You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Reductive decolorization of azo dyes via in situ generation of green tea extract-iron chelate
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-018-1907-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ling Yu, Yewen Qiu, Yang Yu, Shanquan Wang |
| Abstract |
In this study, rapid decolorization of azo dyes was achieved by in situ-generated green tea extract-iron (GTE-Fe) chelate for the first time. When changing reaction conditions from the aerobic condition to the anaerobic condition, the decolorization efficiencies of two azo dyes, i.e., acid orange 7 (AO7) and acid black 1 (AB1), increased from 46.38 and 83.17 to 90.13 and 95.37%, respectively. The recalcitrant AO7 was then selected as the targeting pollutant in subsequent optimization and mechanism studies. Experimental evidences showed that the initial concentrations of AO7, Fe(III), and GTE are the key factors to optimize the decolorization efficiency. Further characterization studies by spectroscopic analysis, including FESEM, FTIR, and XPS, suggested that the major mechanism of AO7 decolorization is the nucleophilic attack of the oxygen in green tea polyphenols (GTP), and this attack could be facilitated by the organometal chelation. This study provided an efficient and environmental friendly strategy to decolorize azo dyes via in situ generation of the GTE-Fe chelate, as well as its mechanistic insights, shedding lights on in situ remediation of azo dye pollution. Graphical abstract ᅟ. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 3 | 30% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 20% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
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 14 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,756,367
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#5,072
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,285
of 331,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#109
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 331,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.