2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108837
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sorption of selected pharmaceuticals on river benthic biofilms formed on artificial substrata

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, as DIC is negatively charged at our experimental pH, it could therefore also sorb electrostatically to positively charged fractions of the EPS, such as amino groups in sugars and proteins, as it was suggested by Rodriguez-Escales and Sanchez-Vila to describe the enhanced sorption of the UV filter BP-3 in the presence of biofilm. Additionally, DIC has been extracted from river biofilms as well, confirming the possibility of retention of DIC onto biofilms. Besides sorption, DIC was also biodegraded in C1 and C2, but not in C3.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, as DIC is negatively charged at our experimental pH, it could therefore also sorb electrostatically to positively charged fractions of the EPS, such as amino groups in sugars and proteins, as it was suggested by Rodriguez-Escales and Sanchez-Vila to describe the enhanced sorption of the UV filter BP-3 in the presence of biofilm. Additionally, DIC has been extracted from river biofilms as well, confirming the possibility of retention of DIC onto biofilms. Besides sorption, DIC was also biodegraded in C1 and C2, but not in C3.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sorption was more pronounced in C3, being consistent with batch experiments, which showed more sorption in the muffled soil ( Section S14 ). The different behavior of MET can be explained by its cationic charge at the pH during the experiments, allowing ionic interaction with soil (negatively charged) and biofilm (negatively charged above a pH of 7 82 ). Enhanced sorption due to biofilm is a plausible explanation for the higher retention of MET in C1 than that in C2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%