4.7 Article

Removal efficiency and enzymatic mechanism of dibutyl phthalate (DBP) by constructed wetlands

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 25, Issue 23, Pages 23009-23017

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-2384-5

Keywords

Constructed wetlands; Dibutyl phthalate (DBP); Removal efficiency; Enzyme activity

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51578538]
  2. Science and Science and Technology Promotion Project of Ministry of Water Resources [TG1520]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Four vertical-flow constructed wetland systems were set up in the field in order to study the removal efficiency and possible enzymatic mechanism of the constructed wetlands in treating sewage containing different concentrations of dibutyl phthalate (DBP). Under DBP spiked concentrations of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mg/L, good DBP removal rates of 62.08, 82.17, and 84.17% were achieved, respectively. Meanwhile, certain removal effects of general water quality parameters were observed in all four constructed wetlands: with high average removal rates of nitrate nitrogen (NO3 (-)-N) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) of 91.10 similar to 93.89 and 82.83 similar to 89.17%, respectively, with moderate removal efficiencies of total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), ammonia nitrogen (NH4 (+)-N) of 44.59 similar to 49.67, 30.58 similar to 37.18, and 28.52 similar to 37.45%, respectively. Compared to the control, an increase of enzyme activities of urease, phosphatase, dehydrogenase, and nitrate reductase was observed in the treatments with DBP addition. In the presence of 0.5 mg/L of DBP concentration, the urease, phosphatase, and dehydrogenase activities reached the highest levels, with an increase of 350.02, 36.57, and 417.88% compared with the control, respectively. It appeared that the low concentration of DBP might better stimulate the release of enzymes.

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