Additional file 1 of Investigation of Cd(II) sorption by mackinawite (FeS) under anoxic conditions
Creators: name: Park, Minji
name: Lee, Kwang-Sik
name: Ryu, Jungho
name: Song, Young-Suk
name: Jeong, Hoon Young
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2023
Subjects: subject: Biophysics
subject: Biochemistry
subject: Microbiology
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: Physiology
subject: 59999 Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: 39999 Chemical Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Chemical sciences
subject: Ecology
subject: 69999 Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified

description: Additional file 1: Figure S1 X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of as-synthesized FeS with Cu-Kα radiation. Diffraction peaks are indexed according to diffraction pattern of mackinawite. Figure S2 Time profiles of dissolved Fe(II) and Cd(II) concentrations at pH 4.9 (a) and 9.1 (b) in 0.01 M Cd(II)-added 10 g/L FeS batches. Figure S3 Sorbed Cd(II) concentration ([Cd(II)]sorb) versus initial Cd(II) concentration ([Cd(II)]0) at pH 5.5–6.0 (a) and 9.5–10.0 (b). Figure S4 Aqueous speciation of Cd(II) (a) and Hg(b) determined by MINEQL + 4.5 (Environmental Research Software) under the condition of initial M(II) concentration ([M(II)]0) at 0.015 M and total chloride concentration (ClT) at 0.2 M. In part (a), OH-complexes are CdOH+, Cd(OH)2o, Cd(OH)3−, Cd(OH)42−, and Cd2OH3+; and Cl-complexes are CdCl+, CdCl2o, CdCl3−, and CdOHClo. In part (b), OH-complexes are HgOH+, Hg(OH)2o, and Hg(OH)3−; and Cl-complexes are HgCl+, HgCl2o, HgCl3−, HgCl42−, and HgOHClo. Figure S5 Fe(II) adsorption in 10 g/L FeS batches at pH 5.5–6.0. While qFe(II) is adsorbed Fe(II) concentration, [Fe(II)]diss is dissolved Fe(II) concentration. Solid line represents the fit of a Langmuir isotherm. Sorption data are from Jeong et al. (2007). Figure S6 X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the samples that were freeze-dried and then wetted with glycerin. The samples were Cd(II)-reacted FeS batches with the surface loading of Cd(II) ([Cd(II)]0/[FeS]0) at 2.0 mmol/g. Figure S7 Measured dissolved Fe concentrations versus estimated Fe concentrations from the solubility of Fe(OH)2, chloride green rust, magnetite, and ferrihydrite along the measured (pH, Eh) couples. Measured data are from 0.01 M Cd(II)-added 10 g/L FeS at ClT = 0.2 M. Thermodynamic calculations were made by using MINEQL + 4.5. Figure S8 Transmission electron microscopy image (a) and its dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) maps of Cd (b), Fe (c), S (d), Cl (e), and O (f). The sample was from 0.015 M Cd(II)-reacted 2 g/L FeS batch at pH 4.6. Figure S9 Transmission electron microscopy image (a) and its dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) maps of Cd (b), Fe (c), S (d), Cl (e), and O (f). The sample was from 0.015 M Cd(II)-reacted 2 g/L FeS batch at pH 7.2. Figure S10 Transmission electron microscopy image (a) and its dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) maps of Cd (b), Fe (c), S (d), Cl (e), and O (f). The sample was from 0.015 M Cd(II)-reacted 2 g/L FeS batch at pH 9.8. Figure S11 Spatial correlations of Cd versus Fe (a), Fe versus S (b), Fe versus O (c), Cd versus S (d), Cd versus Cl (e), and Cd versus O (f). The EDS maps are from Fig. S8 (0.015 M Cd(II)-reacted 2 g/L FeS batch at pH 4.6). Figure S12 Spatial correlations of Cd versus Fe (a), Fe versus S (b), Fe versus O (c), Cd versus S (d), Cd versus Cl (e), and Cd versus O (f). The EDS maps are from Fig. S9 (0.015 M Cd(II)-reacted 2 g/L FeS batch at pH 7.2). To emphasize the Fe associations with S, the red line in part (b) is identical to the regression line in Fig. S11b. Figure S13 Spatial correlations of Cd versus Fe (a), Fe versus S (b), Fe versus O (c), Cd versus S (d), Cd versus Cl (e), and Cd versus O (f). The EDS maps are from Fig. S10 (0.015 M Cd(II)-reacted 2 g/L FeS batch at pH 9.8). To emphasize the Fe associations with S, the red line in part (b) is identical to the regression line in Fig. S11b.