Efficient removal of tetracycline by reusable magnetic microspheres with a high surface area

Adsorptive removal of antibiotics from water and wastewater: Progress and challenges

“…Thus physicochemical technologies are proving to be highly suitable treatment option for organic contaminants (Homem and Santos, 2011;Wang et al, 2007). Adsorption process is very efficient (Hao et al, 2012;Zhou et al, 2012), simple to design and operate; and it is relatively inexpensive and unaffected by the potential toxicity as for biologically based processes (Ahmaruzzaman, 2008). Adsorption processes are widely used to remove organic contaminants from contaminated stream onto adsorbent surfaces (Han et al, 2008;Homem and Santos, 2011), although their application to antibiotic removal has been reported for around 30 compounds so far.…”

Removal of tetracycline from aqueous solution by a Fe3O4 incorporated PAN electrospun nanofiber mat

“…Many adsorbents have been reported in the removal of TC, such as metal oxides (Gu and Karthikeyan, 2005;Liu et al, 2012a), clays (Figueroa et al, 2004;Liu et al, 2012b), resins (Zhang et al, 2014) and activated carbons (Ji et al, 2009(Ji et al, , 2010. Among them, magnetic nanoparticles (NPs) have drawn great interests in the past few years due to their high specific surface areas, large adsorption capacities and magnetic properties Dai et al, 2012;Bao et al, 2013;Zhou et al, 2012). Although those NPs could be attracted by applying external magnetic field, the separation processes are still tedious and expensive.…”

Effect of resin charged functional group, porosity, and chemical matrix on the long-term pharmaceutical removal mechanism by conventional ion exchange resins

“…Likewise, in this study, no significant difference in the long-term removal mechanism of the 12 pharmaceuticals was observed due to the difference in resin porosity between the 201 Â 4 and D201 resins. In previous investigations, Zhou et al (2012) observed much more effective TC adsorption by mesoporous than microporous resins, while Landry and Boyer (2013) achieved higher DCF removal with a gel resin than a macroporous resin. When the two commercial resins with identical particle size and charged functional groups used in this study were compared, the observed difference in DCF removal (Landry and Boyer, 2013) could be attributed to the combined effect of the different resin porosities and charged functional groups (trimethylamine vs. triethylamine), while the observed difference in TC removal (Zhou et al, 2012) could be attributed to the combined effect of different resin porosities and particle sizes (100e150 vs. 400e600 mm), because smaller particles generally provide a higher surface area to volume ratio, and therefore more NOM is removed (Humbert et al, 2007;Neale and Sch€ afer, 2009).…”

“…Non-electrostatic interactions have often been demonstrated to significantly enhance pharmaceutical removal selectivity during AER treatment (Li and SenGupta, 2004;Landry and Boyer, 2013;Landry et al, 2015). In some cases, nonelectrostatic interaction-dominated neutral resins are even more effective for pharmaceutical removal than AERs when these pharmaceuticals are undissociated (Robberson et al, 2006;Domínguez et al, 2011;Huang et al, 2012;Zhou et al, 2012).…”