Submitted:
09 June 2026
Posted:
10 June 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction

2. Theoretical Background and Coagulation Mechanisms
2.1. Coagulation-Flocculation (CF) Process
2.2. Moringa oleifera Seed Coagulation Mechanism
2.3. Salvia hispanica Seed Coagulation Mechanism
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Wastewater Sampling and Characterization
3.2. Preparation of Coagulants
3.2.1. Moringa Seed Powder
3.2.2. Chia Seed Powder
3.3. Coagulation-Flocculation Procedure
3.4. Analytical Methods
3.4.1. COD Determination
3.4.2. Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Determination
3.5. Statistical Analysis
4. Rseults
4.1. Moringa Seed (MS) Coagulation Performance
4.2. Chia Seed (CS) Coagulation Performance
4.3. Statistical Comparison: One-Way ANOVA
4.4. Comparative Summary of Key Performance Metrics
4.5. Effect of pH on COD Removal



5. Discussion
5.1. Moringa Seed Performance and Mechanism
5.2. Chia Seed Performance: Strengths and Limitations
5.3. Statistical Interpretation and Revised Conclusions
5.4. Contextualization with Literature


5.5. Environmental and Practical Implications for Bangladesh
5.6. Limitations and Future Directions
6. Conclusions
- Moringa seeds (MS) demonstrated broadly consistent and high COD removal efficiencies across pH 1–10 (84.76–96.19% in Effluent 1; 20.00–96.36% in Effluent 2), while chia seeds (CS) showed greater pH sensitivity (8.57–88.57% in Effluent 1; 23.64–96.36% in Effluent 2), particularly under strongly acidic conditions.
- One-way ANOVA across all pooled conditions (MS n = 11, CS n = 22, N = 33) revealed no statistically significant difference in mean COD removal [F(1,31) = 2.13, p = 0.155]; the observed mean difference (~13 percentage points) reflects within-group variance arising from the deliberately wide pH and dosage ranges tested rather than a consistent performance advantage.
- Post-treatment dissolved oxygen was consistently higher under MS treatment (mean 10.45 mg/L, Effluent 1; 9.92 mg/L, Effluent 2) compared to CS treatment (6.91 mg/L; 8.30 mg/L), indicating superior post-treatment ecological compatibility of moringa-treated effluent. Two CS experiments yielded DO below the 5.0 mg/L ecological threshold.
- Both coagulants achieved equivalent peak COD removal (96.36%) under optimized alkaline conditions in Effluent 2, confirming that chia seeds are capable of moringa-equivalent performance under appropriate pH control.
- This study was conducted at laboratory scale. Batch experiments were used instead of a continuous system. Wastewater composition may vary across sources. Only short-term treatment performance was evaluated. Long-term floc stability was not assessed. Sludge characterization was not included. Mechanistic analysis was based on literature support.
- Chia seeds demonstrated dose-independent performance at neutral pH in Effluent 2 (81.82% across 0.10–1.0 g doses), which is practically advantageous where precise dosage control is difficult.
- Both natural coagulants represent environmentally sustainable alternatives to synthetic chemical coagulants, generating biodegradable, heavy-metal-free sludge, with applicability at SME scale in the Bangladesh textile sector, subject to further optimization and pilot-scale validation.
Author Contributions:
Acknowledgments
References
- Bildirici, Melike; Türkkahraman, Irmak; Ömer Ersin, Özgür. Unraveling the Environmental Impacts of the Fashion Industry: A Fourier-Based Analysis of Pollution Dynamics and Causality Across Five Countries. Sustainability 2024, 17, 69–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uddin, Mohammad Abbas; Begum, Most Setara; Ashraf, M.; Azad, A.K.; Adhikary, Avizit Chandra; Hossain, Mohammad Sorowar. Water and chemical consumption in the textile processing industry of Bangladesh. PLoS Sustain. Transform. 2023, 2, e0000072–e0000072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masum, H.; Islam, M.B.; Anowar, Md. Rezvi; Arsh, Kandila; Alam, S. Assessment of textile industry effluents and their impact on local water bodies in an urban setting of Bangladesh. In Discover Environment; 2025; p. 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uddin, MdJ; Jeong, Y.-K. Urban river pollution in Bangladesh during last 40 years: potential public health and ecological risk, present policy, and future prospects toward smart water management. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mustafa, Sanaa Abdulaziz; Al-Rudainy, Abdulmotalib Jasim; Salman, Noor Mohammad. Effect of environmental pollutants on fish health: An overview. Egypt. J. Aquat. Res. J. Aquat. Res. 2024, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalambe, Dipanshu; Randive, Pallavi; Agrekar, Aditya; Meshram, Atul. Applications of Natural and Chemical Coagulants to Treat Water. Journal of Water Resources and Pollution Studies. 2024, pp. 7–11. Available online: https://matjournals.net/engineering/index.php/JoWRPS/article/view/457.
- Yang, Z.L.; Gao, B.Y.; Yue, Q.Y.; Wang, Y. Effect of pH on the coagulation performance of Al-based coagulants and residual aluminum speciation during the treatment of humic acid–kaolin synthetic water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 178, 596–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, C.-Y. Emerging usage of plant-based coagulants for water and wastewater treatment. Process Biochem. 2010, 45, 1437–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chales, G.G.; Tihameri, B.S.; Milhan, N.V.M.; Koga-Ito, C.Y.; Antunes, M.L.P.; dos Reis, A.G. Impact of Moringa oleifera Seed-Derived Coagulants Processing Steps on Physicochemical, Residual Organic, and Cytotoxicity Properties of Treated Water. Water 2022, 14, 2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Okuda, T.; Baes, A.U.; Nishijima, W.; Okada, M. Isolation and characterization of coagulant extracted from moringa oleifera seed by salt solution. Water Res. 2001, 35, 405–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nordmark, B.A.; Przybycien, T.M.; Tilton, R.D. Comparative coagulation performance study of Moringa oleifera cationic protein fractions with varying water hardness. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2016, 4, 4690–4698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Silva, R.M.P.; Pereira, S.A.; Peraza, C.C.; Pereira, R.W.; de Farias, B.S.; Fernandes, S.S. Chia mucilage as a green biocoagulant for fertilizer wastewater: Process optimization, coagulation mechanism, and phytotoxicity. Bioresour. Technol. 2026, 444, 133910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tawakkoly, B.; Alizadehdakhel, A.; Dorosti, F. Evaluation of COD and turbidity removal from compost leachate wastewater using Salvia hispanica as a natural coagulant. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 137, 323–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Desta, W.M.; Bote, M.E. Wastewater Treatment using a Natural Coagulant (Moringa oleifera Seeds): Optimization through Response Surface Methodology. Heliyon 2021, 7, e08451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ueda Yamaguchi, N.; Cusioli, L.F.; Quesada, H.B.; Camargo Ferreira, M.E.; Fagundes-Klen, M.R.; Salcedo Vieira, A.M.; et al. A review of Moringa oleifera seeds in water treatment: Trends and future challenges. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2021, 147, 405–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vigneshwaran, S.; Karthikeyan, P.; Sirajudheen, P.; Meenakshi, S. Optimization of sustainable chitosan/Moringa. oleifera as coagulant aid for the treatment of synthetic turbid water – A systemic study. Environ. Chem. Ecotoxicol. 2020, 2, 132–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katrivesis, F.K.; Karela, A.D.; Papadakis, V.G.; Paraskeva, C.A. Revisiting of coagulation-flocculation processes in the production of potable water. J. Water Process Eng. 2019, 27, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobrosz-Gómez, Izabela; Quintero-Arias, Jesús-David; Gómez-García, Miguel-Ángel. Coagulation-Flocculation - Fenton-Neutralization sequential process for the treatment of industrial effluent polluted with AB194 dye. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2024, 9, 100720–100720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bedekar, P.A.; Bhalkar, B.N.; Patil, S.M.; Govindwar, S.P. Moringa oleifera-mediated coagulation of textile wastewater and its biodegradation using novel consortium-BBA grown on agricultural waste substratum. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 20963–20976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giacoppo, S.; Galuppo, M.; De Nicola, G.R.; Iori, R.; Bramanti, P.; Mazzon, E. 4(α-l-Rhamnosyloxy)-benzyl isothiocyanate, a bioactive phytochemical that attenuates secondary damage in an experimental model of spinal cord injury. Bioorganic Med. Chem. 2015, 23, 80–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amaly, N.; Harrison, S.; Tumuluru, J.S.; Sun, G.; Pandey, P.K. Development and application of a polycationic soybean protein-based flocculant for enhanced flocculation and dewatering of dairy manure. Chemosphere 2025, 371, 144050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramos, S.; Fradinho, P.; Mata, P.; Raymundo, A. Assessing gelling properties of chia (Salvia hispanicaL.) flour through rheological characterization. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2016, 97, 1753–1760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maćczak, P.; Kaczmarek, H.; Ziegler-Borowska, M. Recent Achievements in Polymer Bio-Based Flocculants for Water Treatment. Materials 2020, 13, 3951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aboagye, G.; Navele, M.; Essuman, E. Protocols for assessing antibacterial and water coagulation potential of Moringa oleifera seed powder. MethodsX 2021, 101283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, A.; Subramanian, R.; Manohar, B.; Radha, C. Preparation, characterization and functional properties of Moringa oleifera seed protein isolate. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 56, 2093–2104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM D2035-19 - Standard Practice for Coagulation-Flocculation Jar Test of Water; Ansi.org [Internet]. 2026. Available online: https://webstore.ansi.org/standards/astm/astmd203519.
- European, American and International Standards online - iTeh Standards. iTeh Standards [Internet]. 2026. Available online: https://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/astm/2413f534-6407-48ca-ad41-221cee5fe5aa/astm-d2035-19?
- Yadvika; Yadav, A.K.; Sreekrishnan, T.R.; Satya, S.; Kohli, S. A modified method for estimation of chemical oxygen demand for samples having high suspended solids. Bioresour. Technol. 2006, 97, 721–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shriwastav, A.; Sudarsan, G.; Bose, P.; Tare, V. A modified Winkler’s method for determination of dissolved oxygen concentration in water: Dependence of method accuracy on sample volume. Measurement 2017, 106, 190–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Respino, S.; Field-Farias, S.; Behera, H.; Oh, H.; Smith, L.A.; Daigle, H.; et al. Moringa oleifera Protein-Functionalized Diatomaceous Earth for Nanoparticle Removal. ACS ES&T Water 2025, 5, 678–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonçalves, I.L.; de Menezes Filho, F.C.M.; de Morais, E.B.; de Castro, V.A.; Canales, F.A. Optimization of the use of Moringa oleifera in wastewater treatment by rotational central composite design. Desalin. Water Treat. 2024, 320, 100765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jolly, Yeasmin Nahar; Jahan, R.; Kumar, R.; Abu, Atahar Rabby; Mamun, K.M.; et al. Deciphering the source of heavy metals in industrially affected river sediment of Shitalakshya river, Bangladesh, and potential ecological and health implications. J. Hazard. Mater. Adv. 2023, 10, 100268–100268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Das, N.; Ojha, N.; Mandal, S.K. Wastewater treatment using plant-derived bioflocculants: green chemistry approach for safe environment. Water Sci. Technol. 2021, 83, 1797–1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rendana, M.; Renaldi, F.; Akbar, M.N.; Hardestyariki, D. Optimization of Moringa oleifera-based coagulant in textile wastewater treatment. In Discover Applied Sciences; 2025; p. 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Worku, G.D.; Abate, S.N. Efficiency comparison of natural coagulants (Cactus pads and Moringa seeds) for treating textile wastewater (in the case of Kombolcha textile industry). Heliyon 2025, 11, e42379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

| Sample | Acid Pretreat. | Base Pretreat. | Dose (g) | pH0 | pHᴍ | COD (mg/L) | COD Rem. (%) | DO (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effluent 1 | — | — | 0.10 | 7 | 7 | 320 | 84.76 | 10.47 |
| Effluent 1 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.05 | 1 | 1 | 160 | 92.38 | 13.33 |
| Effluent 1 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.05* | 1 | 1 | 240 | 88.57 | 12.37 |
| Effluent 1 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.10 | 1 | 1 | 80 | 96.19† | 14.28 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.05 | 10 | 10 | 160 | 92.38 | 5.71 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.05 | 7 | 7 | 240 | 88.57 | 7.60 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 7 | 8 | 320 | 84.76 | 9.37 |
| Effluent 2 | 0.1M HCl | — | 0.75 | 7 | 7 | 1760 | 20.00 | 13.33 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.75 | 8 | 7 | 160 | 92.73 | 7.60 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.75 | 10 | 10 | 1040 | 52.73‡ | 9.37 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.75 | 10 | 10 | 80 | 96.36† | 9.37 |
| Sample | Acid Pretreat. | Base Pretreat. | Dose (g) | pH0 | pHᴍ | COD (mg/L) | COD Rem. (%) | DO (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effluent 1 | — | — | 0.05 | 6 | 6 | 400 | 80.95 | 7.61 |
| Effluent 1 | — | — | 0.10 | 6 | 7 | 400 | 80.95 | 5.71 |
| Effluent 1 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.05 | 1 | 1 | 1920 | 8.57 | 6.60 |
| Effluent 1 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.10 | 1 | 1 | 320 | 84.76 | 4.76 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.05 | 7 | 7 | 960 | 54.29 | 3.80 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.05 | 9 | 10 | 240 | 88.57 | 5.71 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 7 | 7 | 880 | 58.10 | 8.57 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 10 | 10 | 1200 | 42.86 | 8.42 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 8 | 7 | 1150 | 45.24 | 8.57 |
| Effluent 1 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 10 | 10 | 1200 | 42.86 | 9.31 |
| Effluent 2 | — | — | 1.00 | 6 | 6 | 400 | 81.82 | 9.52 |
| Effluent 2 | — | — | 0.50 | 6 | 6 | 400 | 81.82 | 7.60 |
| Effluent 2 | — | — | 0.10 | 6 | 6 | 400 | 81.82 | 6.66 |
| Effluent 2 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.10 | 2 | 2 | 320 | 85.45 | 6.60 |
| Effluent 2 | 0.1 M HCl | — | 0.10 | 2 | 2 | 800 | 63.64 | 7.61 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 10 | 10 | 1680 | 23.64 | 7.60 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 7 | 7 | 640 | 70.91 | 8.43 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 8 | 8 | 160 | 92.73 | 8.57 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 10 | 10 | 1200 | 45.45 | 10.47 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 9 | 10 | 320 | 85.45 | 9.80 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 10 | 10 | 80 | 96.36† | 8.37 |
| Effluent 2 | — | 0.1 M NaOH | 0.10 | 10 | 10 | 80 | 96.36† | 8.42 |
| Source of Variation | SS | df | MS (Mean Sq.) | F | p-value | F crit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Between Groups (Coagulant) | 1241.6 | 1 | 1241.6 | 2.13 | 0.155 | 4.16 |
| Within Groups (Error) | 18070.9 | 31 | 583.3 | — | — | — |
| Total | 19312.5 | 32 | — | — | — | — |
| Parameter | MS Effluent 1 | MS Effluent 2 | CS Effluent 1 | CS Effluent 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COD Removal Range (%) | 84.76–96.19 | 20.00–96.36 | 8.57–88.57 | 23.64–96.36 |
| Mean COD Removal (%)† | 89.66 | 65.45 | 58.71 | 75.45 |
| Optimal pH | Neutral–Alkaline (1–10) | Alkaline (8–10) | Neutral–Alkaline (6–10) | Neutral–Alkaline (6–10) |
| DO Range (mg/L) | 5.71–14.28 | 7.60–13.33 | 3.80–9.31 | 6.60–10.47 |
| Mean DO (mg/L)† | 10.45 | 9.92 | 6.91 | 8.30 |
| Max COD Removal (%) | 96.19 | 96.36 | 88.57 | 96.36 |
| Initial Effluent COD (mg/L) | 2100 | 2200 | 2100 | 2200 |
| n (observations) | 7 | 4 | 10 | 12 |
| Study | Coagulant | Wastewater Type | pH | Dosage | COD Removal (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Present Study | Moringa oleifera seeds | Textile dyeing effluent (Bangladesh) | 1–10 | 0.05–0.75 g/250 mL | 84.76–96.36 |
| Present Study | Salvia hispanica (Chia) seeds | Textile dyeing effluent (Bangladesh) | 1–10 | 0.05–1.0 g/250 mL | 8.57–96.36 |
| Worku & Abate (2025) [37] | Moringa seeds | Textile wastewater (Ethiopia) | 6–8 | 10–30 g/L | Up to 88% |
| Rendana et al. (2025) [36] | Moringa + PAM | Textile wastewater | 5–7 | 25 g/L | ~29% COD |
| Tawakkoly et al. (2019) [13] | Salvia hispanica mucilage | Compost leachate | Optimized | RSM-optimized | 62.4% COD |
| Silva et al. (2026) [12] | Chia mucilage (CM) | Fertilizer industry WW | 7 | 0.5 g/L | 85.7% COD |
| Yin et al. (2010) [8] | Moringa oleifera (review) | Various | 6–8 | Various | 70–95% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).