Download - Plants Used in Constructed Wetlands With Horizontal-Review

WETLAND RESTORATION Review Paper

Plants used in constructed wetlands with horizontalsubsurface flow: a review

Jan Vymazal

� Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Abstract The presence of macrophytes is one of the

most conspicuous features of wetlands and their

presence distinguishes constructed wetlands from

unplanted soil filters or lagoons. The macrophytes

growing in constructed wetlands have several prop-

erties in relation to the treatment process that make

them an essential component of the design. However,

only several roles of macrophytes apply to con-

structed wetlands with horizontal subsurface flow

(HF CWs). The plants used in HF CWs designed for

wastewater treatment should therefore: (1) be tolerant

of high organic and nutrient loadings, (2) have rich

belowground organs (i.e. roots and rhizomes) in order

to provide substrate for attached bacteria and oxy-

genation (even very limited) of areas adjacent to roots

and rhizomes and (3) have high aboveground biomass

for winter insulation in cold and temperate regions

and for nutrient removal via harvesting. The com-

parison of treatment efficiency of vegetated HF CWs

and unplanted filters is not unanimous but most

studies have shown that systems with plants achieve

higher treatment efficiency. The vegetation has

mostly a positive effect, i.e. supports higher treatment

efficiency, for organics and nutrients like nitrogen

and phosphorus. By far the most frequently used

plant around the globe is Phragmites australis

(Common reed). Species of the genera Typha (lati-

folia, angustifolia, domingensis, orientalis and glau-

ca) and Scirpus (e.g. lacustris, validus, californicus

and acutus) spp. are other commonly used species. In

many countries, and especially in the tropics and

subtropics, local plants including ornamental species

are used for HF CWs.

Keywords Constructed wetlands � Horizontal flow �Macrophytes � Phragmites australis

Role of plants in constructed wetlands

The presence of macrophytes is one of the most

conspicuous features of wetlands and their presence

distinguishes constructed wetlands from unplanted

soil filters or lagoons. The macrophytes growing in

constructed wetlands have several properties in

relation to the treatment process that make them an

essential component of the design (Brix, 1997).

However, only several roles of macrophytes apply

to constructed wetlands with horizontal subsurface

flow (HF CWs) (Table 1). The plants used in

Guest editors: Dominik Zak, Robert McInnes, Jorg Gelbrecht /

Restoration, biogeochemistry and ecological services of

wetlands

J. Vymazal (&)

Department of Landscape Ecology, Faculty of

Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life

Sciences in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

e-mail: [email protected]

J. Vymazal

ENKI, o.p.s, Trebon, Czech Republic

123

Hydrobiologia

DOI 10.1007/s10750-011-0738-9

constructed wetlands designed for wastewater treat-

ment should therefore: (1) be tolerant of high organic

and nutrient loadings, (2) have rich belowground

organs (i.e. roots and rhizomes) in order to provide

substrate for attached bacteria and oxygenation (even

very limited) of areas adjacent to roots and rhizomes

and (3) have high aboveground biomass for winter

insulation in cold and temperate regions and nutrient

removal via harvesting (Cızkova-Koncalova et al.,

1996; Kvet et al., 1999).

Insulation of the filtration beds

Insulation that the plant cover provides during winter,

especially in temperate and cold climatic regions, is

very important for a steady performance of the

system (Smith et al., 1996; Mander & Jenssen, 2003;

Vymazal & Kropfelova, 2008a). When the standing

litter is covered by snow, it provides a perfect

insulation and helps keep the substrate free of frost

(Brix, 1998). The litter layer helps in protecting the

soil from freezing during winter, but on the other

hand, it also keeps the soil cooler during spring

(Haslam, 1971a, b; Brix, 1994).

Insulation of filtration beds is relevant only under

temperate and cold climatic conditions, i.e. under

freezing conditions during winter. As a consequence,

the processes responsible for pollutant removal do not

slow down substantially, and the treatment perfor-

mance is steady during the year. The steady treatment

performance of HF CWs, with the partial exception

of ammonia and total nitrogen removal, was reported

from Switzerland (Zust & Schonborn, 2003), Norway

(Giæver, 2003; Mæhlum & Jenssen, 2003), Germany

(Kern, 2003; Steinmann et al., 2003), Czech Republic

(Vymazal, 2001, 2009; Vymazal et al., 2003), USA

(Dahab & Surampalli, 2001; Hill et al., 2003), Italy

(Gorra et al., 2007) or Korea (Ham et al., 2004).

Belowground parts as substrate for bacterial

growth

The rhizosphere is known to harbour a great diversity

of bacterial forms (Paul & Clark, 1996) and it is

generally assumed that planted wetlands outperform

unplanted controls mainly because the plant rhizo-

sphere stimulates the microbial community (Gagnon

et al., 2006). It has been suggested that plant

rhizosphere enhances microbial density and activity

by providing root surface for microbial growth, a

source of carbon compounds through root exudates

and a micro-aerobic environment via root oxygen

Table 1 Summary of the major roles of macropyhtes in constructed treatment wetlands (modified from Brix, 1997)

Macrophyte property Role in treatment process

Aerial plant tissue Light attenuation—reduced growth of photosynthesis

Influence of microclimate—insulation during winter

Reduced wind velocity—reduced risk of resuspension

Aesthetic pleasing appearance of the system

Storage of nutrients

Plant tissue in water Filtering effect—filter out large debris

Reduced current velocity—increased rate of sedimentation, reduced risk of resuspension

Excretion of photosynthesis oxygen—increased aerobic degradation

Uptake of nutrients

Provision of surface for periphyton attachment

Roots and rhizomes in the sediment Stabilizing the sediment surface—less erosion

Prevention of the medium clogging in vertical flow systems

Provision of surface for bacterial growth

Release of oxygen increases degradation (and nitrification)

Uptake of nutrients

Release of antibiotics, phytometallophores and phytochelatins

Roles important in HF CWs in italics

Hydrobiologia

123

release (Gersberg et al., 1986; Brix, 1997). Higher

microbial densities in planted systems were reported,

for example, by Hatano et al. (1993) and Munch et al.

(2005). Several authors have shown plants to differ in

root surface area available for bacterial growth

(Hatano et al., 1993; Vymazal et al., 2003, Kyamb-

adde et al., 2004; Gagnon et al., 2006) and Paul &

Clark (1996) pointed out that the plants influence the

specific rhizosphere population. This phenomenon

was observed in constructed wetlands by Collins

et al. (2004) or Li et al. (2008). Plants can also affect

microbial species composition and diversity by

releasing exudates and oxygen into the rhizosphere

that in turn indirectly affects enzyme activity (Singh

& Kumar, 2008).

Oxygen release to the rhizosphere of wetland

plants

The primary difference between water-saturated and

well-drained soils is the availability of oxygen for root

respiration, microbial respiration and chemical oxida-

tion processes (Brix, 1993). In well-drained soils, the

pore spaces are filled with air showing a relatively

high-oxygen content. Microorganisms living in the

soil and roots of plants growing in the soil are therefore

able to obtain oxygen directly from their surroundings.

As the soil pore spaces are connected with the

atmosphere above the soil, the oxygen in the pore

spaces is replenished by rapid diffusion and convec-

tion from the atmosphere (Brix, 1993). In a water-

saturated soil, the pore spaces are filled with water.

The rate of diffusion of oxygen through water is some

104–106 times slower as it is through air, principally

due to the smaller diffusion coefficient in water, but

also because of low solubility of oxygen in water

(Greenwood, 1961; Drew, 1979). Consequently,

water-saturated soils become anaerobic (oxygen-free

or anoxic) except for a few millimetres at the surface

(Jackson & Drew, 1984). Due to absence of oxygen in

waterlogged soils, the roots and rhizomes of plants

growing in water-saturated substrates must obtain

oxygen from their aerial organs internally through the

air spaces in the plants (e.g. Laing, 1940; Coult, 1964;

Teal & Kanwisher, 1966; Armstrong, 1978, 1979;

Dacey, 1980; Studer & Brandle, 1984; Brix, 1993).

The main anatomical feature of wetland plants is the

presence or development of air spaces in different

parts of the leaves, stems, rhizomes and roots (Gopal &

Masing, 1990; Brix, 1998; Tiner, 1999). The presence

of aerenchyma (air-filled) tissue in many wetlands

plants enables these plants to grow in anaerobic or

anoxic soils. The extensive lacunal systems which

normally contain constrictions at intervals to maintain

structural integrity and to restrict water invasion into

damaged tissues may occupy up to 60% of the total

tissue volume (Studer & Brandle, 1984). Many studies

have demonstrated an increase in aerenchyma in plants

subjected to flooding and to stronger anaerobiosis

(Seliskar, 1988; Burdick & Mendelssohn, 1990;

Kludze & DeLaune, 1996). Various gas transport

mechanisms in wetland plants have been reviewed, for

example, by Brix (1993).

Wetland plants tend to minimize their oxygen losses

to the rhizosphere but they do, nevertheless, leak

oxygen from their roots (Armstrong & Armstrong,

1988; Brix, 1989). Oxygen release rates from roots

depend on the internal oxygen concentration, the

oxygen demand of the surrounding medium and the

permeability of the root-walls (Sorrell & Armstrong,

1994). Rates of oxygen leakage are generally highest in

the sub-apical region of roots and decrease with

distance from the root apex (Armstrong, 1979). The

oxygen leakage at the root-tips serves to: (1) oxidize and

detoxify potentially harmful reducing substances in the

rhizosphere, (2) support nitrification (ammonia oxida-

tion) and aerobic decomposition of organic substances

and (3) support formation of precipitates of iron and

manganese hydroxides and oxyhydroxides which addi-

tionally may co-precipitate heavy metals (Vymazal,

2005; Vymazal et al., 2007; Vymazal & Kropfelova,

2008a).

In the literature, a wide range of possible oxygen

flux rates has been reported (Lawson, 1985; Arm-

strong & Armstrong, 1990; Brix & Schierup, 1990;

Gries et al., 1990). This wide range is caused by

species determined differences, by the seasonal

variation in oxygen release rates and by the different

experimental techniques used in the studies (Brix,

2003). However, the oxidized zone is restricted to a

very thin soil layer adjacent to the roots. Therefore,

aerobic processes are limited in the HF CWs

(Vymazal & Kropfelova, 2008b).

Nutrient uptake and storage

Wetland plants require nutrients for growth and

reproduction, and the rooted macrophytes take up

Hydrobiologia

123

nutrients primarily through their root systems. As

wetland plants are very productive, considerable

amounts of nutrients can be bound in their biomass

(Dykyjova, 1978; Dykyjova & Kvet, 1982; Kvet &

Ostry, 1988; Dykyjova & Ulehlova, 1998; Kvet et al.,

1996; Brix, 2003). Total storage of a substance in a

particular compartment is called ‘‘standing stock.’’

Nutrient standing stocks in vegetation are calculated

by multiplying nutrient concentrations in the plant

tissue by plant biomass per unit area and are expressed

as mass per unit area (usually g m-2 or kg ha-1). In

HF CWs, only aboveground standing stock is avail-

able for harvesting and thus nutrient removal. The

nutrient standing stocks are similar in natural and

constructed wetlands. For emergent species in natural

wetlands, Vymazal (1995) reported aboveground N

standing stock in the range of 22–88 g N m-2 for 29

species, Johnston (1991) gave the range of nitrogen

standing stock between 0.6 and 72 g N m-2 with an

arithmetic mean of 20.7 g N m-2 and Vymazal et al.

(1999) reported nitrogen standing stock in above-

ground biomass of Phragmites australis and Phalaris

arundinacea growing in natural stands in the range of

0.04–63.4 g N m-2 and 2.0–15.5 g N m-2, respec-

tively. For HF CWs, Vymazal & Kropfelova (2008a)

reported aboveground N standing stock in the range of

5.3–58.7 g N m-2 for various macrophytes. A similar

trend is valid also for phosphorus. While aboveground

P standing stock in natural stands of emergent

macropyhtes has been reported to be within the range

of 0.1–11 g P m-2 (Johnston, 1991; Vymazal, 1995,

2004), the aboveground P standing stock has been

reported to be within the range of 0.2–10.5 g P m-2

(Vymazal, 2004) for various types of constructed

wetlands and within the range of 0.7–5.5 g P m-2 in

HF CWs (Vymazal & Kropfelova, 2008a). However,

even the highest nutrient aboveground standing stocks

are very low as compared to annual inflow loading to

HF CWs thus the amount of nutrients sequestered in

the biomass usually represents less than 5% of the

inflow load. Vymazal & Kropfelova (2008a) reported

the mean values of N and P inflow loadings for HF

CWs of 1158 g N m-2 year-1 (n = 455) and 262 g P

m-2 year-1 (n = 572). Of course, in tropical and

subtropical regions where harvest is possible several

times during the year, the amount of nutrients

removed via harvesting could remove a substantial

part of the inflow load (e.g. Okurut, 2001). If the

wetlands are not harvested, most of the nutrients from

the biomass are returned to the water during the

decomposition process. Organic compounds released

during the decomposition of aboveground biomass

may serve as a source of carbon for denitrification.

This carbon could be important especially in lightly

loaded systems.

Root exudates

Root systems also release other substances besides

oxygen. These substances are usually organic com-

pounds such as anaerobic metabolites, organic acids,

phytometallophores, peptides (e.g. phytochelatins),

alkaloids, phenolics, terpenoids or steroids (Rovira,

1969; Barber & Martin, 1976; Neori et al., 2000). The

magnitude of this release is still unclear, but reported

values are generally in the range of 5–25% of the

photosynthetically fixed carbon. This organic carbon

exuded by the roots may act as a carbon source for

denitrifiers and thus increase nitrate removal (Platzer,

1996).

Functions of the root exudates are manifold, but

for the treatment process in HF CWs the release of

antimicrobial compounds and phytometallophores

and phytochelatins is probably the most important.

One of the first studies reporting on the excretion of

anti-bacterial substances by macrophytes was pub-

lished by Drobotko et al. (1958). Their results showed

an anti-microbial activity by alkaloids extracted from

Nuphar lutea. However, there is not much informa-

tion on other macrophytes releasing alkaloids (Neori

et al., 2000). Other compounds which are released to

the rhizosphere and could be poisonous to microor-

ganism are phenolics (Dickinson, 1983; Nishizawa

et al., 1990).

Seidel (1976) showed that Scirpus (=Schoenoplec-

tus) lacustris (Bulrush) releases antibiotics from its

roots and a range of bacteria obviously disappeared

from polluted water by passing through a vegetation

of bulrushes. Vincent et al. (1994) showed the

antimicrobial properties of exudates of Mentha

aquatica, Phragmites australis and also of Scirpus

lacustris. According to Gopal & Goel (1993), the

substances excreted by the roots of many wetland

plant species responsible for antimicrobial activity

are tannic and gallic acids but other compounds may

probably be involved as well.

Phytometallophores and phytochelatins are impor-

tant in heavy metals cycling and removal in

Hydrobiologia

123

constructed wetlands. Phytometallophores (formerly

called phytosiderophores) are non-proteinogenic

amino-acid root exudates that chelate and mobilize

Fe, Cu, Zn and Mn (Romheld, 1991; Marschner &

Romheld, 1996). Chelated metals can then be taken

up by roots and subsequently transported to above-

ground plant parts and become available for removal

(Vymazal & Krasa, 2003; Vymazal et al., 2007,

2009). Phytochelatins may be the principal heavy-

metal complexing peptides of higher plants, they are

metallothionein-like in function but differ in their

chemical structure and composition. By excreting

phytochelatins, plants can limit and/or avoid heavy

metal toxicity. The synthesis of these peptides can be

induced by copper, cadmium, mercury, lead and zinc

(Neori et al., 2000).

Allelopathy, i.e. inhibition of one plant species

through chemical means by other plants (Szczepanski,

1977; Rice, 1984) has been well documented

in wetlands (Gopal & Goel, 1993; Hootsmans &

Blindow, 1994). However, it is unclear how allelop-

athy may affect plants in constructed wetlands.

Influence of plants on treatment performance

of HF CWs

The comparison of treatment efficiency of vegetated

HF CWs and unplanted filters is not unanimous, but

most studies have shown that systems with plants

achieve higher treatment efficiency (Table 2). The

vegetation has mostly a positive effect, i.e. supports

higher treatment efficiency, for organics (determined

by biochemical oxygen demand and chemical oxygen

demand) and nutrients such as total Kjeldahl nitrogen

(TKN), ammonia nitrogen (NH4-N), total nitrogen

(TN) and total phosphorus (TP). This could be

explained by increased oxygen supply to the rhizo-

sphere through plant roots as compared to unplanted

filters. On the other hand, plants have usually no

effect on removal of suspended solids indicating that

retention of suspended solids is mainly through

abiotic processes. The results shown in Table 2

concerning the removal of bacteria reveal that in

some systems the removal was affected by the

presence of plants but in some systems not. The

presence of plants may have a negative effect on

the removal of substances which are transformed

under anoxic and/or anaerobic conditions such as

nitrate and sulphate (Table 2).

Several studies have also tried to compare

various macrophyte species in their ability to

support removal of pollutants. Gersberg et al.

(1986) found in HF CW at Santee, CA, that the

Scirpus validus and Phragmites australis beds were

superior at removing ammonia, and both produced

effluent values significantly lower than the Typha

latifolia bed did. Finlayson & Chick (1983) found

exactly the same order of efficiency for NH4?-N

(and TKN) removal from abattoir effluent in

Australia. The removal effect was 54% (56%) for

Scirpus validus, 12% (26%) for Phragmites aus-

tralis and 3% (14%) for a mixture of Typha

domingensis ? T. orientalis. For total P removal,

the order was slightly different but the wetland

with Scirpus showed the highest removal effect

(61%). In this case, removal in the Typha bed

(53%) was superior to that with Phragmites (37%).

Fraser et al. (2004) tested four macrophyte species

(Scirpus validus, Carex lacustris, Phalaris arundin-

acea and Typha latifolia) and their mixture to

compare effectiveness of nutrient removal in sub-

surface wetlands. S. validus was the most effective

species, and P. arundinacea was generally the least

effective at reducing N and P in monocultures. The

four-species mixture was generally highly effective

at nutrient removal, but the results were not

significantly different from the monocultures.

Coleman et al. (2001) found that Typha latifolia

significantly outperformed Juncus effusus and Scirpus

cyperinus in improving effluent quality in experimen-

tal units. In addition, species mixtures outperformed

species monocultures. T. latifolia was the superior

competitor in mixtures. Karathanasis et al. (2003)

studied the effect of Typha latifolia, Festuca arun-

dinacea and polyculture consisting mainly of Iris

pseudacorus, Canna x. generalis, Hemerocallis fulva,

Hibiscus moscheutos, Scirpus validus and Mentha

spicata. Overall, the polyculture systems seemed to

provide the best and most consistent treatment for all

wastewater parameters, while being the least suscep-

tible to seasonal variation.

Burgoon et al. (1989) reported that TKN removal

was highest in a gravel-based mesocosms planted

with Sagittaria latifolia (92%), followed by Typha

Hydrobiologia

123

Table 2 Comparison of treatment efficiency planted HF CWs and unplanted filters

Location Vegetation Parameters Effect Reference

Brazil Typha latifolia COD, BOD5, TSS, TN, NH4-N, TP, FC Positive effect Dornelas et al. (2008)

Canada Phragmites australis BOD5, COD, TKN, NH4-N Positive effect Naylor et al. (2003)

Typha latifolia TSS, TP, PO4-P, NO3-N No effect

Canada Phragmites australis TN Positive effect Maltais-Landry et al. (2009)

Typha angustifolia

China Phragmites australis TN Positive effect Zhou et al. (2004)

Zizania caduciflora

Costa Rica Coix lacryma-jobi BOD5, FC Positive effect Dallas & Ho (2005)

Germany Phragmites australis FC No effect Vacca et al. (2005)

Greece Typha latifolia TKN, TP Positive effect Akratos & Tsihrintzis (2007)

COD No effect

Mexico Phragmites australis FC Positive effect Rivera et al. (1995)

Typha sp.

Morocco Arundo donax COD, TSS, NH4-N, TP Positive effect El Hafiane & El Hamouri (2004)

Nepal Phragmites karka BOD5, COD, TKN, TP Positive effect Pandey et al. (2006)

TSS, NH4-N No effect

New Zealand Scirpus validus BOD5, TSS, FC No effect Tanner et al. (1995)

Spain Typha latifolia BOD5, NH4-N, FC Positive effect Ciria et al. (2005)

TSS, COD No effect

NO3-N Negative effect

Spain Scirpus lacustris FC Positive effect Soto et al. (1999)

Spain Phragmites australis TN, TP Positive effect De Lucas et al. (2006)

Lythrum salicria SO42- Negative effect

Tanzania Phragmitesmauritianus

NH4-N, TKN Positive effect Haule et al. (2002)

Typha domingensis

Typha capensis

Cyperus grandis

Cyperus dubius

Kylinga erecta

Tanzania Phragmitesmauritianus

COD, NH4-N Positive effect Kaseva (2004)

Tanzania Typha latifolia COD, NH4-N, PO4-P, SO42- Positive effect Mbuligwe (2004)

Colocasia esculenta NO3-N No effect

USA Scirpus validus Positive effect Gersberg et al. (1986)

Phragmites australis

Typha latifolia

USA Typha latifolia Positive effect Karathanasis et al. (2003)

Festuca arundinaceae BOD5, TSS

Polyculture FC No effect

USA Sagaittaria latifolia TKN Positive effect Burgoon et al. (1989)

Typha latifolia BOD5 No effect

Scirpus pungens


Hydrobiologia

123

latifolia (86%), Scirpus pungens (76%) and Phrag-

mites australis (68%). Tanner (1996) evaluated eight

emergent species in a subsurface flow constructed

wetland treatment system in New Zealand according

to their ability to sequester nutrients, taking into

account their aboveground biomass, production of

harvestable biomass, seasonality of aboveground

growth, tissue nutrient level and potential for root-

zone aeration. The highest potential was achieved by

Zizania latifolia, followed by Glyceria maxima and

Phragmites australis. On the other hand, the lowest

potential was found for Juncus effusus and Bolbo-

schoenus fluviatilis. Other species in the study were

Baumea articulata, Cyperus involucratus and

Schoenoplectus (Scirpus) validus.

The results reported in the literature indicate that

mixed vegetation is more effective in pollutant

removal as compared to stands of single species

(Karathanasis et al., 2003; Fraser et al., 2004).

However, most of the studies were relatively short

and it is a question whether all the species in a

mixture would survive in a long-term run. It is well

known from constructed wetlands (e.g. Vymazal,

2006) as well as from natural habitats (e.g. Vymazal

et al., 2008) that competition among plant species

may be a slow process which can take 5–10 years

before any noticeable change in plant species com-

position is observed.

A comprehensive literature survey on the effect of

plants on pollutant removal in constructed wetlands

with subsurface flow and differences in performance

between plants has recently been published by

Brisson & Chazarenc (2009).

Plants used for HF CWs

From a theoretical point of view, many emergent

species could be used for HF constructed wetlands.

However, in reality, only a limited number of species

has been used so far.

Phragmites spp.

By far, the most commonly used plant for HF

constructed wetlands is Phragmites australis (Cav.)

Trin. ex Steudel (Poaceae) (Common reed) (Cooper

et al., 1996; Kadlec & Knight, 1996; Vymazal et al.,

1998; Kadlec & Wallace, 2008; Vymazal & Kropfe-

lova, 2008a) P. australis (=Phragmites communis

Trin.) is a perennial and flood-tolerant grass with an

extensive rhizome system which usually penetrates to

depths of about 0.6–1.0 m. Stems are rigid with

hollow internodes with the range in shoot height from

less than 0.5 m to giant forms about 8 m tall from the

marshes of the Danube delta (Haslam 1971a, b) and

Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (Maxwell, 1957). Com-

mon reed is a cosmopolitan grass occurring as a

dominant component in the freshwater, brackish and

in some cases also marine littoral communities

almost all over the world (Haslam, 1972, 1973;

Rodewald-Rudescu, 1974; Dykyjova & Hradecka,

1976; Hocking et al., 1983; Soetaert et al., 2004). Its

distribution is widespread throughout Europe, Africa,

Asia, Australia and North America between 10� and

70� latitude (Hawke & Jose, 1996).

Maximum aboveground biomass of P. australis is

highly variable depending on latitude, climate,

Table 2 continued

Location Vegetation Parameters Effect Reference

USA Carex lacustris TP. TN Positive effect Fraser et al. (2004)

Scirpus validus

Phalaris arundinacea

Typha latifolia

USA Juncus effuses TP, TKN, NH4-N Positive effect Coleman et al. (2001)

Scirpus cyperinus TSS, FC No effect

Typha latifolia BOD5 Positive effect*

Mixture of the three

COD chemical oxygen demand, BOD biological oxygen demand, TSS total suspended solids, TN total nitrogen, TKN total Kjeldahl

nitrogen, TP total phosphorus, FC faecal coliforms

* For Typha and mixture

Hydrobiologia

123

salinity, water depth, eutrophication and interactions

between these factors. Vymazal & Kropfelova (2005)

in their review reported the range between 413 and

9,890 g dry matter (DM) m-2 for 12 natural stands

from Europe, Asia and Australia. However, the most

common values for maximum aboveground biomass

found in natural stands are between 1,000 and

2,000 g DM m-2. The biomass of Phragmites

australis is similar in HF CWs; Vymazal & Kropfe-

lova (2005) reported the values between 788 and

5,070 g DM m-2. The R/S (root/shoot) ratio in

natural stands is usually high (2–5, but up to 20),

indicating high underground biomass (Cızkova,

1999), but in HF CWs it is commonly less than 1.0

(Vymazal & Kropfelova, 2008a). With little external

loss, the maximum aboveground mass is generally

assumed to be within 85–100% of net annual

aboveground production (Mason & Bryant, 1975;

Gessner et al., 1996).

Phragmites australis is used throughout Europe

Canada, Australia, most parts of Asia (with the

exception of India and Nepal) and Africa (with the

exception of its central part). Phragmites karka is

used in HF CWs in India and Nepal (e.g. Billore

et al., 2001, 2008; Bista et al., 2004; Bista &

Khatiwada, 2008; Singh et al., 2009) and Phragmites

mauritianus Kunth is used in central Africa (e.g.

Byekwaso et al., 2002). In the United States,

Common reed is considered an exotic and invasive

plant species by natural resource and wildlife agen-

cies. As a result, the use of this species has been

limited in the United States (Wallace & Knight,

2006). A similar situation applies to New Zealand.

Common reed is used for the treatment of municipal

and domestic wastewater but has also been success-

fully used for HF CWs treating various types of

wastewater (Table 3).

Typha spp.

Typha spp. (Cattails) (Typhaceae) are erect rhizoma-

tous perennial plants with jointless stems. The plants

are up to 3 m tall with an extensive branching

horizontal rhizome system. Leaves are flat or slightly

rounded on the back, in their basal parts spongy

(Sainty & Jacobs, 2003). Cattail species are commonly

found inhabiting shallow bays, irrigation ditches,

lakes, ponds, rivers and both brackish and fresh water

marshes. The most important Typha species found in

wetlands are T. latifolia L. (Common cattail, Broad-

leaved cattail), T. angustifolia L. (Narrow-leaved

cattail), T. domingensis Pers. (Southern cattail, Santo

Domingo cattail), T. glauca Godr. (Blue cattail) and

T. orientalis C. Presl (Broadleaf cumbungi, Raupo).

T. latifolia is a cosmopolitan species but not being

found in central and South Africa. T. angustifolia is

also considered to be a cosmopolitan species by some

authors but some authors consider it to be an alien

species in North America. Neither does it occur in the

tropics, where it is replaced by T. domingensis.

T. glauca, a hybrid of T. latifolia and T. angustifolia,

is most common in North America, T. domingesis is

found in subtropical and tropical parts of the Americas,

Australia and Africa, and T. orientalis is found in

the region between East Asia (China, Japan) and

Australia.

Typha is a very productive species with maximum

aboveground biomass values in both natural stands

and constructed wetlands exceeding 5,000 g DM m-2

(e.g. Maddison et al., 2003; Obarska-Pempkowiak &

Ozimek, 2003; Maine et al., 2006). Cattail is very

often used in constructed wetlands with free water

surface (Kadlec & Wallace, 2008) but it is probably

the second most commonly used plant for HF CWs

for various types of wastewater around the world

(Table 4). Cattail is very common in HF CWs for

municipal and domestic sewage in the United States

(Wallace & Knight, 2006; Kadlec & Wallace, 2008)

neither is it uncommon in sewage treating systems in

other countries (Table 4).

Scirpus (Schoenoplectus) spp.

Species belonging to the genus Scirpus (Cyperaceae)

are annual or perennial herbs which grow in tufts or

large colonies. Stems are sharply triangular or

slightly rounded and softly angled, up to 3 m tall

or even taller in some species. Roots penetrate down

to 70–80 cm resulting in greater root-zone aeration

and concomitant microbial nitrification. However, in

constructed wetlands S. validus roots penetrate

sometimes only to 10–30 cm (Pullin & Hammer,

1991; Tanner, 1994).

Scirpus lacustris L. (syn. Schoenoplectus lacustris

(L.) Palla) (Common clubrush) was used by Seidel at

early stages of the development of constructed

wetlands for wastewater treatment (e.g. Seidel,

1965, 1976). However, at present, Scirpus is mostly

Hydrobiologia

123

Table 3 The use of


(* mauritianus, ** karka)

in HF CWs for various

types of wastewaters

Type of wastewater Location Reference

Petrochemical industry USA Wallace (2002)

UK Chapple et al. (2002)

Taiwan Yang & Hu (2005)

China Ji et al. (2002)

South Africa Wood & Hensman (1989)

Chemical industry UK Sands et al. (2000)

Portugal Dias et al. (2006)

China Wang et al. (1994)

Pulp and paper industry Kenya Abira et al. (2005)*

Tannery industry Portugal Calheiros et al. (2007)

Turkey Kucuk et al. (2003)

Textile industry Australia Davies & Cottingham (1992)

Slovenia Bulc et al. (2006)

Germany Winter and Kickuth (1989)

Abattoir Mexico Poggi-Varaldo et al. (2002)

Food processing industry Slovenia Vrhovsek et al. (1996)

France Khalil et al. (2005)

Italy Gorra et al. (2007)

Italy Mantovi et al. (2007)

Italy Pucci et al. (2000)

Lithuania Gasiunas et al. (2005)

The Netherlands De Zeeuw et al. (1990)

Distillery and winery India Billore et al. (2001)**

Italy Masi et al. (2002)

Coke plant effluent France Jardinier et al. (2001)

Mining waters Germany Gerth et al. (2005)

Cobalt recovery processing Uganda Byekwaso et al. (2002)*

Pig farm effluent UK Gray et al. (1990)

Lithuania Strusevicius & Struseviciene (2003)

Taiwan Lee et al. (2004)

Fish farm effluent Canada Comeau et al. (2001), Naylor et al. (2003)

Germany Schulz et al. (2003)

Taiwan Lin et al. (2002)

Shrimp culture effluent Taiwan Lin et al. (2003)

Dairy effluents Italy Mantovi et al. (2003)

Lithuania Gasiunas et al. (2005)

Germany Kern & Brettar (2002)

Japan Kato et al. (2006)

Highway runoff UK Shutes et al. (2001)

Stormwater runoff Taiwan Kao et al. (2001)

Airport runoff UK Worrall et al. (2002)

Switzerland Rothlisberger (1996)

Nursery runoff Australia Headley et al. (2001)

Agricultural runoff China Zhou et al. (2004)

Hydrobiologia

123

used in North America, Australia and New Zealand

(Table 5) (e.g. Behrends et al., 1994; Tanner, 1994;

Wallace & Knight, 2006; Kadlec & Wallace, 2008).

Other species used in HF constructed wetlands are

Scirpus validus Vahl. (syn. Schoenoplectus validus

(Vahl.) A. Lowe and D. Lowe), Scirpus tabernae-

montani C.C. Gmel. (syn. Schoenoplectus tabernae-

montani (C.C.Gmel.) Palla) (Softstem bulrush),

Scirpus californicus (C.A. Meyer) Steud. (syn.

Schoenoplectus californicus (C.A. Mey.) Palla)

(Giant bulrush), Scirpus acutus Muhl. ex Bigelow

(syn. Schoenoplectus acutus (Muhl. ex Bigelow) A.

Lowe and D. Lowe var. acutus) (Hardstem bulrush),

Scirpus cyperinus (L.) Kunth (Woolgrass).

Phalaris arundinacea

Phalaris arundinacea L. (Poaceae) (Reed canary-

grass) is a 1–3 m tall long-lived perennial grass

(Kephart & Buxton, 1993; Lewandowski et al.,

2003). It produces a dense stands and prominent

networks of vigorous roots and rhizomes, penetrating

to a depth of about 30–40 cm, allowing for aggres-

sive vegetative spread (Katterer & Andren, 1999).

Reed canarygrass grows best under cool and moist

conditions in a large array of wetland habitats such as

wet meadows or river banks (Jakrlova, 1975; Coops

et al., 1996; Galatowitsch et al., 2000; Lavergne &

Molofsky, 2004). Reed canarygrass is native to the

temperate zones of the Northern Hemisphere and is

widely distributed throughout Eurasia (Lavergne &

Molofsky, 2004). It was originally introduced from

Europe to the United States shortly after 1850 and has

since spread throughout North America (Merigliano

& Lesica, 1998; Galatowitsch et al., 1999) and is

considered as an invasive species especially in

anthropogenically disturbed areas (Lavergne &

Molofsky, 2004).

Studies have shown that Phalaris increases its above-

ground biomass as a result of higher nutrient supply

(Katterer & Andren, 1999; Green & Galatowitsch,

2001). The same phenomenon has been reported

from HF CWs where aboveground biomass is substan-

tially higher than belowground biomass (Behrends

et al., 1994; Bernard & Lauve, 1995; Vymazal &

Kropfelova, 2005, 2008a).

Phalaris arundinacea has commonly been used for

HF constructed wetlands in the Czech Republic either

as single species or in combination with Phragmites

australis because of its easy planting and good

insulation properties during the winter (Vymazal &

Kropfelova, 2005; Vymazal, 2006). The use of reed

canarygrass was also reported from the United States

(e.g. Behrends et al., 1994; Bernard & Lauve, 1995)

and Wallace & Knight (2006) included Phalaris in

the list of suitable species for HC CWs. Mæhlum

et al. (1999) reported the use of Phalaris in a HF

CWs for landfill leachate in Norway and Platzer et al.

(2002) reported Phalaris in a HF CWs in Nicaragua.

Iris spp.

Iris pseudacorus (L.) (Iridaceae) (Yellow flag) is a

decorative perennial herb up to 1.5 m tall with a

robust rhizome. Stem is upright, rounded to flat and

branched. It is found across the whole of Europe, in

the Middle East and North Africa along the ponds,

lakes, slowly flowing streams and rivers and in wet

Table 3 continuedType of wastewater Location Reference

Landfill leachate USA Sanford (1999)

Norway Mæhlum et al. (1999)

UK Robinson et al. (1999)

USA Eckhardt et al. (1999)

USA Surface et al. (1993)

Poland Wojciechowska & Obarska-Pempkowiak (2008)

Slovenia Urbanc-Bercic et al. (1998), Bulc et al. (2006)

Zupancic Justin et al. (2007)

Canada Kinsley et al. (2006)

Polluted river Mexico Duran-de-Bazua et al. (2000)

Taiwan Jing et al. (2001)

Hydrobiologia

123

meadows. In North America, Iris versicolor (North-

ern blue flag) and, in Europe, Iris sibirica (Siberian

iris) are also used for HF constructed wetlands.

Calheiros et al. (2007) reported the use Iris

pseudacorus for experimental HF CWs treating waste-

waters from tannery industry in Portugal. Mander et al.

(2001) described the use of I. pseudacorus in a HF CW

designed to treat wastewaters from a hospital in

Estonia. Dias & Pacheco (2001) reported in their

summary on the constructed wetland status in

Portugal that I. pseudacorus is very often used

for HF CWs. I. pseudacorus is also used in the

Czech Republic for small on-site treatment HF CWs

(Vymazal, 2006).

Table 4 The use of Typha in HF CWs for various types of wastewaters

Type of wastewater Location Species Reference

Sewage Estonia latifolia Mander et al. (2001)

France latifolia Merlin et al. (2002)

Portugal latifolia Dias & Pacheco (2001)

Mexico latifolia Belmont et al. (2004)

Colombia angustifolia Williams et al. (1999)

Central America domingensis Platzer et al. (2002)

Australia orientalis Davison et al. (2005)

domingensis Greenway (1996)

Czech Republic latifolia Vymazal (2006)

Tanzania latifolia Kaseva (2004)

Tunisia latifolia M’hiri et al. (2005)

India latifolia Juwarkar et al. (1994)

Mexico latifolia Rivas (2008)

Hospital India latifolia Diwan et al. (2008)

Petrochemical industry South Africa sp. Wood & Hensman (1989)

Taiwan orientalis Yang & Hu (2005)

Pulp and paper industry Keny domingensis Abira et al. (2005)

USA latifolia Hammer et al. (1993)

Tannery industry Portugal latifolia Calheiros et al. (2007)

Abbatoir Australia orientalis Finlayson & Chick (1983)

Mexico latifolia Poggi-Varaldo et al. (2002)

Uruguay domingensis Vymazal & Kropfelova (2008a)

Food processing industry Italy latifolia Mantovi et al. (2007)

Distillery and winery India latifolia Billore et al. (2001)

Murphy et al. (2008)

Soft drink industry Uruguay domingensis Vymazal & Kropfelova (2008a)

Mining waters USA latifolia Pantano et al. (2000)

Laundry Australia orientalis Davison et al. (2005)

Thailand angustifolia Kantawanichkul & Wara-Aswapati (2005)

Pig farm Australia domingensis Finlayson et al. (1987)

Highway runoff UK latifolia Shutes et al. (2001)

Greenhouse runoff Canada latifolia Prystay & Lo (1998)

Landfill leachate Norway australis Mæhlum et al. (1999)

Slovenia latifolia Urbanc-Bercic et al. (1998)

Bulc et al. (2006)

Canada latifolia Birkbeck et al. (1990)

Hydrobiologia

123

Locally used plants

Besides the macrophyte species mentioned in previ-

ous sections, many other plants are used in HF CWs

(Table 6). Those plants are usually local species

which are easily available and grow well under local

climatic conditions. Among those plants, many

ornamental species have been used, especially for

on-site treatment where aesthetic and pleasing look is

often a part of the design. The list of species in

Table 6 indicates that over the years a wide variety of

species has been used.

Final remarks

Macrophytes are definitely an essential part of HF

CWs. Over the years of development of this

technology, many plant species have been used but

only several species have been used frequently.

Despite the fact that HF CWs have been used for

wastewater treatment for more than four decades,

attempts to use the plant biomass for further utiliza-

tion are still very scarce. The main reasons for this

situation are several: (a) the production is usually

seasonal and (b) the amount of biomass is too small

to support year-round production.

In general, more attempts to use plants from

constructed wetlands have been made in developing

countries where designers are looking for further

benefits besides wastewater treatment. For example,

Zurita et al. (2009) reported on the use of commercially

valuable ornamental species in a pilot scale HF CW in

Mexico. These plants were Zantedeschia aethiopica

(Giant white arum lily), Strelitzia reginae (Crane flower,

Bird of paradise), Anthurium andraenum (Flamingo

flower) and Agapanthus africanus (Agapanthus). The

authors concluded that it was possible to produce these

plants in constructed wetlands without reducing the

efficiency of the treatment system.

Nelson et al. (2008) reported on the use of so-

called Wastewater Gardens�, i.e. HF CWs planted

with a wide variety of native tropical fruit trees,

flowering shrubs, wetland ferns and macrophytes in

order to add values to the wastewater treatment

through production of valuable plants and fruits and

subsequent subsoil irrigation.

Wetland macrophytes are very productive and this

fact has been taken into consideration when bioen-

ergy crops are evaluated (e.g. Hadders & Olsson,

1997; Nilsson & Hansson, 2001; Lewandowski et al.,

2003; Maddison et al., 2009). In addition, Maddison

et al. (2009) reported on the use of cattail for

construction materials. Cattail chips mixed with clay

are used in the production of safe and cost-efficient

building blocks. The material is light and has good

thermal insulation properties. Fibre material from

cattail spadices is used as clay reinforcement. The

fibre is an ideal material to avoid cracks in clay

plaster. Ready-made dry fibre and clay mixtures and

Table 5 The use of Scirpus in HF CWs for various types of wastewaters

Type of wastewater Location Species Reference

Abbatoir Australia validus Finlayson & Chick (1983)

Pig farm Australia validus Finlayson et al. (1987)

Fish farm effluent New Mexico, USA californicus Zachritz & Jacquez (1993)

Sewage France maritimus Merlin et al. (2002)

Australia validus Davison et al. (2005)

New Zealand validus Duncan (1992)

Minnesota, USA acutus Nivala & Rousseau (2008)

Minnesota, USA fluviatilis Nivala & Rousseau (2008)

Kentucky, USA cyperinus Watson et al. (1990)

Kentucky, USA validus Watson et al. (1990)

Mexico validus Rivas (2008)

Meat processing New Zealand validus Van Oostrom & Cooper (1990)

Dairy farm New Zealand validus Tanner (1992)

Cheese production Minnesota, USA fluviatilis Wallace (pers. comm.)

Hydrobiologia

123

Table 6 Examples of ornamental and locally used plants in HF CWs

Scientific name Common name Location Reference

Acorus calamus Sweet flag Ohio, USA Steer et al. (2002)

Kentucky, USA Watson et al. (1990)

Acrostichum danaefolium Giant leather fern Mexico Hernandez & Sanchez-Navarro (2008)

Arundo donax Giant reed Morocco El Hafiane & El Hamouri (2004)

Asclepias incarnata Swamp milkweed Ohio, USA Steer et al. (2002)

Baumea articulata Jointed twigrush Australia Davison et al. (2005)

New Zealand Adcock & Ganf (1994)

Vymazal & Kropfelova (2008a)

Bolboschoenus fluviatilis River bulrush Australia Davison et al. (2005)

Vermont, USA Drizo et al. (2006)

Brachiaria mutica Para grass El Salvador Katsenovich et al. (2009)

Canna glauca Canna lily Central America Platzer et al. (2002)

Canna sp. Canna lily Mayotte near Esser et al. (2006)

Mozambique Paulo et al. (2008)

Brazil

Canna x. generalis Common garden canna Kentucky, USA Karathanasis et al. (2003)

Canna indica Indian shot Portugal Calheiros et al. (2007)

Carex acutiformis Lesser pond sedge Denmark Brix & Schierup (1989)

Germany Kern & Brettar (2002)

Slovenia Zupancic Justin et al. (2009)

Canna latifolia Canna lily Nepal Singh et al. (2009)

Carex gracilis Slender sedge Slovenia Urbanc-Bercic et al. (1998)

Vrhovsek et al. (1996)

Coix lacryma-jobi Job’s tears Costa Rica Dallas et al. (2004)

Colocasia esculenta Wild taro, Elephant ear Tanzania Mbuligwe (2004)

Mexico Hernandez & Sanchez-Navarro (2008)

India Bindu et al. (2008)

Cyperus articulatus Jointed flatsedge Nicaragua Platzer et al. (2002)

Cyperus flabelliformis Umbrella plant Thailand Kantawanichkul et al. (2008)

Cyperus immensus Fula fulfulde Kenya Abira et al. (2005)

Cyperus involucratus Umbrella sedge New Zealand Tanner (1996)

Fiji Vymazal & Kropfelova (2008a)

Cyperus isocladus Dwarf papyrus Brazil Paulo et al. (2008)

Cyperus malcacensis Shichito matgrass China Yang et al. (1994)

Eleocharis sphacelata Giant spikerush Australia Finlayson & Chick (1983)

New Zealand Duncan (1992)

Echinochloa polystachia Caribgrass Ecuador Lavigne & Jankiewicz (2000)

Epilobium hirsutum Hairy willow-herb Czech Republic Vymazal (2006)

Festuca arundinacea Fescue Kentucky, USA Karathanasis et al. (2003)

Filipendula ulmaria Queen of the meadow Czech Republic Vymazal (2006)

Glyceria maxima Sweet mannagrass New Zealand Van Oostrom & Cooper (1990)

Czech Republic Vymazal (2006)

Gynerium sagittatum Wild cane Jamaica Stewart (2005)

Heliconia psittacorum Andromeda Brazil Paulo et al. (2008)

Colombia Ascuntar Rios et al. (2009)

Hydrobiologia

123

cattail chips and clay blocks are produced and sold on

the market (Mauring, 2003).

Acknowledgments The study was supported by grants No.

206/06/0058 ‘‘Monitoring of Heavy Metals and Selected Risk

Elements during Wastewater Treatment in Constructed

Wetlands’’ from the Czech Science Foundation and No.

2B06023 ‘‘Development of Mass and Energy Flows

Evaluation in Selected Ecosystems’’ from the Ministry of

Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic.

Table 6 continued

Scientific name Common name Location Reference

Heliconia rostrata Heliconia Mexico Hernandez & Sanchez-Navarro (2008)

Hemerocallis fulva Day lilies Kentucky, USA Karathanasis et al. (2003)

Hibiscus moscheutos Hibiscus Kentucky, USA Karathanasis et al. (2003)

Hymenocallis littoralis Spider lily Mexico Hernandez & Sanchez-Navarro (2008)

Iris versicolor Blue flag Kentucky, USA Watson et al. (1990)

Juncus effusus Soft rush Portugal Dias & Pacheco (2001)

Slovenia Urbanc-Bercic et al. (1998)

Canada Birkbeck et al. (1990)

Juncus inflexus Meadow rush Slovenia Urbanc-Bercic et al. (1998)

Juncus sp. Rush Spain Serrano et al. (2008)

Kyllinga erecta Greater kyllinga Tanzania Haule et al. (2002)

Lepironia articulata Blue rush China Yang et al. (1994)

Liatris pychnostachya Blazing star Minnesota, USA Wallace (pers. comm.)

Lobelia cardinalis Cardinal flower Ohio, USA Steer et al. (2002)

Mentha spicata Spearmint Kentucky, USA Karathanasis et al. (2003)

Monochoria vaginalis Heartshape false pickerelweed China Junsan et al. (2000)

Panicum maximum Saboya Ecuador Lavigne & Jankiewicz (2000)

Panicum repens Torpedo grass Washington, USA Thut (1993)

Pennisetum purpureum Napier grass Central America Platzer et al. (2002)

Pontederia cordata Pickerelweed Ohio, USA Steer et al. (2002)

Phylidrum lanuginosum Frogsmouth Australia Browning & Greenway (2003)

Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan Minnesota, USA Wallace (pers. comm.)

Sagittaria latifolia Broadleaf arrowhead Minnesota, USA Nivala & Rousseau (2008)

Minnesota, USA Wallace (pers. comm.)

Kentucky, USA Watson et al. (1990)

Scirpus sylvaticus Wood clubrush Estonia Mander et al. (2005)

Silphium perfoliatum Cup plant Minnesota, USA Wallace (pers. comm.)

Sorghum halapense Johnson grass Jordan Al Omari & Fayyad (2003)

Spartina alterniflora Saltmarsh cordgrass Alabama, USA White (1994)

Spartina pectinata Prairie cordgrass Germany Kern & Brettar (2002)

Stenotaphrum secundatum Buffalo grass Portugal Calheiros et al. (2007)

Thalia geniculata Alligator flag El Salvador Katsenovich et al. (2009)

Thrinax radiata Chit palm Mexico Hernandez & Sanchez-Navarro (2008)

Thysanolaena maxima Tiger grass Mayotte near Mozambique Esser et al. (2006)

Triglochin procerum Water ribbons Australia Adcock & Ganf (1994)

Zizania caduciflora Manchurian wildrice China Zhou et al. (2004)

Zizaniopsis bonariensis Espadana Brazil Philippi et al. (2006)

Hydrobiologia

123

References

Abira, M. A., J. J. A. van Bruggen & P. Denny, 2005. Potential

of a tropical subsurface constructed wetland to remove

phenol from pre-treated pulp and papermill wastewater.

Water Science and Technology 51(9): 173–175.

Adcock, P. & G. G. Ganf, 1994. Growth characteristics of three

macrophyte species growing in natural and constructed

wetland system. Water Science and Technology 29:

95–102.

Akratos, C. S. & V. A. Tsihrintzis, 2007. Effect of temperature,

HRT, vegetation and porous media on removal efficiency

of pilot-scale horizontal subsurface flow constructed

wetlands. Ecological Engineering 29: 173–191.

Al Omari, A. & M. Fayyad, 2003. Treatment of domestic

wastewater by subsurface flow constructed wetlands in

Jordan. Desalination 155: 27–39.

Armstrong, W., 1978. Root aeration in the wetland conditions.

In Hook, D. D. & R. M. M. Crawford (eds), Plant Life in

Anaerobic Environment. Ann Arbor Science Publishers,

Ann Arbor, MI: 269–297.

Armstrong, W., 1979. Aeration in higher plants. In Wood-

house, H. W. W. (ed.), Advances in Botanical Research.

Academic Press, London: 226–332.

Armstrong, J. & W. Armstrong, 1988. Phragmites australis – a

preliminary study of soil-oxidizing sites and internal gas

transport pathways. New Phytologist 108: 373–382.

Armstrong, J. & W. Armstrong, 1990. Light-enhanced con-

vective throughflow increases oxygenation in rhizomes

and rhizosphere of Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex

Steud. New Phytologist 114: 121–128.

Ascuntar Rios, D., A. F. Toro Velez, M. R. Pena & C.

A. Madera Parra, 2009. Changes of flow patterns in a

horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland treating

domestic wastewater in tropical regions. Ecological

Engineering 35: 274–280.

Barber, D. A. & J. K. Martin, 1976. The release of organic

substances by cereal roots into soils. New Phytologist 76:

69–80.

Behrends, L. L., E. Bailey, M. J. Bulls, H. S. Coonrod & F.

J. Sikora, 1994. Seasonal trends in growth and biomass

accumulation of selected nutrients and metals in six spe-

cies of emergent aquatic macrophytes. In Proceedings of

4th International Conference on Wetland Systems for

Water Pollution Control, ICWS’94 Secretariat, Guangz-

hou: 274–289.

Belmont, M. A., E. Cantellano, S. Thompson, M. Williamson,

A. Sanchez & C. D. Metcalfe, 2004. Treatment of

domestic wastewater in a pilot-scale natural treatment

system in central Mexico. Ecological Engineering 23:

299–311.

Bernard, J. M. & T. E. Lauve, 1995. A comparison of growth

and nutrient uptake in Phalaris arundinacea L. growing in

a wetland and a constructed bed receiving landfill leach-

ate. Wetlands 15: 176–182.

Billore, S. K., N. Singh, H. K. Ram, J. K. Sharma, V. P. Singh,

R. M. Nelson & P. Das, 2001. Treatment of a molasses

based distillery effluent in a constructed wetland in central

India. Water Science and Technology 44(11/12):

441–448.

Billore, S., K. Prashant, J. K. Sharma, N. Singh, H. Ram, P. Dass

& R. Jain, 2008. Restoration and conservation of stagnant

water bodies by gravel-bed treatment wetlands and artifi-

cial floating reed beds in tropical India. In Billore, S.,

P. Dass & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th Interna-

tional Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution

Control, Vol. 1. Institute of Environment Management and

Plant Sciences, Vikram University, Ujjain: 408–414.

Bindu, T., V. P. Sylas, M. Mahesh, P. S. Rakesh & E. V. Ra-

masamy, 2008. Pollutant removal from domestic waste-

water with Taro (Colocasia esculenta) planted in a

subsurface flow system. Ecological Engineering 33: 68–82.

Birkbeck, A. E., D. Reil & R. Hunter, 1990. Application of

natural and engineered wetlands for treatment of low-

strength leachate. In Cooper, P. F. & B. C. Findlater (eds),

Constructed Wetlands in Water Pollution Control. Perg-

amon Press, Oxford: 411–418.

Bista, K. R. & N. R. Khatiwada, 2008. Assessment of reed bed

technology for wastewater treatment in Nepal. In Billore,

S., P. Dass & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th

International Conference on Wetland Systems for Water

Pollution Control, Vol. 1. Institute of Environment Man-

agement and Plant Sciences, Vikram University, Ujjain:

1124–1129.

Bista, K. R., P. Sharma, N. R. Khatiwada & K. K. Bhattarani,

2004. Cost effective design of horizontal reed beds

treating wastewater in Nepal. In Proceedings of 9th


Pollution Control. ASTEE and Cemagref, Lyon: 299–305.

Brisson, J. & F. Chazarenc, 2009. Maximizing pollutant

removal in constructed wetlands: should we pay more

attention to macrophyte species selection? Science of the

Total Environment 407: 1923–1930.

Brix, H., 1989. Gas exchange through dead culms of reed

Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steudel. Aquatic

Botany 35: 81–93.

Brix, H., 1993. Macrophyte-mediated oxygen transfer in wet-

lands: transport mechanisms and rates. In Moshiri, A. G.

(ed.), Constructed Wetlands for Water Quality Improve-

ment. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL: 391–398.

Brix, H., 1994. Functions of macrophytes in constructed wet-

lands. Water Science and Technology 29: 71–78.

Brix, H., 1997. Do macrophytes play a role in constructed

treatment wetlands? Water Science and Technology

35(5): 11–17.

Brix, H., 1998. Denmark. In Vymazal, J., H. Brix, P. F. Coo-

per, M. B. Green & R. Haberl (eds), Constructed Wet-

lands for Wastewater Treatment in Europe. Backhuys

Publishers, Leiden: 123–156.

Brix, H., 2003. Plants used in constructed wetlands and their

functions. In Dias, V. & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of

Conference on the Use of Aquatic Macrophytes for

Wastewater Treatment in Constructed Wetlands. ICN and

INAG, Lisbon: 81–109.

Brix, H. & H.-H. Schierup, 1989. Sewage treatment in con-

structed wetlands – Danish experience. Water Science and

Technology 21: 1665–1668.

Brix, H. & H.-H. Schierup, 1990. Soil oxygenation in con-

structed reed beds: the role of macrophyte and soil–

atmosphere interface oxygen transport. In Cooper, P. F. &

Hydrobiologia

123

B. C. Findlater (eds), Constructed Wetlands in Water

Pollution Control. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 53–66.

Browning, K. & M. Greenway, 2003. Nutrient removal and

plant biomass in a subsurface flow constructed wetland in

Brisbane, Australia. Water Science and Technology 48(5):

183–189.

Bulc, T. G., A. Ojstrsek & D. Vrhovsek, 2006. The use of

constructed wetland for textile wastewater treatment. In

Dias, V. & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 10th Inter-

national Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pol-

lution Control. MAOTDR 2006, Lisbon: 1667–1675.

Burdick, D. M. & I. A. Mendelssohn, 1990. Relationship

between anatomical and metabolic response to waterlog-

ging in the coastal grass Spartina patens. Journal of

Experimental Botany 41: 233–238.

Burgoon, P. S., K. R. Reddy & T. A. DeBusk, 1989. Domestic

wastewater treatment using emergent plants cultured in

gravel and plastic substrate. In Hammer, D. A. (ed.),

Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment. Lewis

Publishers, Chelsea, MI: 536–541.

Byekwaso, E., F. Kansiime, J. Logstrum & S. Andersen, 2002.

The optimisation of a reed bed filter for effluent treatment

at Kasese Cobalt Company Limited, Uganda. In Pro-

ceedings of 8th International Conference on Wetland

Systems for Water Pollution Control. University of Dar es

Salaam, Tanzania: 660–668.

Calheiros, C. S. C., A. O. S. S. Rangel & P. K. L. Castro, 2007.

Constructed wetland systems vegetated with different

plants applied to the treatment of tannery wastewater.

Water Research 41: 1790–1798.

Chapple, M., P. Cooper, D. Cooper & M. Revitt, 2002. Pilot

trials of a constructed wetland system for reducing the

dissolved hydrocarbon in the runoff from a decommis-

sioned refinery. In Proceedings of 8th International Con-

ference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control.

University of Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania/IWA: 877–883.

Ciria, M. P., M. L. Solano & P. Soriano, 2005. Role of mac-

rophyte Typha latifolia in a constructed wetland for

wastewater treatment and assessment of its potential as a

biomass fuel. Biosystems Engineering 92: 535–544.

Cızkova, H., 1999. Growth dynamics and ecophysiology of

Phragmites in relation to the climatic conditions in boreal-

Mediterranean and oceanic-continental gradients. In Brix,

H. (ed.), Eureed II. Final Project for Contracts ENV4-

CT95-0147 and IC20-CT-960020. University of Aarhus,

Denmark: 45–52.

Cızkova-Koncalova, H., J. Kvet & J. Lukavska, 1996.

Response of Phragmites australis, Glyceria maxima and

Typha latifolia to addition of piggery sewage in a flooded

sand culture. Wetlands Ecology and Management 4:

43–50.

Coleman, J., L. Hench, K. Garbutt, A. Sextone, G. Bissonnette

& J. Skousen, 2001. Treatment of domestic wastewater by

three plant species in constructed wetlands. Water, Air,

and Soil Pollution 128: 283–295.

Collins, B., J. V. McArthur & R. R. Sharitz, 2004. Plant effects

on microbial assemblages and remediation of acidic coal

pile runoff in mesocosm treatment wetlands. Ecological


Comeau, Y., J. Brisson, J.-P. Reville, C. Forget & A. Drizo,

2001. Phosphorus removal from trout farm effluents by

constructed wetlands. Water Science and Technology

44(11/12): 55–60.

Cooper, P. F., G. D. Job, M. B. Green & R. B. E. Shutes, 1996.

Reed Beds and Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater

Treatment. WRc Publications, Medmenham, Marlow.

Coops, H., F. W. B. van der Brink & G. van der Velde, 1996.

Growth and morphological responses of four helophyte

species in an experimental water-depth gradient. Aquatic

Botany 54: 11–24.

Coult, D. A., 1964. Observations on gas movement in the

rhizome of Menyanthes trifoliata L. with comments on the

role of the endodermis. Journal of Experimental Botany

15: 205–218.

Dacey, J. W. H., 1980. Internal winds in water lilies – an

adaptation for life in anaerobic sediments. Science 210:

1017–1019.

Dahab, M. F. & R. Y. Surampalli, 2001. Subsurface-flow

constructed wetlands treatment in the plains: five years of

experience. Water Science and Technology 44(11/12):

375–380.

Dallas, S. & G. Ho, 2005. Subsurface flow reedbeds using

alternative media for the treatment of domestic greywater

in Monteverde, Costa Rica, Central America. Water Sci-

ence and Technology 51(10): 119–128.

Dallas, S., B. Scheffe & G. Ho, 2004. Reedbeds for greywater

treatment – case study in Santa Elena-Monteverde, Costa

Rica, Central America. Ecological Engineering 23: 55–61.

Davies, T. H. & P. D. Cottingham, 1992. The use of con-

structed wetlands for treating industrial effluent. In Pro-

ceedings of 3rd International Conference on Wetland

Systems in Water Pollution Control. IAWQ and Austra-

lian Water and Wastewater Association, Sydney, NSW:

53.1–53.5.

Davison, L., T. Headley & K. Pratt, 2005. Aspects of design,

structure, performance and operation of reed beds – eight

years’ experience in northeastern New South Wales,

Australia. Water Science and Technology 51: 129–138.

De Lucas, A., J. Villasenor, R. Gomez & J. Mena, 2006.

Influence of polyphenols in winery wastewater wetland

treatment with different plant species. In Dias, V. &

Vymazal, J. (eds), Proceedings of 10th International

Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution

Control. MAOTDR 2006, Lisbon: 1677–1685.

De Zeeuw, W., G. Heijnen & J. De Vries, 1990. Reed bed

treatment as a wastewater (post) treatment alternative in

the potato starch industry. In Cooper, P. F. & B. C. Find-

later (eds), Constructed Wetlands in Water Pollution

Control. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 551–553.

Dias, V. N. & P. M. Pacheco, 2001. Constructed wetlands for

wastewater treatment in Portugal: a global overview. In

Vymazal, J. (ed.), Transformations of Nutrients in Natural

and Constructed Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden:

271–303.

Dias, V. N., C. Canseiro, A. R. Gomes, B. Correia & C. Bicho,

2006. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in

Portugal: a global overview. In Dias, V. & J. Vymazal

(eds), Proceedings of 10th International Conference on

Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. MAOTDR

2006, Lisbon: 91–101.

Dickinson, C. H., 1983. Micro-organisms in peatlands. In Gore,

A. J. P. (ed.), Mires-Swamp, Bog, Fen, And Moor.

Hydrobiologia

123

Ecosystems of the World, Vol. 4A. Elsevier, Amsterdam:

225–245.

Diwan, V., P. Shrivastava & V. Vyas, 2008. Horizontal sub-

surface flow constructed wetland in a tropical climate: a

performance study from Ujjain, India. In Billore, S., P.

Dass & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th Interna-




Dornelas, F. L., M. B. Machado & M. von Sperling, 2008.

Performance evaluation of planted and unplanted sub-

surface-flow constructed wetlands for the post-treatment

of UASB reactor effluents. In Billore, S., P. Dass & J.

Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th International Con-

ference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control,

Vol. 1. Institute of Environment Management and Plant

Sciences, Vikram University, Ujjain: 400–407.

Drew, M. C., 1979. Plant responses to anaerobic conditions in

soil and solution culture. Current Advances in Plant Sci-

ence 36: 1–14.

Drizo, A., E. Twohig, D. Weber, S. Bird & D. Ross, 2006.

Constructed wetlands for dairy effluent treatment in

Vermont: two years of operation. In Dias, V. & J. Vy-

mazal (eds), Proceedings of 10th International Conference

on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. MAO-

TDR 2006, Lisbon: 1611–1621.

Drobotko, V. G., E. Y. Rashba, B. E. Aizenman, S. I. Zelepu-

kha, S. I. Novikova & M. B. Kaganskaya, 1958. Anti-

microbial activity of alkaloids obtained from Valerianaofficinalis, Chelidonium majus, Nuphar luteum and Asa-rum europium. Antibiotiki 22, Chem. Abstr. 53: 12589d.

Duncan, C. B. M., 1992. Constructed subsurface flow wetland

treatment of municipal wastewater: some New Zealand

experience. In Proceedings of 3rd International Confer-

ence on Wetland Systems in Water Pollution Control.

IAWQ and Australian Water and Wastewater Association,

Sydney, NSW: 23.1–23.8.

Duran de Bazua, C., R. Haberl, I. Kreiner, Ranjani-Krishnan, V.

M. Luna-Pabello, F. E. Fenoglio-Limon, C. Kneidinger, S.

Millan-Hernandez, M. Miranda-Rios, H. F. Ramırez-Ca-

rillo, N. V. Salinas-Castillo, H. Sanchez-Garcia, P. Schaller

& M. G. Soto-Esquivel, 2000. Artificial wetlands: viable

options for rural, suburban, and urban areas in Mexico City.

In Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Wetland

Systems for Water Pollution Control. Lake Buena Vista,

Florida. University of Florida, Gainesville/International

Water Association: 873–879.

Dykyjova, D., 1978. Nutrient uptake by littoral communities of

helophytes. In Dykyjova, D. & J. Kvet (eds), Pond Littoral

Ecosystems. Structure and Functioning, Ecological Stud-

ies, Vol. 28. Springer-Verlag, Berlin: 257–277.

Dykyjova, D. & D. Hradecka, 1976. Production ecology of

Phragmites communis. 1. Relation of two ecotypes to the

microclimate and nutrient conditions of habitat. Folia

Geobotanica et Phytotaxonomica 11: 23–61.

Dykyjova, D. & J. Kvet, 1982. Mineral nutrient economy in

wetlands of the Trebon Basin Biosphere Reserve. In

Gopal, B., R. E. Turner, R. G. Wetzel & D. F. Whigham

(eds), Wetlands: Ecology and Management. National

Institute of Ecology and Institute of Science Publication,

Jaipur: 325–355.

Dykyjova, D. & B. Ulehlova, 1998. Mineral economy and

cycling of minerals in wetlands. In Westlake, D. F., J. Kvet

& A. Szczepanski (eds), The Production Ecology of Wet-

lands. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 318–366.

Eckhardt, D. A. V., J. M. Surface & J. H. Peverly, 1999. A

constructed wetland system for treatment of landfill

leachate, Monroe County, New York. In Mulamoottil, G.,

E. A. McBean & F. Rever (eds), Constructed Wetlands for

the Treatment of Landfill Leachates. Lewis Publisher/

CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL: 205–222.

El Hafiane, F. & B. El Hamouri, 2004. Subsurface-horizontal

flow constructed wetland for polishing high rate ponds

effluent. In Proceedings of Conference on Wetland Sys-

tems and Waste Stabilization Ponds Communications of

Common Interest. ASTEE, Lyon: 141–146.

Esser, D., P. Jusiak & A. Lienard, 2006. The use of constructed

wetlands for the treatment of effluents from housing

schemes and villages in an island in the tropics: the case

of Mayotte. In Dias, V. & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings

of 10th International Conference on Wetland Systems for

Water Pollution Control. MAOTDR, Lisbon: 877–888.

Finlayson, C. M. & A. J. Chick, 1983. Testing the potential of

aquatic plants to treat abattoir effluent. Water Research

17: 415–422.

Finlayson, M., A. Chick, I. von Oertzen & D. Mitchell, 1987.

Treatment of piggery effluent by an aquatic plant filter.

Biological Wastes 19: 179–196.

Fraser, L. H., S. M. Carty & D. Steer, 2004. A test of four plant

species to reduce total nitrogen and total phosphorus from

soil leachate in subsurface wetland microcosms. Biore-

source Technology 94: 185–192.

Gagnon, V., F. Chazarenc, Y. Comeau & J. Brisson, 2006.

Influence of macrophytes species on microbial density and

activity in constructed wetlands. In Proceedings of 10th


Pollution Control. MAOTDR 2006, Lisbon: 1025–1033.

Galatowitsch, S. M., N. O. Anderson & P. D. Ascher, 1999.

Invasiveness in wetland plants in temperate North

America. Wetlands 19: 733–755.

Galatowitsch, S. M., D. C. Whited, R. Lehtinen, J. Husveth &

K. Schik, 2000. The vegetation of wet meadows in rela-

tion to their land-use. Environmental Monitoring and

Assessment 60: 121–144.

Gasiunas, V., Z. Strusevicius & M.-S. Struseviciene, 2005.

Pollutant removal by horizontal subsurface flow con-

structed wetlands in Lithuania. Journal of Environmental

Science and Health 40A: 1467–1478.

Gersberg, R. M., B. V. Elkins, S. R. Lyon & C. R. Goldman,

1986. Role of aquatic plants in wastewater treatment by

artificial wetlands. Water Research 20: 363–368.

Gerth, A., A. Hebner, G. Kiessig, A. Kuchler & A. Zellmer,

2005. Passive treatment of minewater at the Schlema-

Alberoda site. In Book of Abstracts of the International

Symposium on Wetland Pollutant Dynamics and Control.

Ghent University, Belgium: 53–54.

Gessner, M. O., B. Schieferstein, U. Muller, S. Barkmann & U.

A. Lenfers, 1996. A partial budget of primary organic

carbon flows in the littoral zone of a hardwater lake.

Aquatic Botany 55: 93–105.

Giæver, H. M., 2003. Experience and results from the north-

ernmost constructed wetland in Norway. In Mander, U. &

Hydrobiologia

123

P. Jenssen (eds), Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater

Treatment in Cold Climates. WIT Press, Southampton:

215–235.

Gopal, B. & U. Goel, 1993. Competition and allelopathy in

aquatic plant communities. Botanical Reviews 59:

155–210.

Gopal, B. & V. Masing, 1990. Biology and ecology. In Patten,

B. C. (ed.), Wetlands and Shallow Continental Water

Bodies. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague: 91–239.

Gorra, R., M. Freppaz, R. Ambrosoli & E. Zanini, 2007.

Seasonal performance of a constructed wetland for

wastewater treatment in alpine environment. In Borin, M.

& S. Bacelle (eds), Proceedings of International Confer-

ence on Multi Functions of Wetland Systems. P.A.N.

s.r.l., Padova: 66–67.

Gray, K. R., A. J. Biddlestone, G. Job & E. Galanos, 1990. The

use of reed beds for the treatment of agricultural effluents.

In Cooper, P. F. & B. C. Findlater (eds), Constructed

Wetlands in Water Pollution Control. Pergamon Press,

Oxford: 333–346.

Green, E. K. & S. M. Galatowitsch, 2001. Differences in wet-

land plant community establishment with additions of

nitrate-N and invasive species (Phalaris arundinacea and

Typha x glauca). Canadian Journal of Botany 79: 170–178.

Greenway, M., 1996. Nutrient bioaccumulation in wetland

plants receiving municipal effluent in constructed wetlands

in tropical Australia. In Proceedings of 5th International


Control, Chapter II/1. Universitat fur Bodenkultur, Vienna.

Greenwood, D. J., 1961. The effect of oxygen concentration on

the decomposition of organic materials in soil. Plant and

Soil 14: 360–376.

Gries, C., L. Kappen & R. Losch, 1990. Mechanism of flood

tolerance in reed, Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex

Steudel. New Phytologist 114: 589–593.

Hadders, G. & R. Olsson, 1997. Harvest of grass for com-

bustion in late summer and in spring. Biomass and Bio-

energy 12: 171–175.

Ham, J. H., C. G. Yoon, S. J. Hwang & K. W. Jung, 2004.

Seasonal performance of constructed wetland and winter

storage pond for sewage treatment in Korea. Journal of

Environmental Science and Health A39: 1329–1343.

Hammer, D. A., B. P. Pullin, D. K. McMurry & J. W. Lee,

1993. Testing color removal from pulp mill wastewaters

with constructed wetlands. In Moshiri, G. A. (ed.), Con-

structed Wetlands for Water Pollution Improvement. CRC

Press/Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL: 449–452.

Haslam, S. M., 1971a. Community regulation in Phragmitescommunis Trin I. Monodominant stands. Journal of

Ecology 59: 65–73.

Haslam, S. M., 1971b. The development and establishment of

young plants of Phragmites communis Trin. Annals of

Botany 35: 1059–1072.

Haslam, S. M., 1972. Biological Flora of the British Isles, No.

128. Phragmites communis Trin. Journal of Ecology 60:

585–610.

Haslam, S. M., 1973. Some aspects of the life history and

autecology of Phragmites communis Trin. A review.

Polskie Archiwum Hydrobiologii 20: 79–100.

Hatano, K., C. C. Trettin, C. H. House & A. G. Wolumn, 1993.

Microbial populations and decomposition activity in three

subsurface flow constructed wetlands. In Moshiri, G. A.

(ed.), Constructed Wetlands for Water Quality Improve-

ment. CRC Press/Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL:

541–547.

Haule, A. T., H. B. Pratap, H. J. Y. Katima, T. S. A. Mbwette

& K. Njau, 2002. Nitrogen removal from domestic

wastewater in subsurface flow constructed wetlands by

indigenous macrophytes in the tropics. A comparative

study for six potential macrophytes in Tanzania. In Pro-



Salaam and IWA, Arusha, Tanzania: 938–951.

Hawke, C. J. & P. V. Jose, 1996. Reedbed Management for

Commercial and Wildlife Interests. The Royal Society for

the Protection of Birds, Sandy, Bedfordshire.

Headley, T. R., D. O. Huett & L. Davison, 2001. The removal

of nutrients from plant nursery irrigation runoff in sub-

surface horizontal-flow wetlands. Water Science and

Technology 44(11/12): 77–84.

Hernandez, L. & P. Sanchez-Navaro, 2008. Integration of con-

structed wetland systems technology in the Maxican

Caribbean: a review of the Akumal experience. In Billore,

S., P. Dass & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th Inter-

national Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollu-

tion Control, Vol. 1. Institute of Environment Management

and Plant Sciences, Vikram University, Ujjain: 912–917.

Hill, C. M., J. M. Duxbury, L. D. Goehring & T. Peck, 2003.

Designing constructed wetlands to remove phosphorus

from barnyard run-off: seasonal variability in loads and

treatment. In Mander, U. & P. Jenssen (eds), Constructed

Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment in Cold Climates.

WIT Press, Southampton: 181–196.

Hocking, P. J., C. M. Finlayson & A. J. Chick, 1983. The

biology of Australian weeds. 12. Phragmites australis(Cav.) Trin. ex Steudel. Journal of Australian Institute of

Agricultural Science 40: 123–132.

Hootsmans, M. J. M. & I. Blindow, 1994. Allelopathic limi-

tation of algal growth by macrophytes. In van Vierssen,

W., M. Hootsmans & J. Vermaat (eds), Lake Veluwe, a

Macrophyte-Dominated System Under Eutrophication

Stress. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 175–192.

Jackson, M. B. & M. C. Drew, 1984. Effects of flooding on

growth and metabolism of herbaceous plants. In Koz-

lowski, T. T. (ed.), Flooding and Plant Growth. Academic

Press, New York: 47–128.

Jakrlova, J., 1975. Primary productivity and plant chemical

composition in floodplain meadows. Acta Scientiae Nat-

uralis (Brno) 9: 1–52.

Jardinier, N., G. Blake, A. Mauchamp & G. Merlin, 2001.

Design and performance of experimental constructed

wetlands treating coke plant effluents. Water Science and

Technology 44(11/12): 485–491.

Ji, G., T. Sun, Q. Zhou, X. Sui, S. Chang & P. Li, 2002.

Constructed subsurface slow wetland for treating heavy

oil-produced water of the Liaohe Oilfield in China. Eco-

logical Engineering 18: 459–465.

Jing, S.-R., Y.-F. Lin, D.-Y. Lee & T. W. Wang, 2001. Nutrient

removal from polluted river water by using constructed

wetlands. Bioresource Technology 76: 131–135.

Johnston, C. A., 1991. Sediments and nutrient retention by

freshwater wetlands: effects on surface water quality.

Hydrobiologia

123

CRC Critical Reviews in Environmental Control 21:

491–565.

Junsan, W., C. Yuhua & S. Qian, 2000. The application of

constructed wetland to effluent purification in pig plant. In

Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Wetland

Systems for Water Pollution Control, Lake Buena Vista,

Florida. University of Florida, Gainesville/International

Water Association: 1477–1480.

Juwarkar, A. S., B. Oke, A. Juwarkar & S. M. Patnaik, 1994.

Domestic wastewater treatment through constructed wet-

land in India. In Proceedings of 4th International Con-


ICWS Secretariat, Guangzhou, P.R. China (Appendix).

Kadlec, R. H. & R. L. Knight, 1996. Treatment Wetlands.

Lewis/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Kadlec, R. H. & S. D. Wallace, 2008. Treatment Wetlands, 2nd

ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Kantawanichkul, S. & S. Wara-Aswapati, 2005. LAS removal

by a horizontal flow constructed wetland in tropical cli-

mate. In Vymazal, J. (ed.), Natural and Constructed

Wetlands: Nutrients, Metals and Management. Backhuys


Kantawanichkul, S., S. Karnchanawong & S. R. Jing, 2008.

Treatment of fermented fish production wastewater by

constructed wetland system in Thailand. In Billore, S., P.





Kao, C. M., J. Y. Wang, H. Y. Lee & C. K. Wen, 2001.

Application of a constructed wetland for non-point source

pollution control. Water Science and Technology 44(11/

12): 585–590.

Karathanasis, A. D., C. L. Potter & M. S. Coyne, 2003. Veg-

etation effect on fecal bacteria, BOD, and suspended solid

removal in constructed wetlands treating domestic

wastewater. Ecological Engineering 20: 157–169.

Kaseva, M. E., 2004. Performance of a sub-surface flow con-

structed wetland in polishing pre-treated wastewater – a

tropical case study. Water Research 38: 681–687.

Kato, K., T. Koba, H. Ietsugu, T. Saigusa, T. Nozoe, S. Ko-

bayashi, K. Kitagawa & S. Yanagiya, 2006. Early per-

formance of hybrid reed bed system to treat milking

parlour wastewater in cold climate in Japan. In Dias, V. &

J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 10th International


Control. MAOTDR 2006, Lisbon: 1111–1118.

Katsenovich, Y. P., A. Hummel-Batista, A. J. Ravinet & J.

F. Miller, 2009. Performance evaluation of constructed

wetlands in a tropical region. Ecological Engineering 35:

1529–1537.

Katterer, T. & O. Andren, 1999. Growth dynamics of reed

canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) and its allocation

of biomass and nitrogen belowground in a field receiving

daily irrigation and fertilisation. Nutrient Cycling in

Agroecosystems 54: 21–29.

Kephart, K. D. & D. R. Buxton, 1993. Forage quality responses

of C3 and C4 perennial grasses to shade. Crop Science 33:

831–837.

Kern, J., 2003. Seasonal efficiency of a constructed wetland

for treating dairy farm wastewater. In Mander, U. &


treatment in Cold Climates. WIT Press, Southampton:

197–214.

Kern, J. & I. Brettar, 2002. Nitrogen turnover in a subsurface

constructed wetland receiving dairy farm wastewater. In

Pries, J. (ed.), Treatment Wetlands for Water Quality

Improvement. CH2M Hill Canada Limited, Waterloo,

ON: 15–21.

Khalil, A., P. Prudent, M. M. Bettaieb & M. Domeizel, 2005.

Pilot treatment plant: constructed soil reed bed for a

cheese dairy farm effluent. In Book of Abstracts of the

International Symposium on Wetland Pollutant Dynamics

and Control. Ghent University, Belgium: 77–78.

Kinsley, C. B., A. M. Crolla, N. Kuyucak, M. Zimmer & A.

Lafleche, 2006. Nitrogen dynamics in a constructed wet-

land system treating landfill leachate. In Dias, V. & J.



MAOTDR, Lisbon: 295–305.

Kludze, H. K. & R. D. DeLaune, 1996. Soil redox intensity

effects on oxygen exchange and growth of cattail and

sawgrass. Soil Science Society of America Journal 60:

616–621.

Kucuk, O. S., F. Sengul & I. K. Kapdan, 2003. Removal of

ammonia from tannery effluents in a reed bed constructed

wetland. Water Science and Technology 48(11/12):

179–186.

Kvet, J. & I. Ostry, 1988. Mineral nutrient accumulation in the

principal plant communities in the Rozmberk fishpond

littoral. In Hroudova, Z. (ed.), Littoral Vegetation of the

Rozmberk Fishpond and its Mineral Nutrient Economy,

Studie CSAV, 88/9. Academia, Praha: 97–104.

Kvet, J., M. Tetter & F. Klimes, 1996. Grassland production as

a basis for agricultural use of the Luznice floodplain. In

Prach, K., J. Jenık & A. R. G. Lange (eds), Floodplain

Ecology and Management. SPB Academic Publishing,

Amsterdam: 245–249.

Kvet, J., J. Dusek & S. Husak, 1999. Vascular plants suitable

for wastewater treatment in temperate zones. In Vymazal,

J. (ed.), Nutrient Cycling and Retention in Natural and

Constructed Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden:

101–110.

Kyambadde, J., F. Kansiime, L. Gumaelius & G. Dalhammar,

2004. A comparative study of Cyperus papyrus and Mi-scanthidium violaceum-based constructed wetlands for

wastewater treatment in tropical climate. Water Research

38: 475–485.

Laing, H. E., 1940. Respiration of the rhizomes of Nupharadvenum and other water plants. American Journal of

Botany 27: 574–581.

Lavergne, S. & J. Molofsky, 2004. Reed canary grass (Phalarisarundinacea) as a biological model in the study of plant

invasions. Critical Reviews in Plant Science 23: 415–429.

Lavigne, R. L. & J. Jankiewicz, 2000. Artificial wetland

treatment technology and it’s use in the Amazon River

forests of Ecuador. In Proceedings of 7th International


Control. University of Florida, Gainesville: 813–820.

Lawson, G. J., 1985. Cultivating reeds (Phragmites australis)

for root zone treatment of sewage. Contract Report ITE,

965th ed. Water Research Centre, Cumbria.

Hydrobiologia

123

Lee, C. Y., C. C. Lee, F. Y. Lee, S. K. Tseng & C. J. Liao,

2004. Performance of subsurface flow constructed wet-

land taking pretreated swine effluent under heavy loads.

Bioresource Technology 92: 173–179.

Lewandowski, I., J. M. O. Scurlock, E. Lindvall & M. Chris-

tou, 2003. The development and current status of peren-

nial rhizomatous grasses as energy crops in the US and

Europe. Biomass and Bioenergy 25: 335–361.

Li, J., Y. Wen, Q. Zhou, Z. Xingjie, X. Li, S. Yang & T. Lin,

2008. Influence of vegetation and substrate on the removal

and transformation of dissolved organic matter in hori-

zontal subsurface-flow constructed wetland. Bioresource

Technology 99: 4990–4996.

Lin, Y. F., S. R. Jing, D. Y. Lee & T. W. Wang, 2002. Nutrient

removal from aquaculture wastewater using a constructed

wetlands system. Aquaculture 209: 169–184.

Lin, Y. F., S. R. Jing & D. Y. Lee, 2003. The potential use of

constructed wetlands in a recirculating aquaculture system

for shrimp culture. Environmental Pollution 123: 107–113.

M’hiri, F. M., S. Kouki & B. Hanchi, 2005. Performance of

constructed wetland treating domestic wastewaters in

Tunisia: first experience. In Book of Abstracts of the

International Symposium on Wetland Pollutant Dynamics

and Control. Ghent University, Belgium: 114–115.

Maddison, M., K. Soosaar, L. Lohmus & U. Mander, 2003.

Typha populations in wastewater treatment wetlands in

Estonia: biomass production, retention of nutrients and

heavy metals. In Mander, U., C. Vohla & A. Poom (eds),

Proceedings of Conference on Constructed and Riverine

Wetlands for Optimal Control of Wastewater at Catch-

ment Scale. University of Tartu, Tartu: 274–281.

Maddison, M., T. Mauring, K. Remm, M. Lesta & U. Mander,

2009. Dynamics of Typha latifolia L. populations in

treatment wetlands in Estonia. Ecological Engineering 35:

258–264.

Mæhlum, T. & P. D. Jenssen, 2003. Design and performance of

integrated subsurface flow wetlands in a cold climate. In

Mander, U. & P. Jenssen (eds), Constructed Wetlands for

Wastewater Treatment in Cold Climates. WIT Press,

Southampton: 69–86.

Mæhlum, T., W. S. Warner, P. Stalnacke & P. D. Jenssen,

1999. Leachate treatment in extended aeration lagoons

and constructed wetlands in Norway. In Mulamoottil, G.,

E. A. McBean & F. Revers (eds), Constructed Wetlands

for the Treatment of Landfill Leachates. Lewis Publisher/


Maine, M. A., H. Hadad, G. Sanchez, S. Caffaratti & C. Bo-

netto, 2006. Removal efficiency in a constructed wetland

for wastewater treatment from a tool factory. In Dias, V.

& J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 10th International


Control. MAOTDR, Lisbon: 1753–1761.

Maltais-Landry, G., R. Maranger & J. Brison, 2009. Effect of

artificial aeration and macrophyte species on nitrogen

cycling and gas flux in constructed wetlands. Ecological


Mander, U. & P. Jenssen (eds), 2003. Constructed Wetlands for

Wastewater Treatment in Cold Climates. WIT Press,

Southampton.

Mander, U., V. Kuusemets, M. Oovel, T. Mauring, R. Ihme &

A. Pieterse, 2001. Wastewater purification efficiency in

experimental treatment wetlands in Estonia. In Vymazal,

J. (ed.), Transformations of Nutrients in Natural and

Constructed Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden:

201–224.

Mander, U., K. Lohmus, S. Teiter, K. Nurk, T. Mauring &

J. Augustin, 2005. Gaseous fluxes from subsurface flow

constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Journal of

Environmental Science and Health 40A: 1215–1226.

Mantovi, P., M. Marmiroli, E. Maestri, S. Tagliavini, S.

Piccinini & N. Marmiroli, 2003. Application of a hori-

zontal subsurface flow constructed wetland on treatment

of dairy parlor wastewater. Bioresource Technology 88:

85–94.

Mantovi, P., S. Piccinni, F. Lina, M. Marmiroli & N. Mar-

miroli, 2007. Treating wastewaters from cheese produc-

tions in H-SSF constructed wetlands. In Borin, M. & S.

Bacelle (eds), Proceedings of International Conference on

Multi Functions of Wetland Systems. P.A.N. s.r.l., Pado-

va: 72–73.

Marschner, H. & V. Romheld, 1996. Root-induced changes in

the availability of micronutrients in the rhizosphere. In

Waisel, Y., A. Eshel & U. Kafkaki (eds), Plant Roots: The

Hidden Half. Marcel Decker Inc, New York: 557–580.

Masi, F., G. Conte, N. Martinuzzi & B. Pucci, 2002. Winery

high organic content wastewaters treated by constructed

wetlands in Mediterranean climate. In Proceedings of 8th


Pollution Control. University of Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania/

IWA: 274–282.

Mason, C. F. & R. J. Bryant, 1975. Production, nutrient content

and decomposition of Phragmites communis Trin and

Typha angustifolia L. Journal of Ecology 63: 71–95.

Mauring, T., 2003. The use of reed and cattail produced in

constructed wetlands as building material. In Mander, U.,

C. Vohla & A. Poom (eds), Constructed and Riverine

Wetlands for Optimal Control of Wastewater at Catch-

ment Scale. Institute of Geography, University of Tartu,

Tartu: 286–288.

Maxwell, G., 1957. A Reed Shaken by the Wind. Longmans

Green, London.

Mbuligwe, S. E., 2004. Comparative effectiveness of engi-

neered wetland systems in the treatment of anaerobically

pre-treated domestic wastewater. Ecological Engineering

23: 269–284.

Merigliano, M. F. & P. Lesica, 1998. The native status of reed

canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) in the inland

Northwest, USA. Natural Areas Journal 18: 223–230.

Merlin, G., J.-L. Pajean & T. Lissolo, 2002. Performances of

constructed wetlands for municipal wastewater treatment

in rural mountainous area. Hydrobiologia 469: 87–98.

Munch, C., P. Kuschk & I. Roske, 2005. Root stimulated

nitrogen removal: only a local effect or important for

water treatment. Water Science and Technology 51(9):

185–192.

Murphy, C., D. J. Cooper & P. Hawes, 2008. The application of

wetland technology for copper removal from distillery

wastewater: a case study. In Billore, S., P. Dass &



Control, Vol. 1. Institute of Environmental Management


Hydrobiologia

123

Naylor, S., J. Brisson, M. A. Labelle, A. Drizo & Y. Comeau,

2003. Treatment of freshwater fish farm effluent using

constructed wetlands: the role of plants and substrate.


Nelson, M., F. Cattin, M. Rajendran & L. Hafouda, 2008.

Value-adding through creation of high diversity gardens

and ecospaces in subsurface flow constructed wetlands:

Case studies in Algeria and Australia of Wastewater

Gardens� systems. In Billore, S., P. Dass & J. Vymazal


Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control, Vol. 1.

Institute of Environmental Management and Plant Sci-

ences, Vikram University, Ujjain: 344–356.

Neori, A., K. R. Reddy, H. Cıskova-Koncalova & M. Agami,

2000. Bioactive chemicals and biological-biochemical

activities and their functions in rhizospheres of wetland

plants. Botanical Reviews 66: 350–378.

Nilsson, D. & P. A. Hansson, 2001. Influence of various

machinery combinations, fuel proportions and storage

capacities on costs for co-handling of straw and reed

canary grass to district heating plants. Biomass and Bio-

energy 20: 247–260.

Nishizawa, K., I. Nakata, A. Kishida, W. A. Ayer & L.

M. Browne, 1990. Some biologically active tannins of

Nuphar variegatum. Phytochemistry 9: 2491–2494.

Nivala, J. & D. P. L. Rousseau, 2008. Reversing clogging in

subsurface-flow constructed wetlands by hydrogen per-

oxide treatment: two case studies. In Billore, S., P. Dass &



Control, Vol. 1. Institute of Environment Management


Obarska-Pempkowiak, H. & T. Ozimek, 2003. Comparison of

usefulness of three emergent macrophytes for surface

water protection against pollution and eutrophication:

case study, Bielkowo, Poland. In Vymazal, J. (ed.),

Wetlands-Nutrients, Metals and Mass Cycling. Backhuys


Okurut, T. O., 2001. Plant growth and nutrient uptake in a

tropical constructed wetland. In Vymazal, J. (ed.),

Transformations of Nutrients in Natural and Constructed

Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden: 451–462.

Pandey, M. K., B. R. Kansakar, V. Tare & P. D. Jenssen, 2006.

Feasibility study of municipal wastewater treatment using

pilot scale constructed wetlands in Nepal. In Dias, V. & J.



MAOTDR, Lisbon: 1919–1926.

Pantano, J., R. Bullock, D. McCarthy, T. Sharp & C. Stilwell,

2000. Using wetlands to remove metals from mining

impacted groundwater. In Means, J. L. & R. E. Hinchee

(eds), Wetlands & Remediation. Battelle Press, Colum-

bus, OH: 383–390.

Paul, E. A. & F. E. Clark, 1996. Soil Microbiology and Bio-

chemistry, 2nd ed. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.

Paulo, P. L., L. Begosso, N. Pansonato, M. A. Bonez & R.

R. Shrestha, 2008. Design and configuration criteria for

wetland systems treating greywater. In Billore, S., P. Dass

& J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th International


Control, Vol. 1. Institute of Environment Management


Philippi, L. S., P. H. Sezerino, B. Panceri, D. P. Olijnyk & B.

Kossatz, 2006. Root zone system to treat wastewater in

rural areas in south of Brazil. In Dias, V. & J. Vymazal


Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. MAOTDR,

Lisbon: 901–908.

Platzer, C., 1996. Enhanced nitrogen elimination in subsurface

flow artificial wetlands – a multi stage concept. In Pro-


Systems for Water Pollution Control, Chapter I/7. Uni-

versitat fur Bodenkultur, Vienna.

Platzer, M., V. Caceresy, N. Fong & R. Haberl, 2002. Inves-

tigations and experiences with subsurface flow con-

structed wetlands in Nicaragua, Central America. In



Salaam and IWA, Arusha, Tanzania: 350–365.

Poggi-Varaldo, H. M., A. Gutierez-Saravia, G. Fernandez-

Villagomez, P. Martınez-Pereda & N. Rinderknecht-Sei-

jas, 2002. A full-scale system with wetlands for slaugh-

terhouse wastewater treatment. In Nehring, K. W. & S.

E. Brauning (eds), Wetlands and Remediation II. Battelle

Press, Columbus, OH: 213–223.

Prystay, W. & K. V. Lo, 1998. Assessment of constructed

wetlands for the reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus

from greenhouse wastewaters. In Tauk-Tornisielo, S. M.

& E. Salati Filho (eds), Proceedings of 6th International

Conference on Wetlands Systems for Water Pollution

Control. Universidade Estadual Paulista, Sao Paulo State,

Brazil/IAQW: 101–114.

Pucci, B., G. Conte, N. Martinuzzi, L. Giovannelli & F. Masi,

2000. Design and performance of a horizontal flow con-

structed wetland for treatment of dairy and agricultural

wastewater in the ‘‘Chianti’’ countryside. In Proceedings

of 7th International Conference on Wetland Systems for

Water Pollution Control. Lake Buena Vista, Florida.

University of Florida, Gainesville/International Water

Association: 1433–1436.

Pullin, B. P. & D. A. Hammer, 1991. Aquatic plants improve

wastewater treatment. Water and Environmental Tech-

nology 3: 36–40.

Rice, E. E., 1984. Allelopathy, 2nd ed. Academic Press, New

York.

Rivas, H., 2008. Technical, social, economical and environ-

mental aspects related to the use of constructed wetlands to

preserve the water quality in a Mexican lake. In Billore, S.,

P. Dass & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of 11th Interna-




Rivera, F., A. Warren, E. Ramirez, O. Decamp, P. Bonilla, E.

Gallogos, A. Calderon & J. T. Sanchez, 1995. Removal of

pathogens from wastewaters by the root zone method

(RZM). Water Science and Technology 32: 211–218.

Robinson, H., G. Harris, M. Carville, M. Barr & S. Last, 1999.

The use of an engineered reed bed system to treat leachate

at Monument Hill landfill site, southern England. In

Mulamoottil, G., E. A. McBean & F. Rovers (eds),

Hydrobiologia

123

Constructed Wetlands for the Treatment of Landfill

Leachate. Lewis Publishers/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL:

71–97.

Rodewald-Rudescu, L., 1974. Das Schilfrohr, Phragmitescommunis Trin. Die Binnengewasser, Bd. 27. Schweiz-

erbart’scher Verlag, Stuttgart.

Romheld, V., 1991. The role of phytosiderophores in acquisi-

tion of iron and other micronutrients in graminaceous

species: an ecological approach. Plant and Soil 130:

127–134.

Rothlisberger, F., 1996. Kickuth reed bed technology – the

situation in Switzerland with a comparison between

technical wastewater treatment and Kickuth reed bed

technology. In Proceedings of 5th International Confer-

ence on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control.

Universitat fur Bodenkultur, Vienna, Poster 36.

Rovira, A. D., 1969. Plant root exudates. Botanical Reviews

35: 35–57.

Sainty, G. R. & S. W. L. Jacobs, 2003. Waterplants in Aus-

tralia, 4th ed. Sainty and Associates Pty Ltd, Potts Point.

Sands, Z., L. S. Gill & R. Rust, 2000. Effluent treatment reed

beds: results after ten years of operation. In Means, J. F. &

R. E. Hinchee (eds), Wetlands and Remediation. Battelle

Press, Columbus, OH: 273–279.

Sanford, W. E., 1999. Substrate type, flow characteristics, and

detention times related to landfill leachate treatment effi-

ciency in constructed wetlands. In Mulamoottil, G., E.

A. McBean & F. Rovers (eds), Constructed Wetlands for

the Treatment of Landfill Leachate. Lewis Publishers/


Schulz, C., J. Gelbrecht & B. Rennert, 2003. Treatment of

rainbow trout farm effluents in constructed wetland with

emergent plants and subsurface horizontal water flow.

Aquaculture 217: 207–221.

Seidel, K., 1965. Phenol-Abbau in Wasser durch Scirpus la-custris L. wahrend einer Versuchsdauer von 31 Monaten.

Naturwissenschaften 52: 398–406.

Seidel, K., 1976. Macrophytes and water purification. In

Tourbier, J. & R. W. Pierson (eds), Biological Control of

Water Pollution. Pennsylvania University Press, Phila-

delphia, PA: 109–122.

Seliskar, D. M., 1988. Waterlogging stress and ethylene pro-

duction in the dune slack plant, Scirpus americanus.

Journal of Experimental Botany 39: 1639–1648.

Serrano, L., D. de la Vega, M. A. Diaz, I. Ruiz, R. Bondelle &

M. Soto, 2008. First results of a constructed wetland

treating winery and domestic wastewater. In Billore, S., P.





Shutes, R. B. E., D. M. Revitt, L. N. L. Scholes, M. Forshaw &

B. Winter, 2001. An experimental constructed wetland

system for the treatment of highway runoff in the UK.

Water Science and Technology 44(11/12): 571–578.

Singh, D. K. & S. Kumar, 2008. Nitrate reductase, arginine

deaminase, urease and dehydrogenases activities in natu-

ral soil (ridge with forest) and in cotton soil after cetam-

iprid treatments. Chemosphere 71: 412–418.

Singh, S., R. Haberl, O. Moog, R. R. Shrestha, P. Shrestha &

R. Shrestha, 2009. Performance of an anaerobic baffled

reactor and hybrid constructed wetland treating high-

strength wastewater in Nepal – a model for DEWATS.

