journal article·2021-11-17

Selective Adsorption and Efficient Degradation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons by a Hydrophobic/Lipophilic Biomass Porous Foam Loaded with Microbials

Lihua Chen, Kaihui Xu, Yuhan Zhang, Qimeige Hasi, Xiaofang Luo, Juanjuan Xu, An Li

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces· Volume 13· Issue 45
Publisher page

Abstract

Highly efficient elimination of petroleum pollution is of great importance for addressing environmental issues and social sustainability. In this study, we demonstrate a novel strategy for efficient elimination of petroleum pollution by selective adsorption of it by an ultralight hydrophobic/lipophilic microorganism-loaded biomass porous foam (BTS-MSFT4@MTMS) followed by a green degradation of adsorbates under mild conditions. The porous structure of biomass porous foam (MSFT) could provide plenty of room for immobilization of Bacillus thuringiensis (BTS), while a simple surface modification of the MSFT load with a BTS strain (BTS-MSFT4) by methyltrimethoxysilane (MTMS) could change its wettability from hydrophilic to lipophilic, which makes selective adsorption of hydophobic petroleum pollution from water for biodegradation possible. As expected, using a petroleum n-hexadecane solution with a concentration of 3% as a model oily wastewater, the as-prepared BTS-MSFT4@MTMS possesses both a superior selective adsorption of ca. 99% and high degradation activity with a high degradation rate of up to 86.65% within 8 days under the conditions of 37 °C, 120 r min–1, and pH = 7, while the degradation rates for the BTS-MSFT4 and the free BTS strain were measured to be only 81.62 and 65.65%, respectively, under the same conditions. In addition, the results obtained from the study on environment tolerance show that the BTS-MSFT4@MTMS exhibits a strong tolerance under different conditions with various pHs, temperatures, and initial concentrations. Compared with the existing methods for removal of petroleum pollution by direct adsorption of petroleum pollution via superoleophilic porous materials or applying free microorganisms for biodegradation only, which suffers the drawbacks of low selectivity or poor efficiency, our method has great advantages of cost-effectiveness, scalable fabrication, and high efficiency without secondary pollution. Moreover, such a two-in-one strategy by integration of both selective adsorption and biodegradation into biodegradable BTS-MSFT4@MTMS may particularly have great potential for practical application in environmental remediation.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Microbial bioremediation and biosurfactants · Pickering emulsions and particle stabilization · Surface Modification and Superhydrophobicity

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Key Laboratory of State Ethnic Affairs Commission, College of Chemical Engineering, Northwest Minzu University, Northwest Xincun 1, Lanzhou 730030, P. R. China

Center of Experiment, Northwest Minzu University, Lanzhou 730030, P. R. China

College of Petrochemical Technology, Lanzhou University of Technology, Langongping Road 287, Lanzhou 730050, P. R. China

Funding

Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China · National Natural Science Foundation of China · Gansu Province

References (45)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.05.00410.1016/j.ibiod.2012.05.004 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.06.04710.1016/j.biortech.2016.06.047 ↗
3. 10.1039/C9GC00747D10.1039/C9GC00747D ↗
4. 10.1007/s10750-018-3559-210.1007/s10750-018-3559-2 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.02.05610.1016/j.envpol.2016.02.056 ↗
6. 10.1007/s40726-017-0063-710.1007/s40726-017-0063-7 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.05010.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.050 ↗
8. 10.1111/j.1751-7915.2011.00260.x10.1111/j.1751-7915.2011.00260.x ↗
9. Wei Y. · Water Air Soil Poll. · 2020 · 231 · 110.1007/s11270-019-4368-6 ↗
10. Ramadass K. · Crit. Rev. Env. Sci. Tec. · 2020 · 21 · 1
11. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.07.13710.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.07.137 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.04.02210.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.04.022 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.cej.2019.12305510.1016/j.cej.2019.123055 ↗
14. 10.1039/C9GC03254A10.1039/C9GC03254A ↗
15. 10.1039/c1ee01092a10.1039/c1ee01092a ↗
16. 10.1021/am507238y10.1021/am507238y ↗
17. 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.08.04410.1016/j.envpol.2018.08.044 ↗
18. 10.1039/C9GC03861B10.1039/C9GC03861B ↗
19. 10.1039/C5GC01818H10.1039/C5GC01818H ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jiec.2017.12.04110.1016/j.jiec.2017.12.041 ↗
21. 10.1002/cssc.20120097910.1002/cssc.201200979 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.11621210.1016/j.seppur.2019.116212 ↗
23. 10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b0163710.1021/acssuschemeng.8b01637 ↗
24. 10.1002/cssc.20130031910.1002/cssc.201300319 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.seppur.2020.11810610.1016/j.seppur.2020.118106 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.03710.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.037 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.00610.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.006 ↗
28. 10.1016/S1002-0160(12)60057-510.1016/S1002-0160(12)60057-5 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.12280610.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.122806 ↗
30. Bouabidi Z. B. · Environ. Chem. Lett. · 2018 · 17 · 24110.1007/s10311-018-0795-7 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.12242710.1016/j.biortech.2019.122427 ↗
32. 10.1039/c2gc35970g10.1039/c2gc35970g ↗
33. 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.05.02010.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.05.020 ↗
34. Duan L. · Chem. Eng. Commun. · 2015 · 203 · 94810.1080/00986445.2015.1074897 ↗
35. 10.1080/07388551.2020.175158310.1080/07388551.2020.1751583 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.06.00110.1016/j.jchromb.2005.06.001 ↗
37. 10.1021/acsomega.9b0090610.1021/acsomega.9b00906 ↗
38. Datta S. · Environ. Chem. Lett. · 2020 · 19 · 52110.1007/s10311-020-01081-y ↗
39. 10.1039/C9RA06726D10.1039/C9RA06726D ↗
40. 10.1021/acsomega.9b0204510.1021/acsomega.9b02045 ↗
41. 10.1159/00044135810.1159/000441358 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.11487510.1016/j.envpol.2020.114875 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.03.16710.1016/j.biortech.2017.03.167 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.12288610.1016/j.biortech.2020.122886 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.jcis.2011.01.10810.1016/j.jcis.2011.01.108 ↗