ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2019
Enhanced remediation of arsenic and chromium co-contaminated soil by eletrokinetic-permeable reactive barriers with different reagents.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Pretreatment and Polarization Shielding on EK-PRB of Fe/Mn/C-LDH for Remediation of Arsenic Contaminated Soils.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Effective Remediation of Arsenic-Contaminated Soils by EK-PRB of Fe/Mn/C-LDH: Performance, Characteristics, and Mechanism.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Effect of additives on the remediation of arsenic and chromium co-contaminated soil by an electrokinetic-permeable reactive barrier.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Chromium toxicity, speciation, and remediation strategies in soil-plant interface: A critical review.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
- Electrokinetic remediation of uranium(VI)-contaminated red soil using composite electrolyte of citric acid and ferric chloride.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- Phytoremediation of Heavy Metal Pollution: A Bibliometric and Scientometric Analysis from 1989 to 2018.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present work focused on the effects of different reagents on the remediation of arsenic and chromium co-contaminated soil by electrokinetic technology coupled with permeable reactive barrier (EK-PRB). In a running of EK-PRB, reductant (ascorbic acid, sodium citrate) and chelating agent (EDTA-2Na) were used to pretreat contaminated soil together with CaAl-LDH as reactive materials for PRB. As a result, the chelating agent improved the removals of As and Cr in co-contaminated soil. However, the reducing agent only increased As removal. When 0.05 M sodium citrate was used in pretreatment, the As removal attained the maximum of 50.5%, although Cr removal was only 44.1% at the same time. When the contaminated soil was pretreated with 0.01 M EDTA-2Na, the Cr removal increased to 54.28%, although As removal was only 26.3%. After EK-PRB, the As and Cr were efficiently captured by CaAl-LDH, resulting in maximal fixed amounts of 126.5 mg/kg (As) and 1507.6 mg/kg (Cr). The XRD and FITR analyses of LDH indicated that As was mainly adsorbed on the surface of LDH. As for Cr, it was mainly intercalated into interlayer of LDH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30511220What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.