Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742

DOI 10.1007/s11270-011-1062-8

A System Dynamic Model and Sensitivity Analysis

for Simulating Domestic Pollution Removal in a Free-Water
Surface Constructed Wetland
Yung-Chieh Wang & Yu-Pin Lin &
Chun-Wei Huang & Li-Chi Chiang &
Hone-Jay Chu & Wen-Sheng Ou

Received: 11 July 2011 / Accepted: 20 December 2011 / Published online: 7 January 2012
# Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Abstract This work develops a system dynamic simu-
lation model for free-water surface constructed wet-
lands, as well as provides appropriate values for the
parameters of constructed wetland management. The
system dynamic model is calibrated and validated by
using data from a 1-year study of a constructed wetland
in Tainan of southern Taiwan. Additionally, the major
parameters that affect the simulation output are obtained
via sensitivity analysis by using generalized likelihood
uncertainty estimation (GLUE). A high R2 and Nash–
Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency between the simulated
and measured outflow values indicate that in addition to
reproducing the changing trends of dissolved oxygen
(DO), 5-day biological oxygen demand (BOD5), total
nitrogen (TN), total suspended sediment (TSS), and
total phosphorous (TP) concentrations, the model can
simulate the variations of DO, BOD5, and TSS. Taken
into account the interactions among parameters, the
GLUE method successfully obtained the model sensi-
tive parameters from the Monte Carlo parameter sets.
Sensitivity analysis results indicate that the parameters
of microorganisms are sensitive factors that affect DO,
BOD5, and TN, while sediment diameter largely influ-
ences TP and TSS. Further elucidating environmental
microorganisms would increase the model accuracy and
provide a valuable reference for constructed wetland
management and design.

Y.-C. Wang Keywords Constructed wetland . Water quality .

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
System dynamic model . Sensitivity analysis
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332, USA

Y.-P. Lin (*) : C.-W. Huang : L.-C. Chiang 1 Introduction

Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering,
National Taiwan University,
Taipei 10617 Taiwan, Republic of China
e-mail: yplin@ntu.edu.tw
H.-J. Chu
Department of Geomatics,
National Cheng Kung University,
Tainan 70101 Taiwan, Republic of China
W.-S. Ou
Department of Landscape Architecture,
National Chin-Yi University of Technology,
Taichung 41170 Taiwan, Republic of China
Free-water surface (FWS) constructed wetlands (CWs),
have been widely applied at various stages of wastewater
treatment and to treat water from different sources and
with diverse characteristics (Ghermandi et al. 2007;
Vymazal 2007). In FWS CWs, the effluent quantity of
suspended particles is usually reduced physically by ag-
gregation, sedimentation, filtration, and adhesion onto
macrophytes; chemical processes include volatilization
of ammonium, as well as adsorption and ion exchange
of phosphorous and heavy metals (Merz 2000).
2720
Microorganisms (both autotrophic and heterotrophic) and
aquatic macrophytes both play important roles on the
decomposition, mineralization, transformation (nitrifica-
tion and denitrification), and biological uptake from water
column (Kadlec and Knight 1996; Merz 2000; Wynn and
Liehr 2001). Natural filtration through FWS systems
provides a water reclamation solution that can meet reuse
quality standards for a variety of applications, in particu-
lar for no contact to medium quality uses (Ghermandi et
al. 2007). The removal performance of conventional
wastewater treatment parameters such as the biochemical
and chemical oxygen demand (biological oxygen de-
mand (BOD), COD), total suspended solids (TSS), and
nutrients has been object of extensive research in the last
two decades (Kadlec et al. 2000; Ghermandi et al. 2007).
As the popularity of, and interest, in wetlands have
increased, so has interest in modeling the processes that
occur within a wetland. However, a comprehensive
understanding of these processes is desirable in order
to design, model, manage, monitor, and maintain con-
structed wetlands. Different types of models such as
simple first-order plug flow model, K-C model, regres-
sion model, hydrodynamic model, stochastic model,
and system dynamic model have been developed to
simulate the processes of nutrient cycles in wetlands
(Kadlec and Knight 1996; Lee 1999; Wynn and Liehr
2001; Mayo and Bigambo 2005; Marsili-Libelli and
Checchi 2005; Chavan and Dennett 2008). Each type
of model has its own potential and constraints with
respect to the requirements and expectations of simulat-
ing nutrient cycles. Moreover, these wetland models
range from simple simulation using the wetland hydro-
logical cycle to more complex models involving hydro-
logical, N, P, TSS, and vegetation cycles (Kadlec and
Knight 1996; Lee 1999; Wynn and Liehr 2001; Lee et
al. 2002; Mayo and Bigambo 2005; Marsili-Libelli
and Checchi 2005; Chavan and Dennett 2008).
System dynamics (SD) approach, created in the mid-
1950s, is a powerful methodology and computer simu-
lation modeling technique for framing, understanding,
and discussing complex issues and problems and has
been used to model wetland systems by a number of
researchers, e.g., Lee (1999), Wynn and Liehr (2001),
Mayo and Bigambo (2005), Hafner and Jewell (2006),
Chavan and Dennett (2008), and Wang et al. (2009).
However, many of the simulation models for constructed
wetlands focus on either a few nutrient cycles or subsur-
face flow systems (Wynn and Liehr 2001; Mayo and
Bigambo 2005; Hafner and Jewell 2006; Chavan and
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
Dennett 2008; Wang et al. 2009); thus, a dynamic sim-
ulation model which describes most of the major nutrient
cycles in FWS constructed wetlands is expected.
Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses are primarily
concerned with the question of how model outputs are
affected by the variability of the model parameters and
input values. Sensitivity analysis is the determination
of which parameters predominately control the model
behavior (Beven and Freer 2001; Rankinen et al.
2006; Zhang et al. 2009), whereas uncertainty analysis
is the estimation of error in the model output due to
uncertainty in the model structure, parameters and data
inputs (Rankinen et al. 2006; Dean et al. 2009). Gen-
eralized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) is
an extension of the regional sensitivity analysis tech-
nique proposed by Spear and Hornberger in 1980 (Dean
et al. 2009). The GLUE technique developed by Beven
and Binley (1992) has been recently used extensively
for simultaneous calibration and uncertainty assessment
of hydrological and water quality models (Pastres and
Ciavatta 2005; Mantovan and Todini 2006; Rankinen et
al. 2006; Pohlert et al. 2007). Unlike other methods, the
GLUE technique allows assessment of the global uncer-
tainty present in various modeling elements (e.g., input
data, model structure, and parameter errors) in a way
that is conceptually easy to implement (Blasone et al.
2008).
The objective of this study is to develop a simulation
model for FWS constructed wetlands by using SD soft-
ware STELLA 5 (High Performance Systems 1990–
1997) in order to realize the interactions between circu-
lations of nutrients in wetland systems. From January to
December 2004, weekly sampling data were collected
from an FWS-constructed wetland pond in National
Cheng-Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan. Furthermore,
sensitivity analysis using the GLUE approach was ap-
plied to find the important parameters that affect water
treatment efficiency, and then calibration and validation
were used to assess the accuracy of the model. Accu-
rate prediction of system dynamics and identifica-
tion of the major parameters that affect FWS
constructed wetland treatment efficiency would pro-
vide useful tools for the design and operation.
2 Material and Methods
The model was developed using software STELLA 5
following the structural procedure for model development.
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
The physical, chemical, and biological processes in the
proposed FWS constructed wetland model followed
the descriptions in several studies (Lee 1999; Wynn
and Liehr 2001; Mayo and Bigambo 2005; Chavan
and Dennett 2008). Figure 1 show a brief overview of
the parameter subset selection and tuning procedure
referred the procedure of Brun et al. (2002) and
Chavan and Dennett (2008). In this study, model
calibration was included in the procedure. Next,
single-sensitivity analysis and uncertainty analysis of
model parameters were then processed. For model
calibration (from step 1 to 6), we have to define the
physical, chemical, and biological mechanism in the
proposed FWS constructed wetland model in the first
step. Because of the influences between parameters
and five outflow concentration predictions (dissolved
oxygen (DO), 5-day biological oxygen demand
(BOD5), total nitrogen (TN), total suspended sediment
(TSS), and total phosphorous (TP)), model calibration
Fig. 1 Procedure of a
systematic parameter set
selection
2721
would be a multi-objective problem. Assuming equal
weights for each objective, we integrate the multiple
objectives (Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency
(NSE) values of all target outputs, including DO,
BOD5, TN, TSS, and TP) into a single objective
function. Therefore, maximum of total Nash–Sutcliffe
coefficient of efficiency, NSEtotal would be represented
as the objective function in this study (step 2). A total
of 32 parameters were evaluated in this study (Table 1).
The initial values of all parameters were given by
referring to previous studies or the mean of the range
of literature values (step 3). One thousand parameter
set within the range of +10% and −10% of the initial
values of the current parameter set is then generated
by Monte Carlo simulation (step 4). After ranking the
performance of all parameter set, the current parameter
set would be replaced by better one (step 5). The
iteration to obtain the best set of parameters is stopped
until each NSE value of target outputs is satisfied with
2722 Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742

Table 1 Model calibration parameter values

Parameter Description Literature value Source Calibration

Autotroph system
δNSa Death rate of Nitrosomonas (1/day) 0.002 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.002
μmax_NSa The maximum growth rate of Nitrosomonas 0.01 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.0108
(1/day) 0.33–2.21 Jorgensen et al. (1991); Mayo
and Bigambo (2005); Wang et
al. (2009)
KNH4_NSa NH4+-N half saturation constant of NS (g/m3) 0.8 Weber and Tchobanoglous (1986) 1.24
1.0 Wynn and Liehr (2001)
KDO_NSa DO half saturation constant of NS (g/m3) 0.15–2.0 Kadlec and Knight (1996) 0.8378
1.0 Wynn and Liehr (2001)
Heterotroph system
δ`a Death rate of heterotroph (1/day) 0.005 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.005
μmax_aHTa The maximum growth rate of aerobic 0.015 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.018
heterotroph (1/day) 0.58; 3.65 Mashauri and Kayombo (2002)
μmax_anHTa The maximum growth rate of anaerobic 0.014 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.018
heterotroph (1/day) 0.58; 3.65 Mashauri and Kayombo (2002)
KNO3_HTa NH4+-N half saturation constant of HT (g/m3) 0.15 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.1887
KDO_HTa DO half saturation constant of HT (g/m3) 1.0 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 1.0
0.1–1.0
0.08; 0.9 Mashauri and Kayombo (2002)
KTOC_HTa TOC half saturation constant of HT (g/m3) 50 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 32.035
16.2232; Marsili-Libelli and Checchi (2005)
64.492
55; 185 Mashauri and Kayombo (2002)
Dissolved oxygen system
YHT_DOa DO yield coefficient of HT (g microbes/g O2) 0.813 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 6.22
YNS_DOa DO yield coefficient of NS (g microbes/g O2) 0.084 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 11.17
Phosphorous System
PTP Fraction of P in plant biomass (g P/g biomass) 0.0008 Jorgensen (1983) 0.0008
PPmina PP mineralization coefficient (1/day) N/A N/A 0.3
FacP/SSa The surface area fraction of SS occupied by P N/A N/A 0.1309
Carbon System
PTc Fraction of C in plant biomass (g C/g biomass) 0.47 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.4
PTdegration_r Biomass degradation rate of plants (1/day) 0.0063 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.0063
PTgrowth_ra Biomass growth rate of plants (1/day) 0.059TN+ Polomski et al. (2008) 0.059 TN+
13.48 13.48
BODCa Fraction of C in influent BOD (g C/g BOD5) 0.82 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.725
DOCleaching_r DOC leaching rate (1/day) 0.15 Kadlec (1986) 0.15
PCaccumulate_ra Peat carbon accumulate rate (1/day) 2300 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 2300
PCa Carbon fraction of peat (g C/g peat) 0.8 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.8
SSCa Carbon fraction of suspended sediment (g C/g SS) N/A N/A 0.8
MicrobNa Nitrogen fraction of microbes (g N/g microbes) 0.124 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.124
YHTa Heterotroph yield coefficient (g microbes/g C) 0.34; 0.75 Mashauri and Kayombo (2002) 1.0
Nitrogen system
PTC:N Ration of C to N in plant biomass 23.5 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 23.5
(g C/g N)
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742 2723

Table 1 (continued)

Parameter Description Literature value Source Calibration

Dr20a Denitrification rate constant at 20°C 0.0–1.0 Baca and Arnett (1976) 3.74
(1/day) 1.1–1.2 Tchobanoglous and Burton (1991)
0.025–0.61 Kadlec and Knight (1996)
0.002–0.46 Arheimer and Wittgren (2002)
0.195 Mayo and Bigambo (2005)
0.09–0.89 Chavan and Dennett (2008)
0.1369; 0.2197 Sonavane and Munavalli (2009)
θ1a Arrhenius constant for denitrification 1.02–1.09 Baca and Arnett (1976) 1.0485
1.08–1.10 Tchobanoglous and Burton (1991)
1.09 Beutel et al. (2009)
DONfixation_ra Fixation rate of DON (1/day) N/A N/A 0.2
YNSa Nitrosomonas yield coefficient 0.03–0.13 Charley et al. (1980) 0.02915
(g microbes/g N) 0.15 Mayo and Bigambo (2005); Wang
et al. (2009)
PN Nitrogen fraction of peat (g N/g peat) 0.025 Wynn and Liehr (2001) 0.025
SSN Nitrogen fraction of suspended sediment N/A N/A 0.2
(g N/g SS)
Suspended sediment system
dssa Settling particle diameter (m) 1×10−8 −1× Kadlec and Knight (1996) 4.91×10−6
10−6 (for clay)
1×10−6 −1× Kadlec and Knight (1996)
10−5 (for silt)
5×10−6 Mayo and Bigambo (2005)
a
Sensitive parameters for GLUE analysis (i.e. parameters which δ are greater than 0.1%)

the stop criterion (i.e., NSEDO >0.5) to ensure the
accuracy of all the model output predictions (step 6).
R2 and the NSE values of simulated output against
measured outflow concentrations are applied for both
model calibration and validation. Single sensitivity
analysis is then performed to obtain the sensitive
parameters (step 7) and produce parameter important
ranking (step 8) according to the predictions of the
system dynamic model to identify the sensitive param-
eter subset (step 9). Finally, uniform sampling is used
within the specified ranges that will normally produce
a good correlation with measured data (Page et al.
2003). Moreover, 5,000 parameter sets with the +30%
and −30% of above sensitive parameters from the
single-parameter analysis were applied in GLUE uncer-
tainty analysis (step 10). In addition, the measured and
simulated outflow values are statistically analyzed using
Statistical Package for Social Science 10.0 (SPSS Inc.
1989–2006).
2.1 Study Area and Data
The study area is a wetland pond constructed by the
Department of Architecture in National Cheng-Kung
University. The FWS pond treats wastewater from the
department building. The FWS treatment system, where
the data was collected, is 18.0 m long, 2.0 m wide, and
0.8 m deep with a 0.3 m layer of soil on the impermeable
base. The front half of the pond is planted with cattail
(Typha orientalis Presl.) and the rear half is planted with
water hyacinths (Eichhornia crassipes). During the
study period (January–December 2004), the water vol-
ume was maintained at approximately 12.2 m3 with 0.85
porosity (water depth 0.4 m). The measured wastewater
inflow rate was 2 m3/day from January to February 2004
and 3 m3/day from March to December 2004. The
retention time is the volume of the reactor divided by
the flow rate. Thus, the hydraulic retention time was 6.1
per day during the first period and 4.1 per day in the
2724
second period. Further details of the FWS system’s
operations can be found in Ou et al. (2006). The data
was collected weekly from January to December 2004
(Ou et al. 2006). For each water sample, the concen-
trations of DO, BOD5, ammonium-nitrogen (NH4+),
nitrate (NO3−), organic nitrogen (ON), TP, and TSS
were analyzed for both the inflow and the outflow. All
the analysis samples and data were collected according
to the standard method (APHA et al. 1995). The data
collected between January and June were used for mod-
el calibration, and those collected between July and
December were used for model validation. Climatolog-
ical parameters, such as the temperature, daily precip-
etation, and day length were obtained from Taiwan’s
Central Weather Bureau. Parameters that were not mea-
sured in the study area, such as the maximum growth
rates, half-saturation coefficients, and death rates of
microbes and macrophytes, were derived from previous
studies (Dawson and Murphy 1972; Jorgensen 1983;
Lee 1999; Wynn and Liehr 2001; Mayo and Bigambo
2005; Polomski et al. 2008) and recalibrated by our
model.
2.2 Model Construction
The proposed FWS model is comprised of eight sub-
models representing the water budget, dissolved oxy-
gen balance, carbon cycle, nitrogen cycle, suspended
particle content, phosphorous cycle, and bacteria pop-
ulations (autotrophic and heterotrophic) in wetland
systems (Fig. 2).
In the model, it is assumed that the wetland acts as a
single continuously stirred tank reactor (Lee 1999;
Reed et al. 1995; Wynn and Liehr 2001; Hafner and
Fig. 2 Conceptual model of a FWS constructed wetland
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
Jewell 2006; Wang et al. 2009). While many wetlands
are simulated as plug flow reactors (such as first-order
models: Kadlec and Knight 1996; Diederik et al. 2004;
Chavan and Dennett 2008; Chavan et al. 2008), the
actual flow conditions are between plug flow and
completely mixed scenarios; thus, a continuously
stirred tank reactor may be an alternative approach
(Lee 1999; Reed et al. 1995; Wynn and Liehr 2001).
Because of free lying water in the FWS systems, two
pools of water (a free-surface water layer and a sub-
strate water layer) are simulated for such systems (Lee
1999). Accordingly, the state variables with similar
circulation processes in each submodel are divided
into two categories for the free-surface and substrate
water layers.
2.2.1 Hydrological Submodel
The hydrological submodel calculated the water mass
balance of the hydrological cycle by the dynamic
water budget approach (Kadlec and Knight 1996;
Lee 1999; Chavan and Dennett 2008; Hull et al.
2008). The input data, including the inflow, outflow,
precipitation, and air temperature, were obtained from
the field investigation. The water lost through evapo-
transipiration was estimated by Thornthwaite’s meth-
od using the following equation:
nH nD 10  T a
PET ¼ 1:6  ð Þð Þð Þ ; ð1Þ
12 30 I
where, PET0potential evapotransipiration (centime-
ter), nH0the number of daylight hours, nD0the num-
ber of days in the month, T0the average monthly air
temperature (°C), and I0the annual heat index. The
heat index, I, and coefficient, a, were calculated using
the equations proposed by Jorgensen (1983).
2.2.2 Dissolved Oxygen Submodel
In the oxygen submodel, the sediment’s oxygen de-
mand, which is the oxygen consumed in the substrate
layer, is represented by oxidation processed by auto-
trophic and heterotrophic bacteria including their res-
piration patterns (Lee 1999; Wynn and Liehr 2001).
Biomass flux is the product of biomass oxygenation
resulting from photosynthesis. The oxygen is released
from the root zone of macrophytes in wetlands (Merz
2000; Hull et al. 2008; Kadlec 2008). Based on the
theory that processes like Knudsen diffusion are
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
responsible for root zone aeration (Grosse 1991), it is
assumed that there is a uniform vegetation stand
throughout the wetland system; thus, plants transport
oxygen to their roots at a constant rate during the
growing season. Autotrophic and heterotrophic respi-
ration patterns were calculated by dividing the micro-
bial growth by the oxygen yield rate of microbes (Lee
1999; Wynn and Liehr 2001).
The diffusion of DO between surface and substrate
pore water was estimated by the following mass trans-
fer equation (Lee 1999):
DOMT ¼ KDO MT  ðCBottom DO  CSurface DO Þ
where, DOMT 0the diffusion of DO from one pool to
the other (gram per day), KDO_MT 0mass transfer co-
efficient of DO (one per day), Csurface_DO 0the DO
concentration in surface water (gram per cubic meter);
CBottom_DO 0the DO concentration in substrate pore wa-
ter (gram per cubic meter), and A0the area of water–
substrate interface (square meter).
The reaeration process in wetlands is usually
explained by the general two-film theory, which is
based on mass transfer (Jorgensen 1983). The follow-
ing equations have been used to model the reaeration
process (Lee 1999; Wynn and Liehr 2001):
DOreair ¼ KaðT  CÞ  Adif  ðCs DO  CSurface
where,
KaðT  CÞ ¼ Kað20 CÞ θðrT20Þ ;
Kað20 CÞ ¼ 0:116 þ 2147:8S 1:2 ;
Cs DO ¼ 14:61996  0:40420  T þ 0:00842
 T 2  0:00009  T 3 ;
where, DOre-air 0the oxygen added through reaeration
(gram per day), Ka(T°C) 0the reaeration coefficient at
T°C (one per day), Adif 0the surface area through
which diffusion takes place (square meter), Cs_DO 0
the oxygen saturation concentration (gram per cubic
meter), CSurface_DO 0the DO concentration in the water
layer (gram per cubic meter), Ka(20°C) 0the reaeration
coefficient at 20°C (meter per day), θr 01.024; S0the
2725
slope of the wetland (meter per meter), and T0water
temperature (degree Celcius).
2.2.3 Carbon Submodel
In the carbon submodel, the particulate organic carbon
(POC) is defined as a homogeneous mixture of decay-
ing plant litter, sloughed microbial cells, and particu-
late influent wastewater BOD (Jansson and Persson
1982). The dissolved organic carbon (DOC) is a ho-
mogeneous mixture of dissolved influent BOD and
carbon compounds leached from decaying plant ma-
 A; terial. Biomass carbon is increased by plant growth
ð2Þ and reduced by plant death and the harvesting of live
plants. The amounts of growth, death, and removal of
living plants are determined by the rates of plant
growth and death, as well as the removal of parts of
living plant parts; the amounts vary according to the
season. Standing dead carbon as the results of plant
death is reduced by the removal of dead plant parts,
physical degradation, and leaching of standing dead
carbon to DOC.
POC in surface and substrate pore water is increased
by POC inflow, physical degradation of plants, and
microbial death; and reduced by POC mineralization,
peat accumulation, and POC outflow. POC exchange
between the free surface and substrate water layers
DO Þ; occurs through settling and resuspension of POC. The
ð3Þ two processes are related to sediment deposition and
resuspension modeled by the suspended sediment sub-
model. DOC in surface and substrate pore water is in-
creased by DOC inflow and dead biomass leaching, and
ð4Þ
reduced by DOC mineralization and DOC outflow. The
mass transfer of DOC between free surface and substrate
pore water through diffusion was estimated according to
ð5Þ the concentration gradient between the two layers.
The mineralization of POC and DOC, combined
with mineralization, immobilization, and ammonifica-
tion of particulate and dissolved organic nitrogen
ð6Þ (PON and DON), are modeled by an estimating meth-
od based on the works of Gidley (1995), Lee (1999),
and Wynn and Liehr (2001). Because of the presence
of anaerobic microsites in high DO concentration
areas and aerobic rootzones in low DO concentration
areas, anaerobic and aerobic bacteria are always pres-
ent. It is assumed that the percentage of each bacteria
and the average heterotrophic yield are functions of
DO concentration (Tchobanoglous and Burton 1991;
Wynn and Liehr 2001).
2726 Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742

8

2.2.4 Nitrogen Submodel >
>
DON
>
>  MicrobN  HTgrowth
>
> TON þ NH4
>
>
>
> TOC
Nitrogen basically comprises organic and inorganic >
> if > MicrobC:N
>
>
(e.g., NO3−-N, NH4+-N) nitrogen in wetland systems. < TON
DONimob ¼
To model the nitrogen cycle in FWS wetlands, the >
>

>
> DOC  
following processes are considered: ammonification, >
>  MicrobN  HTgrowth  NH4HT
>
> TOC
imob
>
>
immobilization, nitrification, denitrification, leaching, >
>
>
> TOC
fixation, peat accumulation, and biological uptake by : if < MicrobC:N ;
TON
plants (Lee 1999; Wynn and Liehr 2001; Mayo and
ð8Þ
Bigambo 2005; Chavan and Dennett 2008; Chavan et
al. 2008). The mass balance of PON in surface and
substrate pore water consists of the PON inflow, the
NH4HT imob ¼ MicrobN  HTgrowth  NH4 =ðTON þ NH4 Þ
sloughing of dead microbial cells, the physical degra-
dation of plants to PON, PON ammonification, PON ð9Þ
immobilization by heterotrophs, PON settling from 8
>
>
TOC
> MicrobC:N or POC < 0:1
>
> 0 if
free surface water, the resuspension of PON from the >
> TON2 3
>
>


>
>
bottom substrate layer, the accumulation of nitrogen in <
POC  6 HTgrowth  PON
> 7
peat, and PON outflow. DON in surface and substrate ¼ 46 YHT POC 7
PONammo
> TOC 5
>
>  
pore water is increased by DON inflow, the leaching >
>  Microb  HT growth  NH4HT
>
>
N imob
>
>
of N from standing dead plants, and nitrogen fixation; >
> TOC
: if < MicrobC:N ;
and it is reduced by DON ammonification, DON immo- TON

bilization by heterotrophs, plant DON uptake, and DON ð10Þ

outflow. NH4 in surface and substrate pore water com-
prises the NH4+-N inflow, nitrification of NH4+-N to 8
NO3−N, organism NH4+-N uptake, diffusion of NH4+- >
>
> 0 if
TOC
> MicrobC:N or DOC < 0:1
>
> TON
N from one pool to the other, and NH4+-N outflow. NO3 >
>
>
>
in surface and substrate pore water consists of NO3−-N <



DONammo ¼ DOC HTgrowth DON
inflow, plant NO3−-N uptake, NO3−-N denitrification, >
>
>
   DONimob
>
>
TOC YHT DOC
diffusion of NO3−-N from one pool to the other, and >
>
>
>
:
TOC
< MicrobC:N ;
NO3−-N outflow. The mass transfer of nitrogen (DON, if
TON
NH4+-N, and NO3−-N) between free surface and sub- ð11Þ
strate pore water through diffusion was estimated in the
same way as that used for DOC. where, PONimob 0PON immobilization (gram per day),
The utilization of nitrogen by microbes through DON imob 0DON immobilization (gram per day),
immobilization and ammonification is affected by the PON ammo 0PON ammonification (gram per day),
relative fractions of carbon and nitrogen in microbes DONammo 0DON ammonification (gram per day),
and their environment (Lee 1999): NH4HT_imob 0the NH4+-H utilized by heterotrophs dur-
ing organic degradation (gram per day), and MicrobN 0
the microbial N content (grams N per gram microbes).
8
 The denitrification process follows the Arrhenius
>
>
PON
 MicrobN  HTgrowth
>
> kinetics equation in the temperature range 3–28°C
>
> TON þ NH4
>
>
>
> TOC (Dawson and Murphy 1972); hence, the following
>
> if > MicrobC:N
>
> TON Arrhenius kinetics equation is used to model denitri-
<
PONimob ¼ fication (Mayo and Bigambo 2005):
>
>

>
> POC  
>
>  MicrobN  HTgrowth  NH4HT
>
> TOC
imob
NO3denitro ¼ Dr20  θ1 ðT 20Þ  NO3 ; ð12Þ
>
>
>
>
>
> TOC
: if < MicrobC:N ;
TON
where, NO3denitro 0the denitrification of nitrate to ni-
ð7Þ trogen gas (gram per day); Dr20 0the denitrification
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742 2727

rate constant at 20°C (one per day), θ1 0the Arrhenius attachment to accomplish the settling, resuspension, or
constant, which ranges from 1.02 to 1.09 (Tchobanoglous transformation of phosphorous. Following the works of
and Burton 1991; Beutel et al. 2009); T0the water tem- Christensen et al. (1994), Lee (1999), and Chavan and
perature (degree Celcius); and NO3 0the amount of nitrate Dennett (2008), we adjust the content of particulate
in the system (gram). phosphorous (PP) by PP inflow, PP settling, resuspen-
sion of PP, PP mineralization, and PP outflow. The
2.3 Total Suspended Sediment Submodel
settling and resuspension of particulate phosphorous,
which are directly related to sediment deposition and
In the TSS submodel, the mass balance for sediments
resuspension modeled in the sediment subsystem, are
in the wetland system, adapted from Christensen et al.
determined by the amount of sediment deposition and
(1994) and Chavan and Dennett (2008), includes the
resuspension multiplied by the ratio of the surface area
TSS inflow, sediment deposition from the free-surface
that is PP occupied and non-PP occupied. Mineraliza-
water layer to the substrate layer, resuspension of sedi-
tion of phosphorous is modeled as first-order equations
ments from the bottom of the wetland, and TSS outflow.
for both the surface and bottom categories of particles.
Recent studies have shown that for steady-state condi-
Dissolved phosphorous (DP) content is affected by DP
tions like those in constructed wetlands, where the flow
inflow, the diffusion of DP from one pool to the other,
velocity is small, settling is the major process of TSS
DP uptake by plants, and DP outflow. The mass transfer
removal (Reddy et al. 1999; Braskerud 2002b). The
of DP between free surface and substrate pore water
settling velocity of particles can be derived by Stokes
through diffusion is estimated in the same way as that
Law equation, which has been widely applied in the
used for the other dissolved nutrients mentioned above.
field (Kadlec and Knight 1996; Lee 1999; Braskerud
2002b; Chavan and Dennett 2008):
2.3.2 Autotroph Dynamics Submodel


Sg  1
Vsettling ¼ g  dss 
2
; ð13Þ In the autotroph dynamic submodel, the growth of
18  n
Nitrosomonas (NSgrowth) is estimated by Monod dual
where, Vsettling 0the settling velocity of sediment (meter substrate limitation kinetics combined with the effects
per second), g0the acceleration of gravity (meter per of the temperature and pH value (Wheaton et al. 1991;
square second), dss 0the diameter of a sediment particle Wynn and Liehr 2001):
(meter), Sg 0the specific gravity of the particle, and ν0
the kinematic viscosity of water (square meter per NSgrowth ¼ μNS  TempNS  pHNS  MNS ; ð15Þ
second).
The removal of suspended sediments by settling per


day (TSSSettling; one per second) is calculated as fol- CNH4 CDO
μNS ¼ μmax NS   ;
CNH4 þ KNH4 NS CDO þ KDO NS
lows (Chavan and Dennett 2008):
ð16Þ


Vsettling
TSSsettling ¼ ; ð14Þ where, μNS 0the actual NS specific growth rate (one
H per day), μmax_NS 0the NS maximum growth rate (one
per day), TempNS 0the temperature factor, pHNS 0the
where, H0the mean water depth of the wetland (meter).
pH value factor, MNS 0the amount of NS (gram), CNH4
As water velocity increases, there is a point at
and CDO 0the concentrations of NH4+-N and DO, re-
which the shear stress will detach particles from the
spectively (gram per cubic meter), K NH4_NS 0NS
wetland bottom (Lee 1999). Therefore, a critical ve-
NH4+-N half saturation constant (gram per cubic me-
locity can be determined to predict the resuspension of
ter), and KDO_NS 0NS DO half saturation constant
material from the wetland bottom.
(gram per cubic meter). The expression of Monod
kinetics modifies the NS growth rate when oxygen
2.3.1 Phosphorous Submodel or ammonium is limited. The half saturation constants
represent substrate concentrations at which the growth
The phosphorous cycle is assumed that the suspended of NS reaches its half maximum rate. The amount of
sediment particles use their surface area for phosphorous NS death is modeled as a first-order reaction because
2728
there is little knowledge about the factors that control
the death of microbes.
2.3.3 Heterotroph Dynamics Submodel
The growth of heterotrophic bacteria (HTgrowth) is also
estimated in a similar way as estimating the growth of
Nitrosomonas. In wetlands, where both anaerobic and
aerobic microsites exist, bacteria can utilize these con-
ditions for growth (Gidley 1995).
HTgrowth ¼ HTa growth þ HTan growth
¼ MHT  ðaμaHT þ ð1  aÞμanHT Þ  TempHT  pHHT



CTOC
μaHT ¼ μmax aHT   ;
CTOC þ KTOC HT



CTOC
 
CTOC þ KTOC HT
μanHT ¼ μmax anHT

CNO3
 ;
CNO3 þ KNO3 HT
where, HTa_growth and HTan_growth 0the growth of aero-
bic and anaerobic heterotrophs respectively (gram per
day); MHT 0the amount of HT (gram); α0fraction of
aerobic heterotroph (gram aerobic HT per gram HT);
TempHT 0the temperature factor; pHHT 0the pH value
factor; μaHT 0the actual aerobic HT specific growth rate
(one per day); μanHT 0the actual anaerobic HT specific
growth rate (one per day); μ max_aHT 0the aerobic
HT maximum growth rate (one per day); μmax_anHT 0
the anaerobic HT maximum growth rate (one/day);
CTOC, CDO, and CNO3 0concentrations of TOC, DO,
and NO3−-N, respectively (gram per cubic meter);
KTOC_HT 0HT TOC half saturation constant (gram per
cubic meter), KDO_HT 0HT DO half saturation constant
(gram per cubic meter); and KNO3_HT 0HT NO3−-N half
saturation constant (gram per cubic meter).
2.4 Model Calibration, Validation, and Sensitivity
and Uncertainty Analysis
In this study, the Nash—Sutcliffe coefficient of effi-
ciency (NSE) is used as a goodness-of-fit criterion and
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
as the likelihood measure (Rankinen et al. 2006) de-
fined as follows:
Lðθi jY Þ ¼ ð1  σ2i =σ2obs Þ; ð20Þ
where, L(θi|Y) denotes the likelihood measure for the
ith model simulation each state variable for parameter
vector θi conditioned on a set of observations Y,
σ2i denotes the associated error variance for the ith
model and σ2obs denotes the observed variance for the
period under consideration.
According to the model structure, five model out-
ð17Þ puts including DO, BOD5, TN, TSS, and TP predic-
tions are influenced by parameters interactively. In
order to find an optimal parameter set with accuracy
CDO of each model output prediction, the model calibration
CDO þ KDO HT would be formulated as a multi-objective problem.
ð18Þ Subjectively assuming the importance of each model
output prediction is equitable, we integrate multiple
objectives with an equal weight into a single objective
KDO HT function. The objective function (NSEtotal) is defined
CDO þ KDO HT as follows:
NSEtotal ¼WDO NSEDO þWBOD5 NSEBOD5 þWTN NSETN
ð19Þ
þWTP NSETP þWTSS NSETSS ; ð21Þ
where WDO ¼ WBOD5 ¼ WTN ¼ WTSS ¼ WTP , NSE i
denotes the NSE values of target outputs for i0DO,
BOD5,TN,TP,TSS, Wi denotes the weightings for the
NSE values of target output and subject to the equa-
tions of FWS constructed wetland model.
For the purpose of maintaining the accuracy of all
NSE values of target outputs at the same time, the stop
criterion is designed to terminate the calibration proce-
dure when each NSE value of target outputs (NSEDO,
NSEBOD5, NSETN, NSETSS, NSETP) is greater than 0.5.
After Monte Carlo simulation, the best parameter
set was selected and used for the single-sensitivity
analysis. In this study, single-sensitivity analysis was
preceded by increasing and decreasing the one param-
eter value of the best parameter set at one time by 10%
to represent upper (positive) and lower (negative)
bounds for each state variable (DO, etc.), respectively.
The sensitivity of the state variables to the parameter
in upper or lower bound is calculated as the ratio of the
relative absolute change in output to the change in one
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
parameter value (Eq. 22; Chavan and Dennett 2008).
Then, the mean of sensitivity measure δj can be de-
fined as the sensitivity of the mean model output to a
change in the parameter pj based on the mean square
sense (Eq. 23; Brun et al. 2002).
! TN, TSS, and TP outflow concentrations with that of
@xupper Pj @xlower Pj
Sij ¼ max i
upper ; ilower ð22Þ
@pj xi @pj xi
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1X n
dj ¼ S2 ð23Þ
n i¼1 ij
where, xi denotes the output of state variable i
with respect to the best parameter set; Pj denotes
the value of the parameter j in the best parameter
set; @xupper
i and @xlower
i denote the change of output
of state variable i with respect to parameter j in
upper and lower bounds, respectively, compared to
the output with respect to the best parameter set;
@pupper
j and @plower
j denote the change of parameter j
in upper and lower bounds, respectively. In this
study, the most important parameters are ranked
based on the δj values. A high δj implies that the
value of parameter pj significantly influences the
simulation results and a low one shows that the
simulation result does not depend on parameter pj
(Brun et al. 2002).
GLUE approach is implemented by sampling
from assumed probability models of uncertain
parameters and determining the propagation of the
uncertainty by model outputs. Accordingly, simula-
tions that achieve a likelihood value less than zero
are rejected as nonbehavioral (Viola et al. 2009).
However, the GLUE algorithm can comprehensively
evaluate the parameter likelihood function in a de-
fined parameter space, but requires intensive com-
putational time, such as using Monte Carlo
simulations in the GLUE algorithm. To reduce this
computational intensity, in this study, uncertainty
analysis is preceded by the above individual sensi-
tivity analysis to confine the evaluation of the pa-
rameter likelihood function to sensitive parameters.
Detailed discussions of the GLUE method can be
found in Beven and Binley (1992), Beven and
Freer (2001), and Zak et al. (1997).
2729
3 Results and Discussion
3.1 Model Calibration
Performance of the proposed model was evaluated by
comparing its output for simulations of DO, BOD5,
the measured values. Table 1 lists the calibrated pa-
rameter values and those derived from the literature.
Most of the calibrated values did not deviate signifi-
cantly from those in the literature. Actually, many of
the parameter values were either identical to or located
in the range of values of the literature, including those
related to microbial growth, i.e., growth rates, death
rates, and half-saturation constants.
In the carbon system, an attempt was made to
increase the prediction accuracy of BOD5 effluent
concentration by setting the calibrated values of bio-
mass carbon fraction (PTC) and BOD5 carbon fraction
(BODC) at 0.400 and 0.725, respectively, instead of at
the values reported in the literature (0.470 and 0.820,
respectively). The biomass growth rate of plants
(PTgrowth_r) was taken from the study by Polomski et
al. (2008), indicating that the growth rates of some
aquatic plants, such as cattails, increased linearly and
correlated well with the levels of nitrogen and phos-
phorous supplied. Next, an attempt was made to im-
prove the accuracy of simulation results of dissolved
oxygen by magnifying the DO yield coefficients of
autotrophic and heterotrophic bacteria by 1–2 orders
from the stoichiometry results of Wynn and Liehr
(2001). Specifically, the magnified coefficients were
0.084 (gram microbes per gram O2) to 11.17 (gram
microbes per gram O2) for autotrophs and 0.813 to
6.22 g microbes/g O2 for heterotrophs. Microbial res-
piration is proportional to microbial growth (Wynn
and Liehr 2001); the oxygen yield rate of microbes
implies the amount of microbial biomass growth by
consuming one unit weight of oxygen. While there
was deficient information about the microorganisms
in the study area, the species of autotrophs and heter-
otrophs and their populations were estimated based on
literature (Charley et al. 1980; Jorgensen 1983; Kadlec
1986; Jorgensen et al. 1991; Wynn and Liehr 2001;
Mayo and Bigambo 2005; Polomski et al. 2008).
However, parameters related to microbes, e.g., mi-
crobe species, size of each population, and the fraction
between dominant and subordinate communities,
heavily depend on the surviving conditions. Thus,
2730
magnified values of oxygen yields may attribute to
different surroundings in which microbes survive.
The Dr20 was increased from 1.0 (one per day) to
3.74 (one per day) to improve the simulation of nitro-
gen. Some of the parameters used to measure the
carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous systems could not
be found in the literature (Table 1); hence, further
experiments are warranted. The Arrhenius constant
for denitrification was 1.0485 within the range
(1.020–1.100) of previous studies.
Linear regression analysis results of calibration
(January to June 2004) suggest that this model
achieved an acceptable agreement between DO,
BOD5, TN, TSS, and TP output, with NSE and R2
values over 0.6 in calibration (Table 2). Moreover, the
NSE values of simulated outflow concentrations
against measured concentrations for DO and TSS are
greater than 0.80. Figure 3a–e show the calibration
results of simulated effluent values against measured
outflow concentrations of DO, BOD5, TN, TSS, and
TP. In each graph in Fig. 3, although replicating the
variation trend in the measured outflow value (dotted
line), the simulated value (solid line) of the outflow
concentration shows a smoother change curve. The
simulated DO outflow concentration was overesti-
mated from April to June in 2004 (Fig. 3a), which
may have contributed to the estimation errors about
plant density and the hours of daylight. As Tainan is in
a tropical region where afternoon storms, with a sub-
sequent increase in cloud cover, are common; thus,
overestimation of photosynthesis efficiency leads to
higher simulated DO values. Kadlec (2005, 2008) also
found that vegetation influences the oxygen supply to
Table 2 Calibration and validation results for simulated out-
flow values with measured outflow values
Water quality NSE
DO Calibration 0.814
Validation 0.773
BOD5 Calibration 0.804
Validation 0.722
TN Calibration 0.672
Validation 0.520
TSS Calibration 0.808
Validation 0.558
TP Calibration 0.545
Validation 0.745
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
surface water in several ways. For instance, emergent
vegetation may reduce reaeration by blocking the
wind and shading out algae.
In this study, the BOD5 outflow simulation values
correlated well with the measured effluent concentra-
tions in the first 2 months of the study period (i.e.,
January and February); however, a time lag occurred
between the simulation and measured outflow values
from March to mid May (Fig. 3b). The first highest peak
of BOD5 outflow concentration occurred at 3.25 months,
whereas the respective highest peak value in the simula-
tion occurred 1–2 weeks later. Despite the near impossi-
bility of the composition of inflow wastewater remaining
fixed all of the time, the ratio of POC to DOC might be
attributed to a time lag between the simulation and
measured outflow values. The TN in the calibration
period (Fig. 3c) was slightly underestimated due to the
low simulated values of NH4+-N and NO3−-N resulting
from the high nitrification and denitrification rates ini-
tially. Nitrification is the process whereby ammonium
(used by autotrophic bacteria as an electron source) is
converted into nitrate. This process is modeled as the
quotient of Nitrosomonas growth and Nitrosomonas
yield (Lee 1999). The water temperatures of the study
area during the simulation period were measured from
16°C to 28°C, which was located in the optimal temper-
ature range affecting Nitrosomonas growth (Wynn and
Liehr 2001), the efficiency of nitrification is significantly
related to Nitrosomonas population. In the same way, the
process of denitrification is normally conducted by
microbes which also involved in nitrification; in addi-
tion, the rate of denitrification is affected by Nitrosomo-
nas population as well. Since the Nitrosomonas
population was overestimated initially, the high efficien-
cy of nitrification resulted in the simulation values for
TN (Mayo and Bigambo 2005).
Simulated outflow concentrations of TSS and TP
R2
correlated with the measured values (Fig. 3d, e). Since
0.610 the simulation processes of TSS and TP depend on
0.718 particle deposition and resuspension, physical factors
0.768 (e.g., water velocity and particle diameter) significantly
0.671 impacted the results. This study followed most studies of
0.707 modeling wetland processes in assuming that particles
0.514 are spheres. This assumption should be discussed in the
0.826 future to increase the accuracy of the proposed model.
0.747 Microbial respiration is proportional to microbial growth
0.606
(Wynn and Liehr 2001); the oxygen yield rate of
0.721
microbes implies the amount of microbial biomass
growth by consuming one unit weight of oxygen.
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
Fig. 3 Comparison between measured outflow, simulated outflow, and inflow concentrations of a DO, b BOD5, c TN, d TSS, and e TP
from January to December 2004
3.2 Model Validation
Linear regression analysis results of model validation
(July–December 2004) suggest that the proposed
model achieved an acceptable agreement between the
DO, BOD5, TN, TSS, and TP output with NSE and R2
values exceeding 0.5 in the model validation step
(Table 2). Moreover, the NSE values of simulated
outflow concentrations against measured concentra-
tions for DO, BOD5, and TP are greater than 0.70.
2731
Figure 3 also shows the results of model validation
(the data collected between July and December 2004)
for all five water quality items (i.e., DO, BOD5, TN,
and TP). The especially low value (i.e., lower than the
inflow concentration) of the measured outflow DO
concentration in the first week of July may be attrib-
uted to the reduced reaeration caused by the vegetation
cover (Kadlec 2008) or to technical errors in the in-
strument; it was thus taken out as an outlier. The extent
to which the model overestimates the outflow DO
2732
concentration from June to July may be attributed to
the overestimated plant photosynthesis rate resulting
from the raining season in Tainan (Fig. 3a). The sim-
ulated values of BOD5 effluent were an almost perfect
fit with the measured outflow values, except for the
underestimation of data in November (Fig. 3b). Since
many of the parameters related to vegetation, such as
the growth, death, and degradation rates of plants,
were obtained from the literature (Wynn and Liehr
2001; Polomski et al. 2008), the lower simulation
values of BOD5 may be attributed to the different
degradation rates of plants in different climatic
regions. Microbial respiration is proportional to mi-
crobial growth (Wynn and Liehr 2001); the oxygen
yield rate of microbes implies the amount of microbial
biomass growth by consuming one unit weight of
oxygen. Effluent TN concentrations were overesti-
mated from June to July and underestimated from July
to August in the model validation results (Fig. 3c). In
the proposed model, the main processes that reduce
TN are the uptake of ammonium and organic nitrogen
by organisms (plants and microbes) as well as the
nitrification of ammonium. Estimation errors of both
the autotrophic and heterotrophic bacteria populations
may contribute to the overestimation of TN because of
the influence and variability of microbes on nitrogen
transformation processes such as nitrification. Lower
efficiency of nitrification and nitrogen uptakes
resulted in the higher values of TN concentrations.
Additionally, among the several internal and external
factors affecting the nitrogen uptake of plants and
microbes included the C/N ratios in organisms and
the environment, growth rates of organisms, tempera-
ture variations, and pH values (Lee 1999; Wynn and
Liehr 2001; Mayo and Bigambo 2005; Chavan and
Dennett 2008). A situation in which the ratio of TOC/
TON is less than that of MicrobC:N implies that mi-
crobial growth is C limited and the amounts of POC
and DOC utilized by heterotrophs are based on the
relative fraction of each. However, if the ratio of TOC/
TON exceeds that of MicrobC:N, the environment is N
limited for microbial growth. Microbes utilize the
organic nutrients (DON and PON) by immobilization.
They turn transform some of the nutrients into an
inorganic form and release them back into the water
through mineralization or ammonification (Lee 1999;
Wynn and Liehr 2001). Notably, this study did not
directly measure data of microorganism processes of
the study wetland. However, measured data of
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
microorganism processes increase the effectiveness
and accuracy of wetland models for modeling TN
concentrations.
Concentrations of TSS were sensitive to disturban-
ces caused by plant harvesting and precipitation (Ou et
al. 2006). The TSS simulation followed the trend of
measured outflow concentrations and correlated well
with the values except for the first month in the vali-
dation period (i.e., July; Fig. 3d). Simulation results
for the TP effluent were good to fit the measured TP
values, while exhibiting a smoother shape of high
peak value between August and October (Fig. 3e).
Since the TP processes were estimated by first-order
equations, the variation trend of outflow TP concen-
tration heavily depended on the inflow TP concentra-
tion. Thus, the shape of the TP effluent variation curve
from August to October was similar to the shape of TP
inflow concentration curve. Moreover, the underesti-
mated values of outflow TP concentration in the last
month of the study resulted from overestimation of the
plant uptake at the end of the growing season, i.e., the
effect of plant dormancy was more evident in the
actual situation. However, a year of simulation data
may be insufficient to calibrate a phosphorus model
due to storages turn over at the time scale of a couple
years and a wide band of stochastic phosphorus re-
moval behavior by all wetland (Kadlec and Knight
1996).
3.3 Sensitivity Analysis
Table 3 shows the single-sensitivity analysis results
and ranks of parameter sensitivity with the best set of
model parameters after the calibration procedure using
Monte Carlo simulation. A high δj means that the
value of the parameter δj has an important influence
on the simulation result, while a value of zero indi-
cates that the simulation result does not depend on the
parameter pj (Brun et al. 2002). The parameters with δj
values greater than 0.1 are considered as sensitive
model parameters (Table 3). Parameters with the sen-
sitivity index approaching zero imply that individual
parameters affected the simulations insignificantly.
However, some of the parameters marked with an aster-
isk in Table 1 influenced the outflow concentrations,
individually and jointly (Table 3). The DO concentra-
tion was highly sensitive to the parameters related to
microbes, including the maximum growth rates, half
saturation constants, and DO yield coefficients of both
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742 2733

Table 3 Sensitivity analysis for model parameters

Sensitivity SDO,j (%)b c

SBOD5 ;j ð%Þb c STN,j (%)b c STSS,j (%)b c
STP,j (%)b c δj (%)d Rank
Parameter ja

dss 0 0 0.01 15.36 2.98 6.997 1

Θ1 0.99 0.45 14.91 0 0 6.686 2
BODC 1.48 8.03 0.57 0 0 3.660 3
μmax_NS 0.68 0.01 6.91 0 0 3.105 4
YNS 0.94 0.01 6.43 0 0 2.906 5
YHT_DO 3.04 0.01 0.93 0 0 1.422 6
KDO_NS 0.15 0.04 2.33 0 0 1.044 7
Dr20 0.34 0.15 2.28 0 0 1.033 8
μmax_aHT 1.7 0.59 0.43 0 0 0.827 9
KTOC_HT 1.43 0.6 0.34 0 0 0.710 10
YNS_DO 1.47 0 0.43 0 0 0.685 11
FacP/SS 0 0 0 0 1.49 0.666 12
μmax_anHT 1.02 0.42 0.26 0 0 0.507 13
YHT 0.1 1.1 0.12 0 0 0.497 14
PPmin 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.402 15
PCaccumulate_r 0.65 0.11 0.27 0 0 0.319 16
PC 0.65 0.11 0.27 0 0 0.319 17
KNH4_NS 0.25 0.04 0.53 0 0 0.263 18
KDO_HT 0.13 0.03 0.04 0 0 0.062 19
SSC 0.13 0.02 0.03 0 0 0.060 20
MicrobN 0.11 0.02 0.04 0 0 0.053 21
δNS 0.01 0 0.09 0 0 0.040 22
DONfixation_r 0 0 0.07 0 0 0.031 23
KNO3_HT 0.06 0.02 0.01 0 0 0.029 24
δHT 0.03 0.04 0 0 0 0.022 25
PTc 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 26
PTdegration_r 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 27
DOCleaching_r 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 28
PTC:N 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 29
PN 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 30
SSN 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 31
PTP 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 32
a
Definitions of the symbols are shown in Table 2
b
Percentiles which are smaller than 0.01% are shown as 0.00% in the table
c
Sij shows the largest sensitivity for change in parameter at upper or lower bounds
Sij ¼ maxð@p@x i =xi
upper ; @xi =xi Þ;
=pj @plower =p
j j j

@pupper
j represents the change of parameter j in upper bound (the prediction simulated by 10% increase or decrease of best parameter set);
@plower
j represents the change of parameter j in lower bound (the prediction simulated by 10% increase or decrease of best parameter set).
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P5
d
d j ¼ 15 Sij2
i¼1
2734
autotrophic and heterotrophic bacteria. The DO yield
coefficients of autotrophic and heterotrophic bacteria
largely affect DO concentrations because they influence
directly the respiration of microbes that belong to flows
of DO stokes in the proposed model. Some other param-
eters related to biological and chemical oxidation of
microbes (i.e., BODC, Dr20, θ1, YNS) also obviously
influenced the DO simulation. The DO concentration
is inversely proportional to the microbial level since
oxygen is consumed increasingly by aerobic biological
processes, such as microbial respiration, nitrification
and the decomposition of other organisms. This obser-
vation confirms the findings of Wynn and Liehr (2001),
who posited that excessive aerobic bacteria growth
caused the underestimation of DO concentrations. Ad-
ditionally, the nitrogen contents in microbes and sedi-
ments were inadequately sensitive by adjusting 10%
variation of the parameter values.
BOD5 and TN concentrations were also sensitive to
microbial parameters, which affected DO concentra-
tions. This finding suggests that BOD5 and TN concen-
trations are highly related to DO because, in wetlands,
many of the degradation, transformation, and minerali-
zation processes depend on microorganisms (Lee 1999;
Mayo and Bigambo 2005). Since heterotrophic bacteria
play an important role in carbon mineralization and
decomposition, BOD5 is sensitive to populations of het-
erotrophs and the amount of carbon in the BOD inflow.
In contrast, TN is highly sensitive to parameters of
autotrophic bacteria (Nitrosomonas), Arrhenius constant
for denitrification (θ1), and the Dr20, which affect the
efficiency of nitrification and denitrification (Dawson
and Murphy 1972; Mayo and Bigambo 2005; Beutel et
al. 2009). Compared to the effects autotrophs on TN, TN
concentrations are also slightly sensitive to heterotroph
parameters since heterotrophic bacteria are also respon-
sible for ammonification and immobilization of nitrogen.
The particulate fraction of inflow ON also significantly
affects TN, while particulate and dissolved ON go
through different reduction processes in the proposed
model.
In the proposed model, microbial or plant related
parameters did not affect the TP and TSS outflow
concentrations, except for the slight influence of the
plant biomass phosphorous fraction (PTP) on the TP
concentration (i.e., the δi of PTP were smaller than
0.01% and shown as 0.00% in Table 3). The fact that
the phosphorous cycle highly depends on the sus-
pended sediment cycle in the proposed model explains
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
why the TP concentration is sensitive to the dss, which
is a highly sensitive factor for TSS. Besides, outflow
TP concentrations are sensitive to P occupied sedi-
ment surface area (FacP/SS), which is also related to
particles. This finding validates the results of previous
studies, which determined that particle settling is the
major phosphorous removal mechanism (Reddy et al.
1999; Braskerud 2002a; Chavan and Dennett 2008).
3.4 Model Uncertainty Analysis
For a situation in which calibration data are limited
and the input parameters are highly uncertain, the
model output contains a large degree of uncertainty
(Hassan et al. 2008). In such a case, a more quantita-
tive use of the calibration data and the calibration
goodness-of-fit results is critical for appropriately
quantifying the predictive uncertainty (Hassan et al.
2008). Moreover, as parameter sets rather than indi-
vidual parameter values are of primary importance, the
interaction between parameters is simply taken into
account in GLUE (Page et al. 2003). In this study, a
range of model responses rather than a single response
was predicted using all behavioral parameter sets.
Each parameter set was used to simulate the proposed
model, in which the chosen likelihood measures were
evaluated and the model as accepted as behavioral or
rejected as nonbehavioral on the basis of its goodness
of fit (Page et al. 2003).
Figures 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 show the sensitivity of the
above 18 individual sensitive parameters to DO,
BDO5, TN, TSS, and TP, respectively. Each dot rep-
resents the NSE index of one parameter set from the
5,000 Monte Carlo simulations. The best simulation
tends to occur in a particular section of the parameter
space, or where all behavioral simulations are restrict-
ed to a smaller region of the parameter space than the
given range (−30% to +30% of parameters in this
study; Page et al. 2003). GLUE sensitivity analysis
results indicate that sensitive parameters included
BODC (fraction of C in influent BOD) in simulating
BOD5, θ1 (Arrhenius constant for denitrification) in
simulating TN, Dr20 in simulating DO and TN, dss in
simulating TSS and TP, and FacP/SS in simulating TP.
These GLUE sensitivity analysis results also reflect
the feasible parameter spaces and demonstrate the
relationship between model efficiency and model
parameters in this study. The scatter plots also
revealed that feasible values of the parameters range
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742 2735

Fig. 4 Scatter plots of NSE values associated with sensitive parameters based on the GLUE method for simulating DO
2736 Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742

Fig. 5 Scatter plots of NSE values associated with sensitive parameters based on the GLUE method for simulating BOD5
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742 2737

Fig. 6 Scatter plots of NSE values associated with sensitive parameters based on the GLUE method for simulating TN
2738 Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742

Fig. 7 Scatter plots of NSE values associated with sensitive parameters based on the GLUE method for simulating TSS
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742 2739

Fig. 8 Scatter plots of NSE values associated with sensitive parameters based on the GLUE method for simulating TP
2740
over most of the calibration values. Apparently, little
or no sensitivity is available for the remaining param-
eters for which good simulations are found across the
full given range of parameter values, depending on the
values of the other parameters in the set giving a
behavioral simulation.
4 Conclusions
The proposed model incorporates and simulates most
of the main nutrient cycles in constructed wetlands by
using a system dynamics approach, which considers
the complex interactions between nutrient metabo-
lisms in wetland systems as well as the completeness
of the model calibration. Additionally, there are five
state variables of model output predictions (DO,
BOD5, TN, TSS, and TP) which could be intricately
related by the model parameters. The parameter sen-
sitivity and uncertainty in wetland modeling are stud-
ied using the single parameter sensitivity and GLUE
analyses. Many of the parameter values of the pro-
posed model correlate with those found in the litera-
ture, except for a few plant and microbe-related
factors. Modeling results indicate that high R2 and
NSE values between the simulated and measured out-
flow concentrations reveal that the proposed model
can reproduce accurately the seasonal trends of all five
factors. Taken into account the interactions among
parameters, the GLUE method was successfully used
to obtain the parameter uncertainty from the Monte
Carlo simulations. The parameters of microorganisms
are sensitive factors that influence DO, BOD5, and TN
simulations; meanwhile, sediment diameter is the ma-
jor factor influencing TP and TSS. The interactions
and the relationships between cycles are evident dur-
ing simulation of the proposed model.
Further increasing the prediction accuracy of the
proposed model requires more closely examining
some parameters obtained from the literature, includ-
ing the composition of suspended sediments and sub-
strate liters, the species and populations of bacteria
(autotrophs, aerobic heterotrophs, and anaerobic heter-
trophs), and the actual growth rates of plants. Since
living plants roots exude carbon compounds, i.e. an
important factors affecting microbial growth, a future
study should consider this component. Moreover, in
the proposed model, the same categories of microbial
parameters are assigned the same values in both the
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
free surface water and substrate layers. As is well
known, the environments of different species of
microbes may vary, making it relatively easy to un-
derestimate the importance of microbe-related factors
and ultimately degrade the simulation accuracy of the
proposed model. Facilitating the design and manage-
ment of constructed wetlands requires improving the
simulation model by more closely examining environ-
mental microorganisms in constructed wetlands. Fu-
ture studies should also examine how flow patterns
affect constructed wetlands. Further considerations
about mechanisms of phosphorous cycle should be
more detailed and could be integrated into the pre-
sented phosphorous submodel. Finally, the effects of
flow patterns as well as the actual mixing conditions in
constructed wetlands should be included in the future.
References
American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water
Works Association, Water Environment Federation.
(1995). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater (19th ed.). Washington: American Public
Health Association.
Arheimer, B., & Wittgren, H. B. (2002). Modelling nitrogen
retention in potential wetlands at the catchment scale.
Ecological Engineering, 19(1), 63–80.
Baca, R. G., & Arnett, R. C. (1976). A limnological model for
eutrophic lakes and impoundments, Battelle, Inc. Richland,
Washington: Pacific Northwest Laboratories.
Beutel, M. W., Newton, C. D., Brouillard, E. S., & Watts, R. J.
(2009). Nitrate removal in surface-flow constructed wetlands
treating dilute agricultural runoff in the lower Yakima Basin,
Washington. Ecological Engineering, 35, 1538–1546.
Beven, K. J., & Binley, A. (1992). The future of distributed
models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hy-
drological Processes, 6, 279–298.
Beven, K., & Freer, J. (2001). Equifinality, data assimilation,
and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of
complex environmental systems using the GLUE method-
ology. Journal of Hydrology, 249(1–4), 11–29.
Blasone, R. S., Madsen, H., & Rosbjerg, D. (2008). Uncertainty
assessment of integrated distributed hydrological models
using GLUE with Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling.
Journal of Hydrology, 353, 18–32.
Braskerud, B. C. (2002a). Design consideration for increased
sedimentation in small wetlands treating agricultural run-
off. Water Science and Technology, 45(9), 77–85.
Braskerud, B. C. (2002b). Measurement and modelling of phos-
phorus retention in small constructed wetlands treating agri-
cultural non-point source pollution. 7th IWA Conference on
Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. Institute of
Food Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, 1, 75–85.
Brun, R., Kühni, M., Siegrist, H., Gujer, W., & Reichert, P.
(2002). Practical identifiability of ASM2d parameters—
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
systematic selection and tuning of parameter subsets. Water
Research, 36(16), 4113–4127.
Charley, R. C., Hooper, D. G., & Mclee, A. G. (1980). Nitrifi-
cation kinetics in activated sludge at various temperatures
and dissolved oxygen concentrations. Water Research, 14,
1387–1396.
Chavan, P. V., & Dennett, K. E. (2008). Wetland simulation
model for nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediments retention in
constructed wetlands. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 187,
109–118.
Chavan, P. V., Dennet, K. E., Marchand, E. A., & Spurkland, L.
E. (2008). Potential of constructed wetland in reducing
total nitrogen loading into the Truckee River. Wetlands
Ecology and Management, 16(3), 189–197.
Christensen, N., Mitsch, W. J., & Jorgensen, S. E. (1994). A first
generation ecosystem model of the Des Plains river exper-
imental wetlands. Ecological Engineering, 3, 495–521.
Dawson, R. W., & Murphy, K. L. (1972). The temperature
dependency of biological denitrification. Water Research,
6, 71–73.
Dean, S., Freer, J., Beven, K., et al. (2009). Uncertainty assess-
ment of a process-based integrated catchment model of
phosphorus. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk
Assessment, 23(7), 991–1010.
Diederik, P. L., Rousseaua, P. A., & Vanrolleghemb, N. D. P.
(2004). Model-based design of horizontal subsurface flow
constructed treatment wetlands: a review. Water Research,
38, 1484–1493.
Gidley, T.M. (1995). Development of a constructed subsurface
flow wetland simulation model. M.S. thesis. North Carolina
State University, Raleigh, NC
Ghermandi, A., Bixio, D., & Thoeye, C. (2007). The role of free
water surface constructed wetlands as polishing step in
municipal wastewater reclamation and reuse. Science of
Total Environment, 380, 247–258.
Grosse, W. (1991). Thermoosmotic air transport in aquatic plants
affecting growth activities and oxygen diffusion to wetlands
soils. In D. A. Hammer (Ed.), Constructed wetlands for
wastewater treatment (pp. 469–476). Chelsea, MI: Lewis.
Hafner, S. D., & Jewell, W. J. (2006). Predicting nitrogen and
phosphorus removal in wetlands due to detritus accumula-
tion: a simple mechanistic model. Ecological Engineering,
27(1), 13–21.
Hassan, A., Bekhit, H., Chapman, J. (2008). Uncertainty assess-
ment of a stochastic groundwater flow model using GLUE
analysis. Journal of Hydrology, 362(1–2), 89–109.
Hull, V., Parrella, L., & Falcucci, M. (2008). Modelling dis-
solved dynamics in coastal lagoons. Ecological Modelling,
211, 468–480.
Jansson, S. L., & Persson, J. (1982). Mineralization and immobi-
lization of soil nitrogen. In F. J. Stevenson (Ed.), Nitrogen in
Agricultural Soils (pp. 229–252). Madison: American Soci-
ety of Agronomy, Inc., Crop Science Society of America,
Inc., and Soil Science Society of America, Inc.
Jorgensen, S. E. (1983). Application of ecological modelling in
environmental management, part A. New York: Elsevier.
Jorgensen, S. E., Nielsen, S. N., & Jorgensen L. A. (1991).
Handbook of ecological parameters and ecotoxicology.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Kadlec, J. A. (1986). Nutrient dynamics in wetlands. In K. R.
Reddy, & W. H. Smith (Eds.), Aquatic Plants for Water
2741
Treatment and Resource Recovery (pp. 393–419).
Orlando, FL: Magnolia Publishing.
Kadlec, R. H. (2005). Vegetation effects on ammonium reduc-
tion in treatment wetlands. In J. Vymazal (Ed.), Natural
and constructed wetlands: nutrients, metals and manage-
ment (pp. 233–260). Leiden: Backhuys.
Kadlec, R. H. (2008). The effects of wetland vegetation and
morphology on nitrogen process. Ecological Engineering,
33(2), 126–141.
Kadlec, R. H., & Knight, R. L. (1996). Treatment wetlands.
Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Kadlec, R. H., Knight, R. L., Vymazal, J., Brix, H., Cooper, P.,
& Haberl, R. (2000). Constructed wetlands for pollution
control — processes, performance, design and operation.
IWA Scientific and Technical Report No. 8. London, UK:
IWA Publishing.
Lee, E.R. (1999). Set-Wet: a wetland simulation model to opti-
mize NPS pollution control. M.S. Thesis. Virginia State
University, Blacksburg, VA.
Lee, E. R., Mostaghimi, S., & Wynn, T. M. (2002). A model to
enhance wetland design and optimize nonpoint source
pollution control. Journal of the American Water Resour-
ces Association, 38(1), 17–32.
Mantovan, P., & Todini, E. (2006). Hydrological forecasting
uncertainty assessment: Incoherence of the GLUE method-
ology. Journal of Hydrology, 330(1–2), 368–381.
Marsili-Libelli, S., & Checchi, N. (2005). Identification of dy-
namic models for horizontal subsurface constructed wet-
lands. Ecological Modelling, 187, 201–218.
Mashauri, D. A., & Kayombo, S. (2002). Application of the two
coupled models for water quality management: facultative
pond cum constructed wetland models. Physics and Chem-
istry of the Earth, 27, 773–781.
Mayo, A. W., & Bigambo, T. (2005). Nitrogen transformation in
horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands I: model de-
velopment. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 30, 658–667.
Merz, S. K. (2000). Guidelines for using free water surface
constructed wetlands to treat municipal sewage. Australia:
Queensland Department of Natural Resources.
Ou, W. S., Lin, Y. F., Jing, S. R., & Lin, H. T. (2006). Perfor-
mance of a constructed wetland–pond system for treatment
and reuse of wastewater from campus buildings. Water
Environment Research, 78(12), 2369–2376.
Page, T., Beven, K. J., Freer, J., & Jenkins, A. (2003). Investi-
gating the uncertainty in predicting responses to atmo-
spheric deposition using the model of acidification of
groundwater in catchments (MAGIC) within a generalized
likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) framework. Wa-
ter, Air, and Soil Pollution, 142, 71–94.
Pastres, R., & Ciavatta, S. (2005). A comparison between the
uncertainties in model parameters and in forcing functions:
its application to a 3D water-quality model. Environmental
Modelling & Software, 20(8), 981–989.
Pohlert, T., Huisman, J. A., Breuer, L., & Frede, H. G. (2007).
Integration of a detailed biogeochemical model into SWAT
for improved nitrogen prediction––model development,
sensitivity, and GLUE analysis. Ecological Modelling,
203, 215–228.
Polomski, R. F., Taylor, M. D., Bielenberg, D. G., Bridges, W.
C., Klaine, S. J., & Whitwell, T. (2008). Differential nitro-
gen and phosphorous recovery by five aquatic garden
2742
species in laboratory-scale subsurface-constructed wet-
lands. HortScience, 43(3), 868–874.
Rankinen, K., Karvonen, T., & Butterfield, D. (2006). An ap-
plication of the GLUE methodology for estimating the
parameters of the INCA-N model. Science of the Total
Environment, 365(1–3), 123–139.
Reddy, K. R., Kadlec, R. H., & Gale, P. M. (1999). Phosphorus
retention in streams and wetlands: a review. Environmental
Science & Technology, 29(1), 83–146.
Reed, S. C., Middlebrooks, E. J., & Crites, R. W. (1995).
Natural systems for waste management and treatment
(2nd ed.). NY: McGraw-Hill.
Sonavane, P. G., & Munavalli, G. R. (2009). Modeling nitrogen
removal in a constructed wetland treatment system. Water
Science & Technology, 60(2), 301–309.
SPSS 10.0, 1989–2006, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL.
STELLA (1990–1997). High Performance Systems. Hanover, NH.
Tchobanoglous, G., & Burton, F. L. (1991). Wastewater engi-
neering: treatment, disposal, and reuse (3rd ed.). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Viola, F., Noto, L. V., Cannarozzo, M., et al. (2009). Daily
streamflow prediction with uncertainty in ephemeral catch-
ments using the GLUE methodology. Physics and Chem-
istry of the Earth, 34(10–12), 701–706.
Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:2719–2742
Vymazal, J. (2007). Removal of nutrients in various types of
constructed wetlands. Science of the Total Environmental,
380, 48–65.
Wang, Y., Zhang, J., Kong, H., Inamori, Y., Xu, K., Inamori, R.,
& Kondo, T. (2009). A simulation model of nitrogen trans-
formation in reed constructed wetlands. Desalination, 235,
93–101.
Weber, A. S., & Tchobanoglous, T. (1986). Prediction of nitri-
fication in water hyacinth treatment systems. Journal Wa-
ter Pollution Control Federation, 58, 376–380.
Wheaton, F., Hochheimer, J., & Kaiser, G. E. (1991). Fixed film
nitrification filters for aquaculture. In D. E. Brune & J. R.
Tomasso (Eds.), Aquaculture and water quality (pp. 272–
303). Baton Rouge: The World Aquaculture Society.
Wynn, T. M., & Liehr, S. K. (2001). Development of a con-
structed subsurface-flow wetland simulation model. Eco-
logical Engineering, 16, 519–536.
Zak, S., Beven, K. J., & Reynolds, B. (1997). Uncertainty in the
modelling of critical loads: a practical methodology. Water,
Air, and Soil Pollution, 98, 279–316.
Zhang, X. S., Srinivasan, R., & Bosch, D. (2009). Calibration
and uncertainty analysis of the SWAT model using genetic
algorithms and Bayesian model averaging. Journal of Hy-
drology, 374(3–4), 307–317.