Evaluation of the giant reed (Arundo donax) in horizontal subsurface flow wetlands for the treatment of recirculating aquaculture system effluent
- 482 Downloads
Two emergent macrophytes, Arundo donax and Phragmites australis, were established in experimental subsurface flow, gravel-based constructed wetlands (CWs) receiving untreated recirculating aquaculture system wastewater.
Materials and methods
The hydraulic loading rate was 3.75 cm day−1. Many of the monitored water quality parameters (biological oxygen demand [BOD], total suspended solids [TSS], total phosphorus [TP], total nitrogen [TN], total ammoniacal nitrogen [TAN], nitrate nitrogen [NO3], and Escherichia coli) were removed efficiently by the CWs, to the extent that the CW effluent was suitable for use on human food crops grown for raw produce consumption under Victorian state regulations and also suitable for reuse within aquaculture systems.
Results and discussion
The BOD, TSS, TP, TN, TAN, and E. coli removal in the A. donax and P. australis beds was 94%, 67%, 96%, 97%, 99.6%, and effectively 100% and 95%, 87%, 95%, 98%, 99.7%, and effectively 100%, respectively, with no significant difference (p > 0.007) in performance between the A. donax and P. australis CWs. In this study, as expected, the aboveground yield of A. donax top growth (stems + leaves) (15.0 ± 3.4 kg wet weight) was considerably more than the P. australis beds (7.4 ± 2.8 kg wet weight). The standing crop produced in this short (14-week) trial equates to an estimated 125 and 77 t ha−1 year−1 biomass (dry weight) for A. donax and P. australis, respectively (assuming that plant growth is similar across a 250-day (September–April) growing season and a single-cut, annual harvest).
The similarity of the performance of the A. donax- and P. australis-planted beds indicates that either may be used in horizontal subsurface flow wetlands treating aquaculture wastewater, although the planting of A. donax provides additional opportunities for secondary income streams through utilization of the energy-rich biomass produced.
KeywordsArundo donax Phragmites australis Constructed treatment wetlands Recirculating aquaculture system Victoria, Australia
- Allinson G, Watt A, Gervasi D, Mitchell B (2005) Renovating a constructed wetland for industrial wastewater treatment. Water 32(3):46–51Google Scholar
- ANZECC, ARMCANZ (2000) Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st edn. American Public Health Association, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- BOM (2011) Climate data on-line. Commonwealth of Australia 2011, Bureau of Meteorology. Available at http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data. Accessed September 2011
- Comeau Y, Brisson J, Réville JP, Forget C, Drioz A (2001) Phosphorus removal from trout farm effluents by constructed wetlands. Water Sci Technol 44(11–12):55–60Google Scholar
- Daniel WW (1990) Applied nonparametric statistics, 2nd edn. PWS-Kent, BostonGoogle Scholar
- EPA (1991) Guidelines for wastewater irrigation. Environment Protection Authority, Publication 168. EPA Victoria, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
- Gersberg RM, Gearhart RA, Ives M (1989a) Pathogen removal in constructed wetland. In: Hammer DA (ed) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Lewis, Chelsea, pp 431–446Google Scholar
- Gersberg RM, lyon SR, Brenner R, Elkins BV (1989b) Integrated wastewater treatment using artificial wetlands: a gravel marsh case study. In: Hammer DA (ed) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Lewis, Chelsea, pp 145–152Google Scholar
- Hatano K, Trettin CC, House CH, Wolumn AG (1993) Microbial populations and decomposition activity in three subsurface flow constructed wetlands. In: Moshiri GA (ed) Constructed wetlands for water quality improvement. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 541–547Google Scholar
- Idris SM, Jones PL, Salzman SA, Allinson G (2011) Performance of the giant reed (Arundo donax) in experimental wetlands receiving variable loads of industrial stormwater. Wat Air Soil Poll. doi:10.1007/s11270-011-0881-y
- IWA (2000) Constructed wetlands for pollution control. Processes, performance, design and operation. IWA, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Kadlec RH, Knight RL (1996) Treatment wetlands. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- Kadlec RH, Wallace SD (2009) Treatment wetlands, 2nd edn. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- Karpiscak MM, Gerba CP, Watt PM, Foster KE, Falabi JA (1996) Multi-species plant systems for wastewater quality improvements and habitat enhancement. Water Sci Technol 33(10–11):231–236Google Scholar
- Lawrie R (1996) Irrigation impacts at Nowra. Water 23:32–35Google Scholar
- Lewis M, Jackson M (2002) Nalgrass: a nonwood fiber source suitable for existing US pulp mills. In: Janick J, Whipkey A (eds) Trends in new crops and new uses. ASHS, Alexandria, pp 371–376Google Scholar
- Milden A, Redding T (1998) Environmental management for aquaculture. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Rawlinson P (2002) The economics efficiencies of partial and intensive recirculation aquaculture systems for Murray cod. In: Ingram BA (ed) Murray cod aquaculture: now and into the future. Victorian Institute of Animal Science, Attwood, pp 17–18Google Scholar
- Robinson JB (1992) Grapevine nutrition. In: Coombe BG, Dry PR (eds) Viticulture. Volume 2, practices. Winetitles, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
- Ryerson DE, Dengler NG (1994) Light induced phenotypic plasticity in plants. In: Goldman CA (ed) Tested studies for laboratory teaching. Proceedings of the 15th Workshop/Conference of the Association for Biology Laboratory Education (ABLE); 15:259–293Google Scholar
- Seidel K (1976) Macrophytes and water purification. In: Tourbier J, Pierson RW (eds) Biological control of water pollution. Pennsylvania University Press, Philadelphia, pp 109–122Google Scholar
- Stevens D (2006) Growing crops with recycled wastewater. CSIRO, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- Walpole RE, Myers RH (1990) Probability and statistics for engineers and scientist, 4th edn. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar