2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2006.06.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of variable hydroperiods and water level fluctuations on denitrification capacity, nitrate removal, and benthic-microbial community structure in constructed wetlands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
2

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
16
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, Serralves Lake also exhibited the lowest NO 3 removal efficiency, possibly because of lower NO 3 uptake by the dominant phytoplankton species. Although other researchers suggest that lower water retention time could also contribute to a better NO 3 removal (Ishida et al 2006), the opposite occurred in this study. Aslan and Kapdan (2006) suggested that a major reason for low nutrient removal efficiency, even under conditions of high nutrient concentrations, could be light limitation of phytoplankton growth because of excessive chlorophyll-a, which seems to be the situation for these study lakes.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 93%
“…Interestingly, Serralves Lake also exhibited the lowest NO 3 removal efficiency, possibly because of lower NO 3 uptake by the dominant phytoplankton species. Although other researchers suggest that lower water retention time could also contribute to a better NO 3 removal (Ishida et al 2006), the opposite occurred in this study. Aslan and Kapdan (2006) suggested that a major reason for low nutrient removal efficiency, even under conditions of high nutrient concentrations, could be light limitation of phytoplankton growth because of excessive chlorophyll-a, which seems to be the situation for these study lakes.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 93%
“…Gao et al (2009) also demonstrated that the net N mineralization is positively correlated with the water contents (WCs) in both mash and peat soils. Additionally, Ishidaa et al (2006) observed that the variable hydroperiods and water level fluctuations affect nitrate (NO 3 À ) removal. Many studies have focused on the N dynamics in agricultural catchments (Kulasova et al, 2012), freshwater wetlands (Edwards and Withers, 2008), lakeshore wetlands (Luna-Guido et al, 2000), shallow-flooded peat lands (Kieckbusch and Schrautzer, 2007) and coastal salt wetlands (McKinney et al, 2001;Çakir et al, 2010), but little information is available on the changes in the nitrogen contents along the soil profile in an inland salt marsh under various flooding conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides this, the water volume of a lake has direct relations with its water surface area and water depth. The water surface area determines the zone where sediment denitrification occurs and the water depth affects the zone available for reed growing in the lake (Ishida et al, 2006;Lawniczak et al, 2010). The influence mechanism of water release on the water quality restoration is complicated, so the influence of parameter variation on reed management regime has no obvious rule.…”
Section: Effect Of Parameter Simplificationmentioning
confidence: 99%