Elsevier

Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

Volume 67, Issue 22, 15 November 2003, Pages 4223-4230
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

Surface complexation of arsenic(V) to iron(III) (hydr)oxides: structural mechanism from ab initio molecular geometries and EXAFS spectroscopy

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7037(03)00237-0Get rights and content

Abstract

Arsenic(V), as the arsenate (AsO4)3− ion and its conjugate acids, is strongly sorbed to iron(III) oxides (α-Fe2O3), oxide hydroxides (α–,γ–FeOOH) and poorly crystalline ferrihydrite (hydrous ferric oxide). The mechanism by which arsenate complexes with iron oxide hydroxide surfaces is not fully understood. There is clear evidence for inner sphere complexation but the nature of the surface complexes is controversial. Possible surface complexes between AsO4 tetrahedra and surface FeO6 polyhedra include bidentate corner-sharing (2C), bidentate edge-sharing (2E) and monodentate corner-sharing (1V). We predicted the relative energies and geometries of AsO4-FeOOH surface complexes using density functional theory calculations on analogue Fe2(OH)2(H2O)nAsO2(OH)23+ and Fe2(OH)2(H2O)nAsO4+ clusters. The bidentate corner-sharing complex is predicted to be substantially (55 kJ/mole) more favored energetically over the hypothetical edge-sharing bidentate complex. The monodentate corner-sharing (1V) complex is very unstable. We measured EXAFS spectra of 0.3 wt. % (AsO4)3− sorbed to hematite (α-Fe2O3), goethite(α–FeOOH), lepidocrocite(γ–FeOOH) and ferrihydrite and fit the EXAFS directly with multiple scattering. The phase-shift-corrected Fourier transforms of the EXAFS spectra show peaks near 2.85 and 3.26 Å that have been attributed by previous investigators to result from 2E and 2C complexes. However, we show that the peak near 2.85 Å appears to result from As-O-O-As multiple scattering and not from As-Fe backscatter. The observed 3.26 Å As-Fe distance agrees with that predicted for the bidentate corner-sharing surface (2C) complex. We find no evidence for monodentate (1V) complexes; this agrees with the predicted high energies of such complexes.

Introduction

Under moderately acidic conditions, arsenic(V) as HnAsO43−n is strongly sorbed by iron oxides and oxide hydroxides such as ferrihydrite, goethite and hematite (Fuller et al., 1993; Waychunas et al 1993, Sun and Doner 1996, Jain et al 1999. The strong sorption of As onto these minerals is invoked as an important mechanism of natural attenuation of As pollution in soil and groundwater (Livesey and Huang, 1981) and lacustrine sediments Aggett and Roberts 1986, Belzile and Tessier 1990. Sorption onto iron oxide hydroxide minerals is especially significant in controlling As solubilities in acid mine drainage and mine-tailings ponds (Carlson et al., 2002). The marine geochemistry of arsenic also indicates control by sorption onto iron oxide hydroxides Sullivan and Aller 1996, Pichler et al 1999.

A molecular understanding of the sorption of arsenic by iron oxides and oxyhydroxides is needed to predict the long-term fate of As in aqueous sediments. Previous spectroscopic studies (e.g., Waychunas et al 1993, Waychunas et al 1993, Hsia et al 1994, Sun and Doner 1996, Fendorf et al 1997, pressure-jump relaxation kinetics measurements Grossl and Sparks 1995, Grossl et al 1997 and titration measurements (Jain et al., 1999) show that arsenate adsorbs to iron oxide hydroxides by forming inner-sphere surface complexes by ligand exchange with hydroxyl groups at the mineral surface. However, the nature of the inner-sphere complex has been controversial (Fig. 1). Using EXAFS spectroscopy, Waychunas et al. (1993) argued for bidentate complexes (2C in Fig. 1) resulting from corner-sharing between AsO4 tetrahedra and edge-sharing pairs of FeO6 octahedra. The 2C complex yields an As-Fe distance near 3.26 Å. For goethite (α-FeOOH), the 2C complex would form on the {110} surfaces which are, in fact, the dominant surfaces (e.g., Boily et al., 2001). Waychunas et al. (1993) also fit their data to a second contribution corresponding to monodentate complexes (designated 1V in Fig. 1) that result from corner-sharing between AsO4 tetrahedra and FeO6 octahedra. The 1V complex gives an As-Fe distance near 3.6 Å. Manceau (1995), however, argued that Waychunas et al. (1993) incorrectly calculated the phase shifts in the EXAFS spectra and that the correct As-Fe distance for the second complex is near 2.8 Å; such a short As-Fe distance would result from bidentate edge-sharing between AsO4 tetrahedra and free FeO6 edges (designated 2E in Fig. 1). In goethite, the 2E complex would form on the {001} and {021} faces which usually comprise a small fraction of the goethite surface (e.g., Boily et al., 2001). Waychunas et al 1995, Waychunas et al 1996 argued against the 2E complex for structural reasons, problems with fits of EXAFS that include a 2E complex, and wide-angle scattering data that fail to show any distance corresponding to a 2E complex.

Fendorf et al. (1997) interpreted their EXAFS data as indicating three surface complexes: a monodentate corner sharing (1V) complex with an As-Fe distance of 3.6 Å, a bidentate corner-sharing (2C) with two As-Fe distances near 3.25 Å and a bidentate edge-sharing complex (2E) with a single As-Fe distance of 2.83–2.85 Å. Fendorf et al. (1997) proposed that the relative importance of each complex depended on the degree of surface loading. Farquhar et al. (2002) obtained EXAFS of As(V) on goethite and lepidocrocite and found peaks in the Fourier transform near 2.93 Å and 3.30–3.31 Å. They attributed the 3.30–3.31 Å peaks to (2C) complexes but were uncertain if the 2.93 Å peak represented a 2E complex.

In this paper, we attempt to resolve the controversy over the inner-sphere surface complexation mechanism: we first predict the geometries and relative energies of AsO4-FeOOH surface complexes using density functional theory calculations on analog Fe2(OH)2(H2O)nAsO4+ and Fe2(OH)2(H2O)nAsO2(OH)2+3 clusters. Secondly, we measure EXAFS spectra of AsO4 sorbed to goethite, hematite, lepidocrocite and ferrihydrite but fit the data with inclusion of effects due to multiple scattering. From these results, we are able to identify the dominant surface complex of AsO4 on iron oxides and oxide hydroxide phases and are also able to explain discrepancies between earlier experimental results.

Section snippets

Density functional calculations

Quantum mechanical calculation of cluster geometries and energies were done using the ADF 2.0 code (te Velde et al., 2001) which implements density functional theory for finite clusters and molecules using the linear combination of atomic orbital formalism. Molecular orbitals in the ADF code are constructed from Slater type atomic orbitals which consist of a Cartesian part rkrxkxykyzkz with kx+ky+kz = l (l = angular momentum quantum number) and an exponential part e−αr. Density functional

Predicted geometries and energetics of asO4 surface complexes using DFT

We calculated the optimized geometries of Fe2(OH)2(H2O)nAsO4+ and Fe2(OH)2(H2O)nAsO2(OH)2+3 clusters corresponding to 2E and 2C complexes of AsO43− and AsO2(OH)2. We used a spin-unrestricted calculation and set the clusters to have a ferromagnetic configuration. The choice of a ferromagnetic vs. antiferromagnetic configuration for the Fe2(OH)2(H2O)8 substrate should have only a minor chemical effect. (Note that a spin-restricted calculation would be seriously in error, however, since it would

Conclusions

Adsorption of arsenate HnAsO43−n onto goethite, lepidocrocite, hematite and ferrihydrite occurs by the formation of inner-sphere surface complexes resulting from bidentate corner-sharing between AsO4 and FeO6 polyhedra (2C). The bidentate edge-sharing complexes proposed by Manceau (1995) are predicted by density functional calculations to be energetically unfavorable. Moreover, the apparent As-Fe peaks near 2.85 Å in the EXAFS spectra that have been attributed to edge-sharing complexes (Fendorf

Acknowledgements

Part of this work was supported by NERC grant GR9/03506. Synchrotron time was also provided by CLRC Daresbury Laboratory. SRR’s studentship was supported by BNFL. We are especially grateful to Dr. Ian Stewart, Bristol University for help in implementing software on the Beowulf cluster. We also thank Dr. D.M. Heasman and C. Muskett for help in data collection. We are grateful for the comments of two anonymous reviewers.

Associate editor: G. Helz

References (34)

  • G.A. Waychunas et al.

    Wide angle X-ray scattering (WAXS) of “two-line” ferrihydrite structureEffect of arsenate sorption and counterion variation and comparison with EXAFS results

    Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta

    (1996)
  • J.A. Wilkie et al.

    Adsorption of arsenic onto hydrous ferric oxide - effects of adsorbate/adsorbent ratios and co-occurring solute

    Colloids and Surfaces A - Physicochem. Eng. Aspects

    (1996)
  • J. Aggett et al.

    Insight into the mechanism of accumulation of arsenate and phosphate in hydro lake sediments by measuring the rate of dissolution with ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid

    Environ. Sci. Technol.

    (1986)
  • Binsted N (1998) EXCURV98: CCLRC Daresbury Laboratory computer program. Daresbury Laboratory, Warrington,...
  • L. Carlson et al.

    Scavenging of as from acid mine drainage by schwertmannite and ferrihydriteA comparison with synthetic analogues

    Env. Sci. Technol.

    (2002)
  • A.J. Dent et al.

    A Guide to EXBACK, EXCALIB, and EXCURV92

    (1992)
  • M.L. Farquhar et al.

    Mechanisms of arsenic uptake from aqueous solution by interaction with goethite, lepidocrocite, mackinawite, and pyriteAn X-ray absorption spectroscopy study

    Env. Sci. Tech.

    (2002)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text