ScienceDirect - Journal of Environmental Sciences
Transcription
ScienceDirect - Journal of Environmental Sciences
Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 27 2015 www.jesc.ac.cn 1 The potential risk assessment for different arsenic species in the aquatic environment Meng Du, Dongbin Wei, Zhuowei Tan, Aiwu Lin, and Yuguo Du 9 Synthesis of linear low-density polyethylene-g -poly (acrylic acid)-co-starch/organo-montmorillonite hydrogel composite as an adsorbent for removal of Pb(ΙΙ) from aqueous solutions Maryam Irani, Hanafi Ismail, Zulkifli Ahmad, and Maohong Fan 21 Research and application of kapok fiber as an absorbing material: A mini review Yian Zheng, Jintao Wang, Yongfeng Zhu, and Aiqin Wang 33 Relationship between types of urban forest and PM2.5 capture at three growth stages of leaves Thithanhthao Nguyen, Xinxiao Yu, Zhenming Zhang, Mengmeng Liu, and Xuhui Liu 42 Bioaugmentation of DDT-contaminated soil by dissemination of the catabolic plasmid pDOD Chunming Gao, Xiangxiang Jin, Jingbei Ren, Hua Fang, and Yunlong Yu 51 Comparison of different combined treatment processes to address the source water with high concentration of natural organic matter during snowmelt period Pengfei Lin, Xiaojian Zhang, Jun Wang, Yani Zeng, Shuming Liu, and Chao Chen 59 Chemical and optical properties of aerosols and their interrelationship in winter in the megacity Shanghai of China Tingting Han, Liping Qiao, Min Zhou, Yu Qu, Jianfei Du, Xingang Liu, Shengrong Lou, Changhong Chen, Hongli Wang, Fang Zhang, Qing Yu, and Qiong Wu 70 Could wastewater analysis be a useful tool for China? — A review Jianfa Gao, Jake O'Brien, Foon Yin Lai, Alexander L.N. van Nuijs, Jun He, Jochen F. Mueller, Jingsha Xu, and Phong K. Thai 80 Controlling cyanobacterial blooms by managing nutrient ratio and limitation in a large hypereutrophic lake: Lake Taihu, China Jianrong Ma, Boqiang Qin, Pan Wu, Jian Zhou, Cheng Niu, Jianming Deng, and Hailin Niu 87 Reduction of NO by CO using Pd–CeTb and Pd–CeZr catalysts supported on SiO2 and La2O3–Al2O3 Victor Ferrer, Dora Finol, Roger Solano, Alexander Moronta, and Miguel Ramos 97 Development and case study of a science-based software platform to support policy making on air quality Yun Zhu, Yanwen Lao, Carey Jang, Chen-Jen Lin, Jia Xing, Shuxiao Wang, Joshua S. Fu, Shuang Deng, Junping Xie, and Shicheng Long 108 Modulation of the DNA repair system and ATR-p53 mediated apoptosis is relevant for tributyltininduced genotoxic effects in human hepatoma G2 cells Bowen Li, Lingbin Sun, Jiali Cai, Chonggang Wang, Mengmeng Wang, Huiling Qiu, and Zhenghong Zuo 115 Impact of dissolved organic matter on the photolysis of the ionizable antibiotic norfloxacin Chen Liang, Huimin Zhao, Minjie Deng, Xie Quan, Shuo Chen, and Hua Wang 124 Enhanced bio-decolorization of 1-amino-4-bromoanthraquinone-2-sulfonic acid by Sphingomonas xenophaga with nutrient amendment Hong Lu, Xiaofan Guan, Jing Wang, Jiti Zhou, Haikun Zhang 131 Winter survival of microbial contaminants in soil: An in situ verification Antonio Bucci, Vincenzo Allocca, Gino Naclerio, Giovanni Capobianco, Fabio Divino, Francesco Fiorillo, and Fulvio Celico 139 Assessment of potential dermal and inhalation exposure of workers to the insecticide imidacloprid using whole-body dosimetry in China Lidong Cao, Bo Chen, Li Zheng, Dongwei Wang, Feng Liu, and Qiliang Huang CONTENTS 147 Biochemical and microbial soil functioning after application of the insecticide imidacloprid Mariusz Cycoń and Zofia Piotrowska-Seget 159 Comparison of three-dimensional fluorescence analysis methods for predicting formation of trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids Nicolás M. Peleato and Robert C. Andrews 168 The migration and transformation of dissolved organic matter during the freezing processes of water Shuang Xue, Yang Wen, Xiujuan Hui, Lina Zhang, Zhaohong Zhang, Jie Wang, and Ying Zhang 179 Genomic analyses of metal resistance genes in three plant growth promoting bacteria of legume plants in Northwest mine tailings, China Pin Xie, Xiuli Hao, Martin Herzberg, Yantao Luo, Dietrich H. Nies, and Gehong Wei 188 Effect of environmental factors on the complexation of iron and humic acid Kai Fang, Dongxing Yuan, Lei Zhang, Lifeng Feng, Yaojin Chen, and Yuzhou Wang 197 Resolving the influence of nitrogen abundances on sediment organic matter in macrophyte-dominated lakes, using fluorescence spectroscopy Xin Yao, Shengrui Wang, Lixin Jiao, Caihong Yan, and Xiangcan Jin 207 Predicting heavy metals' adsorption edges and adsorption isotherms on MnO2 with the parameters determined from Langmuir kinetics Qinghai Hu, Zhongjin Xiao, Xinmei Xiong, Gongming Zhou, and Xiaohong Guan 217 Applying a new method for direct collection, volume quantification and determination of N2 emission from water Xinhong Liu, Yan Gao, Honglian Wang, Junyao Guo, and Shaohua Yan 225 Effects of water management on arsenic and cadmium speciation and accumulation in an upland rice cultivar Pengjie Hu, Younan Ouyang, Longhua Wu, Libo Shen, Yongming Luo, and Peter Christie 232 Acid-assisted hydrothermal synthesis of nanocrystalline TiO2 from titanate nanotubes: Influence of acids on the photodegradation of gaseous toluene Kunyang Chen, Lizhong Zhu, and Kun Yang 241 Air–soil exchange of organochlorine pesticides in a sealed chamber Bing Yang, Baolu Han, Nandong Xue, Lingli Zhou, and Fasheng Li 251 Effects of elevated CO2 on dynamics of microcystin-producing and non-microcystin-producing strains during Microcystis blooms Li Yu, Fanxiang Kong, Xiaoli Shi, Zhen Yang, Min Zhang, and Yang Yu 259 Sulfide elimination by intermittent nitrate dosing in sewer sediments Yanchen Liu, Chen Wu, Xiaohong Zhou, David Z. Zhu, and Hanchang Shi 266 Steel slag carbonation in a flow-through reactor system: The role of fluid-flux Eleanor J. Berryman, Anthony E. Williams-Jones, and Artashes A. Migdisov 276 Amine reclaiming technologies in post-combustion carbon dioxide capture Tielin Wang, Jon Hovland, and Klaus J. Jens 290 Do vehicular emissions dominate the source of C6–C8 aromatics in the megacity Shanghai of eastern China? Hongli Wang, Qian Wang, Jianmin Chen, Changhong Chen, Cheng Huang, Liping Qiao, Shengrong Lou, and Jun Lu 298 Insights into metals in individual fine particles from municipal solid waste using synchrotron radiation-based micro-analytical techniques Yumin Zhu, Hua Zhang, Liming Shao, and Pinjing He J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N M EN TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 0 7–2 1 6 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-environmental-sciences Predicting heavy metals' adsorption edges and adsorption isotherms on MnO2 with the parameters determined from Langmuir kinetics Qinghai Hu, Zhongjin Xiao, Xinmei Xiong, Gongming Zhou, Xiaohong Guan⁎ State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resources Reuse, College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China. Email: huqinghaihqh@163.com AR TIC LE I N FO ABS TR ACT Article history: Although surface complexation models have been widely used to describe the adsorption of Received 26 February 2014 heavy metals, few studies have verified the feasibility of modeling the adsorption kinetics, Revised 7 May 2014 edge, and isotherm data with one pH-independent parameter. A close inspection of the Accepted 11 May 2014 derivation process of Langmuir isotherm revealed that the equilibrium constant derived from Available online 13 November 2014 the Langmuir kinetic model, KS-kinetic, is theoretically equivalent to the adsorption constant Keywords: modified Langmuir isotherm model (MLI model) incorporating pH factor were developed. The Heavy metals MLK model was employed to simulate the adsorption kinetics of Cu(II), Co(II), Cd(II), Zn(II) and Adsorption edge Ni(II) on MnO2 at pH 3.2 or 3.3 to get the values of KS-kinetic. The adsorption edges of heavy Adsorption isotherm metals could be modeled with the modified metal partitioning model (MMP model), and the Adsorption constants values of KS-Langmuir were obtained. The values of KS-kinetic and KS-Langmuir are very close in Langmuir isotherm, KS-Langmuir. The modified Langmuir kinetic model (MLK model) and to each other, validating that the constants obtained by these two methods are basically the same. The MMP model with KS-kinetic constants could predict the adsorption edges of heavy metals on MnO2 very well at different adsorbent/adsorbate concentrations. Moreover, the adsorption isotherms of heavy metals on MnO2 at various pH levels could be predicted reasonably well by the MLI model with the KS-kinetic constants. © 2014 The Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail: guanxh@tongji.edu.cn (Xiaohong Guan). .cn The behavior, transport, and ultimate fate of heavy metals in aquatic environment are often controlled by the sorption reactions on the reactive surfaces of soil minerals (Wen et al., 1998; Serrano et al., 2009). Moreover, adsorption is found to be a promising technique to remove heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions because of its low operational and maintenance costs and high efficiency, especially for the heavy metal ions at low concentrations (Shi et al., 2005). Different empirical approaches, in particular the measurements of adsorption kinetics, adsorption isotherms and adsorption edges, have been commonly used in the studies of the adsorption behavior of heavy metals on various adsorbents including minerals. However, it is troublesome to get these data under various practical conditions. Thus, accurate description of the sorption process with mathematic modeling is critical for the assessment of environmental risk of heavy metals and the development of sound adsorption technologies for removing heavy metals. Therefore, sorption modeling has received considerable attention. Many studies have been performed on surface complexation models (constant capacitance model, double layer model, triple layer model, and charge distribution multi-site complexation model) to describe the adsorption of heavy metals on pure mineral surfaces or soils and the results are quite promising (Wen et al., 1998; Ponthieu et al., 2006; Weerasooriya et al., 2007). These above-mentioned models incorporate the surface electrostatic effects and thus contain many .ac Introduction je sc http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2014.05.036 1001-0742/© 2014 The Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N ME N TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 07–2 1 6 The consistency between the Langmuir kinetic rate constant (equilibrium constant) and the Langmuir isotherm parameter (adsorption constant) can be expected since the Langmuir isotherm expression is derived based on the Langmuir kinetics (Yiacoumi and Tien, 1995a, 1995b). Moreover, Wang et al. (2004) incorporated the variation of surface site density with pH in the Langmuir isotherm and then developed a modified metal partitioning model (MMP model) to simulate and predict the adsorption edges of heavy metals on fly ash very well with only one parameter, KS (adsorption constant). Therefore, it is feasible to model the adsorption kinetics, edge, and isotherm data with one pH-independent parameter, adsorption constant or equilibrium constant, by developing proper adsorption models. However, to the best of our knowledge, there was no researcher taking advantage of the consistency between the equilibrium constant and adsorption constant to predict the adsorption edges and isotherms based on the equilibrium constant derived from the adsorption kinetics. Manganese oxides are highly reactive minerals in sedimentary environments, where they influence the fate and transport of potentially toxic trace elements and essential micronutrients (Frierdich and Catalano, 2012). Moreover, manganese dioxide (MnO2) exhibits higher affinity and larger adsorption capacity for heavy metals than other metal oxides such as Al2O3, Fe2O3, Fe3O4, and TiO2 (Tamura et al., 1996, 1997). Therefore, MnO2 was employed as the adsorbent in this study. The objectives of this article were (1) to incorporate the pH effects into the Langmuir kinetic model and employ this modified Langmuir kinetic model (MLK model) to simulate and calculate the adsorption kinetics of heavy metals on MnO2; (2) to calculate the adsorption edges and adsorption isotherms of heavy metals on MnO2 with the equilibrium constants obtained from the MLK model; and (3) to further verify this practice by comparing the simulation results and parameters with the MMP model developed by Wang et al. (2004, 2006). 1. Materials and methods 1.1. Materials All chemicals were of analytical grade and were purchased from Shanghai Reagent Station (China). The stock solutions containing target heavy metals were prepared by dissolving their corresponding chloride salts into 18.2 MΩ Milli-Q water and acidified with HCl to pH 2.0. 1.2. Batch equilibrium titration .ac .cn Surface site densities and acidity constants of MnO2 were determined through a batch acidimetric-alkalimetric titration method. Unless otherwise specified, 0.01 mol/L NaCl was used as a background electrolyte in all experiments. The titration procedure consisted of: (1) adding appropriate amount of MnO2 to double distilled deionized water and shake for 12 hr to disperse the aggregates and hydrate adsorption sites prior to each experiment; (2) distributing 100 mL of the suspension to a series of 125-mL conical flasks; (3) adding different amounts of acid (HCl) and base (NaOH) to the 125-mL flasks to adjust pH to a range of 2.0–10.0; a control flask without acid or base addition was included in each batch; (4) capping all flasks and then shake at 220 oscillation/min using an SHZ-C shaker for 24 hr at 25 ± 1°C; (5) recording the final pH and plot the acid/base addition volume as a function of pH to obtain an overall titration curve; (6) filtering the suspensions and titrate the filtrate (50 mL) back to the final pH of the control; and (7) sc empirical parameters, which makes the modeling process very complex and limits their practical application (Guan et al., 2009). Venema et al. (1996) discussed the scope and limitations of such models and commented that, none of them can simultaneously describe all available data for a particular extended data set although most of these models can satisfactorily quantify the adsorption phenomenon under the specific conditions used in the experiments. Background