Cited by 360Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removalCoagulation and Flocculation StudiesEnzyme-mediated dye degradation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 197 of the 199 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 28 of the 93 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Biomass-Based Adsorbents for Removal of Dyes From Wastewater: A Review

Open access
Aragaw, Tadele Assefa, Bogale, Fekadu Mazengiaw·2021·Frontiers in Environmental Science

Abstract

Dyes, especially azo dyes contained in wastewaters released from textile, pigment, and leather industries, are entering into natural waterbodies. This results in environmental deterioration and serious health damages (for example carcinogenicity and mutagenesis) through food chains. Physiochemical, membrane processes, electrochemical technology, advanced oxidation processes, reverse osmosis, ion exchange, electrodialysis, electrolysis, and adsorption techniques are commonly used conventional treatment technologies. However, the limitations of most of these methods include the generation of toxic sludge, high operational and maintenance costs. Thus, technological advancements are in use to remediate dyes from effluents. Adsorption using the nonconventional biomass-based sorbents is the greatest attractive alternatives because of their low cost, sustainability, availability, and eco-friendly. We present and reviewed up-to-date publications on biomass-based sorbents used for dye removal. Conceptualization and synthesizing their state-of-the-art knowledge on their characteristics, experimental conditions used were also discussed. The merits and limitations of various biosorbents were also reflected. The maximum dye adsorption capacities of various biosorbents were reviewed and synthesized in the order of the biomass type (algae, agricultural, fungal, bacterial, activated carbon, yeast, and others). Surface chemistry, pH, initial dye concentration, temperature, contact time, and adsorbent dose as well as the ways of the preparations of materials affect the biosorption process. Based on the average dye adsorption capacity, those sorbents were arranged and prioritized. The best fit of the adsorption isotherms (for example Freundlich and Langmuir models) and basic operating parameters on the removal dyes were retrieved. Which biomass-based adsorbents have greater potential for dye removal based on their uptake nature, cost-effectiveness, bulk availability, and mono to multilayer adsorption behavior was discussed. The basic limitations including the desorption cycles of biomass-based adsorbent preparation and operation for the implementation of this technology were forwarded.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes literature on biomass-based adsorbents (algae, agricultural, fungal, bacterial, activated carbon, yeast, and others) for removing dyes from wastewater, emphasizing adsorption as a low-cost, eco-friendly alternative to conventional treatments. It reports that performance depends on surface chemistry, pH, initial dye concentration, temperature, contact time, adsorbent dose, and preparation/modification, with many biomasses achieving up to 99% removal.

Key findings

  • Dye pollution is large: 0.7–1.6 million tons of dyes are produced yearly, with 10–15% discharged as wastewater; conventional treatments often generate toxic sludge and have high operational/maintenance costs.
  • Biomass-based adsorbents can outperform commercial activated carbon in some cases: *Spirulina platensis* reached 482.2 mg/g for Reactive Red 120 versus 267.2 mg/g for commercial activated carbon at pH 2 and 25°C; other reported capacities include 190.2 mg/g for Reactive Yellow 86 on free *Lentinus concinnus*, 279.14 mg/g for crystal violet on citric acid-functionalized brown algae, 225.2 mg/g for methylene blue on polysulfone–*E. coli* composite, and 212.05 mg/g for methylene blue/malachite green on brewer’s yeast biomass.
  • Adsorption isotherms and kinetics varied, but Langmuir and pseudo-second-order models were most commonly best fits across fungal, algal, bacterial, yeast, and agricultural adsorbents; pH controls whether anionic or cationic dyes are favored.
  • Cost and regeneration are key: biochar from groundnut shell had the least cost (₹0.91/g) and highest capacity (46.3 mg/g) among coconut shell, groundnut shell, and rice husk for Basic Red 09; mandarin peel adsorbent maintained >50% capacity after four cycles, while banana peel removal decreased from 100 to 64% (MG) and 76% (MB) after five uses.

Methods

  • Narrative review and synthesis of up-to-date publications on biomass-based sorbents for dye removal, covering characteristics, experimental conditions, merits/limitations, and adsorption capacities by biomass type.
  • Literature search included PubMed with the query “biosorbents for the removal of dyes” (2002–2020; 209 papers) and Google Scholar; retrieved publications were filtered and prioritized by relevance to the review scope.
  • Data were compiled into tables summarizing adsorbent source/species, modification, dye type, adsorption capacity, fitted isotherm/kinetic models, mixing time, sorbent dose, dye concentration, pH, and removal efficiency.

Limitations

  • The paper states most biomass-based adsorption studies are laboratory-scale and use simulated wastewater, so cost analysis is limited, particularly for microbial biomass; comparison among studies is difficult because each uses different parameters for efficiency determination.
  • The paper states desorption/regeneration, scaling up, cost analysis, and safe disposal of spent adsorbents and eluents remain constraints; more work is needed in mixed/multi-pollutant systems representative of real wastewater.
  • Evident from the text: this is a narrative review without quantitative meta-analysis, and its PubMed search is described as not comprehensive (Google Scholar was added), so synthesized rankings and comparisons depend on the selected literature.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fenvs.2021.764958

Cites

197 of 197 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 3
CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 3 Various low-cost adsorbents potential for dye removal: adopted with modification from Siddiqui et al. (2018).
FIGURE 3 Various low-cost adsorbents potential for dye removal: adopted with modification from Siddiqui et al. (2018).CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

36 No full text of the sources · 25 No basis given · 15 Own interpretation · 9 Partly supported · 8 Supported · 7 Supported so far · 6 Sources not found · 5 Own result · 4 Not checked yet · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 36 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 29
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 59
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 4
80 of 80
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Biomass-based adsorbents are eco-friendly, low-cost, and have good surface characteristics.

    “Owing to eco-friendly, low cost, and good surface characteristics, biomass-based adsorbents are attracting attention and are widely studied.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Commercial activated carbon cost is high for industrial applications.

    “Although the removal of dye using CAC is efficient, its cost is high for industrial applications.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Some biomass-based activated carbons prepared at laboratory scale have superior adsorption capacity to commercial activated carbon, but limited information exists on industrial application.

    “And some studies reported that the adsorption capacities of some biomass-based activated carbons prepared in the laboratory scale showed superior adsorption capacity than CAC; however, limited information is available on the application of biomass-based activated carbon at the industrial level.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Scaling up and cost analysis is a significant constraint for utilizing biomass-derived adsorbents for dye removal.

    “The other most significant constraint for utilizing biomassderived adsorbents for dye removal is the scaling up and cost analysis.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Recovery or regeneration procedures may require a significant amount of energy and solvents depending on the activation processes used.

    “In addition, the recovery or regeneration procedure may also need a significant amount of energy and solvents depending on the activation processes used.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Real dye-containing wastewater, such as textile industry wastewater, usually comprises a mixture of many dyes.

    “in real dye-containing wastewater, like textile industries that usually comprise a mixture of many dyes.”
6 of 6

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Show all 199 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Ahmad, Oil Palm Biomass-Based Adsorbents for the Removal of Water Pollutants-A Review, J. Environ. Sci. Health Part C, 29, 177, 10.1080/10590501.2011.601847 · DOI
  2. Amreen, 2020, Fast and Efficient Elimination of Malachite Green Dye by Activated Carbon Derived from Fresh Water Micro Algae : Kinetics and Thermodynamic Studies, 2581
  3. Gnanadoss, 2013, Bioremediation of Textile Dye Using White Rot Fungi: a Review, Rev. Int. J. Cur Res. Rev., 5, 1
  4. Gowtham, 2021, Experimental Study on Performance Assessment of Fenton and Photo- Fenton Oxidation Process for Methylene Blue, Proc. Int. Acad. Ecol. Environ. Sci., 11, 43
  5. Karthik, 2016, Bioremediation of Dye Bearing Effluents Using Microbial Biomass, Ecol. Environ. Conserv, 22, S423
  6. Mahmoudi, Investigation and Optimization of the Performance of Sono-Photo-Electro-Fenton Process for Removal of Acid Black 172 and Disperse Blue 56 from Polluted Water: Comparison of the Degradation Activity with electro-Fenton-based Processes, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 1, 10.1007/s13762-021-03296-0 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 360

Metadata

Authors
Aragaw, T. A., & Bogale, F. M.
Affiliations
Bahir Dar University (ET)
Corresponding author
Aragaw, Tadele Assefa
Venue
Frontiers in Environmental Science
Published
2021-12-09
Volume
9
ISSN
2296-665X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200145837
Cited by
360
References
199
Citations by year
2026: 102 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 84 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 2
FWCI
13.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Environmental Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Coagulation and Flocculation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Enzyme-mediated dye degradation
Keywords
dye removal, azo dyes, biomass-derived adsorbents, biosorption, textile wastewater, adsorption isotherms, Langmuir isotherm, Freundlich isotherm, multilayer adsorption, agricultural waste adsorbent, activated carbon, yeast, desorption, low-cost wastewater treatment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review