MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012395393 · doi:10.17660/ejhs.2020/85.1.1

Type of constructed wetlands influence nutrient removal and nitrous oxide emissions from greenhouse wastewater

2020· article· en· W3012395393 on OpenAlexafffund
Vicky Lévesque, Hani Antoun, Philippe Rochette, Martine Dorais

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Horticultural Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'AlimentationUniversité Laval
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsWastewaterEnvironmental scienceEffluentGreenhouseEnvironmental engineeringGreenhouse gasNitrous oxideConstructed wetlandTypha angustifoliaSewage treatmentWetlandEichhornia crassipesMacrophytePollutantAgronomyChemistryAquatic plantEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current study, three constructed wetlands (CWs) were tested as a sustainable method of treating highly ion charged greenhouse wastewater before disposal.Because of their anaerobic conditions, it was hypothesized that free water surface flow (FWS) and horizontal-subsurface flow (HSS) CWs would be more efficient at removing NO 3 -and SO 4 2-from greenhouse wastewater than the vertical-flow (VSS) CW, but that FWS and HSS would emit more greenhouse gases.To test this hypothesis and propose the most sustainable CW for the greenhouse industry, this study compared three types of CWs (FWS, HSS and VSS) for their nutrient removal performance and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions.The experiment was conducted in a greenhouse and consisted of 36 wetland units (12 replicates) of 0.8 m 3 operated with reconstituted greenhouse wastewater enriched with sucrose (C:N ratio of 2.9) at a 10-day hydraulic retention time, corresponding to the effluent loading rate coming from commercial greenhouse vegetable crops.The CWs were filled with water (FWS), gravel (HSS), or sand (VSS) and planted with Eichhornia crassipes (FWS) or Typha latifolia (HSS, VSS), two macrophytes largely used to treat wastewaters heavily loaded in nutriment.Results showed that HSS performed better than the FWS and VSS at reducing pollutants from the greenhouse wastewater, with 45% total N load removed.Although 59% of the NO 3 -N load was removed in the FWS and HSS, a high accumulation of NO 2 -(1.28 g N m -2 d -1 ) occurred in FWS.The removal of ammonium (NH 4 -N) (~26%) loadings was similar in all CWs.Only 4% of the SO 4 -S load was removed in the FWS and HSS, and no SO 4 -S reduction was observed in VSS.Mean cumulative N 2 O emissions were 7 and 59 times higher in FWS (1.59 g m -2 d -1 ) than in HSS and VSS, respectively.Although VSS emitted less N 2 O than the other CWs tested in this study, HSS was the best option in terms of reducing CO 2 emissions and nutrient pollutants from greenhouse wastewater before disposal.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Horticultural ScienceSame topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207