ArticleSaudi journal of biological sciences2015
Effect of nickel on nutrient removal by selected indigenous protozoan species in wastewater systems.
Article in Saudi journal of biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of the Active Sludge Microorganisms Population During Wastewater Treatment in a Micro-Pilot Plant.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Ecotoxicity ofToxics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nutrient and heavy metal pollutions are major concern worldwide. This study aimed at comparing the effect of Ni(2+) on nutrient removal efficiency of four indigenous wastewater protozoan species (Aspidisca sp., Paramecium sp., Peranema sp., Trachelophyllum sp.). Specific physicochemical parameters and microbial growth/die-off were measured using standard methods. The results revealed that protozoan species were able to simultaneously remove phosphate, nitrate and Ni(2+) at concentrations ranging between 66.4-99.36%, 56.19-99.88% and 45.98-85.69%, respectively. Peranema sp. appeared to be the isolates with the highest removal of nutrients (Phosphate-99.36% and Nitrate-99.88%) while Paramecium sp. showed higher removal of Ni(2+) at 85.69% and low removal of nutrients. Aspidisca sp. was the most sensitive isolate to Ni(2+) but with significant nutrient removal (Phosphate-66.4% and Nitrate-56.19%) at 10 mg-N(2+)/L followed by an inhibition of nutrient removal at Ni(2+) concentration greater than 10 mg/L. Significant correlation between the growth rate and nutrient removal (r = 0.806/0.799, p < 0.05 for phosphate and nitrate, respectively) was noted. Except for Peranema sp. which revealed better nutrient removal ability at 10 mg-Ni(2+)/L, an increase in Ni(2+) concentration had a significant effect on nutrient removal efficiency of these indigenous protozoan species. This study suggests that although Ni(2+) appeared to be toxic to microbial isolates, its effect at a low concentration (10 mg-Ni(2+)/L) towards these isolates can be used to enhance the wastewater treatment process for the removal of nutrients. Peranema sp., which was able to remove both Ni(2+) and nutrients from wastewater mixed-liquor, can also be used for bioremediation of wastewater systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.