COMPETITIVE ADSORPTION OF HEAVY METALS BY SOILS

O.P. BANSAL1*
1Department of Chemistry, D. S. College, Aligarh, 202001, Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra, 282004, Uttar Pradesh, India
* Corresponding Author : drop1955@gmail.com

Received : 13-05-2018     Accepted : 22-05-2018     Published : 30-05-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 10       Pages : 6067 - 6072
Int J Agr Sci 10.10 (2018):6067-6072

Keywords : Heavy metals, Distribution coefficient, Competitive adsorption, CEC, Organic carbon
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Author thankful to Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra, 282004, Uttar Pradesh, India
Author Contribution : Sole Author

Cite - MLA : BANSAL, O.P. "COMPETITIVE ADSORPTION OF HEAVY METALS BY SOILS." International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 10.10 (2018):6067-6072.

Cite - APA : BANSAL, O.P. (2018). COMPETITIVE ADSORPTION OF HEAVY METALS BY SOILS. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 10 (10), 6067-6072.

Cite - Chicago : BANSAL, O.P. "COMPETITIVE ADSORPTION OF HEAVY METALS BY SOILS." International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 10, no. 10 (2018):6067-6072.

Copyright : © 2018, O.P. BANSAL, Published by Bioinfo Publications. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Abstract

Manner and from human activities there are huge possibilities of the change in heavy metal ratio in soil and plants during a time period. This study was conducted to evaluate the selectivity sequence and to estimate the competitive adsorption of several heavy metals (Pb, Cu, Zn, Cd and Ni) on six different soils of India in mono metal and multi metal solutions. The results denoted that the sorption isotherms of all these heavy metals on all the studied soils were characterized by Langmuir equation. Results indicated that all the soils have a maximum sorption capacity and binding strength for Pb. Metal solid/liquid distribution coefficients (Kd), which represent the adsorption affinity of the metallic cations in solution for the solid phase were also calculated, the Kd values denote that the sequence of preference was Pb > Cu > Cd > Zn > Ni which may be correlated with the metal hydrolysis constant. The value of metal Kd was lower in multi metal solution than mono metal solution. The order of preference was supported by Langmuir Qmax values and relative sorption capacity values. The adsorption of heavy metals was significantly positively correlated with soil organic matter and soil CEC while negatively correlated with soil pH. The values of Langmuir constants, Kd and relative sorption capacity also suggest that the adsorption was in the order of soil 3 > soil 5 > soil 2 > soil 4 > soil 1> soil 6.

References

1. Food and Agicultural Organization, (1996) Rome declaration on Food security and World Food Summit Plan of Action, Dec, 26, 2016.
2. Fatemitalab R., Zare M. and Kardar S. (2016) International Journal of Environmental Science, 13, 1229–1234.
3. Amin N., Hussain A., Alamzeb S. and Begum S. (2013) Food Chemistry, 136, 1515-1523.
4. Mohammad I., Daniel A.K., Kiyawa S.A. and Kutama A.S. (2017) International Journal of Chemical Material and Environmental Research, 4, 131-136.
5. Mahmoud E. K. and Ghoneim A.M. (2016) Solid Earth, 7, 703–711
6. Michaela Vytopilova M., Tejnecky V., Boruvka L. and Drabek O. (2015) Soil &Water Research, 10, 1–9
7. Sipos P., Balazs R. and Nemeth T. (2018) Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental. Science, 13, 175-186.
8. Agwaramgbo L.O.E., Zulpo S. and Lira S.O. (2017) British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 19, 1-9
9. Park Jong-Hwan, SikOk Y., Kim Seong-Heon, Cho Ju-Sik, Heo Jong-Soo, Delaune Ronald D. and Seo Dong-Cheol ( 2016) Chemosphere, 142, 77-83.
10. Han L., Qian L., Chen M., Yan J. and Hu Q. (2017) Scientific Reports, 7, doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-02353-4
11. Gupta N., Khan D.K. and Santra S.C. (2012) Environmental Monitoring Assessment, 184, 6673-6682.
12. Bansal O.P. (1982) Journal of Indian Society Soil Science, 30, 459-462.
13. Khalfa L., Bagane M., Cervera M.L. and Najjar S. (2016) International Journal of Chemical and Molecular Engineering, 10, 583-589.
14. Alkhatib E.A., Grunzke D. and Chabot T. (2016) Hydrology Current Research, 7, doi.org/10.4172/2157-7587.1000241.
15. Anderson P. R. and Christensen T.H. (1988) Journal of Soil Science, 39, 15-22.
16. Sangiumsak N. and Punrattanasin P. (2014) Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 23, 853-865.
17. Baghenejad M., Javaheri F. and Moosavi A.A. (2016) Archives in Agronomy and Soil Science, 62, 1462-1473.
18. Fontes M.P.F., De Matos A. T., Dacosta L. M. and Neves J. C. L. (2000) Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 31, 2939-2958.
19. Sipos P., Németh T., Kovács Kis V. and Mohai I. (2009) Journal of Hazardous Materials, 168, 1512-1520
20. Proust D. (2015) Journal of Soils and Sediments, 15,607-622.
21. Xiong X., Stagnitti F., Túróczy N., Allinson G., Li P., Nieber J., Steenhuis T.S., Parlange J.-Y., Leblanc M., Ziogas A.K., Ferreire A.J.D. and Keizer J.J. (2005) Australian Journal of Soil Research, 43, 351-356.