↓ Skip to main content

Denitrifying woodchip bioreactor and phosphorus filter pairing to minimize pollution swapping

Overview of attention for article published in Water Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 5,590)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
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.
Title
Denitrifying woodchip bioreactor and phosphorus filter pairing to minimize pollution swapping
Published in
Water Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.watres.2017.05.026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura E. Christianson, Christine Lepine, Philip L. Sibrell, Chad Penn, Steven T. Summerfelt

Abstract

Pairing denitrifying woodchip bioreactors and phosphorus-sorbing filters provides a unique, engineered approach for dual nutrient removal from waters impaired with both nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P). This column study aimed to test placement of two P-filter media (acid mine drainage treatment residuals and steel slag) relative to a denitrifying system to maximize N and P removal and minimize pollution swapping under varying flow conditions (i.e., woodchip column hydraulic retention times (HRTs) of 7.2, 18, and 51 h; P-filter HRTs of 7.6-59 min). Woodchip denitrification columns were placed either upstream or downstream of P-filters filled with either medium. The configuration with woodchip denitrifying systems placed upstream of the P-filters generally provided optimized dissolved P removal efficiencies and removal rates. The P-filters placed upstream of the woodchip columns exhibited better P removal than downstream-placed P-filters only under overly long (i.e., N-limited) retention times when highly reduced effluent exited the woodchip bioreactors. The paired configurations using mine drainage residuals provided significantly greater P removal than the steel slag P-filters (e.g., 25-133 versus 8.8-48 g P removed m(-3) filter media d(-1), respectively), but there were no significant differences in N removal between treatments (removal rates: 8.0-18 g N removed m(-3) woodchips d(-1); N removal efficiencies: 18-95% across all HRTs). The range of HRTs tested here resulted in various undesirable pollution swapping by-products from the denitrifying bioreactors: nitrite production when nitrate removal was not complete and sulfate reduction, chemical oxygen demand production and decreased pH during overly long retention times. The downstream P-filter placement provided a polishing step for removal of chemical oxygen demand and nitrite.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 20%
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Professor 6 6%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 15 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 24 23%
Engineering 23 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 17%
Chemical Engineering 5 5%
Mathematics 1 <1%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 26 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 73. 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 17 August 2017.
All research outputs
#191,418
of 12,269,818 outputs
Outputs from Water Research
#16
of 5,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,280
of 267,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Water Research
#4
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,269,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,590 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 267,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.