Desorption of rare earth elements biosorbed on <scp> <i>Euglena mutabilis</i> </scp> suspensions and biofilms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Increasing demand for rare earth elements (REEs) has stimulated research on novel recovery methods from sources like industrial effluents. Our recent study demonstrated that algal biofilms are good candidates for the adsorption of REEs and that the extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) within the biofilm were a key accumulator of REEs. In this work, we measured the desorption kinetics, extents, and selectivity of REEs from the algae Euglena mutabilis in suspensions and biofilms using aqueous solutions of HCl at pH between 1.5 and 4, and Na 2 EDTA at pH 5. We examined the potential for reusing suspended and biofilm biomass for repeated adsorption–desorption cycles. The desorption kinetics were similar for suspensions and biofilms, with equilibrium being reached within 20 min. The extent of desorption was higher in biofilms with 86% and 95% desorption, compared to suspensions which had 72% and 74% desorption using HCl and Na 2 EDTA, respectively. We postulate that the difference between suspensions and biofilms is attributed to the binding sites in the EPS matrix of the biofilm being more readily protonated than those at the algal cell wall surface. Heavy REEs were found to preferentially desorb at pH 4 over lighter REEs. After 3 repeated adsorption–desorption cycles, the adsorption capacity of biofilms increased by 280% and 80% using HCl and Na 2 EDTA, respectively, compared to an 80% decrease in biosorption capacity for the suspension. The increase in biofilm biosorption capacity was attributed to the simultaneous desorption of divalent cations alongside REEs from the EPS increasing the number of available binding sites.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".