Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Agricultural Water Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat

Review

Comparison of international standards for irrigation with reclaimed water

Panpan Zhao a, b, Meng Ma b, Yaqi Hu b, Wenyong Wu b, *, Juan Xiao a, *
a
College of Water Resource Science and Engineering, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, PR China
b
State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycles in River Basins, Department of Irrigation and Drainage, China Institute of Water Resources and
Hydropower Research, Beijing 100048, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling editor: Dr. B.E. Clothier Water shortage problems have received wide attention since the past decades as the global environment and
climate continue to change. To tackle with this escalating challenge, generations of study has been conducted in
Keywords: the research for water utilization efficiency. Reclaimed water has been widely used in many countries for in­
Reclaimed water dustry, agriculture and landscape. Despite the economic value and environmental benefits the reclaimed water
Agricultural irrigation
brings,. contents such as heavy metal ions, organic pollutants and pathogenic microorganisms may enter the soil-
Green space irrigation
plant-atmosphere system, thus posing potential environmental health risks. Therefore, many laws, guidelines and
Water quality
International standards standards have been published to maintain the security of irrigation with reclaimed water. This paper compares
the standards of irrigation with reclaimed water among different organizations and countries by analyzing the
similarities and differences from different types of classification and water quality parameters requirements, in
which their advantages and limitations are demonstrated. Finally, some suggestions are provided for future
development and modification of the relevant standards in this field.

1. Introduction
With global climate and environmental changes, water stress and
shortage are increasing. In 2018, there were 2.3 billion people living in
countries with water shortages, with 721 million of them in countries
with high or critical levels of water stress (UNDP, 2021). In the coming
decades, the global demand for water resources will increase signifi­
cantly. Agriculture consumes more than 70% of water resources, and the
demand for water resources for industry and energy production will also
climb significantly (UNESCO, 2017).
Recycling part of the water resources and improving the water uti­
lization efficiency can help alleviate the water shortage problem.
Reclaimed water is already widely used in many countries in industrial,
agricultural, municipal and landscape applications (Yang et al., 2013;
Fan et al., 2016). According to statistical information from the Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) and United Nations (UN), the actual
global irrigated area is 2.75 million km2 (AQUASTAT, 2014). The
wastewater used and generated by agricultural irrigation cannot be
ignored. Municipal wastewater is the main source of wastewater used
directly in agriculture, with 11% of global water withdrawals from
municipalities, of which 8% is discharged as wastewater, i.e. about 330
km3 of municipal wastewater may be used to irrigate 40 million hm2 of
agricultural land per year (wastewater use of about 8000 m3/hm2)
(Mateo-Sagasta et al., 2015), representing 15% of the total irrigated
area. Municipal wastewater reuse, including agricultural irrigation, is
common in regions and countries such as the Middle East, North Africa,
the Mediterranean region, Australia (AUS), China, Mexico and the
United States (USA) (UNESCO, 2017). In addition to agricultural irri­
gation, reclaimed water can also be used for landscape and green space
irrigation within municipality, such as irrigation in parks, highway
green belts, landscapes around houses, golf courses, etc.(EPA, 2004).
Compared with untreated wastewater irrigation, the pollution risk of
reclaimed water irrigation is much lower, and the reclaimed water
contains nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and organic
matters that may contribute to plant growth. Reclaimed water irrigation
can also reduce pollutant emissions in the water environment, reduce
the use of chemical fertilizers, and improve soil quality, thereby pro­
ducing certain environmental benefits(Chen et al., 2014, Feng et al.,
2003). The use of reclaimed water helps to reduce the self-cleaning
pressure on environmental waters, thus helping to promote a virtuous
cycle between irrigation water and environmental waters. And irriga­
tion with reclaimed water also has certain economic benefits. The re­
covery of by-products such as salt, nitrogen and phosphorus from the
production of reclaimed water helps to reduce treatment and operating

* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: wenyongwu@126.com (W. Wu), 569318898@qq.com (J. Xiao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107974
Received 2 August 2022; Received in revised form 1 October 2022; Accepted 3 October 2022
Available online 24 October 2022
0378-3774/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
P. Zhao et al.
costs, and includes the assessment of environmental benefits and the
promotion of recycled water for the community, which helps to increase
the willingness of the government and the public to invest and consume
it (Li et al., 2014a, 2014b; UNESCO, 2017). It can be seen that in the field
of agricultural and green space irrigation, reclaimed water irrigation has
great application potential. At the same time, studies have confirmed
that the reclaimed water may contain a variety of toxic trace substances
(such as organic pollutants, heavy metal ions, etc.) and pathogenic mi­
croorganisms. These pollutants will enter the soil, vegetation, and
groundwater with irrigation and accumulate, which may harm the
soil-plant ecosystem, cause certain pollution to groundwater, and then
threaten human health (Ofori et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2017; Lyu et al.,
2022). Therefore, reclaimed water irrigation needs to be regulated by
certain laws and regulations, as well as some standard guidelines. Some
organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the Eu­
ropean Union (EU), and the UN. have closely followed the issue of
reclaimed water and have published relevant documents (WHO, 2006;
EP and CEU, 2018; EP and CEU, 2020; UNESCO, 2017). However, there
are still many shortcomings. For instance, the Sustainable Development
Goal target 6.3 of UN (UN SGD 6.3), which related to wastewater reuse
and water quality, still lacks wastewater data for many countries (WHO
and UNHABITAT, 2018). Other relevant international, regional and civil
society organizations are still scarce. And relevant regional or global
research exchanges, surveys and statistics, and information disclosure
still need to be strengthened. It has been reported that the area irrigated
with unsafe wastewater may be ten times the area irrigated with treated
wastewater, even more.(Scott et al., 2010). Therefore addressing the
issue of reclaimed water and regulating its use can help reduce the
environmental and health risks associated with water pollution. Even
the current widely required level of secondary treatment can already
largely remove biodegradable organic matters from wastewater, with
considerable environmental and social benefits (Li et al., 2014a, 2014b;
UNESCO, 2017).
Based on the above background, this paper compares and analyzes
the guidelines and standards related to irrigation with reclaimed water
from different countries and organizations around the world, reviews
the development history and characteristics of different types of classi­
fication, analyzes the similarities and differences in water quality pa­
rameters as well as advantages and disadvantages of them. It is expected
to provide some common references and update suggestions for related
standards.
2. Overview of reclaimed water irrigation standards
2.1. Standards related to water reuse worldwide
Many organizations and countries have promulgated laws, regula­
tions, guidelines and standards for irrigation with reclaimed water. The
World Health Organization published “WHO Guidelines for the Safe Use
of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater” in 2006 (WHO, 2006).
In 2002, 2007 and 2010, China issued the “GB/T 18919–2002 The
Reuse of Urban Recycling Water—Classified Standard”, “GB
20922–2007 The Reuse of Urban Recycling Water—Quality of Farmland
Irrigation Water” and “GB/T 25499–2010 The Reuse of Urban Recycling
Water—Water Quality Standard for Green Space Irrigation” (AQSIQ,
2002a; AQSIQ, 2007; AQSIQ, 2010). In 2020, “GB/T 18920 The Reuse of
Urban Recycling Water—Water Quality Standard for Urban Miscella­
neous Use” replaced the 2002 version (AQSIQ, 2002b; AQSIQ, 2020).
The industry standard “SL368–2006 Standards of Reclaimed Water
Quality” was also released in 2006 (MWRC, 2007). The Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan also formulated
“Guidelines for the Reuse of Treated Wastewater” in 2005 (MLIT, 2005).
In 2004, the USA Environmental Protection Agency issued “Guide­
lines for Water Reuse”, which was revised in 2012 (EPA, 2004; EPA,
2012). At the same time, some states in the United States have also is­
sued relevant legal provisions, such as “the California water recycling
2
Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974
criteria” in California, “the guidelines, titled reuse of treated wastewater
guidance manual” in Pennsylvania, and “New Hampshire’s land treat­
ment and disposal of reclaimed wastewater” in New Hampshire (EPA,
2004; EPA, 2012). AUS published “Australian Guidelines for Water
Recycling: Managing Health and Environmental Risks” in 2006 (EPHCA,
2006). Russia enacted “SanPiN 2.1.7.573–96 Hygienic Requirements to
Wastewater and Sewage Sludge Use for Land Irrigation and Fertiliza­
tion” in 1996 (MHR, 1996). In 2010, Israel enacted the “Public Health
Ordinance: Effluent Quality Standards and Rules for Sewage Treat­
ment”. It replaces 1992 regulations on wastewater treatment from
“Public Health Ordinance” (WAI, 2010; WAI, 1992).
Although the EU has long begun to control wastewater reuse, it is
mostly in the form of legal provisions. The EU has also been exploring
uniform standards and regulations. In 2018, it issued a draft regulation
of “Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Mini­
mum Requirements for Water Reuse”, and issued an official document in
2020 (EP and CEU, 2018; EP and CEU, 2020). Many EU countries have
also issued relevant standards. For example, Cyprus issued “No. 106
(1)/2002, the Water Pollution Control act 2002′′ in 2002, on this basis,
“Decree No. 296/03.06.05, General Conditions for Disposing of Waste
from Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants” was introduced in 2005
(MANREC, 2002; MANREC, 2005). France issued “Regulations on the
Reuse of Irrigation Water for Agriculture and Green Space” in 2010 and
amended them in 2014 (MSAPHF, 2010; MSAPHF, 2014). Greece issued
“KYA673/400/199, No. 5673/400 Measures and Conditions for Pro­
cessing Municipal Wastewater” in 2002, and “FEK B 354/08–03–2011,
DECISIONS No.co.145116, Determination of Measures, Conditions and
Procedures for the Reuse of Treated Wastewater and Other Provisions”
in 2011 (MEECCG, 2002; MEECCG, 2011). In Italy, “The Regulating
Technical Standards for Wastewater Reuse” was issued in 2003(MEI,
2003) And in 2006, Portugal issued “The Guidelines for Good Practice of
Water Reuse for irrigation: Portuguese standard NP 4434′′ (IQP, 2005).
Spain issued “Spanish Regulations for Water Reuse, Royal Decree
1620/2007′′ in 2007 (ASERSA, 2007), etc.
Jordan was introduced “JS 893:2006 Water—Reclaimed domestic
wastewater” in 2006, replacing “JS 893:2002 Water –Reclaimed
Wastewater” (ISMJ, 2006; ISMJ, 2002) Saudi Arabia enacted “Treated
Sanitary Wastewater and Its Reuse Regulations” in 2000 (MOWE, 2000).
2.2. Classification of reclaimed water irrigation uses
For the recycling of wastewater, there is no unified guideline docu­
ment in the international arena (Li et al., 2009a; Li et al., 2009b; Li et al.,
2014a, 2014b). Parameters and values of reclaimed water quality
standards are related to their classifications based on irrigation pur­
poses, crop types, and irrigation methods. The standard classifications of
various organizations and countries combine some local characteristics
(Li et al., 2014a, 2014b). Table 1 summarizes the classifications of
reclaimed water irrigation standards of some organizations and
countries.
The purposes of reclaimed water irrigation will involve farmland
irrigation and green space or landscape irrigation. Irrigation of farmland
is the most widely involved, such as the standards of US, China, Spain
and Saudi Arabia (EPA, 2012; AQSIQ, 2007; ASERSA, 2007; MOWE,
2000). The European Union, AUS, France, Greece, Portugal and Jordan
have more specific agricultural or other uses (EP and CEU, 2020;
EPHCA, 2006; MSAPHF, 2014; MEECCG, 2011; IQP, 2005, JISM, 2006).
Green space or landscape irrigation are often used as a subordinate
branch of municipal miscellaneous uses, such as American and Spanish
standards (EPA, 2012; ASERSA, 2007), but they are also separately
classified as an important use in countries such as China, Greece and
Japan (AQSIQ, 2010; MEECCG, 2011; MLIT, 2005), Landscape irriga­
tion is also listed separately in the Australian guidelines (EPHCA, 2006).
When reclaimed water is used for agricultural irrigation, it needs to
be differentiated according to the type of crop. Different crop types
imply different crop usages, crop characteristics, and exposure risks of
 P. Zhao et al.
Table 1
Classification of Reclaimed Water Irrigation Standards.
Country/ Classification of reclaimed water irrigation standards References
Organization

WHO Unrestricted irrigation Restricted irrigation Localized (drip) irrigation WHO (2006)
EU A: All food crops consumed raw where the B: Food crops consumed raw C: Food crops consumed raw where the D: Industrial, energy and seeded crops EP and CEU
edible part is in direct contact with where the edible part is edible part is produced above ground and is (2020)
reclaimed water and root crops consumed produced above ground and is not in direct contact with reclaimed water, CEU, 1991
raw not in direct contact with processed food crops and non-food crops
reclaimed water, processed including crops used to feed milk- or meat-
food crops and non-food crops producing animals (drip irrigation or other
including crops used to feed irrigation method that avoids direct contact
milk- or meat-producing with the edible part of the crop)
animals (all irrigation
methods)
USA Urban reuse Agricultural reuse EPA (2012)
Unrestricted Restricted Food crops Processed food crops/non-food crops
Japan Sprinkling water MLIT (2005)
China Farmland irrigation Green space irrigation Forestry irrigation MWRC
Fibre crops Dry grain Wet grain Open-air Unrestricted Restricted access green space (2007)
vegetables access green irrigation AQSIQ
space irrigation (2007)
AQSIQ
(2020)
AUS Commercial food crops Commercial food Nonfood Pasture or fodder crop Pasture or fodder crop irrigation (including Landscape irrigation EPHCA
consumed raw or crops crops irrigation (including hay, hay, silage and commercial fodder (2006)
unprocessed silage and commercial production). Withholding period
fodder production).
Limited withholding
3

period
Russia Unrestricted irrigation MHR (1996)
Israel Unrestricted irrigation WAI (2010)
Cyprus All crops (it is forbidden to irrigate leafy Vegetables eaten cooked Crops for human consumption amenity Fodder crops Industrial crops MANREC
vegetables, bulbs and tubers eaten by eggs.) (potatoes, zucchini and areas of limited public access (2002)
sweet potatoes) MANREC
(2005)
France A: Vegetable, fruit and vegetable crops not processed by an B: Vegetable, fruit and C: Nurseries and shrubs and other floral D: Short-rotation or very short-rotation coppice, with MSAPHF
appropriate industrial heat treatment (except watercress); vegetable crops transformed crops; other cereal and forage crops; fruit controlled public access (2014)
green space open to the public by an adapted industrial heat trees
treatment; pasture; flowers
sold cut; fresh fodder
Greece Restricted irrigation: Unrestricted irrigation Urban uses and periurban green MEECCG
Areas where public access is not expected, fodder and industrial All crops such as fruit trees, vegetables, vines or Cemeteries, golf courses, public parks, freeway embankments, recreational (2002)

Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

crops, pastures, trees (except fruit trees), provided that fruits are not crops whose products are consumed raw, facilities, fire protection, street cleaning and decorative; including groves and MEECCG
in contact with the soil, seed crops and crops whose products are greenhouses. Allows the application of various forests (2011)
processed before consumption methods of irrigation, including sprinkler
irrigation.
Italy Irrigation of food and nonfood crops, green areas, parks, and sport fields MEI, 2003
Portugal A: Vegetables to be B: Public parks and gardens, sport C: Vegetables to be D: Cereals (except rice), vegetables for industrial process prior to consumption, crops for textile industry, IQP (2005)
eaten raw lawns, forest with public easy access cooked, forage crops, crops for oil extraction, forest and lawns located in places of difficult or controlled public access.
vineyards, orchards
Spain Urban uses Agricultural uses Recreational uses Environmental uses ASERSA
Q1: Q2: Q1: Crop irrigation Q2: Irrigation of crops for Q3: Localized irrigation of tree crops Golf courses Irrigation of woodland, green areas and (2007)
Irrigation of Landscape using a system human consumption using whereby reclaimed water is not allowed to irrigation other space not accessible to the public;
private gardens irrigation of whereby reclaimed application methods that come into contact with fruit for human silviculture
urban areas water comes into do not prevent direct consumption; irrigation of ornamental
(parks, sports direct contact with contact of reclaimed with flowers, nurseries and greenhouses whereby
(continued on next page)
P. Zhao et al. Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

people exposed to crop. Organizations and Countries such as EU, USA,

AUS, Cyprus, France, Greece, Portugal, and Spain divide edible crops

ISMJ (2006)
References
into food crops, processed edible crops, and unprocessed / processed

MOWE
(2000)
commercial food crops to eat (EP and CEU, 2020; EPA, 2012; EPHCA,
2006; MANREC, 2005; MSAPHF, 2014; MEECCG, 2011; IQP, 2005;
ASERSA, 2007). The standard of Jordan is not allowed to use reclaimed
water to irrigate vegetables that are eaten raw, and irrigation must be
stopped two weeks before harvesting the crop when using reclaimed
water for the purposes of irrigating fruit trees, with the exclusion of
fallen fruits that are in contact with the soil (ISMJ, 2006). China divides
it into dryland cereal and oil crops (wheat, soybean, corn, etc., which
rely on natural precipitation and artificial irrigation in arid and
semi-arid areas), and paddy fields Cereals (rice, etc., which should grow
in deep and fertile soil, and maintain a certain water layer of cereal
crops), and open-field vegetables (except greenhouse vegetables that
need to be processed, cooked and peeled) (AQSIQ, 2007). Cereals and oil
crops are also specified in Portuguese and Spanish standards. France,
Cut flowers

Portugal and Spain have classifications that take into account vegetables
and fruit trees (IQP, 2005; ASERSA, 2007; MSAPHF, 2014).
For inedible crops, EU, AUS, Cyprus, Greece, Portugal, Spain, etc., all
consider fodder crops (EP and CEU, 2020; EPHCA, 2006; MANREC,
2005; MEECCG, 2011; IQP, 2005; ASERSA, 2007), Chinese standards
C: Field crops, industrial crops and forest

consider fiber crops (cotton, jute, flax and other crops that produce plant
Restricted irrigation

fiber) (AQSIQ, 2007), and Portugal also considers crops for textile (IQP,
reclaimed water does not come into contact
with the crops; irrigation of industrial non-
food crops, nurseries, silo fodder, cereals

2005).
The division of countries such as the US is only based on whether it is
edible or need to be processed, which is more inclined to consider from
the perspective of consumers. However, for the division of dryland and
paddy fields in China (AQSIQ, 2007) and the subdivision of crop types in
France, Portugal and Spain, more factors were considered such as the
textile and edible purposes, the difference in the growth environment of
dryland and paddy crops, processing methods (oil extraction, cooking,
trees
and oilseeds

and peeling), in which not only the consumers demands but also the
perspectives of producers are considered (MSAPHF, 2014; IQP, 2005;
B: Fruit trees, sides of roads outside

ASERSA, 2007).
Unrestricted irrigation

WHO, China, USA, Israel, Cyprus, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Saudi

Arabia all have unrestricted irrigation and restricted irrigation divisions
edible parts of the plants,

Agricultural uses
city limits, and landscape
irrigation of pasture land
which are not eaten raw

(WHO, 2006; AQSIQ, 2010; EPA, 2012; WAI, 2010; MANREC, 2005;
but after an industrial

producing animals

MEECCG, 2011; IQP, 2005; ASERSA, 2007, JISM, 2006). The unre­
treatment process;

for milk- or meat-

stricted irrigation defined by WHO mainly refers to the freedom of

contact between crops and consumers (WHO, 2006). The definitions of
restricted and unrestricted irrigation in other standards are similar, but
they will be described in more detail on specific occasions. Such as,
urban reuse of reclaimed water in the US has unrestricted irrigation and
Restricted irrigation

restricted irrigation two categories. Description of unrestricted irriga­

A: Cooked vegetables, parks, playgrounds and sides of roads
edible parts of crops

tion is the use of reclaimed water for nonpotable applications in

Classification of reclaimed water irrigation standards

to be eaten raw

municipal settings where public access is not restricted, and description

of restricted irrigation is the use of reclaimed water for nonpotable ap­
plications in municipal settings where public access is controlled or
restricted by physical or institutional barriers, such as fencing, advisory
signage, or temporal access restriction. The above urban uses refer to the
irrigation of places or areas such as recreational field, golf course,
grounds and

landscape, parks and recreation centers, athletic fields, school yards and
similar)

playing fields (EPA, 2012). The reuse of urban recycling water in China
Unrestricted irrigation

divides green space irrigation into unrestricted green space and

restricted green space, similar to that of the United States. Unrestricted
within city limits

green space refers to green space that is completely open to the public,
such as parks, residential areas and campus green space, etc. Restricted
Urban use

green space refers to green space that restricts public access, such as
highway green belts, cemeteries and other green space (AQSIQ, 2010).
Table 1 (continued )

Compared with agricultural irrigation, which still has laws to follow,

the division of green landscape is more chaotic. In addition to the
Organization

Saudi Arabia

common municipal reuse branches, green space irrigation such as gar­

Country/

dens or green belts, and landscape irrigation, China discusses reclaimed

Jordan

water forestry reuse alongside agricultural and pasture reuse, referring

to forestry and ornamental plant irrigation, planting and raising

4
P. Zhao et al. Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

seedlings (MWRC, 2006). Sprinkling water in Japanese standards refers indicators, but also has a certain flexibility of execution. (Table 2).
to irrigate trees, plants and lawns or flush roads (MLIT, 2005). Greece The Russian standard mainly distinguishes between sewage reuse
counts golf irrigation as Urban uses and Periurban green (MEECCG, and sludge reuse (MHR, 1996). Israeli wastewater treatment standards
2011). Spain defines golf course irrigation as recreational uses (ASERSA, are relatively strict. According to soil sensitivity, it is divided into un­
2007). The French, Spanish and Jordanian standards all take into ac­ restricted irrigation and river water replenishment while ensuring that it
count horticultural uses such as nurseries, floral crops, cut flowers, and is almost harmless to the soil and water sources (WAI, 2010). Although
ornamental crops (MSAPHF, 2014; ASERSA, 2007; ISMJ, 2006). the Italian standard does not provide a more detailed classification of
In terms of irrigation methods, WHO considers that it can be uses and occasions, it gives many reference indicators (MEI, 2003).
moderately relaxed under drip irrigation conditions (WHO, 2006). The Some EU countries have more detailed classification of reclaimed
EU also imposes restrictions on drip irrigation or other irrigation water standards in terms of specific uses, which is more meaningful for
methods that avoid direct contact with edible parts for food crops, countries with higher water quality treatment levels. Cyprus, France,
processed food crops and non-food crops (EP and CEU, 2020). The urban Portugal and Jordan divide the quality of reclaimed water into different
reuse of the Greek standard also takes into account the prohibition of grades, and the corresponding grades of irrigation water can be selected
sprinkler forms of irrigation. that it can be moderately relaxed under for different purposes (MANREC, 2005; MSAPHF, 2014; IQP, 2005;
drip irrigation conditions (MEECCG, 2011). The Spanish standard calls ISMJ, 2006). This classification method may become a trend after the
for broader turbidity limits when drip or micro-sprinkler irrigation is refinement and development of reclaimed water irrigation.
used (in Table 6) (ASERSA, 2007). Jordanian standards require that
sprinkler irrigation is prohibited except for golf course irrigation, which 3. Reclaimed water quality parameters
must be done at night (ISMJ, 2006). With the development and popu­
larization of various irrigation methods, the formulation of reclaimed 3.1. Organic and nutrient parameters
water irrigation standards should pay more attention to taking irrigation
methods into consideration. The parameters of organic and nutrients mainly include Biochemical
In addition, Jordan divides the standards into standard groups and Oxygen Demand (BOD5), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Dissolved
guidelines. the former is used to require the implementation of strict Oxygen (DO), Anionic Surfactants (LAS), Total Phenol (TPh), Volatile
compliance with the basic water quality parameters limit values, the Phenol (VPh), Pentachlorophenol (PCP), Chloral, Tetrachloroethylene
latter is used to guide the implementation of the control of heavy metals (PERC), Total Chlorinated Solvents (TCS), Total Aldehydes (TAl),
and other meticulous water quality parameters (ISMJ, 2006). Chinese Acrolein, Formaldehyde (FORMALD), Trichloromethane (Sum of con­
reclaimed water agriculture and greening reuse standards divide the centrations, TTHM), Total Aromatic Solvents (TAS), Benzo(a)pyrene [B
parameters into two major categories: basic control items and selective (a)P], Benzene, Total Phosphorus (TP), Total Nitrogen (TN), Ammonia
control items (AQSIQ, 2007; AQSIQ, 2010). United Nations Environ­ Nitrogen (NH+ 4 ), Totail Organic Nitrogen Solvents (TONS), Fat Oil and
ment Programme Global Environment Monitoring System for Fresh­ Grease (FOG), Petroleum (Petro.), and Pesticides etc. Most countries
water also divided into 1-level simple water quality parameters and have given BOD limit values, and parameters such as COD, DO, LAS,
2-level parameters (UNEP, 2021). This grouping method not only en­ nitrogen and phosphorus are also involved constantly.
sures the comprehensiveness and basic security of the measurement BOD, COD and DO are comprehensive parameters of organic pollu­
tion in water bodies. Higher BOD values indicate higher organic content
and more serious pollution in water (Zhang and Yang, 2011; Xu and
Table 2 Wang, 2018) COD measures the level of organic pollution in a water
Parameters groups.
body by the oxygen produced from the oxidation of organic matter by
Group 1 Group 2 References strong chemical oxidants (Wang and Wang, 2022). The content of DO
China: Basic control Selective control parameters: AQSIQ can reflect the quality of water and its self-purification ability (Wu and
Farmland parameters: Be, Co, Cu, Fluoride, Fe, Mn, (2007) Zhu, 2020). BOD focuses on reflecting organic pollutants that can be
irrigation BOD5, COD, SS, DO, Mo, Ni, Se, Zn, B, V, Cyanide, degraded by microorganisms. COD focuses on measuring the organic
pH, TDS, Chloride, CN, Trichloroacetaldehyde,
compound oxidized by the oxidant. DO focuses on the oxygen content in
Sulfide, Residual Acrolein, Formaldehyde,
chlorine, Petroleum, Benzene the water itself. Due to the difficulty of degradation of organic pollutants
Volatile Phenol, in water bodies and the strong dependence on biochemical degradation,
LAS, Hg, Cd, As, Cr BOD organic pollution has a strong comprehensive measurement effect.
(6 +), Pb, Fecal Currently, many standards mostly use five-day biochemical oxygen de­
Coliform, Ascaris
Lumbricoides Eggs
mand (BOD5), and COD and DO can be considered as additional pa­
China: Basic control Selective control parameters: AQSIQ rameters to supplement the measurement of organic pollution.
Green parameters: SAR, Cd, As, Hg, Cr (6 +), Pb, (2010) Common nitrogen and phosphorus parameters include TN, Kjeldahl
space Turbidity, smell, Be, Co, Cu, Fluoride, Mn, Mo, AQSIQ -
Nitrogen, NH+ 4 , Nitrate Nitrogen (NO3), Elemental Phosphorus, TP, etc.
irrigation chromaticity, pH Ni, Se, Zn, B, V, Fe, CN, (2020)
As important nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus play an important role
TDS, BOD5,Total Trichloroacetaldehyde,
residual chlorine, Acrolein, Benzene, SO2-4
in the growth and development of crops. Nitrogen promotes plant
Chloride, LAS, NH+ 4, growth under long-term effects (Liang et al., 2021). Phosphorus plays a
Fecal coliform, role in photosynthetic reactions, cells energy transfer and respiration
Ascaris (Marschner, 2011; Fernandes et al., 2015). Excessive intake of Nitrogen
Lumbricoides egg,
DO, Fe, Mn, E. coli,
and Phosphorus will also have certain adverse effects on crops, such as
Jordan Standards group: Guidelines.：Phenol, MBAS, Ulimat affecting the population structure of cotton fields, leading to premature
BOD5, COD, DO, TDS, T-PO4, Cl, SO4, HCO3, (2012) aging of hybrid bolls and reduced yield of hybrid cotton (Yang et al.,
TSS, pH, NO3, TN, E. Na, Mg, Ca, SAR, Al, As, Be, ISMJ 2020). The Nitrogen and Phosphorus levels in normal wastewater
coli, Intestinal Cu, F, Fe, Li, Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, (2006)
treatment results are basically within the controllable range, but for
Helminthes Eggs, Se, Cd, Fe, Zn, Cr, Hg, V, Co,
FOG B, CN some special cases, such as in sandy soils with low Phosphorus content
UNEP Level 1： Oxygen, Level 2: Additional UNEP, and high mobility (Saentho et al., 2022), and acidic soils where high
GEMS/ Salinity, parameters 2020 Nitrogen content tends to exacerbate soil acidification (Tian and Niu,
Water Phosphorus, 2015), Therefore, it is recommended to select appropriate Nitrogen and
Nitrogen, pH
Phosphorus parameters and limit values according to the results of water

5
 P. Zhao et al.
Table 3
Comparison of organic and nutrient index of reclaimed water and irrigation water in various countries.
CY./ORG. Classification Parameters (mg/L, except for markings)

BOD5 COD DO LAS TPh VPh PCP Chl- PERC TCS TAl Acr- FOR- TT- TAS B (a) Ben- TP TN NH+
4 TO- FOG Petro. Pesti-
oral olein MALD HM P zene NS cides

EU (EP and CEU, 2020) A ≤ 10 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

B/C/D ≤ 35 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
USA (EPA, 2012) Urban reuse (Unrestricted) ≤ 10 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Urban reuse (Restricted) ≤ 30 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Agri. Reuse (Food Crops) ≤ 10 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Agri. Reuse (Processed Food ≤ 30 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Crops/Non-Food Crops)
Japan (MLIT, 2005) Sprinkling water ≤ 20 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
China (AQSIQ, 2007; Farmland (Fibre crops) 100 200a) ≥ 8.0 – 1.0 – 0.5 – – – 0.5 1.0 – – – 2.5 – – – – – 10 –
MWRC, 2007; AQSIQ, 0.5
2010; AQSIQ, 2020) Farmland (Dry grain) 80 180a) ≥ 8.0 – 1.0 – 0.5 – – – 0.5 1.0 – – – 2.5 – – – – – 10 –
0.5
Farmland(Wet grain) 60 150a) ≥ 5.0 – 1.0 – 0.5 – – – 0.5 1.0 – – – 2.5 – – – – – 5.0 –
0.5
a)
Farmland (Open-air vegetables) 40 100 ≥ 5.0 – 1.0 – 0.5 – – – 0.5 1.0 – – – 2.5 – – – – – 1.0 –
0.5
Forestry ≤ ≤ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
35b) 90a)
Green space ≤ 10 – – ≤ – – – ≤ – – – – ≤ 1.0 – – – ≤ 2.5 – – ≤8 – – – –
0.5 0.5
AUS (EPHCA, 2006) Landscape < 20 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Commercial food crops < 20 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Pasture or fodder crop < – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
6

20b)
Israelc) (WAI, 2010) Unrestricted 10 100 > 2 – – – – – – – – – – – – – 5 25 10 – – – –
< 15 < 0.5 < < < 15
150 15 35
Cyprus (MANREC, 2005) All crops 10 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Vegetables eaten cooked 10 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
15d)
Crops for human consumption; 20 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Amenity areas of limited public 30e)
access /Fodder crops
Industrial crops 50 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
70d)
France (MSAPHF, 2014) A – < 60 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Greece (MEECCG, 2011) Restricted ≤ 25 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

Unrestricted ≤ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
10e)
Urban uses and Periurban green ≤ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
10e)
Italy (MHI, 2003) Crops and green areas 20 100 – 0.5f) 0.1 – 0.003 – 0.01 0.04 0.5 – – 0.03 0.01 10− 5
10− 3
2 15 2 0.01 10 0.05d) 0.05g)
10− 4,h)
10− 5,i)
Jordan (ISMJ, 2006) A 30 100 > 2 100j) < – – – – – – – – – – – – – 45 30l – 8 – –
0.002k)
B 200 500 – 100j) – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 70 45l – 8 – –
C 300 500 – 100j) – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 100 70l – 8 – –
Cut flowers 15 50 > 2 15j) – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 70 45l – 2 – –
Saudi Arabia (MOWE, Unrestricted 10 – – – 0.002k) – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 5.0 – – – –
2000) 10.0l
Restricted 40 – – – 0.002k) – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 5.0 – – – –
10.0l
P. Zhao et al. Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

quality treatment and the requirements of soil types.

In the current water quality monitoring results of most countries, the
pollution of LAS basically feet the water quality standards, and occa­
sionally exceeds the standard in some months and water bodies. The
washing liquid, washing powder and detergent commonly used in
people’s life belong to LAS. Therefore, the catering industry, car washing
and road construction are easy to become the main sources of LAS
pollution. Rural areas have little contact with their pollution sources, so
this parameter can be disregarded. For urban irrigation, whether to set
relevant limit values can be considered according to the water source.
The LAS limit values in some current reclaimed water irrigation stan­
dards are outdated and overly conservative when compared to actual
test data (Tang et al., 2016; Mao et al., 2021; Uning et al., 2022). If this
parameter is considered to be retained, it is suggested to reduce the limit
values, especially for urban reclaimed water irrigation.
Regulations of Israel give maximum for arithmetic monthly average, maximum and minimum three kinds of restrictions, Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5 same as above.

Petroleum, Phenols, Chloral, Benzene, etc. are mainly due to indus­

trial pollution. The exposure to reclaimed water is limited, but as the
types involved are still increasing with technological development, more
research and evaluation is needed.
Indicates the chemical oxygen demand measured using potassium dichromate (K2Cr2O7) as the oxidant, i.e. thepotassium dichromate index CODCr..

3.2. Inorganic parameters

The parameters of inorganic mainly include Total Dissolved Solids

(TDS), Chloride (Cl), Chlorine Residual (Cl2 res.), Boron (B), Fluoride
(F), pH, Sulfide Adsorption Ration (SAR), Total Water Hardness (TWH,
calculated as CaCO3), Electrical Conductance (EC), Magnesium (Mg),
Calcium (Ca), Sodium (Na), Phosphide (P, include PO4), Sulfide (S),
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), Sulfur trioxide (SO3), Sulfate (SO2- 4 ), Hydrogen
carbonate (HCO-4), Selenium (Se), Aluminum (Al), Lithium (Li), and
Cyanide (CN).
Among them, the comprehensive parameters are TDS, pH, SAR, total
water hardness and EC. TDS and EC are proportional to the ion content
and reflect the cleanliness of the water body. pH reflects the acidity of
water and has a great impact on both crop growth and metabolism and
soil microbial activity. Different standards give slightly different pH
limits, for example, 6.0–9.0 in the US, Japan and China are closer,
around 5.5–8.5, and 6.5–8.5 in Israel. pH limits should be stricter,
considering the potential salinization of soil brought about by long-term
irrigation with reclaimed water and the relevance of pH to the con­
centration of heavy metals or other substances (EPA, 2012).
SAR and Total water hardness mainly measures the content of Ca2+
and Mg2+. The increase of irrigation water hardness may cause pipe
blockage and affect work efficiency and equipment life (Tamiru and
Bekele, 2020，Jia ， et al., 2020). Also, it may cause environmental
problems, such as an increase in groundwater hardness. Hardness may
be related to heavy metal plasma content， and there may be some
seasonal fluctuations (Yesilnacar and Gulluoglu, 2008; Tamiru and
Bekele, İlhan et al., 2020, 2021). Currently, there are few studies on the
risk assessment of hardness in reclaimed water irrigation. Relevant
research should be strengthened, and strict supervision should be car­
ried out in areas with high hardness.
For stable water quality areas, chloride pollution, fluoride pollution
and sulfide pollution mainly from the chemical industry, mining in­
dustry, etc., and limited contact with irrigation water, can be ignored.
Methyl blue active substances (MBAS).

Water treatment often use chlorine or chlorine dioxide disinfection,

residual chlorine exceeds the standard will have a significant irritating
smell, bringing users an intuitive sense of unpleasantness, and will react
with other organic substances in the water, causing harm to human
Phosphorated pesticides.

Nitrate Nitrogen (NO-3).

health, so the residual chlorine limit is very necessary.

Chlorinated biocides.

For crops, the range of reasonable B concentrations is very narrow. In

Total surfactants.
Other pesticides.
80% of samples.

arid, semi-arid or coastal areas, B often exceeds crop requirements due

Soluble BOD5.

Mineral oils.

to poor drainage or intrusion of seawater with high B content and

diffusion of seawater aerosols (Landi et al., 2019). Although B is
Phenol.

involved in many crop metabolic processes, some studies believe that

the effect of Boron on vascular plants has been completely overturned
(Lewis, 2019), so a new round of confirmation research and evaluation
h
d
b

k
g
a

e
c

l
j

7
 P. Zhao et al.
Table 4
Comparison of inorganic salt indexes of reclaimed water irrigation water quality in various countries.
CY./ORG. Classification Parameters (mg/L, except for markings)

TDS Cl Cl2 res. B F pH SAR TWH EC Mg Ca Na P S H2S SO3 SO4a HCO-4 Se Al Li CN

(mmol/ (dS/
L) m)

WHO (WHO, Unrestricted – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

2006) /Restricted
USA (EPA, Urban reuse – – 1(min.) 0.75 1.0 6.0–9.0 – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.02 5.0 2.5 –
2012) (Unrestricted）
Urban reuse – – 1(min.) 0.75 1.0 6.0–9.0 – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.02 5.0 2.5 –
(Restricted)
Agri. Reuse (Food – – 1(min.) 0.75 1.0 6.0–9.0 – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.02 5.0 2.5 –
Crops）
Agri. reuse – – 1(min.) 0.75 1.0 6.0–9.0 – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.02 5.0 2.5 –
(Processed Food
Crops/Non-Food
Crops)
Japan (MLIT, Sprinkling water – – 0.1a) – – 5.8–8.6 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
2005) ≥ 0.4b
and c)

China (AQSIQ, Farmland (Fibre 1000c) 350 1.5 1.0 2.0 5.5–8.5 – ≤ – – – – – 1.0 – – – – 0.02 – – 0.5
2007; crops) 2000d 450
MWRC, Farmland (Dry 1000c) 350 1.5 1.0 2.0 5.5–8.5 – ≤ – – – – – 1.0 – – – – 0.02 – – 0.5
2007; grain) 2000d 450
AQSIQ, Farmland (Wet 1000c) 350 1.0 1.0 2.0 5.5–8.5 – ≤ – – – – – 1.0 – – – – 0.02 – – 0.5
2010; grain) 2000d) 450
AQSIQ, Farmland (Open- 1000 350 1.0 1.0 2.0 5.5–8.5 – ≤ – – – – – 1.0 – – – – 0.02 – – 0.5
8

2020) air vegetables) 450

Forestry ≤ – – – – 5.5–8.5 – ≤ – – – – – – – – – – – – – ≤
1000 450 0.05
Green space ≤ ≤ ≥ 1.0f) ≤ ≤ 6.0–9.0 ≤9 ≤ – – – – – – – – < – ≤ – – ≤
1000 250 0.2–0.5g) 1.0 2.0 500 500 0.02 0.05
2000e)
Israel (WAI, Unrestricted – 250 1 0.4 2 6.5–8.5 5.0 – 1.4 – – 150 – – – – – – 0.02 5 2.5 0.1
2010) < 0.8–2.5 < < < 6.5 < < < < < 6.25 <
280 0.5 3 1.8 300 0.05 12.5 0.2
Italy (MHI, Crops and green – 250 0.2 1.5 6.0–9.5 10 – 3 – – – – – 0.5 0.5 500 – 0.01 1 2.5 0.05
2003) areas <4
Spain ( Agri. uses – – – 0.5 – – 6.0 – 3.0 – – – – – – – – – 0.02 – – –
ASERSA,
2007)

Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

Jordan (ISMJ, A/B/C 1500 400 – 1.0 2 – 9.0 – – 100 230 30 – – – 500 400 0.05 5.0 0.075 0.1
2006) Cut flower 1500 400 – 1.0 2 – 9.0 – – 100 230 30 – – – 500 400 0.05 5.0 0.075h) 0.1
2.5
Saudi Arabia ( Restricted 2500 – 0.5 0.75 1 – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.02 5.0 2.5 –
MOWE, Unrestricted 2500 – 0.2–0.5 0.75 1 – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0.02 5.0 2.5 –
2000)
a
Free residual chlorine.
b
Combined residual chlorine.
c
Non-saline land.
d
Saline-alkali land.
e
The parameter values in brackets are parameters for areas with high TDS content in coastal and local water sources.
f
Total chlorine residua (Leave the factory).
g
Total chlorine residua (End of pipe network).
h
For citrus.
P. Zhao et al. Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

should be carried out on the toxicity of boron to crops. Therefore, it is

U
necessary for many countries to specify B limits in their water quality

–
–
–
–
–
–

–
–
–
–
standards for reclaimed water irrigation. At low concentrations, Se has a

0.001
Ti
positive effect on abiotic stress regulation(Kaur et al., 2014). So for
–
–
–
–
–
–

–
–
–
–
reclaimed water irrigation, perhaps selenium deserves further attention.
Al and Li are also metals that are easily accessible in daily life. The
Sn

3
–
–
–
–
–
–

–
–
–
–
aluminum ≤ 5 mg/L and lithium ≤ 2.5 mg/L given by Israel are good

10
Ba

reference objects.
–
–
–
–
–
–

–
–
–
–
0.125
≤ 1.0
3.3. Heavy metal parameters
0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Co

<
–

– Some countries give a variety of heavy metal pollutant parameters,

< 0.25
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002

0.002

such as Arsenic (As), Hydrargyrum (Mercury or Hg), Chromium (Cr),

0.01
0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1
0.1

0.1
Be

≤
–

Nickel (Ni), Lead (Pb), Cadmium (Cd), Zinc (Zn), Iron (Fe), Copper (Cu),
Manganese (Mn), Molybdenum (Mo), Vanadium (V), Beryllium (Be),
≤ 0.1

0.25
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Cobalt (Co), Barium (Ba), Stannum(Sn), and Titanium (Ti)(U). Heavy
<
V

metals are widely used in agriculture, chemical industry, pharmaceu­

tical industry and other fields, bringing certain risks to the environment
0.025
≤ 0.5
0.01

0.01

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Mo

0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5

and human health, and have always attracted people’s attention (Tiwari
<
–

et al., 2022). Therefore, it is necessary to control the content of heavy

metal pollutants in reclaimed water. Heavy metals and their compounds
Mn

0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3

0.3

0.2

0.5
0.2

0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
≤

<
–

are used in a wide variety of industries and are highly toxic, so they are
distinguished from other inorganic and organic parameters and are
0.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

0.5

0.2

0.5
1.0

0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
Cu

<
–

discussed separately in this section.

Heavy metal pollutants often have a major impact on human health,
<5
5.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

1.5

5.0
5.0
5.0
Fe

such as As, Cr, and Cd, which can cause genomic instability, and high
2

2
–

doses of Hg and lead Pb, which can induce severe complications such as
<5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0

1.0

0.5

5.0
4.0
4.0
Zn

kidney failure abdominal cramps, and bloody diarrhea (Balali-Mood

≤

2
–

et al., 2021, Bernhoft, 2012; Tsai et al., 2017). As, Co, Cr and Ni exhibit
≤ 0.01

≤ 0.01

0.025
0.005

the highest toxicity in water bodies (Vinod et al., 2019). Although the
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01

0.01

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Cd

<

comprehensive parameters such as TDS and hardness will change when

–

the heavy metal content is too high, it is still necessary to be selective

≤ 0.2
0.10

0.25

about the heavy metal items when it comes to more specific monitoring
5.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2

0.1

0.1

0.2
0.1
0.1
Pb

<
–

and tracing.
Parameters (mg/L, except for markings)

According to the list of carcinogens published by the WHO, Class I

< 0.5
Comparison of heavy metal parameters of reclaimed water irrigation water quality in various countries.

0.05
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Ni

carcinogens include As, inorganic arsenic compounds, Be, beryllium

≤
–

compounds, Cd, cadmium compounds, chromium (VI) compounds,

0.005a)
≤ 0.1a)

< 0.25

nickel compounds, et al. Class II carcinogens include Co, cobalt com­

≤ 0.1
0.1a)
0.1a)
0.1a)
0.1a)
0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Cr

pounds, cobalt metal without tungsten carbide, cobalt sulfate and other
–

soluble cobalt (II) salts, Pb, molybdenum trioxide, Ni and nickel alloys,
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001

0.001

0.001

0.002

0.005
0.001

0.002
0.001
0.001

et al. Class III carcinogens include arsenobetaine and other organic

Hg

arsenic compounds that are not metabolized in humans, chromium (III)

≤

<
–

compounds, implanted foreign bodies of metallic chromium or titanium

0.05
0.05

0.05

0.05

0.25
0.02

and of cobalt-based, chromium-based, and titanium-based alloys,

0.1
0.1
0.1

0.1

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
As

<
–

stainless steel and depleted uranium, hematite, lead compounds

(organic), maneb, Hg and mercury inorganic compounds., et al.
Nonfood crops/Pasture or fodder crop
Landscape/ Commercial food crops/

Carcinogen categories can inform the selection of heavy metal pollutant

Farmland (Open-air vegetables)

indices, and in addition factors such as local industrial structure and

geography are necessary to consider. For example, some studies have
found that the content of Fe and Mn in surface water of China is rela­
Farmland (Wet grain）
Farmland (Fibre crops)

Crops and green areas

Farmland (Dry grain)

tively high. The average values of Mn, Co, As and Ni exceed the
A/B/C/Cut flower
Agricultural reuse

maximum allowable values for drinking water stipulated by the US EPA.

Classification

And the average values of Ni, Cd and Cr in US surface water are also
Unrestricted

Unrestricted
Green space

Restricted
Agri. uses

higher than the drinking water values recommended by WHO (2017)

Forestry

and USEPA (2009), so localities should reasonably select heavy metal

Represents hexavalent Chromium.

parameters according to the survey and statistical results (Vinod et al.,

2019).
It can be seen from the table that the limits of Cu, Mo and Co in China
2007; AQSIQ, 2010; AQSIQ,
China (AQSIQ, 2007; MWRC,

Saudi Arabia (MOWE, 2000)

are 0.5–1.0 mg/L, 0.5 mg/L and 1.0 mg/L, which are relatively loose
compared with other countries, especially for Mo and Co. Co at 0.1–1.0
Spain (ASERSA, 2007)
Jordan (ISMJ, 2006)
AUS (EPHCA, 2006)

mg/L will be toxic to most crops. Feed crops grown from soils with high
Israel (WAI, 2010)

Italy (MHI, 2003)

USA (EPA, 2012)

Mo content may be toxic to livestock. It is recommended to moderately

lower the Mo and Co limits (Ayers and Westcot, 1985). Pb parameters in
CY./ORG.

the USA are also high compared to other countries. Be parameter of

2020)
Table 5

China restrictions are also too harsh. Jordan and Saudi Arabia have more
lenient regulations for Zn, at 5 mg/L and 4 mg/L respectively. Heavy
a

9
 Table 6

P. Zhao et al.
Comparison of hygiene and sensory parameters of reclaimed water irrigation water quality in various countries.
CY./ORG. Classification Parameters (mg/L, except for markings)

E.coli (CUF/ Fecal Salmonellae Legionella Ascaris Taenia Helminth Chro- Turbidity Stink TSS Exterior
100 ml) Coliform (CUF/100 ml) spp. (CUF/ Lumbricoides saginata and eggs /L mati- (NTU)
(CUF/100 L) eggs /L Taenia city
ml) solium eggs
/L

WHO (WHO, 2006) Unrestricted ≤ 1000 – – – – – ≤1 – – – – –

< 104,a)
Restricted ≤ 105 – – – – – ≤1 – – – – –
< 106,b)
EU (EPandCEU, A ≤ 10 – – ≤ 1000 – – – – ≤5 – ≤ 10 –
2020) B ≤ 100 – – ≤ 1000 – – ≤ 1c) – – – ≤ 35 –
C ≤ 1000 – – ≤ 1000 – – ≤ 1c) – – – ≤ 35 –
D ≤ 104 – – ≤ 1000 – – – – – – ≤ 35 –
USA (EPA, 2012) Urban reuse – No – – – – – – ≤2 – – –
(Unrestricted) detectable
(median)
Urban reuse – ≤ 200 – – – – – – – – ≤ 30 –
(Restricted) (median)
Agri. Reuse – No – – – – – – ≤2 – – –
(Food Crops) detectable
(median)
Agri. reuse – ≤ 200 – – – – – – – – ≤ 30 –
(Processed (median)
food crops
/non-food crops)
Japan (MLIT, Sprinkling water No detectable – – – – – – – ≤2 No – No
10

2005) (1000) unpleasant unpleasant

sensation sensation
China (AQSIQ, Farmland – ≤ 4000 – – ≤2 – – ≤ 30 ≤ 10 – ≤ –
2007; MWRC, (Fibre crops) 100d)
2007; AQSIQ, Farmland – ≤ 4000 – – ≤2 – – ≤ 30 ≤ 10 – ≤ 90d) –
2010; AQSIQ, (Dry grain)
d)
2020) Farmland(Wet grain) – ≤ 4000 – – ≤2 – – ≤ 30 ≤ 10 – ≤ 80 –
Farmland (Open-air – ≤ 2000 – – ≤2 – – ≤ 30 ≤ 10 – ≤ 60d) –
vegetables)
Forestry – ≤ 1000 – – – – – ≤ 30 ≤ 10 – ≤ 30d) –
Green space No detectable ≤ 20 – – ≤2 – – ≤ 30 ≤ 10 No – –
(Restricted) (median) unpleasant
sensation
Green space No detectable ≤ 100 – – ≤1 – – ≤ 30 ≤5 No – –

Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

(Unrestricted) (median) unpleasant
sensation
AUS (EPHCA, Landscape irrigation < 1000(if not – – – – – – – – – < 30d) –
2006) disinfected)
Commercial food crops <1 – – – – – – – – – – –
consumed raw or
unprocessed
Commercial food crops < 1000 – – – – – – – – – < 30d) –
Nonfood crops < 10000 – – – – – – – – – – –
Pasture or fodder crop < 100 – – – – – – – – – < 30d) –
(limited withholding
period)
(continued on next page)
 P. Zhao et al.
Table 6 (continued )
CY./ORG. Classification Parameters (mg/L, except for markings)

E.coli (CUF/ Fecal Salmonellae Legionella Ascaris Taenia Helminth Chro- Turbidity Stink TSS Exterior
100 ml) Coliform (CUF/100 ml) spp. (CUF/ Lumbricoides saginata and eggs /L mati- (NTU)
(CUF/100 L) eggs /L Taenia city
ml) solium eggs
/L

Pasture or fodder crop < 1000 – – – – – – – – – < 30d) –

(withholding period)
Russia (MHR, Wastewater Irrig. < 1000 – – – <1 – <1 – – – – –
1996)
Israel (WAI, 2010) Unrestricted – 10 – – – – – – – – 10 –
< 50 < 15
Cyprus (MANREC, All crops – ≤ 15e) – – – – None – – – 10d)f) –
2005) 5ef
Vegetables eaten – ≤ 10e) – – – – None – – – ≤ 15 d)
–
cooked 50ef 10d)f)
Crops for human – ≤ 1000e) – – – – None – – – ≤ 45d) –
Consumption; Amenity 200ef 30d)f)
areas of limited public
access
Fodder crops – ≤ 5000e) – – – – None – – – ≤ 45d) –
1000ef 30d)f)
Industrial crops – ≤ 104,e) – – – – – – – – – –
3000e)f
France (MSAPHF, A ≤ 250 – – – – – – – – – ≤ 15 –
2014) B ≤ 104 – – – – – – – – – – –
C ≤ 105 – – – – – – – – – – –
11

D – – – – – – – – – – – –
Greece (MEECCG, Restricted ≤ 200 – – – – – – – – – 35 –
2011) Unrestricted ≤ 5f) – – – – – – – – – ≤ 2f) –
≤ 50g)
Urban uses and – ≤ 2f) – – – – – – – – ≤ 2f) –
Periurban green ≤ 20g)
Italy (MHI, 2003) Crops and green areas ≤ 100 – absent – – – – – – – – –
10f)
h)
Portugal (IQP, A – ≤ 100 – – – – ≤1 – – – – –
2005) B – ≤ 200h) – – – – ≤1 – – – – –
C – ≤ 1000h) – – – – ≤1 – – – – –
D – ≤ 104,h) – – – – ≤1 – – – – –
Spain (ASERSA, Urban uses (Q1) 0 – – 100i) – – 0.1j) – 2 – 10d) –
2007) Urban uses(Q2) 200 – – 100i) – – 0.1j) – 10 – 20d) –

Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

Agri. uses(Q1) 100 – c= 3k) 1000i) – – 0.1j) – No set – 35d) –
M= 1000k) limit
Agri. uses(Q2) 1000 – c= 3k) – – 1l) 0.1j) – No set – 35d) –
M= 1000k) limit
Agri. uses(Q3) 104 – – 100i) – – 0.1j) – No set – 35d) –
limit
i) j) d)
Recreational uses 200 – – 100 – – 0.1 – 10 – 20 –
1000m) No set 35d)m)
limitm)
Environmental uses No set limit – – – – – No set – No set – 35d) –
limit limit
Jordan (ISMJ, A 100e) – – – – – ≤1 – 10 – 50 –
2006) B 1000e) – – – – – ≤1 – – – 200 –
C – – – – – – ≤1 – – – 300 –
Cut flowers < 1.1e) – – – – – ≤1 – 5 – 15 –
(continued on next page)
 P. Zhao et al.
Table 6 (continued )
CY./ORG. Classification Parameters (mg/L, except for markings)

E.coli (CUF/ Fecal Salmonellae Legionella Ascaris Taenia Helminth Chro- Turbidity Stink TSS Exterior
100 ml) Coliform (CUF/100 ml) spp. (CUF/ Lumbricoides saginata and eggs /L mati- (NTU)
(CUF/100 L) eggs /L Taenia city
ml) solium eggs
/L

Saudi Arabia ( Urban use 2.2e) – – – – – 1 – – – 10 –

MOWE, 2000) (Unrestricted)
Urban use 1000e) – – – – – – – – – 40 –
(Restricted)
e)
Agri. uses 2.2 – – – – – 1 – – – 10 –
(Unrestricted)
e)
Agri. uses 1000 – – – – – 1 – – – 40 –
(Restricted)
12

a
High-growing leaf crops or drip irrigation.
b
When exposure is limited or regrowth is likely.
c
For irrigation of pastures or forage.
d
Suspended solids (SS).
e
MPN/100 ml.
f
80% samples.
g
95% samples.
h
NMP/100 ml or CFU/100 ml.
i
If there is a risk of aerosolization.
j
At least the following genera must be included in all quality categories: Ancylostoma, Trichuris and Ascaris.
k
Where n = number of aliquot samples analyzed; m = (MAV) maximum acceptable value for the bacterial count; M = maximum permitted value for the bacterial count (MAV + Maximum Deviation Limit); c =
maximum number of aliquot samples whose bacterial count falls between “m” and “M”.
l
When irrigating pasture land for milk- or meat producing animals.

Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974

m
If irrigation water is directly applied to soil (drip irrigation, micro-sprinkler).
P. Zhao et al.
metal parameters for reclaimed water irrigation often refer to other
types of water quality standards or guidelines that are older. Most of the
standards have references to criteria of FAO (Ayers and Westcot, 1985).
Some of the limits in this criteria are lack of relevant data. For example,
the limit value for Cr is stated as "Toxicological data are not available
and conservative limits are recommended", and the limit value for Pb is
stated as "Plant cell growth is inhibited at very high concentrations".
Moreover, the criteria is originally intended to guide irrigation water,
and perhaps more caution should be exercised for reclaimed water
because of the possible synergistic effects of multiple contaminants.
3.4. Hygiene and sensory parameters
Hygiene and sensory parameters are the top priority of reclaimed
water quality requirements, WHO and other organizations or countries
still give E. coli and worm egg indicator requirements, although there
are no clear requirements for other types of indicators.
The parameters of hygiene and sensory parameters mainly include
Escherichia coliform (E. coli), fecal coliform, salmonellae, legionella spp.,
Ascaris Lumbricoides eggs, Taenia saginata and Taenia solium eggs,
Helminth Eggs, Chromaticity, Turbidity, Stink, Total Suspended Solids
(TSS), and Exterior.
E. coli, fecal coliforms, ascaris lumbricoides eggs, and helminth eggs
are pathogenic biological parameters. Common water bacteriological
parameter bacteria include total coliforms, fecal coliforms and E. coli.
Total coliform is a group of bacteria with certain characteristics related
to fecal contamination, and fecal coliform, which is part of total coliform,
can reflect the degree of fecal contamination of water more closely than
total coliform. E. coli is the main species of total coliforms and fecal
coliforms. Salmonella is a pathogenic bacterium excreted in feces by
human and animal patients or carriers (SEPAC, 2002; Chen and Yang,
2020). Currently, E. coli is used as parameter bacteria in many countries
around the world (AQSIQ, 2020), and the definitions of total coliform
and fecal coliform often need to be changed with taxonomic updates,
many of which are not related to fecal contamination, especially total
coliform. Salmonella appears in water with great variability and the
isolation technique has limitations in sensitivity and selectivity.
Compared to E. coli, which is more accurate in indicating fecal
contamination, so it can be considered in preference to E. coli (Tallon,
2005; SEPAC, 2002; Khan and Gupta, 2020).
Helminths are also a collective term for a group of pathogens that in
low-income and lower-middle-income countries are burdened by hel­
minthic diseases caused by wastewater use. ascaris lumbricoides is often
used as the primary parameter due to the long survival time of eggs and
low infectivity compared to other parasites, bacteria and viruses.
However, the main factor for helminths egg removal is settling, so the
efficiency of egg removal should be based on the type of worm egg with
the lowest settling rate. Studies have shown that in clean water, ascaris
lumbricoides eggs settle slowly. In low-quality water, ascaris lum­
bricoides eggs settle the fastest, so ascaris lumbricoides as a represen­
tative parameter is also inappropriate. Therefore, it is necessary to carry
out further research on the more accurate parameter of worm eggs, and
it is necessary to distinguish the types of helminths eggs in the deter­
mination and detection of water quality (Feachem et al., 1983; Sengupta
et al., 2011).
Chromaticity, turbidity, stink, TSS, and exterior are from the color,
turbidity level, smell and other appearance of the performance of the
visual response to the cleanliness of the water body. For water body
appearance parameters, TSS can be used as a comprehensive measure.
Visual parameters and olfactory parameters can also be added in ac­
cording to the demand.
4. Discussion
Through the previous review, we found that the reclaimed water
laws, guidelines or standards of many organizations or countries have a
13
Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974
long history, but a considerable number of them have not been updated
for many years. The variability in the parameters chosen in different
documents is also significant, and the potential lag of the standards
relative to the current urban and agricultural development is unavoid­
able. For some developed countries, due to the advanced technology and
research emphasis, the classification of reclaimed water will be more
detailed or more parameters were selected to constrain the application,
which can be tough for developing countries. For example, the NEWater
of Singapore directly treats reclaimed water to exceed the WHO drinking
water standard level (Lee and Tan, 2016; WHO, 2011), which is lack of
reference for the vast majority of countries and regions that only need to
meet general irrigation and recreational activities. Due to the problem of
water shortage, some developing countries were forced to start using
reclaimed water for irrigation very early, and many of them have not
been effectively monitored and demonstrated. With economic global­
ization and industrial adjustment, the problem of reclaimed water in
developing countries may be more severe and urgent(UNESCO, 2017).
Through the comparison and analysis above, we make the following
recommendations, based on the classification and parameters that
appear in most of the standards, and the necessity of the parameters. We
recommend that the reclaimed water parameters should be at least
divided into two categories: restricted irrigation and unrestricted irri­
gation, or agricultural irrigation and urban green space or landscape
irrigation, needing to formulate and adjust the specific applicable sce­
narios and crops of each category according to the actual situation. If the
consideration is more detailed, it is more recommended to divide the
recycled water quality into different levels. Various uses can match the
corresponding level of irrigation water. At the same time, we selected
some comprehensive parameters and parameters that need to be strictly
controlled, and divided them into first-class parameters and second-class
parameters as recommendations.
For first-class parameters, the organic and nutrient parameters, we
selected the comprehensive parameter BOD5 to measure the overall
pollution level. For the inorganic parameter, we chose three compre­
hensive parameters of TDS, pH and TWH to measure the cleanliness of
the water body and ensure the safety of transportation and water uses.
At the same time, we also selected the method of control residual
chlorine to control the effect of wastewater treatment. For hygiene and
sensory parameters, we selected E. coli and Helminth eggs to reflect the
content of pathogenic organisms in the water body. Meanwhile, we
selected stink and TSS to ensure good water quality from both intuitive
perception and comprehensive parameter limits.
For second-class parameters, we choose COD, NH+ 4 , LAS, SAR, EC,
Ascaris Lumbricoides Eggs, Fecal Coliforms, Li, Al, Se, B, and Fluoride to
measure the pollution levels of organic and nutrients, inorganic and
pathogenic microorganisms, and then to ensure the crop safety. Heavy
metal parameters present in most current standards, such as As, Hg, Cr,
Ni, Pb, Cd, Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn, Mo, V, Be, and Co, are still retained.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, we compiled and analyzed the literature on reclaimed
water irrigation laws, regulations, guidelines and standards from WHO,
EU, China, USA, AUS, Russia, Israel, Jordan and etc. It was found that
most of the standards are more inclined to consumer point of view to
consider the edibility of the crop and whether it is processed, and need to
consider more about aspects such as crop type and irrigation method.
The method of classifying reclaimed water quality in countries such as
Jordan, France, Cyprus and Portugal may become a trend. The division
of reclaimed water quality parameters into strict control groups and
selective guidance control groups in Jordan and China, help to widely
adapt to different regions of water quality parameters needs. We
recommend that reclaimed water irrigation parameters be divided into
at least restricted and unrestricted irrigation, or agricultural irrigation
and green or landscape irrigation.
From the perspective of pollutant types, this paper divides the
P. Zhao et al.
reclaimed water irrigation parameters into four categories: organic and
nutrient parameters, inorganic parameters, heavy metal parameters,
and hygiene and sensory parameters. It is recommended to keep BOD5,
TDS, pH, E. coli, Helminth eggs, etc. as the first-class parameters for
strict control, and COD, NH+
4 , LAS, SAR, EC, B, As, Hg, Cr, etc. as the
second-class parameters for selective guidance. It is hoped that different
countries and regions will update their reclaimed water irrigation
standards according to their own conditions in a timely manner and
reach consensus in first-class parameters as early as possible.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgements
This project was financially funded by National Natural Science
Foundation of China (52079146). The authors are grateful to the editors
and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful and constructive
comments for improving the paper.
References
AQSIQ, S.A.C., 2002a. GB/T 18919-2002 The Reuse of Urban Recycling
Water—Classified standard. Standards Press of China, Beijing.
AQSIQ, S.A.C., 2002b. GB/T 18920-2002, The Reuse of Urban Recycling Water—Water
Quality Standard for Urban Miscellaneous Use. Standards Press of China, Beijing.
AQSIQ, S.A.C., 2007. GB 20922-2007 The Reuse of Urban Recycling Water—Quality of
Farmland Irrigation Water. Standards Press of China, Beijing.
AQSIQ, S.A.C., 2010. GB/T 25499-2010 The Reuse of Urban Recycling Water—Water
Quality Standard for Green Space Irrigation. Standards Press of China, Beijing.
AQSIQ, S.A.C., 2020. GB / T 18920-2020 The Reuse of Urban Recycling Water—Water
Quality Standard for Urban Miscellaneous Use. Standards Press of China, Beijing.
AQUASTAT, 2014. Area Equipped for Irrigation. Infographic. Food and Agricultural
Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome. www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/
infographics/Irrigation_eng.pdf.
ASERSA, 2007. Spanish regulations for water reuse, Royal Decree 1620 / 2007, ASERSA.
Ayers, R.S., Westcot, D.W., 1985. Water Quality for Agriculture. FAO.
Balali-Mood, M., Naseri, K., Tahergorabi, Z., et al., 2021. Toxic mechanisms of five heavy
metals: mercury, lead, chromium, cadmium, and arsenic. Front Pharm. 12, 643972
https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.643972.
Bernhoft, R.A., 2012. Mercury toxicity and treatment: a review of the literature.
J. Environ. Public Health 12, 460508. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/460508.
Chen, M.G., Yang, H., 2020. Laboratory quality control of enzyme substrate method for
determination of total coliform, fecal coliform and Escherichia coli in water.
J. Green. Sci. Tech. 8, 123–125.
Chen, W.P., Lu, S.D., Zhang, W.L., Yi, L.L., Jiao, W.T., 2014. Ecological risks and
sustainable utilization of reclaimed water and wastewater irrigation. Acta Ecol. Sin.
34 (1), 163–172.
EP&CEU, 2018. Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and of the council
on minimum requirements for water reuse, COM(2018) 337 final 2018/0169 (COD).
EP&CEU, 2020. Regulation (EU) 2020/741 of the European parliament and of the
council of 25 May 2020 on minimum requirements for water reuse (Text with EEA
relevance), Official Journal of the European Union.
EPA, USAID, 2004. Guidelines for Water Reuse. EPA.
EPA, USAID, 2012. Guidelines for Water Reuse. EPA.
EPHCA, NRMMCA, AHMC, 2006. Australian guidelines for water recycling: managing
health and environmental risks (Phase 1).
Fan, D.Q., Wu, Y.H., Cui, C.X., 2016. Inspiration of foreign reclaimed water utilization.
Urban Manag. Sci. Technol. 18 (6), 76–79. https://doi.org/10.16242/j.cnki.
umst.2016.06.023.
Feachem, R.G., Bradley, D.J., Garelick, H., et al., 1983. Sanitation and Disease: Health
Aspects of Excreta and Wastewater Management. Wiley.
Feng, S.Y., Qi, Z.M., Huang, G.H., et al., 2003. Effects of fresh water and sewage
irrigation on growth of winter wheat. Irrig. Drain. 22 (3), 11–14.
Fernandes, A.M., Soratto, R.P., Pilon, C., 2015. Soil phosphorus increases dry matter and
nutrient accumulation and allocation in potato cultivars. Am. J. Potato Res. 92,
117–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12230-014-9422-8.
İlhan, N., Yetiş, A.D., Yeşilnacar, M.İ., Atasoy, A.D.S., 2021. Predictive modelling and
seasonal analysis of water quality indicators: three different basins of Şanlıurfa,
14
Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974
Turkey. Environ. Dev. Sustain 24, 3258–3292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-
021-01566-y.
IQP, 2005. The guidelines for good practice of water reuse for irrigation: Portuguese
standard NP 4434, IQP.
ISMJ, 2002. JS 893:2002 Water –Reclaimed Wastewater, ISMJ.
ISMJ, 2006. JS 893:2006 Water - Reclaimed domestic wastewater, ISMJ.
Jia, S.C., Gao, J.Q., Guo, H., Wang, C., Chen, Y.Y., Li, Q., Tian, Y.M., 2020. Influence of
water quality on corrosion of cast iron pipe in reclaimed water. J. Chin. Soc. Corros.
Prot. 40 (6), 569–576. https://doi.org/10.11902/1005.4537.2019.133.
Kaur, N., Sharma, S., Kaur, S., et al., 2014. Selenium in agriculture: a nutrient or
contaminant for crops? Arch Agron. Soil Sci. 60 (12), 1593–1624. https://doi.org/
10.1080/03650340.2014.918258.
Khan, F.M., Gupta, R., 2020. Escherichia coli (E. coli) as an indicator of fecal
contamination in groundwater. A Rev. Int. Conf. Sustain. Dev. Water Environ.
225–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45263-6_21.
Landi, M., Margaritopoulou, T., Papadakis, I.E., Araniti, F., 2019. Boron toxicity in
higher plants: an update. Planta 250 (4), 1011–1032. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00425-019-03220-4.
Lee, H., Tan, T., 2016. Singapore’s experience with reclaimed water: NEWater. Int. J.
Water Resour. Dev., 2016 32 (4), 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/
07900627.2015.1120188.
Lewis, D.H., 2019. Boron: the essential element for vascular plants that never was.
N. Phytol. 221 (4), 1685–1690. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15519.
Li, F.Y., Wichmann, K., Otterpohl, R., 2009a. Review of the technological approaches for
grey water treatment and reuses. Sci. Total Environ. 407 (11), 3439–3449. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.02.004.
Li, F.Y., Wichmann, K., Otterpohl, R., 2009b. Evaluation of appropriate technologies for
grey water treatments and reuses. Water Sci. Technol. 59 (2), 249–260.
Li, K., Wei, Y.S., Wang, J.X., Cheng, Y.T., Chen, M.X., Li, Y.Y., 2014a. Water reclamation:
standardls comparison and cost analysis. Acta Sci. Circumstantiae 34 (7),
1635–1653. https://doi.org/10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2014.0562.
Li, Y.J., Qu, W., Fan, Y.H., 2014b. Flexibility of key indexes for quality of reclaimed
water in China. China Water Resour. 19, 29–31.
Liang, G.P., Luo, Y.Q., Zhou, Z.H., Waring, B.G., 2021. Nitrogen effects on plant
productivity change at decadal time-scales. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 00, 1–12. https://
doi.org/10.1111/geb.13391.
Lyu, S.D., Wu, L.S., Wen, X.F., Wang, J., Chen, W.P., 2022. Effects of reclaimed
wastewater irrigation on soil-crop systems in China: a review. Sci. Total Environ.
813, 152531 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152531.
MANREC, 2002, No. 106(1)/2002, The water pollution control act 2002, MANREC.
MANREC, 2005, Decree no. 296/03.06.05, General Conditions for Disposing of Waste
from Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants, MANREC.
Mao, X.H., Li, Hl, Li, W.Q., Li, J., Lei, C., 2021. Characteristics of water related non point
source pollution and its impact on urban water environment in Shenzhen. J. Green.
Sci. Tech. 23 (17), 52–55.
Marschner, H., 2011. Marschner’s mineral nutrition of higher plants. Academic press.
Mateo-Sagasta, J., Raschid-Sally, L., Thebo, A., 2015. Global wastewater and sludge
production, treatment and use. In: Drechsel, P., Qadir, M., Wichelns, D. (Eds.),
Wastewater: Economic Asset in Urbanizing World. Springer, Netherlands.
MEECCG. 2002, KYA673/400/199, No. 5673/400, Measures and conditions for
processing municipal wastewater, MEECCG.
MEECCG. 2011, FEK B 354/08–03-2011, DECISIONS No.co.145116, Determination of
Measures, Conditions and Procedures for the Reuse of Treated Wastewater and Other
Provisions, MEECCG.
MHI, 2003. the Regulating Technical Standards for Wastewater Reuse, MHI.
MHR, 1996. SanPiN 2.1.7.573–96, Hygienic requirements to wastewater and sewage
sludge use for land irrigation and fertilization, MHR.
MLIT, 2005. Manual on Water Quality Standards for Reuse of Treated Sewage Water.
MLIT. https://www.mlit.go.jp/kisha/kisha05/04/040422/05.pdf.
MOWE, 2000. Treated Sanitary Wastewater and Its Reuse Regulations. MOWE.
MSAPHF, 2010. Regulations on the reuse of irrigation water for agriculture and green
space. MSAPHF.
MSAPHF, 2014. Regulations on the reuse of irrigation water for agriculture and green
space. MSAPHF.
MWRC, 2007. SL 368-2006 Standards of reclaimed water quality. MWRC.
Ofori, S., Puskacova, A., Ruzickova, I., Wanner, J., 2021. Treated wastewater reuse for
irrigation: pros and cons. Sci. Total Environ. 760, 144026 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.144026.
Saentho, A., Wisawapipat, W., Lawongsa, P., Aramrak, S., Prakongkep, N., Klysubun, W.,
Christl, I., 2022. Speciation and pH- and particle size-dependent solubility of
phosphorus in tropical sandy soils. Geoderma 408, 115590. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115590.
Scott C., Drechsel P., Raschid-Sally. L., et al. 2010. Wastewater irrigation and health:
challenges and outlook for mitigating risks in low-income countries. Earthscan-
IDRC-IWMI, UK; www.idrc.ca/en/ev-149129–201-1-DO_TOPIC.html.
Sengupta, M.E., Thamsborg, S.M., Andersen, T.J., Olsen, A., Dalsgaard, A., 2011.
Sedimentation of helminth eggs in water. Water Res 45 (15), 4651–4660. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.06.017.
SEPA, 2002. Analytical Methods for Water and Wastewater Monitoring. China Environ
Sci Press, Beijing.
Tallon, P., 2005. Microbial indicators of faecal contamination in water: a current
perspective. Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 166, 139–166.
Tamiru, M., Bekele, G., 2020. Various absorbents and parameters affecting removal of
water hardness from wastewater: review. Int J. Water Wastewater Treat. 6 (3)
https://doi.org/10.16966/2381-5299.173.
P. Zhao et al.
Tang, W.Y., Yao, X.Y., Pan, T., Long, J.F., Lu, Z.J., 2016. Taking Guitang River in
Changsha City as an example, water quality monitoring and management of Urban
Inland River. J. Green. Sci. Tech. 16, 52–55.
Tian, D.S., Niu, S.L., 2015. A global analysis of soil acidification caused by nitrogen
addition. Environ. Res Lett. 10, 024019 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/2/
024019.
Tiwari, A.K., Pal, S.L., Srivastava, N., Shah, M., Ahmad, I., Mohammad, Y.,
Alshahrani, M.Y., Pal1, D.B., 2022. Bioadsorbent and adsorbent-based heavy metal
removal technologies from wastewater: new insight. Biomass Convers. Bior 1–22.
Tsai, M.T., Huang, S.Y., Cheng, S.Y., 2017. Lead poisoning can be easily misdiagnosed as
acute porphyria and nonspecific abdominal pain Case reports in emergency medicine
2017. Case Rep. Emerg. Med 2, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.3109/
10408444.2013.768596.
Ulimat A. Wastewater production, treatment, and use in Jordan[C].Second Regional
Workshop Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture, New Delhi, India. 2012.
UN, 2021. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2021. UNDESA.
UNEP, 2021. Progress on ambient water quality. Tracking SDG 6 series: global indicator
6.3.2 updates and acceleration needs. Nairobi.https://communities.unep.org/di
splay/sdg632/Introduction%20to%20the%20Methodology_EN%20(3).
pdf#DocumentsandMaterials-Intro.
UNESCO, 2017. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2017,
Wastewater: the untapped resource. UNESCO.
Uning, R., Suratman, S., Latif, M.T., Mustaffa, N.I.H., 2022. Assessment on the
distributions and exchange of anionic surfactants in the coastal environment of
Peninsular Malaysia: A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11356-021-18395-1.
Vinod, K., Ripu, D.P., Anket, S., Palak, B., Gagan, P.S.S., Aditi, S.B., Ioannis, K., Renu, B.,
Ashwani, K.T., Yeboah, G.A., Jesús, R.-C., 2019. Global evaluation of heavy metal
content in surface water bodies: a meta-analysis using heavy metal pollution indices
and multivariate statistical analyses. Chemosphere 236, 124364. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124364.
15
Agricultural Water Management 274 (2022) 107974
WAI, 1992. Public Health Ordinance, WAI.
WAI, 2010. Public Health Ordinance: Effluent Quality Standards and Rules for Sewage
Treatment, WAI.
Wang, S.M.H., Wang, L.K., 2022. COD Determination And Cleaning Solution Preparation
Using Potassium Permanganate For Hazardous Waste Minimization, 4. Lenox
Institute Press. https://doi.org/10.17613/ggyx-4033.
Wang, Z., Li, J., Li, Y., 2017. Using reclaimed waterfor agriculturaland landscape
irrigation in China: a review. Irrig. Drain. 66 (5), 672–686. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ird.2129.
WHO, 2006. WHO Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater.
WHO, 2011. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality (4th Ed.). http://www.who.int/wate
r_sanitation_health/publications/dwq_guidelines/en/.
WHO, UNHABITAT, 2018. Progress on safe treatment and use of wastewater: piloting the
monitoring methodology and initial findings for SDG indicator 6.3.1. WHO &
UNHABITAT,, Geneva.
Wu, X.Z., Zhu, T.T., 2020. Discussion on determination of dissolved oxygen in water by
electrochemical dissolved oxygen meter. Guangdong Chem. Ind. 431 (21), 145–157.
Xu, X.L., Wang, Yi, 2018. Discussion on the Determination Method of Five-day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) in Sewage, 8. China Standardization Press,
pp. 216–217. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-5944.2018.08.117.
Yang, J., Huang, X., Luo, X.N., 2020. Effects of density and fertilization amount on yield
and its component factors of hybrid cotton. J. Agric. Sci. 48 (9), 53–54, 58.
Yang, M.G., Zhao, S.Q., Wang, Q.X., Chen, S.Z., 2013. A summary of progress in
reclaimed water utilization and its advancement in foreign countrie. Haihe Water
Resour. 2013 (4), 30–33. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-7328.2013.04.012.
Yesilnacar, M.I., Gulluoglu, M.S., 2008. Hydrochemical characteristics an d the effects of
irrigation on groundwater quality in Harran Plain, GAP Project, Turkey. Environ.
Geol. 54 (1), 183–196.
Zhang, J., Yang, W.W., 2011. Whole -course quality control in determining wateand
wastewater biochemical oxygen demand after five days. Environ. Sci. Manag. 36 (7),
139–145.