2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simultaneous nitrification, denitrification and phosphorus removal in aerobic granular sequencing batch reactors with high aeration intensity: Impact of aeration time

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
17
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
3
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…During the last month of operations (days 487-522), the reactor worked under pseudo-stationary conditions and the nitrogen removal efficiency was 71 ± 6% (effluent nitrogen concentrations: 8.6 ± 2.0 mgTIN/L and 9.8 ± 2.2 mgTN/L). The nitrogen removal registered in the present study is comparable with other literature results for higher C/N wastewater treatment with AGS (68 -71% obtained by Chen et al (2011) with C/N = 10; 64 -86% obtained by He et al (2018) with C/ N = 9.7). Thus, considering the very low C/N of the treated wastewater (2.8 ± 1.3 g bCOD/gTN during Stage I, and 3.8 ± 1.6 g bCOD/gTN during Stage II), the obtained results are noteworthy, compared with the reference literature (Derlon et al, 2016;Lochmatter et al, 2014;Pronk et al, 2015a).…”
Section: Nitrogen Removalsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…During the last month of operations (days 487-522), the reactor worked under pseudo-stationary conditions and the nitrogen removal efficiency was 71 ± 6% (effluent nitrogen concentrations: 8.6 ± 2.0 mgTIN/L and 9.8 ± 2.2 mgTN/L). The nitrogen removal registered in the present study is comparable with other literature results for higher C/N wastewater treatment with AGS (68 -71% obtained by Chen et al (2011) with C/N = 10; 64 -86% obtained by He et al (2018) with C/ N = 9.7). Thus, considering the very low C/N of the treated wastewater (2.8 ± 1.3 g bCOD/gTN during Stage I, and 3.8 ± 1.6 g bCOD/gTN during Stage II), the obtained results are noteworthy, compared with the reference literature (Derlon et al, 2016;Lochmatter et al, 2014;Pronk et al, 2015a).…”
Section: Nitrogen Removalsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…4B), indicating that the species richness was improved by the addition of external carbon source. The peaks (5.58, 0.039) occurred with the mixture of HAc and HPr on Day 80, suggesting the highest relative abundances of bacterial community (He et al, 2018). However, Shannon (4.59) and Simpson indexes (0.032) unexpectedly fell down with more HPr on Day 120, implying that HPr was not a suitable carbon source for DPR in terms of bacterial richness, which was in accordance with the poor nutrient metabolism performance (Fig.…”
Section: Effect Of Carbon Source On the Microbial Structure Communitymentioning
confidence: 80%
“…Combining with the microbial diversity (Fig. 4A-B), the results showed that more disparate microbial distributions were shared under the mixture of HAc and HPr, which had been proved that mixed carbon source decidedly shaped the bacterial community (He et al, 2018).…”
Section: Effect Of Carbon Source On the Microbial Structure Communitymentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Even in some cases, the development of cyanobacteria was resistant to the allelopathic secreted substances from the macrophytes [49]. A long-term and stable partial nitrification could be achieved in the intermittent aeration [50,51]. Besides, the suitable relatively calm state for cyanobacteria was disturbed by the aeration, resulting in the higher removal rate obtained in tank B with aeration than that in tank A without aeration (Figure 4).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%