Advertisement

Journal of Ocean University of China

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 135–142 | Cite as

Removal of Mercury (Hg(II)) from Seaweed Extracts by Electrodialysis and Process Optimization Using Response Surface Methodology

  • Jiuyi Sun
  • Xin Su
  • Zhen Liu
  • Junlan Liu
  • Zhun MaEmail author
  • Yongchao Sun
  • Xueli Gao
  • Jun Gao
Article

Abstract

In this work, response surface methodology (RSM) was employed to model and optimize electrodialysis process for mercury (Hg(II)) removal from seaweed extracts. Box-Behnken design (BBD) was utilized to evaluate the effects and the interaction of influential variables such as operating voltage, influent flow rate, initial concentration of Hg(II) on the removal rate of Hg(II). The developed regression model for removal rate response was validated by analysis of variance, and presented a good agreement of the experimental data with the quadratic equation with high value coefficient of determination value ({tiR}2 = 0.9913, {tiR}Adj2 = 0.9678). The optimum operating parameters were determined as 7.17 V operating voltage, 72.54 L h−1 influent flow rate and 5.04 mg L−1 initial concentration of mercury. Hg(II) removal rate of 76.45% was acquired under the optimum conditions, which showed good agreement with model-predicted (75.81%) result. The results revealed that electrodialysis can be considered as a promising strategy for removal of Hg(II) from seaweed extracts.

Key words

electrodialysis seaweed extracts mercury removal response surface methodology Box-Behnken design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by the Key Research Project of Shandong Province (No. 2017CXGC 1004), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 21878178), the Shandong Science and Technology Development Plan (No. 2018GGX107001) and the Young Tai- shan Scholars Program of Shandong Province.

