Submitted:
04 April 2026
Posted:
07 April 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract

Keywords:
1. Introduction
1.1. Novelty and Importance of the Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area and Environmental Context
2.2. Description of the Treatment Process

2.3. Sampling Strategy
2.4. Physicochemical Analyses
2.5. Calculation of Irrigation Suitability Parameters
2.5.1. Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) [17].
2.5.2. Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) [18].
2.5.3. Risk Index for Soil Permeability (ISP) [18].
2.6. Microbiological Analyses
2.7. Kinetic Modeling
2.8. Statistical Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Overall Performance of Wastewater Treatment Plants Under Hyper-Arid Conditions

3.2. Seasonal Variability of Treatment Performance
3.3. Salinity of Effluents and Suitability for Agricultural Reuse
3.4. Effluent Microbiological Quality and Sanitary Safety
3.5. Kinetic Modeling of COD Degradation
3.6. Implications for Land Management and Reuse Policies
3.7. Transferability to Other Arid and Hyperarid Oases
| Site / Country | Climate | Processing method | Influential COD (mg/L) | COD effluent (mg/L) | COD Yield (%) | CE effluent (dS/m) | Agricultural use possible |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Timimoun – Algeria | Saharan hyper-arid | Activated sludge + UV | 780 | 75 | 90 | 2.4–2.8 | Salt-tolerant crops |
| Al-Ahsa – Saudi Arabia | Hyper-arid | Prolonged activated sludge | 720 | 85 | 88 | 2.6–3.1 | Yes (strict management) |
| Ouargla – Algeria | Hyper-arid | Lagooning + planted filters | 650 | 110 | 83 | 3.2 | Limit |
| Negev – Palestine | Extreme arid | MBR | 600 | 30 | 95 | 1.8 | Yes (broad spectrum) |
| Al-Qassim – Saudi Arabia | Hyper-arid | Conventional activated sludge | 700 | 95 | 86 | 2.9 | Yes (forage) |
| Rajasthan – India | Hot arid | Activated sludge + ponds | 680 | 120 | 82 | 3.4 | Restricted |
| Southern Tunisia – Tunisia | Arid | aerated lagoon | 620 | 100 | 84 | 3.0 | Yes (salt tolerance) |
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Minhas, P.S., Ramos, T.B., Ben-Gal, A., Pereira, L.S. Coping with salinity in irrigated agriculture: Crop evapotranspiration and water management issues. Agricultural Water Management, 2020. 227, 105832. [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, AS., Kutaila, AF., Al-Hinai, H.S. et al. Sustainable agriculture in Oman: evaluating treated wastewater irrigation effects on soil quality, heavy metal accumulation, and alfalfa growth. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci, 2025. 24, 81. [CrossRef]
- Lyu, S., Chen, W., Zhang, W., Fan, Y. and Jiao, W. Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse in China: Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2016. 39, 86-96. [CrossRef]
- Rezzoug, C., Merzougui, T., Bouchiba, A. (2025). Wastewater treatment technologies and challenges in Algeria and their future prospects. Discover Sustain. 6, 884. [CrossRef]
- Bendida, A., Kendouci, M.A., Mebarki, S., El-Bari Tidjani, A. Wastewater purification and recycling using plants in an arid environment for agricultural purposes: Case of the Algerian Sahara. Appl. Water Sci. 2024. 14, 123. [CrossRef]
- Moussaoui, T., Derdour, A., Hosni, A., Ballesta-de los Santos, M., Legua, P., Pardo-Picazo, M.Á. (2023). Assessing the Quality of Treated Wastewater for Irrigation: A Case Study of Ain Sefra Wastewater Treatment Plant. Sustainability, 2023. 15(14), 11133. [CrossRef]
- Ukoha-Onuoha, E., Horsfall, I. The evolution of wastewater reuse for irrigation: Lessons learned and future directions. Next Sustainability. 2026. Volume 7, 100253. [CrossRef]
- Mazouzi, M., Chenchouni, H. Evaluating the Impacts of Treated Wastewater and Groundwater Irrigation on Soil Quality and Physico-Chemical Properties. Eurasian Soil Sc. 2026. 59, 30. [CrossRef]
- Machineni, L. Review on biological wastewater treatment and resources recovery: attached and suspended growth systems. Water Science and Technology. 2019. 80 (11): 2013–2026. [CrossRef]
- Christou, A., Agüera, A., Bayona, J.M., Cytryn, E., Fotopoulos, V., Lambropoulou, D., Manaia, C.M., Michael, C., Revitt, M., Schröder, P., Fatta-Kassinos, D. The potential implications of reclaimed wastewater reuse for irrigation on the agricultural environment: The knowns and unknowns of the fate of antibiotics and antibiotic resistant bacteria and resistance genes – A review. Water Research, 2017. 123, 448–467. [CrossRef]
- Savari, M., Amghani, M., Malekian, A. Application of the diffusion of innovation theory to identify factors affecting the use of treated wastewater in crop irrigation: a study in Tehran province. Cleaner Engineering and Technology. 2025 (b). Volume 29, 101094. [CrossRef]
- Dib, D., Ouanes, M., Fellah, M. et al. Suitability of a classic wastewater treatment plant to purify the collective effluent of Oum El-Bouaghi City, North East Algeria. Appl Water Sci. 2025.15, 204. [CrossRef]
- Alfarra, A., Alnahhal, M., Hussein, A.H. Wastewater reuse in arid regions: Opportunities and challenges. Water. 2020, 12(9), 2539.
- UNESCO. United Nations World Water Development Report 2023: Partnerships and Cooperation for Water; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2023.
- APHA. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 24th ed; APHA/AWWA/WEF: Washington, DC, USA. 2022.
- Panda, D., Kumar, A., Gangawane, K.M. Principles of Wastewater Treatment and Sludge Generation. In: Mandpe, A., Shah, M.P. (eds) Wastewater Sludge Nexus. Sustainable Landscape Planning and Natural Resources Management. Springer, Cham, 2025.
- Henze, M., van Loosdrecht, M.C.M., Ekama, G.A., Brdjanovic, D. Biological Wastewater Treatment: Principles, Modelling and Design. IWA Publishing. 2017.
- Das, A., Mishra, S., Ayejoto, D.A. Harnessing Biotechnology for Sustainable Wastewater Treatment and Circular Economy. Earth Syst Environ 9, 2025. 625–638. [CrossRef]
- Hajjar, T., Mohtar, R., Abou Jaoude, L., Yanni, S. Treated wastewater reuse for irrigation in a semi-arid region. Science of The Total Environment. 2025. Volume 966, 178579. [CrossRef]
- Singhopon, T., Canh, V., Kadoya, S., Katayama, H. A full-scale Co-located comparison of virus removal by membrane bioreactor and conventional activated sludge systems. Water Research, 2026. Volume 292, 125352. [CrossRef]
- Bari, A.H., Akolkar, H.N., Hatvate, N.T., Haghi, A.K. Introduction to Wastewater Treatment. In: Wastewater Treatment. Synthesis Lectures on Sustainable Development. Springer, Cham 2026. [CrossRef]
- García. F., Jaramillo, A., Garay, C., Sánchez, K., Gonzales, L. Effectiveness of membrane technologies in removing emerging contaminants from wastewater: Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration. Water Cycle. 2025. Volume 6, Pages 357-373. [CrossRef]
- Reid, E., Liu, X., Judd, S. Effect of high salinity on activated sludge characteristics and membrane permeability in an immersed membrane bioreactor. Journal of Membrane Science. 2006. Volume 283, Issues 1–2, 20. Pages 164-171. [CrossRef]
- Metcalf & Eddy. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Resource Recovery. McGraw-Hill, 2014.
- Drechsel, P., Qadir, M., Galibourg, D. The WHO Guidelines for Safe Wastewater Use in Agriculture: A Review of Implementation Challenges and Possible Solutions in the Global South. Water. 2022. 14(6), 864. [CrossRef]
- Alresheedi, M.T., Haider, H., Albuaymi, A.M., Alsulaili, A.D., Alshammari, S.B. (2023). Sustainability of a low-cost decentralized treatment system for wastewater reuse: Resident perception-based evaluation for arid regions. Water 15, 3458. [CrossRef]
- Rezzoug, C., Merzougui, T., Bouchiba, A. Wastewater treatment technologies and challenges in Algeria and their future prospects. Discover Sustainability. 2025; 6, 884. [CrossRef]
- Mabrouk, O., Hamdi, H., Sayadi, S., Al-Ghouti, M., Abu-Dieyeh, M., Zouari, N. Reuse of Sludge as Organic Soil Amendment: Insights into the Current Situation and Potential Challenges. Sustainability. 2023. 15(8), 6773. [CrossRef]
- Al-Rashdi, T., Ahmed, M., Stefanakis, A. Assessment of a sludge treatment reed bed mesocosm under an arid and hot climate. Ecological Engineering. 2025. Volume 218, 107676. [CrossRef]
- Savari, M., Amghani, M., Malekian, A. Treated wastewater irrigation: A bridge between water scarcity, a healthy environment, and safe food production. One Health. 2025 (a). Volume 21, 101251. [CrossRef]
- Rezzoug, C., Belhadj, M., Merzougui, T., Bouchiba, A (2026). Wastewater Treatment Plants as Environmental Barriers in Hyperarid Regions: A Comprehensive Evaluation of their Performance, Groundwater Protection, and Reuse in Agriculture in the Algerian Sahara. Processes 2026, 14(7), 1112; [CrossRef]
- Gugliucci, W., Pepe, O., Ventorino, V. Biomass conversion strategies and wastewater reuse: a deep focus on hydrothermal liquefaction as a circular economy approach. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2024. 11, 177. [CrossRef]
- Dhinesh, R., Kirthiga, S.S., Gopinath, A., Taherzadeh, M. Future Trends and Innovations: Emerging Technologies in Wastewater Treatment and Potential Breakthroughs in Resource Recovery. In: Dhiman, S., Mukherjee, G. (eds) Resource Resurgence. Springer Water. Springer, Cham. 2025. [CrossRef]
- Azuma, T., Adachi, F., Kawahara, R., Yamaguchi, N., Kanamori, H. First nationwide survey of the distribution and seasonal variation of antimicrobials in effluents from wastewater treatment plants in Japan. Journal of Hazardous Materials Advances, 2026. Volume 21, 101054. [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y., Shao, G., Wu, S., Xiaojun, W., Lu, J., Cui, J. Changes in soil salinity under treated wastewater irrigation: A meta-analysis. Agricultural Water Management, 2021. 255, 106986. [CrossRef]
- Qadir, M., Drechsel, P., Jiménez Cisneros, B., Kim, Y., Pramanik, A., Mehta, P., Olaniyan, O. Global and regional potential of wastewater as a water, nutrient and energy source. Natural Resources Forum, 2020. 44(1), 40–51. [CrossRef]
- Heyde, B.J., Braun, M., Soufi, L. et al. Transition from irrigation with untreated wastewater to treated wastewater and associated benefits and risks. npj Clean Water. 2025. 8, 6. [CrossRef]
- Abou Jaoude, L., Kamaleddine, F., Bou Said, R., Mohtar, R.H., Dbaibo, R., Yanni, S.F. Treated wastewater reuse and its impact on soil properties and potato and corn growth. Science of the Total Environment, 2025. 958, 178130. [CrossRef]
- Vymazal, J. (2011). Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: Five decades of experience. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(1), 61–69. [CrossRef]
- Levy, G., Bar-Tal, A., Cytryn, E., Borisover, M. Wastewater as a contamination risk for agricultural soils. In: Naidu, R. (eds) Contaminants in agricultural soils: Challenges and solutions. Burleigh Dodds Series in Agricultural Science, vol 166. Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing, Cambridge, UK, 2025.
- Peña, N., Maroto-Melle, E., Del Rey, S., Valenciano, A., Gutiérrez, M., Gracia-Lor, E. Ecotoxicological risk and seasonal removal of licit and illicit drugs in wastewater treatment plants: A comparison of secondary and tertiary processes. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2025. Volume 499, 140290. [CrossRef]






| Code | Point | Description |
|---|---|---|
| P1 | WWTP Input | Raw wastewater |
| P2 | Clarifier outlet | Secondary effluent |
| P3 | UV outlet | Final effluent for reuse |
| B1 | Stabilized mud | Sludge intended for recovery |
| Setting | Method | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| COD | Dichromate | APHA 5220D |
| BOD5 | Incubation period: 5 days | APHA 5210B |
| TSS | GF/C Filtration | APHA 2540D |
| NH4+ | Indophenol | APHA 4500-NH3 |
| NO3− | UV 220 nm | APHA 4500-NO3 |
| PT | Ascorbic acid | APHA 4500-P |
| CE | Conductimetry | ISO 7888 |
| pH | Potentiometry | ISO 10523 |
| Setting | Entrance (mg/L) | Exit (mg/L) | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| COD | 780 ± 60 | 75 ± 10 | 90% |
| BOD5 | 420 ± 35 | 40 ± 5 | 90.5% |
| MES | 320 ± 28 | 20 ± 3 | 93.8% |
| NH4+ | 58 ± 6 | 10 ± 2 | 82.7% |
| NTK | 68 ± 5 | 18 ± 3 | 73% |
| PT | 11 ± 3 | 4 ± 1 | 64% |
| Setting | Measured value | FAO threshold | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| CE | 2.4–2.8 dS/m | < 3 | Acceptable |
| SAR | 6.2 | < 10 | Low risk |
| RSC | 1.1 meq/L | < 1.25 | Satisfying |
| Cl− | 5.4 meq/L | < 7 | Tolerable |
| Bore | 0.65 mg/L | < 1 | Risk-free |
| Bore | 0.65 mg/L | < 1 | Risk-free |
| Indicator | Entrance (UFC/100mL) | Exit UV (UFC/100mL) | Reduction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total coliforms | >106 | <102 | 4 log10 |
| E. coli | >105 | <10 | 4–5 log10 |
| Fecal coliforms | >106 | <102 | 4 log10 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).