2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.10.114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of response surface methodology for optimization of lead biosorption in an aqueous solution by Aspergillus niger

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
150
2
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 390 publications
(164 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
(66 reference statements)
10
150
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…An R 2 value of 0.861 rendered this regression model as statistically significant. The value of lack of fit was insignificant (>0.05) thereby confirming the quadratic model appropriate for this study [35].…”
Section: Adsorption Isothermssupporting
confidence: 50%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…An R 2 value of 0.861 rendered this regression model as statistically significant. The value of lack of fit was insignificant (>0.05) thereby confirming the quadratic model appropriate for this study [35].…”
Section: Adsorption Isothermssupporting
confidence: 50%
“…During the batch studies, the experimental factors were optimized for maximum phenol removal using response surface methodology (RSM). RSM is an optimization procedure based on mathematics and statistics and is implemented for estimation of the most advantageous operational parameters as well as the relative significance of each parameter involved in complex interactions with other such parameters [18][19][20][21][22]. In this study, central composite design (CCD) of RSM was utilized in determining the effects of solution pH, adsorbent dosage and time of contact on phenol removal by various soil composites used as a membrane.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The insignificant p-values for lack of fit, at 95% confidence level, also suggest that the fits of the data are appropriate. The fit of these empirical models was also checked by the coefficient of determination (R 2 ), the adj-R 2 , the pred-R 2 , and the coefficient of variation (CV); see Table 4 tions was not explained by the models; R 2 values close to 1 indicate good fits [20]. The pred-R 2 value of MOE was 0.9237, meaning that the full model is estimated to explain about 92.37% of the variability in new data.…”
Section: Statistical Analysis Of the Response Surface Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Larger F-and smaller p-values suggest more significant corresponding variables (Amini et al 2008;Kalavathy et al 2009). The lack of fit measures the failure of the model to represent data in the experimental domain at points that are not included in the regression.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%