electrolyte within the environmentally relevant ionic strength range of 0.005–0.04 mol/L (in lakes, rivers, groundwaters but not in sea) has negligible impact on the adsorption of metals over the pH range studied, as illustrated in Appendix A Fig. S1, suggesting that metal ions are specifically adsorbed on the MnO2 (Christophi and Axe, 2000). The negligible influences of ionic strength on heavy metal adsorption on various minerals had also been reported (Christophi and Axe, 2000; Tamura and Furuichi, 1997). Mahmudov and Huang (2011) reported that the change of specific chemical energy constituted the major portion of the change of total free energy of adsorption whereas electrostatic energy appeared to play a much less significant role on the adsorption process. It was argued that simpler hypotheses are more likely to be a correct priori to make sharper, more testable predictions (Jeffery and Berger, 1992). McBride (1997) pointed out that the adsorption behavior of mineral surfaces can usually be understood in terms of simple mass action principles and coordination chemistry without involving electrostatic effects. Thus, the adsorption models ignoring the electrostatic effects may be preferred for practical applications. Serrano et al. (2009) developed a non-electrostatic equilibrium model with both surface complexation and ion exchange reactions to describe the sorption of heavy metals on four soils over a wide range of pH and metal concentration. Pagnanelli and his colleagues presented two approaches to model the effect of pH on heavy metal adsorption on biomaterials (Esposito et al., 2002; Pagnanelli et al., 2003). One introduced qmax as a pH function into the Langmuir isotherm to obtain the heavy metal biosorption capacities at different pH and the other was based on the non-competitive mechanism between heavy metals and H+ protons (Esposito et al., 2002; Pagnanelli et al., 2003). To describe the binding of heavy metals to humic substances containing heterogeneous ligands, Benedetti et al. (1995) developed a Non-Ideal Competitive Adsorption model based on a Langmuir–Freundlich type affinity distribution function. Wang et al. (2004, 2006) developed a modified metal partitioning model from the Langmuir isotherm which could successfully quantify the adsorption edges of heavy metals on fly ash. Rudzinski and Plazinski (2010) also presented an equilibrium sorption isotherm equation incorporating pH effects, which could describe the pH-dependent adsorption of heavy metals. However, the above-mentioned studies did not relate the parameters of adsorption kinetics with those of adsorption edges and isotherms. The kinetics of adsorption is one of the most important factors in adsorption system design, since the adsorbate residence time and the reactor dimensions are controlled by the adsorption/ desorption kinetics. Various kinetic models, such as Statistical Rate Theory approach, pseudo-first order, pseudo-second order, and the Elovich equations, had been proposed to simulate the adsorption kinetics (Plazinski et al., 2009). Their theoretical derivations existing in literature could not be interpreted as general ones but rather as those related to a specific system or to a limited range of operating conditions (Plazinski et al., 2009). The common practice is to determine the adsorption rate constants by simulating the adsorption kinetics of heavy metals on minerals obtained under various conditions with a specific adsorption kinetic model. Thus, the adsorption rate constants calculated with these models are specific and not inter-related. For instance, the rate constants obtained by these models are pH-specific. One reason is that none of these models incorporates pH effect, which strongly affects the adsorption processes (Wang et al., 2004). Plazinski and his colleague modified the statistical rate approach, which could describe the pH-dependent kinetics of metal ion adsorption with one rate constant, but there were two uncertain parameters (α or β) ranging from 0 to 1 (Plazinski and Rudzinski, 2009; Plazinski, 2010). je 208 209 J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N M EN TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 0 7–2 1 6 developing the net titration curve by subtracting the acid/base consumed by the supernatant from the overall titration curve under the same pH conditions. Carbon dioxide was not purged since the impact arose from dissolved CO2 was counteracted by subtracting the acid/base consumed in back titration from the corresponding forward titration. 1.3. Batch adsorption experiments The batch adsorption experiments were carried out to investigate the adsorption kinetics, adsorption edges and adsorption isotherms of heavy metals on MnO2. The first two steps of adsorption experiments were the same as those of the titration experiments. The pH of the solute solutions and the MnO2 suspension were adjusted to the desired level with NaOH and/or HCl solution before the adsorption experiments. The adsorption reaction was initiated by dosing pre-determined amount of stock solution of heavy metals to the MnO2 suspension. Then the flasks were sealed and shaken at 220 oscillation/min using an SHZ-C shaker (purchased from Shanghai Jiapeng Co., Ltd) at 25 ± 1°C. To investigate the adsorption kinetics, the flasks were taken out from the shaker at different time intervals. However, the adsorption reaction lasted for 24 hr to determine the adsorption edges and isotherms. 1.4. Chemical analyses The morphology of MnO2 was observed with a scanning electron microscope (Philips XL-30 ESEM purchased from Philips-FEI). The particle size was determined with laser particle analyzer (Better Size 2000). The X-ray diffraction pattern of MnO2 was collected on a Bruker D & Advance X-ray powder diffractometer (D8 Advance X). The specific surface area was determined by the Brunauer– Emmett–Teller (BET) (Micromeritics ASAP 2020 Surface Area and Porosity Analyzer) method. ZetaSizer Nano ZS 90 (Malvern Instruments, Worcestershire, UK) was used to determine the zeta potential of MnO2. Our preliminary study confirmed that the same results were obtained using either 0.22 or 0.45 μm membrane filter made of cellulose acetate. Thus, at the end of each adsorption test, the suspensions were immediately filtered through a 0.45 μm membrane filter and the filtrates were collected, acidified, and analyzed using the ICP-AES (Agilent 720-ES manufactured by Agilent Technologies.) to determine the concentration of heavy metals. A pHS-3C pH electrode supplied by INESA Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd, calibrated with buffers at pH 4.00, 6.86, and 9.18, was used to measure pH. 1.5. Data analyses SigmaPlot, a software that can perform nonlinear regression, was employed to fit the titration curves of MnO2 to determine its surface density and acidity as well as to fit the metal adsorption data to determine the adsorption constants of metals. Wang et al., 2004, 2008). The following Eq. (1) was employed to simulate the net titration data for determining the surface site concentration and the corresponding acidity constant, based on the assumption that multiple types of monoprotic surface sites were present on the particle surface (Wang et al., 2004): ΔV SS ¼ X V 0 STi K Hi i ¼ 1−n C ( 1 1 þ − H þ K Hi Hþ 0 þ K Hi ) ð1Þ where, ΔVSS (mL) is the net volume of stock acid/base (negative value for acid) solution consumed by surface sites; V0 (mL) is the total volume of MnO2 suspension; STi (mol/g) is the total concentration of surface site species i; KHi is the acidity constant of species i; C (mol/L) is the concentration of the acid/base stock solution; and [H+]0 (mol/L) is the hydrogen ion concentration of the control unit. Note the total surface site concentration STi = Γi × SS., here Γi is the surface site density for species i (mol/g) and SS (g/L) is the solid concentration. The net volume of stock acid/base solution consumed by surface sites under a certain pH condition, ΔVSS, an be calculated using Eq. (2): ΔV SS ¼ ΔV overall −ΔV water ð2Þ where, ΔVoverall (mL) is the total volume of acid or base added during titration and ΔVwater for a certain pH is determined based on the ΔVwater–pH curve, and the ΔVwater–pH curve is determined by a titration experiment using a water sample that has the same ionic strength as that in MnO2 suspensions. 2.2. Incorporation of pH effect into the Langmuir kinetic model The adsorption reaction on metal oxide surface, postulating that there is one type of surface site and two surface reactions controlling the metal adsorption, can be elucidated by Eqs. (3)–(4): SOH⇌SO− þ Hþ ð3Þ KH − where, SOH and SO are the protonated and deprotonated MnO2 sites, respectively; KH is the acidity constant. ka SO− þ M2þ ⇌ SOMþ kb ð4Þ KS where, M2+ is the dissolved free divalent heavy metal ion; SOM+ is metal-adsorbent complex, KS (L/mol) is the equilibrium constant; ka is the adsorption rate constant, and kd is the desorption rate constant. Moreover, it is assumed that one free-surface site (SO−) binds one metal ion (Wang et al., 2004). According to Langmuir kinetic model, the adsorption kinetics of heavy metals can be expressed as: − h i d M2þ dt h i ¼ ka M2þ ½SO− −kd SOMþ ð5Þ 2.1. Titration model h i d M2þ =dt ¼ 0; The determination of surface site density and acidity is a key step for adsorption modeling (Guan et al., 2009; Su et al., 2008; which is referred to KS-kinetic in the following part. .cn 2. Model development where, [ ] (mol/L) stands for the aqueous concentration, and t (sec) is time. At equilibrium, ð6Þ je sc .ac K S ¼ ka =kd 210 J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N ME N TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 07–2 1 6 The following mass balance equations are considered: metal adsorption, the dissolved metal concentration can be expressed as: Surface site balance: ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi r 2 4M ffi 1 MT T MT 1 − þ 1− þ 1 þ − þ h i ST αH ST K S αH ST K S ST ST 2þ M ¼ 2 ST ST ¼ ½SO− þ ½SOH þ SOMþ ð7Þ Metal balance: h i MT ¼ M2þ þ SOMþ ð8Þ where, ST (mol/L) and MT (mol/L) are the total surface site concentration and the total metal concentration, respectively. It is postulated that the concentration of soluble metal hydroxide species is negligible (Tamura and Furuichi, 1997; Pagnanelli et al., 2003). þ − H ½SO KH ð9Þ Inserting Eqs. (8) and (9) into Eq. (7), one gets: þ − h i H ½SO þ MT − M2þ K H h i 1 ¼ ½SO− þ MT − M2þ αH ST ¼ ½SO− þ ð10Þ where, αH ¼ K þK HHþ , the ratio of deprotonated sites to the total H ½ surface sites that are not occupied by heavy metals. Then inserting Eqs. (8) and ((10) into Eq. (5), one gets: ð11Þ ð15Þ If the surface concentration (mol/g) is defined as, SOMþ Mass adsorbent ð16Þ and h i2 h i þ αH ka M2þ þ fαH ka ðST −MT Þ þ kd g M2þ ¼ kd M T ð12Þ Eq. (12) indicates that the concentration of residual metal in the solution, [M2+], is a function of t, pH, total surface site concentration, and initial metal ion concentration. It is inferred as MLK model that incorporates the effect of pH (included in the αH term). The values of ka and kd could be obtained by simulating the kinetics data of heavy metal adsorption and the details of the procedure are present in Appendix A Supplementary data. The derivation process of MLK model revealed that it was only applicable at constant pH. Since buffer may influence heavy metal adsorption, no buffer was used in the adsorption tests. Thus, the adsorption kinetics experiments should be performed at low pH, which could maintain almost constant without buffer during the adsorption experiments, to obtain the values of KS-kinetic with MLK model. 2.3. Adsorption edge and isotherm A mathematic model describing the adsorption edge of metal ions on fly ash was developed by Wang et al. (2004). Assuming that only free metal ions are present in the system and that only one type of acid site is responsible for the Γmax ¼ ST Mass adsorbent ð17Þ Thus, the MLI equation can be re-organized to be: h i αH K S Γ max M2þ h i Γ¼ 1 þ αH K S M2þ ð18Þ 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Characterization of MnO2 The MnO2 particles were aggregated with many small particles (Fig. 1a), resulting in a rough surface and a porous structure. Its particle size is mainly in micro-size range with the average size of 20 μm, as shown in Fig. 1b. The BET specific surface area of MnO2 was determined to be 49.1 m2/g. The XRD pattern, as illustrated in Fig. 1c, revealed that MnO2 employed in this study was a γ-MnO2 (Adelkhani, 2012). As demonstrated in Fig. 1d, the point of zero charge (pHpzc) of MnO2 was 3.1, which fell within the range of point of zero charge values reported by Zhang et al. (2008). The concentration of soluble Mn(IV) was less than 0.1 mg/L at pH ≥ 4.2, as .cn dt h i αH K s ST M2þ h i SOMþ ¼ 1 þ αH K S M2þ Γ¼ Eq. (11) can be further modified to be: h i d M2þ The MMP model can be obtained by incorporating Eqs. (13) in (14), which can be used to describe metal partitioning under different metal loadings and different pH conditions. It was easy to derive the MMP model for a system that contains multiple surface sites following the practice of Wang et al. (2004). In addition, the modified Langmuir isotherm model (MLI model) that incorporates the pH effect in metal adsorption isotherm can be expressed as (Wang et al., 2004): .ac dt h i h i h i ¼ ka αH ST þ M2þ −M T Þ M2þ −kd ðMT − M2þ ð14Þ MT sc − h i d M2þ h i M2þ je ½SOH ¼ where, KS (L/mol) is the adsorption constant of heavy metal ions in Langmuir adsorption isotherm, which is referred to KS-Langmuir in the following part. Then, the metal partitioning or the ratio of metal concentration in the solid phase to the total metal concentration in the system (R) can be expressed as: R ¼ 1− From the definition of KH, one can get: ð13Þ 211 J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N M EN TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 0 7–2 1 6 (Lewis acids). Compared to S1O−, S2O− was expected to have much greater tendency to coordinate with heavy metals since the pKH of S2 was much larger than that of S1. Simulating the adsorption edges of heavy metals with the MMP model for two types of surface sites, when both S1O− and S2O− were considered as adsorption sites, revealed that the adsorption constants of heavy metals on surface site S1 were much smaller than those on surface site S2 or even negative, as listed in Appendix A Table S1. Moreover, the simulation results with MMP model for single type of surface sites (S2O−) were almost identical to those with MMP model for two types of surface sites. Therefore, S2O− should be the adsorption sites accounting for the adsorption of heavy metals and only one type of surface sites (S2O−) was considered in the following modeling process. shown in Appendix A Fig. S2. However, the dissolution of MnO2 was not negligible at very low pH and the concentration of Mn(IV) was as high as 11.8 mg/L at pH = 2.0. 3.2. Surface site acidity and speciation Fig. 2a shows the net titration results for MnO2 at different concentrations. The site densities and acidity constants of MnO2 were determined by fitting the titration curves using Eq. (1). The best curve fitting results were based on the two-site assumption, as indicated by smooth curves. Thus, it was hypothesized that the MnO2 surface contains two types of surface sites, denoted as sites S1 and S2. The densities (Γ) of acid sites S1 and S2 are 1.6 × 10− 4 ± 0.1 × 10−4 and 1.3 × 10− 4 ± 0.1 × 10−4 mol/g, respectively and their acidity constants (pKH) are 3.5 ± 0.1 and 7.0 ± 0.2, respectively. Since the values of pKH for these two sites are all greater than pHpzc, the deprotonated surface sites are negatively charged. As the surface is positively charged at pH below 3.1, there must be another surface site S0 which is positively charged before deprotonation. However, site S0 was not observed since our titration was limited to pH above 2.0 due to the considerable dissolution of MnO2 at pH ≤ 2.0. Fig. 2b demonstrates the speciation of S1 and S2 at various pH levels. Then the deprotonated form of surface sites S1 and S2, S1O− and S2O−, which are negatively charged and can act as Lewis base, should contribute to the adsorption of heavy metal ions 3.3. Modeling the adsorption kinetics of metal ions Fig. 3 shows the adsorption kinetics of Cu(II), Co(II), Cd(II), Zn(II), and Ni(II) on MnO2. For all metals, the adsorption was fast and majority of metals were removed within the first 120 min of contact with the adsorbent. However, the adsorption experiments lasted for 24 hr to ensure that the adsorption equilibrium could be achieved. Moreover, Fig. 3 reveals that the adsorption of heavy metals increased significantly with the increase of pH, which may be ascribed to the increase in the amount of deprotonated surface site (S2) as illustrated 5 a b 4 3 2 1 500 nm 0 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 Size (μm) c γ-MnO (021) (221) Zeta Potential (mV) (110) (121) Intensity (a.u) d 10 2 0 -10 -20 -30 40 60 2 Theta (degrees) 80 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 pH .cn 20 je sc .ac Fig. 1 – (a) Scanning electron microscope image of MnO2; (b) Particle size distribution of MnO2; (c) X-ray diffraction patterns of γ-MnO2 employed in this study; (d) zeta potential of MnO2 as a function of pH using 0.01 mol/L NaCl as the background electrolyte, the concentration of MnO2 was 0.1 g/L. 212 J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N ME N TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 07–2 1 6 1.6 Surface site density (×10-4 mol/g) a 10 pH 8 6 Modeling 5 g/L 10 g/L 50 g/L 4 2 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.1 mol/L base added (mL L/g) b 1.4 1.2 S1OH 1.0 S2OH 0.8 0.6 S1 O - 0.4 S2O- 0.2 0.0 2 0.15 4 6 pH 8 10 Fig. 2 – (a) Net titration results for MnO2 of three concentrations (ΔVSS/SS as a function of pH); (b) surface speciation of MnO2 at different pH levels. S1, S2: surface sites. (dotted lines) coincide with the experimental data reasonably well, indicating that the adsorption kinetics of heavy metal on MnO2 at various pH could be described with a single set of parameters. However, this model could not predict the adsorption kinetics of heavy metal at higher pH so well as it did at lower pH, which should be ascribed to the variation of pH (±0.3) when the adsorption kinetics was performed in the pH range 4.5–5.1. In addition, this MLK model can be employed to predict the adsorption kinetics carried out at different concentrations of metals and adsorbent, since they are also incorporated in this model. Appendix A Fig. S4 shows the Ni(II) adsorption kinetics on MnO2 in the first 120 min of adsorption at different pH levels. in Fig. 2b. The adsorption kinetics of heavy metals on MnO2 fitted very well to the pseudo second order kinetic model with a high correlation coefficient (R2 > 0.99), as illustrated in Appendix A Fig. S3, indicating that the adsorption of heavy metals on MnO2 was reaction-controlled rather than mass transfer-controlled (Özer et al., 2004). The MLK model was used to simulate the kinetics of heavy metal adsorption on MnO2 in 120 min at pH 3.2 or 3.3, which was very low and kept almost constant during the adsorption tests, to obtain the adsorption rate constant (ka ), the desorption rate constant (kd ) and then the corresponding equilibrium constant (KS-kinetic). The determined ka , kd , and KS values were summarized in Table 1. As shown in Fig. 3, the MLK model could simulate the kinetics of heavy metal adsorption on MnO2 at pH 3.2 or 3.3 quite well. Because the MLK model incorporates the effect of pH, the MLK model could be applied to predict the adsorption kinetics of heavy metals at other pH levels with the parameters (ka and kd) listed in Table 1. Fig. 3 demonstrates that the calculations 3.4. Predicting the metal adsorption edges The adsorption edges of Cu(II), Co(II), Cd(II), Zn(II), and Ni(II) ions on MnO2 were determined in the pH range of 2.0–7.0 and shown in Fig. 4. The adsorption of heavy metals on MnO2 increased Cu(II), pH = 4.5 ± 0.3 80 Cu(II), pH = 3.2 60 80 30 25 15 0 40 0 04080120 40 04080120 20 Co(II), pH = 4.5 ± 0.3 0 0 100 Removal efficiency (%) 50 Cd(II), pH = 5.1 ± 0.3 Co(II), pH = 3.3 Cd(II), pH = 3.3 04080120 0 40 80 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time (min) 20 20 60 10 0 40 0 04080120 20 Zn(ll), pH = 5.1 ± 0.3 Zn(ll), pH = 3.3 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 Time (min) 04080120 Ni(ll), pH = 5.1 ± 0.3 Ni(ll), pH = 3.3 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Time (min) .cn Removal efficiency (%) 100 je sc .ac Fig. 3 – Adsorption kinetics of heavy metals. Experimental condition: adsorbent dose, 5 g/L; initial metal concentrations (mmol/L), Cu(II) 0.104, Co(II) 0.126, Cd(II) 0.113, Zn(II) 0.125, Ni(II) 0.110. Symbols are experimental data; solid lines are simulation results with MLK model; dashed lines are adsorption kinetics predicted with the parameters got from MLK model. The insets show the first 120 min of the kinetics data at low pH for each metal ion. 213 J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N M EN TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 0 7–2 1 6 Removal efficiency (%) 100 Cu(II) Co(II) Zn(II) Ni(II) Cd(II) 80 60 40 20 Removal efficiency (%) 0 100 2 3 4 5 6 Equilibrium pH 7 80 60 Modeling 40 Predicting 20 0 2 3 4 5 6 Equilibrium pH 7 2 3 4 5 Equilibrium pH 6 7 Fig. 4 – Adsorption edges of heavy metals. Experimental conditions: adsorbent dose, 5 g/L; initial metal concentrations (mmol/L): Cu(II) 0.104, Co(II) 0.126, Cd(II) 0.113, Zn(II) 0.125, Ni(II) 0.110. Solid lines are simulation results with MMP model; dashed lines are predicted with the corresponding adsorption constants got from the MLK model. MnO2, 1.0 g/L MnO2, 5.0 g/L 100 80 60 40 20 0 8 7 Equ 6 5 ilib rium pH 4 0 ) 0.12 ol/L 0.04 (mm 0.06 i(II) 0.08 of N 0.10 ation 3 0.12 entr c on lc tia i n I ency (%) Removal effici ency (%) Removal effici 100 80 60 40 20 0 8 7 Equ 6 ilib 5 rium pH 4 0 ) 0.1 ol/L 0.2 ) (mm 0.3 i(II 0.4 n of N 0.5 ratio 3 0.6 cent n o lc tia Ini Fig. 5 – Adsorption edges of Ni(II) determined at different adsorbate/adsorbent concentrations. Solid lines are the prediction results at different initial metal concentrations with the corresponding adsorption constants got from the MLK model. The surfaces, plotted by the MMP model with the equilibrium constant (KS-kinetic), describe the Ni(II) adsorption edges on MnO2 at different metal/adsorbent concentrations. Table 1 – Comparison of the equilibrium constants determined from the modified Langmuir kinetic model (MLK model) (logKS-kinetic) with those from the the modified metal partitioning model (MMP model) (logKS-Langmuir) (confidence level: α < 0.05). kd (× 10−3) 3.21 2.55 1.42 1.13 0.64 1.82 6.68 7.26 3.76 5.16 ± ± ± ± ± 0.96 0.52 0.45 0.18 0.21 ± ± ± ± ± 0.71 1.50 2.48 0.65 1.88 Eq. (14) R logKS-kinetic ((mol/L)− 1) logKS-Langmuir ((mol/L)− 1) 0.937 0.980 0.951 0.974 0.929 7.25 6.58 6.29 6.48 6.09 7.35 6.54 6.39 6.34 6.17 ± ± ± ± ± 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.02 R logK1 a 0.995 0.992 0.997 0.980 0.999 6.00 4.80 3.92 5.04 4.14 sc Stability constant of MOH+. je a ka (× 104) Eq. (6) .cn Cu(II) Co(II) Cd(II) Zn(II) Ni(II) Eq. (12) .ac Element J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N ME N TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 07–2 1 6 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 pH 4.0 14 12 l/L) mo 8 10 II) (m i( 6 of N 4 3.5 on i t 2 a r 3.0 0 ent onc al c i t i In Fig. 6 – Experimental data and predictive curves for the adsorption isotherms of Ni(II) at different pH (3.3 ± 0.1 and 4.3 ± 0.1). Experimental conditions: adsorbent dose, 5 g/L; initial Ni(II) concentration 0.110 mmol/L. Solid lines are predicted results with adsorption constants got from the MLK model. The surface, plotted by the MLI model with the equilibrium constant (KS-kinetic), describes the Ni(II) adsorption isotherms on MnO2 at different pH. demonstrated by the surface plot in Fig. 6. The predicted adsorption isotherms matched the experimental results reasonably well over the entire concentration range. This prediction approach is also applicable to other divalent heavy metal ions and to predict the adsorption edges and isotherms of these metals over a wide range of pH and broad metal loading conditions. 3.6. Linear correlation .cn The divalent heavy metal ions also form hydroxo complexes in homogeneous solutions (hydrolysis) with different reactivities, which can be evaluated by the reported stability constants of the hydroxo complexes. The adsorption constants of heavy metals on MnO2 were compared with the reactivities of these heavy metals to form hydroxo complexes, as illustrated in Appendix A Fig. S5a. There is a good correlation between equilibrium constants and the stability of MOH+ (Stumm and Morgan, 1996). Similar phenomenon was observed for heavy metal adsorption on both MnO2 and Fe2O3 (Tamura and Furuichi, 1997). The similar tendency of heavy metal ions for adsorption and hydrolysis indicates similarities in the two reactions, which can be regarded as the interaction between Lewis acid and Lewis base. The deprotonated surface hydroxyl sites and hydroxide ions are Lewis base and they interact with heavy metal ions, which are Lewis acid, via their oxygen atoms. Thus, the heavy metal ions with higher reactivity to form hydroxo complexes have higher adsorption affinities for MnO2. Consequently, the adsorption constants of other heavy metal ions on MnO2 can be estimated based on the correlation shown in Appendix Fig. S5a. Moreover, the correlation between the equilibrium constants determined from the MLK model (KS-kinetic) and the adsorption constants obtained from the MMP model (KS-Langmuir) is demonstrated in Appendix A Fig. S5b. There is a sound linear .ac Eq. (18) is a MLI model which incorporates the pH factor, included in the αH term, in the Langmuir isotherm. According to this MLI model, the variation of the adsorption capacity of one adsorbent with pH is not due to the change of adsorption constant with pH but to the change of effective adsorption site density with pH. Thus the MLI model can be applied to simulate or predict the adsorption isotherms over a wide pH range with only one adsorption constant. The adsorption isotherms of Ni(II) on MnO2 at pH 3.3–6.0 were predicted by the MLI model with KS-kinetic as the adsorption constant, as 0.12 sc 3.5. Predicting the adsorption isotherms 0.14 je with increasing pH. As pH increased, the net surface charge of MnO2 became more negative, resulting in an increase in cation adsorption and the “S” shaped adsorption edge was observed. These adsorption edge results are consistent with what other researchers have reported (Christophi and Axe, 2000). In neutral and low pH ranges, adsorption of the free metal ion is the only mechanism for metal adsorption because the formation of metal-hydroxide complexes is not significant (Wang et al., 2004). Tamura and Furuichi (1997) confirmed that if metal adsorption onto metal oxides took into account hydroxo complexes (MOH+), it made this adsorption path difficult to accept since the adsorption affinity of those species would be too high to be believable. Moreover, Tamura and Furuichi (1997) suggested that the adsorption of divalent heavy metal ion be through the interaction between the positive charge of the heavy metal ions and the negative charge of deprotonated hydroxyl sites –O−. Thus, only the interaction of free metal ions with the deprotonated form of surface site S2, i.e., S2O−, was considered in this study. The MMP model developed by Wang et al. (2004) (Eq. (14)) was employed to simulate the adsorption edges and the results are presented in Fig. 4. The KS-Langmuir values of different heavy metals, listed in Table 1, revealed that the adsorption affinities of heavy metal ions toward MnO2 surface followed the order of Cu(II) > Co(II) > Cd(II) ≈ Zn(II) > Ni(II). Different sequences of affinity of heavy metals for various adsorbents had been reported (Christophi and Axe, 2000), while Cu(II) always had greater affinity than the other four heavy metals investigated in this study. As discussed above, the equilibrium constants (KS-kinetic) got from the adsorption kinetics of heavy metals are theoretically identical to the adsorption constants in Langmuir isotherm. Therefore, this MMP model was employed to predict the adsorption edges of heavy metal ions on MnO2 with the equilibrium constants (KS-kinetic) determined from Eq. (6) (Fig. 4). With the equilibrium constants (KS-kinetic) determined from MLK model, MMP model could predict the adsorption edges superbly. The MMP model can also be used to predict the adsorption edges of heavy metals at different heavy metal concentrations and sorbent concentrations. Thus, the adsorption edges of Ni(II) on MnO2 (1.0, 5.0 g/L) over a wide Ni(II) concentration range were predicted by the MMP model with KS-kinetic, as shown by the surface plots in Fig. 5. The adsorption edges of Ni(II) on MnO2 at different initial Ni(II) concentrations (0.058, 0.110, 0.225, 0.550 mmol/L) were determined experimentally and are present in Fig. 5. There is a quite good agreement between the experimental data and the model predictions. (mmol/L.g) Ni(II) adsorbed 214 215 J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N M EN TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 0 7–2 1 6 This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation (No. 21277095), and the Tongji University Open Funding for Materials Characterization (No. 2013080). The authors also appreciate the constructive suggestions from Dr. Li Wang. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2014.05.036. REFERENCES Adelkhani, H., 2012. The effect of acidity of electrolyte on the porosity and the nanostructure morphology of electrolytic manganese dioxide. Appl. Surf. Sci. 258 (17), 6232–6238. Benedetti, M.F., Milne, C.J., Kinniburgh, D.G., Vanriemsdijk, W.H., Koopal, L.K., 1995. Metal ion binding to humic substances: application of the nonideal competitive adsorption model. Environ. Sci. Technol. 29 (2), 446–457. Christophi, C.A., Axe, L., 2000. Competition of Cd, Cu, and Pb adsorption on goethite. J. Environ. Eng.-ASCE 126, 66–74. Esposito, A., Pagnanelli, F., Veglio, F., 2002. pH-related equilibria models for biosorption in single metal systems. Chem. Eng. Sci. 57 (3), 307–313. Frierdich, A.J., Catalano, J.G., 2012. Distribution and speciation of trace elements in iron and manganese oxide cave deposits. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 91, 240–253. Guan, X.H., Su, T.Z., Wang, J.M., 2009. Quantifying effects of pH and surface loading on arsenic adsorption on NanoActive alumina using a speciation-based model. J. Hazard. Mater. 166 (1), 39–45. Jeffery, W., Berger, J., 1992. Ockham's Razor and Bayesian analysis. Am. Sci. 64–72. Mahmudov, R., Huang, C.P., 2011. Selective adsorption of oxyanions on activated carbon exemplified by Filtrasorb 400 (F400). Sep. Purif. Technol. 77 (3), 294–300. .cn Acknowledgment .ac We succeeded to use only one pH-independent metal adsorption constant (KS-kinetic), determined from the adsorption kinetics of heavy metals, for the description of heavy metals' adsorption edges and isotherms on MnO2 over a wide range of pH, metal loading conditions and adsorbent concentrations. Many factors neglected in this study (surface heterogeneity, effect of coexisting ions, mass transfer etc.) may modify the mechanism of adsorption of both protons and metal ions, and thus further theoretical studies considering those weak points seem necessary. However, the simple model approach proposed in this study can be treated as a starting point for revealing the relationship among adsorption kinetics, edge, and isotherm. sc 4. Conclusions McBride, M.B., 1997. A critique of diffuse double layer models applied to colloid and surface chemistry. Clay Clay Miner. 45 (4), 598–608. Özer, A., Özer, D., Ekiz, H.I., 2004. The equilibrium and kinetic modelling of the biosorption of copper(II) ions on Cladophora crispata. Adsorption 10 (4), 317–326. Pagnanelli, F., Esposito, A., Toro, L., Veglio, F., 2003. Metal speciation and pH effect on Pb, Cu, Zn and Cd biosorption onto Sphaerotilus natans: Langmuir-type empirical model. Water Res. 37 (3), 627–633. Plazinski, W., 2010. Statistical rate theory approach to description of the pH-dependent kinetics of metal ion adsorption. J. Phys. Chem. C 114 (21), 9952–9954. Plazinski, W., Rudzinski, W., 2009. Modeling the effect of pH on kinetics of heavy metal ion biosorption. A theoretical approach based on the statistical rate theory. Langmuir 25 (1), 298–304. Plazinski, W., Rudzinski, W., Plazinska, A., 2009. Theoretical models of sorption kinetics including a surface reaction mechanism: a review. Adv. Colloid Interf. Sci. 152 (1–2), 2–13. Ponthieu, M., Juillot, F., Hiemstra, T., van Riemsdijk, W.H., Benedetti, M.F., 2006. Metal ion binding to iron oxides. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 70 (11), 2679–2698. Rudzinski, W., Plazinski, W., 2010. How does mechanism of biosorption determine the differences between the initial and equilibrium adsorption states? Adsorption 16 (4–5), 351–357. Serrano, S., O'Day, P.A., Vlassopoulos, D., Garcia-Gonzalez, M.T., Garrido, F., 2009. A surface complexation and ion exchange model of Pb and Cd competitive sorption on natural soils. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 73 (3), 543–558. Shi, Z.Q., Di Toro, D.M., Allen, H.E., Ponizovsky, A.A., 2005. Modeling kinetics of Cu and Zn release from soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39 (12), 4562–4568. Stumm, W., Morgan, J.J., 1996. Aquatic Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. Su, T.Z., Guan, X.H., Gu, G.W., Wang, J.M., 2008. Adsorption characteristics of As(V), Se(IV), and V(V) onto activated alumina: effects of pH, surface loading, and ionic strength. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 326 (2), 347–353. Tamura, H., Furuichi, R., 1997. Adsorption affinity of divalent heavy metal ions for metal oxides evaluated by modeling with the Frumkin isotherm. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 195 (1), 241–249. Tamura, H., Katayama, N., Furuichi, R., 1996. Modeling of ion-exchange reactions on metal oxides with the Frumkin isotherm .1. Acid–base and charge characteristics of MnO2, TiO2, Fe3O4, and Al2O3 surfaces and adsorption affinity of alkali metal ions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 30 (4), 1198–1204. Tamura, H., Katayama, N., Furuichi, R., 1997. The Co2+ adsorption properties of Al2O3, Fe2O3, Fe2O3, TiO2, and MnO2 evaluated by modeling with the Frumkin isotherm. J. Colloid. Interf. Sci. 195 (1), 192–202. Venema, P., Hiemstra, T., van Riemsdijk, W.H., 1996. Comparison of different site binding models for cation sorption: description of pH dependency, salt dependency, and cation–proton exchange. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 181 (1), 45–59. Wang, J.M., Teng, X.J., Wang, H., Ban, H., 2004. Characterizing the metal adsorption capability of a class F coal fly ash. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38 (24), 6710–6715. Wang, J.M., Ban, H., Teng, X.J., Wang, H., Ladwig, K., 2006. Impacts of pH and ammonia on the leaching of Cu(II) and Cd(II) from coal fly ash. Chemosphere 64 (11), 1892–1898. Wang, J.M., Wang, T., Burken, J.G., Chusuel, C.C., Ban, H., Ladwig, K., et al., 2008. Adsorption of arsenic(V) onto fly ash: a speciation-based approach. Chemosphere 72 (3), 381–388. Weerasooriya, R., Tobschall, H.J., Bandara, A., 2007. Modeling interactions of Hg(II) and bauxitic soils. Chemosphere 69 (10), 1525–1532. Wen, X.H., Du, Q., Tang, H.X., 1998. Surface complexation model for the heavy metal adsorption on natural sediment. Environ. je relationship between KS-kinetic and KS-Langmuir and their values are so close to each other, confirming that the constants obtained by these two methods are basically the same. J O U RN A L OF E N V I RO N ME N TA L S CI EN CE S 27 (2 0 1 5 ) 2 07–2 1 6 .ac .cn Zhang, L.Z., Ma, J., Yu, M., 2008. The microtopography of manganese dioxide formed in situ and its adsorptive properties for organic micropollutants. Solid State Sci. 10 (2), 148–153. sc Sci. Technol. 32 (7), 870–875. Yiacoumi, S., Tien, C., 1995a. Modeling adsorption of metal-Ions from aqueous-solutions. 1. Reaction-controlled cases. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 175 (2), 333–346. Yiacoumi, S., Tien, C., 1995b. Modeling adsorption of metal ions from aqueous solutions. 2. Transport controlled cases. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 175 (2), 347–357. je 216 Editorial Board of Journal of Environmental Sciences Editor-in-Chief X. Chris Le University of Alberta, Canada Associate Editors-in-Chief Jiuhui Qu Shu Tao Nigel Bell Po-Keung Wong Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Peking University, China Imperial College London, UK The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China Editorial Board Aquatic environment Baoyu Gao Shandong University, China Maohong Fan University of Wyoming, USA Chihpin Huang National Chiao Tung University Taiwan, China Ng Wun Jern Nanyang Environment & Water Research Institute, Singapore Clark C. K. Liu University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA Hokyong Shon University of Technology, Sydney, Australia Zijian Wang Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Zhiwu Wang The Ohio State University, USA Yuxiang Wang Queen’s University, Canada Min Yang Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Zhifeng Yang Beijing Normal University, China Han-Qing Yu University of Science & Technology of China, China Terrestrial environment Christopher Anderson Massey University, New Zealand Zucong Cai Nanjing Normal University, China Xinbin Feng Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Hongqing Hu Huazhong Agricultural University, China Kin-Che Lam The Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong, China Erwin Klumpp Research Centre Juelich, Agrosphere Institute Germany Peijun Li Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Michael Schloter German Research Center for Environmental Health Germany Xuejun Wang Peking University, China Lizhong Zhu Zhejiang University, China Atmospheric environment Jianmin Chen Fudan University, China Abdelwahid Mellouki Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique France Yujing Mu Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Min Shao Peking University, China James Jay Schauer University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA Yuesi Wang Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Xin Yang University of Cambridge, UK Environmental biology Yong Cai Florida International University, USA Henner Hollert RWTH Aachen University, Germany Jae-Seong Lee Sungkyunkwan University, South Korea Christopher Rensing University of Copenhagen, Denmark Bojan Sedmak National Institute of Biology, Slovenia Lirong Song Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Chunxia Wang National Natural Science Foundation of China Gehong Wei Northwest A & F University, China Daqiang Yin Tongji University, China Zhongtang Yu The Ohio State University, USA Environmental toxicology and health Jingwen Chen Dalian University of Technology, China Jianying Hu Peking University, China Guibin Jiang Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Sijin Liu Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Tsuyoshi Nakanishi Gifu Pharmaceutical University, Japan Willie Peijnenburg University of Leiden, The Netherlands Bingsheng Zhou Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Environmental catalysis and materials Hong He Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Junhua Li Tsinghua University, China Wenfeng Shangguan Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China Ralph T. Yang University of Michigan, USA Environmental analysis and method Zongwei Cai Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, China Jiping Chen Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Minghui Zheng Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Municipal solid waste and green chemistry Pinjing He Tongji University, China Editorial office staff Managing editor Editors English editor Qingcai Feng Zixuan Wang Suqin Liu Catherine Rice (USA) Kuo Liu Zhengang Mao Copyright© Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. and Science Press. All rights reserved. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 环境科学学报(英文版) www.jesc.ac.cn Aims and scope Journal of Environmental Sciences is an international academic journal supervised by Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. The journal publishes original, peer-reviewed innovative research and valuable findings in environmental sciences. The types of articles published are research article, critical review, rapid communications, and special issues. The scope of the journal embraces the treatment processes for natural groundwater, municipal, agricultural and industrial water and wastewaters; physical and chemical methods for limitation of pollutants emission into the atmospheric environment; chemical and biological and phytoremediation of contaminated soil; fate and transport of pollutants in environments; toxicological effects of terrorist chemical release on the natural environment and human health; development of environmental catalysts and materials. For subscription to electronic edition Elsevier is responsible for subscription of the journal. Please subscribe to the journal via http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jes. For subscription to print edition China: Please contact the customer service, Science Press, 16 Donghuangchenggen North Street, Beijing 100717, China. Tel: +86-10-64017032; E-mail: journal@mail.sciencep.com, or the local post office throughout China (domestic postcode: 2-580). Outside China: Please order the journal from the Elsevier Customer Service Department at the Regional Sales Office nearest you. Submission declaration Submission of the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The publication should be approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out. If the manuscript accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder. Editorial Authors should submit manuscript online at http://www.jesc.ac.cn. In case of queries, please contact editorial office, Tel: +86-10-62920553, E-mail: jesc@rcees.ac.cn. Instruction to authors is available at http://www.jesc.ac.cn. Journal of Environmental Sciences (Established in 1989) Volume 27 2015 Supervised by Chinese Academy of Sciences Sponsored by Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences Edited by Editorial Office of Journal of Published by Elsevier Limited, The Netherlands Distributed by Domestic North Street, Beijing 100717, China P. O. Box 2871, Beijing 100085, China Local Post Offices through China Foreign E-mail: jesc@rcees.ac.cn CN 11-2629/X Science Press, 16 Donghuangchenggen Environmental Sciences Tel: 86-10-62920553; http://www.jesc.ac.cn Editor-in-chief Science Press, Beijing, China X. Chris Le Domestic postcode: 2-580 Elsevier Limited http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jes Printed by Beijing Beilin Printing House, 100083, China Domestic price per issue RMB ¥ 110.00