The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of applying different carbon substrates on nutrient removal and greenhouse gas emissions by constructed wetlands treating carbon-depleted hydroponic wastewater
Abstract
The addition of external carbon sources is crucial for effective biological treatment of nutrient-rich but carbon-depleted hydroponic wastewater using constructed wetlands. In this study, we examined the effects of applying three types of carbon substrates, namely sucrose, hydroponic kale residues, and common reed litter, on the nutrient removal efficiency and greenhouse gas emission rate of vertical flow constructed wetlands. The addition of sucrose and common reed litter was shown to perform equally well in enhancing the removal of total nitrogen (84.9-93.5%), nitrate (98.3-99.8%) and phosphate (53.8-55.2%) as compared to the control. Moreover, the application of common reed litter led to significantly lower mean CH 4 and N 2 O emissions than that of kale residues. These findings suggested that Phragmites reed litter, which is easily found in wetlands worldwide, could be an effective, low-cost and climate-friendly carbon substrate to be applied in constructed wetlands for hydroponic wastewater treatment.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“At pilot scale, a cyanobacterial consortium maintained in a 1150 L outdoor tubular PBR for 130 consecutive days at pH 10.4–11.4 achieved areal productivities of 3.1–5.8 g m−2 d−1 while enabling direct atmospheric CO2 capture, demonstrating that high-pH alkaliphilic cultivation supports stable long-term outdoor production [49].”
From Cyanobacteria as a Photosynthetic Chassis for Metabolic Pathway Engineering with Heterologous Gene Expression (2026) · cites this paper as [49]
Citations
Cites
Weier, K. L., Doran, J. W., Power, J. F., & Walters, D. T. (1993) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1993.03615995005700010013x · Cited by 967
Şenbayram, M., Chen, R., Budai, A., Bakken, L. R., & Dittert, K. (2011) · Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2011.06.022 · Cited by 436
Greenhouse gas emission in constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: A review
Mander, Ü., Dotro, G., Ebie, Y., et al. (2014) · Ecological Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.12.006 · Cited by 334
Guo, S., Zhou, Y., Shen, Q., & Zhang, F. (2007) · Plant Biology · doi:10.1055/s-2006-924541 · Cited by 279
Zhou, X., Wang, X., Zhang, H., & Wu, H. (2017) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2017.05.072 · Cited by 233
Fan, J., Wang, W., Zhang, B., et al. (2013) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2013.06.038 · Cited by 221
Shen, Z., Zhou, Y., Hu, J., & Wang, J. (2013) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.02.026 · Cited by 179
Effect of carbon source on the denitrification in constructed wetlands
Lu, S.-L., Hu, H., Sun, Y., et al. (2009) · Journal of Environmental Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1001-0742(08)62379-7 · Cited by 178
The Utilisation of Reed ( Phragmites Australis ): A Review
Köbbing, J. F., Thevs, N., & Zerbe, S. (2013) · Mires and Peat · doi:10.19189/001c.129325 · Cited by 177
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Walshe, J., & Saha, S. K. (2026) · Current Issues in Molecular Biology · doi:10.3390/cimb48060638 · Cited by 1
“…maintained in a 1150 L outdoor tubular PBR for 130 consecutive days at pH 10.4–11.4 achieved areal productivities of 3.1–5.8 g m − 2 d − 1 while enabling direct atmospheric CO 2 capture, demonstrating that high-pH alkaliphilic cultivation supports stable long-term outdoor production [49].”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhou, T., Liu, J., Lie, Z., & Lai, D. Y. F.
- Affiliations
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Seoul National University (KR)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Lai, Derrick Y.F.
- Venue
- Bioresource Technology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-08
- Volume
- 357
- Pages
- 127312
- ISSN
- 0960-8524 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4280592540
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 5.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Bioresource Technology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Innovations in Aquaponics and Hydroponics Systems
- Keywords
- constructed wetlands, carbon substrates, nutrient removal, greenhouse gas emissions, methane, nitrous oxide, sucrose, vertical flow constructed wetlands, nitrogen removal, phosphate removal, nitrate removal
- MeSH terms
- Greenhouse Gases, Nutrients, Carbon, Methane, Nitrogen, Nitrous Oxide, Sucrose, Hydroponics, Wetlands, Wastewater
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
