You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Co-treatment of landfill leachate and municipal wastewater using the ZELIAC/zeolite constructed wetland system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Environmental Management, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.10.020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amin Mojiri, Lou Ziyang, Ramlah Mohd Tajuddin, Hossein Farraji, Nafiseh Alifar |
| Abstract |
Constructed wetland (CW) is a low-cost alternative technology to treat wastewater. This study was conducted to co-treat landfill leachate and municipal wastewater by using a CW system. Typha domingensis was transplanted to CW, which contains two substrate layers of adsorbents, namely, ZELIAC and zeolite. Response surface methodology and central composite design have been utilized to analyze experimental data. Contact time (h) and leachate-to-wastewater mixing ratio (%; v/v) were considered as independent variables. Colour, COD, ammonia, nickel, and cadmium contents were used as dependent variables. At optimum contact time (50.2 h) and leachate-to-wastewater mixing ratio (20.0%), removal efficiencies of colour, COD, ammonia, nickel, and cadmium contents were 90.3%, 86.7%, 99.2%, 86.0%, and 87.1%, respectively. The accumulation of Ni and Cd in the roots and shoots of T. domingensis was also monitored. Translocation factor (TF) was >1 in several runs; thus, Typha is classified as a hyper-accumulator plant. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 196 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 11% |
| Researcher | 18 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 29 | 15% |
| Unknown | 53 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 42 | 21% |
| Environmental Science | 41 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 6% |
| Chemical Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 11% |
| Unknown | 67 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 March 2021.
All research outputs
#7,778,730
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Environmental Management
#1,869
of 6,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,744
of 294,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Environmental Management
#11
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.