Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29494968›Full record

ReviewThe Science of the total environment2018

Constructed wetlands for greywater recycle and reuse: A review.

S Arden, X Ma

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Science of the total environment, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Greywater treatment using treatment wetland systems - five cases from Northern Europe.Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Treated greywater as a novel water resource: The perspective of greywater treatment for reuse from a bibliometric analysis.Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Organic Compounds and Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Behavior in Greywater Treated by a Constructed Wetland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Horizontal Flow Constructed Wetland for Greywater Treatment and Reuse: An Experimental Case.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

2 authors.

S ArdenUniversity of Florida, 100 Phelps Lab, Gainesville, FL 32611, United States.
X MaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45268, United States. Electronic address: ma.cissy@epa.gov.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concern over dwindling water supplies for urban areas as well as environmental degradation from existing urban water systems has motivated research into more resilient and sustainable water supply strategies. Greywater reuse has been suggested as a way to diversify local water supply portfolios while at the same time lessening the burden on existing environments and infrastructure. Constructed wetlands have been proposed as an economically and energetically efficient unit process to treat greywater for reuse purposes, though their ability to consistently meet applicable water quality standards, microbiological in particular, is questionable. We therefore review the existing case study literature to summarize the treatment performance of greywater wetlands in the context of chemical, physical and microbiological water quality standards. Based on a cross-section of different types of wetlands, including surface flow, subsurface flow, vertical and recirculating vertical flow, across a range of operating conditions, we show that although microbiological standards cannot reliably be met, given either sufficient retention time or active recirculation, chemical and physical standards can. We then review existing case study literature for typical water supply disinfection unit processes including chlorination, ozonation and ultraviolet radiation treating either raw or treated greywater specifically. An evaluation of effluent water quality from published wetland case studies and the expected performance from disinfection processes shows that under appropriate conditions these two unit processes together can likely produce effluent of sufficient quality to meet all nonpotable reuse standards. Specifically, we suggest that recycling vertical flow wetlands combined with ultraviolet radiation disinfection and chlorine residual is the best combination to reliably meet the standards.

Indexed as

Disinfectionlog(10) reduction targets (LRTs)Low energy treatment optionNonpotable water reuseWetland treatment performances

Identifiers

PMID29494968
PMCPMC7362998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.