ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Pathways regulating nitrogen removal in constructed ditch wetlands: effects of different inflow ratios and artificial aeration.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Constructed ditch wetland (CDW) is a combination of idle ditch and constructed wetland, which is typically used in rural areas to remove pollutants from domestic wastewater. However, its low total nitrogen (TN) removal remains a pressing issue. To enhance total nitrogen removal, an approach of supplying water at two locations in the CDW at different influent flow ratios, combined with artificial aeration, was proposed to adjust carbon and oxygen distribution in the system. The highest average TN removal was achieved at low influent concentration (CDW4; influent flow ratio 1:2). The removal of TN in winter and spring were 58.93 and 83.26%, respectively. The distribution of carbon sources in the back zone enhanced denitrification. Of the high influent concentration treatments, CDW2 (2:1) achieved 16.97% more TN removal on average compared with CDW1 (3:0), after extra artificial aeration was applied in the front zone. However, nitrification was a limiting step in the system, which became the primary problem preventing pollutant purification. Moreover, nitrifying bacteria abundance was negatively correlated to the influent flow ratio and autotrophic denitrifying bacterial abundance was positively correlated to the influent flow ratios. Graphical abstract.
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.