Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Biosorption

Biosorption is a passive, metabolism-independent process in which biological materials, such as microorganisms, algae, fungi, or derived biomass, adsorb and accumulate pollutants—primarily heavy metals, dyes, and organic compounds—from aqueous solutions through surface binding mechanisms like ion exchange, complexation, and electrostatic interactions.^[1] This technique leverages the functional groups on cell walls, including carboxyl, hydroxyl, amino, and phosphate groups, to achieve high selectivity and efficiency in pollutant removal, often outperforming traditional physicochemical methods in cost and environmental compatibility.^[2] Originating from early 20th-century wastewater treatments like activated sludge processes, biosorption gained prominence in the late 1970s as a sustainable alternative for addressing heavy metal contamination in industrial effluents.^[2] Key mechanisms of biosorption include physical adsorption via van der Waals forces, chemical sorption through covalent bonding or chelation, and ion exchange where metal ions replace lighter ions on the biosorbent surface, all influenced by factors such as pH (typically optimal at 3.0–6.5), temperature, and initial pollutant concentration.^[3] Dead biomass is commonly used for its simplicity and avoidance of toxicity issues, while living biomass can incorporate active processes like bioaccumulation for enhanced removal, though this requires metabolic maintenance.^[1] Applications span municipal and industrial wastewater treatment, metal recovery from mining operations, and remediation of radionuclides, with notable examples including the removal of chromium(VI) at capacities up to 330.84 mg/g using brown algae like Sargassum horneri.^[2] The advantages of biosorption lie in its eco-friendliness, low operational costs, and utilization of abundant waste materials—such as agricultural residues, sewage sludge, or microbial cultures—as biosorbents, promoting circular economy principles.^[1] Advances from 2019–2020 focused on biomass modification through chemical treatments or immobilization in matrices like calcium alginate to improve reusability and capacity, achieving capacities as high as 698.48 mg/g for dyes like methylene blue with seaweed-derived sorbents.^[1] Subsequent developments as of 2025 include surfactant-modified biosorbents for enhanced efficiency and microbial approaches targeting pharmaceuticals and heavy metals from battery waste.^[4]^[5] Despite these benefits, challenges remain in scaling up for commercial use and optimizing kinetics, modeled via isotherms like Langmuir or Freundlich and pseudo-second-order equations.^[3] Overall, biosorption represents a versatile, green technology integral to modern environmental engineering for mitigating water pollution.^[2]

Definition and Fundamentals

Definition and Principles

Biosorption is defined as the ability of biological materials, including dead or inactive biomass, to accumulate heavy metals or other pollutants from aqueous solutions through passive physico-chemical processes, independent of the organism's metabolic activity.^[2] This process relies on the inherent affinity of biological surfaces for sorbates, enabling the sequestration of contaminants without requiring cellular energy input or viability of the biosorbent.^[6] Unlike bioaccumulation, which involves active transport and metabolism in living cells, biosorption is a rapid, reversible adsorption mechanism suitable for non-living materials derived from microorganisms, plants, or algae.^[7] The fundamental principles of biosorption center on interactions such as surface binding, ion exchange, and complexation between pollutant ions and functional groups on the biomass surface. For instance, heavy metal ions like Cd²⁺ and Pb²⁺ bind to electron-donating groups such as carboxyl (-COOH) and hydroxyl (-OH) on the biosorbent, forming stable complexes through electrostatic attraction or covalent linkages.^[8] These mechanisms exploit the heterogeneous chemical composition of biological materials, including polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids, which provide a diverse array of binding sites.^[9] Ion exchange often involves the displacement of lighter ions (e.g., H⁺ or Ca²⁺) from the biomass by heavier metal cations, enhancing selectivity for toxic pollutants.^[5] In practice, the biosorption process begins with the contact of the biosorbent with the contaminated solution, typically under agitation to facilitate mass transfer, followed by the achievement of equilibrium where the rate of adsorption equals desorption.^[10] This equilibrium immobilizes the pollutants on the biomass surface without external energy, allowing for straightforward separation of the loaded biosorbent from the treated effluent.^[11] Originating from pioneering studies in the 1980s on microbial metal uptake, particularly by researchers like Bohumil Volesky, biosorption has evolved into a recognized eco-friendly alternative to conventional chemical treatments for wastewater remediation.^[12]

Historical Context

The concept of biosorption emerged in the late 1970s and early 1980s from studies on microbial tolerance to heavy metals, where researchers observed that certain microorganisms could passively accumulate metals through surface binding rather than metabolic processes.^[12] Pioneering work by Bohumil Volesky and colleagues demonstrated this phenomenon using waste microbial biomass for uranium and thorium removal, marking the initial formulation of biosorption as a distinct process. A key example was the 1981 study by Tsezos and Volesky, which explored biosorption using fungal biomass, highlighting its potential for treating nuclear waste effluents. During the 1990s, biosorption research expanded toward practical applications, with efforts to scale up processes for industrial wastewater treatment, including pilot-scale systems for metal recovery from mining effluents.^[13] Seminal reviews, such as Volesky and Holan's 1995 publication in Biotechnology Progress, synthesized mechanisms and biosorbent performance, influencing subsequent developments and establishing biosorption as a viable alternative to chemical methods.^[14] In the 2000s, focus shifted to genetic engineering of biosorbents, with modifications to bacteria and fungi enhancing metal-binding capacities through overexpressed metallothioneins and surface proteins.^[15] Post-2010 advancements integrated nanotechnology with biosorption, such as hybrid nanocomposites combining algal biomass with nanoparticles to improve selectivity and efficiency for heavy metal removal.^[16] Recent 2020s studies emphasize sustainable biosorbents derived from waste biomass, like agricultural residues and food industry byproducts, promoting circular economy approaches. Recent studies (2024–2025) have explored surfactant-enhanced biosorption and agroindustrial waste-derived sorbents for improved efficiency in dye and heavy metal removal.^[1]^[17] This evolution reflects a transition from living cells, which faced toxicity limitations, to dead or inactivated biomass for robust, non-metabolic uptake.^[18]^[10]

