Home Technology Advancing wastewater treatment: a review on the cutting-edge graphene oxide-enhanced polymeric membranes
Article Open Access

Advancing wastewater treatment: a review on the cutting-edge graphene oxide-enhanced polymeric membranes

  • Ellora Priscille Ndia Ntone , Sunarti Abdul Rahman EMAIL logo , Rozaimi Abu Samah , Muhammad Ashraf Fauzi , Eugene Ngwana Ngouangna , Hasrinah Hasbullah ORCID logo and Qusay Fadhil Alsalhy
Published/Copyright: November 13, 2025
Download Article (PDF)
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Submit Manuscript Author Information
Reviews in Chemical Engineering
From the journal Reviews in Chemical Engineering Volume 42 Issue 1

Abstract

Access to clean water remains a critical global challenge, underscoring the urgent need for efficient, sustainable, and cost-effective wastewater treatment technologies. Among emerging solutions, graphene-based membranes, particularly those incorporating graphene oxide (GO), have attracted growing attention due to their ultrathin structure, tunable molecular sieving abilities, and oxygen-containing functional groups that enhance adsorption and filtration capabilities. This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric and scientometric analysis of research on GO-enhanced polymeric membranes for advanced wastewater treatment from 2015 to 2025. Key trends in publications and citations are identified, along with leading countries, institutions, authors, and emerging research themes in the field. The review also explores the underlying mechanisms of contaminant removal, including GO mixed matrix membrane (MMMs) synthesis methods, characterization techniques, fabrication techniques, and performance limitations such as fouling and structural instability in aqueous environments. Finally, emerging directions are discussed, including the integration of novel nanomaterials and GO functionalization strategies to improve membrane performance and long-term stability. This study offers valuable insights to guide future research and industrial applications of GO-based MMMs in sustainable water treatment technologies.

Keywords: graphene oxide; bibliometric analysis; polymeric membrane; wastewater treatment

1 Introduction

The advancement of membrane technology gained momentum in the mid-1900s with the widespread adoption of polymer-based membranes. These membranes are composed of various polymers, including polysulfone (PSf), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polyacrylonitrile (PAN), polyimide (PI), polyethersulfone (PES), polyethylene (PE), and cellulose acetate (CA) (Kadirkhan et al. 2022, Abdullah et al. 2023, Hackett et al. 2024, Sabri et al. 2024). Their affordability, ease of fabrication, and adaptability contributed to their extensive use in industrial applications such as gas separation and water treatment (Ahmad et al. 2009; Chung et al. 2007). However, due to limitations in chemical and thermal resistance, polymeric membranes faced challenges in harsh environments. To address these shortcomings, ceramic (inorganic) membranes emerged later in the 20th century, offering enhanced stability and durability under extreme conditions (Wayo et al. 2024). Despite their superior resistance to high temperatures and aggressive chemicals, ceramic membranes are costly and brittle, restricting their broader application (Baumann et al. 2013; Fard et al. 2018; Akash et al. 2024; Chen et al. 2024).

To mitigate the individual drawbacks of polymeric and ceramic membranes, mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) were introduced in the 21st century. These hybrid membranes integrate polymer matrices with organic-inorganic fillers, such as silicon dioxide (SiO2) (Qureshi et al. 2024), zirconium dioxide (ZrO2), titanium dioxide (TiO2), aluminium oxide (Al2O5), graphene oxide (GO) (Ntone et al. 2024a), metal organic frameworks (MOFs) (Cheng et al. 2023), MXene (Xu et al. 2023), zeolites (Kadja et al. 2023), and even tea waste biomass (El-Sayed et al. 2023). By combining the cost-effectiveness and processability of polymers with the enhanced selectivity and durability of inorganic materials, MMMs offer a more versatile solution for applications like carbon capture, water purification, and gas separation (Cheng et al. 2018; Qu et al. 2018). This synergy results in membranes with improved mechanical strength, thermal stability, and separation efficiency, making them a promising alternative to conventional polymeric and ceramic membranes. A comparative overview of these membrane types is provided in Table 1 (Vandezande 2015).

Table 1:

Comparison of polymeric, ceramic and mixed matrix membrane (Abdullah et al. 2023; Katare et al. 2023; Akash et al. 2024).

Properties Polymeric membrane Ceramic membrane Mixed matrix membrane
Materials Organic polymers (e.g., polysulfone, polyamide) Inorganic (e.g., alumina, silica, zirconia) Hybrid (polymer matrix with inorganic fillers, e.g., zeolites, GO)
Permeance Moderate to high High High (enhanced by fillers like MOFs or GO)
Selectivity Good (depends on polymer type) Excellent Excellent (tailored by filler material)
Thermal stability Limited (up to ∼150 °C) Very high (>800 °C) Moderate to high (depends on filler-polymer interaction)
Chemical resistance Moderate Excellent (acidic/alkaline environments) Enhanced (varies with filler)
Mechanical strength Moderate High Improved over pure polymers
Fouling resistance Susceptible (can be mitigated with coatings) Excellent Good (with antifouling fillers like functionalized GO)
Cost Low to moderate High Moderate
Fabrication complexity Easy (scalable for industrial use) Complex (limited by material processing) More complex than polymers but scalable
Applications Water desalination, gas separation, wastewater treatment High-temperature or chemical-resistant applications Water treatment, gas separation, oil-water separation
Advantages Flexible, low cost, lightweight Robust, excellent stability, long life Combines strengths of polymers and inorganics
Disadvantages Prone to fouling, limited stability in harsh conditions Brittle, expensive, challenging to fabricate in large areas Complex design, filler-polymer compatibility issues

GO, often described as a single monomolecular layer derived from graphite, contains various oxygen-containing functional groups such as hydroxyl (-OH), carboxyl (-COOH), carbonyl (C=O), and epoxide (Ray 2015; Woo et al. 2018; Ursino and Figoli 2022). Due to its strong hydrophilic nature, GO has been widely recognized as an effective nanofiller, as it enhances water transport through membranes. Its abundance of functional groups, excellent physicochemical properties that aid in membrane filtration, and high stability further contribute to its suitability for this application (Al-Maliki et al. 2022; Chai et al. 2021; Fu et al. 2020; Kyzas et al. 2015; Ntone et al. 2023a).

The incorporation of GO into polymeric membranes significantly enhances their hydrophilicity, permeance, pollutant removal efficiency, and antifouling characteristics (Alnoor et al. 2020). For example, a PSf/GO-vanillin membrane was designed for landfill wastewater treatment, achieving a flux recovery ratio (FRR) of 93.57 % and over 99 % rejection for BSA, though its rejection rate for Mg2+ was 92.5 % (Yadav et al. 2022). Additionally, the M5 membrane, which included GO in the casting solution, exhibited a pure water flux of 91 L m−2 h−1, whereas the PSf/vanillin (M1) membrane had a lower flux of 39 L m−2 h−1. Similarly, a polyphenylene sulfone and GO (PPSU/GO) membrane demonstrated an 83 % increase in pure water flux, reaching 231.7 L m−2 h−1, compared to unmodified PPSU membrane (Xiao et al. 2017). The FRR of the PPSU/GO membrane was also measured at 86 %, indicating good antifouling performance. Jatoi et al. (2024) modified GO membrane with asparagine amino-acid (As@GO) which exhibited exceptional water permeance (1740 L m−2 h−1·bar−1) and high rejection of dyes and heavy metals, demonstrating long-term stability for effective wastewater treatment applications.

Recent reviews have extensively examined various aspects of GO-enhanced polymeric membranes. For instance, Tiwary et al. (2024) investigated how temperature, oxygen concentration, and functional groups influence separation efficiency and the tunable mechanical properties of GO-based membranes. Zubair et al. (2024) focused on GO/PSf membranes for organic pollutant removal, emphasizing their antifouling behavior and separation performance. Similarly, Shah et al. (2023) provided a broad overview of GO-based MMM fabrication, stability, wastewater treatment applications, and associated environmental and safety considerations. While scientometric and bibliometric approaches are increasingly adopted across scientific disciplines, only a limited number of reviews have applied these tools to map research trends specifically in GO-polymeric membranes for wastewater treatment. This review addresses that gap by integrating bibliometric analysis with a detailed technical evaluation of advanced fabrication methods, characterization techniques, separation mechanisms, current challenges, future development pathways for GO-MMMs and incorporates a SWOT analysis to assess commercialization readiness and sustainability, aspects rarely covered together in prior literature.

The rapid expansion of research on GO-MMMs for water treatment has produced a diverse and fragmented body of literature, encompassing multiple fabrication techniques, characterization methods, and application areas. Traditional technical reviews provide in-depth insights into material properties, performance metrics, and application-specific outcomes, yet often lack a quantitative assessment of how the research landscape has evolved over time. Conversely, bibliometric analyses offer data-driven perspectives on publication trends, collaboration networks, and thematic evolution, but do not fully address the underlying technical principles, fabrication challenges, and operational limitations of GO-MMMs.

To bridge this gap, the present work integrates a bibliometric mapping of GO-MMM research with a comprehensive technical review, enabling a holistic understanding of both the scientific progress and the technological potential of GO-MMMs in water and wastewater treatment. Specifically, the study aims to: (i) perform a bibliometric analysis of GO-MMM publications from 2015 to 2025 to identify global trends, leading authors, institutions, and thematic clusters; (ii) critically review the structural characteristics, fabrication methods, separation mechanisms, and application-specific performance of GO-MMMs; (iii) highlight the current challenges and limitations impeding their large-scale implementation; and (iv) conduct a SWOT analysis to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with GO-MMM adoption from technical, environmental, and economic perspectives.

2 Methodology

A bibliometric analysis was performed by reviewing prior studies. This project aimed to explore innovative applications of GO in MMMs for water purification. The methodology for conducting bibliographic and bibliometric research is outlined in Figure 1. To gather relevant data, the “Web of Science” (WoS) database was searched using specific keywords ((“graphene oxide” OR GO) AND (“mixed matrix membrane*” OR MMM OR “composite membrane*”) AND (“water treatment” OR wastewater OR desalination OR “oil-water separation” OR “dye removal” OR “metal removal” OR “pharmaceutical removal”)). The collected literature was then categorized and critically analyzed to extract key findings, trends, and gaps related to the application of GO in MMMs for water purification. This systematic approach ensured both comprehensive coverage and thematic organization of the most relevant and impactful studies in the field.

Figure 1: Research framework outlining the bibliometric analysis process and thematic structure of the study.
Figure 1:

Research framework outlining the bibliometric analysis process and thematic structure of the study.

3 Bibliometric results and interpretation

A search was conducted in the Web of Science (WoS) core collection database using a set of relevant keywords ((“graphene oxide” OR GO) AND (“mixed matrix membrane*” OR MMM OR “composite membrane*”) AND (“water treatment” OR wastewater OR desalination OR “oil-water separation” OR “dye removal” OR “metal removal” OR “pharmaceutical removal”)) between 2015 to 2025. The topic search (TS) function was applied to retrieve articles based on their title, abstract, and keywords. Data extraction was performed on 5 August 2025. Initially, 1,645 papers were identified, but after filtering for reviews and articles only published in English language, 1,404 papers remained for further analysis. The total number of citations recorded was 34,493, and 33,251 without self-citation. The average citation per document was 46.74, and the h-index for the dataset was 123. Figure 2 presents the number of publications on GO-MMMs for wastewater treatment (2015–2025).

Figure 2: Annual number of publications and citations related to GO-MMMs for wastewater treatment (2015–2025).
Figure 2:

Annual number of publications and citations related to GO-MMMs for wastewater treatment (2015–2025).

3.1 Co-authorship of institutions

A total of 671 institutions from 39 countries have contributed to GO-MMMs research, meeting the minimum criterion of five publications. Table 2 highlights the top 20 universities actively publishing in this area. The global impact of an institution in this field is reflected in its publication volume. Leading the list is the Chinese academy of science with 27 documents published, followed by King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals with 14 published documents and then, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia with 13 published documents. Notably, nine of the top 20 universities are based in China, three are based in Iran while the remaining are located in Malaysia, Turkey, South Africa, the United States, Mexico, the United Kingdom and South Africa. The significant contribution of Chinese institutions underscores their dominance in GO-MMMs research. Surprisingly, despite the relevance of this topic to sustainability management, American and European universities have contributed relatively little to this specialized field.

Table 2:

Top 20 institutions publishing on GO-MMMs.

Rank Institution Country Documents Citations Total link strength
1. Chinese academy of science China 27 1,855 24
2. King Fahd university of petroleum and minerals Saudi Arabia 14 433 8
3. Universiti teknologi Malaysia Malaysia 13 672 4
4. Tianjin polytechnic university China 12 566 3
5. Kharazmi university Iran 10 401 10
6. Qingdao university China 10 307 7
7. Dalian university of technology China 8 331 2
8. Khalifa university of science and technology United Arab Emirates 8 226 2
9. Tsinghua university China 7 337 7
10. University of Tehran Iran 7 188 3
11. Istanbul technical university Turkey 6 561 9
12. University of Chinese academy of sciences China 6 286 8
13. South China university of technology China 6 329 4
14. University South Africa South Africa 6 159 4
15. Tianjin university China 6 447 3
16. Zhengzhou university China 6 401 3
17. Technological institute of Monterrey Mexico 5 118 6
18. Colorado state university United state 5 106 5
19. Imperial college London United Kingdom 5 383 5
20. Islamic Azad university Iran 5 37 2

3.2 Co-authorship network of countries

Table 3 illustrates the countries with the highest published documents on GO. China dominates GO-MMM research output with 260 publications, accounting for nearly five times the number produced by the second-ranked country, Iran (54 publications). This leadership is supported by extensive government investment in membrane technology and strong institutional networks such as the Chinese Academy of Sciences, reflected in China’s highest total link strength (84). However, when impact is considered through total citations, Australia (3,001 citations from 30 publications) and Singapore (1,794 citations from 17 publications) emerge as top performers, indicating a focus on high-impact, high-quality research despite smaller output. Similarly, the USA shows a high average citation rate (1,603 from 34 publications) and strong international collaboration (total link strength of 40). Thematic analysis suggests that countries like China, India, and Iran contribute heavily to saturated areas such as dye and heavy metal removal, while Australia, Singapore, and the USA are increasingly involved in emerging directions such as pharmaceutical removal, oil–water separation, and advanced fabrication techniques (e.g., layer-by-layer assembly, photocatalytic MMMs). This indicates a gradual shift from volume-driven research toward specialized, high-impact niche areas that could accelerate commercialization potential.

Table 3:

Top 22 countries publishing on GO.

Rank Country Documents Citations Total link strength
1. China 260 12,044 84
2. Iran 54 1,580 28
3. India 35 790 24
4. USA 34 1,603 40
5. Saudi Arabia 30 1,004 35
6. Australia 30 3,001 26
7. Malaysia 25 917 24
8. Pakistan 23 562 39
9. South Korea 21 1,392 23
10. UAE 18 481 16
11. Singapore 17 1794 18
12. England 15 1,114 16
13. South Africa 15 1,027 11
14. Italy 13 636 8
15. Canada 11 307 12
16. Qatar 11 640 5
17. Taiwan 10 257 11
18. Poland 10 134 8
19. Japan 9 513 11
20. Turkey 8 662 9

3.3 Document citation analysis

Table 4 summarizes the results of the document citation analysis. The most frequently cited paper is by (Hegab and Zou 2015), with 513 citations. Published in the Journal of Membrane Science, the study, explores recent advances in GO-assisted desalination membranes, covering their structures, fabrication strategies, performance, and potential for scalable, low-energy water purification. The second most cited article, authored by (Bano et al. 2015) has 451 citations, appears in Journal of Materials Chemistry A. This research focuses on fabricating PA/GO nanofiltration membranes with enhanced water flux and antifouling properties for desalination. The third most cited work by (Xu et al. 2016), has accumulated 356 citations and developed a GO/TiO2-PVDF hybrid ultrafiltration membrane with enhanced photocatalytic antifouling and self-cleaning properties. Overall, the 10 most referenced studies primarily emphasize the high solubility of GO in water and other solvents, along with its abundant functional groups, tunable structure, and strong compatibility with polymers, enabling the fabrication of high-performance membranes for water purification, desalination, dye removal, gas separation, and antifouling applications.

Table 4:

Top 10 document citation analysis.

Rank Author Paper summary Citation
1 Hegab and Zou (2015) Reviewed recent advances in GO-assisted desalination membranes, covering their structures, fabrication strategies, performance, and potential for scalable, low-energy water purification. 513
2 Bano et al. (2015) Developed PA/GO nanofiltration membranes with enhanced water flux and antifouling properties for desalination. Incorporating 0.2 wt% GO increased flux twelve-fold without reducing salt rejection, offering a stable, high-performance NF membrane. 451
3 Xu et al. (2016) Developed a GO/TiO2-PVDF hybrid ultrafiltration membrane with enhanced photocatalytic antifouling and self-cleaning properties. Achieved over double the water flux of pristine PVDF and 92.5 % BSA rejection, making it a promising multifunctional material for water treatment. 356
4 Wang et al. (2016b) Developed a GO@PAN nanofiltration membrane with controllable GO layer thickness, achieving high water flux at low pressure and near 100 % Congo red rejection. The hydrophilic–hydrophobic gate nanochannel model explains its efficient water transport, offering potential for advanced water treatment. 306
5 Lai et al. (2016) Fabricated GO-incorporated TFN nanofiltration membranes with enhanced hydrophilicity, achieving higher water flux and salt rejection than TFC membranes. The 0.3 wt% GO membrane showed optimal performance, overcoming the typical flux–rejection trade-off in water softening. 305
6 Wang et al. (2016a) Developed ZIF-8/GO-based TFN membranes with uniform nanoparticle dispersion, achieving high bivalent salt rejection and excellent antimicrobial activity. The membranes combine efficient desalination with strong bactericidal properties, offering great potential for multifunctional water treatment. 282
7 Liu et al. (2020) Developed a GO/MXene composite membrane with enhanced stability, achieving over 11 × higher water flux than GO membranes and >99.5 % rejection of dyes and natural organic matter, making it highly promising for water treatment. 268
8 Lai et al. (2018) Fabricated GO-incorporated TFN membranes via a novel interfacial polymerization technique, achieving higher hydrophilicity, improved antifouling, and up to 31.4 % higher water flux with excellent salt rejection, demonstrating broad applicability for water treatment. 263
9 Zhan et al. (2018b) Developed a poly (arylene ether nitrile) (PEN)/GO- polydopamine (PDA) nanofibrous composite membrane with high flux, 99.8 % dye rejection, excellent mechanical strength, temperature resistance, and antifouling performance, offering a durable and efficient solution for dye separation. 256
10 Zhang et al. (2017) Developed IPDI-crosslinked GO framework membranes with enhanced stability, enlarged nanochannels, high water flux (80–100 L m−2 h−1·bar−1), and >96 % dye rejection, offering a promising solution for wastewater treatment. 237

Figure 3 represent the document citation mapping of authors generated through the bibliometric analysis. Five clusters were generated; blue cluster for GO-MMM fabrication, green cluster for application-oriented performance studies, red cluster for pollutant removal mechanisms, purple cluster for synthesis innovation and functionalization and yellow cluster for interdisciplinary and hybrid approaches.

Figure 3: Network visualization of document citation analysis.
Figure 3:

Network visualization of document citation analysis.

3.4 Co-word analysis

Using the same database, co-word or keyword network analysis of research revealed five clusters: purple (GO performance and fabrication); green (polymeric membranes and antifouling); red (desalination and high-performance separation); yellow (thin-film composites and gas separation); blue (photocatalysis and dye removal) from 2067 keywords. Some keywords that had high occurrence include: GO (255 occurrences), composite membrane (97 occurrences), separation (91 occurrences). Figure 4 displays the network topology of the co-word analysis. It is easy to see the five groups, each of which stands for a different issue. The interpretation of each cluster is given as follows:

  1. Cluster 1 (purple): This cluster centers on GO and its performance, encompassing fabrication methods, adsorption, nanoparticles, and removal processes. It highlights that most research focuses on developing GO-based membranes and evaluating their separation efficiency and contaminant removal capacity in aqueous systems

  2. Cluster 2 (green): This theme connects polymeric substrates such as PSf, PES, and PVDF with key properties like hydrophilicity, antifouling, and ultrafiltration. The focus here is on enhancing membrane wettability, reducing fouling, and improving flux recovery for wastewater treatment applications.

  3. Cluster 3 (red): Keywords in this group, including desalination, nanofiltration, reverse osmosis, and layered membranes, represent research targeting saline water treatment and salt rejection. GO incorporation is explored to achieve higher water flux, selectivity, and mechanical stability in large-scale separation processes.

  4. Cluster 4 (yellow): This smaller but significant cluster links thin-film composites, gas separation, covalent organic frameworks, and interfacial polymerization. It reflects research expanding GO membrane applications beyond water purification into gas and solvent-resistant separations.

  5. Cluster 5 (blue): This cluster associates photocatalytic degradation, dye removal, oil-water separation, and heavy metal removal. The emphasis is on multifunctional membranes that combine adsorption with photocatalytic activity for advanced treatment of industrial effluents.

Figure 4: Network visualization of Co-word analysis.
Figure 4:

Network visualization of Co-word analysis.

4 Technical review of GO-MMMs in water treatment

4.1 Characterization techniques

4.1.1 Raman spectroscopy, Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), hydrophilicity and zeta potential

FTIR is used to analyze the incorporation of GO into polymer matrices by detecting oxygen-containing functional groups such as epoxy, carboxyl, and hydroxyl. The GO spectrum features distinct absorption peaks around 3,340 cm−1 and 1734 cm−1, corresponding to O–H and C=O stretching vibrations, respectively (Jaramillo-Fierro and Cuenca 2024). When GO is introduced into the polymer matrix, the PES–GO spectrum shows a broadening at the 1,600 cm−1 peak. Additionally, as depicted in Figure 5a (Lemos et al. 2021), the Raman spectrum of PES displays a pronounced peak at 1,146 cm−1 (C–O–C stretching) along with broad bands at 1,579 and 1,600 cm−1, which are associated with phenyl structure vibrations. Moreover, as seen in Figure 5b, incorporating GO into the PVDF matrix enhances the β-phase intensity (at 840 cm−1) while reducing the α-phase intensity (at 760 cm−1). This transformation indicates that the carbonyl groups in GO nanosheets act as nucleation sites, facilitating the formation of the β-phase in PVDF chains (Sun et al. 2022).

Figure 5: Characterization images based on (a) Raman spectra of GO, PES/GO and PES (Lemos et al. 2021), with permission from elsevier; (b) FTIR of GO, PVDF, PVDF/GO-s and PVDF/GO-h (Sun et al. 2022); (c) contact angle of PES, PES/GO-0.25, PES/GO-0.50 and PES/GO-1 (Bhatti et al. 2018); and (d) zeta potential of PSF, PSf/MOF5@GO-0.5 and PSf/MOF5@GO-1 (Mondal and Indurkar 2024), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 5:

Characterization images based on (a) Raman spectra of GO, PES/GO and PES (Lemos et al. 2021), with permission from elsevier; (b) FTIR of GO, PVDF, PVDF/GO-s and PVDF/GO-h (Sun et al. 2022); (c) contact angle of PES, PES/GO-0.25, PES/GO-0.50 and PES/GO-1 (Bhatti et al. 2018); and (d) zeta potential of PSF, PSf/MOF5@GO-0.5 and PSf/MOF5@GO-1 (Mondal and Indurkar 2024), with permission from Elsevier.

The contact angle refers to the angle formed when a liquid, such as water, comes into contact with a membrane’s surface (Almansouri et al. 2025). This angle is primarily influenced by the membrane’s surface characteristics, including porosity and pore size, rather than external conditions (Ahmad et al. 2022; Altinkaya et al. 2024; Rahman et al. 2024). Enhancement of water permeance is achieved by incorporating hydrophilic GO nanoparticles into the membrane, which strengthens its interaction with water (Ntone et al. 2025). This enhancement results from oxygen-containing functional groups present within the polymer matrix. A reduction in the membrane’s contact angle (Figure 5c) as the GO concentration increases signifies improved hydrophilicity (Bhatti et al. 2018). However, an excessive amount of GO may lead to aggregation within the polymer, slightly raising the contact angle.

Moreover, the zeta potential, which represents the charge at the interface between a solid surface and the surrounding liquid, plays a crucial role in assessing nanoparticle surface characteristics and predicting long-term stability (Serrano-Lotina et al. 2023; Yuan et al. 2022). The presence of hydrophilic functional groups on the membrane surface not only enhances hydrophilicity but also increases the negative charge, leading to a higher zeta potential. As the GO content rises from 0 % to 0.5 %, the zeta potential of the GO-modified membrane also increases (Figure 5d) (Mondal and Indurkar 2024).

4.1.2 Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)

SEM is employed to examine the impact of GO on polymeric membrane morphology, focusing on both surface and cross-sectional characteristics. As illustrated in Figure 6a (Meng et al. 2016), incorporating GO into the polymer matrix leads to the formation of an asymmetric porous structure with a finger-like sublayer. This sublayer consists of finger-like micro-voids that gradually transition into a sponge-like structure at the bottom. Additionally, the thicker top layer formed due to GO integration enhances the membrane’s mechanical strength (Camacho et al. 2020). A similar morphology was observed by Ntone et al. (2024b) (Figure 6b), where the hydrophilic functional groups of GO accelerated the exchange between water and the solvent DMAc, promoting pore formation and expediting the phase inversion process. However, as depicted in Figure 6c, an excessive amount of GO shortens the finger-like channels in the top layer and reduces the macro-void volume in the bottom layer, making them less distinct (Abdalla et al. 2023). Moreover, the incorporation of GO increases the membrane’s selective skin layer thickness, rising from approximately 0.51 ± 0.18 μm in pure PES to 0.89 ± 0.39 μm in PES-GO (0.6 %). Similarly, the thickness of PSF/GO membranes increases from 43.6 ± 1.6 μm at 0.25 wt% GO to 58.1 ± 3.0 μm at 0.5 wt% GO (Subtil et al. 2022). Compared to MMMs, control membranes exhibit a smoother surface with lower porosity (Rahman et al. 2024, Taha et al. 2024).

Figure 6: SEM images of a) cross-section of PES (a), PES-GO (0.3 %) (b) and PES-GO (0.6 %) (c) (Abdalla et al. 2023); b) cross-section of MMM PES/GO-0.1 and MMM PES/GO-0.4 (Ntone et al. 2024b), with permission from elsevier; and c) surface (a) PSf (b) 0.2 % and cross cross-section (d) PSf (e) 0.2 % (Subtil et al. 2022), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 6:

SEM images of a) cross-section of PES (a), PES-GO (0.3 %) (b) and PES-GO (0.6 %) (c) (Abdalla et al. 2023); b) cross-section of MMM PES/GO-0.1 and MMM PES/GO-0.4 (Ntone et al. 2024b), with permission from elsevier; and c) surface (a) PSf (b) 0.2 % and cross cross-section (d) PSf (e) 0.2 % (Subtil et al. 2022), with permission from Elsevier.

4.1.3 Mechanical strength

The mechanical properties of GO-based MMMs play a vital role in enhancing their durability and overall performance compared to unmodified membranes. These properties are typically evaluated using tensile strength tests, which measure elongation at break, Young’s modulus, and tensile stress (Liu et al. 2022). As the GO content increases, elongation at break generally decreases, while both tensile stress and Young’s modulus tend to improve. The incorporation of GO into the polymer matrix reinforces the membrane by strengthening interfacial interactions, facilitating hydrogen bonding, and inducing Van der Waals forces that contribute to a crosslinked network structure (Ntone et al. 2024b). Due to GO’s ability to enhance PSf crystallinity, a membrane containing 0.25 wt % GO exhibited a higher Young’s modulus and greater resistance to tensile stress (Ravishankar et al. 2018). However, when the GO concentration increased to 1 wt %, the tensile strength declined, which was attributed to poor dispersion and the formation of aggregates. The inclusion of GO improved the mechanical strength of the mixed matrix membrane, achieving a tensile strength of 1.99 MPa and an elastic modulus of 103.14 MPa. This improvement suggests that GO’s functional groups enhanced the membrane’s interfacial interaction with the polymer, thereby strengthening its structure (Wu et al. 2023).

4.1.4 Pure water flux and antifouling properties

The incorporation of GO into polymeric membranes generally results in a higher pure water flux (PWF) compared to unmodified membranes. For instance, introducing carboxylated GO (CGO) into a PES matrix at concentrations of 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 wt % increases the PWF of the PES-M membrane from 51.7 to 65.1, 82.6, 90.9, and 102.4 L m−2 h−1, respectively (Kong et al. 2020b). This enhancement is primarily attributed to the improved porosity and hydrophilicity of CGO-modified membranes. Similarly, the addition of 0.5 and 1 wt % GO to PSF/PANI membranes significantly boosted their PWF, adsorption capacity, filtration efficiency, and overall water flux (Tabasum et al. 2024). However, increasing GO concentration to 2 wt % led to agglomeration and pore blockage, causing a subsequent decline in PWF as depicted in Figure 7a.

Nanoparticle aggregation presents a significant challenge as it can negatively affect critical membrane properties such as mechanical stability and water permeance. To mitigate these issues, researchers suggest carefully controlling nanoparticle concentrations to achieve optimal membrane performance (Kadhim et al. 2020).

As illustrated in Figure 7c, all membranes demonstrated relatively high BSA rejection rates in the foulant rejection test, exceeding 90.0 %. The GO characteristics of CGO introduce ionic and hydrogen bonding sites into the PES membrane, leading to the formation of a robust hydration layer, as depicted in Figure 7d. This hydration layer aids in BSA removal while effectively minimizing its adsorption. Although excessive GO aggregation resulted in increased hydrophobicity, its incorporation enhanced the membrane’s adsorption properties and anti-fouling performance (Tabasum et al. 2024).

Figure 7: GO-based MMM performances on (a) Pure water flux (Tabasum et al. 2024), with permission from RSC publications; (b) permeation flux of the membrane prepared at different GO concentrations (Kadhim et al. 2020); (c) flux recovery ratio of PES-M and CGO-M; (d) schematic illustration of BSA detachment on CGO-M (Kong et al. 2020b), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 7:

GO-based MMM performances on (a) Pure water flux (Tabasum et al. 2024), with permission from RSC publications; (b) permeation flux of the membrane prepared at different GO concentrations (Kadhim et al. 2020); (c) flux recovery ratio of PES-M and CGO-M; (d) schematic illustration of BSA detachment on CGO-M (Kong et al. 2020b), with permission from Elsevier.

In the initial analysis, several key parameters are used to evaluate the extent of membrane fouling. Total fouling resistance (Rt), reversible fouling resistance (Rr), and irreversible fouling resistance (Rir) are three commonly applied metrics derived from Darcy’s law to assess a membrane’s anti-fouling behavior (Im et al. 2019; Du et al. 2020). These parameters are determined using the following equations:

(1) R t = TMP μ J
(2) R t = R m + R ir + R r

where TMP is the transmembrane pressure, △P (pa), μ is the viscosity of the influent, J represents the membrane flux (m3/(m2·s)), Rm is the intrinsic membrane resistance (m−1). Rr is the contamination caused by concentration polarization, which leads to surface contamination that is readily removed; Rir is the irreversible contamination caused by the deposition of contaminants on the surface of the membrane and in the pores of the membrane, which is difficult removed and leads to a permanent decrease in the flux. The calculation flux recovery rate (FRR), Rr, and Rir related to membrane fouling is seen in Figure 7c are calculated using the following equations:

(3) FRR % = J w 2 J w 1 × 100 %
(4) FRR % = J w 1 − J P J w 1 × 100 %
(5) R r % = J w 2 − J P J w 1 × 100 %
(6) R ir % = J w 1 − J w 2 J w 1 × 100 %

4.2 Advanced fabrication methods

For the purpose of achieving a consistent distribution of NPs and strong interfacial interaction with the polymer matrix, several manufacturing processes have been developed. Phase inversion, polymer grafting, electrospinning, vacuum/evaporation/pressure self-assembly methods, in-situ synthesis, layer-by-layer self-assembly, and co-deposition methods are among the fabrication methods, as seen in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Schematic illustrations of (A) phase inversion (Arundhathi et al. 2024); (B) polymer grafting (Suresh et al. 2021); (C) electrospinning (Tomar et al. 2023), with permission from ACS publication; (D) vacuum/evaporation/pressure self-assembly; (E) in-situ synthesis (Siddique et al. 2021); (F) layer by layer self – assembly (Wang et al. 2022b); and (G) co-deposition method (Wang et al. 2022a), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 8:

Schematic illustrations of (A) phase inversion (Arundhathi et al. 2024); (B) polymer grafting (Suresh et al. 2021); (C) electrospinning (Tomar et al. 2023), with permission from ACS publication; (D) vacuum/evaporation/pressure self-assembly; (E) in-situ synthesis (Siddique et al. 2021); (F) layer by layer self – assembly (Wang et al. 2022b); and (G) co-deposition method (Wang et al. 2022a), with permission from Elsevier.

4.2.1 Phase inversion (blending technique)

The phase inversion technique is widely used for fabricating GO-based MMMs. In this method, a uniform polymer solution blended with nanoparticles is cast into a thin film, followed by immersion in a non-solvent coagulation bath to trigger phase separation and form a porous membrane structure, as illustrated in Figure 8a (Arundhathi et al. 2024; Ntone et al. 2023b) . This approach is cost-effective, straightforward, and highly adaptable for use with various polymers. Additionally, it generates a porous structure that enhances both water flux and selectivity. Several techniques fall under this methodology, including immersion precipitation, vapor-induced phase separation (VIPS), evaporation-induced phase separation (EIPS), and thermally induced phase separation (TIPS) (Geleta et al. 2023; Iqbal et al. 2024; Yuan et al. 2023).

Using this process, two primary membrane types can be produced: flat-sheet membranes and hollow fiber membranes. Hollow fiber membranes were synthesized through non-solvent induced phase separation (NIPS) with a polymer blend of PSF and 1.0 wt % GO. The resulting membranes demonstrated good permeance due to their enhanced hydrophilicity, along with suitable mechanical and thermal stability (Casetta et al. 2024). Likewise, the phase inversion technique was applied to develop MOF5/GO MMMs for removing heavy metals such as Pb, Cu, Zn, Cd, Ni, and Cr (Mondal and Indurkar 2024). The data suggest that the M-0.5 membrane, with an improved water flux of 116 L m−2 h−1, can achieve metal rejection rates of up to 99 %.

4.2.2 Polymer grafting

Polymer grafting is a promising approach to enhance membrane surface hydrophilicity and fouling resistance. Common chemical grafting methods for surface modification include grafting-to, grafting-from, and grafting-through, as illustrated in Figure 8b. Among these, the grafting-to technique is relatively simple, as polymer attachment can be completed in a single step (Suresh et al. 2021). This method includes direct grafting and the use of bridging agents. In one study, GO was integrated into a PES membrane containing zwitterionic groups through grafting. The introduction of these zwitterionic groups led to a partial increase in pore size due to rapid phase separation during coagulation (Raseala et al. 2025), ultimately improving the membrane’s fouling resistance and permeance.

Grafting-from, also referred to as graft polymerization, involves the gradual expansion of monomers from active grafting sites on the polymer backbone, forming side chains of varying lengths (Suresh et al. 2021, Saini and Awasthi 2022). This method allows better control over the grafting layer thickness, as the monomer concentration can be progressively adjusted (Koli and Singh 2023). However, regulating the final length of the polymer chains remains a challenge. In one example, polyethylene glycol (PEG) was grafted onto GO via free-radical polymerization, demonstrating excellent CO2 extraction potential (Lee et al. 2023).

Another method, grafting-through, enables the formation of well-defined side chains. This approach typically involves free radical copolymerization, where a lower molecular weight monomer reacts with a macromonomer functionalized with acrylate. The number of grafted chains is influenced by the copolymerization efficiency of the monomers and the molar ratio between the monomers and macromonomers (Hassan et al. 2023).

4.2.3 Electrospinning

As depicted in Figure 8c, electrospinning is a widely used technique in industrial applications for large-scale production due to its straightforward setup and key influencing factors, such as polymer properties, additives, tip-to-collector distance, feed rate, and applied voltage. This method offers various approaches to control the characteristics of the resulting nanofibers (Ntone et al. 2023a; Tomar et al. 2023). Its versatility, affordability, and ease of modification make it an attractive option for producing ultra-fine fibers. Electrospinning was employed to fabricate GO/Chitosan and PVDF nanostructures for oil/water separation. The modified membrane demonstrated excellent stability under harsh conditions and exhibited strong anti-fouling properties (Mehranbod et al. 2021). Additionally, oil separation efficiency exceeded 99 % in testing. Likewise, electrospinning was used to synthesize PAN-GO-Fe3O4 composite nanofibers, which achieved a maximum Cr(VI) adsorption capacity of 124.34 mg/g at pH 3 (Sahoo et al. 2021).

To create a Janus membrane, a layered electrospinning approach was applied to cPVA-PVDF/PMMA/GO. Initially, a blend of PVDF, PMMA, and GO was electrospun to develop a hydrophobic layer. Then, PVA nanofibers were sequentially electrospun onto this layer to form a composite membrane, which was later crosslinked to complete the Janus structure (Wu et al. 2022). The incorporation of GO significantly enhanced the membrane’s hydrophobicity, mechanical strength, and overall stability.

4.2.4 Vacuum/evaporation/pressure self-assembly methods

Pressure-assisted self-assembly (PAS), vacuum-assisted self-assembly (VAS), and evaporation-assisted self-assembly (EAS) are widely used techniques for fabricating GO-based selective layer (SL) membranes and free-standing GO-MMMs, as illustrated in Figure 8d (Yang et al. 2018). These methods involve filtering GO suspensions through porous substrates to form lamellar structures with nanochannels, facilitating selective water permeation. PAS, in particular, yields denser and more organized laminates, enhancing both thermal stability and overall performance (Tsou et al. 2015). The interlayer spacing (d-spacing) can be modified by adjusting factors such as oxidation levels, crosslinking agents, surfactants, or deposition speeds (Sun et al. 2020; Xu et al. 2017). Compared to EAS, VAS and PAS tend to reduce d-spacing, leading to larger pores and lower selectivity. In VAS, slower deposition results in improved flow and higher salt rejection compared to faster deposition (Xu et al. 2017). Incorporating materials like diamines optimally enhances stability and performance (Qian et al. 2019;Ngouangna et al. 2025), although excessive expansion of interlayer spacing may compromise selectivity.

4.2.5 In-situ synthesis

In-situ synthesis ensures the uniform dispersion of GO within MMMs (GO-MMMs) by forming the polymer matrix directly in the presence of GO, often through the polymerization of monomers. This approach offers benefits such as improved mechanical and thermal properties along with consistent GO distribution throughout the matrix. Figure 8e illustrates three synthesis routes for this method. The first involves exposing a polymer and metal ion precursor solution to a specific liquid or gas, facilitating the formation of uniformly distributed nanoparticles within or on the polymer matrix (Sadegh et al. 2024). The second occurs when nanofillers are dispersed into a monomer solution, leading to polymerization under suitable conditions with a designated catalyst (Ali et al. 2024). The third approach combines both methods, where monomers and nanoparticle precursors dissolve in an appropriate solvent along with an initiator, resulting in the simultaneous formation of both the polymer and nanoparticles (Siddique et al. 2021). A GO-silver nanoparticle composite (GO-AgNPs) was synthesized through an in-situ process, where silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) were grown directly on the GO surface via a “one-pot reaction.” In this process, silver nitrate (AgNO3) served as the AgNP precursor, while gallic acid (GA) functioned as both the reducing and stabilizing agent (Bao et al. 2022).

4.2.6 Layer by layer self-assembly

GO-based MMMs are fabricated through the sequential deposition of GO nanosheets onto a polymeric substrate using the layer-by-layer (LbL) self-assembly technique (Figure 8f). To enhance membrane stability and functionality, GO nanosheets are often integrated with polyelectrolytes or cross-linking agents. This approach enables precise control over membrane properties such as separation efficiency, surface charge, and thickness. For instance, (Wang et al. 2022a) developed a nanofiltration membrane incorporating GO through LbL self-assembly combined with interfacial polymerization, where the well-structured GO layers contributed to improved separation performance. Likewise, Nan et al. (2016) significantly increased water permeance and salt rejection by constructing positively charged nanofiltration membranes using GO and polyethyleneimine via LbL assembly. These studies highlight the effectiveness of the LbL technique in engineering GO-MMMs with tailored properties for various separation processes.

4.2.7 Co-deposition method

The co-deposition method (Figure 8g) for fabricating GO-MMMs involves the simultaneous deposition of both GO nanofillers and polymer, ensuring a uniform and well-integrated membrane structure. This technique enhances GO dispersion within the polymer matrix, leading to improvements in separation efficiency, mechanical properties, and thermal stability. For instance, research has demonstrated that incorporating GO into anion exchange membranes alongside polyethyleneimine and tannic acid enhances membrane longevity and resistance to fouling (Li et al. 2021b).

Table 5 provides a summary of fabrication techniques, contact angle measurements, rejection efficiency, mechanical properties, permeance, and flux ratio from previous studies. The water contact angle values of PSF, PES, PEI and PVDF composites are notably lower than those of their unmodified counterparts due to the presence of GO. The intrinsic hydrophilicity of GO-based composites is attributed to their hydroxyl, carboxyl, and epoxide functional groups, which significantly decrease the hydrophobicity of polymer membranes (Rouhollahi et al. 2024). This hydrophilic nature is particularly advantageous in altering the surface wettability of inherently hydrophobic membranes, which, despite their robust mechanical and chemical properties, tend to suffer from severe fouling in aqueous separations (Nan et al. 2016; Ntone et al. 2025). Most modified GO-MMMs exhibited enhanced permeance and rejection rates, as GO provides ample surface area and active functional groups that aid in contaminant removal. Additionally, introducing TiO2 nanoparticles alone into the polymer matrix resulted in lower rejection rates compared to GO incorporation (Davari et al. 2021).

Table 5:

Summary of recently published articles on GO-MMMs.

GO-MMMs Fabrication method Water contact angle Rejection % Mechanical properties Pure water flux and permeance Flux recovery ratio References
PSF-GO Phase inversion 34.2° Lead: 98 % Young’s modulus: 79.46 MPa; tensile stress: 1.1 MPa; elongation break: 12.48 mm 52.1 L m−2 h−1·bar – Ravishankar et al. (2018)
GO and polyethyleneimine (PEI) Layer-by-layer assembly – Mg2+: 93.9 %; Na+: 38.1 % – 4.2 L m−2 h−1·bar – Nan et al. (2016)
Nano diamond GO- PVC Phase inversion 91.8° BSA: 95.08 % Tensile stress: 5.34 MPa; elongation: 29.18 % 440.0 L m−2 h−1 – Khakpour et al. (2019)
PES-polyaniline-reduced GO PANI(HCSA)-rGO Phase inversion – Organic carbon rejection: 93 % – 227 L/m2·h L·m−2·h−1 81 % Subtil et al. (2020)
PVDF-polyaniline GO (PANI-GO) Phase inversion – BSA: 78 %; allura red: 98 %; methyl orange: 95 % – 46 L m−2 h−1 92 % Nawaz et al. (2021)
PES-polyvinyl alcohol-GO-sodium alginate (PVA-GO-NaAlg) Chemical hydrogel + phase inversion – BSA: 98.5 % – 115.7 L m−2 h−1 88.7 % Amiri et al. (2020)
PVDF-TiO2-GO Phase inversion – BSA: 91.38 % – 199.97 L m−2 h−1 89.22 % Wu et al. (2019)
PES-GO Fe3+/Tax-PIP Co-deposition – MgSO4: 89.52 % – 21.66 L m−2 h−1·bar – Yang et al. (2019b)
PSF-ZnO-GO Sol–gel method + phase inversion 39.6° Humic acid: 99 % – 51.1 L m−2 h−1 – Chung et al. (2017)

4.3 Contaminants removal mechanisms

4.3.1 Adsorption mechanism

Modifying the surface and pore walls of polymer membranes with functional groups enables selective adsorption of target pollutants (Figure 9a). As contaminated water flows through the membrane, the active binding sites interact with the pollutants due to the extremely short submicron-scale contact distance between them. This close proximity enhances the adsorption efficiency, leading to a high removal rate and capacity for contaminants in drinking water (Khulbe and Matsuura 2018).

Figure 9: Schematic illustrations of (A) adsorption mechanism, (B) size exclusion mechanism and (C) photocatalytic mechanism for contaminant removal.
Figure 9:

Schematic illustrations of (A) adsorption mechanism, (B) size exclusion mechanism and (C) photocatalytic mechanism for contaminant removal.

GO-MMMs possess a high surface area, diverse functional groups, and distinctive molecular interactions that contribute to their ability to remove contaminants from water (An et al. 2023). These contaminants include dyes, heavy metals, pharmaceutical residues, and emerging pollutants. The interaction between graphene and the aromatic rings of organic pollutants occurs through multiple mechanisms. In the case of pharmaceuticals, GO facilitates adsorption through four primary interactions: electrostatic forces, hydrophobic effects, hydrogen bonding, and π–π stacking (Isaeva et al. 2021).

4.3.1.1 π–π interactions

Aromatic rings can engage in π–π non-covalent interactions when their π-electron clouds overlap, leading to stable bonding. In MMMs, GO plays a vital role in removing contaminants, particularly those with aromatic structures (Banerjee et al. 2016). The presence of a high density of sp2 hybridized carbon atoms in GO enhances adsorption by promoting π–π interactions with aromatic drugs. For instance, tetracycline exhibits high removal efficiency in water due to its strong π–π interactions with GO (Yao et al. 2020). Similarly, GO’s π–π stacking ability contributes to the effective elimination of diclofenac, which contains aromatic rings (Ghani et al. 2018). Moreover, the versatility of this mechanism is evident in the efficient adsorption of propranolol, an aromatic beta-blocker, through a combination of π–π stacking and electrostatic interactions (Kyzas et al. 2015).

4.3.1.2 Hydrogen bonding

Hydrogen bonding plays a crucial role in the adsorption of contaminants onto adsorbent materials like GO in MMMs. This process occurs when hydrogen atoms attached to electronegative elements such as oxygen or nitrogen in pharmaceutical compounds interact with functional groups like – OH, –C=O and – COOH present on the GO surface. For instance, paracetamol’s – OH group forms strong hydrogen bonds with the oxygen-containing functional groups on GO (Moussavi et al. 2016). Similarly, ciprofloxacin, an antibiotic, establishes hydrogen bonds through its carboxyl and amine groups. In the same study, sulfamethoxazole exhibited adsorption driven by hydrogen bonding with polar oxygen-containing groups, enhancing its removal efficiency (Shan et al. 2017). Additionally, ibuprofen, a widely used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, is effectively adsorbed due to hydrogen interactions between its carboxyl group and GO’s functional groups. Triclosan, a hydrophobic contaminant, also forms hydrogen bonds, though its adsorption is further reinforced by hydrophobic interactions (Shan et al. 2017). Hydrogen bonding is a vital mechanism in water treatment technologies, as it improves selectivity and facilitates the removal of polar pharmaceutical pollutants. The specificity of these interactions depends on both the chemical structure of the contaminants and the functionalization of the adsorbent.

4.3.1.3 Electrostatic interaction

One important method for eliminating pollutants from membranes such as GO-MMMs is electrostatic interaction. It happens when functional groups in the membrane and pollutants with opposing charges are drawn to one another, promoting adsorption or retention. Antibiotics like ciprofloxacin, which can have cationic, anionic, or neutral forms based on pH, also depend on electrostatic interactions. By attaching to negatively charged groups on GO, GO-MMMs exhibit a high retention of ciprofloxacin in its cationic form (Khalil et al. 2020). By increasing their rejection rates at pH levels above their pKa, where they become negatively charged, this feature is very helpful in keeping ionizable medications like ibuprofen and sulfamethoxazole (Lou et al. 2020). As demonstrated with sulfadiazine and propranolol at different pH values, ionized medications are also eliminated via electrostatic repulsion between their charged species and the GO membrane (Zhang et al. 2019a).

4.3.1.4 Hydrophobic interactions

For GO-MMMs to efficiently eliminate nonpolar pharmaceutical contaminants, hydrophobic interactions play a crucial role. These interactions between the hydrophobic graphitic planes of GO and the nonpolar regions of pharmaceutical compounds enhance adsorption efficiency. Medications such as triclosan, diclofenac, and ibuprofen, which have high log Kow values, exhibit strong hydrophobic interactions that promote their adsorption onto nonpolar surfaces (Kong et al. 2020a). The effectiveness of these interactions depends on both the hydrophobicity of the molecules and the adsorbent properties. The importance of surface hydrophobicity is evident from the strong adhesion of hydrophobic personal care products (PCPs) like triclosan to activated carbon (Brauer and Fischer 2024). Overall, hydrophobic interactions significantly enhance the adsorption of nonpolar and aromatic pharmaceutical pollutants in GO-MMMs, highlighting their potential for wastewater treatment. These mechanisms provide a versatile approach to pollutant removal, complementing existing adsorption strategies such as electrostatic interactions and hydrogen bonding.

4.3.2 Size exclusion

Apart from adsorption, size exclusion also known as size sieving plays a critical role in separating contaminants based on molecular size. GO, when dispersed within the polymer matrix creates interlayer nanochannels and interfacial gaps that act as size-selective barriers. These channels typically range from 0.3 to 0.1 nm, depending on factors such as GO loading, degree of oxidation and functionalization. Molecules smaller than the effective pore size can pass through the membrane, while larger species are sterically excluded as seen in Figure 9b. This mechanism is especially effective in rejecting large organic molecules (e.g., dyes, heavy metals), colloidal particles, and macromolecular solutes, while allowing water or small ions to permeate. Additionally, the uniform dispersion of GO enhances the structural rigidity and narrows pore distribution, further improving selectivity through physical sieving.

4.3.3 Photocatalytic mechanism

The combining approach involving photo-Fenton and membrane separation techniques in treating organic wastewater pollution has become in important technique due to its efficacy. This mechanism primarily relies on the combination effect of separation sieving and photocatalytic degradation (Song et al. 2025). Graphene-based 2D carbon nanomaterials such as GO and reduced-GO, have been widely explored as photocalysts because of their good optical properties, high electron mobility, large surface, strong thermal conductivity, good flexibility and chemical stability (Shetti et al. 2019). During membrane filtration process, contaminant molecules are retained on the membrane surface due to the sieving action of the membrane pores. Moreover, certain molecules may pass through the membrane due to their small particle size (Figure 9d) (Binazadeh et al. 2023). For instance, GO/PVDF MMM was prepared for photocatalytic methylene blue (MB+) degradation under visible light irradiation reaching a dye removal efficiency of 83.5 % (Alyarnezhad et al. 2020). In another study, sulfonated GO/ZnO incorporated with PES was used for degration of crystal violet and ciprofloxacin in the presence of UV light irradiation revealing removal efficiency of 92.3 % and 95.1 % respectively (Boopathy et al. 2020).

Upon exposure to UV or visible light, the photocatalyst within the membrane matrix absorbs photons, generating electron-hole pairs. These photogenerated electrons (e−) and holes (h+) migrate to the surface of the photocatalyst, where they participate in redox reactions. The holes oxidize water or hydroxide ions to produce hydroxyl radicals (•OH), while electrons reduce dissolved oxygen to superoxide radicals (•O2−). These reactive oxygen species (ROS) possess strong oxidative potential and can degrade complex dye molecules into less harmful or mineralized products (e.g., CO2 and H2O) (Imran et al. 2025; Ramesh et al. 2024).

Table 6 demonstrates that GO-MMMs possess exceptional versatility in addressing diverse water pollutants, including heavy metals, dyes, and pharmaceuticals, through a combination of adsorption, size-based separation, and photocatalytic degradation. Across studies, removal efficiencies commonly exceed 90 %, with several systems achieving near-complete contaminant elimination. Adsorption-dominated mechanisms, often enhanced by GO’s π–π interactions and abundant functional groups, excel for both ionic (Pb2+, Cr(VI), Se(IV)) and organic (ibuprofen, triclosan, dyes) species. Incorporation of photocatalytic nanomaterials such as TiO2, ZnO, and polyaniline enables the degradation of persistent pollutants, bridging the gap between separation and chemical breakdown. These results underscore two consistent trends: (i) GO functionalization and hybridization significantly expand removal pathways beyond size exclusion alone, and (ii) synergistic mechanisms yield robust and broad-spectrum performance, positioning GO-MMMs as promising candidates for next-generation wastewater treatment technologies.

Table 6:

GO-MMMs removal mechanism and efficiency for contaminants removal.

GO-MMMs Mechanism Contaminant Removal efficiency References
GO-HMDA Electrostatic interaction, hydrogen bonding Lead, Pb2+; cadmium, Cd2+ >95 % Kaur et al. (2018)
GO/MNPs/HAP@CA Adsorption, π–π interactions Chromium, Cr(VI) 97.3 % Majdoub et al. (2021)
Selenium, Se(IV) 96 %
Methylene blue (MB) 95.1 %
PES/GO Adsorption, molecular sieving Ibuprofen >99 % Shan et al. (2017)
Adsorption, steric hindrance Triclosan >90 %
Molecular sieving Gemfibrozil >95 %
GO-PVDF MMM Adsorption, π–π interactions Diclofenac >94 % Ghani et al. (2018)
PUF/PDA-PEI/GO Adsorption, molecular sieving Congo red, CR 99.34 % Al-Wafi et al. (2020)
Methylene blue (MB) 96.62 %
PSf/TiO2/GO Adsorption, size exclusion Glyphosate 70 % Li et al. (2019)
Trifluralin 80 %
PVDF/GO Photocatalytic degradation Methylene blue (MB+) 83.5 % Alyarnezhad et al. (2020)
PES/GO/ZnO Photocatalysis degradation Crystal violet 92.3 % Boopathy et al. (2020)
Ciprofloxacin 95.1 %
PSF/PANI/GO Photocatalysis degradation Methylene blue (MB+) 98 % Tabasum et al. (2024)
PES/ZnO/GO Photocatalysis degradation Carbamazepine 80 % Mahlangu et al. (2023)
Brilliant black 70 %
PES/TiO2/GO Photocatalysis degradation Methyl orange (MO) 68 % Bhattacharyya et al. (2025)

5 Challenges and limitations

5.1 Membrane fouling

A major challenge in membrane-based separation processes is membrane fouling, where unwanted substances accumulate on the membrane surface or within its pores. This issue leads to a significant decline in membrane permeance, durability, and overall efficiency, while also increasing energy consumption (Hosseini and Toosi 2019; Mallah et al. 2024). Compared to conventional membranes, graphene-based membranes, particularly GO-MMMs, demonstrate inherent resistance to fouling due to their distinctive surface properties and nanoscale structure. However, fouling remains a concern, especially in long-term applications or complex environmental conditions (Alsawaftah et al. 2021; Edokali et al. 2024).

Various antifouling strategies have been extensively explored in the literature. One effective approach involves blending different polymers with varying hydrophilicity levels to minimize impurity adhesion on the membrane surface. Another widely studied method is the incorporation of nanoparticles or nanomaterials into the membrane matrix, which can enhance fouling resistance by modifying surface characteristics or introducing antimicrobial properties (Ahmad et al. 2021; Tiwary et al. 2024). Additionally, hydrophilic or zwitterionic coatings provide a robust barrier against contaminants, while photocatalytic nanosheets improve self-cleaning capabilities (Kamran et al. 2022). These advancements not only mitigate fouling but also enhance membrane performance by improving water flux and selectivity (Mustafa et al. 2022).

Further research and development are essential to fully optimize the antifouling properties of GO-MMMs, making them more efficient and sustainable for real-world applications. Innovative approaches such as functionalizing GO with specific chemical groups, developing hybrid membrane materials, and employing advanced coating techniques could help overcome persistent fouling challenges. By addressing these limitations, researchers can significantly extend the operational lifespan of GO-MMMs, reduce energy consumption, and facilitate their adoption across various industries, including gas separation, wastewater treatment, and water purification.

5.2 GO dispersion and stability

GO-MMMs contain hydrophilic oxygenated functional groups that attract water molecules, leading to the hydration of the GO sheets and an increase in interlayer spacing (Kallem et al. 2023). This swelling, driven by hydration and electrostatic repulsion from negatively charged groups, eventually overcomes van der Waals forces or hydrogen bonding, causing the membrane structure to collapse (Zheng et al. 2017). The instability worsens under highly alkaline conditions as stronger electrostatic repulsion further disrupts the layered structure. Additionally, water cations influence GO-MMMs stability; Na+ weakens structural integrity, while Al3++ enhances it. These factors highlight the susceptibility of GO-MMMs to structural degradation in specific aqueous environments (Xi et al. 2018).

To mitigate this issue, both covalent and non-covalent cross-linking strategies have been employed. Reactive carboxyl and hydroxyl groups on GO nanosheets serve as binding sites for covalent interactions with various cross-linking agents. Meanwhile, non-covalent approaches; such as hydrogen bonding, π–π stacking, van der Waals interactions, hydrophobic forces, and electrostatic attractions, have been explored to enhance the water stability of GO-based nanofiltration (NF) membranes (Wang et al. 2020a). For instance, Zhu et al. (2025) developed the GO-Zn-TA80 membrane, which demonstrated outstanding long-term stability across a wide range of pH levels and salinity conditions. This enhanced durability is attributed to the coordination and electrostatic interactions among Zn2+, tannic acid (TA), and GO nanosheets, along with the reinforcement of interlayer adhesion through a metal-polyphenol network (MPN) (Lv et al. 2020).

Lv et al. (2024) developed GO-MMMs cross-linked with copper ions and tannic acid, which enhanced both their permeance and structural stability. The incorporation of copper–tannic acid complexes, along with electrostatic interactions and complexation between copper ions, TA, and GO nanosheets, strengthened the attraction between GO layers. Additionally, π–π interactions between GO and TA, as well as hydrogen bonding, contributed to this reinforcement. To further enhance the water stability of GO-MMMs, various metal ions including: Al3+, Fe3+, La3+, Ca2+, Mg2+, and Ni2+, can serve as cross-linking agents (Ghaffar et al. 2019; Lin et al. 2024).

The GO-MMMs was developed by incorporating amino-functionalized MXene (MXene-NH2), which enhanced permeance by increasing the interlayer spacing of GO and providing a more efficient pathway for water transport (Nie et al. 2020). The resulting GO/MXene-NH2 composite membrane exhibited a water flux of approximately 11.31 L m−2 h−1·bar, nearly four times higher than the GO-MMMs of around 2.73 L m−2 h−1·bar. The interaction between the carboxyl groups of GO and the amino groups of MXene-NH2 helps maintain the integrity of the layered structure, enhancing its stability (Chang et al. 2024). Additionally, cross-linking agents such as 1,3,5-benzenetricarbonyl trichloride, glutaraldehyde (Halakoo and Feng 2020), and 1-allyl-3-vinylimidazolium chloride (Ye et al. 2019) can prevent GO nanosheets from dissolving or dispersing in water by forming strong bonds with their hydroxyl and carboxyl groups.

6 Future directions and innovations

6.1 Intercalation of nanomaterials into GO-MMMs

Incorporating nanoparticles into GO-MMMs modifies the size of permeation channels and interlayer spacing, leading to improved permeance and structural stability (Figures 10b,c). This expansion of interlayer spacing enhances the membrane’s ability to filter out impurities. Ren et al. (2024) developed a Fe(OH)3@GO membrane using an in-situ nanoparticle anchoring technique via vacuum filtration. This advanced membrane demonstrated exceptional performance, achieving a significantly higher water permeance of approximately 90.9 L m−2 h−1·bar, 19 times greater than conventional GO membranes, while maintaining over 99 % rejection of Evans blue (EB) and below 4 % rejection of NaCl. The Fe(OH)3 nanoparticles play a crucial role in widening the GO membrane’s interlayer gaps, thereby facilitating water transport (Zhan et al. 2018a) as illustrated in Figure 10d. However, excessive nanoparticle loading may obstruct mass transfer pathways, leading to a decline in water permeance (Wang et al. 2020a).

Figure 10: Structural illustrations on a) The preparation of Fe(OH)3@GO membrane via vacuum filtration technique (Ye et al. 2019); b) schematic illustration of d-spacings of graphene, dry GO, and GO soaked in water (Wang et al. 2020b), with permission from RSC publications; c) mechanisms of transport process of GO and GO/NH2–Fe3O4 membranes; d) plots of (a) contact angle and (b) surface zeta potential (mV) of pristine and resultant MMMs; and e) effect of pH on rejection (a) Cr(VI) and (b) Co(II) of pristine and resultant MMMs (Zeeshan et al. 2024), with permission from Elsevier.
Figure 10:

Structural illustrations on a) The preparation of Fe(OH)3@GO membrane via vacuum filtration technique (Ye et al. 2019); b) schematic illustration of d-spacings of graphene, dry GO, and GO soaked in water (Wang et al. 2020b), with permission from RSC publications; c) mechanisms of transport process of GO and GO/NH2–Fe3O4 membranes; d) plots of (a) contact angle and (b) surface zeta potential (mV) of pristine and resultant MMMs; and e) effect of pH on rejection (a) Cr(VI) and (b) Co(II) of pristine and resultant MMMs (Zeeshan et al. 2024), with permission from Elsevier.

Zeeshan et al. (2024) incorporated GO-Ag nanoparticles (NPs) into cellulose acetate (CA) NF/MMMs. The modified membranes exhibited outstanding rejection rates, achieving 99 % for Co(II) and 91 % for Cr(VI) (Figure 10e). Additionally, their pure water flux (PWF) reached 660.56 L m−2 h−1, marking a 78.45 % improvement compared to the unmodified membrane. This enhancement was attributed to increased surface hydrophilicity, roughness, and porosity, which also contributed to better antifouling properties (Figure 10e). In a separate study, Runlin et al. (2023) developed a GO/Mn3O4/PVDF composite membrane by employing a LbL self-assembly method for GO nanosheets while intercalating Mn3O4 nanoparticles to adjust the functional layer spacing. The resulting composite membrane exhibited excellent structural integrity and stability.

Figure 11: SWOT analysis of GO-MMMs.
Figure 11:

SWOT analysis of GO-MMMs.

6.2 Advances in GO functionalization

The chemical modification of GO nanoparticle in MMMs through reactions involving functional groups, particularly oxygen-containing ones, is referred to as GO-MMMs functionalization. Bandehali et al. (2020) enhanced GO nanoplates by surface functionalization using glycidyl-POSS. Membranes incorporating PEI/POSS-GO demonstrated better uniformity compared to PEI/GO membranes. Additionally, PEI/PG membranes exhibited significantly higher rejection rates for Na2SO4, Pb(NO3)2, CrSO4, and Cu(NO3) 2 compared to both PEI/GO and pristine PEI membranes. To further modify GO nanosheets, β-alanine (βA) was used as a biocompatible heterobifunctional crosslinker through a pressure-assisted self-assembly technique (Valizadeh et al. 2021). The β-alanine crosslinking effectively controlled the excessive d-spacing expansion of GO in water and improved the rejection of penicillin G Procain by a factor of three. Table 7 summarizes recent advancements in functionalized GO-MMMs research.

Table 7:

Recent studies of functionalised GO-MMMs for water treatment.

Functionalized GO-MMMs Contaminant Rejection (%) Pure water flux and permeance References
GO/GEM RB 99.0 320 L/m2 h bar Ahmed Janjhi et al. (2021)
GO-EDA/PA-HFC MgCl2 94.1 18.0 L/m2·h Li et al. (2021a)
Zn2+ 93.3
Cu2+ 92.7
Ni2+ 90.4
Pb2+ 88.3
TiO2-GHNMs NaCl 97.0 62.0 L/m2 h bar Al-Gamal et al. (2021)
PVDF-g-PAA20-TiO2-GO Phenol >60 – Tran et al. (2020)
TFN0.008 Pb2+ 99.9 34.3 L/m2·h Saeedi-Jurkuyeh et al. (2020)
Cd2+ 99.7
Cr2+ 98.3
PES/PVP/GO Pb2+ 80.6 150.1 L/m2·h Poolachira and Velmurugan (2022)
Multilayered GO Ibuprofen 100 672.5 L/m2 h bar Bahamon and Vega (2019)
GO/SAA RB 99.0 930 L/m2 h bar Chandio et al. (2021)

6.3 Commercialization potential and practical feasibility

Evaluating the commercial potential and practical feasibility of GO-MMMs is important for transitioning from promising research outcomes to viable industrial applications. This evaluation considers several key factors including fabrication techniques, raw material costs, membrane performance, capital and operational cost (Hua et al. 2024). Scalability is also a pivotal assessment as it determines the adaptability of the membrane material choice, the diversity of fabricable membrane modules. GO-MMMs have shown significant promise for gas separation due to their high selectivity and permeance (Ali et al. 2024). Scaling up their dispersibility to be used in industrial scale remains a major challenge.

A comparative evaluation of various GO-MMM fabrication techniques is summarized in Table 8. Phase inversion remains one of the most widely applied methods due to its moderate material costs, straightforward GO dispersion via solvent blending, and relatively low equipment requirements. The method is also attractive for its low processing cost and high productivity, though it generates a substantial amount of waste. Polymer grafting, in contrast, is associated with higher material and equipment costs and more complex processing steps, but can achieve superior interfacial compatibility between polymer and GO, though producing a moderate amount of waste. Electrospinning offers precise control over membrane morphology and high productivity, yet suffers from high polymer and solution preparation costs, expensive equipment, and generally lower waste production. In-situ synthesis is comparatively low-cost, with minimal equipment investment and moderate polymerization-related processing expenses, producing low waste while maintaining good GO dispersion. LbL assembly, although moderate in material and equipment costs, is labour-intensive, has limited productivity, and generates a moderate amount of waste. Finally, co-deposition stands out as the most cost-effective approach in terms of materials, equipment, and processing; however, it offers lower productivity and generates a high amount of waste despite providing good GO dispersion. This comparison highlights the trade-offs between cost, scalability, environmental impact, and performance that must be considered when selecting a suitable fabrication route for GO-MMMs.

Table 8:

Cost evaluation of GO-MMM fabrication techniques.

GO-MMMs fabrication method Materials and preparation cost GO dispersion Equipments cost Processing cost Productivity Waste
Polymer Solution
Phase inversion Moderate Blending with solvent Moderate <50 k USD Cheap Cheap High
Polymer grafting High Moderate High <100 k USD High High Moderate
Electrospinning High High High <100 k USD High Low
In-situ synthesis Moderate – Good <1 k USD Moderate: Polymerization Moderate Low
Layer by layer Moderate High Moderate <50 k USD Moderate Low Moderate
Co-deposition Low Moderate Good <10 k USD Low Cheap High

7 Other applications of GO-MMMs

7.1 CO2 separation

The tunable structure and functionalized surface chemistry of GO-MMMs have made them highly effective for carbon dioxide (CO2) separation. Studies indicate that incorporating GO into polymer matrices enhances CO2 permeability and selectivity by improving membrane stability and facilitating efficient gas transport pathways. For instance, in PSf-based MMMs, the combination of GO with zeolitic imidazole frameworks (ZIF-302) significantly enhanced CO2/N2 selectivity, achieving an optimal value of 52 while also increasing permeability (Sarfraz and Ba-Shammakh 2016). Similarly, the incorporation of aminosilane-functionalized GO into Pebax® 1,657 membranes surpassed the Robeson upper bound for gas separation, yielding a CO2 permeability of 934.3 Barrer and a CO2/N2 selectivity of 71.1 (Zhang et al. 2019b).

Additionally, a novel approach integrating holey GO into PIM-1 membranes effectively mitigated physical aging, maintaining high CO2 permeability over an extended period (Luque-Alled et al. 2021). These advancements highlight the strong potential of GO-MMMs for large-scale CO2 separation applications, particularly in carbon capture and post-combustion flue gas treatment.

Several factors influence the performance of MMMs, including polymer type, dispersion quality, choice of inorganic material, filler particle characteristics, pore size, particle morphology, and polymer–filler interactions. Table 9 provides a summary of the performance of various polymer GO-MMMs discussed in this review.

Table 9:

Performance of GO-MMMs for CO2 separation.

GO-MMMs Conditions CO2 permeability (barrer) CO2/CH4 selectivity CO2/N2 selectivity CO2/H2 selectivity References
PMMA/Matrimid@5218/GO 35 °C; 2–10 bars 14.23 83.07 31.76 – Salehi et al. (2025)
6FDA-copolyimide GO-ZIF-8 25 °C; 2 bars 147 47.5 – Jain et al. (2021)
Pebax-based GO/core shell ZIF-8@ZIF-67 – 173.2 – 61.9 11.6 Liu et al. (2021)
ZIF-8/GO- PSF MMMs – 1.77 6.3 1.4 – Anastasiou et al. (2018)
UiO-66-NH2@GO – 7.28 52 – Jia et al. (2019)
PEBAX/A-prGO 25 °C; 4 bars 47.2 23.75 105.6 – Mohammed et al. (2019)
GO/zeolitic imidazole ZIF – 626.4 17.5 45.9 – Lee et al. (2021)
ZIF-8@GO ethyl cellulose MMM – 203.3 – 33.4 – Yang et al. (2019a)
Polyvinylamine/GO/PANI@CNTs mixed matrix composite membranes 25 °C; 1 bar 170 – 122.4 – Wang et al. (2019)

8 SWOT analysis

As illustrated in Figure 11, the SWOT analysis of the GO-MMMs for pollutant removal and water treatment has been conducted by considering perspectives of social, economic, and environmental sustainability.

Due to the strong interactions between GO and the polymer matrix, GO-based MMMs exhibit exceptional mechanical strength and thermal stability, making them highly durable in demanding conditions (Ntone et al. 2024a). Their large surface area and tunable functional groups contribute to excellent water permeance and selective separation capabilities, making them well-suited for filtration applications. Additionally, the antimicrobial properties of GO help extend membrane lifespan and reduce maintenance costs by minimizing biofouling (Fahmi et al. 2018).

Despite these advantages, GO-MMMs often face challenges related to dispersion, as GO tends to aggregate within the polymer matrix, leading to inconsistent performance. The complexity and cost of fabrication can also hinder large-scale commercial implementation. Moreover, prolonged exposure to water may result in structural degradation and reduced membrane efficiency, raising concerns about GO’s long-term stability in aqueous environments (Ebrahimi et al. 2016).

The growing need for sustainable and energy-efficient water treatment solutions presents significant opportunities for GO-MMMs in desalination, wastewater treatment, and industrial separation. Enhancements in surface functionalization and the integration of hybrid nanomaterials could further improve membrane durability and selectivity, broadening their range of applications. Additionally, increased investment in research and stronger industry–academia collaborations could drive the development of more cost-effective production techniques, facilitating wider commercialization (Aliyev et al. 2018).

However, regulatory challenges related to potential environmental and health risks from GO leaching and nanoparticle release could slow adoption. GO MMMs also face competition from alternative membrane technologies, such as MOFs and other nanocomposite membranes, which may limit their market penetration. Furthermore, concerns about long-term performance and scalability might discourage industries from transitioning to GO-based membranes, delaying their widespread use in practical applications.

9 Conclusions

This bibliometric and scientometric analysis provides a detailed overview of the research progress, trends, and technological advancements in polymeric membranes incorporating GO. The findings reveal a continuous upward trajectory in publications and citations between 2015 and 2025, underscoring the growing scientific and industrial interest in GO-MMMs for water treatment applications. China, spearheaded by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, remains the global leader in this field, with substantial contributions also emerging from Iran, India, and the United States.

The superior performance of GO-MMMs in contaminant removal arises from a combination of mechanisms, including size exclusion, photocatalysis, and adsorption. These are enabled by GO’s rich array of hydrophilic functional groups, its compatibility with a wide range of polymers, efficient fabrication techniques, and its ability to form strong electrostatic and chemical interactions with target pollutants. Despite these advantages, several challenges persist. Membrane fouling and the structural instability of GO in aqueous environments remain significant barriers to commercial scalability and long-term operational stability.

Future research directions are expected to emphasize the intercalation of nanomaterials, advanced surface functionalization strategies, and the integration of GO-MMMs with hybrid treatment processes such as advanced oxidation and electrochemical systems. Additionally, scaling up fabrication methods while minimizing production costs and environmental impact will be crucial for industrial adoption. Long-term studies on the durability, cleaning efficiency, and recyclability of GO-MMMs under realistic operating conditions will further enhance their commercial viability. Collectively, these efforts will drive the development of next-generation GO-MMMs with improved stability, selectivity, antifouling properties, and cost-effectiveness, ultimately enabling more sustainable and high-performance water purification technologies for diverse applications.

Corresponding author: Sunarti Abdul Rahman, Faculty of Chemical & Process Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, Lebuh Persiaran Tun Khalil Yaakob, 26300, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah for supporting this work under International Publication Grant (RDU233303).

  1. Research ethics: Not applicable.

  2. Informed consent: Not applicable.

  3. Author contributions: Ellora Priscille Ndia Ntone: conceptualization, methodology. investigation, data analysis, visualization, writing original draft, reviewing and editing. Sunarti Abdul Rahman: supervision, project administration, writing, reviewing and editing. Rozaimi Abu Samah: supervision, resources, writing, reviewing and editing. Muhammad Ashraf Fauzi: supervision, software, resources, writing, reviewing and editing. Eugene Ngwana Ngouangna: software, writing, reviewing and editing. Hasrinah Hasbullah: supervision, resources, writing, reviewing and editing. Qusay Fadhil Alsalhy: supervision, resources, visualization, writing, reviewing and editing. All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  4. Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.

  5. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  6. Research funding: Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah International Publication Grant (RDU233303).

  7. Data availability: Not applicable.

References

Abdalla, O., Rehman, A., Nabeeh, A., Wahab, M.A., Abdel-Wahab, A., and Abdala, A. (2023). Enhancing polysulfone mixed-matrix membranes with amine-functionalized graphene oxide for air dehumidification and water treatment. Membranes 13: 678, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes13070678.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Abdullah, R., Astira, D., Widyanto, A.R., Dharma, H.N.C., Hidayat, A.R.P., Santoso, L., Sulistiono, D.O., Rahmawati, Z., Gunawan, T., Jaafar, J., et al.. (2023). Recent development of mixed matrix membrane as a membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment: a review. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 8: 100485, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100485.Search in Google Scholar

Ahmad, A.L., Hassan, A.I., Khan, A.L., Shahid, S., Ahmadiannamini, P., Latif Ahmad, A., Hassan, A.I., and Peng, L.C. (2021). Non-solvent influence of hydrophobic polymeric layer deposition on PVDF hollow fiber membrane for CO2 gas absorption. Membranes 12: 41, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12010041.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Ahmad, N.N.R., Mohammad, A.W., Mahmoudi, E., Ang, W.L., Leo, C.P., and Teow, Y.H. (2022). An overview of the modification strategies in developing antifouling nanofiltration membranes. Membranes 12: 1276, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12121276.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Ahmad, A.L., Sunarti, A.R., Teong, L.K., and Fernando, W.J.N. (2009). Development of thin film composite for CO2 separation in membrane gas absorption application. Asia - Pacific J. Chem. Eng. 4: 787–792, https://doi.org/10.1002/apj.339.Search in Google Scholar

Ahmed Janjhi, F., Chandio, I., Ali Memon, A., Ahmed, Z., Hussain Thebo, K., Ali Ayaz Pirzado, A., Ali Hakro, A., and Iqbal, M. (2021). Functionalized graphene oxide based membranes for ultrafast molecular separation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 274: 117969, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.117969.Search in Google Scholar

Akash, F.A., Shovon, S.M., Rahman, W., Rahman, M.A., Chakraborty, P., Prasetya, T.A.E., and Monir, M.U. (2024). Advancements in ceramic membrane technology for water and wastewater treatment: a comprehensive exploration of current utilizations and prospective horizons. Desalin. Water Treat. 319: 100569, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dwt.2024.100569.Search in Google Scholar

Al-Gamal, A.Q., Falath, W.S., and Saleh, T.A. (2021). Enhanced efficiency of polyamide membranes by incorporating TiO2-Graphene oxide for water purification. J. Mol. Liq. 323: 114922, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2020.114922.Search in Google Scholar

Al-Maliki, R.M., Alsalhy, Q.F., Al-Jubouri, S., Salih, I.K., AbdulRazak, A.A., Shehab, M.A., Németh, Z., and Hernadi, K. (2022). Classification of nanomaterials and the effect of graphene oxide (GO) and recently developed nanoparticles on the ultrafiltration membrane and their applications: a review. Membranes 12.10.3390/membranes12111043Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Al-Wafi, R., Ahmed, M.K., and Mansour, S.F. (2020). Tuning the synthetic conditions of graphene oxide/magnetite/hydroxyapatite/cellulose acetate nanofibrous membranes for removing Cr(VI), Se(IV) and methylene blue from aqueous solutions. J. Water Process Eng. 38: 101543, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101543.Search in Google Scholar

Ali, S.A., Mulk, W.U., Khan, A.U., Bhatti, H.S., Hadeed, M., Ahmad, J., Habib, K., Shah, S.N., and Younas, M. (2024). Review on synthesis and characterization of advanced nanomaterials-based mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) for CO2 capture: progress, challenges, and prospects. Energy Fuels 38: 18330–18366, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.4c03305.Search in Google Scholar

Aliyev, E.M., Khan, M.M., Nabiyev, A.M., Alosmanov, R.M., Bunyad-zadeh, I.A., Shishatskiy, S., and Filiz, V. (2018). Covalently modified graphene oxide and polymer of intrinsic microporosity (PIM-1) in mixed matrix thin-film composite membranes. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 13: 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1186/s11671-018-2771-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Almansouri, H.E., Edokali, M., Abu Seman, M.N., Ndia Ntone, E.P., Che Ku Yahya, C.K.M.F., and Mohammad, A.W. (2025). Antifouling and desalination enhancement of forward osmosis-based thin film composite membranes via functionalized multiwalled carbon nanotubes mixed matrix polyethersulfone substrate. Membranes 15: 240, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes15080240.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Alnoor, O., Laoui, T., Ibrahim, A., Kafiah, F., Nadhreen, G., Akhtar, S., and Khan, Z. (2020). Graphene oxide-based membranes for water purification applications: effect of plasma treatment on the adhesion and stability of the synthesized membranes. Membranes 10: 292, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes10100292.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Alsawaftah, N., Abuwatfa, W., Darwish, N., and Husseini, G. (2021). A comprehensive review on membrane fouling: mathematical modelling, prediction, diagnosis, and mitigation. Water 13: 1327, https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091327.Search in Google Scholar

Altinkaya, S.A. (2024). A review on microfiltration membranes: fabrication, physical morphology, and fouling characterization techniques. Front. Membr. Sci. Technol. 3: 1426145, https://doi.org/10.3389/frmst.2024.1426145.Search in Google Scholar

Alyarnezhad, S., Marino, T., Parsa, J.B., Galiano, F., Ursino, C., Garcìa, H., Puche, M., and Figoli, A. (2020). Polyvinylidene fluoride-graphene oxide membranes for dye removal under visible light irradiation. Polymers 12: 1509, https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12071509.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Amiri, S., Asghari, A., Vatanpour, V., and Rajabi, M. (2020). Fabrication and characterization of a novel polyvinyl alcohol-graphene oxide-sodium alginate nanocomposite hydrogel blended PES nanofiltration membrane for improved water purification. Sep. Purif. Technol. 250: 117216, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.117216.Search in Google Scholar

An, Y.C., Gao, X.X., Jiang, W.L., Han, J.L., Ye, Y., Chen, T.M., Ren, R.Y., Zhang, J.H., Liang, B., Li, Z.L., et al. (2023). A critical review on graphene oxide membrane for industrial wastewater treatment. Environ. Res. 223: 115409, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.115409.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Anastasiou, S., Bhoria, N., Pokhrel, J., Kumar Reddy, K.S., Srinivasakannan, C., Wang, K., and Karanikolos, G.N. (2018). Metal-organic framework/graphene oxide composite fillers in mixed-matrix membranes for CO2 separation. Mater. Chem. Phys. 212: 513–522, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2018.03.064.Search in Google Scholar

Arundhathi, B., Pabba, M., Raj, S.S., Sahu, N., and Sridhar, S. (2024). Advancements in mixed-matrix membranes for various separation applications: state of the art and future prospects. Membranes 14: 224, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes14110224.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Bahamon, D. and Vega, L.F. (2019). Molecular simulations of phenol and ibuprofen removal from water using multilayered graphene oxide membranes. Mol. Phys. 117: 3703–3714, https://doi.org/10.1080/00268976.2019.1662129.Search in Google Scholar

Bandehali, S., Moghadassi, A., Parvizian, F., Zhang, Y., Hosseini, S.M., and Shen, J. (2020). New mixed matrix PEI nanofiltration membrane decorated by glycidyl-POSS functionalized graphene oxide nanoplates with enhanced separation and antifouling behaviour: heavy metal ions removal. Sep. Purif. Technol. 242: 116745, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.116745.Search in Google Scholar

Banerjee, P., Das, P., Zaman, A., and Das, P. (2016). Application of graphene oxide nanoplatelets for adsorption of ibuprofen from aqueous solutions: evaluation of process kinetics and thermodynamics. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 101: 45–53, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2016.01.021.Search in Google Scholar

Bano, S., Mahmood, A., Kim, S.J., and Lee, K.H. (2015). Graphene oxide modified polyamide nanofiltration membrane with improved flux and antifouling properties. J. Mater. Chem. A 3: 2065–2071, https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ta03607g.Search in Google Scholar

Bao, Y., Tian, C., Yu, H., He, J., Song, K., Guo, J., Zhou, X., Zhuo, O., and Liu, S. (2022). In situ green synthesis of graphene oxide-silver nanoparticles composite with using gallic acid. Front. Chem. 10: 905781, https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2022.905781.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Baumann, S., Meulenberg, W.A., and Buchkremer, H.P. (2013). Manufacturing strategies for asymmetric ceramic membranes for efficient separation of oxygen from air. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 33: 1251–1261, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2012.12.005.Search in Google Scholar

Bhattacharyya, S., Donato, L., Chakraborty, S., Calabrò, V., Davoli, M., and Algieri, C. (2025). Synergistic efficiency of TiO2-GO nanocomposite membranes in dye degradation for sustainable water pollution remedy. Earth Syst. Environ. 9: 639–652, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-024-00527-5.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatti, H.T., Ahmad, N.M., Niazi, M.B.K., Alvi, M.A.U.R., Ahmad, N., Anwar, M.N., Cheema, W., Tariq, S., Batool, M., Aman, Z., et al. (2018). Graphene oxide-PES-based mixed matrix membranes for controllable antibacterial activity against Salmonella typhi and water treatment. Int. J. Sci. 2018: 7842148.10.1155/2018/7842148Search in Google Scholar

Binazadeh, M., Rasouli, J., Sabbaghi, S., Mousavi, S.M., Hashemi, S.A., and Lai, C.W. (2023). An overview of photocatalytic membrane degradation development. Materials 16: 3526, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16093526.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Boopathy, G., Gangasalam, A., and Mahalingam, A. (2020). Photocatalytic removal of organic pollutants and self-cleaning performance of PES membrane incorporated sulfonated graphene oxide/ZnO nanocomposite. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 95: 3012–3023, https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.6462.Search in Google Scholar

Brauer, J. and Fischer, M. (2024). Computational screening of hydrophobic zeolites for the removal of emerging organic contaminants from water. Chem. Phys. Chem. 25: 202400347, https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.202400347.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Camacho, L.M., Pinion, T.A., and Olatunji, S.O. (2020). Behavior of mixed-matrix graphene oxide: polysulfone membranes in the process of direct contact membrane distillation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 240: 116645, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.116645.Search in Google Scholar

Casetta, J., Virapin, E., Pochat-Bohatier, C., Bechelany, M., and Miele, P. (2024). Polymeric hollow fiber (HF) mixed matrix membranes (MMMs): mutual effect of graphene oxide (GO) and polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) on nano-structuration. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 681: 132805, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2023.132805.Search in Google Scholar

Chai, P.V., Choy, P.Y., Teoh, W.C., Mahmoudi, E., and Ang, W.L. (2021). Graphene oxide based mixed matrix membrane in the presence of eco-friendly natural additive gum Arabic. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 9: 105638, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.105638.Search in Google Scholar

Chandio, I., Janjhi, F.A., Memon, A.A., Memon, S., Ali, Z., Thebo, K.H., Pirzado, A.A.A., Hakro, A.A., and Khan, W.S. (2021). Ultrafast ionic and molecular sieving through graphene oxide based composite membranes. Desalination 500: 114848, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2020.114848.Search in Google Scholar

Chang, R., Ma, J., Hou, Y., and Xu, J. (2024). Graphene oxide intercalated with MXene as composite membranes with improved permeability for wastewater treatment. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 7: 11749–11756, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.4c01357.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, M., Heijman, S.G.J., and Rietveld, L.C. (2024). Ceramic membrane filtration for oily wastewater treatment: basics, membrane fouling and fouling control. Desalination 583: 117727, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2024.117727.Search in Google Scholar

Cheng, Y., Joarder, B., Datta, S.J., Alsadun, N., Poloneeva, D., Fan, D., Khairova, R., Bavykina, A., Jia, J., Shekhah, O., et al. (2023). Mixed matrix membranes with surface functionalized metal–organic framework sieves for efficient propylene/propane separation. Adv. Mater. 35: 2300296, https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202300296.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Cheng, Y., Ying, Y., Japip, S., Jiang, S.D., Chung, T.S., Zhang, S., and Zhao, D. (2018). Advanced porous materials in mixed matrix membranes. Adv. Mater. 30: 1802401, https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201802401.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Chung, T.S., Jiang, L.Y., Li, Y., and Kulprathipanja, S. (2007). Mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) comprising organic polymers with dispersed inorganic fillers for gas separation. Prog. Polym. Sci. 32: 483–507, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2007.01.008.Search in Google Scholar

Chung, Y.T., Mahmoudi, E., Mohammad, A.W., Benamor, A., Johnson, D., and Hilal, N. (2017). Development of polysulfone-nanohybrid membranes using ZnO-GO composite for enhanced antifouling and antibacterial control. Desalination 402: 123–132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2016.09.030.Search in Google Scholar

Davari, S., Omidkhah, M., and Salari, S. (2021). Role of polydopamine in the enhancement of binding stability of TiO2 nanoparticles on polyethersulfone ultrafiltration membrane. Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 622: 126694, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2021.126694.Search in Google Scholar

Du, P., Li, X., Yang, Y., Zhou, Z., and Fan, X. (2020). Dual coagulation with floc breakage to alleviate ultrafiltration membrane fouling caused by algae organic matter. Desalination 493: 114660, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2020.114660.Search in Google Scholar

Ebrahimi, S., Mollaiy-Berneti, S., Asadi, H., Peydayesh, M., Akhlaghian, F., and Mohammadi, T. (2016). PVA/PES-amine-functional graphene oxide mixed matrix membranes for CO2/CH4 separation: experimental and modeling. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 109: 647–656, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2016.03.009.Search in Google Scholar

Edokali, M., Mehrabi, M., Cespedes, O., Sun, C., Collins, S.M., Harbottle, D., Menzel, R., and Hassanpour, A. (2024). Antifouling and stability enhancement of electrochemically modified reduced graphene oxide membranes for water desalination by forward osmosis. J. Water Process Eng. 59: 104809, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2024.104809.Search in Google Scholar

El-Sayed, M.Y., Alsohaimi, I.H., Alrashidi, A.N., Aldawsari, A.M., Alshahrani, A.A., and Hassan, H.M.A. (2023). Mixed matrix membrane comprising functionalized sulfonated activated carbon from tea waste biomass for enhanced hydrophilicity and antifouling properties. Diam. Relat. Mater. 136: 109945, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diamond.2023.109945.Search in Google Scholar

Fahmi, M.Z., Wathoniyyah, M., Khasanah, M., Rahardjo, Y., Wafiroh, S., and Abdulloh (2018). Incorporation of graphene oxide in polyethersulfone mixed matrix membranes to enhance hemodialysis membrane performance. RSC Adv. 8: 931–937, https://doi.org/10.1039/c7ra11247e.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Fard, A.K., McKay, G., Buekenhoudt, A., Al Sulaiti, H., Motmans, F., Khraisheh, M., and Atieh, M. (2018). Inorganic membranes: preparation and application for water treatment and desalination. Materials (Basel, Switzerland) 11.10.3390/ma11010074Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Fu, C.C., Hsiao, Y.S., Ke, J.W., Syu, W.L., Liu, T.Y., Liu, S.H., and Juang, R.S. (2020). Adsorptive removal of p-cresol and creatinine from simulated serum using porous polyethersulfone mixed-matrix membranes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 245: 116884, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2020.116884.Search in Google Scholar

Geleta, T.A., Maggay, I.V., Chang, Y., and Venault, A. (2023). Recent advances on the fabrication of antifouling phase-inversion membranes by physical blending modification method. Membranes 13: 58, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes13010058.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Ghaffar, A., Zhang, L., Zhu, X., and Chen, B. (2019). Scalable graphene oxide membranes with tunable water channels and stability for ion rejection. Environ. Sci.: Nano 6: 904–915, https://doi.org/10.1039/c8en01273c.Search in Google Scholar

Ghani, M., Ghoreishi, S.M., and Azamati, M. (2018). Magnesium-aluminum-layered double hydroxide-graphene oxide composite mixed-matrix membrane for the thin-film microextraction of diclofenac in biological fluids. J. Chromatogr. A 1575: 11–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2018.09.024.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Hackett, C., Hale, D., Bair, B., Manson-Endeboh, G.D., Hao, X., Qian, X., Ranil Wickramasinghe, S., and Thompson, A. (2024). Polysulfone ultrafiltration membranes fabricated from green solvents: significance of coagulation bath composition. Sep. Purif. Technol. 332: 125752, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.125752.Search in Google Scholar

Halakoo, E. and Feng, X. (2020). Layer-by-layer assembled membranes from graphene oxide and polyethyleneimine for ethanol and isopropanol dehydration. Chem. Eng. Sci. 216: 115488, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2020.115488.Search in Google Scholar

Hassan, N.S., Jalil, A.A., Bahari, M.B., Khusnun, N.F., Aldeen, E.M.S., Mim, R.S., Firmansyah, M.L., Rajendran, S., Mukti, R.R., Andika, R., et al. (2023). A comprehensive review on zeolite-based mixed matrix membranes for CO2/CH4 separation. Chemosphere 314: 137709, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.137709.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Hegab, H.M. and Zou, L. (2015). Graphene oxide-assisted membranes: fabrication and potential applications in desalination and water purification. J. Membr. Sci. 484: 95–106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.03.011.Search in Google Scholar

Hosseini, N. and Toosi, M.R. (2019). Removal of 2,4-D, glyphosate, trifluralin, and butachlor herbicides from water by polysulfone membranes mixed by graphene oxide/TiO2 nanocomposite: study of filtration and batch adsorption. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 17: 247–258, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40201-019-00344-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Hua, Y., Park, S., and Jeong, H.K. (2024). Redefining progress, challenges, and future opportunities of mixed-matrix membranes from an engineering perspective for commercial gas separation applications: a review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 12: 113753, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2024.113753.Search in Google Scholar

Im, D., Nakada, N., Fukuma, Y., and Tanaka, H. (2019). Effects of the inclusion of biological activated carbon on membrane fouling in combined process of ozonation, coagulation and ceramic membrane filtration for water reclamation. Chemosphere 220: 20–27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.12.071.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Imran, M., Abdullah, A.Z., Khan, M.E., and Mohammad, A. (2025). A focused review on photocatalytic potential of graphitic carbon nitride (g-C3N4) based metal oxide-nanostructures for effective remediation of most overused antibiotics. J. Environ. Manage. 373: 123759, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123759.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Iqbal, A., Cevik, E., Mustafa, A., Qahtan, T.F., Zeeshan, M., and Bozkurt, A. (2024). Emerging developments in polymeric nanocomposite membrane-based filtration for water purification: a concise overview of toxic metal removal. Chem. Eng. J. 481: 148760, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2024.148760.Search in Google Scholar

Isaeva, V.I., Vedenyapina, M.D., Kurmysheva, A.Y., Weichgrebe, D., Nair, R.R., Nguyen, N.P.T., and Kustov, L.M. (2021). Modern carbon-based materials for adsorptive removal of organic and inorganic pollutants from water and wastewater. Molecules 26: 6628, https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26216628.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Jain, A., Ahmad, M.Z., Linkès, A., Martin‐Gil, V., Castro‐muñoz, R., Izak, P., Sofer, Z., Hintz, W., and Fila, V. (2021). 6FDA-DAM:DABA co-polyimide mixed matrix membranes with GO and ZIF-8 mixtures for effective CO2/CH4 separation. Nanomaterials 11: 668, https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11030668.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Jaramillo-Fierro, X. and Cuenca, G. (2024). Theoretical and experimental analysis of hydroxyl and epoxy group effects on graphene oxide properties. Nanomaterials 14: 714, https://doi.org/10.3390/nano14080714.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Jatoi, A.H., Ali, A., Nadeem, A., Phulpoto, S.N., Iqbal, M., Memon, A.A., Yang, J., and Thebo, K.H. (2024). High-performance asparagine-modified graphene oxide membranes for organic dyes and heavy metal ion separation. New J. Chem. 48: 1715–1723, https://doi.org/10.1039/d3nj04552h.Search in Google Scholar

Jia, M., Feng, Y., Qiu, J., Zhang, X.F., and Yao, J. (2019). Amine-functionalized MOFs@GO as filler in mixed matrix membrane for selective CO2 separation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 213: 63–69, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2018.12.029.Search in Google Scholar

Kadhim, R.J., Al-Ani, F.H., Al-Shaeli, M., Alsalhy, Q.F., and Figoli, A. (2020). Removal of dyes using graphene oxide (GO) mixed matrix membranes. Membranes 10: 366, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes10120366.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Kadirkhan, F., Goh, P.S., Ismail, A.F., Wan Mustapa, W.N.F., Halim, M.H.M., Soh, W.K., and Yeo, S.Y. (2022). Recent advances of polymeric membranes in tackling plasticization and aging for practical industrial CO2/CH4 applications: a review. Membranes 12: 71, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12010071.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Kadja, G.T.M., Dwihermiati, E., Sagita, F., Mukhoibibah, K., Umam, K., Ledyastuti, M., and Radiman, C.L. (2023). Mercapto functionalized–natural zeolites/PVDF mixed matrix membrane for enhanced removal of methylene blue. Inorg. Chem. Commun. 157: 111263, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inoche.2023.111263.Search in Google Scholar

Kallem, P., Elashwah, N., Bharath, G., Hegab, H.M., Hasan, S.W., and Banat, F. (2023). Zwitterion-grafted 2D MXene (Ti3C2TX) nanocomposite membranes with improved water permeability and self-cleaning properties. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 6: 607–621, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.2c04722.Search in Google Scholar

Kamran, U., Rhee, K.Y., Lee, S.Y., and Park, S.J. (2022). Innovative progress in graphene derivative-based composite hybrid membranes for the removal of contaminants in wastewater: a review. Chemosphere 306: 135590, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135590.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Katare, A., Kumar, S., Kundu, S., Sharma, S., Kundu, L.M., and Mandal, B. (2023). Mixed matrix membranes for carbon capture and sequestration: challenges and scope. ACS Omega 8: 17511–17522, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.3c01666.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Kaur, H., Bansiwal, A., Hippargi, G., and Pophali, G.R. (2018). Effect of hydrophobicity of pharmaceuticals and personal care products for adsorption on activated carbon: adsorption isotherms, kinetics and mechanism. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25: 20473–20485, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0054-7.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Khakpour, S., Jafarzadeh, Y., and Yegani, R. (2019). Incorporation of graphene oxide/nanodiamond nanocomposite into PVC ultrafiltration membranes. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 152: 60–70, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2019.09.029.Search in Google Scholar

Khalil, A.M.E., Memon, F.A., Tabish, T.A., Salmon, D., Zhang, S., and Butler, D. (2020). Nanostructured porous graphene for efficient removal of emerging contaminants (pharmaceuticals) from water. Chem. Eng. J. 398: 125440, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.125440.Search in Google Scholar

Khulbe, K.C. and Matsuura, T. (2018). Removal of heavy metals and pollutants by membrane adsorption techniques. Appl. Water Sci. 8: 1–30, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-018-0661-6.Search in Google Scholar

Koli, M.M. and Singh, S.P. (2023). Surface-modified ultrafiltration and nanofiltration membranes for the selective removal of heavy metals and inorganic groundwater contaminants: a review. Environ. Sci: Water Res. Technol. 9: 2803–2829, https://doi.org/10.1039/d3ew00266g.Search in Google Scholar

Kong, F.-x., Liu, Q., Dong, L.-q., Zhang, T., Wei, Y.-b., Chen, J.-f., Wang, Y., and Guo, C.-m. (2020a). Rejection of pharmaceuticals by graphene oxide membranes: role of crosslinker and rejection mechanism. J. Membr. Sci. 612: 118338, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118338.Search in Google Scholar

Kong, S., Lim, M.young, Shin, H., Baik, J.H., and Lee, J.C. (2020b). High-flux and antifouling polyethersulfone nanocomposite membranes incorporated with zwitterion-functionalized graphene oxide for ultrafiltration applications. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 84: 131–140, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2019.12.028.Search in Google Scholar

Kyzas, G.Z., Koltsakidou, A., Nanaki, S.G., Bikiaris, D.N., and Lambropoulou, D.A. (2015). Removal of beta-blockers from aqueous media by adsorption onto graphene oxide. Sci. Total Environ. 537: 411–420, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.144.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Lai, G.S., Lau, W.J., Goh, P.S., Ismail, A.F., Tan, Y.H., Chong, C.Y., Krause-Rehberg, R., and Awad, S. (2018). Tailor-made thin film nanocomposite membrane incorporated with graphene oxide using novel interfacial polymerization technique for enhanced water separation. Chem. Eng. J. 344: 524–534, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.03.116.Search in Google Scholar

Lai, G.S., Lau, W.J., Goh, P.S., Ismail, A.F., Yusof, N., and Tan, Y.H. (2016). Graphene oxide incorporated thin film nanocomposite nanofiltration membrane for enhanced salt removal performance. Desalination 387: 14–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2016.03.007.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, C.S., Moon, J., Park, J.T., and Kim, J.H. (2023). Engineering CO2-philic pathway via grafting poly(ethylene glycol) on graphene oxide for mixed matrix membranes with high CO2 permeance. Chem. Eng. J. 453: 139818, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.139818.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, C.S., Song, E., Park, J.T., and Kim, J.H. (2021). Ultrathin, highly permeable graphene oxide/zeolitic imidazole framework polymeric mixed-matrix composite membranes: engineering the CO2-philic pathway. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 9: 11903–11915, https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.1c03917.Search in Google Scholar

Lemos, H.G., Ragio, R.A., Conceição, A.C.S., Venancio, E.C., Mierzwa, J.C., and Subtil, E.L. (2021). Assessment of mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) incorporated with graphene oxide (GO) for co-treatment of wastewater and landfill leachate (LFL) in a membrane bioreactor (MBR). Chem. Eng. J. 425: 131772.10.1016/j.cej.2021.131772Search in Google Scholar

Li, J., Gong, J.L., Zeng, G.M., Zhang, P., Song, B., Cao, W.C., Fang, S.Y., Huan, S.Y., and Ye, J. (2019). The performance of UiO-66-NH2/graphene oxide (GO) composite membrane for removal of differently charged mixed dyes. Chemosphere 237: 124517, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124517.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Li, P., Li, Y.X., Wu, Y.Z., Xu, Z.L., Zhang, H.Z., Gao, P., and Xu, S.J. (2021a). Thin-film nanocomposite NF membrane with GO on macroporous hollow fiber ceramic substrate for efficient heavy metals removal. Environ. Res. 197: 111040, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111040.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Li, Y., Shi, S., Cao, H., and Cao, R. (2021b). Robust antifouling anion exchange membranes modified by graphene oxide (GO)-Enhanced Co-deposition of tannic acid and polyethyleneimine. J. Membr. Sci. 625: 119111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119111.Search in Google Scholar

Lin, T., Ren, X., Wen, X., Karton, A., Quintano, V., and Joshi, R. (2024). Membrane based in-situ reduction of graphene oxide for electrochemical supercapacitor application. Carbon 224: 119053, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2024.119053.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, N., Cheng, J., Hou, W., Yang, X., and Zhou, J. (2021). Pebax-based mixed matrix membranes loaded with graphene oxide/core shell ZIF-8@ZIF-67 nanocomposites improved CO2 permeability and selectivity. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 138: 50553, https://doi.org/10.1002/app.50553.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, T.-Y., Cheng, Y.-W., Jung Lee, S., Jeong Yoon, S., and Jeon, I.-Y. (2022). Graphene/polymer nanocomposites: preparation, mechanical properties, and application. Polymers 14: 4733, https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14214733.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Liu, T., Liu, X., Graham, N., Yu, W., and Sun, K. (2020). Two-dimensional MXene incorporated graphene oxide composite membrane with enhanced water purification performance. J. Membr. Sci. 593: 117431, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117431.Search in Google Scholar

Lou, Y., Tan, F.J., Zeng, R., Wang, M., Li, P., and Xia, S. (2020). Preparation of cross-linked graphene oxide on polyethersulfone membrane for pharmaceuticals and personal care products removal. Polymers 12: 1921, https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12091921.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Luque-Alled, J.M., Tamaddondar, M., Foster, A.B., Budd, P.M., and Gorgojo, P. (2021). PIM-1/Holey graphene oxide mixed matrix membranes for gas separation: unveiling the role of holes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interface 13: 55517–55533, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c15640.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Lv, X. Bin, Xie, R., Ji, J.Y., He, P., Yuan, Y.F., Ju, X.J., Wang, W., Liu, Z., and Chu, L.Y. (2024). Enhancing stability and ionic sieving efficiencies of GO membranes via copper ion crosslinking and tannic acid intercalation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 336: 126232, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2023.126232.Search in Google Scholar

Lv, X. Bin, Xie, R., Ji, J.Y., Liu, Z., Wen, X.Y., Liu, L.Y., Hu, J.Q., Ju, X.J., Wang, W., and Chu, L.Y. (2020). A novel strategy to fabricate cation-cross-linked graphene oxide membrane with high aqueous stability and high separation performance. ACS Appl. Mater. Interface. 12: 56269–56280, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c15178.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Mahlangu, O.T., Mamba, G., and Mamba, B.B. (2023). A facile synthesis approach for GO-ZnO/PES ultrafiltration mixed matrix photocatalytic membranes for dye removal in water: leveraging the synergy between photocatalysis and membrane filtration. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 11: 110065, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2023.110065.Search in Google Scholar

Majdoub, M., Amedlous, A., Anfar, Z., Jada, A., and El Alem, N. (2021). Engineering of amine-based binding chemistry on functionalized graphene oxide/alginate hybrids for simultaneous and efficient removal of trace heavy metals: towards drinking water. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 589: 511–524, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2021.01.029.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Mallah, N.B., Shah, A.A., Pirzada, A.M., Ali, I., Khan, M.I., Jatoi, A.S., Ullman, J.L., and Mahar, R.B. (2024). Advanced control strategies of membrane fouling in wastewater treatment: a review. Processes 12: 2681, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12122681.Search in Google Scholar

Mehranbod, N., Khorram, M., Azizi, S., and Khakinezhad, N. (2021). Modification and superhydrophilization of electrospun polyvinylidene fluoride membrane using graphene oxide-chitosan nanostructure and performance evaluation in oil/water separation. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 9: 106245, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.106245.Search in Google Scholar

Meng, N., Priestley, R.C.E., Zhang, Y., Wang, H., and Zhang, X. (2016). The effect of reduction degree of GO nanosheets on microstructure and performance of PVDF/GO hybrid membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 501: 169–178, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2015.12.004.Search in Google Scholar

Mohammed, S.A., Nasir, A.M., Aziz, F., Kumar, G., Sallehhudin, W., Jaafar, J., Lau, W.J., Yusof, N., Salleh, W.N.W., and Ismail, A.F. (2019). CO2/N2 selectivity enhancement of PEBAX MH 1657/Aminated partially reduced graphene oxide mixed matrix composite membrane. Sep. Purif. Technol. 223: 142–153, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.04.061.Search in Google Scholar

Mondal, M. and Indurkar, P.D. (2024). Heavy metals remediation using MOF5@GO composite incorporated mixed matrix ultrafiltration membrane. Chem. Eng. J. 494: 153155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2024.153155.Search in Google Scholar

Moussavi, G., Hossaini, Z., and Pourakbar, M. (2016). High-rate adsorption of acetaminophen from the contaminated water onto double-oxidized graphene oxide. Chem. Eng. J. 287: 665–673, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.11.025.Search in Google Scholar

Mustafa, B., Mehmood, T., Wang, Z., Chofreh, A.G., Shen, A., Yang, B., Yuan, J., Wu, C., Liu, Y., Lu, W., et al. (2022). Next-generation graphene oxide additives composite membranes for emerging organic micropollutants removal: separation, adsorption and degradation. Chemosphere 308: 136333, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.136333.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Nan, Q., Li, P., and Cao, B. (2016). Fabrication of positively charged nanofiltration membrane via the layer-by-layer assembly of graphene oxide and polyethylenimine for desalination. Appl. Surf. Sci. 387: 521–528, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.06.150.Search in Google Scholar

Nawaz, H., Umar, M., Ullah, A., Razzaq, H., Zia, K.M., and Liu, X. (2021). Polyvinylidene fluoride nanocomposite super hydrophilic membrane integrated with polyaniline-graphene oxide nano fillers for treatment of textile effluents. J. Hazard. Mater. 403: 123587, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123587.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Ngouangna, E.N., Dzulkarnain, I.B., Jaafar, M.Z., Norddin, M.N.A.M., Oseh, J.O., Afolabi, F.O., Yakasai, F., Gbadamosi, O.A., Yahya, M.N., Ayodele, B.V., et al. (2025). Nanoparticles-stabilized CO2 foam in porous media for EOR and CCUS: a state-of-the-art review involving mechanisms, challenges, influencing parameters, and research opportunities. Arab. J. Sci. Eng., https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-025-10512-3.Search in Google Scholar

Nie, L., Goh, K., Wang, Y., Lee, J., Huang, Y., Enis Karahan, H.E., Zhou, K., Guiver, M.D., and Bae, T.H. (2020). Realizing small-flake graphene oxide membranes for ultrafast size-dependent organic solvent nanofiltration. Sci. Adv. 6: 17, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz9184.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Ntone, E.P.N., Abu Samah, R., Abdul Wahab, M.S., Alsalhy, Q.F., and Rahman, S.A. (2024a). Review of PPCPs remediation in Asia: the role of agricultural waste in adsorption-membrane hybrid technology. Chem. Eng. Commun. 212: 1132–1166.10.1080/00986445.2024.2447843Search in Google Scholar

Ntone, E.P.N., Abd Rahman, S., Samah, R.A., and Alsalhy, Q.F. (2024b). Enhanced paracetamol removal using PES/GO mixed matrix membranes: a study on synthesis, characterization, and performance evaluation. J. Eng. Res.10.1016/j.jer.2024.11.011Search in Google Scholar

Ntone, E.P.N., Rahman, S.A., Abdul Wahab, M.S., Samah, R.A., and Ahmad, A.L. (2023a). A mini review on membrane potential for pharmaceutical and personal care product (PPCP) removal from water. Water Air Soil Pollut. 234: 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-023-06450-1.Search in Google Scholar

Ntone, E.P.N., Rahman, S.A., Samah, R.A., and Wahab, M.S.A. (2025). Functionalization of polyethersulfone membrane with graphene oxide to improve membrane performance and properties for water treatment. AIP Conf. Proc. 3266: 1.10.1063/5.0248983Search in Google Scholar

Ntone, E.P.N., Rahman, S.A., Samah, R.A., Wahab, M.S.A., Jawad, Z.A., and Hasbullah, H. (2023b). A comparison study on performance of thin film composite membrane embedded with graphene oxide for acetaminophen, diclofenac and ibuprofen separation from waste water. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 195: 28–37, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2023.05.023.Search in Google Scholar

Poolachira, S. and Velmurugan, S. (2022). Efficient removal of lead ions from aqueous solution by graphene oxide modified polyethersulfone adsorptive mixed matrix membrane. Environ. Res. 210: 112924, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.112924.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Qian, Y., Zhang, X., Liu, C., Zhou, C., and Huang, A. (2019). Tuning interlayer spacing of graphene oxide membranes with enhanced desalination performance. Desalination 460: 56–63, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.03.009.Search in Google Scholar

Qu, M., Abdelaziz, O., Gao, Z., and Yin, H. (2018). Isothermal membrane-based air dehumidification: a comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82: 4060–4069, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.10.067.Search in Google Scholar

Qureshi, A.H., Ahmad, N., Rana, M.A.A., Manzoor, B., and Zayed, T. (2024). Construction sector transition towards smart applications of graphene oxide in cement-based composites: a scientometric review and bibliometric analysis. Buildings 14: 3042, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14103042.Search in Google Scholar

Rahman, S.A., Ndia Ntone, E.P., Alagu, D., Rajeswaran, D.D., Shoparwe, N.F., Mun, S.L.S., and Lee, Y.Y. (2024). A comparison study on hydrophobic and hydrophilic-mixed matrix membranes for diethanolamine removal. Mater. Res. Innov. 29: 262–268, https://doi.org/10.1080/14328917.2024.2432697.Search in Google Scholar

Ramesh, N., Lai, C.W., Johan, M.R. Bin, Mousavi, S.M., Badruddin, I.A., Kumar, A., Sharma, G., and Gapsari, F. (2024). Progress in photocatalytic degradation of industrial organic dye by utilising the silver doped titanium dioxide nanocomposite. Heliyon 10: e40998, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40998.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Raseala, M.J., Motsa, M.M., Sigwadi, R.A., and Moutloali, R.M. (2025). Incorporation of graphene oxide into zwitterion containing polyethersulfone membranes to minimize fouling during the remediation of abattoir wastewater. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 145: 596–609, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2024.10.053.Search in Google Scholar

Ravishankar, H., Christy, J., and Jegatheesan, V. (2018). Graphene oxide (GO)-blended polysulfone (PSf) ultrafiltration membranes for lead ion rejection. Membranes 8: 77, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes8030077.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Ray, S.C. (2015). Application and uses of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide. Appl. Graphene and Graphene-Oxide Base. Nanomater. 1: 39–55, https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-37521-4.00002-9.Search in Google Scholar

Ren, Y.H., Zhang, W.H., Yin, M.J., Liu, Z.J., and An, Q.F. (2024). In-situ nanoparticles intercalating graphene oxide membranes for superior water transport in dye desalination. J. Membr. Sci. 697: 122544, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2024.122544.Search in Google Scholar

Rouhollahi, M., Mohammadi, T., Mohammadi, M., and Tofighy, M.A. (2024). Fabrication of nanocomposite membranes containing Ag/GO nanohybrid for phycocyanin concentration. Sci. Rep. 14: 1–24, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-73719-8.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Runlin, H., Chaoyue, W., Congcong, B., and Hanli, W. (2023). Facile preparation of high performance GO/Mn3O4/PVDF composite membranes with intercalation of manganese oxide nanowires. RSC Adv. 13: 19002–19010, https://doi.org/10.1039/d3ra02594b.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Sabri, N.S.M., Hasbullah, H., Jye, L.W., Sadikin, A.N., Ibrahim, N., Rahman, S.A., Ismail, A.F., and Kusworo, T.D. (2024). Permeable and antifouling PSf-Cys-CuO ultrafiltration membrane for separation of biological macromolecules proteins. Environ. Qual. Manag. 33: 103–112, https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.21995.Search in Google Scholar

Sadegh, N., Dehcheshmeh, I.M., and Sadegh, F. (2024). Review of zeolitic imidazolate framework/graphene oxide: a synergy of synthesis, properties and function for multifaceted applications in nanotechnology. FlatChem 44: 100618, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flatc.2024.100618.Search in Google Scholar

Saeedi-Jurkuyeh, A., Jafari, A.J., Kalantary, R.R., and Esrafili, A. (2020). A novel synthetic thin-film nanocomposite forward osmosis membrane modified by graphene oxide and polyethylene glycol for heavy metals removal from aqueous solutions. React. Funct. Polym. 146: 104397, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2019.104397.Search in Google Scholar

Sahoo, S.K., Panigrahi, G.K., Sahoo, J.K., Pradhan, A.K., Purohit, A.K., and Dhal, J.P. (2021). Electrospun magnetic polyacrylonitrile-GO hybrid nanofibers for removing Cr(VI) from water. J. Mol. Liq. 326: 115364, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2021.115364.Search in Google Scholar

Saini, N. and Awasthi, K. (2022). Insights into the progress of polymeric nano-composite membranes for hydrogen separation and purification in the direction of sustainable energy resources. Sep. Purif. Technol. 282: 120029, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.120029.Search in Google Scholar

Salehi, A., Omidkhah, M., Ebadi Amooghin, A., and Moftakhari Sharifzadeh, M.M. (2025). Improved gas separation performance of PMMA/Matrimid@5218/graphene oxide (GO) mixed matrix membranes. J. CO2 Util. 91: 103012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2024.103012.Search in Google Scholar

Sarfraz, M. and Ba-Shammakh, M. (2016). Synergistic effect of incorporating ZIF-302 and graphene oxide to polysulfone to develop highly selective mixed-matrix membranes for carbon dioxide separation from wet post-combustion flue gases. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 36: 154–162, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2016.01.032.Search in Google Scholar

Serrano-Lotina, A., Portela, R., Baeza, P., Alcolea-Rodriguez, V., Villarroel, M., and Ávila, P. (2023). Zeta potential as a tool for functional materials development. Catal. Today 423: 113862, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2022.08.004.Search in Google Scholar

Shah, I.A., Bilal, M., Ihsanullah, I., Ali, S., and Yaqub, M. (2023). Revolutionizing water purification: unleashing graphene oxide (GO) membranes. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 11: 111450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2023.111450.Search in Google Scholar

Shan, D., Deng, S., Li, J., Wang, H., He, C., Cagnetta, G., Wang, B., Wang, Y., Huang, J., and Yu, G. (2017). Preparation of porous graphene oxide by chemically intercalating a rigid molecule for enhanced removal of typical pharmaceuticals. Carbon 119: 101–109, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2017.04.021.Search in Google Scholar

Shetti, N.P., Malode, S.J., Malladi, R.S., Nargund, S.L., Shukla, S.S., and Aminabhavi, T.M. (2019). Electrochemical detection and degradation of textile dye Congo red at graphene oxide modified electrode. Microchem. J. 146: 387–392, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.01.033.Search in Google Scholar

Siddique, T., Dutta, N.K., and Choudhury, N.R. (2021). Mixed-matrix membrane fabrication for water treatment. Membranes 11: 557, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11080557.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Song, R., Han, W., Yang, Z., Ye, Z., Yang, Y., Zheng, H., Zhao, S., and Zeng, G. (2025). Mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) for dyes and antibiotics removal from wastewater using photo-Fenton catalysis MOFs as additives. J. Water Process Eng. 69: 106614, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2024.106614.Search in Google Scholar

Subtil, E.L., Almeria Ragio, R., Lemos, H.G., Scaratti, G., García, J., and Le-Clech, P. (2022). Direct membrane filtration (DMF) of municipal wastewater by mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) filled with graphene oxide (GO): towards a circular sanitation model. Chem. Eng. J. 441: 136004, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.136004.Search in Google Scholar

Subtil, E.L., Gonçalves, J., Lemos, H.G., Venancio, E.C., Mierzwa, J.C., dos Santos de Souza, J., Alves, W., and Le-Clech, P. (2020). Preparation and characterization of a new composite conductive polyethersulfone membrane using polyaniline (PANI) and reduced graphene oxide (rGO). Chem. Eng. J. 390: 124612.10.1016/j.cej.2020.124612Search in Google Scholar

Sun, J., Qian, X., Wang, Z., Zeng, F., Bai, H., and Li, N. (2020). Tailoring the microstructure of poly(vinyl alcohol)-intercalated graphene oxide membranes for enhanced desalination performance of high-salinity water by pervaporation. J. Membr. Sci. 599: 117838, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2020.117838.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, X., Shiraz, H., Wong, R., Zhang, J., Liu, J., Lu, J., and Meng, N. (2022). Enhancing the performance of PVDF/GO ultrafiltration membrane via improving the dispersion of GO with homogeniser. Membranes 12: 1268, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes12121268.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Suresh, D., Goh, P.S., Ismail, A.F., and Hilal, N. (2021). Surface design of liquid separation membrane through graft polymerization: a state of the art review. Membranes 11: 832, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11110832.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Tabasum, A., Siddique, A., Razzaq, H., Nawaz, H.H., Razzaque, S., Tahir, S., Taimur, S., Jabeen, N., and Shehzadi, S. (2024). Integrated synergy: PSF/PANI/GO membranes for dual-action textile dye detoxification. Mater. Adv. 5: 4736–4752, https://doi.org/10.1039/d4ma00165f.Search in Google Scholar

Taha, Y.R., Zrelli, A., Hajji, N., Alsalhy, Q., Shehab, M.A., Németh, Z., and Hernadi, K. (2024). Optimum content of incorporated nanomaterials: characterizations and performance of mixed matrix membranes a review. Desalin. Water Treat. 317: 100088, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dwt.2024.100088.Search in Google Scholar

Tiwary, S.K., Singh, M., Chavan, S.V., and Karim, A. (2024). Graphene oxide-based membranes for water desalination and purification npj 2D. Mater. Appl. 8: 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41699-024-00462-z.Search in Google Scholar

Tomar, Y., Pandit, N., Priya, S., and Singhvi, G. (2023). Evolving trends in nanofibers for topical delivery of therapeutics in skin disorders. ACS Omega 8: 18340–18357, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.3c00924.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Tran, M.L., Fu, C.C., Chiang, L.Y., Hsieh, C. Te, Liu, S.H., and Juang, R.S. (2020). Immobilization of TiO2 and TiO2-GO hybrids onto the surface of acrylic acid-grafted polymeric membranes for pollutant removal: analysis of photocatalytic activity. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 8: 5, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2020.104422.Search in Google Scholar

Tsou, C.H., An, Q.F., Lo, S.C., De Guzman, M., Hung, W.S., Hu, C.C., Lee, K.R., and Lai, J.Y. (2015). Effect of microstructure of graphene oxide fabricated through different self-assembly techniques on 1-butanol dehydration. J. Membr. Sci. 477: 93–100, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2014.12.039.Search in Google Scholar

Ursino, C. and Figoli, A. (2022). Nanomaterials in polymeric membranes for water treatment applications. Sep. Sci. Technol. 15: 255–280.10.1016/B978-0-323-90763-7.00016-0Search in Google Scholar

Valizadeh, S., Naji, L., and Karimi, M. (2021). Controlling interlayer spacing of graphene oxide membrane in aqueous media using a biocompatible heterobifunctional crosslinker for Penicillin-G procaine removal. Sep. Purif. Technol. 263: 118392, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.118392.Search in Google Scholar

Vandezande, P. (2015). Next-generation pervaporation membranes: recent trends, challenges and perspectives. In: Pervaporation, vapour permeation and membrane distillation: principles and applications. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK, pp. 107–141.10.1016/B978-1-78242-246-4.00005-2Search in Google Scholar

Wang, X.-l., Dong, S.-q., Qin, W., Xue, Y.-x., Wang, Q., Zhang, J., Liu, H.-y., Zhang, H., Wang, W., and Wei, J.-f. (2022b). Fabrication of highly permeable CS/NaAlg loose nanofiltration membrane by ionic crosslinking assisted layer-by-layer self-assembly for dye desalination. Sep. Purif. Technol. 284: 120202, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.120202.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Z., He, F., Guo, J., Peng, S., Cheng, X.Q., Zhang, Y., Drioli, E., Figoli, A., Li, Y., and Shao, L. (2020b). The stability of a graphene oxide (GO) nanofiltration (NF) membrane in an aqueous environment: progress and challenges. Mater. Adv. 1: 554–568, https://doi.org/10.1039/d0ma00191k.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Y., Li, L., Zhang, X., Li, J., Liu, C., Li, N., and Xie, Z. (2019). Polyvinylamine/Graphene oxide/PANI@CNTs mixed matrix composite membranes with enhanced CO2/N2 separation performance. J. Membr. Sci. 589: 117246, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117246.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, J., Qu, Y., Liang, T., Liu, Z., Sun, P., Li, Z., Wang, X., Hu, Y., Wang, L., and Wang, N. (2022a). Fabrication of a graphene oxide-embedded separation bilayer composite nanofiltration membrane using a combination of layer-by-layer self-assembly and interfacial polymerization. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 8: 1923–1937, https://doi.org/10.1039/d2ew00160h.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, N., Sun, H., Yang, H., Li, X., Ji, S., and An, Q.F. (2020a). Hollow polyhedron-modified graphene oxide membranes for organic solvent nanofiltration with enhanced permeance. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 3: 5874–5880, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.0c01029.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, J., Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Uliana, A., Zhu, J., Liu, J., and Van Der Bruggen, B. (2016a). Zeolitic imidazolate framework/graphene oxide hybrid nanosheets functionalized thin film nanocomposite membrane for enhanced antimicrobial performance. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 8: 25508–25519, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.6b06992.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Wang, J., Zhang, P., Liang, B., Liu, Y., Xu, T., Wang, L., Cao, B., and Pan, K. (2016b). Graphene oxide as an effective barrier on a porous nanofibrous membrane for water treatment. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 8: 6211–6218, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.5b12723.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Wayo, D.D.K., Irawan, S., Satyanaga, A., Kim, J., Noor, B.M.M.Z., and Rasouli, V. (2024). Filter cake neural-objective data modelling and optimization. Symmetry 16: 1074.10.20944/preprints202401.1757.v1Search in Google Scholar

Woo, Y.C., Kim, S.H., Shon, H.K., and Tijing, L.D. (2018). Introduction: membrane desalination today, past, and future. In: Current trends and future developments on (bio-) membranes. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. xxv–xlvi.10.1016/B978-0-12-813551-8.00028-0Search in Google Scholar

Wu, H., Shi, J., Ning, X., Long, Y.Z., and Zheng, J. (2022). The high flux of superhydrophilic-superhydrophobic janus membrane of cPVA-PVDF/PMMA/GO by layer-by-layer electrospinning for high efficiency oil-water separation. Polymers 14: 621, https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14030621.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Wu, H., Wang, L., Xu, W., Xu, Z., and Zhang, G. (2023). Preparation of a CAB−GO/PES mixed matrix ultrafiltration membrane and its antifouling performance. Membranes 13: 241, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes13020241.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Wu, L.-g., Zhang, X.-y., Wang, T., Du, C.-h., and Yang, C.-h. (2019). Enhanced performance of polyvinylidene fluoride ultrafiltration membranes by incorporating TiO2/graphene oxide. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 141: 492–501, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2018.11.025.Search in Google Scholar

Xi, Y.H., Liu, Z., Liao, Q.C., Xie, R., Ju, X.J., Wang, W., Faraj, Y., and Chu, L.Y. (2018). Effect of oxidized-group-supported lamellar distance on stability of graphene-based membranes in aqueous solutions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 57: 9439–9447, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.8b01959.Search in Google Scholar

Xiao, S., Yu, S., Yan, L., Liu, Y., and Tan, X. (2017). Preparation and properties of PPSU/GO mixed matrix membrane. Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 25: 408–414, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2017.02.009.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, L., Chen, Y., Su, W., Cui, J., and Wei, S. (2023). Synergistic adsorption of U(VI) from seawater by MXene and amidoxime mixed matrix membrane with high efficiency. Sep. Purif. Technol. 309: 123024, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.123024.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, W.L., Fang, C., Zhou, F., Song, Z., Liu, Q., Qiao, R., and Yu, M. (2017). Self-assembly: a facile way of forming ultrathin, high-performance graphene oxide membranes for water purification. Nano Lett. 17: 2928–2933, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b00148.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Xu, Z., Wu, T., Shi, J., Teng, K., Wang, W., Ma, M., Li, J., Qian, X., Li, C., and Fan, J. (2016). Photocatalytic antifouling PVDF ultrafiltration membranes based on synergy of graphene oxide and TiO2 for water treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 520: 281–293, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2016.07.060.Search in Google Scholar

Yadav, S., Ibrar, I., Samal, A.K., Altaee, A., Déon, S., Zhou, J., and Ghaffour, N. (2022). Preparation of fouling resistant and highly perm-selective novel PSf/GO-vanillin nanofiltration membrane for efficient water purification. J. Hazard. Mater. 421: 126744, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126744.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Yang, K., Dai, Y., Zheng, W., Ruan, X., Li, H., and He, G. (2019a). ZIFs-modified GO plates for enhanced CO2 separation performance of ethyl cellulose based mixed matrix membranesf. Sep. Purif. Technol. 214: 87–94, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2018.04.080.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, Y., Li, Y., Li, Q., Wang, Y., Tan, C.H., and Wang, R. (2019b). Rapid co-deposition of graphene oxide incorporated metal-phenolic network/piperazine followed by crosslinking for high flux nanofiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 588: 117203, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117203.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, H., Wang, N., Wang, L., Liu, H.X., An, Q.F., and Ji, S. (2018). Vacuum-assisted assembly of ZIF-8@GO composite membranes on ceramic tube with enhanced organic solvent nanofiltration performance. J. Membr. Sci. 545: 158–166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2017.09.074.Search in Google Scholar

Yao, N., Li, C., Yu, J., Xu, Q., Wei, S., Tian, Z., Yang, Z., Yang, W., and Shen, J. (2020). Insight into adsorption of combined antibiotic-heavy metal contaminants on graphene oxide in water. Sep. Purif. Technol. 236: 116278, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.116278.Search in Google Scholar

Ye, J., Zhang, B., Gu, Y., Yu, M., Wang, D., Wu, J., and Li, J. (2019). Tailored graphene oxide membranes for the separation of ions and molecules. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2: 6611–6621, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.9b01356.Search in Google Scholar

Yuan, T., Gao, L., Zhan, W., and Dini, D. (2022). Effect of particle size and surface charge on nanoparticles diffusion in the brain white matter. Pharm. Res. 39: 767–781, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11095-022-03222-0.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Yuan, H., Liu, J., Zhang, X., Chen, L., Zhang, Q., and Ma, L. (2023). Recent advances in membrane-based materials for desalination and gas separation. J. Clean. Prod. 387: 135845, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.135845.Search in Google Scholar

Zeeshan, M.H., Ruman, U.E., Shafiq, M., Waqas, S., and Sabir, A. (2024). Intercalation of GO-Ag nanoparticles in cellulose acetate nanofiltration mixed matrix membrane for efficient removal of chromium and cobalt ions from wastewater. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 12: 113713, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2024.113713.Search in Google Scholar

Zhan, Y., He, S., Wan, X., Zhao, S., and Bai, Y. (2018a). Thermally and chemically stable poly(arylene ether nitrile)/halloysite nanotubes intercalated graphene oxide nanofibrous composite membranes for highly efficient oil/water emulsion separation in harsh environment. J. Membr. Sci. 567: 76–88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.09.037.Search in Google Scholar

Zhan, Y., Wan, X., He, S., Yang, Q., and He, Y. (2018b). Design of durable and efficient poly(arylene ether nitrile)/bioinspired polydopamine coated graphene oxide nanofibrous composite membrane for anionic dyes separation. Chem. Eng. J. 333: 132–145, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.09.147.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, P., Gong, J.L., Zeng, G.M., Deng, C.H., Yang, H.C., Liu, H.Y., and Huan, S.Y. (2017). Cross-linking to prepare composite graphene oxide-framework membranes with high-flux for dyes and heavy metal ions removal. Chem. Eng. J. 322: 657–666, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2017.04.068.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, G., Zhou, M., Xu, Z., Jiang, C., Shen, C., and Meng, Q. (2019a). Guanidyl-functionalized graphene/polysulfone mixed matrix ultrafiltration membrane with superior permselective, antifouling and antibacterial properties for water treatment. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 540: 295–305, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2019.01.050.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Zhang, J., Xin, Q., Li, X., Yun, M., Xu, R., Wang, S., Li, Y., Lin, L., Ding, X., Ye, H., et al. (2019b). Mixed matrix membranes comprising aminosilane-functionalized graphene oxide for enhanced CO2 separation. J. Membr. Sci. 570–571: 343–354, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2018.10.075.Search in Google Scholar

Zheng, S., Tu, Q., Urban, J.J., Li, S., and Mi, B. (2017). Swelling of graphene oxide membranes in aqueous solution: characterization of interlayer spacing and insight into water transport mechanisms. ACS Nano 11: 6440–6450, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b02999.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Zhu, Y., Du, Y., Ma, H., Zhang, H., Wen, G., Lv, X., Yu, H., Liang, T., Cheng, C., and Ji, J. (2025). Enhancing photothermal conversion efficiency and aqueous stability of graphene oxide membranes for clean water production. Sep. Purif. Technol. 360: 130958, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2024.130958.Search in Google Scholar

Zubair, M., Farooq, S., Hussain, A., Riaz, S., and Ullah, A. (2024). A review of current developments in graphene oxide–polysulfone derived membranes for water remediation. Environ. Sci.: Adv. 3: 983–1003, https://doi.org/10.1039/d4va00058g.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2025-04-25
Accepted: 2025-10-04
Published Online: 2025-11-13
Published in Print: 2026-01-29

© 2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Reviews
  3. Advancing wastewater treatment: a review on the cutting-edge graphene oxide-enhanced polymeric membranes
  4. Technological aspects and problems of using nanoparticles as a modifier of composite materials
  5. Review of flotation reagents for scheelite: collectors and depressants
  6. Engineering insights into thermal plasma processing for plastic waste management: a review
https://doi.org/10.1515/revce-2025-0016
Keywords for this article
graphene oxide; bibliometric analysis; polymeric membrane; wastewater treatment
Creative Commons
BY 4.0

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Reviews
  3. Advancing wastewater treatment: a review on the cutting-edge graphene oxide-enhanced polymeric membranes
  4. Technological aspects and problems of using nanoparticles as a modifier of composite materials
  5. Review of flotation reagents for scheelite: collectors and depressants
  6. Engineering insights into thermal plasma processing for plastic waste management: a review
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2026 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 11.1.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/revce-2025-0016/html
Scroll to top button