Table 5. Comparative Analysis of Proposed and Published Methods for MB Removal.
| sorbent | pH | adsorbent dosage (g) | contact time (min) | temperature (°C) | capacity (mg g–1) | isotherm model | kinetic study | reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| magnetic boehmite composite | 7 | 0.05 | 180 | 25 | 70.03 | Langmuir | PSO | (44) |
| cyclodextrin-modified magnetic nanospheres | 7 | 0.005 | 40 | 25 | 305.8 | Langmuir | PSO | (45) |
| chitosan-zeolite zwitterion composite | 9 | 0.2 | 180 | 30 | 156.1 | Freundlich | PSO | (46) |
| sugar cane bagasse biochar | 7.4 | 0.03 | 180 | 30 | 38.76 | Langmuir | PSO | (47) |
| granular aerobic sludge | 6 | 0.25 | 60 | 25 | 381.7 | Langmuir | PSO | (48) |
| phragmites waste | 7 | 0.2 | 150 | 4 | 54.9 | Both | PSO | (49) |
| low cost activated sludge | 0.06 | 10 | 25 | 366.3 | Langmuir | PSO | (50) | |
| modified-activated sludge composite | 6 | 0.02 | 25 | 181.4 | Both | PSO | (51) | |
| poly(LIM-co-DVB-co-AMPS) | 7 | 0.01 | 30 | 25 | 98 | Langmuir | PSO | this work |