These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28577313)

  • 21. Rejection of pharmaceutically active compounds and endocrine disrupting compounds by clean and fouled nanofiltration membranes.
    Yangali-Quintanilla V; Sadmani A; McConville M; Kennedy M; Amy G
    Water Res; 2009 May; 43(9):2349-62. PubMed ID: 19303127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Efficiency of RO/NF membranes at the removal of veterinary antibiotics.
    Dolar D; Vuković A; Ašperger D; Košutić K
    Water Sci Technol; 2012; 65(2):317-23. PubMed ID: 22233911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Modeling micropollutant removal by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes: considerations and challenges.
    Castaño Osorio S; Biesheuvel PM; Spruijt E; Dykstra JE; van der Wal A
    Water Res; 2022 Oct; 225():119130. PubMed ID: 36240724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Treatability of organic fractions derived from secondary effluent by reverse osmosis membrane.
    Hu JY; Ong SL; Shan JH; Kang JB; Ng WJ
    Water Res; 2003 Nov; 37(19):4801-9. PubMed ID: 14568067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Fouling of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes by dairy industry effluents.
    Turan M; Ates A; Inanc B
    Water Sci Technol; 2002; 45(12):355-60. PubMed ID: 12201123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Use of fouling resistant nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes for dyeing wastewater effluent treatment.
    Myung SW; Choi IH; Lee SH; Kim IC; Lee KH
    Water Sci Technol; 2005; 51(6-7):159-64. PubMed ID: 16003974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Removal of Cd(II) ions from aqueous solution and industrial effluent using reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes.
    Kheriji J; Tabassi D; Hamrouni B
    Water Sci Technol; 2015; 72(7):1206-16. PubMed ID: 26398037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Adsorption of recalcitrant contaminants of emerging concern onto activated carbon: A laboratory and pilot-scale study.
    Diniz V; Gasparini Fernandes Cunha D; Rath S
    J Environ Manage; 2023 Jan; 325(Pt A):116489. PubMed ID: 36257229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Achieving low concentrations of chromium in drinking water by nanofiltration: membrane performance and selection.
    Giagnorio M; Ruffino B; Grinic D; Steffenino S; Meucci L; Zanetti MC; Tiraferri A
    Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2018 Sep; 25(25):25294-25305. PubMed ID: 29946838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Effect of silica fouling on the removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes.
    Lin YL; Chiou JH; Lee CH
    J Hazard Mater; 2014 Jul; 277():102-9. PubMed ID: 24560524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Membrane filtration of wastewater effluents for reuse: effluent organic matter rejection and fouling.
    Jarusutthirak C; Amy G
    Water Sci Technol; 2001; 43(10):225-32. PubMed ID: 11436785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Group Contribution Method to Predict the Mass Transfer Coefficients of Organics through Various RO Membranes.
    Kibler R; Mohrhardt B; Zhang M; Breitner L; Howe KJ; Minakata D
    Environ Sci Technol; 2020 Apr; 54(8):5167-5177. PubMed ID: 32208649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Removal of haloacetic acids from swimming pool water by reverse osmosis and nanofiltration.
    Yang L; She Q; Wan MP; Wang R; Chang VW; Tang CY
    Water Res; 2017 Jun; 116():116-125. PubMed ID: 28324708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Removal of pharmaceutically active compounds from water sources using nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes: Comparison of removal efficiencies and in-depth analysis of rejection mechanisms.
    Matin A; Jillani SMS; Baig U; Ihsanullah I; Alhooshani K
    J Environ Manage; 2023 Jul; 338():117682. PubMed ID: 37003228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Factors affecting fluoride and natural organic matter (NOM) removal from natural waters in Tanzania by nanofiltration/reverse osmosis.
    Shen J; Schäfer AI
    Sci Total Environ; 2015 Sep; 527-528():520-9. PubMed ID: 26005995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Response surface methodology and artificial neural network modelling for the performance evaluation of pilot-scale hybrid nanofiltration (NF) & reverse osmosis (RO) membrane system for the treatment of brackish ground water.
    Srivastava A; K A; Nair A; Ram S; Agarwal S; Ali J; Singh R; Garg MC
    J Environ Manage; 2021 Jan; 278(Pt 1):111497. PubMed ID: 33130432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Rejection of micropollutants by clean and fouled forward osmosis membrane.
    Valladares Linares R; Yangali-Quintanilla V; Li Z; Amy G
    Water Res; 2011 Dec; 45(20):6737-44. PubMed ID: 22055122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Factors affecting the rejection of organic solutes during NF/RO treatment--a literature review.
    Bellona C; Drewes JE; Xu P; Amy G
    Water Res; 2004 Jul; 38(12):2795-809. PubMed ID: 15223273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Rejection efficiency of water quality parameters by reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes.
    Peng W; Escobar IC
    Environ Sci Technol; 2003 Oct; 37(19):4435-41. PubMed ID: 14572097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Achieving very low mercury levels in refinery wastewater by membrane filtration.
    Urgun-Demirtas M; Benda PL; Gillenwater PS; Negri MC; Xiong H; Snyder SW
    J Hazard Mater; 2012 May; 215-216():98-107. PubMed ID: 22410725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.