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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Sonochemical destruction of free and metal-binding ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid.
    Author: Frim JA, Rathman JF, Weavers LK.
    Journal: Water Res; 2003 Jul; 37(13):3155-63. PubMed ID: 14509702.
    Abstract:
    This study focused on the sonochemical degradation of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and chromium-EDTA complexes. Degradation of the copper(II)-EDTA complex was also investigated as a comparison metal complex. A 90% degradation of a 150-microM EDTA solution with continuous O2-bubbling was shown for the 20-kHz system in approximately 3 h (kpseudo-first order = 1.22 x 10(-2) min-1) and less than 1 h for the 354-kHz system (kpseudo-first order = 5.42 x 10(-2) min-1). These results are consistent with the higher concentrations of hydrogen peroxide found in the higher frequency system and an expected oxidation of EDTA in bulk solution. The presence of a chelated metal decreased the rate of degradation at both frequencies. Cr(III)-EDTA degraded the slowest, supporting the theory that the extremely slow ligand exchange rate of chromium is the determining factor in how fast degradation by hydroxyl radical can occur. The 354-kHz system showed a 17% decrease in the original 150-microM Cr(III)-EDTA complex after 3 h of sonication. All of the chromium from the degraded EDTA complex existed as a combination of oxidized Cr(VI) and possibly small amounts of a new Cr(III)-organic complex (Cr(III)-Y). The 20-kHz system showed a similar extent of degradation (16%) after 3 h of sonication, despite lower hydroxyl radical production. Fifty percent of the chromium from the degraded EDTA complex was found as free Cr3+ ion, with the remaining 50% existing as both Cr(III)-Y and Cr(VI). Varying degrees of bulk oxidation, near-bubble thermolysis, and perhaps different degradation pathways at the two frequencies are responsible for these differences.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]