Premium
The Fate and Transport of Viruses through Surface Water Constructed Wetlands
Author(s) -
Chendorain Michael,
Yates Marylynn,
Villegas Frank
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
journal of environmental quality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.888
H-Index - 171
eISSN - 1537-2537
pISSN - 0047-2425
DOI - 10.2134/jeq1998.00472425002700060022x
Subject(s) - wetland , constructed wetland , coliphage , tracer , residence time (fluid dynamics) , hydrology (agriculture) , environmental science , effluent , environmental engineering , dispersion (optics) , chemistry , soil science , wastewater , environmental chemistry , ecology , bacteriophage , biology , physics , geology , geotechnical engineering , biochemistry , escherichia coli , gene , nuclear physics , optics
Coliphage removal efficiency and the effects of wetland hydrology on virus transport were determined for constructed wetlands in San Jacinto, CA. Mathematical models were used to further characterize virus transport. MS2, an F‐specific RNA (FRNA) coliphage was used as a model for human enteric viral behavior. Two wetland types were studied, a one‐phase cell and three‐phase cell. These wetlands received unchlorinated secondary effluent at a constant rate. The mean residence time in the wetlands was 9 ± 3 d as determined using bromide as a conservative tracer. Assuming 100% porosity, a plug flow model predicts this mean residence time within the experimental standard deviation (8 d). This suggests that a negligible volume was occupied by vegetation and settled solids. The convection‐dispersion equation adequately simulated the residence time distribution of the conservative tracer. MS2 removal in the wetlands was experimentally determined to be 97 ± 3%. There was no distinction between the two wetland types in terms of removal efficiency. The average coliphage decay rate was calculated to be 0.44 per day. However, the error involved with using the first order decay rate was high, 83 ± 12%. Therefore, first order decay does not adequately describe removal processes within the wetland. Most virus removal occurred within the first 3 m ( k = 4.0 ± 1.8 d −1 ) with a removal efficiency of 85.3 ± 0.6%. The remainder had a decay rate of 0.20 ± 0.17 d −1 with a removal efficiency of 56 ± 33%.