Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Academia.eduAcademia.edu
OPEN ACCESS International Journal of Aquatic Science ISSN: 2008-8019 Vol. 10, No. 1, 27-36, 2019 Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris and a mixture of two algae in municipal wastewater treatment Mohammad Hadi Abolhasani1*, Seyed Abbas Hoseini2, Rasool Ghorbani2 and Ordog Vince3 1) Department of Natural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Islamic Azad University, Khorasgan Isfahan Branch, Esfahan, Iran. 2) Department of Natural Resources, Agriculture and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran. 3) Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Institute Of Plant Biology, University of West Hungary. Received: April-03-2018 Accepted: May-19-2018 Published: January-01-2019 Abstract: This experiment was conducted over a 15-day period to determine efficiency of two algae species, Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris, either singularly or in combination, in nutrient absorption from municipal wastewater. Algal cell counting was performed daily, but water nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, ammonia, chlorophyll a, algal biomass, BOD and COD levels were determined every other day. At the end of the experiment, water phosphate in treatments C0, M50 and S100 was zero. Also, water nitrate levels reached zero, only in treatment M50 and all groups of treatment S. The maximum algal biomass was observed in treatment S0 (0.6 gL -1; p<0.05) at the end of the experiment. Algal biomass of the treatment S groups was significantly lower than that of the other treatments (0.2 gL -1; p<0.05). The maximum chlorophyll a with significant difference was observed in treatment S0. COD and BOD content showed constant trends among the treatments. The lowest COD and BOD was observed in treatments S and C respectively (4.1 mgL -1; p<0.05; 1.3 mgL-1; p<0.05). Overall, Sc. Obliquus was more efficient than Ch. vulgaris in biomass production, chlorophyll a concentration and nutrient absorption. Keywords: Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris, phosphate, municipal wastewater Introduction Huge amounts of anthropogenic municipal wastewater are produced in the residential regions. Water and detergents utilization in routine life, human activities like construction and agriculture, discharge huge amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus to the aquatic ecosystems. Water nutrient enrichment and eutrophication may affect the ecosystem structure and function. Algae are photosynthetic organisms which use sun light to convert carbon (carbon dioxide) into other organic materials and release oxygen into atmosphere (Huzisige and Ke, 1993; Gebre, 2017). It is necessary to monitor aquatic ecosystems nitrogen and phosphorus and prevent violation of the suitable water criteria. Employ of micro-algae with high wastewater treatment potential is a biological method to suppress water nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus (Zhang et al., 2017; De la Noiie and Proulx, 1988). Wastewater treatment by micro-algae has some advantages such as nitrogen and phosphorus recycling, prevention of subsequent pollution and biomass production which can be applied for biofuel, cosmetic materials, hygienic materials and food production (Voltolina, et al., 2004; Yalcin , et al., 2006). Chlorella vulgaris is a green single-cell alga with worldwide distribution; whereas, Scenedesmus is a green non-motile alga (Lee, et al., () hadi.mha2001@yahoo.com 2001; Li, et al., 2010). Micro-algae are superior to macro-algae and higher plants, because they grow rapidly and are capable to adapt natural and artificial conditions, which this adaptation is accompanied with increased protein, carbohydrate and lipid synthesis (Rasmussen, et al., 2008). Green algae have outstanding ability to adapt in a variety of aquatic ecosystem (Solisio, et al., 2008; Brodie et al., 2017). Ch. vulgaris and Sc. obliquus are rapid growing organisms, resistant to handling in rearing systems, easy and inexpensive to produce, capable to tolerate a wide range of temperature and pH; also they absorb nutrients rapidly and even are able to absorb nitrogen and phosphorus at very low ambient concentrations (Li, et al., 2010; Abolhasani et al., 2018; Jung et al., 2017). This experiment has been conducted on different concentrations of municipal wastewater, because water nutrient shortage may inhibit algae growth and efficiency (Kong, et al., 2010). The aim of this study was to determine growth and efficiency of Ch. vulgaris and Sc. obliquus to remove nutrients from different concentrations of municipal wastewater, and to determine interaction of the two algae when are mixed to treat the wastewater. Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Materials and Methods first sampling, t: time between the two sampling. DT=log2e/SGR The algae were cultured under static system condition in liquid culture medium Z8 according to Lavens and Sorgeloos (1996). 500-ml flasks filled with 250 ml culture medium were used for this experiment, under sterile condition and at 23°C±2 temperature. Municipal wastewater of Gorgan City was obtained from the main refinery at the final stage. The wastewater was first filtered with filter paper and then autoclaved to ensure lack of microbial load. This experiment was conducted with 9 treatments and 4 replications, which include: Chlorella 0, 50, 100 (C0, C50, C100), Scenedesmus 0, 50, 100 (S0, S50, S100) and Chlorella-Scenedesmus mixture 0, 50, 100 (M0, M50, M100). Three concentrations of the wastewater were used: 50% (1 part of sterile distilled water was mixed with 2 parts of the wastewater), 100% (1 part of sterile distilled water was mixed with 1 part of the wastewater), and 0% (no dilution was performed); initial nutrient concentrations of each medium are presented in Table 1. This experiment was conducted as a completely randomized design using factorial method with two factors: algae type (Chlorella, Scenedesmus and mixed) and wastewater concentration (0, 50 and 100 percent). To monitor organic materials removal over time, regression was used; whereas, to find relationship among the measured parameters, Pearson correlation test was used. The analyses were performed in SPSS 17 software, and graphs were drawn using Excel 2013. Results As phosphate and nitrate are the major nutrients in wastewater, efficiency of the algae for these compounds’ uptake was investigated during the experiment. The effect of algae type, wastewater concentration, time and interactions among them on phosphate uptake was as follow (Tab. 2). Tab. 1: Initial concentration of nutrients in each treatment (mgL-1). Compounds Nitrite Phosphate Nitrate Ammonia 0% 58.2 52.2 116.4 2.05 50% 38.9 24 107 1.55 Tab. 2: F-value for the effect of algae, wastewater concentration and their interaction on phosphate removal. 100% 32.3 21.3 69.15 0.95 Time (Day) 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Algae inoculation into each replication of the treatments was conducted in a constant manner. For this, 24000 cells were inoculated into each 500-l flasks filled with 250 ml of autoclaved wastewater. In the mixture treatment, 12000 cells from each algae species were inoculated to the medium (Voltolina, et al., 2004). Dry matter and chlorophyll a were measured every other day according to Permila and Rao (1997) and Aminot and Ray (1999). Cell counts was daily made by hemocytometery method (Martınez et al., 2000). Measurement of nutrients (phosphorus and nitrate) was conducted every other day using Wagtech kits (UK) and photometer apparatus. BOD5 was determined every other day according to Gonzales et al. (1997). Specific growth rate (SGR) and doubling time (DT) are two important factors indicating reproduction rate of algae in culture medium. SGR and DT were determined according to the following formulas (Omori and Ikeda, 1984): Con. 177.74** 231.65** 213.67** 174.57** 93.32** 55.59** 40.61** Con.: Concentration ** P<0.01; * P<0.05 Alga×Con. 81.7* 598.7** 206.78** 9.43 89.3* 139.58** 121.1** Algal type and wastewater concentration had significant effect on phosphate uptake in the culture medium during the experiment, but their interaction was not significant at day 8. According to the results (Tab. 3), phosphate and nitrate concentrations significantly decreased during the experiment. Wastewater phosphate was completely depleted in M0, M50 and S100. The maximum phosphate concentration was observed in C50 group (2 mgL-1). S100 treatment had the lowest phosphate during the experiment; but C0 treatment had the highest phosphate during the first 8 days of the experiment, and C50 treatment had the highest phosphate in the last days of the experiment. On the other hand, the mixed algae treatment had the higher rate of phosphate uptake. According to the Table 4, effect of the algae type, wastewater concentration, time and their interactions on nitrate uptake was as follow at different time. SGR= (LnN2-LnN1)/t N2: cell count in the second sampling; N1: cell count in the Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 Alga 417.29** 915.41** 201.17** 171.38** 120.58** 74.17** 49.34** 2 Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Tab. 3: Phosphate concentration in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 S0 S100 S50 0 50.4Aa (±0.47) 21.3aC (±0.37) 24aB (±0.38) 50.4aA (±0.47) 21.3aC (±0.37) 24aB (±0.38) 50.4aA (±0.47) 21.3aC (±0.37) 24aB (±0.38) 2 40.4bA (±0.6) 9Be (±0.21) 22.5aC (±0.42) 13.2bD (±0.25) 7.2bF (±0.17) 10.5bE (±0.2) 30.3bB (±0.5) 5.1bG (±0.14) 22bC (±0.42) 4 27cA (±0.63) 8.1bE (±0.21) 16bC (±0.29) 10.8cD (±0.23) 4.8cG (±0.13) 6.5cF (±0.15) 22.2cB (±0.47) 2.8cH (±0.1) 15cC (±0.26) 6 24dA (±0.68) 7.8bD (±0.15) 10cC (±0.1) 4.2dF (±0.13) 3.1eG (±0.1) 5.5cE (±0.11) 12dB (±0.14) 2.3dH (±0.1) 9dC (±0.12) Day 8 13eA (±0.67) 5.7cD (±0.43) 8dC (±0.5) 2.5eF (±0.31) 2.4fF (±0.3) 2.9dE (±0.34) 10eB (±0.41) 2dF (±0.21) 8dC (±0.5) 10 5.4fC (±0.53) 4.8dD (±0.41) 6eB (±0.57) 2.2eF (±0.34) 2.4fF (±0.35) 1eG (±0.28) 7.2fA (±0.59) 1.12eG (±0.2) 3.5eE (±0.32) 12 2.4Gc (±0.49) 4eA (±0.54) 3fB (±0.5) 1.8eD (±0.24) 0.8gF (±0.09) 0.8eF (±0.09) 1gF (±0.1) 0.65fG (±0.07) 1.03fE (±0.1) 14 0hF 1.6fB (±0.12) 2fA (±0.16) 1eC (±0.08) 0.04hE (±0.013) 0eF 0.8gD (±0.01) 0gF 0.72fD (±0.001) Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letters within each column (α=0.05). Tab. 4: F-values of effect of algae type, concentration and their interaction on nitrate uptake. Time (Day) 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Alga 354.5** 152.33** 320.89** 103.96** 92.69** 95.49** 76.87** Con. 200.41** 161.98** 355.85** 89.87** 103.98** 90.44** 87.4** Con.: Concentration ** P<0.01; * P<0.05 Alga×Con. 130.91** 91.23* 145.76** 85.88** 73.18 75.95** 34.21 the end of the experiment (18.9 mgL-1). M100 treatment had the lowest nitrate during the first 6 days of the experiment; S50 treatment had the lowest value from the day 6 until the end of the experiment; and the highest nitrate was observed in C0 treatment throughout the experiment (Tab. 5). Similar to phosphate, nitrate uptake was significantly affected by algal type and wastewater concentration, interaction and wastewater concentration had no significant effects at days 10 and 14. Nitrate was completely depleted at day 12 in S50 group and at the end of experiment in M50, S0 and S100 groups, but C0 group had the highest nitrate at Tab. 5: Nitrate values in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 S0 S100 S50 0 116.4aA (±2.76) 69.15aC (±1.67) 107aB (±1.98) 116.4aA (±2.76) 69.15aC (±1.67) 107aB (±1.98) 116.4aA (±2.76) 69.15aC (±1.67) 107aB (±1.98) 2 83.52bA (±1.12) 44.52bD (±1.01) 51.15bB (±1.08) 48.98bC (±1.04) 11.16bF (±0.7) 33.45bE (±0.9) 53.3bB (±1.07) 18.06bF (±1) 49.85bC (±1.03) 4 79.74cA (±2.1) 35cD (±1.4) 45.85cC (±1.7) 46.5cB (±1.7) 9.96cG (±0.9) 14.85cF (±1.12) 29.76cE (±1.37) 12.8cG (±1.1) 10.65cG (±1.01) 6 70.74dA (±2.72) 28.44dC (±1.31) 18.6dE (±1.21) 34.08dB (±1.52) 9.18cG (±0.91) 12.85dF (±1.1) 24.48dD (±1.23) 5.61dH (±0.8) 9.98cG (±0.93) Day 8 59.4eA (±2.12) 26.9dB (±1.73) 10.72eE (±1.34) 13.02eD (±1.38) 7.2dG (±1.01) 8.85eF (±1.08) 21.24eC (±1.43) 3.72eH (±0.9) 5.4dH (±0.98) 10 36.7fA (±1.98) 21.66eB (±1.25) 7.55fC (±1.09) 4.7fD (±1.01) 4.65eD (±1.01) 1.06fF (±0.9) 3.1fE (±0.98) 2.3fF (±0.94) 1.51eF (±0.67) 12 30.48gA (±1.45) 16.89fB (±0.97) 3.53gC (±0.12) 1.94gD (±0.1) 1.42fD (±0.09) 0.18fE (±0.01) 0.58gE (±0.03) 1.15fE (±0.08) 14 18.9hA (±1.13) 5.64gB (±0.9) 0.65hC (±0.09) 0.36gC (±0.05) 0.27fC (±0.01) 0fE 0fC Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letters within each column (α=0.05). Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 2 0fC 0gC 0fC Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Figure 1 shows that treatments C50 and C100 (89% and 92% respectively) removed lower phosphate percentage than the other treatments; also, treatments C0 and C100 (83% and 91%) removed lower nitrate percentage than that of the other treatments. C0 group removed significantly lower nitrate percentage than C100; both groups nitrate removal percentages were significantly lower than that of the other treatments. Treatments C0, M50 and S100 had significantly higher phosphate removal percentages than that of the other treatments. Overall, Ch. vulgaris efficiency in nitrate and phosphate removal was lower than the other treatments (P<0.05). Fig. 3: Phosphate removal trend in Chlorella treatment. Phosphate removal was faster in concentration 0, compared to the other concentrations, and increase in concentration slowed down the phosphate removal (Fig. 4). Fig. 1: Percentage of nitrate and phosphate removal in different treatments at the end of the experiment. Different letters show significant difference among the treatments (α=0.05). Fig. 4: Phosphate removal pattern in Scenedesmus treatment. With regard to Figure 2, the treatments efficacy in phosphate uptake was relatively similar, when mixed algae are used. Among the Chlorella treatments, C0 group was significantly more efficacious to remove phosphate from culture media (Fig. 3). Phosphate uptake in Scenedesmus groups was very fast, as the phosphate of medium approximately reached zero at the day 10. Nitrate removal from the media was very fast. Nitrate removal was faster in concentration 0, compared to the other concentrations, and increase in concentration slowed down nitrate removal (Fig. 5). Nitrate uptake in Chlorella treatments was lower than the other treatments, and the lowest level was observed in C0 group (Fig. 6). Nitrate uptake in Scenedesmus was very fast, and the fastest uptake was observed in S0 group (Fig. 7). Algae biomass is directly related to medium nutrient concentration. As shown in Table 6, algae biomass in Chlorella treatments showed no significant change during the experiment; whereas, in Scenedesmus and mixed treatments algae biomass significantly changed during the experiment. The highest biomass was observed in S0 treatment (0.6 gL-1); whereas, the lowest biomass was observed in the Chlorella treatment (C0, C50, C100; 0.2 g L-1). Biomass in C100 treatment was 0.1 g L-1 during the first 8-day of the experiment. Fig. 2: Phosphate removal trend in mixed algae treatment. Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 2 Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Fig. 5: Nitrate removal pattern in mixed algae treatment. Fig. 6: Nitrate removal pattern in Chlorella treatment. Fig. 7: Nitrate removal pattern in Scenedesmus treatment. Tab. 6: Biomass in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 S0 S100 S50 2 0bB (±0.01) 0cB (±0.01) 0dB (±0.01) 0.1dA (±0.01) 0.1bA (±0.01) 0.1cA (±0.01) 0.1dA (±0.01) 0.1dA (±0.01) 0.1cA (±0.01) 4 0.1aA (±0.01) 0cC (±0.01) 0.1cB (±0.01) 0.1dB (±0.01) 0.1bB (±0.01) 0.1cB (±0.01) 0.2cA (±0.02) 0.1dB (±0.01) 0.1cB (±0.01) Day 8 0.2aB (±0.01) 0.1bC (±0.01) 0.2bB (±0.01) 0.2cB (±0.01) 0.3aA (±0.02) 0.3bA (±0.02) 0.2cB (±0.01) 0.3bA (±0.02) 0.2bB (±0.01) 6 0.2aB (±0.02) 0.1bC (±0.01) 0.2bB (±0.02) 0.2cB (±0.02) 0.3aA (±0.02) 0.3bA (±0.02) 0.2cB (±0.02) 0.2cB (±0.02) 0.2bB (±0.02) 10 0.2aD (±0.01) 0.1bE (±0.01) 0.3aC (±0.02) 0.3bC (±0.02) 0.3aC (±0.02) 0.4aB (±0.03) 0.5bA (±0.03) 0.3bC (±0.02) 0.2bC (±0.01) 12 0.2aE (±0.01) 0.2aE (±0.01) 0.2bE (±0.01) 0.4aC (±0.03) 0.3aD (±0.02) 0.4aC (±0.03) 0.6aA (±0.04) 0.5aB (±0.04) 0.4aC (±0.03) 14 0.2aE (±0.01) 0.2aE (±0.01) 0.2bE (±0.01) 0.4aC (±0.02) 0.3aD (±0.02) 0.4aC (±0.02) 0.6aA (±0.03) 0.5aB (±0.03) 0.4aC (±0.02) Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letters within each column (α=0.05). Overall, the Scenedesmus treatments had signific-antly higher biomass compared to the other treatments, at the end of the experiment (P<0.05). However, the Chlorella treatments had significantly lower biomass from the first day of the experiment. The mixed treatments’ biomass was intermediate with the highest biomass in M0 and M50, and the lowest in Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 M100. Chlorophyll a values are shown in Table 7. Chlorophyll of the Scenedesmus treatments was significantly higher than the other treatments at the last days (14th) of the experiment. Also, chlorophyll concentration in the treatments M was higher than those of the C group. Overall, the highest chlorophyll 2 Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … value was observed at the day 10 in M50 treatment (4.97 mgL-1), but the lowest value was related to C100 at the day 2 (2.91 mgL-1). Mean chlorophyll value at the day 10 was higher than the other sampling days in all groups. The lowest chlorophyll values were observed in the Chlorella treatments at all the sampling days. Among the Chlorella treatments, C100 treatment had the lowest chlorophyll value. Overall, S0 treatment had significantly higher chlorophyll at the end of the experiment (P<0.05); whereas, C100 treatment had the lowest chlorophyll. During the experiment, M50 treatment had the highest value (P<0.05). Chlorophyll value in M50 treatment is correlated to algae cell graph, which shows the highest number a t the day 8, and increase in algae cell number has resulted in biomass augment in M50 treatment. Tab. 7: Chlorophyll a values in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 S0 S100 S50 2 1.6gE (±0.67) 1.5gE (±0.62) 1.55fE (±0.63) 1.7eC (±0.71) 1.88fB (±0.74) 1.77cC (±0.72) 2.22eA (±0.81) 1.84fB (±0.71) 1.9fB (±0.82) 4 3.5bD (±0.5) 2.91bE (±0.45) 3.12bD (±0.46) 4.25aB (±0.65) 3.94bC (±0.61) 4.85aA (±0.72) 4.4bB (±0.67) 3.88bC (±0.58) 4.41bB (±0.67) Day 8 3.1cC (±0.49) 2.96bC (±0.47) 3.04bC (±0.51) 3.64bB (±0.76) 3.71cB (±0.78) 3.68bB (±0.77) 4.4bA (±0.85) 3.71cB (±0.78) 3.77cB (±0.79) 6 2.83eC (±0.58) 2.89cC (±0.6) 2.98cC (±0.61) 3.57bB (±0.76) 3.02dB (±0.65) 3.27cB (±0.72) 4.33bA (±0.88) 3.23dB (±0.64) 3.43cB (±0.7) 10 3.9aC (±0.81) 3.16aD (±0.61) 3.27aD (±0.65) 3.43cC (±0.67) 4aB (±0.88) 4.97aA (±0.91) 4.87aA (±0.95) 4.28aB (±0.9) 4.64aB (±0.93) 12 2.91dD (±0.54) 2.46dD (±0.42) 2.65dD (±0.46) 3.42cB (±0.78) 2.98dD (±0.57) 3.53bB (±0.81) 3.78cA (±0.83) 3.3dC (±0.71) 3.1dC (±0.68) 14 2.65fB (±0.55) 2.13eB (±0.45) 2.2eB (±0.47) 2.83dB (±0.59) 2.23eB (±0.48) 2.45cB (±0.51) 3.17dA (±0.64) 2.37eB (±0.49) 2.27eB (±0.49) Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letterswithin each column (α=0.05). In the first days of the experiment (until day 6), cell count in Chlorella group (C0 and C50) was higher than the other groups. In the middle of the experiment (until day 10) M treatments (M0 and M50) had the highest cell count. At the end of the experiment (the day 10), S treatments (S0, S100 and S50) had the highest cell count. During the whole period of the experiment, the highest cell count was observed at the day 8 in M50 treatment (in M group, total number of Chlorella and Scenedsmus cells was counted). Among the Scenedesmus treatments, S0 treatment had the highest cell count at the day 12, whereas, among the Chlorella treatments, C) treatment had the highest cell count. Overall, the Scenedesmus treatments showed an increasing pattern, but Chlorella treatments showed increasing pattern in the first days of the experiment and decreasing pattern in the last days of the experiment (Tab. 8). Totally, cell count of M50 treatment and that of S50 treatment were highest at the day 8 and the end of the experiment among the treatments respectively Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 (P<0.05). BOD5 showed decreasing pattern during the study period (Tab. 9). During the experiment, Chlorella group had higher BOD than the other treatments; among which C50 treatment had higher BOD than the other treatments. Scenedesmus treatments had the lowest BOD among the treatments; M treatments had intermediate BOD, which was similar to that of the Chlorella group in the first days of the experiment. This pattern continued until the last day of the experiment, but it was significantly lower than that of the Chlorella treatment. There was no significant difference in BOD among the Scenedesmus treatments, but they had lower BOD than the other treatments (P>0.05). The Chlorella treatment had similar BOD, which was significantly higher than those of S and M treatments (P<0.05). COD was similar to BOD5 between groups during the study period (Tab. 10). SGR of the Chlorella group was significantly lower than the other treatment. Scenedesmus treatments had the highest SGR, 3 Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Tab. 8: Algae cell number (x0.00001) in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 S0 S100 S50 2 1.1bA (±0.47) 1.13aA (±0.48) 0.87cB (±0.31) 1.12gA (±0.47) 0.98cB (±0.35) 1.04fD (±0.4) 0.59eC (±0.21) 0.46eC (±0.16) 0.36gC (±0.12) 4 12aA (±1.12) 1.07bD (±0.56) 9.78bB (±1.06) 6.68cC (±0.94) 2.29aD (±0.71) 3.86cD (±0.82) 2.32dD (±0.72) 1.11dE (±0.58) 1.17fE (±0.6) 6 14.24bC (±1.76) 0.84bA (±0.12) 11.74aA (±1.32) 7.72bB (±1.21) 1.22bC (±0.23) 10.49aA (±1.25) 2.93dD (±0.29) 1.32cE (±0.24) 1.7eE (±0.35) Day 8 1.24bD (±0.21) 1.12aD (±0.14) 0.67cE (±0.01) 14.49aA (±1.22) 1.57bD (±0.24) 32.74dB (±2.35) 3.97cB (±0.89) 2.2bC (±0.65) 2.87dC (±0.71) 10 0.98cF (±0.12) 0.9bF (±0.1) 0.53cF (±0.09) 12.66eB (±2.13) 1.59bE (±0.23) 27.1bD (±2.98) 10bC (±1.75) 2.3bD (±0.46) 4.33cD (±0.78) 12 1.4bD (±0.61) 0.22cD (±0.07) 0.63cD (±0.08) 2.18dC (±0.71) 1.21bC (±0.53) 2.72dC (±0.75) 12.12aC (±1.43) 2.4bC (±0.75) 4.76bB (±0.89) 14 0.72cC (±0.11) 0.25cC (±0.09) 0.56cC (±0.1) 1.57fB (±0.43) 2.17aB (±0.67) 2eB (±0.63) 4.49cA (±1.1) 2.83aB (±0.93) 5.87aA (±1.23) Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letters 0 within each column (α=0.05). Tab. 9: BOD5 value in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 S0 S100 S50 2 4.86aA (±0.98) 2.74aC (±0.67) 3.91aB (±0.89) 3.72aB (±0.85) 2.56aC (±0.57) 2.26aC (±0.43) 1.59aD (±0.34) 1.56aD (±0.32) 2.1aD (±0.4) 4 2.77bA (±0.86) 2.24bB (±0.8) 3bA (±0.88) 2.9bA (±0.89) 2.2bB (±0.79) 2bC (±0.79) 1.2bD (±0.61) 1.2bD (±0.61) 1.92bD (±0.74) Day 8 1.86cB (±0.85) 1.94cA (±0.87) 2.42dA (±0.98) 2.32cA (±0.96) 1.96cA (±0.88) 1.6cB (±0.7) 1cC (±0.13) 1.08cC (±0.14) 1.72cB (±0.74) 6 1.94cA (±0.92) 1.66cB (±0.74) 2.3cA (±0.99) 2.06cA (±0.97) 1.75cB (±0.78) 1.5cB (±0.7) 0.91cC (±0.09) 1cC (±0.13) 1.5cC (±0.56) 10 1.64dB (±0.71) 2cA (±0.97) 2.18eA (±0.99) 2dA (±0.97) 1.82cB (±0.96) 1.4dB (±0.67) 0.9cC (±0.23) 0.98cC (±0.26) 1.6cC (±0.69) 12 1.68dB (±0.71) 1.78cB (±0.74) 1.8fB (±0.8) 2dA (±0.84) 1.62dB (±0.68) 1.2eC (±0.5) 0.8dD (±0.24) 0.94cD (±0.31) 1.2dD (±0.5) 14 1.52eA (±0.71) 1.56cA (±0.72) 1.48gA (±0.65) 1.4eB (±0.61) 1.36dB (±0.54) 1fC (±0.31) 0.7dC (±0.13) 0.72dC (±0.14) 0.78eC (±0.15) Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letters within each column (α=0.05). Tab. 10: COD value in different treatments during the experiment (mean ± SD). Treatment C0 C100 C50 M0 M100 M50 Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 2 24.31aA (±1.56) 13.72aC (±1.1) 19.56aB (±1.41) 18.6aB (±1.37) 12.8aC (±1) 11.3aC (±0.98) 4 13.88bA (±1.54) 11.2aB (±1.34) 15bA (±1.64) 14.5bA (±1.58) 11aB (±1.32) 10aB (±1.23) 6 11.64bA (±1.56) 10bB (±1.2) 13.8bA (±1.78) 12.4cA (±1.67) 10.5aB (±1.23) 9bB (±1.1) 2 Day 8 9.3bB (±1.23) 9.7bB (±1.27) 12.1bA (±1.87) 11.6cA (±1.76) 9.8bB (±1.28) 8cC (±1.11) 10 8.2cB (±1.12) 10bA (±1.25) 10.9cA (±1.29) 10cA (±1.25) 9.1bA (±1.17) 7dB (±1.03) 12 8.4cB (±1.24) 8.9cA (±1.28) 9cA (±1.29) 10cA (±1.34) 8.1cB (±1.22) 6eC (±1.08) 14 7.6cA (±1.34) 7.8cA (±1.37) 7.4dA (±1.3) 7dA (±1.27) 6.8dB (±1.25) 5fB (±1.1) Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Tab. 10: continued. Treatment S0 S100 S50 2 7.95aD (±0.9) 7.8aD (±0.9) 10.5aC (±0.99) 4 6bC (±1.1) 6bC (±1.1) 9.6aB (±1.14) Day 8 5bD (±0.98) 5.4cD (±1.09) 8.6bC (±1.14) 6 5.5bC (±0.76) 6bC (±0.98) 9bB (±1.1) 10 4.5cC (±0.87) 4.9cC (±0.9) 8bB (±1.08) 12 4cD (±0.9) 4.7cD (±1.01) 6cC (±1.08) 14 3.5dC (±1.06) 3.6dC (±1.07) 3.9dC (±1.09) Lowercase letters show significant difference within each row and uppercase letters within each column (α=0.05). however, M100 treatment had the highest SGR (2.98). DT showed inverse trend compared to SGR as the highest DT was related to Chlorella treatments and C50 (0.7) and the lowest DT was observed in Scenedesmus group (Fig. 8). highest nitrate was related to C0 treatment suggesting that Chlorella is more efficient in phosphate removal and Scenedesmus is more efficient in both nitrate and phosphate removal. However, M50 was the only treatment that completely depleted the medium phosphate and nitrate suggesting that the two algae mixture was more efficient among the treatments. Lee and Lee (2001) reported that phosphate removal rate by Chlorella kessleri is 28% with initial phosphate concentration of 10 mgL-1 in culture medium. However, Mallick et al. (2002) reported that Phormidium bonheri was capable to completely remove phosphate and nitrate with initial concentrations of 30 and 42 mgL-1 in culture medium. Similar to the our results, it was found that Sc. obliquus is capable to remove 97% of nitrogen and phosphorus within 14 days with initial concentration of 27.4 and 11.8 mgL-1 (Martinez et al., 2000). Scenedesmus obliquus is able to remove 99.1% of wastewater nitrogen (NH4-N) within 12 days with initial concentration of 3.8 mgL-1 (Yang et al., 2011). In our study, Chlorella reproduced with a high rate in the first days of the experiment, but it showed declining trend after the day 8 suggesting lower tolerance of Chlorella to culture medium conditions compared to the two other groups. In the mixed algae group, increasing pattern started at the day 4 continued until the day 10th, but showed decreasing pattern in the last days. However, in Scenedesmus group an increasing pattern was observed during the experiment suggesting its high resistance to the culture medium conditions. The highest chlorophyll value was observed in S0 treatment; Scenedesmus and Chlorella had significantly the highest and the lowest chlorophyll values among all treatments had. M50 treatment had the highest chlorophyll due to synergistic effect. This treatment had the highest cell count at the day 8th suggesting correlation between cell count and chlorophyll content. According to Fig. 4 and 5, under constant conditions, each Chlorella cell has higher chlorophyll value than each Scenedesmus Fig. 8: SGR and DT in different treatments during the experiment. Different letters show significant difference during the experiment (α=0.05). Overall, S50, M100 and S100 treatments had significantly the highest DT and the lowest SGR during the experiment (P>0.05). However, the lowest DT was related to C50 and C100 (P<0.05). M0 and M50 treatments’ DT was between the Chlorella and Scenedesmus groups, but had significantly higher DT and lower SGR than the Chlorella group. C0 treatment was similar to M0 and M50, but the other Chlorella treatments were significantly lower than the other treatments. Discussion The results showed that Chlorella, Scenedesmus and mixed treatments had the highest phosphate uptake at 0%, 100% and 50% wastewater dilution, respectively, which phosphate was completely depleted. Phosphate uptake rate was higher in the first days compared to the last days of the experiment. All Scenedesmus groups and M50 treatment completely depleted the medium nitrate, but the Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 3 Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … cell. The highest and the lowest algal biomass was found in Scenedesmus and Chlorella groups, respectively. The mixed treatment, although was close to Scenedesmus group, had significantly lower biomass than this group. It is suggested that culture medium nitrogen had more important role than phosphorus in algae biomass production; this explain weak biomass production in C0 treatment despite complete phosphate uptake. Ruiz-Marin et al. (2010) found that in wastewater as culture medium, growth rate of Ch. vulgaris (8 h) is higher than Sc. obliquus (20 h), which is in agreement with the present results. Also, they reported that Sc. obliquus is more resistance to various medium conditions than Ch. vulgaris, and S. obliquus had significantly higher chlorophyll-a at the end of the experiment (0.54 vs. 0.22 mgL-1). Tam and Wong (2000) reported than high ammonium uptake by C. vulgaris is due to reaction between carboxyl group in the outer membrane and ammonium molecules. Chlorophyll and biomass of S. obliquus and C. vulgaris was found to be related energy intake (light) and self-shading in culture medium. Ruiz-Marin et al. (2010) reported that chlorophyll and biomass of S. obliquus was higher than C. vulgaris (0.56 vs. 0.31 g L-1). Kaewsarn (2002) showed that C. vulgaris has low efficiency when cell count and wastewater concentration is low, compared to high cell count and wastewater concentration. At low cell count and wastewater concentration (nitrate = 90 mgL-1) C. vulgaris removed 69% of nitrate and 58% of COD within 10 days. When cell count and wastewater concentration increased (nitrate = 178 mgL-1) C. vulgaris removed 80% of nitrate and 63% of COD within 10 days suggesting that this alga is more efficient in wastewater with high concentrations. count at the day 8th which was significantly higher than the other treatments. Overall, Scenedesmus treatment, particularly S0 treatment, was more efficient in biomass production, chlorophyll value and nutrient uptake compared to Chlorella treatment. Chlorella treatment was superior to the other treatments in wastewater treatment, except for phosphate uptake, which C0 treatment completely depleted the medium phosphate content. Finally, it is suggested that change in wastewater concentration and algae type can improve municipal wastewater refining. References  Chen Z., Chen S., Lu G. and Chen, X. (2012) Phosphorus limitation for the colony formation, growth and photosynthesis of an edible cyanobacterium, Nostoc sphaeroides. Biotechnology letters, 34(1), 137-143.  de la Noüe, J. and Proulx D. (1988) Biological tertiary treatment of urban wastewaters with chitosan-immobilized Phormidium. Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 29: 292-297.  González, L. E., Cañizares, R. O. and Baena S. (1997) Efficiency of ammonia and phosphorus removal from a Colombian agroindustrial wastewater by the microalgae Chlorella vulgaris and Scenedesmus dimorphus. Bioresource Technology, 60: 259-262.  Huzisige, H. and Ke B. (1993) Dynamics of the history of photosynthesis research. Photosynthesis Research, 38: 185-209.  Kaewsarn P. (2002) Biosorption of copper (II) from aqueous solutions by pre-treated biomass of marine algae Padina sp. Chemosphere, 47: 1081-1085.  Kong Q.-X., Li L., Martinez B., Chen P. and Ruan R. (2010) Culture of microalgae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii in wastewater for biomass feedstock production. Applied biochemistry and Biotechnology, 160: 9.  Lavens P. and Sorgeloos P. (1996) Manual on the production and use of live food for aquaculture: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).  Lee K. and Lee C.-G. (2001) Effect of light/dark cycles on wastewater treatments by microalgae. Biotechnology and Bioprocess Engineering, 6: 194-199.  Mallick N. (2002) Biotechnological potential of immobilized algae for wastewater N, P and metal removal: a review. biometals, 15: 377-390.  Martınez M., Sánchez S., Jimenez J., El Yousfi F. and Munoz L. (2000) Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from urban wastewater by the microalga Scenedesmus obliquus. Bioresource Technology, 73: 263-272.  Oliveira R., Dodd J. and Castro P. (2001) The mycorrhizal status of Phragmites australis in several polluted soils and sediments of an industrialised region of Northern Portugal. Mycorrhiza, 10: 241-247.  Premila V. and Rao M.U. (1997) Effect of crude oil on the growth and reproduction of some benthic marine algae of Conclusion It is concluded that mixture of the two algae results in high biomass and cell count and is more efficient in nitrogen and phosphorus uptake, because M50 was the only treatment that totally depleted the medium phosphate and nitrate at the end of the experiment. Other mixed treatments were also efficient in nutrient uptake and had no significant difference compared to Scenedesmus treatments. The highest biomass was observed in M100 at the day 10th suggesting that these two algae have synergic effects; whereas, S0 treatment had the highest biomass and the Chlorella treatments had the lowest biomass. Also, algae mixture had synergic effect on chlorophyll value and cell count, as M50 treatment showed the highest cell Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 3 Abolhasani et al. (2019) Evaluation the efficiency of Scenedesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris … Sciences 6:123-127·  Vilar V.J., Loureiro J.M., Botelho C.M. and Boaventura R. A. (2008) Continuous biosorption of Pb/Cu and Pb/Cd in fixed-bed column using algae Gelidium and granulated agar extraction algal waste. Journal of hazardous materials, 154: 1173-1182.  Voltolina D., Gomez-Villa H. and Correa G. (2004) Biomass production and nutrient removal in semicontinuous cultures of Scenedesmus sp. (chlorophyceae) in artificial wastewater, under a simulated day-night cycle. Vie et milieu, 54: 21-25.  Xin L., Hong-Ying H. and Jia Y. (2010) Lipid accumulation and nutrient removal properties of a newly isolated freshwater microalga, Scenedesmus sp. LX1, growing in secondary effluent. New biotechnology, 27: 59-63.  Yang J., Xu M., Zhang X., Hu Q., Sommerfeld M. and Chen Y. (2011) Life-cycle analysis on biodiesel production from microalgae: water footprint and nutrients balance. Bioresource Technology, 102: 159-165. Visakhapatnam coastline. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences, 26: 195-200.  Rasmussen H.E., Blobaum K.R., Park Y.-K., Ehlers S.J., Lu F. and Lee J.-Y. (2008) Lipid extract of Nostoc commune var. sphaeroides Kützing, a blue-green alga, inhibits the activation of sterol regulatory element binding proteins in HepG2 cells. The Journal of nutrition, 138: 476481.  Ruiz-Marin A., Mendoza-Espinosa L.G. and Stephenson T. (2010) Growth and nutrient removal in free and immobilized green algae in batch and semi-continuous cultures treating real wastewater. Bioresource Technology, 101: 58-64.  Solisio C., Lodi A., Soletto D. and Converti A. (2008) Cadmium biosorption on Spirulina platensis biomass. Bioresource Technology, 9: 5933-5937.  Tam N. and Wong Y. (1989) Wastewater nutrient removal by Chlorella pyrenoidosa and Scenedesmus sp. Environmental Pollution, 58: 19-34.  Tepe Y., Naz M. and Türkmen M. (2006) Utilization of different nitrogen sources by cultures of Scenedesmus acuminatus. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Int. J. Aqu. Sci; 10 (1): 27-36, 2019 4