Article

Comparison of water-soluble and exchangeable forms of Al in acid forest soils

Department of Soil Science and Geology, Czech University of Agriculture in Prague, Kamycka 129, CZ165 21 Prague 6--Suchdol, Czech Republic.
Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry (Impact Factor: 3.27). 10/2005; 99(9):1788-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2005.06.024
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Soil acidification promotes Al release from minerals and parent bedrocks; it also affects Al mobilization and speciation. Speciation of KCl extractable and water-extractable Al in forest soils was done by means of HPLC/IC method. Species Al3+ were the most abundant Al forms in the KCl extracts (around 93%). Prevailing Al forms (more than 70%) in aqueous extracts were Al(X)1+, [i.e., Al(OH)2+, Al(SO4)+, AlF2+, Al(oxalate)+, Al(H-citrate)+, etc.] species. It is assumed that most of KCl and water-extractable Al is bound in soil sorption complex (i.e., highly dispersed colloidal fraction of the soil solid phase creating negative charge) where majority of Al exists in the form of Al3+ species. The ECEC values, total carbon content and parameters related to soil organic matter composition (N and S content) have apparent effect on Al speciation. The most toxic Al3+ species are more concentrated in the B horizons compared to the A and E horizons. Aqueous extracts simulate Al release to soil solution under normal conditions; it can thus exhibit the actual Al toxicity. On the other hand, KCl extraction describes a potential threat for case of strong disturbance of natural soil conditions.

1 Follower
 · 
96 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this manuscript is to introduce a modified Spectroscopic method for the determination of water-extractable forms of organic carbon (WEOC) from forest soils and to compare this simple spectroscopy method with the most common but economically demanding method of elemental analysis. Afterwards, the spectroscopy method was applied to a large series of aqueous extracts from real soil samples. These samples originate from two different soil environments – from under beech and under spruce forests. extraction of WEOC was made by deionised water. The extracts were divided into two parts; the contents of WEOC were determined by means of elemental analysis and also by means of the modified spectroscopy method. The comparison of determined amounts of WEOC revealed a close and statistically significant relationship between the results of these independent methods (F-test = 849.9 for p < 0.001; R2 = 97.8 %). The Spectroscopic method proved to be fast, easy and an economical alternative to the commonly used method of elemental analysis. Generally, the amounts of WEOC determined under spruce forest were significantly higher than those determined under beach forest. There has been observed decreasing trend of WEOC amounts with increasing depth of soil profiles for both studied environments.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation activities lead to soil degradation in vicinity with the livestock breeding facilities, mainly due to ammonia emissions from the various stages of the process. In this research, the soil degradation effects of an inten-sive hog farming operation (IHFO) located at a Med-iterranean limestone soil coastal area, have been investigated. Soil samples of the upper mineral soil were taken in various distances (10–1,500 m) and directions from the IHFO boundaries. Thirteen ex-perimental cycles were carried out in the duration of 1.5 years starting in March 2009 until October 2010. The soil samples were analysed on total, exchangeable and water-soluble Al, Fe and Mn. Significantly higher concentrations of the exchangeable and water-soluble Al, Fe and Mn were observed on soil samples at increasing proximity downwind from the farm (south). Southern soil average concentrations of exchangeable Al 3+ , Fe 3+ and Mn 2+ ranged between 3.56 and 7.45 mmol Al 3+ kg −1 soil, 5.85 and 7.11 mmol Fe 3+ kg −1 soil and 2.36 and 5.03 mmol Mn 2+ kg −1 soil, respectively. Southern soil average concentrations of water-soluble Al, Fe and Mn forms ranged between 1.1 and 4.6 ppm Al, 0.5 and 0.8 ppm Fe and 0.4 and 1 ppm Mn, respectively. Keywords East Mediterranean . Environmental impacts . Intensive hog farming operations . Soil mobilisation of Al . Fe and Mn
    Water Air and Soil Pollution 11/2012; 223(9). DOI:10.1007/s11270-012-1324-0 · 1.69 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Soil acidity and the associated problems of aluminum (Al) toxicity and scarce exchangeable bases are typically the most important limiting factors of agricultural yield in wet tropical regions. The goals of this study were to test how soil lime rates affect the forms and distribution of Al in the soil fractions and how different levels of bioavailable Al affect two tomato genotypes grown in wet tropical soils. The tomato genotypes CNPH 0082 and Calabash Rouge were grown in two wet tropical soils in a greenhouse. Soil lime rates of 0, 560, and 2240 mg kg(-1) soil (clay soil) and 0, 280, and 1120 mg kg(-1) soil (sandy soil) were applied to modify Al concentrations. Dry mass production and Al concentrations were determined in shoots and roots. Al was fractionated in the soil, and the soil solution was speciated after cultivation. The Calabash Rouge genotype possesses mechanisms to tolerate Al(3+), absorbed less Al, exhibited smaller reduction in growth, and lower Al concentrations in plant parts than the CNPH 0082. Increased soil pH reduced the exchangeable Al fraction and increased the fraction mainly linked to organic matter. Al in the soil in the form of complexes with organic compounds and Al(SO4)(+) (at the highest lime rate) did not affect plant development. Soil acidity can be easily neutralized by liming the soil, which transforms toxic Al(3+) in the soil into forms that do not harm tomato plants, thereby avoiding oxidative stress in the plants. Al-induced stress in tomatoes varies with genotypes and soil type.
    Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 04/2015; 187(4):4366. DOI:10.1007/s10661-015-4366-0 · 1.68 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
33 Downloads
Available from
May 28, 2014