotubes magnetic nanocomposite for toxic hexavalent chromium removal from solution. J Mol Liq 233:197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sivakumar D (2016) Biosorption of hexavalent chromium in a tannery industry wastewater using fungi species. Global J Environ Sci Manage 2:105–124Google Scholar
  33. Sureshkumar V, Daniel SK, Ruckmani K, Sivakumar M (2016) Fabrication of chitosan–magnetite nanocomposite strip for chromium removal. Appl Nanosci 6:277–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tan Y, Wei C, Gong Y, Du L (2017) Adsorption of hexavalent chromium onto sisal pulp/polypyrrole composites, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. IOP Publishing, pp 012007–0120013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wang Y, Gao H, Sun J, Li J, Su Y, Ji Y, Gong C (2011) Selective reinforced competitive biosorption of Ag (I) and cu (II) on Magnetospirillum gryphiswaldense. Desalination 270:258–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weber W, Morris J (1962): Advances in water pollution research, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Water Pollution Research. Pergamon Press Oxford, pp 231Google Scholar
  37. Zafar S, Aqil F, Ahmad I (2007) Metal tolerance and biosorption potential of filamentous fungi isolated from metal contaminated agricultural soil. Bioresour Technol 98:2557–2561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhang L, He R, Gu H-C (2006) Oleic acid coating on the monodisperse magnetite nanoparticles. Appl Surf Sci 253:2611–2617CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mining EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations