<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">AS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Agricultural Sciences</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2156-8553</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/as.2019.107067</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">AS-93640</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Biomedical&amp;Life Sciences</subject><subject> Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Effective Sodium Metabisulfite (Na&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt;S&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt;O&lt;sub&gt;5&lt;/sub&gt;), HCl, Sulfur and Distilled Water for the Removal of Pb, Zn and Cr Contaminated Soil in the Columns Method
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Abdulbaset</surname><given-names>Egrira Salama</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sub>1</sub></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><addr-line>Department of Soil and Water, Faculty of Agriculture, Bani Waleed University, Bani Waleed, Libya</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>09</day><month>07</month><year>2019</year></pub-date><volume>10</volume><issue>07</issue><fpage>882</fpage><lpage>892</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>28,</day>	<month>March</month>	<year>2019</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>8,</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2019</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>11,</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2019</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  This paper presents an evaluation of different dose of Sodium Metabisulfite (0.01 M Na
  <sub>2</sub>S
  <sub>2</sub>O
  <sub>5</sub>), (Na
  <sub>2</sub>S
  <sub>2</sub>O
  <sub>5</sub>) + (0.1 HCl), and Distilled water for the removal of soil contaminated with Pb, Zn and Cr by the column mode. The field soil contained concentrations of Pb (307.31 mg
  &amp;#8901;kg
  <sup>&amp;#8722;1</sup>), Zn (207.77 
  mg
  &amp;#8901;
  kg
  <sup style="white-space:normal;">&amp;#8722;1</sup>) and Cr (447.50 
  mg
  &amp;#8901;
  kg
  <sup style="white-space:normal;">&amp;#8722;1</sup>). Both (0.01 M 
  Na
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  S
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  O
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">5</sub>), (
  Na
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  S
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  O
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">5</sub>) + (0.1 HCl), and Distilled water were found to be effective on removing (
  Na
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  S
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  O
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">5</sub>) Pb, Cr and Zn respectively. (
  Na
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  S
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  O
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">5</sub>) + (0.1 HCl) Cr, Zn and Pb respectively. Sulfur Pb, Cr and Zn respectively. The removal rate of Pb, Zn, and Cr varied from 10.35% - 26%, 3.4% - 21.60% and 4.97% - 23.88% for (0.01 M 
  Na
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  S
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  O
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">5</sub> respectively. The removal rate of Pb, Zn, and Cr varied from 16.13% - 20.07%, 8.20% - 23.48%, 5.42% - 28.93% for (0.01 M 
  Na
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  S
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">2</sub>
  O
  <sub style="white-space:normal;">5</sub> + 0.1 M HCl) respectively. The removal rate of Pb, Zn, and Cr varied from 10.20% - 25.5%, 9.55% - 25.13% and 6.04% - 25.54% for (S) respectively.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Sodium Metabisulfite (Na&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt;S&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt;O&lt;sub&gt;5&lt;/sub&gt;)</kwd><kwd> HCl</kwd><kwd> Sulfur and Distilled Water</kwd><kwd> Pb</kwd><kwd> Zn and Cr Soil Contaminated Sequential Washing</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Industrialization and modern lifestyles have led to the production and release of hazardous effluents into the environment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref2">2</xref>] . Pollution of soils with nonbiode-gradable pollutants such as heavy metals is an important environmental concern that affects both industrialized and emerging countries [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref6">6</xref>] . It has been estimated that about 235 million ha of arable land worldwide are polluted by heavy metals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref7">7</xref>] . Heavy metals have a considerable toxicity for microorganisms, plants, and animals and can present high potential risks to human health [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref10">10</xref>] . Many chemical, physical, and biological methods have been suggested to solve the problem of heavy metal contamination, in which soil washing is one of the most effective treatments [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref11">11</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref12">12</xref>] . Among all heavy metals, lead (Pb) has recently gained increased interest due to its potential to cause various toxicological effects in humans, such as anemia, liver and kidney damage, and cancer [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref13">13</xref>] . In soil washing techniques, where soil-bound contaminants are transferred to the liquid phase by desorption and solubilization, acid washing and chelator soil washing are two most prevalent removal methods [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref14">14</xref>] . A mixture of 0.1 M Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> and 0.01 M Na<sub>2</sub>EDTA provide an economically optimum solution for Cd and Zn removal [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref15">15</xref>] . Soil washing can be practiced in two ways, batch washing and column washing. Compared to batch washing, column washing has many advantages. Firstly, the soil structure remains intact, which is not the case for batch extractions. Secondly, the process can minimize the chance of workers exposure to contaminants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref16">16</xref>] . What’s more, column washing was proved to have better metal removal effects than batch washing [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref17">17</xref>] . Soil washing is particularly frequently used in soil remediation because it: 1) completely removes the contaminants, hence ensures the rapid cleanup of a contaminated site [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref18">18</xref>] , 2) meets specific criteria, 3) reduces or eliminates long-term liability, 4) may be the most cost-effective solution and may produce recyclable material or energy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref19">19</xref>] . Since heavy metals are sparingly soluble and occur predominantly in a sorbed state, washing the soils with water alone is expected to remove too low an amount of cations in the leachates, chemical agents have to be added to the washing water [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref20">20</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref21">21</xref>] . With chemical soil washing, soil particles are cleaned by selectively transferring the contaminants from the soil into solution [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref22">22</xref>] . The effectiveness of washing is closely related to the ability of the extracting solution to dissolve the metal contaminants in soils. However, the strong bonds between the soil and metals make the cleaning process difficult. Therefore, only extract ants capable of optimally dissolving the metals must be carefully sought during soil washing. One of the permanent solutions is soil washing with solutions containing chelating agents which, contrary to acid washing processes, permit heavy metal desorption from soil solid phase by forming strong and water soluble metal ligand complexes without deterioration of soil physico-chemical properties [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref23">23</xref>] . The object of this paper was to evaluate the removal efficiency of the heavy metal by using (0.01 M Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>), (Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>) + (0.1 HCl), and S+ Distilled water in treating a contaminated soil in laboratory columns and to select the optimal conditions. The study also focused on the dispose of leaching washing.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><p>The clay-loam soil used in this study was collected from soil sample surface (0 - 40 cm) located in Bahira City, Egypt northern. The sampling period in (2015), Soil sampling geographic coordinate 31.197045N and 18.098445E. The sample were aired air dried and crushed pass through 2 mm sieve to elaborate the different analysis—Soil Physical Analysis: Texture was determined using sieves and Hydrometer method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref24">24</xref>] .</p><p>Soil Chemical Analysis: Salinity was measured at in the soil paste extract and pH of 1:2.5 soil suspension by EC meter and P<sup>H</sup> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref25">25</xref>] , Sodium Absorption Ration (SAR) was calculated from Ca, Mg, and Na soluble concentrations, soil organic matter content (OM%) was determined by Walkely &amp; Black method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref25">25</xref>] and CaCO<sub>3</sub>% was determined using the pressure calcimeter method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref25">25</xref>] . <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> shows chemical characteristics of soil surface sample extremely alkaline, p<sup>H</sup> values &gt; 8, Nonsaline, moderately sodic and low organic matter.</p><p>Columns washing studies were carried in lab to examine the removal efficiency of the heavy-metal by using different includes doses from (0.01 M Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>), (Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>) + (0.1 HCl), sulfur and Distilled water in a contaminated soil. Firstly, to evaluate the effect of (0.01 M Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>), (0.01 Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>) + (0.1 HCl), Sulfur (250 g) mixture with soil (2250 g) and Distilled water concentrations on the removal of Pb, Zn and Cr. Briefly, 2500 grams of contaminated soil was placed in soil columns (A, B) and 2250 grams of contaminated soil and 250 grams of sulfur of was placed in soil column (C). Distilled water was added to the column (C) samples at 980 ml ratio distilled water. The soils in the columns were initially saturated with deionized water from the bottom to avoid entrapment of air in the soil pore space. Column with 7.5 cm in diameter and 120 cm in height. A plastic mesh (D = 0.2 mm) was placed at the bottom of the column to retain the soil. Due to the long period of time required for leaching of the chelating agent solution from a high-density soil column by gravity and precipitation of some compounds, which decreased hydraulic conductivity of solution during leaching, Determination of metals: heavy metals were determined in soil sample using Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer Shimadzu model (AA-6650). Digestion of soil sample: Using dry ashing at 430˚C - 600˚C and then diluted with 1:1 (10% HCl: Water) and then filtrate the solution.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results and Discussion</title><p>Effects of Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> on Heavy Metals Removal:</p><p>The evolution of treatment of soil samples with a contamination rate Pb (307.31 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>), Zn (207.77 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) and Cr (447.50 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) with heavy metal (Pb, Zn and Cr) Before the Additions of 0.01, Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> with corresponding volume</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Chemical Characteristics of soil surface sample</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Sam.</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >p<sup>H</sup></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >EC dS/m</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="6"  >Soluble Ions (meq / L)</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >SAR</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >CaCO<sub>3</sub> (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >OM (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ca<sup>2+</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mg<sup>2+</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Na<sup>+</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >K<sup>+</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cl<sup>−</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SO 4 2 −</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sample</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.20</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>of Depths in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>. Each for contaminated soil was equal to 980 mL per 2500 g of soil. Remediation of heavy metals contaminated soils depends, among other factors, on the time elapsing between the chelating agent in the leaching solution and the total metal content bound to the soil particles [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref26">26</xref>] . Meantime, leaching for the first, leaching (Column(A)) by Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> at Depth (20 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 54.06 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 29 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, and 60 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. at Depth (40 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 31.78 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 27.27 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 20 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. at Depth (60 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 42.57 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 44 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 86 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. at Depth (80 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 63.78 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 32.53 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 96 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. at Depth (100 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 34.97 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 36.63 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 50 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. at Depth (120 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 26 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 33.52 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 90 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> shows the removal efficiency Pb, Zn and Cr in soil after washing with Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>. The removal rate of Pb, Zn and Cr varied from at Depth (20 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 17.61%, 14.93% and 13.43% respectively. at Depth (40 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 10.35%, 13.45% and 4.97% respectively. at Depth (60 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 13.87%, 21.6% and 21.4%respectively. at Depth (80 cm)</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Heavy Metals (mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) Content in Sectioned Soil Column Leached with (0.01 M) Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub></title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Depth (cm)</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="12"  >Column(A)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >Heavy Metals (mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Removal%</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Heavy Metals</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Statistical Analysis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >17.61</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.43</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Med</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.03</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >10.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Mean</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >13.87</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >SD</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.99</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >20.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.88</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Max</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36.63</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >11.39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.44</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Min</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.52</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >90</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >26.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>for Pb, Zn and Cr were 20.77%, 16.1% and 23.88 %respectively. at Depth (100 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 11.39%, 18% and 12.44% respectively. at Depth (120 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 26.00%, 16.55% and 22.39% respectively. removal efficiencies for Pb, high at Depth (120 cm) concentration obviously affected Pb removal from contaminated soils, removal efficiencies for Cr, at Depth (80 cm), removal efficiencies for Cr, at Depth (120 cm), removal efficiencies for Zn, at Depth (60 cm), removal efficiencies for Zn, at Depth (100 cm), removal efficiencies for pb, at Depth (20 cm). removal efficiencies for Cr and Zn respectively, low at Depth (40 cm), This phenomenon could be explained by that the presence of large concentrations of ions without participation in chelation process (such as the large quantity of sodium ions present in the Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> solutions) can lower the stability of metal–chelant complexes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref27">27</xref>] . The different properties of the metals and their different release mechanisms resulted in differences in their mobility during soil washing [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref28">28</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref29">29</xref>] . In the washing process of the column soil, initially, the weakly bound metals were released from the soil, then the residual fractions, strongly bound metals such as oxides and silicates, were extracted from the retained contaminants [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref30">30</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref31">31</xref>] .