Wetlands For Tropical Applications

S FOR
TROPICAL APPLICATIONS
Wastewater Treatment by Constructed Wetlands
Edited by
NorioTANAKA
W u n Jern N G
K B S N JINADASA
Imperial College Press

WETLANDS FOR
P599.9781848162976-tp.indd 1 6/7/11 11:50 AM

WETLANDS FOR
Edited by
Norio Tanaka
Saitama University, Japan
Wun Jern Ng
Nanyang Environment & Water Research Institute,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
K B S N Jinadasa
University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka

ICP
P599.9781848162976-tp.indd 2 6/7/11 11:50 AM

This page is intentionally left blank
Published by
57 Shelton Street
Covent Garden
London WC2H 9HE
Distributed by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224
USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
WETLANDS FOR TROPICAL APPLICATIONS

Copyright © 2011 by Imperial College Press
All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the Publisher.
For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance
Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy is
not required from the publisher.
Desk Editor: Tjan Kwang Wei
ISBN-13 978-1-84816-297-6
ISBN-10 1-84816-297-9
Typeset by Stallion Press

Email: enquiries@stallionpress.com
Printed in Singapore.
KwangWei - Wetlands for Tropical Appls.pmd 1 6/13/2011, 11:58 AM

b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page v
b1033 Constructed Wetlands for Tropical Applications
PREFACE
There is growing awareness that highly mechanized wastewater treat-

ment can be energy intensive and this may not be consistent with the
environments in which such activity is to take place. Pertinent issues
then may include the cost of energy and possibly an ill-fit with the
“eco-friendly” urban landscape concept which has gained currency in
recent years. This book discusses the constructed wetland which is an
engineered system, based on macrophytes or plants and co-existing
microbial populations, intended to provide secondary treatment of
municipal wastewaters, and polishing of secondary effluents and
urban runoff. While the constructed wetland may be thought of by
some as being primarily suitable for rural application, it should not be
overlooked; it may be incorporated as part of the landscaping in urban
applications; hence enhancing its applications in the latter areas.
The discussion in this book has a focus on the application of the
constructed wetland in the tropical environment — an environment
where temperatures are higher and variations of these are narrower.
Such an environment can positively affect system performance
(Chapter 1). The tropical environment is one where there are signifi-
cant numbers of developing nations and the populations in these can
benefit from the better sanitation which the constructed wetland pro-
vides (Chapter 2). Chapters 3 and 4 provide information on the types
of plants which can be used in the tropical wetland and the biological
processes which occur in the system. It is noteworthy that given the
tropical condition, plant dynamics and microbial kinetics can be sub-
stantially higher compared to those in the temperate environment.
v
b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page vi
vi Preface
Such differences shall need to be noted since much of the literature

available describes the temperate condition. The contributors to this
book had worked together on constructed wetlands in the tropics and
have provided Chapters 5, 6, and 7 on design, engineering, and costs
respectively so that the book can provide guidance not only to
students but also practitioners in the field.
The contributors to this book have also endeavored to present a
reader-friendly document. Numerous photographs, drawings, figures,
and tables have been provided. Many of the photographs are in colour
so as to provide a better sense of what actual field conditions looked
like. As we continue to expand our knowledge of constructed wetland
application in the tropical environment, we envisage this information
shall be added into subsequent editions of the book.
27 July 2010
W J Ng and Norio Tanaka
b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page vii
CONTENTS
Preface v
Chapter 1 An Introduction to Wetlands 1
in the Tropics
Jagath Manatunge and W.A.U. Witharana
1.1 Definitions of Wetlands 1
1.2 Geographic Distribution of Tropical 3
Natural Wetlands
1.3 Adoption to the Tropical Environment 5
1.4 Constructed Wetlands in Tropical Climates 6
1.5 Examples of Applications 11
Chapter 2 The Tropical Environment 13

M.I.M. Mowjood and S. Sasikala
2.1 Population and Food Production 13
2.1.1 Demographics changes 15
2.1.2 The rural economy 15
2.1.3 Agriculture 16
2.2 Changing Environments 18
2.2.1 Water resources 18
2.2.2 Water scarcity 20
2.3 Environmental Degradation 22
2.3.1 Access to safe water and pollution 22
2.3.2 Wastewaters 23
vii
b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page viii
viii Contents
2.4 Protecting the Environment 25

2.4.1 Wastewater management 25
2.4.2 Integrated water resources management 26
(IWRM)
2.4.3 The role of government agencies 28
and society
Chapter 3 Pollutants and Wetland Treatment 29

K.B.S.N. Jinadasa and G.M.P.R. Weerakoon
3.1 Wetland Treatment Process 29
3.1.1 Introduction 29
3.1.2 Types of wetlands 30
3.1.3 Wetland configuration 31
3.1.4 Wetland hydrology 34
3.1.5 Soils in the wetland 35
3.1.6 Wetland vegetation 37
3.1.7 Role of wetland vegetation in the 38
treatment process
3.2 Pollutants and Their Transformations 39
3.2.1 Biodegradable organics 39
3.2.2 Suspended solids 41
3.2.3 Nitrogen 42
3.2.4 Phosphorus 44
3.2.5 Sulfur 45
Chapter 4 Wetland Plant Dynamics 47

Norio Tanaka and S.K. Weragoda
4.1 Types of Macrophytes and Factors Affecting 47
Their Growth
4.1.1 Introduction 47
4.1.2 Submergent macrophytes 47
4.1.3 Emergent macrophytes 49
4.1.4 Floating and floating-leave macrophytes 49
4.1.5 Factors affecting macrophyte growth 51
b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page ix
Contents ix
4.1.6 Effect of harvesting in wetlands 53

4.1.7 The emission of greenhouse gases in 54
the tropical wetlands
4.2 Role of Macrophytes in Wetlands 56
4.3 Plant Physiology 61
4.4 Case Study on Growth Characteristics of 63
Wetland Macrophytes
Chapter 5 Design of Tropical Constructed 69

Wetlands
W.J. Ng and Gayan Gunaratne
5.1 The Importance of Wastewater Quality 69
Parameters in Facility Design
5.1.1 Influent wastewater characteristics and 69
effluent water quality requirements
5.1.2 Potential of wetlands for wastewater 70
treatment under tropical conditions
5.1.3 How wetlands improve water quality 73
5.2 Process Design — Reaction Rate and 77
Hydraulic Residence Time (HRT)
5.2.1 Reaction rates and HRT 77
5.2.2 Sizing of constructed wetland 79
(FWS and SSF)
5.2.3 Water depth in FWS 82
5.2.4 Bed depth in SSF 82
5.2.5 Effect of evaporation on the design 82
5.2.6 Integration of wetland designs 83
5.3 Water Quality Improvement — A Tropical 83
Case Study
5.3.1 Effectiveness of Scirpus grossus in the 83
treatment of domestic wastes in a
constructed wetland
5.4 Effects of Vegetation on Water Quality 90
Improvement
b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page x
x Contents
Chapter 6 Engineering the Wetlands 95

D.R.I.B. Werellagama and Sisira Karunaratne
6.1 Introduction 95
6.2 Flow Control 95
6.2.1 Need for flow control 95
6.2.2 Inlet and outlet structures 96
6.3 Substrate in Wetlands 99
6.3.1 Sand and gravel 99
6.3.2 Organic substrate 100
6.4 Construction Aspects 100
6.4.1 Site conditions 101
6.4.2 Soil conditions 102
6.4.3 Drainage 102
6.4.4 Piping work 103
6.4.5 Side walls 104
6.4.6 Synthetic liners and clay liners 106
6.4.7 Planting 108
6.4.8 Fencing and protection 110
6.5 Pre-Treatment for the Wetland System 110
6.5.1 Stormwater bypass 110
6.5.2 Removal of solids (screens, silt traps, 111
and traps for floating material)
6.6 Maintenance of Wetlands 111
6.6.1 Introduction of common aspects of 111
failures and maintenance
6.6.2 Frequency of maintenance of wetland 111
plants, systems, and hydraulics
Chapter 7 Cost and Sustainability of Constructed 115

Wetlands
A.K. Karunarathna
7.1 Introduction 115
7.1.1 Land value and location 116
7.1.2 Treatment goals 117
7.1.3 Type of wetlands 117
b1033_FM.qxd 3/14/2011 10:30 AM Page xi
Contents xi
7.2 Construction Costs 118

7.2.1 Basic cost components 118
7.3 Operation and Maintenance Costs 125
7.4 Sustainability of Constructed Wetlands in Tropics 126
7.4.1 Ecological and economic sustainabilities 126
7.4.2 Longevity of constructed wetlands 128
7.4.3 Socio-environmental aspects of constructed 129
wetland management — lesson learnt
References 131
Index 147
b1033_Chapter-01.qxd 3/18/2011 8:53 AM Page 1
CHAPTER 1
AN INTRODUCTION TO WETLANDS
IN THE TROPICS
Jagath Manatunge and W.A.U. Witharana
1.1 Definitions of Wetlands

Natural and even human-made tropical wetlands can be subjected to
dry and wet weather conditions during part of or throughout the
year and so can be transitional in nature. Wetlands can, therefore, be
continuously flooded, intermittently flooded, and non-flooded
systems. In all cases, however, the defining feature of wetlands is: its
soil is sufficiently wet and for a long enough period, if indeed; there
are cycles of wet and dry, to alter the soil’s properties because of the
chemical, physical, and biological changes that occur therein.
Because of such soil conditions, certain plant species will not thrive
and so are excluded from wetlands (Kadlec, 1995). These excluded
plant species are typically those that require aerobic soil conditions.
Soil saturated with water or with standing water over it would not be
able to provide such aerobic conditions. Wetlands are, therefore,
dominated by plant species that are adapted to growing in seasonally
or continuously flooded soils with resulting anaerobic or low oxygen
conditions.
In summary, then, wetlands may be defined as follows:
Definition 1: Lands where saturation with water is the dominant

factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of
plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface
(Cowardin et al., 1979).
1
2 J. Manatunge and A. Witharana
Definition 2: Clean Water Act (CWA, 1972) defined wetlands as

“those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground
water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions”.
Definition 3: The Service publication, “Classification of Wetlands

and Deepwater Habitats of the United States” (Cowardin et al.,
1979), defined wetlands as lands where saturation with water is the
dominant factor determining the nature of soil development and the
types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its sur-
face. The single feature that most wetlands share is soil or substrate
that is at least periodically saturated with or covered by water. The
water creates severe physiological problems for all plants and animals
except those that are adapted for life in water or in saturated soil.
Definition 4: Lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic sys-

tems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land
is covered by shallow water. For the purposes of this classification,
wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes:
(1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly
hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil;
and (3) the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered
by shallow water at some time during the growing season of the year
(Cowardin et al., 1979; Lewis et al., 1981).
Definition 5: A wide range of ecosystems ranging from areas that are

never flooded to areas that are deeply flooded all of the time. Areas
that are not flooded may still be classified as wetlands because of sat-
urated soil conditions where water is at or below the ground surface
during part of a typical growing season (Kadlec and Knight, 1996).
Definition 6: Ramsar Convention defined wetlands as a wide variety

of natural and human-made habitat types including swamps, marshes,
billabongs, lakes, salt marshes, mudflats, mangroves, coral reefs, fens,
peat bogs, or bodies of water — whether natural or artificial, permanent
An Introduction to Wetlands in the Tropics 3
or temporary. Water within these areas can be static or flowing; fresh,

brackish or saline; and can include inland rivers and coastal or marine
water to a depth of six meters at low tide. There are even under-
ground wetlands.
Differences between tropical and temperate environments can
have important effects on wetland function and this will in turn have
impact on the use of wetlands for wastewater treatment. It is worth
noting that in much of the tropics humidity is high year-round,
although there may be a distinct wet and a dry season, while closer to
the equator it can be wet year round. Also important to note is the
ambient temperature does not change as substantially at any time as
it would in temperate climates (Pearce and Smith, 2000). This can be
expected to impact on plant growth and hence also wastewater treat-
ment performance. Wetlands intended for wastewater treatment have
been shown to be distinctly affected by hydrologic (Livingston, 1989)
and temperature variations (Kadlec and Reddy, 2001; Zdragas
et al., 2002).
1.2 Geographic Distribution of Tropical Natural

Wetlands
As shown in the Fig. 1.1, the tropics is the zone between the Tropic
of Cancer at latitude 23½° north and the Tropic of Capricorn at
23½° south. At the center of the tropics lies the equator. In the
Western Hemisphere, tropical countries include Mexico, all of Central
America, all of the Caribbean Islands from just south of Nassau in
the Bahamas, and the top half of South America, including Colombia,
Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana,
as well as the northern portions of Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, and
Brazil. In Africa, the only nations that cannot be called tropical coun-
tries are Morocco and Tunisia in the north and Lesotho and
Swaziland in the south. The remaining parts of the continent lie
either entirely or at least partly in the tropics. India, in south Asia,
lies mostly in the tropics, and all countries of Southeast Asia are trop-
ical countries. Australia, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, Kiribati,
and most of the other island nations of Oceania in the South Pacific
Fig. 1.1 The tropical zone (30ο north and 30ο south of the equator) (source:
Encyclopedia Britannica, 1997)
are tropical countries, as well. Not all tropical countries have the
same climate, but they all have a limited range in their temperatures
and less climate change over a year than is found in other zones.
Their climate is distinguished chiefly by wet and dry seasons instead
of large temperature differences. The flora and fauna of tropical
countries differ as well. The distribution of natural wetlands in the
tropics is as follows:
• South America: 1,200,000 km2,

• Asia: 350,000 km2,
• Africa: 340,000 km2, and
• Australia: 2,000 km2.
According to the wetlands database (Table 1.1) of the Ramsar

Convention — “wetlands should be selected for the ‘List’ on account
of their international significance in terms of ecology, botany, zool-
ogy, limnology or hydrology”. Over the years, the Conference of the
contracting parties has adopted more specific criteria interpreting the
Table 1.1 Distribution of Ramsar wetlands in tropics
Country Ramsar sites Area/hectares
Bangladesh 2 611,200
Central African Republic 1 101,300
Congo 5 438,960
Costa Rica 11 510,050
Ecuador 13 201,126
Ghana 6 178,410
Guatemala 7 628,592
Honduras 6 223,320
Kenya 5 101,849
Malaysia 5 55,355
Nigeria 11 1,076,728
Pakistan 19 1,343,627
Sri Lanka 3 8,522
Tanzania 4 4,868,424
Thailand 10 370,600
Uganda 11 354,803
Convention text, as well as an information sheet on Ramsar Wetlands

and a classification system of wetlands type. The Convention’s goal is
to achieve Ramsar listing for as many wetlands throughout the world
as can meet the criteria of international importance. In the short-
term, the objective is to have at least 2,500 sites in the “List” by
2010. To bring this much of the world’s natural wetland resource
under the umbrella of Ramsar status, the Convention urges all States
to make significant efforts to implement the systematic approach for
the development of the “List” in each country as adopted under the
Strategic Framework.
1.3 Adoption to the Tropical Environment

Natural wetlands are among the most important ecosystems in the
world, as they not only contribute toward maintaining the regional
and global ecological balances, but also locally provide habitats and
breeding grounds for fauna and flora. The survival of wetlands is
sensitive to the hydrology of the area where it is located. Hydraulic

function generally refers to the inflow and outflow of water and its
interaction with other site factors at wetlands. Wetlands hydrology
occurs when, under normal circumstances, either the land surface is
inundated or the upper portion of the soil is saturated at a sufficient
frequency and duration to create the anaerobic condition. Given the
preceding, wetlands are obviously affected by the net balance between
the water input such as rainfall and the water loss such as evapo-
transpiration (Kadlec and Reddy, 2001). This balance can be
impacted on by the application of wastewater if natural or constructed
wetland is used for wastewater treatment.
The tropics are dominated by the movement of the tropical rain
belt, which oscillates from the northern to the southern tropics,
thus causing the alternating dry and wet seasons. During the wet
season, it rains heavily and regularly almost every day. The daytime
temperature will nevertheless rarely fall below 25°C and nights
are generally only a few degrees cooler. The tropics are, however,
never as hot as the deserts that lie to the north and south of
the tropical climate zone, and daytime temperatures will rarely
exceed 35°C.
The absence of seasonal low temperature conditions coupled with
narrow temperature variations positively affect wetlands wastewater
treatment performance. This contrasts with performance in temperate
areas. Brix (1994) described decreases in biological oxygen demand
(BOD) and nitrogen removal by a wetland in a temperate zone dur-
ing winter due to decreased microbial activity under reduced
temperature conditions in the soil. Kadlec and Reddy (2001) noted
that microbe-mediated reactions are most affected by temperatures
below 15°C.
1.4 Constructed Wetlands in Tropical Climates

Many developing countries lay within the tropical zone and are
presently experiencing rapid population and economic growth. This
is often coupled with increasing rural migration to urban centers and
growing urbanization. The provision of public services including
wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal has often not kept pace
with these developments. This has consequently compromised good
sanitation and increased health risks. Often times the shortcomings in
sanitation could not be adequately addressed because financial and
technical resources have been inadequate. Economically viable and
practical solutions for wastewater treatment may not necessarily be
easy to identify since the trend in recent years has been the develop-
ment of high rate and increasingly compact systems that require
substantial energy input, costs (both by way of installation and by
operational costs), and technical expertise on the part of the opera-
tors. Furthermore, many of these highly mechanized systems (because
of their energy requirements) may incur a relatively large carbon foot-
print and so weaken the argument for sustainability. It may perhaps be
argued that where suitable locations can be identified, a system that
has a lower energy requirement and produces lesser residues may be
more appropriate. These two factors would almost certainly mean
lower operating costs. The wetland may well be one such system. The
potential applications of wetlands include the secondary treatment of
municipal and certain industrial wastewaters and the polishing of
secondary effluent and runoff that would have carried pollution from
diffused sources. A wetland specifically created for such wastewater
treatment would be referred to as a constructed wetland and the
successful applications of such constructed wetlands have been
reported to significantly reduce suspended solids, BOD, pathogens,
heavy metals, and excessive nutrients from wastewaters (see Table 1.2).
While the focus of this book is on the constructed treatment wet-
land that is intended for improving water quality, the constructed
wetland can also be used for other purposes such as:
• To compensate for and help offset the rate of conversion of natu-

ral wetlands resulting from agriculture and urban development —
i.e. the constructed habitat wetlands;
• To provide flood control — i.e. the constructed flood control wet-
lands; and
• To be used for the production of food and fiber — the constructed
aquaculture wetlands (Kadlec and Knight, 1996).
Table 1.2 Examples of constructed tropical wetlands applications
Country Application Reference
Honduras Reduction of BOD and mosquito Diemont, 2006

larval development
Tanzania Polishing of pre-treated wastewater Kaseva, 2004
Uganda Wastewater treatment with nutrients Joseph, 2005
removal
Tunisia Nitrogen and bacterial removal from Keffala and Ghrabi, 2005
domestic wastewater
China Municipal wastewater treatment Zhang et al., 2009
Malaysia Storm water treatment Nur Asmazila, 2004
Hong Kong Water quality improvement in the Cha, 2004
deep bay catchment
Sri Lanka Treating septic tank effluent Tanaka et al., 2004
Kenya Wastewater treatment Nzengy’a and Wishitemi,
2001
Tropical Treatment of septage Koottatep et al., 2001
regions
Uganda Treating municipal wastewater Okurut et al., 1999
Tanzania Wastewater treatment Mashauri et al., 2000
Kenya Treating domestic wastewater Nyakang’o and van Bruggen,
1999; Okurut and
van Bruggen, 2001
Kenya Treating pulp and paper wastewater Abira, 2007
Kenya Treating sugar milling effluent Opaa and Raburu, 2003
(unpublished data)
Constructed wetlands for the four applications identified, and espe-

cially the constructed treatment wetland, has attracted attention in
the tropical region among the developing countries because the
method has been perceived as a low-cost wastewater treatment
option. Going forward, however, even among developed countries,
the constructed treatment wetland may find application especially in
the growing numbers of eco-developments. Notwithstanding this
growing interest, much of the published literature on constructed
treatment wetland has been on applications in the temperate regions
of Europe and the United States.
This need not be an unexpected situation since the constructed

treatment wetland was first described some 40 years ago in Europe
and North America (Shutes, 2001; Shutes and Sriyaraj, 2001).
Possessing the advantages of low construction and operating costs
as well as the possibility to use it on its own or in combination with
other systems, the constructed treatment wetland was subsequently
used for small communities in the developing countries where
potential health benefits from pathogen removal are considerable
(Cooper and Knight, 1996; Shutes and Sriyaraj, 2001). However,
interest and use in developing countries have not been as wide-
spread as might have been expected given the system’s perceived
low cost and demands on a skilled workforce. Subsequently, the
technology has been developed further to provide tertiary treatment
for domestic and industrial effluent. The body of literature on trop-
ical constructed treatment wetland applications is relatively more
limited (Kivaisi, 2001; Lim et al., 2001; Meutia, 2001; Abira, 2007;
Kaseva, 2004). Notwithstanding the preceding, it is argued that
constructed treatment wetlands can find greater application in the
tropical zone given the climate and cost of the system (Meutia,
2001) and large-scale applications are already found in tropical and
sub-tropical Asia — China, Hong Kong, and Thailand.
Application of constructed treatment wetlands in the tropics is
not without environmental issue and a significant one concerns the
breeding of insects, which may be disease vectors. An example is the
mosquito. The latter require standing water to lay their eggs that can
hatch into larvae within a week. The constructed treatment wetland
would need to be appropriately designed and operated to reduce
breeding of such insect vectors and hence limit the incidence of dis-
eases such as malaria.
Going forward, the wetland method may see wider application, as
technical improvements are made to the method and government
policies change such that its use is encouraged. For example, the use
of constructed wetlands with polyculture (i.e. mixed plant species)
can result in greater removal efficiencies than found in monoculture
systems. There also should be better awareness that such a treatment
method is not only cost competitive but when properly applied is
more environmentally benign in a holistic manner. Education and dis-

semination of information are the key to encouraging such awareness.
Motivation to use the method may be prompted by government poli-
cies that encourge integrated approaches toward pollution control
(as in wastewater treatment), resource recovery (as in using the
treated water for agricultural purposes, plant material for energy, etc.),
and conservation (of soils and water resources in a watershed). The
integrated approach with the proper identification of the benefits and
the assessment of the values of these benefits will help place wetlands
in a better competitive position relative to other treatment systems.
Studies have already been performed on the economic value of con-
structed wetlands with largely positive outcomes (Yang et al., 2008,
2004; Costanza et al., 1997).
The design criteria for tropical wetlands should take into account
the warm and wet climate these are to operate in. This awareness of
climatic conditions is necessary because much of the early work on
design criteria originated in temperate countries and so requires mod-
ification. The latter is particularly relevant when it comes to
permissible loading, unit process and system sizing, and macrophyte
selection. The performance of the wetland will obviously depend on
the wastewater characteristics, process capabilities as per the design,
operation and maintenance protocols, and in some cases, site-specific
environmental factors. Where the latter is concerned, such conditions
should be evaluated during planning of a wetland treatment system
and these include geography, soil, groundwater, rainfall, runoff, wind,
biology, and socioeconomic factors.
A significant impediment to the wider application of constructed
wetlands in the tropics is poor understanding of the system and its
capabilities in relation to various wastewaters. Where developing
countries are concerned, this may be due to the lack of financial
resources to undertake extensive and comprehensive surveys and
research. Where developed economies are concerned, it may be due
to misconceptions of what wetlands are and what they can do. A con-
sequence of these is the relative lack of wetland experts familiar with
tropical conditions.
1.5 Examples of Applications

ARRPET (Asian Regional Research Project on Environmental
Technology) was initiated in 2001 (http://www.arrpet.ait.ac.th/) to
assess environmental degradation in Asia by the Swedish International
Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). With co-ordination from
the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), ARRPET involved National
Research Institutions (NRIs) from eight Asian countries — China,
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and
Vietnam. In particular, the project sought to address issues concerning
the management of domestic and industrial wastewaters. The
University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, investigated the treatment of
industrial wastewater with emergent plants in a wetland setting and
subsequent energy recovery via biomethanation of the harvested plant
material. Scirpus acutus, Typha angustifolia, and Phragmites karka
were used as the macrophytes and these were exposed to wastewater
carrying zinc from a galvanizing process. Zinc removal, to the extent
that met the limit for discharge to inland waters, <5 mg L−1, stipulated
by the Central Environmental Authority of Sri Lanka, was noted.
Constructed wetlands have been found useful in the tropics for
the management of stormwater in terms of flow attenuation and qual-
ity. The wetland is particularly appropriate in areas where there is high
groundwater level to provide a continuous supply of water necessary
to sustain the wetland system (Urbonas and Stahre, 1993).
Stormwater contains many pollutants including particulates and dis-
solved materials. The constructed wetland with its combination plant
mediated, microorganism mediated, and physical and chemical
processes has the array of mechanisms needed to treat the stormwa-
ter. Sediments may settle to the bottom of the wetland where
chemical transformation and microbial degradation continue. Such
microbial degradation also occurs in the biofilms that attach to the
leaves and stems of the macrophytes. The macrophytes themselves
incorporate some of the pollutants into their tissues.
CHAPTER 2
THE TROPICAL ENVIRONMENT
M.I.M. Mowjood and S. Sasikala
This chapter discusses some of the issues concerning societal and

economic development and the environment in tropical countries.
Many of the latter countries are still in the developing stage and are
characterized by large populations, low per-capita income, and poor
supporting infrastructure. People in developing countries mainly
depend on an agriculture-based economy. Therefore, water is very
important, as it can affect their livelihoods. Water scarcity and the lack
of access to safe drinking water are the serious threat to the wellbeing
of such populations. Although many developing countries give eco-
nomic development the highest priority, such development can be
compromised if problems remain with basic needs such as safe drink-
ing water, water for food production, as well as health and sanitation
services. Economic development without due consideration for the
environment will yield short-term benefits only, while the consequent
environmental degradation will have long-term impact.
2.1 Population and Food Production

It has been reported that 95% of the global population growth takes
place in tropical developing countries (Rockstrom et al., 2003). The
difficulties associated with populations are not only due to fast growth
rates but also by migration that concentrates populations at particular
locations. Figure 2.1 shows the population centers in the world
(www.un.org/esa/population). The population growth in Asia has
resulted in greater pressure on natural resources such as land, water,
13
14 M.I.M. Mowjood and S. Sasikala
Fig. 2.1 World population distribution by region (percentage of population is

given on top of the bars)
and forests. Ensuring that the basic needs and livelihood (income
generation) are met and so reducing poverty and progressively
improving living standards have become two of the major challenges
for the governments in the developing countries.
As countries develop, there is often a tradeoff between the agri-
cultural and industrial sectors with diminution of the former. The
reason for this is the perceived better financial benefits that can
accrue from industrialization over farming at the individual person
level. The conversion from “low” intensity farming to “high”
intensity farming in the tropics by the integration of agriculture
with industrialization, has become increasingly evident in the
recent past. Agro-industrialization generally means large-scale pro-
duction (of food or other useful agricultural products) by high
inputs — of improved seeds, chemical fertilizers, pesticides, water,
and increasing use of machinery so as to extract maximum output
from the land in the shortest possible time. The transition from
“peasant” agriculture to industrial agriculture, notwithstanding the
benefits in terms of much increased food production, has resulted
in various unintended social, cultural, economical, and ecological
consequences.
The Tropical Environment 15
2.1.1 Demographics changes

Migration can be beneficial for economic growth. Countries have
attained economic growth through a transfer of workforce from the
rural and agricultural sectors to the urban, industrial, and business
sectors. The economic productivity of rural-to-urban migrants is higher
than that of rural non-migrants and the productivity of established
urban dwellers is again higher than that of the migrants. However, such
migration has impacts on the social and cultural contexts of the rural as
well as the receiving urban societies and on the support infrastructure
of the urban areas. Among the positive impacts, migrations improve the
situation at a particular location by reducing consumption pressure on
resources. Migration can also be a source of income for those who
remain in the rural areas through migrants’ remittances or post-work
returnees. The negative impacts include depletion in the rural areas of
the most skilled people and so creating labor shortages during peak
periods where there is heightened demand for labor. This depletion can
lead to the cycles of increasing rural economy degradation.
The weakened economy in a rural area makes infrastructure and
services development difficult since in the first instance, the delivery
of such infrastructure and services to a low density and dispersed rural
population is typically costlier than delivery to the high density urban
population. Because of this, many governments in tropical countries
promote the shifting and concentration of people in order to provide
goods and services more effectively. Poor infrastructure and services
in rural areas serve as a push factor for migrations. Figure 2.2 shows
the trend in rural and urban population for low and middle income
countries in the world (Barney, 2004). It is evident that urban popu-
lation increases exponentially while the rural population shrinks
slowly. Such population growth in urban centers will inevitably cause
environmental degradation therein.
2.1.2 The rural economy

Land has been used effectively in rural economies in the past, sus-
tained by indigenous knowledge on farming. Crop production is
Fig. 2.2 Rural and urban populations in the mid- and low-income countries
integrated with animal husbandry for mutual benefit. Instead of

monoculture (as is often the case when farming is industrialized),
which can produce much more of a single product, the mixed
farming (different crops and livestock) produced a greater variety of
products from a given piece of land. Such diversity in terms of agri-
cultural activity and products has been a feature of the rural
economy. Short of catastrophic failure, failure in a particular crop can
be mitigated by other crops cultivated within the given area. Family
members augmented with help from the community provide the
labor needed. Farm animals play a major role as a source of energy
required to meet the demands of cultivation, transport, and fuel
(biogas) for domestic use. The introduction of agro-industrial prac-
tices and industrial-scale farming has changed the rural economy.
Rural farmers have to compete with large-scale production from the
industrial farms. The latter’s large production can depress prices and
the lower selling prices can greatly affect efforts at poverty reduction
and improving the living standard of large numbers of people in the
tropical environment.
2.1.3 Agriculture
The rural economy frequently revolves around rain-fed agriculture.
Such agricultural activity still accounts for a large portion of the
world food production. This is because 80% of the world’s physical

agricultural area is small scale and rain fed. Such farms generate 62%
of the world’s staple foods (http://faostat.fao.org). Unfortunately,
rain-fed farming has been neglected over the past several decades.
Water management is an important challenge in the rain-fed agricul-
ture due to the variability in rainfall and the occurrences of floods
and dry spells.
The Green Revolution which occurred in the 1960s–1970s, was a
significant landmark in the agricultural practices in the tropical region.
There was then an urgent need for increasing food production to meet
the demands of an increasing population in the developing countries.
Crop yields were increased by many folds due to the introduction of
improved plant varieties and much increased applications of fertilizers
and pesticides. It has been estimated that about 40% of all farmers in the
developing countries were using improved seeds by the 1990s, with the
greatest use found in Asia, followed by Latin America (Peter et al.,
2000). Figure 2.3 shows the increase in rice production in different
regions compared with the total production in the world after the
Fig. 2.3 Rice production in different parts of the world over a 45-year period
Table 2.1 Impact of Green Revolution
Advantages Disadvantages
Increased yield per hectare Excessive use of pesticides

Increased cropping intensity Clearing of natural forests
Efficient use of land and other resources Global warming
Development of high-yield varieties with improved Degradation of land
disease resistance
Improved plant varieties with better response to Weeds have increased
irrigation and chemical fertilizers
Uniformity in the field Pest infestation has gone up
Loss of biodiversity
Green Revolution (http://faostat.fao.org). The contribution from Asia

was much higher compared to other regions.
Food production with minimum resource utilization would be
the more sustainable approach. The analysis of the outcomes of the
green revolution after 50 years has not yielded results that are entirely
positive. There are indications of increased income and asset alloca-
tion disparities, and worsening absolute poverty. Some of the benefits
and shortcomings are identified in Table 2.1. These have resulted in
an environment that may not necessarily change in the anticipated
manner (UN-ESCAP, 2005).
2.2 Changing Environments

2.2.1 Water resources
The world’s available freshwater supply is not evenly distributed geo-
graphically and is often not located where populations are centered.
About three-quarters of the annual rainfall occurs in the areas contain-
ing less than one-third of the world’s population, while two-thirds of
the world’s population live in areas receiving only a quarter of the
world’s annual rainfall. For instance, about 20% of the global average
runoff each year is accounted for by the Amazon Basin, a vast region
with fewer than 10 million people. Similarly, the Congo Basin accounts
for about 30% of the African continent’s annual runoff, but the basin
has only 10% of the population (Population Information Programme,

1998). Rainfall is seasonal in most of the tropical regions. The seasonal
nature of rainfall is a great challenge for planners and users. Many devel-
oping countries can use no more than 20% of their potentially available
freshwater resources from rainfall (Commonwealth Parliamentary
Conference, 2007). Monsoons may fail in some years and natural phe-
nomena such as the El Niño Southern Oscillation can lead to significant
differences in rainfall in the southern Pacific Ocean affecting south-east
Asia and South and Central America. Further, climatic change and its
impact on water resources complicate the decision-making toward
sustainable water resources management.
Numerous dam and water diversion projects were initiated in the
developing countries in the 1970s–1980s. Large dry areas became irri-
gated and crop production then increased dramatically. However,
environmental concerns surfaced after the 1980s and dam and water
diversion projects are now considered in a more circumspect manner
(Rosegrant, 1997). Environmental impact analysis (EIA) has become
an essential criterion for the approval of any development project in
the developing countries after 1980s. As human activities impact on a
natural water system, the components of the system (i.e. inflows, out-
flows, and changes in storage) will also change and must be accounted
for in any management decision. Understanding water budgets and
how they change in response to human activities is an important aspect
of water resource management.
Where available, groundwater has also been exploited. The excessive
abstraction of water has led to depleted aquifers and environmental
degradation. Water tables are falling in key food-producing countries.
Lester (2000) stated that 480 million of the world’s 6 billion people
are fed with grain produced with water from over-pumped aquifers.
Poverty abatement becomes more difficult as shallower wells belong-
ing to the poor dry up and it is not affordable to deepen wells or buy
stronger pumps. The smaller farms are eventually absorbed by the
larger farms with access to deeper wells. Climatic change will exacer-
bate the difficulties faced by the rural farmers with the increased
frequency of extreme weather events. These difficulties contribute to
change in demographics.
2.2.2 Water scarcity

“Water scarcity” is a decrease in the volume of water available per
capita over time and is the consequence of water deficits that occur
when the consumption of freshwater within a social entity exceeds the
level of sustainable supply.
Table 2.2 shows the water scarce areas in the world in 2000 and
2050. It is ironic but many areas in the tropics, which is often asso-
ciated with abundant rainfall, are anticipated to be water scarce in
the future. The minimum requirement of water for direct con-
sumption, preparation of food, and personal hygiene is considered
Table 2.2 Levels of water scarcity and countries in 2000 and 2050
Per capita water availability (m3/person/year)
Year <1000 1000–2000 >2000
2000 Algeria South Africa Brazil

Tunisia Botswana Canada
Libya Zambia USA
Egypt Zimbabwe India
Sudan Ethiopia Sri Lanka
Saudi Arabia Nepal
Turkey Thailand
Iran China
Cambodia
Australia
Indonesia
Tanzania
Somalia
Kenya
Russia
Mauritania
Bolivia
Peru
Mongolia
Nigeria
Niger
(Continued )
Table 2.2 (Continued )
Per capita water availability (m3/person/year)
Year <1000 1000–2000 >2000
2050 Algeria India Brazil

Tunisia Sri Lanka Canada
Libya Nepal USA
Egypt China Bolivia
Sudan Thailand Peru
South Africa Cambodia Mongolia
Botswana Indonesia Russia
Zambia Mauritania Australia
Zimbabwe Nigeria
Tanzania Niger
Ethiopia
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Iran
Somalia
Kenya
to be 40 liters per person per day and the maximum haul distance
(if water is not piped) to an individual’s dwelling should not exceed
200 m (UNICEF, 2005). A source would be considered adequate if
it can support an extraction rate of not less than 10 liters per minute
per capita for 90% of the time and interruptions per year should
not exceed a total of 10 days. The quality of water supplied should
obviously need to conform to the currently accepted minimum stan-
dards with respect to health-related microbiological and chemical
contaminants.
Table 2.3 shows the per-capita water availability (m3/year) in
several countries in 1955, 1975, 1990, 2000, and projected avail-
ability in 2025 (http://www.itt.com/waterbook). It is noted that
the per-capita availability declined and is expected to continue
declining with increasing populations. This again emphasizes that
water resources are finite and, therefore, need to be protected in
the tropics.
Table 2.3 Per-capita water availability (m3/year); from 1955 to 2025
Country 1955 1975 1990 2000 2025
China 4,597 3,050 2,427 2,215 1,818

India 5,277 3,074 2,464 1,882 1,496
Sri Lanka 4,930 3,878 2,498 2,656 1,738
Nigeria 8,304 NA 2,838 NA 1,078
Pakistan 10,590 NA 3,962 NA 1,803
Kenya 2,087 NA 636 NA 235
Sudan 11,899 NA 4,792 NA 1,993
Philippines 13,507 NA 5,173 NA 3,072
Nepal 19,596 NA 8,686 NA 4,244
2.3 Environmental Degradation

2.3.1 Access to safe water and pollution
Access to safe water is vital for better health and sanitation and leads
to social development. The World Health Organization (WHO) esti-
mates that around four million deaths each year can be attributed to
water-related diseases such as cholera, hepatitis, dengue fever, malaria,
and other parasitic diseases. Waterborne diseases are caused by path-
ogenic microorganisms that are transmitted when contaminated water
is consumed. According to the World Health Organization, diarrheal
disease accounts for an estimated 4.1% of the total daily global burden
of disease (with 88% of this attributable to unsafe water) and is respon-
sible for the deaths of 1.8 million people each year. Unfortunately, the
majority of these victims are children.
Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment (2000) estimated
that 2.4 and 1.1 billion people worldwide do not have access to
improved sanitation and improved water supply, respectively. The urban
areas are also coming under increasing pressure because of their rapid
growth. Such growth has frequently resulted in informal or poorly
managed settlements, where sanitation coverage is typically very low,
resulting in human waste (and backyard industrial wastewaters) being
discharged untreated. This threatens the water supply and human
health in the downstream. The UN Economic and Social Council has
estimated that “to meet the sanitation target in urban areas, an addi-
tional 1 billion people would need to gain access to sanitation facilities
by 2015, taking into account population increases” (UNICEF,
2006). With the increasingly rapid urbanization and industrialization
in developing countries, the need for sanitation facilities will grow at
an accelerating pace. While the need for more sanitation infrastruc-
ture is clear, there is no single sanitation solution. Sanitation
management practices and technologies need to meet the local con-
text that may include rural, low-density areas to urban, high-density
communities with different social and economic conditions.
Urban and industrial developments not only compete for water
but can also pollute the water sources making them unsuitable for
beneficial uses. Water is polluted when it contains materials that make
it unsuitable for a given use. Surface water is more vulnerable to pol-
lution due to the easier access. Pollution can be from non-point
sources (i.e. pollutants come from a widespread area and cannot be
tracked to a single point or source). Soil erosion, pesticides and
fertilizers in runoff, and possibly animal wastes pollution, are the
examples of non-point source pollution. Pollution can also include
point source pollution (i.e. pollutants are traceable to a specific
source, such as a leaking chemical tank, effluents coming from a par-
ticular industrial site, or farming operation such as a manure spill).
Although the latter may seem easy to control, this has not been found
to be necessarily so since there are economic, political, and social
factors involved.
2.3.2 Wastewaters
The majority of natural streams that flow through cities that are
densely populated and intensively urbanized have been converted
(intentionally or otherwise) into wastewater canals particularly in
many developing countries. Natural streams are polluted indiscrimi-
nately by the dumping of solid wastes and discharge of wastewaters
from various sources due to increased population, urbanization, and
related social, economic, and cultural factors. The discharge of inade-
quately treated wastewaters into receiving waterbodies such as rivers,
lakes, and even the ocean, can severely strain the pollutant load-car-
rying capacity of such waterbodies. When this capacity is exceeded,
the waterbody is deemed polluted and shall likely show the visual
manifestations of the pollution.
Domestic sewage is a major source of pollution. The amount of
water consumed by a community depends on many factors. External
factors include climate: more water is needed in hot weather (tropical
environment) than in cold. Some factors may be cultural or behav-
ioral, e.g., washing practices.
About half of the two million tonnes of human excrement that is
produced annually in urban areas enter waterbodies before receiving
adequate treatment. Sewage can be either black water (which includes
wastewater from the toilets) or gray water (which excludes wastewater
from the toilets). Black water is typically stronger in terms of contam-
inant concentrations (and in particular in terms of particulates and
organic content) compared to gray water. Gray water is easier to treat
and recycle and can be used for irrigation and non-potable use in the
home. The sewage management situation can be made more difficult
when the sewers also receive surface runoff and industrial discharges.
Storm water is a non-residential source and carries trash and other pol-
lutants from streets, as well as pesticides and fertilizers from yards and
fields. Poor connections combined with deteriorating old sewer pipes
result in sewage leaking and possibly contaminating groundwater.
Centralized sewerage treatment systems are very expensive in terms of
capital and operation and maintenance for the developing countries.
Industrial wastewaters are considerably more varied in terms of
composition compared to domestic sewage. These may be very strong
and may contain toxic materials. The latter may include metal salts,
organics, oil, and grease. These have the capacity to damage the receiv-
ing waterbody and larger ecosystem. Agro-industrial wastewaters are
known to be very strong in the tropics and have contributed much to
polluting freshwater resources. Wastewaters in this category include
those from the food-processing plants (e.g. milk, coconut, sugar, and
palm oil) and other products (e.g. leather, textile, and rubber).
Intensive animal husbandry has also been a major contributor. Animal
wastes coupled with non-point source contributions of nitrogen and
phosphorus have resulted in eutrophication of both freshwater water-

bodies and coastal waters, resulting in the periodic algal blooms.
Contamination of water need not always come from wastewater
discharges. Disposal sites and even wastewater treatment systems can
lead to polluting discharges. At inappropriately managed disposal sites,
leachate can be generated and these can be very pollutive if allowed
to enter waterbodies. Leaching is the process where chemicals from a
solid material (which can be solid wastes) dissolve into or are carried
away by the water while the latter filters through that material. The
resulting liquid is the leachate comprising both particulate and dis-
solved components, and shall likely have both organic and metals
present. In areas which have not been sewered, septic tanks can be
commonly used to treat domestic sewage. These are tanks buried in
the ground to hold and anaerobically degrade the pollutants. Effluent
from such tanks can be led out to a drain field where it is allowed to
soak into the ground. Oil and grease as well as the larger waste parti-
cles that are not degradable, or degrade very slowly, accumulate in the
tank and must eventually be pumped out and disposed of elsewhere.
While septage can pollute surface waters if the effluent is not appro-
priately managed, it is often associated with groundwater pollution.
2.4 Protecting the Environment

2.4.1 Wastewater management
Wastewater management is a process with a broader perspective of
environmental concerns, as it includes concepts such as cleaner pro-
duction, green technologies, etc. These concepts emphasize proactive
measures that are more effective than the react and treat approach.
Cleaner production (CP) is a forward-looking, anticipate and pre-
vent philosophy. CP refers to a mentality of how goods and services
are produced with the minimum environmental impact under present
technological and economic limits. CP is also the continuous applica-
tion of an integrated preventive environmental strategy to processes,
products, and services to increase overall efficiency and to reduce risks
to humans and the environment. CP can be applied to the processes
used in any industry, to products themselves and to various services

provided in society. This philosophy has an exceptional potential for
addressing wastewater management issues.
The treatment technology selected is influenced by the character-
istics of the wastewater discharge itself. Such characteristics may
broadly be identified in the two categories of quantity and quality.
High flows with discharge patterns, which show significant peaks and
troughs coupled with large pollutant loads, would typically require
more sophistication in the treatment facility in terms of its design and
operation. It should also be noted in the tropical context that the
existing infrastructure may have aged, having not been properly main-
tained and is also likely to not have the capacity to meet the needs of
a growing population. Coupled with the growing population, such
systems may also be required to deal with industrial wastewaters that
were not considered in the plant design in the first instance.
Upgrading these facilities or installing new facilities without giving
due consideration to the capacity of the local population to continue
managing the system appropriately after handover, has often resulted
in poorly operated facilities generating inadequately treated effluents.
With respect to the environment, the lack of proper wastewater
treatment in the developing countries should be changed as soon as is
possible. Due to the financial situation and the stricter standards
imposed, wastewater sewerage and treatment are much more developed
in the industrialized countries. Options for wastewater treatments are
yet to be explored in a sustainable manner and harnessing the positive
factors of the tropical environment. Among the promising technologies
for application in the developing countries is the constructed wetland
(CW), due to their characteristic properties such as the utilization of
natural processes, simple construction, simple operation and mainte-
nance (O/M), process stability, and cost effectiveness.
2.4.2 Integrated water resources management (IWRM)

IWRM has emerged as an appealing concept to dealing with water-
related problems. According to the GWP (2000), “it is a process which
promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land
and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and

social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sus-
tainability of vital ecosystems”. This integrated approach to water
resources management helps to protect the environment, promote eco-
nomic growth and sustainable food production, and improve human
health. Globally, IWRM is emerging as an accepted alternative to the
sector-by-sector, top-down management style that has dominated water
resources management in the past.
IWRM foundations as a global approach were laid at the Dublin
Conference on Water and Environment in 1992 (http://www.cap-net.
org/tutorial-iwrm/3-principles). The concept rose to prominence in
global water policy around the time of the Second World Water
Forum in 2000.
Responsible institutions and organizations play a major role in
the management of water resources in the countries. This ranges
from user groups at the local level to ministries at the national level.
Promoting livelihood opportunities, ensuring equity and benefit
sharing, and maintaining the water services are the primary duties for
governmental institutions. These responsibilities can also include
resources allocation and distribution, protecting the customary use
rights (and rights of minority groups), the maintenance and
improvement of infrastructures, and the monitoring and evaluation
of performance on the quality of the product (i.e., the water).
Establishing and maintaining linkages and hence communication
between the users and policy makers at various levels is very impor-
tant in the water sector. Institutions are expected to represent the
stakeholders including the environment. Therefore, institutional
arrangement is a very vital component in IWRM. Unfortunately,
government policies in tropical regions can be “sectoral” in nature,
resulting in regulations and guidelines that are also “sectoral” in
nature. This can lead to the replication or overlapping in function
and the implementation activity of agencies, possibly resulting
in confusion and conflicts that have threatened the efficient and
equitable use of water resources. This would mean, apart from
government agencies, private companies, community-based organi-
zations, which have the participation of women and disadvantaged
groups, non-government organizations (NGOs), and other relevant

sections of civil society should be involved.
2.4.3 The role of government agencies and society

Given the importance of good sanitation to a population’s wellbeing
and economic development, governments would need to consider
provision of protecting water resources and sanitation infrastructure
with relative urgency. Typically, the approach to improving the water
resource situation and sanitation can include the following:
• examine alternative wastewater treatment methods (such as eco-

logical sanitation) that are less water-intensive, cheaper, more
energy-efficient, and easier to build and maintain than traditional
sewage systems,
• upgrade existing sewage treatment infrastructure (i.e., from primary
to secondary to tertiary treatment, as well as disinfection),
• mobilize funding to improve sewage and wastewater treatment
facilities through partnerships with the private sector or non-
governmental organizations,
• implement and enforce sewer use by laws to reduce water pollu-
tion from local industries and monitor compliance, and
• work with local industries to reduce their water consumption and
the amount of pollutants present in their effluent.
CHAPTER 3
POLLUTANTS AND WETLAND

TREATMENT
K.B.S.N. Jinadasa and G.M.P.R. Weerakoon
3.1 Wetland Treatment Process

3.1.1 Introduction
Wetlands have been noted to be a significant resource in terms of pro-
viding a livelihood and these may be natural, as in around the
confluence of the rivers Tigris and Euphrates in southern Iraq, or in
managed forms, as in the rice paddies of Southeast Asia (Mitsch and
Gosselink, 2000). However, wetlands have also been noted to
improve water quality and this now is the basis for considering wet-
lands as a potential option for wastewater treatment. This application
is gradually becoming more widespread due to the demand for water
quality improvement methods that are less energy intensive and the
increasing need for wastewater reclamation and reuse. In line with the
latter requirement, constructed wetlands can effectively complement
other sewage treatment systems in terms of providing the polishing
step. The attraction of the wetlands approach lies in their engineering
simplicity relative to the more mechanized systems commonly
encountered (e.g. the activated sludge process in its various engi-
neered configurations), and with this engineering simplicity there are
the consequent simpler operational requirements and lower capital
and operating costs (Denny, 1997). The latter can be an important con-
sideration for the developing countries. Examples of countries where
the wetlands have found application include Sri Lanka, Tanzania,
29
30 K.B.S.N. Jinadasa and G.M.P.R. Weerakoon
Mexico, China, Kenya and Uganda (Ansola et al., 2003; Kaseva,

2004; Belmont et al., 2004; Polprasert et al., 1996). Vertical-flow and
horizontal-flow wetland systems based on soil, sand, and/or gravel
are used to treat domestic and industrial wastewaters. Wetlands are
also applied for passive treatment of diffuse pollution arising, for
example, from mine drainage as well as from urban and motorway
surface runoffs. In addition to serving as treatment facilities, wetlands
can also serve as a wildlife conservation resource and thereafter be
seen as “natural” recreational areas for the local community.
Somewhat more difficult to quantify, but nevertheless useful, is the
esthetic benefit associated with a constructed wetland plant system, as
the latter is more easily incorporated into the constructed landscape
of the community the facility is designed to serve. These factors are
presently important drivers bringing the constructed wetlands into
those urban areas aiming to adopt the eco-city approach and move
toward a more sustainable mode of development.
3.1.2 Types of wetlands

A wetland is an area that is regularly saturated by surface water or
groundwater and is characterized by a prevalence of vegetation that is
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (e.g., swamps, bogs, fens,
marshes, and estuaries) (US-EPA, 1993). The previous and still cur-
rent emphasis is on the ecological importance of wetlands. However,
the treatment processes occurring within these systems have been
noted and have become increasingly relevant to efforts to take wet-
lands beyond relevance for natural ecology and into environmental
management needs such as wastewater treatment. In wastewater
treatment, the constructed wetland is a treatment facility that repli-
cates the processes occurring in natural wetlands. Constructed
wetlands are complex and integrated systems in which the water,
plants, animals, microorganisms, and the environment (i.e. the sun,
soil, and air) interact to improve water quality (Gelt, 1997). Although
the primary purpose of the constructed wetlands is to treat waste-
water, such facilities do bring wider ecological benefits such as
providing habitats for wild birds and animals.
Pollutants and Wetland Treatment 31
Constructed wetlands can typically be categorized as:
• Subsurface flow (SSF) wetlands (Fig. 3.1) where the wastewater

would flow beneath a coarse substrate (bed media) such as a gravel
bed matrix and at depths of not more than 0.6 m and
• Free water surface (FWS) wetlands (Fig. 3.2) where the waste-
water would flow above and in the shallow depths of a generally
impervious soil surface, usually at depths of less than 0.5 m. The
water then flows through a dense growth of vegetation. Open
pools may or may not be incorporated.
3.1.3 Wetland configuration

SSF wetlands are not unexpectedly more effective at filtering out
solids and removing biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) on a per-unit
Wetland
Plants
Control
Drainfield Drainfield
Rock Rock
Inlet
Liner Bed Media Outlet
Fig. 3.1 Subsurface flow wetland
Drain field
Rock
Water
Inlet
Liner
Bed Media
Fig. 3.2 Free water surface wetland

land area basis. Since the wastewater remains below the surface, the
possibility for human or wildlife contact with the wastewater is
reduced. In addition, there is a lower potential for insect infestation.
Because of these advantages, it is becoming commoner for SSF sys-
tems to be added upstream of FWS installations. In general, however,
the design criteria for SSF wetlands do not differ substantially from
that of FWS wetlands although it should be noted the system’s
hydrology and the rate of pollutant removal can be expected to be
noticeably different. In SSF wetlands, the pollutants are transported
through the bed media (e.g. the gravel bed) where a microbial con-
sortium exists on the surfaces of the bed media and on roots of the
plants. Pollutant degradation and/or binding occur when it comes
into contact with the microorganisms. There are four important com-
ponents in each cell of a wetland installation. These are (1) the inlet
distribution system, (2) the basin configuration, (3) the bed media,
and (4) the outlet control system (Kadlec and Knight, 1996).
The number of cells in a wetland installation will be influenced by
the site topography, the type and amount of maintenance that is
planned, and the degree of redundancy needed. FWS wetlands should
have at least two parallel cells to ensure there is sufficient operational
flexibility. This arrangement is important in the event of unexpected
failures such as vegetation die-off, wetland contamination, and struc-
tural failures (e.g. berms or holding bunds collapse). However, the
number of cells will be determined by the costs considerations, the site
constraints, and the degree of operational flexibility needed. General
guidelines for more effective cell design include: (1) avoiding blind
spots in corners, (2) providing flow straightening berms inside the cell,
(3) re-establishing proper flow distribution at intermediate points in a
flow path, and (4) maintaining good bottom uniformity during con-
struction and start-up (Kadlec and Knight, 1996).
Constructed wetlands can be built at, below, or even above the
existing land surface if an external water source is supplied
(i.e. the wastewater). The grading of a particular wetland in relation to
the appropriate elevation is important for the optimal use of the
wetland area in terms of water distribution. Soil type and groundwater
level must also be considered if the water shortage and consequent drying
of the wetland is to be avoided. Liners can prevent excessive desiccation,

particularly where soils have a high permeability (e.g. sand and gravel)
or where there is limited or periodic flow. Rooting substrate is an
important consideration to ensure vigorous growth of the target
macrophytes. A loamy or sandy topsoil layer of 20–30 cm in depth is
ideal for most wetland macrophyte species in a FWS wetland. A SSF
wetland will require coarser material such as gravel and/or coarse sand.
The hydric soil is saturated with water and contains the roots, rhizomes,
and other active connections of the macrophytes to the surface envi-
ronment. There will be accumulation of detritus on this layer (Fig. 3.3).
Understanding of the chemical transformations in constructed wetlands
has attracted the research interest. Biogeochemical cycling of nitrogen
is a complex process involving inter-conversions between different
nitrogen species and transfers between various stores. In addition to
interstitial water, nitrogen may be stored in and above ground, in live
and dead plant materials, in invertebrates and microbes, and sorbed
on the surfaces of organic and inorganic solids. Conversion pathways
include ammonia volatilization, ammonification, nitrification, denitri-
fication, anammox (anaerobic ammonium oxidation), dissimilatory
reduction, plant and microbial assimilations, and re-mineralization
during decomposition (Jetten et al., 1999; Kadlec and Knight, 1996).
Sorption and microbial assimilation (including algal) are rapid processes,
but plant assimilation is slower. The removal of residual organic pollu-
tants is also an important consideration and the transformations of
Emergent
vegetation
Live Standing
dead
Water
Detritus
Hydric soil
Underling strata
Fig. 3.3 Structural components of a wetland

dissolved organic carbon through a constructed wetland have been

studied.
3.1.4 Wetland hydrology

The term “wetland hydrology” encompasses all hydrologic character-
istics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to
the surface at some time during the growing season. Areas with
evident characteristics of wetland hydrology are those where the
presence of water has an overriding influence on the characteristics of
vegetation and soils due to anaerobics, hence reducing conditions.
Such characteristics are usually present in areas that are inundated or
have soils that are saturated to the surface for sufficient duration to
develop hydric soils and support vegetation typically adapted for life
in periodically anaerobic soil conditions.
The hydrology of wetlands is controlled by the following features.
• Topographic location (e.g. depressions, flood plains, slopes),

• Landscape position (elevation in the drainage basin relative to
other wetlands, lakes, and streams in the locality),
• The relative amounts of water flowing in and water flowing out of
the wetland,
• The hydro-geological framework,
• The geochemistry of surface and ground water,
• The presence or absence of vegetation,
• The type of vegetation,
• The type of soil, and
• Local climate.
The selection of appropriate sites for constructed wetlands may be

aided by the following indicators.
• Drainage patterns — These occur primarily in wetlands adjacent to

streams and consist of surface evidence of drainage flow into or
through an area.
• Drift lines or small piles of debris deposited by flowing water —

These are most likely found adjacent to streams or other sources
of water flow in wetlands and often occur along contours and
mostly in tidal marshes, which is an indicator of the extent of
flooding in the area.
• Sediment deposition — Plants and other vertical objects often
have thin layers, coatings, or depositions of mineral or organic
matter on them after inundation. This is an indication of the
minimum inundation level.
• Watermarks — These are commonest on woody vegetation. They
occur as stains on bark or other erected objects (e.g. bridge pillars,
buildings, fences, etc.) and indicate the approximate depth of
standing or flowing water.
• Stream gauge data and records of floods.
• The visual observation of saturated soils.
• The visual observation of inundation — This is the most obvious
and revealing hydrologic indicator and aerial observation can indi-
cate the extent of inundation. It is, however, necessary to note that
seasonal conditions and recent weather conditions can contribute
to this indicator.
• Rust-colored plant roots or zones of soil around them — This is
caused by the leaking of oxygen out of plant roots, resulting in the
oxidation of iron compounds in the soil around the plant roots
and indicates a water-logged condition.
3.1.5 Soils in the wetland

The soil has an important role in achieving wetland functions, as it has
to provide a stable support stratum for the macrophytes, any plant
nutrients not brought in with the wastewater, and an appropriate
environment for microbial activity. The soil may be obtained locally
and used unmodified or may be formulated to achieve specific char-
acteristics. The depth of this planting layer should be 20–30 cm.
Experience has shown that wetland formation is accelerated by the
application of a high-quality soil substrate.
The important characteristics in a good wetland soil are:
• Organic matter content — Leaf compost, which has between 25%

and 40% organic matter depending on source, is generally used to
increase the organic matter content. Typically, leaf compost is
incorporated in a ratio of 1:1 with loamy topsoil that has an organic
matter content of about 5% or is blended in a ratio of 2:1 (two parts
compost) with loamy subsoil that has a very low organic matter
content. As a guide, the formulated soil is expected to have an
organic matter content as high as 20%, although 12% may be
adequate for constructed wetlands (Gould and Thomas, 2006).
• Soil texture — The texture of the final soil mix is critical for proper
permeability, moisture holding capacity, and resistance to com-
paction or subsidence. The most commonly recommended USDA
textural classes include: sandy loam (SL), fine sandy loam (FSL),
silt loam (SiL) or loam (L) (Gould and Thomas, 2006).
— Sandy loam — SLs consist of soil materials containing some-
what less sand and more silt plus clay than loamy sands
(70–90% sand, 0–30% silt, and 0–15% clay). SLs are not dom-
inated by any particular size of sand particle. It contains 30%
or more very coarse, coarse or medium sand (but less than 25%
very coarse and coarse sand), and less than 30% of either fine
sand or very fine sand.
— Fine sandy loam — FSLs contain at least 50% of fine sand and
less than 15% of very coarse, coarse, and medium sand.
— Silt loam — SiL has rather small amounts of sand and clay and
is composed mostly of silt-sized particles.
— Loam — L is a medium-textured soil material and it feels as
though it contains a relatively even mixture of sand, silt, and
clay (Brown, 2003).
• Cation exchange capacity (CEC) — Cation exchange is the
replacement of one positively charged ion, attached to the soil or
sediment, with another positively charged ion (Kaldec and Knight,
1996). The CEC is a measure of a soil’s ability to hold and release
many of the primary plant nutrients that occur as cations (e.g. Ca,
Mg, K, and NH4) (Gould and Thomas, 2006) and is usually

reported in milliequivalents per 100 grams of soil (Kaldec and
Knights, 1996). It is useful to know the CEC of a soil, as it gives
an idea of the potential fertility of the soil. The estimate of CEC is
made by adding meq% values for calcium, magnesium, potassium,
sodium, and exchangeable acidity. SLs and FSL soils have a CEC
of 5–10 meq% and Ls and SiL soils have a CEC of 5–15 meq%
(Apps Lab.). (A CEC of 20 or more is recommended for good
plant growth. A general rule of thumb is that a soil manufactured
with compost blended and having 15–20% organic matter will
have an adequate CEC.)
• Bulk density — Bulk density is the mass-per-unit volume of the
whole soil, including pore space, so it is a reflection of
porosity. Bulk density impacts the soil resistance to the penetra-
tion plant roots and the movement of air and water within and
through the soil. For constructed wetland soils, the recom-
mended range of bulk density is 1.05–1.17 g/cc (1600–1800
lbs/cubic yards) following delivery to site (Gould and Thomas,
2006).
• Soil pH — Soil pH is a measure of the hydrogen ion concentra-
tion in the soil moisture. The soil pH determines the availability of
nutrients and other chemical constituents. A pH of 6.5 to 7.5 is
recommended although the specific needs of the macrophytes
selected should be determined and the pH adjusted as needed for
optimum growth.
3.1.6 Wetland vegetation

Wetland vegetation may be grouped into four ecological categories
depending primarily on growth position in relation to the water level
(Whitley et al., 1999). While some wetland plants can tolerate sub-
stantial variations in soil moisture and water level, the others have
strict water requirements for survival. The selection of the appropri-
ate plants for each growth position is important since water levels do
tend to vary on seasonal and inter-annual periods according to
climatic conditions and management practices.
The four categories are:
• Shoreline plants — Plants that grow in wet soil on raised hum-

mocks or along the shorelines of streams, ponds, bogs, marshes,
and lakes. These plants grow at or above the level of standing
water although some may be rooted in shallow water.
• Emergents — Plants that grow out of the water are called emer-
gents. A common emergent is the broadleaf arrowhead named for
the arrowhead shape of its leaf.
• Floating plants — These plants float on the water and examples
such as the spatter dock and duckweed tend to occur in ponds and
in places along streams and rivers where there is little or no
current.
• Submergents — The last group grow completely under the surface
of water. Plants such as the water milfoil have roots that anchor
them to the bottom of the pond while the others such as the
coontail are submerged but not rooted.
3.1.7 Role of wetland vegetation in the treatment process

As primary producers, wetland vegetation has a vital role in wetland
ecology and performs a number of other significant functions such as
maintaining water quality by filtering out sediments and removing
nutrients. The wetland processes also result in the “tea”-colored
(from organic compounds) solution in wetlands and this with the
shading of riparian zones reduce the frequency and severity of algal
blooms. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the plant components and
the impact these have on wastewater treatment.
Wetland vegetation often exhibits distinct morphological, physio-
logical, and reproductive adaptations that allow a greater tolerance
and survival within wetland areas. Plant species that are common to
the wettest environments often exhibit the greatest degree and the
most effective adaptations to wetland conditions. As hydrologic con-
ditions vary from periodic or seasonal saturation to permanent
inundation, the vegetation will also vary from species specifically
adapted to wetland areas to a more transitional grouping of species
(Table 3.2), some of which lack the necessary adaptations or

tolerances to wet conditions.
Table 3.1 Role of the wetland vegetation in treatment process
Macrophyte component Role in treatment process
Aerial plant tissue • Light attenuation — reduces the growth of

phytoplankton
• Reduces the velocity of wind, and
reduces the risk of re-suspension
• Aesthetically pleasing appearance
• Storage of nutrients
Plant tissue in water • Filtering effect — the removal of debris
• Reduces current velocity — increases the
rate of sedimentation and reduces the risk
of re-suspension
• Provides surface area for biofilm attachment
• Releases photosynthetic oxygen and
increases aerobic degradation
• Uptake of nutrients
Roots and rhizomes in the soil • Provide surface for bacteria and other
microorganisms attachment
• Stabilize the sediment surface and reduce
erosion
• Prevent the soil from clogging
• The release of oxygen increases organic
degradation and nitrification
• Uptake of nutrients
• Storage of nutrients
• Release of antibiotics and pathogen
removal
3.2 Pollutants and Their Transformations

3.2.1 Biodegradable organics
Organic matter contains approximately 45–50% carbon (C), which
can be utilized by a wide array of microorganisms as a source of
energy (DeBusk, 1999). A large number of these microorganisms
consume oxygen to decompose the organic compounds to carbon
Table 3.2 Plant type and occurrence in wetlands
Indicator category Occurrence in wetlands

(estimated probability)
Obligatory wetland plants >99%

Facultative wetland plants 67–99%
Facultative plants 33–67%
Facultative upland plants 1–33%
Obligatory upland plants <1%
Source: 1987 USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual and

USFWS National Wetland Inventory; subsequently
modified by the National Plant List Panel.
dioxide in a process that provides energy for growth. A portion of the

microbial consortium in a wetland will be adapted to the aerobic (i.e.
oxygenated) surface waters and another adapted to anaerobic (oxygen-
depleted) soils. This combination of two oxygen regimes makes the
wetland a potentially highly effective process for the removal of
organic compounds from a variety of wastewaters. Organic pollutants
are broken down to carbon dioxide and methane, both of which are
lost to the atmosphere. Wetlands also store and recycle large amounts
of organic carbon in the plants and animals that live within the wet-
land and in the detritus. Because of the storing of organic carbon,
wetlands can be the exporters of organic carbon in the form of fine
particulate and dissolved matter.
The more readily degradable organic compounds typically found
in municipal wastewater can be rapidly removed in wetlands.
Biological removal of a variety of persistent (not readily decomposed)
organic compounds, such as lignin-based compounds and petroleum
products, can also be achieved in wetlands, although the removal rates
may be substantially lower. In particular, recent interest had focused
on the removal of undesirable organic chemicals not normally present
in surface water or ground water, or naturally occurring substances
that may cause harmful environmental effects, by constructed wet-
lands. However, the nature and extent of the microbial degradation
of organic chemicals within a constructed wetland is expected to be
strongly depend on the physico-chemical properties of the contami-

nant (Gwenaël et al., 2009), as the biological degradability of organic
compounds may often be explained by its chemical structure. For
instance, the presence of secondary, tertiary, or quaternary carbon
atoms may inhibit degradation.
A commonly used parameter for indicating the effect of biologi-
cally available carbon on a receiving waterbody is biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD). The latter is a measure of the amount of oxygen
needed by microorganisms to stabilize the biologically degradable
organic compounds in the water or soil. Where the test conducted is
over five days at 20°C, then it is referred to as the BOD5. BOD reduc-
tion by wetlands may approach 100% (Hemond and Benoit, 1988).
Table 3.3 shows the locations and processes where the reduction of
BOD may take place.
Table 3.3 Locations and processes where BOD is reduced (adapted

from Sundaravadivel and Vigneswaran, 2001)
Contaminant Location Process
BOD Stems and leaves Microbial respiration

Roots Microbial respiration
Bed media (gravel/sand) Microbial respiration
Bed media (gravel/sand) Settling
3.2.2 Suspended solids

Wetlands can be very effective at suspended solids (SS) removal from
the water column and contaminants that are associated with the SS,
such as nutrients and heavy metals, would also be consequently
removed. Aside from the wastewater, SS may also enter the wetland
with runoff from the surrounding environs (e.g. litterfall) or with the
inflow from associated waterbodies. The extent of sediment deposi-
tion in wetlands depends on water velocity, flooding regimes, vegetated
area of the wetland, and water retention time. Sediment deposition in
wetlands reduces the entry of turbid water into downstream ecosystems.
Typically, wetland vegetation traps 80–90% of the sediments in runoff

(Gilliam, 1994; Johnston, 1991). The concentration of SS in
the water column is measured gravimetrically, by filtering a sample of
water, drying the residue on the filter paper, and weighing.
Turbidity, which is primarily caused by suspended particulate matter
interfering with the passage of light through a sample, is sometimes
used as a surrogate measurement for SS. The total amount of SS in a
sample would be referred to as total SS (TSS) while the organic and
inorganic portions would be referred to as volatile SS (VSS) and fixed
SS (FSS), respectively. Most wetland treatment systems would tend to
be over-designed with respect to TSS removal since removal of other
contaminants would have been the determining factor for sizing. The
concentrations of TSS at almost background levels can be achieved
after wastewater inflow into and within the wetland itself.
3.2.3 Nitrogen
In the biosphere, nitrogen is continuously transformed among
organic, soluble inorganic, and gaseous forms. The nitrogen cycle is
complex and is affected by the wetland conditions such as water
chemistry, climate, vegetation, and water depth and flow. Impact on
the nitrogen cycle would in turn affect the transformations and
removal of nitrogen entering with the wastewater. It has been esti-
mated that wetlands may remove between 70% and 90% of nitrogen
entering the system (Reilly, 1991; Gilliam, 1994).
Nitrogen transformations begin with ammonification where
microbes mineralize organic nitrogen to ammonia (typically in
ammonium form). Ammonia is converted from organic forms
through an energy-releasing multi-step biochemical process. This
energy may be used by microbes for growth, and nitrogen in ammo-
nia is then incorporated into the microbial cell. A large fraction (can
be up to near complete conversion) of the incoming organic nitrogen
can be converted to ammonia (Kadlec and Knight, 1996). The rate of
ammonification is dependent on ambient temperature, pH, C:N ratio
of the wastewater, available supplementary nutrients in the system,
and soil conditions (Reddy and Patrick, 1984). The ammonification
process is essentially a catabolism of amino acids and presumably

includes several types of de-amination reactions. Oxidative de-amination
can be written as:
amino acids → imino acids → keto acids → NH3
and may be operative in the soil layer with oxidative environment. On

the other hand, reductive de-amination (Rose, 1976) presumably
takes place in the soil layer with a reductive environment:
amino acids → saturated acids → NH3.
Nitrification is defined as the biological oxidation of ammonium to

nitrate with nitrite as an intermediate in the reaction sequence. This
definition has limitations where heterotrophic microorganisms are
involved but is adequate for the autotrophic species that are typically
dominant (Hauck, 1984). Nitrification is a chemoautotrophic process
and the nitrifying bacteria derive energy from the oxidation of ammo-
nia and/or nitrite and carbon dioxide are used as a carbon source for
the synthesis of new cells. Paul and Clark (1996) pointed out that
Warrington, in 1878, at Rothamsted, United Kingdom, found that
nitrification was a two-step process involving two groups of microor-
ganisms. One microbial group oxidized ammonium-N to nitrite-N
and nitrate-N while the other oxidized nitrite-N to nitrate-N (Paul
and Clark, 1996; Schmidt et al., 2001; Schmidt et al., 2003 ):
NH4+ + 1.5O2 ⇒ NO2− + 2H+ + H2O

NO2− + 0.5O2 ⇒ NO3−
NH4+ + 2O2 ⇒ NO3− + 2 H+ + H2O.
Denitrification involves the stepwise reduction of nitrate through

nitrite, nitrogen oxide, and nitrous oxide, ending with gaseous nitro-
gen (Reddy and Patrick, 1984; Tiedje, 1988). Denitrifiers are
facultative anaerobic organisms because they can use oxygen for their
respiration when it is present but change to nitrate when conditions
become anoxic (Knowles, 1982; Tiedje, 1988). In waterlogged soils,
anoxic conditions predominate because the chemical and microbial

demands for oxygen exceed the supply. Unlike the diffusion of oxy-
gen from the atmosphere into water, the diffusion of nitrate in water
is better under waterlogged conditions. Denitrification requires
energy and this energy is derived from the oxidation of organic matter
(heterotrophic denitrification) as shown in the following equation
(Reddy and Patrick, 1984):
5(CH2O) + 4NO3− + 4H+ → 5CO2 + 2N2 + 7H2O.
The factors that can influence the progress of denitrification include

pH and temperature. The pH optimum for denitrification is in the
range of 6 to 8, but considerable denitrification activity can still be
found at pH values down to 4. Besides heterotrophic denitrification,
other denitrification pathways exist. For example, in autotrophic den-
itrification, pyrite can be used as an electron donor leading to the
reduction of nitrate and the oxidation of sulphide by Thiobacillus den-
itrificans and the oxidation of iron by Gallionella ferruginea
(Blicher-Mathiesen and Hofmann, 1999).
3.2.4 Phosphorus
Phosphorus is often a minor constituent in soils — averaging at
0.05% — and phosphorus deficiency in plants is a common soil
fertility problem. It may enter a wetland with the wastewater in the
form of orthophosphates and these would have typically been applied
as fertilizers in farming activities or household chemicals. Associated
with farming activities and domestic sewage, phosphorus will also be
present in the form of organically bound phosphates. These would be
formed in the biological processes associated with the animals farmed
and the human population in the locality. Where there are urban cen-
ters, phosphorus may also be in the form of condensed phosphates
(phyro, meta, and others) and these would have been used to treat
boiler waters to reduce scaling.
Wetlands remove phosphorus through biological, physical, and
chemical processes. Sedimentation is an important mechanism for the
removal of particulate inorganic and organic phosphorus, and sedi-

ment burial is considered to be the major long-term phosphorus
storage in wetlands. A part of the sedimented organic phosphorus can
be mineralized to dissolved inorganic phosphorus, which can subse-
quently be partially released back to water. Dissolved inorganic
phosphorus is either immobilized via assimilation by macrophytes,
algae, or microorganisms or it can be retained by amorphous and
crystalline Fe or Al oxides, or by Ca. However, a part of the immobi-
lized phosphorus in plant biomass can be re-mineralized back to a
dissolved inorganic form and thus it represents only a short-term
phosphorus storage. In contrast, phosphorus bound to inorganic
sorption components may be a more long-term storage for phospho-
rus though Fe-bound phosphorus is sensitive to changes in the redox
potential, and during anoxic conditions it can be released, but a part
of that mobilized phosphorus can be resorbed by Al oxides.
Therefore, a large amount of sorption components in the wetland soil
is essential to achieve long-term and stable phosphorus retention
(Liikanen et al., 2003).
In the wetland, phosphorus may be removed from the liquid
phase by incorporation into the plant tissue and thereafter the plants
are harvested. It should be noted that unless the plants are harvested
and removed from the wetland, the phosphorus removed from the
wastewater would still largely remain in the wetland with the plant
material.
3.2.5 Sulfur
Sulfur can be expected to exist in various forms in the wetland. For
example, sulfates are typically concentrated in the upper sediments
and dissolved in the water column above with the concentrations up
to 8,700 mg/L. Jarosite (which forms at pH <4) is a basic hydrous
sulfate of potassium and iron with a chemical formula of
KFe(III)3(OH)6(SO4)2 and is also common in small amounts associated
with high pyrite concentrations and oxidizing conditions. Hydrogen
sulphide is produced by microorganisms in the water column and sed-
iments by sulfate reduction. Sulfate reducing microorganisms can use
sulfates instead of free oxygen to respire, producing H2S as an end

product. Most wetland sediments will be anoxic (without free oxy-
gen) below the surface layer because bacteria on the surface would
have used the free oxygen to respire. Hydrogen sulfide may also be
produced during the decomposition of organic matter rich in organic
sulfur. Hydrogen sulfide, at the concentrations typical at a wetland, is
more likely to cause an odor nuisance problem than be at toxic con-
centration. Some volatile organic sulfur compounds may be emitted
and these may also generate unpleasant odors. Experience would sug-
gest emission of such compounds can be a problem at wetlands
treating wastewaters. When previously anoxic sediments are exposed
to oxygen, sulfur dioxide (SO2) can be produced during the oxidation
of sulfides (e.g., pyrite) by oxygen. This process can be catalyzed by
sulfur-oxidizing microorganisms. Sulfur dioxide has an acrid smell
and can have adverse health effects following chronic exposure.
CHAPTER 4
WETLAND PLANT DYNAMICS
Norio Tanaka and S.K. Weragoda
4.1 Types of Macrophytes and Factors Affecting

Their Growth
4.1.1 Introduction
Macrophytes growing in the surface waterbodies such as lakes, ponds,
streams, and wetlands can be grouped into four categories based on the
relationship between their growth and water level (Fig. 4.1). They are:
1. Submergent macrophytes that grow completely below the water

surface,
2. Emergent macrophytes that are rooted in the sediments and have
parts protruding above the water surface,
3. Floating macrophytes that have leaves floating on the water surface
but are nevertheless anchored to the bottom sediments (even
though their leaves are floating at the free water surface; these
macrophytes are much similar to the emergent macrophytes in
terms of material budget), and
4. Floating macrophytes that do not anchor at all (this plant cate-
gory is similar to the floating macrophytes in terms of light
attenuation).
4.1.2 Submergent macrophytes

Submergent macrophytes are either true root-producing (H. verticil-
lata) or non-true root-producing (Vallisneria demersum) macrophytes
47
48 N. Tanaka and S.K. Weragoda
Fig. 4.1 Various types of aquatic macrophytes based on their growth in relation to
the water surface: (a) submergent macrophytes that are completely under water (e.g.
Hydrilla verticillata), (b) emergent macrophyte where roots and parts of plant stems
are under water while leaves and flowers exist above the water level (e.g. Typha angus-
tifolia), (c) floating-leaves macrophytes with leaves and flowers/fruits floating on the
water surface while roots are anchored in the bottom sediments (e.g. Nelumbo lutea),
and (d) floating macrophytes with leaves and flowers/fruits floating on the water sur-
face while roots exist just below the water surface and are not anchored (e.g.
Eichhornia crassipes)
with most of their vegetative mass present below the water surface.
Usually, they produce soft stems that would lead them to being sus-
pended in the water. However, flowering can be seen in some species
just above the water surface (Egeria densa).
Tape grass (Vallisneria sp.), fanwort (Cabomba caroliniana) and
water milfoils (Myriophyllum spicatum) are some of the submergent
macrophytes found in tropical regions. Tape grass produces flowers
and is pollinated underwater or at the water surface. Sago pondweeds
(Stuckenia pectinata) have branches and leaves that reach and spread
across the water just below the surface. Fanwort produces flowers that
float on the surface while water milfoils have flower stalks that emerge
Wetland Plant Dynamics 49
up to 15 cm above the water. Submergent aquatic macrophytes per-

form several functions in waterbodies including providing food and
habitat for wildlife, affecting the nutrient and other chemical cycles,
and can significantly impact on diurnal variation in dissolved oxygen
concentrations.
4.1.3 Emergent macrophytes

Emergent macrophytes grow out of the water while being rooted to
the bottom sediments. This means their stems, leaves, and flowers are
visible above the water level. Emergent macrophytes can have no par-
ticular stems (as in the common understanding of a stem) such as in
cattails (Typha latifolia) or very large leaves with big spikes of flowers
as in arrowheads (Sagittara latifolia) and fire flag (Thalia geniculata).
The most frequently used wetland emergent macrophytes in the trop-
ical environment are cattail (T. latifolia), bulrush (Scirpus lacustris),
and reed (Phragmites australis) (Brix, 1993; Belmont et al., 2004;
Dallas et al., 2004). Emergent macrophytes impact on waterbodies by
increasing evapotranspiration and hence water loss from the water-
body, which is discussed later in this chapter.
Although much of the emergent macrophytes grow above the
water level, they can be adversely affected by small variations in the
water level. The species selected for wetland applications should prefer-
ably be adapted to daily or seasonal fluctuations in the water level. It
should be emphasized that most wetland macrophytes cannot tolerate
extended periods of flooding or drying of the roots. The water depth
of the free water surface in wetlands is typically designed to be less than
10 cm in the tropical environment while for subsurface flow wetlands,
the water level is maintained just below the surface of the bed (Reed
et al., 1988). As an example, the water level was set at 5 cm below the
bed surface in a study done by Chazarenc et al. (2003).
4.1.4 Floating and floating-leave macrophytes

Tropical wetlands, because of year-round growing conditions, often
have substantial growths of floating instead of emergent macrophytes.
Water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) and water hyacinth (E. crassipes)

(Fig. 4.2) are the common floating macrophytes found in the tropical
environment. Floating and floating-leaves macrophytes (Fig. 4.3)
often contribute dead plant materials that accumulate in the sediments
and thereby reduce water depth over time. Where there is excessive
Fig. 4.2 P. stratiotes, a floating macrophyte common in tropical environments
Fig. 4.3 Nymphaea nouchali, flowering of floating-leaves macrophyte, which is

rooted in bottom sediment
growth of water hyacinth or water lettuce, these macrophytes may

cover the surface of the waterbody to such an extent as to cause major
habitat, recreational, navigational, and flood-control problems.
Floating macrophytes have both positive and negative impacts on
ecological systems. On the positive side, free-floating macrophytes
provide shading of the water column, thereby providing a cooler
habitat for fish and macro invertebrates in what otherwise would be a
warm water environment (Nahlik and Mitsch, 2006). On the nega-
tive side, floating macrophytes minimize submergent photosynthesis
and gaseous exchange between the atmosphere and water column,
resulting in low dissolved oxygen levels in the water. Experiments
done in Sri Lanka have revealed that a fully covered surface (100%
surface coverage) surface by Lemna minor reduced dissolved oxygen
to less than 1.0 mgL−1, creating anoxic conditions above and in the
sediments (unpublished data). Another study done in Brazil has sim-
ilarly revealed that drastic reduction in dissolved oxygen can be
expected and in this particular case, it was down to 0.87 mgL−1
(Sipaúba-Tavares et al., 2003).
4.1.5 Factors affecting macrophyte growth

The factors that influence aquatic macrophyte growth include light
penetration, nutrients and their chemical compositions in the sedi-
ments and water column, and water temperature. Light penetration is
dependent on the turbidity of the water and plant cover on the water
surface, and is important for submergent macrophytes. In the tropi-
cal environment where growth can occur throughout the year,
floating macrophytes can grow well and a wetland surface can then be
continuously under cover. Coupled with this, higher water column
turbidity occurs due to the consequent higher organic and dead mate-
rial loads resulting from increased plant growth. These conditions
limit light penetration and also the growth of submergent plants.
Vertical profile measurements on transmission of photosynthetically
active radiation (PAR) made in open-water areas and sites dominated
by emergent, floating, or submergent vegetation in subtropical wet-
lands in Florida, USA have shown that 20% or less of surface light
intensity was transmitted to a depth of 60 cm. The spectral irradiance

of water at the inflow revealed that peak irradiance shifted from
538 nm at the surface to 643 nm by 60 cm (Chimney et al., 2006).
Nutrient availability has direct positive correlation with macrophyte
biomass quantities. Macrophytes assimilate nutrients from available
mineral forms for their growth. The amount of available nutrients in the
water column and sediments, when compared with temperate situa-
tions, is typically higher in the tropical environment. Nevertheless,
plant uptake may contribute to nutrients removal because of their fast
year-round growth pattern (Konnerup et al., 2009).
In the tropics, temperature is almost consistently favorable for
plant and microbial growth, and a consequence of this is a more con-
sistent treated water quality from the wetland. Plant productivity can
be expected to be high in the tropics and Neue et al. (1997) reported
that many natural and constructed tropical wetlands have net primary
productivity of more than 1000 gCm−2yr−1, which is greater than most
other ecosystems (Kivaisi, 2001). Referring to previous studies, the
growth rates of various macrophytes have been noted to vary within
the 550–4,300 gDW m−2yr−1 range in the tropics (Table 4.1). For
example, dry biomass of cattail ranged from 3.0 to 5.4 kg m−2 and this
Table 4.1 Tropical macrophyte growth data reported in previous studies
Macrophyte Growth rate

No. species Country (gDWm−2yr−1) Reference
1 Heliconia sp. Thailand 550 Konnerup et al., 2009

2 Schoenoplectus Queensland, 1000 Greenway, 2003
validus Australia
3 Spirodela sp. Queensland, 2000 Greenway, 2003
Australia
4 Elecharis Queensland, 3000 Greenway, 2003
sphaceolata Australia
5 Canna sp. Thailand 3100 Konnerup et al., 2009
6 Typha Queensland, 4000 Greenway, 2003
domingensis Australia
7 Cyperus sp. Thailand 4300 Kantawanichkul
et al., 2009
corresponded to net production rates of 43–76 ton ha−1yr−1

(Koottatep et al., 2005).
Other factors affecting the growth of macrophytes in wetlands
include the hydraulic retention time (HRT). When HRT was one day,
Cyperus involucratus was observed to grow the tallest, but fell easily.
However, Canna siamensis showed the highest biomass production at
five-day HRT (5.68 kg m−2) (Sohsalam et al., 2008). The maximum
heights of three commonly encountered macrophytes are presented in
Table 4.2.
Not only the above-ground biomass, but the below-ground bio-
mass also varied with the macrophyte type and nutrient availability.
The length of Typha augustifolia roots was only about 30–40 cm
while P. australis was 50–60 cm (Koottatep et al., 2005). Below-
ground biomass values for floating-leaves Cyperus papyrus swamps
had an average of 1296 gDW m−2 and rooted papyrus swamps,
776 gDW m−2 (Kipkemboi et al., 2002). The root zones of the
cattails and ornamental flowers (Canna sp.) extended down into full
subsurface depth of 0.5 m (Belmont et al., 2004).
4.1.6 Effect of harvesting in wetlands

As decomposition rates are higher given the year-round favorable tem-
peratures, nutrients are released and available for the continuous
growth of macrophytes. Typically, then, site-specific harvesting proto-
cols are required. The effectiveness of a particular harvesting protocol
in terms of nutrients removal will be decided by the nutrients content
in the biomass. For example, comparing Canna with Heliconia, har-
vesting Canna may give better results, as it has been estimated that
Table 4.2 Maximum heights of commonly found wetland macrophytes observed

in the tropical environment
Maximum
No. Macrophyte species Country height (m) Reference
1 Phragmites australis Costa Rica 1.5 Dallas et al., 2004

2 Scirpus grossus Sri Lanka 1.5 Jinadasa et al., 2008
3 Typha augustifolia Sri Lanka 2.9 Jinadasa et al., 2008
85 gNm−2yr−1 can be removed by above-ground biomass harvest of

Canna, whereas Heliconia managed just 12 gNm−2yr−1 (Konnerup
et al., 2009). More than 50% of the N was stored in the leaves and
their regular removal can be expected to increase wetlands N removal
(Lim et al., 2001). It should, however, be noted that many studies of
temperate systems have shown that the amount that can be removed
by harvesting is generally insignificant (Tanner, 2001). This may be
because only one harvest (e.g. of emergent macrophyte, T. angustifolia)
is possible within a year in the temperate environment — e.g. Japan
(Tanaka et al., 2005), while 3–4 harvests have been reported in the
tropical region — e.g. Sri Lanka (Jinadasa et al., 2008) (Fig. 4.4).
Figure 4.5 shows the effect of harvesting on Scirups grossus and
T. angustifolia in the tropical environment. There appears to be an
optimal harvesting interval and for T. angustifolia, it was eight weeks
for maximum N removal rate (Koottatep and Polprasat, 1997).
4.1.7 The emission of greenhouse gases in the tropical

wetlands
Emergent macrophytes are intimately involved in the production,
oxidation, and release of methane (CH4) from freshwater wetlands.
At tropical climate
At temperate climate
Shoot height (cm)
Harvesting
Harvesting
Harvesting
Harvesting
Time
Fig. 4.4 Comparison of consecutive harvesting on macrophyte growth within a

period of a year at temperate and tropical zones
Fig. 4.5 Change in shoot height of S. grossus and T. angustifolia over four cycles of
growth and harvest (modified from Jinadasa et al., 2008)
Most of the organic matters produced by the macrophytes are

decomposed anaerobically in the sediments resulting in metha-
nogenesis and interstitial water being saturated with CH4. Studies
have revealed that macrophytes mediate the bulk of CH4 released
from vegetated wetlands, generally accounting for 80–90% of
the CH4 emitted. For this reason, much attention has been paid
to the factors controlling methanogenesis and CH4 emission from
the various types of wetlands and their contribution to global
warming.
In one of the first comparisons of its kind, researchers have
demonstrated that wetlands in tropical areas are able to absorb and
hold onto about 80% more carbon than can wetlands in temperate
zones. Tropical wetland sediment is more densely packed with car-
bon. The average carbon density of soil was observed to be 110 grams
of carbon per kilogram of soil while 53 grams of carbon per kilogram
of soil was observed in the temperate environment (www.
sciencedaily.com). CH4 emission in tropical mangrove wetlands in
Australia was measured in the range of 20–250 µgm−2h−1 (Kreuzwieser
et al., 2003). The experiments done in Costa Rica revealed that CH4
emission from a wetland was 45 gCm−2yr−1. However, values were

lower in Indonesia, at 4–19 gCm−2yr−1 (Mitsch et al., 2008).
Other than CH4, N2O also contributes to global warming. N2O
emission in the tropical mangrove wetlands in Australia was measured
and was in the range of 2–14 µgm−2h−1 (Kreuzwieser et al., 2003).
However, when N2O emission is increased, CH4 emission is reduced
due to the possible inhibitory effects of N2O on methonogens.
4.2 Role of Macrophytes in Wetlands

Aquatic macrophytes typically provide the main “structural” elements
in constructed wetlands. The active reaction zone of wetlands is the
root zone or rhizosphere. This is where physiochemical and biologi-
cal processes induced by the macrophytes, microorganisms, soil, and
pollutant interactions take place. It has been observed that con-
structed wetlands are more suitable for wastewater treatment under
tropical conditions as the warm climate is more conducive to year-
round macrophyte growth and microbiological activity (Bojcevska
and Tonderski, 2007).
Macrophytes enhance water quality in a number of ways such as
stabilizing the sediments, limiting shore line erosion, absorbing nutri-
ents both from the overlying water and from the bottom sediment,
and trapping suspended particulate materials. In addition to the
macrophytes’ action, there are actions mediated indirectly by the
macrophytes including filtration and chemical precipitation through
the contact of water with the macrophyte-stabilized substrate and
macrophyte-generated litter. Chemical transformations include
adsorption and ion exchange on the surface of the macrophytes, sub-
strate, sediment, and litter. The microbial populations associated with
the macrophytes also contribute to the transformation of pollutants
and are responsible for processes such as nitrification and denitrifica-
tion. These microbial populations are a part of the larger ecosystem
wherein there is competition, growth, decay, and predation (Fig. 4.6).
Nutrients removal through plant uptake can be significant in
tropical wetlands. A comparison between planted (Phragmites karka
and T. latifolia) and unplanted systems has clearly shown the importance
Chemical
Sedimentation precipitation
Filtration Predation
Limiting
erosion
Ion Adsorption
exchange Organic
decomposition
Nitrification/
denitrification
Fig. 4.6 Treatment processes that can occur in wetland systems
of macrophytes in the removal of TN, TP, and BOD (Juwarkar et al.,

1995). Other macrophytes such as C. involucratus, C. siamensis,
(Heliconia spp,) Hymenocallis littoralis, T. augustifolia and Thalia
deabata have also been studied for nutrient uptake and these have
been shown, within a period of 90 days, to have removal values in the
ranges of 34.9–142.0 gN m−2 and 5.8–24.8 gP m−2 for nitrogen and
phosphorus, respectively (Sohsalam et al., 2008). The nitrogen
uptake rates of various macrophytes under tropical conditions are
shown in Table 4.3.
It has been noted that constructed wetlands removed 66–73% of
influent N as effluent N concentrations varied from 8.5–9.8 mgL−1 in
the case of T. latifolia and 8.2–9.2 mgL−1 in the case of Phragmites
karka. It was observed the N removal by P. karka was greater due to
more profuse growth compared to T. latifolia. The removal of P was
less than N and it ranged from 23% to 48% (Juwarkar et al., 1995).
In high temperature conditions, E. crassipes has been reported to
assimilate up to 200 mgP m−2day−1 (Nahlik and Mitsch, 2006).
Planted systems have been noted to be typically superior in terms of
Table 4.3 Average nitrogen uptake rates by various macrophytes under tropical
conditions
Nitrogen uptake
rate (gNm−2yr−1)
(or gNm−2day−1
No. Macrophyte species Country “*” cases) Reference
1 Schoenoplectus validus Queensland, 14.5 Greenway, 2003

Australia
2 Elecharis sphaceolata Queensland, 40.5 Greenway, 2003
Australia
3 Typha domingensis Queensland, 54.0 Greenway, 2003
Australia
4 T. angustifolia Thailand 266 Koottatep and
Polprasat, 1997
5 E. crassipes Costa Rica 0.78* Nahlik and Mitsch,
2006
6 Cyperus sp. Thailand 0.86* Kantawanichkul
et al., 2009
removing ammonium and total Kjedahl nitrogen and free water sur-
face wetlands were significantly better than subsurface flow wetlands.
The free water surface allowed nitrification and volatilization to take
place more readily (Lim et al., 2001).
Soil hydraulic conductivity is improved by rooted macrophytes
because the turnover caused by the root mass creates macropores in
the soil. This allows for greater percolation of water, thus increasing
wastewater–plant interactions. As an example, measurements have
shown significantly higher hydraulic conductivity in the saturated top-
soil of wetlands (6.2 m day−1 on average) compared to mown grass-
lands (1.47 m day−1) and arable land (0.79 m day−1) with alluvial top
soil (Halabuk, 2006).
Macrophytes usually have above and below ground plant struc-
tures that provide large surface areas for the growth of microbial
biofilms. These biofilms are responsible for much of the microbial
processes in a constructed wetland. Even dead plant material, which
forms the litter layer, can provide support for microbial growth. The
dead leaves and stems falling to the bottom create multiple layers of
organic debris. This accumulation of decomposing biomass creates
highly porous layers that provide attachment surfaces for microor-
ganisms. This litter layer contributes significantly to wastewater
treatment in constructed and natural wetlands. The impact of the
attached microbial growth also contributes significantly to nutrient
removal. The latter is, however, influenced by temperature, pH, and
alkalinity of the water, inorganic carbon source, the size of the micro-
bial population, and the concentration of dissolved oxygen
(Polprasert, 1997). The preceding factors in association with the type
of macrophyte influence the composition of the microbial population.
For example, the mean numbers of nitrifying bacteria in C. papyrus
root (2.15 × 106 ± 1.53 × 105 MPN g−1DW) were significantly higher
than those associated with the Miscanthidium violaceum root mat
(1.30 × 104 ± 8.83 × 102 MPN g−1DW) (Kyambadde et al., 2004).
Residual numbers of fecal coliform is an important indicator of
the effectiveness of a domestic wastewater treatment facility.
Reduction in the numbers of pathogen indicators (and the
pathogens) in wetland systems is due to sorption, sedimentation, and
predation. The impact of sunlight is not as significant since light pen-
etration is attenuated by the macrophytes. The values recorded for
total coliforms (TC), E. coli, and enterococci were 2.50 (±0.58), 2.42
(±0.43), and 2.32 (±0.60) in Log10 units and the TC removal is much
higher in Cuba (tropical) than in England (temperate) (Perkins and
Hunter, 2000). In Egypt, Stott et al., (1999) achieved a 100%
removal of parasitic ova from domestic wastewater intended for
agriculture use (Kivaisi, 2001).
Macrophytes mediate the transfer of oxygen to the supporting soil
through the plant tissue and the leakage from root systems to the rhi-
zosphere where the aerobic degradation of organic matter and
nitrification will take place. Radial oxygen loss (ROL) creates aerobic
conditions in the rhizosphere. The oxygen transfer rates to below
ground were about 80 gm−2day−1 in planted and 60 gm−2day−1 in
unplanted systems at a HLR of 80 mm day−1 (Kantawanichkul et al.,
2009). The macrophyte root and rhizomes in the rhizosphere leak
oxygen into the microzones in an otherwise anaerobic zone and
stimulate the breakdown of carbonaceous compounds resulting in

BOD removal of 78–91% at 165–237 mgL−1 of inflow BOD concen-
tration with T. latifolia and P. karka (Juwarkar et al., 1995). C. papyrus
transferred 6.3 g m−2day−1 oxygen to soil while P. australis transferred
12 gm−2day−1 as its maximum (Armstrong et al., 1990). Hollow vessels
(Fig. 4.7) in plant tissue enable this movement of oxygen.
Macrophytes reduce water velocity as it flows through the wet-
land. This enhances sedimentation, reduces erosion, and increases
opportunity for contact between the water and plant surface areas.
The dense root system of the macrophytes helps to stabilize the soil
surface and to retard the formation of erosion channels (Fig. 4.8).
The growth of roots within the soil also helps to reduce the effect of
clogging and compaction.
Macrophytes as a biotic link in wetland ecosystems play an impor-
tant role in maintaining the ecogeological equilibrium and the
biogeochemical cycles of elements due to their ability to accumulate
and bind soluble pollutants. Another ecologically important feature of
macrophytes is their ability to accumulate biogenic elements and toxic
substances, including heavy metals, proportionally to their concentration
Fig. 4.7 Cross-sectional view of the terminal leaf of Scirpus grossus showing the
arrangement of the hollow vessels that facilitate aeration from aboveground to
belowground organs
Fig 4.8 Dense root system of Arundo donax helping to bind and stabilize the soil
and so retard the formation of erosion channels
in the environment. This property has led to increasing interest in

macrophytes as indicators of biogeochemical processes and biomoni-
tors of pollution (Kurilenko et al., 2002). Typha angustata has shown
its capacity in the remediation of contamination by heavy metals
(Bose et al., 2008). Concentrating heavy metals in the macrophytes
provides for convenient extraction and possible reuse options for the
heavy metals. If metals recovery is not practiced, the harvest shall have
to be disposed in a manner that prevents the mobilization of the
metals back to the environment (Ghosh and Singh, 2005).
4.3 Plant Physiology

In the tropical environment, significant loss of water occurs in con-
structed wetland systems due to evapotranspiration (ET) and hence
may have a large impact on the water balance and thereby also on out-
flow nutrient concentrations, and along with that treatment
performance. Therefore, as the measures of the treatment efficiency
of a tropical constructed wetland system, mass balance estimations are
better than differences between inflow and outflow concentrations
(Bojcevska and Tonderski, 2007). Wetlands tend to have higher ET if
the surrounding surfaces have lower ET. This is due to the advection
of energy and the phenomenon is called the edge or oasis effect.

Wetlands also tend to have higher ET rates if they are configured long
and narrow. This is referred to as the clothesline effect. The latter
occurs when air passes from dry unvegetated surfaces to moist vege-
tated surfaces and in the process impacts on vapor gradients and heat
transfer (Bojcevska and Tonderski, 2007). The water loss by some
tropical macrophytes due to ET is shown in Table 4.4.
ROL and gas transportation are another two significant factors to be
considered in the wetland design. Gas transportation from above-ground
parts through the rhizome into the fine root is affected by the surface
area of aerenchymal tissue. This flow of gas is driven by diffusion
processes and/or convective flows that may include pressure differentials.
Very intensive convective gas transport has been observed in T. latifolia
and P. australis and this is caused by low pressure in the oxygen-
consuming parts of the plant and higher pressure in the leaves. The
experimental procedure for the measurement of ROL has been exten-
sively described in the published literature (Kludze et al., 1993; Sorrell
and Armstrong, 1994; Kludze and DeLaune, 1996; Sasikala et al., 2009).
The rate of release of root oxygen is calculated from the rate of
decrease in the concentration of Ti3+ citrate solution in the incubation
flasks (Fig. 4.9). The net rate of ROL will be then be calculated by
using the formula:
ROL = C(y − z),
where ROL is the radial oxygen loss (µmol O2 plant−1), c is the initial vol-
ume of Ti3+ citrate added to each flask (L), y is the concentration of Ti3+
Table 4.4 Average daily water loss by the ET of various tropical macrophytes
Macrophyte Evaporation loss

No. species Country (mm day−1) Reference
1 Heliconia sp. Thailand 8 Konnerup et al., 2009

2 Cyperus sp. Thailand 20.1 Konnerup et al., 2009
3 Canna sp. Thailand 28 Konnerup et al., 2009
4 Typha sp. Malaysia 18.2–32.9 Lim et al., 2001
Fig. 4.9 The ROL is determined by measuring changes in the concentration of

Ti3+ citrate in solution at six-hour time intervals with a spectrophotometer
citrate solution of control (without macrophytes) (µmol Ti3+ L−1), and z

is the concentration of Ti3+ citrate solution after six hours with macro-
phytes (µmol Ti3+ L−1). The mean diameter of the main roots is measured
with a vernear scale and the surface area of the main roots then estimated.
dry Root weights are determined after drying for 72 hours at 85°C.
4.4 Case Study on Growth Characteristics

of Wetland Macrophytes
Phenological patterns are diverse and still not well understood for the
range of macrophytes that may be important in the tropical context. In
contrast to temperate regions, climatic conditions in the tropical
regions have smaller variations in the year. For example, annual aver-
age temperature is typically within a 5°C range, around an average of
about 30°C. Accordingly, macrophytes do not have a dormancy period
and so grow continuously throughout the year. A case study on the
growth of Typha and Scirpus is discussed in the following sections.
The experiment was carried out in Sri Lanka (i.e. under tropical
conditions). First, dormant propagules such as tubers and rhizomes of
30–35 cm in length were planted by placing 15–20 cm into the silt.
This helped to prevent the propagules from floating out of the bottom
medium. Approximately 10–15 cm of stem would be left on the rhi-
zomes so that the macrophytes can obtain oxygen through the stems.
The propagules were typically spaced at 50 cm × 50 cm intervals to
give adequate space for individual plant growth (Fig. 4.10). When the
flow of water was initiated, the water level did not overtop the
macrophytes for extended periods as this may kill the macrophytes.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4.10 (a) Scirpus growing in an experimental constructed wetland with the
quadrant used for plant sampling and (b) the ditches show Typha (right) and Scirpus
(left) plantings
Macrophytes were well established before wastewater was intro-

duced to the system. The macrophytes would then have had the
opportunity to overcome the stress of planting before stresses asso-
ciated with the wastewater was introduced. Initially, commercial
nutrient solutions were applied so that the macrophytes had ade-
quate nutrients for growth. For satisfactory plant establishment
under tropical conditions, Scirpus sp. needed 4–5 months while
Typha sp. took 7–8 months for their establishment (Jinadasa et al.,
2008). Scirpus sp. reached a maximum height of 153 ± 4.6 cm and
T. angustifolia reached a maximum height of 288 ± 4.5 cm then
(Fig. 4.11).
The average productivity of S. grossus was nearly 1.39 ± 0.19 kg
m and is higher than that of T. angustifolia (0.79 ± 0.25 kg m−2).
−2
Harvesting of emergent macrophytes had a pronounced effect on the

growth and nutrient uptake rates. Harvesting could affect nutrient
storage in perennial plant tissues, depending on the time of harvest
and the type of biomass (leaf, rhizome, or both) harvested, and it
could also alter the storage of rhizome carbohydrates needed for early
growth and stand strength. Harvesting was done when macrophytes
became growth saturated and this was determined based on flowering
300
Scirpus grossus
Typha angustifolia
Shoot height (cm)
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Days after planting
Fig. 4.11 Comparison of shoot height of S. grossus and T. angustifolia during the
period following planting (modified from Jinadasa et al., 2008)
(Fig. 4.12). Frequent above-ground harvesting can slow down

growth and biomass production, particularly in T. angustifolia
(Fig. 4.13). Total productivity could, however, be increased if the
shoots were removed repeatedly during the growth period.
Below-ground biomass variation for Scirpus increased toward the
outlet suggesting that below-ground biomass production might have
been affected near the inlet region where higher nutrient concentra-
tions existed (Fig. 4.14). The ratio between above-ground and
below-ground biomass (AGB/BGB) was noted to vary around 1
suggesting that above-ground harvesting had not affected the below-
ground biomass production. The reason for the variation in
below-ground biomass production could be due to the different root
structure of T. angustifolia and S. grossus. Rhizome storage in
T. angustifolia is higher compared to S. grossus and after harvesting,
the stored material in the below-ground biomass translocated toward
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.12 (a) S. grossus flowering and when 80% of macrophytes flower, this point
is considered growth saturation. S. grossus typically requires 4–5 months before reach-
ing growth saturation. The latter is the optimum time for harvesting the macrophytes
and (b) T. angustifolia at growth saturation after 8–9 months
1800 Scirpus grossus

Typha angustifolia
1600
Above-ground biomass (g/m2)

1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
1 2 3 4
Harvesting sequence
Fig. 4.13 Variation of biomass production of S. grossus and T. angustifolia in

consecutive harvests (modified from Jinadasa et al., 2008)
5
1600 (a)
Below-ground biomass (gm−1)
1400 4
1200
AGB/BGB
1000 3
800
2
600
400
1
200
0 0
5
1600 (b)
Roots and rhizome
Below-ground biomass (gm−2)
1400 4
AGB/BGB
1200
3
AGB/BGB
1000
800
2
600
400
1
200
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Fractional distance from inlet (%)
Fig. 4.14 Variation in below-ground biomass of (a) S. grossus and (b) T. angustifo-
lia along the channel; AGB — above-ground biomass and BGB — below-ground
biomass (modified from Jinadasa et al., 2008)
above-ground plant parts and hence decreasing the below-ground

biomass. It is different for S. grossus because its root structure is
mainly composed of roots and not rhizomes. Therefore, multiple
above-ground harvesting will be more effective for S. grossus, as its
rhizome biomass is less compared with T. angustifolia.
CHAPTER 5
DESIGN OF TROPICAL
CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS
W.J. Ng and Gayan Gunaratne
5.1 The Importance of Wastewater Quality

Parameters in Facility Design
Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) design is largely governed by
wastewater influent quality and quantity, and the required treated
effluent quality parameters. However, it should be noted that the
design and implementation of a WWTP can have many constraints
beyond these quality parameters. These constraints include the issues
concerning financing, the availability of space, the appropriateness of
a technology for local application, the availability of an appropriately
trained workforce, climatic conditions, and hydrological and hydro-
geological factors.
5.1.1 Influent wastewater characteristics and effluent

water quality requirements
The major types of wastewaters that have to be treated include domes-
tic, municipal, industrial (e.g. from landfills, pulp and paper
manufacturing, mine drainage, petroleum refining, electroplating, tex-
tile dyeing etc.), agricultural, agro-industrials, and stormwater runoffs.
Influent characteristics of wastewater can be defined based on physical,
chemical, and microbiological properties. Effluent quality require-
ments are determined by the discharge limits and/or possibly on the
end user’s requirements (Table 5.1). For example, if the water is to be
69
70 W.J. Ng and G. Gunaratne
Table 5.1 Effluent quality requirement — example from tropical developing

country (gazette extraordinary of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
2008-Feb-01)
Determinant Tolerance limit
Max. total SS, mg L−1 50.0

Particle size of total SS, µm 850.0
pH value at ambient temperature (∼25°C) 6.0–8.5
Max. BOD5 at 20°C, mg L−1 30
Temperature of discharge <40°C at any section of the stream
within 15 m downstream from the
effluent outlet
Max. oils and greases, mg L−1 10.0
Max. phenolic compounds, mg L−1 1.0
Max. cyanides as CN , mg L−1 0.2
Max. sulfides, mg L−1 2.0
Max. fluorides, mg L−1 2.0
Max. total residual chlorine, mg L−1 1.0
Max. total cadmium, mg L−1 0.1
Max. total copper, mg L−1 3.0
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (as N), mg L−1 150.0
Ammonical nitrogen (as N), mg L−1 50.0
Dissolved phosphates (as P), mg L−1 5.0
reused, the effluent quality needs to match the end user’s reuse qual-
ity requirements. When the need for water reclamation increases, the
end user and the originator of the wastewater could be the same.
5.1.2 Potential of wetlands for wastewater treatment

under tropical conditions
Most constructed wetlands in tropical countries are soil- or gravel-
based horizontal-flow systems. They are used to treat stormwater
runoff and domestic and industrial wastewaters. Wetlands have also
been applied for the passive treatment of relatively difficult wastewaters
such as mine drainage water. Although various conventional methods
have been applied to treat stormwater, many of these technologies
have costs issues or are too complex to operate reliably with minimal
Design of Tropical Constructed Wetlands 71
attention. Constructed wetlands integrated into a best management

practice concept are a sustainable means for treating wastewater and
have proved to be more economical (in terms of construction and
maintenance), and energy efficient than traditional centralized treat-
ment systems. Furthermore, wetlands enhance biodiversity and are less
sensitive to variations in loading rates. Recently, constructed wetlands
have been identified as a sustainable wastewater management option
for tropical developing countries. Their low cost and enhanced per-
formance under tropical conditions can be strong drivers for adoption.
The concept of wetlands for wastewater treatment must be holis-
tic and realistic and should include a commonsensical approach with
a view toward sustainable development. According to Brix (1997),
constructed wetlands are suitable for wastewater treatment and espe-
cially so for post-treatment, because the wetland vegetation and
organisms can adapt to the wastewater inflow and utilize the various
organic and inorganic pollutants during their metabolic and other life
processes. The literature holds information on the use of constructed
wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment although the quantum
on modern tropical applications is less. Domestic wastewater is the
water that has been used by a community and that contains all the
material added to the water during its use. It is thus composed of
human body wastes (feces and urine) together with the water used for
flushing toilets, personal washing, laundry, food preparation, and the
cleaning of kitchen utensils.
5.1.2.1 Advantages of constructed wetlands

Constructed wetlands are a cost-effective and technically feasible
approach for treating wastewater and runoff for several reasons:
• wetlands can be less expensive to build than the other treatment

options,
• operation and maintenance expenses (energy and supplies) are
relatively low,
• operation and maintenance require only periodic, rather than
continuous, on-site labor,
• wetlands have considerable buffering capacity and so are able to

tolerate fluctuations in flow, and
• they facilitate water reuse and recycling.
In addition:
• they provide habitat for many wetland organisms,

• they can be built to fit harmoniously into the landscape and so can
esthetically enhance spaces, and
• they are an environmentally sensitive approach that is viewed
with favor by a public that is sympathetic to eco- and sustainable
developments.
5.1.2.2 Limitations of constructed wetlands

Constructed wetlands almost without exception will require a larger land
area for implementation. Wetland treatments are economical relative to
other options only where land is available and affordable. Wetland treat-
ment performance could vary seasonally in response to changing
environmental conditions, including rainfall and drought. The tropical
condition can play a major role in mitigating some of the shortcomings
in climate-influenced performance. While the average performance over
the year may be acceptable, wetland treatment cannot be relied upon if
effluent quality must meet stringent discharge standards at all times. The
biological transformations, including wetland plants, are sensitive to
toxic chemicals, such as ammonia and pesticides. Flushes of pollutants or
shock loadings may temporarily reduce the effectiveness of wetland
treatment. Mosquito breeding can be a problem and when wetland
treatment systems are overloaded organically and anaerobic conditions
develop, malodors are an issue. To better reduce the incidence of such
occurrences, actions such as pretreatment to reduce total organic load-
ing, step feeding of the influent wastewater stream with effective influent
distribution and effluent recycle, and vegetation management can be ini-
tiated. In general, natural controls are preferred because human-made
control agents may result in developing resistance in disease vectors such
as the mosquito (Wieder et al., 1989).
5.1.3 How wetlands improve water quality

A wetland is a complex assemblage of water, substrate, plants (vascu-
lar plants and algae), litter (primarily fallen plant material),
invertebrates (mostly insect larvae and worms), and an array of micro-
organisms (most importantly bacteria). The mechanisms that are
available to improve water quality are, therefore, numerous and often
interrelated. These mechanisms include:
• settling of suspended particulate matter,

• filtration and chemical precipitation through contact of the water
with the substrate and litter,
• chemical transformations,
• adsorption and ion exchange on the surfaces of plants, substrate,
sediment, and litter,
• the breakdown and transformation of pollutants by microorgan-
isms and plants,
• the uptake and transformation of nutrients by microorganisms and
plants, and
• the predation and natural die-off of pathogens.
The most effective treatment wetlands are those that foster the above
mechanisms.
5.1.3.1 Suspended solids removal

Solids in water can be categorized as total suspended solids (TSS) and
total dissolved solids (TDS). The suspended fraction comprises
organic and inorganic particles. Efficient TSS removal can be achieved
if the particles in the influent are sufficiently large and/or dense.
SS removal is aided by three basic mechanisms:
1. Sedimentation — Heavier particles will settle nearer the inlet than

lighter particles, which will settle closer to the outlet. Discrete
particle settling rates can be calculated using Stoke’s law and
appropriate drag coefficients. Plant detritus can play a major role
in SS removal in free water surface wetlands and in subsurface

flow wetlands as bed media can promote SS trapping.
2. Aggregation (flocculation) — This is the process where particles
flocculate due to particle attraction and it is governed by surface
chemistry properties. Aggregation allows the formation of larger
and heavier particles that in turn helps in their removal.
3. Interception — Interception becomes useful when the smaller
particles need to be removed at low hydraulic retention times.
Biofilm growth in the bed media and on support surfaces in free
water columns can be significant interceptors of the smaller parti-
cles, as these move past.
However, the amount of SS can also increase with the wetland and
this is typically caused in the main by algal growth in free water sur-
face (FWS) conditions (Peng et al., 2005). Root filtration by reeds
and duckweeds can lead to substantial SS reduction (Nozaily-Al et al.,
2000). When wastewater with high SS concentration is fed continu-
ously to a wetland, clogging can occur and this will then lower the
treatment performance. Therefore, pretreatment for SS removal is
necessary if wetland performance is to be maintained over extended
periods. However, as decomposition rates are higher under tropical
conditions, clogging will have a lesser impact compared to wetlands
under temperate conditions. It has been noted that FWS wetlands are
better able to tolerate larger inputs of SS than subsurface flow (SSF)
wetlands.
5.1.3.2 BOD removal

The organic contaminants in wastewater can vary in biodegrada-
bility — from readily biodegradable to persistent and possibly even
inert. Typically, domestic wastewater can be expected to contain a
higher ratio of biodegradable organic matter than many industrial
wastewaters. As the biodegradable content increases, the oxygen
needed to stabilize the organics will also increase resulting in a higher
BOD level. Dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in the water decrease
due to aerobic microbial consumption, as organic contaminants are
degraded. The depletion of DO will adversely affect the quality of

the waterbody. The removal of BOD performance of temperate
constructed wetlands indicates typical mass removal of BOD effi-
ciencies are about 70% at mass loading rates of up to 28 gm−2d−1
(USEPA, 1993).
In FWS wetlands, the removal of BOD is primarily due to the
attached microbial growth. The major source of oxygen for these
reactions is reaeration at the water surface. Reaeration by photosyn-
thesis will typically be insufficient if algal growth is not substantial.
Any excess oxygen transmitted by the plant to the root zone is likely
to be consumed in the soil and will not contribute significantly to DO
levels in the water. The major oxygen sources for SSF systems are the
gases transmitted by vegetation to the root zone. Since the waste-
water flow is below the surface, there can only be limited atmospheric
reaeration. Therefore, the selection of the appropriate macrophyte
species that can transmit oxygen to the soil is an important factor in
SSF wetlands.
In colder climates, microbial activity can be low although this can
increase when seasons change and temperatures become higher.
Organic degradation and BOD removal can then become higher
(Steinmann et al., 2003). This means during the colder months much
organic matter may not be degraded but is merely trapped in the wet-
land bed. This will happen to a much lesser extent under tropical
conditions, as degradation rates can be much higher over the whole
year. The rapid degradation of organic matter accumulated in the bed
(because of SS trapping therein — especially with high SS waste-
waters) can subsequently lead to the release of BOD into the bulk
liquid.
5.1.3.3 Removal of nitrogen

The removal of nitrogen in the wastewater takes place by
nitrification/denitrification, plant uptake, microbial assimilation,
adsorption, and volatilization in a wetland. Anaerobic ammonium
oxidation (ANOMMOX) and complete autotrophic nitrogen-removal
over nitrite (CANON) are the recently discovered mechanisms for the
removal of nitrogen in microbe-based systems. It is not impossible

that similar processes may also occur in the wetlands — albeit in a less
controlled fashion. The chemical state of the aquatic system plays an
important role in nitrogen-related transformations. The reaction rate
will depend on the ambient conditions and the water chemistry in a
wetland system and the removal of nitrogen ranges from 25 to 85%
(USEPA, 1998).
As nitrification and denitrification increases with temperature, the
removal of nitrogen in tropical climates will be higher than in tem-
perate conditions.
• Denitrification rates almost double (1.5–2.0) with each 10°C

increment until 60°C.
• Alkalinity/pH, temperature, and redox potential/DO are the
important factors controlling the reaction rates of nitrification and
denitrification.
• Ammonia volatilization increases 1.3–3.5 times with each 10°C
rise in temperature from 0°C to 30°C.
5.1.3.4 Removal of phosphorus

Phosphorus (P) is found in organic and inorganic compounds but free
orthophosphate is the only form of P, which could be utilized directly
by macrophytes and algae. The major mechanisms for the removal of P
are plant uptake and retention in soil (USEPA, 1998). Consequently,
the major transformations of P in wetlands are: peat/soil accretion,
adsorption/desorption, precipitation/dissolution, plant/microbial
uptake, fragmentation and leaching, and mineralization and burial.
Approximately 40–60% removal of P can be expected. The adsorption
capacity of P in soil increases with the increase in clay content in the bed
media. Clay with more Fe and Al may accelerate the removal of P
(Steiner and Freeman, 1989). Given the shallow nature of constructed
wetlands, any disturbance of the bottom sediments (e.g. by humans
performing maintenance work, or fish) can cause the resuspension of
sedimented particulates with P and so a spike in TP concentrations in
the water column.
5.1.3.5 Reduction of coliforms

The reduction of coliforms is noted to be more efficient at higher pH
values. The removal of coliforms in FWS constructed wetlands is
found to be mainly due to the physical separation of suspended parti-
cles (Kadlec and Knight, 1996; Reed et al., 1995). The removal of
suspended particles is important because coliforms can be attached to
these. Pathogenic bacteria and viruses are also removed by the mech-
anisms such as predation, absorption, and die-off arising from the
unfavorable environmental conditions such as exposure to UV from
sunlight and temperatures unfavorable for cell reproduction (USEPA,
1998).
5.2 Process Design — Reaction Rate and Hydraulic

Residence Time (HRT)
The following assumptions are typically made for wetlands design:
• The temperature of water can be assumed to be approximately

equal to the mean ambient temperature. This is a reasonable
assumption for tropical environments (Kadlec and Knight, 1996)
and the shallow depths of constructed wetlands.
• The removal rates for BOD and nitrogen in FWS constructed
wetland systems can be based on first-order kinetics and plug-
flow models proposed by the USEPA (1988) and Reed et al.
(1995), which have been used in the design of most constructed
wetland systems in the USA and Europe (Chen et al., 1999;
Economopoulou and Tsihrintzis, 2003; Economopoulou and
Tsihrintzis, 2004). These can be applied in tropics but with suit-
able modifications to account for different climatic conditions.
5.2.1 Reaction rates and HRT

It should be noted that the rates of reaction of almost all biological
processes are temperature dependent and increase with increasing
temperatures. Therefore, the tropical environment will favor the
biodegradation of organic matter, nitrification/denitrification, etc.

The removal rates of BOD and nitrogen in FWS constructed wetlands
can be estimated with Eq. (1) (Reed et al., 1995). Table 5.2 shows
similar results published by Sundaravadivel and Vigneswaran (2001).
The removals of coliforms and phosphorus can be estimated with
Eq. (2) (Kadlec and Knight, 1996; Economopoulou and Tsihrintzis,
2004).
Ce t
= e - KT (for BOD and N). (1)
Ci
KT = k20θ20(T−20)
For BOD, KT = 0.678 (1.06)T−20 (d−1).
For nitrification, KT = 0.2187 (1.0648)T−20 (d−1).
For denitrification, KT = 1.15T−20 (d−1).
K1
Ce
= e h1 (for coliforms and P). (2)
Ci
For fecal coliforms, K1 = 0.3 (md−1).

For P, K1 = 0.0273 (md−1).
h1 = Q/A,
where
Ce — Pollutant effluent concentration,
Table 5.2 Temperature coefficients and rate constants (Sundaravadivel and

Vigneswaran, 2001)
Surface flow systems Subsurface flow systems
Pollutant θ20 k20 θ20 k20
BOD 1.060 0.678 1.060 1.104

Nitrification 1.048 0.218 1.048 0.411
Denitrification 1.150 1.000 1.150 1.000
Pathogen removal 1.190 2.600 1.190 2.600
Ci — Pollutant influent concentration:

(mg/L for BOD, N, and P)
(coliform count/100mL for fecal coliform),
KT — Reaction rate parameter (d−1),
K1 — Reaction rate constant (m d−1),
h1 — Hydraulic loading rate (m d−1),
t — Hydraulic residence time (HRT) (d),
Q — Design flow rate (m3d−1),
A — Mean surface area (m2),
T — Water temperature or ambient temperature in °C.
The HRT can, thereafter, be estimated based on the most critical case.
For the effective removal of ammonium, it is recommended to have a
minimum of 6–8 days of retention (Economopoulou and Tsihrintzis,
2004).
5.2.2 Sizing of constructed wetland (FWS and SSF)

Typically, deciding the areal requirements is an iterative process and is
an estimate because the structure and functions of wetland ecosystems
are very complex. The following equations also help to estimate the
areal requirement for FWS wetland based on BOD removal.
• If slope or hydraulic gradient <1%:
Q (lnC o - lnC e - 0.6539)

A= ;
65 KT d
KT = K20 (1.1)T−20, d = bed depth (m).
• Or else:
Q (lnC o - lnC e - 0.6539)
A= 1 ; S = bed slope.
301 KT S 3
The following equation allows the estimation of the areal requirement
for SSF wetland based on BOD.
Q (lnC o - lnC e )
As = ; KT = K20 (1.06)T−20, η = bed porosity.
K T dh
Table 5.3 Media characteristics for SSF systems (USEPA, 1998)
Hydraulic
Max. 10% grain conductivity
Media type size, mm Porosity, η (ks) m3/m2d K20
Medium sand 1 0.42 420 1.84

Coarse sand 2 0.39 480 1.35
Gravelly sand 8 0.35 500 0.86
Typical media types including medium to coarse sands have K20 values
of approximately 1.28 d−1 for SSF wetlands. Based on European data,
the K20 values presented in Table 5.2 have been tested for media up
to gravelly sand size at warm temperatures (T > 20°C).
Design example 1: FWS system

Design an FWS wetland to produce secondary treated effluent qual-
ity in a warm climate with a mean annual temperature of 25°C. The
design flow is 800 m3 d−1, influent wastewater is from a facultative
lagoon with a BOD5 concentration of 150 mg L−1, and the treated
effluent BOD5 required is 15 mg L−1.
Solution:
Assume the slope of the wetland will be 1% to allow drainage by grav-
ity. Estimate required detention time at 25°C:
KT = K20(1.1)T−20 = 0.0057(1.1)(25–20) = 0.0092 d−1
(lnC o - lnC e ) - 0.6539

t=
65 KT
(ln150 - ln15) - 0.6539

t= = 2.75 d.
(65)(0.0092)
For a warm climate site, use a 10 cm water depth on a year-round

basis. If cattail plants are to be grown, the bed depth should be
30 cm, the total bed depth, or d is 40 cm. Use the following equation
to find the surface area required.
Q (lnC o - lnC e - 0.6539)

A=
65 KT d
(800 m3 )d -1 (ln150 - ln15 - 0.6539)

A=
(65)(0.0092)(0.4 m)
A = 5514 m2.
Use an aspect ratio (L/W) of 10:1 and determine dimensions for the
wetland channels, assuming a square plot is available.
A = L/W = (10 W)W = 550 m2.
Thus, W = 23.48 m, L = 234.8 m.
Design example 2: SSF system

Calculate the required area and bed depth for an SSF system where
influent wastewater is from a facultative lagoon. Assumed influent
BOD5 to the wetlands will be 150 mg L−1. The desired effluent BOD5
is 15 mg L−1. The predominant wetland plant type in surrounding
marshes is cattail. Water temperature is 25°C.
Solution:
Choose cattail for this SSF since it is successfully growing in the
locality. Cattail penetrate approximately 0.3 m into the medium. The
bed media depth (d) should, therefore, be 0.3 m. The bed slope is
based on the site topography. Most systems will be designed with a
slope of 1% or slightly higher. For this design, choose a slope of 1%
for the ease of construction (s = 0.01). Reed et al. (1995) have indi-
cated the need to check the value KsS < 8.60. Choose a media of
coarse sand and from Table 5.2,
η = 0.39, Ks = 480 and K20 = 1.35. KsS = (480)(0.01) = 4.8 < 8.60
KT = K20 (1.1)T−20 = 1.35(1.1)25–20 = 2.17 d−1.
Determine the cross-sectional area by using the following equation:
Ac = Q/(KsS) = 800/(480)(0.01) = 167 m2.
Determine the bed width:
W = Ac /d = 167/0.3 = 557 m.
Determine the surface area required:
Q (ln C o - ln C e ) 800(ln150 - ln15)

As = = As = 255 m 2 .
= 72
K T dh (2.17)(0.3)(0.39)
Determine the bed length (L) and detention time (t):
L = As /W = 7255/557 = 13 m
T = Vv/Q = LWdη/Q = (13)(557)(0.3)(0.39)/800 = 1.06 d.
5.2.3 Water depth in FWS

Water depth is a critical factor, and for effective free water surface
constructed wetlands this is typically kept at less than 0.1 m during warm
periods and less than 0.45 during cool periods (Reed et al., 1995).
5.2.4 Bed depth in SSF

Bed depth for SSF wetlands is generally less than 0.6 m (Kadlec and
Knight, 1996). Typical flow depths vary from 0.49 m to 0.79 m (Cooper
et al., 1998). This has been influenced by how far roots penetrate into the
soil (and therefore different bed depths for different emergent plants).
Deeper beds require less horizontal linear distance in construction.
5.2.5 Effect of evaporation on the design

Evaporation is an important factor in FWS wetlands while trans-
piration loss is found in both FWS and SSF wetlands. Enhanced
evapotranspiration increases the concentration of pollutants inside
the wetland. Evaporation controls the water temperature (i.e. water

can adsorb more heat energy), especially at the higher temperatures.
• The presence of vegetation retards evaporation by providing shade,

increasing humidity near the surface, and reducing wind effect.
• The evaporation loss has to be taken into account in water budget
calculations, used in wetland sizing.
• Evaporation and evapotranspiration are important in the wetland
energy budget calculation.
5.2.6 Integration of wetland designs

The inability to achieve the complete removal of nutrients (i.e. diffi-
culty in establishing a system with simultaneous nitrification/
denitrification processes) brought up the idea of integrating different
systems in a series to find out the best configuration for integration.
This will typically be considered because some of the removal
processes require aerobic conditions while the others need anaerobic
conditions or anoxic conditions.
• FWS and SSF systems are integrated sometimes in the series, while
vertical flow and horizontal flow are also common examples for
such integrated systems.
• Emergent plant systems and submerged or floating plant systems
also have remarkable potential for integration as they produce bet-
ter performance when combined rather than functioning as
individual systems.
5.3 Water Quality Improvement — A Tropical

Case Study
5.3.1 Effectiveness of Scirpus grossus in the treatment of
domestic wastes in a constructed wetland
The work was carried out in a wetland in Sri Lanka (latitude 7°N,
longitude 80°E) and investigated the ability of S. grossus planted in a
constructed wetland to treat domestic wastewater. One unit was
planted with S. grossus (U2), while the other was used as a control
(U1). Influent wastewater and effluent from each wetland channel
were tested monthly for 10 physical, chemical, and biological param-
eters over a 20-month period. Plant growth measurements were
carried out throughout the study period.
5.3.1.1 Water quality monitoring

Figure 5.1 shows the BOD5 concentration variation for influent and
effluent at U1 and U2. After a six-month acclimation period, the sys-
tem was more stable and better performance was observed when
compared to the first six months. This initial period was necessary for
the establishment of the plants and microbial ecosystem following the
first planting. Better removal performances were observed with
the planted unit. After 18–20 months from planting, it was noted that
the removal efficiencies declined slightly. This could be because of the
clogging of the SSF system due to continuous operation. The influ-
ent and effluent concentration variations of NH4+-N and NO3−-N
100
Influent
90 Control (U1)
Scirpus grossus (U2)
BOD5 concentration (mgL−1)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Months after planting
Fig. 5.1 BOD5 variations with respect to time after planting

(from first planting) is presented in Figs. 5.2 and 5.3, respectively.

Similar with the removal of BOD5, a higher removal of NH4+-N was
observed after plant establishment although the removal of NO3−-N
fluctuated.
25
Influent
Control (U1)
NH4-N concentration (mgL−1)
20 Scirpus grossus (U2)
15
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 5.2 NH4+-N concentration variation with respect to time after planting
10
Influent
Control (U1)
8 Scirpus grossus (U2)
NO3-N concentration (mgL−1)
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 5.3 NO3−-N concentration variation with respect to time after planting
The average water quality parameters for physical, chemical, and

biological treatment are shown in Table 5.4. The effect of plants on
the quality of water was observed with the significant change in BOD5
and NH4+-N. The U2’s effluent concentrations of BOD5 and NH4+-N
were significantly lower than those of U1. The concentrations of DO
were found to be significantly higher in the U2’s effluent compared
to the influent while the control, U1, did not show such variation.
The variation in the concentration NO3−-N in the influent and efflu-
ent of U1 and U2 are shown in Fig. 5.3.
Changes in pH, conductivity, TDS, and total phosphorus were
found to be insignificant when compared to influent and effluent
concentrations of both control U1 and the planted channel U2 (see
Table 5.4). Around 61% of total suspended solids were found to be
removed (calculated from Table 5.4), suggesting that the system offered
an effective mechanism for the removal of solids. However, regular
checking of the pretreatment units might be needed because high levels
of suspended solids could clog the system and lead to system failure
(Vymazal, 2002).
It was noted that total phosphorus removal was not high in both
units. It is presumed that the shorter HRT (∼24 hours) used in this study
compared to other studies (USEPA, 1999; Toet et al., 2005) is a possi-
ble reason for the overall low level of phosphorus removal. Phosphorus
removal in most constructed wetland systems is usually not very effective
because opportunities for contact between the wastewater and the soil
are limited. However, it is important to remove phosphorus before the
treated wastewater is discharged into waterbodies, because this nutrient
can cause excessive algal growth in waterways (including blue-green
algae), which can put stress on natural ecosystems, harming aquatic life
and animals that use these water sources (although if the wetland efflu-
ent is reused for irrigation, the P will be useful).
The fecal contamination of water is a serious problem due to the
possibilities of spreading diseases through pathogens. The current sys-
tem with an SSF was found to be effective at removing fecal coliforms,
and the removal of around 90% in U2 suggested that its present veg-
etative system with S. grossus is quite effective in coliform removal.
Experimental results were compared with first-order model results.
Figure 5.4 presents the experimental and theoretical variations for
Table 5.4 Influent and effluent water qualities at wetland test facility
b1033_Chapter-05.qxd
Total Fecal
Conductivity TDS TSS DO BOD NH4+ NO3− phosphorus coliform (cfu
Treatment pH (mScm−1) (mgL−1) (mgL−1) (mgL−1) (mgL−1) (mgL−1) (mgL−1) (mgL−1) 100 mL−1)
b1033
Influent 7.5 0.37 191.1 167.7 0.99 61.3 17.04 1.47 1.90 842
3/18/2011
Effluent of 7.2 0.36 184.7 74.0 1.31 32.7 10.00 0.63 1.50 208
control (U1)
Effluent of 7.1 0.34 188.8 65.0 1.91 18.8 4.9 1.02 1.55 83
9:03 AM
Planted
wetland (U2)
Removal 55.9% 46.6% 41.3% 57.1% 21.1% 75.3%
efficiency
Page 87
(control U1)
Removal 61.2% 69.3% 71.2% 30.6% 18.4% 90.2%
efficiency
(planted U2)
Influent vs. n.s. n.s. n.s. p < 0.001 n.s. p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.01 n.s. p < 0.001
effluent (U1)
Constructed Wetlands for Tropical Applications
Influent vs. n.s. n.s. n.s. p < 0.001 p < 0.01 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 n.s. n.s. p < 0.001
effluent (U2)
Effluents (U1) n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. p < 0.001 p < 0.001 n.s. n.s. n.s.
vs. (U2)
Design of Tropical Constructed Wetlands
87
50
Experimental — Scirpus
45 Calculated
40
35
BOD5 (mgL−1)
30
25
20
15
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 5.4 Comparison of experimental results with first-order model results for BOD5
Table 5.5 Comparison of experimental results with first-order model

results
K25 value from KT = k20θ (T −20)

(EPA, 1993; Sundaravadivel,
Pollutant (for 2001; Reed et al., 1995; K25 Present study
rate constant) Jing et al., 2004) (tropical)
BOD 0.907 ∼ 1.477 1.565

Nitrification 0.520 ∼ 1.075 1.503
Denitrification 1.15 ∼ 2.011 1.753
Pathogen removal 6.205 3.208
KT — Reaction rate parameter (d −1)
BOD5 compared with first-order model results. Table 5.5 summarizes

the experimental and theoretical calculations based on first-order
model result calculations. NH4+-N and NO3−−N concentrations were
determined along the channel at a depth of about 10 cm below the soil
surface (Fig. 5.5). It was noted that both concentrations decreased
along the channel, but the concentration of NH4+-N only decreased
noticeably after about 4 m from the inlet while a gradual reduction of

NO3−-N was observed from inlet to the outlet. A high concentration
of total nitrogen in the soil was noted near the inlet when compared
to the middle and toward the outlet of the system (Fig. 5.6).
20 2.0
NH4+-N
1.8
NO3−-N
NH4+-N concentration (mgL−1)
NO3−-N concentration (mgL−1)

16 1.6
1.4
1.2
12
1.0
0.8
8
0.6
0.4
4 0.2
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Distance from the inlet (m)
Fig. 5.5 Nutrient concentration variation along the channel in terms of NH4+-N
and NO3−-N
2.2
Total nitrogen concentration in soil (%)
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Distance from the inlet (m)
Fig. 5.6 Nutrient concentration variation along the channel: soil total nitrogen
concentration
5.4 Effects of Vegetation on Water

Quality Improvement
The DO concentration was significantly higher in the effluent com-
pared to the influent in vegetated wetland U2, suggesting aeration
within the system. This can be because much oxygen is released to the
root zone in S. grossus. This higher oxygen transport could support
the effective microbial degradation of organic matter and the nitro-
gen transfer mechanisms in the root zone. U2 showed a significantly
lower BOD5 concentration in the effluent compared to that of U1
(p < 0.001), suggesting higher microbial activity compared to the
control. The physical removal of BOD5 is believed to occur rapidly
through the settling and entrapment of particulate matter in the
empty spaces in the gravel or rock media. Soluble BOD5 is removed
by microbial growth on the media surfaces and growth attached to
the plant roots and rhizomes penetrating the bed (Kadlec, 1995).
However, it is difficult to distinguish between aerobic and anaerobic
processes with regard to the removal of BOD5 in SSF systems
(Vymazal, 2002). Tropical conditions with relatively constant and
higher temperatures would have made the biological reactions occur
more rapidly.
The major processes of nitrogen cycling in wetlands are nitrifica-
tion, ammonification, denitrification, anaerobic ammonium
oxidation, ammonium volatilization, N assimilation by microorgan-
isms, and uptake by plants. Nitrification and denitrification are
assumed as the main processes responsible for the removal of nitrogen
in the constructed wetlands (Vyamazal, 2002). Wastewater generated
from human waste can have significant levels of ammonia and organic
nitrogen but a less significant level of nitrate. It was observed that the
concentration of NH4-N was low (p < 0.001) in the effluent of the
vegetated unit when compared to the effluent of the control unit. It
is presumed that the higher microbial activity and oxygen transfer to
the soil with S. grossus led to a high rate of organic matter decompo-
sition (BOD5 removal) and effective nitrification (NH4+-N removal).
It has been reported (Szogi et al., 2003) that microbial nitrification
and denitrification were higher in the Scirpus spp. than in other
species (such as Typha) and this was likely to be related to the higher
oxygen concentration and more favorable conditions for efficient
microbial processes in the constructed wetlands vegetated with
Scirpus. The concentration of NO3− was low in the effluent of U1
(Table 1) compared to the influent. However, statistical analysis
showed that there was no distinct difference with regard to removals
in U2 compared to the influent and also the effluent of the control
unit. Although wetlands may remove substantial quantities of nitro-
gen from wastewater and subsequently store it in plant materials, they
also potentially release a significant quantity of nitrogen into down-
stream ecosystems. A significant proportion of nitrogen in wetlands
can be in organic form, contained either in the vegetation (live
plants), plant detritus, macrofauna, microorganisms, soil organic mat-
ter, or as dissolved organic compounds such as urea and amino acids
(Kadlec and Knight, 1996). It has been found that the effective
reduction of ammonium and subsequent nitrification and different
denitrification activities are also possible reasons for the difficulty in
distinguishing the difference in the removal of NO3-N between the
control and the vegetated units (Bachand and Horne, 1999).
In the case study given in Sec. 5.3, a higher concentration of
nitrogen was observed near the inlet region at a depth of about
10 cm (i.e. root zone) below the soil surface. The concentration,
then, decreased rapidly along the unit (Fig. 5.6). As noted in
Fig. 5.5, the concentration of NH4+ was the main stream of nitrogen
entering the system. It was presumed that continuous feeding of
wastewater led to the accumulation of this higher concentration of
nitrogen in the soil. The results of water quality for the period were
compared with the EPA design guidelines (Table 5.2). The rate of
coefficients can be different in tropical conditions as shown in this
table. Particularly, the nitrification rate coefficient was found to
be 1.503, whereas it is only 0.52 ∼ 1.075 in the design guidelines.
This follows from the higher microbial activity in tropical conditions
and especially nitrification activity can be higher in SSF systems.
Another possible reason is anaerobic elimination of nitrite by ammonia
(NH4+ + NO2− → N2 + 2H2O).
Identifying and quantifying microbial populations related to vari-

ous biotransformations could be a viable parameter to compare
different types of treatment systems. Nitrification mainly involves
nitrosomonas and nitrobactor microbial concentrations in the system.
Therefore, identifying the activity of nitrification by quantifying nitro-
somonas and nitrobactor was determined based on the methods
developed by the Soil Science Society of America (Figs. 5.7 and 5.8).
Although the presence of these microbial populations was noted, it is
not possible to describe a clear variation trend along the channel or in
terms of depth. Further investigations need to be conducted to iden-
tify the nitrifiers in tropical constructed wetlands using molecular
techniques. Such a study will identify and quantify the exact amounts
of nitrifiers present and active in the tropical constructed wetlands.
The rate of coefficient of pathogen removal was lower when com-
pared to the guideline values (Table 5.2) suggesting the low-retention
Depth 10 cm
Depth 15 cm
Depth 25 cm
10
9
8
7
MPN (10 6)
6
5
4
3
2
1
Fr 0
ac
tio De
na 80 pth
ld 25
ist 60 De cm
an pth
ce 40 15
fro cm
m 20 De
in l pth
et 10
(% cm
)
Fig. 5.7 Nitrification activity in the channel: nitrosomonas

Depth 10 cm
Depth 15 cm
Depth 25 cm
10
9
8
7
MPN (10 6)
6
5
4
3
2
1
Fr 0
ac
tio 0 De
na 8 pth
ld 25
ist 60 De cm
an pth
ce 40 15
fro cm
m 20 De
in l pth
et 10
(% cm
)
Fig. 5.8 Nitrification activity in the channel: nitrobactor
time affected the main removal mechanisms of natural die-off, sedi-

mentation, filtration, predation, and adsorption for pathogen
removal. The findings of this study suggest that the design parame-
ters need to be modified significantly in tropical conditions, and
reliance on the guidelines derived from temperate climates would not
be feasible for tropical conditions.
CHAPTER 6
ENGINEERING THE WETLANDS
D.R.I.B. Werellagama and Sisira Karunaratne
6.1 Introduction
The typical goals associated with the operation of a wetland are effec-
tive pollutants removal, easy operation and maintenance (O&M),
low-cost operation, esthetic value, and economic benefits. As with all
treatment systems, maintenance is important for the wetlands too.
Without maintenance, the wetland will fail before the end of its
design service life. Good system performance and the ease of mainte-
nance begin with proper design. Continuing practice in constructed
wetlands has resulted in design guidelines being formulated and these
have evolved, as fresh findings are made. While many of these guide-
lines address the obvious function of the wetland (i.e. the removal of
the pollutants), other less obvious factors, which may still impact on
system performance and public perception of such performance, also
need attention — e.g. access for operators and equipment, water level
control, controlling erosion and scour damage, the removal of accu-
mulated solids, debris removal, weed control, proper harvesting and
replanting, the control of pests that may harm the wetland plants and
embankments and mosquito control.
6.2 Flow Control

6.2.1 Need for flow control
Flow, continuous or intermittent, needs to be controlled so that the
water level in a constructed wetland can be manipulated and maintained.
95
96 D.R.I.B. Werellagama and S. Karunaratne
In the free water surface (FWS) wetland, the water table is maintained at
just above the soil surface. In the subsurface flow (SSF) type, it is main-
tained below the soil surface with typical water depths as discussed in
Chapter 5. The inlet and outlet control structures of the flow control
system play important roles in maintaining water levels. Since these are
used frequently, the flow control mechanisms should be kept as simple
as possible for routine operation and for the ease of maintenance. In
addition to equipment simplicity and robustness, they need to be easily
accessible so that operators can reach these structures readily.
6.2.2 Inlet and outlet structures

Inlets for FWS and SSF wetlands can be simple structures, comprising
an open-end pipe, channel, or gated pipe, which release water into the
wetland (Fig. 6.1). The size of gravel placed at the inlet of the SSF
wetland should be graded from coarse to fine, to reduce risk of solids
clogging the SSF wetland bed. Flow has to be well distributed at inlet
region to ensure as even a loading as possible and to reduce the risk
of clogging and channeling. Channeling often occurs when the
length–width ratio of channel is small; short circuiting occurs and
some islands form where water will not pass through. Valves or weir
(a)
Fig. 6.1 Inlet distribution systems (a) small-sized gravel and (b) large-sized gravel
Engineering the Wetlands 97
(b)
Fig. 6.1 (Continued )
Fig. 6.2 Weir to maintain and measure flow rate to a wetland
boxes can be used to regulate the flow to the wetland (Fig. 6.2). In
calibrating the weirs, one has to consider the lower viscosity in the
wastewater due to higher temperatures in the tropics.
The availability of ample tropical sunlight and nutrient can allow
algae to grow profusely. Algal growths can affect the hydraulics at
inlet areas when surface manifolds are used. Clogging by suspended
solids in the wastewater is also a significant issue with subsurface

flows. Therefore, influent suspended solids concentration has to be
appropriately controlled. The hydraulic conductivity of beds can be
improved by using gabion type gravel-based inlets.
In FWS wetlands, the water level is controlled by the outlet struc-
ture, which can be a weir or spillway. Water depths in the SSF
wetlands are maintained with manifolds located just above the bot-
tom (at outlet). Perforated subsurface manifolds are then connected
to an adjustable outlet that offers better flexibility and reliability.
A swivel stand pipe (Figs. 6.3 and 6.4) will allow the water level to be
adjusted to suit the requirements as shown (Carty et al., 2008).
Where possible, the hydraulic appurtenances should be tested follow-
ing installation (using clean water), before filling in the media and
sending wastewater in.
Fig. 6.3 Outlet set-up in SSF constructed wetland system

Fig. 6.4 Outlet structure for adjusting the water level in SSF wetland
6.3 Substrate in Wetlands

The role of the substrate (growth medium) in wetlands is to support
vegetation and to provide sites for biogeochemical reactions. Wetland
substrate can consist of soil, sand, gravel, and organic materials.
Researchers (e.g. Jinadasa et al., 2006) have shown that the substrate
plays a major role in the removal of pollutant by wetlands and this is
complemented by the vegetation. According to SLS 745 (2009), the
minimum depth of the aggregate in the bed shall be 600 mm and the
nominal aggregate size shall be greater than 2 mm.
6.3.1 Sand and gravel

Constructed wetlands receiving wastewater high in nutrients, such as
domestic and agricultural wastewaters, can be built with sand, gravel,
stone chips, or any other material that is insoluble in water and resist-
ant to the corrosive nature of wastewater. Media should not suffer
attrition during initial packing. The retention of debris should not
greatly affect its permeability. Fine material should be washed away
before packing the media into the wetland beds. Sand is an alternative
to soil and provides a good bed texture that is suitable for hand plant-
ing. Similarly, gravel can also be used. Many SSF wetlands treating
domestic sewage have used media ranging from medium gravel to
coarse rock. Sand and gravel dry out quickly and may need to be irri-
gated to maintain water levels while the vegetation is becoming
established and whenever wastewater flow is inadequate. The best
combination of hydraulic conductivity and void ratio can be found
with media in the size range of 12–25 mm (Campbell and Ogden,
1999). Near the inlet region, larger-sized (37–75 mm) gravel media
should be used. The larger voids in such larger media provide space
for solids to settle and also create uniform flow. The first one meter at
the inlet region is normally used for this purpose. For the SSF sys-
tems, bed material should be arranged from coarse to fine. Although
no hard rules can be given, it is best to use media within a few sieve
sizes because the uniform media will not pack too much and hence
allow better water flow for a longer period. If a much more mixed
media is used, the pores will be in the size order of the smallest media.
In tropical countries, properly graded rock media (used in road con-
struction) can be used as the wetland substratum. Their ready
availability because of application as a road and construction material
is a plus point. Their higher density (specific gravity ≈2.7) will require
stronger retaining walls, as the media depth increases, which is
increasing the construction costs.
6.3.2 Organic substrate

Coir-pith, sawdust, hay or straw bales, and plant litter have been used
as organic substrate. Organic material provides a source of carbon to
support microbial activity. Organic material also consumes oxygen
and creates the anoxic environments that are required for some
treatment processes such as nitrate reduction.
6.4 Construction Aspects

It is easier to construct the wetland during dry weather, as the con-
struction conditions may be difficult in the rainy period. The surface
water in the rainy days has to be diverted around and away from the
wetland cell. This diversion will be useful during the operation of
wetland also, as a stormwater bypass as shown in Fig. 6.8. In wetland

design and construction, to ensure reliability and safety, standard civil
engineering construction principles have to be followed. Accurate
measurements and professional consultation is necessary to ensure
correct compaction, structure stability, and proper drainage. The rel-
evant permits should be obtained from the local governmental
authorities. Construction plans and specifications developed from
treatment requirements and site investigations should be carefully
reviewed before construction is initiated. Carty et al. (2008) have
developed useful decision support diagrams that are also relevant for
the tropical wetland.
Construction includes building access roads, clearing, constructing
the basins and dikes, lining, piping, and providing valves, planting or
seeding and fertilizing, and turfing the dikes and other disturbed areas.
Permeability specifications must be followed carefully to prevent water
leakage into or out of the wetland basins. If synthetic liners are
required, installation should follow the manufacturer’s instructions for
bedding material, sealing (liner-to-liner and liner-to-piping and control
structures), and material placement on top of the liner. Before accept-
ing the constructed wetland basin, it should be tested by being flooded
to the design depth and all components, such as pumps and water
control should then be operated to ensure there is system integrity.
6.4.1 Site conditions

Selecting an appropriate location can result in significant savings in
construction costs. Site selection should consider the use and access
of land, the availability of land if subsequent expansion is needed, site
topography, the soils, environmental resources at the site and adjoin-
ing land, and impact on the neighbors. The site that is selected for a
constructed wetland should minimally be:
• conveniently located near the source of the wastewater and

providing adequate space and
• gently sloping so that water can flow through the system by gravity
and so avoid the need for costly pumping.
The effectiveness of a constructed wetland in treating wastewater is

related to the time the wastewater is retained inside the wetland. The
site selected should be large enough to accommodate this require-
ment for the present and for any anticipated future expansion. The
site should also:
• be above the water table,

• not be in a floodplain,
• not contain threatened or endangered species,
• not contain archeological or historic resources, and
• meet the local authority regulations regarding a passive treatment
site.
6.4.2 Soil conditions

Most soils can support constructed wetland vegetation. Soil proper-
ties such as permeability, cation exchange capacity (CEC), pH,
electrical conductivity (EC), texture, and soil organic matter should
nevertheless be ascertained. The pH of the soil plays an important
role in the transformations occurring in the wetland. Favorable pH is
normally between 6.5 and 8.5. The soil has to provide enough sup-
plements to support plant growth and microbial activity, particularly
during startup and subsequently if, for any reason, the wastewater
does not contain sufficient quantities. The initial establishment of
plants is crucial to the success of any wetland. Previous research has
demonstrated that an organic matter supplement (e.g. amendment
with coir-pith) could enhance the initial establishment (Tanaka et al.,
2008).
6.4.3 Drainage
The drainage system in the wetland has to be designed to ensure that
the treated water can be effectively channeled away into the natural
drainage (river or stream) in the area. Where feasible, wetland efflu-
ent, which may still contain residual nutrients, may be used for
agricultural irrigation (Fig. 6.5).
Fig. 6.5 Effluent of constructed wetland diverted to nursery plots
Puddling and stagnant water should not be allowed; as such

shallow waters encourage the breeding of insect vectors such as
mosquitoes. If mosquito control is achieved with fish, then some
deeper permanent water areas will be helpful for the survival of the
fish whenever the wetland is drained for maintenance purposes. BTI
bacteria can be introduced to puddles to control mosquitoes.
6.4.4 Piping work

The pipe works for conveying water in and out of the wetland should
be designed to require as little maintenance as is practicable. The
choice of piping material is important — for example in applications
where there is exposure to sunlight, uPVC pipes may deteriorate quite
quickly in the tropics. All installed piping should be subjected to the
appropriate tests before backfilling and allowing wastewater flows.
Figure 6.6 shows the piping arrangement suggested in the SLS 745
(2009). Practice in tropical applications has shown round perforations
in pipes may clog (slits are better). Another option is using adjustable
outlets as discussed in Sec. 6.2 (lowering the outlet providing addi-
tional head within wetland, to counterbalance the effect of head loss
Fig. 6.6 Typical arrangement (including piping) of a horizontal flow constructed

wetland used for secondary treatment of wastewater (from SLS 745, Part II, 2009).
in the pipes due to clogging) to achieve the desired volume of flow

from each pipe.
6.4.5 Side walls

Wetland beds shall be contained within impermeable sidewalls, which
are capable of withstanding internal and external water pressures,
external soil pressure, and any other reasonable loads (SLS 745,
Part II, 2009). In a wetland, the outer embankments surround the
entire system while inner embankments or dikes divide the system
into cells. The heights of these inner and outer embankments are often
the same. The outer embankment must, however, be high enough
to protect the system from overtopping during a specific design storm

(e.g. 25-year, 24-hour storm). Design height for the outer embank-
ment should be based on the following:
• For the design storm — include direct precipitation on the wet-

land plus runoff from embankments and if inflow to the wetland
is unrestricted, include precipitation on surfaces that can feed into
the wetland; and
• Allow a freeboard of at least 300 mm.
6.4.5.1 Dike top width

The top width of dikes used to surround and divide the constructed
wetland must be wide enough to accommodate the requirements of
construction, and operation and maintenance. Outer embankments
should be at least 5 m wide at the top to prevent burrowing animals
from creating through holes that will then drain the system into the
surrounding area. The top width for dikes inside can be 2.5–3 m.
A 3–4 m wide access road with a maximum grade of 12% should be
provided to allow vehicular access to the outlet structure area, the
sides of the basin, and to the sediment forebay(s). The road surface
should be selected to suit the anticipated frequency of use and
vehicular load without excessive erosion and consequent damage.
6.4.5.2 Dike side slopes

Side slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical).
Consideration should be given to flatter slopes since these provide
for better slope stability and accommodation for maintenance activi-
ties. Some of the common structural failures seen in wetlands are
sidewalls overturning due to inadequate foundations (arising from
poor design or construction). The failure of cement plaster in the
walls (when the dikes are not earthen but of brick or concrete con-
struction) and foundation failure can also result from long-term
exposure to water and wastewater by products. Thermal cracks on
walls can occur due to the elongated nature of the structure (brick
Fig. 6.7 Typical exposed thermal crack on the wall of a wetland basin
or inappropriately reinforced concrete) exposed to the tropical

climate.
Cracks in the sidewalls will allow partially treated wastewater to
flow out from these cracks and cause nuisance conditions. Thermal
cracks may be avoided by incorporating expansion joints in the
walls.
6.4.6 Synthetic liners and clay liners

Unlined constructed wetlands are allowed only where the seasonal
high groundwater table is:
• below the bottom of the bed (for vertical flow beds) and
• more than 1 m below the bottom of the bed (for horizontal flow
beds) (SLS 745, Part II, 2009).
All other wetlands should be lined. The wetland bed has to be lined
with an impermeable lining to reduce seepage of partially treated
effluent into the environment. The use of clay or synthetic liners has
typically become a requirement so as to protect groundwater from
contamination. The liners also reduce the permeation of water into

the wetlands, helping to retain capacity for treatment.
6.4.6.1 Synthetic liners

Synthetic materials that are generally used as liners include:
polyvinylchloride (PVC), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), linear
low density polyethylene (LLDPE), and polypropylene (PP).
Installation of these liners is a skilled process since damage resulting
in tears will compromise liner integrity. A scrim (woven net of nylon
or PE embedded in plastic) can provide extra strength against tears in
material. The liners with scrims are more expensive. Minimum thick-
ness of PE is 1 mm and 0.75 mm for PVC & PE. Lapping and sealing
are critical for seepage prevention. For example, in non-welded liners,
the overlap should be at least 50 mm (and sealed by tape). The liner
need to be checked for cuts and holes before placement and leaks after
placement by ponding water over the liner to a depth of at least
30 cm above the top of the inlet and outlet pipes. Before placing the
liner, it is prudent to line the wetland excavation with geotextile fab-
ric or 5–8 cm of sand to protect the synthetic liner from punctures
caused by debris and small stones. Over excavation or additional fill
height, or a combination of both, will be needed to accommodate the
sand layer. Where a liner is installed, it should tie in vertically at the
embankments, preventing any lateral movement under or through
the embankments. Liner failure can lead to serious consequences.
Failures can include tearing, curling, and deterioration during service.
Such failures are the functions of design, construction, and material
selection, and determine the service life of the wetlands. While the
exposure to the sunlight will make many plastics brittle, in wetland
applications, once the synthetic liner is put in place, the exposure to
the sunlight is not typically an issue. The risks are, therefore, prima-
rily present during installation. Laying the liner and backfilling shall
have to be well coordinated to reduce liner exposure to the sunlight.
Geosynthetic clay liners (GCL) have a recommended overlap of
300 mm. Such a liner system may comprise compacted and shaped
earth bunds, the GCL layer, and 2-mm thick HDPE. The sub-grade
should be prepared beforehand to reduce the risk of damage to the

liner during installation.
6.4.6.2 Clay liners

When dispersive clays are used for the liner, they prevent seepage,
but increase the turbidity of the wetland effluent. To prevent turbid-
ity issues, non-dispersive clays can be used. Protecting the
embankments from wave effects (caused by wind on large cells) with
rip rap is helpful for reducing turbidity issues. If a clay liner is used
to reduce infiltration, the specifications provided in Table 6.1 apply
(Virginia Department of Conservation, 2001) and the following are
recommended:
• A clay liner should have a minimum compacted thickness of 300 mm.

• A layer of clayey soil (150–300 mm thickness) should be placed
over the liner.
• Other liners may be used subject to manufacturer’s specifications
and previous local experience.
6.4.7 Planting
It is important to make sure that the selected plants are free of disease
and mold. Roots have to be kept moist at all times before and after
planting. Plants should be inserted into the media bed to a depth of
50–100 mm with the shoots slightly exposed. Planting should be done
at least six weeks prior to flooding the wetland with wastewater to
Table 6.1 Clay liner specifications (adopted from Virginia

Department of Conservation, 2001)
Property Unit Specified value
Permeability cm s−1 1 * 10−6

Clay plasticity index % Not less than 15
Liquid limit of clay % Not less than 30
Clay particles passing % Not less than 30
Clay compaction % 95% of standard proctor density
reduce stress on the newly planted vegetation. The planting period

should avoid the rainy season. If after six weeks the plants do not seem
to have taken hold and growing, a replanting, in between the original
plants, in a similar pattern shall have to be considered. If wastewater is
not yet available following planting, the wetland shall have to be
flooded with water and this should be within 50 mm from the top of
the planting media. An all-purpose water-soluble fertilizer can be
applied (at the manufacturer’s lowest rate recommended for lawns)
every three weeks until wastewater is available. Water should not be
above the top surface of planting media, as plant survival can decline
to less than 50 percent under such conditions. The minimum period
for acclimation, before the introduction of wastewater, with watering
and fertilizing should typically be six weeks after first planting.
Thereafter, the water level must be maintained at 25–50 mm below the
surface of the planting media throughout at least one full growing sea-
son. Failure to do so shall likely result in substantial plant death.
6.4.7.1 Saturation of plants and weed growths

Harvesting can involve full removal of the plant or only the above-ground
portion. The guidelines given in Chapter 4 on harvesting (frequency,
proper time, proper rate, and proper pattern) should be followed.
Otherwise, plant regrowth may be adversely affected and nuisance
conditions (such as mosquito breeding) develop. A fraction of the
floating plants should be removed if these have become dense. After
lowering the water level, excess emergent plants can be cut and
removed. Weeds should be removed, if possible, physically. If chemi-
cals are applied, they should be applied cautiously since these may also
damage the useful wetland plants. The water level may have to be
temporarily lowered so that the weeds can be identified. The weeds
should be disposed off at an appropriate location and preferably away
from the wetlands. Leaf fall from surrounding vegetation and over-
growing wetland plants should be removed from the inlet zone and
the macrophyte zone. The outlet weirs should be especially protected
as these can become clogged, reducing the outflow of treated efflu-
ent and thereby flooding the wetland.
6.4.8 Fencing and protection

Wetland systems, nurseries, and other components can be at risk from
natural, human, and animal activities. Adequate fencing and gates should
be provided to prevent unauthorized access. Extreme wind, rain, and
drought conditions can severely affect wetland systems. Windbreakers can
be constructed with trees and these help in esthetics as well. If trees are
to be used as windbreakers, they should, where possible, be established
first so that by the time wetlands are commissioned, the trees are ready.
6.5 Pre-Treatment for the Wetland System

6.5.1 Stormwater bypass
If large volumes of stormwater pass through the wetland during a
storm event, it can affect the wetland adversely. The minimum
retention time will then not be available, affecting wetland treatment
performance. Structures and wetland plants may be damaged because
of high hydraulic load. The plants can be especially vulnerable in the
first growing season. Sediments carried in stormwater can clog the
wetland, altering its topography, changing flow-paths and water levels.
Silt traps (as in fore bays or pre-settling basins) may be needed to retain
the sand and silt if such sediments are expected to be an issue. Where
feasible, a separate stormwater collection system with a bypass, when
stormwater flows become excessive, should be the preferred option. A
schematic stormwater bypass arrangement is shown in Fig. 6.8.
Fig. 6.8 Providing a bypass for large flows

6.5.2 Removal of solids (screens, silt traps, and traps

for floating material)
Sediment and debris can adversely affect the performance of wetland
process. Coarse screens will be useful for the removal of gross partic-
ulate material of the size larger than 5 mm. If screens and silt traps are
provided, access should be provided to ensure these can be cleaned
regularly and the material removed from the screens and traps are
easily transported away.
6.6 Maintenance of Wetlands

6.6.1 Introduction of common aspects of failures
and maintenance
All engineered systems are designed to have a particular service life.
MUSIC (2005) recommended 30-year service life for constructed
wetlands (with 50 years maximum subject to expert evaluation).
Sometimes, the option of abandoning the whole system after several
years of use (and covering with soils, allowing nature to remediate the
area) has been adopted as an alternative to regular maintenance. This
takes into account the cost of desludging and other repairs.
6.6.2 Frequency of maintenance of wetland plants,

systems, and hydraulics
Proper design and construction (including pre-treating wastewater,
appropriate loading rates, and simple mechanical control requiring
low maintenance) will ensure less reliance on operational control and
maintenance (O&M). This will limit regular O&M to flow monitor-
ing and adjustment, water level control, and the monitoring of water
quality and biological parameters. Infrequent O&M items include the
repair of pumps, embankments and control structures, vegetation
management, and the removal of accumulated solids (Kadlec and
Knight, 1996). The regulatory agencies may impose a compliance
monitoring regime to assess the attainment of treatment objectives,
performance, efficiency, and the long-term viability of the system.
Compliance monitoring guidelines will specify minimum sampling

requirements. The general guidelines given below are intended to
facilitate the trouble-free operation of a wetland.
The upstream treatment (pre-treatment) system should be inspected
monthly for the structural integrity and the quantity and quality of its
effluent (i.e. influent to the wetland). If sediment accumulation is
observed in the wetland, this indicates the need for better solids sep-
aration upstream. The sludge levels in upstream treatment stages
should be verified yearly. If necessary, these upstream treatment units
should be desludged yearly to maintain treatment performance and to
avoid sludge carry-over into wetland.
Regular wetland operations can be identified as (a) operations
before plant establishment and (b) operations after plant establish-
ment. During plant establishment, the functions specified should be
carried out fairly intensively in daily, weekly, and monthly intervals.
After the plants have been established, constructed wetlands require a
minimum level of regular (weekly, monthly, and yearly) actions to
maintain the vegetation in the beds. The maintenance requirements
of wetlands mentioned in several publications (e.g. Tanner and
Kloosterman, 1997; Turon et al., 2007) mainly refer to applications
in temperate climates but many of these observations are also true for
tropical applications. The main differences between applications in
the tropics and temperate regions are the higher temperatures, higher
ecological diversity, and higher growth rates of the plants and algae in
tropical countries (some plants may be dormant or may die-back over
the winter months in temperate climates). For many tropical wet-
lands, the need for a bypass to divert high flows is a reality due to
higher intensity of seasonal tropical storms.
Unobstructed flow in the wetland should be verified daily if possi-
ble, because flow variations affect the treatment hydraulics. Taking a
daily walk along the embankments will help in making such observa-
tions. During wetland establishment, the rainfall adjacent to the
wetland should be recorded. The water levels within the wetland should
be observed and recorded, while measuring the inflows and outflows.
The inlets and outlets should be visually inspected daily for
adequate and uniform inflow and outflow. Blockages and damages
should be identified and remedied. Inlet and outlet pipes should be

inspected weekly for blockages, algal growths, sediment accumula-
tion, and debris. All algal growths, plants, or blockages around the
inlets and outlets should be cleared. The water levels should be
adjusted as required (particularly during the dry periods and when
wastewater flows are low). The water level controls should be final-
ized by the plant establishment stage. Leakages should be repaired
regularly.
Any wetland media removed should be replaced after cleaning
(washing), as they may affect flow hydraulics. Identifying proper
places for washing the media within the wetland area is necessary, as
the wash water should not be discharged indiscriminately.
During wetland start-up, the planted vegetation should be
inspected at least weekly. Plants should be visually inspected for plant
growth, health, and the presence of damage by insects, birds, or
rodents. Insects and pests should be controlled. Unwanted plant
species should be removed and uprooted plants should be replanted.
Excess plants can also be removed to avoid overcrowding. Weeds can
be controlled in the wetland by hand-weeding, temporary water level
increases, and, if necessary, by herbicide application. Herbicide appli-
cation is a last resort only and should be done with caution.
During the first growing season of wetland plants, the embank-
ments of the wetland should be inspected weekly for weeds, erosion,
and damage by rodents and other pests. By walking along the
embankments, both internal and external faces of the embankment
can be inspected for any water leakage, slippage, or distortion. The
vegetation should be cut or hand-weeded monthly to allow access. If
this option is not sufficient or inner banks are not accessible, herbi-
cide can be applied. Large animals such as cattle (and especially water
buffaloes in the tropics) should not be allowed to graze at a wetland,
as they may damage the embankments and the planted vegetation
within the cells.
Water levels should be maintained at less than 300 mm in
free-surface water wetlands. Yet in an established wetland, many
macrophytes can tolerate water depths up to 500 mm, as well as low
or no water for short periods. To avoid clogging (due to mud, slime,
and algae), solids over 75 mm deep should be removed, as determined

by regular inspection and depth measurement. The vegetation should
not be disturbed during sludge removal. The solids should be dis-
posed off at pre-identified and approved locations.
The established wetland should be visually inspected monthly for
any weed, plant health, or pest problems, and plant cover by the
selected species should be verified. The weeds in wetland can be
removed by hand-weeding and temporary water level increase once a
month. Apply herbicide only if there are no other options. Remove
dead plants every six months, clean debris, and replant if necessary.
The inlets and outlets should be visually inspected monthly for
adequate and uniform inflow. Blockages and damages should be iden-
tified and necessary adjustments made. The end caps of the pipes
should be removed yearly and flushed out and cleaned thoroughly to
remove slime build-ups and other blockages.
In the established wetland, the general appearance of the final
treated effluent at the outlet should be checked once a month. This
inspection should include water color and the presence of sewage
fungi, smell, and any plant material. Even if the treated effluent water
is clear, it may have residual nutrient loads. The algal growths and
plants around the outlet should be inspected and cleaned to provide
access and prevent blockages. It is good to check the condition and
appearance of receiving waters both upstream and downstream. The
appearance of discolored water and sludge banks or foam would be
indicative of pollution and hence possibly poor wetland performance.
Downstream erosion is indicative of poor outlet design.
In the established wetland, embankments should be inspected
monthly for weeds, erosion, and damage. Weeds on inner embank-
ments can be controlled by hand-weeding or herbicide application
once in two months. Grazing by large animals such as cows and water
buffaloes must continue to be disallowed. The fencing around the
wetland is important for keeping cattle away and should be weekly
inspected to ensure fencing is intact.
CHAPTER 7
COST AND SUSTAINABILITY OF

CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS
A.K. Karunarathna
7.1 Introduction
As discussed in Chapter 2, the tropical and subtropical climate
regions in the world provide an environment that is largely
conducive for higher biological activity and productivity, and hence
potentially better performance is achievable with constructed
wetland systems. These regions are characterized by steady solar
energy flux and warm temperatures throughout the year and hence
avoid the high- and low-growth periods seen in temperate climates.
Consequently, the treatment efficiencies in tropical and subtropical
wetlands exceed the average performance of those in temperate
climates. Given the continuous and higher biological activity, the
constructed wetlands in tropical and subtropical climates can typi-
cally have lower area requirement compared to wetlands located in
the temperate regions.
Many of the cost components incurred in a constructed wetland
project are similar to those in civil engineering type projects. As with
many civil engineering constructions, the unit cost of the constructed
wetland installation decreases with the increasing capacity. For
instance, Fig. 7.1 illustrates the scale dependency of the unit cost of
wetland construction. The scale: cost relationship can be expected to
hold true in temperate and tropical applications.
In addition to the scale dependency, the cost of each constructed
wetland project will vary depending on a number of other factors such
115
116 A.K. Karunarathna
300
250
Capital cost, US$/PE
200
150
100
50
0
1 10 100 1000
Population served, PE
Fig. 7.1 Wetland construction cost as influenced by the size of the wetland
(adapted from Gauss, 2008)
as land value, location relative to the source of the wastewater, treat-

ment goals, and the type of wetlands.
7.1.1 Land value and location

The constructed wetland system requires more space than the more
intensely mechanized wastewater treatment processes. For instance, a
constructed wetland would require an area 10 times larger than that
required by an equivalent extended aeration system employing
mechanical dewatering (Tsagarakis et al., 2003). Although the con-
structed wetland systems require more land than the conventional
wastewater treatment plants, the decision as to whether a constructed
wetland system is appropriate must be based on a more holistic con-
sideration of the economic costs and benefits of a constructed wetland
system when compared to those for the other treatment methods. It
is noted that most constructed wetlands have been built in rural areas
or located on public lands, and this may reduce the impact of the land
cost. This, however, will unlikely to be so, if systems are intended for
application at densely populated urban or semi-urban locations. The
cost trends of labor and construction materials do, however, vary
Cost and Sustainability of Constructed Wetlands 117
widely by region depending on the level and mix of construction

work then current in each market (Johannes et al., 2006). The rela-
tive sizes of the various cost components within a wetland and more
mechanized system project are different and this will result in a dif-
ferent overall cost that may not necessarily disadvantage the wetland.
Thus, the wetland system should not be dismissed from considera-
tion even when wastewater treatment is intended for more densely
populated areas.
7.1.2 Treatment goals

Typically, the greater the level of wastewater treatment required,
the higher the extent of land needed for the treatment system if a
biological treatment process is targeted. The regulations and/or
owners may also include requirements in addition to the typical
requirement of BOD and the removal of SS. For example, if
the treated effluent is to be disinfected before discharge, then the
treatment system shall need to include a disinfection stage such
as chlorination — i.e. adding to the cost of installation and
operation.
7.1.3 Type of wetlands

The unit costs for almost all the materials and services are essentially
the same for the FWS and SSF wetlands. The exception to this would
be the substrate cost incurred in SSF wetlands. In the latter case,
a 30–60 cm depth of gravel (porous substrate) typically fills the
bed, whereas the medium for the FWS wetland usually consists of a
15 cm layer of topsoil as growth media for the plants. Aside from the
cost differentials caused by the substrate, the configuration of the
wetland and the number of cells therein do affect the construction
costs. For example, each cell would require its set of hydraulic con-
trol structures and liners (which extend up the dikes) and obviously
additional sets of these will add to the cost. Notwithstanding this,
the additional costs have to be weighed against the increased ease of
system operation.
7.2 Construction Costs

Although some general guidelines have been developed over the
years, wetland construction is not as well “defined” as it is with the
more mechanized systems. The nature of a system (especially when
incorporated into eco-developments that require greater sensitivity to
the surrounding environment) does require a greater repertoire of
construction methods and the selection of materials. It will, therefore,
not be easy to develop a simple, comprehensive, and rigid set of
guidelines for wetland construction. The costs of construction nor-
mally include those for civil works, mechanical works, engineering
designs and on-site supervision, start-up costs, and the cost of bor-
rowings to provide for the working capital. In addition to these, there
will usually be a number of local factors that increase the construction
costs. The commonest ones are special site preparations, quality of
materials available, and stipulated regulatory requirements (e.g., gov-
erning construction activities). For instance, the construction of a
constructed wetland system with a flexible membrane liner because
suitable material for a clay liner is not available nearby will considerably
increase the construction cost.
The cost data in this chapter was derived from various reports and
publications and the figures and tables presented are based on the
estimated cost or expenditures in each system at the time of con-
struction. The figures include the price variations associated with
locality and local market conditions. Because of these factors, it would
not be representative to provide a general cost in terms of the unit
cost. Notwithstanding the preceding, the percentage contribution of
each wetland component to the total cost may be useful to facilitate
some degree of comparison among projects.
7.2.1 Basic cost components

Construction costs are those expenditures that are required to build a
constructed wetland system. They are exclusive of costs required to
operate or maintain the action throughout its lifetime. Construction
costs consist primarily of expenditures initially incurred to install the
constructed wetland that include all labor, equipment, and material

costs, including contractor markups, such as overhead and profit,
associated with activities such as mobilization/demobilization, moni-
toring, site work, installation of extraction, containment, or treatment
systems and disposal. The expenditures for professional/technical
services that are necessary to support the construction of constructed
wetland systems are often included in the construction cost. The
major construction cost elements are listed below:
• Project planning and design costs,

• Site cleaning, excavation, and earthwork cost,
• Liner cost,
• Substrate cost,
• Plants and planting costs, and
• Miscellaneous construction costs.
However, the costs of construction activities are typically estimated

on an element-by-element basis. Contractor markups such as
overhead and profit are generally included in these cost elements,
rather than listed separately in the construction cost summary.
Contingency is typically added as a percentage to the total cost of
construction activities. Professional/technical services are typically
estimated as a percentage of the total cost of construction activities
plus contingency.
7.2.1.1 Project planning and design costs

Project planning and design cost vary with the size of the constructed
wetland system. If a constructed wetland system is a component of an
integrated wastewater treatment system with advance primary treat-
ment steps, the designing cost of the constructed wetland system may
be decreased. Small constructed wetlands, which can be built manu-
ally or by using simple tools, can be designed with basic technical
know-how by spending a minimum on planning and design. Planning
costs for a larger constructed wetland project that demands a fleet of
heavy earthmoving machinery and additional site infrastructures are
usually expressed as a percentage of the overall construction cost.

Because of rules of the thumb, 15% of the direct cost is allocated for
the project rules of the planning and design.
7.2.1.2 Excavation and earthwork cost

Though a wetland can be built at any site, construction costs can be
exceptionally high if the extensive earthmoving or additional struc-
tures such as flood protection dams or slope protection measures are
required.
The cost of excavation and earthwork typically includes grading
the site to produce level basins that are enclosed by earthen berms,
and in the case of FWS wetlands, reserving and replacing topsoil in
the bed to serve as the vegetation growth medium. For small wetland
systems, multipurpose small earthmoving machinery (i.e., backhoes) is
commonly used. The cost of earthwork includes the cost of earth mov-
ing, equipment, and the source of earth supply (on-site or imported),
which is a volumetric cost (per m3). Table 7.1 compares the cost of
earthwork incurred during the construction of wetlands.
7.2.1.3 Liner cost

A liner is principally applied to restrict the possible contamination of
groundwater and also to prevent groundwater from infiltrating into
the wetland. Indeed, a proper liner should act as a barrier to gas
migration. A proper liner installed in a wetland restricts the spreading
of the below-ground vegetative propagule of wetland plants to outside,
Table 7.1 The cost of earthwork for constructed wetland systems
Area Earthwork Cost

Year Location (m2) volume (m3) (US$/m3) Source
2003 Colombia 21,770 15,634 2.2 Arias and Brown, 2009

2004 Sri Lanka 110 98 4.2 Jinadasa, 2006
2008 Sri Lanka 12,000 15,083 8.9 ± 2.7 Unpublished data*
*Estimated cost.
consequently saving a hidden cost on maintenance. Usually, the liner

system covers the whole water contact area of the wetland cell.
Although several kinds of liner systems are available, the selection of
a liner for a particular wetland should be based on site-specific char-
acteristics and regulatory requirements. Where on-site soils or clay
provide an adequate seal, the compaction of these materials may be
sufficient to line the wetland.
On-site soils can be used if they can be compacted to achieve a
low permeability of <10−7 cm/sec. Consequently, the laboratory analy-
sis of on-site soils for potential use in the liner would add a small cost
at the preliminary site investigation stage. However, if the existing
low-permeability soil layer is thinner than 30 cm, alternative liner
material should be introduced to fulfill the design goals and regulatory
requirements. In addition, for sites underlain by highly permeable
sandy soils or gravels, fractured bedrock will have to be sealed by
some other lining method.
The second option often considered is a liner constructed of
compacted clay or other soils with appropriate amendments. This
type of liner may be constructed with soils from the excavation itself
or soil may be imported from nearby borrow sources. If the soils
require amendments such as bentonite or soil dispersants, the unit
cost of the compacted liner will be significantly higher than for a
liner that only requires compaction to achieve a satisfactorily low
permeability.
The third option is to line the wetland cell with an artificial liner
material. Although small constructed wetlands are often lined by
reinforced concrete, the use of reinforced concrete structures for
large wetlands or pond systems is not desirable (Hayes et al., 2000)
due to the high cost of construction. Alternatively, the use of flexi-
ble membrane liners (FML) and bentonite-enhanced geosynthetic
liners would be effective. In addition to liner material cost, the cost
occurred in synthetic liner application often requires additional
works. If the site soils contain angular stones, sand bedding or geo-
textile cushions should be placed under the liner to prevent
punctures. The liner should be covered with 8–15 cm of soil (or fine
sand) to prevent the roots of the vegetation from penetrating the
liner. The percentage cost for the synthetic liner decreases with the
increase of the size of the wetland (cell) since the area of the perime-
ter run-out material in the liner and works on the panel seaming
decreases as a percentage of the total area.
The cost of the liner system of a particular wetland project
largely depends on site-specific conditions and the availability of
material in the regional market. Therefore, project planners should
calculate the total cost including the maintenance and potential risk
of failure. A useful tool in comparing design alternatives is to eval-
uate unit costs. The benefits of alternatives may then be compared
against unit costs to aid in selecting a design alternative. Table 7.2
illustrates a cost comparison for different thicknesses of compacted
clay liners, synthetic liner, and reinforced concrete used in con-
structed wetland construction in tropical developing countries.
The unit costs of FML installed under temperate climates in indus-
trialized countries are also shown in Table 7.2 for comparison
purposes.
The use of alternative liner materials in waste/wastewater con-
tainment facilities has grown in many rural developing countries
Table 7.2 Cost comparisons of design options for liner construction in medium-
to large-scale wetlands
Area Unit cost

Year Location Liner type (m2) (US$/m2) Source
2003 Colombia Geomembrane 24,670 1.2 Arias and Brown,

2009
2004 Sri Lanka Cement 30 650 Jinadasa, 2006
brick wall
2008 Sri Lanka HDPE 40,000 4.6 ± 2.1 Unpublished data*
60-mil FML
2005 USA HDPE 297–6,141 3.6 + 0.8 to Wallace and
30-mil FML 19.0 + 3.2 Knight, 2006**
+ Geotextile
*Estimated cost.
**Minimum and maximum data from eight wetland systems.
due to high cost and the need for skilled labor for FML installa-
tions. For instance, Gunarathna et al. (2007) introduced a low-cost
liner made from pieces of waste polyethylene films and clayey soils
(soils with >20% clay content). The liner composite was
constructed by sandwiching a layer of polyethylene pieces between
5-cm thick clay layers, to a thickness of 15 cm, by compacting the
composite manually with a turf roller. Long-term performance of
the liner in 35-m2 landfill cell demonstrated a good resistance to
flow (saturated hydraulic conductivity ∼1.0 10−7 cm/sec). The
main advantages of the liner are its low cost (∼US$0.8/m2) and
significantly low conductivity compared to the same thickness of
clay liner.
7.2.1.4 Substrate cost

The substrates in an FWS wetland are the top-soil placed on top of
the liner that serves as the growth medium for the emergent vegeta-
tion in the system. The on-site soils can be used as the substrate
media for the FWS wetlands if on-site soils exhibit the required spec-
ifications. In such cases, the on-site substrates may be used to remove
debris, rocks, existing seed banks (where the on-site vegetations are
not desirable to the wetland system), and may be directly filled into
wetland cells. This work can be included as a part of the earthwork
cost or else as a separate job. In the case where on-site soil is unde-
sirable for use in FWS wetlands, an additional cost account for
purchasing, transporting, and handling occurs. The unit cost of these
materials depends on the quality of the material, the volume needed,
and the distance from the source to the wetland site. A fleet of earth-
moving machineries (or off-terrain vehicles) may be required where
the cell size is too large for manual application.
Instead of normal surface soils, SSF wetlands require specific types
of bed substrates. The cost of SSF bed substrates is the most expen-
sive item in the construction of SSF wetland and may vary depending
on site-specific conditions. Table 7.3 illustrates the cost of bed sub-
strates used for different SSF wetlands in different geographical
Table 7.3 Unit cost spent on substrate materials of SSF wetlands
Substrate Area Unit cost % of

Year Location type (m2) (US$/m3) total Source
2003 Colombia 3/4″ Gravel 24,670 19.3 32.5 Arias and

Brown, 2009
2004 Sri Lanka 3/4″ Aggregates 100 13.4 10.1 Jinadasa, 2006
2004 Costa 20-mm Rock 30 ∼20.0 ∼50.0 Dallas et al.,
Rica 2004
2005 USA 9–25-mm 297 −15.3 to n/a Wallace and
Rock 6,141 67.6 Knight, 2006*
*Minimum and maximum data from eight wetland systems.
regions. The unit costs of substrate material available in the USA are
also shown in Table 7.3 for comparison purposes. However, these
figures should be used only as guidance since the material used, instal-
lation, conditions, and site conditions are not comparable.
Furthermore, it has been established that the major mechanisms
for removing phosphorus from wastewater by constructed wetlands
are chemical adsorption and sedimentation by substrates, rather than
plant uptake and microbe removal (Drizo et al., 1999; Westholm,
2006). Thus, the selection and assembly of substrates are very
important for wetland construction especially when planning for
long-term efficient phosphorus removal.
7.2.1.5 Plants and planting costs

There are many variables in calculating the total costs associated with
the vegetation establishment phase of a wetland construction project.
However, the following generalizations can be made:
• Large projects have a lower unit cost (cost/plant or cost/m2) than

small ones because of discounted materials costs and reduced
mobilization costs.
• Projects having multiple goals (e.g. recreation and planting of
commercial plant species) are generally more costly.
• The cost of mechanized planting is typically much less than planting

by hand particularly on large sites.
The costs of plant materials are highly variable; however, the follow-
ing generalizations can be made:
• Transplants acquired from the wild are cheap.

• Direct seeding is more less expensive than transplanting from
nurseries.
• Species that are difficult to propagate are often expensive.
Even within the regional market, the costs of plant materials can be
considerably different according to the type and size of the propag-
ule. However, most of the costs associated with planting are for labor,
with additional costs related to bed preparation, soil amendments,
and planting equipment if required. A rough estimate of the labor
requirement for planting can be established (Huffman, 1978; Arias
and Brown, 2009):
• 100–300 man-hours/ha for transplants and sprigs,

• 100–150 man-hours/ha for rhizomes, tubers, and rootstocks, and
• 10–40 man-hours/ha for seeds.
7.3 Operation and Maintenance Costs

Although, the operation and maintenance of constructed wetland sys-
tems designed for wastewater treatment are relatively simple and
require minimal time, constructed wetlands require regular mainte-
nance to ensure that they operate correctly. Since the wetland system
itself does not require any mechanical equipment in the treatment
process, most of the operation activities are limited to hydraulic con-
trol processes such as inflow and effluent outflow control, and water
level control. Therefore, the many aspects of the operation and main-
tenance of constructed wetland are similar to wastewater stabilization
lagoon (stabilization ponds). However, special emphasis should be
given to the operation and maintenance of influent pretreatment
systems since most of the regular wetland failures are linked with
inappropriate management of influent wastewaters (USEPA, 1993).
The most appropriate method to ensure an economical operation and
maintenance of the wetland system is to formulate an operation and
maintenance plan during the design of the constructed wetland sys-
tem. The plan can be updated to reflect specific system characteristics
learned during actual operation.
As discussed earlier in this chapter, most of the constructed wet-
land projects established in the tropical developing countries are
pilot-scale projects designed and maintained by intuitions (e.g.,
universities) and non-government organizations (NGOs). Thus, the
operation and maintenance of those facilities are carried out as part of
a research/integrated project, and the cost of human resources
(labor), which are the main cost constituent in the operation and
maintenance of wetland, have not been separated out. The decision to
employ a permanent operator (caretaker) for a particular wetland
depends on the scale of the facility.
Although individual cost components for operation and mainte-
nance are difficult to illustrate, the time required to carry out the
various operation and maintenance tasks for the entire wetland system
can be quantified. Table 7.4 summarizes the itemized operation and
maintenance requirements of a pilot plant in Masaya, Nicaragua, that
serves about 1,000 people (Gauss, 2008).
7.4 Sustainability of Constructed Wetlands in Tropics

7.4.1 Ecological and economic sustainabilities
With few exceptions, most of the developing and the least developed
countries are located in tropical and subtropical regions of the world.
In these countries, public and private wastewater treatments and dis-
posal systems are often very deficient or even entirely missing. In
order to reduce or avoid the further deterioration of the environ-
mental conditions in these countries, the wastewater has to be treated.
Over the decays, it has been recognized that centralized mechanical
wastewater treatment systems are inappropriate for semi-urban rural
Table 7.4 Frequency and duration of labor employed for routine operation and
maintenance activities of an SSF constructed wetland (350 m2 × 4 beds) in Masaya,
Nicaragua (Gauss, 2008)
Materials
Activities necessary Frequency Time required
Clean filter/screen Shovel and Daily 10 min

at inlet and dispose wheelbarrow
the solids
Measure influent flow Flow meter Daily 5 min
Control water level Flexible hose/ Daily 5 min
within constructed adjustable
wetland pipe
Clean accumulated Surface skimmer Every 15 min
surface scum and and wheelbarrow three days
dispose
Extract sludge from Shovel and Depending 30–40 min
the bottom wheelbarrow on the
accumulation
of sludge
Plant harvesting Machete, rake, According to 50 m2 of area/
and wheelbarrow growth cycle person/day
Excavate and replace Pick, shovel, When 1.5–2 m3/
the bed media and wheelbarrow; superficial person/day
substrate of the use new media water flow
distribution zone of same is noted
granulmetry
communities, as many of these centralized treatment systems are

maintenance and energy intensive (Tchobanoglous et al., 2003). The
choice of the appropriate technology will depend on several factors
such as the composition of the wastewater, the availability of land, the
availability of funds and expertise, reuse options, and community
needs. Different operation and maintenance options will have to be
considered with respect to sustainable plant operation, the use of local
resources, knowledge, and workforce. Thus, in regions where cen-
tralized mechanical technologies cannot be effectively maintained,
promoting less energy-intensive wastewater technologies could result
in improved water quality, benefiting the health, economy, and

esthetics of the region. Thus, wetland treatment technology in tropi-
cal countries offers a comparative advantage over conventional and
mechanized treatment systems because the level of solar energy input,
ecological diversity, and economic viability is greater.
The use of bioregenerative technologies for wastewater treatment
are advantageous over resource intensive technologies, as they can be
constructed using locally available materials, and rely on renewable
energy resources, lessening the need for imported resources. In this
context, the constructed wetland treatment of wastewater has been
recognized as a promising technology for communities that have lim-
ited access to energy and material resources. Several indices are used
to evaluate and analyze the efficiency and effectiveness of constructed
wetland technology (i.e., treatment performance, monitory cost, and
energy). Among them, energy evaluations and a measure of the envi-
ronmental and human economic resource utilization, showed that
compared to conventional sewage treatment, wetland wastewater
treatment systems use far less imported and purchased materials.
Wetland systems are also less energy-dependent, lessening depend-
ence on electrical infrastructure, and require simpler maintenance
since the system largely relies on the ecological action of microbes and
plants for their efficacy (Nelson et al., 2001; Chen et al., 2007; Arias
and Brown, 2009). Thus, when evaluating the cost and benefit of
constructed wetland systems for wastewater treatment, the use of
energy evaluation will give a clear vision as many of the resources are
being considered in analysis.
7.4.2 Longevity of constructed wetlands

Among the major constituents in wastewater, the removal of nitrogen
is considered effective and steady over the lifespan of constructed wet-
land because nitrogen can be converted to nitrogen gas and be emitted
to the atmosphere because of the coupled nitrification–denitrification
process. However, the sustainable removal mechanism for phospho-
rus in the constructed wetland systems is only achieved by harvesting
plants and removing the saturated filter media. However, the amount
of phosphorus that can be removed by harvesting plants usually

constitutes only a small fraction of the amount of phosphorus loaded
into the system with the sewage (Brix, 1997). The adsorption and/or
precipitation of phosphorous by a substrate in the constructed wet-
land systems are a finite process; once the material is saturated, it will
have to be either washed or, more probably, replaced. However, the
knowledge of the phosphorous adsorption capacity of the bed sub-
strate material can be used to estimate the maximum amount of
phosphorous that can be taken and/or removed from a given waste-
water, while it cannot provide an accurate estimation of the longevity
of a wastewater treatment system.
7.4.3 Socio-environmental aspects of constructed

wetland management — lesson learnt
Although the resources allocate for the construction, operation, and
maintenance of construction wetland systems are comparatively
smaller than the conventional energy intensive wastewater treatment
systems, qualified personals should be involved in the design, con-
struction, and operation and monitoring of the constructed wetland
projects. Moreover, a detail feasibility study is required where the pro-
posed system locates in environmentally sensitive areas such as coastal
zones, natural wetlands, natural or artificial reservoirs, and vulnerable
groundwater aquifers. The intensity of such a study largely depends
on regulations stipulated by the state or provincial governments and
the scale of the constructed wetland.
Another important factor in overall constructed wetland manage-
ment is the participation of various relevant stakeholders. Especially,
community participation in all stages of constructed wetland projects
is an important element, especially where the operation and mainte-
nance of construction wetlands are supposed to be undertaken by the
local community. Local representatives should have the right to
participate in the wastewater treatment committee’s planning, decision-
making, and the implementation of projects. A facilitator may be
needed to initiate the involvement of various stakeholders and the
integration of all affected interests and factors. Monitoring should not

only be done for water quality parameters, but all stages in the
management of the water treatment system should be monitored.
Therefore, implementers have to understand both the attitudes
and behavior of people and develop feasible strategies for sensitizing
and motivating people on the needs for cooperation and appropriate
environmental practices.
b1033_References.qxd 3/21/2011 12:04 PM Page 131
REFERENCES
Chapter 1
Abira, M.A. A Pilot Constructed Treatment Wetland for Pulp and Paper Mill
Wastewater, Taylor & Francis, Leiden, The Netherlands, 2007.
Brix, H. Use of constructed wetlands in water pollution control: historical
development, present status, and future perspectives, Water Science &
Technology, 30(8), 209–223, 1994.
Cha, M.W. The application of constructed wetlands for water quality
improvement in the deep bay catchment of Hong Kong, Wetlands
Ecosystems in Asia, 401–412, 2004.
Constanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Grooot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B.,
Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G.,
Sutton, P., and van den Belt, M. The value of the world’s ecosystem
services and natural capital, Nature, 387, 253–260, 1997.
Cooper, C.M. and Knight, S.S. Insecticide and metal contamination of a
mixed cover agricultural watershed, Water Science and Technology,
33(2), 227–234, 1996.
Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., and La Roe, E.T. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, which was
published by the Service in 1979 (FWS/OBS–79/31), 131 pp. 1979.
CWA. Clean Water Act — Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of
1972, Public Law 92–500, 1972.
Diemont, S.A.W. Mosquito larvae density and pollutant removal in tropical
wetland treatment systems in Honduras, Environment International,
32(3), 332–341, 2006.
Joseph, K. Optimizing Processes for Biological Nitrogen Removal in Nakivubo
Wetland, Ph.D. Thesis. Uganda. Royal Institute of Technology,
Department of Biotechnology Stockholm. ISBN 91-7283-962-7, 2005.
131
132 References
Kadlec, R.H. Overview: surface flow constructed wetlands, Water Science &
Technology, 32, 1–12, 1995.
Kadlec, R.H. and Knight, R.L. Treatment wetlands, Lewis Publishers Boca
Raton, FL, 1996.
Kadlec, R.H. and Reddy, K.R. Temperature effects in treatment wetlands,
Water Environment Research, 73(5), 543–557, 2001.
Kaseva, M.E. Performance of a sub-surface flow constructed wetland in pol-
ishing pre-treated wastewater — a tropical case study, Water Research,
38(3), 681–687, 2004.
Keffala, C. and Ghrabi, A. Nitrogen and bacterial removal in constructed
wetlands treating domestic waste water, Desalination, 185(1–3),
383–389, 2005.
Kivaisi, A.K. The potential for constructed wetlands for wastewater treat-
ment and reuse in developing countries: a review, Ecological Engineering,
16(4), 545–560, 2001.
Koottatep, T., Polprasert, C., Oanh, N.T.K., Heinss, U., Montangero, A.,
and Strauss, M. Potentials of vertical-flow constructed wetlands for
septage treatment in tropical regions, Advances in Water and Wastewater
Treatment Technology, 315–323, 2001.
Lewis, R.R. Economics and feasibility of mangrove restoration. In: Proceedings
of the Coastal Ecosystems Workshop, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/
OBS–80/59, pp. 88–94, 1981.
Lim, D.V., Lim, P.E., and Wong, T.F. Oxygen demand, nitrogen and copper
removal by free-water-surface and subsurface-flow constructed wetlands
under tropical conditions, Environment International, 26(5–6),
425–431, 2001.
Livingston, E.H. Use of wetlands for urban stormwater management. In:
D.A. Hammer (Ed.). Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment,
Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp. 253–264, 1989.
Mashauri, D.A., Mulungu, M.M., and Abdulhussein, B.S. Constructed wet-
land at the University of Dar es Salaam, Water Research, 34(4),
1135–1144, 2000.
Meutia, A.A. Treatment of laboratory wastewater in a tropical constructed
wetland comparing surface and subsurface flow, Water Science &
Technology, 44(11–12), 499–506, 2001.
References 133
Nur Asmazila M.N. Strom Water Treatment Using Constructed Wetlands.

First International Conference on Managing Rivers in the 21st Century:
Issues and Challengers, River Engineering and Urban Drainage Research
Center, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kampus Kejuruteraan, Seri
Ampangan, Penang, Malaysia, 2004.
Nyakang’o J.B. and van Bruggen J.J.A. Combination of a well functioning
constructed wetland with a pleasing landscape design in Nairobi, Kenya,
Water Science Technology, 40, 249–256, 1999.
Nzengy’a, D.M. and Wishitemi, B.E.L. The performance of constructed
wetlands for wastewater treatment: a case study of Splash wetland in
Nairobi, Kenya, Hydrological Processes, 15(17), 3239–3247, 2001.
Okurut, T.O., Rijs, G.B.J., and van Bruggen, J.J.A. Design and performance
of experimental constructed wetlands in Uganda, planted with Cyperus
papyrus and Phragmites mauritianus, Water Science and Technology,
40(3), 265–271, 1999.
Okurut, T.O. and van Bruggen, J.J.A. Evaluation of the treatment perform-
ance of a household CW. In: T.S.A. Mbwette, J.H.Y. Katima, and S.E.
Jorgensen (Eds.), Application of Wetland Systems and Waste Stabilisation
Ponds in Water Pollution Control, IKR Publishers, Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania, pp. 49–63, 2001.
Opaa, B.O. and Raburu, P.O. 2003 (unpublished data).
Pearce, E.A. and Smith, C.J. The Hutchinson World Weather Guide, 5th
edition, Helicon, 2000.
Shutes, R.B.E. Artificial wetlands and water quality improvement,
Environment International, 26(5–6), 441–447, 2001.
Shutes, R.B.E. and Sriyaraj, K. An assessment of the impact of motorway
runoff on a pond, wetland and stream, Environment International,
26(5–6), 433–439, 2001.
Tanaka, N., Asaeda, T., Hasegawa, A., and Tanimoto, T. Modelling of the
long-term competition between Typha angustifolia and Typha latifolia
in shallow water effects of eutrophication, latitude and initial advantage
of belowground organs, Aquatic Botany, 79(4), 295–310, 2004.
Urbonas, B. and Stahre, P. Stormwater Best Management Practices and
Detention, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1993.
134 References
Yang, W., Chang, J., Xu, B., Peng, C., and Ying, G. Ecosystem service value
assessment for constructed wetlands: a case study in Hangzhou, China,
Ecological Economics, 68(1–2), 116–125, 2008.
Zdragas, A., Zalidis, G.C., Takavaloglou, V., Katsavoumi, S., Anastasiadis,
E.T., Eskridge, K., and Panoras, A. The effect of environmental condi-
tions on the ability of a constructed wetland to disinfect municipal
wastewaters, Environmental Management, 29, 510–515, 2002.
Zhang, Z., Gersberg, R.M., and Keat, T.S. Constructed wetlands in China,
Ecological Engineering, 35(10), 1367–1378, 2009.
Chapter 2
Barney, C. Urban growth in developing countries: a review of current trends
and a caution regarding existing forecasts, World Development, Elsevier
Ltd., London, UK, 32(1), 23–51, 2004.
Common Wealth Parliamentary Conference. Access to water in developing
countries, India, Data paper, 3–53, 2007.
GWP (Global Water Partnership). Integrated Water Resources Management,
GWP, Stockholm. TAC Background Paper No. 4, 2000.
Lester, R.B. How water scarcity will shape the new century, keynote speech
presented at Stockholm water conference, 2000.
Peter, R., Collins, J., and Moore, F. Lessons from green revolution, Do we
need new technology to end hunger, Tikkun Magazine, l5(2), 52–56,
2000.
Population Information Programme. Population reports: solution for a
water short world, USA, 1998.
Rockstrom, J., Barron, J., and Fox, P. Water productivity in rain fed agricul-
ture: challenges and opportunities for small holder farmers in
drought-prone tropical agro ecosystem, UNESCO-IHE Institute for
Water Education, Delft, the Netherlands, 2003.
Rosegrant Mark, W. Water Resources in the 21st century: challenges and impli-
cations for action, International Food Policy Research Institute, 1997.
UN-ESCAP. Income generation and poverty reduction experiences of
selected Asian countries, New York, NY, 2005.
UNICEF. Water for life making it happen, World Health Organization,
2005.
References 135
UNICEF. UN Economic and Social Council, Water, sanitation and hygiene

strategies for 2006–2015. United Nations Children’s Fund, 2006.
World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, 2000. Global Water Supply
and Sanitation Assessment Report.
http://www.un.org/esa/population: accessed on 20 February 2009.
http://faostat.fao.org: accessed on 23 December 2009.
http://www.itt.com/waterbook: accessed on 30 July 2009.
http://www.cap-net.org/tutorial-iwrm/3-principles: accessed on 20 October
2008.
Chapter 3
Ansola, G., Manuel, J., Cortijo, R.G., and Luis, E. Experimental and
full-scale pilot plant constructed wetlands for municipal wastewater
treatment, Ecological Engineering, 21(1), 43–52, 2003.
Belmont, M.A., Cantellano, E., Thompson, S., Williamson, M., Sánchez, A.,
and Metcalfe, C.D. Treatment of domestic wastewater in a pilot-scale
natural treatment system in Central Mexico, Ecological Engineering,
23(4–5), 299, 2004. Resource Scientists (NHANRS).
Blicher-Mathiesen, G. and Hoffmann, C.C. Denitrification as a sink for dis-
solved nitrous oxide in a freshwater riparian fen, Journal of Environmental
Quality, 28, 257–262, 1999.
Brown, R.B. Fact Sheet SL-29, Soil and Water Science Department, Florida
Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural
Sciences, University of Florida, 2003.
DeBusk, W.F. Fact Sheet of the Soil and Water Science Department, Florida
Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural
Sciences, University of Florida, 1999.
Denny, P. Implementation of constructed wetlands in developing countries,
Journal of Water Science and Technology, 35(5), 27, 1997.
Gelt, J. Constructed wetlands: using human ingenuity, Natural Processes to
Treat Water, Build Habitat, 9(4), 1997.
Gilliam, J.W., (1994), Riparian wetlands and water quality, Journal of
Environmental Quality, 25, 1994.
Gould, T.J. and Thomas, P. Fact Sheet: Soils for Constructed Wetlands; New
Hampshire Association of Natural Resource Scientist, 2006.
136 References
Gwenaël, I., Braeckevelt, M., Kuschk, P., Richnow, H.H. Monitoring and
assessing processes of organic chemicals removal in constructed wet-
lands, Chemosphere, 74(3), 349–362, 2009.
Hauck, R.D. Atmospheric nitrogen chemistry, nitrification, denitrification,
and their relationships. In: O. Hutzinger, (Ed.), The Handbook of
Environmental Chemistry, 1(C), The Natural Environment and
Biogeochemical Cycles, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984.
Hemond, H.F. and Benoit, J. Cumulative impacts on water quality functions
of wetlands, Environmental Management, 1988.
Jetten, M.S.M., Strout, M., Van de Pas-Schoonen, K.T., Schalk, J., Van don-
gen, U.G.J.M., Van de Graat, A.A., Logemann, S., Muyzer, G., Van
Loosdrecht, M.C.M., and Kuenen, J.G. The anaerobic oxidation of
ammonium, FEMS Microbiol Rev, 22, 421–437, 1999.
Johnston, C.A. Sediment and nutrient retention by freshwater wetlands: effects
on surface water quality, Critical Review of Environment Control, 1991.
Kadlec, R.H. and Knight, R.L. Treatment Wetlands, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
Florida, 1996.
Kaseva, M.E. Performance of a sub-surface flow constructed wetland in pol-
ishing pre-treated wastewater — a tropical case study, Water Research,
38(3), 681, 2004.
Knowles, R. Denitrification. Microbiological Reviews, 46(1), 43–70, 1982.
Liikanen, A., Puustinen, M., Koskiaho, J., Vaisanen, T., Martidainen, P., and
Hartkainen, H. Phosphorus Removal in a Wetland Constructed on Former
Arable Land, Finland, 2003.
Mitsch, W.J. and Gosselink, J.G. Wetlands (3rd ed.), John Wiley & Sons,
New York, NY, 2000.
Paul, E.A. and Clark, F.E. Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry (2nd ed.),
Academic Press, San Diego, California, 1996.
Polprasert, C., Dan, N.P., and Thayalakumaran, N. Application of con-
structed wetlands to treat some toxic wastewaters under tropical
conditions, Water Science and Technology, 34, 165–171, 1996.
Reddy, K.R. and Patrick, W.H. Nitrogen transformations and loss in flooded
soil and sediments. Critical Review of Environment Control, 1984.
Reilly, W.K. A new way with wetlands, Journal of Soil and Water
Conservation, DeKeyser, Shawn & Region, Dakota State University,
Fargo, ND 58105, 1991.
References 137
Rose, A.H. Chemical Microbiology, Plenum Press, New York, NY, 1976.
Schmidt, I., Sliekers, O., Schmid, M., Bock, E., Fuerst, J., Gijs, J., Kuenen,
M.S.M. and Jetten, M.S. New concepts of microbial treatment processes
for the nitrogen removal in wastewater. FEMS Microbiology Review,
24(4), 481–492, 2003.
Schmidt, I., Zart, D., and Bock, E. Effects of gaseous NO2 on cells of
Nitrosomonas eutropha previously incapable of using ammonia as an
energy source, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 79, 39–47, 2001.
Sundaravadivel, M. and Vigneswaran, S. Constructed wetlands for waste-
water treatment. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and
Technology, 31(4), 351–409, 2001.
Tiedje, J.M. Ecology of Denitrification and Dissimilatory Nitrate Reduction
to Ammonium, 179–244, 1988.
US-EPA. Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment:
A Technological Assessment. EPA 832-R-93-008, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 1993.
USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual and USFWS National Wetland
Inventory; subsequently modified by the National Plant List Panel.
Whitley, J.R., Bassett, B., Dillard, J.G., and Haefner, R.A. Water Plants for
Missouri Ponds. Missouri Department Conservation, Jefferson City,
Missouri, 151, 1999.
Chapter 4
Armstrong, W., Armstrong, J., and Beckett, P.M. Measurement and model-
ing of oxygen release from roots of Phragmites australis. In: P.F. Cooper
and B.C. Findlater (Eds.), Constructed Wetlands in Water Pollution
Control, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 41–51, 1990.
Belmont, M.A., Cantellano, E., Thompson, S., Williamson, M., Sànchez, A.,
and Metcalfe, C.D. Treatment of domestic wastewater in a pilot-scale
natural treatment system in Central Mexico, Ecological Engineering, 23,
299–311, 2004.
Bojcevska, H. and Tonderski, K. Impact of loads, season, and plant species
on the performance of a tropical constructed wetland polishing effluent
from sugar factory stabilization ponds, Ecological Engineering, 29, 66–76,
2007.
138 References
Brix, H. Macrophyte-mediated oxygen transfer in wetlands: transport mech-

anisms and rates. In: Moshiri, G.A. (Ed.), Constructed Wetlands for
Water Quality Improvement, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Ann Arbor,
London, Tokyo, pp. 391–398, 1993.
Chazarenc, F., Merlin, G., and Gonthier1, Y. Hydrodynamics of horizontal
subsurface flow constructed wetlands, Ecological Engineering, 21,
165–173, 2003.
Chimney, M.J., Wenkert, L., and Pietro, K.C. Patterns of vertical stratifica-
tion in a subtropical constructed wetland in south Florida (USA),
Ecological Engineering, 27, 322–330, 2006.
Dallas, S., Scheffe, B., and Ho, G. Reedbeds for greywater treatment-case
study in Santa Elena-Monteverde, Costa Rica, Central America,
Garcia-Armisen, T., Prats, J., Marrero, Y., and Servais, P. Faecal bacterial
indicators removal in various wastewater treatment plants located in
Almendares River watershed (Cuba), Water Science and Technology,
58(4), 773–779, 2008.
Ghosh, M. and Singh, S.P. A review on phytoremediation of heavy metals
and utilization of its byproducts, Applied Ecology and Environmental
Research, 3(1), 1–18, 2005.
Greenway, M. Suitability of macrophytes for nutrient removal from surface
flow constructed wetlands receiving secondary treated effluent in
Queensland, Australia. Water Science and Technology, 48(2), 121–128,
2003.
Halabuk, A. Influence of different vegetation types on saturated hydraulic
conductivity in alluvial top soils, Biologia, Bratislava, 61/Suppl. 19,
S266–S269, 2006.
Jinadasa, K.B.S.N., Tanaka, N., Sasikala, S., Werellagama, D.R.I.B.,
Mowjood, M.I.M., and Ng, W.J. Impact of harvesting on constructed
wetlands performance — a comparison between Scirpus grossus and
Typha angustifolia, Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A,
43(6), 1–8, 2008.
Juwarkar, A., Oke, B., Juwarkar, A., and Patnaik, S.M. Domestic wastewater
treatment through constructed wetland in India, Water Science &
Technology, 32(3), 291–294, 1995.
References 139
Kantawanichkul, S., Supreeya Kladprasert, S., and Brix, H. Treatment of

high-strength wastewater in tropical vertical flow constructed wetlands
planted with Typha angustifolia and Cyperus involucratu, Ecological
Engineering, 35, 238–247, 2009.
Kipkemboi, J., Kansiime, F., and Denny, P. The response of Cyperus papyrus
(L.) and Miscanthidium violaceum (K. Schum.) Robyns to eutrophica-
tion in natural wetlands of Lake Victoria, Uganda, African Journal of
Aquatic Science, 27, 11–20, 2002.
Kivaisi, A.K. The potential for constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment
and reuse in developing countries: a review, Ecological Engineering, 16,
545–560, 2001.
Kludze, H.K. and DeLaune, R.D. Soil redox intensity effects on oxygen
exchange and growth of cattail and sawgrass, Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 60, 616–621, 1996.
Kludze, H.K., DeLaune, R.D., and Patrick, W.J. Jr. Aerenchyma formation
and methane and oxygen exchange in rice, Soil Science Society of America
Journal, 57, 386–391, 1993.
Konnerup, D., Koottatep, T., and Brix, H. Treatment of domestic waste-
water in tropical, subsurface flow constructed wetlands planted with
Canna and Heliconia, Ecological Engineering, 35, 248–257, 2009.
Koottatep, T. and Polprasert, C. Role of plant uptake on nitrogen removal
in constructed wetlands located in tropics, Water Science and Technology,
36(12), 1–8, 1997.
Koottatep, T., Surinkul, N., Polprasert, C., Kamal, A.S.M., Koné, D.,
Montangero, A., Heinss, U., and Strauss, M. Treatment of septage in
constructed wetlands in tropical climate — lessons learnt after seven
years of operation, Water Science and Technology, 51(9), 119–126,
2005.
Kreuzwieser, J., Buchcholz, J., and Rennenbergm, H. Emission of methane
and nitrous oxide by Australian mangrove ecosystems, Plant Biology, 5,
423–431, 2003.
Kurilenko, A.V., Zakhartsev, M.V., and Chelomin, V.P. In vitro effect of cop-
per ions on transbilayer distribution of aminophospholipids in
synaptosomal membrane of walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma),
Aquatic Toxicology, 58, 131–136, 2002.
140 References
Kyambadde, J., Kansiime, F., Gumaelius, L., and Gunnel Dalhammar, G. A

comparative study of Cyperus papyrus and Miscanthidium violaceum-
based constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in a tropical
climate, Water Research, 38, 475–485, 2004.
Lim, P.E., Wong, T.F., and Lim, D.V. Oxygen demand, nitrogen and copper
removal by free-water-surface and subsurface-flow constructed wetlands
under tropical conditions, Environment International, 26, 425–431,
2001.
Mitsch, W.J., Tejada, J., Nahlik, A., Kohlmann, B., Bernal,B., Carlos, E., and
Hernández, C.E. Tropical wetlands for climate change research, water
quality management and conservation education on a university campus
in Costa Rica, Ecological Engineering, 34, 276–288, 2008.
Nahlik, A., and Mitsch, W.J. Tropical treatment wetlands dominated by free-
floating macrophytes for water quality improvement in Costa Rica.
Neue, H.U., Gaunt, L.L., Wang, L.P., Becker-Heidmann, P., and Quijano, C.
Carbon in tropical wetlands, Geordema, 79, 163–185, 1997.
Perkins, J. and Hunter, C. Removal of enteric bacteria in a surface flow con-
structed wetland in Yorkshire, England. Water Research, 34, 1941–1947,
2000.
Polprasert, C. Role of plant uptake on nitrogen removal in constructed
wetlands located in the tropics, Water Science and Technology, 36, 1–8,
1997.
Reed, S.C., Middlebrooks, E.J., and Crites, R.W. Natural Systems for
Waste Management and Treatment, McGraw-Hill Inc., New York,
NY, 1988.
Sasikala, S., Tanaka, N., Wah Wah, H.S.Y., and Jinadasa, K.B.S.N. Effects of
water level fluctuation on radial oxygen loss, root porosity, and nitrogen
removal in subsurface vertical flow wetland mesocosms, Ecological
Engineering, 35, 410–417, 2009.
Sipaúba-Tavares, L.H., Barros, A.F., and Braga, F.M.S. Effect of floating
macrophyte cover on the water quality in fishpond, Biological Sciences,
25(1), 101–106, 2003.
Sohsalam, P., Englande, A.J., and Sirianuntapiboo, S. Seafood wastewater
treatment in constructed wetland: tropical case, Bioresource Technology,
99, 1218–1224, 2008.
References 141
Sorrell, B.K. and Armstrong, W. On the difficulties of measuring oxygen

release by root systems of wetland plants, Journal of Ecology, 82,
177–183, 1994.
Stott, R., Jenkins T., Bahgat M., and Shalaby, I. Capacity of constructed wet-
lands to remove parasite eggs from wastewater in Egypt, Water Science
and Technology, 117–123, 1999.
Tanaka, N., Watanabe, T., Asaeda, T., and Takemura, T. Management of
below-ground biomass of Typha angustifolia by harvesting shoots above
the water surface on different summer days, Landscape and Ecological
Engineering, 1, 113–126, 2005.
Tanner, C.C. Growth and nutrient dynamics of soft-stem bulrush in con-
structed wetlands treating nutrient-rich wastewaters, Wetlands Ecology
and Management, 9, 49–73, 2001.
www.sciencedaily.com. Tropical wetlands hold more carbon than temperate
marshes, Science Daily, 14 Oct. 2008.
Chapter 5
Bachand, P.A.M. and Horne, A.J. Denitrification in constructed free-water
surface wetlands. II. Effects of vegetation and temperature, Ecological
Engineering, 14, 17–32, 1999.
Brix, H. Do macrophytes play a role in constructed treatment wetlands?
Water Science and Technology, 35, 11–17, 1997.
Chen, S., Wang, G.T., and Xue, S.K. Modeling BOD removal in constructed
wetlands with mixing cell method, Journal of Environmental Engineering,
125(1), 64–71, 1999.
Cooper, P.F. and Green, B. Wetland treatment in the United Kingdom. In:
Vymazal J., Cooper P.F., Green M.B. and Herberl R., Blackhuys (Eds.),
Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment in Europe, Publishers,
Leiden, The Netherlands, pp. 315–335, 1998.
Economopoulou, M.A. and Tsihrintzis, V.A. Design methodology and area
sensitivity analysis of horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands,
Water Resources Managent, 17(2), 147–174, 2003.
Economopoulou, M.A. and Tsihrintzis, V.A. Design methodology of free
water surface constructed wetlands, Water Resources Management, 18,
541–565, 2004.
142 References
Jing, S.-R. and Lin, Y.-F. Seasonal effect on ammonia nitrogen removal by
constructed wetlands treating polluted river water in southern Taiwan,
Environmental Pollution, 127(2), 291–301, 2004.
Kadlec, R.H. Overview: surface flow constructed wetlands, Water Science
and Technology, 32, 1–12, 1995.
Kadlec, R.H. and Knight R.L. Treatment Wetlands, Boca Raton, CRC Press,
Florida.
Nozaily-Al, F., Alaerts, G., and Veenstra, S. Performance of duckweed-covered
sewage lagoons-I. Oxygen balance and COD removal, Water Research,
34(10), 2727–2733, 2000.
Peng, J., Wang, B., and Wang, L. Multi-stage ponds-wetlands ecosystem for
effective wastewater treatment, J Zhejiang Univ SCI., 6B(5), 346–352,
2005.
Reed, S.C., Crites, R.W., and Middlebrooks, E.J. Natural Systems for Waste
Management and Treatment (2nd ed.), McGraw-Hill, Inc, New York,
NY, 1995.
Steiner, G.R. and Freeman, R.J. Configuration and substrate design consid-
erations for constructed wetlands in wastewater treatment. In: D.A.
Hammer (Ed.), Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment, Lewis
Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp. 363–367, 1989.
Steinmann, C.R., Weinhart, S., and Melzer, A. A combined system of lagoon
and constructed wetland for an effective wastewater treatment, Water
Research, 37, 2035–2042, 2003.
Sundaravadivel, M. and Vigneswaran, S. Constructed wetlands for waste-
water treatment, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and
Technology, 31, 351–409, 2001.
Szogi, A.A., Hunt, P.G., and Humenik, F.J. Nitrogen distribution in soils of
constructed wetlands treating lagoon wastewater, Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 67, 1943–1951, 2003.
Toet, S., Logtestijn, R.S.P.V., Kampf, R., Schreijer, M., and Verhoeven,
J.T.A. The effect of hydraulic retention time on the removal of pollu-
tants from sewage treatment plant effluent in a surface-flow wetland
system, Wetlands, 25, 375–391, 2005.
US-EPA. Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment:
A Technological Assessment, EPA 832-R-93-008, United States Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, 1993.
References 143
US-EPA. Design Manual: Constructed Wetlands and Aquatic Plant Systems

for Municipal Wastewater Treatment, EPA 625-1-88-022, United States,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1998.
US-EPA. Free Water Surface Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment: A Techno-
logical Assessment, EPA 832-S-99-002, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 1999.
Vymazal, J. The use of sub-surface constructed wetlands for wastewater
treatment in the Czech Republic: 10 years experience, Ecological
Engineering, 18, 633–646, 2002.
Wieder, R.K., Tchobanoglous, G., and Tuttle, R.W.. Preliminary considera-
tions regarding constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. In:
D.A. Hammer (Ed.), Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp. 297–305, 1989.
Chapter 6
Campbell, C.S. and Ogden, M.H. Constructed Wetlands in the Sustainable
Landscape, Wiley, New York, NY, 1999.
Carty, A., Scholz, M., Heal, K., Gouriveau, F., and Mustafa, A. The universal
design, operation and maintenance guidelines for farm constructed wetlands
(FCW) in temperate climates, Bioresource Technology, 99(15), 6780–6792.
Jinadasa, K.B.S.N., Tanaka, N., Mowjood, M.I.M., and Werellagama, D.R.I.B.
Effectiveness of Scirpus grossus in treatment of domestic wastes in a con-
structed wetland, Journal of Freshwater Ecology, 21(4), 603–612, 2006.
Kadlec, R.H. and Knight, R. Treatment Wetlands, CRC Lewis Publishers,
Boca Raton, FL, 1996.
MUSIC. Wetlands software, http://www.toolkit.net.au/Tools/MUSIC
(visited 2009), eWater CRC (eWater Ltd.) Innovation Centre, University
of Canberra, Australia, 2005.
SLS 745. Part 2: 2009 Code of practice for the design of septic tanks and
associated effluent disposal systems–systems disposing to surface, sys-
tems for on-site effluent reuse and larger systems disposing to ground.
(First Revision) Sri Lanka standards Institute, 2009 Sri Lanka Standards
Institution. Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2009.
Tanaka, N., Karunarathna, A.K., and Jinadasa, K.B.S.N. Effect of coconut
coir-pith supplement on nitrogen and phosphate removal in subsurface
flow wetland microcosms, Chemistry and Ecology, 24(1), 1–8, 2008.
144 References
Tanner, C.C., Kloosterman, V.C. Guidelines for constructed wetland treat-

ment of farm dairy wastewaters in New Zealand, NIWA Science and
Technology Series, 48, 1997.
Turon, C., Comas, J., Alemany, J., Cortés, U., and Poch, M. Environmental
decision support systems: a new approach to support the operation
and maintenance of horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands,
2007.
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Constructed
Wetlands Minimum Standard, Virginia Department of Conservation
and Recreation, USA, www.dcr.virginia.gov/soil_and_water/documents/
Chapter_3–09.pdf. (visited 2008), 2001.
Chapter 7
Arias, M.E. and Brown, M.T. Feasibility of using constructed treatment wet-
lands for municipal wastewater treatment in the Bogotá Savannah,
Colombia, Ecological Engineering, 35, 1070–1078, 2009.
Brix, H. Do macrophytes play a role in constructed treatment wetlands?,
Water Science and Technology, 35(5), 11–17, 1997.
Chen, B., Chen, Z.M., Zhou, Y., Zhou, J.B., and Chen, G.Q. Emergy as
embodied energy based assessment for local sustainability of a con-
structed wetland in Beijing, Communications in Nonlinear Science and
Numerical Simulation, 14(2), 622–635, 2004.
Dallas, S., Scheffe, B. and Hob, G. Reed beds for greywater treatment-case
study in Santa Elena-Monteverde, Costa Rica, Central America,
Drizo, A., Frost, C. A., Grace, J., and Smith, K.A. Physico-chemical screen-
ing of phosphate-removing substrates for use in constructed wetland
systems, Water Research, 33(17), 3595–3602, 1999.
Gauss, M. Constructed wetlands: a promising wastewater treatment system
for small localities — experiences from Latin America. Water and
Sanitation Program, Latin America and the Caribbean (WSP-LAC),
World Bank Office, Lima, Peru, 2008.
Gunarathna, H.A.Y.R., Kapukotuwa, A.S.B., Karunarathna, A.K., and
Basnayake, B.F.A. Construction and evaluation of a low cost, waste poly-
ethylene based liner for small landfills, Proceedings of the International
References 145
Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Chennai, India,

pp. 226–233, 2007.
Hayes, D.F., Olin, T.J., Fischenich, J.C. and Palermo, M.R. Wetlands
Engineering Handbook, Wetlands Research Program, Environmental
Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS, 2000.
Huffman, R.T. Wetland habitat development with dredged material: engi-
neering and plant propagation. US Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Technical Report DS-78–16, NTIS
No. AD A073 493, 1978.
Jinadasa, PhD thesis, Saitama University, 2006.
Johannes, J.M., Koch, P.D., and Rasche, P.R.H. Estimating regional con-
struction cost differences: theory and evidence, Managerial and
Decision Economics, 6, 70–79, MA, 2006.
Nelson, M., Odum, H.T., Brown, M.T. and Alling, A. “Living off the land”:
resource efficiency of wetland wastewater treatment, Advances in Space
Research, 27(9), 1547–1556, 2001.
Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F.L., and Stensel, H.D. Wastewater Engineering —
Treatment and Reuse, McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA, 2003.
Tsagarakis, K.P., Mara, D.D. and Angelakis, A.N. Application of cost criteria
for selection of municipal wastewater treatment systems, Water, Air, &
Soil Pollution, 142(1–4), 187–210, 2003.
US-EPA. Subsurface flow constructed wetlands for waste water treatment: a
technology assessment, EPA Office of Water, Washington, D.C., EPA
832-R-93–008, 1993.
Wallace, S.D. and Knight, R.L. Small scale constructed wetland treatment
systems: feasibility, design criteria and O&M requirements. Water
Environmental Research Foundation (WERF), London, 2006.
Westholm, L.J. Substrates for phosphorus removal — potential benefits for
on-site wastewater treatment? A review, Water Research, 40, 23–36,
2006.
b1033_Index.qxd 3/21/2011 12:08 PM Page 147
INDEX
Above-ground 53, 54, 62, 66–68 Community 127, 129

Agriculture 14 Constructed wetland 26
Algal blooms 25 Contaminated water 22
Algal growths 97, 113, 114 Cost components 115, 117, 118,
Alternative liner 121, 122 126
Animal husbandry 24 Crop yields 17
Anoxic 43–46, 83 Cyperus 52, 53, 58, 62
Aquifers 19
Asia 13 Dam 19
Aspect Ratio See Length–Width Decomposition 53
ratio Degradation 15, 19
Denitrification 56
Below-ground 53, 66–68 Desiccation 33
Benefits 116, 122 Design criteria 10
Biochemical oxygen demand Detritus 33, 40
31, 41 Dissolved oxygen 49, 51, 59
Biodegradable organic 39, 74 Diversity 16
Biomass 52–54, 59, 65–68 Drainage patterns 34
Drift lines 35
Canna 52–54, 62 Dry spells 17
Cattail 49, 52, 53
Cell design 32 Earthwork cost 119, 120, 123,
Channelling See short circuiting also, cost of earthworks 120
Chemical contaminants 21 Economy 15
Chemical transformation 33 Ecosystem 24
Civil society 28 Efficient 27
Cleaner production 25 Effluent 25
Climatic change 19 Egeria densa 48
Coliform 59 El Niño 19
147
148 Index
Emergent macrophytes 47, 49, Imported 120, 121, 128

54, 65 Indigenous 15
Energy 16, 115, 127–129 Industrialization 14
Environment 13 Inlet 96–98, 100, 107, 109,
Environmental impact analysis 112–114
19 Institutions 27
Equipment 119, 120, 125 IWRM 26
Equitable use 27
Equity 27 Labor 116, 119, 123, 125–127
Eutrophication 25 Latin America 17
Evapotranspiration 49, 61 Leachate 25
Extraction rate 21 Length–Width ratio 96
Liners 33, 101, 106–108
Failure 32, 86 Livelihood 14
Farming 14 Longevity 128, 129
Fertilizers 17
Floating macrophytes 47, 48, 50, Macrophytes 33, 35, 37, 45,
51 47–66
Floods 17 Management 126, 129, 130
Flow control 95 Manual 123
Free water surface wetlands 31, Mechanized 116–118, 125, 128
74 Media 98–100, 108, 109, 111,
Freshwater 18, 19 113
Methane 54
Gaseous exchange 51 Microbial degradation 40
Green Revolution 17 Microbiological 21
Green technologies 25 Microorganisms 22, 30, 32, 39,
Groundwater 19 41, 43, 45, 46
Growth 47–49, 51–60, 63–66 Migration 15
Monoculture 16
Harvesting 53, 54, 65, 66, 68, Monsoons 19
95, 109
Health 22 Nitrification 56, 58, 59
Heavy metals 41 Nitrogen 24, 33, 42, 43, 70,
Hydraulic retention time 53 75–91
Hydric soil 33, 34 Ammonification 90
Hydrilla verticillata 48 Conversion pathways 33
Index 149
Ammonia volatilization Point source pollution 23

33 Pollutant degradation 32
Ammonification 33, 42 Pollutant loads 26
Anammox 33 Pollution 23
Denitrification 33, 43, Population 13
44 Poverty 14
Dissimilatory reduction Private sector 28
33
Microbial assimilation 33 Quality 21
Nitrification 33, 39, 43
Plant assimilation 33 Rain fed 17
Re-mineralization 33 Rainfall 17
Cycle 42 Ramsar 2, 4, 5
Cycling 90 Regional market 122, 125
Denitrification 75, 76, 78, Rhizome 59, 62, 64–66, 68
83, 88, 90, 91 Root zone 53, 56
Nitrification 75, 76, 78, 83, Runoff 18
88, 90–93 Rural 16
Non-point sources 23
Number of cells 32, 117 Sanitation 22
Nutrients 35–39, 41, 42 Scale dependency 115
Scirpus grossus 53, 60
On-site 120, 123 Sediment deposition 35, 41
Organic degradation 39 Semi-urban 116, 126
Outlet 96, 98, 99, 103, 105, Septic tanks 25
107, 109, 112–114 Sewage 24
Overhead and profit 119 Short circuiting 96
Silt traps 110, 111
Pathogen removal 39 Soils 33–35, 37, 40, 43, 44
Periodic flow 33 Bulk density 37
Persistent organic compounds 40 Cation exchange capacity 36
Pesticides 17 Fertility 37, 44
Phosphorus 25, 44, 45, 76, 78, Organic matter content 36
86, 87 Soil pH 37
Orthophosphates 44 Soil texture 36
Photosynthesis 51 Type 30, 32, 34, 40, 43
Phragmites australis 49, 53 Solar energy 115, 128
Plants 95, 102, 108–114 Solid wastes 23
150 Index
Sorption 33, 45 Water management 17

Stakeholders 27, 129 Water resources management 19
Streams 23 Water scarcity 20
Sub surface flow wetland 31 Water shortage 32
Submergent macrophytes 47, 48, Water supply 22
51 Waterbodies 23
Substrate 99, 100 Waterborne diseases 22
Substrate 31, 33, 35 Bed media Watermarks 35
31, 32, 41 Weather 19
Subsurface flow wetlands 73 Wells 19
Sulfur 45, 46 Wetland cells 32
Suspended solids 41, 73, 86 Wetland configuration
Sustainable 18 Wetland design 62
Synthetic liner 121, 122 Wetland hydrology 34
Wetland soils 37
Temperature 51–53, 57, 59, 63 Bulk density 37
Thermal cracks 105, 106 Cation exchange capacity 36,
Topography 81 102
Treatment 24 Organic matter content 36
Tropical 47–59, 61–65 Soil pH 37
Climate 3, 4, 6, 9, 10 Soil texture 36
Wetlands 1–11 Wetland treatment process 29
Tropical countries 13, 15 Wetland vegetation 37–39, 42,
Tropics 14 71
Turbidity 42 Emergent 38, 82, 83
Types of wetlands 30 Floating plants 38, 83
Typha angustifolia 48 Role 35, 38–40, 72, 73, 76
Shore line plants 38
Undesirable organic chemicals 40 Submergents 38, 83
Unit cost 115, 117, 118, Wetlands 47, 49, 51–59, 61,
121–124 62
Uptake 52, 56–58, 65 Applications 7–9, 11
Urban 116, 126 Definition 1, 2
Natural 1–7
Wastewater 23 Women 27
Water budgets 19 World Health Organization 22
WETLANDS FOR
This book provides a systematic exposition of the

design features of constructed wetlands, and their
management (in terms of siting, physical maintenance,
and operation). Only very few books {or chapters) have
been published on constructed wetlands in tropical
conditions and none are current. The selection of plant
species, managing their growth and harvesting cycles,
and the impact these have on the attenuation of organic
and inorganic pollutants, nutrients, and pathogens
would be of interest to students and practitioners of
the art working under tropical conditions. The potential
of constructed wetlands as a low-cost intervention for
developing countries in tropical regions that faced
water pollution problems, in particular, deserves to be
explored systematically.
ISBN-13 978-1-81816-397-6
ISBN-10 1-84816-297-8

www.icpress.co.uk

Wetlands For Tropical Applications

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wetlands For Tropical Applications

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S FOR

Imperial College Press

P599.9781848162976-tp.indd 1 6/7/11 11:50 AM

Imperial College Press

P599.9781848162976-tp.indd 2 6/7/11 11:50 AM

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

WETLANDS FOR TROPICAL APPLICATIONS

Desk Editor: Tjan Kwang Wei

Typeset by Stallion Press

KwangWei - Wetlands for Tropical Appls.pmd 1 6/13/2011, 11:58 AM

There is growing awareness that highly mechanized wastewater treat-

Such differences shall need to be noted since much of the literature

Chapter 2 The Tropical Environment 13

2.4 Protecting the Environment 25

Chapter 3 Pollutants and Wetland Treatment 29

Chapter 4 Wetland Plant Dynamics 47

4.1.6 Effect of harvesting in wetlands 53

Chapter 5 Design of Tropical Constructed 69

Chapter 6 Engineering the Wetlands 95

Chapter 7 Cost and Sustainability of Constructed 115

7.2 Construction Costs 118

Jagath Manatunge and W.A.U. Witharana

1.1 Definitions of Wetlands

Definition 1: Lands where saturation with water is the dominant

2 J. Manatunge and A. Witharana

Definition 2: Clean Water Act (CWA, 1972) defined wetlands as

Definition 3: The Service publication, “Classification of Wetlands

Definition 4: Lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic sys-

Definition 5: A wide range of ecosystems ranging from areas that are

Definition 6: Ramsar Convention defined wetlands as a wide variety

An Introduction to Wetlands in the Tropics 3

or temporary. Water within these areas can be static or flowing; fresh,

1.2 Geographic Distribution of Tropical Natural

4 J. Manatunge and A. Witharana

• South America: 1,200,000 km2,

According to the wetlands database (Table 1.1) of the Ramsar

An Introduction to Wetlands in the Tropics 5

Table 1.1 Distribution of Ramsar wetlands in tropics

Country Ramsar sites Area/hectares

Convention text, as well as an information sheet on Ramsar Wetlands

1.3 Adoption to the Tropical Environment

6 J. Manatunge and A. Witharana

sensitive to the hydrology of the area where it is located. Hydraulic

1.4 Constructed Wetlands in Tropical Climates

An Introduction to Wetlands in the Tropics 7

• To compensate for and help offset the rate of conversion of natu-

8 J. Manatunge and A. Witharana

Table 1.2 Examples of constructed tropical wetlands applications

Country Application Reference

Honduras Reduction of BOD and mosquito Diemont, 2006

Constructed wetlands for the four applications identified, and espe-

An Introduction to Wetlands in the Tropics 9

This need not be an unexpected situation since the constructed

10 J. Manatunge and A. Witharana

more environmentally benign in a holistic manner. Education and dis-

An Introduction to Wetlands in the Tropics 11

1.5 Examples of Applications

THE TROPICAL ENVIRONMENT

M.I.M. Mowjood and S. Sasikala

This chapter discusses some of the issues concerning societal and

2.1 Population and Food Production

14 M.I.M. Mowjood and S. Sasikala

Fig. 2.1 World population distribution by region (percentage of population is