4.7 Article

Removal and accumulation of Cu, Ni and Zn in horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands: Contribution of vegetation and filling medium

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 408, Issue 21, Pages 5097-5105

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.045

Keywords

Analysis of plant tissues; Contaminated site; Experimental investigation; Heavy metals; Constructed wetlands; Horizontal subsurface flow beds; Plant uptake and accumulation

Funding

  1. LARA [Lara FE120 Obiettivo2]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the accumulation and removal of Cu, Ni and Zn in two horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment, which differ by shape, presence of macrophytes and water depth. Between March and December 2007, the three metals were measured in the influent and effluents of the two systems. Average percentage removal rates were extremely low for Cu (3% and 9% in the two beds) and higher for Zn and Ni (between 25 and 35%). Under higher Zn influent concentrations, it was found to be between 78-87%, which is in agreement with other literature data. During the peak standing crop season (August), biomasses of the different parts of Phragmites australis (stems, leaves and flowers, roots and rhizomes) were analysed in terms of weight and heavy metal concentration in order to assess heavy metal distribution among the tissues. It was found that the plants contribute to total heavy metal removal to a lesser extent than the filling medium. Aboveground tissues remove 34% of Cu, 1.8% of Ni and 6.2% of Zn % and, once harvested, their disposal does not appear to pose a problem for the environment. If heavy metals are present at high concentrations in the horizontal subsurface flow bed influent, over time, their accumulation in the filling medium could necessitate special care in the bed's management to avoid release into the surrounding environment. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available