Table 3 Comparison of the adsorption best conditions of this study with other literature
Adsorbent | Dose, g\L | Shaking Time, min | pH | [Dye], ppm | % | qm | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MoO3 | 0.6 | 50 | 10 | 50 | 99 | 151.41 | This work |
WO3 | 2 | 40 | 2 | 50–100 | 99 | 102.73 | This work |
Alg/Clin/Fe3O4 | 2 | 60 | 10 | 10 | 93.62 | 12.48 | [54] |
Clin/Fe3O4 | 1 | 60 | 10 | 10 | 97.57 | 45.66 | [54] |
Activated carbon (AC) | 0.05 | 5 | 6.5–7 | 100 | 95 | 148.80 | [55] |
WO3 | 0.002 | – | 5 | – | – | 64.20 | [21] |
Hordeum vulgare bran (BB) | 2.5 | 4 h | 5.07 | 10 | – | 63.20 | [56] |
Enset (Ensete ventricosum midrib leaf, EVML) | 2.5 | 1 h | 5.07 | 10 | – | 35.50 | [56] |
Gum ghatti–graft–poly(4-acryloyl morpholine) hydrogel | – | 3.33 h | 7 | 1000 | – | 90.60 | [57] |
Xylan–gelatin-crosslinked hydrogel | – | 5.83 h | 5.84 | 40 | – | 26.04 | [58] |
Schott or taro tuber hydrogel | 0.12 | 80 | 8.5 | 20 | 72.35 | 12.50 | [59] |
Magnetite hierarchical hollow silica spheres (Fe3O4@HHSS) | 1 | 120 | 7 | 10 | 97.6 | 71.45 | [60] |
Cellulose capped magnetite nanofluids | – | – | – | – |  | 13.54 | [61] |
Magnetite nanorods coated with green tea polyphenols | 1 | 16 | 7 | 3.5 | 95 | 7.25 | [62] |
Iron impregnated nanoclay | 0.08 | 120 | 7 | 40 | – | 79.68 | [51] |
Nanoclay | 0.12 | 140 | 11 | 20 | – | 54.85 | |
nZVI | 0.14 | 140 | 13 | 20 | – | 15.25 |