References

  1. Agregán, R., Franco, D., and Carballo, J., 2018. Shelf life study of healthy pork liver pâté with added seaweed extracts from Ascophyllum nodosum, Fucus vesiculosus and Bifurcaria bifurcate. Food Research International, 112: 400–411, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.06.063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Babilas, D., and Dydo, P., 2018. Selective zinc recovery from electroplating wastewaters by electrodialysis enhanced with complex formation. Separation and Purification Technology, 192: 419–428, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2017.10.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee, A., 2018. PVA modified filled copolymer membranes for pervaporative dehydration of acetic acid-systematic optimization of synthesis and process parameters with response surface methodology. Journal of Membrane Science, 549: 84–100, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2017.11.056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Battacharyya, D., Babgohari, M. Z., and Rathor, P., 2015. Seaweed extracts as biostimulants in horticulture. Scientia Horticulturae, 196: 39–48, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.09.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belkada, F. D., Kitous, O., and Drouiche, N., 2018. Electrodialysis for fluoride and nitrate removal from synthesized photovoltaic industry wastewater. Separation and Purification Technology, 204: 108–115, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2018.04.068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, Y. C., Cheng, C. Y., and Liu, C. T., 2018. Alleviative effect of fucoxanthin-containing extract from brown seaweed Laminaria japonica on renal tubular cell apoptosis through upregulating Na+/H+ exchanger NHE1 in chronic kidney disease mice. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 224: 391–399, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2018.06.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cui, L., Li, G. P., and Li, Y. Z., 2017. Electrolysis-electrodialysis process for removing chloride ion in wet flue gas desulfurization wastewater (DW): Influencing factors and energy consumption analysis. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 123: 240–247, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2017.05.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dahaghin, Z., Mousavi, H. Z., and Sajjadi, M., 2017. A novel magnetic ion imprinted polymer as a selective magnetic solid phase for separation of trace lead(II) ions from agricultural products, and optimization using a Box-Behnken design. Food Chemistry, 237: 275–281, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.05.118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fernandes, F., Barbosa, M., and Pereira, D. M., 2018. Chemical profiling of edible seaweed (Ochrophyta) extracts and assessment of their in vitro effects on cell-free enzyme systems and on the viability of glutamate-injured SH-SY5Y cells. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 116: 196–206, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.04.033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frioui, S., and Oumeddour, R., 2017. Highly selective extraction of metal ions from dilute solutions by hybrid technology of electrodialysis. Separation and Purification Technology, 174: 264–274, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2016.10.028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gfiveng, A., and Karabacakoglu, B., 2005. Use of electrodialysis to remove silver ions from model solutions and wastewater. Desalination, 172: 7–17, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ghorbani, F., Younesi, H., and Ghasempouri, S. M., 2008. Application of response surface methodology for optimization of cadmium biosorption in an aqueous solution by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Chemical Engineering Journal, 145: 267–275, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEJ.2008.04.028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Govindaswamy, V., Vasudeva, V., and Balaraman, M., 2001. Response surface methodology for optimization of growth parameters for the production of carotenoids by a mutant strain of Rhodotorula gracilis. European Food Research and Technology, 213: 234–239, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s002170100356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang, J. J., and Shi, S. J., 2018. Seaweeds and cancer prevention. Bioactive Seaweeds for Food Applications, 14: 269–290, DOI: https://doi.org/10.10.16/B978-0-12-813312-5.00014-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li, Z. X., Ma, Z., and Xu, Y. T., 2018. Developing homogeneous ion exchange membranes derived from sulfonated polyethersulfone/N-phthaloyl-chitosan for improved hydrophilic and controllable porosity. Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, 35 (8): 1716–1725, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-018-0064-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu, C., Peng, J. H., and Zhang, L. B., 2018. Mercury adsorption from aqueous solution by regenerated activated carbon produced from depleted mercury-containing catalyst by microwave- assisted decontamination. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196: 109–121, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu, W., Xu, H. M., and Liao, Y., 2019. Recyclable CuS sorbent with large mercury adsorption capacity in the presence of SO2 from non-ferrous metal smelting flue gas. Fuel, 235: 847–854, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.08.062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morsi, R. E., Al-Sabagh, A. M., and Moustafa, Y. M., 2018. Polythiophene modified chitosan/magnetite nanocomposites for heavy metals and selective mercury removal. Egyptian Journal of Petroleum, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2018.03.004.Google Scholar
  19. Noguchi, M., Nakamura, Y., and Shoji, T., 2018. Simultaneous removal and recovery of boron from waste water by multistep bipolar membrane electrodialysis. Journal of Water Process Engineering, 23: 299–305, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2018.04.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Oehmen, A., Vergel, Y., and Fradinho, J., 2014. Mercury removal from water streams through the ion exchange membrane bioreactor concept. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 264: 65–70, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.10.067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pedra, A. G. L. M., Ramlov, F., and Maraschin, M., 2017. Cultivation of the red seaweed Kappaphycus alvarezii with effluents from shrimp cultivation and brown seaweed extract: Effects on growth and secondary metabolism. Aquaculture, 479: 297–303, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rhilassi, A. E., Boujaady, H. E., and Bennani-Ziatni, M., 2017. Use of response surface methodology for optimization of fluoride adsorption in an aqueous solution by Brushite. Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 10 (2): 3292–3302, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2013.12.028.Google Scholar
  23. Sadyrbaeva, T. Z., 2016. Removal of chromium (VI) from aqueous solutions using a novel hybrid liquid membraneelectrodialysis process. Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification, 99: 183–191, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2015.07.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sahu, U. K., and Mahapatra, S. S., 2018. Application of Boxe-Behnken design in response surface for adsorptive removal of arsenic from aqueous solution using CeO2/Fe2O3/graphene nanocomposite. Materials Chemistry and Physics, 207: 233–242, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2017.11.042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shen, J. N., Hou, Z. D., and Gao, C. J., 2017. Using bipolar membrane electrodialysis to synthesize di-quaternary ammonium hydroxide and optimization design by response surface methodology. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 25: 1176–1181, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2017.03.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sobolczyk-Bednarek, J., and Łaba, W., 2018. Optimization of copper, lead and cadmium biosorption onto newly isolated bacterium using a Box-Behnken design. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 149: 275–283, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.12.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Su, C. Y., Li, W. G., and Wang, Y., 2013. Adsorption property of direct fast black onto acid-thermal modified sepiolite and optimization of adsorption conditions using Box-Behnken response surface methodology. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 7: 503–511, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-012-0477-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Suraiya, S., Lee, J. M., and Cho, H. J., 2018. Monascus spp. fermented brown seaweeds extracts enhance bio-functional activities. Food Bioscience, 21: 90–99, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2017.12.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tak, B., Tak, B., and Kim, Y., 2015. Optimization of color and COD removal from livestock wastewater by electrocoagulation process: Application of Box-Behnken design (BBD). Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 28: 307–315, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2015.03.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tripathi, P., Srivastava, V. C., and Kumar, A., 2009. Optimization of an azo dye batch adsorption parameters using Box-Behnken design. Desalination, 249: 1273–1279, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2009.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang, Q., Gao, X. L., and Ma, Z., 2018. Combined water flux enhancement of PES-based TFC membranes in ultrasonicassisted forward osmosis processes. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 64: 266–275, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2018.03.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang, Y. M., and Huang, C. H., 2010. Optimization of electrodialysis with bipolar membranes by using response surface methodology. Journal of Membrane Science, 362: 249–254, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2010.06.049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wu, H., Sun, J. X., and Qi, D. X., 2018. Photocatalytic removal of elemental mercury from flue gas using multi-walled carbon nanotubes impregnated with titanium dioxide. Fuel, 230: 218–225, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.05.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Xue, J. L., Wu, Y. N., and Shi, K., 2019. Study on the degradation performance and kinetics of immobilized cells in strawalginate beads in marine environment. Bioresource Technology, 280: 88–94, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.02.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yang, W., Liu, Z. Y., and Xu, W., 2018. Removal of elemental mercury from flue gas using sargassum chars modified by NH4Br reagent. Fuel, 214: 196–206, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.11.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yang, Y., Gao, X. L., and Li, Z. K., 2018. Porous membranes in pressure-assisted forward osmosis: Flux behavior and potential applications. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 60: 160–168, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2017.10.054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ocean University of China, Science Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiuyi Sun
    • 1
  • Xin Su
    • 1
  • Zhen Liu
    • 1
  • Junlan Liu
    • 1
  • Zhun Ma
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yongchao Sun
    • 2
  • Xueli Gao
    • 2
  • Jun Gao
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Chemical and Environmental EngineeringShandong University of Science and TechnologyQingdaoChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Marine Chemistry Theory and Technology, Ministry of Education; College of Chemistry and Chemical EngineeringOcean University of ChinaQingdaoChina

Personalised recommendations