2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2009.09.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of plant diversity on microbial biomass and community metabolic profiles in a full-scale constructed wetland

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
53
1
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 156 publications
(60 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
1
53
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In the diagram, Gram + for Gram-positive bacteria abundance, Gram − for Gram-negative bacteria abundance, Anaerobic for anaerobic bacteria abundance; DHA for dehydrogenase, Ure for urease, Nitr for nitrate reductase, Pho for phosphatase pollutants in the constructed wetlands (Ahn et al 2007;Krasnits et al 2009). Microbial community structure has been proposed to be an important determinant of water quality improvement in the wetland systems (Calheiros et al 2009;Faulwetter et al 2009), and temperature (Smith et al 2010), hydrologic regime and pollutant treatments (Mentzer et al 2006;Steenwerth et al 2006), plant diversity and function group richness (Zhang et al 2010 and biotic succession (Kent et al 2007), could strongly influence the microbial community structure. In the present study, the effects of microbial community structure (four diagnostic fatty acid (FA) groups) and environmental parameters on pollutant removal efficiencies were also determined by RDA (Fig.…”
Section: Relationships Between Microbial Community Structures and Funmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the diagram, Gram + for Gram-positive bacteria abundance, Gram − for Gram-negative bacteria abundance, Anaerobic for anaerobic bacteria abundance; DHA for dehydrogenase, Ure for urease, Nitr for nitrate reductase, Pho for phosphatase pollutants in the constructed wetlands (Ahn et al 2007;Krasnits et al 2009). Microbial community structure has been proposed to be an important determinant of water quality improvement in the wetland systems (Calheiros et al 2009;Faulwetter et al 2009), and temperature (Smith et al 2010), hydrologic regime and pollutant treatments (Mentzer et al 2006;Steenwerth et al 2006), plant diversity and function group richness (Zhang et al 2010 and biotic succession (Kent et al 2007), could strongly influence the microbial community structure. In the present study, the effects of microbial community structure (four diagnostic fatty acid (FA) groups) and environmental parameters on pollutant removal efficiencies were also determined by RDA (Fig.…”
Section: Relationships Between Microbial Community Structures and Funmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Substrate ammonium concentrations decreased with the increase of SR in 2008 in this study, maybe as a result of increased microbial community diversity and microbial biomass carbon and N and enzyme activities in the substrate with higher SR enhanced nitrification [18,26]. Meanwhile, the slope of the positive regression between substrate nitrate concentration and SR became steeper in 2008 as compared with that in 2007 (Fig.…”
Section: Effects Of Species Richness On Substrate Inorganic N Concentmentioning
confidence: 50%
“…The field experiment was located at the CW (1000 m 2 , 29853 0 N, 122823 0 E) in Zhoushan City and the CW's structure was described in Zhang et al [18] and Zhu et al [16]. Each plant species had a uniform mesophytic growth habitat in the down-flow chambers (i.e., A pond, Fig.…”
Section: Site Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Fisher et al ( 2009 ) also demonstrated a better performance of mixed wetlands, with the mixture of I. pseudacorus and other plants showing the best performance. Other advantages of mixed CWs are their lower susceptibility to seasonal changes and disturbances, as well as their more biodiverse microbial populations (Qiu et al, 2011; Zhang et al, 2010.…”
Section: Aq2mentioning
confidence: 99%