4.7 Article

Toxicity of sulfide-modified nanoscale zero-valent iron to Escherichia coli in aqueous solutions

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 220, 期 -, 页码 523-530

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.12.159

关键词

Nanoscale zero-valent iron; sulfidation; Toxicity; Escherichia coli; Groundwater

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51879100, 51709100]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [531107040788]
  3. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT-13R17]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sulfide-modified nanoscale zero-valent iron (S/nZVI) has been widely studied for groundwater remediation, but the potential environmental risks are poorly understood. This study examined the toxicity of S/nZVI to Escherichia coli in aqueous solutions. The sulfidation could reduce toxicity of nZVI, and S/nZVI exhibited a weaker toxicity at lower Fe/S molar ratio, resulting from the lower Fe content and higher sulfate and iron oxide. The toxicity of S/nZVI was significantly alleviated in the presence of N-Acetyl-L-cysteine (a scavenger for reactive oxygen species (ROS)), revealing that the ROS-induced oxidative stress was the principal mechanism. Moreover, Transmission Electron Microscopy images elucidated that the membranes of S/nZVI-treated cells were disrupted and S/nZVI existed on E. coli surface and in the cytoplasm. S/nZVI might have interacted with the amine, carboxyl, and ester groups on E. coli cell surface, as demonstrated by Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy analysis. However, the presence of individual groundwater component (e.g., Ca2+, SO42-, HCO3- and humic acid) could more or less alleviate the toxicity of S/nZVI. Furthermore, S/nZVI only exhibited slight toxic effect (<0.15-log after 1 h) in the presence of the mixed components. The same faint toxicity was observed for the aged S/nZVI, indicating that S/nZVI could lose its toxicity over time. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. 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