You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Environments
  • Editor’s Choice
  • Review
  • Open Access

24 September 2024

A Review of Chitosan as a Coagulant of Health-Related Microorganisms in Water and Wastewater

,
,
and
1
Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
2
Division of Biological Safety, Duke University Hospital, Duke University Health System, Durham, NC 27710, USA
3
Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
4
Department of Public Health, College of Pharmacy & Health Sciences, Campbell University, Buies Creek, NC 27506, USA
This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Technologies of Water and Wastewater Treatment (2nd Edition)

Abstract

The coagulation and flocculation properties of chitosan, an organic biopolymer derived from chitin, have been researched as an alternative to synthetic polymers and inorganic metal salt coagulants currently used in water and wastewater treatment. In an effort to encourage further research into the practical uses of chitosan as green chemistry in water and wastewater treatment and to promote the efficacious removal of microbial contaminants in drinking and wastewater, we have summarized the current state of research pertaining to the treatment of microorganisms in water and wastewater. A search of PubMed revealed 720 possible titles and abstracts, of which 44 full-text articles were identified as matching the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this systematic review. Results are presented based on the type of water matrix treated (i.e., drinking water, wastewater, and recreational waters) and a summary table providing details on the types and forms of chitosan utilized and the treatment mechanisms and processes described in the study. We find chitosan to be an effective coagulant, flocculant, and adsorbent for removing microbes from water and wastewater; some modified forms of chitosan can inactivate microbes and achieve disinfection, such as those containing metals like silver and antimicrobial chemicals like quaternary ammonium compounds or other strong oxidants, and use with filtration or electrochemical processes can achieve extensive reductions in microbes to meet performance targets of the World Health Organization.

1. Introduction

Chitosan, a naturally occurring product derived from the chemical or enzymatic deacetylation of chitin, has been proposed as a low-cost, eco-friendly, and sustainable coagulant for use in water and wastewater treatment applications [1,2]. Chitosan has been proposed for a variety of practical uses due to its structural properties, including water solubility, molecular weight, degree of deacetylation, and various chemically created conformations [3,4]. Chitosan is a polysaccharide of repeating N-acetyl-D-glucosamine and D-glucosamine monomers that can be functionalized to increase its solubility in water and act as a cationic coagulant and adsorbent or, in some forms, a disinfectant. The protonation of amino groups of D-glucosamine forms cationic chitosan suspensions that are able to destabilize suspended colloids, induce floc formation, and adsorb negatively charged microorganisms, clay, and organic matter [5,6]. As an organic polyelectrolyte, chitosan is biodegradable, non-toxic, and widely available.
Despite these positive attributes, chitosan also has limitations related to its different chemical properties and poor solubility in neutral or alkaline aqueous solutions [7]. However, various physically and chemically modified forms of chitosan have been synthesized or modified and then evaluated for use in water and wastewater treatment.
In an effort to encourage more research and greater practical use, we compiled and examined the published scientific literature on chitosan in water and wastewater applications by conducting a systematic review of historical and current literature on the use of chitosan as a water and wastewater coagulant and adsorbent to capture and remove microbial contaminants. We examined the reported ability of different chitosans to remove microorganisms in water and wastewater directly or disinfect them, as well as their use in combination with other technologies such as sedimentation, filtration, and electrochemical processes. Historically, chitosans have been used in water and wastewater treatment for many decades, and a range of applications have been described. However, chitosans for water and wastewater treatment have not been widely adopted in practice or have become “mainstream” technologies. We consider chitosans for water and wastewater treatment to be a simple and effective but overlooked technology that deserves greater consideration for use in point-of-use technologies, as well as in small communities and larger municipal water and wastewater systems. In this brief review, we summarize the available literature on chitosan use in water and wastewater systems to control health-related microorganisms, with the goal of encouraging more widespread use in practice.

2. Materials and Methods

The objective of this review is to systematically gather and summarize the current research findings pertaining to chitosan applications for public-health-related microorganisms in water and wastewater. The scope of this review focuses solely on applications related to water or wastewater and microorganisms and does not cover chemical or other environmental remediation by chitosans, as these aspects have already been summarized in other reviews [8,9]. For this literature review, we searched the PubMed database using the following search terms: “chitosan AND (Water treatment [majr] OR Wastewater [majr]) (fft[Filter]))”. PubMed was chosen as it is the largest database of biomedical and health science literature. Selection criteria were defined based on the scope of the review, and the inclusion and exclusion criteria are described in Table 1. Briefly, selected articles included original peer-reviewed papers in English reporting the use of chitosan as a coagulant in the removal and/or disinfection of at least one microorganism or the use of chitosan coagulation to reduce turbidity (as a surrogate for microorganisms). In this review, we have excluded studies that focused only on chemical removal as well as other review articles on other chitosan applications.
Table 1. Screening criteria for study inclusion and exclusion.
To conduct this review, we used Covidence, a web-based collaboration software platform that streamlines the production of systematic and other literature reviews (Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia; available at www.covidence.org). Covidence software aided in managing the review process by organizing abstracts and paper reviews, logging reviewer responses, handling inclusion and exclusion criteria, and preventing repeats of effort. Each study title and abstract were screened by a minimum of two out of three reviewers based on the selection criteria (Table 1). In cases of disagreement for inclusion or exclusion, the third reviewer made a decision on the disposition of the study. Articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria were not considered for a full-text review. To determine the final articles for inclusion, papers that passed title–abstract screening were divided into topical sections and reviewed for inclusion by one author. Articles that did not meet inclusion criteria at this stage were reviewed again by another author for a final decision.

3. Results

3.1. Search Results

A total of 720 articles were identified by our search strategy, of which 672 were excluded during the title–abstract screening period. Four additional studies were excluded during the full-text review (Figure 1). A total of 44 articles were included in our full review (Table 2).
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the literature search process.
Table 2. Publications reporting microbial reductions using chitosan as a coagulant.

3.2. Chitosan in Drinking Water Treatment

Chitosan has been applied historically as well as more recently in drinking water and wastewater applications as a pre-treatment or partial treatment for the removal and/or disinfection of a variety of microbial contaminants, as well as turbidity as a microbial surrogate. The goal of these treatments is to increase the removal efficiency and/or disinfection of water and waste treatment technologies, particularly point-of-use (POU) and household water treatment technologies. For these types of technologies, the World Health Organization (WHO) has set performance targets that include “protective”, and “highly protective” tiers for bacterial targets of two and four log10 reductions, respectively, and viral reductions of three and five log10, respectively [54]. In studies examining chitosan alone, such as coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation, the “protective” level of protection was often but not always met for bacteria, viruses, and turbidity [12,16,21,28,30]. In studies examining other combination water treatment technologies, such as chitosan pre-treatment followed by sand filters or cloth filters, additional log10 reductions were possible under certain conditions, but only the protective performance category was met [15,18]. In contrast, when ceramic water filters were evaluated with chitosan pre-treatment, over a four log10 reduction in viruses and over a six log10 reduction in bacteria were possible, achieving the highly protective WHO performance level [24].
In studies examining other microorganisms or surrogates, such as protozoan parasites and surrogate microspheres, removals were based on the dose and loading of the chitosan itself. One study examined low-dose applications and determined that 3.0 mg/L resulted in extensive coagulation, whereas lower doses were not effective [20].

Advances in Chitosan Technology for Drinking Water

In addition to its use as a coagulant, chitosan has also been modified for advanced drinking water and wastewater treatment. One of these modifications includes the incorporation of metallic nanoparticles as a composite into the chitosan material. Several studies examined the use of silver, finding E. coli reductions of less than one log10 [19,27], and copper or carbon, which resulted in log10 reductions between one and two for S. aureus, E. coli, and A. flavus [14]. In an evaluation of chitosan-oligosaccharide-coated iron oxide nanoparticles, approximately 86% of entamoeba cysts were recovered from simulated water samples [11].
Another modification of chitosan included changing the structure of chitosan to form quaternized chitosan. Using this material, porcine parovirus and Sindbis virus were reduced by 3.5 and 4 log10, respectively [31]. Other studies evaluating quaternized chitosan found reductions of greater than five log10 for E. coli [29] and greater than four log10 for S. aureus [23].
Other modifications included (1) chitosan coated with activated carbon, which resulted in a four log10 reduction in E. coli [26] and (2) cotton gauze coated with chitosan, which was used to disinfect Gram-positive and -negative bacteria [17]. Microfiltration membranes, which include chitosan as a component of the membrane itself, were also effective [13,25]. Specifically, Cooper et al. (2013) reported a 50% Staphylococccus aureus reduction by contact disinfection with chitosan (85% deacetylation degree)-polycaprolactone nanofiber mats and also a 100% removal of polystyrene particles of 0.1-, 0.3-, and 1-micrometer diameter by mat filtration [13]. Also, Jin et al. (2017) reported Microcystis aeruginosa removal from drinking water by coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation with chitosan (molecular mass of 20,000 g/mol; (deacetylation degree not reported), followed by a >95% disinfection in the floc stored for 6–8 days [25].

3.3. Surface and Recreational Water Treatment

Of the studies included in this review, nine focused on surface water treatment. Five studies investigated chitosan coagulation–flocculation alone [33,35,36,37,38], three studies utilized filtration after chitosan pre-treatment [22,32,34], and one study utilized a combination of adsorption and filtration [39]. Five [33,35,36,37,38] studies reported on chitosan coagulation–flocculation alone, of which three papers focused specifically on cyanobacteria or algae removal [33,35,36]. Shao et al. used 80 and 160 mg/L of chitosan-modified kaolinite loading to significantly reduce the levels of chlorophyll-a, carotenoids, phycocyanin, and allophycocyanin in water spiked with Microcystis aeruginosa, indicating that chitosan pre-treatment could lead to effective cell mortality [33]. Similarly, Habtemariam et al. (2021) optimized chitosan dosing at 4 mg/L to achieve a 59.9% reduction in chlorophyll-a and a 62.1% decrease in turbidity in turbid lake and reservoir waters [35]. Du et al. (2023) developed a nanochitosan-grafted flocculant (PAD-g-MNC), which achieved removal rates of 93.5%–95.4% for turbidity and 95.1–97.3% for chlorophyll-a at dosages of 4–5 mg/L of PAD-g-MNC [36].
Similar to Du et al., Chen et al. synthesized a dual-functioning nanochitosan-grafted flocculant (CPAM-g-NCS), which demonstrated significant flocculation and antibacterial performance, achieving a residual turbidity of 1.97 NTU in a low-turbidity Salmonella suspension [38]. Chung et al. utilized chitosan coagulation–flocculation to test the treatment of aquaculture wastewater [37]. The authors reported 99.998% removal of unspecified bacteria using 12 mg/L of high molecular weight chitosan (dissolved in 0.2 M acetic acid).
Four studies integrated coagulation–flocculation with subsequent filtration to enhance microbial removal [22,32,39]. Studies utilized a variety of filtration media, including sand [32,34], various other granular media [22], and one that was chitosan-modified [39].
Two studies that tested the use of chitosan pre-treatment followed by sand filtration resulted in a <1 log10 reduction [32,34]. Mandloi et al. (2004) found an optimum dose of 0.15 mg/L of unspecified chitosan flakes dissolved in a 1% acetic acid solution for the treatment of water with a turbidity of 15 NTU [34]. Pre-treatment was followed by sand filtration, which together resulted in total coliform reductions (MPN/100 mL) of 73.2% after 60 min and 87.5% after 120 min. Lu et al. (2016) studied the removal of cryptosporidium-sized microspheres from pool water by testing various doses of chitosan, ranging from 4.68 to 34.32 mg/L of SeaKlear commercial chitosan, followed by sand filtration. Pre-treatment followed by filtration could only remove <75% of the cryptosporidium-sized microspheres (compared to 20–63% with filtration alone) [32]. Christensen et al. (2017) reported pre-treatment using a 1 mg/l dose of KitoFlokk (diluted from a 0.5% stock solution in 0.1 M HCl) followed by dual-media contact filtration, which resulted in 2.5–3 log10 reductions in viruses and parasites (including cryptosporidium) and 4.5–5.0 log10 reductions in bacteria [22]. The reasons for microbial reduction performance differences among different studies are unclear, but they could be related to differences in chitosan properties and doses, the in-test water quality, and differences related to the specific test microbes.
Thongsamer et al. incorporated both filtration and adsorption mechanisms by using fixed-bed biofilters with chitosan-modified coconut husk biochar pellets, which achieved a 66–81% removal of E. coli from lake water; the effectiveness was not significantly different from other biofilter types [39].

3.4. Wastewater Treatment

Chitosan coagulants have shown significant promise as a green alternative to metallic and synthetic polymer coagulants for reducing inorganic and organic contaminants [10,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,52,53]. While much of the chitosan research focuses on the removal or reducing the bioavailability of heavy metals in wastewater treatment [51], several studies demonstrate its potential to reduce fecal pathogen concentrations in wastewater and sewage from wastewater treatment facilities [10,40,41,53]. Wastewater and sewage sludge contain high levels of fecal coliforms, with concentrations of 106 to 108 in raw sewage and even higher concentrations in various wastewater sludges [55,56,57].
The discharge, disposal, and possible beneficial use of treated wastewater effluents and sludges is based in part on achieving pathogen concentrations below the maximum allowable regulatory limits. The coagulation and flocculation of wastewaters and sludges with chitosan can aid in reducing fecal pathogen concentrations to meet pathogen reduction requirements based on fecal coliform (FC) or E. coli concentrations in the treated sludge (biosolids). The Environmental Protection Agency in the USA requires achieving Class A biosolids with <1000 for the most probable number (MPN) of FC/g of the total dry-weight solids and Class B to have no more than 2 × 106 FC MPN/G of the total dry-weight solids [41,58]. Globally, the World Health Organization specifies microbial quality guidelines for treated wastewater sludge as well as treated wastewater based on allowable levels of E. coli bacteria [59]. The E. coli limit for treated sludge is 1000 culturable organisms per gram of total solids. The E. coli limit for treated wastewater used for agriculture irrigation (food crop production) is 1000 organisms per liter for the unrestricted irrigation of crops eaten raw and a higher limit of 100,000 organisms per liter when other management methods are employed, such as a lengthy storage period before crop harvest to achieve further pathogen die-off.
In summary, this literature review revealed studies of treatments by chitosan and its various forms for a wide variety of microorganisms that were evaluated in labs and at wastewater treatment facilities. Chitosan has been shown to reduce microbial concentrations of culturable fecally derived bacteria [41], such as E. coli [10,40,53] and S. aureus [10,40], in wastewater and sludges. Cainglet et al. 2023 found that microbial community composition assessed through 16s rRNA-sequencing displayed composition changes between different stages of biological stabilization but did not display changes between the coagulant choice [44]. They also found a low overall abundance of genera of known pathogenic species and fecal indicators and found Enterococcus spp. in >1% of all coagulant-derived thickened raw sludge, while Mycobacterium had a relative abundance of >1% for chitosan and polyaluminum chloride sludge samples [51].
Research on chitosan has also investigated applications for the treatment of nutrient loads in wastewater using algae. For example, chitosan coagulants remove suspended solids and colloids to clarify the water and allow for the cultivation of microalgae such as Botryococcus spp. [47] and Haematococcus pluvialis [42] to aid in the removal of nitrogen and phosphorous, as well as to reduce unwanted algal biomass [46] when desired. Chitosans have found additional use as a constituent in forming membranes and in the development of biotechnologies to aid in the treatment of wastes. As an example, Guo et al., 2021 investigated ammonia removal by Bacillus spp. immobilized in chitosan beads and reported a 96.5% reduction [45].

4. Discussion

In this review, we found considerable evidence that chitosan enhances the reduction of microorganisms and related constituents in water, wastewater, and sludge in a variety of circumstances. In many cases, the combination of chitosan with point-of-use water treatment technologies allowed these treatment methods to reach the “protective” or “highly protective” performance levels specified by the WHO Household Water Treatment recommendations. In wastewater treatment, chitosan evaluated for the removal of both nutrient loads and bacteria was often extensive and better than alternative treatment alternatives.
This systematic review had a number of limitations. First, we limited the review to studies published online, so we may have missed early literature on chitosan coagulation or disinfection that was not available through online tools. Second, because our search strategy focused on studies that examined microbial removal using chitosan coagulation and flocculation, we may have missed important studies on chitosan performance that did not have documented microbial removal information but addressed the removal of other matrix contaminants or constituents. Our review suggests that chitosan and its various forms and derivatives are effective coagulants in surface water, wastewater, and sludges. However, there is a continued need to evaluate microbial removals or disinfection by the various chemical and physical forms and derivatives of chitosan to determine their most effective doses for coagulation and/or disinfection in each matrix type alone or in combination with other treatment processes, such as filtration.
A limitation of the available literature on chitosans for microbial reductions and disinfection is that all studies we found were lab-based or on a pilot scale. To our knowledge, there have not been large-scale field studies of chitosans for microbial reductions in full-scale municipal water or wastewater systems. This remains an unmet need that we recommend be filled by further studies.
Our findings demonstrate that chitosan is an effective resource in the coagulation and eventual removal and/or disinfection of microorganisms in water, wastewater, and sludge. Hence, we encourage chitosan to be considered an alternative coagulant and potential disinfectant in water, wastewater, and sludge treatment systems. As there is the potential for chitosan to be produced locally from the shells of shrimp and other crustaceans, as well as from certain insects, it presents a low-cost alternative to other inorganic and organic chemical coagulants currently used in water and waste treatment.
In recent work comparing the cost of traditional coagulants to chitosan, the cost of using alum for drinking water treatment ranged from 0.05 to 1.50 U.S. dollars (USD) [60,61] compared to 0.0025 for chitosan per meter cubed (m3) [62]. Meanwhile, in wastewater, the cost for alum was USD 0.10 [62] compared to 0.015 for chitosan per m3 [61]. Not all biocoagulants are less expensive than alum or traditional chemical coagulants, but chitin or chitosan does cost less, generally due to lower operational costs [62].
There are many opportunities to further improve and expand water and wastewater treatment systems using chitosan, especially in the developing world, where small businesses and entrepreneurs may be able to create and market such products and systems at affordable costs [24].

5. Conclusions

Based on our review of the currently available literature on chitosan coagulation and the disinfection of microorganisms in water, wastewater, and sludges, we have summarized compelling evidence that chitosan is an effective coagulant and potential disinfectant in these settings. From this examination, it is clear that there are opportunities to incorporate this neglected coagulant and potential disinfectant into water and wastewater treatment systems and to further explore them for removal and inactivation of microorganisms.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.S.B. and M.D.S.; formal analysis, C.K.C., H.H.O. and E.S.B.; investigation, C.K.C., H.H.O. and E.S.B.; data curation, C.K.C., H.H.O. and E.S.B.; writing—original draft preparation, C.K.C., H.H.O. and E.S.B.; writing—review and editing, C.K.C., H.H.O., E.S.B. and M.D.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Renault, F.; Sancey, B.; Badot, P.M.; Crini, G. Chitosan for coagulation/flocculation processes—An eco-friendly approach. Eur. Polym. J. 2009, 45, 1337–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kumar, M.N.V.R.; Muzzarelli, R.A.A.; Muzzarelli, C.; Sashiwa, H.; Domb, A.J. Chitosan Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Perspectives. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 6017–6084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Strand, S.P.; Danielsen, S.; Christensen, B.E.; Vårum, K.M. Influence of chitosan structure on the formation and stability of DNA-chitosan polyelectrolyte complexes. Biomacromolecules 2005, 6, 3357–3366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Florea, B.I.; Thanou, M.; Junginger, H.E.; Borchard, G. Enhancement of bronchial octreotide absorption by chitosan and N-trimethyl chitosan shows linear in vitro/in vivo correlation. J. Control. Release 2006, 110, 353–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bielefeldt, A.R.; Kowalski, K.; Schilling, C.; Schreier, S.; Kohler, A.; Scott Summers, R. Removal of virus to protozoan sized particles in point-of-use ceramic water filters. Water Res. 2010, 44, 1482–1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Strand, S.P.; Vårum, K.M.; Østgaard, K. Interactions between chitosans and bacterial suspensions: Adsorption and flocculation. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2003, 27, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Rinaudo, M. Chitin and chitosan: Properties and applications. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2006, 31, 603–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhang, L.; Zeng, Y.; Cheng, Z. Removal of heavy metal ions using chitosan and modified chitosan: A review. J. Mol. Liq. 2016, 214, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gerente, C.; Lee, V.K.C.; Cloirec, P.L.; McKay, G. Application of Chitosan for the Removal of Metals From Wastewaters by Adsorption—Mechanisms and Models Review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 37, 41–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Li, X.; Sun, J.; Che, Y.; Lv, Y.; Liu, F. Antibacterial properties of chitosan chloride-graphene oxide composites modified quartz sand filter media in water treatment. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 121, 760–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shukla, S.; Arora, V.; Jadaun, A.; Kumar, J.; Singh, N.; Jain, V.K. Magnetic removal of Entamoeba cysts from water using chitosan oligosaccharide-coated iron oxide nanoparticles. Int. J. Nanomed. 2015, 10, 4901–4917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Soros, A.; Amburgey, J.E.; Stauber, C.E.; Sobsey, M.D.; Casanova, L.M. Turbidity reduction in drinking water by coagulation-flocculation with chitosan polymers. J. Water Health 2019, 17, 204–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Cooper, A.; Floreani, R.; Ma, H.; Bryers, J.D.; Zhang, M. Chitosan-based nanofibrous membranes for antibacterial filter applications. Carbohydr. Polym. 2013, 92, 254–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Morsi, R.E.; Alsabagh, A.M.; Nasr, S.A.; Zaki, M.M. Multifunctional nanocomposites of chitosan, silver nanoparticles, copper nanoparticles and carbon nanotubes for water treatment: Antimicrobial characteristics. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2017, 97, 264–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Holmes, E.B.; Oza, H.H.; Bailey, E.S.; Sobsey, M.D. Evaluation of Chitosans as Coagulants-Flocculants to Improve Sand Filtration for Drinking Water Treatment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Christensen, E.; Myrmel, M. Coagulant residues’ influence on virus enumeration as shown in a study on virus removal using aluminium, zirconium and chitosan. J. Water Health 2018, 16, 600–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ferrero, F.; Periolatto, M.; Vineis, C.; Varesano, A. Chitosan coated cotton gauze for antibacterial water filtration. Carbohydr. Polym. 2014, 103, 207–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Oza, H.H.; Holmes, E.B.; Bailey, E.S.; Coleman, C.K.; Sobsey, M.D. Microbial reductions and physical characterization of chitosan flocs when using chitosan acetate as a cloth filter aid in water treatment. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0262341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Natarajan, S.; Bhuvaneshwari, M.; Lakshmi, D.S.; Mrudula, P.; Chandrasekaran, N.; Mukherjee, A. Antibacterial and antifouling activities of chitosan/TiO2/Ag NPs nanocomposite films against packaged drinking water bacterial isolates. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 19529–19540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Brown, T.J.; Emelko, M.B. Chitosan and metal salt coagulant impacts on Cryptosporidium and microsphere removal by filtration. Water Res. 2009, 43, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Fabris, R.; Chow, C.W.; Drikas, M. Evaluation of chitosan as a natural coagulant for drinking water treatment. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 61, 2119–2128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Christensen, E.; Nilsen, V.; Håkonsen, T.; Heistad, A.; Gantzer, C.; Robertson, L.J.; Myrmel, M. Removal of model viruses, E. coli and Cryptosporidium oocysts from surface water by zirconium and chitosan coagulants. J. Water Health 2017, 15, 695–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  23. Correia, V.G.; Ferraria, A.M.; Pinho, M.G.; Aguiar-Ricardo, A. Antimicrobial Contact-Active Oligo(2-oxazoline)s-Grafted Surfaces for Fast Water Disinfection at the Point-of-Use. Biomacromolecules 2015, 16, 3904–3915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Coleman, C.K.; Mai, E.; Miller, M.; Sharma, S.; Williamson, C.; Oza, H.; Holmes, E.; Lamer, M.; Ly, C.; Stewart, J.; et al. Chitosan Coagulation Pretreatment to Enhance Ceramic Water Filtration for Household Water Treatment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 9736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Jin, Y.; Pei, H.; Hu, W.; Zhu, Y.; Xu, H.; Ma, C.; Sun, J.; Li, H. A promising application of chitosan quaternary ammonium salt to removal of Microcystis aeruginosa cells from drinking water. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 583, 496–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cao, C.; Wu, X.; Zheng, Y.; Chen, Y. Three-dimensional cubic ordered mesoporous carbon with chitosan for capacitive deionization disinfection of water. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 15001–15010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hu, Z.; Zhang, L.; Zhong, L.; Zhou, Y.; Xue, J.; Li, Y. Preparation of an antibacterial chitosan-coated biochar-nanosilver composite for drinking water purification. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 219, 290–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Abebe, L.S.; Chen, X.; Sobsey, M.D. Chitosan Coagulation to Improve Microbial and Turbidity Removal by Ceramic Water Filtration for Household Drinking Water Treatment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, Y.; El-Deen, A.G.; Li, P.; Oh, B.H.L.; Guo, Z.; Khin, M.M.; Vikhe, Y.S.; Wang, J.; Hu, R.G.; Boom, R.M.; et al. High-Performance Capacitive Deionization Disinfection of Water with Graphene Oxide-graft-Quaternized Chitosan Nanohybrid Electrode Coating. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 10142–10157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Strand, S.P.; Nordengen, T.; Østgaard, K. Efficiency of chitosans applied for flocculation of different bacteria. Water Res. 2002, 36, 4745–4752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mi, X.; Vijayaragavan, K.S.; Heldt, C.L. Virus adsorption of water-stable quaternized chitosan nanofibers. Carbohydr. Res. 2014, 387, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Lu, P.; Amburgey, J.E. A pilot-scale study of Cryptosporidium-sized microsphere removals from swimming pools via sand filtration. J. Water Health 2015, 14, 109–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Shao, J.; Wang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Liu, H.; Peng, L.; Wei, X.; Lei, M.; Li, R. Physiological responses of Microcystisaeruginosa NIES-843 (cyanobacterium) under the stress of chitosan modified kaolinite (CMK) loading. Ecotoxicology 2012, 21, 698–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Mandloi, M.; Chaudhari, S.; Folkard, G.K. Evaluation of Natural Coagulants for Direct Filtration. Environ. Technol. 2004, 25, 481–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Habtemariam, H.; Kifle, D.; Leta, S.; Mucci, M.; Lürling, M. Removal of cyanobacteria from a water supply reservoir by sedimentation using flocculants and suspended solids as ballast: Case of Legedadi Reservoir (Ethiopia). PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0249720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Du, B.; Tang, Q.; Chen, W.; Rong, X.; Zhang, K.; Ma, D.; Wei, Z.; Chen, W. Insight into the purification of algael water by a novel flocculant with enhanced branched nanochitosan structure. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 331, 117283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chung, Y.-C.; Li, Y.-H.; Chen, C.-C. Pollutant Removal From Aquaculture Wastewater Using the Biopolymer Chitosan at Different Molecular Weights. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 2005, 40, 1775–1790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Chen, W.; Rong, X.; Peng, J.; Tang, Q.; Luo, H.; Fan, L.; Feng, K.; Zheng, H. Assessment of a novel nanostructured flocculant with elevated flocculation and antimicrobial activity. Chemosphere 2020, 239, 124736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Thongsamer, T.; Vinitnantharat, S.; Pinisakul, A.; Werner, D. Fixed-bed biofilter for polluted surface water treatment using chitosan impregnated-coconut husk biochar. Environ. Pollut. 2023, 334, 122137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Zhang, Y.; Yin, M.; Li, L.; Fan, B.; Liu, Y.; Li, R.; Ren, X.; Huang, T.-S.; Kim, I.S. Construction of aerogels based on nanocrystalline cellulose and chitosan for high efficient oil/water separation and water disinfection. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020, 243, 116461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Parkpian, P.; Leong, S.T.; Laortanakul, P.; Poonpolwatanaporn, P. Environmental applicability of chitosan and zeolite for amending sewage sludge. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 2002, 37, 1855–1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Sato, H.; Nagare, H.; Huynh, T.N.C.; Komatsu, H. Development of a new wastewater treatment process for resource recovery of carotenoids. Water Sci. Technol. 2015, 72, 1191–1197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  43. Mohamed Hatta, N.S.; Lau, S.W.; Chua, H.B.; Takeo, M.; Sen, T.K.; Mubarak, N.M.; Khalid, M.; Zairin, D.A. Parametric and kinetic studies of activated sludge dewatering by cationic chitosan-like bioflocculant BF01314 produced from Citrobacter youngae. Environ. Res. 2023, 224, 115527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Cainglet, A.; Tesfamariam, A.; Heiderscheidt, E. Organic polyelectrolytes as the sole precipitation agent in municipal wastewater treatment. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 271, 111002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Guo, J.; Chen, C.; Chen, W.; Jiang, J.; Chen, B.; Zheng, F. Effective immobilization of Bacillus subtilis in chitosan-sodium alginate composite carrier for ammonia removal from anaerobically digested swine wastewater. Chemosphere 2021, 284, 131266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. de Godos, I.; Guzman, H.O.; Soto, R.; García-Encina, P.A.; Becares, E.; Muñoz, R.; Vargas, V.A. Coagulation/flocculation-based removal of algal–bacterial biomass from piggery wastewater treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 923–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gani, P.; Mohamed Sunar, N.; Matias-Peralta, H.; Abdul Latiff, A.A.; Mohamad Fuzi, S.F.Z. Growth of microalgae Botryococcus sp. in domestic wastewater and application of statistical analysis for the optimization of flocculation using alum and chitosan. Prep. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2017, 47, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Holder, S.L.; Lee, C.-H.; Popuri, S.R. Simultaneous wastewater treatment and bioelectricity production in microbial fuel cells using cross-linked chitosan-graphene oxide mixed-matrix membranes. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 13782–13796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Shitu, A.; Zhang, Y.; Danhassan, U.A.; Li, H.; Tadda, M.A.; Ye, Z.; Zhu, S. Synergistic effect of chitosan-based sludge aggregates CS@NGS inoculum accelerated the start-up of biofilm reactor treating aquaculture effluent: Insights into performance, microbial characteristics, and functional genes. Chemosphere 2022, 303, 135097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, J.; Hu, Q.; Lu, J.; Lin, S. Study on the effect of chitosan conditioning on sludge dewatering. Water Sci. Technol. 2019, 79, 501–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cainglet, A.; Kujala, K.; Liimatainen, M.; Prokkola, H.; Piippo, S.; Postila, H.; Ronkanen, A.-K.; Heiderscheidt, E. The influence of coagulant type on the biological treatment of sewage sludge. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 869, 161706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Lin, F.; Qin, W.; Wei, J.; Lv, J.; Yang, P. Effect of chemical regulation combined with mechanical filtration on deep dewatering and consolidation characteristics of sludge. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 89088–89100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Shafi, Q.I.; Ihsan, H.; Hao, Y.; Wu, X.; Ullah, N.; Younas, M.; He, B.; Rezakazemi, M. Multi-ionic electrolytes and E. coli removal from wastewater using chitosan-based in-situ mediated thin film composite nanofiltration membrane. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 294, 112996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. World Health Organization. WHO International Scheme to Evaluate Household Water Treatment Technologies; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  55. Rose, J.B.; Dickson, L.J.; Farrah, S.R.; Carnahan, R.P. Removal of pathogenic and indicator microorganisms by a full-scale water reclamation facility. Water Res. 1996, 30, 2785–2797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. George, I.; Crop, P.; Servais, P. Fecal coliform removal in wastewater treatment plants studied by plate counts and enzymatic methods. Water Res. 2002, 36, 2607–2617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. George, I.; Crop, P.; Servais, P. Use of beta-D-galactosidase and beta-D-glucuronidase activities for quantitative detection of total and fecal coliforms in wastewater. Can. J. Microbiol. 2001, 47, 670–675. [Google Scholar]
  58. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. NPDES Inspection Manual. In CFR Part 503 Subpart D, EPA Method 1681; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  59. World Health Organization. Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater—Volume 4: Excreta and Greywater Use in Agriculture; World Health Organization, United Nations Environment Programme, Eds.; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  60. Keeley, J.; Jarvis, P.; Judd, S.J. An economic assessment of coagulant recovery from water treatment residuals. Desalination 2012, 287, 132–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Hamawand, I.; Ghadouani, A.; Bundschuh, J.; Hamawand, S.; AAl Juboori, R.; Chakrabarty, S.; Yusaf, T. A Critical Review on Processes and Energy Profile of the Australian Meat Processing Industry. Energies 2017, 10, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kangama, A.; Zeng, D.; Tian, X.; Fang, J. Application of Chitosan Composite Flocculant in Tap Water Treatment. J. Chem. 2018, 2018, 2768474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
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.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.