Biosorption of heavy metal ions from contaminated wastewater: an eco-friendly approach

Figures & data

Figure 1. Source of heavy metal ions contamination in the environment.

Table 1. Different heavy metals and their sources with their Toxicity.

Heavy metals	Sources	Toxicity	References
Cr (IV)	Anticorrosive, Industrial welding, tanneries, steel industries, fly ash, leather tanning	Anemia, gastric and intestinal ulcer, hair loss, carcinogenic, vomiting, headache, diarrhea, nausea	(42)
Cd (II)	Food processing, tobacco smoke, phosphate fertilizers, metal and paints industry	Human carcinogens, lung cancer, kidney disease, pulmonary irritation	(43, 44)
Ni (II)	Among the products manufactured by the company are kitchen appliances, paints and powders, superphosphate fertilizers, battery processing units, metal refining, and galvanizing	Cardiovascular diseases can cause chest pain, dizziness, and shortness of breath. Other symptoms include dry cough, headache, nausea, dermatitis, hair loss, and an increased risk of lung, nasal, and neurotoxic cancers., and an increased risk of lung, nasal, and neurotoxic cancers	(45)
As (III & V)	Semiconductors, Fungicide, herbicides, pesticides, wood preservatives, industrial dust and dyes	Carcinogenesis, diabetes, portal fibrosis	(46, 47)
Pb (II)	Automobile batteries, Lead batteries, lead paints, herbicides and insecticides	Pb (II) toxicity affects the nervous system and also interferes with the mammalian spermatogenesis	(46, 48)
Cu (II)	Cu (II) contamination in the water is caused due to electroplating, the leather industry, pesticides and fertilizers industry	Carcinogenesis, diabetes, liver damage, insomnia, Wilson disease	(46, 49)
Zn (II)	Wood preservatives, ointments, rubber industries, paint and dyes	Dizziness, fatigue, zinc pox, cough, depression, increased thirst, neurological signs, lethargy	(50, 51)
Sb (II)	Petroleum, ceramics and refineries	Increase blood cholesterol, decrease blood sugar level	(51)
Hg (II)	Thermometers, paints, light bulb industries, leather tanning, wood preservatives, adhesives, ointment-producing industries and medical waste	Depression, hair loss, fatigue, brain damage, lung and kidney failure, drowsiness, restlessness, autoimmune disease,	(52, 53)
Se (II)	Industrial activities such as mining, petroleum refining, and coal combustion are significant sources of Se(II) contamination in water	Hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal disturbances, hair and finger nail loss, caustic burns, circulatory problems	(49, 51–53)

Figure 2. Physiochemical methods for removal of heavy metal ions from contaminated water.

Table 2. Advantages and limitations of physiochemical methods.

Physicochemical methods	Advantages	Disadvantages	References
Ion Exchange	High efficiency for specific metal. Regenerable and reusable resins	Limited selectivity for certain heavy metal ions. It Generates brine waste from regeneration	(63–67)
Chemical Precipitation	This method is simple and cost-effective. This method is suitable for large-scale treatment	Generates large volumes of sludge as waste. This method is pH and temperature	(63, 68)
Membrane Processes	The high removal efficiency of this method. This method can be used for selective removal of heavy metal ions	This process is energy-intensive, especially for pressure-driven processes like RO. Membrane fouling can occur and require maintenance	(69, 70)
Electrochemical Method	This method is also effective for low concentrations of heavy metal ions. This method applies to the treatment of a wide range of heavy metals	This method has some disadvantages like high energy consumption. Requires skilled operation. Electrode materials can corrode or degrade over time	(71, 72)

Table 3. Physiochemical methods comparison with biosorption methods.

Methods	Advantages	Limitations	References
Physiochemical methods	These methods are effective for the precipitation of heavy metal ions contamination from water. This method can quickly and effectively remove heavy metal ions. The method is useful for effectively removal of wide range of heavy metal ions from contaminated water. These methods are applicable for both cationic and anionic metal ion species.	These methods have some disadvantages including the generation of toxic sludge which has toxic impacts on the environment and high operation cost.	(83–87)
Biosorption	This eco-friendly process with lower operation costs. Biosorption is based on the dead biomass of plant residue or other microbes including algae. Therefore, no need for media requirements and maintenance. Biosorption is a quick and effective heavy metal removal method. The raw use in the biosorption process are widely available or can be easily grown.	This is not a well-stabilized method for water treatment. Further research in this area is needed and implementation of biosorption techniques at a commercial scale, particularly in water treatment plants	(88–90)

Figure 3. Mechanism of Cr (VI) ions removal from contaminated water.

Table 4. Heavy metal removal efficiency of some important biosorbent.

Biosorbents	Heavy metal	Removal efficiency (%)	pH	Initial metal ion concentration (mg/L)	References
Rice husk	As (V)	90.7		15	(96)
Macromolecule-carbonized rice husks	As (V)	85	3–9	0.1	(97)
Macromolecule-carbonized rice husks	Pb (II)	97	3–9	0.1	(98)
Iron oxide amended with rice husk nanoparticles	As (III)	95	–	10	(98)
Sulfur modified straw coke	Hg (II)	97.1	3.2		(99)
Banana peel powder	Cr (VI)	90.07	2	30	(100)
Moringa stenopetala seed powder	Cr (VI)	92.17	2	30	(100)
Eupatorium adenophorum biomass	Cd (II)	93.3	7	–	(101)
Treated Water Hyacinth	Cu (II)	31.3	–	3500	(102)
Treated Water Hyacinth	Ni (II)	20.1	–	4000	(102)

Figure 4. Preparation of biosorbent from biomasses.

Table 5. Advantages and disadvantages of biosorbents use for removal of heavy metals.

Advantages
Biosorbent property	Discription	References
Cost-effective	Biosorbents are often readily available and can be sourced at low cost, especially agricultural wastes or byproducts.	(80, 112)
Environmentally friendly	Unlike chemical methods, biosorption is a green technology that does not involve hazardous chemicals or produce toxic byproducts.	(79, 113)
Regenerable	Some biosorbents can be regenerated and reused, which enhances their cost-effectiveness and sustainability.	(89, 114)
High selectivity	Biosorbents can be engineered or selected for high specificity towards particular metal ions, reducing the risk of interference from other ions	(115, 116)
Low energy requirements	Biosorption processes typically operate at ambient temperatures and pressures, requiring less energy compared to some other methods	(117, 118)
Biodegradability	Biosorbents are often biodegradable, reducing environmental impact after use or disposal	(119, 120)
Disadvantages
Low capacity	Biosorbents often have a lower capacity for metal ion adsorption compared to some synthetic adsorbents	(121)
Slow kinetics	Biosorption processes can be slower compared to chemical methods, requiring longer contact times for effective removal	(122)
pH and temperature sensitivity	Biosorption efficiency can be affected by pH and temperature, requiring careful control for optimal performance	(117)
Biomass handling	Processing large quantities of biomass can be challenging, requiring proper pretreatment and disposal methods	(123)
Potential leaching	There is a risk of metal ions being released back into the environment if the biosorbent is not properly managed or regenerated	(124)
Specificity limitations	While high selectivity is an advantage, it can also be a limitation if the biosorbent is too specific and cannot effectively remove a wide range of metal ions.	(123)

Table 6. Examples of isotherm models for heavy metal biosorption.

Metal	Biosorbent	Isotherm model	References
Cr (VI)	Chitosan-coated MnO2	Langmuir	(136)
Cd (II)	Magnetically modified peanut husks	Freundlich	(143)
Ni (II)	Wet torrefied microalgal biochar	Temkin	(144)
	Algal-derived biochar	Langmuir
Pb (II)	Eucalyptus camdulensis – Derived Biochar	H–J isotherm and Temkin	(145)
Ni (II)	Eucalyptus camdulensis – Derived Biochar	H–J isotherm and Temkin	(145)
As (III)	Dried Chlamydomonas sp.	Langmuir	(146)
Zn (II)	Streptomyces sp. Biomass	Freundlich	(147)
Sb(III)	Fe(III) Modified Proteus Cibarius	Langmuir	(148)
Zn (II), Cd (II), Pb (II)	Alkaline-Treated Soy Waste Biomass	Langmuir	(149)
Cu(II), Zn(II), Co(II)	Mustard Waste Biomass Functionalized with Polymeric Thiocarbamate	Freundlich	(150)

Sharma, P.; Singh, S.P.; Parakh, S.K.; Tong, Y.W. Health Hazards of Hexavalent Chromium (Cr (VI)) and its Microbial Reduction. Bioengineered 2022, 13 (3), 4923–4938. doi:10.1080/21655979.2022.2037273.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kubier, A.; Wilkin, R.T.; Pichler, T. Cadmium in Soils and Groundwater: A Review. Appl. Geochem. 2019, 108, 104388. doi:10.1016/j.apgeochem.2019.104388.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Huff, J.; Lunn, R.M.; Waalkes, M.P.; Tomatis, L.; Infante, P.F. Cadmium-induced Cancers in Animals and in Humans. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health 2007, 13 (2), 202–212. doi:10.1179/oeh.2007.13.2.202.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Genchi, G.; Carocci, A.; Lauria, G.; Sinicropi, M.S.; Catalano, A. Nickel: Human Health and Environmental Toxicology. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17 (3), 679. doi:10.3390/ijerph17030679.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mustapha, M.U.; Halimoon, N. Microorganisms and Biosorption of Heavy Metals in the Environment: A Review Paper. J. Microb. Biochem. Technol. 2015, 7 (5). doi:10.4172/1948-5948.1000219.

 Google Scholar

Sharma, S.; Tiwari, S.; Hasan, A.; Saxena, V.; Pandey, L.M. Recent Advances in Conventional and Contemporary Methods for Remediation of Heavy Metal-Contaminated Soils. 3. Biotech. 2018, 8 (4). doi:10.1007/s13205-018-1237-8.

 Google Scholar

Bilal, M.; Rasheed, T.; Sosa-Hernández, J.; Raza, A.; Nabeel, F.; Iqbal, H. Biosorption: An Interplay between Marine Algae and Potentially Toxic Elements—A Review. Mar. Drugs. 2018, 16 (2), 65. doi:10.3390/md16020065.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sumiahadi, A.; Acar, R. A Review of Phytoremediation Technology: Heavy Metals Uptake by Plants. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018, 142, 012023. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/142/1/012023.

 Google Scholar

K, K.; Sardar, R.; Bhargavi, U.R.; Devi, E.; Bhunia, I.; Tiwari, B.; N, O. Advances in Exopolysaccharides Based Bioremediation of Heavy Metals in Soil and Water: A Critical Review. Carbohydr. Polym. 2018, 199, 353–364. doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.07.037.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shafiq, M.; Alazba, A.A.; Amin, M.T. Removal of Heavy Metals from Wastewater Using Date Palm as a Biosorbent: A Comparative Review. Sains Malaysiana 2018, 47 (1), 35–49. doi:10.17576/jsm-2018-4701-05.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jamshed, Z.; VAmit, P. Review on Heavy Metal Pollution in Major Lakes of India: Remediation through Plants. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 11 (6), 255–265. doi:10.5897/AJEST2017.2299.

 Google Scholar

Sulaymon, A.H.; Mohammed, A.A.; Al-Musawi, T.J. Multicomponent Biosorption of Heavy Metals Using Fluidized Bed of Algal Biomass. J. Eng. 2023, 19 (4), 469–484. doi:10.31026/j.eng.2013.04.05.

 Google Scholar

Qasem, N.A.A.; Mohammed, R.H.; Lawal, D.U. Removal of Heavy Metal Ions from Wastewater: A Comprehensive and Critical Review. NPJ Clean Water 2021, 4 (1). doi:10.1038/s41545-021-00127-0.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pohl, A. Removal of Heavy Metal Ions from Water and Wastewaters by Sulfur-Containing Precipitation Agents. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2020, 231 (10). doi:10.1007/s11270-020-04863-w.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gavrilescu, M. Removal of Heavy Metals from the Environment by Biosorption. Eng. Life Sci. 2004, 4 (3), 219–232. doi:10.1002/elsc.200420026.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Barakat, M.A. New Trends in Removing Heavy Metals from Industrial Wastewater. Arabian J. Chem. 2011, 4 (4), 361–377. doi:10.1016/j.arabjc.2010.07.019.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Liu, C.; Wu, T.; Hsu, P.-C.; Xie, J.; Zhao, J.; Liu, K.; Sun, J.; Xu, J.; Tang, J.; Ye, Z.; Lin, D.; Cui, Y. Direct/Alternating Current Electrochemical Method for Removing and Recovering Heavy Metal from Water Using Graphene Oxide Electrode. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (6), 6431–6437. doi:10.1021/acsnano.8b09301.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yadav, M.; Singh, G.; Jadeja, R.N. Physical and Chemical Methods for Heavy Metal Removal. Pollut. Water Manage. 2021, 377–397. doi:10.1002/9781119693635.ch15.

 Google Scholar

Asif, Z.; Chen, Z. Removal of Arsenic from Drinking Water Using Rice Husk. Appl. Water. Sci. 2015, 7 (3), 1449–1458. doi:10.1007/s13201-015-0323-x.

 Google Scholar

Babazad, Z.; Kaveh, F.; Ebadi, M.; Mehrabian, R.Z.; Juibari, M.H. Efficient Removal of Lead and Arsenic Using Macromolecule-Carbonized Rice Husks. Heliyon 2021, 7 (3), e06631. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06631.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pillai, P.; Kakadiya, N.; Timaniya, Z.; Dharaskar, S.; Sillanpaa, M. Removal of Arsenic Using Iron Oxide Amended with Rice Husk Nanoparticles from Aqueous Solution. Mater. Today: Proc. 2020, 28, 830–835. doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2019.12.307.

 Google Scholar

Zhao, S.; Sun, K.; Xie, P.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, J.; Zhu, Y.; Sun, Z. Mercury Removal from Coal Combustion Flue Gas by Mechanochemically Sulfur Modified Straw Coke and its Mercury Stability. Fuel 2024, 355, 129498. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129498.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Badessa, T.S.; Wakuma, E.; Yimer, A.M. Bio-Sorption for Effective Removal of Chromium(VI) from Wastewater Using Moringa Stenopetala Seed Powder (MSSP) and Banana Peel Powder (BPP). BMC Chem. 2020, 14 (1). doi:10.1186/s13065-020-00724-z.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Joshi, H.K.; Vishwakarma, M.C.; Kumar, R.; Sharma, H.; Joshi, S.K.; Bhandari, N.S. Adsorption of Cd2+ from Synthetic Wastewater by Modified Leaves of Eupatorium Adenophorum and Acer Oblongum: Thermodynamics, Kinetics and Equilibrium Studies. Discover Water 2022, 2 (1). doi:10.1007/s43832-022-00018-6.

 Google Scholar

González-Tavares, C.; Salazar-Hernández, M.; Talavera-López, A.; Salgado-Román, J.M.; Hernández-Soto, R.; Hernández, J.A. Removal of Ni(II) and Cu(II) in Aqueous Solutions Using Treated Water Hyacinth (Eichhornia Crassipes) as Bioadsorbent. Separations 2023, 10 (5), 289. doi:10.3390/separations10050289.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Karić, N.; Maia, A.S.; Teodorović, A.; Atanasova, N.; Langergraber, G.; Crini, G.; Ribeiro, A.R.L.; Đolić, M. Bio-Waste Valorisation: Agricultural Wastes as Biosorbents for Removal of (in)Organic Pollutants in Wastewater Treatment. Chem. Eng. J. Adv. 2022, 9, 100239. doi:10.1016/j.ceja.2021.100239.

 Google Scholar

Buhani; Istikomah; Suharso; Sumadi; Sutarto; Alghamdi, H.M.; Elwakeel, K.Z. Cationic Surfactant-Modified Tetraselmis Sp. for the Removal of Organic Dyes from Aqueous Solution. Molecules 2023, 28 (23), 7839. doi:10.3390/molecules28237839.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yaashikaa, P.R.; Kumar, P.S.; Saravanan, A.; Vo, D.-V.N. Advances in Biosorbents for Removal of Environmental Pollutants: A Review on Pretreatment,: Removal Mechanism and Future Outlook. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 420, 126596. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126596.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Elwakeel, K.Z.; Elgarahy, A.M.; Al-Bogami, A.S.; Hamza, M.F.; Guibal, E. 2-Mercaptobenzimidazole-Functionalized Chitosan for Enhanced Removal of Methylene Blue: Batch and Column Studies. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9 (4), 105609. doi:10.1016/j.jece.2021.105609.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Osman, A.I.; El-Monaem, E.M.A.; Elgarahy, A.M.; Aniagor, C.O.; Hosny, M.; Farghali, M.; Rashad, E.; Ejimofor, M.I.; López-Maldonado, E.A.; Ihara, I.; Yap, P.-S.; Rooney, D.W.; Eltaweil, A.S. Methods to Prepare Biosorbents and Magnetic Sorbents for Water Treatment: A Review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2023, 21 (4), 2337–2398. doi:10.1007/s10311-023-01603-4.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hamza, M.F.; Fouda, A.; Elwakeel, K.Z.; Wei, Y.; Guibal, E.; Hamad, N.A. Phosphorylation of Guar Gum/Magnetite/Chitosan Nanocomposites for Uranium (VI) Sorption and Antibacterial Applications. Molecules 2021, 26 (7), 1920. doi:10.3390/molecules26071920.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

do Carmo, S.N.; Merib, J.; Dias, A.N.; Stolberg, J.; Budziak, D.; Carasek, E. A Low-cost Biosorbent-Based Coating for the Highly Sensitive Determination of Organochlorine Pesticides by Solid-Phase Microextraction and Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detection. J. Chromatogr., A 2017, 1525, 23–31. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2017.10.018.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wei, Y.; Salih, K.A.M.; Rabie, K.; Elwakeel, K.Z.; Zayed, Y.E.; Hamza, M.F.; Guibal, E. Development of Phosphoryl-Functionalized Algal-PEI Beads for the Sorption of Nd(III) and Mo(VI) from Aqueous Solutions – Application for Rare Earth Recovery from Acid Leachates. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 412, 127399. doi:10.1016/j.cej.2020.127399.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Priya, A.K.; Gnanasekaran, L.; Dutta, K.; Rajendran, S.; Balakrishnan, D.; Soto-Moscoso, M. Biosorption of Heavy Metals by Microorganisms: Evaluation of Different Underlying Mechanisms. Chemosphere 2022, 307, 135957. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135957.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Elwakeel, K.Z.; Elgarahy, A.M.; Elshoubaky, G.A.; Mohammad, S.H. Microwave Assist Sorption of Crystal Violet and Congo Red Dyes onto Amphoteric Sorbent Based on Upcycled Sepia Shells. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 2020, 18 (1), 35–50. doi:10.1007/s40201-019-00435-1.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Adewuyi, A. Chemically Modified Biosorbents and Their Role in the Removal of Emerging Pharmaceutical Waste in the Water System. Water. (Basel) 2020, 12 (6), 1551. doi:10.3390/w12061551.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Elwakeel, K.Z.; Aly, M.H.; El-Howety, M.A.; El-Fadaly, E.; Al-Said, A. Synthesis of Chitosan@activated Carbon Beads with Abundant Amino Groups for Capture of Cu(II) and Cd(II) from Aqueous Solutions. J. Polym. Environ. 2018, 26 (9), 3590–3602. doi:10.1007/s10924-018-1243-2.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Huang, D.; Li, B.; Ou, J.; Xue, W.; Li, J.; Li, Z.; Li, T.; Chen, S.; Deng, R.; Guo, X. Megamerger of Biosorbents and Catalytic Technologies for the Removal of Heavy Metals from Wastewater: Preparation,: Final Disposal, Mechanism and Influencing Factors. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 261, 109879. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109879.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Devanesan, S.; AlSalhi, M.S. Effective Removal of Cd2+, Zn2 + by Immobilizing the Non-Absorbent Active Catalyst by Packed Bed Column Reactor for Industrial Wastewater Treatment. Chemosphere 2021, 277, 130230. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130230.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ghosh, S.; Selvakumar, G.; Kennedy Ajilda, A.A.; Webster, T.J. Microbial Biosorbents for Heavy Metal Removal. New Trends Removal Heavy Met. Ind. Wastewater 2021, 213–262. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-822965-1.00010-6.

 Google Scholar

Rana, V.; Ghosh, D.; Maiti, S.K. Removal of Heavy Metals from Coke-plant Effluents by Using Wetlands. New Trends Removal Heavy Met. Ind. Wastewater 2021, 263–299. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-822965-1.00011-8.

 Google Scholar

Singh, V.; Singh, J.; Mishra, V. Sorption Kinetics of an Eco-Friendly and Sustainable Cr (VI) Ion Scavenger in a Batch Reactor. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9 (2), 105125. doi:10.1016/j.jece.2021.105125.

 Google Scholar

Rozumová, L.; Životský, O.; Seidlerová, J.; Motyka, O.; Šafařík, I.; Šafaříková, M. Magnetically Modified Peanut Husks as an Effective Sorbent of Heavy Metals. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2016, 4 (1), 549–555. doi:10.1016/j.jece.2015.10.039.

 Google Scholar

Yu, K.L.; Lee, X.J.; Ong, H.C.; Chen, W.-H.; Chang, J.-S.; Lin, C.-S.; Show, P.L.; Ling, T.C. Adsorptive Removal of Cationic Methylene Blue and Anionic Congo Red Dyes Using Wet-Torrefied Microalgal Biochar: Equilibrium,: Kinetic and Mechanism Modeling. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 272, 115986. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115986.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shafiq, M.; Alazba, A.A.; Amin, M.T. Kinetic and Isotherm Studies of Ni2+ and Pb2+ Adsorption from Synthetic Wastewater Using Eucalyptus Camdulensis—Derived Biochar. Sustainability 2021, 13 (7), 3785. doi:10.3390/su13073785.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mohamed, M.S.; Hozayen, W.G.; Alharbi, R.M.; Ibraheem, I.B.M. Adsorptive Recovery of Arsenic (III) Ions from Aqueous Solutions Using Dried Chlamydomonas Sp. Heliyon 2022, 8 (12), e12398. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12398.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kumari, S.; Agrawal, N.K.; Agarwal, A.; Kumar, A.; Malik, N.; Goyal, D.; Rajput, V.D.; Minkina, T.; Sharma, P.; Garg, M.C. A Prominent Streptomyces Sp. Biomass-Based Biosorption of Zinc (II) and Lead (II) from Aqueous Solutions: Isotherm and Kinetic. Separations 2023, 10 (7), 393. doi:10.3390/separations10070393.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Li, X.; Deng, R.; Tang, Z.; Zhou, S.; Zeng, X.; Wang, J.; Hursthouse, A. A Study of the Adsorption and Removal of Sb(III) from Aqueous Solution by Fe(III) Modified Proteus Cibarius with Mechanistic Insights Using Response Surface Methodology. Processes 2021, 9 (6), 933. doi:10.3390/pr9060933.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bulgariu, L.; Ferţu, D.I.; Cara, I.G.; Gavrilescu, M. Efficacy of Alkaline-Treated Soy Waste Biomass for the Removal of Heavy-Metal Ions and Opportunities for Their Recovery. Materials. (Basel) 2021, 14 (23), 7413. doi:10.3390/ma14237413.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bulgariu, D.; Nemeş, L.(N).; Ahmad, I.; Bulgariu, L. Isotherm and Kinetic Study of Metal Ions Sorption on Mustard Waste Biomass Functionalized with Polymeric Thiocarbamate. Polymers. (Basel) 2023, 15 (10), 2301. doi:10.3390/polym15102301.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Data mentioned in this manuscript.