Download PDF
Open Access
CC BY 4.0 · Sustainability & Circularity NOW 2025; 02: a27052083
DOI: 10.1055/a-2705-2083
Digitalisation and AI for Rational Chemical Design and Circular Economy
Original Article

Modified Halophyte Biochar for Congo red Removal: Adsorption and Neural Prediction

Authors

  • Disha P. Mehta

    1   Department of Chemistry, Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, India

  • Pragnesh N. Dave 

    1   Department of Chemistry, Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, India

  • Ruksana R. Sirach

    1   Department of Chemistry, Sardar Patel University, Vallabh Vidyanagar, India

  • Vijay V. Kumar

    2   Department of Ecology, Gujarat Institute of Desert Ecology, Bhuj, India

Funding Information DM has received financial research support from the Scheme of Developing High Quality Research (SHODH), File no. 202301642 and dated Jan 21, 2025.
Further Information
  Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category


Graphical Abstract

Preview

Abstract

Adsorption is widely recognized as a reliable and cost-effective technique for the removal of dye pollutants from aqueous environments. This study investigates a novel adsorbent—ferrite composite of biochar (FCOB) for Congo red (CR) dye removal. It was synthesized by pyrolyzing Suaeda monoica leaf powder to obtain biochar, followed by base treatment to produce base-treated biochar, and subsequent coprecipitation with NiCuZnFe₂O₄ ferrite spinel. The XRD analysis of FCOB confirmed the successful incorporation of spinel NiCuZnFe2O4 into FCOB, as evidenced by the presence of two prominent characteristic peaks of the spinel structure. The SEM image revealed the irregular-crumpled structure of FCOB. BET analysis revealed the mesoporosity in FCOB, with a surface area of 44.64 ± 0.2396 m2 g−1. The optimum adsorption was achieved at a pH of 2, adsorbent dosage of 20 mg, initial CR concentration of 50 mg/L, contact time of 320 min, and temperature of 85 °C. The maximum CR dye removal percentage (R%) was 99.75%. At pH = 2, the strong electrostatic attraction between protonated FCOB adsorbent and anionic CR seemed to be the dominant adsorption mechanism. The adsorption data was best (R 2 = 0.99) described by the Redlich–Peterson isotherm model, indicating a heterogeneous surface with some degree of monolayer adsorption. The maximum adsorption capacity estimated from the Langmuir model was q max = 239.80 mg/g. The adsorption kinetics data was best described by pseudo-second-order model (R 2 = 0.99), suggesting that chemisorption is likely the rate-limiting step. The CR adsorption process was spontaneous and endothermic with ΔH° = 71.02 ± 1.41 kJ/mol. ANN analysis revealed that both BR and LM algorithms accurately predicted removal efficiency and adsorption capacity, achieving R values greater than 0.995. FCOB could also be regenerated and recycled up to 5 cycles retaining ≅65% removal efficiency for CR. Therefore, FCOB can serve as a biodegradable, cost-effective, nontoxic, and renewable adsorbent in treating CR-dye contaminated industrial wastewater, especially from textile and printing sectors.

Keywords

Congo red - Adsorption - Biochar - Suaeda monoica - Ferrite spinel

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 07 July 2025

Accepted after revision: 15 September 2025

Article published online:
14 October 2025

© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

Bibliographical Record
Disha P. Mehta, Pragnesh N. Dave, Ruksana R. Sirach, Vijay V. Kumar. Modified Halophyte Biochar for Congo red Removal: Adsorption and Neural Prediction. Sustainability & Circularity NOW 2025; 02: a27052083.
DOI: 10.1055/a-2705-2083
 

  • References

  • 1 Srivatsav P, Bhargav BS, Shanmugasundaram V, Arun J, Gopinath KP, Bhatnagar A. Water 2020; 12 (12) 3561
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Goswami L, Kushwaha A, Kafle SR, Kim B-S. Catalysts 2022; 12 (08) 817
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Sirach R, Dave PN. J Hazard Mater Adv 2023; 10: 100300
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 World population 2024 – StatisticsTimes.com https://statisticstimes.com/demographics/world-population.php (accessed June 25, 2024)
  • 5 Zhong R, Chen A, Zhao D. et al. J Clean Prod 2023; 385: 135740
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Water purification|Description, Processes, & Importance | Britannica https://www.britannica.com/topic/water-purification (accessed June 25, 2024)
  • 7 Al-Tohamy R, Ali SS, Li F. et al. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 2022; 231: 113160
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Chequer FMD, de Oliveira GAR, Ferraz ERA. et al. Eco-Friendly Textile Dyeing and Finishing. IntechOpen; 2013
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Teo SH, Ng CH, Islam A. et al. J Clean Prod 2022; 332: 130039
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Sallam SA, El-Subruiti GM, Eltaweil AS. Catal Lett 2018; 148 (12) 3701-3714
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Gholami M, Nasseri S, Alizadehfard M-R, Mesdaghinia A. Water Qual Res J 2003; 38 (02) 379-391
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Türgay O, Ersöz G, Atalay S, Forss J, Welander U. Sep Purif Technol 2011; 79 (01) 26-33
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Anantha MS, Olivera S, Hu C. et al. Environ Technol Innov 2020; 17: 100612
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 14 Joseph J, Radhakrishnan RC, Johnson JK, Joy SP, Thomas J. Mater Chem Phys 2020; 242: 122488
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Gadekar MR, Ahammed MM. Desalin Water Treat 2016; 57 (55) 26392-26400
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Arciniega Cano O, Rodríguez González CA, Hernández Paz JF. et al. Catal Today 2017; 282: 168-173
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Banu HAT, Karthikeyan P, Vigneshwaran S, Meenakshi S. Int J Biol Macromol 2020; 154: 188-197
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Kathing C, Saini G. Recent Prog Mater 2022; 4 (04) 1-15
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Patel F, Patel P, Patel N, Patel S. Color Removal from Dye Wastewater: A Review. 2014
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Baskar AV, Bolan N, Hoang SA. et al. Sci Total Environ 2022; 822: 153555
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Girish CR. Int J Eng Technol 2018; 7: 330-334
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Sutar S, Jadhav J. Bioresour Technol Rep 2024; 25: 101726
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Environ Pollut 2023; 323: 121318
  • 24 Perveen S, Nadeem R, Nosheen F, Asjad MI, Awrejcewicz J, Anwar T. Nanomaterials 2022; 12 (16) 2828
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Zhang J, Fu K, Zhong S, Luo J. Environ Sci Technol 2025; 59 (07) 3603-3612
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Rushdi IW, Hardian R, Rusidi RS. et al. Chem Eng J 2025; 510: 161595
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 Lafi R, Montasser I, Hafiane A. Adsorpt Sci Technol. 2018
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Wang J, Tan Y, Yang H, Zhan L, Sun G, Luo L. Sci Rep 2023; 13 (01) 21174
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Ibraheem F, Al-Zahrani A, Mosa A. Plants 2022; 11 (04) 537
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 30 Zein R, Satrio Purnomo J, Ramadhani P, Safni, Alif MF, Putri CN. Arab J Chem 2023; 16 (02) 104480
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 31 Tomczyk A, Sokołowska Z, Boguta P. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 2020; 19 (01) 191-215
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 32 Panizio R, Castro C, Pacheco N. et al. Heliyon 2024; 10 (18) e37882
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 33 Norooz Oliaee J, Dehghany M, McKellar ARW, Moazzen-Ahmadi N. J Chem Phys 2011; 135 (04) 044315
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 34 Chermahini ME, Ghiaci M, Chermahini AN, Shirvani M. Heliyon 2024; 10: e38780
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 35 Li X, Wang J, Li S, Li Z, Zheng Z, Zhang Y. Pharmaceutics 2019; 11 (09) 469
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 36 Asker FW, Mahamad ZZ, Eliwei AG, Nief OA. Int J Appl Chem 2017; 13 (02) 169-177
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 37 Ngernyen Y, Petsri D, Sribanthao K, Kongpennit K. RSC Adv 2023; 13 (21) 14712-14728
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 38 Rabiei M, Palevicius A, Dashti A. et al. Materials 2020; 13 (19) 4380
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 39 Hassaan MA, Yılmaz M, Helal M, El-Nemr MA, Ragab S, El Nemr A. Sci Rep 2023; 13: 12724
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 40 Sadhana K, Praveena K, Bharadwaj S, Murthy SR. J Alloys Compd 2009; 472 (01/02) 484-488
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 41 Schneider P. Appl Catal A Gen 1995; 129 (02) 157-165
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 42 Osterrieth JWM, Rampersad J, Madden D. et al. Adv Mater 2022; 34 (27) 2201502
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 43 Hua Z, Pan Y, Hong Q. RSC Adv 2023; 13 (18) 12502-12508
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 44 Rápó E, Tonk S. Molecules 2021; 26 (17) 5419
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 45 Idan IJ, Abdullah LC, Choong TS, Jamil SNABM. Adsorpt Sci Technol 2018; 36 (01/02) 694-712
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 46 Sumanjit, Rani S, Mahajan RK. Arab J Chem 2016; 9: S1464-S1477
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 47 dishamehta2307/ANN-training-dataset. https://github.com/dishamehta2307/ANN-training-dataset (accessed August 11, 2025)
  • 48 Wang J, Guo X. Chemosphere 2020; 258: 127279
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 49 Emara AM, Elsharma EM, Abdelmonem IM. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 2025; 334 (01) 227-237
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 50 Semwal N, Mahar D, Chatti M, Dandapat A, Chandra Arya M. Heliyon 2023; 9 (11) e22027
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 51 Iqbal J, Shah NS, Sayed M. et al. J Hazard Mater 2021; 403: 123854
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 52 Faheem, Du J, Bao J, Hassan MA, Irshad S, Talib MA. Arab J Sci Eng 2019; 44 (12) 10127-10139
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 53 Rubangakene NO, Elwardany A, Fujii M, Sekiguchi H, Elkady M, Shokry H. Chem Eng Res Des 2023; 189: 636-651
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 54 Pandey D, Daverey A, Dutta K, Arunachalam K. Environ Monit Assess 2022; 194 (12) 880
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 55 Laxmi Deepak Bhatlu M, Athira PS, Jayan N, Barik D, Dennison MS. Adsorpt Sci Technol 2023; 2023: e7369027
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 56 Jadhav SK, Thorat SR. Biosci Biotechnol Res Asia 2022; 19 (01) 141-151
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 57 Wijaya A, Yuliasari N. Indones J Mater Res 2023; 1 (01) 1-7
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 58 Elsherif KM, Alkherraz AM, Edwards H, Abdulsalam Mutawia BY. Environ Health Eng Manag 2024; 11 (03) 273-284
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 59 Dharmendra G, Sahoo JK, Hota A, Sahoo SK. ECS Trans 2022; 107 (01) 5127
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 60 Lakshmanan G, Rajeshkannan C, Kavitha A, Mekala B, Kamaladevi N. J Pharmacogn Phytochem 2013; 2 (03) 49-152
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 61 Elhenawy Y, Fouad K, Bassyouni M, Al-Qabandi OA, Majozi T. Energy Convers Manag: X 2024; 22: 100583
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 62 Ben Ali M, Bakhtaoui Y, Flayou M. et al. E3S Web Conf 2025; 601: 00087
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 63 Mehta D, Dave PN, Kumar VV. Toxic Crystal Violet Dye Removal by Novel, Eco-Friendly Seablite Biochar–Ferrite Composite: Adsorption Isotherm, Kinetics, and Artificial Neural Network. RSC Adv 2025; 15 (40) 33189-33208
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 64 Fito J, Abewaa M, Nkambule T. Appl Water Sci 2023; 13 (03) 78
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 65 Ghaedi AM, Vafaei A. Adv Colloid Interf Sci 2017; 245: 20-39
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 66 Coconut husk-raw clay-Fe composite: preparation, characteristics and mechanisms of Congo red adsorption | Scientific Reports. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-18763-y (accessed August 6, 2025)