Advertisement

Effect of earthworms and plants on the efficiency of vertical flow systems treating university wastewater

  • Stevo LavrnićEmail author
  • Sandra Cristino
  • Maribel Zapater-Pereyra
  • Jan Vymazal
  • Domenico Cupido
  • Giovanni Lucchese
  • Benedetta Mancini
  • Maurizio L. Mancini
Research Article
First Online:

Abstract

One of the possible ways to improve the operation efficiency of constructed wetlands and to prevent their clogging is the application of earthworms. They have already been successfully applied for vermicomposting and for sludge dewatering and treatment. A few studies have already examined the effect of earthworms on the treatment of wastewater by vertical flow constructed wetlands (VFCWs), but none of them have provided a yearlong research result from an open-air system or compared the effect that different seasons in a temperate climate area can have on these invertebrates. The goal of this research was to estimate the effect that earthworms and plants have on VFCW’s operation. Four mesocosms (a filter, a filter with earthworms, a VFCW and a VFCW with earthworms) were built and their influent and effluent water quality was monitored for a period of 1 year. They were fed with wastewater coming from a building of the University of Bologna (Italy). The results have shown that the presence of earthworms in this specific system did not reduce the organic matter content of the substrate, but it has positively influenced plants’ growth. However, since neither earthworms nor plants had a statistically significant effect on the effluent quality, it can be concluded that the integration of these invertebrates cannot improve wastewater treatment of vertical flow filters or constructed wetlands.

Keywords

Constructed wetlands Earthworms Filters Plants Seasonal effect Wastewater treatment 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The first author’s PhD scholarship was financed by the European Commission through Erasmus Mundus PhD in Marine and Coastal Management programme. The authors would like to thank Prof. Elena Fabbri from the University of Bologna for her help during the development of this project, and Dr. Marco Maglionico and Dr. Sara Simona Cipolla from CIRI (University of Bologna) for their contribution to the research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11356_2019_4508_MOESM1_ESM.docx (15 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 14 kb)

References

  1. APHA (American Public Health Association) (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st edn. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Arora S, Kazmi AA (2015) The effect of seasonal temperature on pathogen removal efficacy of vermifilter for wastewater treatment. Water Res 74:88–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boutilier L, Jamieson R, Gordon R, Lake C, Hart W (2009) Adsorption, sedimentation, and inactivation of E. coli within wastewater treatment wetlands. Water Res 43(17):4370–4380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen Z, Hu S, Hu C, Huang L, Liu H, Vymazal J (2016) Preliminary investigation on the effect of earthworm and vegetation for sludge treatment in sludge treatment reed beds system. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(12):11957–11963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ciria MP, Solano ML, Soriano P (2005) Role of Macrophyte Typha latifolia in a constructed wetland for wastewater treatment and assessment of its potential as a biomass fuel. Biosyst Eng 92(4):535–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Collison RS, Grismer ME (2015) Nitrogen and COD removal from septic tank wastewater in subsurface flow constructed wetlands: plants effects. Water Environ Res 87(11):1999–2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Díaz FJ, O’Geen AT, Dahlgren RA (2010) Efficacy of constructed wetlands for removal of bacterial contamination from agricultural return flows. Agric Water Manag 97(11):1813–1821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Edwards CA, Bater JE (1992) The use of earthworms in environmental management. Soil Biol Biochem 24(12):1683–1689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. EN ISO 7899-2:2000: Water quality - Detection and enumeration of intestinal enterococci - Part 2: Membrane #ltration method (ISO 7899-2:2000). Available online: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/wej.12088. Accessed on 4th Nov 2018
  10. Headley T, Nivala J, Kassa K, Olsson L, Wallace S, Brix H, van Afferden M, Müller R (2013) Escherichia coli removal and internal dynamics in subsurface flow ecotechnologies: effects of design and plants. Ecol Eng 61(part B):564–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huang J, Wenshu C, Zhong Q, Wang S (2013) Influence of temperature on micro-environment, plant eco-physiology and nitrogen removal effect in subsurface flow constructed wetland. Ecol Eng 60:242–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kanianska R, Jad’ud’ová J, Makovníková J, Kizeková M (2016) Assessment of relationships between earthworms and soil abiotic and biotic factors as a tool in sustainable agricultural. Sustainability 8(9):906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lavrnić S, Mancini ML (2016) Can constructed wetlands treat wastewater for reuse in agriculture? Review of guidelines and examples in South Europe. Water Sci Technol 73(11):2616–2626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Le Bayon RC, Milleret R (2009) Effects of earthworms on phosphorus dynamics—a review. Dyn Soil Dyn Plant 3(2):21–27Google Scholar
  15. Li HZ, Wang S, Ye JF, Xu ZX, Jin W (2011) A practical method for the restoration of clogged rural vertical subsurface flow constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment using earthworm. Water Sci Technol 63(2):283–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li H, Li Y, Gong Z, Li X (2013) Performance study of vertical flow constructed wetlands for phosphorus removal with water quenched slag as a substrate. Ecol Eng 53:39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mancini B (2017) Application of sequence based typing (SBT) technique to typing strains of legionella spp.: development of an environmental risk map. PhD thesis. University of Bologna. Bologna, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  18. Matos GD, Arruda MAZ (2003) Vermicompost as natural adsorbent for removing metal ions from laboratory effluents. Process Biochem 39(1):81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Meng P, Pei H, Hu W, Shao Y, Li Z (2014) How to increase microbial degradation in constructed wetlands: influencing factors and improvement measures. Bioresour Technol 157:316–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Molleda P, Blanco I, Ansola G, de Luis E (2008) Removal of wastewater pathogen indicators in a constructed wetland in Leon, Spain. Ecol Eng 33(3):252–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ngo PT, Rumpel C, Doan TT, Jouquet P (2012) The effect of earthworms on carbon storage and soil organic matter composition in tropical soil amended with compost and vermicompost. Soil Biol Biochem 50:214–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nivala J, Knowles P, Dotro G, García J, Wallace S (2012) Clogging in subsurface-flow treatment wetlands: measurement, modeling and management. Water Res 46(6):1625–1640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nuengjamnong C (2010) Implementation of earthworm-assisted constructed wetlands to treat wastewater and possibility of using alternative plants in constructed wetlands. PhD thesis. Hamburg University of technology. Hamburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  24. Nuengjamnong C, Chiarawatchai N, Polprasert C, Otterpohl R (2011) Treating swine wastewater by integrating earthworms into constructed wetlands. J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng 46(7):800–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ouattara JMP, Coulibaly L, Tiho S, Ouattara A, Goure G (2011) Panicum maximum (Jacq.) density effect upon macrofauna structure in sediments of pilot-scale vertical flow constructed wetlands treating domestic wastewater. Ecol Eng 37(2):217–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sgroi M, Pelissari C, Roccaro P, Sezerino PH, García J, Vagliasindi FGA, Ávila C (2018) Removal of organic carbon, nitrogen, emerging contaminants and fluorescing organic matter in different constructed wetland configurations. Chem Eng J 332:619–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sharma PK, Takashi I, Kato K, Ietsugu H, Tomita K, Nagasawa T (2013) Seasonal efficiency of a hybrid sub-surface flow constructed wetland system in treating milking parlor wastewater at northern Hokkaido. Ecol Eng 53:257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Singh RP, Fu D, Jia J, Wu J (2018) Performance of earthworm-enhanced horizontal sub-surface flow filter and constructed wetland. Water 10(10):1309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tamis J, van Schouwenburg G, Kleerebezem R, van Loosdrecht MC (2011) A full scale worm reactor for efficient sludge reduction by predation in a wastewater treatment plant. Water Res 45(18):5916–5924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tanner CC, Sukias JP (1995) Accumulation of organic solids in gravel bed constructed wetlands. Water Sci Technol 32(3):229–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Taylor M, Clarke WP, Greenfield PF (2003) The treatment of domestic wastewater using small-scale vermicompost filter beds. Ecol Eng 21(2–3):197–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tomar P, Suthar S (2011) Urban wastewater treatment using vermi-biofiltration system. Desalination 282:95–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Torrens A, Molle P, Boutin C, Salgot M (2009) Removal of bacterial and viral indicator in vertical flow constructed wetlands and intermittent sand filters. Desalination 246(1):169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. UNI EN ISO 9308-1:2014/A1:2017 Water quality — Enumeration of Escherichia coli and coliform bacteria — Part 1: Membrane #ltration method for waters with low bacterial background 5ora (ISO 9308-1:2014/Amd1:2016). Available online: http://store.uni.com/catalogo/index.php/uni-en-iso-9308-1-2017.html. Accessed on 7 Nov 2018
  35. van Vliet PCJ, van der Stelt B, Rietberg PI, de Goede RGM (2007) Effects of organic matter content on earthworms and nitrogen mineralization in grassland soils. Eur J Soil Biol 43(1):S222–S229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vymazal J (2007) Removal of nutrients in various types of constructed wetlands. Sci Total Environ 380(1–3):48–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vymazal J (2011) Plants used in constructed wetlands with horizontal subsurface flow: a review. Hydrobiologia 674(1):133–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wu L, Li X, Song H, Wang G, Jin Q, Xu X, Gao Y (2013) Enhanced removal of organic matter and nitrogen in a vertical-flow constructed wetland with Eisenia foetida. Desalin Water Treat 51(40–42):7460–7468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wu S, Kuschk P, Brix H, Vymazal J, Dong R (2014) Development of constructed wetlands in performance intensifications for wastewater treatment: a nitrogen and organic matter targeted review. Water Res 57:40–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Xu D, Xu J, Wu J, Muhammad A (2006) Studies on the phosphorus sorption capacity of substrates used in constructed wetland systems. Chemosphere 63(2):344–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Xu DF, Li YX, Zheng JW, Guan YD, Fang H (2012) Effects of earthworms and substrate on Iris pseudacorus growth. Adv Mater Res 550-553:1429–1434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Xu D, Li Y, Fan X, Guan Y, Fang H, Zhao L (2013a) Influence of earthworm Eisenia fetida on Iris pseudacorus's photosynthetic characteristics, evapotranspiration losses and purifying capacity in constructed wetland systems. Water Sci Technol 68(2):335–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Xu D, Li Y, Howard A (2013b) Influence of earthworm Eisenia fetida on removal efficiency of N and P in vertical flow constructed wetland. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20(9):5922–5929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xu D, Li Y, Howard A, Guan Y (2013c) Effect of earthworm Eisenia fetida and wetland plants on nitrification and denitrification potentials in vertical flow constructed wetland. Chemosphere 92(2):201–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zapater-Pereyra M, Ilyas H, Lavrnić S, van Bruggen JJA, Lens PNL (2015) Evaluation of the performance and space requirement by three different hybrid constructed wetlands in a stack arrangement. Ecol Eng 82:290–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhao YQ, Babatunde AO, Hu YS, Kumar JLG, Zhao XH (2011) Pilot field-scale demonstration of a novel alum sludge-based constructed wetland system for enhanced wastewater treatment. Process Biochem 46:278–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhou Q, Hui Z, Bañuelos G, Yan B, Liang Y, Jing Y, Li H (2017) Impacts of vegetation and temperature on the treatment of domestic sewage in constructed wetlands incorporated with ferric-carbon micro-electrolysis material. Int J Phytoremedia 19(10):915–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhu H, Zhou Q-W, Yan B-X, Liang Y-X, Yu X-F, Gerchman Y, Cheng X-W (2018) Influence of vegetation type and temperature on the performance of constructed wetlands for nutrient removal. Water Sci Technol 77(3–4):829–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Campus de Puerto RealUniversity of CádizCádizSpain
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Chimica, Ambientale e dei MaterialiUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Scienze Biologiche, Geologiche e AmbientaliUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly
  4. 4.Independent researcherMunichGermany
  5. 5.Faculty of Environmental SciencesCzech University of Life Sciences PraguePraha 6Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options