See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227919049

Use of keratin fiber for separation of heavy metals from water

Article  in  Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology · November 2004

DOI: 10.1002/jctb.1132

CITATIONS READS

127 1,714

2 authors:

Piyush Kar Mudit Misra

University of Alberta Monash University (Australia)
79 PUBLICATIONS   1,274 CITATIONS    103 PUBLICATIONS   3,046 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Water treatment using porous natural fibers View project

TiO2 nanotube array-noble metal nanoparticle heterojunctions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Piyush Kar on 14 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)
DOI: 10.1002/jctb.1132

Use of keratin fiber for separation of heavy

metals from water
P Kar∗ and M Misra
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering/MS388, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV 89557, USA

Abstract: Nano-porous keratin fiber is effective in removing heavy metals from solutions. The biosorption
of heavy metals from solutions is dependent upon the solution pH, the contact time, surface area and
temperature. The intrinsic properties of the keratin fiber, ie stability over a wide range of pH, structural
toughness and high surface area, are the positive factors. Alkaline ultrasonic treatment of the keratin
fiber resulted in a multi-fold increase in metal uptake. Adsorption of heavy metals using both batch and
column operations was conducted. Multiple elution and adsorption tests indicated that it is possible to
reuse keratin fiber as a biosorbent for a number of cycles.
 2004 Society of Chemical Industry

Keywords: keratin fiber; heavy metals; removal; processing

INTRODUCTION for removal of copper.7 Avian Keratin Protein Fiber

Removal of heavy metals from drinking and pro-
cess water is a subject of continued research. Several
industries dealing with mining, manufacturing and
processing tasks generate solutions containing heavy
metals in excess of discharge limits, thus necessitating
treatment of the water before discharge. Conventional
methods for removal of these metals from solutions are
precipitation, coagulation/flocculation, cementation,
chelation and ion exchange. These technologies either
have the inherent problem of sludge handling and dis-
posal and/or are best suited for solutions having high
metal concentrations. However, since conventional
water treatment materials are relatively expensive and
require complex operational set-up and safety pre-
cautions, there is an increasing interest in the use of
biomass for removal of dissolved metals from aqueous
solutions.1 A variety of low cost biomass has been
developed and commercialized for controlling pol-
lution from diverse sources; these are yeasts, fungi,
algae, bacteria and some aquatic plants, and are used
to concentrate metals from aqueous diluted solutions,
accumulating them inside their cell structure.2 These
biotechnological processes are mainly categorized as
biosorption and bioprecipitation.
The use of a novel biomass, the keratin protein fiber,
for purification of heavy metal-contaminated water is
a promising technology. Studies on wool keratin for
binding of heavy metals began in the 1950s. The
different metals that have been reported for uptake
by wool are mercury, copper and silver,3 cadmium
and lead4 and chromium and aluminum.5,6 Another
form of keratin, mohair keratin, has been reported
is a form of animal fibrous protein, and is extracted
from the feathers of birds such as chicken and turkey.8
Keratin fiber has been very effective in the removal
of precious metals like gold9,10 and also has been
reported for binding of copper, iron and chromium11
from water solutions. The advantages of avian keratin
fibers (referred to as ‘keratin fibers’ subsequently in
this paper) over other similar biosorbents lie in the for-
mer being a more abundant and yet cheap bioresource
than other similar biosorbents (such as wool and silk
keratin). Moreover, the keratin fibers’ properties, like
high tensile strength and water insolubility, make it
more attractive for biosorption. The production of
chicken feathers is abundant and most of the feathers
are disposed off as waste. Therefore the application
of these keratin fibers for purification of industrial
wastewater and drinking water is a very economical
method and using it is equivalent to the use of one
waste for clean-up of another.
The paper reports the binding behavior of copper,
lead, chromium, mercury and uranium. The effects
of parameters like pH, adsorbent to adsorbate
ratio, initial metal concentration, particle size and
temperature on the metal uptake are discussed. A
method called ‘alkaline ultrasonic treatment’ which
treats the material in order to alter its surface properties
for improved metal removal is described. Comparison
has been made between the metal removal behavior of
the treated and the as-received material and a detailed
description of the treatment procedure is given.
Experimental results demonstrating the reusability of
the adsorbent in the column method are presented.

∗ Correspondence to: P Kar, Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering/MS388, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV 89557,

USA
E-mail: pkar@unr.edu
Contract/grant sponsor: MaXim LLC, Pasadena, CA, USA
(Received 31 March 2004; revised version received 29 June 2004; accepted 6 July 2004)
Published online 7 September 2004
 2004 Society of Chemical Industry. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 0268–2575/2004/$30.00 1313
P Kar, M Misra

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Keratin fiber
Down feathers of chicken which were used for the
extraction of keratin fibers have quills 1 cm long.15
The quills are branched into fibers, the lengths of
which vary widely, from a few hundred microns to a
few centimeters. Figure 1 shows a keratin fiber having
a small length, ie 200 µm. Each fiber is generally very
thin and hairy, having a diameter in the range of
5–50 µm12 as determined from the Scanning Electron
Micrograph (SEM) shown in Fig 2. The surface area of
keratin protein fiber, as determined by BET, is around
11 m2 g−1 .13 The fiber fraction of the feather material
is a nano-porous network with pores of size in the
range of 0.05–0.10 µm, as evident from the Atomic
Force Micrograph (AFM) shown in Fig 3. Fourier
Transform Infrared Spectroscopic (FTIR) analysis
confirmed the presence of carboxylic, disulfide,
carbon–sulfur, carbon–hydrogen and sulfur–sulfur
functional groups.12 The fibers have good tensile
strength and are therefore difficult to grind, though
size reduction could be achieved by a vibratory ball
mill.14
MaXim Biosystems of Pasadena, California, sup-
plied the keratin fiber used for the experiments.
Keratin fibers are extracted from down feathers of Figure 2. Scanning Electron (SEM) micrograph of the Keratin Fiber
(as-received), showing the fibrous structure, scale—10 microns. The
chicken, the fiber obtained by separating it from the
width of the fibers as evident from the figure varies from 5 to
quill portion of the chicken feathers;15 this is the 50 microns.
as-received material used for the experiments. The
moisture content is 12–13% and the protein content
is 88%.16 In addition to these major constituents, the
as-received material has 43.2 mg calcium per 100 g of
fiber, 11.80 mg iron per 100 g of fiber, 42 mg sodium
per 100 g of fiber and traces of fat (0.96%).16 The

800

600

400
X 200.000
Z 4.648
200
Keratin Protein Fiber

Figure 3. Atomic Force Microscope (AFM) topographic image of the

Figure 1. Scanning Electron (SEM) micrograph of the keratin fiber keratin fiber (as-received), scale—10 microns. The dark pits on the
(as-received), scale—100 microns. Fibers vary in lengths widely, ie figure are the micropores.
from a few hundred microns to a few centimeters. This figure shows a
keratin fiber having a very small length, ie 200 microns.

1314 J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)


keratin fiber was also used in some experiments,
after being processed, for enhanced metal uptake,
ie ultrasonically processed and size reduced (after
fine grinding).
Preparation of heavy metal solutions
Stock solutions of heavy metals were prepared
separately by dissolving their salts, ie nitrates, chlorides
and sulfates, in deionized water. A stock solution of
100 mg per dm3 (ie parts per million, referred to as
‘ppm’) was first prepared which was then diluted
to the initial heavy metal concentration for each
experiment. A final pH adjustment was carried out
for all solutions before commencing an experiment.
The pH was adjusted to between 5 and 7 for heavy
metals like lead and copper. Care was taken so as
not to exceed the precipitation pH of the metal
cations, eg while preparing copper solution a pH
of 5.6 (the precipitation pH of copper) was not
exceeded. For heavy metals like chromium a lower
pH was maintained.
Batch tests
Heavy metal stock solutions of 1000 ppm were
prepared using their chloride and nitrate salts, from
which solutions of lower concentrations were obtained
by dilution. The pH adjustments were done using
HCl (100 mmol dm−3 ) and NaOH (100 mmol dm−3 )
solutions. Batch adsorption tests were conducted in
conical flasks with the desired adsorbent to adsorbate
ratio. The pH of the solution was adjusted according to
the purpose of the test. The suspensions were agitated
by shaking in a water bath shaker at 100 revolutions
per minute (rpm). The conditioning temperature was
adjusted and maintained at the desired level. The
conditioned solutions were filtered after a desired
time and analyzed by atomic absorption spectroscopy.
Deionized water was used in all experiments and all
chemicals used were of analytical grade.
Column tests
As shown in Fig 4, a vertical column with an internal
diameter of 4 cm and a height of 57 cm was used.
The active bed volume of the column was 800 cm3 .
The column operation cycle had the following stages:
(1) adsorption (by passing the metal-contaminated
solution), (2) desorption, by passing appropriate
eluting agent (dilute HCl in this case), (3) first-
stage washing, (4) regeneration, by passing NaOH
(0.1 mmol dm−3 ) solution down the column, and
(5) second-stage washing, by washing with deionized
water. After second-stage washing the column is ready
for the beginning of the next cycle. The column
usually holds about 135 g of keratin fiber. Heavy metal
solution of desired pH and concentration was passed
through at a flow rate of 6.6 cm3 per minute. Elution
was carried out using HCl (10 mmol dm−3 ) solution
at pH 2.0 and washing by deionized water.
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)
Separation of heavy metals from water
Column
Outlet
Influent
Column Packed
With Keratin
Fiber Under
Pressure
Effluent
Heavy Metal
Containing Solution
Pump With the
Provision of Flow-rate
Processed /Pure Control
Water
Column
Inlet
Figure 4. Schematic of the continuous column for heavy metals’
removal from solutions using keratin fiber.
Ultrasonic processing
Ultrasonic treatment was carried out in batch and
continuous methods. In the batch method small vol-
umes of the solutions (about 200 cm3 ) with about 4 g
of keratin were exposed to ultrasound using an ultra-
sonic gun having a frequency of 24 kilohertz (kHz).
The ultrasonic exposure was for different times, 30 s
to a minute. The continuous treatments were carried
out using a Nearfield Ultrasonic processor, manu-
factured by Advanced Sonic Processing Company,
New Jersey. This particular device has dual frequency,
ie, 16 kHz and 20 kHz. Materials were treated at a
single frequency or at dual frequencies. A continuous
treatment cycle processed 100 dm3 of slurry (mixture
of keratin fiber and an alkaline solution prepared by
dissolving NaOH pellets and diluting with deionized
water (final NaOH concentration of 3.5 mmol dm−3 ),
having a pH value between 11.0 and 12.0 and contain-
ing 0.5 weight % keratin fiber. The slurry was exposed
to ultrasound at a flow rate of 2 dm3 per minute.
Subsequent to conditioning the material was filtered,
washed, and dried at 50 ◦ C. The dried materials were
tested for heavy metal removal from solutions.
Analytical procedure
Solutions were analyzed for final heavy metal concen-
trations using a Varian Atomic Absorption Spectrom-
eter (referred subsequently as AA), model SpectraAA-
200 (Nitrous Oxide-Acetylene and Air-Acetylene
flames) and ICPMS. Atomic Absorption was used
for determining mg per dm3 level concentrations and
ICPMS for determining µg per dm3 level concentra-
tions. In order to ascertain the repeatability of the
1315
P Kar, M Misra

numbers obtained analytically some of the experi- to claim that both wool and avian keratin bind metal
ments were repeated in their entirety. Blank samples cations at the same sites (ie the carboxylic group).
containing deionized water were used intermittently However, the exact mechanism of chemiosorption
as internal checks to test the dependability of AA cal- of metal cations onto avian keratin fiber is not
ibration. For each sample the AA took three readings fully understood for all metals (cations and anionic
and gave the final result, which was the average of all complexes) at very acidic and alkaline pH values.
three readings. It may also be added that removal of metals like
mercury and chromium at very acidic pH values may
be occurring by binding of anionic mercury complexes
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION to disulfide bonds.
Batch test results
Removal of heavy metal by batch mode Removal of heavy metals from a mixed-metal solution
Copper, lead, chromium, mercury and uranium are Tests were performed on two different combinations
among the heavy metals removed from solutions using of mixed metals as follows: (1) three-metal solution,
the keratin fiber. Table 1 shows the different metals, and (2) five-metal solution.
corresponding pH and the metal loading. Cations
like copper and lead were removed from solutions
Three-metal solution. Solutions (100 cm3 ) containing
most effectively between pH 5 and 6. Chromium and
about 2 ppm of Cu, Pb, and Hg at three different pH
mercury were removed better at relatively lower pH
values, ie 1.9, 5.5, and 5.9, were conditioned with
values. Uranium removal was observed at relatively
0.3 g of keratin fiber. The filtrate was analyzed for Cu,
alkaline pH values. The rate of removal was rapid
Pb, and Hg. As shown in Table 2, the removal was of
and the adsorption process was close to completion in
the following order: Pb > Hg > Cu at pH 5.5 and 5.9.
30 min. It was interesting to observe that the increase
The result subscribes to the belief that biosorption of
in the amount of adsorbate (or the keratin fiber) did
metal cations onto keratin protein fiber is better when
not affect the metal uptake markedly in the batch tests;
the metal cation is higher in atomic weight, thus lead is
this may be due to the presence of hydrophobic groups
adsorbed better than copper because its atomic weight
in the surface of fiber which make mixing difficult in
is greater. At the same time mercury, though highest in
water solutions.
atomic weight, is believed to form an anionic complex
Metal removal by keratin occurs by a combination
in solution and thus showed better adsorption at the
of physiosorption and chemiosorption. Physiosorption
lower pH, unlike Pb and Cu.
occurs by trapping of metal ions in the nano-porous
network in the fiber. Chemiosorption is believed to
occur at the carboxylic binding sites of wool keratin Five-metal solution. Solutions (100 cm3 ) containing
in the pH range of 2–6.17,18 In this pH range about 2 ppm of Cu, Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni at three
metal cations compete with protons for the available different pH values, 4.2, 5.0, 5.6, were conditioned
carboxylic binding sites. Therefore after the removal with 0.2 g of keratin fiber. As shown in Table 2, the
of heavy metals from solutions, protons are released highest metal removal occurred at pH 5.6 and the
into the solution, decreasing its pH. Reconfirming the removal was in the following order: Pb > Cu > Cd >
above mechanism it has been observed that the pH Zn > Ni. The higher removal of lead compared with
decreases as a result of the removal of heavy metal copper can be explained by the same reasoning as
cations from solutions by keratin fiber. Moreover, given in the previous paragraph, ie the greater the
since wool keratin and avian keratin fiber both belong
to same class of material (ie keratin), it may be safe Table 2. Metal removal from mixed metal solutions, ie three-metal
and five-metal solutions
Table 1. Different heavy metals, the corresponding pH range for
Three-metal solution
removal by keratin fiber and the maximum loading onto keratin fiber
Removal (%)
Loading (milligrams of heavy
Metals pH range metal per gram of keratin)
pH Cu Pb Hg
Pb 5 or above 3.83 (batch tests)
1.9 0 0 97.6
5.33 (ultra-fine)
4.5 56.2 100 92.3
9 (alkaline-ultrasonically
5.6 62.1 100 89.6
processed and batch mode)
12 (alkaline-ultrasonically Five-metal solution
processed and column mode)
Removal (%)
Cu 4 or above 3.25
Zn 4 or above Very small
pH Cu Pb Zn Cd Ni
Ni 5 or above Very small
Hg 2–6 4.36 4.2 38.20 69.70 0.00 9.70 10.90
U 5–8 Not verified 5.0 45.65 78.60 2.10 14.50 7.00
Cr 1.5–6 3.50 5.6 48.80 83.50 3.80 17.00 10.10

1316 J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)


atomic weight the better the metal cation uptake-by
the keratin fiber. Also, it can be inferred from these
results that the keratin fiber removes very low amounts
of Zn, Cd and Ni. Why Zn, Cd and Ni did not show
substantial adsorption is still not clear, but the results
demonstrate the cation selectivity of the keratin fiber.
Column test results
Biosorption of uranium—column adsorption of uranium
from Gerlach water
Drinking water in Gerlach (a town in the state of
Nevada, USA) contains 150 parts per billion (ppb) of
uranium, it is naturally occurring. However, it violates
the drinking water standard for uranium, which is
20 ppb. The keratin fiber was successfully tested for
uranium removal from this water. The pH of the
water was 7.8. The results of uranium removal from
the Gerlach water, conducted in the packed column
using 100 g of the keratin fiber, are given in Fig 5.
As can be seen, the column-packed keratin fiber is
capable of purifying the uranium to meet the drinking
water standard of 20 ppb; 30 dm3 of the water was
successfully purified by the column.
Continuous column adsorption of lead using the alkaline
ultrasonically processed keratin fiber
A column adsorption test was conducted using alkaline
ultrasonically processed keratin fiber (see ‘Materials
and Methods’ section for description of the process-
ing). Ultrasonically processed keratin fiber (135 g) was
packed into a column (schematic as shown in Fig 4);
105 dm3 of the solution having 10 ppm lead were
successfully purified using the column. In the first col-
umn cycle 65 dm3 of lead solution, having an initial
180
150
Final Concentration (ppb).
120
90
60
30
EPA standard
0 0
0 10 20
Volume of Gerlach Water Passed (litres)
Figure 5. Plot of Uranium Uptake from Gerlach Water (containing
150 ppb Uranium) using keratin fiber. Nearly 30 liters of water
contaminated with low concentration of uranium was filtered using
the as-received keratin fiber.
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)
Separation of heavy metals from water
concentration of 10 ppm, could be purified, meeting
the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) standard (ie 20 ppb). In the second cycle
40 dm3 of the same solution were purified (meeting
the EPA standard). Subsequent cycles could have
resulted in the purification of larger volumes of the
solution. The results are shown in Fig 6. Desorption
tests confirmed that 99% of the lead can be removed
from the keratin by washing with hydrochloric acid.
The amount of lead uptake during column experi-
ments was 12 mg per gram of keratin as compared
with 9 mg per gram (on average) in the batch tests
(discussed in the next section) using alkaline ultra-
sonically processed material. The higher uptake in the
column mode is attributed to better contact between
adsorbate and adsorbent.
Effect of alkaline ultrasonically processing
Ultrasonic waves have been used for many practical
applications because these affect the surface properties
by increasing the surface area and altering the surface
chemistry of a material. Ultrasound was used to
process keratin fiber after mixing it in an alkaline water
solution. The treatment modified the keratin fiber
surface by increasing the surface area (by the cavitation
effect) and by embedding hydroxyl ions in it. These
hydroxyl ions brought about surface precipitation of
heavy metals. The treatment, as described earlier
in the Materials and Methods section, was carried
out by mixing keratin fiber (as-received) in alkaline
solution (pH between 11 and 12) and exposing
the solution to ultrasound at different frequencies.
Treatment was done in the continuous mode using an
ultrasonic frequency of 16 or 20 kHz or combination
of the two and also in a batch mode using an
ultrasonic frequency of 24 kHz. The uptake of lead
using ultrasonically-treated keratin fiber is given in
Table 3. As can be seen, the continuous mode of
treatment yielded better lead removal than the batch
45
40
Cycle-I
Effluent Lead Concentration (ppb).
35 Cycle-II
30 EPA Standard for Lead
25
20
15
10
5
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
30 40 50 Volume Passed (liters)
Figure 6. Plot of Effluent Lead Concentration vs Volume Passed,
results from the continuous column test using the alkaline
ultrasonically processed fiber. The fiber filtered almost 50 liters of lead
in the first pass and about 40 liters of lead after washing and
regeneration.
1317
P Kar, M Misra

mode. So, it has been generalized from the results 60

(which are tested for repeatability) that the lower
the ultrasonic frequency the better the heavy metal
adsorption. Similar results were obtained for lead. It is 50
also inferred that the loading (adsorbate to adsorbent
ratio) of lead on keratin increases about 3–4-folds
from that of the as-received (or un-processed) fiber. 40

