Journal of Ecology and Environment

한국생태학회 (The Ecological Society of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Macrophytes on Biological Treatment of Processed-Leachate from Sanitary Landfill Sites

  • Kim, In-Sung (School of Biological Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Choi, Hong-Keun (College Natural Science, Ajou University) ;
  • Lee, Eun-Ju (School of Biological Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • 발행 : 2006.02.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Three macrophytes species, that are, Phragmites australis, Zizania latifolia and Typha angustifolia were grown in mono culture in order to compare growth (relative biomass increase rate), variation of photosynthetic pigment (total chlorophyll, Chl a, Chl b and Chl a/Chl b) and effectiveness of nutriment removal in 15%o NaCl-salt solution or processed-leachate (salinity 19.6%o) from sanitary landfill sites. The relative biomass increase rate of p. australis was significantly higher than Z. latifolia and T. angustifolia. In the case of processed-leachate treatment, the relative biomass increase rates of above-part, rhizome and root of P. australiswere 178 %, 148 % and 157 %, respectively. Also, in 15%o NaCl-salt solution treatment, the relative biomass increase rates of P. australis increased as follows; 161 % (above-part), 183 % (rhizome) and 112 % (root). Total chlorophyll contents increased significantly in the leaves of P. australis and Z. latifolia grown in 15%o NaCl-salt solution and processed-leachate. Among three macrophytes, P. australis was evaluated as most effective macrophyte for the biological retreatment of processed-leachate from sanitary landfill sites.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Brix H. 1997. Do macrophytes play a role in constructed treatment wetlands. Water Sci Technol 35: 11-17 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0273-1223(96)00873-6
  2. Carmen EP, Crossman TL. 2001. Phytoremediation. In: In situ treatment technology (Nyers EK, eds). Lewis Publishers, New York, pp 391-435
  3. Choi HK. 1985. A monograph of vascular hydrophytes in Korea (PhD thesis). Seoul National University, Seoul
  4. Coleman J, Hench K, Garbutt K, Sextone A, Bissonette G, Skousen J. 2001. Treatment of domestic wastewater by three wetland plant species in constructed wetlands. Water Air Soil Poll 128: 283-295 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010336703606
  5. Cronk JK, Fennessy MS. 2001. Wetland plants; Biology and ecology. Lewis Publishers, Boca Ration
  6. Fanf Z, Bouwkamp J, Solomos T. 1998. Chlorophyllase activities and chlorophyll degradation during leaf senescence in non-yellowing mutant and wild type of Phaseolus vulgaris L. J Exp Bot 49: 503-510 https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/49.320.503
  7. Fraser LH, Carty SM, Steer D. 2004. A test of four plant species to reduce total nitrogen and total phosphorus from soil leachate in subsurface wetland microcosms. Bioresource Technol 94: 185-192 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2003.11.023
  8. Gersberg RM, Elkins BV, Lyons SR, Goldman CR. 1986. Role of aquatic plants in wastewater treatment by artificial wetlands. Water Res 20: 363-368 https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(86)90085-0
  9. Gersberg RM, Elkins BV, Lyons SR, Goldman CR. 1986. Role of aquatic plants in wastewater treatment by artificial wetlands. Water Res 20: 363-368 https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(86)90085-0
  10. Hoel BO, Solhaug KA. 1998. Effect of irradiance on chlorophyll estimation with the Minolta SPAD-502 leaf chlorophyll meter. Ann Bot 82: 389-392 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1998.0683
  11. Hootsmans MJM, Wiegman F. 1998. Four helophyte species growing under salt stress: their salt of life? Aquat Bot 62: 81-94 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3770(98)00085-0
  12. Im J, Woo H, Choi M, Han H, Kim C. 2001. Simultaneous organic and nitrogen removal from municipal landfill leachate using an anaerobic-aerobic system. Water Res 19: 895-904 https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(85)90148-4
  13. Johnson JR, Saunders JR. 2003. Evaluation of chlorophyll meter for nitrogen management in cotton. In: Annual Report 2002 of the North Mississippi Research and Extension Center. Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Station Bulletin, pp 162-163
  14. Kadlec RH, Knight R. 1996. Treatment wetlands. Lewis Publishers, Boca Ration
  15. Ma HC, Fung L, Wang SS, Altman A, Hüttermann A. 1997. Photosynthetic response of Populus euphratica to salt stress. Forest Ecol Manag 93: 55-61 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03943-6
  16. Parida AK, Das AB, Sanada Y, Mohanty P. 2004. Effects of salinity on biochemical components of the mangrove, Aegiceras cornoculatum. Aquat Bot 80: 77-87 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2004.07.005
  17. Porra RJ, Thompson WA, Kriedemann PE. 1989. Determination of accurate extinction coefficients and simultaneous equations for assaying chlorophylls a and b extracted with four different solvents: verification of the concentration of chlorophyll standards by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Biochim Biophys Acta 975: 384- 394 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-2728(89)80347-0
  18. Santos CV. 2004. Regulation of chlorophyll biosynthesis and degradation by salt stress in sunflower leaves. Scientia Hortic 103: 93-99 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2004.04.009
  19. Steer D, Fraser LH, Boddy J, Seibert B. 2002. Efficiency of small constructed wetlands for subsurface treatment of single family domestic effluent. Ecol Eng 18: 429-440 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8574(01)00104-5