Performance of the Giant Reed (Arundo donax) in Experimental Wetlands Receiving Variable Loads of Industrial Stormwater

Two emergent macrophytes, Arundo donax and Phragmites australis, were established in experimental subsurface flow, gravel-based constructed wetlands (CWs) and challenged by untreated stormwater collected from the hard-pan and other surfaces of a dairy processing factory in south-west Victoria, Australia. The hydraulic loading rate was tested at two levels, sequentially, 3.75 and 7.5 cm day−1. Some of the monitored variables were removed more efficiently by the planted beds in comparison to unplanted CWs (biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP); p < 0.007) but there was no significant difference between the A. donax and P. australis CWs in removal of BOD, suspended solids (SS) and TN (p > 0.007) at 3.75 cm day−1 or SS and TN at 7.5 cm day−1. At 3.75 cm day−1, BOD, SS, TN and TP removal in the A. donax and P. australis CWs was 71%, 61%, 78% and 75% and 65%, 60%, 73% and 41%, respectively. Nutrient removal at 7.5 cm day−1 in the A. donax and P. australis beds was 87%, 91%, 84% and 71% and 96%, 94%, 87% and 55%, respectively. As expected, the A. donax CWs produced considerably more biomass (10 ± 1.2 kg wet weight) than the P. australis CWs (2.7 ± 1.2 kg wet weight). This equates to approximately 107 and 36 tonnes ha−1 year−1 biomass (dry weight) for A. donax and P. australis, respectively (assuming 250 days of growing season and single-cut harvest). The performance similarity of the A. donax- and P. australis-planted CWs indicates that either may be used in HSSF wetlands treating dairy factory stormwater, although the planting of A. donax provides additional opportunities for secondary income streams through utilisation of the biomass produced.

[1]  S. Terzakis,et al.  Constructed wetlands treating highway runoff in the central Mediterranean region. , 2008, Chemosphere.

[2]  Robert E. Perdue,et al.  Arundo donax—Source of musical reeds and industrial cellulose , 1958, Economic Botany.

[3]  J. Brisson,et al.  Maximizing pollutant removal in constructed wetlands: should we pay more attention to macrophyte species selection? , 2009, The Science of the total environment.

[4]  D. Stevens,et al.  Growing Crops with Reclaimed Wastewater , 2006 .

[5]  Jan Vymazal,et al.  Removal of organics in constructed wetlands with horizontal sub-surface flow: a review of the field experience. , 2009, The Science of the total environment.

[6]  C. Ververis,et al.  Fiber dimensions, lignin and cellulose content of various plant materials and their suitability for paper production , 2004 .

[7]  Charles P. Gerba,et al.  Multi-species plant systems for wastewater quality improvements and habitat enhancement , 1996 .

[8]  E. Gallegos The effects of wastewater irrigation on groundwater quality in Mexico. , 1998 .

[9]  T. Manios,et al.  PLANT SPECIES IN A TWO-YEAR-OLD FREE WATER SURFACE CONSTRUCTED WETLAND TREATING DOMESTIC WASTEWATER IN THE ISLAND OF CRETE , 2002, Journal of environmental science and health. Part A, Toxic/hazardous substances & environmental engineering.

[10]  J. Janick,et al.  Trends in new crops and new uses , 2002 .

[11]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  Comparison of free water and horizontal subsurface treatment wetlands , 2009 .

[12]  J. Janick,et al.  Nalgrass: a nonwood fiber source suitable for existing US pulp mills. , 2002 .

[13]  A. Monti,et al.  Cradle-to-farm gate life cycle assessment in perennial energy crops , 2009 .

[14]  S. Cosentino,et al.  First results on evaluation of Arundo donax L. clones collected in Southern Italy , 2006 .

[15]  J. Vymazal Horizontal sub-surface flow and hybrid constructed wetlands systems for wastewater treatment , 2005 .