4.7 Article

Fate of sulfonamides, macrolides, and trimethoprim in different wastewater treatment technologies

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 372, Issue 2-3, Pages 361-371

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2006.07.039

Keywords

pharmaceuticals; antibiotics; solid retention time; membrane bioreactor; wastewater

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The elimination of sulfonamides, macrolides and trimethoprim from raw wastewater was investigated in several municipal wastewater treatment plants. Primary treatment provided no significant elimination for the investigated Substances. Similar eliminations were observed in the secondary treatment of two conventional activated sludge (CAS) systems and a fixed-bed reactor (FBR). Sulfamethoxazole, including the fraction present as N-4-acetyl-sulfainethoxazole, was eliminated by approximately 60% in comparison to about 80% in a membrane bioreactor (MBR) independently of the solid retention time (SRT), indicating a positive correlation of the observed elimination to the organic substrate concentration. The elimination for macrolides and trimethoprim varied significantly between the different sampling campaigns in the two CAS systems and in the FBR. In the MBR, these analytes were eliminated up to 50% at SRTof 16 +/- 2 and 33 +/- 3 d. Trimethoprim, clarithromycin and dehydro-erythromycin showed a higher elimination of up to 90% at a SRT of 60-80 d indicating a correlation with reduced substrate loading (SL). Together with the high SRT, the SL may lead to an increased biodiversity of the active biomass, resulting in a broader range of degradation pathways available. Two investigated sand filters showed different elimination behavior. One led to a significant elimination of most macrolides (17-23%) and trimethoprim (74 +/- 14%), while no elimination was observed in the other sand filter investigated. (c) 2006 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