Groundnut Husk: An Operative, Natural Waste and Low Cost Adsorbents for Sudan III Dye
Sujit S. Mathakari1, Vikas B Suryawanshi2, Sambhaji S. Bhande3, Sushil R. Mathapati1*
1Department of Chemistry, Shri Madhavrao Patil Mahavidyalaya, Murum - 413605, Dist. Osmanabad.
2Department of Chemistry, KMC College, Khopoli, Dist. Raigadh.
3Department of Physics, Baburaoji Adaskar Mahavidyalaya, Kaij - 431123, Dist. Beed.
*Corresponding Author E-mail: sushilrswami@gmail.com
ABSTRACT:
The adsorption of Sudan-III dye on various low-cost, natural west adsorbents have been studied. We have examine adsorption of Sudan-III dye with varying concentration on natural west, biomass adsorbents like rice husk, soya husk, chana (green vatana) husk and groundnut husk for fixed time adopting well known soaking method. The data obtained was studied using Freundich and Langmuir adsorption isotherms. The study was extended and prepared solutions were screened for PH metric and UV study. The considerable effort has been taken to minimize the toxic content using the natural waste.
The exclusion of color contamination from wastewater is often more essential than the removal of the soluble colorless organic substances, which frequently contribute the major fraction of the biochemical oxygen demand. Various techniques have been described for removing textile dyes from wastewater such as coagulation/ flocculation, membrane filtration, flotation, precipitation, adsorption, pair extraction, ion exchange, ion ultrasonic, electrolysis, mineralization, advanced oxidation and chemical reduction etc.5
Sudan III has many industrial and scientific applications such as coloring of fuel and staining for microscopy7,8. Addition to it, Sudan dye is used in plastics, oil and waxes 9 due to its low cost and availability 10. Moreover, several analytical techniques have shown that Sudan-III dyes are present in measurable and hazardous concentrations in many foodstuffs. In some European countries, Sudan-III dyes have been found in food products such as chilli powder, fish sauce, noodle soup, worchester sauce and pizza6.
The International Agency of Research on cancer (IARC) has classified Sudan dyes as class three carcinogens11,12. Sudan dyes and products formed during its degradation are considered injurious to human health due to their teratogenicity, genotoxicity and carcinogenicity that leads to cancer. Many experimental studies on animal specimen have confirmed the formation of tumour due to the presence of different Sudan dyes in food products. Sudan dyes are reported to have sensitizing characteristics and simply they get absorbed through dermal route and airways, it leads to health problems13. Such problems has stimulated research into its determination. The significance of the problem has provoked interest in techniques for removing Sudan dye from solution. Several analytical techniques have been reported for the determination of Sudan dyes include solid-phase spectrophotometry14 and mass spectroscopy15-19.
Nowadays, adsorption has been universally acknowledged as one of the most operative pollutant removal process. The adsorption techniques has took more attention due to its some advantages such as low cost, ease in handling, low consumption of reagents, as well as scope for recovery of value added components through desorption and regeneration of adsorbent20,21. Adsorption on natural west has long been used to a significant extent for the removal of dissolved organic constituents and dyes from wastes and polluted waters22.
Our ongoing research interest is to design an ecofriendaly and green methods for organic transformation, which focused on solvent free synthesis, avoid the use of toxic compounds23-25. We consist with our research area, in the present study, we have reported an adsorption process for Sudan-III dye, using groundnut husk as low cost, natural waste adsorbent. We have examined several natural biomass like rice husk, soya husk, chana (Green vatana) husk and groundnut husk etc. for extraction of Sudan-III from the prepared solution. Additionally, present study has been focused on the pattern of adsorption of Sudan-III dye under numerous conditions such as concentration of dye and adsorbent dose, pH and contact time.
EXPERIMENTAL:
The chemicals used were of analytical grade reagent as received without any further purification. Natural adsorbents (rice husk, soya husk, chana (green vatana) husk and groundnut husk) were obtained from a local mill and were pre-treated according to the technique described in the literature26,27. Initially, we collected the specified natural absorbents, dried in sunlight to remove moisture and crushed using mortar and pestle to reduce the size. The small grain size was obtained using filtration through cotton cloth.
The adsorbtion of Sudan-III in methanol solution has been studied using digital dual beam spectrophotometer (EQ-826 UV spectrometer; range 190-950). PH of investgated solutions has been recorded on digital PH meter (model EQ-610).
General procedure to prepare solutions of Sudan-III.
Warm 73.5 mL of 95% ethyl alcohol in a hot water bath. Add 0.5 g of Sudan-III and stir well.
Make the solution up to 100 mL by adding 75 oC warm deionized water stir it well and cool to room temperature, filter if necessary. The solutions with varying concentration of Sudan-III (50%, 40%, 30% and 20%) were prepared in methanol from the above prepared solution.
Preparation of sample to study the adsorption of Sudan-III:
The samples were prepared by adding 0.5 g of adsorbent (rice husk, soya husk, chana husk and groundnut husk) in 50%, 40%, 30% and 20% Sudan-III in methanol. Before the investigation of adsorption and pH, prepared samples were preserved at room temperature for 2 days.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
Groundnut husk and other selected natural adsorbents are operative due to their widespread porosity and very large surface area for adsorption22. Rice husk, soya husk, chana (Green vatana) husk and groundnut husk have been used to investigate the adsorption of Sudan-III dyes from solution. For the present examination, we prepared solution of Sudan-III in methanol and examined with prescribed adsorbents with different concentration of Sudan-III. The adsorption and pH of prepared solutions have been studied and summarized in Table 1.
The results showed that pH of 50% concentration with 0.5 g ground nut husk was highest than other adsorbents and it increases on second day. It indicates that, the adsorption is more for ground nut husk. Meanwhile, we have recorded the absorbance for reported adsorbents on both days. Obtained results indicate that decreasing in absorption for the prepared Sudan-III solutions where ground nut husk has dripping for two days, while other adsorbents were not much effectively soaked Sudan III and showed more absorbtion. This observations support to the ground nut husk is a good adsorbent for Sudan-III dye. In addition to this, the gradual increase in absorbance was observed as concentration of Sudan-III increases (shown in Figure 1).
Figure. 1: Plot of conc. v/s Absorbance
The adsorption data were modeled using the Langmuir, Freundlich. The Langmuir model (all adsorption sites assumed similar) was used to estimate the maximum adsorption capacity corresponding to the saturation of the activated carbon surface using the linearized form of Langmuir isotherms:
Kd = qe/Ce = qmKL – qe (1)
Table 1: The adsorption and pH of prepared solutions
|
Sr. No. |
Conc. of Sudan-III |
Absorbent |
PH |
Absorbance |
||
|
Ist Day |
IInd Day |
Ist Day |
IInd Day |
|||
|
1 |
50 % |
Soya husk |
8.07 |
8.15 |
0.821 |
0.819 |
|
2 |
Groundnut husk |
8.33 |
8.56 |
0.803 |
0.799 |
|
|
3 |
Chana husk |
7.87 |
7.91 |
0.826 |
0.823 |
|
|
4 |
Rice husk |
7.63 |
7.74 |
0.806 |
0.805 |
|
|
5 |
40% |
Soya husk |
6.65 |
6.70 |
0.785 |
0.782 |
|
6 |
Groundnut husk |
7.17 |
7.36 |
0.756 |
0.751 |
|
|
7 |
Chana husk |
6.99 |
7.10 |
0.775 |
0.772 |
|
|
8 |
Rice husk |
6.94 |
7.05 |
0.765 |
0.762 |
|
|
9 |
30% |
Soya husk |
6.45 |
6.52 |
0.750 |
0.748 |
|
10 |
Groundnut husk |
7.10 |
7.28 |
0.712 |
0.708 |
|
|
11 |
Chana husk |
6.75 |
6.81 |
0.722 |
0.720 |
|
|
12 |
Rice husk |
6.60 |
6.68 |
0.718 |
0.717 |
|
|
13 |
20% |
Soya husk |
6.84 |
6.93 |
0.723 |
0.721 |
|
14 |
Groundnut husk |
6.91 |
7.01 |
0.638 |
0.633 |
|
|
15 |
Chana husk |
6.70 |
6.78 |
0.653 |
0.650 |
|
|
16 |
Rice husk |
6.54 |
6.62 |
0.642 |
0.639 |
|
The obtained values were summarized in Table No. 2. The Freundlich Model (adsorption sites varying in their interaction with the sorbate) is an empirical equation used to estimate the adsorption capacity of the activated carbon for the dye the linearzied from the of the Freundlich isotherm:
Log qe=log kf +1/n log ce (2)
Figure. 2. Calculation of Kf for selected adsorbents.
Table 2. Kd values for different concentration of adsorbent.
|
Sr. No. |
Conc. of Sudan-III |
Adsorbent |
Kd |
|
1 |
50 % |
Soya husk |
38.38 |
|
2 |
Groundnut husk |
36.98 |
|
|
3 |
Chana husk |
25 |
|
|
4 |
Rice husk |
28.2 |
|
|
5 |
40% |
Soya husk |
33.33 |
|
6 |
Groundnut husk |
60.60 |
|
|
7 |
Chana husk |
37.93 |
|
|
8 |
Rice husk |
45.45 |
|
|
9 |
30% |
Soya husk |
66.66 |
|
10 |
Groundnut husk |
71.42 |
|
|
11 |
Chana husk |
81.88 |
|
|
12 |
Rice husk |
66.66 |
|
|
13 |
20% |
Soya husk |
5.26 |
|
14 |
Groundnut husk |
2.56 |
|
|
15 |
Chana husk |
41.66 |
|
|
16 |
Rice husk |
4.37 |
A plot of log qe versus log Ce gives a straight line with a slope of 1/n and intercept of log Kf. Where Kf and n are the Freundlich constants. The value of n indicates the affinity towards the adsorbent. The calculated quantities were listed in Table No. 3. Parameters for plotting Langmuir, Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm of Sudan-III are summarized in Table No. 4.
The graph between log Qe Vs log Ce has been plotted, the intercept on y-axis gives the values of 1/n. From the obtained values we have calculated the values of Kf for the above selected adsorbents. The values of Kf are shown in graph (Figure 2).
Table 3. Freundlich parameters
|
Adsorbent |
Freundlich |
n |
|
|
R2 |
KF |
||
|
Soya husk |
0.285 |
0.1123 |
5.7404 |
|
Groundnut husk |
0.154 |
0.1077 |
6.97 |
|
Chana husk |
0.469 |
0.1029 |
0.0735 |
|
Rice husk |
0.263 |
0.1154 |
1.32 |
Table 4. Parameters for plotting Langmuir, Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm of Sudan-III.
|
Sr. No |
Adsorbent |
Conc of Adsorbent |
Ce(mg/L) |
1/Ce |
Log Ce |
Qe |
1/Qe |
Log Qe |
|
1 |
Soya husk |
20% |
19.0 |
0.0526 |
1.27 |
0.10 |
10.00 |
- |
|
2 |
30% |
18.0 |
0.0555 |
1.25 |
1.20 |
0.83 |
0.0791 |
|
|
3 |
40% |
30.0 |
0.0333 |
1.47 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
0.00 |
|
|
4 |
50% |
36.0 |
0.0278 |
1.55 |
1.40 |
0.71 |
0.1461 |
|
|
5 |
Groundnut husk |
20% |
19.5 |
0.0516 |
1.29 |
0.05 |
20.00 |
- |
|
6 |
30% |
17.5 |
0.0571 |
1.24 |
1.25 |
0.80 |
0.0969 |
|
|
7 |
40% |
25.0 |
0.0400 |
1.39 |
1.50 |
0.66 |
0.1760 |
|
|
8 |
50% |
36.5 |
0.0274 |
1.56 |
1.35 |
0.74 |
0.1303 |
|
|
9 |
Chana husk |
20% |
19.2 |
0.0520 |
1.28 |
0.08 |
12.50 |
- |
|
10 |
30% |
16.5 |
0.0600 |
1.21 |
1.35 |
0.74 |
0.1309 |
|
|
11 |
40% |
29.0 |
0.0340 |
1.46 |
1.10 |
0.91 |
0.0413 |
|
|
12 |
50% |
40.0 |
0.0250 |
1.60 |
1.00 |
1.00 |
1.0210 |
|
|
13 |
Rice Husk |
20% |
19.1 |
0.0523 |
1.28 |
0.10 |
10.00 |
- |
|
14 |
30% |
16.4 |
0.0609 |
1.21 |
1.32 |
0.75 |
0.1200 |
|
|
15 |
40% |
28.98 |
0.0345 |
1.46 |
1.11 |
0.90 |
0.0450 |
|
|
16 |
50% |
39.97 |
0.0250 |
1.60 |
0.99 |
1.01 |
- |
CONCLUSION:
We have investigated different adsorption systems for the adsorption of Sudan-III dye. In present study soya husk, groundnut husk, chana husk and rice husk were examine under the adsorption of different concentration of (20%, 30%, 40% and 50%) Sudan-III. In this analysis, sorption was carried out at room temperature and PH of prepared solutions was found between 6.52–8.56. Other physic-chemical parameters were determined and two adsorption isotherm models were studied. The sorption data was fitted into Langmuir and Freundlich isotherms, out of which Freundlich adsorption was found to be best fit with good regression value. Thus, it could be concluded that the ground nut husk is good adsorbent for removal of Sudan III from aqueous solution.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
Authors are thankful to the management and Principals of their respective institutions for encouragement and assistance.
1. Volesky B. Hydrometallurgy,2001, 59:203
2. Gordon Mc. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 1979, 12:307
3. Azhar S. S., Liew A. G., Suhardy D., Hafiz K. F., Hatim M. D. I. Am J Applied Sci, 2005, 2(11):1499
4. Abd El-Latif, M. M., Ibrahim A. M., El-Kady M. F. Journal of American Science, 2010, 6(6):267
5. Ladhe, U.V., Patil, P. R. Intern. J. of Sci., Env. and Tech., 2014, 3(2):546
6. Pardo O., Yusa V., Leon N., Pastor A. Talanta, 2009, 78:178
7. Riin R., Ivo L., Sergei Y., Koit H. J Chromatogr A, 2010, 1217:2747
8. Common decision on emergency measures regarding chilli products, curcuma and palm oil, OJ, (2005/402/EC) L135/34
9. Orawon C., Wanida W., Weena S., Kate G., Yifang Z., Zhiwei Z. Food Chem, 2008, 109:876
10. Monica A., Mohammed Z., Alberto E., Angel R. J Supercrit Fluid, 2011, 55:977
11. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk Chemical to Man, IARC, Lyon, 1975, 8:125
12. Commission Decision 2003/460/EC, European Union, 2003
13. Alim-un-N., Naseem Z., Yasha N. B. Pak. J. Biochem. Mol. Biol., 2016, 49(1):29
14. Zhang P., Zhang J., Gong W., Gopalan A., Lee K. J Chromatogr A, 2005, 1098(1-2):183
15. Calbiani F., Careri M., Elviri L., Mangia A., Zagononi I. J Chromatogr A, 2004, 1058(1-2):127
16. Ma M., Luo X., Chen B., Su S., Yao S. J Chromatogr A, 2006, 1103(1):170
17. Mazzetti M., Fascioli R., Mazzoncini I., Spinelli G., Morelli I., Bertoli A. Food Addit Contam, 2004, 21(10):935
18. Rovellini. P. Rivista Italiana delle Sostanze Grasse 2005, 82(6):299
19. Tateo F., Bononi M. J Agr Food Chem, 2004, 52(4):655
20. Igwe J. C., Abia. A.A. African Journal of Biotechnology, 2006, 5 (12):167
21. Abdel-Ghani N.T., Hefny, M., El-Chagbaby G.A.F. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Tech., 2007, 4(1):67
22. Weber W. J. Jr. Physico-chemical Processes for Water Quality Control, 1972, New York
23. Mathapati, S. R., Sakhare, J. F., Swami, M. B., Dawle, J. K., Der Pharma Chemica, 2012, 4(6):2248
24. Mathapati, S. R., Prasad, D., Atar, A. B., Nagaraja, B. M., Dawle, J.K., Jadhav, A. H., Materials Today Proceedings, 2019, 9:661
25. Mathapati, S. R., Patil, K. N., Mathakari, S. S., Suryawanshi, A.W., Jadhav, A. H., Phosphorus, Sulfur, and Silicon and the Related Elements, 2021, 196:538
26. Wu L. P., Li Y. F., Huang C. Z., Zhang Q. Analytical Chemistry, 2006, 78(15):5570
27. Ken-Sen C., Jhy-Ching T., Chieh-Tsung L. Journal of Bioresources Tech., 2001, 78:217
Received on 03.08.2022 Modified on 23.12.2022
Accepted on 10.03.2023 ©AJRC All right reserved
Asian J. Research Chem. 2023; 16(2):105-108.
DOI: 10.52711/0974-4150.2023.00017