Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of Surfactin, a Promising Carbonate Ore Collector, on the Physicochemical Properties of Magnesite Surface

  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In carbonate flotation, oleate has been used for many years as a collector in industrial scale. Compared to sulfide minerals, the flotation of carbonate minerals requires more collector consumption and has lower yield and selectivity. It has been previously shown that surfactin provides higher yields in smaller amounts than oleate in the bioflotation of calcite as one of the carbonate minerals. In this study, the usability of surfactin as a flotation collector for magnesite was investigated. For this purpose, the adsorption of surfactin on the magnesite surface was inspected with analyses such as FTIR, SEM–EDS, contact angle, and zeta potential measurements. In addition, the effect of surfactin on the surface tension of water was also revealed. The same analyses were also performed for oleate as a reference point. All flotation experiments were performed without optimizing with both collectors. FTIR results showed that the surfactin, like oleate, was chemically adsorbed on the magnesite surface. Surface tension analyses showed that the surface tension of water decreased to approximately 32 N m−1 at 10−4 M oleate concentration, and this value decreased to below 25 N m−1 at the same surfactin concentration. According to contact angle measurement results, the contact angle of magnesite was 85° after the surfactin adsorption of 2 × 10−4 M concentration, while this value remained at 46° for oleate. Finally, according to flotation experiments, high temperatures and high collector dosages are necessary for acceptable flotation recovery with oleate, yet surfactin can produce the desired result at ambient temperatures and lower collector amounts.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The authors do not have permission to share data.

References

  1. Gautam KK, Tyagi VK (2006) Microbial surfactants: a review. J Oleo Sci 55(4):155–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Öz Aksoy D, Özdemir S, Koca S, Çakmak H, Aytar Çelik P, Çabuk A, Koca H (2022) Modelling of magnesite flotations with two different collectors: Biocollector and oleate. J ESOGU Eng Arc Fac 30:106–114

  3. Saraç T, Anagün AS, Özçelik F, Çelik PA, Toptaş Y, Kizilkaya B, Çabuk A (2022) Estimation of biosurfactant production parameters and yields without conducting additional experiments on a larger production scale. J Microbiol Methods 202:106597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Koca S, Aksoy D, Ozdemir S, Çelik PA, Çabuk A, Koca H (2022) Surfactin as an alternative microbial collector to oleate in magnesite-quartz selective flotation. Sep Sci Technol 1–12

  5. Aksoy DÖ, Özdemir S, Çelik PA, Koca S, Çabuk A, Koca H, Brito-Parada P (2022) Fusion of the microbial world into the flotation process. Miner Process Extr Metall Rev 1–15

  6. Sanwani E, Chaerun S, Mirahati R, Wahyuningsih T (2016) Bioflotation: bacteria-mineral interaction for eco-friendly and sustainable mineral processing. Procedia Chem 19:666–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Manga EB, Celik PA, Cabuk A, Banat IM (2021) Biosurfactants: opportunities for the development of a sustainable future. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 56:101514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Atkins AS, Bridgwood EW, Davis AJ, Pooley FD (1987) A study of the suppression of pyritic sulphur in coal froth flotation by Thiobacillus ferrooxidans. Coal Prep 5(1–2):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Townsley CC, Atkins AS, Davis AJ (1987) Suppression of pyritic sulfur during flotation tests using the Bacterium Thiobacillus ferrooxidans. Biotechnol Bioeng 30(1):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Davis AJ, Atkins AS (1988) A comparison between Thiobacillus ferrooxidans and biological by-products in the desulphurisation of coal fines in flotation. Resour Conserv Recycl 1:223–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fazaelipoor MH, Khoshdast H, Ranjbar M (2010) Coal flotation using a biosurfactant from Pseudomonas aeruginosa as a frother. Korean J Chem Eng 27(5):1527–1531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Patra P, Natarajan KA (2004) Microbially induced flocculation and flotation for separation of chalcopyrite from quartz and calcite. Int J Miner Process 74(1–4):143–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hosseini TR, Kolahdoozan M, Tabatabaei YS, Oliazadeh M, Noaparast M, Eslami AF, Manafi Z, Alfantazi A (2005) Bioflotation of Sarcheshmeh copper ore using Thiobacillus ferrooxidans bacteria. Miner Eng 18(3):371–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lopez LY, Merma AG, Torem ML, Pino GH (2015) Fundamental aspects of hematite flotation using the bacterial strain Rhodococcus ruber as bioreagent. Miner Eng 75:63–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim G, Choi J, Silva RA, Song Y, Kim H (2016) Feasibility of bench-scale selective bioflotation of copper oxide minerals using Rhodococcus opacus. Hydrometallurgy 168:94–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yang Z, Feng YL, Li HR, Wang WD, Qing TE (2014) Effect of biological pretreatment on flotation recovery of pyrolusite. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China 24(5):1571–1577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Attia YA, Elzeky M, Ismail M (1993) Enhanced separation of pyrite from oxidized coal by froth flotation using biosurface modification. Int J Miner Process 37(1–2):61–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim G, Park K, Choi J, Gomez-Flores A, Han Y, Choi SQ, Kim H (2015) Bioflotation of malachite using different growth phases of Rhodococcus opacus: effect of bacterial shape on detachment by shear flow. Int J Miner Process 143:98–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhao JM, Wu W, Zhang X, Zhu M, Tan W (2017) Characteristics of bio-desilication and bio-flotation of Paenibacillus mucilaginosus BM-4 on aluminosilicate minerals. Int J Miner Process 168:40–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Farghaly M, Abdel-Khalek NA, Abdel-Khalek MA, Selim KA, Abdullah SS (2020) Physicochemical study and application for pyrolusite separation from high manganese-iron ore in the presence of microorganisms. Physicochem Probl Miner Process 57(1):273–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zheng XP, Smith RW, Mehta RK, Misra M, Raichur AM (1998) Anionic flotation of apatite from dolomite modified by the presence of a bacterium. Miner Metall Proc 15(2):52–56

    Google Scholar 

  22. Abdel-Khalek NA, Elmahdy AM, El-Midany AA, Farrah S (2008) Optimisation of bioflotation of carbonaceous impurities from phosphate ore. Trans Inst Min Metall C 117(1):38–42

    Google Scholar 

  23. Botero AEC, Torem ML, de Mesquita LMS (2007) Fundamental studies of Rhodococcus opacus as a biocollector of calcite and magnesite. Miner Eng 20(10):1026–1032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Consuegra GL, Kutschke S, Rudolph M, Pollmann K (2020) Halophilic bacteria as potential pyrite bio-depressants in Cu-Mo bioflotation. Miner Eng 145:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  25. Yehia A, Khalek MA, Ammar M (2017) Cellulase as a new phosphate depressant in dolomite-phosphate flotation. Physicochem Probl Miner Process 53(2):1092–1104

    Google Scholar 

  26. Vasanthakumar B, Ravishankar H, Subramanian S (2014) Basic studies on the role of components of Bacillus megaterium as flotation biocollectors in sulphide mineral separation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98(6):2719–2728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Da Silva ACS, Santos PN, Silva TA, Andrade RF, Campos-Takaki GM (2018) Biosurfactant production by fungi as a sustainable alternative. Arq Inst Biol 85:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Marchant R, Banat IM (2012) Microbial biosurfactants: challenges and opportunities for future exploitation. Trends Biotechnol 30(11):558–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Toptas Y, Çelikdemir M, Tuncer C, Şahin YB, Çelik PA, Burnak N, Çabuk A, Bütün V (2016) Optimization of a biosurfactant production from bacteria isolated from soil and characterization of the surfactant. Turkish J Biochem 41(5):338–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pereira ARM, Hacha RR, Torem ML, Merma AG, Silvas FP (2021) Direct hematite flotation from an iron ore tailing using an innovative biosurfactant. Sep Sci Technol 56(17):2978–2988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Didyk AM, Sadowski Z (2012) Flotation of Serpentinite and quartz using biosurfactants. Physicochem Probl Miner Process 48(2):607–618

    Google Scholar 

  32. Bastrzyk A, Fiedot-Toboła M, Polowczyk I, Legawiec K, Płaza G (2019) Effect of a lipopeptide biosurfactant on the precipitation of calcium carbonate. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 174:145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vecino X, Devesa-Rey R, Cruz JM, Moldes AB (2013) Evaluation of biosurfactant obtained from Lactobacillus pentosus as foaming agent in froth flotation. J Environ Manag 128:655–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang B, Yin W, Yao J, Zhu Z, Sun H, Chen K, Cao S (2021) Selective collection and differential adsorption of pentaethoxylated laurylamine for the flotation recovery of magnesite from quartz. Colloids Surf A: Physicochem Eng Asp 625:126991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sun H, Yang B, Zhu Z, Yin W, Sheng Q, Hou Y, Yao J (2021) New insights into selective-depression mechanism of novel depressant EDTMPS on magnesite and quartz surfaces: adsorption mechanism, DFT calculations, and adsorption model. Miner Eng 160:106660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sun H, Yin W, Yao J (2022) Study of selective enhancement of surface hydrophobicity on magnesite and quartz by N, N-Dimethyloctadecylamine: separation test, adsorption mechanism, and adsorption model. Appl Surf Sci 583:152482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sun H, Yin W, Yang B, Chen K, Sheng Q (2021) Efficiently separating magnesite from quartz using N-hexadecyltrimethylammonium chloride as a collector via reverse flotation. Miner Eng 166:106899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhu Z, Fu Y, Yin W, Sun H, Chen K, Tang Y, Yang B (2022) Role of surface roughness in the magnesite flotation and its mechanism. Particuology 62:63–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tsave PK, Kostoglou M, Karapantsios TD, Lazaridis NK (2021) A hybrid device for enhancing flotation of fine particles by combining micro-bubbles with conventional bubbles. Minerals 11(6):561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Wonyen D, Kromah V, Gibson B, Nah S, Chelgani SC (2018) A review of flotation separation of Mg carbonates (dolomite and magnesite). Minerals 8(8):354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Celik PA, Cakmak H, Aksoy DO (2021) Green bioflotation of calcite using surfactin as a collector. J Dispers Sci Technol 1–11

  42. Shaligram NS, Singhal RS (2010) Surfactin – a review on biosynthesis, fermentation, purification and applications. Food Technol Biotechnol 48(2):119–134

    Google Scholar 

  43. Cakmak H, Gungormedi G, Dikmen G, Celik PA, Cabuk A (2017) The true methodology for rhamnolipid: various solvents affect rhamnolipid characteristics. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 119(10):1700002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Moulin P, Roques H (2003) Zeta potential measurement of calcium carbonate. J Colloid Interface Sci 261(1):115–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Drelich JW, Marmur A (2018) Meaningful contact angles in flotation systems: critical analysis and recommendations. Surf Innov 6:19–30

    Google Scholar 

  46. Rosen MJ, Kunjappu JT (2012) Surfactants and interfacial phenomena, 4th edn. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  47. Henwood D (1995) The effect of conditioning on froth flotation (Master's thesis, University of Cape Town)

  48. Gence N, Özdağ H (1995) Surface properties of magnesite and surfactant adsorption mechanism. Int J Miner Process 43:37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Li S, Wang ZJ, Chang TT (2014) Temperature oscillation modulated self-assembly of periodic concentric layered magnesium carbonate microparticles. PLoS One 9(2):e88648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Jung J, Yu KO, Ramzi AB, Choe SH, Kim SW, Han SO (2012) Improvement of surfactin production in Bacillus subtilis using synthetic wastewater by overexpression of specific extracellular signaling peptides, comX and phrC. Biotechnol Bioeng 109(9):2349–2356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Grzechnik A, Simon P, Gillet P, McMillan P (1999) An infrared study of MgCO3 at high pressure. Physica B 262(1–2):67–73

  52. Hossain FM, Dlugogorski BZ, Kennedy EM, Belova IV, Murch GE (2010) Electronic, optical and bonding properties of MgCO3. Solid State Commun 150(17–18):848–851

  53. El-Sheshtawy HS, Aiad I, Osman ME, Abo-ELnasr AA, Kobisy AS (2015) Production of biosurfactant from Bacillus licheniformis for microbial enhanced oil recovery and inhibition the growth of sulfate reducing bacteria. Egypt J Pet 24(2):155–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. De Faria AF, Teodoro-Martinez DS, de Oliveira Barbosa GN, Vaz BG, Silva ÍS, Garcia JS, Tótola MR, Eberlin MN, Grossman M, Alves OL, Durrant LR (2011) Production and structural characterization of surfactin (C14/Leu7) produced by Bacillus subtilis isolate LSFM-05 grown on raw glycerol from the biodiesel industry. Process Biochem 46(10):1951–1957

  55. Yao J, Yang B, Chen K, Sun H, Zhu Z, Yin W, Song N, Sheng Q (2021) Sodium tripolyphosphate as a selective depressant for separating magnesite from dolomite and its depression mechanism. Powder Technol 382:244–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Yang B, Sun H, Wang D, Yin W, Cao S, Wang Y, Zhu Z, Jiang K, Yao J (2020) Selective adsorption of a new depressant Na2ATP on dolomite: implications for effective separation of magnesite from dolomite via froth flotation. Sep Purif Technol 250:117278

  57. Çelik PA, Manga EB, Çabuk A, Banat IM (2021) Biosurfactants’ potential role in combating COVID-19 and similar future microbial threats. App Sci 11:334

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge Mineral Processing Engineering Department of Istanbul Technical University, for contact angle measurements.

Funding

This study was supported by Eskisehir Osmangazi University Scientific Research Projects Committee (Project No: 2019–2733) and the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) (Project No: 119M711).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mining Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, 26040, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Derya Öz Aksoy & Sabiha Koca

  2. Department of Biotechnology and Biosafety, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, 26040, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Serhat Özdemir, Pınar Aytar Çelik & Ahmet Çabuk

  3. Environmental Protection and Control Program, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, 26110, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Pınar Aytar Çelik

  4. Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, 26040, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Ahmet Çabuk

  5. Eskisehir Technical University, Porsuk Technical College, 26140, Eskisehir, Turkey

    Hüseyin Koca

Authors
  1. Derya Öz Aksoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Serhat Özdemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pınar Aytar Çelik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sabiha Koca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ahmet Çabuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hüseyin Koca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Derya Öz Aksoy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Öz Aksoy, D., Özdemir, S., Aytar Çelik, P. et al. Effects of Surfactin, a Promising Carbonate Ore Collector, on the Physicochemical Properties of Magnesite Surface. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 40, 1–12 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-022-00709-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-022-00709-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation