Next Article in Journal
Nitrogen-Functionalized Graphite Felt for Tetracycline Degradation in Chlorinated Wastewater via Metal-Free Electro-Fenton
Previous Article in Journal
Transition Metal Single-Atom-Anchored PdN2 Monolayer for Superior Alkaline Hydrogen Oxidation Reactions
Previous Article in Special Issue
Non-Radical Catalytic Ozonation for Wastewater Treatment: Evidence Standards, Bromate Trade-Offs, and Scale-Up Constraints
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation of Tetracycline-Class Antibiotics Using Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3

1
School of Geography and Tourism, Harbin University, Harbin 150066, China
2
School of Food Engineering, East University of Heilongjiang, Harbin 150066, China
3
State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150086, China
4
Heilongjiang Provincial Ecological and Environmental Monitoring Center, Harbin 150096, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Catalysts 2026, 16(6), 563; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal16060563 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 16 May 2026 / Revised: 13 June 2026 / Accepted: 15 June 2026 / Published: 18 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Catalysts for Wastewater/Sewage Treatment)

Abstract

Tetracycline-class antibiotics are persistent contaminants in aquatic environments and are difficult to remove by conventional treatment processes. In this study, a recoverable granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 catalyst was prepared through ligand anchoring followed by secondary Fe-MOF growth on spherical γ-Al2O3 and applied to catalytic ozonation of tetracycline (TC) under ordinary-bubble and microbubble-assisted operation. Structural characterization supported the formation of Fe-containing MOF domains on the alumina support, accompanied by an increase in BET surface area from 164.28 to 210.05 m2 g−1 and enhanced Lewis-acid-related pyridine-IR signals. Under conventional bubbling ozonation, the optimized catalyst achieved 67.93% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal during an overall 50 min run consisting of 30 min dark adsorption followed by 20 min ozonation. In a 12 L microbubble reactor, the catalyst-assisted system reached 93.74% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal at pH 6 with 100 g catalyst and 6 mg min−1 fed ozone, showing higher apparent removal than ordinary ozonation, microbubble ozonation, and ordinary-bubble catalytic ozonation under the tested configuration. Phosphate-blocking and radical-quenching experiments were consistent with the involvement of Lewis-acid-related sites, hydroxyl radicals, and superoxide-related pathways, but these tests are interpreted as indirect mechanistic evidence. LC-MS analysis suggested possible hydroxylation, demethylation, deamidation, ring opening, and low-molecular-weight product formation. The system also transformed chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and doxycycline and reduced COD and TOC in a simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix. Because parent-compound HPLC/LC-MS time-series quantification, ozone utilization/off-gas ozone measurement, bubble-size/kLa analysis, and ICP-based Fe loading/leaching data were not available, the present work is positioned as an apparent catalyst–reactor coupling study rather than a complete catalytic, hydrodynamic, or process-level demonstration.

1. Introduction

Tetracycline (TC) and related tetracycline-class antibiotics are widely used in human medicine, livestock production, and aquaculture, and a substantial fraction can enter aquatic environments through excretion, manure application, pharmaceutical discharge, and wastewater effluents [1,2,3,4,5]. Their environmental relevance extends beyond parent-compound persistence. Continuous exposure may inhibit microbial activity, select for antibiotic-resistance genes, and create residual ecological risks even when concentrations are below acute-toxicity thresholds. TC is therefore a useful model compound for evaluating advanced oxidation systems intended for antibiotic-contaminated water, provided that the analysis does not stop at chromophore disappearance and considers transformation, organic-load reduction, and process applicability.
Conventional treatment processes address only parts of this problem. Adsorption can rapidly transfer antibiotics from water to a solid phase, but the spent adsorbent still requires regeneration or disposal [6,7,8]. Biological treatment is scalable and cost-effective for many municipal streams, yet antibiotic toxicity, poor biodegradability, and resistance-gene selection can compromise treatment stability [9,10]. Fenton-like, photocatalytic, persulfate-based, and hybrid advanced oxidation processes can transform recalcitrant organics, but many systems remain constrained by oxidant cost, narrow pH windows, catalyst separation, secondary salt generation, or matrix sensitivity [11,12,13,14,15,16]. Catalytic ozonation is attractive because ozone can directly attack electron-rich moieties and, when activated on suitable catalytic surfaces, can generate reactive oxygen species (ROS) that broaden oxidation pathways [17,18,19].
Fe-based metal–organic frameworks (Fe-MOFs), including MIL-101(Fe), are promising ozonation catalysts because their Fe nodes, carboxylate coordination environments, high surface areas, and tunable porosity can provide sites for ozone adsorption and electron-transfer reactions [20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. However, suspended Fe-MOF powders are difficult to recover from treated water and may lose structural integrity during repeated oxidative operation. Supporting Fe-MOF domains on a granular carrier is a practical route to improve handling and separation while preserving catalytic functionality. Spherical γ-Al2O3 provides mechanical strength, mesoporosity, surface hydroxyl groups, and established use as a catalyst carrier [27,28,29].
Gas–liquid–solid mass transfer is an independent limitation in ozonation. Ordinary bubbles have relatively low interfacial area and short gas residence time, which can reduce dissolved ozone availability and off-gas utilization. Microbubbles can increase interfacial area, prolong gas residence, enhance local mixing, and improve the probability that ozone reaches both dissolved pollutants and catalyst-surface active sites [30,31,32,33,34,35]. However, without bubble-size distribution, dissolved ozone, off-gas ozone, or volumetric mass-transfer coefficients, a microbubble effect should be interpreted as a comparative reactor-performance observation rather than a fully quantified hydrodynamic mechanism.
The aim of this work was to couple a recoverable granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 composite with microbubble-assisted ozone delivery and to evaluate its apparent performance for tetracycline-class antibiotic oxidation. The scope of the study was deliberately defined conservatively. UV–Vis curves are used as apparent removal indicators, LC-MS signals are used for tentative transformation-product assignment, phosphate-blocking and scavenger tests are treated as indirect mechanistic evidence, and the absence of parent-compound chromatographic time series, ozone-utilization data, bubble-size/kLa measurements, and ICP-based Fe loading/leaching data is explicitly acknowledged. Therefore, the work is framed as a proof-of-concept catalyst–reactor coupling study rather than a fully validated catalytic ozonation process.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 Construction and Characterization

The catalyst design addresses a practical constraint in catalytic ozonation: powdered Fe-MOFs may show good activity, but they are difficult to recover and operate in gas–liquid–solid reactors. The two-step route uses γ-Al2O3 granules as both a mechanical support and a porous scaffold. Acid activation is intended to expose surface hydroxyl groups and coordinatively unsaturated Al sites; H2BDC then interacts with the hydroxylated surface; and Fe3+ reacts with the pre-anchored ligand during secondary Fe-MOF growth. This sequence is intended to improve interfacial contact between the Fe-containing phase and the granular carrier compared with physical mixing [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27].
The XRD pattern of pure MIL-101(Fe) exhibited characteristic reflections near 2θ = 9.0°, 10.2°, 16.6°, and 18.1°, consistent with reported MIL-101(Fe) structures (Figure 1). In the supported composites, MIL-101(Fe)-related reflections were weak and partially overlapped with the alumina background, suggesting low MOF loading and/or highly dispersed Fe-containing domains. Therefore, XRD was interpreted together with SEM/EDS, XPS, and FT-IR evidence rather than used alone to prove full MIL-101(Fe) crystallinity on the support [28,29].
SEM images show that the alumina surface was roughened and decorated with MIL-101(Fe)-like crystallites after the two-step growth process (Figure 2). The optimized MA-20 sample showed a more developed rough surface than the pristine γ-Al2O3, while samples prepared with lower or higher support dosages showed different coverage and aggregation features. EDS mapping of MA-20 confirmed distributed Fe, O, and Al signals across the mapped region (Figure 3). This supports the presence of Fe-containing domains on the alumina granules but does not quantify Fe loading.
FT-IR spectra (Figure 4) showed features associated with the organic ligand and metal–carboxylate coordination in the supported composites. XPS of the optimized MA-20 sample (Figure 5a–d) detected Fe, C, O, and Al. The C 1s envelope included components attributable to aromatic carbon and carboxyl carbon from H2BDC. Fe 2p peaks near 711.9 and 725.8 eV, together with a satellite feature near 718.0 eV, were consistent with Fe(III)-containing coordination environments reported for MIL-101(Fe)-based materials. These data support Fe-associated surface sites, but they do not prove an Fe2+/Fe3+ redox cycle during ozonation [30].
Pristine γ-Al2O3 had a BET surface area of 164.28 m2 g−1, pore volume of 0.20 cm3 g−1, and mean pore size of 4.95 nm. The optimized MA-20 composite had a higher BET surface area of 210.05 m2 g−1, pore volume of 0.29 cm3 g−1, and mean pore size of 5.56 nm (Table 1). Py-IR indicated enrichment of Lewis-acid-related sites after Fe-MOF growth, with the total integrated signal increasing from 443.65 for γ-Al2O3 to 692.72 for MA-20 (Table 2). The BET and Py-IR results are consistent with increased surface accessibility and Lewis-acid-related functionality, but they should not be interpreted as direct Fe loading or absolute acid-site quantification.

2.2. Conventional Catalytic Ozonation and Synthesis Optimization

Synthesis optimization identified the MA-20 catalyst formulation used for subsequent microbubble and mechanistic experiments. When H2BDC concentration was held at 4 mmol, the best performance was obtained with 20 g alumina support and 1 mmol MIL-101(Fe) precursor solution, giving 67.93% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal during the overall 50 min run consisting of 30 min dark adsorption followed by 20 min ozonation. After fixing the 1 mmol precursor and 20 g support, varying H2BDC concentration showed that 4 mmol was optimal: 2, 4, 6, and 8 mmol H2BDC gave apparent removals of 48.01%, 67.93%, 57.98%, and 54.99%, respectively (Figure 6 and Table 3).
Catalyst dosage had only a modest effect under conventional bubbling conditions. With 3, 4, 5, and 6 g catalyst in 500 mL of 40 mg L−1 TC, apparent removal efficiencies were 64.75%, 65.58%, 67.93%, and 68.28%, respectively, and apparent rate constants were 0.05594, 0.05594, 0.05969, and 0.06086 min−1. The incremental increase was already small above 3 g and became especially marginal between 5 and 6 g. This indicates that simply adding more granular catalyst does not proportionally increase apparent oxidation once ozone delivery, gas–liquid transfer, active-site accessibility, or pollutant concentration becomes limiting.
Although 6 g gave a slightly higher apparent removal than 5 g, 5 g was selected because the incremental gain relative to additional catalyst mass was marginal. The dosage result also supports the later reactor-level strategy: improving ozone delivery may be as important as increasing catalyst inventory.
Solution pH and coexisting ions affected conventional catalytic ozonation. Acidic conditions suppressed apparent removal, whereas near-neutral and alkaline conditions improved removal. From an application perspective, pH 6 was selected as the representative operating condition because it avoids extreme chemical adjustment while maintaining favorable catalytic performance. Coexisting ions inhibited catalytic ozonation, but the inhibition mechanisms are not reduced to a single radical-scavenging effect. CO32−/HCO3 is a well-known ·OH scavenger and can form CO3· with lower oxidation selectivity. Cl can react with ·OH or ozone-derived oxidants and may generate reactive chlorine species or chlorinated byproducts. NO3 and SO42− effects may involve ionic strength, competitive adsorption, altered ozone decomposition, and interfacial chemistry [31,32,33,34,35,36,37].

2.3. Adsorption Contribution and Analytical Scope

The degradation experiments included a 30 min dark adsorption step before ozone introduction. Therefore, the kinetic curves mainly describe the ozonation stage after adsorption equilibration rather than total removal from initial solution contact. This approach reduces, but does not eliminate, ambiguity from adsorption because adsorption capacity and adsorption isotherms of TC on γ-Al2O3 and MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 were not quantified. For this reason, removal is described as apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal after adsorption equilibration rather than as intrinsic catalytic conversion. Future adsorption-only controls should report C/C0 after dark equilibration, adsorption capacities, and isotherm parameters for both the support and the composite.
The use of UV–Vis absorbance at 360 nm provides a rapid trend indicator, but reaction products may absorb in the same region. Consequently, UV–Vis curves cannot unambiguously quantify parent-TC degradation. The mixed-antibiotic COD/TOC data and LC-MS product assignments provide broader evidence for oxidation and organic-load reduction, but they do not replace time-resolved HPLC-UV or LC-MS quantification of the parent compound.

2.4. Lewis-Acid-Related Sites and Reactive Species

The role of Lewis-acid-related sites was evaluated by combining Py-IR and phosphate-blocking results. Py-IR showed enhanced Lewis-acid-related signals after introducing Fe-containing MOF domains, while phosphate addition decreased apparent TC removal during catalytic ozonation. Because phosphate species can coordinate with Lewis-acidic metal or alumina sites, this inhibition is consistent with the involvement of Lewis-acid-related sites in ozone activation. However, phosphate may also affect pH, ionic strength, surface charge, and TC speciation; therefore, the blocking test is supportive rather than exclusive evidence.
Radical-quenching experiments suggested the participation of ROS. TBA decreased apparent TC removal, consistent with a contribution from ·OH, whereas BQ caused stronger inhibition, suggesting that O2·-related pathways may also be involved. Scavengers can affect adsorption, surface reactions, and ozone decomposition; therefore, the ROS pathway is proposed as a plausible interpretation rather than directly proven. Direct EPR spin-trapping would be required for unambiguous radical verification [32,33].

2.5. Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation

The microbubble experiments provide the key reactor-level comparison in the study. In the 12 L reactor, ordinary-bubble ozonation, microbubble ozonation, ordinary-bubble catalytic ozonation, and microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation gave apparent UV–Vis-based TC removals of 45.72%, 53.27%, 69.72%, and 93.74%, respectively, under the tested conditions (Figure 7). The corresponding apparent rate constants were kOB-O3 = 0.03147 min−1, kMB-O3 = 0.0394 min−1, kCat + OB = 0.06084 min−1, and kCat + MB = 0.1391 min−1. Based on these apparent pseudo-first-order rate constants, an apparent coupling factor was calculated as kCat + MB/(kMB-O3 + kCat + OB − kOB-O3). The obtained value of approximately 2.02 is used here only as a descriptive apparent enhancement metric. Because ozone utilization, off-gas ozone, dissolved ozone, bubble-size distribution, and kLa were not quantified, this metric should not be interpreted as proof of a quantified mass-transfer mechanism [36,37,38].
The optimized catalyst inventory was 100 g in 12 L, corresponding to 8.33 g L−1. Although this dosage is relatively high compared with suspended powder catalysts, the granular material is recoverable and more compatible with fixed-bed, fluidized, or recirculating contactor concepts. At 40 mg L−1 TC and 93.74% apparent removal in 12 L, the apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal per gram catalyst was approximately 4.50 mg g−1. The fed ozone dose was 300 mg over 50 min, corresponding to approximately 0.67 mg fed O3 per mg apparent TC removed. This is only a screening-level fed-dose metric because fed ozone is not equal to consumed ozone and apparent TC disappearance does not represent mineralization (Table 4).
The Fe precursor dosage used during synthesis provides only a nominal input of Fe species and cannot be used to determine the actual Fe loading on the γ-Al2O3 support. Because ICP analysis of digested catalyst and treated effluent was not available in the present dataset, Fe loading, Fe-normalized activity, and Fe leaching are not reported as quantitative stability indicators. Accordingly, the reuse results are interpreted only as preliminary operational repeatability of the recoverable granular catalyst under the tested conditions.
The five-cycle reuse test showed a decline from 93.72% to 85.73%, indicating short-term operational repeatability but also measurable deactivation. Because Fe leaching and post-use XPS/SEM/FT-IR characterization were not available, the deactivation cannot be assigned to a specific route. Possible contributors include surface blockage, loss of accessible sites, structural changes, mechanical attrition, and metal release.

2.6. Tentative LC-MS Transformation Pathway

LC-MS analysis Asuggests that TC underwent sequential oxidative transformations rather than a single cleavage event. The parent ion at m/z 445 was accompanied by products tentatively assigned to hydroxylation, demethylation, deamidation, C-N bond cleavage, ring opening, and further fragmentation (Figure 8 and Table 5). Hydroxylated products, such as signals near m/z 461, are consistent with attack at electron-rich sites of the tetracycline skeleton. Signals such as m/z 431, 427, 417, 401, 318, 288, and 279 suggest progressive modification and fragmentation of the fused-ring structure. These assignments are chemically plausible and consistent with oxidative TC degradation pathways reported for Fe-MOF and ozonation-related systems [32,33].
The product list separates observed mass signals from mechanistic interpretation. LC-MS detects ions, not reaction pathways directly. A proposed product can support a route only when its mass shift, retention behavior, and preferably MS/MS fragmentation are consistent with a plausible chemical transformation. Low-molecular-weight signals at m/z 61, 118, and 130 may suggest further fragmentation, but their exact structures require confirmation because low m/z features can arise from solvent background, in-source fragments, or co-eluting compounds. A time-resolved LC-MS or HPLC-UV series would be needed to distinguish primary transformation products from secondary oxidation products and to quantify parent-TC disappearance selectively.
To provide additional support for the transformation-pathway discussion, representative LC-MS spectra collected after 10 and 20 min are provided in Table 6 and Table 7. These spectra were used to assign representative product ions and to compare the appearance of intermediate signals at different reaction times. Because authentic standards, MS/MS confirmation, and calibrated parent-TC time-series quantification were not available, these LC-MS data are used for qualitative product identification rather than quantitative parent-compound degradation analysis.

2.7. Tetracycline-Class Antibiotic and Mixed-Matrix Treatment

The system also degraded other tetracycline-class antibiotics (Figure 9 and Table 8). Under the microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation condition, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and doxycycline removals were 95.45%, 87.35%, and 85.76%, respectively, with apparent first-order rate constants of 0.15226, 0.10301, and 0.09717 min−1. These results support the tetracycline-class framing, but differences among species should be interpreted cautiously. Different substituents on the tetracycline skeleton can alter adsorption affinity, electron density, steric accessibility, acid-base speciation, and susceptibility to ozone-derived ROS. The mixed-antibiotic matrix should be regarded as a simulated multi-contaminant system rather than a real effluent, because background organic matter, suspended solids, inorganic salts, and natural-water constituents were not included.
A mixed-antibiotic solution further tested the system beyond single-compound UV–Vis monitoring. Microbubble ozone alone removed 52.17% COD and 47.13% TOC, whereas MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3-assisted microbubble ozone removed 81.63% COD and 70.68% TOC under the same conditions. This is a broader performance indicator than chromophore disappearance because it shows bulk organic-load reduction. Even so, COD/TOC reduction does not prove complete mineralization or detoxification, and residual products may retain antibacterial activity or ecological effects.

2.8. Practical Implications and Limitations

The granular composite is the central material contribution. MIL-101(Fe) provides Fe-associated coordination environments and Lewis-acid-related sites that may activate ozone, while γ-Al2O3 provides mechanical strength, mesoporosity, and ease of recovery. This architecture is more relevant to wastewater reactors than suspended Fe-MOF powders because it reduces post-treatment separation difficulty and can be translated to packed-bed, fluidized, or recirculating contactor concepts. At the same time, supporting an MOF on an inert or semi-active carrier dilutes active Fe sites per gram of catalyst and may introduce internal diffusion resistance. The composite is therefore unlikely to outperform optimized powder catalysts on a purely mass-normalized basis; its value lies in bridging catalytic function and process handling [39,40,41].
The scope of the present work should be interpreted carefully. First, TC removal was mainly evaluated by UV–Vis monitoring at 360 nm; therefore, the reported removal represents apparent chromophore-related removal rather than selective HPLC-confirmed parent-TC degradation. Second, the microbubble contribution was evaluated through side-by-side reactor performance comparisons, while off-gas ozone, dissolved ozone, bubble-size distribution, and kLa were not quantified. Thus, the observed enhancement supports a reactor-level apparent intensification effect under the tested configuration but does not provide a complete hydrodynamic or ozone mass-transfer model. Third, although SEM/EDS, XPS, FT-IR, BET, and Py-IR collectively support the formation of Fe-containing domains and Lewis-acid-related sites on γ-Al2O3, ICP-based Fe loading, Fe leaching, and Fe-normalized activity were not available. Therefore, the material is described as a recoverable granular Fe-containing MOF/alumina composite, while long-term catalyst stability and metal release require future verification. Fourth, the mixed-antibiotic test was performed in a simulated matrix rather than real secondary effluent or surface water. Finally, COD/TOC reduction indicates organic-load reduction but does not prove detoxification. Toxicity assays, antibacterial-activity tests, and antibiotic-resistance-gene monitoring are needed before environmental-risk reduction can be claimed [42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Chemicals and Materials

Tetracycline hydrochloride (TC), chlortetracycline (CTC), oxytetracycline (OTC), doxycycline (DC), ferric chloride hexahydrate (FeCl3·6H2O), terephthalic acid (H2BDC; benzene-1,4-dicarboxylic acid), N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), ethanol, hydrochloric acid, sodium hydroxide, potassium iodide, sodium chloride, sodium sulfate, sodium carbonate, sodium nitrate, sodium phosphate, disodium hydrogen phosphate, sodium dihydrogen phosphate, tert-butanol (TBA), p-benzoquinone (BQ), and KBr were used as received. Spherical activated γ-Al2O3 granules with a nominal diameter of 2–3 mm were used as the support. Deionized water was used throughout. MIL denotes Material of Institute Lavoisier, and MOF denotes metal–organic framework.

3.2. Catalyst Synthesis and Sample Labels

MIL-101(Fe) powder was synthesized by a solvothermal route. FeCl3·6H2O (1.08 g, 4 mmol) and H2BDC (0.66 g, 4 mmol) were dissolved in 80 mL DMF and stirred for 3 h. The solution was transferred to a Teflon-lined autoclave and heated at 110 °C for 20 h. After natural cooling, the solid product was separated, washed repeatedly with DMF and ethanol to remove unreacted precursors and residual solvent, dried at 70 °C for 24 h, and ground to obtain MIL-101(Fe) crystals.
Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 was prepared by a two-step hydrothermal process designed to anchor H2BDC on alumina before Fe-MOF growth. Spherical γ-Al2O3 was first activated in hydrochloric acid solution at 70 °C for 3 h, filtered, washed with deionized water, and dried at 70 °C for 24 h. In the ligand-anchoring step, H2BDC was dissolved in 30 mL DMF, mixed with activated γ-Al2O3, transferred to a Teflon-lined autoclave, and heated at 110 °C for 20 h. The H2BDC-modified alumina was filtered, washed with DMF and ethanol, and dried at 70 °C for 24 h. In the second hydrothermal step, the ligand-modified granules were reacted with an Fe-containing MIL-101(Fe) precursor solution at 110 °C for 20 h. After cooling, the MIL-101(Fe)-loaded γ-Al2O3 granules were washed with DMF and ethanol and dried at 70 °C for 24 h. The synthesis variables and sample labels used in the figures are defined in Table 9. The schematic route for preparing the granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 catalyst is shown in Figure 10.

3.3. Characterization

Crystalline phases were analyzed by X-ray diffraction (XRD, D8 Advance, Bruker AXS SE, Karlsruhe, Germany). Surface morphology and elemental distribution were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, SU8100, Hitachi High-Tech Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS, Xplore 15, Oxford Instruments NanoAnalysis, High Wycombe, UK) mapping. Surface elemental states were measured by ESCALAB 250 X-ray photoelectron spectrometer (XPS, ESCALAB 250, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Nitrogen adsorption–desorption isotherms (Micromeritics ASAP 2460, Micromeritics Instrument Corporation, Norcross, GA, USA) were collected to determine BET surface area, pore volume, and pore size. The γ-Al2O3 isotherm refers to the starting support prior to Fe-MOF growth. Isotherms after acid activation and after H2BDC anchoring were not available and are therefore not used to assign the separate effects of each synthetic step. Functional groups were analyzed by FT-IR using the KBr pellet method over 4000–400 cm−1. Lewis-acid-related sites were evaluated by Thermo fisher Nicolet 6700 pyridine-adsorbed infrared spectroscopy (Py-IR, Nicolet 6700, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) after desorption at different temperatures. The Py-IR values are reported as relative integrated Lewis-acid-related signals rather than absolute acid-site quantities.

3.4. Conventional Catalytic Ozonation

Conventional ozonation experiments were carried out in 500 mL TC solution (40 mg L−1). A known mass of MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 granules was added, and the reactor was kept under continuous liquid–solid contact by magnetic stirring during the 30 min dark adsorption step and the subsequent ozonation stage. Unless otherwise stated, the representative conditions were pH 6, 5 g catalyst, and an ozone feed of 1.2 mg min−1. The overall run consisted of 30 min dark adsorption followed by 20 min ozonation. At selected time intervals, 3 mL aliquots were withdrawn, filtered through a 0.45 µm membrane, and analyzed by UV–Vis spectrophotometry at 360 nm. Because oxidative intermediates may also absorb in the UV region, the reported removal values are described as apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal rather than selective parent-compound degradation.

3.5. Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation Procedure

Microbubble ozonation was conducted in a 12 L cylindrical reactor equipped with a dissolved-gas release microbubble generator (Custom-built microbubble generator, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China). Ozone generated from the ozone generator was metered by a gas flow controller and mixed with circulating liquid in a gas–liquid mixing pump and stainless-steel mixing tank under pressure before being released through the diffuser into the reactor. Unless otherwise stated, the optimized microbubble experiment used 12 L of 40 mg L−1 TC solution, pH 6, 100 g MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3, and 6 mg min−1 fed ozone. The granular catalyst was immersed in the bulk liquid and contacted by hydraulic recirculation and bubble-induced mixing; it was not evaluated as a shallow fixed bed in the present configuration. A potassium iodide tail-gas absorption unit was installed for ozone retention, but quantitative off-gas ozone concentration, dissolved ozone concentration, bubble-size distribution, and kLa were not measured. Therefore, microbubble-assisted enhancement is discussed based on comparative degradation performance under the tested reactor configuration.
Accordingly, the present microbubble comparison is not used to calculate ozone utilization efficiency or kLa, but only to compare apparent treatment performance under otherwise similar operating conditions.

3.6. Matrix Effects, Stability, COD/TOC, LC-MS, and Data Treatment

The effects of pH, catalyst dosage, ozone dose, TC initial concentration, and inorganic ions were tested under otherwise identical conditions. Sulfate, carbonate, chloride, and nitrate were added to evaluate matrix effects. Catalyst reuse was assessed over five cycles; after each cycle, the catalyst was recovered, washed, dried at 60 °C for 12 h, and reused. Because ICP-based Fe loading, Fe leaching, Fe-normalized activity, and post-use surface characterization were not available in the present dataset, the reuse experiment is interpreted as preliminary operational repeatability rather than complete catalyst-stability verification. COD was measured by a sealed digestion–colorimetric method, and TOC was measured after filtration, acidification, inorganic-carbon removal, and nitrogen purging. LC-MS (Nexera UHPLC LC-30A, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan; TripleTOF 5600, AB Sciex LLC, Marlborough, MA, USA) was used to identify transformation products during TC degradation and to infer possible degradation pathways. Product assignments are described as tentative unless supported by MS/MS fragments or authentic standards. A simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix containing TC, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and doxycycline was used to evaluate broader tetracycline-class treatment performance; this matrix was not a real secondary effluent or surface-water sample.
Apparent pseudo-first-order rate constants were obtained from linear fits of −ln(Ct/C0) versus reaction time. The fitted constants are used as process-specific apparent descriptors under the tested reactor configurations rather than intrinsic catalytic rate constants. Because complete replicate time-series datasets and k ± SD values were not available for all experiments, the kinetic analysis is interpreted comparatively.

4. Conclusions

A recoverable granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 composite was prepared and coupled with microbubble-assisted ozonation for apparent tetracycline-class antibiotic removal. Structural characterization supported the introduction of Fe-containing domains on the alumina support, accompanied by increased BET surface area and enhanced Lewis-acid-related Py-IR signals. Under conventional bubbling conditions, the optimized MA-20 material achieved 67.93% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal during the overall 50 min run. In a 12 L microbubble reactor, the catalyst-assisted ozonation system reached 93.74% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal at pH 6 with 100 g catalyst and 6 mg min−1 fed ozone, showing higher apparent removal than ordinary ozonation, microbubble ozonation, and ordinary-bubble catalytic ozonation under comparable test conditions.
Phosphate-blocking and radical-quenching experiments were consistent with contributions from Lewis-acid-related sites, ·OH, and O2·-related pathways, but they are not definitive mechanistic proof. LC-MS analysis indicated possible hydroxylation, demethylation, deamidation, ring opening, and further fragmentation, although product assignments remain tentative without calibrated time-resolved parent-compound analysis, MS/MS confirmation, or authentic standards. The system also transformed chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and doxycycline and reduced COD and TOC in a simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix. Overall, the results support granular Fe-containing MOF/γ-Al2O3-assisted microbubble ozonation as a promising apparent catalyst–reactor coupling concept for intensified tetracycline-class antibiotic oxidation under the tested conditions. The present dataset does not establish a complete catalytic mechanism, Fe-stability profile, or process-level ozone-utilization model. Future work should quantify parent-compound degradation by HPLC/LC-MS time series, Fe loading and leaching by ICP, ozone utilization and off-gas ozone, bubble-size distribution and kLa, long-term stability, real-water matrix effects, and toxicity evolution before scale-up or engineering claims are made.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.C. and S.W.; methodology, W.C., P.C., X.L., Y.Z. and Y.Y.; validation, W.C., S.W. and Y.W.; formal analysis, W.C., P.C., X.L., Y.Z. and Y.Y.; investigation, W.C., P.C., X.L., Y.Z. and Y.Y.; resources, S.W. and Y.W.; writing—original draft preparation, W.C.; writing—review and editing, S.W. and Y.W.; supervision, S.W. and Y.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Funding was received from the Research Start-up Fund for Young Doctors of Harbin University (HUDF2023104), The Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province (PL2025B023), the Fundamental Research Funds for Provincial Undergraduate Universities in Heilongjiang Province (2024-KYYWF-1338), the Ecological Environment Protection Research Project of Heilongjiang Province (HST2024S015) and the Harbin Science and Technology Bureau Self-funded Project (2023ZCZJCG049).

Data Availability Statement

Data are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the above-mentioned funding projects.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

AOPsAdvanced oxidation processes
BQP-benzoquinone
CODChemical oxygen demand
CTCChlortetracycline
DCDoxycycline
DMFN,N-dimethylformamide
EDSEnergy-dispersive spectroscopy
EPRElectron paramagnetic resonance
FT-IRFourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
H2BDCBenzene-1,4-dicarboxylic acid/terephthalic acid
LC-MSLiquid chromatography–mass spectrometry
MILMaterial of Institute Lavoisier
MOFMetal–organic framework
OTCOxytetracycline
Py-IRPyridine-adsorbed infrared spectroscopy
ROSReactive oxygen species
TBATert-butanol
TCTetracycline
TOCTotal organic carbon
XPSX-ray photoelectron spectroscopy
XRDX-ray diffraction

References

  1. Daghrir, R.; Drogui, P. Tetracycline antibiotics in the environment: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2013, 11, 209–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Amangelsin, Y.; Semenova, Y.; Dadar, M.; Aljofan, M.; Bjørklund, G. The Impact of Tetracycline Pollution on the Aquatic Environment and Removal Strategies. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Chang, D.; Mao, Y.; Qiu, W.; Wu, Y.; Cai, B. The Source and Distribution of Tetracycline Antibiotics in China: A Review. Toxics 2023, 11, 214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ren, S.; Wang, S.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Gao, F.; Dai, Y. A review on current pollution and removal methods of tetracycline in soil. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2023, 58, 2578–2602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bacanlı, M.; Başaran, N. Importance of antibiotic residues in animal food. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2019, 125, 462–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Putra, E.K.; Pranowo, R.; Sunarso, J.; Indraswati, N.; Ismadji, S. Performance of activated carbon and bentonite for adsorption of amoxicillin from wastewater: Mechanisms, isotherms and kinetics. Water Res. 2009, 43, 2419–2430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Lu, Z.; Liu, G.; Xie, H.; Zhai, Y.; Li, X. Advances and solutions in biological treatment for antibiotic wastewater with resistance genes: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 368, 122115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Li, S.; Show, P.L.; Ngo, H.H.; Ho, S.-H. Algae-mediated antibiotic wastewater treatment: A critical review. Environ. Sci. Ecotechnol. 2022, 9, 100145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Li, Z.; Liu, R.; Gao, W.; Zhang, W.; Li, C.; Liu, X.; Wang, N. CuFe2O4/penicillin residue biochar heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst used in the treatment of antibiotic wastewater: Synthesis, performance and working mechanism. J. Water Process Eng. 2023, 55, 104124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tang, H.; Shang, Q.; Tang, Y.; Liu, H.; Zhang, D.; Du, Y.; Liu, C. Filter-membrane treatment of flowing antibiotic-containing wastewater through peroxydisulfate-coupled photocatalysis to reduce resistance gene and microbial inhibition during biological treatment. Water Res. 2021, 207, 117819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Khakyzadeh, V. Evaluation of the performance of a hybrid advanced oxidation process for degradation of organic pollutants in aqueous media. Int. J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 2022, 104, 1062–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Li, X.; Ma, J.; He, H. Recent advances in catalytic decomposition of ozone. J. Environ. Sci. 2020, 94, 14–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Lin, F.; Wang, Z.; Ma, Q.; Yang, Y.; Whiddon, R.; Zhu, Y.; Cen, K. Catalytic deep oxidation of NO by ozone over MnOx loaded spherical alumina catalyst. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2016, 198, 100–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yu, L.; Zhang, Y.; Li, F.; Xu, C. Efficient catalytic ozonation for hexazinone degradation by Fe/Ce-doped MOF derivatives. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2024, 344, 127277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mohebali, H.; Moussavi, G.; Karimi, M.; Giannakis, S. Development of a magnetic Ce-Zr bimetallic MOF as an efficient catalytic ozonation mediator: Preparation, characterization, and catalytic activity. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2023, 315, 123670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Chen, H.; Wang, J. MOF-derived Co(3)O(4)-C@FeOOH as an efficient catalyst for catalytic ozonation of norfloxacin. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 403, 123697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Hu, Q.; Zhang, M.; Xu, L.; Wang, S.; Yang, T.; Wu, M.; Lu, W.; Li, Y.; Yu, D. Unraveling timescale-dependent Fe-MOFs crystal evolution for catalytic ozonation reactivity modulation. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 431, 128575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Kumar, N.; Verma, P.; Thakur, A. Iron metal–organic frameworks: Synthesis, characterization and application in phenol degradation in wastewater. Results Chem. 2025, 14, 102144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Trueba, M.; Trasatti, S.P. γ-Alumina as a Support for Catalysts: A Review of Fundamental Aspects. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. 2005, 2005, 3393–3403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yang, C.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, J.; Sun, W.; Yang, L.; Lin, H.; Lv, S. A novel granular MOF composite with dense and ordered MIL-100(Fe) nanoparticles grown on porous alumina: Green synthesis and enhanced adsorption of tetracycline hydrochloride. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 426, 131724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Villarroel-Rocha, D.; García-Carvajal, C.; Amaya-Roncancio, S.; Villarroel-Rocha, J.; Torres-Ceron, D.A.; Restrepo-Parra, E.; Sapag, K. MIL-101(Fe)@ceramic-monolith for arsenic removal in aqueous solutions. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 29622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Yamada, T.; Shiraishi, K.; Kitagawa, H.; Kimizuka, N. Applicability of MIL-101(Fe) as a cathode of lithium ion batteries. Chem. Commun. 2017, 53, 8215–8218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Barbosa, A.D.S.; Julião, D.; Fernandes, D.M.; Peixoto, A.F.; Freire, C.; de Castro, B.; Granadeiro, C.M.; Balula, S.S.; Cunha-Silva, L. Catalytic performance and electrochemical behaviour of Metal–organic frameworks: MIL-101(Fe) versus NH2-MIL-101(Fe). Polyhedron 2017, 127, 464–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gecgel, C.; Simsek, U.B.; Gozmen, B.; Turabik, M. Comparison of MIL-101(Fe) and amine-functionalized MIL-101(Fe) as photocatalysts for the removal of imidacloprid in aqueous solution. J. Iran. Chem. Soc. 2019, 16, 1735–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wang, Y.; Guo, W.; Li, X. Activation of persulfates by ferrocene-MIL-101(Fe) heterogeneous catalyst for degradation of bisphenol A. RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 36477–36483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Xie, Q.; Li, Y.; Lv, Z.; Zhou, H.; Yang, X.; Chen, J.; Guo, H. Effective Adsorption and Removal of Phosphate from Aqueous Solutions and Eutrophic Water by Fe-based MOFs of MIL-101. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 3316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Ambroz, F.; Macdonald, T.J.; Martis, V.; Parkin, I.P. Evaluation of the BET Theory for the Characterization of Meso and Microporous MOFs. Small Methods 2018, 2, 1800173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ji, P.; Drake, T.; Murakami, A.; Oliveres, P.; Skone, J.H.; Lin, W. Tuning Lewis Acidity of Metal–Organic Frameworks via Perfluorination of Bridging Ligands: Spectroscopic, Theoretical, and Catalytic Studies. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140, 10553–10561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Xu, Y.-P.; Wang, Z.; Tan, H.-Z.; Jing, K.-q.; Xu, Z.-N.; Zheng, F.-K. Lewis Acid Sites in MOFs Supports Promoting the Catalytic Activity and Selectivity for CO Esterification to Dimethyl Carbonate. Catal. Sci. Technol. 2020, 10, 1699–1707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yu, D.; Wang, L.; Yang, T.; Yang, G.; Wang, D.; Ni, H.; Wu, M. Tuning Lewis acidity of iron-based metal-organic frameworks for enhanced catalytic ozonation. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 404, 127075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nair, S.S.; Pinedo-Cuenca, R.; Stubbs, T.; Davis, S.J.; Ganesan, P.B.; Hamad, F. Contemporary application of microbubble technology in water treatment. Water Sci. Technol. 2022, 86, 2138–2156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Jeong, J.; Song, W.; Cooper, W.J.; Jung, J.; Greaves, J. Degradation of tetracycline antibiotics: Mechanisms and kinetic studies for advanced oxidation/reduction processes. Chemosphere 2010, 78, 533–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Zhang, Y.; Zhou, J.; Chen, X.; Wang, L.; Cai, W. Coupling of heterogeneous advanced oxidation processes and photocatalysis in efficient degradation of tetracycline hydrochloride by Fe-based MOFs: Synergistic effect and degradation pathway. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 369, 745–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ling, Z.; Gu, Y.; He, B.; Chen, Z.; Hu, H.; Liu, H.; Ding, W. Biochar-Supported FeCo-MOF derivative catalyzes PDS-Mediated degradation of tetracycline. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2024, 349, 127841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. He, L.; Dong, Y.; Zheng, Y.; Jia, Q.; Shan, S.; Zhang, Y. A novel magnetic MIL-101(Fe)/TiO2 composite for photo degradation of tetracycline under solar light. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 361, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Bharali, L.; Dhar, A. Removal of Organic Contaminants from Aquatic Environments Using Metal-Organic Framework (MOF) Based Materials. In Metal Organic Frameworks for Wastewater Contaminant Removal; Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2023; pp. 203–226. [Google Scholar]
  37. Bathla, A.; Lee, J.; Younis, S.A.; Kim, K.-H. Recent advances in photocatalytic reduction of CO2 by TiO2– and MOF–based nanocomposites impregnated with metal nanoparticles. Mater. Today Chem. 2022, 24, 100870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Miranda, R.; Latour, I.; Blanco, A. Silica Removal from a Paper Mill Effluent by Adsorption on Pseudoboehmite and γ-Al2O3. Water 2021, 13, 2031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, J.-C.; Ren, J.; Yao, H.-C.; Zhang, L.; Wang, J.-S.; Zang, S.-Q.; Han, L.-F.; Li, Z.-J. Synergistic photocatalysis of Cr(VI) reduction and 4-Chlorophenol degradation over hydroxylated α-Fe2O3 under visible light irradiation. J. Hazard. Mater. 2016, 311, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Han, M.; Wang, H.; Zhou, J.; Liu, K.; Wang, N.; Chen, X.; Liu, Y.; Liang, H. Introducing Lewis Base-Phosphate to Boost Neutral Seawater Splitting in Anion Exchange Membrane Electrolyzer. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 35, 2415143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wang, H.; Zhao, K.; Ma, T. Chapter 36—New situation of water resources management and water pollution control. In Water Security: Big Data-Driven Risk Identification, Assessment and Control of Emerging Contaminants; Liang, B., Gao, S.-H., Wang, H.-C., Wang, A.-J., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2024; pp. 593–603. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang, M.; Wu, X.; Wei, K. Analytical Techniques Progress of Antibiotics in Water Environment. Guangzhou Chem. Ind. 2025, 53, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Enhui, X. Sources, Effects and Treatment Methods of Antibiotics in the Aquatic Environment. J. Luohe Vocat. Tech. Coll. 2024, 23, 38–43. [Google Scholar]
  44. Sichuang, Z. Research Progress in Technology and Methodology for Antibiotic Treatment in Water. Liaoning Chem. Ind. 2025, 54, 295–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kong, Y.; Hou, Z.; Wang, J. Advances in carbocatalytic ozonation for water purification. China Environ. Sci. 2025, 45, 854–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xia, L.; He, H.; Wu, D. Research progress on the treatment of phenol containing wastewater by heterogeneous catalyst ozonation. Ind. Water Treat. 2024, 44, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wang, Q.; Yang, Z.; Xu, H. Influence of inorganic anions on degradation of phthalic acid during heterogeneous catalytic ozonation. Chin. J. Environ. Eng. 2017, 11, 2113–2118. [Google Scholar]
  48. Yu, Q.; Zhang, J.; Ding, L.; Liu, C.; Yan, C.; Niu, J.; Zhang, R. Performance of conventional bubble ozonation and microbubble ozonation onnorfloxacin removal from wastewater. Chin. J. Environ. Eng. 2025, 19, 291–301. [Google Scholar]
  49. Wang, J.; Zhou, C.; Wang, C.; Xia, Q.; Zhou, Z. Study on the treatment of phenol wastewater by microbubble synergistic ozone. Appl. Chem. Ind. 2025, 54, 404–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chen, Y.; Ni, P.; Wu, C.; Zhang, B.; Zheng, X. Efficiency and mechanism of microbubble O3/H2O2 advanced treatment of secondary effluent from a resin factory. J. Environ. Eng. Technol. 2024, 14, 1158–1166. [Google Scholar]
  51. Ye, X.; Zhang, X.; Dong, L.; Li, L. Research on the treatment effect of microbubble ozone process in pharmaceutical wastewater. Water Wastewater Eng. 2023, 59, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zeng, K.; Liu, Y.; Lin, D.; Chen, W.; Huang, C.; Chen, J. Advanced Treatment of Papermaking Wastewater by Combined Process of γ-FeOOH Catalyzed Ozone Microbubble and BAF. Water Purif. Technol. 2023, 42, 117–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhai, L.; Cui, Y.; Li, C.; Shi, X.; Gao, J.; Lan, X. Research and application process of microbubble generator. Chem. Ind. Eng. Prog. 2024, 43, 111–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Li, Z.; Ning, k.; Guo, N.; Ren, X.; Zheng, R.; Wang, L. Research progress on advanced treatment of tetracycline resistance genes in wastewater. Mod. Chem. Ind. 2024, 44, 55–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. XRD patterns of γ-Al2O3 support, MIL-101(Fe), and supported MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 samples prepared with different γ-Al2O3 support dosages. Labels 5 g, 10 g, 20 g, and 30 g refer to the support dosages defined in Table 1.
Figure 1. XRD patterns of γ-Al2O3 support, MIL-101(Fe), and supported MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 samples prepared with different γ-Al2O3 support dosages. Labels 5 g, 10 g, 20 g, and 30 g refer to the support dosages defined in Table 1.
Catalysts 16 00563 g001
Figure 2. SEM images of (a) γ-Al2O3, (b) MIL-101(Fe), (c,d) optimized MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3, (e) MA-5, (f) MA-10, and (g) MA-30. MA labels are defined in Table 1. The red dashed box indicates the region selected for higher-magnification observation.
Figure 2. SEM images of (a) γ-Al2O3, (b) MIL-101(Fe), (c,d) optimized MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3, (e) MA-5, (f) MA-10, and (g) MA-30. MA labels are defined in Table 1. The red dashed box indicates the region selected for higher-magnification observation.
Catalysts 16 00563 g002
Figure 3. SEM-EDS mapping and EDS spectrum of optimized MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3: (a) SEM image of mapped region; (b) O; (c) Al; (d) Fe; (e) EDS spectrum.
Figure 3. SEM-EDS mapping and EDS spectrum of optimized MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3: (a) SEM image of mapped region; (b) O; (c) Al; (d) Fe; (e) EDS spectrum.
Catalysts 16 00563 g003
Figure 4. FT-IR spectra of MIL-101(Fe) and MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 composites prepared with different γ-Al2O3 support dosages.
Figure 4. FT-IR spectra of MIL-101(Fe) and MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 composites prepared with different γ-Al2O3 support dosages.
Catalysts 16 00563 g004
Figure 5. Characterization of optimized MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 unless otherwise stated: (a) XPS survey spectra; (b) C 1s spectrum; (c) Fe 2p spectrum; (d) O 1s spectrum; (e) N2 adsorption–desorption isotherms of γ-Al2O3 and supported composites; (f) pore-size distributions; (g) Py-IR spectra of γ-Al2O3; (h) Py-IR spectra of MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3. Colored lines in the high-resolution XPS spectra represent fitted component peaks/envelopes.
Figure 5. Characterization of optimized MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 unless otherwise stated: (a) XPS survey spectra; (b) C 1s spectrum; (c) Fe 2p spectrum; (d) O 1s spectrum; (e) N2 adsorption–desorption isotherms of γ-Al2O3 and supported composites; (f) pore-size distributions; (g) Py-IR spectra of γ-Al2O3; (h) Py-IR spectra of MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3. Colored lines in the high-resolution XPS spectra represent fitted component peaks/envelopes.
Catalysts 16 00563 g005
Figure 6. Conventional bubbling catalytic ozonation of TC over MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3: (a) effect of catalyst dosage; (b) apparent pseudo-first-order kinetic fitting; (c) effect of initial pH; (d) effect of coexisting ions; (e) phosphate-blocking test; (f) radical-quenching test. Curves represent apparent UV–Vis-based removal after the 30 min dark adsorption period.
Figure 6. Conventional bubbling catalytic ozonation of TC over MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3: (a) effect of catalyst dosage; (b) apparent pseudo-first-order kinetic fitting; (c) effect of initial pH; (d) effect of coexisting ions; (e) phosphate-blocking test; (f) radical-quenching test. Curves represent apparent UV–Vis-based removal after the 30 min dark adsorption period.
Catalysts 16 00563 g006
Figure 7. Microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation of TC: (a) schematic of the 12 L reactor; (b) comparison of ordinary ozonation, microbubble ozonation, ordinary-bubble catalytic ozonation, and microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation; (c) apparent kinetic fitting; (d) effect of catalyst dosage; (e) effect of ozone dose; (f) effect of TC concentration; (g) effect of pH; (h) five-cycle reuse performance.
Figure 7. Microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation of TC: (a) schematic of the 12 L reactor; (b) comparison of ordinary ozonation, microbubble ozonation, ordinary-bubble catalytic ozonation, and microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation; (c) apparent kinetic fitting; (d) effect of catalyst dosage; (e) effect of ozone dose; (f) effect of TC concentration; (g) effect of pH; (h) five-cycle reuse performance.
Catalysts 16 00563 g007
Figure 8. Proposed transformation network of TC during MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3-assisted microbubble ozonation. Product assignments are tentative and based mainly on m/z shifts and literature-reported tetracycline oxidation pathways. I, II, and III denote the proposed transformation pathways shown in the network.
Figure 8. Proposed transformation network of TC during MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3-assisted microbubble ozonation. Product assignments are tentative and based mainly on m/z shifts and literature-reported tetracycline oxidation pathways. I, II, and III denote the proposed transformation pathways shown in the network.
Catalysts 16 00563 g008
Figure 9. Degradation of tetracycline-class antibiotics and COD/TOC removal from a simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix: (a,b) chlortetracycline removal and apparent kinetics; (c,d) oxytetracycline removal and apparent kinetics; (e,f) doxycycline removal and apparent kinetics; (g) COD removal in the simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix; (h) TOC removal in the simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix.
Figure 9. Degradation of tetracycline-class antibiotics and COD/TOC removal from a simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix: (a,b) chlortetracycline removal and apparent kinetics; (c,d) oxytetracycline removal and apparent kinetics; (e,f) doxycycline removal and apparent kinetics; (g) COD removal in the simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix; (h) TOC removal in the simulated mixed-antibiotic matrix.
Catalysts 16 00563 g009
Figure 10. Schematic route for granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 preparation, showing acid activation of spherical γ-Al2O3, H2BDC anchoring, Fe3+ coordination, washing/drying, and secondary Fe-MOF growth.
Figure 10. Schematic route for granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 preparation, showing acid activation of spherical γ-Al2O3, H2BDC anchoring, Fe3+ coordination, washing/drying, and secondary Fe-MOF growth.
Catalysts 16 00563 g010
Table 1. Textural properties of γ-Al2O3 and MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 prepared with different support dosages.
Table 1. Textural properties of γ-Al2O3 and MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3 prepared with different support dosages.
SampleBET Surface Area (m2 g−1)Pore Volume (cm3 g−1)Pore Size (nm)
γ-Al2O3 starting support164.280.204.95
MA-5171.570.378.64
MA-10172.880.347.83
MA-20/optimized catalyst210.050.295.56
MA-30206.690.433.89
Table 2. Relative Lewis-acid-related Py-IR signals. Values are relative integrated signals, not absolute acid-site amounts.
Table 2. Relative Lewis-acid-related Py-IR signals. Values are relative integrated signals, not absolute acid-site amounts.
SampleTotal Integrated Lewis-Acid-Related Signal/a.u.Medium-Temperature Desorption Signal/a.u.High-Temperature Desorption Signal/a.u.
γ-Al2O3443.65133.2676.26
MA-20 MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3692.72667.6329.28
Table 3. Synthesis and dosage optimization based on apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal during the overall 50 min run.
Table 3. Synthesis and dosage optimization based on apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal during the overall 50 min run.
VariableConditionApparent UV–Vis-Based TC Removal After 50 min (%)Selected Condition
H2BDC concentration2 mmol48.01
H2BDC concentration4 mmol67.93Yes
H2BDC concentration6 mmol57.98
H2BDC concentration8 mmol54.99
Catalyst dosage3 g in 500 mL64.75
Catalyst dosage4 g in 500 mL65.58
Catalyst dosage5 g in 500 mL67.93Yes
Catalyst dosage6 g in 500 mL68.28
Table 4. Summary of apparent degradation performance and interpretation under representative ozonation conditions.
Table 4. Summary of apparent degradation performance and interpretation under representative ozonation conditions.
TestConditionMain Observation/Interpretation
Conventional catalytic ozonation40 mg L−1 TC, pH 6, 5 g catalyst, 1.2 mg min−1 O367.93% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal during the overall 50 min run
Microbubble catalytic ozonation12 L, 40 mg L−1 TC, pH 6, 100 g catalyst, 6 mg min−1 O393.74% apparent UV–Vis-based TC removal; k = 0.1391 min−1
Four-system comparisonOrdinary O3, microbubble O3, catalyst + ordinary O3, catalyst + microbubble O3Apparent coupling factor based on k values ≈ 2.02
Phosphate blockingPhosphate species added before ozonationRemoval decreased; consistent with involvement of Lewis-acid-related sites, but not exclusive evidence
TBA/BQ quenchingTBA for ·OH; BQ for O2·Both inhibited apparent removal; scavenger results are indirect
Five-cycle reuseRepeated catalytic microbubble-assisted ozonationRemoval decreased from 93.72% to 85.73%; stability remains preliminary without Fe leaching/post-use characterization
Mixed-antibiotic matrixTC, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and doxycyclineCOD and TOC removals reached 81.63% and 70.68% in a simulated matrix
Table 5. Tentatively assigned TC transformation products from LC-MS analysis.
Table 5. Tentatively assigned TC transformation products from LC-MS analysis.
Productm/zMass Shift or FeatureTentative TransformationConfidence Level
TC445Parent ionParent compoundHigh
P1461+16 DaHydroxylationMedium
P2447+2 DaMass-increased transformation productLow
P3433−12 DaDemethylation/deamidation-related productMedium
P4431−14 DaDemethylation-related productMedium
P5427−18 DaDehydration/oxidation-related productLow–medium
P6417−28 DaFurther side-chain oxidationLow–medium
P8401−44 DaDehydroxylation/decarboxylation-related productLow
P9318Fragmentation productRing opening/skeleton cleavageLow
P10288Fragmentation productRing opening/skeleton cleavageLow
P11279Fragmentation productC-N cleavage/smaller aromatic productLow
P12130Low-molecular-weight signalFurther fragmentationLow
P13118Low-molecular-weight signalFurther fragmentationLow
P1461Low-molecular-weight signalFurther fragmentation/background possibleVery low
Table 6. Representative LC-MS spectra of TC transformation products after 10 min.
Table 6. Representative LC-MS spectra of TC transformation products after 10 min.
TimeProductSpectral Graph
10 minCatalysts 16 00563 i001Catalysts 16 00563 i002
Catalysts 16 00563 i003Catalysts 16 00563 i004
Catalysts 16 00563 i005Catalysts 16 00563 i006
10 minCatalysts 16 00563 i007Catalysts 16 00563 i008
Catalysts 16 00563 i009Catalysts 16 00563 i010
Catalysts 16 00563 i011Catalysts 16 00563 i012
Catalysts 16 00563 i013Catalysts 16 00563 i014
Table 7. Representative LC-MS spectra of TC transformation products after 20 min.
Table 7. Representative LC-MS spectra of TC transformation products after 20 min.
TimeProductSpectral Graph
20 minCatalysts 16 00563 i015Catalysts 16 00563 i016
Catalysts 16 00563 i017Catalysts 16 00563 i018
Catalysts 16 00563 i019Catalysts 16 00563 i020
Catalysts 16 00563 i021Catalysts 16 00563 i022
Catalysts 16 00563 i023Catalysts 16 00563 i024
Catalysts 16 00563 i025Catalysts 16 00563 i026
Catalysts 16 00563 i027Catalysts 16 00563 i028
Table 8. Apparent degradation of tetracycline-class antibiotics under microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation.
Table 8. Apparent degradation of tetracycline-class antibiotics under microbubble-assisted catalytic ozonation.
AntibioticApparent Removal After 50 min (%)k (min−1)Relative Degradability
Tetracycline93.740.1391High
Chlortetracycline95.450.15226Highest
Oxytetracycline87.350.10301Moderate
Doxycycline85.760.09717Moderate
Table 9. Catalyst labels and synthesis conditions used to clarify mass labels in figures.
Table 9. Catalyst labels and synthesis conditions used to clarify mass labels in figures.
Label Used in Figuresγ-Al2O3 Support DosageH2BDC ConditionFe-MOF Precursor ConditionPurpose
Al2O3Commercial γ-Al2O3 supportNoneNoneStarting support
MIL-101(Fe)No support4 mmol4 mmol FeCl3·6H2O routePowder reference
MA-55 g4 mmol unless otherwise stated1 mmol screening condition unless otherwise statedSupported catalyst screening
MA-1010 g4 mmol unless otherwise stated1 mmol screening condition unless otherwise statedSupported catalyst screening
MA-20/optimized catalyst20 g4 mmol1 mmol screening conditionSelected catalyst for subsequent tests
MA-3030 g4 mmol unless otherwise stated1 mmol screening condition unless otherwise statedSupported catalyst screening
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, S.; Chen, P.; Cui, W.; Wang, Y.; Liang, X.; Zhao, Y.; Yang, Y. Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation of Tetracycline-Class Antibiotics Using Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3. Catalysts 2026, 16, 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal16060563

AMA Style

Wang S, Chen P, Cui W, Wang Y, Liang X, Zhao Y, Yang Y. Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation of Tetracycline-Class Antibiotics Using Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3. Catalysts. 2026; 16(6):563. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal16060563

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Shuai, Peiyao Chen, Wenqi Cui, Yingning Wang, Xiongwei Liang, Yufeng Zhao, and Yang Yang. 2026. "Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation of Tetracycline-Class Antibiotics Using Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3" Catalysts 16, no. 6: 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal16060563

APA Style

Wang, S., Chen, P., Cui, W., Wang, Y., Liang, X., Zhao, Y., & Yang, Y. (2026). Microbubble-Assisted Catalytic Ozonation of Tetracycline-Class Antibiotics Using Granular MIL-101(Fe)/γ-Al2O3. Catalysts, 16(6), 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/catal16060563

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop