Вы здесь

Funct. Mater. 2017; 24 (4): 699-705.

doi:https://doi.org/10.15407/fm24.04.699

Study of biofilms based on filamentous bamboo for surface water bioremediation

Zhang Huifang1,2, Cao Wenping2, Sun Ling2, Liu Hanhu1

1 School of Environmental Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221000, China
2College of Environmental Engineering, Xuzhou Institute of Technology,Xuzhou,Jiangsu 221000, China

Abstract: 

Two kinds of fillers were chosen to explore surface water remediation with a sequencing batch biofilm reactor (SBBR). By comparing SBBR with the plastic filling reactor (PFR), which was considered as the control group, the effectiveness of a filamentous bamboo reactor (FBR) for removing organic substances, nitrogen and phosphorous as well as biomass changes. Experimental results suggested that in using a FBR the average removal rates of CODMn, TN, NH4+–N and NO3—N were 65.70%, 62.18%,48.55% and 65.29% respectively when their initial concentration were 8.81—9.53 mgL–1, 7.20—8.51 mgL–1, 2.71—3.62 mgL–1 and 4.13—5.22 mgL–1. In spite of remarkable advantages over PFR in removing CODMn, TN, NH4+–N and NO3—N, FBR was not quite effective for removing TP. The uses of bamboo filaments as carriers and carbon source, their high content of hydrophilic functional groups and abundant microbial facies were major reasons why FBR could remedy waters effectively.

Keywords: 
Bamboo Filament, SBBR, Ex–situ Remediation, Surface Water, Eutrophication
References: 

1. M.T. Dokulil, K.Teubner,Eutrophication: Causes, Consequences and Control [M]. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp.1–16, 2011.

2. L. Zhu, Z.Li, T.Ketola, Ecol. Eng., 37, 1460, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.03.010

3. H. Qin, Z. Zhang, M.Liu, H.Liu, Y.Wang, X.Wen, Y.Zhang and S.Yan, Ecol..Eng., 95, 753, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.07.022

4. H. Wu, J.Zhang, P.Li, Ecol. Eng., 37, 560, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2010.11.020

5. X. Zhou, U. Wang, J .Environ. Sci., 22, 1710, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(09)60310-7

6. A. Cristina, M.B. Josep, M.Isabel, J.Salas, J.Garcнa, Ecol..Eng., 80, 108, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.07.056

7. M. Rodgers, X. Zhan, Rev. Environ.Sci.Biotechn.,2, 213, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RESB.0000040467.78748.1e

8. W. Zhang, Y. Zhang, L.Yin, Acta Scient. Circumst., 37, 1787, 2017.

9. W. Cao, H. Zhang,Y. Wang and J.Pan,, Ecolog.Eng., 42, 146, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2012.02.018

10. CaoW., S.Tan, Chinese J. Environ. Eng., 4,1585, 2010.

11. C. Wang, J.Xi, H.Hu, Acta Sci. Circum Stunt., 27, 53, 2007.

12. L. Wang, B. Xi, L. Zhang, Environ. Pollut. Prev., 34, 29, 2012.

13. L. Xie, B.Cai, D. Yang, J. Tongji Univ. (Natural Science), 37, 224, 2009.

14. S.Yang, F.Yang, Z.Fu, Bioresour. Technol, 100, 2369, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.11.022

15. F.Zhao, S.Xia, X.Yang,W.Wang, J.Li, B.Gu, Z.He, Ecol. Eng. 40, 53, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.12.012

16. L.Su, J.Chen, W.Cao, Y.Song, J. Kunming Univ.Science and Technology (Sci, Techn.) 35, 93, 2010.

.

Current number: