A pilot scale trickling filter system was designed, developed, and operated using a constant recirculation method for treatment of municipal wastewater. Maize cob (TF1) and date palm fibre (TF2) were used as biofilm support media in a trickling filter system. Both the TF1 and TF2 were compared based on the removal efficiency of pollution indicators such as biological oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids (TSS), electrical conductivity (EC), total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP) and sulphates. The hydraulic flow rate and loading were set as 0.432 m3/h and 0.0064 m3/m2.minute, respectively at temperature range of 15–42 °C for 15 operational weeks. Both the TF1 and TF2 showed acceptable removal efficiency (61% to 76.3%) for pathogen indicators such as total count, fecal coliforms and Escherichia coli. However, 8–15% higher removal efficiency was observed for TF1 for all the pollution indicators compared to TF2. The results suggest that both the biofilm support media in trickling filter have potential to treat municipal wastewater in peri-urban small communities to produce environmentally friendly effluent.

  • Agricultural waste-based biofilm support media.

  • Removal of carbonaceous and nitrogenous contaminants.

  • Log reduction of pathogen indicators.

  • Maize cob media is more efficient than date palm fiber.

Rapid urbanization, industrialization and extensive agricultural activities are exerting colossal pressure on the water quality status of Pakistan due to increased wastewater disposal and reuse (Noreen et al. 2017; Wu et al. 2018). The existence of combined sewers for domestic and industrial effluents is also increasing the multifarious water pollution. It is estimated that 7.5708 × 106 m3 of wastewater is being disposed of to receiving water bodies every day in Pakistan (Ali et al. 2017; Khan et al. 2019). This has increased the pollution in the water environment and impacted ecological health including humans, aquatic biota, animals, and agriculture. So, it becomes essential for planners to treat wastewater before disposal or reuse. Wastewater treatment (WWT) refers to removal of contaminants from the wastewater for production of environmentally friendly effluent for safe disposal and agricultural reuse (Licciardello et al.; 2018). It is estimated that about 10–20% of all the wastewater generated in the developing world receives treatment and the rest is discharged to the receiving water environment without treatment (Rasool et al. 2018). Similarly, in Pakistan, the status of WWT (6–8%) is poor, assuming all existing treatment systems operate at their full designed capability (Shah & Hashmi 2012; Ali et al. 2017; Haider et al. 2017).

The major constraints for WWT in the developing world are related to the cost and energy requirements of conventional WWT systems. The treatment systems' compatibility and combined sewers systems for both domestic and industrial effluents are also major limitations for development of a WWT system (Sato et al. 2013; Miller-Robbie et al. 2017; Udaiyappan et al. 2017). The optimal selection of suitable and practicable technology according to the local settings is important because of the monetary precincts and concerns of choice for effective adoption of WWT systems (Massoud et al. 2009; Zhang et al. 2015; Droste & Gehr 2018). The outcomes of various research studies recommended the practicality of attached growth treatments like rotating biological contactors, membrane reactors, fluidized bed biofilm reactors and trickling filter systems (Velázquez & Nacheva 2017; Antonie 2018). Among them, the trickling filter system is a prominent treatment technology because it is less mechanically complicated. It has better treatment stability, less energy demand and good sludge thickening physiognomies (Naz et al. 2015; Gikas 2016; Ali et al. 2017). Its working principle is based on biological attached growth treatment on support media using various microorganisms. This process degrades colloidal and dissolved organics into protoplasm and various gases. The settling of protoplasm is accomplished in a secondary clarifier (Eding et al. 2006; Zhu & Rothermel 2014).

The research trend of the trickling filter system can be related to its hybridization, such as of vertical or horizontal flow, low cost biofilm support media and treatment process optimization (Pang 2014; Aslam et al. 2017). Various media have been evaluated for WWT in trickling filters such as calcitic gravel, rocks/plastic, nylon pan scrubbers, geotextiles, commercial and pall rings, coal, tire rubber, plastic sheet (corrugated), ceramsite and zeolite, oyster shell, cylindrical luffa (Lekang & Kleppe 2000; Odd & Helge 2000; Liu et al. 2010; Alimahmoodi et al. 2012; Vianna et al. 2012; Zhao et al. 2013; Kim et al. 2014; Khan et al. 2015; Naz et al. 2015; Zhang et al. 2015; Li et al. 2016; Wu et al. 2016; Zhang et al. 2016). However, to further reduce the cost of the trickling filter system, self-sustainable support media having less economic value should be used (Ali et al. 2017). Therefore, the present research study aimed to develop a simple and efficient trickling filter WWT system with biofilm support media such as maize cob (TF1) and date palm fiber (TF2). The evaluation of biofilm support media was also accomplished to overcome the impacts of the pollution indicators and to produce good quality effluent that can safely be used for peri-urban agriculture.

Experimental setup

A pilot-scale WWT system including two stage trickling filters was designed and developed at the farming area of BZU Multan, Pakistan (Figure 1). This WWT system utilises a trickling filter as the dominant form of biological treatment. This research mainly focused on the trickling filter part of the WWT system. The dimensions of the primary clarifier were 3.1 m length, 3.1 m width, and 1.5 m depth. The two-stage trickling filter was designed and installed for secondary biological treatment of wastewater. Both the trickling filters have a diameter of 1.0 m. Maize cobs (TF1) and date palm fibre (TF2) were applied as a biofilm support media for the first and second trickling filter, respectively (Figure 3). The biofilm support media depth was maintained as 1.95 m for comparison of TF1 and TF2. The dimensions (2.7 m length, 2.13 m width, and 1.52 m depth) of the secondary clarifier were the same for both the developed TF1 and TF2. The secondary clarifier also serves the purpose of a recirculation tank. The trickling filter distribution system installed at the uppermost part of filter was in the form of a rotating arm with perforations for uniform distribution. An electric submersible pump (1HP) was coupled to the distribution system by a polyvinyl chloride piping system. Polyethylene pipe with a diameter of 5.0 cm was connected to the outlet of a submersible pump to transfer the wastewater to the distribution system. Control valves were provided to adjust the flow rate. The bypass valves were used to control the rate of inflow. A drainage layer of 0.5 m (20 inches) depth was installed at the bottom of the TF1 and TF2 reactors for oxygenation. The other cause of ventilation was the production of convection currents due to the temperature difference between atmospheric air and wastewater. An underdrain system was installed below the trickling filter reactor to facilitate the flow of effluent and sludge to the secondary clarifier.

Figure 1

WWT system including trickling filter (Kanwar et al. 2019).

Figure 1

WWT system including trickling filter (Kanwar et al. 2019).

Close modal
Figure 2

WW flow scheme to the developed trickling filter system.

Figure 2

WW flow scheme to the developed trickling filter system.

Close modal
Figure 3

Variations in BOD, COD and DO concentrations of effluent from TF1 and TF2 during 15 operational weeks.

Figure 3

Variations in BOD, COD and DO concentrations of effluent from TF1 and TF2 during 15 operational weeks.

Close modal

The TF1 and TF2 were operated for treatment of approximately 2.5 m3 (2500 L = 660 gallons) of wastewater per day for about 15 weeks. The influent from the distribution system over the maize cob and date palm fibre bed was maintained at a hydraulic flow rate of 7.2 L/min (Q = 0.432 m3/h, 0.0064 m3/m2. minute). The mixture of raw sludge and wastewater (7:3) was pumped into TF1 and TF2 for 12 days to develop active biofilm before the optimum operation of the system. The minimum, maximum and average ambient temperatures were found as 15, 42 and 29 °C respectively during the research.

Experimental operation

Wastewater from the domain of the Agricultural Engineering department was disposed of into the main sewage line. Wastewater taken from the septic tank of the main sewage line of the Department of Agricultural Engineering was used to assess the removal performance of the developed TF systems. A 1 HP submersible pump was installed in the septic tank of the sewage line to transfer wastewater from the septic tank to the primary clarifier of the WWT system. The retention time of 45 minutes was given to the primary clarifier for removal of suspended solids and particulate BOD. The primary treated wastewater was supplied to the trickling filter for organic matter stabilization using attached biofilm. This process produced protoplasm (biological floc) and various gases. The settling of protoplasm was accomplished in the secondary clarifier with retention time of 60 minutes. Thus, the secondary clarified effluent was obtained at the outflow of the secondary clarifier. The illustration of wastewater flow during WWT is shown in Figure 2.

Physico-chemical and microbial characterization

The wastewater samples were analyzed for pH, chemical oxygen demand (COD), biological oxygen demand (BOD), dissolved oxygen (DO), electrical conductivity (EC), total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids (TSS), total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), sulphate, total count, fecal coliform and Escherichia coli according to Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA 2012; Khan et al. 2019).

The TF1 (maize cob) and TF2 (date palm fiber) were compared for removal of COD, BOD, TSS, TDS, EC, TN, TP, sulphate, total count, fecal coliforms and fecal coliforms. These quality parameters are used to indicate the contamination strength of wastewater (Gatto et al. 2015; Seow et al. 2016). The other objective of this study is to remove the aesthetic unpleasantness of wastewater in terms of color and odour. The odour in wastewater is produced by the sulfuric aromatic compounds (mercaptans), excessive nutrients and decomposition of ketones and aldehydes (Abegglen et al. 2008). It was observed that several recirculations of wastewater over attached biofilm helps in the decomposition of organic compounds and odour removal. The increased contact of contaminants with biofilm facilitates the removal of odorous and other compounds. The mean values of the influent wastewater characteristics of TF1 and TF2 are given in Table 1.

Table 1

Influent wastewater characteristics

OperationalWastewater quality parameters
weeksBOD [mg/L]COD [mg/L]DO [mg/L]pHTDS [mg/L]TSS [mg/L]TN [mg/L]TP [mg/L]EC [μS/m]Sulphate [mg/L]
107 132 2.6 6.5 530 159 22.55 17.31 1250 202 
119 148 2.8 7.1 535 214 16.69 15.38 1290 276 
143 175 3.1 5.7 543 223 13.11 15.38 1230 187 
138 171 2.3 5.9 538 168 20.22 15.38 1270 155 
131 164 2.4 6.9 545 219 25.2 15.38 1960 140 
133 168 2.6 7.5 525 283 17.99 30.77 1150 176 
152 192 2.5 6.1 496 285 20.13 15.38 1070 181 
201 247 2.7 7.2 380 291 22.77 15.31 1030 319 
196 298 1.9 6.7 586 258 42 15.38 1200 127 
10 179 226 1.7 7.1 540 263 53 15.3 1040 348 
11 129 161 2.9 7.3 566 169 18.93 15.3 1100 383 
12 187 242 2.5 7.9 496 231 37.34 15.3 1500 221 
13 179 225 2.6 7.8 427 177 15.89 15.38 1798 173 
14 158 195 2.9 7.8 425 105 32 15.77 1715 156 
15 118 159 2.3 7.6 439 184 17.34 15.38 1780 169 
OperationalWastewater quality parameters
weeksBOD [mg/L]COD [mg/L]DO [mg/L]pHTDS [mg/L]TSS [mg/L]TN [mg/L]TP [mg/L]EC [μS/m]Sulphate [mg/L]
107 132 2.6 6.5 530 159 22.55 17.31 1250 202 
119 148 2.8 7.1 535 214 16.69 15.38 1290 276 
143 175 3.1 5.7 543 223 13.11 15.38 1230 187 
138 171 2.3 5.9 538 168 20.22 15.38 1270 155 
131 164 2.4 6.9 545 219 25.2 15.38 1960 140 
133 168 2.6 7.5 525 283 17.99 30.77 1150 176 
152 192 2.5 6.1 496 285 20.13 15.38 1070 181 
201 247 2.7 7.2 380 291 22.77 15.31 1030 319 
196 298 1.9 6.7 586 258 42 15.38 1200 127 
10 179 226 1.7 7.1 540 263 53 15.3 1040 348 
11 129 161 2.9 7.3 566 169 18.93 15.3 1100 383 
12 187 242 2.5 7.9 496 231 37.34 15.3 1500 221 
13 179 225 2.6 7.8 427 177 15.89 15.38 1798 173 
14 158 195 2.9 7.8 425 105 32 15.77 1715 156 
15 118 159 2.3 7.6 439 184 17.34 15.38 1780 169 

BOD is considered as an important parameter used to determine the biodegradation rates of organic contamination load in wastewater (Shah et al. 2015). The BOD removal rates of TF1 and TF2 are presented in Figure 3. The mean value of BOD was 151.42 mg/L in the wastewater as an influent and decreased to an average value of 13.68 mg/L 17.4 mg/L and 30.9 mg/L in the effluent of TF1 and TF2, respectively. It presented an average removal rate of the BOD as 87.6% for TF1 and 78.7% for TF2 during the whole 15-week operational period. The results show that BOD removal efficiency increased with operational time from the 1st to 15th week and ranged from 77.4% to 97.5% for TF1 and 67% to 87.1% for TF2 at a flow rate of 7.2 L/min. The highest removal efficiency was recorded as 97.9% in the 10th week for TF1 and 87% in the 13th week for TF2. However, the TF1 was found to be more efficient in BOD removal than TF2, comparatively. Likewise, the mean COD of the influent and effluent was observed to be 189.3 mg/L and 22.8 mg/L for TF1 and 189.3 mg/L and 38.5 mg/L for TF2, respectively. However, the highest COD decline was recorded for the 9th operational week (96%) for TF1 (COD removal from 298 mg/L to 12 mg/L) and the 11th operational week (86%) for TF2 (COD removal from 161 mg/L to 22.5 mg/L) (Figure 3). It was also observed that effluent BOD and COD values were found to be much less than the BOD (80 mg/L) and COD (150 mg/L) values described by the National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS) (Metcalf & Eddy 2013; Khan et al. 2019).

The constant increase in removal of COD and BOD can be credited to the provision of organic and inorganic nutrients by recirculation and increase in temperature difference between ambient air and wastewater. This temperature difference causes natural downward ventilation and development of metabolically competent biofilm (Kornaros & Lyberatos 2006; Monayeri et al. 2007; Takeyuki et al. 2008; Zieliński et al. 2013). The higher removal efficiency of TF1 than TF2 was obtained due to the filamentous structure of maize cob, which caused rapid microbial attachment (Ali et al. 2016). The constant increase in the decline in removal efficiency of BOD and COD for the first nine operational weeks of TF1 and the first 11 operational weeks of TF2 might be due to the maintenance of an aerobic zone in the exterior portion of the biofilm and destruction of the anaerobic zone by proper flushing (Wijeyekoon et al. 2004; Alimahmoodi et al. 2012). The COD and BOD removal efficiencies of TF1 and TF2 were observed to be higher than the trickling filter with polystyrene media (86.7% COD and 90.7% BOD), rubber media (81.9% COD and 86.7% BOD), plastic media (94.7% COD and 94.3% BOD), cotton stick media (80% COD and 78% BOD) and stone media (85.6% COD and 85.6% BOD) (Naz et al. 2015; Aslam et al. 2017; Rasool et al. 2018). The influent DO value was found to be very low (2.25 mg/L) but after treatment the DO enhancement was observed as 30–152% for TF1 and 16–111% for TF2. This DO enhancement with BOD and COD removal indicates active metabolism of organic pollutants by microbes in the developed biofilm of TF1 and TF2 (Sa & Boaventura 2001; Calheiros et al. 2015). The other reason for DO enhancement was the regular arrangement of media (maize cob and date palm fiber) with high porosity that causes effective passive aeration during recirculation of wastewater (Gullicks et al. 2011). Thus, this sufficient aeration produced by the natural draft increased the DO level and decreased organic pollutants (BOD and COD) in the effluent. Similar results of DO enhancement with BOD removal were observed by Khan et al. (2015).

The pH of untreated wastewater was observed as 7 ± 0.7 (Figure 4). The pH variation was obtained as 7.4 ± 0.7 for TF1 and 7.3 ± 0.6 for TF2 during 15 operational weeks at a temperature range of 18–42 °C. This pH variation may be due to the buffering capacity of the media and also the redox and nitrification-denitrification reactions converting nitrates to molecular nitrogen (Blum et al. 2018; Silva et al. 2017; Cavazana et al. 2018; Ugurlu & Ozturkcu 2018). pH is used to define the quality of biological WWT, macrophyte performance and the existence of biological life (Bai et al. 2011; Tarpani & Azapagic 2018). The obtained pH range indicated the feasibility of good biological treatment, effective nitrification and optimum operation of the trickling filter (Shah et al. 2015; Kanwar et al. 2019; Khan et al. 2019). The pH range of 6–9 was considered suitable for optimum performance of the trickling filter (Chen et al. 2017; Priya & Selvan 2017). The results of the present study for pH variation was also revealed in the same range that indicates the application potential of developed trickling filter systems for domestic WWT. Similar results were obtained for biofilm support media of oyster shell, maize cob and cotton sticks (Liu et al. 2010; Ali et al. 2016; Aslam et al. 2017).

Figure 4

Variations in pH and EC values of effluent from TF1 and TF2 during 15 operational weeks.

Figure 4

Variations in pH and EC values of effluent from TF1 and TF2 during 15 operational weeks.

Close modal

The parameter EC is used to indicate the salinity potential of water by measuring the current carrying capacity due to the presence of free ionised constituents (Norton-Brandao et al. 2013; Khan et al. 2019). The permissible limit of EC by FAO is 7,000 μS/m (FAO 1992). The EC value of untreated wastewater was observed as 1,359 ± 310 μS/m. In the present study, about 15.5% and 14.9% reduction in EC value was found during treatment by TF1 and TF2, respectively (Figure 4). The EC value of effluent was found as 1,144 ± 247 μS/m for TF1and 1,152 ± 251 μS/m for TF2. The EC value of effluent was found to be much less than the permissible limit (FAO 1992). The major reason for EC removal was due to reduction in free metal ions by conversion of nitrates, nitrites and ammonium into molecular nitrogen. Pitchard et al. (2007) also reported that the reductions in the TSS play a key role in the decline of EC values. Muthukumaran & Ambujam (2003) investigated that primary clarification reduces the EC concentration. A fixed biofilm reactor integrated with a sand column filter was also found to be effective in reduction of the EC value (29.4%) (Khan et al. 2015).

The important wastewater quality parameters are TDS and TSS because they act as rise in soil osmotic pressure, specific ion toxicity and carriers of pathogens. The TDS and TSS of untreated wastewater was observed as 505 ± 59.8 mg/L and 215 ± 54.6 mg/L, respectively (Table 1). The high TSS values were due to the existence of colloidal and non-settleable solids including large sand particles, clay and fine silt. The TDS concentrations were found to be higher than those of BOD and COD due to different inorganic contaminants (calcium, potassium, sodium, magnesium, fluorides, chlorides, phosphates, bicarbonates, and sulphates) along with dissolved organic constituents. In the present study, about 47.8% and 42.3% reduction in TDS value was found during treatment by TF1 and TF2, respectively (Figure 5). The TDS value of the effluent was found as 263 ± 45.5 mg/L for TF1 and 287 ± 44.9 mg/L for TF2. However, after treatment through the pilot-scale TF1 and TF2 systems, the concentrations of TSS were reduced to 16.4 ± 14 mg/L and 31.6 ± 13.8 mg/L, respectively (Figure 5). The treated wastewater was found to be feasible for agriculture and safe disposal based on the recommended TDS (<1000 mg/L) and TSS (25–80 mg/L) values (WHO 2006; US-EPA 2007). The reduction in TDS value was due to the continuous recirculation of wastewater over the media bed. This continuous recirculation enhances the contact time between microbial biofilm and dissolved contaminants and hence microorganisms performed metabolic activities to decompose these dissolved contaminants (Ali et al. 2017). Rasool et al. (2018) reported 62.8% reduction in TDS and 99.9% reduction in TSS while using the pilot-scale stone media trickling filter. Further reduction in TDS (66%) and TSS (100%) was also observed by integrating the stone media trickling filter with the sand column filter (Khan et al. 2015).

Figure 5

Variation in TDS and TSS concentrations of effluent from TF1 and TF2 during 15 operational weeks.

Figure 5

Variation in TDS and TSS concentrations of effluent from TF1 and TF2 during 15 operational weeks.

Close modal

The total nitrogen (TN) of untreated wastewater was observed 25 ± 11 mg/L. In the present study, about 32% and 22.7 reductions in TN value was found during treatment by TF1 and TF2, respectively (Figure 5). The TN value of effluent was found as 16 ± 5.1 mg/L for TF1 and 18.7 ± 6.8 mg/L for TF2 (Figure 6). These effluent values were found to be within the permissible limit (30 mg/L), which indicated effective simultaneous nitrification and denitrification by the trickling filter (WHO 2006; US-EPA 2007). The basis to attain a better removal efficiency of TN was the favourable temperature, DO enhancement, good BOD/TN ratio and internal recirculation of wastewater (Diaz-Elsayed et al. 2017; Jiang et al. 2017). The observed temperature range of 18–42 °C was found to be feasible to enhance the population of nitrifiers (He et al. 2007; Ge & Champagne 2016). Moreover, the decline in inorganic/organic contaminants has a positive effect on the growth of nitrifiers, resulting in good nitrification/denitrification. Therefore, presently the removal efficiency of the TN can be correlated with the COD/BOD removal and enhancement of DO due to the continuous recirculation of wastewater over the media bed (Figures 3 and 6). The high DO level of treated wastewater indicated favourable BOD/TP and BOD/TN ratios that improved biological nutrient removal without external carbon addition (Morgan 1999). This supplemental DO is used primarily by the decomposing bacteria and later by the nitrifying bacteria to succeed in their own metabolic activities. The average carbon (BOD) to nitrogen (TN) ratio during the operational time of 15 weeks was observed to be in the range of 4:1–14:1. However, a maximum removal of TN of 52.9% was observed for a BOD/TN ratio of 3:1 during the 10th week of TF1 operation, while minimum removal (12.8%) of TN was obtained in the 13th week of TF1 operation at a BOD/TN ratio of 14:1. For TF2, the maximum and minimum reduction in TN was recorded as 37.8 and 8% under the condition of BOD/TN ratio of 4:1 and 13:1, respectively. The inadequate nitrification under high BOD/TN ratio may be due to the leading growth of heterotrophic bacteria and the repressing growth of autotrophic (Fdz-Polanco et al. 2000). This competition can produce spatial distribution of microbes inside the biofilm matrix that affects nitrification performance due to the impact of the mass transfer processes. Okabe et al. (1996) investigated whether nitrifiers and heterotrophs concurred in the outmost biofilm at C/N = 0. Michaud et al. (2014) reported a significantly lower removal rate of total ammonium nitrogen at C/N ≥ 0.5 than at C/N = 0. Siebritz et al. (1983) observed that the process of nitrification was strongly inhibited if COD/TKN (BOD/TKN) was more than 20 (10). To reduce this inhibitory impact on nitrification, the particulate and soluble organic carbon should be reduced. The reduction in treatment efficiency of TN for higher COD/N ratio may be due to the excessive development of microorganisms.

Figure 6

Reduction in TN, TP and sulphate concentrations by TF1 and TF2 treatment.

Figure 6

Reduction in TN, TP and sulphate concentrations by TF1 and TF2 treatment.

Close modal

TP is a macro-nutrient present in WW in small amounts. The high TP in WW causes eutrophication in water bodies. In the present research, phosphorus removal from TF1 and TF2 was recorded as 38.5% and 32.1% respectively (Figure 6). The effluent TP was found to be close to the permissible limit (8.6 mg/L) (WHO 2006; US-EPA 2007). So, this wastewater can be effectively used for agriculture based on the TP concentration. Phosphorus removal from TF1 and TF2 may be due to settling of non-soluble phosphorus in primary clarifier and incorporation of soluble phosphorus into the biofilm on the support media of TF (Richardsen 2017). This removal may also be due to the presence of phosphate-accumulating bacteria and high oxidation of iron (Fe2+) into ferric ion (Fe3+), which assists in the fixing of phosphorus by forming a chemical precipitate in an aerobic environment. The TP removal rate for a trickling filter was reported as in the range from 5–16% to 21–30% in the Thames Water region of UK while assimilation of TP into the biofilm was found from 0.9 to 1.2% through the TF and secondary clarifier (Pearce 1998). Naz et al. (2015b) reported the presence of Dechloromonas in the biofilm of stone media. Zhang et al. (2015) found the removal efficiency of COD, TN, and TP (94.1%, 92.8%, and 92.0% respectively) using a vertical flow trickling filter and horizontal flow multi-soil-layering bioreactor. Norton-Brandao et al. (2013) also suggested the WWT technology of media filtration for TP removal. The measurement of sulphate is of prime importance in wastewater samples due to the production of the sulphuric aromatic compounds (mercaptans). A higher sulphate removal rate was observed for TF1 than TF2 (Figure 6). The removal efficiency for sulphate was found to be 28.2% for TF1 and 24.3% for TF2. This reduction may be due to the accumulation of sulphate reducing bacteria and enhancement of DO that was used to oxidize reduced forms of sulphuric compounds (Särner (1990); Wik (2003)). Khan et al. (2015) recorded 63.15% sulphate removal by plastic media trickling filter through 48 hours of treatment.

The removal of pathogens was assessed using pathogen indicators such as total count, fecal coliform and E. coli. The concentrations of total count, fecal coliform and E. coli in the trickling filter system are mentioned in Table 2. The average removal of total count, fecal coliform and E. coli from combined TF1 and TF2 treatment were observed to be 76.3% (49–96%), 61% (33–91%) and 62% (31–85%) respectively. However, the further removal of total count, fecal coliforms and E. coli is essential in order to meet their permissible limits for safe agricultural reuse (WHO 2006; US-EPA 2007; Khan et al. 2019). The highest removal of total count was obtained for the 5th and 6th operational weeks. The removal of fecal coliforms and E. coli was observed to increase constantly from the 1st to 15th operational weeks. The removal of total count, fecal coliform and E. coli may be due to the adsorption of pathogenic bacteria in metabolically active biofilm by greater contact time in the reactor (Stefanakis et al. 2015, 2019). This removal is also directly associated with the removal of carbonaceous pollutants (BOD and COD) by settling of protoplasm in secondary clarifier (Curtis 2003). Abbadi et al. (2012) rejected the 1 log (90% reduction) through an activated sludge WWT system. Log reduction is the 10-fold reduction of microbial organisms present in the sample. Rasool et al. (2018) obtained 54–92% removal of total cfu/100 mL during treatment by pilot scale stone media trickling filter and reduction of 0–54% of fecal coliform for the first nine weeks and then 80–90% reduction after nine weeks due to the development of biofilm. The reduction of the geometric mean of fecal coliforms was observed as 4.3, 4.0, 5.8 and 5.4 log10 for media of polystyrene, plastic, rubber, and stones, respectively. Kaveh et al. (2019) also mentioned the 98 and 99% removal of total coliforms and fecal coliforms by sand cum four seed powder filter. Multi soil layering cum sand filter rejected 4.46, 4.47 and 4.13 log units for total coliforms, fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci, respectively (Latrach et al. 2016).

Table 2

Removal efficiency of pathogen indicators of developed TF

WeeksTotal count [cfu/100 mL]
Fecal coliform [MPN/100 mL]
E. coli[cfu/100 mL]
UntreatedTreatedRemoval efficiencyUntreatedTreatedRemoval efficiencyUntreatedTreatedRemoval efficiency
397928 49989 87 3981 2681 33 72900 50400 31 
251009 79303 68 32623 21589 34 78800 53700 32 
158310 39681 74 6405 4011 37 37000 24600 33 
316048 49989 84 7545 4689 38 79800 44400 44 
398539 50350 87 1995 1100 45 85000 46600 45 
158921 5243 96 15648 8497 46 83300 40000 52 
100432 4213 95 19852 8488 57 95100 35200 63 
20952 4592 78 8041 3456 57 91800 26100 71 
51118 11430 77 1598 687 57 45000 11300 74 
10 19953623 5013302 74 133852 51890 61 93600 20200 78 
11 9998015 2510868 74 63095 5921 90 69900 16000 77 
12 6307588 1994244 68 15948 1399 91 76300 17100 77 
13 39808732 19951605 49 530987 44987 91 78500 14500 81 
14 998889 251077.6 74 19952 1764 91 98200 15200 84 
15 25117753 9999889 60 241799 24114 90 86900 13000 85 
WeeksTotal count [cfu/100 mL]
Fecal coliform [MPN/100 mL]
E. coli[cfu/100 mL]
UntreatedTreatedRemoval efficiencyUntreatedTreatedRemoval efficiencyUntreatedTreatedRemoval efficiency
397928 49989 87 3981 2681 33 72900 50400 31 
251009 79303 68 32623 21589 34 78800 53700 32 
158310 39681 74 6405 4011 37 37000 24600 33 
316048 49989 84 7545 4689 38 79800 44400 44 
398539 50350 87 1995 1100 45 85000 46600 45 
158921 5243 96 15648 8497 46 83300 40000 52 
100432 4213 95 19852 8488 57 95100 35200 63 
20952 4592 78 8041 3456 57 91800 26100 71 
51118 11430 77 1598 687 57 45000 11300 74 
10 19953623 5013302 74 133852 51890 61 93600 20200 78 
11 9998015 2510868 74 63095 5921 90 69900 16000 77 
12 6307588 1994244 68 15948 1399 91 76300 17100 77 
13 39808732 19951605 49 530987 44987 91 78500 14500 81 
14 998889 251077.6 74 19952 1764 91 98200 15200 84 
15 25117753 9999889 60 241799 24114 90 86900 13000 85 

The developed pilot scale trickling filter system was evaluated for removal of BOD, COD, TDS, TSS, EC, TN, TP, sulphates and pathogen indicators using maize cob (TF1) and date palm fiber (TF2) biofilm support media for an operational time of 15 weeks. The treatment efficiency of TF1 was obtained as 88%, 87%, 48%, 91.6%, 32%, 38.4%, 16% and 28.2% for BOD, COD, TDS, TSS, TN, TP, EC, and sulphate, respectively. Similarly, the TF2 removed 79% BOD, 79% COD, 42% TDS, 85.5% TSS, 23% TN, 32.1% TP, 15% EC and 24.3% sulphate. Overall, the removal efficiency of TF1 was observed to be 8–15% higher than that of TF2 for removing the studied pollution indicators. Thus, the present research can potentially play an important role in managing not only the regional wastewater pollution but also help relatively safe re-use of the wastewater for peri-urban agriculture and protect our receiving environment. This is particularly significant in the current water resource shortage scenario in the country and may also help to safe re-use of wastewater for peri-urban food agriculture in the Multan region of Pakistan as well as in the developing world.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

Abbadi
J.
Saleh
R.
Nusseibeh
S.
Qurie
M.
Khamis
M.
Karaman
R.
Scrano
L.
Bufo
S. A.
2012
Microbial removal from secondary treated wastewater using a hybrid system of ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis
.
Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering
A1
(
7A
),
853
.
Abegglen
C.
Ospelt
M.
Siegrist
H.
2008
Biological nutrient removal in a small-scale MBR treating household wastewater
.
Water Research
42
(
1–2
),
338
346
.
Ali
I.
Khan
Z. M.
Sultan
M.
Mahmood
M. H.
Farid
H. U.
Ali
M.
Nasir
A.
2016
Experimental study on Maize Cob trickling filter-based wastewater treatment system: design, development, and performance evaluation
.
Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
25
(
6
),
2265
.
Ali
I.
Khan
Z. M.
Peng
C.
Naz
I.
Sultan
M.
Ali
M.
Mahmood
M. H.
Niaz
Y.
2017
Identification and elucidation of the designing and operational issues of trickling filter systems for wastewater treatment
.
Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
26
(
6
),
2431
2444
.
Antonie
R. L.
2018
Fixed Biological Surfaces-Wastewater Treatment: the Rotating Biological Contactor
.
CRC Press
,
Boca Raton, FL
.
APHA, AWWA & WEF
2012
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater
.
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation
,
Washington, DC
, p. 22.
Aslam
M. M. A.
Khan
Z. M.
Sultan
M.
Niaz
Y.
Mahmood
M. H.
Shoaib
M.
Shakoor
A.
Ahmad
M.
2017
Performance evaluation of trickling filter-based wastewater treatment system utilizing cotton sticks as filter media
.
Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
26
(
5
),
1955
1962
.
Bai
J.
Xiao
R.
Cui
B.
Zhang
K.
Wang
Q.
Liu
X.
Gao
H.
Huang
L.
2011
Assessment of heavy metal pollution in wetland soils from the young and old reclaimed regions in the Pearl River Estuary, South China
.
Environmental Pollution
159
(
3
),
817
824
.
Blum
J. M.
Su
Q.
Ma
Y.
Valverde-Pérez
B.
Domingo-Félez
C.
Jensen
M. M.
Smets
B. F.
2018
The pH dependency of N-converting enzymatic processes, pathways and microbes: effect on net N2O production
.
Environmental Microbiology
20
(
5
),
1623
1640
.
Calheiros
C. S.
Bessa
V. S.
Mesquita
R. B.
Brix
H.
Rangel
A. O.
Castro
P. M.
2015
Constructed wetland with a polyculture of ornamental plants for wastewater treatment at a rural tourism facility
.
Ecological Engineering
79
,
1
7
.
Cavazana
T. P.
Pessan
J. P.
Hosida
T. Y.
Monteiro
D. R.
Delbem
A. C. B.
2018
Ph changes of mixed biofilms of Streptococcus mutans and Candida albicans after exposure to sucrose solutions in vitro
.
Archives of Oral Biology
90
,
9
12
.
Curtis
T.
2003
Bacterial Pathogen Removal in Wastewater Treatment Plants. The Handbook of Water and Wastewater Microbiology
. pp.
477
490
.
Academic Press
,
London, UK
.
Diaz-Elsayed
N.
Xu
X.
Balaguer-Barbosa
M.
Zhang
Q.
2017
An evaluation of the sustainability of onsite wastewater treatment systems for nutrient management
.
Water Research
121
,
186
196
.
Droste
R. L.
Gehr
R. L.
2018
Theory and Practice of Water and Wastewater Treatment
.
John Wiley & Sons
,
Hoboken, NJ
.
Eding
E. H.
Kamstra
A.
Verreth
J. A. J.
Huisman
E. A.
Klapwijk
A.
2006
Design and operation of nitrifying trickling filters in recirculating aquaculture: a review
.
Aquacultural Engineering
34
(
3
),
234
260
.
FAO
1992
Wastewater Treatment and use in Agriculture
.
Irrigation and Drainage Paper
, p.
47
.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy
.
Fdz-Polanco
F.
Mendez
E.
Uruena
M. A.
Villaverde
S.
Garcıa
P. A.
2000
Spatial distribution of heterotrophs and nitrifiers in a submerged biofilter for nitrification
.
Water Research
34
(
16
),
4081
4089
.
Gatto
D.
Andrea
M. L.
Salas
B. A. G. J.
Garcés
V.
Rodriguez-Alvarez
M. S.
Iribarnegaray
M. A.
2015
The use of (treated) domestic wastewater for irrigation: current situation and future challenges
.
International Journal of Water and Wastewater Treatment
1
(
1
),
2381
5299
.
Gikas
P.
2016
Towards energy positive wastewater treatment plants
.
Journal of Environmental Management
203
,
621
629
.
Gullicks
H.
Hasan
H.
Das
D.
Moretti
C.
Hung
Y. T.
2011
Biofilm fixed film systems
.
Water
3
(
3
),
843
868
.
Haider
R.
Yasar
A.
Tabinda
A. B.
2017
Urban emission patterns at a semi-arid site in Lahore, Pakistan
.
Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
26
(
1
),
5
.
Kanwar
R. M. A.
Khan
Z. M.
Farid
H. U.
2019
Development and adoption of wastewater treatment system for peri-urban agriculture in Multan, Pakistan
.
Water Science and Technology
80
(
8
),
1524
1537
.
Kaveh
O. A.
Saeid
E.
Vijay
P.
Singh
N. R.
Dalezios
M. G.
Hossein
G.
Shahide
D.
Majedeh
H.
2019
Decreasing the number of coliforms of wastewater treatment plants using sand filtration together with four-seed powder
.
International Journal of Research Studies in Agricultural Sciences
5
,
2454
6224
.
Khan
Z. U.
Naz
I.
Rehman
A.
Rafiq
M.
Ali
N.
Ahmed
S.
2015
Performance efficiency of an integrated stone media fixed biofilm reactor and sand filter for sewage treatment
.
Desalination and Water Treatment
54
(
10
),
2638
2647
.
Khan
Z. M.
Asif Kanwar
R. M.
Farid
H. U.
Sultan
M.
Arsalan
M.
Ahmad
M.
Shakoor
A.
Ahson Aslam
M. M.
2019
Wastewater evaluation for Multan, Pakistan: characterization and agricultural reuse
.
Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
28
(
4
),
1
16
.
Kim
B.
Gautier
M.
Prost-Boucle
S.
Molle
P.
Michel
P.
Gourdon
R.
2014
Performance evaluation of partially saturated vertical-flow constructed wetland with trickling filter and chemical precipitation for domestic and winery wastewaters treatment
.
Ecological Engineering
71
,
41
47
.
Latrach
L.
Ouazzani
N.
Masunaga
T.
Hejjaj
A.
Bouhoum
K.
Mahi
M.
Mandi
L.
2016
Domestic wastewater disinfection by combined treatment using multi-soil-layering system and sand filters (MSL–SF): a laboratory pilot study
.
Ecological Engineering
91
,
294
301
.
Lekang
O. I.
Kleppe
H.
2000
Efficiency of nitrification in trickling filters using different filter media
.
Aquacultural Engineering
21
(
3
),
181
199
.
Licciardello
F.
Milani
M.
Consoli
S.
Pappalardo
N.
Barbagallo
S.
Cirelli
G.
2018
Wastewater tertiary treatment options to match reuse standards in agriculture
.
Agricultural Water Management
210
,
232
242
.
Liu
Y. X.
Yang
T. O.
Yuan
D. X.
Wu
X. Y.
2010
Study of municipal wastewater treatment with oyster shell as biological aerated filter medium
.
Desalination
254
(
1–3
),
149
153
.
Massoud
M. A.
Tarhini
A.
Nasr
J. A.
2009
Decentralized approaches to wastewater treatment and management: applicability in developing countries
.
Journal of Environmental Management
90
(
1
),
652
659
.
Metcalf & Eddy
2013
Wastewater Engineering: Treatment, Disposal, and Reuse
.
McGraw-Hill Science
,
New York, NY
.
Michaud
L.
Giudice
A. L.
Interdonato
F.
Triplet
S.
Ying
L.
Blancheton
J. P.
2014
C/N ratio-induced structural shift of bacterial communities inside lab-scale aquaculture biofilters
.
Aquacultural Engineering
58
,
77
87
.
Monayeri
S. E.
Atta
N. N.
Mokadem
S. E. l.
Aboul
A. M.
2007
Effect of organic loading rate and temperature on the performance of horizontal biofilters
. In
Eleventh International Water Technology Conference
.
IWTC11 2007
,
Sharm El-Sheikh
,
Egypt
, Vol
2007
, pp.
671
682
Morgan
S. J.
1999
Upgrading A Trickling Filter Wastewater Treatment Plant to Biological Nutrient Removal Standard
.
Doctoral dissertation
,
University of Tasmania
,
Tasmania, Australia
.
Muthukumaran
N.
Ambujam
N. K.
2003
Wastewater treatment and management in urban areas – a case study of Tiruchirappalli City, Tamil Nadu, India
. In:
Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Environment and Health
,
Chennai, India
, pp.
15
17
.
Naz
I.
Saroj
D. P.
Mumtaz
S.
Ali
N.
Ahmed
S.
2015a
Assessment of biological trickling filter systems with various packing materials for improved wastewater treatment
.
Environmental Technology
36
(
4
),
424
434
.
Norton-Brandão
D.
Scherrenberg
S. M.
van Lier
J. B.
2013
Reclamation of used urban waters for irrigation purposes–a review of treatment technologies
.
Journal of Environmental Management
122
, (
85–98
).
Odd
I. L.
Helge
K.
2000
Efficiency of nitrification in trickling filters using different filter media
.
Aquacultural Engineering
21
,
181
199
.
Okabe
S.
Hiratia
K.
Ozawa
Y.
Watanabe
Y.
1996
Spatial microbial distributions of nitrifiers and heterotrophs in mixed-population biofilms
.
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
50
(
1
),
24
35
.
Pang
H.
2014
Study of the Hydrodynamic Characteristics, COD Elimination and Nitrification in A new Multi-Section Bioreactor
.
Doctoral dissertation
.
Pearce
P. A.
1998
Options for phosphorus removal on trickling filter plants
. In:
Chemical Water and Wastewater Treatment V
.
(H. H. Hahn, E. Hoffman & H. Odegaard, eds)
.
Springer
,
Berlin, Heidelberg
.
Pitchard
M.
Mkandawire
T.
Neill
J. G. O.
2007
Biological, chemical and physical drinking water quality from shallow wells on Malawi: case study of Blantyre, Chiradzulu and Mulanje
.
Physics and Chemistry of the Earth Parts A/B/C
32
,
1167
1177
.
Richardsen
K. L.
2017
Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal in Typical Norwegian Wastewater
.
Master's thesis
,
NTNU
.
Sa
C. S. A.
Boaventura
R. A. R.
2001
Biodegradation of phenol by Pseudomonas putida DSM 548 in a trickling bed reactor
.
Biochemical Engineering Journal
9
(
3
),
211
219
.
Särner
E.
1990
Removal of sulphate and sulphite in an anaerobic trickling (ANTRIC) filter
.
Water Science and Technology
22
(
1–2
),
395
404
.
Sato
T.
Qadir
M.
Yamamoto
S.
Endo
T.
Zahoor
A.
2013
Global, regional, and country level need for data on wastewater generation, treatment, and use
.
Agricultural Water Management
130
,
1
13
.
Seow
T. W.
Lim
C. K.
Nor
M. H. M.
Mubarak
M. F. M.
Lam
C. Y.
Yahya
A.
Ibrahim
Z.
2016
Review on wastewater treatment technologies
.
International Journal of Applied Environmental Sciences
11
(
1
),
111
126
.
Shah
M.
Hashmi
H. N.
2012
Macrophyte waste stabilization ponds: an option for municipal wastewater treatment
.
International Journal of Physical Sciences
7
(
30
),
5162
.
Shah
M.
Hashmi
H. N.
Ghumman
A. R.
Zeeshan
M.
2015
Performance assessment of aquatic macrophytes for treatment of municipal wastewater
.
Journal of the South African Institution of Civil Engineering
57
(
3
),
18
25
.
Siebritz
I. P.
Ekama
G. A.
Marais
G. V. R.
1983
A parametric model for biological excess phosphorus removal
.
Water Science and Technology
15
(
3–4
),
127
152
.
Stefanakis
A.
Bardiau
M.
Trajano
D.
Couceiro
F.
Williams
J.
Caplin
J.
Taylor
H.
2015
Removal of Indicator Bacteria and Bacteriophages in A Full-Scale Trickling Filter-Aerated Constructed Wetland Wastewater Treatment Plant
.
Stefanakis
A. I.
Bardiau
M.
Trajano
D.
Couceiro
F.
Williams
J. B.
Taylor
H.
2019
Presence of bacteria and bacteriophages in full-scale trickling filters and an aerated constructed wetland
.
Science of the Total Environment
659
,
1135
1145
.
Takeyuki
S.
Siriwat
J.
Toshihiro
H.
Marc
A.
Deshusses
2008
Removal of ammonia from contaminated air in a biotrickling filter-Denitrifying bioreactor combination system
.
Water Research
42
,
4507
4513
.
Udaiyappan
A. F. M.
Hasan
H. A.
Takriff
M. S.
Abdullah
S. R. S.
2017
A review of the potentials, challenges and current status of microalgae biomass applications in industrial wastewater treatment
.
Journal of Water Process Engineering
20
,
8
21
.
US-EPA
2007
Bureau of Water Supply and Wastewater Management: Department of Environmental Protection Agency, Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Training (Module 20: Trickling Filters)
.
Velázquez
Y. F.
Nacheva
P. M.
2017
Removal of pharmaceuticals from municipal wastewater by aerated submerged attached growth reactors
.
Journal of Environmental Management
192
,
243
253
.
Vianna
M. R.
de Melo
G. C.
Neto
M. R. V.
2012
Wastewater treatment in trickling filters using luffa cyllindrica as biofilm supporting medium
.
Journal of Urban and Environmental
6
(
2
),
57
66
.
WHO
2006
Guidelines for the Safe use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater: Policy and Regulatory Aspects
, Vol.
1
.
World Health Organization
,
Geneva, Switzerland
.
Wijeyekoon
S.
Mino
T.
Satoh
H.
Matsuo
T.
2004
Effects of substrate loading rate on biofilm structure
.
Water Research
38
,
2479
2488
.
Wik
T.
2003
Trickling filters and biofilm reactor modelling
.
Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology
2
(
2–4
),
193
212
.
Wu
Z.
Wang
X.
Chen
Y.
Cai
Y.
Deng
J.
2018
Assessing river water quality using water quality index in Lake Taihu Basin, China
.
Science of the Total Environment
612
,
914
922
.
Zhu
J.
Rothermel
B.
2014
Everything you need to know about trickling filters
.
Clear Waters
44
(
2
),
16
19
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).