Table 2.

Comparison of live and dead fungi sorption features.

S/no.	Sorption characteristics	Sorption by dead biomass	Sorption by living biomass	Reference
1	Cost-effectiveness	Utilize less cost	Utilize high cost	[36]
2	Recovery of toxicant	Possible	Difficult	[36]
3	Regeneration and reuse activities	Possible to reuse various cycle	Difficult	[28, 36]
4	Energy demand	Low energy demand	Energy is highly required	[36]
5	Rate of removal	Rapid	Usually slow due to intercellular accumulation	[36]
6	Selectivity	Poor, but can be improved by modification/processing of biomass	Better	[28, 36]
7	pH	Strongly affect sorption capacity	Partially sorption capacity	[28, 36]
8	Maintenance	Easy	Difficult	[36]
9	Cell disruption	No	Yes	[37, 38]
10	Percentage of heavy metals removal	High	Low	[37, 38]
11	Desorption efficiency	High	Low	[37, 38]
12	Recovery and reuse potential of the cell	High	Low	[37, 38]
13	Binding sites and functional groups	More	Less	[37, 38]
14	Modeling and analysis	Easy	Difficult	[4]