We have recently published an article titled “Simultaneous and Efficient Removal of Cr(VI) and Methyl Orange on LDHs Decorated Porous Carbons” in Chemical Engineering Journal (Chem. Eng. J., 352, 306–315, (2018)). The XPS signals of Cr(III) and Cr(VI) were mis-labelled in Fig. 7d. The corrected Figure are shown in the following. Thank you for the correction of Dr. Hai Nguyen Tran, the advices are professional and valuable. We are really sorry that we have mistaken the peaks of Cr(III) and Cr(VI). Hexavalent chromium is always characterized by higher binding energies than trivalent chromium as Dr. Hai Nguyen Tran analyzed. Therefore, we carefully checked the high resolution Cr 2p spectrum of our data. The re-revised Cr 2p spectrum (Fig. 7d in the manuscript) and the corresponding XPS analysis of samples before and after adsorption (Table S7) are corrected as follows: Moreover, Table S7 has been revised accordingly as follows. Due to the incorrect identification of Cr(III) and Cr(VI) in the Cr 2p spectra, the discussion in the adsorption mechanisms investigation (the Section 3.5): “Interestingly, Cr(III) peak intensity decreased in the binary system (Table S7) suggested that positively charged Cr(III) might impetus the MO adsorption through electrostatic interactions.” should be changed to “On the other hand, the positively charged Cr(III) deposited on the surfaces of Ni/Al@PAB could impetus the MO adsorption through electrostatic interactions.” The conclusion and mechanism interpretation are still solid. We would like to acknowledge the suggestion of this corrigendum by Dr. Hai Nguyen Tran (Duy Tan University).
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Environmental Chemistry
- Chemical Engineering(all)
- Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering