2015
DOI: 10.1002/btpr.2177
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adsorption performance of creatinine on dialdehyde nanofibrillated cellulose derived from potato residues

Abstract: Potato residue is vastly produced in the food industry but it is landfilled. This article describes the treatment of purified cellulose derived from potato residues by a high pressure homogenizer to produce nano-fibrillated cellulose (NFC), which was then oxidized by sodium periodate to prepare dialdehyde nano-fibrillated cellulose (DANFC). The produced NFC and DANFC were characterized by a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). The orthogonal experiment was indu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 49 publications
(93 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the coefficient of determination was close to 1 for the pseudo‐second‐order model, and the calculated q e values were close to those of experimental values presented in Figures –, which showed a close fit of the experimental data to the pseudo‐second‐order kinetic model. These results also suggest that the adsorption might be the rate‐limiting process, and the selection of DCNCs for creatinine removal is a better option than other samples as it has a faster adsorption rate and is smaller. However, other cellulosic materials, e.g.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…However, the coefficient of determination was close to 1 for the pseudo‐second‐order model, and the calculated q e values were close to those of experimental values presented in Figures –, which showed a close fit of the experimental data to the pseudo‐second‐order kinetic model. These results also suggest that the adsorption might be the rate‐limiting process, and the selection of DCNCs for creatinine removal is a better option than other samples as it has a faster adsorption rate and is smaller. However, other cellulosic materials, e.g.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 89%