↓ Skip to main content

A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic…

Overview of attention for article published in Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A comparative study of anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor for biological removal of diethyl phthalate from wastewater: a performance, kinetic, biogas, and metabolic pathway study
Published in
Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13068-017-0826-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samira Yousefzadeh, Ehsan Ahmadi, Mitra Gholami, Hamid Reza Ghaffari, Ali Azari, Mohsen Ansari, Mohammad Miri, Kiomars Sharafi, Soheila Rezaei

Abstract

Phthalic acid esters, including diethyl phthalate (DEP), which are considered as top-priority and hazardous pollutants, have received significant attention over the last decades. It is vital for industries to select the best treatment technology, especially when the DEP concentration in wastewater is high. Meanwhile, anaerobic biofilm-based reactors are considered as a promising option. Therefore, in the present study, for the biological removal of DEP from synthetic wastewater, two different anaerobic biofilm-based reactors, including anaerobic fixed film baffled reactor (AnFFBR) and up-flow anaerobic fixed film fixed bed reactor (UAnFFFBR), were compared from kinetic and performance standpoints. As in the previous studies, only the kinetic coefficients have been calculated and the relationship between kinetic coefficients and their interpretation has not been evaluated, the other aim of the present study was to fill this research gap. In optimum conditions, 90.31 and 86.91% of COD as well as 91.11 and 88.72% of DEP removal were achieved for the AnFFBR and UAnFFFBR, respectively. According to kinetic coefficients (except biomass yield), the AnFFBR had better performance as it provided a more favorable condition for microbial growth. The Grau model was selected as the best mathematical model for designing and predicting the bioreactors' performance due to its high coefficients of determination (0.97 < R(2)). With regard to the insignificant variations of the calculated Grau kinetic coefficients (KG) when the organic loading rate (with constant HRT) increased, it can be concluded that both of the bioreactors can tolerate high organic loading rate and their performance is not affected by the applied DEP concentrations. Both the bioreactors were capable of treating low-to-high strength DEP wastewater; however, according to the experimental results and obtained kinetic coefficients, the AnFFBR indicated higher performance. Although the AnFFBR can be considered as a safer treatment option than the UAnFFFBR due to its lower DEP concentrations in sludge, the UAnFFFBR had lower VSS/TSS ratio and sludge yield, which could make it more practical for digestion. Finally, both the bioreactors showed considerable methane yield; however, compared to the UAnFFFBR, the AnFFBR had more potential for bioenergy production. Although both the selected bioreactors achieved nearly 90% of DEP removal, they can only be considered as pre-treatment methods according to the standard regulations and should be coupled with further technology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Researcher 6 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 17 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 23 32%
Engineering 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Chemical Engineering 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 20 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts
#1,416
of 1,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,981
of 330,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts
#62
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,578 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.