| Title |
Impacts of biofouling on the removal of pharmaceutically active compounds by a nanofiltration membrane
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-017-1065-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yu Yang, Chen Li, Li-an Hou |
| Abstract |
The impacts of biofouling on the retention of pharmaceutically active compounds (PhACs) by a commercially available nanofiltration membrane (NF 270) were systematically studied. Biofouling was achieved through inoculating live and dead Pseudomonas aeruginosa into artificial wastewater. In comparison to a clean membrane, an increase in PhAC rejection during biofouling with live cells was observed. However, the rejection behaviors presented more complex changes during biofouling with dead cells: PhAC rejection was below the clean membrane in the early biofouling stage; however, in the later stage, PhAC rejection was above the clean membrane. In addition, PhAC rejection behaviors present the similar tendency as salt rejection under both biofouling conditions. In addition, solute rejections were much lower for biofouling with dead cells than those for biofouling with live cells. Combined with biofilm characterization under both biofouling conditions, we could conclude that biofilm enhanced osmotic pressure (BEOP) due to higher cell counts and biofilm thickness led to a decrease in PhAC retention, especially for the dead cells. In addition, more dominant steric exclusion in the later stage of biofouling due to higher extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) concentration on the membrane surface resulted in an increase in PhAC retention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 27% |
| Researcher | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 4 | 36% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2017.
All research outputs
#21,420,714
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#7,000
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#383,823
of 447,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#175
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.