Effect of multifactors interaction on competitive adsorption of Zn2+ and Cd2+ by response surface methodology

  • Zhenru Niu
  • Qiang Xue
  • Shuo Qi
  • Ying Guo
  • Honghan Chen
Original Article


The problem associated with multi-metals contaminated soils has generated increasingly more attention. Thus, it is necessary within the field to study the mutual influence of environmental factors on competitive adsorption. The majority of studies carried out to date have concentrated on the variation of adsorption capacity or the removal efficiency, with only a single factor changed (including pH, ionic strength, and metal concentration). However, the interaction effect among various environmental factors was ignored in these studies. The purpose of this study was mainly aimed toward the investigation of the interaction of two influential factors, as well as the influential degree of each factor (such as the initial pH, ionic strength, initial metal concentration, and the competitive metal concentration) on competitive adsorption using the response surface method. These results demonstrated that the influential degree of each factor studied on the competitive adsorption of Zn2+ and Cd2+ followed the trend of having the initial concentration of the target metal > initial pH > concentration of competitive metal > ionic strength. When the metal concentration was held constant, we found that the competitive adsorption of Zn2+ initially increased, followed by a decrease with increasing initial pH. However, this was found to change minimally with increasing ionic strength. When the initial pH or ionic strength was held constant, the competitive ability was observed to increase with increasing Zn2+ concentration. However, with increasing Zn2+ or Cd2+ concentrations, the variation degree of the competitive adsorption was found to become smaller. These results provide novel information toward a better understanding of the effect of multifactors on the competitive adsorption of Zn2+ and Cd2+.


Zn2+ and Cd2+ Competitive adsorption Response surface method Interaction among environmental factors Influential magnitude 



This work was financially supported by the Fundamental Research Fund for the Central Universities (No. 2652017174 and 2652017166), the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant 41672239), the geological surevy project of the China Geological Survey (DD20160300, 1212011121166), and the National Water Pollution Control and Treatment Science and Technology Major Project (2015ZX07406005-001).


  1. Antoniadis V, Tsadilas CD (2007) Sorption of cadmium, nickel, and zinc in mono- and multimetal systems. Appl Geochem 22(11):2375–2380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azizi A (2015) Investigating the controllable factors influencing the weight loss of grinding ball using SEM/EDX analysis and RSM model. Eng Sci Technol 18(2):278–285Google Scholar
  3. Azmi NB, Bashir MJK, Sethupathi S, Wei LJ, Aun NC (2015) Stabilized landfill leachate treatment by sugarcane bagasse derived activated carbon for removal of color, COD and NH3-N—optimization of preparation conditions by RSM. J Environ Chem Eng 3(2):1287–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bezerra MA, Santelli RE, Oliveira EP, Villar LS, Escaleira LA (2008) Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta 76(5):965–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chotpantarat S, Ong SK, Sutthirat C, Osathaphan K (2011) Competitive sorption and transport of Pb2+, Ni2+, Mn2+, and Zn2+ in lateritic soil columns. J Hazard Mater 190(1–3):391–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cojocaru C, Zakrzewska-Trznadel G (2007) Response surface modeling and optimization of copper removal from aqua solutions using polymer assisted ultrafiltration. J Membr Sci 298(1–2):56–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Concas A, Ardau C, Cristini A, Zuddas P, Cao G (2006) Mobility of heavy metals from tailings to stream waters in a mining activity contaminated site. Chemosphere 63(2):244–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ebrahimi M, Mahboubi F, Naimi-Jamal MR (2015) RSM base study of the effect of deposition temperature and hydrogen flow on the wear behavior of DLC films. Tribol Int 91:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flogeac K, Guillon E, Aplincourt M (2007) Competitive sorption of metal ions onto a north-eastern France soil. Isotherms and XAFS studies. Geoderma 139(1–2):180–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghaemi N, Madaeni SS, Daraei P, Rajabi H, Shojaeimehr T, Rahimpour F, Shirvani B (2015) PES mixed matrix nanofiltration membrane embedded with polymer wrapped MWCNT: fabrication and performance optimization in dye removal by RSM. J Hazard Mater 298:111–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glatstein DA, Francisca FM (2015) Influence of pH and ionic strength on Cd, Cu and Pb removal from water by adsorption in Na-bentonite. Appl Clay Sci 118:61–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Helios-Rybicka E, Wójcik R (2012) Competitive sorption/desorption of Zn, Cd, Pb, Ni, Cu, and Cr by clay-bearing mining wastes. Appl Clay Sci 65–66:6–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hong Y, Reible DD (2014) Modeling the effect of pH and salinity on biogeochemical reactions and metal behavior in sediment. Water Air Soil Pollut 225:1800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Janyasuthiwong S, Phiri SM, Kijjanapanich P, Rene ER, Esposito G, Lens PN (2015) Copper, lead and zinc removal from metal-contaminated wastewater by adsorption onto agricultural wastes. Environ Technol 36(24):3071–3083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kim M-J (2014) A study on the adsorption characteristics of cadmium and zinc onto acidic and alkaline soils. Environ Earth Sci 72(10):3981–3990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kundu P, Paul V, Kumar V, Mishra IM (2015) Formulation development, modeling and optimization of emulsification process using evolving RSM coupled hybrid ANN-GA framework. Chem Eng Res Des 104:773–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Laokuldilok N, Thakeow P, Kopermsub P, Utama-ang N (2016) Optimisation of microencapsulation of turmeric extract for masking flavour. Food Chem 194:695–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lu Y, Yao H, Li C, Han J, Tan Z, Yan Y (2016) Separation, concentration and determination of trace chloramphenicol in shrimp from different waters by using polyoxyethylene lauryl ether-salt aqueous two-phase system coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography. Food Chem 192:163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maneeboon T, Vanichsriratana W, Pomchaitaward C (2010) Optimization of lactic acid production by pellet-form Rhizopus oryzae in 3-L airlift bioreactor using response surface methodology. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 161(1–8):137–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ming H, Naidu R, Sarkar B, Lamb DT, Liu Y, Megharaj M, Sparks D (2016) Competitive sorption of cadmium and zinc in contrasting soils. Geoderma 268:60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parhi R, Suresh P (2016) Formulation optimization and characterization of transdermal film of simvastatin by response surface methodology. Mater Sci Eng, C 58:331–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Podstawczyk D, Witek-Krowiak A, Dawiec A, Bhatnagar A (2015) Biosorption of copper(II) ions by flax meal: empirical modeling and process optimization by response surface methodology (RSM) and artificial neural network (ANN) simulation. Ecol Eng 83:364–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Qi S, Xue Q, Niu Z, Zhang Y, Liu F, Chen H (2016) Investigation of Zn2+ and Cd2+ adsorption performance by different weathering basalts. Water Air Soil Pollut 227(4):126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Qiao Y, Hu Y, An J, Wu D, Shu G, Fu H, Peng G, Deng J (2015) Preparation and characterization of iron–cobalt composite microcapsules. J Alloy Compd 653:570–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Samavati V (2013) Polysaccharide extraction from Abelmoschus esculentus: optimization by response surface methodology. Carbohyd Polym 95(1):588–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shaheen SM, Tsadilas CD, Rupp H, Rinklebe J, Meissner R (2015) Distribution coefficients of cadmium and zinc in different soils in mono-metal and competitive sorption systems. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 178(4):671–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tan W, Liu F, Feng X, He J (2008) Determination of the point-of-zero charge of manganese oxides with different methods including an improved salt titration method. Soil Sci 173(4):277–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vidal M, Santos MJ, Abrão T, Rodríguez J, Rigol A (2009) Modeling competitive metal sorption in a mineral soil. Geoderma 149(3–4):189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wu Y, Xu Y, Zhang J, Hu S (2010) Evaluation of ecological risk and primary empirical research on heavy metals in polluted soil over Xiaoqinling gold mining region, Shaanxi, China. Trans Nonferr Metals Soc China 20(4):688–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Xu Y, Cai F, Yu Z, Zhang L, Li X, Yang Y, Liu G (2016) Optimisation of pressurised water extraction of polysaccharides from blackcurrant and its antioxidant activity. Food Chem 194:650–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yang S, Ren X, Zhao G, Shi W, Montavon G, Grambow B, Wang X (2015) Competitive sorption and selective sequence of Cu(II) and Ni(II) on montmorillonite: batch, modeling, EPR and XAS studies. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 166:129–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zheng Y, Wang A (2010) Removal of heavy metals using polyvinyl alcohol semi-IPN poly(acrylic acid)/tourmaline composite optimized with response surface methodology. Chem Eng J 162(1):186–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhenru Niu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Qiang Xue
    • 1
  • Shuo Qi
    • 1
  • Ying Guo
    • 1
  • Honghan Chen
    • 1
  1. 1.Beijing Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, School of Water Resources and EnvironmentChina University of GeosciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Tianjin North China Geological Exploration General InstituteTianjinPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations