4.6 Article

A microscopic and spectroscopic study of rapid antimonite sequestration by a poorly crystalline phyllomanganate: differences from passivated arsenite oxidation

Journal

RSC ADVANCES
Volume 7, Issue 61, Pages 38377-38386

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7ra05939f

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Shandong Province Natural Science Foundation [ZR2016DQ08]
  2. CPSF-CAS Joint Foundation [2016LH0048]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M600829]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51678315]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

During the reaction of arsenite (As(III)) with delta-MnO2 (a typically poorly crystalline phyllomanganate), a significant decrease in the oxidation rate is frequently observed, which is mainly attributed to the surface passivation of delta-MnO2. However, whether surface passivation also occurs during the antimonite (Sb(III)) oxidation process is unclear. In this study, the behavior and mechanisms of Sb(III) oxidation were compared with those of As(III) during their reactions with delta-MnO2. The experimental kinetics results indicated that the oxidation rate of Sb(III) was 6.14-44.71 times faster than that of As(III) with initial concentrations ranging from 100 to 1000 mu M. The macroscopic and spectroscopic results suggested that surface passivation during the adsorption of Mn(II) and the formation of Mn(III) were the predominant causes for the decrease in the As(III) oxidation rate, whereas surface passivation may not have been the limiting factor during Sb(III) oxidation. Compared to As(III) oxidation, the rapid oxidation of Sb(III) by delta MnO2 led to significant changes in the structure and properties of delta-MnO2, and contributed to the precipitation of Mn(II) antimonate (MnSb2O6). The results of this study facilitate a better understanding of the environmental behavior of Sb and As on metal-oxide surfaces in aquatic environments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available