4.8 Article

The interacting effects of temperature and plant community type on nutrient removal in wetland microcosms

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 96, 期 9, 页码 1039-1047

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2004.09.007

关键词

treatment wetlands; phytoremediation; eutrophication; nitrogen; phosphorous; seasonality; microcosms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Treatment wetlands can remove nutrients from inflow sources through biogeochemical processes. Plant composition and temperature play important roles in the nutrient removal efficiency of these wetlands, but the interactions between these variables are not well understood. We investigated the seasonal efficiency of wetland macrophytes to reduce soil leachate concentrations of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in experimental microcosms. Each microcosm contained one of six vegetation treatments: unplanted, planted with one of four species (Carex lacustris, Scirpus validus, Phalaris arundinacea and Typha latifolid) in monoculture or planted with an equal abundance of all four species. Microcosms were also subjected to two temperature treatments: insulated microcosms and microcosms exposed to environmental conditions. A constant nutrient solution containing 56 mg/l N and 31 mg/ l P was added to all microcosms three times a week. Water samples were analyzed monthly for total dissolved nitrogen and total dissolved phosphorous. Microcosms exhibited a typical pattern of seasonal nutrient removal with higher removal rates in the growing season and lower rates in the winter months. In general, planted microcosms outperformed unplanted microcosms. Among the plant treatments, Carex lacustris was the least efficient. The four remaining plant treatments removed an equivalent amount of nutrients. Insulated microcosms were more efficient in the winter and early spring months. Although a seasonal pattern of nutrient removal was observed, this variation can be minimized through planting and insulation of wetlands. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据