Mechanisms and Processes

Core Mechanisms

Biosorption primarily involves several physico-chemical mechanisms that enable the passive binding of pollutants, such as heavy metals, to the surfaces of biological materials without requiring cellular energy. These mechanisms include physical adsorption, where solutes adhere to the biomass surface through weak van der Waals forces or hydrophobic interactions; chemical adsorption, involving stronger chemical bonds; ion exchange, in which metal cations displace lighter ions like protons (H⁺) or calcium (Ca²⁺) from binding sites on the biosorbent; surface complexation, where metal ions form coordination complexes or chelates with ligands such as amino (-NH₂) or sulfhydryl (-SH) groups; and microprecipitation, wherein metal ions precipitate as insoluble compounds directly on the biomass surface. These processes occur predominantly on the cell walls of biosorbents, leveraging their inherent polymeric structures.^[14]^[19] The interactions driving biosorption are mediated by specific functional groups on the biosorbent, including carboxyl (-COOH), hydroxyl (-OH), and amino (-NH₂) groups, which facilitate binding through electrostatic attraction—particularly when oppositely charged—or covalent bonding for more stable associations. For instance, at acidic pH, protonated groups like -COOH can exchange with positively charged metal ions, while at higher pH, deprotonated sites enable electrostatic uptake of anions or chelation of cations. A notable example is the biosorption of hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)), where biomass such as the brown alga Sargassum species not only adsorbs Cr(VI) but also reduces it to the less toxic trivalent form (Cr(III)) via electron transfer from surface functional groups, enhancing overall removal efficiency. This reduction is confirmed through techniques like X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), revealing shifts in chromium oxidation states post-biosorption.^[14]^[19] Unlike metabolically active bioaccumulation, which relies on energy-dependent transport across cell membranes, biosorption is metabolically independent, occurring with dead or inactive biomass through passive diffusion and rapid attainment of equilibrium. This passivity allows for quick uptake kinetics, often within minutes to hours, and reversibility under changing conditions, distinguishing it from slower, enzyme-mediated active transport processes. The synergy of multiple mechanisms—such as combined ion exchange and surface complexation—amplifies biosorption capacity, with certain fungal biomasses like Rhizopus arrhizus achieving uptakes of 100-300 mg/g for heavy metals, representing up to 25-30% of the biomass dry weight. This multi-faceted approach underscores biosorption's versatility for pollutant sequestration.^[14]^[19]

Biosorption Kinetics and Isotherms

Biosorption kinetics describe the rate at which sorbate ions are removed from solution by biosorbents, providing insights into the controlling mechanisms and time required for equilibrium. These models are essential for designing efficient biosorption systems, as the process is often rate-limited by diffusion steps, including external film diffusion, intraparticle diffusion, and adsorption onto active sites. Common kinetic models include pseudo-first-order, pseudo-second-order, and intraparticle diffusion, which are applied to experimental data to determine rate constants and predict uptake over time. In heavy metal biosorption studies, such as those involving lead (Pb²⁺) and cadmium (Cd²⁺), these models reveal that chemisorption frequently dominates, leading to better fits with pseudo-second-order kinetics.^[20] The pseudo-first-order model, originally derived from solid-liquid phase reaction kinetics, assumes that the rate of sorbate occupation of biosorption sites is proportional to the number of unoccupied sites. It is expressed in nonlinear form as:

q_t = q_e (1 - e^{-k_1 t})

where q_t is the amount sorbed at time t (mg/g), q_e is the equilibrium sorption capacity (mg/g), and k_1 is the rate constant (min⁻¹). To derive this, start with the differential equation \frac{dq_t}{dt} = k_1 (q_e - q_t), which integrates to the logarithmic linear form \log(q_e - q_t) = \log q_e - \frac{k_1 t}{2.303} for parameter estimation. This model applies best to physisorption-dominated processes or initial rapid uptake phases but often underestimates equilibrium capacities in chemisorption scenarios, as seen in biosorption of Cu²⁺ by algal biomass where it yielded lower correlation coefficients compared to other models.^[20]^[21] In contrast, the pseudo-second-order model assumes chemisorption control, where the rate is proportional to the square of available sites, suitable for valence force interactions between sorbate and biosorbent. The nonlinear equation is:

q_t = \frac{k_2 q_e^2 t}{1 + k_2 q_e t}

Derivation begins with \frac{dq_t}{dt} = k_2 (q_e - q_t)^2, rearranging to \frac{dq_t}{(q_e - q_t)^2} = k_2 dt, and integrating from 0 to t and 0 to q_t, yielding the linear form \frac{t}{q_t} = \frac{1}{k_2 q_e^2} + \frac{t}{q_e} for plotting t/q_t versus t. This model is widely adopted in biosorption due to its high fit (R² > 0.99) for heavy metals like Pb²⁺ on fungal biomass, indicating chemisorption dominance, and initial sorption rates h = k_2 q_e^2 that highlight rapid equilibrium attainment.^[20]^[22] The intraparticle diffusion model addresses mass transfer limitations within the biosorbent, assuming sorption rate is proportional to the square root of time. It is given by:

q_t = k_p t^{1/2} + C

where k_p is the intraparticle diffusion rate constant (mg/g·min^{1/2}) and C relates to boundary layer thickness. Derived from Fick's second law for radial diffusion in spherical particles, multi-linear plots of q_t versus t^{1/2} identify stages: external diffusion (steep slope), intraparticle diffusion (gradual), and equilibrium (plateau). This model is applied when diffusion controls the rate, as in Pb²⁺ biosorption by bacterial biomass, where k_p values decrease with increasing initial concentration, confirming diffusion as a rate-limiting step in heterogeneous biosorbents.^[20] Biosorption isotherms model equilibrium distribution of sorbate between solution and biosorbent, enabling prediction of maximum uptake and surface behavior. These are crucial for scaling processes, as they indicate saturation points; for instance, in heavy metal studies, isotherms fit data to estimate capacities, often revealing favorable adsorption (separation factor <1). Key models include Langmuir, Freundlich, and Temkin, selected based on surface homogeneity and interaction assumptions.^[20] The Langmuir isotherm assumes monolayer adsorption on homogeneous sites with no lateral interactions, deriving from ideal localized adsorption. The nonlinear form is:

q_e = \frac{q_m K_L C_e}{1 + K_L C_e}

where q_m is the maximum capacity (mg/g), K_L is the Langmuir constant (L/mg), and C_e is equilibrium concentration (mg/L). Linearization as \frac{C_e}{q_e} = \frac{1}{q_m K_L} + \frac{C_e}{q_m} allows parameter calculation via plotting. It applies to uniform biosorbent surfaces, yielding q_m up to approximately 126 mg/g for Pb²⁺ on acid-modified rice husk, and the dimensionless separation factor R_L = \frac{1}{1 + K_L C_0} (0 < R_L < 1) confirms favorable biosorption.^[20]^[23] The Freundlich isotherm, an empirical model for heterogeneous surfaces, assumes multilayer adsorption with exponentially decreasing energy. It is:

q_e = K_F C_e^{1/n}

where K_F (mg/g·(L/mg)^{1/n}) relates to capacity and $1/n (0 < 1/n < 1) indicates intensity. The linear form \log q_e = \log K_F + \frac{1}{n} \log C_e is used for fitting. Suitable for non-ideal biosorption like Cd²⁺ on algal biomass, it explains varying affinities on diverse functional groups, though it lacks a finite saturation limit.^[20]^[24] The Temkin isotherm considers uniform adsorption energy distribution and indirect sorbate interactions, assuming heat decreases linearly with coverage. The equation is:

q_e = \frac{RT}{b_T} \ln(K_T C_e)

where b_T (J/mol) relates to heat, K_T (L/g) is the equilibrium binding constant, R is the gas constant (8.314 J/mol·K), and T is temperature (K). Linearized as q_e = B \ln K_T + B \ln C_e with B = RT/b_T, it applies to systems with interaction effects, such as Zn²⁺ biosorption on phosphoric acid-modified rice husk, where it estimates sorption heat around 25 J/mol, indicating physisorption.^[20]^[24] In practice, model selection relies on statistical fits (e.g., R², chi-square), with pseudo-second-order and Langmuir often prevailing in heavy metal biosorption due to chemisorption and monolayer tendencies, aiding in process optimization without delving into underlying mechanisms.^[20]^[21]

Biosorbents and Materials

Natural Biological Biosorbents

Natural biological biosorbents encompass unmodified biomass derived from microorganisms and agricultural byproducts, offering cost-effective options for heavy metal sequestration due to their abundant functional groups and natural availability.^[25] These materials are categorized primarily by their biological origins, including bacteria, fungi, algae, and yeast, each exhibiting distinct cell wall compositions that facilitate ion binding through mechanisms such as ion exchange and complexation.^[5] Agricultural wastes, such as rice husk and peanut shells, further extend this category as lignocellulosic biosorbents with inherent porosity and low acquisition costs.^[26] Bacterial biosorbents, like Bacillus subtilis, leverage their peptidoglycan-rich cell walls to provide high surface areas and numerous binding sites for metals such as lead and cadmium.^[27] This gram-positive bacterium demonstrates biosorption capacities of approximately 60-100 mg/g for Pb(II) under optimal conditions, attributed to its robust exopolysaccharide layers that enhance metal affinity.^[28] Fungal biosorbents, exemplified by Aspergillus niger, utilize chitin and glycoproteins in their cell walls to target radionuclides like uranium(VI).^[29] Algal biosorbents, such as Sargassum species, rely on alginate and carboxyl groups in their cell walls for high-affinity binding, with reported capacities up to 100-200 mg/g for various metals including Pb(II) and Cu(II).^[30] Yeast biosorbents, including Saccharomyces cerevisiae, employ mannoproteins and chitin in their walls to sorb metals like chromium(VI), removing up to 99.66% from effluents at neutral pH.^[31] The efficacy of these biosorbents often favors dead biomass over living cells, as the former enables passive, metabolism-independent sorption without the need for nutrient supply or toxicity concerns, while allowing regeneration and reuse through desorption.^[32] Living biomass, conversely, can incorporate active bioaccumulation but requires controlled environments to sustain viability.^[1] For instance, dead algal biomass exhibits enhanced stability in continuous systems compared to living counterparts.^[33] Biosorption capacities vary, with algae demonstrating up to approximately 23 mg/g for Cd(II) in brown seaweed like Sargassum fusiforme.^[34] Agricultural wastes serve as economical natural biosorbents; rice husk, rich in silica and lignin, achieves 90% removal of Pb(II) and Cr(III) in lab-scale tests from synthetic wastewater.^[35] Similarly, peanut shells, with their high cellulose content, enable over 90% Cd(II) removal when pretreated minimally, as shown in 2021 studies on ionic liquid-enhanced variants, though unmodified forms retain substantial efficacy.^[36] These wastes highlight the scalability of biosorption using agro-residues abundant in developing regions.^[37] Preparation of natural biological biosorbents typically involves straightforward processes like oven-drying at 60°C to inactivate cells and grinding to uniform particles, preserving native functional groups without chemical alterations.^[25] Immobilization in alginate beads or biofilms further enhances mechanical durability for practical applications, as seen with entrapped Sargassum achieving 100% Pb(II) removal at 200 mg/L.^[33] Such methods ensure biosorbents remain unmodified while improving handling and reusability.^[38]

Engineered and Modified Biosorbents

Engineered biosorbents are created by altering natural biological materials through targeted modifications to enhance their adsorption capacity, selectivity, stability, and reusability for heavy metal removal from aqueous solutions. These modifications address limitations of unmodified biosorbents, such as low mechanical strength and difficulty in separation, by introducing functional groups, improving surface area, or enabling easy recovery.^[39] Developments in the 2010s and 2020s have focused on sustainable, low-cost approaches, drawing from agricultural and microbial wastes to produce high-performance materials suitable for industrial-scale wastewater treatment.^[40] Chemical modifications involve treating biosorbents with acids, bases, or reagents to alter surface functional groups, thereby increasing binding sites and selectivity for specific ions. For instance, acid treatment protonates carboxyl and amino groups, enhancing attraction to anionic metals like Cr(VI), while alkaline treatment deprotonates sites for cationic metals. Surface grafting, such as attaching polyethyleneimine, introduces additional amine groups for improved chelation. A representative example is sulfuric acid-treated acorn waste, which achieved a Pb(II) adsorption capacity of 96.8 mg/g at optimal conditions, following pseudo-second-order kinetics, outperforming untreated biomass by increasing surface negativity.^[41] Another approach, esterification via poly(amic acid) modification of biomass, boosts selectivity for Pb(II) and Cd(II) by esterifying carboxyl groups to form more stable complexes with target ions.^[42] Acid-modified waste fungal biomass, such as that from Aspergillus niger, has demonstrated high Cr(VI) removal efficiency at low pH and short contact times.^[43] Physical modifications primarily employ immobilization techniques to encapsulate biosorbents in supportive matrices, improving durability and facilitating separation without compromising adsorption efficiency. Common methods include entrapment in calcium alginate beads, where microbial cells or biomass are mixed with sodium alginate and crosslinked with CaCl₂, yielding mechanically robust beads with high reusability. For example, Bacillus subtilis immobilized in calcium alginate beads exhibited a Cd(II) capacity of 251.91 mg/g and maintained performance over 5 cycles, with only minor capacity loss due to stable bead integrity.^[38] Similarly, Trichoderma viride entrapped in alginate achieved 40.1% Cr(VI) removal and 75% Ni(II) recovery across 5 cycles, enhancing reusability compared to free biomass.^[38] These techniques often result in 9-10% higher efficiency than free cells for metals like Cu(II) and Zn(II), as immobilization prevents biomass aggregation and leaching.^[38] Biological modifications leverage genetic engineering to overexpress metal-binding proteins or transporters in microorganisms, creating highly selective biosorbents with enhanced intracellular sequestration. Bacteria like Escherichia coli are engineered to express heterologous genes, such as metallothioneins (MTs) or specific permeases, increasing uptake without toxicity. A key example is E. coli modified with the NiCoT permease from Helicobacter pylori, achieving 4.8 mg/g dry weight Ni(II) accumulation from 50 μM solutions, with improved selectivity over native strains by facilitating targeted ion transport.^[40] Another advancement involves overexpressing Pisum sativum MT in Serratia marcescens combined with MerT/P transporters, reducing Hg(II) from 2 g/L to 6.3 ng/L through efficient import and binding.^[40] For Cd(II), Lactobacillus plantarum MntA transporter in E. coli lowered concentrations from 1 mg/L to 0.2 mg/L, demonstrating up to 80% higher accumulation via overexpressed surface-binding proteins.^[40] These 2010s innovations, including extremophile chassis like Deinococcus radiodurans for uranium precipitation (90% efficiency), enable operation in harsh conditions.^[40] Notable advancements include magnetic biosorbents, developed in the 2010s, where iron oxide nanoparticles (e.g., Fe₃O₄) are impregnated into biomass for rapid magnetic separation post-adsorption. Fe₃O₄-impregnated biochar composites removed up to 95% Cd(II) and Cr(VI) from wastewater, with surface area increases of 20-50% over unmodified versions, facilitating easy recovery without filtration.^[39] Regeneration of modified biosorbents is typically achieved via acid desorption, such as 0.2 M HCl, restoring 90-94% capacity for metals like Cu(II) and Cd(II) over 9-10 cycles before significant decline.^[44] Hybrid biosorbents combining biomass with activated carbon further elevate performance; for instance, date seed waste-Ganoderma lucidum hybrids attained 365.9 mg/g Pb(II) capacity at pH 4.5, leveraging synergistic porosity and functional groups for >98% removal in combined systems.^[45] Nanoparticle-coated algal composites, like Fe₂O₃-algal biomass, have shown enhanced Cu(II) biosorption, with capacities doubling relative to unmodified algae due to increased active sites and magnetic recoverability.^[46]