</p><p>Effects of Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> + HCl on Heavy Metals Removal:</p><p>The evolution of treatment of soil samples with a contamination rate Pb (307.31 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>), Zn (207.77 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) and Cr (447.50 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) with heavy metal (Pb, Zn and Cr) Before the Additions of Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>+HCl with corresponding volume of Depths in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> Each for contaminated soil was equal to 980 mL per 2500 g of soil. Washing of metal-contaminated soils with 0.1 M HCl, showed some promise as a remediation technique as it rapidly and effectively removes some heavy metals (e.g., Cr, Pb, Zn and Ni) from contaminated soils [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref32">32</xref>] . Remediation of heavy metals contaminated soils depends, among other factors, on the time elapsing between the chelating agent in the leaching solution and the total metal content bound to the soil particles [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref26">26</xref>] . Meantime, leaching for the first, leaching (Column (B)) by Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> + HCl at Depth (20 cm) for Pb, Zn and</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Heavy metals (mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) Content in sectioned soil column leached with Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> + HCl</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Depths (cm)</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="10"  >Column(B)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Heavy Metals (mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Removal%</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >Heavy Metals</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Statistical Analysis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Med</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.055</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.50</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.92</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mean</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.90</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SD</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.68</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.34</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Max</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.78</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.02</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Min</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Cr were 45 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 23.45 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 6.70 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (40 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 50 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 13.11 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 3.15 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (60 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 36 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 23.62 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 16.78 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (80 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 56 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 37.5 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 12.38 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (100 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 45 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 28.49 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 9.02 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> ppm respectively. At Depth (120 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 47 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 33.54 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 9.97 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> shows the removal efficiency Pb, Zn and Cr in soil after washing with Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> + HCl. The removal rate of Pb, Zn and Cr varied from at Depth (20 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 16.13%, 14.68% and 11.54% respectively. at Depth (40 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 17.92%, 8.20% and 5.42% respectively. at Depth (60 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 12.90%, 14.78% and 28.93% respectively. at Depth (80 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 20.07%, 23.48% and 21.34% respectively. at Depth (100 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 16.13%, 17.83% and 15.55% respectively. at Depth (120 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 16.84%, 21% and 17.19% respectively. removal efficiencies for Cr, high at Depth (60 cm) concentration obviously affected Cr removal from contaminated soils, removal efficiencies for Zn, at Depth (80 cm), removal efficiencies for Pb, at Depth (80 cm), removal efficiencies for Pb, at Depth (40 cm), removal efficiencies for Zn, at Depth (100 cm), removal efficiencies for pb, at Depth (20 and 100 cm). removal efficiencies for Zn and Cr respectively, low at Depth (40 cm). 0.1 M hydrochloric acid releases heavy metals from many soil “pools”, e.g., exchangeable, organically complexed and secondary minerals (carbonates, oxides and hydroxides of iron and manganese) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref33">33</xref>] . HCl is very effective in the removal of heavy metals and achieve high removal efficiency in the case of natural pH without neutralization to no loss the acidic property that are of high importance for the movement of contaminant sand solubility and thus easily extracted.</p><p>Effects of Sulfur 250 g (10%) + Soil 2250 g (90%). Distilled water on Heavy Metals Removal:</p><p>The use of elemental S to decrease soil pH and increase the solubility of heavy</p><p>metals in soils has been suggested [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref34">34</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref35">35</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.93640-ref36">36</xref>] . However, more investigations are needed to evaluate the feasibility of this method as a tool for the enhancement of metal solubility and uptake by a metal accumulator in alkaline or neutral soils contaminated by different concentrations of heavy metals. The evolution of treatment of soil samples with a contamination rate Pb (307.31 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>), Zn (207.77 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) and Cr (447.50 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) with heavy metal (Pb, Zn and Cr) Before the Additions of Sulfur with corresponding volume of Depths in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> Each for contaminated soil was equal (Distilled water) to 980 mL per 250 g of Sulfur per of 2250 g of soil. Remediation of heavy metals contaminated soils depends, among other factors, on the time elapsing between the chelating agent in the leaching solution and the total metal content bound to the soil particles (26). Meantime, leaching for the first, leaching (Column (C)) by Sulfur at Depth (20 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 7.31 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 50 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 5.69 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (40 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 4.38 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 33 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 4.14 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (60cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 4.63 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 46 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 2.22 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (80 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 4.31 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 19 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 1.34 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (100 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 5.06 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 21 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 4. 08 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively. At Depth (120 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 2.92 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>, 30 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> and 4.80 mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup> respectively.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref> shows the removal efficiency Pb, Zn and Cr in soil after washing with Sulfur 250 g (10%) + Soil 2250 g (90%) with Distilled water. The removal rate of Pb, Zn and Cr varied from at Depth (20 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 25.51%, 25.13% and 25.54% respectively. at Depth (40 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 15.31%, 16.58% and 18.60% respectively. at Depth (60 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 16.18%, 23.12% and 9.97% respectively. at Depth (80 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 15.06%, 9.55% and 6.04 %respectively. at Depth (100 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 17.71%, 10.55% and 18.32% respectively. at Depth (120 cm) for Pb, Zn and Cr were 10.23%, 15.08% and 21.54%respectively. removal efficiencies for Cr,</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Heavy metals (mg∙kg<sup>−1</sup>) content in sectioned soil column leached with sulfur 250 g (10%) + Soil 2250 g (90%). Distilled water</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Depth (cm)</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="10"  >Column (C)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Heavy Metals (ppm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Removal%</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >Heavy Metals</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Statistical Analysis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pb</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cr</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Med</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.58</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mean</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33.16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.71</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.63</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SD</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.63</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.34</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Max</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.71</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Min</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.92</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.34</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.92</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>high at Depth (20 cm) concentration obviously affected Cr removal from contaminated soils, removal efficiencies for Pb and Zn respectively at Depth (20 cm), removal efficiencies forZn, at Depth (60 cm), removal efficiencies for Cr, at Depth (120 cm), removal efficiencies for Cr, at Depth (60 and 100 cm), removal efficiencies for pb, at Depth (20 cm). removal efficiencies for Cr respectively, low at Depths (60 and 40 cm).</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Conclusion</title><p>The removal efficiencies of Pb, Zn and Cr in the soil by (Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>), HCl, sulfur and distilled water at different dosages were evaluated. Both Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> exhibited good removal efficiencies for extractable Pb in column washing experiment, while Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> + HCl and concentrations of were found to be effective in extracting Cr from the contaminated soil tested in the study. But concentrations of the dosage of sulfur did not produce a proportional gain in the Pb, Zn and Cr removing from soils. Sequential extraction indicated that the elements fraction that is weakly bonded to soil particles is insignificant. That is well explained the disproportional gain with the increasing concentration of washing solution. Our study also clearly proved that sequential washing using Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> and Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> + HCl is likely to be more efficient remediation strategy for the soil than any sulfur and distilled water. This is important, since cost-effectiveness and relatively low environmental impacts are required in the on-site remediation.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Salama, A.E. (2019) Effective Sodium Metabisulfite (Na<sub>2</sub>S<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>), HCl, Sulfur and Distilled Water for the Removal of Pb, Zn and Cr Contaminated Soil in the Columns Method. Agricultural Sciences, 10, 882-892. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2019.107067</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.93640-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kayser, A., Wenger, K., Keller, A., Attinger, W., Felix, H.R., Gupta, S.K., et al. (2000) Enhancement of Phytoextraction of Zn, Cd, and Cu from Calcareous Soil: The Use of NTA and Sulphur Amendments. Environmental Science &amp; Technology, 34, 1778-1783. https://doi.org/10.1021/es990697s</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Seidel, H., Ondruschka, J., Morgenstern, P. and Stottmeister, U. (1998) Bioleaching of Heavy Metals from Contaminated Aquatic Sediments Using Indigenous Sulphur-Oxidizing Bacteria: A Feasibility Study. Water Science &amp; Technology, 37, 387-394. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.1998.0776</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tichy, R., Fajtl, J., Ku&amp;zcaron;el, S. and Kolá&amp;rcaron;, L. (1997) Use of Elemental Sulphur to Enhance a Cadmium Solubilization and Its Vegetative Removal from Contaminated Soil. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 46, 249-255.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00420560</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Harmsen, K. (1977) Behaviour of Heavy Metals in Soils. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Devis, A.P. and Hotha, B.V. (1998) Journal of Environmental Engineering, 124, 1066. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1998)124:11(1066)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tsang, D.C., Zhang, W. and Lo, I. (2007) Copper Extraction Effectiveness and Soil Dissolution Issues of EDTA-Flushing of Artificially Contaminated Soils. Chemosphere, 68, 234-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.01.022</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Polettini, A., Pomi, R. and Rolle, E. (2007) The Effect of Operating Variables on Chelant-Assisted Remediation of Contaminated Dredged Sediment. Chemosphere, 66, 866-877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.06.023</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhang, W., Huang, H., Tan, F., Wang, H. and Qiu, R. (2010) Influence of EDTA Washing on the Species and Mobility of Heavy Metals Residual in Soils. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 173, 369-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.08.087</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sun, B., Zhao, F., Lombi, E. and McGrath, S. (2001) Leaching of Heavy Metals from Contaminated Soils Using EDTA. Environmental Pollution, 113, 111-120. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(00)00176-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Papassiopi, N., Tambouris, S. and Kontopoulos, A. (1999) Removal of Heavy Metals from Calcareous Contaminated Soils by EDTA Leaching. Water, Air, &amp; Soil Pollution, 109, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005089515217</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Heil, D., Samani, Z., Hanson, A. and Rudd, B. (1999) Remediation of Lead Contaminated Soil by EDTA. I: Batch and Column Studies. Water, Air, &amp; Soil Pollution, 113, 77-95. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005032504487</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Page, A.L., Miller, R.H. and Keeny, R. (1982) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties, Agron. Monograph No. 9, ASA, Madison, WI.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kettler, T.A., Doran, J.W. and Gilbert, T.L. (2001) Simplified Method for Soil Particle-Size Determination to Accompany Soil-Quality Analyses. Science Society of America Journal, 65, 849-852. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2001.653849x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xu, Y. and Zhao, D. (2005) Removal of Copper from Contaminated Soil by Use of Poly(amidoamine) Dendrimers. Environmental Science and Technology, 39, 2369-2375. https://doi.org/10.1021/es040380e</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nwuche, C.O. and Ugoji, E.O. (2008) Effects of Heavy Metal Pollution on the Soil Microbial Activity. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 5, 409-414. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03326036</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dikinya, O. and Areola, O. (2010) Comparative Analysis of Heavy Metal Concentration in Secondary Treated Wastewater Irrigated Soils Cultivated by Different Crops. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 7, 337-346. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03326143</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Davies, A.P. and Singh, I. (1995) Washing of Zinc (II) from Contaminated Soil Column. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 121, 174-185. 
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1995)121:2(174)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">GOC (2003) Site Remediation Technologies: A Reference Manual. Contaminated Sites Working Group, Ontario.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Wood, P. (1997) Remediation Methods for Contaminated Sites. In: Hester, R. and Harrison, R., (Eds.), Contaminated Land and Its Reclamation, Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1680/clair.25950.0003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Neale, C.N., Bricka, R.Y. and Chao, A.C. (1997) Evaluating Acids and Chelating Agents for Removing Heavy Metals from Contaminated Soils. Environmental Progress, 16, 274-280. https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.3300160416</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bassi, R., Prasher, S.O. and Simpson, B.K. (2000) Extraction of Metals from a Contaminated Sandy Soil Using Citric Acid. Environmental Progress, 19, 275-282. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.670190415</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hauser, L., Tandy, S., Schulin, R. and Nowack, B. (2005) Column Extraction of Heavy Metals from Soils Using the Biodegradable Chelating Agent EDDS. Environmental Science &amp; Technology, 39, 6819-6824. https://doi.org/10.1021/es050143r</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chaiyaraksa, C. and Sriwiriyanuphap, N. (2004) Batch Washing of Cadmium from Soil and Sludge by a Mixture of Na2S2O5 and Na2EDTA. Chemosphere, 56, 1129-1135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.03.016</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hassani, S., et al. (2014) Protective Effects of Curcumin and Vitamin E against Chlorpyrifos-Induced Lung Oxidative Damage. Human &amp; Experimental Toxicology, 34, 668-676. https://doi.org/10.1177/0960327114550888</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bolan, N., Kunhikrishnan, A., Thangarajan, R., Kumpiene, J., Park, J., Makino, T., Kirkham, M.B. and Scheckel, K. (2014) Remediation of Heavy Metal(loid)s Contaminated Soils—To Mobilize or to Immobilize? Journal of Hazardous Materials, 266, 141-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.12.018</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mulligan, C.N. (2005) Environmental Applications for Biosurfactants. Environmental Pollution, 133, 183-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2004.06.009</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nouri, J., Mahvi, A. and Bazrafshan, E. (2010) Application of Electro-Coagulation Process in Removal of Zinc and Copper from Aqueous Solutions by Aluminum Electrodes. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 4, 201-208.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kamani, H., Hoseini, M., Seyedsalehi, M., Mahdavi, Y., Jaafari, J. and Safari, G.H. (2014) Concentration and Characterization of Airborne Particles in Tehran’s Subway System. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 21, 7319-7328. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-2659-4</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ghozikali, M.G., Mosaferi, M., Safari, G.H. and Jaafari, J. (2015) Effect of Exposure to O3, NO2, and SO2 on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Hospitalizations in Tabriz, Iran. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22, 2817-2823. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3512-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bermudez, G., Jasan, R., Plá, R. and Pignata, M.L. (2012) Heavy Metals and Trace Elements in Atmospheric Fall-Out: Their Relationship with Topsoil and Wheat Element Composition. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 213, 447-456. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.02.023</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yaghmaeian, K., Jaafarzadeh, N., Nabizadeh, R., Dastforoushan, G. and Jaafari, J. (2015) CFD Modeling of Incinerator to Increase PCBs Removal from Outlet Gas. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 13, 60. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40201-015-0212-0</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kamani, H., Hoseini, M., Safari, G.H., Jaafari, J. and Mahvi, A.H. (2014) Study of Trace Elements in Wet Atmospheric Precipitation in Tehran, Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 186, 5059-5067.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-014-3759-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jafari, J., Mesdaghinia, A., Nabizadeh, R., Farrokhi, M. and Mahvi, A.H. (2013) Investigation of Anaerobic Fluidized Bed Reactor/Aerobic Moving Bed Bio Reactor (AFBR/MMBR) System for Treatment of Currant Wastewater. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 42, 860-867.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ashrafi, S.D., Rezaei, S., Forootanfar, H., Mahvi, A.H. and Faramarzi, M.A. (2013) The Enzymatic Decolorization and Detoxification of Synthetic Dyes by the Laccase from a Soil-Isolated Ascomycete, Paraconiothyrium variabile. International Biodeterioration &amp; Biodegradation, 85, 173-181. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.07.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jaafari, J., Mesdaghinia, A., Nabizadeh, R., Hoseini, M., and Mahvi, A.H. (2014) Influence of Upflow Velocity on Performance and Biofilm Characteristics of Anaerobic Fluidized Bed Reactor (AFBR) in Treating High-Strength Wastewater. J. Environ. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 12, 139. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40201-014-0139-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.93640-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Esfandyari, Y., et al. (2015) Degradation and Biodegradability Improvement of the Olive Mill Wastewater by Peroxi-Electrocoagulation/Electrooxidation-Electroflotation Process with Bipolar Aluminum Electrodes. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22, 6288-6297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3832-5</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>