4.7 Article

Interaction of the fluoroquinolone antibiotic, ofloxacin, with titanium oxide nanoparticles in water: Adsorption and breakdown

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 441, 期 -, 页码 1-9

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.09.067

关键词

Ofloxacin; TiO2 nanoparticles; Fluoroquinolone degradation; Wastewater PPCPs

资金

  1. NASA-Michigan Space Grant Consortium Seed Grant Program
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  3. Hope College Department of Geological & Environmental Sciences
  4. Hope College Department of Chemistry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mobility and fate of fluoroquinolone antibiotics in natural waters, soil-water systems and wastewater are controlled in part by surface interactions with nanometer (10(-9) m) metal oxide particles. Experiments were performed by mixing solutions of ofloxacin (OFL), a common, fluoroquinolone-class human and veterinary antibiotic, with 25 nm-TiO2 (anatase) nanoparticles at different pH conditions. Both sorption and degradation of OFL were observed in the drug-nanoparticle solutions with initial OFL concentrations of similar to 3 to 690 mu M. Though overall isotherm behavior is logarithmic, OFL removal from the solution can be approximated by linear removal coefficients (K-r). At pH 4. K-r = 42 +/- 8 L kg(-1), at pH 6 K-r = 1288 +/- 217 L kg(-1), and at pH 9 K-r = 26 +/- 7 L kg(-1). Rinsing of substrates at pH 4 resulted in desorption of approximately 11% of the original OFL removed from the solution by TiO2 nanoparticles. Less than 1% of the removed OFL at pH 6 was recovered by rinsing the substrate; and, at pH 9 about 39% of the OFL removed by nanoparticles during the initial mixing experiment was desorbed during rinsing. Mass spectral analysis of OR solutions after the removal of the solid nanoparticles yielded ions that indicate the presence of de-methylated and de-carboxylated fluoroquinolone species, resulting from the degradation of OFL at the TiO2 surface. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据