Oxidation and biotoxicity assessment of microcystin-LR using different AOPs based on UV, O3 and H2O2

Research Article
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

Microcystin-LR attracts attention due to its high toxicity, high concentration and high frequency. The removal characteristics of UV/H2O2 and O3/H2O2 advanced oxidation processes and their individual process for MC-LR were investigated and compared in this study. Both the removal efficiencies and rates of MC-LR as well as the biotoxicity of degradation products was analyzed. Results showed that the UV/H2O2 process and O3/H2O2 were effective methods to remove MC-LR from water, and they two performed better than UV-, O3-, H2O2-alone processes under the same conditions. The effects of UV intensity, H2O2 concentration and O3 concentration on the removal performance were explored. The synergistic effects between UV and H2O2, O3 and H2O2 were observed. UV dosage of 1800 mJ ·cm–2 was required to remove 90% of 100 mg·L–1 MC-LR, which amount significantly decreased to 500 mJ·cm–2 when 1.7 mg·L–1 H2O2 was added. 0.25 mg·L–1 O3, or 0.125 mg·L–1 O3 with 1.7 mg·L–1 H2O2 was needed to reach 90% removal efficiency. Furthermore, the biotoxicity results about these UV/H2O2, O3/H2O2 and O3-alone processes all present rising trends with oxidation degree of MC-LR. Biotoxicity of solution, equivalent to 0.01 mg·L–1 Zn2+, raised to 0.05 mg·L–1 Zn2+ after UV/H2O2 or O3/H2O2 reaction. This phenomenon may be attributed to the aldehydes and ketones with small molecular weight generated during reaction. Advice about the selection of MC-LR removal methods in real cases was provided.

Keywords

Microcystin-LR Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) Biotoxicity Synergistic effects 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Major Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution Control and Treatment in China (No. 2014ZX07203-009).

Supplementary material

11783_2018_1030_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (88 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 88 KB.

References

  1. 1.
    Wang N Y, Wang K, Wang C. Performance comparison of different algicides on growth of Microcystis aeruginosa and microcystin (MC)-LR release as well as the removal pathway of MC-LR in riverways. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2017, 11(6): 3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sharma V K, Triantis T M, Antoniou M G, He X, Pelaez M, Han C, Song W, O’Shea K E, de la Cruz A A, Kaloudis T, Hiskia A, Dionysiou D D. Destruction of microcystins by conventional and advanced oxidation processes: A review. Separation and Purification Technology, 2012, 91: 3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    WHO. Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, 2nd ed: addendum to volume 2—Health Criteria and Other Supporting Information. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1998, 95–110Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chang J, Chen Z L, Wang Z, Shen JM, Chen Q, Kang J, Yang L, Liu X W, Nie C X. Ozonation degradation of microcystin-LR in aqueous solution: Intermediates, byproducts and pathways. Water Research, 2014, 63(7): 52–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rositano J, Nicholson B C, Pieronne P. Destruction of cyanobacterial toxins by ozone. Ozone Science and Engineering, 1998, 20(3): 223–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Al Momani F, Smith D W, Gamal El-Din M. Degradation of cyanobacteria toxin by advanced oxidation processes. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2008, 150(2): 238–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Park J A, Yang B, Park C, Choi J W, Genuchten C M V, Lee S H. Oxidation of microcystin-LR by the fenton process: Kinetics, degradation intermediates, water quality and toxicity assessment. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2016, 309: 339–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu I, Lawton L A, Cornish B, Cornish B, Robertson P K J. Mechanistic and toxicity studies of the photocatalytic oxidation of microcystin-LR. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A Chemistry, 2002, 148(1): 349–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang C, Xi J Y, Hu H Y. Chemical identification and acute biotoxicity assessment of gaseous chlorobenzene photodegradation products. Chemosphere, 2008, 73(8): 1167–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sun X, Wang C, Ji M. Production and release of microcystin-LR during treatment using chemical algicide. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2017, 26(1A): 572–578Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang C, Huang Y K, Zhao Q, Ji M. Treatment of secondary effluent using a three-dimensional electrode system: COD removal, biotoxicity assessment, and disinfection effects. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2014, 243: 1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chang J, Chen Z L, Wang Z, Kang J, Chen Q, Lei Y, Shen J M. Oxidation of microcystin-LR in water by ozone combined with UV radiation: The removal and degradation pathway. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2015, 276: 97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    He X, Pelaez M, Westrick J A, O’Shea K E, Hiskia A, Triantis T, Kaloudis T, Stefan M I, de la Cruz A A, Dionysiou D D. Efficient removal of microcystin-LR by UV-C/H2O2 in synthetic and natural water samples. Water Research, 2012, 46(5): 1501–1510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    He X, de la Cruz A A, Hiskia A, Kaloudis T, O’Shea K, Dionysiou D D. Destruction of microcystins (cyanotoxins) by UV-254 nmbased direct photolysis and advanced oxidation processes (AOPs): Influence of variable amino acids on the degradation kinetics and reaction mechanisms. Water Research, 2015, 74: 227–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ren J. The inhibition mechanism and effect of UV/H2O2 process on Microcystis aeruginosa and its degradation mechanism to microcystin-LR. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Shanghai: Fudan University, 2011 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lawton L A, Robertson P K J. Physico-chemical treatment methods for the removal of microcystins (cyanobacterial hepatotoxins) from potable waters. Chemical Society Reviews, 1999, 28(4): 217–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Antoniou M G, Shoemaker J A, de la Cruz A A, Dionysiou D D. Unveiling new degradation intermediates/pathways from the photocatalytic degradation of microcystin-LR. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008, 42(23): 8877–8883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Song W, Xu T, Cooper W J, Dionysiou D D, De la Cruz A A, O’Shea K E. Radiolysis studies on the destruction of microcystin-LR in aqueous solution by hydroxyl radicals. Environmental Science & Technology, 2009, 43(5): 1487–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hureiki L, Croué J P, Legube B, Dore M. Ozonation of amino acids: Ozone demand and aldehyde formation. Ozone Science and Engineering, 1998, 20(5): 381–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chang J. Study on degradation mechanisms of different oxidation methods based on removal of microcystin-LR in water. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Harbin: Harbin Institute of Technology, 2015 (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Environmental Science and EngineeringTianjin UniversityTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations