Role of Wetland Plants and Use of Ornamental Flowering Plants in Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment: A Review

The vegetation in constructed wetlands (CWs) plays an important role in wastewater treatment. Popularly, the common emergent plants in CWs have been vegetation of natural wetlands. However, there are ornamental flowering plants that have some physiological characteristics similar to the plants of natural wetlands that can stimulate the removal of pollutants in wastewater treatments; such importance in CWs is described here. A literature survey of 87 CWs from 21 countries showed that the four most commonly used flowering ornamental vegetation genera were Canna, Iris, Heliconia and Zantedeschia. In terms of geographical location, Canna spp. is commonly found in Asia, Zantedeschia spp. is frequent in Mexico (a country in North America), Iris is most commonly used in Asia, Europe and North America, and species of the Heliconia genus are commonly used in Asia and parts of the Americas (Mexico, Central and South America). This review also compares the use of ornamental plants versus natural wetland plants and systems without plants for removing pollutants (organic matter, nitrogen, nitrogen and phosphorous compounds). The removal efficiency was similar between flowering ornamental and natural wetland plants. However, pollutant removal was better when using ornamental plants than in unplanted CWs. The use of ornamental flowering plants in CWs is an excellent option, and efforts should be made to increase the adoption of these system types and use them in domiciliary, rural and urban areas

Evaluation of Wastewater Treatment by Microcosms of Vertical Subsurface Wetlands in Partially Saturated Conditions Planted with Ornamental Plants and Filled with Mineral and Plastic Substrates

The current knowledge about the role terrestrial ornamental plants play in constructed wetlands (CWs) has scarcely been evaluated. Likewise, little attention has been given towards the use of new support or fill media for subsurface flow CWs, which may result in the reduction of costs when implemented on a large scale. This study evaluated, during nine months, the effect of three terrestrial ornamental plants and two substrates on the elimination of pollutants in wastewaters by using fill-and-drain vertical subsurface flow CWs (FD-CWs). Sixteen microcosms were used, nine filled with polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and nine with porous river stone (PRS). For each type of substrate, duplicates of microcosms were used, utilizing Anthurium sp., Zantedeschia aethiopica, and Spathiphyllum wallisii as vegetation and two other CWs without vegetation as controls. The environmental conditions, number of flowers, and height of the plants were registered. The results revealed that both substrates in the FD-CWs were efficient in removing pollutants. The average removal of pollutants in systems with vegetation revealed a positive effect on the reduction of the biochemical oxygen demand (55–70%), nitrates (28–44%), phosphates (25–45%), and fecal coliforms (52–65%). Meanwhile, in units without vegetation, the reduction of pollutants was nearly 40–50% less than in those with vegetation. The use of PET as a filling substrate in CWs did not affect the growth and/or the flowering of the species; therefore, its use combined with the species studied in CWs may be replicated in villages with similar wastewater problems. This may represent a reduction in implementation costs when utilizing PET recycled wastes and PRS as substrates in these systems in comparison with the typical substrates used in CWs. More studies are needed to better understand the interactions among these novel support media and the commercial terrestrial ornamental plants

Environmental, Economic, and Social Potentialities of Ornamental Vegetation Cultivated in Constructed Wetlands of Mexico

Sustainable development implies the proper use of natural resources, such as water resources, but the environmental, economic, and social benefits should also be considered. In the water sector, for example, sanitation is one of the challenges that arise in rural localities. However, issues related to it may be solved with the use of constructed wetlands (CWs), which may allow the cultivation of ornamental plants with phytoremediation properties. Through a content analysis, the environmental, economic, and social potential of ornamental species used in Mexico for phytoremediation in CWs is documented in this study. The environmental potential of the plants was considered based on their phytoremediation properties. The economic potential was determined from research articles and from the National Agri-Food Information System. The social potential was analyzed considering the ornamental and artisanal use of the plants. In total, 21 species of phytoremediation plants were identified. Anthurium andreanum and Zantedeschia aethiopica stand out for their commercial value, reported in 2018 to be 272,875 and 30,318 USD, respectively, at the national level. The social potential was identified by the ornamental or artisanal use for flower arrangements and weaving. This study reveals that the use of CWs with ornamental vegetation is a sustainable option to clean wastewater, reuse water, and generate economic incentives. Thus, it is essential to provide the community with adequate training for the management of CWs in those sites that lack treatment systems

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health