No abstract

In the present study six adsorbents viz. wood charcoal, fly ash, coconut charcoal, saw dust, coconut fiber and baggasse charcoal were studied for their capacity to remove atrazine from water. The removal efficiency of different adsorbents varied from 76.5% to 97.7% at 0.05 ppm concentration and 78.5% to 95.5% at 0.1 ppm concentration of atrazine solution, which was less than removal efficiency of activated charcoal reported as 98% for atrazine (Adams and Watson, J Environ Eng ASCE 39:327-330, 1996). Wood charcoal was a cheap (Rs 15 kg(-1)) and easily available material in house holds. Since wood charcoal was granular in nature, it could be used for the removal of atrazine from water to the extent of 95.5%-97.7%. Fly ash is a waste product of thermal plant containing 40%-50% silica, 20%-35% alumina, 12%-30% carbon and unburnt minerals having a high pH of 9-10. It is very cheap and abundant material and has comparatively good adsorption capacity. It was found that fly ash effectively removed about 84.1%-88.5% atrazine from water at 0.05 and 0.1 ppm levels. Coconut shell is also waste product. Therefore, both are inexpensive. The removal efficiency of atrazine from water was 92.4%-95.2% by coconut shell charcoal and 85.9%-86.3% by coconut fiber. Sawdust is generally used as domestic fuel and found everywhere. It is also very cheap (Re. 1 kg(-1)). Baggasse charcoal is a waste product of sugar mill and abundant material. Its cost is due to transport expense, which depends upon distance from the sugar mill. The removal efficiency of sawdust and baggasse charcoal was found 78.5-80.5 and 76.5-84.6, respectively. The efficacy of chemically treated adsorbents for the removal of atrazine from water is in the order: wood charcoal > coconut shell charcoal > fly ash > coconut fiber charcoal > baggasse charcoal > sawdust.

No abstract

No abstract

The potential of mass spectrometry (MS) is often not fully utilized due to the absence of systematic workflow of mass spectral interpretation, partially caused by the lack of simplified literature for interpretation of soft ionization methods and collision induced fragmentation spectral data interpretation. Therefore, this review summarizes the rational work flows for the interpretation of mass spectral data generated using atmospheric pressure ionization (API) and collision induced dissociation (CID) fragmentation. Designed workflow will definitely assist the readers to interpret MS and MS/MS spectral data, especially for the structural elucidation of small drug molecules and their impurities.