ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019
Application of Graphene Oxide for Adsorption Removal of Geosmin and 2-Methylisoborneol in the Presence of Natural Organic Matter.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the adsorption characteristics of geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol (MIB) on graphene oxide (GO) in the absence and presence of natural organic matter (NOM). The graphene oxide had fast adsorption kinetics for both compounds because of its open-layered structure, with adsorption equilibrium being achieved within 15 min of contact. Although NOM did not affect the adsorption of geosmin on GO, it delayed that of MIB, probably because of competition for adsorption sites. The adsorption isotherms show that GO had a greater capacity for geosmin adsorption than for MIB because geosmin was more hydrophobic. Moreover, NOM interfered with the adsorption of MIB onto the GO, but increased the amount of adsorbed geosmin, which likely occurred because NOM increased the dispersibility of GO, which then increased the number of GO adsorption sites. The difference in the effects of NOM on GO adsorption of geosmin and MIB may be explained by their hydrophobicity. Although the adsorption of geosmin and MIB by GO was fast, its capacity to adsorb both compounds was substantially lower than that of activated carbon because of its higher hydrophilicity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.