2016
DOI: 10.1590/s1413-4152201687067
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tratamento de águas residuárias de suinocultura em sistemas alagados construídos, com Chrysopogon zizanioides e Polygonum punctatum cultivadas em leito de argila expandida

Abstract: Eng Sanit Ambient | v.22 n.1 | jan/fev 2017 | 123-132 RESUMONo presente estudo avaliou-se a remoção de demanda bioquímica de oxigênio (DBO), nitrogênio total (N T ) e fósforo total (P T ) da água residuária de suinocultura (ARS) em sistemas alagados construídos (SACs) de escoamento horizontal subsuperficial, além da contribuição das espécies vegetais cultivadas: Polygonum punctatum (erva-de-bicho) e Chrysopogon zizanioides (capim-vetiver). Foram implantados três SACs, utilizando-se argila expandida como meio s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
1
3

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(3 reference statements)
1
3
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The final phosphorus concentration in the CW1 was 1.58 mg L -1 and in the CW2 was 0.89 mg L -1 , representing average removal efficiencies of, respectively, 58.66% and 78.1%. Although these results are much higher than those obtained by Mendonça et al (2012), who obtained average removal efficiencies of 33.6% and 34.3% in CWs planted with cattails and with 2 days of HRT, they are similar to the results found by Ramos et al (2017) who obtained, with 3.2 days of HRT, removal efficiencies of 51±24%, 69±22% and 45±19% in CWs without vegetation, planted with P. punctatum, and planted with and C. zizanioides, respectively. Fia et al (2017) also reported high phosphorus removal efficiencies (73-78%) in the treatment of swine wastewater in CWSs planted with cattails with HRT of 11.8-12 days.…”
Section: Total Phosphorussupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The final phosphorus concentration in the CW1 was 1.58 mg L -1 and in the CW2 was 0.89 mg L -1 , representing average removal efficiencies of, respectively, 58.66% and 78.1%. Although these results are much higher than those obtained by Mendonça et al (2012), who obtained average removal efficiencies of 33.6% and 34.3% in CWs planted with cattails and with 2 days of HRT, they are similar to the results found by Ramos et al (2017) who obtained, with 3.2 days of HRT, removal efficiencies of 51±24%, 69±22% and 45±19% in CWs without vegetation, planted with P. punctatum, and planted with and C. zizanioides, respectively. Fia et al (2017) also reported high phosphorus removal efficiencies (73-78%) in the treatment of swine wastewater in CWSs planted with cattails with HRT of 11.8-12 days.…”
Section: Total Phosphorussupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The TN and NH4 + removal efficiencies in the CW2 can be considered satisfactory, since the average values obtained are higher than those reported in the literature for non-aerated constructed wetlands. Ramos et al (2017) reported average TN removal efficiencies of 38-48% in systems planted with Polygonum punctatum and Chrysopogon zizanioides with HRT of 3.2 days. It should be noted that these removal efficiencies were exceeded in only 24 hours in our Effect of hydraulic retention time on chemical … Rev.…”
Section: Nitrogen Removalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dentre alternativas de tratamento ou pós-tratamento de águas residuárias, destaca-se o uso de sistemas alagados construídos (SACs), comumente conhecidos como constructed wetlands (RAMOS et al, 2017) preenchidos com materiais porosos, de alta condutividade hidráulica, normalmente brita, que servem de suporte para o cultivo de macrófitas (MATOS et al, 2012) ou gramíneas (AMORIM et al, 2015) possibilitando seu uso de modo harmônico com a paisagem natural, oferecendo benefícios consideráveis, como implantação e operação com custos relativamente baixos, integração à parques e sistemas recreacionais (MATOS et al, 2008;PRATA et al, 2013).…”
Section: Segundounclassified
“…The system, as featured by low cost of investment, simple operation and maintenance, stable decontamination effect and a certain ornamental value, etc., has attracted many scholars to conduct researches, and it's used to treat sewages of different types (Vymazal, 2009). Santos, Augusto, and Camargo (2015), used artificial wetlands system to treat sewages of aquaculture, Xian, Hu, and Chen (2010) used floating beds system of aquatic plants to dispose sewages from pig breeding system, Ramos, Borges, Gonçalves, and Matos (2017) treat sewages of pig with emergent aquatic macrophytes, in treatment of septic tank sludge. Some studies testing the flow as Jong and Tang (2014), vertical flow Calderón-Vallejo, Andrade, Manjate, Madera-Parra, and Von Sperling (2015), Andrade, Sperling, and Manjate (2017) or influence of recirculation Lavrora andKoumanova (2010), Foladori, Ruaben, andOrtigara (2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%