Biogenic engineered zinc oxide nanoparticle for sulfur black dye removal from contaminated wastewater: comparative optimization, simulation modeling, and isotherms

Figures & data

Figure 1. Synthesis of zinc oxide nanoparticles via isolated bacterial strain.

Figure 2. Phylogenetic tree of isolated bacillus paramycoides.

Figure 3. Characterization of ZnO and ZnO-ME. (a) FT-IR of ZnO and ZnO-ME (before dye adsorption), (b) XRD of ZnO and ZnO-ME and (c) UV–VIS spectrum of ZnO and ZnO-ME.

Figure 4. (a,b) surface morphology analysis, (c,d) EDX spectrum and (e,f) nitrogen adsorption–desorption curve and pore size distribution for ZnO-ME and ZnO.

Figure 5. Predicted against actual values plots for (a) for ZnO and (b) for ZnO-ME and normal percentage probability plots for (c) for ZnO and (d) for ZnO-ME for sulfur black dye adsorption.

Table 1. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the adsorption of sulfur black dye using ZnO and ZnO-ME nanoparticles

ZnO												ZnO-ME
Source	Sum of Squares		df	Mean Square	F-value		p-value				Source	Sum of Squares	df			Mean Square	F-value	p-value
CCD-Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the adsorption of sulfur black dye using ZnO and ZnO-ME nanoparticles
Model	499.38		6	83.23	303.79		< 0.0001		significant		Model	636.54	3			212.18	431.11	< 0.0001		significant
A-dose	130.01		1	130.01	474.54		< 0.0001				A-dose	133.7	1			133.7	271.65	< 0.0001
B-conc.	103.96		1	103.96	379.47		< 0.0001				B-conc.	227.56	1			227.56	462.35	< 0.0001
C-contact time	265.6		1	265.6	969.45		< 0.0001				C-contact time	280.64	1			280.64	570.21	< 0.0001
AB	3.12		1	3.12	11.41		0.007
AC	0.125		1	0.125	0.4563		0.5147
BC	0.125		1	0.125	0.4563		0.5147
Residual	2.74		10	0.274							Residual	6.4	13			0.4922
Lack of Fit	1.94		6	0.3233	1.62		0.3342		not significant		Lack of Fit	5.2	9			0.5776	1.93	0.2758		not significant
Pure Error	0.8		4	0.2							Pure Error	1.2	4			0.3
Cor Total	502.12		16								Cor Total	642.94	16
ZnO-ME										ZnO
Source		DF				Adj SS	Adj MS	F-Value	P-Value	Source			DF	Adj SS	Adj MS	F-Value			P-Value
PBD-Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the adsorption of suflur black dye using ZnO and ZnO-ME nanoparticles
Model		3				631.583	210.528	461.12	0	Model			3	497.583	165.861	315.97			0
Linear		3				631.583	210.528	461.12	0	Linear			3	497.583	165.861	315.97			0
Dose (mg)		1				126.75	126.75	277.62	0	Dose (mg)			1	154.083	154.083	293.53			0
Conc. (mg/lit)		1				270.75	270.75	593.03	0	Conc. (mg/lit)			1	126.75	126.75	241.46			0
Contact time (min)		1				234.083	234.083	512.72	0	Contact time (min)			1	216.75	216.75	412.91			0
Error		9				4.109	0.457			Error			9	4.724	0.525
Curvature		1				0.776	0.776	1.86	0.21	Curvature			1	0.058	0.058	0.1			0.761
Lack-of-Fit		4				2.833	0.708	5.67	0.061	Lack-of-Fit			4	4.167	1.042	8.33			0.032
Pure Error		4				0.5	0.125			Pure Error			4	0.5	0.125
Total		12				635.692				Total			12	502.308
ZnO-ME										ZnO
Source		DF				Adj SS	Adj MS	F-Value	P-Value	Source				DF	Adj SS	Adj MS			F-Value	P-Value
FFD-Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the adsorption of suflur black dye using ZnO and ZnO-ME nanoparticles
Model		3				415.375	138.458	263.73	0	Model				4	339.5	84.875			679	0
Linear		3				415.375	138.458	263.73	0	Linear				3	336.375	112.125			897	0
Dose (mg)		1				91.125	91.125	173.57	0	Dose (mg)				1	105.125	105.125			841	0
Conc. (mg/lit)		1				171.125	171.125	325.95	0	Conc. (mg/lit)				1	78.125	78.125			625	0
Contact time (min)		1				153.125	153.125	291.67	0	Contact time (min)				1	153.125	153.125			1225	0
Error		5				2.625	0.525			2-Way Interactions				1	3.125	3.125			25	0.007
Curvature		1				1.125	1.125	3	0.158	Dose (mg)*Conc. (mg/L)				1	3.125	3.125			25	0.007
Lack-of-Fit		4				1.5	0.375	*	*	Error				4	0.5	0.125
Total		8				418				Curvature				1	0.125	0.125			1	0.391
										Lack-of-Fit				3	0.375	0.125			*	*
										Total				8	340

Table 2. Model summary and statistical analysis.

Model	R^2	Adjusted R^2	Predicted R^2	Std. Dev.	Mean
CCD (ZnO)	0.9945	0.9913	0.9838	0.5234	71.41
CCD (ZnO-ME)	0.9900	0.9878	0.9814	0.7016	80.06
FFD (ZnO)	0.9985	0.9971	0.9920	0.3535	70.67
FFD (ZnO-ME)	0.9937	0.9900	0.9823	0.7245	79.00
PBD (ZnO)	0.9906	0.9875	0.9793	0.7245	70.77
PBD (ZnO-ME)	0.9935	0.9914	0.9869	0.6756	79.15

Figure 6. Residual plots for PBD for ZnO and ZnO-ME nanoparticles.

Figure 7. Residual plots for FFD for ZnO and ZnO-ME nanoparticles.

Table 3. Comparison of adsorption percentage of zinc oxide nanoparticles for various dyes.

Nanomaterials	Dye	Adsorption (%)	Reference
ZnO	Ismate violet 2R (IV2R) dye (aqueous solution)	91.5	[45]
ZnO	Textile industry effluent (real)	65.6	[45]
Lemon peel beads-doped zinc oxide (LBZ) NPs	Reactive Blue 4 (RB4) dye	66.64	[46]
ZnO	Congo Red dye	87.3	[47]
ZnO-loaded zeolite	Crystal violet	69.7	[48]
ZnO	Sulfur black	71	Present study
ZnO-ME	Sulfur black	80	Present study

Table 4. Isotherm parameters for sulfur black dye adsorption on ZnO and ZnO-ME.

		Parameter value
Isotherm Model	Parameter	ZnO	ZnO-ME
Langmuir	qmax (mg/g)	2.774	4.123
	R^2	0.324	0.267
Freundlich	n	0.858	0.767
	Kf (mg/g)	2.926	3.88
	R^2	0.9625	0.9549
Temkin	b (J/mol)	74.52	95.442
	Kt (L/mg)	0.339	0.432
	R^2	0.670	0.679

Figure 8. (a) FT-IR spectra of nanomaterials before and after adsorption; (b) potential adsorption mechanism.

Al-Arjan WS. Zinc oxide nanoparticles and their application in adsorption of toxic dye from aqueous solution. MDPI Polymer. 2022;14(15):3086. doi: 10.3390/polym14153086

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Praipipat P, Ngamsurach P, Prasongdee V. Comparative reactive blue 4 dye removal by lemon peel bead doping with iron(III) oxide-hydroxide and zinc oxide. ACS Omega. 2022;7(45):41744–41758. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.2c05956

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Chauhan AK, Kataria N, Garg VK. Green fabrication of ZnO nanoparticles using Eucalyptus spp. leaves extract and their application in wastewater remediation. Chemosphere. 2020;247:125803. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125803

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Elfeky AS, Youssef HF, Elzaref AS. Adsorption of dye from wastewater onto ZnO nanoparticles-loaded zeolite: kinetic, thermodynamic and isotherm studies. Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie. 2020;234(2):255–278. doi: 10.1515/zpch-2018-1342

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its supplementary materials.