Removal (%)
Effect of size reduction
It is difficult to grind the keratin fiber, however size 30
reduction could be achieved by grinding in a ball-mill
having the brand name ‘SPEX Mill’. The Particles
size, decreased as a function of grinding time and the 20
four different particle sizes so obtained are given in
Table 4. Tests performed with ground keratin fiber Initial Conc. - 10ppm
show a marked increase in the heavy metal uptake Initial Conc. - 20ppm
10
(shown in Table 4). This may be due to increase in Initial Conc. - 30ppm
the surface area and exposure of the functional groups Initial Conc. - 40ppm
responsible for metal binding. However, size reduction
0
is a difficult and an energy-intensive process and not 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
feasible commercially. Time (hours)

Figure 7. Removal of Copper at 25 ◦ C, removal (%) steadily

Effect of temperature
decreased with increasing concentration.
Temperature tests were performed to study copper
removal. Batch tests performed at 25, 35, and 70
45 ◦ C indicate an increase in copper uptake with
temperature, as can be observed from Figs 7, 8, and
9 respectively. Higher temperatures (about 45 ◦ C) 60
favored a steady increase in copper removal in
tests performed with solutions of relatively lower
Initial Conc. - 10ppm
concentrations, ie 10 ppm of copper. The solutions 50 Initial Conc. - 20ppm
of higher concentrations resulted in relatively low Initial Conc. - 30ppm
removal at all the temperatures. The maximum uptake Initial Conc. - 40ppm
40
Removal (%)

Table 3. Lead removal (batch mode) results using alkaline

ultrasonically processed keratin using 0.1 g of keratin per 100 cm3
of solution
30
Ultrasonic frequency (kHz) Lead uptake (%)

16 (continuous) 91
20 (continuous) 85 20
16 and 20 (continuous) 89
24 (continuous) 80
10
Table 4. The loading to keratin fibers of different sizes (please note
that sizes here do not refer to that of a single fiber but to a single unit
which is a cluster of numerous single fibers) 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Loading Time (hours)
(milligram
Figure 8. Removal of Copper at 35 ◦ C, removal improved from the
of lead
25 ◦ C case although the same trend of low removal (%) at high
Product Approximate per gram
concentration was observed.
identification Product obtained size (µm) of keratin)

Coarse Supplied by Maxim in 1000–5000 3.83 capacity of the keratin fiber was believed to be almost
October 2000 reached for the degree of contact between metal
Medium Supplied by Maxim in 300–1000 4.39 cations and keratin fiber for limitations attributed
December 2000 to improper mixing (ie the adsorbate–adsorbent
Fine 7.5min grinding in 200–500 4.41 contact) in the batch test experimental mode, etc.
SPEX Mill
Temperatures higher than 45 ◦ C were not considered
Ultra Fine 20min grinding in 15 5.33
because the fiber material is believed to be destabilized
SPEX Mill
at the higher temperatures. Though tests for the

