Environmental pressure, land utilization, and economic feasibility have resulted in the development of alternatives to treatment fish farm wastewater. We examined the influence of two water treatment systems—a constr...Environmental pressure, land utilization, and economic feasibility have resulted in the development of alternatives to treatment fish farm wastewater. We examined the influence of two water treatment systems—a constructed wetland (CW) and a soil filter system (SF)—on the constitution of the phytoplankton community analyzed through the functional grouping of species and nutrients removal of aquaculture farm. The CW provided high removal efficiency: 82.9% for ammonia, 87.0% for nitrate, 96.9% for nitrite, 85.5% for total phosphorus, 88.5% for SRP and 71.6% for BOD. Removal efficiency of SF was lower than CW, removing 82.1% of ammonia, 7.2% of total phosphorus, 45.9% of SRP and 39.4% of nitrite, but was satisfactory. The functional group F, made up of Chlorophyceae Dictyosphaerium pulchellum and Kirchneriella lunaris, was the most representative in both systems, followed by functional group P and constituted by Zygnemaphyceae Melosira sp. The number of functional groups decreased in the outlet of the two treatment systems, where S1, H1 and W1, characteristic of eutrophic environment, were retained. Data show that CW and the SF system are potentially applicable to the fish farm wastewater treatment and ensure an improvement in water quality.展开更多
基金the“Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Level Personnel”(Capes)for scholarship and“Sao Paulo Research Foundation”(Fa-pesp)financial support(10/50478-6).
文摘Environmental pressure, land utilization, and economic feasibility have resulted in the development of alternatives to treatment fish farm wastewater. We examined the influence of two water treatment systems—a constructed wetland (CW) and a soil filter system (SF)—on the constitution of the phytoplankton community analyzed through the functional grouping of species and nutrients removal of aquaculture farm. The CW provided high removal efficiency: 82.9% for ammonia, 87.0% for nitrate, 96.9% for nitrite, 85.5% for total phosphorus, 88.5% for SRP and 71.6% for BOD. Removal efficiency of SF was lower than CW, removing 82.1% of ammonia, 7.2% of total phosphorus, 45.9% of SRP and 39.4% of nitrite, but was satisfactory. The functional group F, made up of Chlorophyceae Dictyosphaerium pulchellum and Kirchneriella lunaris, was the most representative in both systems, followed by functional group P and constituted by Zygnemaphyceae Melosira sp. The number of functional groups decreased in the outlet of the two treatment systems, where S1, H1 and W1, characteristic of eutrophic environment, were retained. Data show that CW and the SF system are potentially applicable to the fish farm wastewater treatment and ensure an improvement in water quality.
