Skip to Content
You are currently on the new version of our website. Access the old version .
MoleculesMolecules
  • Review
  • Open Access

30 August 2021

Recent Improvement Strategies on Metal-Organic Frameworks as Adsorbent, Catalyst, and Membrane for Wastewater Treatment

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Materials Science and Engineering Research Group, Faculty of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia
2
Research Center for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, West Java, Indonesia
3
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Jl. Ir. Sutami 36, Surakarta 57126, Central Java, Indonesia
4
Materials and Metallurgy Engineering, Institut Teknologi Kalimantan, Jl. Soekarno Hatta 15, Balikpapan 76127, East Kalimantan, Indonesia

Abstract

The accumulation of pollutants in water is dangerous for the environment and human lives. Some of them are considered as persistent organic pollutants (POPs) that cannot be eliminated from wastewater effluent. Thus, many researchers have devoted their efforts to improving the existing technology or providing an alternative strategy to solve this environmental problem. One of the attractive materials for this purpose are metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) due to their superior high surface area, high porosity, and the tunable features of their structures and function. This review provides an up-to-date and comprehensive description of MOFs and their crucial role as adsorbent, catalyst, and membrane in wastewater treatment. This study also highlighted several strategies to improve their capability to remove pollutants from water effluent.

1. Introduction

Clean water is a crucial resource for all living things on Earth. However, massive water contamination and rapid population growth have led to a water scarcity problem. In 2003, Gleick reported that over 1000 million people have limited access to safe drinking water worldwide [1]. Currently, many hazardous contaminants, namely persistent organic pollutants (POPs), are found in industrial discharged water. There are many organic pollutants which can be categorized as POPs including industrial chemicals (such as polychlorinated biphenyls/PCBs, synthetic dyes [2]), agriculture waste product (pesticide [3] and herbicide [4]), endocrine disrupting chemicals/EDCs (such as phenols [5], personal care, and pharmaceutical products/PCPPs (such as antibiotic [2]). These pollutants have become a significant global concern since many of them are carcinogenic, resistant to conventional degradation treatment, and can be bioaccumulated in species through the food chain [2]. Thus, a tremendous effort is needed to find the best wastewater treatment for elimination of POPs from water resources.
Various methods have been extensively employed for the POPs removal in wastewater such as flocculation/coagulation [6], adsorption [5,7], photocatalytic [8,9], Fenton-like catalysts [10,11], membrane separation [12,13], and reverse osmosis [14]. Among these methods, adsorption, catalytic degradation, and membrane separation are promising techniques for eliminating harmful pollutants from wastewater due to their low cost and simple process [13,15,16]. The correct choice of materials has a significant influence on the removal performance of those methods [17,18,19]. In this context, metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have attracted tremendous attention as futuristic materials for wastewater treatment as an adsorbent, catalyst or membrane due to their advantageous features including adjustable pore topology, large internal surface area, and easy chemical tunability (Figure 1) [20,21,22].
Figure 1. Illustration of MOFs’ advantages as adsorbent, catalyst, or membrane for wastewater treatment.
MOFs are a new class of crystalline porous materials consisting of a regular arrangement of organic and inorganic components in a rigid periodic network structure [23]. The inorganic positively charged metal ions form nodes as secondary building units that bind the organic linkers together to form a repeating cage-like structure with a hollow structure, allowing MOFs with ultrahigh porosity (up to 90% free volume [24]) and extraordinarily large internal surface area (up to 7000 m2/g experimentally and 14,600 m2/g hypothetically [25]). Thanks to the nearly unlimited combination between metal nodes and organic linkers as their building blocks, MOFs enjoy an exponential growth with more than 90,000 structures found to date [22]. An example of the unlimited combination of MOFs structures that can be obtained between various metal nodes and two of the most favorable linkers (terephthalic acid and trimesic acid) can be seen in Figure 2 [19].
Figure 2. Example of unlimited combination between various metal nodes with: (left) 1,4-benzene dicarboxylate (terephthalic acid) to create UiO-66, MIL-101, MIL-53, MIL-88B, MOF-5, and (right) 1,3,5-benzene tricarboxylate (trimesic acid) to produce MIL-100 and MOF-199 (HKUST-1). Reproduced with permission from ref [19] Copyright (2021) Elsevier.
Although MOFs display good performance for wastewater treatment, its application is limited by its instability in water [26]. Several MOFs such as MOF-5 and MIL-101-V undergo ligand displacement caused by hydrolysis in water exposure, which degrades the MOF [27]. Nevertheless some MOFs such as MOF-74, MIL-101 (Al, Fe, Cr), MIL-53 (Al, Cr), UiO-66, and ZIF-8 show good stability in water [28,29,30,31], making these MOFs more suitable for wastewater pollutant adsorbent application. MOFs with a comparatively strong Mg-O bond (MOF-74), Zn-N bond (ZIF-8), Cr-O bond (MIL-101(Cr)), and Al-O bond (MIL-53(Al)) between their metal ion and organic ligand have been reported to have higher water stability than MOFs with a weaker Cu-O bond (HKUST-1) and Zn-O bond (MOF-5, MOF-508) [32]. Considering that MOFs water stability is mandatory requirement for their application in wastewater treatment, recent approach to enhance MOF’s water stability is discussed as a general strategy in this review. Furthermore, this review highlights recent strategies to improve water-stable MOFs’ performance that correlated with their specific role as an adsorbent, catalyst, or membrane. These include a novel solution either by MOFs functionalization, addition of metal doping, transition metal, semiconductor, or non-metal addition. A summary of specific improvement strategies can be seen in Figure 3. To date, discussion on many reviews only focuses on one or two specific roles of MOFs in wastewater treatment. Thus, this review might hold an advantage since this review offers an up-to-date strategy (from 2015 to 2021) with broader perspectives to cover all MOFs’ roles in wastewater treatment, either as an adsorbent, catalyst, or membrane.
Figure 3. Specific improvement strategies of MOFs as adsorbent, catalyst and membrane for wastewater treatment.

2. General Improvement Strategies: Enhancing the Water Stability of Metal-Organic Frameworks

For application in wastewater remediation where contact with water molecules is unavoidable, water stability is a must-have prerequisite in order for MOFs to be viable for use. Early MOFs such as MOF-5 are reported to be unstable in water (or steam/vapor), as the Zn2+ ion is not a high-valence ion that can support strong Zn-O coordination bond [33]. Recent advancements have led to the creation of thermodynamically water-stable MOFs such as the UiO-series and ZIF-series MOFs [34]. In general, the water stability of these MOFs can be attributed to its metal-ligand coordination bond, which is stronger than the bond between the MOF’s metal center and water molecules, thus preventing water from taking over and hydrolyzing the bond. This can be achieved by using high-valence metal ions (e.g., Zr, Ce) instead of lower valence ions (e.g., Zn, Cu) [35]. While the aforementioned criteria are necessary to enhance the MOF’s thermodynamic stability, it is not the sole governing factor of the MOF’s stability in water. Another aspect to consider is kinetic stability, in which stability can be achieved by relying on sufficiently high activation energy barrier (Ea) being present [36]. Thus, even if a MOF does not possess inherently good thermodynamic stability (i.e., water could hydrolyze the coordination bond if it manages to reach the metal core), stability may still be achieved by kinetic factors that presents activation energy barrier (i.e., the water could not even come near the metal core), including steric effects and hydrophobicity. In the former case, high metal coordination numbers can create a crowding effect, as well as the presence of ligands with aromatic structure that creates steric hindrance. In the latter case, hydrophobicity itself can be divided into two criteria: (1) hydrophobicity in the MOF’s internal structure, and (2) hydrophobicity in the surface/pores.
As this review aims to mainly discuss the improvement strategies on existing MOFs in wastewater remediation, strategies that involves changing the internal MOF’s structure/component during synthesis (i.e., thermodynamic stability) will not be discussed. A comprehensive review and compilation discussing the relation between each of the MOF’s structural factors and its water stability has been elegantly reviewed by Burtch et al. [36]. This section of the review will mainly focus on discussing the post-synthesis modification of existing MOF structure to make it more water-stable, which includes surface hydrophobic modification, as well as ligand functionalization of existing MOFs structures and introducing hydrophobic coating. A summary of improvement strategy for kinetically water-stable MOFs is presented in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Improvement strategies for kinetically water-stable MOFs through post-synthesis modification.