1318 J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)


90
80
70
60
Initial Conc. - 10ppm
Initial Conc. - 20ppm
Removal (%)
50 Initial Conc. - 30ppm
Initial Conc. - 40ppm
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20
Time (hours)
Figure 9. Removal of Copper at 45 ◦ C, removal (%) is best among
the temperatures considered (25, 35 and 45 ◦ C), the trend of low
removal (%) at higher concentrations remaining intact.
effect of temperature are yet to be performed for
other heavy metals and those using processed keratin
fiber, it is safe to claim that lead would demonstrate
a similar temperature effect for its removal from
aqueous solutions.
SUMMARY
(1) Keratin protein fiber has demonstrated a good
capacity as a medium for purification of cop-
per, lead, chromium, mercury and uranium from
solutions having low concentrations of contami-
nant. In the natural pH range (pH 5.0–7.0) the
keratin protein fibers have unique selectivity for
lead and copper, and at acidic pH for removal
of chromium and mercury. Its stability and high
tensile strength renders it reusable, applicable in a
broad pH range and adaptable to pre-processing
for improved uptake.
(2) The surface hydrophobicity of keratin protein
fibers makes mixing difficult in aqueous solutions,
thereby limiting adsorbate–adsorbent contact and
the metal uptake. The metal uptake is increased
significantly by the column mode due to the non-
existence of difficulties such as mixing.
(3) Alkaline ultrasonic processing, by the cavitation
effect, increases the surface area. It is also
believed that due to processing, hydroxyl ions
become embedded in the surface and cause
surface precipitation of metal cations, thereby
improving uptake.
(4) Though it is difficult to reduce particle size,
grinding increases the surface area and exposes the
J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:1313–1319 (online: 2004)
View publication stats
Separation of heavy metals from water
surface functional groups responsible for sorption,
thereby increasing metal uptake.
(5) Adsorption of heavy metals like copper and lead
steadily improves with temperature.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We thank MaXim LLC, Pasadena, CA, USA, for
supporting this work.
REFERENCES
1 Sekhar KC, Subramanian S, Modak JM and Natarajan KA,
Removal of metal ions using an industrial biomass with
reference to environmental control. Int J Miner Process
53:107–120 (1988).
2 Cañizares-Villanueva RO, Biosorption of heavy metals using
microbial biomass. Microbiologia 42:131–143 (2000).
3 Hojo N, The change of adsorbability of Hg, Cu and Ag of
wool through alkali treatment. Sen-I Gakkaishi 14:953–955
(1958).
4 Hamrajani SN and Narwani CS, Polarographic study of metal
ion complexes with keratin fibers (wool) at pH 4–5 and
25 30 temperature 30◦ . Part I. Chlorides and nitrates of Hg++ ,
Cu++ , Cd++ , and Pb++ . Journal of Indian Chemical Society
44:704–709 (1967).
5 Hartley FR, Studies in Chrome Mordanting II. The binding of
chromium(III) cations to wool. Australian Journal of Chemistry
21:2723–2735 (1968).
6 Hartley FR, The uptake of aluminum by wool. Australian Journal
of Chemistry 21:1013–1022 (1968).
7 Gutherie RE and Laurie SH, The binding of copper (II) to
mohair keratin. Australian Journal of Chemistry 21:2437–2443
(1968).
8 Gassner G, Schmidt WF, Line MJ, Waters RM and
Thomas CG, Fiber and fiber products from feathers US
Patent No 5,750,030 issued January 6 (1998).
9 Suyama K, Fukazawa Y and Suzumura H, Biosorption of
precious metal ions by chicken-feather. Applied Biochemistry
and Biotechnology 57/58:67–74 (1996).
10 Ishikawa S and Suyama K, Recovery and refining of Au by gold-
cyanide ion biosorption using animal fibrous proteins. Applied
Biochemistry and Biotechnology 70–72:719–728 (1998).
11 Schmidt WF, Codling EE, Thomas CG, Line MJ, Stuczyn-
ski T and Gassner G, Binding of heavy metal ions to fibers
and filters from poultry feathers, in Proceedings of Nonwovens
Conference, Memphis, TN, 17–19 March 1997, TAPPI Press,
Atlanta, GA, pp 105–107 (1997).
12 Kar P, Keratin Protein Fiber for removal of heavy metals from
solutions. MS Thesis, University of Nevada Reno (2002).
13 Misra M, Kar P and Priyadarshan G, Keratin Protein Nano-
fiber for removal of heavy metals and contaminants, in
MRS Symposium Proceedings, December, Boston MA, vol 702,
pp 35–41 (2001).
14 Kar P, Misra M, Homonoff EC and Licata Carlo, AKF , Avian
Keratin-Protein Fiber as a biosorbent for heavy metals from
solutions, in Proceedings of the 14th American Filtration Society,
May, Tampa, FL (2001).
15 Schmidt WF and Jayasundera S, Microcrystalline keratin fiber,
in Natural Fibers Plastics and Composites—Recent Advances,
ed by Wallenberger F and Weston N. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Norwell, MA, pp 51–66 (2003).
16 Materials Safety Data Sheet for avian keratin fiber, provided by
MaXim LLC, Pasadena, CA, USA (2000).
17 Masri SM and Friedman M, Interaction of keratins with metal
ions. Uptake profiles, mode of binding, and effects o properties
of wool. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology
48:551–587 (1974).
18 Kokot S, Sites for Cu(II) stabilization on wool keratin. Textile
Research Journal 63:159–161 (1993).
1319