respectively, and TP (efficiency of 94.5%).
Although the concentration of nutrients varied greatly, primarily because
of the raw manure variations and rain fluctuations that occurred during the
experimental period, the efficiency remained high.
The median values and standard deviation obtained during the experimental
period can be observed in Table 3 and Fig. 2.
Most of the TKN load applied to the serial duckweed ponds was
removed after one year.
Moreover, approximately 260 kg of nitrogen was recovered from the water (Table 4). However, it is necessary to express the applied load in terms of the application
rate to compare the results with other authors.
In this way, the TKN surface application rate was approximately 46 kg/haday,
and the removal rate was 43.7 kg/haday or 4.4 g/m2day (Table 5).
Cheng et al.(2002a) reported the highest removal rates in their investigation
of the nitrogen removal from swine waste by Lemna minor; they
found removal rates of 3.4 g TKN/m2day (in vitro experiment) and
respectively, and TP (efficiency of 94.5%). Although the concentration of nutrients varied greatly, primarily because of the raw manure variations and rain fluctuations that occurred during theexperimental period, the efficiency remained high. The median values and standard deviation obtained during the experimental period can be observed in Table 3 and Fig. 2.Most of the TKN load applied to the serial duckweed ponds wasremoved after one year.Moreover, approximately 260 kg of nitrogen was recovered from the water (Table 4). However, it is necessary to express the applied load in terms of the application rate to compare the results with other authors. In this way, the TKN surface application rate was approximately 46 kg/haday, and the removal rate was 43.7 kg/haday or 4.4 g/m2day (Table 5). Cheng et al.(2002a) reported the highest removal rates in their investigationof the nitrogen removal from swine waste by Lemna minor; theyfound removal rates of 3.4 g TKN/m2day (in vitro experiment) and
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..