ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2017
Greenhouse wastewater treatment by baffled subsurface-flow constructed wetlands supplemented with flower straws as carbon source in different modes.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of water exchange rate on morphological and physiological characteristics of two submerged macrophytes from Erhai Lake.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Four laboratory-scale baffled subsurface-flow constructed wetlands (BSCWs) were established for the treatment of greenhouse wastewater containing high levels of nitrate and sulfate in the present study. Each BSCW microcosm involved a treatment zone and another post-treatment zone with a surface area ratio of 2:1. Evenly mixed straws of carnation and rose (w/w: 1/1), two common ornamental flowers, were supplemented as an organic carbon source into the treatment zone through a hydrolysis zone (CW 1), decentralized vertically installed perforated pipes (CW 2), and centralized pipes (CW 3 in the figures), except the blank system. Removals and transformations of nitrogen and sulfate as well as carbon release in the BSCWs were investigated and comparatively assessed. Results showed that the supplements of flower straws could greatly enhance both the nitrate and sulfate removals, and good performance was achieved during the beginning operation period of 30 days, followed by decline due to insufficient organic carbon supply. Nitrate removal efficiency was significantly higher and more stable compared to sulfate. The highest removal rates of nitrate and sulfate were achieved in the CW 3, with a mean value of 4.33 g NO
Indexed as
Identifiers
27787703What 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.