Reciprocating biofilter for water reuse in aquaculture

Michael H Paller, W. M. Lewis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The reciprocating biofilter is automatically dewatered at regular and frequent intervals, in contrast to the conventional upflow submerged biofilter which is continually inundated. Reciprocating biofilters were compared with submerged biofilters in terms of ability to maintain water quality in small-scale fish holding units. In the first trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 35% more fish in terms of numbers, 59% more fish in terms of weight, and a 45% greater feeding rate. In the second trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 29% more fish in terms of numbers, 33% more fish in terms of weight, and a 29% greater feeding rate. Superior performance of the reciprocating filters appeared to be the results of resistance to clogging and improved aeration of the filter substrate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)139-151
Number of pages13
JournalAquacultural Engineering
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1982

Fingerprint

water reuse
biofilters
filters
aquaculture
filter
fish
aeration
water quality
substrate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aquatic Science

Cite this

Reciprocating biofilter for water reuse in aquaculture. / Paller, Michael H; Lewis, W. M.

In: Aquacultural Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 2, 01.01.1982, p. 139-151.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Paller, Michael H ; Lewis, W. M. / Reciprocating biofilter for water reuse in aquaculture. In: Aquacultural Engineering. 1982 ; Vol. 1, No. 2. pp. 139-151.
@article{4b442a71676a49f1905771dc8909a900,
title = "Reciprocating biofilter for water reuse in aquaculture",
abstract = "The reciprocating biofilter is automatically dewatered at regular and frequent intervals, in contrast to the conventional upflow submerged biofilter which is continually inundated. Reciprocating biofilters were compared with submerged biofilters in terms of ability to maintain water quality in small-scale fish holding units. In the first trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 35{\%} more fish in terms of numbers, 59{\%} more fish in terms of weight, and a 45{\%} greater feeding rate. In the second trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 29{\%} more fish in terms of numbers, 33{\%} more fish in terms of weight, and a 29{\%} greater feeding rate. Superior performance of the reciprocating filters appeared to be the results of resistance to clogging and improved aeration of the filter substrate.",
author = "Paller, {Michael H} and Lewis, {W. M.}",
year = "1982",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/0144-8609(82)90005-X",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "1",
pages = "139--151",
journal = "Aquacultural Engineering",
issn = "0144-8609",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reciprocating biofilter for water reuse in aquaculture

AU - Paller, Michael H

AU - Lewis, W. M.

PY - 1982/1/1

Y1 - 1982/1/1

N2 - The reciprocating biofilter is automatically dewatered at regular and frequent intervals, in contrast to the conventional upflow submerged biofilter which is continually inundated. Reciprocating biofilters were compared with submerged biofilters in terms of ability to maintain water quality in small-scale fish holding units. In the first trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 35% more fish in terms of numbers, 59% more fish in terms of weight, and a 45% greater feeding rate. In the second trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 29% more fish in terms of numbers, 33% more fish in terms of weight, and a 29% greater feeding rate. Superior performance of the reciprocating filters appeared to be the results of resistance to clogging and improved aeration of the filter substrate.

AB - The reciprocating biofilter is automatically dewatered at regular and frequent intervals, in contrast to the conventional upflow submerged biofilter which is continually inundated. Reciprocating biofilters were compared with submerged biofilters in terms of ability to maintain water quality in small-scale fish holding units. In the first trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 35% more fish in terms of numbers, 59% more fish in terms of weight, and a 45% greater feeding rate. In the second trial the reciprocating filter systems averaged 29% more fish in terms of numbers, 33% more fish in terms of weight, and a 29% greater feeding rate. Superior performance of the reciprocating filters appeared to be the results of resistance to clogging and improved aeration of the filter substrate.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0020128266&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0020128266&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0144-8609(82)90005-X

DO - 10.1016/0144-8609(82)90005-X

M3 - Article

VL - 1

SP - 139

EP - 151

JO - Aquacultural Engineering

JF - Aquacultural Engineering

SN - 0144-8609

IS - 2

ER -