JEQ Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in J Environ Qual 12:257-262 (1983)
© 1983 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by De Busk, T. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ryther, J. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by De Busk, T. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ryther, J. H.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by De Busk, T. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ryther, J. H.

Removal of Nitrogen and Phosphorus From Waste Water in a Waterhyacinth-Based Treatment System1

T. A. De Busk, L. D. Williams and J. H. Ryther2

ABSTRACT

The importance of waterhyacinth plant material (living and detrital) as a sink for nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) was evaluated in a waste water treatment system in south Florida. The treatment system consisted of four ponds (0.1 ha each) from which plants were harvested, and one pond (0.2 ha) from which plants were not harvested. Nitrogen and phosphorus were removed in the plant standing crop at higher rates in the harvested ponds (362 and 115 mg m–2 d–1, respectively) than in the non-harvested pond (55 and 15 mg m–2 d–1, respectively). However, immobilization of N and P as plant detritus in the sediment was less in the harvested ponds (3 and 1% of standing crop assimilation, respectively) than in the non-harvested pond (33 and 13% of standing crop assimilation). With the exception of N in the nonharvested pond, estimates of nutrient removal by the waterhyacinth standing crop and detritus from 4 May–4 Aug. 1981 were similar (within 35 mg N or P m–2 d–1) to the observed nutrient removal from the waste water. Denitrification accounted for 92% of the N removed from the non-harvested pond. On an areal basis, approximately 2.4 times more N was removed by denitrification in the non-harvested pond than was assimilated by waterhyacinth growth in the harvested ponds (875 vs. 362 mg N m–2 d–1).

Mean total N removal from the complete system resulted in an 87% reduction, from 9.96 to 1.25 mg/L. Total P was reduced only 10%, from 4.68 to 4.23 mg/L.

Key Words: macrophytes • nutrients • biological waste water treatment


NOTES

1 Contribution no. 312 from the Harbor Branch Foundation, Ft. Pierce, FL 33450.

2 Senior Biologist, University of Florida; Research Associate, Harbor Branch Foundation; and Professor, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.

Received for publication June 14, 1982.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Vadose Zone Journal Journal of Plant Registrations
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Copyright © 1983 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.