Ecological Engineering 35: 654–660.

Smith, I. D., G. N. Bis, E. R. Lemon & L. R. Rozema, 1996. A

thermal analysis of a sub-surface, vertical flow con-

structed wetland. In Proceedings of 5th International


Control, Chapter I/1. Universitat fur Bodenkultur, Vienna.

Soetaert, K., M. Hoffmann, P. Meire, M. Starink, D. van

Oevelen, S. van Regenmortel & T. Cox, 2004. Modelling

growth and carbon allocation in two reed beds (Phrag-mites australis) in the Scheldt estuary. Aquatic Botany 79:

211–234.

Sorrell, B. K. & W. Armstrong, 1994. On the difficulties of

measuring oxygen release by root systems of wetland

plants. Journal of Ecology 82: 177–183.

Soto, F., M. Garcia, E. de Luis & E. Becares, 1999. Role of

Scirpus lacustris in bacterial and nutrient removal from

wastewater. Water Science and Technology 40: 241–247.

Steer, D., L. Fraser, J. Boddy & B. Seibert, 2002. Efficiency of

small constructed wetlands for subsurface treatment of

single-family domestic effluent. Ecological Engineering

18: 429–440.

Steinmann, C. R., S. Weinhart & A. Melzer, 2003. A combined

system of lagoon and constructed wetland for an effective

wastewater treatment. Water Research 37: 2035–2042.

Stewart, E., 2005. Evaluation of Septic Tank and Subsurface

Flow Wetland for Jamaican Public School Wastewater

Treatment. MSc. Thesis, Michigan Technological

University.

Strusevicius, Z. & S. M. Struseviciene, 2003. Investigations of

wastewater produced on cattle-breeding farms and its

treatment in constructed wetlands. In Mander, U., C. Vohla

& A. Poom (eds), Proceedings of International Conference

on Constructed and Riverine Wetlands for Optimal Con-

trol of Wastewater at Catchment Scale. University of

Tartu, Institute of Geography, Tartu: 317–324.

Studer, C. & R. Brandle, 1984. Sauerstoffkonsum und -ver-

sorgung der Rhizome von Acorus calamus L., Glyceriamaxima (Hartmann) Holmberg, Menyanthes trifoliata L.,

Phalaris arundinacea L., Phragmites communis Trin. und

Typha latifolia L. Botanica Helvetica 94: 23–31.

Surface, M. J., J. H. Peverly, T. S. Steenhuis & W. E. Sanford,

1993. Effect of season, substrate composition, and plant

growth on landfill leachate treatment in a constructed

wetland. In Moshiri, G. A. (ed.), Constructed Wetlands for

Water Quality Improvement. Lewis Publishers, Boca

Raton, FL: 461–472.

Szczepanski, A. J., 1977. Allelopathy as a means of biological

control of water weeds. Aquatic Botany 3: 193–197.

Tanner, C. C., 1992. Treatment of dairy farm wastewaters in

horizontal and up-flow gravel-bed constructed wetlands.

In Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Wet-

land Systems in Water Pollution Control. IAWQ and

Australian Water and Wastewater Association, Sydney,

NSW: 21.1–21.9.

Tanner, C. C., 1994. Treatment of agricultural wastewaters and

growth of Schoenoplectus validus in constructed wetlands.

Ph.D. Thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton.

Tanner, C. C., 1996. Plants for constructed wetland treatment

systems – a comparison of the growth and nutrient uptake

Hydrobiologia

123

of eight emergent species. Ecological Engineering 7:

59–83.

Tanner, C. C., J. S. Clayton & M. P. Upsdell, 1995. Effect of

loading rate and planting on treatment of dairy farm

wastewaters. I. Removal of oxygen demand, suspended

solids and faecal coliforms. Water Research 29: 17–26.

Teal, J. M. & J. W. Kanwisher, 1966. Gas transport in the

marsh grass Spartina alterniflora. Journal of Experimental

Botany 17: 355–361.

Thut, R. N., 1993. Feasibility of treating pulp mill effluent with

a constructed wetland. In Moshiri, G. A. (ed.), Con-

structed Wetlands for Water Quality Improvement. CRC/

Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL: 441–447.

Tiner, R. W., 1999. Wetland Indicators. A Guide to Wetland

Identification, Delineation, Classification, and Mapping.

Lewis Publishers/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Urbanc-Bercic, O., T. Bulc & D. Vrhovsek, 1998. Slovenia. In

Vymazal, J., H. Brix, P. F. Cooper, M. B. Green & R.

Haberl (eds), Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater

Treatment in Europe. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden:

241–250.

Vacca, G., H. Wand, M. Nikolausz, P. Kuschk & M. Kastner,

2005. Effect of plants and filter materials on bacteria

removal in pilot-scale constructed wetlands. Water

Research 39: 1361–1373.

Van Oostrom, A. J. & R. N. Cooper, 1990. Meat processing

effluent treatment in surface-flow and gravel-bed con-

structed wastewater wetlands. In Cooper, P. F. & B.

C. Findlater (eds), Constructed Wetlands in Water Pol-

lution Control. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 321–332.

Vincent, G., S. Dallaire & D. Lauzer, 1994. Antimicrobial

properties of roots exudate of three macrophytes: Menthaaquatica L., Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. and Scirpuslacustris L. In Proceedings of 4th International Confer-


ICWS’94 Secretariat, Guangzhou: 290–296.

Vrhovsek, D., V. Kukanja & T. Bulc, 1996. Constructed wet-

land (CW) for industrial waste water treatment. Water

Research 30: 2287–2292.

Vymazal, J., 1995. Algae and Element Cycling in Wetlands.

Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI.

Vymazal, J., 2001. Removal of organics in Czech constructed

wetlands with horizontal sub-surface flow. In Vymazal, J.

(ed.), Transformations of Nutrients in Natural and Con-

structed Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden: 305–327.

Vymazal, J., 2004. Removal of phosphorus in constructed

wetlands with sub-surface flow in the Czech Republic.

Water, Air, and Soil Pollution: Focus 4: 657–670.

Vymazal, J., 2005. Removal of heavy metals in a horizontal

sub-surface flow constructed wetland. Journal of Envi-

ronmental Science and Health 40A: 1369–1379.

Vymazal, J., 2006. The use of constructed wetlands for

wastewater treatment in the Czech Republic. In Burk, A.

R. (ed.), Focus on Ecology Research. Nova Science

Publishers Inc., New York: 175–196.

Vymazal, J., 2009. Horizontal sub-surface flow constructed wet-

lands Ondrejov and Spalene Porıcı in the Czech Republic –

15 years of operation. Desalination 246: 226–237.

Vymazal, J. & P. Krasa, 2003. Distribution of Mn, Al, Cu and

Zn in a constructed wetland receiving municipal sewage.


Vymazal, J. & L. Kropfelova, 2005. Growth of Phragmitesaustralis and Phalaris arundinacea in constructed wet-

lands for wastewater treatment in the Czech Republic.

Ecological Engineering 25: 606–621.

Vymazal, J. & L. Kropfelova, 2008a. Wastewater Treatment in

Constructed Wetlands with Horizontal Sub-Surface Flow.

Springer, Dordrecht.

Vymazal, J. & L. Kropfelova, 2008b. Is concentration of dis-

solved oxygen a good indicator of processes in filtration

bed of horizontal-flow constructed wetlands? In Vymazal,

J. (ed.), Wastewater Treatment, Plant Dynamics and

Management in Constructed and Natural Wetlands.

Springer, Dordrecht: 311–317.

Vymazal, J., H. Brix, P. F. Cooper, M. B. Green & R. Haberl

(eds), 1998. Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater

Treatment in Europe. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.

Vymazal, J., J. Dusek & J. Kvet, 1999. Nutrient uptake and

storage by plants in constructed wetlands with horizontal

sub-surface flow: a comparative study. In Vymazal, J. (ed.),

Nutrient Cycling and Retention in Natural and Constructed

Wetlands. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden: 85–100.

Vymazal, J., V. Ottova, J. Balcarova & H. Dousova, 2003.

Seasonal variation in fecal indicators removal in con-

structed wetlands with horizontal subsurface flow. In

Mander, U. & P. Jenssen (eds), Constructed Wetlands for

Wastewater treatment in Cold Climates. WIT Press,

Southampton: 237–258.

Vymazal, J., J. Svehla, L. Kropfelova & V. Chrastny, 2007.

Trace metals in Phragmites australis and Phalaris arun-dinacea growing in constructed and natural wetlands.

Science of the Total Environment 380: 154–162.

Vymazal, J., C. B. Craft & C. J. Richardson, 2008. Plant

community response to long-term N and P fertilization. In

Richardson, J. (ed.), The Everglads Experiments. Lessons

for Ecosystem Restoration. Ecological Studies 201,

Springer , Berlin: 505–527.

Vymazal, J., L. Kropfelova, J. Svehla, V. Chrastny & J. Stıc-

hova, 2009. Trace elements in Phragmites australisgrowing in constructed wetlands for treatment of muni-

cipal wastewater. Ecological Engineering 35: 303–309.

Wallace, S. D., 2002. On-site remediation of petroleum contact

wastes using subsurface-flow wetlands. In Nehring, K. W.

& S. E. Brauning (eds), Wetlands and Remediation II.

Battelle Press, Columbus, OH: 125–132.

Wallace, S. D. & R. L. Knight, 2006. Small Scale Constructed

Wetland Treatment Systems. Feasibility, Design Criteria,

and O&M Requirements. Water Environment Research

Foundation, Alexandria, VA.

Wang, J., X. Cai, Y. Chen, Y. Yang, M. Liang, Y. Zhang, Z.

Wang, Q. Li & X. Liao, 1994. Analysis of the configu-

ration and the treatment effect of constructed wetland

wastewater treatment system for different wastewaters in

South China. In Proceedings of 4th International Confer-



Watson, J. T., K. D. Choate & G. R. Steiner, 1990. Perfor-

mance of constructed wetland treatment systems at Ben-

ton, Hardin, and Pembroke, Kentucky, during the early

vegetation establishment phase. In Cooper, P. F. &

B. C. Findlater (eds), Constructed Wetlands in Water

Pollution Control. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 171–182.

Hydrobiologia

123

White, K. D., 1994. Enhancement of nitrogen removal in

subsurface-flow constructed wetlands by employing a

2-stage configuration, an unsaturated zone, and recircu-

lation. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on

Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. ICWS’94

Secretariat, Guangzhou: 219–229.

Williams, J. B., D. Zambrano, M. G. Ford, E. May &

J. E. Butler, 1999. Constructed wetlands for wastewater

treatment in Colombia. Water Science and Technology

40(3): 217–223.

Winter, M. & R. Kickuth, 1989. Elimination of sulphur com-

pounds from wastewater by the root zone process I. Per-

formance of a large-scale purification plant at a textile

finishing industry. Water Research 23: 535–546.

Wojciechowska, E. & H. Obarska-Pempkowiak, 2008. Per-

formance of reed beds supplied with municipal landfill

leachate. In Vymazal, J. (ed.), Wastewater Treatment,

Plant Dynamics and Management in Constructed and

Natural Wetlands. Springer, Dordrecht: 251–265.

Wood, A. & L. C. Hensman, 1989. Research to develop engi-

neering guidelines for implementation of constructed

wetlands for wastewater treatment in Southern Africa. In

Hammer, D. A. (ed.), Constructed Wetlands for Waste-

water Treatment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI: 581–589.

Worrall, P., D. M. Revitt, G. Prickett & D. Brewer, 2002.

Constructed wetlands for airport runoff–the London

Heathrow experience. In Nehring, K. W. & S. E. Brauning

(eds), Wetlands and Remediation II. Battelle Press,

Columbus, OH: 177–186.

Yang, L. & C. C. Hu, 2005. Treatments of oil-refinery and

steel-mill wastewaters by mesocosm constructed wetland

systems. Water Science and Technology 51(9): 157–164.

Yang, Y., X. Zhencheng, H. Kangping, W. Junsan &

W. Guizhi, 1994. Removal efficiency of the constructed

wetland wastewater treatment system at Bainikeng,

Shenzhen. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference

on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control.


Zachritz II, W. H. & R. B. Jacquez, 1993. Treating intensive

aquaculture recycled water with a constructed wetlands

filter system. In Moshiri, G. A. (ed.), Constructed Wet-

lands for Water Quality Improvement. CRC Press/Lewis

Publishers, Boca Raton, FL: 609–614.

Zhou, Q., R. Zhang, Y. Shi, Y. Li, J. Paing & B. Picot, 2004.

Nitrogen and phosphorus removal in subsurface con-

structed wetland treating agriculture stormwater runoff. In


Systems for Water Pollution Control. ASTEE 2004 and

Cemagref, Lyon: 75–82.

Zupancic Justin, M., M. Zupancic, T. Griessler Bulc, A. Zri-

mec, V. Simon Selih, P. Bukovec & D. Vrhovsek, 2007.

Combined purification and reuse of landfill leachate by

constructed wetland and irrigation of grass and willows.

In Borin, M. & S. Bacelle (eds), Proceedings of Interna-

tional Conference on Multi Functions of Wetland Sys-

tems. P.A.N. s.r.l., Padova: 118–119.

Zupancic Justin, M., D. Vrhovsek, A. Stuhlbacher & T.

G. Bulc, 2009. Treatment of wastewater in hybrid con-

structed wetland from the production of vinegar and

packaging of detergents. Desalination 246: 100–109.

Zurita, F., J. De Anda & M. A. Belmont, 2009. Treatment of

domestic wastewater and production of commercial

flowers in vertical and horizontal subsurface-flow con-

structed wetlands. Ecological Engineering 35: 861–869.

Zust, B. & A. Schonborn, 2003. Constructed wetlands for

wastewater treatment in cold climates: planted soil filter

Schattweid – 13 years’ experience. In Mander, U. &


Treatment in Cold Climates. WIT Press, Southampton:

53–68.

Hydrobiologia

123