Fabrication of novel magnetic graphene oxide nanocomposites for selective adsorption of mercury from aqueous solutions

  • Hossein HosseinzadehEmail author
  • Soleyman Hosseinzadeh
  • Shahryar Pashaei
Research Article


In this work, a novel functionalized graphene oxide (GO) was used as an effective and selective adsorbent for removal of mercury (Hg2+). The magnetic nanocomposite adsorbent (MNA) based on GO was prepared through surface reversible addition–fragmentation chain transfer copolymerization of acrylic monomers and then the formation of Fe3O4 nanoparticles. The structure of MNAs was characterized by using FTIR, SEM, TEM, VSM, XRD, and nitrogen adsorption/desorption isotherms. The results of ion adsorption of MNAs demonstrated high selectivity and adsorption efficiency for Hg2+ in the presence of competing ions. Furthermore, the removal of Hg2+ obeyed a pseudo-second-order model and fitted well to the Langmuir isotherm model with the maximum Hg2+ uptake of 389 mg g−1. The MNA was also confirmed as good materials for re-use and maintained 86% of its initial adsorption capacity for mercury after the fifth regeneration cycles. Finally, the experimental results demonstrated that the solution pH, ion concentration, and temperature had a major impact on Hg(II) adsorption capacity. The results indicate that the MNAs with high adsorption abilities could be very promising adsorbents for the selective recovery of ions in wastewater treatment process.

Graphical abstract


Nanocomposite Graphene oxide RAFT Mercury Adsorption 



  1. Allen MJ, Tung VC, Kaner RB (2010) Honeycomb carbon: a review of grapheme. Chem Rev 110:132–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anirudhan TS, Divya L, Ramachandran M (2008) Mercury(II) removal from aqueous solutions and wastewaters using a novel cation exchanger derived from coconut coir pith and its recovery. J Hazard Mater 157:620–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Azizi Ganzagh MA, Yousefpour M, Taherian Z (2016) The removal of mercury (II) from water by Ag supported on nanomesoporous silica. J Chem Biol 9:127–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barron-Zambrano J, Laborie S, Viers P, Rakib M, Durand G (2004) Mercury removal and recovery from aqueous solutions by coupled complexation–ultrafiltration and electrolysis. J Membr Sci 229:179–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bessbousse H, Rhlalou T, Verchère JF, Lebrun L (2008) Removal of heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions by filtration with a novel complexing membrane containing poly(ethyleneimine) in a poly(vinyl alcohol) matrix. J Membr Sci 307:249–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Budinova T, Petrov N, Parraband J, Baloutzovc V (2007) Use of an activated carbon from antibiotic waste for the removal of Hg(II) from aqueous solution. J Environ Manag 88:165–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Das S, Samanta A, Gangopadhyay G, Jana S (2018) Clay-based nanocomposites as recyclable adsorbent toward Hg(II) capture: experimental and theoretical understanding. ACS Omega 3:6283–6292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Donia AM, Atia AA, Elwakeel KZ (2008) Selective separation of mercury(II) using magnetic chitosan resin modified with Schiff’s base derived from thiourea and glutaraldehyde. J Hazard Mater 151:372–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duan YH, Han DS, Batchelor B, Wahab A (2016) Synthesis, characterization, and application of pyrite for removal of mercury. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 490:326–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duan S, Xu X, Liu X, Wang Y, Hayat T, Alsaedi A, Meng Y, Li J (2018) Highly enhanced adsorption performance of U(VI) by non-thermal plasma modified magnetic Fe3O4 nanoparticles. J Colloid Interface Sci 513:92–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. El Samrani AG, Lartiges BS, Villiéras F (2008) Chemical coagulation of combined sewer overflow: heavy metal removal and treatment optimization. Water Res 42:951–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ge H, Wang J (2017) Ear-like poly (acrylic acid)-activated carbon nanocomposite: a highly efficient adsorbent for removal of Cd(II) from aqueous solutions. Chemosphere 169:443–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huang SH, Chen DH (2009) Rapid removal of heavy metal cations and anions from aqueous solutions by an amino-functionalized magnetic nano-adsorbent. J Hazard Mater 163:174–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kadivelu K, Kavipriya M, Karthika C, Vennilamani N, Pattabhi S (2004) Mercury (II) adsorption by activated carbon made from sago waste. Carbon 42:745–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lai JT, Filla D, Shea R (2002) Functional polymers from novel carboxyl-terminated trithiocarbonates as highly efficient RAFT agents. Macromolecules 35:6754–6756Google Scholar
  16. Le MQC, Cao XT, Lee WK, Hong SS, Lim KT (2017) Fabrication and adsorption properties of novel magnetic graphene oxide composites for removal of methylene blue. Mol Cryst Liq Cryst 644:160–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li N, Bai R, Liu C (2005) Enhanced and selective adsorption of mercury of mercury ions on chitosan beads grafted with polyacrylamide via surface-initiated atom transfer radical polymerization. Langmuir 21:11780–11787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li L, Fan L, Sun M, Qiu H, Li X, Duan H, Luo C (2013) Adsorbent for chromium removal based on graphene oxide functionalized with magnetic cyclodextrin–chitosan. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 107:76–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li Z, Wei Q, Yuan R, Zhou X, Liu H, Shan H, Song Q (2007) A new room temperature ionic liquid 1-butyl-3-trimethylsilylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate as a solvent for extraction and preconcentration of mercury with determination by cold vapor atomic absorption spectrometry. Talanta 71:68–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu X, Kaminski MD, Guan Y, Chen H, Liu H, Rosengart AJ (2006) Preparation and characterization of hydrophobic superparamagnetic magnetite gel. J Magn Magn Mater 306:248–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu X, Sun J, Xu X, Alsaedi A, Hayat T, Li J (2019) Adsorption and desorption of U(VI) on different-size graphene oxide. Chem Eng J 360:941–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu X, Xu X, Sun J, Alsaedi A, Hayat T, Li J, Wang X (2018) Insight into the impact of interaction between attapulgite and graphene oxide on the adsorption of U(VI). Chem Eng J 343:217–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Madaeni SS, Jamali Z, Islami N (2011) Highly efficient and selective transport of methylene blue through a bulk liquid membrane containing Cyanex 301 as carrier. Sep Purif Technol 81:116–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mauchauffée S, Meux E (2007) Use of sodium decanoate for selective precipitation of metals contained in industrial wastewater. Chemosphere 69:763–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moad G, Rizzardo E, Thang SH (2013) RAFT polymerization and some of its applications. Chem Asian J 8:1634–1644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Molinari R, Poerio T, Cassano R, Picci N, Argurio P (2004) Copper(II) removal from wastewaters by a new synthesized selective extractant and SLM viability. Ind Eng Chem Res 43:623–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morsi RE, Al-Sabagh AM, Moustafa YM, El Kholy SG, Sayed MS (2018) Polythiophene modified chitosan/magnetite nanocomposites for heavy metals and selective mercury removal. Egyp J Petrol 27:1077–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Saad DM, Cukrowska EM, Tutu H (2013) Selective removal of mercury from aqueous solutions using thiolated cross-linked polyethylenimine. Appl Water Sci 3:527–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Saha PD, Chakraborty S, Chowdhury S (2012) Batch and continuous (fixed-bed column) biosorption of crystal violet by Artocarpus heterophyllus (jackfruit) leaf powder. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 92:262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shafiabadi M, Dashti A, Tayebi HA (2016) Removal of Hg (II) from aqueous solution using polypyrrole/SBA-15 nanocomposite: experimental and modeling. Synth Met 212:154–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Song BY, Eom Y, Lee TG (2011) Removal and recovery of mercury from aqueous solution using magnetic silica nanocomposites. Appl Surf Sci 257:4754–4759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tang JC, Lv HH, Gong YY, Huang Y (2015) Preparation and characterization of a novel graphene/biochar composite for aqueous phenanthrene and mercury removal. Bioresour Technol 196:355–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yoon J, Amy G, Chung J, Sohn J, Yoon Y (2009) Removal of toxic ions (chromate, arsenate, and perchlorate) using reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, and ultrafiltration membranes. Chemosphere 77:228–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zabihi M, Ahmadpour A, HaghighiAsl A (2009) Removal of mercury from water by carbonaceous sorbents derived from walnut shell. J Hazard Mater 167:230–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zaspalis V, Pagana A, Sklari S (2007) Arsenic removal from contaminated water by iron oxide sorbents and porous ceramic membranes. Desalination 217:167–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhao Y, Li J, Zhao L, Zhang S, Huang Y, Wu X, Wang X (2014) Synthesis of amidoxime-functionalized Fe3O4@SiO2 core–shell magnetic microspheres for highly efficient sorption of U(VI). Chem Eng J 235:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhao J, Ren W, Cheng HM (2012) Graphene sponge for efficient and repeatable adsorption and desorption of water contaminations. J Mater Chem 22:20197–20202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhou C, Zhu H, Wang Q, Wang J, Cheng J, Guo Y, Zhou X, Bai R (2017) Adsorption of mercury(II) with an Fe3O4 magnetic polypyrrole–graphene oxide nanocomposite. RSC Adv 7:18466–18479CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemistry DepartmentPayame Noor UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Chemical Engineering DepartmentPayame Noor UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations