Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Constructed wetlands for pollution control

Nature Reviews Earth & Environment volume 4, pages 218–234 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Artificial wetlands are used in over 50 countries to sustainably treat wastewater. These constructed wetlands (CWs) make use of natural biogeochemical and physical processes to remove organic matter and nutrients, while providing co-benefits such as ecosystem services and recreation. However, their performance can be variable, as local weather conditions, wastewater composition and operation can affect contaminant removal. In this Review, we discuss the global application and distribution of CWs, and factors affecting their functioning. Based on data from 335 field-scale CWs, hybrid CWs (which use two or more types of CW during water treatment) are the most effective for water-quality improvement and greenhouse gas mitigation, removing 76%, 63% and 72% of organic matter, nitrogen and phosphorus, respectively (based on the median values). Plant species, substrate selection, and environmental and hydraulic conditions affect performance, with variations in contaminant removal performance mainly related to temperature, hydraulic residence time and pollutant loading rates. Pollutant removal and long-term performance of CWs can be enhanced through strategies such as artificial aeration, cold-resistant plant selection, electron donor supplementation and clogging repair. Engineers and scientists must work together to design and manage CWs, ideally maximizing their co-benefits alongside pollution control.

Key points

  • Organic matter and nutrient removal performance, greenhouse gas emission fluxes and variables that affect these factors in constructed wetlands (CWs) are described using a global database of 2,457 water-quality observations and 129 greenhouse gas measurements extracted from 244 peer-reviewed publications.

  • Field-scale CWs were used in over 50 countries globally during 2001–2021, mainly in Europe (38.8%), Asia (32.8%), North America (14.0%) and Africa (8.1%).

  • There are clear differences in organic and nutrient removal in different types of CWs; hybrid CWs show the best median removal efficiencies for chemical oxygen demand (75.7%), ammonia-nitrogen (72.1%), total nitrogen (63.4%) and total phosphorus (71.8%), respectively.

  • Hybrid CWs have lower nitrous oxide (median fluxes 1.4 mg m−2 d−1), methane (median fluxes 91.5 mg m−2 d−1) and carbon dioxide (median fluxes 4.6 g m−2 d−1) emissions; their global warming potential is the lowest of the CW types.

  • Future CW design and management should prioritize ecosystem services while balancing water pollutant removal and socioeconomic benefits.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Development and application of constructed wetlands.
Fig. 2: Classification, configuration and characteristics of CWs.
Fig. 3: Biogeochemical mechanisms in constructed wetlands.
Fig. 4: Contaminant removal effectiveness and greenhouse gas fluxes.
Fig. 5: Strategies for treatment performance intensification.
Fig. 6: Sustainable design, operation and maintenance of CWs for water pollution control.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chung, M. G., Frank, K. A., Pokhrel, Y., Dietz, T. & Liu, J. Natural infrastructure in sustaining global urban freshwater ecosystem services. Nat. Sustain. 4, 1068–1075 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Curmi, E. et al. An integrated representation of the services provided by global water resources. J. Environ. Manage. 129, 456–462 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vörösmarty, C. J. et al. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555–561 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jones, E. R., Van Vliet, M. T., Qadir, M. & Bierkens, M. F. Country-level and gridded estimates of wastewater production, collection, treatment and reuse. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 13, 237–254 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wu, L. et al. Global diversity and biogeography of bacterial communities in wastewater treatment plants. Nat. Microbiol. 4, 1183–11195 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lu, L. et al. Wastewater treatment for carbon capture and utilization. Nat. Sustain. 1, 750–758 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. He, M. et al. Waste-derived biochar for water pollution control and sustainable development. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 3, 444–460 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wu, H. et al. A review on the sustainability of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: design and operation. Bioresour. Technol. 175, 594–601 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wu, S., Kuschk, P., Brix, H., Vymazal, J. & Dong, R. Development of constructed wetlands in performance intensifications for wastewater treatment: a nitrogen and organic matter targeted review. Water Res. 57, 40–55 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brix, H. Use of constructed wetlands in water pollution control: historical development, present status, and future perspectives. Water Sci. Technol. 30, 209–223 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang, R. et al. Can we use mine waste as substrate in constructed wetlands to intensify nutrient removal? A critical assessment of key removal mechanisms and long-term environmental risks. Water Res. 210, 118009 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang, D., Gersberg, R. M. & Keat, T. S. Constructed wetlands in China. Ecol. Eng. 35, 1367–1378 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Préau, C. et al. Habitat connectivity in agricultural landscapes improving multi-functionality of constructed wetlands as nature-based solutions. Ecol. Eng. 182, 106725 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhao, Y., Ji, B., Liu, R., Ren, B. & Wei, T. Constructed treatment wetland: glance of development and future perspectives. Water Cycle 1, 104–112 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zheng, Z., Duan, X. & Lu, S. The application research of rainwater wetland based on the Sponge City. Sci. Total Environ. 771, 144475 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Stefanakis, A. I. The role of constructed wetlands as green infrastructure for sustainable urban water management. Sustainability 11, 6981 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Knight, R., Clarke, R. Jr & Bastian, R. Surface flow (SF) treatment wetlands as a habitat for wildlife and humans. Water Sci. Technol. 44, 27–37 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Knight, R. L. Wildlife habitat and public use benefits of treatment wetlands. Water Sci. Technol. 35, 35–43 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kadlec, R. Comparison of free water and horizontal subsurface treatment wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 35, 159–174 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sundaravadivel, M. & Vigneswaran, S. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 31, 351–409 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hiley, P. D. The reality of sewage treatment using wetlands. Water Sci. Technol. 32, 329–338 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vymazal, J. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: five decades of experience. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 61–69 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Vymazal, J. Do laboratory scale experiments improve constructed wetland treatment technology? Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 12956–12957 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Crites, R. W. Design Manual: Constructed Wetlands and Aquatic Plant Systems for Municipal Wastewater Treatment (USEPA Office of Research and Development, 1988).

  25. ATV-Hinweis, H. Behandlung von häuslichen Abwasser in Pflanzenbeeten. Regelwerk Abwasser-Abfall Vol. 262 (Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Abwassertechnik, 1989).

  26. Brix, H. & Arias, C. A. Danish guidelines for small-scale constructed wetland systems for onsite treatment of domestic sewage. Water Sci. Technol. 51, 1–9 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Merz, S. K. Guidelines for Using Free Water Surface Constructed Wetlands to Treat Municipal Sewage (Queensland Department of Natural Resources, 2000).

  28. Vymazal, J. The use of hybrid constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment with special attention to nitrogen removal: a review of a recent development. Water Res. 47, 4795–4811 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Vymazal, J. The historical development of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Land 11, 174 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Afzal, M. et al. Floating treatment wetlands as a suitable option for large-scale wastewater treatment. Nat. Sustain. 2, 863–871 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Vymazal, J. Plants used in constructed wetlands with horizontal subsurface flow: a review. Hydrobiologia 674, 133–156 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vymazal, J. Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Water 2, 530–549 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Vymazal, J. Removal of nutrients in various types of constructed wetlands. Sci. Total Environ. 380, 48–65 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Vymazal, J. Horizontal sub-surface flow and hybrid constructed wetlands systems for wastewater treatment. Ecol. Eng. 25, 478–490 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Solano, M., Soriano, P. & Ciria, M. Constructed wetlands as a sustainable solution for wastewater treatment in small villages. Biosyst. Eng. 87, 109–118 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Steer, D., Fraser, L., Boddy, J. & Seibert, B. Efficiency of small constructed wetlands for subsurface treatment of single-family domestic effluent. Ecol. Eng. 18, 429–440 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Oliveira, G. A. et al. Floating treatment wetlands in domestic wastewater treatment as a decentralized sanitation alternative. Sci. Total Environ. 773, 145609 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yeh, N., Yeh, P. & Chang, Y. Artificial floating islands for environmental improvement. Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev. 47, 616–622 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Vymazal, J., Zhao, Y. & Mander, Ü. Recent research challenges in constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: a review. Ecol. Eng. 169, 106318 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Brix, H. & Schierup, H. H. The use of aquatic macrophytes in water-pollution control. Ambio 28, 100–107 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Abou-Elela, S. I., Golinielli, G., Abou-Taleb, E. M. & Hellal, M. S. Municipal wastewater treatment in horizontal and vertical flows constructed wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 61, 460–468 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wu, S., Vymazal, J. & Brix, H. Critical review: biogeochemical networking of iron in constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 7930–7944 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lee, C. G., Fletcher, T. D. & Sun, G. Nitrogen removal in constructed wetland systems. Eng. Life Sci. 9, 11–22 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tang, S. et al. Microbial coupling mechanisms of nitrogen removal in constructed wetlands: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 314, 123759 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Picek, T., Čížková, H. & Dušek, J. Greenhouse gas emissions from a constructed wetland — plants as important sources of carbon. Ecol. Eng. 31, 98–106 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wu, H. et al. Nutrient removal in constructed microcosm wetlands for treating polluted river water in northern China. Ecol. Eng. 37, 560–568 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Li, L. et al. Growth characteristics of six wetland plants and their influences on domestic wastewater treatment efficiency. Ecol. Eng. 60, 382–3392 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Yang, Y., Zhao, Y., Liu, R. & Morgan, D. Global development of various emerged substrates utilized in constructed wetlands. Bioresour. Technol. 261, 441–452 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Li, Q., Long, Z., Wang, H. & Zhang, G. Functions of constructed wetland animals in water environment protection — a critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 760, 144038 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wang, S. et al. Microbial nitrogen cycle hotspots in the plant-bed/ditch system of a constructed wetland with N2O mitigation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 6226–6236 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Meng, P., Pei, H., Hu, W., Shao, Y. & Li, Z. How to increase microbial degradation in constructed wetlands: influencing factors and improvement measures. Bioresour. Technol. 157, 316–326 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kuypers, M. M., Marchant, H. K. & Kartal, B. The microbial nitrogen-cycling network. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 16, 263–2276 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wang, H., Chang, H., Zhang, C., Feng, C. & Wu, F. Occurrence of chlorinated paraffins in a wetland ecosystem: removal and distribution in plants and sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 994–1003 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Verduzo Garibay, M., Fernández del Castillo, A., de Anda, J., Senés-Guerrero, C. & Gradilla-Hernández, M. Structure and activity of microbial communities in response to environmental, operational, and design factors in constructed wetlands. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 19, 11587–11612 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Faulwetter, J. L., Burr, M. D., Parker, A. E., Stein, O. R. & Camper, A. K. Influence of season and plant species on the abundance and diversity of sulfate reducing bacteria and ammonia oxidizing bacteria in constructed wetland microcosms. Microb. Ecol. 65, 111–127 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Saeed, T. & Sun, G. A review on nitrogen and organics removal mechanisms in subsurface flow constructed wetlands: dependency on environmental parameters, operating conditions and supporting media. J. Environ. Manage. 112, 429–448 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Vymazal, J. & Kröpfelová, L. Multistage hybrid constructed wetland for enhanced removal of nitrogen. Ecol. Eng. 84, 202–208 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Dell’Osbel, N. et al. Hybrid constructed wetlands for the treatment of urban wastewaters: increased nutrient removal and landscape potential. Ecol. Eng. 158, 106072 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Lesage, E., Rousseau, D., Meers, E., Tack, F. & De Pauw, N. Accumulation of metals in a horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland treating domestic wastewater in Flanders, Belgium. Sci. Total Environ. 380, 102–115 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Chen, C., Luo, J., Bu, C., Zhang, W. & Ma, L. Efficacy of a large-scale integrated constructed wetland for pesticide removal in tail water from a sewage treatment plant. Sci. Total Environ. 838, 156568 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Bayati, M. et al. Assessing the efficiency of constructed wetlands in removing PPCPs from treated wastewater and mitigating the ecotoxicological impacts. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 231, 113664 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Zhou, X. et al. Microplastic abundance, characteristics and removal in large-scale multi-stage constructed wetlands for effluent polishing in northern China. Chem. Eng. J. 430, 132752 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Calheiros, C. et al. Bacterial community dynamics in horizontal flow constructed wetlands with different plants for high salinity industrial wastewater polishing. Water Res. 44, 5032–5038 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Lin, G. & Lin, X. Bait input altered microbial community structure and increased greenhouse gases production in coastal wetland sediment. Water Res. 218, 118520 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Jiang, L. & Chui, T. F. M. A review of the application of constructed wetlands (CWs) and their hydraulic, water quality and biological responses to changing hydrological conditions. Ecol. Eng. 174, 106459 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Choi, H., Geronimo, F. K., Jeon, M. & Kim, L. H. Evaluation of bacterial community in constructed wetlands treating different sources of wastewater. Ecol. Eng. 182, 106703 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhou, T., Liu, J., Lie, Z. & Lai, D. Effects of applying different carbon substrates on nutrient removal and greenhouse gas emissions by constructed wetlands treating carbon-depleted hydroponic wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 357, 127312 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zhang, J. et al. Enhancement of surface flow constructed wetlands performance at low temperature through seasonal plant collocation. Bioresour. Technol. 224, 222–228 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Feng, L. et al. A novel plant-girdling study in constructed wetland microcosms: insight into the role of plants in oxygen and greenhouse gas transport. Chem. Eng. J. 431, 133911 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Reeder, B. C. Assessing constructed wetland functional success using diel changes in dissolved oxygen, pH, and temperature in submerged, emergent, and open-water habitats in the Beaver Creek Wetlands Complex, Kentucky (USA). Ecol. Eng. 37, 1772–1778 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Greenaway, M. & Woolley, A. Changes in plant biomass and nutrient removal over 3 years in a constructed wetland in Cairns, Australia. Water Sci. Technol. 44, 303–310 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Vymazal, J. Emergent plants used in free water surface constructed wetlands: a review. Ecol. Eng. 61, 582–592 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Ji, M. et al. New insights for enhancing the performance of constructed wetlands at low temperatures. Bioresour. Technol. 301, 122722 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Saeed, T. & Sun, G. A comparative study on the removal of nutrients and organic matter in wetland reactors employing organic media. Chem. Eng. J. 171, 439–447 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Zhang, N. et al. Impact analysis of hydraulic loading rate on constructed wetland: Insight into the response of bulk substrate and root-associated microbiota. Water Res. 216, 118337 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Maltais-Landry, G., Chazarenc, F., Comeau, Y., Troesch, S. & Brisson, J. Effects of artificial aeration, macrophyte species, and loading rate on removal efficiency in constructed wetland mesocosms treating fish farm wastewater. J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 6, 409–414 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Maucieri, C., Barbera, A. C., Vymazal, J. & Borin, M. A review on the main affecting factors of greenhouse gases emission in constructed wetlands. Agr. For. Meteorol. 236, 175–193 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Datry, T. et al. A global analysis of terrestrial plant litter dynamics in non-perennial waterways. Nat. Geosci. 11, 497–503 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Helfter, C. et al. Phenology is the dominant control of methane emissions in a tropical non-forested wetland. Nat. Commun. 13, 133 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Colliver, B. & Stephenson, T. Production of nitrogen oxide and dinitrogen oxide by autotrophic nitrifiers. Biotechnol. Adv. 18, 219–232 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Malyan, S. K. et al. Methane production, oxidation and mitigation: a mechanistic understanding and comprehensive evaluation of influencing factors. Sci. Total Environ. 572, 874–896 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Mander, Ü., Maddison, M., Soosaar, K. & Karabelnik, K. The impact of pulsing hydrology and fluctuating water table on greenhouse gas emissions from constructed wetlands. Wetlands 31, 1023–1032 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Mander, Ü. et al. Gaseous fluxes from subsurface flow constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. J. Environ. Sci. Health 40, 1215–1226 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Pan, T., Zhu, X. & Ye, Y. Estimate of life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from a vertical subsurface flow constructed wetland and conventional wastewater treatment plants: a case study in China. Ecol. Eng. 37, 248–254 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Søvik, A. & Kløve, B. Emission of N2O and CH4 from a constructed wetland in southeastern Norway. Sci. Total. Environ. 380, 28–37 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Maltais-Landry, G., Maranger, R. & Brisson, J. Effect of artificial aeration and macrophyte species on nitrogen cycling and gas flux in constructed wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 35, 221–229 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. De Klein, J. J. & van der Werf, A. K. Balancing carbon sequestration and GHG emissions in a constructed wetland. Ecol. Eng. 66, 36–42 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Mander, Ü. et al. Greenhouse gas emission in constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: a review. Ecol. Eng. 66, 19–35 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Wu, H., Fan, J., Zhang, J., Ngo, H. H. & Guo, W. Large-scale multi-stage constructed wetlands for secondary effluents treatment in northern China: carbon dynamics. Environ. Poll. 233, 933–942 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Mitsch, W. J. et al. Wetlands, carbon, and climate change. Landsc. Ecol. 28, 583–597 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Sun, H., Xin, Q., Ma, Z. & Lan, S. Effects of plant diversity on carbon dioxide emissions and carbon removal in laboratory-scale constructed wetland. Environ. Sci. Poll. Res. 26, 5076–5082 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Søvik, A. et al. Emission of the greenhouse gases nitrous oxide and methane from constructed wetlands in Europe. J. Environ. Qual. 35, 2360–2373 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Mander, Ü. et al. Gaseous fluxes in the nitrogen and carbon budgets of subsurface flow constructed wetlands. Sci. Total Environ. 404, 343–353 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Maltais-Landry, G., Maranger, R., Brisson, J. & Chazarenc, F. Nitrogen transformations and retention in planted and artificially aerated constructed wetlands. Water Res. 43, 535–545 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Mehring, A. S., Cook, P. L., Evrard, V., Grant, S. B. & Levin, L. A. Pollution‐tolerant invertebrates enhance greenhouse gas flux in urban wetlands. Ecol. Appl. 27, 1852–1861 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Kayranli, B., Scholz, M., Mustafa, A. & Hedmark, Å. Carbon storage and fluxes within freshwater wetlands: a critical review. Wetlands 30, 111–124 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Maucieri, C., Salvato, M., Tamiazzo, J. & Borin, M. Biomass production and soil organic carbon accumulation in a free water surface constructed wetland treating agricultural wastewater in North Eastern Italy. Ecol. Eng. 70, 422–428 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Zhao, Y., Liu, R., Zhao, J., Xu, L. & Sibille, C. A fancy eco-compatible wastewater treatment system: green bio-sorption reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 234, 224–232 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Zhou, X., Wang, X., Zhang, H. & Wu, H. Enhanced nitrogen removal of low C/N domestic wastewater using a biochar-amended aerated vertical flow constructed wetland. Bioresour. Technol. 241, 269–275 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Nivala, J. et al. Oxygen transfer and consumption in subsurface flow treatment wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 61, 544–554 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Wu, H. et al. Intensified organics and nitrogen removal in the intermittent-aerated constructed wetland using a novel sludge-ceramsite as substrate. Bioresour. Technol. 210, 101–107 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Nivala, J., Murphy, C. & Freeman, A. Recent advances in the application, design, and operations & maintenance of aerated treatment wetlands. Water 12, 1188 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Park, J. B., Sukias, J. P. & Tanner, C. C. Floating treatment wetlands supplemented with aeration and biofilm attachment surfaces for efficient domestic wastewater treatment. Ecol. Eng. 139, 105582 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Austin, D., Vazquez-Burney, R., Dyke, G. & King, T. Nitrification and total nitrogen removal in a super-oxygenated wetland. Sci. Total Environ. 652, 307–313 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Hu, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhao, X. & Kumar, J. L. High rate nitrogen removal in an alum sludge-based intermittent aeration constructed wetland. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 4583–4590 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Fan, J. et al. Intermittent aeration strategy to enhance organics and nitrogen removal in subsurface flow constructed wetlands. Bioresour. Technol. 141, 117–122 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Liu, X. et al. Intermittent micro-aeration control of methane emissions from an integrated vertical-flow constructed wetland during agricultural domestic wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Poll. Res. 25, 24426–24444 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Zhou, X. et al. Simultaneous enhancement of nitrogen removal and nitrous oxide reduction by a saturated biochar-based intermittent aeration vertical flow constructed wetland: effects of influent strength. Chem. Eng. J. 334, 1842–1850 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Zhang, X. et al. Simultaneous improvement of waste gas purification and nitrogen removal using a novel aerated vertical flow constructed wetland. Water Res. 130, 79–87 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Zhang, M. et al. Salinity-driven nitrogen removal and its quantitative molecular mechanisms in artificial tidal wetlands. Water Res. 202, 117446 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Pang, Y., Zhang, Y., Yan, X. & Ji, G. Cold temperature effects on long-term nitrogen transformation pathway in a tidal flow constructed wetland. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 13550–13557 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Green, M., Friedler, E., Ruskol, Y. & Safrai, I. Investigation of alternative method for nitrification in constructed wetlands. Water Sci. Technol. 35, 63–70 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Zhao, Y., Sun, G. & Allen, S. Anti-sized reed bed system for animal wastewater treatment: a comparative study. Water Res. 38, 2907–2917 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Wu, S., Zhang, D., Austin, D., Dong, R. & Pang, C. Evaluation of a lab-scale tidal flow constructed wetland performance: oxygen transfer capacity, organic matter and ammonium removal. Ecol. Eng. 37, 1789–1795 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Chang, Y. et al. Dynamics of nitrogen transformation depending on different operational strategies in laboratory-scale tidal flow constructed wetlands. Sci. Total Environ. 487, 49–56 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Austin, D. & Nivala, J. Energy requirements for nitrification and biological nitrogen removal in engineered wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 35, 184–192 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Nuamah, L. A. et al. Constructed wetlands, status, progress, and challenges. The need for critical operational reassessment for a cleaner productive ecosystem. J. Clean. Prod. 269, 122340 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Songliu, L., Hongying, H., Yingxue, S. & Jia, Y. Effect of carbon source on the denitrification in constructed wetlands. J. Environ. Sci. 21, 1036–1043 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Yin, H., Yan, X. & Gu, X. Evaluation of thermally-modified calcium-rich attapulgite as a low-cost substrate for rapid phosphorus removal in constructed wetlands. Water Res. 115, 329–338 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Jia, L. et al. Exploring utilization of recycled agricultural biomass in constructed wetlands: characterization of the driving force for high-rate nitrogen removal. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 1258–1268 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Bruun, J., Pugliese, L., Hoffmann, C. C. & Kjaergaard, C. Solute transport and nitrate removal in full-scale subsurface flow constructed wetlands of various designs treating agricultural drainage water. Ecol. Eng. 97, 88–97 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Wu, S. & Wu, H. Incorporating biochar into wastewater eco-treatment systems: popularity, reality, and complexity. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 3345–3346 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Nguyen, X. C. et al. Combined biochar vertical flow and free-water surface constructed wetland system for dormitory sewage treatment and reuse. Sci. Total Environ. 713, 136404 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Guo, F. et al. Impact of biochar on greenhouse gas emissions from constructed wetlands under various influent chemical oxygen demand to nitrogen ratios. Bioresour. Technol. 303, 122908 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Xie, H. et al. Enhanced triclosan and nutrient removal performance in vertical up-flow constructed wetlands with manganese oxides. Water Res. 143, 457–466 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Wang, H. et al. Element sulfur-based autotrophic denitrification constructed wetland as an efficient approach for nitrogen removal from low C/N wastewater. Water Res. 226, 119258 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Wang, D., Lin, H., Ma, Q., Bai, Y. & Qu, J. Manganese oxides in Phragmites rhizosphere accelerates ammonia oxidation in constructed wetlands. Water Res. 205, 117688 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Jia, L. et al. Interactions of high-rate nitrate reduction and heavy metal mitigation in iron-carbon-based constructed wetlands for purifying contaminated groundwater. Water Res. 169, 115285 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Ge, Z. et al. Natural pyrite to enhance simultaneous long-term nitrogen and phosphorus removal in constructed wetland: three years of pilot study. Water Res. 148, 153–161 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Yan, J. et al. Simultaneous enhancement of treatment performance and energy recovery using pyrite as anodic filling material in constructed wetland coupled with microbial fuel cells. Water Res. 201, 117333 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Siggins, A., Enright, A. M. & O’Flaherty, V. Low-temperature (7 °C) anaerobic treatment of a trichloroethylene-contaminated wastewater: microbial community development. Water Res. 45, 4035–4046 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Du, L. et al. Enhancement of microbial nitrogen removal pathway by vegetation in integrated vertical-flow constructed wetlands (IVCWs) for treating reclaimed water. Bioresour. Technol. 249, 644–651 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Zhou, Q. et al. Impacts of vegetation and temperature on the treatment of domestic sewage in constructed wetlands incorporated with ferric-carbon micro-electrolysis material. Int. J. Phytoremediat. 19, 915–924 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Ji, B. et al. Can subsurface flow constructed wetlands be applied in cold climate regions? A review of the current knowledge. Ecol. Eng. 157, 105992 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Kataki, S., Chatterjee, S., Vairale, M. G., Dwivedi, S. K. & Gupta, D. K. Constructed wetland, an eco-technology for wastewater treatment: a review on types of wastewater treated and components of the technology (macrophyte, biolfilm and substrate). J. Environ. Manage. 283, 111986 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Yan, Y. & Xu, J. Improving winter performance of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in northern China: a review. Wetlands 34, 243–253 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Yates, C. N., Varickanickal, J., Cousins, S. & Wootton, B. Testing the ability to enhance nitrogen removal at cold temperatures with C. aquatilis in a horizontal subsurface flow wetland system. Ecol. Eng. 94, 344–351 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Fan, J., Zhang, J., Ngo, H. H., Guo, W. & Yin, X. Improving low-temperature performance of surface flow constructed wetlands using Potamogeton crispus L. plant. Bioresour. Technol. 218, 1257–1260 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Ying, G., Xing, Y., Li, Z., Pan, J. & Kuang, X. Advantages of psychrophiles in improving bio‐treatment efficiency of small size constructed wetlands during cold weather. Environ. Pro. Sustain. 29, 25–33 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Kang, Y. et al. Enhancement of the performance of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in winter: the effect of Tubifex tubifex. RSC Adv. 6, 34841–34848 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  141. Varma, M., Gupta, A. K., Ghosal, P. S. & Majumder, A. A review on performance of constructed wetlands in tropical and cold climate: insights of mechanism, role of influencing factors, and system modification in low temperature. Sci. Total Environ. 755, 142540 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. Wallace, S., Parkin, G. & Cross, C. Cold climate wetlands: design and performance. Water Sci. Technol. 44, 259–265 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Ayaz, S., Aktaş, Ö., Fındık, N., Akça, L. & Kınacı, C. Effect of recirculation on nitrogen removal in a hybrid constructed wetland system. Ecol. Eng. 40, 1–5 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. Ouellet-Plamondon, C., Chazarenc, F., Comeau, Y. & Brisson, J. Artificial aeration to increase pollutant removal efficiency of constructed wetlands in cold climate. Ecol. Eng. 27, 258–264 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. Tan, X., Yang, Y., Li, X., Gao, Y. & Fan, X. Multi-metabolism regulation insights into nutrients removal performance with adding heterotrophic nitrification-aerobic denitrification bacteria in tidal flow constructed wetlands. Sci. Total Environ. 796, 149023 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Fang, Y. et al. Fifteen-year analysis of constructed wetland clogging: a critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 365, 132755 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Winter, K. J. & Goetz, D. The impact of sewage composition on the soil clogging phenomena of vertical flow constructed wetlands. Water Sci. Technol. 48, 9–14 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Cooper, D., Griffin, P. & Cooper, P. Factors affecting the longevity of sub-surface horizontal flow systems operating as tertiary treatment for sewage effluent. Water Sci. Technol. 51, 127–135 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Pedescoll, A. et al. Practical method based on saturated hydraulic conductivity used to assess clogging in subsurface flow constructed wetlands. Eco. Eng. 35, 1216–1224 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. Nivala, J. & Rousseau, D. P. Reversing clogging in subsurface-flow constructed wetlands by hydrogen peroxide treatment: two case studies. Water Sci. Technol. 59, 2037–2046 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Wang, H., Sheng, L. & Xu, J. Clogging mechanisms of constructed wetlands: a critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 295, 126455 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  152. De Matos, M. P., Von Sperling, M. & de Matos, A. T. Clogging in horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands: influencing factors, research methods and remediation techniques. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol 17, 87–107 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  153. Hu, Z., Chu, Y. & Ma, Y. Design of a combined constructed wetland system and its application on swine wastewater treatment. J. Environ. Eng. 146, 04019093 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  154. Álvarez, J., Ruíz, I. & Soto, M. Anaerobic digesters as a pretreatment for constructed wetlands. Ecol. Eng. 33, 54–67 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  155. Zhong, H., Hu, N., Wang, Q., Chen, Y. & Huang, L. How to select substrate for alleviating clogging in the subsurface flow constructed wetland? Sci. Total Environ. 828, 154529 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  156. Tatoulis, T., Akratos, C. S., Tekerlekopoulou, A. G., Vayenas, D. V. & Stefanakis, A. I. A novel horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland: reducing area requirements and clogging risk. Chemosphere 186, 257–268 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  157. Wang, Z., Dong, J., Liu, L., Zhu, G. & Liu, C. Screening of phosphate-removing substrates for use in constructed wetlands treating swine wastewater. Ecol. Eng. 54, 57–65 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  158. Yang, Y. et al. Can phosphorus adsorption clog an alum sludge‐based biofiltration system? Evidence and insight. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 96, 180–187 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Xu, D., Li, Y., Howard, A. & Guan, Y. Effect of earthworm Eisenia fetida and wetland plants on nitrification and denitrification potentials in vertical flow constructed wetland. Chemosphere 92, 201–206 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  160. Lavrnić, S. et al. Effect of earthworms and plants on the efficiency of vertical flow systems treating university wastewater. Environ. Sci. Poll. Res. 26, 10354–10362 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  161. Li, H., Wang, S., Ye, J., Xu, Z. & Jin, W. A practical method for the restoration of clogged rural vertical subsurface flow constructed wetlands for domestic wastewater treatment using earthworm. Water Sci. Technol. 63, 283–290 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  162. Nuengjamnong, C., Chiarawatchai, N., Polprasert, C. & Otterpohl, R. Treating swine wastewater by integrating earthworms into constructed wetlands. J. Environ. Sci. Health A 46, 800–804 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  163. Hua, G., Zhu, W. & Zhang, Y. A conceptual approach based on suspended solids to estimate clogging time in constructed wetlands. J. Environ. Sci. Health A 45, 1519–1525 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. Liu, H., Cheng, C. & Wu, H. Sustainable utilization of wetland biomass for activated carbon production: a review on recent advances in modification and activation methods. Sci. Total Environ. 790, 148214 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Zhu, J. et al. Variation in the efficiency of nutrient removal in a pilot-scale natural wetland. Wetlands 32, 311–319 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Russell, R. C. Constructed wetlands and mosquitoes: health hazards and management options — an Australian perspective. Ecol. Eng. 12, 107–124 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  167. Verhofstad, M., Poelen, M. V., Van Kempen, M., Bakker, E. & Smolders, A. Finding the harvesting frequency to maximize nutrient removal in a constructed wetland dominated by submerged aquatic plants. Ecol. Eng. 106, 423–430 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  168. Mulkeen, C., Williams, C., Gormally, M. & Healy, M. Seasonal patterns of metals and nutrients in Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steudel in a constructed wetland in the west of Ireland. Ecol. Eng. 107, 192–197 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  169. Kasak, K. et al. Experimental harvesting of wetland plants to evaluate trade-offs between reducing methane emissions and removing nutrients accumulated to the biomass in constructed wetlands. Sci. Total Environ. 715, 136960 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  170. Cui, X., Hao, H., He, Z., Stoffella, P. J. & Yang, X. Pyrolysis of wetland biomass waste: potential for carbon sequestration and water remediation. J. Environ. Manage. 173, 95–104 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Rodriguez-Dominguez, M., Bonefeld, B., Ambye-Jensen, M., Brix, H. & Arias, C. The use of treatment wetlands plants for protein and cellulose valorization in biorefinery platform. Sci. Total Environ. 810, 152376 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  172. Liu, D. et al. Constructed wetlands as biofuel production systems. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 190–194 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  173. Ciria, M., Solano, M. & Soriano, P. Role of macrophyte Typha latifolia in a constructed wetland for wastewater treatment and assessment of its potential as a biomass fuel. Biosyste. Eng. 92, 535–544 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  174. Guo, Z. et al. Optimization of the green and low-cost ammoniation-activation method to produce biomass-based activated carbon for Ni(ii) removal from aqueous solutions. J. Clean. Prod. 159, 38–46 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  175. Li, J., Fan, J., Zhang, J., Hu, Z. & Liang, S. Preparation and evaluation of wetland plant-based biochar for nitrogen removal enhancement in surface flow constructed wetlands. Environ. Sci. Poll. Res. 25, 13929–13937 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  176. Zhang, H. et al. A review on China’s constructed wetlands in recent three decades: application and practice. J. Environ. Sci. 104, 53–68 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  177. Castellar, J. A. et al. Nature-based solutions coupled with advanced technologies: an opportunity for decentralized water reuse in cities. J. Clean. Prod. 340, 130660 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. Matamoros, V., García, J. & Bayona, J. M. Organic micropollutant removal in a full-scale surface flow constructed wetland fed with secondary effluent. Water Res. 42, 653–660 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. Yin, T. et al. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances removal in a full-scale tropical constructed wetland system treating landfill leachate. Water Res. 125, 418–426 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  180. Pi, J., Zhu, G., Gong, T. & Lu, Y. Dissolved organic matter derived from aquatic plants in constructed wetlands: characteristics and disinfection byproducts formation. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 10, 107991 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  181. Gao, T., Wang, X. C., Chen, R., Ngo, H. H. & Guo, W. Disability adjusted life year (DALY): a useful tool for quantitative assessment of environmental pollution. Sci. Total Environ. 511, 268–287 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  182. Lin, X. et al. Occurrence and risk assessment of emerging contaminants in a water reclamation and ecological reuse project. Sci. Total Environ. 744, 140977 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  183. Xu, L., Yu, W., Graham, N., Zhao, Y. & Qu, J. Application of integrated bioelectrochemical-wetland systems for future sustainable wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 1741–1743 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  184. Kivaisi, A. K. The potential for constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment and reuse in developing countries: a review. Ecol. Eng. 16, 545–560 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  185. Kadlec, R. H. & Wallace, S. Treatment Wetlands (CRC, 2008).

  186. Zhang, C. et al. Can constructed wetlands be wildlife refuges? A review of their potential biodiversity conservation value. Sustainability 12, 1442 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  187. De Martis, G., Mulas, B., Malavasi, V. & Marignani, M. Can artificial ecosystems enhance local biodiversity? The case of a constructed wetland in a Mediterranean urban context. Environ. Manage. 57, 1088–1097 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was carried out with the support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 51925803), National Key Research and Development Program of China (no. 2021YFC3200602), Shandong Province Natural Science Foundation (ZR2021YQ36), QiLu Young Scholar Start-up Foundation of Shandong University and Young Taishan Scholars Program of Shandong Province (no. 202103017).

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Haiming Wu, Ruigang Wang, Peihao Yan.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Environmental Science & Engineering, Shandong University, Qingdao, China

    Haiming Wu, Ruigang Wang, Peihao Yan, Zhen Hu, Linlan Zhuang, Zizhang Guo & Jian Zhang

  2. Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University, Tjele, Denmark

    Shubiao Wu

  3. Department of Applied Ecology, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Praha, Czech Republic

    Zhongbing Chen

  4. State Key Laboratory of Eco-Hydraulics in Northwest Arid Region, Xi’an University of Technology, Xi’an, China

    Yaqian Zhao

  5. College of Environment and Ecology, Chongqing University, Chongqing, China

    Cheng Cheng

  6. Environment Research Institute, Shandong University, Qingdao, China

    Huijun Xie

Authors
  1. Haiming Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruigang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peihao Yan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shubiao Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhongbing Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yaqian Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Cheng Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Zhen Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Linlan Zhuang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Zizhang Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Huijun Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Jian Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to writing and editing the manuscript. H.W. led the overall conceptual design and activity. H.W., P.Y. and R.W. researched data for this Review. S.W., Z.C., Y.Z. and Z.G. made a substantial contribution to the discussion of content. L.Z., Z.H., C.C., H.X. and J.Z. reviewed and edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haiming Wu.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Earth & Environment thanks J. Chang and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, H., Wang, R., Yan, P. et al. Constructed wetlands for pollution control. Nat Rev Earth Environ 4, 218–234 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00395-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00395-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing