Abstract
Constructed wetland microcosms (CWMs) are artificially designed ecosystem which utilizes both complex and ordinary interactions between supporting media, macrophytes, and microorganisms to treat almost all types of wastewater. CWMs are considered as green and sustainable techniques which require lower energy input, less operational and maintenance cost and provide critical ecological benefits such as wildlife habitat, aquaculture, groundwater recharge, flood control, recreational uses, and add aesthetic value. They are good alternatives to conventional treatment systems particularly for smaller communities as well as distant and decentralized locations. The pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), and temperature are the key controlling factors while several other parameters such as hydraulic loading rates (HLR), hydraulic retention time (HRT), diversity of macrophytes, supporting media, and water depth are critical to achieving better performance. From the literature survey, it is evaluated that the removal performance of CWMs can be improved significantly through recirculation of effluent and artificial aeration (intermittent). This review paper presents an assessment of CWMs as a sustainable option for treatment of wastewater nutrients, organics, and heavy metals from domestic wastewater. Initially, a concise note on the CWMs and their components are presented, followed by a description of treatment mechanisms, major constituents involved in the treatment process, and overall efficiency. Finally, the effects of ecological factors and challenges for their long-term operations are highlighted.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Lack of appropriate wastewater management practices are contributing to both scarcity and decline of fresh water quality worldwide (Almuktar et al. 2018). The situation is posing serious threat to ecosystems especially in developing countries (Wu et al. 2017). Discharge of majority of raw wastewater directly into rivers has become a common practice due to lack of suitable and effective technologies, operational failures of larger treatment plants, and higher cost involved in setting new treatment units (Kumwimba et al. 2017). The constructed wetlands (CWs) are engineered systems that have evolved as an inventive approach to tackle wastewater from domestic sources mainly because of their reliable efficiency, ecological benefits, easy operation, and less maintenance cost (He et al. 2018: Kumar and Dutta 2019). They use natural functions of macrophytes, soil, and microorganisms to treat different water streams (Ilyas and Masih 2017). The use of this technique has grown-up over recent decades with various successful examples (Zhang et al. 2014). CWs are being used to treat almost all types of wastewater such as domestic sewage, stormwater runoff, agricultural runoff, industrial drainage, and polluted rivers water (Li et al. 2017). There are many co-benefits of CWs together with wastewater treatment and recycling as they also provide important ecological services such as valuable wildlife habitat, aquaculture, groundwater recharge, carbon sequestration, fisheries, flood control, silt capture, recreational uses, and add aesthetic values to the surroundings.
Classification of constructed wetlands
CWs are characterized generally into three categories, namely, subsurface flow constructed wetlands (SSFCWs), surface flow constructed wetlands (SFCWs), and hybrid system. Further, on the basis of the flow path, SSFCWs are differentiated into vertical flow constructed wetlands (VFCWs) and horizontal flow constructed wetlands (HFCWs) (Wang et al. 2018). According to the macrophytic growth, they are categorized into emergent, free-floating, submerged, and floating-leaved macrophytes (Vymazal 2010).
Constructed wetland microcosms (CWMs)
A working model of a CWM (Fig. 1) possesses various types of supporting media and aquatic macrophytes depending upon target pollutants. In general, wastewater reaches the treatment chamber, runs all the way through the supporting media, and is released out of the chamber from an outlet system. A CWM unit has following five major components: basin (or chamber), substrate/media materials, vegetation (mostly macrophytes), and inlet and outlet system (Sudarsan et al. 2015).
A number of researchers across the world have published their review articles on the use of CWs for wastewater treatment (Liu et al. 2015; Haynes 2015; Almuktar et al. 2018). However, there are somewhat few studies detailing the treatment dynamics, rather the information is meant to provide onsite domestic wastewater treatment that are site specific. Recent investigation on CWs has principally provided information on wastewater decontamination (Avila et al. 2014), suitable working models and appropriate choice of macrophytes (Wang and Sample 2013), retention time (HRT), hydraulic loads (HLR) (Dzakpasu et al. 2015), and variety of supporting media (Ge et al. 2015) (Fig. 2).
Treatment mechanisms involved in CWMs
Treatment mechanisms involved in CWMs are biogeochemical transformations and solid/liquid separations. Transformation possesses reduction, oxidation, acid/base reactions, biochemical reactions, flocculation, and precipitation. Separation includes adsorption, absorption, gravity separation, stripping, leaching, filtration, and ion exchange (Choudhary et al. 2011).
Major constituents involved in treatment mechanisms
Wetland vegetation (macrophytes)
In CWMs, macrophytes are primary vegetation. They are essentially grouped in four categories, namely, emergent, submerged, floating-leaved, and free-floating macrophytes (Kumar and Dutta 2019). Growth characteristics and nutrient uptake capacity of some frequently used macrophytes are presented in Table 1. The macrophytes relocate oxygen and provide dissolved organic matter and supporting media for microbial attachment (Meng et al. 2014). They are also contributing to enhance porosity and permeability of the substrate, act as a catalyst, and promote a number of biological and chemical reactions (Yahiaoui et al. 2018). More than 150 species of macrophytes have been reported that are used in CWMs worldwide; however, only a few of them are commonly used. It is observed that emergent aquatic macrophytes are preferred choice because they have high contaminant removal efficiency (Vymazal 2013). The choice of macrophytes must be indigenous which can grow naturally in wetlands. They should be also capable to withstand with short dry periods as well as shocks generated by wastewater loads. Macrophytes which have well developed root and rhizome systems inside the supportive material are most preferable.
Supporting media
Currently, available and frequently used supportive media are the industrial by-products, natural and artificial or synthetic materials (Yan and Xu 2014). Some frequently used supporting media in CWMs are presented in Table 2. They must be chosen according to their capacity to absorb/adhere wastewater contaminants and their permeability. It is generally observed that reduced hydraulic conductivity greatly influenced adsorption ability (Wang et al. 2010). Ultimately, the long-lasting applications of the treatment system are highly affected by the chosen media materials (Wang et al. 2010).
Microorganisms
The principal microorganisms concerned with wetlands system are bacteria, yeasts, protozoa, fungi, and algae. Collectively, all these microorganisms participate in the degradation of nearly all of the wastewater contaminants into insoluble or harmless substances. The well-established microbial communities are attached to the supporting media, plant roots, and/or in leaves in the form of biofilms (Faulwetter et al. 2009). The complex microbial communities in the form of biofilms formed by interactions with wastewater are primarily responsible for the breakdown of the wastewater pollutants and increase the overall treatment performance of the CWMs (Sleytr et al. 2009). Several previous studies have identified and characterized microbial communities in full-scale constructed wetlands and laboratory scale units under specific environments (Calheiros et al. 2009; Krasnits et al. 2009; Sleytr et al. 2009; Dong and Reddy 2010; Zhang et al. 2010). However, in case of domestic wastewater, there is lack of information about how the microbial communities and diversity change during long-term operations (Adrados et al. 2014). Comprehensive information about the structure of these communities must be attained by suitable design improvisation in order to understand the biological developments that are taking place inside them (Dong and Reddy 2010). It is observed that the rhizosphere region of the CWMs is capable of providing unique add-on sites for microbial connection and release root exudates and oxygen which helps in estimating the role of the microbial cosmos (Zhang et al. 2016; Lv et al. 2017). Different design and operational parameters undertaken to treat various wastewater in several countries are presented in Table 3.
Removal of organics
Biodegradation of organics takes place by both aerobic as well as anaerobic microorganisms depending upon the availability of oxygen. For aerobic degradation, oxygen can be added from convection, atmospheric dispersal and through root organization of macrophytes (Cooper et al. 1996), while pores of supporting media are sites responsible for anaerobic biodegradation. Settleable organics are removed rapidly under gravitational forces by filtration and sedimentation whereas soluble organics are removed by attached or suspended microbial growth. Degradation of organics by aerobic processes mainly proceeds by aerobic chemoheterotrophs because they have a faster metabolic rate as compared to chemoautotrophs. These chemoheterotrophic bacteria oxidize organic compounds using oxygen and release carbon dioxide (CO2), ammonia (NH3), and other stable compounds (Garcia et al. 2010). Sufficient supply of oxygen greatly enhances degradation of organic matter by increasing biochemical oxidation (Vymazal and Kropfelova 2009). Anaerobic degradation of organic matter by anaerobic heterotrophic bacteria involves two processes namely methanogenesis and fermentation. In methanogenesis, methanogens (methane-producing bacteria) convert organic compounds into methane (CH4) and CO2 and produce new bacterial cells whereas fermentation utilizes acid-forming bacteria to convert organic matter into organic acids and alcohols. These two processes continue in anaerobic zone of wetland system (Kadlec and Knight 1996).
Removal of nitrogen
The contribution of macrophytes in terms of nitrogen removal varies among several species such as Typha latifolia contributing 1.73 to 8.81%, Canna indica 0.98 to 17.95%, and for Phragmites australis, it ranges from 7.15 to 17.04% (Jesus et al. 2018). In CWMs, the different macrophytes offer oxygen and surface which is necessary for the development of microbes in the root zone, consequently enhancing nitrification. In addition, there is supply of carbon from root system (5–25%, fixed photosynthetically) and optimization of denitrification process (Wang et al. 2012). Wastewater stream has typically inorganic and/or organic form of nitrogen (Stefanakis et al. 2014). Major nitrogen elimination pathways which are engaged with CWMs are classified into two broad categories—novel (new) and classical (traditional) nitrogen removal pathways (Saeed and Sun 2012). Traditional nitrogen removal pathways in CWMs include ammonification, ammonia volatilization, nitrification, denitrification, and adsorption. In the CWM system, ammonification is more in the upper aerobic facultative zone as compared to the bottom obligate anaerobic zone. Both ammonification and ammonia volatilization are pH-dependent process. The suggested pH value to get good results from ammonification ranges from 6.5–8.5 (Saeed and Sun 2012), while a notable rise in pH (> 9.3) converts ammonium ions into ammonia gas (Bialowiec et al. 2011). Adsorption takes place mostly in the form of ammonia into the supporting media (Tsihrintzis 2017) which is used to encourage cation exchange capacity. Supporting media with greater cation exchange capacity has been employed due to their enhanced nitrogen removal efficiency (Saeed and Sun 2012). Biochar is a potential material which supports the denitrification process and removal of NO3− by providing organic carbon source. A short description of novel nitrogen removal pathways is provided below:
Novel nitrogen removal pathways
Recently, some new and more efficient nitrogen exclusion routes are pointed out which comprises of partial nitrification-denitrification, anaerobic ammonium oxidation (Anammox), and completely autotrophic nitrite removal (Canon). The main operating factors of partial nitrification processes (i.e., Anammox and Canon) include temperature, pH, free ammonia, free nitrous acid, HRT, dissolved oxygen, salt, organic compounds, and hydroxylamine (Wang and Yang 2004; Lee et al. 2009). They are described briefly in the following section.
Partial nitrification-denitrification
This process involves translation of NH4–N to NO2–N which is called nitrification (Eq. 1) after that the denitrification of NO2–N to N2 gas (Eq. 2) takes place.
Jianlong and Ning (2004) reported that this process needs approximately 40% and 25% lower organics and oxygen respectively, as compared to other available nitrogen removal methods.
Anammox
Oxidation of ammonium anaerobically (anammox) is a recently revealed nitrogen removal pathway in which ammonium changes into nitrogen gas with the assistance of Planctomycetes bacterial group under anaerobic environment. The anammox process is more advantageous than another treatment system as it requires external carbon in negligible amount. Further, oxygen and energy requirements are also very low and nitrogen is removed at greater speed (Saeed and Sun 2012).
Canon
Removal of nitrite over nitrate in the complete autotrophic way involves the anammox process and partial nitrification simultaneously; together, these processes remove all available total nitrogen (TN) in a particular region. There is a mutual co-existence between anammox bacteria and ammonium oxidizing bacteria. Sun and Austin (2007) reported that the canon process in a vertical flow constructed wetlands (VFCWs) removed a significant amount of nitrogen (approximately 52%).
Removal of Total phosphate (TP)
A mixture of inert and natural phosphate is available in the wastewater stream, out of which, the most common is orthophosphates (PO43−). The performance of CWMs is reduced due to low phosphorus removal efficiency. The treatment efficiency of CWMs towards phosphate depends on the prevailing ecological situations, type and the number of macrophytes, available form of phosphate, and the loading rates (USEPA 2000). The contribution of macrophytes in removal of phosphate ranges from 4.8 to 74.87% (Jesus et al. 2018). Various macrophytes possess different plant uptake capacity such as Typha latifolia contributing 0.06 up to 74.87%, for Canna indica, 0.43 to 4.17%, and for Phragmites australis, it ranges from 0.56 to 36.7% (Jesus et al. 2018). It is pointed out that the higher water depth with reduced flow velocity advances the removal rate (Guo et al. 2017). Phosphate removal is regulated by immobilization by microorganisms, the adherence capability of a range of filter media used in different seasons, temperature, and growth periods. Dissolved state of phosphorus is taken up by macrophytes or adhered to the substrates when the cations such as Fe, Al, Mg, and Ca are present in excess. The process starts by ligand exchange reactions. Phosphate allocates H2O and OH− ions on the face of iron oxides and aluminum. However, the rate of deletion typically decreases unless an appropriate adsorbent matter is incorporated in the system (Vymazal 2010). Removal of phosphorus through various supporting media is ranging between 40 and 60%. Currently, a number of specialized media materials are used in CWMs to attain enhanced removal performance such as slag (Okochi and McMartin 2011), basic oxygen furnace slag (BOFS), sandstone, zeolite, dolomite bauxite (Stefanakis et al. 2014), and electric arc furnace (EAF) (Barca et al. 2014). It is reported that biochar has huge potential to enhance phosphorus removal by providing maximum adherence sites. Inorganic, organic, dissolved, and insoluble phosphate is not as such taken up by macrophytes until they are transformed into a simple soluble form (Choudhary et al. 2011). It has been observed that magnesium (Mg)-containing materials such as magnesia and magnesite, in the supporting media improves TP removal performance (Lan et al. 2018). In terms of plant uptake, macrophytes have lower phosphorus uptake capacity compared to nitrogen because
-
a.
Under aerobic setting, unsolvable phosphate is precipitated with Fe, Ca, and Al ions.
-
b.
Organic peat, clay, and Fe and Al hydroxides and oxides have participated in phosphate adsorption.
-
c.
Phosphorus is bound up in organic matter through assimilation by bacteria, algae, and macrophytes.
A number of man-made substrates such as zirconium oxide nanoparticle (ZON), magnetic iron oxide nanoparticle (MION), and iron oxide coated granular activated carbon (Fe-GAC) have been identified with improved adsorption capability. Because of high-cost involvement, discharge of secondary contaminants, and complications in manufacturing processes, the use of these materials is limited in full-scale treatment systems (Park et al. 2017). As a result, the selection of right filter media with better adsorption ability is crucial for better performance.
Removal of heavy metals
Wastewater which is contaminated with trace metals has the great impact on biosphere; therefore, the remediation of these trace metals is essential. The presences of such metals greatly affect the flora and fauna of an aquatic system (Parnian et al. 2016). Remediation of wastewater polluted with heavy metals implies various technologies in which adsorption, reverse-osmosis, electrodialysis, and ion exchange are more common. Almost all of such technologies are expensive, energy-intensive, and generally metals-specific. However, macrophytes in the CWMs are known to have the huge potential towards trace metals buildup in their tissues (Mishra and Tripathi 2008). Removal of metals from domestic wastewater through CWMs involves mainly filtration, sedimentation, adsorption, cation exchange, precipitation, complexation, macrophyte uptake, and microbial oxidation/reduction processes. Several biotic, abiotic, and environmental factors like pH and temperature in the CWMs have direct consequences on bioaccumulation of trace metals (Xing et al. 2013). Removal of heavy metals in CWs using aquatic macrophytes by different studies has been shown in Table 4.
Sustainability of CWMs
A sustainable design of CWMs for domestic wastewater treatment includes the suitable design of CWMs at proper site with efficient macrophytes and supporting media. Design in a way that it acquires the natural features of the surroundings and to diminish its disturbance. The working model is set by the prevailing landscape, geology, and availability of land. Supply of additional oxygen is via artificial aeration, water depth, optimization of HLR and HRT, bioaugmentation of specific microorganisms, proper plant harvesting; reuse/recycling methods, and the addition of extra organic matters (Fig. 3) (Kadlec and Wallace 2009). Recently, the recirculation of effluent within the CWM system attains huge potential towards enhancement of removal performance through sufficient settling time. The removal performance of CWMs declines considerably when the environmental parameters such as water temperature, pH, and DO are not properly managed (Kadlec and Wallace 2008).
Future concerns and challenges
Firstly, optimization of hydraulics, selection of appropriate macrophytic species and supportive media, mode of operation, and pollutant loading rate are important factors to gain higher removal efficiencies. Suitable plant harvest techniques are vital because when they die and decay, leave nutrients and several other contaminants into the water body. In future research, there is a need to develop techniques to improve treatment efficiencies which could be achieved by microbial augmentation, artificial aeration, a range of supporting media, and supply of additional carbon, tidal action, step feeding, baffled flow, and mixed systems (Wu et al. 2015). CWMs are land intensive, requiring large land area and prone to seasonal weather conditions. Therefore, suitable design improvisation could be done to reduce the overall land requirements. This is also reported by various researchers that the CWMs are by nature prime mosquito habitat. This challenge could be tackled by conserving natural enemies (invertebrates) such as dragonflies, damselflies, beetles, predatory flatworms, true bugs, and crustaceans such as copepods, tadpole shrimp. Fishes, amphibians, spiders, bats, and microbial larvicide Bacillus thuringensis var. israelensis (Bti) are also used to control mosquitoes’ larvae (Mazzacano and Black 2013).
Conclusion
CWMs can be designed as biofilters to imitate the features of natural wetlands for removing nutrients, and other contaminants from the wastewater streams. The focus of this review paper has been on evaluation of treatment performance of CWMs treating domestic wastewater. Both ecological factors such as temperature, pH, DO, and working parameters such as availability of carbon, HLR, HRT, pollutant loads, recirculation, C/N ratios, plant harvesting techniques, addition of extra organic matter, and bioaugmentation of specific microorganisms are vital to achieving sustainable contaminant removal efficiency. Supply of additional oxygen via artificial aeration (mainly intermittent) and effluent recirculation greatly enhances the removal efficiency for organics and nutrients. Novel nitrogen removal pathways have greatly enhanced the nitrogen removal. The removal efficiency increased at influent C/N ratio between 1 and 3 and decreased significantly at the increasing C/N ratios between 3 and 15. The contribution of macrophytes in terms of nitrogen removal varies from 0.98 to 93% and for phosphate ranges from 4.8 to 74.87% depending upon area of the root surface and root oxidizing capacity. Removal of phosphate mostly occurs by adsorption and its efficiency is usually low until a suitable supporting media is not incorporated. Biochar has great potential to support denitrification rate and NO3–N removal by providing carbon source and also enhance phosphorus removal. Typically, the removal of phosphorus from a variety of supportive media ranged from 40 to 60%. Removal of heavy metals from wastewater implies various technologies such as ion exchange, electrodialysis, adsorption, and reverse-osmosis. Almost all these technologies are expensive metals-specific and energy-intensive. However, macrophytes are known to have huge potential towards trace metals buildup in their tissues.
References
Abou-Elela SI, Elekhnawy MA, Khalil MT, Hellal MS (2017) Factors affecting the performance of horizontal flow constructed treatment wetland vegetated with Cyperus papyrus for municipal wastewater treatment. In J Phyto 19(11):1023–1028
Adrados B, Sanchez O, Arias CA, Becares E, Garrido L, Mas J, Brix H, Morato J (2014) Microbial communities from different types of natural wastewater treatment systems: vertical and horizontal flow constructed wetlands and biofilters. Water Res 55:304–312
Almuktar SA, Abed SN, Scholz M (2018) Wetlands for wastewater treatment and subsequent recycling of treated effluent: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(24):23595–23623
Avila C, Matamoros V, Reyes-Contreras C, Piña B, Casado M, Mita L, Bayona JM (2014) Attenuation of emerging organic contaminants in a hybrid constructed wetland system under different hydraulic loading rates and their associated toxicological effects in wastewater. Sci Total Environ 470:1272–1280
Avila C, Pelissari C, Sezerino PH, Sgroi M, Roccaro P, García J (2017) Enhancement of total nitrogen removal through effluent recirculation and fate of PPCPs in a hybrid constructed wetland system treating urban wastewater. Sci Total Environ 584:414–425
Babatunde AO, Zhao YQ, Zhao XH (2010) Alum sludge-based constructed wetland system for enhanced removal of P and OM from wastewater: concept, design and performance analysis. Bioresour Technol 101(16):6576–6579
Barca C, Meyer D, Liira M, Drissen P, Comeau Y, Andrès Y, Chazarenc F (2014) Steel slag filters to upgrade phosphorus removal in small wastewater treatment plants: removal mechanisms and performance. Ecol Eng 68:214–222
Bialowiec A, Janczukowicz W, Randerson PF (2011) Nitrogen removal from wastewater in vertical flow constructed wetlands containing LWA/gravel layers and reed vegetation. Ecol Eng 37(6):897–902
Bohórquez E, Paredes D, Arias CA (2016) Vertical flow-constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment under tropical conditions: effect of different design and operational parameters. Environ Technol 38(2):199–208
Bruch I, Fritsche J, Banninger D, Alewell U, Sendelov M, Hurlimann H, Alewell C (2011) Improving the treatment efficiency of constructed wetlands with zeolite - containing filter sands. Bioresour Technol 102(2):937–941
Butterworth E, Richards A, Jones M, Mansi G, Ranieri E, Dotro G, Jefferson B (2016) Performance of four full-scale artificially aerated horizontal flow constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment. Water 8(9):365
Calheiros CS, Rangel AO, Castro PM (2008) Evaluation of different substrates to support the growth of Typha latifolia in constructed wetlands treating tannery wastewater over long-term operation. Bioresour Technol 99(15):6866–6877
Calheiros CS, Duque AF, Moura A, Henriques IS, Correia A, Rangel AO, Castro PM (2009) Substrate effect on bacterial communities from constructed wetlands planted with Typha latifolia treating industrial wastewater. Ecol Eng 35(5):744–753
Cao W, Zhang Y (2014) Removal of nitrogen (N) from hypereutrophic waters by ecological floating beds (EFBs) with various substrates. Ecol Eng 62:148–152
Caselles-Osorio A, Vega H, Lancheros JC, Casierra-Martínez HA, Mosquera JE (2017) Horizontal subsurface-flow constructed wetland removal efficiency using Cyperus articulatus L. Ecol Eng 99:479–485
Casierra-Martínez HA, Charris-Olmos JC, Caselles-Osorio A, Parody-Munoz AE (2017) Organic matter and nutrients removal in tropical constructed wetlands using Cyperus ligularis (Cyperaceae) and Echinocloa colona (Poaceae). Water Air Soil Pollut 228(9):338
Chong HLH, Chia PS, Ahmad MN (2013) The adsorption of heavy metal by Bornean oil palm shell and its potential application as constructed wetland media. Bioresour Technol 130:181–186
Choudhary AK, Kumar S, Sharma C (2011) Constructed wetlands: an approach for wastewater treatment. Elixir Pollut 37(8):3666–3672
Cooper PF, Job GD, Green MB (1996) Reed beds and constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Water Res Cen 6(7):49
Dong X, Reddy GB (2010) Soil bacterial communities in constructed wetlands treated with swine wastewater using PCR-DGGE technique. Bioresour Technol 101(4):1175–1182
Dzakpasu M, Scholz M, McCarthy V, Jordan SN (2015) Assessment of long-term phosphorus retention in an integrated constructed wetland treating domestic wastewater. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(1):305–313
Elfanssi S, Ouazzani N, Latrach L, Hejjaj A, Mandi L (2017) Phytoremediation of domestic wastewater using a hybrid constructed wetlands in the mountainous rural area. In J Phyto 20(1):75–87
Faulwetter JL, Gagnon V, Sundberg C, Chazarenc F, Burr MD, Brisson J, Stein OR (2009) Microbial processes influencing performance of treatment wetlands: a review. Ecol Eng 35(6):987–1004
Fountoulakis MS, Daskalakis G, Papadaki A, Kalogerakis N, Manios T (2017a) Use of halophytes in pilot-scale horizontal flow constructed wetland treating domestic wastewater. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(20):16682–16689
Fountoulakis MS, Sabathianakis G, Kritsotakis I, Kabourakis EM, Manios T (2017b) Halophytes as vertical-flow constructed wetland vegetation for domestic wastewater treatment. Sci Total Environ 583:432–439
Garcia J, Rousseau DP, Morato J, Lesage ELS, Matamoros V, Bayona JM (2010) Contaminant removal processes in subsurface-flow constructed wetlands: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 40(7):561–661
Ge Y, Wang X, Zheng Y, Dzakpasu M, Zhao Y, Xiong J (2015) Functions of slags and gravels as substrates in large-scale demonstration constructed wetland systems for polluted river water treatment. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(17):12982–12991
Geng Y, Han W, Yu C, Jiang Q, Wu J, Chang J, Ge Y (2017) Effects of plant diversity on phosphorus removal in hydroponic microcosms simulating floating constructed wetlands. Ecol Eng 107:110–119
Gill LW, Ring P, Casey B, Higgins NM, Johnston PM (2017) Long term heavy metal removal by a constructed wetland treating rainfall runoff from a motorway. Sci Total Environ 601:32–44
Guo C, Cui Y, Dong B, Luo Y, Liu F, Zhao S, Wu H (2017) Test study of the optimal design for hydraulic performance and treatment performance of free water surface flow constructed wetland. Bioresour Technol 238:461–471
Haynes RJ (2015) Use of industrial wastes as media in constructed wetlands and filter beds—prospects for removal of phosphate and metals from wastewater streams. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 45(10):1041–1103
He Y, Peng L, Hua Y, Zhao J, Xiao N (2018) Treatment for domestic wastewater from university dorms using a hybrid constructed wetland at pilot scale. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(9):8532–8541
Ilyas H, Masih I (2017) Intensification of constructed wetlands for land area reduction: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(13):12081–12091
Jesus JM, Danko AS, Fiuza A, Borges MT (2018) Effect of plants in constructed wetlands for organic carbonand nutrient removal: a review of experimental factors contributing to higher impact and suggestions for future guidelines. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(5):4149–4164
Jianlong W, Ning Y (2004) Partial nitrification under limited dissolved oxygen conditions. Process Biochem 39(10):1223–1229
Kadlec RH, Knight RL (1996) Treatment wetlands. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton
Kadlec RH, Wallace S (2008) Treatment wetlands. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Kadlec RH, Wallace SD (2009) Treatment wetlands, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Krasnits E, Friedler E, Sabbah I, Beliavski M, Tarre S, Green M (2009) Spatial distribution of major microbial groups in a well-established constructed wetland treating municipal wastewater. Ecol Eng 35(7):1085–1089
Kropfelova L, Vymazal J, Svehla J (2009) Removal of trace elements in three horizontal sub-surface flow constructed wetlands in the Czech Republic. Environ Pollut 157(4):1186–1194
Kumar S, Dutta V (2019) Efficiency of constructed wetland microcosms (CWMs) for the treatment of domestic wastewater using aquatic macrophytes. In: Environmental Biotechnology: for sustainable future. Springer, Singapore, pp 287–307
Kumari M, Tripathi BD (2014) Effect of aeration and mixed culture of Eichhornia crassipes and Salvinia natans on removal of wastewater pollutants. Ecol Eng 62:48–53
Kumwimba MN, Zhu B, Muyembe DK, Dzakpasu M (2017) Growth characteristics and nutrient removal capability of eco-ditch plants in mesocosm sediment receiving primary domestic wastewater. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(30):23926–23938
Lan W, Zhang J, Hu Z, Ji M, Zhang X, Zhang J, Li F, Yao G (2018) Phosphorus removal enhancement of magnesium modified constructed wetland microcosm and its mechanism study. J Chem Eng 335:209–214
Lee CG, Fletcher TD, Sun G (2009) Nitrogen removal in constructed wetland systems. Eng Life Sci 9(1):11–22
Lesage E, Rousseau DPL, Meers E (2007) Accumulation of metals in a horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland treating domestic wastewater in Flanders, Belgium. Sci Total Environ 380(1–3):102–115
Li M, Wu H, Zhang J, Ngo HH, Guo W, Kong Q (2017) Nitrogen removal and nitrous oxide emission in surface flow constructed wetlands for treating sewage treatment plant effluent: Effect of C/N ratios. Bioresour Technol 240:157–164
Lima LKS, Pelosi BT, Silva MGC, Vieira MGA (2013) Lead and chromium biosorption by Pistia stratiotes biomass. Chem Eng Transact 32:1045–1050
Lima MX, Carvalho KQ, Passig FH, Borges AC, Filippe TC, Azevedo JCR, Nagalli A (2018) Performance of different substrates in constructed wetlands planted with E. crassipes treating low-strength sewage under subtropical conditions. Sci Total Environ 630:1365–1373
Liu R, Zhao Y, Doherty L, Hu Y, Hao X (2015) A review of incorporation of constructed wetland with other treatment processes. J Chem Eng 279:220–230
Lv T, Zhang Y, Carvalho PN, Zhang L, Button M, Arias CA, Brix H (2017) Microbial community metabolic function in constructed wetland mesocosms treating the pesticides imazalil and tebuconazole. Ecol Eng 98:378–387
Mazzacano C, Black SH (2013) Ecologically sound mosquito management in wetlands. An overview of mosquito control practices, the risks, benefits, and nontarget impacts, and recommendations on effective practices that control mosquitoes, reduce pesticide use, and protect wetlands. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, Oregon
Meng P, Pei H, Hu W, Shao Y, Li Z (2014) How to increase microbial degradation in constructed wetlands: influencing factors and improvement measures. Bioresour Technol 157:316–326
Mishra VK, Tripathi BD (2008) Concurrent removal and accumulation of heavy metals by three aquatic macrophytes. Bioresour Technol 99(15):7091–7097
Ojoawo SO, Udayakumar G, Naik P (2015) Phytoremediation of phosphorus and nitrogen with Canna x generalis reeds in domestic wastewater through NMAMIT constructed wetland. Aquat Procedia 4:349–356
Okochi NC, McMartin DW (2011) Laboratory investigations of storm water remediation via slag: effects of metals on phosphorus removal. J Hazard Mater 187(1–3):250–257
Park JH, Wang JJ, Kim SH, Cho JS, Kang SW, Delaune RD, Seo DC (2017) Phosphate removal in constructed wetland with rapid cooled basic oxygen furnace slag. J Chem Eng 327:713–724
Parnian A, Chorom M, Jaafarzadeh N, Dinarvand M (2016) Use of two aquatic macrophytes for the removal of heavy metals from synthetic medium. Ecohydrol Hydrobiol 16(3):194–200
Pedescoll A, Sidrach-Cardona R, Hijosa-Valsero M (2015) Design parameters affecting metals removal in horizontal constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment. Ecol Eng 80:92–99
Qasaimeh A, Alsharie H, Masoud T (2015) A review on constructed wetlands components and heavy metal removal from wastewater. J Environ Prot 6(07):710
Rai UN, Upadhyay AK, Singh NK, Dwivedi S, Tripathi RD (2015) Seasonal applicability of horizontal sub-surface flow constructed wetland for trace elements and nutrient removal from urban wastes to conserve Ganga River water quality at Haridwar, India. Ecol Eng 81:115–122
Ren Y, Zhang B, Liu Z, Wang J (2007) Optimization of four kinds of constructed wetlands, substrate combination treating domestic sewage. Wuhan Univ J Natural Sci 12(6):1136–1142
Ren Y, Liu Y, Sun J, Lu H, Yang L, Chen C, Han Y (2016) Lolium perenne as the cultivation plant in hydroponic ditch and constructed wetland to improve wastewater treatment efficiency in a cold region. Wetlands 36(4):659–665
Rozema ER, Rozema LR, Zheng Y (2016) A vertical flow constructed wetland for the treatment of winery process water and domestic sewage in Ontario, Canada: six years of performance data. Ecol Eng 86:262–268
Saeed T, Sun G (2012) A review of nitrogen and organics removal mechanisms in subsurface flow constructed wetlands: dependency on environmental parameters, operating conditions, and supporting media. J Environ Manag 112:429–448
Saeed T, Sun G (2013) A lab-scale study of constructed wetlands with sugarcane bagasse and sand media for the treatment of textile wastewater. Bioresour Technol 128:438–447
Sleytr K, Tietz A, Langergraber G, Haberl R, Sessitsch A (2009) Diversity of abundant bacteria in subsurface vertical flow constructed wetlands. Ecol Eng 35(6):1021–1025
Stefanakis A, Akratos CS, Tsihrintzis VA (2014) Vertical flow constructed wetlands: eco-engineering systems for wastewater and sludge treatment. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam
Sudarsan JS, Roy RL, Baskar G, Deeptha VT, Nithiyanantham S (2015) Domestic wastewater treatment performance using constructed wetland. Sustain Water Res Manage 1(2):89–96
Sun G, Austin D (2007) Completely autotrophic nitrogen removal over nitrite in lab scale constructed wetlands: evidence from a mass balance study. Chemosphere 68(6):1120–1128
Tangahu BV, Abdullah SRS, Basri H, Idris M, Anuar N, Mukhlisin M (2013) Phytoremediation of wastewater containing lead (Pb) in pilot reed bed using Scirpus grossus. Inter J Phyto 15(7):663–676
Tao W, Wang J (2009) Effect of vegetation, limestone, and aeration on nitritation, anammox and denitrification in wetland treatment systems. Ecol Eng 35(5):836–842
Tilak AS, Wani SP, Datta A, Patil MD, Kaushal M, Reddy KR (2017) Evaluation of Ageratum conyzoides in field scale constructed wetlands (CWs) for domestic wastewater treatment. Water Sci Technol 75(10):2268–2280
Tsihrintzis VA (2017) The use of vertical flow constructed wetlands in wastewater treatment. Water Resour Manag 31(10):3245–3270
US Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA (2000) Constructed Wetlands treatment of municipal wastewaters. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio
Vymazal J (2010) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Water Res 2(3):530–549
Vymazal J (2013) Emergent plants used in free water surface constructed wetlands: a review. Ecol Eng 61:582–592
Vymazal J, Kropfelova L (2009) Removal of organics in constructed wetlands with the horizontal sub-surface flow: a review of the field experience. Sci Total Environ 407(13):3911–3922
Wang CY, Sample DJ (2013) Assessing floating treatment wetlands nutrient removal performance through a first order kinetics model and statistical inference. Ecol Eng 61:292–302
Wang J, Yang N (2004) Partial nitrification under limited dissolved oxygen conditions. Process Biochem 39:1223–1229
Wang R, Korboulewsky N, Prudent P, Domeizel M, Rolando C, Bonin G (2010) Feasibility of using an organic substrate in a wetland system treating sewage sludge: impact of plant species. Bioresour Technol 101(1):51–57
Wang R, Baldy V, Périssol C, Korboulewsky N (2012) Influence of plants on microbial activity in a vertical-down flow wetland system treating waste activated sludge with high organic matter concentrations. J Environ Manag 95:S158–S164
Wang M, Zhang D, Dong J, Tan SK (2018) Application of constructed wetlands for treating agricultural runoff and agro-industrial wastewater: a review. Hydrobiologia 805(1):1–31
Wu H, Zhang J, Ngo HH, Guo W, Hu Z, Liang S, Liu H (2015) A review on the sustainability of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: design and operation. Bioresour Technol 175:594–601
Wu H, Lin L, Zhang J, Guo W, Liang S, Liu H (2016) Purification ability and carbon dioxide flux from surface flow constructed wetlands treating sewage treatment plant effluent. Bioresour Technol 219:768–772
Wu H, Fan J, Zhang J, Ngo HH, Guo W (2017) Large-scale multi-stage constructed wetlands for secondary effluents treatment in northern China: carbon dynamics. Environ Pollut 233:933–942
Xing W, Wu H, Hao B, Huang W, Liu G (2013) Bioaccumulation of heavy metals by submerged macrophytes: looking for hyper accumulators in eutrophic lakes. Environ Sci Technol 47(9):4695–4703
Xu D, Xu J, Wu J, Muhammad A (2006) Studies on the phosphorus sorption capacity of substrates used in constructed wetland systems. Chemosphere 63(2):344–352
Yadav AK, Kumar N, Sreekrishnan TR, Satya S, Bishnoi NR (2010) Removal of chromium and nickel from aqueous solution in a constructed wetland: mass balance, adsorption–desorption and FTIR study. J Chem Eng 160(1):122–128
Yahiaoui K, Zoubeidi A, Rouahna N, Ouakouak A (2018) Study of domestic wastewater treatment by macrophyte plant in Arid Region of South-east Algeria (case of el oued region). J Fundam App Sci 10(2)
Yan Y, Xu J (2014) Improving winter performance of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in northern China: a review. Wetlands 34(2):243–253
Zhang CB, Wang J, Liu WL, Zhu SX, Ge HL, Chang SX, Ge Y (2010) Effects of plant diversity on microbial biomass and community metabolic profiles in a full-scale constructed wetland. Ecol Eng 36(1):62–68
Zhang T, Xu D, He F, Zhang Y, Wu Z (2012) Application of constructed wetland for water pollution control in China during 1990–2010. Ecol Eng 47:189–197
Zhang DQ, Jinadasa KBSN, Gersberg RM, Liu Y, Ng WJ, Tan SK (2014) Application of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in developing countries–a review of recent developments (2000–2013). J Environ Manag 141:116–131
Zhang Y, Carvalho PN, Lv T, Arias C, Brix H, Chen Z (2016) Microbial density and diversity in constructed wetland systems and the relation to pollutant removal efficiency. Water Sci Technol 73(3):679–686
Zhao Z, Chang J, Han W, Wang M, Ma D, Du Y, Ge Y (2016) Effect of plant diversity and sand particle size on methane emission and nitrogen removal in microcosms of constructed wetlands. Ecol Eng 95:390–398
Zuo M, Renman G, Gustafsson JP, Klysubun W (2018) Dual slag filters for enhanced phosphorus removal from domestic waste water: performance and mechanisms. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(8):7391–7400
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge laboratory support extended from Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University (A Central University), Lucknow, throughout this study.
Funding
This work received financial support in terms of research fellowship (UGC Ref. no. 3525/SC/NET-JULY 2016) to the first author from University Grants Commission, New Delhi.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kumar, S., Dutta, V. Constructed wetland microcosms as sustainable technology for domestic wastewater treatment: an overview. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26, 11662–11673 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04816-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04816-9