Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21880343›Full record

ArticleWater research2011

Nitrate removal, communities of denitrifiers and adverse effects in different carbon substrates for use in denitrification beds.

Sören Warneke, Louis A Schipper, Michael G Matiasek, Kate M Scow, Stewart Cameron, Denise A Bruesewitz, Ian R McDonald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Water research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 286 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from wastewater by sand with wheat straw.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Remediation of nitrate-contaminated water by solid-phase denitrification process-a review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sören WarnekeDepartment of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. warni1@yahoo.com
Louis A Schipper
Michael G Matiasek
Kate M Scow
Stewart Cameron
Denise A Bruesewitz
Ian R McDonald
University of Waikato · NZUniversity of California, Davis · USGNS Science · NZ

Funding

Workshop on Environmental Technology Transfer and EntrepreneurshipP42ES004699 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI VASYLIEVA, NATALIA · 1987 to 2021
$50.1M
NIEHS NIH HHS 5 P42 ES04699NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES004699
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Denitrification beds are containers filled with wood by-products that serve as a carbon and energy source to denitrifiers, which reduce nitrate (NO(3)(-)) from point source discharges into non-reactive dinitrogen (N(2)) gas. This study investigates a range of alternative carbon sources and determines rates, mechanisms and factors controlling NO(3)(-) removal, denitrifying bacterial community, and the adverse effects of these substrates. Experimental barrels (0.2 m(3)) filled with either maize cobs, wheat straw, green waste, sawdust, pine woodchips or eucalyptus woodchips were incubated at 16.8 °C or 27.1 °C (outlet temperature), and received NO(3)(-) enriched water (14.38 mg N L(-1) and 17.15 mg N L(-1)). After 2.5 years of incubation measurements were made of NO(3)(-)-N removal rates, in vitro denitrification rates (DR), factors limiting denitrification (carbon and nitrate availability, dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and concentrations of NO(3)(-), nitrite and ammonia), copy number of nitrite reductase (nirS and nirK) and nitrous oxide reductase (nosZ) genes, and greenhouse gas production (dissolved nitrous oxide (N(2)O) and methane), and carbon (TOC) loss. Microbial denitrification was the main mechanism for NO(3)(-)-N removal. Nitrate-N removal rates ranged from 1.3 (pine woodchips) to 6.2 g N m(-3) d(-1) (maize cobs), and were predominantly limited by C availability and temperature (Q(10) = 1.2) when NO(3)(-)-N outlet concentrations remained above 1 mg L(-1). The NO(3)(-)-N removal rate did not depend directly on substrate type, but on the quantity of microbially available carbon, which differed between carbon sources. The abundance of denitrifying genes (nirS, nirK and nosZ) was similar in replicate barrels under cold incubation, but varied substantially under warm incubation, and between substrates. Warm incubation enhanced growth of nirS containing bacteria and bacteria that lacked the nosZ gene, potentially explaining the greater N(2)O emission in warmer environments. Maize cob substrate had the highest NO(3)(-)-N removal rate, but adverse effects include TOC release, dissolved N(2)O release and substantial carbon consumption by non-denitrifiers. Woodchips removed less than half of NO(3)(-) removed by maize cobs, but provided ideal conditions for denitrifying bacteria, and adverse effects were not observed. Therefore we recommend the combination of maize cobs and woodchips to enhance NO(3)(-) removal while minimizing adverse effects in denitrification beds.

Indexed as

BacteriaCarbonDenitrificationGene DosageGenes, BacterialGreenhouse EffectMethaneNitrate ReductaseNitratesNitrogenNitrous OxideOxidoreductasesRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSolubilityTemperatureWater PurificationCarbonMethaneNitrate ReductaseNitratesNitrogenNitrous Oxidenitrous oxide reductaseOxidoreductasesRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID21880343
PMCPMC3270496
OpenAlexW2163060733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.