Influencing Factors

Physicochemical Factors

The pH of the solution profoundly influences biosorption efficiency by governing the speciation of metal ions and the ionization state of functional groups on the biosorbent surface, such as carboxyl, hydroxyl, and amino groups. In the optimal pH range of 4-6 for most heavy metals (e.g., Cu²⁺, Pb²⁺, Cd²⁺, and Zn²⁺), deprotonation of these sites imparts a negative charge, promoting electrostatic attraction, ion exchange, and complexation with cationic pollutants.^[47] At lower pH levels, excessive H⁺ ions protonate the binding sites and compete directly with metal cations, significantly diminishing uptake. Temperature exerts an inverse effect on biosorption capacity in many systems, with optimal performance typically observed between 20°C and 30°C, where molecular interactions between pollutants and biosorbents are maximized without thermal disruption. Beyond this range, elevated temperatures weaken sorbate-sorbent bonds—often due to the exothermic nature of the process—and can reduce efficiency by desorbing bound metals or altering biosorbent structure.^[48] This temperature dependence aligns with the Arrhenius equation framework, which relates the process rate constant to activation energy (E_a), illustrating how moderate temperatures enhance diffusion and collision frequency while excessive heat favors desorption over adsorption.^[33] The initial pollutant concentration drives the mass transfer gradient in biosorption, with higher levels accelerating initial uptake rates by increasing the availability of metal ions for binding. However, as concentrations rise, binding sites on the biosorbent saturate more rapidly, limiting overall capacity and shifting the process toward equilibrium sooner; for instance, lead(II) biosorption by immobilized biomass shows positive uptake correlation up to 200 mg/L before plateauing due to site exhaustion.^[33] Ionic strength further modulates these interactions through competition from co-ions like Na⁺, which screen electrostatic forces or vie for sites, typically reducing heavy metal binding by 20-30%; studies on lignocellulosic sorbents report up to 25% sorption decline in solutions with conductivities of 300-1500 μS/cm.^[49]

Operational and Environmental Factors

The biosorbent dosage significantly influences the efficiency of the biosorption process, with higher dosages generally increasing the percentage of pollutant removal due to the greater availability of binding sites and surface area.^[5] For instance, increasing the dosage from 0.1 to 2.0 g per 50 mL can elevate metal ion adsorption from 72% to 89.2%.^[50] Optimal dosages typically range from 2 to 5 g/L, balancing removal efficiency and practicality in laboratory and pilot-scale applications.^[44] However, excessively high dosages may lead to particle aggregation, which reduces the effective surface area available for sorption and can decrease overall uptake capacity.^[51] Contact time is another critical operational parameter, as biosorption is a time-dependent process where initial rapid uptake slows until equilibrium is reached. Equilibrium is commonly achieved within 30 to 120 minutes, depending on the biosorbent type and pollutant concentration, after which further exposure yields minimal additional removal.^[52] Agitation during contact enhances mass transfer by reducing boundary layer resistance around the biosorbent particles, thereby accelerating the rate of pollutant binding and improving overall efficiency.^[53] Moderate agitation speeds promote optimal sorbate-sorbent interactions without causing excessive shear that might disrupt biosorbent integrity.^[54] Environmental factors, particularly in real-world applications, can substantially impact biosorption performance by introducing interferences. The presence of competing ions, such as sodium or calcium, can reduce sorption efficiency by 10-40% through site competition, as observed in simulated wastewaters containing multiple metal ions.^[55] Similarly, organic matter in effluents forms complexes with target pollutants or blocks binding sites, further diminishing removal rates in complex matrices like industrial wastewater.^[56] These matrix effects highlight the need for pre-treatment or process adjustments to mitigate interference in practical settings. Biosorption systems operate in either batch or continuous modes, each with distinct operational considerations affecting performance. Batch systems allow for controlled, discrete treatment cycles ideal for laboratory optimization, while continuous fixed-bed columns enable scalable, uninterrupted processing but are sensitive to flow dynamics. In column setups, lower flow rates of 1-5 mL/min extend breakthrough time—the point at which effluent concentration reaches a predefined threshold—by providing sufficient residence time for effective sorption, whereas higher rates accelerate saturation and reduce overall capacity.^[57]^[58]

Applications and Uses

Environmental Remediation

Biosorption has emerged as a vital technique for restoring polluted water bodies, including rivers and lakes impacted by heavy metal discharges from mining operations. Algal biosorbents, such as species from the genera Chlorella and Scenedesmus, leverage their cell wall polysaccharides and proteins to passively adsorb metals like copper, lead, cadmium, and zinc through ion exchange and complexation mechanisms. These biosorbents have demonstrated high removal efficiencies for heavy metals in various effluents.^[59] In soil remediation, immobilized biosorbents enable in-situ treatment of contaminants such as arsenic, minimizing excavation and promoting ecological recovery. Microbial biomass, such as bacteria or fungi encapsulated in alginate beads or attached to carriers like biochar, is incorporated into contaminated soils to facilitate biosorption and subsequent leaching of arsenic into treatable forms, thereby lowering its mobility and bioavailability. Studies indicate potential effectiveness of such immobilized systems in reducing arsenic levels.^[60]^[61] Recent initiatives in the 2020s, particularly in India, have applied microbial biomass for biosorption of dyes and heavy metals from industrial discharges entering natural water systems, supporting broader environmental restoration efforts. For instance, bacterial species have been used in studies to treat textile and mining effluents, achieving substantial removal of dyes and metals.^[62]^[63] A key advancement in biosorption applications involves its integration with constructed wetlands, where microbial and algal biosorbents in the rhizosphere complement phytoremediation by plants like Phragmites australis for comprehensive heavy metal cleanup. In these hybrid systems, biosorption contributes significantly to total metal removal through substrate-associated biofilms, enhancing overall efficiency in treating stormwater and agricultural runoff while fostering habitat restoration.^[64]^[65] As of 2025, recent studies have explored hybrid microbial-algal systems in wetlands for improved scalability in heavy metal remediation.^[66]

Industrial and Wastewater Treatment

Biosorption plays a crucial role in treating industrial wastewater streams contaminated with heavy metals, dyes, and other pollutants, offering an eco-friendly alternative to conventional methods in controlled manufacturing environments. In the textile industry, effluents laden with synthetic dyes and metals like copper and chromium are effectively remediated using biosorbents such as immobilized algae and treated agricultural wastes; for instance, alkali-modified sunflower seed hulls have achieved significant dye removal from textile wastewater through surface complexation and ion exchange mechanisms.^[67] Similarly, in mining operations, biosorption addresses acid mine drainage by sequestering metals like copper from leached tailing solutions, with fungal and bacterial biomass demonstrating high uptake capacities in continuous flow systems.^[68] Electroplating wastewater, rich in chromium and zinc, benefits from macroalgal biosorbents like Ecklonia sp., which remove these ions effectively in batch and column setups via passive binding to cell wall functional groups.^[69] Bacterial biosorbents, such as immobilized Bacillus laterosporus, have demonstrated nickel(II) removal from aqueous solutions.^[70] Beyond remediation, biosorption facilitates the recovery of valuable metals in industrial processes, enhancing resource efficiency. Baker's yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) exemplifies this by selectively biosorbing gold(III) from acidic cyanide leaching solutions derived from mining and e-waste processing, reducing Au(III) to metallic gold with near-complete recovery in neutral to low-pH conditions.^[71] This approach integrates well into zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) systems, where biosorption concentrates metals for downstream recovery, minimizing liquid waste and enabling water reuse in closed-loop operations, as demonstrated in pilot-scale setups treating metal-laden streams.^[72] Pilot-scale implementations underscore biosorption's scalability for wastewater treatment. In Europe, post-2015 projects like the BIOMETAL demonstration plant have utilized biosorption-based systems to treat electroplating and mining effluents, achieving effective metal removal in continuous operations. Modified algal biomass, such as in the ALGBIO initiative, has been deployed in pilot facilities for municipal and industrial wastewater, processing volumes up to 1000 m³/day while simultaneously capturing CO₂ and nutrients.^[73] These systems highlight biosorption's potential for large-scale adoption, with capacities supporting industrial demands without excessive energy input. Economically, biosorption offers 30-50% cost savings over ion exchange resins due to lower material prices ($10-15/kg for biosorbents versus $30-50/kg for resins) and reduced operational expenses.^[74] Furthermore, biosorbents can be regenerated using dilute acids or bases, permitting reuse in 5-10 cycles with minimal capacity loss, further enhancing sustainability.^[44]

Comparisons and Evaluations

Differences from Bioaccumulation

Biosorption and bioaccumulation represent two distinct mechanisms for the removal or uptake of heavy metals and other pollutants by biological materials, differing fundamentally in their biological requirements and operational characteristics. Biosorption is a passive, metabolism-independent process that involves the binding of contaminants to the surface of non-living biomass, such as dead algal or bacterial cells, achieving equilibrium typically within minutes to hours.^[75] In contrast, bioaccumulation is an active, metabolism-dependent process occurring in living organisms, where pollutants are transported across cell membranes and accumulated intracellularly over extended periods, often spanning days to weeks.^[75] This distinction arises because biosorption relies on physicochemical interactions like ion exchange and adsorption on cell walls, without requiring cellular energy, whereas bioaccumulation integrates with the organism's metabolic pathways, including transport proteins and enzymatic processes.^[76] A key process difference lies in the localization and reversibility of pollutant uptake: biosorption primarily occurs extracellularly on the biomass surface, allowing for potential regeneration of the sorbent and avoiding intracellular toxicity since the cells are inactivated. Bioaccumulation, however, results in intracellular storage, which can lead to toxic effects on the living organism and is generally less reversible due to integration into metabolic cycles.^[76] For instance, in environmental remediation contexts, biosorption using dead algal biomass enables safe external binding of lead ions (Pb²⁺) without risking cellular damage, as demonstrated in studies with species like Sargassum sp. achieving high uptake capacities through surface mechanisms.^[76] Conversely, bioaccumulation in living fish involves Pb²⁺ uptake through gills, ingestion of contaminated prey, and internal sequestration in organs like the liver and kidneys, potentially causing physiological stress and oxidative damage.^[77] These differences extend to ecological implications, particularly regarding biomagnification risks. Biosorption avoids biomagnification—the progressive increase in pollutant concentrations up the food chain—because it employs non-viable biomass that does not enter trophic transfers, thereby protecting higher organisms like fish and humans from amplified exposure.^[75] In bioaccumulation scenarios, such as Pb²⁺ in aquatic ecosystems, contaminants transfer from algae or invertebrates to predatory fish, leading to elevated levels in top consumers and biomagnification factors greater than 1, as observed in riverine food webs.^[77] Furthermore, 1990s pioneering studies highlighted biosorption's superior kinetics, enabling rapid equilibrium in hours compared to the slower metabolic integration over days.^[75] This kinetic advantage underscores biosorption's preference for efficient, large-scale wastewater treatment without the ecological drawbacks of bioaccumulation.

Advantages, Limitations, and Comparisons to Physicochemical Methods

Biosorption offers several key advantages over traditional wastewater treatment methods, primarily due to its reliance on inexpensive, abundant biological materials such as agricultural waste or microbial biomass. The operational cost of biosorbents is notably low, typically ranging from 0.5 to 2 USD per kg, making it accessible for large-scale applications without requiring expensive synthetic materials.^[78] Additionally, the process is eco-friendly, producing no chemical sludge or secondary waste, and operates under mild conditions without the need for additional nutrients or energy-intensive steps.^[10]^[1] Biosorption demonstrates high selectivity for target pollutants like heavy metals, driven by functional groups on the biosorbent surface that enable specific ion binding across a wide pH range (3–9).^[10] Regenerability further enhances its appeal, with biosorbents often retaining significant efficiency after multiple desorption cycles using mild acids like HCl.^[79] It is particularly versatile for treating low-concentration effluents (<100 mg/L), where conventional methods become inefficient or costly.^[10] Despite these strengths, biosorption has notable limitations that can hinder its widespread adoption. The process is generally slower than chemical precipitation for high pollutant loads (>500 mg/L), as biosorption relies on passive surface interactions that require equilibrium times of 30–120 minutes, whereas precipitation achieves rapid removal through bulk reactions.^[80]^[81] Biosorbents are prone to degradation over repeated cycles due to mechanical instability or chemical breakdown, reducing long-term performance without immobilization.^[10] Optimization of parameters like pH, temperature, and contact time is essential for maximal efficiency, adding complexity to process design.^[1] Adsorption capacities for biosorbents typically range from 100–300 mg/g for heavy metals, which is lower than synthetic resins (up to 500 mg/g), limiting their use in high-volume industrial settings.^[82]^[83] When compared to physicochemical methods, biosorption provides a more sustainable alternative, particularly in resource-limited contexts. Versus ion exchange, biosorption is cheaper (up to 50% lower operational costs) but offers lower selectivity in multi-ion solutions due to competition effects, with ion-exchange resins achieving 55–95% removal versus 20–70% for biosorbents like crab carapace.^[10]^[55] Compared to adsorption on activated carbon, biosorption yields similar efficiencies (70–100% for heavy metals) but is more sustainable, utilizing renewable waste materials and avoiding the high energy demands of carbon activation.^[82] Relative to membrane filtration, biosorption avoids clogging and fouling issues, operates at lower pressures, and reduces energy costs by 20–40%, making it preferable for decentralized treatment in developing regions.^[82] Recent meta-analyses from the 2020s indicate biosorption is more cost-effective than these methods for low-concentration wastewater in developing countries, emphasizing its role in addressing global remediation gaps.^[85]

References

[1]
Biosorption: A Review of the Latest Advances - MDPI
Within this context, biosorption is a general term that describes the removal of pollutants by their binding to a material of biological origin (biomass). There ...
[2]
Introductory Chapter: Biosorption - IntechOpen
Biosorption is defined as the passive adsorption of toxic substances by dead, inactive or biologically derived materials. Biosorption is a consequence of ...1. Introduction · 3. Biosorbents · 4.1. Removal Of Organic...
[3]
Biosorption - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Biosorption is defined as a natural process for environmental protection that utilizes various microorganisms to remove heavy metal ions from contaminated ...
[4]
Bacterial Biosorbents, an Efficient Heavy Metals Green Clean-Up ...
Mar 13, 2022 · Volesky defined biosorption as the adsorption of substances from solution by biological materials using physiochemical pathways of uptake, such ...
[5]
[PDF] Biosorption - Amazon AWS
Jan 3, 2014 · Biosorption is a physico-chemical and metabolically-independent process based on a variety of mecha- nisms including absorption, adsorption, ...
[6]
Biosorption - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
It is a process that involves binding of ions to various functional groups present on the surface of the biosorbent by the various means of interactions either ...
[7]
Biosorption: An Interplay between Marine Algae and Potentially ...
Among them, ion exchange is considered the principle mechanism of biosorption, which occurred through different functional groups present on the surface of ...3. Biosorption And Its... · 7. Biosorption Of... · 7.1. Biosorption Of Cadmium
[8]
Microbial biosorption: a sustainable approach for metal removal and ...
Jul 14, 2025 · Microbial biosorption has emerged as a promising and eco-friendly approach for removing and detoxifying heavy metals from contaminated ...
[9]
State of the Art for the Biosorption Process—a Review - PMC - NIH
Equilibrium processes of biosorption are usually carried out in batch reactors, in laboratories, we are using conical flasks with agitation. The sorption ...
[10]
A review on treatment, kinetics mechanism and future scope
It is a metabolically inactive procedure that does not need energy. The composition and kinetic equilibrium of the sorbent's cellular surface determine the ...
[11]
Bacterial biosorbents and biosorption - ScienceDirect.com
History of bacterial biosorption. Early 1980 witnessed the capability of some microorganisms to accumulate metallic elements. Numerous research reports have ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
[12]
The Past, Present, and Future Trends of Biosorption - ResearchGate
Aug 7, 2025 · In this review, we qualitatively examine almost all aspects of biosorption research. A range of subjects are covered, including the initial history, raw ...
[13]
Biosorption of Heavy Metals - Volesky - 1995 - Biotechnology Progress
Biosorption isotherm curves, derived from equilibrium batch sorption experiments, are used in the evaluation of metal uptake by different biosorbents. Further ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
[14]
Engineering Bacteria for Bioremediation - IntechOpen
Genetically modified biosorbents. Genetic engineering has the potential to improve or redesign microorganisms, where biological metal-sequestering systems will ...
[15]
Recent advances in heavy metal/metalloid ion treatment ... - Frontiers
Feb 18, 2024 · However, to overcome these problems, fungus-based bionanocomposites (NCs) can be used as superior materials for the removal of heavy metal ions ...
[16]
Biosorption and me - ScienceDirect.com
Biosorption has been defined as the property of certain biomolecules (or types of biomass) to bind and concentrate selected ions or other molecules from ...Review · Abstract · Biosorption Future--Metals...
[17]
State of the Art for the Biosorption Process—a Review
May 12, 2013 · In this review, we provide a compendium of know-how in laboratory methodology, mathematical modeling of equilibrium and kinetics, identification ...
[18]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0043135407004344
[19]
Kinetic and isotherm studies of adsorption and biosorption ... - PMC
Dec 19, 2013 · Davis TA, Volesky B, Mucci A. A review of the biochemistry of heavy metal biosorption by brown algae. Water Res. 2003;11:4311–4330. doi ...
[20]
Adsorption kinetic modeling using pseudo-first order ... - ScienceDirect
Adsorption kinetics are commonly modeled using pseudo-first and pseudo-second order rate laws. Analyses of published works in the past two decades indicated ...
[21]
(PDF) Langmuir, Freundlich, Temkin and Dubinin–Radushkevich ...
Aug 10, 2025 · The heat of sorption process was estimated from Temkin Isotherm model to be 25.34J/mol and the mean free energy was estimated from DRK isotherm ...Missing: seminal | Show results with:seminal
[22]
A comprehensive review on conventional and biological-driven ...
Bio-HMR (heavy metal removal) systems extract heavy metals from effluents using biomass and are frequently described as low cost, ecologically viable, and easy ...
[23]
Rice Husk-Based Adsorbents for Removal of Metals from ... - PMC
Nov 26, 2023 · This review summarizes the results of numerous studies and characterizes the current state of work in this area, with recommendations for ...
[24]
Structural Changes of Bacillus subtilis Biomass on Biosorption ... - NIH
The study investigated the biosorption of iron from aqueous solutions by Bacillus subtilis.Missing: area | Show results with:area
[25]
Biosorption of Uranium from Aqueous Solution by Live and Dead ...
The ability of live and dead biomass of indigenous Aspergillus niger was examined for the removal of uranium (VI) from dilute aqueous solutions.
[26]
The single batch biosorption of copper(II) ions on Sargassum ...
Abstract. In this study, the biosorption of copper(II) ions to Sargassum acinarum, a brown seaweed, was investigated in a batch system.
[27]
Chromium (VI) biosorption by Saccharomyces cerevisiae subjected ...
S. cerevisiae was able to remove 99.66% of Cr(VI) from effluents by biosorption. The significant variables affecting biosorption were pH, initial Cr(VI) ...
[28]
Assessment of Iron Biosorption Potential by Live and Dead Biomass ...
Dec 18, 2023 · Both live and dead biomass of microorganisms have been used for heavy metal biosorption [49] various comparative studies on the biosorption ...
[29]
Biosorption optimization, characterization, immobilization ... - Nature
Sep 7, 2018 · The maximum biosorption of Pb2+ was 100% at optimum operating conditions: initial Pb2+ concentration of 200 mg/L, temperature 45 °C, pH 4.5, ...
[30]
Equilibrium and Kinetic Studies of Cd2+ Biosorption by the Brown ...
Apr 15, 2014 · When the initial Cd2+ concentration was increased from 30 to 300 mg L−1 (298 K), the biosorption capacity of S. fusiforme increased from 16.2 to ...Effect Of Initial Ph · Equilibrium Study · Biosorption Kinetics
[31]
[PDF] REMOVAL OF Pb AND Cr USING RICE HUSK AS BIOSORBENT ...
Rice husk was used to remove Pb2+ and Cr3+ from wastewater. The study found that rice husk has the potential to be an effective biosorbent.
[32]
Evaluating the Effect of Ionic Liquid on Biosorption Potential of ... - NIH
This report presents a complete study on biosorption of divalent cadmium ions using ionic liquid-treated peanut skin.
[33]
A Comprehensive Review of Agricultural Residue-Derived ... - MDPI
Agricultural-waste-derived biochars—such as those from peanut shells, pomelo peel, mandarin peels, and corncobs—have been employed for dye removal.
[34]
Immobilized microbial biosorbents for heavy metals removal - PMC
Biosorption is a metabolically independent process, in which dead microbial biomass is capable of removal and concentrating metal ions from aqueous solutions.
[35]
Critical review of magnetic biosorbents: Their preparation ...
Feb 1, 2020 · In recent years, many studies have reported the effectiveness of synthesised magnetic biosorbents for the removal of heavy metal(loid)s, dyes, ...
[36]
Heavy Metal Removal by Bioaccumulation Using Genetically ...
This review re-thinks how bioaccumulation can be used and proposes that it can be developed for bioextractive applications—the removal and recovery of heavy ...
[37]
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/17/14/2141
[38]
Chemically Modified Biosorbents and Their Role in the Removal of ...
Types of chemical treatment reported include acid, alkaline, solvent extraction, metal salt impregnation and surface grafting, with alkaline treatment ...
[39]
Biosorption of Cr (VI) by acid-modified based-waste fungal biomass ...
Nov 20, 2022 · The most favorable condition for optimum Cr (VI) remediation of 99.66% by treated waste fungal biomass (TWFB) occurred at pH 3, contact time 10 ...
[40]
Biosorption and Regeneration Studies for Cu (II) and Cd (II ... - MDPI
The regenerated adsorbent can be reused for 9–10 cycles before reaching saturation and being discarded. Regarding the desorption process, Cd (II) demonstrates ...
[41]
A Novel Combined Treatment Process of Hybrid Biosorbent ... - MDPI
The uptake capacity of hybrid biosorbent decreased with the increase in biomass dosage, whereas the reverse was true for percentage removal. The maximum metal ...
[42]
Enhanced biosorption of copper(II) ions by algal biomass-Fe2O3 ...
This study investigates the biosorption capacity of a novel composite made from algal biomass and Fe 2 O 3 nanoparticles for removing copper (Cu(II)) ions.
[43]
Competitive Adsorption of Metal Ions by Lignocellulosic Materials
A pH range of 4–6 was reported as ideal for most metal ions' adsorption due to the amounts of OH− ions present in the solution [34,50]. In a study using ...
[44]
Biosorption of heavy metals from aqueous solutions by ...
Apr 18, 2015 · The increase of temperature indicating a decrease of sorption capacity and the maximum equilibrium uptake occurred at 27 °C as shown in Fig. 2.New Biosorbent In Removing... · Results And Discussion · Biosorption Studies
[45]
Possibilities of using biosorbents and synthetic sorbents in ... - Nature
Feb 11, 2025 · No significant changes were observed in the pH range of 4.0 to 8.0. A reduction in heavy metal sorption of up to 25% was observed in solutions ...
[46]
Thermodynamics of Biosorption for Removal of Co(II) Ions by an ...
Oct 2, 2012 · With increase in the adsorbent dosage, from 0.1 to 2.0 g/50 mL, the amount of adsorbed Co(II) ions increases from 72% to 89.2%. It was noticed ...
[47]
Biosorption as a Perfect Technique for Purification of Wastewater ...
First, with increasing biosorbent dose, aggregation of biosorbent particles leads to a decline in an entire superficial expanse of the biosorbent and an ...
[48]
Adsorption of Methylene Blue from Aqueous Solution Using Steam ...
The adsorption of MB dye at initial concentration of 50 mg∙L−1was studied at different contact time (30 - 120 min). The dye adsorption uptake was increased as ...
[49]
Performances of plant leaf biosorbents for biosorption of ...
Among them, neem leaf powder stands out as having the best adsorption capability, achieving 20% elimination at just 1 g of dosage. At 2 g, the elimination ...
[50]
Chicken drumstick bones as an efficient biosorbent for copper (II ...
Aug 10, 2025 · The results of this study showed that moderate agitation speeds provide good contact between the sorbate and the sorbent, and minimize the ...
[51]
Comparison of sustainable biosorbents and ion-exchange resins to ...
Feb 10, 2019 · Studies with the simulant liquor showed Sr2+ sorption was reduced by 10–40% due to ion-competition for sites. Characterization of ...
[52]
Dynamic removal of methylene blue and methyl orange from water ...
Aug 14, 2025 · The complexity of actual wastewater, often containing competing ions, organic matter, and variable pH further reduces treatment efficiency.
[53]
Batch and continuous packed bed column studies on biosorption of ...
Breakthrough time was found to be 1500 and 600 min for chosen bed height. The results from the study were aimed to contribute in understanding Ni (II) ...
[54]
Batch and continuous fixed bed adsorption of heavy metals removal ...
Oct 9, 2020 · Figure 5 represented the breakthrough curves for various flow rates i.e. 5, 10, 15 and 20 mL/min for adsorption of heavy metals such as Pb, Cu, ...
[55]
Biosorption of toxic heavy metals from aqueous solution by Ulva ...
The maximum removal efficiency values of AP and AAC for heavy metal ions were 64.5 and 84.7 mg/g for Cu+2, 62.5 and 84.6 mg/g for Cd+2, 60.9 and 82 mg/g for Cr+ ...
[56]
Biosorption of Heavy Metals with Algae: Critical Review of Its ... - MDPI
This review aims to highlight the current state of research, focusing on the application of algae biosorption to remove copper from effluents.
[57]
(PDF) Biosorption of arsenic (III) from aqueous solution using ...
Aug 6, 2025 · This study presents a novel biosorbent developed by immobilizing dead Sp2b bacterial biomass into calcium alginate (CASp2b) to efficiently ...
[58]
On the potential of biological treatment for arsenic contaminated ...
This paper gives an evaluation on the feasibility of using biological methods for the remediation of arsenic contaminated soils and groundwater.
[59]
Microbial biosorbent for remediation of dyes and heavy metals ...
Apr 2, 2023 · Cell walls, exopolysaccharides, and extracellular proteins from microorganisms like bacteria, fungi, algae, and yeasts make up these materials.
[60]
Simultaneous removal of malachite green and lead from water by ...
Aug 24, 2024 · Several studies focused on individual microorganisms biosorbing the dyes or heavy metals from wastewater. Algae, bacteria, fungi, and yeasts are ...<|separator|>
[61]
Journal of Bioremediation & Biodegradation - Constructed Wetlands ...
Constructed wetlands have been proven to be the source for the removal of different kinds of industrial effluents like, pesticides, heavy metals (Copper, Zinc, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[62]
Heavy Metal Phytoremediation from Aquatic Ecosystems with ...
Aquatic macrophytes in natural and constructed wetlands proved to be a potent tool for the treatment of heavy metals from industrial effluents. Physico-chemical ...
[63]
Biosorption of dye from textile wastewater effluent onto alkali treated ...
The present study revealed that NaOH treated sunflower seed hull can be used as a low cost biosorbent for the removal of dyes from wastewater effluent from the ...
[64]
Recovery of Copper from Leached Tailing Solutions by Biosorption
... effluent treatment and the ... On the basis of this perspective, this work contributes to state-of-the-art metal biosorption from mining effluents.
[65]
Biosorption Process for Treatment of Electroplating Wastewater ...
Brown seaweed Ecklonia biomass was used for the treatment of electroplating wastewater that contains chromium and zinc ions.
[66]
Biosorption of Nickel (II) from Aqueous Solution Using Bacillus ...
It was observed that with the increase in dosage from 0.5 to 1.5 g/l, the percentage removal was found to increase from 73.48% to 90% (Fig. 5), due to increase ...
[67]
Microbial recovery of gold from neutral and acidic solutions by the ...
An environmentally friendly method using the baker's yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae was developed to recover soluble Au(III) from neutral and acidic solutions ...
[68]
Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewater - Nature
Jul 8, 2021 · This paper comprehensively and critically reviews and discusses these methods in terms of used agents/adsorbents, removal efficiency, operating conditions, and ...
[69]
ALGBIO - CO2 capture from flue gas and phycoremediation of ...
This technology uses microalgae to remove pollutants from wastewater while simultaneously capturing CO2. The ALGBIO solution will slowly steer industries away ...
[70]
[PDF] Biosorption - UPCommons
The price for a biosorbent is around $ 10-15/kg. In comparison, the price for ion exchange resins is $ 30-50/kg. • Metal selective: the metal-sorbing ...Missing: savings | Show results with:savings
[71]
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304386X18302500
[72]
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41545-021-00127-0
[73]
https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101113683
[74]
A sustainable and economical biosorption method for methylene ...
Jul 23, 2025 · ... cost ranges between 2 and 4 USD per kg. Although a full-scale economic analysis falls beyond the scope of this research, the applied ...
[75]
Kinetics of Aqueous Cu(II) Biosorption onto Thevetia peruviana Leaf ...
Jun 1, 2020 · The present study reports the use of TP leaf powder as a biosorbent for Cu(II) removal from aqueous media with an emphasis on its biosorption ...Figure 3 · 2.3. 2. Kinetics Study · 2.3. 5.1. Langmuir...<|control11|><|separator|>
[76]
Biosorption, an efficient method for removing heavy metals from ...
The adsorbent retained >90% efficiency after 142 regeneration cycles, proving its durability and cost-effectiveness. ... The pseudo-second-order rate model well ...
[77]
Adsorption, kinetic and thermodynamic studies for the biosorption of ...
It should be noted that biosorption is generally the preferred approach because of the shorter process times involved, not needing any energy or nutrients, and ...
[78]
https://scijournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bbb.70003
[79]
The Use of Biosorbents in Water Treatment - MDPI
This review explores the various kinds of biosorbents (classification), mechanisms, and factors influencing biosorption, such as biomass content, time, ...
[80]
Efficiency of biological versus mesoporous adsorbents for ... - Nature
Aug 20, 2025 · The theoretical maximum adsorption capacity obtained from Langmuir model was 234 mg/g for titanosilicate ETS-10 and 98 mg/g for yeast ...
[81]
[PDF] A meta-analysis of metal biosorption by suspended bacteria from ...
Dec 11, 2020 · For Ni(II) and Pb(II), the effect sizes and biosorption efficiencies, were decreased at higher initial metal concentrations. This ...
[82]
Waste-based biosorbents as cost-effective alternatives to ...
Mar 18, 2020 · The goal of this study is to demonstrate that waste-based biosorbents can be cost-effective and green alternatives to commercial adsorbents ...