Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 217

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Ammonium removal from wastewaters using natural New Zealand zeolites

Open access
Nguyen, M. L., Tanner, C. C.·1998·New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research

Abstract

Ammoniacal nitrogen (ammonia and ammonium) in agricultural wastewaters can promote eutrophication of receiving waters and be potentially toxic to fish and other aquatic life. Zeolites, which are hydrated aluminum‐silicate minerals, have an affinity for ammonium ions (NH 4 + ) and are, therefore, potentially useful in removing this contaminant from wastewaters. The major objectives of this study were to evaluate the capacity of two natural New Zealand zeolites (clinoptilolite and mordenite) to remove NH 4 + from a range of wastewaters under both batch and flow‐through conditions. Effects of two zeolite particle size ranges (0.25–0.50 mm and 2.0–2.83 mm) on NH 4 + removal performance were also investigated. Results obtained from the batch adsorption experiments indicated that both zeolites tested, regardless of their particle sizes, were equally effective (87–98%) at NH 4 + removal from domestic wastewaters or synthetic solutions containing NH 4 + concentrations of up to 150 gNH 4 ‐N m −3 . However, mordenite showed more effective NH 4 + removal than clinoptilolite for dairy and piggery waste‐waters, and for synthetic solutions containing high NH 4 + concentrations (350–750 g NH 4 ‐N m −3 ). At all equilibrium NH 4 + concentrations tested (0.2–300 g NH 4 ‐N m −3 ), NH 4 + removal by both mordenite and clinoptilolite was significantly ( P < 0.0001) reduced by the presence of competing sodium (Na + ) cations in the synthetic solutions. The maximum amounts of NH 4 + removed by coarse and fine clinoptilolite and coarse and fine mordenite, calculated by the Langmuir model, were 5.77 and 5.74, and 8.09 and 8.28 g NH 4 ‐N kg −1 , respectively. In the slow flow‐through experiment (0.47 mm min −1 ), NH 4 + breakthrough (>1.2 g NH 4 ‐N m −3 ) for both zeolite sources (regardless of their particle sizes) did not occur even after receiving 40 bed volumes (BV) of wastewaters containing 100 g NH 4 ‐N m −3 . The NH 4 + removal at this breakthrough was approximately 99 g NH 4 ‐N m −3 of wastewater throughput, which equates up to 5.8–6.5 g NH 4 ‐N kg −1 zeolite. In contrast, at a faster loading flow rate (15.9 mm min −1 ), the breakthrough was almost immediate (1 BV) for coarse zeolites and after 22 BVs for fine zeolite. The NH 4 + breakthrough capacity for fine mordenite was 2.0–4.4 g NH 4 ‐N kg −1 zeolite. Fine zeolites were more effective than coarse zeolites in removing wastewater NH 4 + (95% and 55% removal, respectively), even after receiving 64 BV of wastewater.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00288233.1998.9513328

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 217

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, M. L., & Tanner, C. C.
Venue
New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-09
Volume
41
Issue
3
Pages
427-446
ISSN
  • 0028-8233 (ISSN-L)
  • 1175-8775
OpenAlex
W2148252857
Cited by
217
References
0
FWCI
5.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ammonium removal from wastewaters using natural New Zealand zeolites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00288233.1998.9513328
The paper
Nguyen, M. L., & Tanner, C. C. (1998). Ammonium removal from wastewaters using natural New Zealand zeolites. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288233.1998.9513328

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.