2.1. Ligand Functionalization

There are two ways in which the functionalization of ligands can improve the water stability of a given MOF. The first mechanism is by improving the internal hydrophobicity of the MOF. It has been widely reported that MOFs stability in water can be improved by incorporating hydrophobic fluorinated and alkyl functional groups on the organic ligands. The presence of a bulky and long alkyl group is demonstrated to be able to turn IRMOF-3, which is not inherently hydrophobic, into a hydrophobic material [37]. Additionally, the modification of aminated MIL-53 [MIL-53(Al)–NH2] by alkyl anhydrides, creating amide functional group, made the material superhydrophobic. In a separate work, attachment of fluorinated group in the form of fluorinated monocarboxylic acid, substituting monocarboxylic acid ligand in DUT-67, has been reported to improve the internal hydrophobicity and water stability of MOFs [38]. Another mechanism in which ligand functionalization can improve the water stability is by relying on steric factors. An interesting MOF to discuss here is UiO-66, where the MOF contains carboxylate ligands that have low pKa, and thus should have been susceptible to hydrolysis. The stability of UiO-66 can be attributed to two factors. The first one is due to the high coordination number, which creates a crowding effect and prevents water from clustering near the metal core. A high coordination number also means that even if one bond were to be hydrolyzed, there are still plenty of other bonding sites to support the lattice structure, therefore giving the overall structure higher tolerance before collapsing due to hydrolysis [39]. The second one can be attributed to the ligand itself, where the aromatic rings in the UiO-66 can exhibit significant rotational dynamics. DeCoste et al. demonstrated that UiO-67 which contains two aromatic rings is more susceptible to water than UiO-66 with only one aromatic ring, possibly due to the greater torsional strain created around the metal cluster [40].
Based on those principles, Zhang et al. developed a new highly water stable Zr-based MOF [41]. The group designed new Zr-based MOFs with hexacarboxylate ligands as functional groups, and the metal clusters are modified with four different functional groups, including HCOO, CH3COO, H2O/OH and PhCOO. Addition of such functional groups can tune the MOF’s water absorption and water stability properties. In a more computational approach, Batra et al. recently developed a machine learning model to predict the water stability of MOFs, using empirically measured dataset of water stabilities from over 200 MOFs to create a relation between each of the chemical and structural features to its water stability [42]. More precisely, the model took account of the MOFs’ metal node, organic linker, and molar ratios, and the developed model has successfully predicted the water stability of several MOFs with high accuracy relative to their experimental results. This generalized model can be used as a baseline for future experiments to synthesize new MOFs with the desired level of water stability in the future.

2.2. Addition of Hydrophobic Coating

The other strategy to improve the water stability of an MOF is by introducing hydrophobic molecules/polymers as hydrophobic coating to increase surface hydrophobicity of the MOF. Sun et al. successfully introduced a hydrophobic octadecyl phosphonic acid (OPA) layer to the surface of several Zr-based MOFs (UiO-66, UiO-66-SO3H, PCN-222) through immersion in OPA ethanol solution for 24 h [43]. Addition of OPA coating on the surface Zr-based MOFs boost the MOF’s hydrophobicity from hydrophilic pristine MOFs (water contact angle (WCA) of UiO-66, UiO-66-SO3H and PCN-222 are 19°, 10°, and 15° respectively) to superhydrophobic OPA-coated MOFs (WCA of OPA-UiO-66, OPA-UiO-66-SO3H and OPA-PCN-222 are 160°, 162°, and 157° respectively). The water stability of OPA-UiO-66-SO3H and OPA-PCN-222 was tested by immersing the MOFs in basic aqueous solution (pH = 11) for seven days. The water stability test was conducted only in basic solution as previous study reported that the MOFs were stable in acidic solutions [44,45]. Both OPA-UiO-66-SO3H and OPA-PCN-222 retained their respective surface area of 1156 and 1713 m2/g after seven days, while under the same conditions pristine UiO-66-SO3H lost 53.8% of its surface area from 1156 to 534 m2/g and pristine PCN-222 completely dissolved into the solution.
Qian et al. treated DUT-4 with organosilicon (namely hydrophobic-treated (HT) DUT-4) by immersing the MOF in organosilicon heptane solution and found that the MOF’s WCA was significantly increased from 13 ± 2 ° (pristine DUT-4) to 148 ± 3° (HT DUT-4) [46]. Water stability of the pristine and HT DUT-4 were evaluated by immersing them in acidic, neutral, and basic aqueous solution at 50 °C for six days. The surface area of the pristine DUT-4 decreased around 80% from 1183.8 m2/g to 192.7, 224.5, and 206.8 m2/g after six days immersion in acidic, neutral, and basic solution respectively. On the other hand, HT DUT-4 retained around 80% of its initial surface area of 1125.4 m2/g in acidic, neutral, and basic solution after six days with surface area of 903.6, 983.8, and 935.4 m2/g respectively.
In addition of using hydrophobic molecules, several studies successfully increased the surface hydrophobicity of MOFs by introducing hydrophobic polymeric materials to the MOFs. Ding et al. increased hydrophobicity and water stability of HKUST-1 by creating hydrophobic layer of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) on the MOF surface through post-synthesis in-situ polymerization [47]. The WCA of the PDMS coated HKUST-1 (designated HKUST-1-P) and pristine HKUST-1 was 135° and 0°, respectively, which proved that the method increased the hydrophobicity of HKUST-1. HKUST-1-P showed good water stability by retaining almost completely its surface area of 1352 m2/g after immersion in water for three days, while the surface area of pristine HKUST-1 decreased from 1451 m2/g to 0.5 m2/g. PDMS coating method is also powerful to increase hydrophobicity of other MOFs, such as ZIF-67 and MIL-125, from the WCA of 0° (their pristine form) to 146° (PDMS-coated ZIF-67) and 141° (PDMS-coated MIL-125), respectively. In a separate work, Yi et al. used catechol-functionalized PDMS (PDMS-Cat) also showed hydrophobicity improvement of ZIF-8 from the WCA of 0° (pristine form) to 126° (PDMS-Cat coated ZIF-8) [48]. Interestingly, stronger hydrophobicity was observed when PDMS-Cat-coated ZIF-8 casted on the carbon cloth substrate (WCA of 156°) since the excess PDMS-Cat that were present in the mixture will form a network and homogeneous MOF coating on the substrate. It is noteworthy that both researchers reported that PMDS [47] or PDMS-Cat [48] coating not only boost hydrophobicity of the MOFs, but also retain their catalytic performance in the presence of water molecules.

4. Conclusions and Future Perspectives

In this review, recent advancements in the use of MOFs for wastewater treatment have been highlighted based on their character and mechanism, specifically MOFs as an adsorbent material, catalyst, and membrane. The three wastewater mechanisms are based on the superiority of the MOF properties themselves. In general, wastewater treatment using MOF material is a new breakthrough, which tries to take benefit of the superiority of MOF properties, especially from the large surface area and highly porous structure, adaptable character, and abundant active sites variations. Furthermore, MOFs can be functionalized and combined with other materials to enhance its performance or cover its weaknesses. Utilization of MOF-derived nanomaterials have shown significantly better performance in wastewater treatment against organic pollutants when compared to traditional adsorbents, catalyst, or membranes. However, it should be noted that the research results obtained are still in the laboratory testing stage.
Although MOF materials have experienced tremendous growth in various aspects, there are still limitations and challenges in implementing MOFs as a wastewater treatment material, especially in large-scale and real-life practical situations. As such, future studies in realizing practical application of MOF may consider the following points:
  • A novel synthesis method to create unique nanostructures, as well as post-treatment modification of MOFs by combining them with other materials, should be experimented further to enhance performance (e.g., adsorption surface area, charge transfer efficiency, etc.) and reusability in aqueous environment. Various uncommon materials may be tried to assess its potential synergy with the MOF (e.g., using sulfide-based instead of oxide-based semiconductors).
  • So far, most reports utilize organic dyes such as methylene blue or methylene orange. Studies should attempt to examine its effectiveness in degrading other organic pollutants (e.g., emerging pollutants such as antibiotics, pesticides, PPCPs) to determine the MOF’s effectiveness against a wide range of organic pollutants found in real-life applications.
  • The influence of pH, temperature and solute ions should be considered, as practical conditions may differ significantly from laboratory conditions. Notably, many reports only report MOF’s usage in a narrow range of pH and in a controlled aqueous medium, whereas real effluent would present more diverse pH and other ions that can affect the MOF’s adsorption and catalytic kinetic (e.g., Na+, Cl, etc.). Development of highly adaptable MOFs that can be effective in a wide range of pH and are less influenced by other solute ions should be considered.
  • In photocatalysis and photo-Fenton catalysis, visible-light-driven catalysts are regarded as the more promising option compared to UV-driven catalysts, as sunlight comprises mostly of visible light. As such, future research may want to focus on using low band-gap MOFs, or utilizing various strategies (e.g., doping, creation of nanocomposite) to make the MOF’s band-gap more suitable for absorbing visible light.
  • Another important concern is preparing water-stable MOFs that are able to work in aqueous solution for POPs removal from the water stream. The post-synthesis approach might be crucial to prepare kinetically water-stable MOFs to retain their structure and maintain their performance in the presence of water molecules. Future research could be focused on the search of thermodynamically water-stable MOFs by discovering MOFs with a stronger coordination bond or kinetically water-stable MOFs by finding better hydrophobic coat that are suitable for MOFs.
The development of MOFs as a wastewater treatment material certainly still needs to be continued. The development is focused to further improve the performance of wastewater treatment material so that it is cheaper, practical, selective, and reusable. Many research approaches that have been taken from the direction of MOFs as adsorbents, catalysts, and membranes and have provided an understanding and conclusion that improving the performance of MOFs as wastewater treatment materials could be conducted through the functionalization of MOFs and the synergy of MOFs’ properties itself. The synergistic properties of MOF that are expected to exist simultaneously in wastewater treatment materials are properties as adsorbent, photocatalyst degradation, and separation membrane at the same time. These three properties are interrelated, and the coexistence of these three properties in a single system may be considered in designing future MOF materials for highly effective wastewater remediator. The other thing that should be focused on the future is the search for the right synthesis technique and MOF material modification, especially for preparing water-stable MOF. Another thing that needs to remain a concern in the development of this wastewater treatment material is the process of material regeneration, which should be easy and practical to make the MOF repeatedly reusable.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.W., A.P. and A.R.; methodology, A.W., E.P., D.R.E., A.H.A. and A.P.; funding acquisition, A.W.; project administration, A.W.; resources, A.W.; supervision, A.W. and A.R.; writing—original draft, A.W., M.A.M., E.P., J.B., A.W.Y.P.P., A.P., D.R.E. and A.H.A.; writing—review and editing, A.W., M.A.M., A.W.Y.P.P. and A.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the ITB Research Fund 2021 scheme from the Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the ITB Research Fund 2021 scheme from the Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gleick, P.H. Global freshwater resources: Soft-path solutions for the 21st century. Science 2003, 302, 1524–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Alharbi, O.M.; Khattab, R.A.; Ali, I. Health and environmental effects of persistent organic pollutants. J. Mol. Liq. 2018, 263, 442–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Singh, S.; Kaushal, S.; Kaur, J.; Kaur, G.; Mittal, S.K.; Singh, P.P. CaFu MOF as an efficient adsorbent for simultaneous removal of imidacloprid pesticide and cadmium ions from wastewater. Chemosphere 2021, 272, 129648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Seo, Y.S.; Khan, N.A.; Jhung, S.H. Adsorptive removal of methylchlorophenoxypropionic acid from water with a metal-organic framework. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 270, 22–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Azmi, L.H.M.; Williams, D.; Ladewig, B.P. Can metal organic frameworks outperform adsorptive removal of harmful phenolic compound 2-chlorophenol by activated carbon? Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2020, 158, 102–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rosińska, A.; Dąbrowska, L. Selection of coagulants for the removal of chosen PAH from drinking water. Water 2018, 10, 886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Khan, M.S.; Khalid, M.; Shahid, M. What triggers dye adsorption by metal organic frameworks? The current perspectives. Mater. Adv. 2020, 1, 1575–1601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Eddy, D.R.; Noviyanti, A.R.; Solihudin, S.; Ishmayana, S.; Tjokronegoro, R.-A. Rice husk for photocatalytic composite material fabrication. Visible-Light Photocatal. Carbon-Based Mater. 2018, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yuan, Y.-P.; Yin, L.-S.; Cao, S.-W.; Xu, G.-S.; Li, C.-H.; Xue, C. Improving photocatalytic hydrogen production of metal–organic framework UiO-66 octahedrons by dye-sensitization. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2015, 168, 572–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wibowo, A.; Indrawan, R.F.; Triadhi, U.; Aimon, A.H.; Iskandar, F.; Ardy, H. Simple preparation of Fenton catalyst@ bacterial cellulose for waste water treatment. Mater. Res. Express 2018, 5, 024005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lv, H.; Zhao, H.; Cao, T.; Qian, L.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, G. Efficient degradation of high concentration azo-dye wastewater by heterogeneous Fenton process with iron-based metal-organic framework. J. Mol. Catal. A Chem. 2015, 400, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sinha Ray, S.; Singh Bakshi, H.; Dangayach, R.; Singh, R.; Deb, C.K.; Ganesapillai, M.; Chen, S.-S.; Purkait, M.K. Recent developments in nanomaterials-modified membranes for improved membrane distillation performance. Membranes 2020, 10, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Kujawa, J.; Al-Gharabli, S.; Muzioł, T.M.; Knozowska, K.; Li, G.; Dumée, L.F.; Kujawski, W. Crystalline porous frameworks as nano-enhancers for membrane liquid separation–Recent developments. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2021, 440, 213969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yang, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Feng, Z.; Rui, X.; Zhang, T.; Zhang, Z. A review on reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes for water purification. Polymers 2019, 11, 1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Varghese, A.G.; Paul, S.A.; Latha, M. Remediation of heavy metals and dyes from wastewater using cellulose-based adsorbents. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2019, 17, 867–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yue, D.; Qian, X.; Zhao, Y. Photocatalytic remediation of ionic pollutant. Sci. Bull. 2015, 60, 1791–1806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nguyen, V.-H.; Smith, S.M.; Wantala, K.; Kajitvichyanukul, P. Photocatalytic remediation of persistent organic pollutants (POPs): A review. Arab. J. Chem. 2020, 13, 8309–8337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Pi, Y.; Li, X.; Xia, Q.; Wu, J.; Li, Y.; Xiao, J.; Li, Z. Adsorptive and photocatalytic removal of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in water by metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 337, 351–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bazargan, M.; Ghaemi, F.; Amiri, A.; Mirzaei, M. Metal–organic framework-based sorbents in analytical sample preparation. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2021, 445, 214107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lee, J.; Farha, O.K.; Roberts, J.; Scheidt, K.A.; Nguyen, S.T.; Hupp, J.T. Metal–organic framework materials as catalysts. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2009, 38, 1450–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Cirujano, F.G.; Luque, R.; Dhakshinamoorthy, A. Metal-organic frameworks as versatile heterogeneous solid catalysts for henry reactions. Molecules 2021, 26, 1445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Moosavi, S.M.; Nandy, A.; Jablonka, K.M.; Ongari, D.; Janet, J.P.; Boyd, P.G.; Lee, Y.; Smit, B.; Kulik, H.J. Understanding the diversity of the metal-organic framework ecosystem. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Furukawa, H.; Cordova, K.E.; O’Keeffe, M.; Yaghi, O.M. The chemistry and applications of metal-organic frameworks. Science 2013, 341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zhou, H.-C.; Long, J.R.; Yaghi, O.M. Introduction to metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 2012, 112, 673–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Farha, O.K.; Eryazici, I.; Jeong, N.C.; Hauser, B.G.; Wilmer, C.E.; Sarjeant, A.A.; Snurr, R.Q.; Nguyen, S.T.; Yazaydın, A.O.Z.R.; Hupp, J.T. Metal–organic framework materials with ultrahigh surface areas: Is the sky the limit? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 15016–15021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Canivet, J.; Fateeva, A.; Guo, Y.; Coasne, B.; Farrusseng, D. Water adsorption in MOFs: Fundamentals and applications. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 5594–5617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Low, J.J.; Benin, A.I.; Jakubczak, P.; Abrahamian, J.F.; Faheem, S.A.; Willis, R.R. Virtual high throughput screening confirmed experimentally: Porous coordination polymer hydration. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 15834–15842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ehrenmann, J.; Henninger, S.K.; Janiak, C. Water adsorption characteristics of MIL-101 for heat-transformation applications of MOFs. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. 2011, 4, 471–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Park, K.S.; Ni, Z.; Côté, A.P.; Choi, J.Y.; Huang, R.; Uribe-Romo, F.J.; Chae, H.K.; O’Keeffe, M.; Yaghi, O.M. Exceptional chemical and thermal stability of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 10186–10191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lan, X.; Zhang, H.; Bai, P.; Guo, X. Investigation of metal organic frameworks for the adsorptive removal of hydrochloride from dilute aqueous solution. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 2016, 231, 40–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Cavka, J.H.; Jakobsen, S.; Olsbye, U.; Guillou, N.; Lamberti, C.; Bordiga, S.; Lillerud, K.P. A new zirconium inorganic building brick forming metal organic frameworks with exceptional stability. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 13850–13851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Tan, K.; Nijem, N.; Gao, Y.; Zuluaga, S.; Li, J.; Thonhauser, T.; Chabal, Y.J. Water interactions in metal organic frameworks. CrystEngComm 2015, 17, 247–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ming, Y.; Kumar, N.; Siegel, D.J. Water adsorption and insertion in MOF-5. ACS Omega 2017, 2, 4921–4928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Feng, M.; Zhang, P.; Zhou, H.-C.; Sharma, V.K. Water-stable metal-organic frameworks for aqueous removal of heavy metals and radionuclides: A review. Chemosphere 2018, 209, 783–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Lee, Y.-J.; Chang, Y.-J.; Lee, D.-J.; Hsu, J.-P. Water stable metal-organic framework as adsorbent from aqueous solution: A mini-review. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2018, 93, 176–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Burtch, N.C.; Jasuja, H.; Walton, K.S. Water stability and adsorption in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 2014, 114, 10575–10612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nguyen, J.G.; Cohen, S.M. Moisture-resistant and superhydrophobic metal− organic frameworks obtained via postsynthetic modification. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 4560–4561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Drache, F.; Bon, V.; Senkovska, I.; Marschelke, C.; Synytska, A.; Kaskel, S. Postsynthetic inner-surface functionalization of the highly stable zirconium-based metal–organic framework DUT-67. Inorg. Chem. 2016, 55, 7206–7213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, Z.; Wang, L.; Qin, L.; Lai, C.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, M.; Xiao, L.; Liu, S.; Zhang, M. Recent advances in the application of water-stable metal-organic frameworks: Adsorption and photocatalytic reduction of heavy metal in water. Chemosphere 2021, 131432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. DeCoste, J.B.; Peterson, G.W.; Jasuja, H.; Glover, T.G.; Huang, Y.-g.; Walton, K.S. Stability and degradation mechanisms of metal–organic frameworks containing the Zr6O4(OH)4 secondary building unit. J. Mater. Chem. A 2013, 1, 5642–5650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhang, Y.-Z.; He, T.; Kong, X.-J.; Lv, X.-L.; Wu, X.-Q.; Li, J.-R. Tuning water sorption in highly stable Zr (IV)-metal–organic frameworks through local functionalization of metal clusters. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 27868–27874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Batra, R.; Chen, C.; Evans, T.G.; Walton, K.S.; Ramprasad, R. Prediction of water stability of metal–organic frameworks using machine learning. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2020, 2, 704–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Sun, Y.; Sun, Q.; Huang, H.; Aguila, B.; Niu, Z.; Perman, J.A.; Ma, S. A molecular-level superhydrophobic external surface to improve the stability of metal–organic frameworks. J. Mater. Chem. A 2017, 5, 18770–18776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Juan-Alcañiz, J.; Gielisse, R.; Lago, A.B.; Ramos-Fernandez, E.V.; Serra-Crespo, P.; Devic, T.; Guillou, N.; Serre, C.; Kapteijn, F.; Gascon, J. Towards acid MOFs–catalytic performance of sulfonic acid functionalized architectures. Catal. Sci. Technol. 2013, 3, 2311–2318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Feng, D.; Gu, Z.Y.; Li, J.R.; Jiang, H.L.; Wei, Z.; Zhou, H.C. Zirconium-metalloporphyrin PCN-222: Mesoporous metal–organic frameworks with ultrahigh stability as biomimetic catalysts. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 10307–10310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Qian, X.; Zhang, R.; Chen, L.; Lei, Y.; Xu, A. Surface hydrophobic treatment of water-sensitive DUT-4 metal–organic framework to enhance water stability for hydrogen storage. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2019, 7, 16007–16012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ding, M.; Jiang, H.-L. Improving water stability of metal–organic frameworks by a general surface hydrophobic polymerization. CCS Chem. 2020, 2740–2748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Yi, B.; Wong, Y.L.; Hou, C.; Zhang, J.; Xu, Z.; Yao, X. Coordination-driven assembly of metal–organic framework coating for catalytically active superhydrophobic surface. Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 8, 2001202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Seow, T.W.; Lim, C.K. Removal of dye by adsorption: A review. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2016, 11, 2675–2679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Crini, G.; Lichtfouse, E.; Wilson, L.D.; Morin-Crini, N. Conventional and non-conventional adsorbents for wastewater treatment. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2019, 17, 195–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bernal, V.; Giraldo, L.; Moreno-Piraján, J.C. Physicochemical properties of activated carbon: Their effect on the adsorption of pharmaceutical compounds and adsorbate–adsorbent interactions. C 2018, 4, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sarici-Özdemir, Ç.; Önal, Y. Study to observe the applicability of the adsorption isotherms used for the adsorption of medicine organics onto activated carbon. Part. Sci. Technol. 2018, 36, 254–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. De Franco, M.A.E.; de Carvalho, C.B.; Bonetto, M.M.; de Pelegrini Soares, R.; Féris, L.A. Diclofenac removal from water by adsorption using activated carbon in batch mode and fixed-bed column: Isotherms, thermodynamic study and breakthrough curves modeling. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 181, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kårelid, V.; Larsson, G.; Björlenius, B. Effects of recirculation in a three-tank pilot-scale system for pharmaceutical removal with powdered activated carbon. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 193, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Zango, Z.U.; Jumbri, K.; Sambudi, N.S.; Ramli, A.; Abu Bakar, N.H.H.; Saad, B.; Rozaini, M.N.H.; Isiyaka, H.A.; Jagaba, A.H.; Aldaghri, O. A critical review on metal-organic frameworks and their composites as advanced materials for adsorption and photocatalytic degradation of emerging organic pollutants from wastewater. Polymers 2020, 12, 2648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Au, V.K.-M. Recent advances in the use of metal-organic frameworks for dye adsorption. Front. Chem. 2020, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Haque, E.; Jun, J.W.; Jhung, S.H. Adsorptive removal of methyl orange and methylene blue from aqueous solution with a metal-organic framework material, iron terephthalate (MOF-235). J. Hazard. Mater. 2011, 185, 507–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chen, C.; Chen, D.; Xie, S.; Quan, H.; Luo, X.; Guo, L. Adsorption behaviors of organic micropollutants on zirconium metal–organic framework UiO-66: Analysis of surface interactions. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 41043–41054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Pouretedal, H.; Sadegh, N. Effective removal of amoxicillin, cephalexin, tetracycline and penicillin G from aqueous solutions using activated carbon nanoparticles prepared from vine wood. J. Water Process. Eng. 2014, 1, 64–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zango, Z.U.; Jumbri, K.; Sambudi, N.S.; Bakar, N.H.H.A.; Abdullah, N.A.F.; Basheer, C.; Saad, B. Removal of anthracene in water by MIL-88 (Fe), NH 2-MIL-88 (Fe), and mixed-MIL-88 (Fe) metal–organic frameworks. RSC Adv. 2019, 9, 41490–41501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Saad, M.E.K.; Khiari, R.; Elaloui, E.; Moussaoui, Y. Adsorption of anthracene using activated carbon and Posidonia oceanica. Arab. J. Chem. 2014, 7, 109–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Karmakar, S.; Roy, D.; Janiak, C.; De, S. Insights into multi-component adsorption of reactive dyes on MIL-101-Cr metal organic framework: Experimental and modeling approach. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019, 215, 259–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ahmadijokani, F.; Mohammadkhani, R.; Ahmadipouya, S.; Shokrgozar, A.; Rezakazemi, M.; Molavi, H.; Aminabhavi, T.M.; Arjmand, M. Superior chemical stability of UiO-66 metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) for selective dye adsorption. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 399, 125346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Akpinar, I.; Yazaydin, A.O. Adsorption of atrazine from water in metal–organic framework materials. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2018, 63, 2368–2375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lv, S.-W.; Liu, J.-M.; Ma, H.; Wang, Z.-H.; Li, C.-Y.; Zhao, N.; Wang, S. Simultaneous adsorption of methyl orange and methylene blue from aqueous solution using amino functionalized Zr-based MOFs. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 2019, 282, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Yang, J.-M.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, R.-Z.; Tong, M.-X. Modulation of the driving forces for adsorption on MIL-101 analogues by decoration with sulfonic acid functional groups: Superior selective adsorption of hazardous anionic dyes. Dalton Trans. 2020, 49, 6651–6660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Abdelhameed, R.M.; Taha, M.; Abdel-Gawad, H.; Hegazi, B. Amino-functionalized Al-MIL-53 for dimethoate pesticide removal from wastewater and their intermolecular interactions. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 327, 114852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Park, J.M.; Jhung, S.H. A remarkable adsorbent for removal of bisphenol S from water: Aminated metal-organic framework, MIL-101-NH2. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 396, 125224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Yu, J.; Xiong, W.; Li, X.; Yang, Z.; Cao, J.; Jia, M.; Xu, R.; Zhang, Y. Functionalized MIL-53 (Fe) as efficient adsorbents for removal of tetracycline antibiotics from aqueous solution. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 2019, 290, 109642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Song, J.Y.; Jhung, S.H. Adsorption of pharmaceuticals and personal care products over metal-organic frameworks functionalized with hydroxyl groups: Quantitative analyses of H-bonding in adsorption. Chem. Eng. J. 2017, 322, 366–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Zhuang, S.; Cheng, R.; Wang, J. Adsorption of diclofenac from aqueous solution using UiO-66-type metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 359, 354–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Gao, X.; Zheng, M.; Zhao, X.; Song, S.; Gao, Z. Ultra-high-capacity adsorption of rhodamine B in a carboxyl-functionalized metal–organic framework via surface adsorption. J. Chem. Eng. Data 2020, 66, 669–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yang, J.-M.; Ying, R.-J.; Han, C.-X.; Hu, Q.-T.; Xu, H.-M.; Li, J.-H.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, W. Adsorptive removal of organic dyes from aqueous solution by a Zr-based metal–organic framework: Effects of Ce (III) doping. Dalton Trans. 2018, 47, 3913–3920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zhang, C.; Li, H.; Li, C.; Li, Z. Fe-loaded MOF-545 (Fe): Peroxidase-like activity for dye degradation dyes and high adsorption for the removal of dyes from wastewater. Molecules 2020, 25, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Yang, Z.-h.; Cao, J.; Chen, Y.-p.; Li, X.; Xiong, W.-p.; Zhou, Y.-y.; Zhou, C.-y.; Xu, R.; Zhang, Y.-r. Mn-doped zirconium metal-organic framework as an effective adsorbent for removal of tetracycline and Cr (VI) from aqueous solution. Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 2019, 277, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yang, S.; Karve, V.V.; Justin, A.; Kochetygov, I.; Espin, J.; Asgari, M.; Trukhina, O.; Sun, D.T.; Peng, L.; Queen, W.L. Enhancing MOF performance through the introduction of polymer guests. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2021, 427, 213525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Hou, L.; Wang, L.; Zhang, N.; Xie, Z.; Dong, D. Polymer brushes on metal–organic frameworks by UV-induced photopolymerization. Polym. Chem. 2016, 7, 5828–5834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Abdi, J.; Abedini, H. MOF-based polymeric nanocomposite beads as an efficient adsorbent for wastewater treatment in batch and continuous systems: Modelling and experiment. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 400, 125862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fu, Q.; Wen, L.; Zhang, L.; Chen, X.; Pun, D.; Ahmed, A.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, H. Preparation of ice-templated MOF–polymer composite monoliths and their application for wastewater treatment with high capacity and easy recycling. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 33979–33988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Ngah, W.W.; Teong, L.; Hanafiah, M.M. Adsorption of dyes and heavy metal ions by chitosan composites: A review. Carbohydr. Polym. 2011, 83, 1446–1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Abednatanzi, S.; Derakhshandeh, P.G.; Depauw, H.; Coudert, F.-X.; Vrielinck, H.; Van Der Voort, P.; Leus, K. Mixed-metal metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2019, 48, 2535–2565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Eddy, D.R.; Ishmah, S.N.; Permana, M.D.; Firdaus, M.L. Synthesis of titanium dioxide/silicon dioxide from beach sand as photocatalyst for Cr and Pb remediation. Catalysts 2020, 10, 1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Xiang, W.; Zhang, Y.; Lin, H.; Liu, C.-J. Nanoparticle/metal–organic framework composites for catalytic applications: Current status and perspective. Molecules 2017, 22, 2103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Yang, Q.; Xu, Q.; Jiang, H.-L. Metal–organic frameworks meet metal nanoparticles: Synergistic effect for enhanced catalysis. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2017, 46, 4774–4808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Alvaro, M.; Carbonell, E.; Ferrer, B.; Llabrés i Xamena, F.X.; Garcia, H. Semiconductor behavior of a metal-organic framework (MOF). Chem. A Eur. J. 2007, 13, 5106–5112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Cao, J.; Yang, Z.-H.; Xiong, W.-P.; Zhou, Y.-Y.; Peng, Y.-R.; Li, X.; Zhou, C.-Y.; Xu, R.; Zhang, Y.-R. One-step synthesis of Co-doped UiO-66 nanoparticle with enhanced removal efficiency of tetracycline: Simultaneous adsorption and photocatalysis. Chem. Eng. J. 2018, 353, 126–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Huang, Q.; Hu, Y.; Pei, Y.; Zhang, J.; Fu, M. In situ synthesis of TiO2@ NH2-MIL-125 composites for use in combined adsorption and photocatalytic degradation of formaldehyde. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2019, 259, 118106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Gómez-Avilés, A.; Peñas-Garzón, M.; Bedia, J.; Dionysiou, D.; Rodríguez, J.; Belver, C. Mixed Ti-Zr metal-organic-frameworks for the photodegradation of acetaminophen under solar irradiation. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2019, 253, 253–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Ao, D.; Zhang, J.; Liu, H. Visible-light-driven photocatalytic degradation of pollutants over Cu-doped NH2-MIL-125 (Ti). J. Photochem. Photobiol. A Chem. 2018, 364, 524–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wang, S.; Meng, F.; Sun, X.; Bao, M.; Ren, J.; Yu, S.; Zhang, Z.; Ke, J.; Zeng, L. Bimetallic Fe/In metal-organic frameworks boosting charge transfer for enhancing pollutant degradation in wastewater. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2020, 528, 147053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Zhang, Z.; Wang, S.; Bao, M.; Ren, J.; Pei, S.; Yu, S.; Ke, J. Construction of ternary Ag/AgCl/NH2-UiO-66 hybridized heterojunction for effective photocatalytic hexavalent chromium reduction. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2019, 555, 342–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Tilgner, D.; Kempe, R. A plasmonic colloidal photocatalyst composed of a metal–organic framework core and a gold/anatase shell for visible-light-driven wastewater purification from antibiotics and hydrogen evolution. Chem. A Eur. J. 2017, 23, 3184–3190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Zhang, W.; Chen, Z.; Al-Naji, M.; Guo, P.; Cwik, S.; Halbherr, O.; Wang, Y.; Muhler, M.; Wilde, N.; Gläser, R. Simultaneous introduction of various palladium active sites into MOF via one-pot synthesis: Pd@[Cu3−xPdx(BTC)2]n. Dalton Trans. 2016, 45, 14883–14887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Abdelhameed, R.M.; Tobaldi, D.M.; Karmaoui, M. Engineering highly effective and stable nanocomposite photocatalyst based on NH2-MIL-125 encirclement with Ag3PO4 nanoparticles. J. Photochem. Photobiol. A Chem. 2018, 351, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Sofi, F.A.; Majid, K.; Mehraj, O. The visible light driven copper based metal-organic-framework heterojunction: HKUST-1@ Ag-Ag3PO4 for plasmon enhanced visible light photocatalysis. J. Alloys Compd. 2018, 737, 798–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Weng, B.; Qi, M.-Y.; Han, C.; Tang, Z.-R.; Xu, Y.-J. Photocorrosion inhibition of semiconductor-based photocatalysts: Basic principle, current development, and future perspective. ACS Catal. 2019, 9, 4642–4687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Hu, L.; Deng, G.; Lu, W.; Pang, S.; Hu, X. Deposition of CdS nanoparticles on MIL-53 (Fe) metal-organic framework with enhanced photocatalytic degradation of RhB under visible light irradiation. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2017, 410, 401–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Heu, R.; Ateia, M.; Awfa, D.; Punyapalakul, P.; Yoshimura, C. Photocatalytic degradation of organic micropollutants in water by Zr-MOF/GO composites. J. Compos. Sci. 2020, 4, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Oveisi, M.; Asli, M.A.; Mahmoodi, N.M. Carbon nanotube based metal-organic framework nanocomposites: Synthesis and their photocatalytic activity for decolorization of colored wastewater. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2019, 487, 169–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Cui, Y.; Nengzi, L.-C.; Gou, J.; Huang, Y.; Li, B.; Cheng, X. Fabrication of dual Z-scheme MIL-53 (Fe)/α-Bi2O3/g-C3N4 ternary composite with enhanced visible light photocatalytic performance. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020, 232, 115959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Tao, X.; Yuan, X.; Huang, L.; Shang, S.; Xu, D. Fe-based metal–organic frameworks as heterogeneous catalysts for highly efficient degradation of wastewater in plasma/Fenton-like systems. RSC Adv. 2020, 10, 36363–36370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Lu, S.; Liu, L.; Demissie, H.; An, G.; Wang, D. Design and application of metal-organic frameworks and derivatives as heterogeneous Fenton-like catalysts for organic wastewater treatment: A review. Environ. Int. 2021, 146, 106273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Sun, Q.; Liu, M.; Li, K.; Zuo, Y.; Han, Y.; Wang, J.; Song, C.; Zhang, G.; Guo, X. Facile synthesis of Fe-containing metal–organic frameworks as highly efficient catalysts for degradation of phenol at neutral pH and ambient temperature. CrystEngComm 2015, 17, 7160–7168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Sharma, V.K.; Feng, M. Water depollution using metal-organic frameworks-catalyzed advanced oxidation processes: A review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 372, 3–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Ding, J.; Sun, Y.-G.; Ma, Y.-L. Highly stable Mn-doped metal–organic framework fenton-like catalyst for the removal of wastewater organic pollutants at all light levels. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 2949–2955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Liu, J.; Li, X.; Liu, B.; Zhao, C.; Kuang, Z.; Hu, R.; Liu, B.; Ao, Z.; Wang, J. Shape-controlled synthesis of metal–organic frameworks with adjustable fenton-Like catalytic Activity. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 38051–38056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Liang, R.; Jing, F.; Shen, L.; Qin, N.; Wu, L. M@ MIL-100 (Fe)(M= Au, Pd, Pt) nanocomposites fabricated by a facile photodeposition process: Efficient visible-light photocatalysts for redox reactions in water. Nano Res. 2015, 8, 3237–3249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Li, Y.; Jiang, J.; Fang, Y.; Cao, Z.; Chen, D.; Li, N.; Xu, Q.; Lu, J. TiO2 nanoparticles anchored onto the metal–organic framework NH2-MIL-88B (Fe) as an adsorptive photocatalyst with enhanced fenton-like degradation of organic pollutants under visible light irradiation. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 16186–16197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Yang, R.; Peng, Q.; Yu, B.; Shen, Y.; Cong, H. Yolk-shell Fe3O4@ MOF-5 nanocomposites as a heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst for organic dye removal. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 267, 118620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Li, W.; Wu, X.; Li, S.; Tang, W.; Chen, Y. Magnetic porous Fe3O4/carbon octahedra derived from iron-based metal-organic framework as heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2018, 436, 252–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Nguyen, V.H.; Bach, L.G.; Bui, Q.T.P.; Nguyen, T.D.; Vo, D.-V.N.; Vu, H.T.; Do, S.T. Composite photocatalysts containing MIL-53 (Fe) as a heterogeneous photo-Fenton catalyst for the decolorization of rhodamine B under visible light irradiation. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 7434–7441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Zhang, H.; Chen, S.; Zhang, H.; Fan, X.; Gao, C.; Yu, H.; Quan, X. Carbon nanotubes-incorporated MIL-88B-Fe as highly efficient Fenton-like catalyst for degradation of organic pollutants. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2019, 13, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Gong, Q.; Liu, Y.; Dang, Z. Core-shell structured Fe3O4@ GO@ MIL-100 (Fe) magnetic nanoparticles as heterogeneous photo-Fenton catalyst for 2, 4-dichlorophenol degradation under visible light. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 371, 677–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Bagherzadeh, S.B.; Kazemeini, M.; Mahmoodi, N.M. Preparation of novel and highly active magnetic ternary structures (metal-organic framework/cobalt ferrite/graphene oxide) for effective visible-light-driven photocatalytic and photo-Fenton-like degradation of organic contaminants. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2021, 602, 73–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Li, Y.; Fang, Y.; Cao, Z.; Li, N.; Chen, D.; Xu, Q.; Lu, J. Construction of g-C3N4/PDI@ MOF heterojunctions for the highly efficient visible light-driven degradation of pharmaceutical and phenolic micropollutants. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2019, 250, 150–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Fang, M.; Montoro, C.; Semsarilar, M. Metal and covalent organic frameworks for membrane applications. Membranes 2020, 10, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Biemmi, E.; Scherb, C.; Bein, T. Oriented growth of the metal organic framework Cu3(BTC)2(H2O)3·xH2O tunable with functionalized self-assembled monolayers. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 8054–8055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Xu, T.; Shehzad, M.A.; Wang, X.; Wu, B.; Ge, L.; Xu, T. Engineering leaf-like UiO-66-SO3H membranes for selective transport of cations. Nano-Micro Lett. 2020, 12, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Lestari, W.W.; Khafidhin, M.A.; Wijiyanti, R.; Widiastuti, N.; Handayani, D.S.; Arrozi, U.S.F.; Kadja, G.T. Novel mixed matrix membranes based on polyethersulfone and MIL-96 (Al) for CO 2 gas separation. Chem. Pap. 2021, 75, 3337–3351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Meyer, L.V.; Vogt, J.; Brede, F.A.; Schäfer, H.; Steinhart, M.; Müller-Buschbaum, K. In situ growth of luminescent MOF thin films of Sr/Eu (II)-imidazolate on functionalized nanostructured alumina. CrystEngComm 2013, 15, 9382–9386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Cao, F.; Zhang, C.; Xiao, Y.; Huang, H.; Zhang, W.; Liu, D.; Zhong, C.; Yang, Q.; Yang, Z.; Lu, X. Helium recovery by a Cu-BTC metal–organic-framework membrane. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012, 51, 11274–11278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Nagaraju, D.; Bhagat, D.G.; Banerjee, R.; Kharul, U.K. In situ growth of metal-organic frameworks on a porous ultrafiltration membrane for gas separation. J. Mater. Chem. A 2013, 1, 8828–8835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Aghili, F.; Ghoreyshi, A.A.; Van der Bruggen, B.; Rahimpour, A. Introducing gel-based UiO-66-NH2 into polyamide matrix for preparation of new super hydrophilic membrane with superior performance in dyeing wastewater treatment. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 105484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Nan, J.; Dong, X.; Wang, W.; Jin, W.; Xu, N. Step-by-step seeding procedure for preparing HKUST-1 membrane on porous α-alumina support. Langmuir 2011, 27, 4309–4312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Wu, X.; Yang, Y.; Lu, X.; Wang, Z. Seeded growth of high-performance ZIF-8 membranes in thick wall autoclaves assisted by modulator. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 613, 118518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Ma, X.; Li, Y.; Huang, A. Synthesis of nano-sheets seeds for secondary growth of highly hydrogen permselective ZIF-95 membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 597, 117629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Xu, L.; Zheng, Q.; Wang, Y.; Jiang, L.; Jiang, J.; Qiu, J. A pillared double-wall metal-organic framework adsorption membrane for the efficient removal of iodine from solution. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 274, 118436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Ibrahim, A.; Lin, Y. Pervaporation separation of organic mixtures by MOF-5 membranes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2016, 55, 8652–8658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Caddeo, F.; Vogt, R.; Weil, D.; Sigle, W.; Toimil-Molares, M.E.; Maijenburg, A.W. Tuning the size and shape of NanoMOFs via templated electrodeposition and subsequent electrochemical oxidation. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 25378–25387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Yao, W.; Guo, H.; Liu, H.; Li, Q.; Xue, R.; Wu, N.; Li, L.; Wang, M.; Yang, W. Simultaneous electrochemical determination of acetaminophen and dopamine based on metal-organic framework/multiwalled carbon nanotubes-Au@ Ag nanocomposites. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2019, 166, B1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Al-Kutubi, H.; Gascon, J.; Sudhölter, E.J.; Rassaei, L. Electrosynthesis of metal–organic frameworks: Challenges and opportunities. ChemElectroChem 2015, 2, 462–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Martinez Joaristi, A.; Juan-Alcañiz, J.; Serra-Crespo, P.; Kapteijn, F.; Gascon, J. Electrochemical synthesis of some archetypical Zn2+, Cu2+, and Al3+ metal organic frameworks. Cryst. Growth Des. 2012, 12, 3489–3498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Hauser, J.L.; Tso, M.; Fitchmun, K.; Oliver, S.R. Anodic electrodeposition of several metal organic framework thin films on indium tin oxide glass. Cryst. Growth Des. 2019, 19, 2358–2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Li, J.; Liu, R.; Zhu, J.; Li, X.; Yuan, S.; Tian, M.; Wang, J.; Luis, P.; Van der Bruggen, B.; Lin, J. Electrophoretic nuclei assembly of MOFs in polyamide membranes for enhanced nanofiltration. Desalination 2021, 512, 115125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Vatanpour, V.; Khadem, S.S.M.; Dehqan, A.; Al-Naqshabandi, M.A.; Ganjali, M.R.; Hassani, S.S.; Rashid, M.R.; Saeb, M.R.; Dizge, N. Efficient removal of dyes and proteins by nitrogen-doped porous graphene blended polyethersulfone nanocomposite membranes. Chemosphere 2021, 263, 127892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Mansor, E.S.; Ali, E.A.; Shaban, A. Tight ultrafiltration polyethersulfone membrane for cheese whey wastewater treatment. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 407, 127175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Mamah, S.C.; Goh, P.S.; Ismail, A.F.; Suzaimi, N.D.; Yogarathinam, L.T.; Raji, Y.O.; EL-badawi, T.H. Recent development in modification of polysulfone membrane for water treatment application. J. Water Process. Eng. 2020, 101835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Heng, Z.W.; Tan, Y.Y.; Chong, W.C.; Mahmoudi, E.; Mohammad, A.W.; Teoh, H.C.; Sim, L.C.; Koo, C.H. Preparation of a novel polysulfone membrane by incorporated with carbon dots grafted silica from rice husk for dye removal. J. Water Process. Eng. 2021, 40, 101805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Pramono, E.; Alfiansyah, R.; Ahdiat, M.; Wahyuningrum, D.; Radiman, C.L. Hydrophilic poly (vinylidene fluoride)/bentonite hybrid membranes for microfiltration of dyes. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 105376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Escorial, J.G.; Lanzanas, S.P.; Berjamin, K.J.; Caliolio, M.H.; Dimaunahan, E.; Lagura, V.; Milo, L.; Basilia, B. Development and physico-chemical characterization of Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) flat sheet membranes with antibacterial properties against E. coli and S. aureus. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1593, 012042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Lovey, J.; Shiny, J.; Alen, V.L. Performance and antifouling behaviour of nanoclay incorporated polysulfone ultrafiltration membrane for wastewater treatment. Desalin. Water Treat. 2020, 180, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Jacob, L.; Joseph, S.; Varghese, L.A. Polysulfone/MMT mixed matrix membranes for hexavalent chromium removal from wastewater. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2020, 45, 7611–7620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Rahimi, Z.; Zinatizadeh, A.A.; Zinadini, S.; van Loosdrecht, M.; Younesi, H. A new anti-fouling polysulphone nanofiltration membrane blended by amine-functionalized MCM-41 for post treating waste stabilization pond’s effluent. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 290, 112649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Vatanpour, V.; Esmaeili, M.; Chahvari, S.; Masteri-Farahani, M. Evaluation of morphology, performance and fouling tendency of mixed matrix PVDF ultrafiltration membranes incorporated by different size-controlled SAPO-34 nanozeolites. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 105900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Mahdavi, H.; Karami, M.; Heidari, A.A. Preparation of mixed matrix membranes made up of polysulfone and MIL-53 (Al) nanoparticles as promising membranes for separation of aqueous dye solutions. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 119033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Zheng, H.; Wang, D.; Sun, X.; Jiang, S.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, D.; Zhang, L. Surface modified by green synthetic of Cu-MOF-74 to improve the anti-biofouling properties of PVDF membranes. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 411, 128524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Dehghankar, M.; Mohammadi, T.; Moghadam, M.T.; Tofighy, M.A. Metal-organic framework/zeolite nanocrystal/polyvinylidene fluoride composite ultrafiltration membranes with flux/antifouling advantages. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2021, 260, 124128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Lin, Y.; Wu, H.-C.; Yasui, T.; Yoshioka, T.; Matsuyama, H. Development of an HKUST-1 nanofiller-templated poly (ether sulfone) mixed matrix membrane for a highly efficient ultrafiltration process. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 18782–18796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Wang, K.; Qin, Y.; Quan, S.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, P.; Liang, H.; Ma, J.; Cheng, X.Q. Development of highly permeable polyelectrolytes (PEs)/UiO-66 nanofiltration membranes for dye removal. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2019, 147, 222–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Zhou, S.; Gao, J.; Zhu, J.; Peng, D.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y. Self-cleaning, antibacterial mixed matrix membranes enabled by photocatalyst Ti-MOFs for efficient dye removal. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 610, 118219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Zhao, P.; Li, R.; Wu, W.; Wang, J.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y. In-situ growth of polyvinylpyrrolidone modified Zr-MOFs thin-film nanocomposite (TFN) for efficient dyes removal. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 176, 107208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Chen, L.; Wang, F.; Yang, W.; Gu, D.; Li, M.; Pan, Q. Cellulose membrane composited with ZIF-8 for selective separation of rhodamine B. ChemistrySelect 2020, 5, 4078–4084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Yang, L.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, J. Zeolite imidazolate framework hybrid nanofiltration (NF) membranes with enhanced permselectivity for dye removal. J. Membr. Sci. 2017, 532, 76–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Ma, J.; Guo, X.; Ying, Y.; Liu, D.; Zhong, C. Composite ultrafiltration membrane tailored by MOF@ GO with highly improved water purification performance. Chem. Eng. J. 2017, 313, 890–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Makhetha, T.; Moutloali, R. Antifouling properties of Cu (tpa)@ GO/PES composite membranes and selective dye rejection. J. Membr. Sci. 2018, 554, 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Zheng, G.; Yao, L.; You, X.; Liao, Y.; Wang, R.; Huang, J.J. Effects of different secondary nano-scaled roughness on the properties of omniphobic membranes for brine treatment using membrane distillation. J. Membr. Sci. 2021, 620, 118918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Li, T.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, L.; Gao, M.; Han, Z. A stable metal-organic framework nanofibrous membrane as photocatalyst for simultaneous removal of methyl orange and formaldehyde from aqueous solution. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2021, 617, 126359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Deng, Y.; Wu, Y.; Chen, G.; Zheng, X.; Dai, M.; Peng, C. Metal-organic framework membranes: Recent development in the synthesis strategies and their application in oil-water separation. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 127004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Zhang, L.; He, Y.; Luo, P.; Ma, L.; Li, S.; Nie, Y.; Zhong, F.; Wang, Y.; Chen, L. Photocatalytic GO/M88A “interceptor plate” assembled nanofibrous membrane with photo-Fenton self-cleaning performance for oil/water emulsion separation. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 130948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Hu, C.; Yoshida, M.; Huang, P.-H.; Tsunekawa, S.; Hou, L.-B.; Chen, C.-H.; Tung, K.-L. MIL-88B (Fe)-coated photocatalytic membrane reactor with highly stable flux and phenol removal efficiency. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 418, 129469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Heu, R.; Ateia, M.; Yoshimura, C. Photocatalytic nanofiltration membrane using Zr-MOF/GO nanocomposite with high-flux and anti-fouling properties. Catalysts 2020, 10, 711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Yang, S.; Zou, Q.; Wang, T.; Zhang, L. Effects of GO and MOF@ GO on the permeation and antifouling properties of cellulose acetate ultrafiltration membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 2019, 569, 48–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Sun, H.; Tang, B.; Wu, P. Hydrophilic hollow zeolitic imidazolate framework-8 modified ultrafiltration membranes with significantly enhanced water separation properties. J. Membr. Sci. 2018, 551, 283–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Baneshi, M.M.; Ghaedi, A.M.; Vafaei, A.; Emadzadeh, D.; Lau, W.J.; Marioryad, H.; Jamshidi, A. A high-flux P84 polyimide mixed matrix membranes incorporated with cadmium-based metal organic frameworks for enhanced simultaneous dyes removal: Response surface methodology. Environ. Res. 2020, 183, 109278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

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