A Supplementary plots

Boxplot of the 10 most frequent Genera in all samples (ordered by median). No filtering nor transformation has been used.

Figure A.1: Boxplot of the 10 most frequent Genera in all samples (ordered by median). No filtering nor transformation has been used.

non-Metric Multidimensional Scaling, Bray-Curtis Dissimilarities. No Transformation.

Figure A.2: non-Metric Multidimensional Scaling, Bray-Curtis Dissimilarities. No Transformation.

Principal Coordinates Analysis using the Jensen-Shannon Divergence dissimilarity measure. No transformation.

Figure A.3: Principal Coordinates Analysis using the Jensen-Shannon Divergence dissimilarity measure. No transformation.

Procrustes analysis of the ordination results from Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2. Procrustes sum of squares: 0.80. The blue arrows indicate the differences in the relative positions of the same samples in both figures.

Figure A.4: Procrustes analysis of the ordination results from Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2. Procrustes sum of squares: 0.80. The blue arrows indicate the differences in the relative positions of the same samples in both figures.

Principal Components Analysis where all positive abundances in the raw count data have been set to 1. Species with abundances <0.1% are removed beforehand.

Figure A.5: Principal Components Analysis where all positive abundances in the raw count data have been set to 1. Species with abundances <0.1% are removed beforehand.

Canonical Correspondence Analysis of samples from 4 of the WWTPs. Hellinger transformed.

Figure A.6: Canonical Correspondence Analysis of samples from 4 of the WWTPs. Hellinger transformed.

Figure A.7: Canonical Correspondence Analysis of all samples from 2013. Hellinger transformed.

Redundancy Analysis biplot with all possible plant design parameters plotted in red. Constrained to WWTP.

Figure A.8: Redundancy Analysis biplot with all possible plant design parameters plotted in red. Constrained to WWTP.

Redundancy Analysis with the constraints (A): Alternation vs Recirculation, (B): Enhanced Biological Phosphorous Removal (EBPR) vs Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR), (C): Primary Setling, and (D): the amount of industrial wastewater, where Low is 5%<10%, Avg. is 10%<35% and High is 35%<100%.

Figure A.9: Redundancy Analysis with the constraints (A): Alternation vs Recirculation, (B): Enhanced Biological Phosphorous Removal (EBPR) vs Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR), (C): Primary Setling, and (D): the amount of industrial wastewater, where Low is 5%<10%, Avg. is 10%<35% and High is 35%<100%.

Figure A.10: Canonical Correspondence Analysis constrained to which year the samples were taken, except the year 2014. The different years are marked with a label at the centroid of the corresponding samples and colored according to the legend.