Chromium in its hexavalent form (Cr(VI)) poses a significant threat to the environment and human health due to its toxicity,

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

• reaching 80–90% under optimal conditions. Cr(VI) adsorption is most effective at acidic pH (~2) and elevated temperatures (40–
• exchange (Bashir et al., 2019; Tiravanti et al., 1997; Rengaraj et the efficient removal of a broad range of contaminants (Allen,
• technologies (Mohammadi et al., 2005) and electrochemical ing 100 mg/L (Crini, 2005). Moreover, its ability to yield a
• Fig. 1. Effect of contact time on the concentration decay curves for Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons (Co = 20 mg/L, T =25°C, activated
• Rys. 1. Wpływ czasu kontaktu na krzywe spadku stężenia dla adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych (Co = 20 mg/l, T = 25°C, ilość węgli akty-
• Fig. 2. Effect of contact time value on adsorption capacity of chromium ions for Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons (Co = 20 mg/L, T =25°C,
• Rys. 2. Wpływ czasu kontaktu na pojemność adsorpcyjną jonów chromu w przypadku adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych (Co = 20 mg/l, T =
• Fig. 3. Effect of contact time value on the percentage removal of chromium ions during Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons. (Co = 20 mg/L, T
• Rys. 3. Wpływ czasu kontaktu na procent usunięcia jonów chromu podczas adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych. (Co = 20 mg/l, T = 25°C, ilość
• Fig. 4. Effect of shaking speed on the percentage removal of chromium ions during Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons (Co = 20 mg/L, pH=2,5,
• Rys. 4. Wpływ szybkości potrząsania na procent usunięcia jonów chromu podczas adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych (Co = 20 mg/l, pH=2,5,
• (2) (Wang et al., 2020): containing 100 mL of aqueous solution with a 20mg/l Cr (VI)
• vated carbon used (g). 100 mL aqueous solution with a 20mg/l Cr (VI) concen-
• 100 mL aqueous solution with a 20mg/l Cr (VI) concen- stant speed of 150 rpm, at a certain time 60min and different
• 2.3.2 Effect of shaking speed mg/L) was contacted with 1 g of adsorbent in 250 mL Erlen-
• containing 100 mL of aqueous solution with a 20mg/l Cr (VI) time 60min.
• Fig. 5. Effect of pH on percentage removal of chromium ions during Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons (Co = 20 mg/L, T=25°C, activated
• Rys. 5. Wpływ pH na procent usunięcia jonów chromu podczas adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych (Co = 20 mg/l, T=25°C, ilość węgli akty-
• Fig. 6. Effect of temperature on the percentage removal of chromium ions during Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons (Co = 20 mg/L, pH=2,5,
• Rys. 6. Wpływ temperatury na procent usunięcia jonów chromu podczas adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych (Co = 20 mg/l, pH=2,5, ilość węgli
• tions with a Cr(VI) concentration of 20 mg/L. The appropriate other sorbents was no longer as pronounced as at the lower
• tration to 8.96 mg/L, Norit to 7.75 mg/L and Biomus to 11.40 This impact is due to the fact that Cr(VI) occurs in various
• ly better results over a shorter period, which may be beneficial pH. In the pH range of 2.0–6.0, HCrO4− and Cr2O72− are the
• Fig. 7. Effect of quantity of Biomus on the percentage removal of chromium ions during Cr(VI) adsorption on activated carbons (Co = 20 mg/L,
• Rys. 7. Wpływ ilości Biomusu na procent usunięcia jonów chromu podczas adsorpcji Cr(VI) na węglach aktywnych (Co = 20 mg/l, pH=2,5, pręd-
• over the entire temperature range, suggesting its high efficien- 25°C.
• optimal temperature appears to be in the range of 40–60 °C or
• The constants KF and 1/n of the Freundlich model are the ed carbons achieved up to 50% removal efficiency at higher
• adsorbent (mg g−1) and the constant indicative of the intensi- tained removal efficiencies of 80–90%. It is worth noting that
• zuje najwyższą wydajność usuwania Cr(VI), sięgającą 80–90% w optymalnych warunkach. Adsorpcja Cr(VI) jest najskuteczniejsza

Methods (brief)

• Three types of activated carbon were used in the study. Each sample was prepared in triplicate to minimize mea-
• at 25°C. The test was conducted for activated carbon samples
• weighing 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 g. The samples were tested in solu-
• The prepared samples were placed on a shaker for 15 minutes. in further experiments. Yang et al. (2020) also observed the
• ty of the adsorption, respectively. a 1 g sample was used in these experiments. The results sug-

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

• Fish — marine, non-predatory (sardines, anchovies, salmon, cod)
• Seaweed/kelp foods (nori, wakame, kombu, dulse — as food products)
• Aluminum
• Chromium

Verification notes

• Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
• Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
• Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
• Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
• HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.