Advertisement

Distribution and availability of copper in aggregate size fractions of some calcareous soils

  • Akram Farshadirad
  • Alireza Hosseinpur
  • Hamidreza Motaghian
Soils, Sec 4 • Ecotoxicology • Research Article
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The difference in copper (Cu) availability between soils can be a result of different distribution of Cu forms in various size fractions of aggregates. This study aimed to determine different Cu forms in bulk soils and aggregate size fractions of some heavy metal-contaminated soils from Isfahan Province, Iran and to examine the relationship between Cu forms associated with different soil aggregates and plant indices.

Materials and methods

Bulk soil of five contaminated soils was partitioned into four aggregate size fractions (2.0 to 4.0 mm (large macro-aggregates), 0.25 to 2.0 mm (small macro-aggregates), 0.05 to 0.25 mm (micro-aggregates), and < 0.05 mm (mineral fraction)) by dry sieving. Copper was fractionated into soluble and exchangeable (F1), carbonate-bound (F2), Fe-Mn oxide-bound (F3), and organic-bound (F4) by Tessier’s method. Copper concentration and dry weight of shoots and roots of corn (corn indices) were determined in a pot experiment to assay the Cu availability in the five studied soils. Relationship between the Cu bound to different chemical fractions in different size aggregates and corn indices was assessed using cluster analysis.

Results and discussion

The results showed that the 0.25–2.0-mm fraction, with the highest mass percentage in the soils, had higher contribution to the total content of Cu in the bulk soils. Copper was mainly associated with the organic-bound and residual fractions in the bulk soils and aggregates. Principal component analysis (PCA) represented that the distribution patterns of Cu chemical fractions in different aggregates were strongly related to the soil type. The study of relationship between Cu fractions and the corn indices demonstrated that the organic-bound fraction of Cu in 2.0–4.0 mm aggregates was remarkably correlated with the Cu concentration in corn root and suggested that the organic-bound fraction of Cu in larger aggregates constitutes the chief plant-available Cu pool in the soils.

Conclusions

Soil type and aggregate size distribution were important factors controlling availability and distribution patterns of Cu fractions in studied soils. The organic-bound fraction of Cu in the larger aggregate fractions appeared to be more readily available for plant than in the smaller aggregate fractions. Therefore, soil aggregate size fractionation can be used to assess the distribution, bioavailability, and environmental hazard of Cu in soils.

Keywords

Chemical fractions Copper availability Pollution Soil physical fractions 

Notes

Funding information

This study supported by funds allocated by the Vice President for research of Shahrekord University (Iran).

References

  1. Acosta JA, Faz A, Kalbitz K, Jansen B, Martinez-Martinez S (2011) Heavy metal concentrations in particle size fractions from street dust of Murcia (Spain) as the basis for risk assessment. J Environ Monitor 13:3087–3096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arias-Estévez M, Novoa-Munoz JC, Pateiro M, Lopez-Periago E (2007) Influence of aging on copper fractionation in an acid soil. Soil Sci 172:225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bech J (2018) Reclamation and management of polluted soils: options and case studies. J Soils Sediments 18:2131–2135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapman HD, Pratt PF (1961) Methods of analysis for soils, plants, and waters. University of California, Riverside, CAGoogle Scholar
  5. Chatenet B, Marticorena B, Gomes L, Bergametti G (1996) Assessing the actual grain-size distributions of desert soils erodible by wind. Sedimentology 43:901–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen Z, Pawluk S, Juma NG (1998) Impact of variations in granular structures on carbon sequestration in two Alberta Mollisols. In: Lal R et al (eds) Soil processes and the carbon cycle. Adv. Soil Sci. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 225–243Google Scholar
  7. Chen JH, He F, Zhang XH, Sun X, Zheng JF, Zheng JW (2014) Heavy metal pollution decreases microbial abundance, diversity and activity within particle-size fractions of a paddy soil. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 87:164–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dankoub Z, Khademi H, Ayoubi S (2012) Magnetic susceptibility and its relationship with the concentration of selected heavy metals and soil properties in surface soils of the Isfahan region. J Environ Study 38(63):4–6Google Scholar
  9. Davidson CM, Duncan AL, Littlejohn D, Ure AM, Garden LM (1998) A critical evaluation of the three-stage BCR sequential extraction procedure to assess the potential mobility and toxicity of heavy metals in industrially-contaminated land. Anal Chim Acta 363:45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Filgueiras AV, Lavilla I, Bendicho C (2002) Chemical sequential extraction for metal partitioning in environmental solid samples. J Environ Monitor 4:823–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gee GW, Bauder JW (1986) Particle size analysis. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Part 1, 2nd edn. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp 404–407Google Scholar
  12. Gong C, Ma L, Cheng H, Liu Y, Xu D, Li B, Liu F, Ren Y, Liu Z, Zhao C, Yang K, Nie H, Lang C (2014) Characterization of the particle size fraction associated heavy metals in tropical arable soils from Hainan Island, China. J Geochem Explor 139:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guo G, Zhang Y, Zhang C, Wang SH, Yan Z, Li F (2013) Partition and characterization of cadmium on different particle size aggregates in Chinese Phaeozem. Geoderma 200:108–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huang B, Li Z, Huang J, Guo L, Nie X, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Zeng G (2014) Adsorption characteristics of Cu and Zn onto various size fractions of aggregates from red paddy soil. J Hazard Mater 264:176–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kalbits K, Wenrich R (1998) Mobilization of heavy metals and arsenic in polluted wetland soils and its dependence on dissolved organic matter. Sci Total Environ 209:27–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li Z, Huang B, Huang J, Chen G, Zhang C, Nie X, Luo N, Yao H, Ma W, Zeng G (2015) Influence of removal of organic matter and iron and manganese oxides on cadmium adsorption by red paddy soil aggregates. RSC Adv 5:90588–90595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Loeppert RH, Suarez DL (1996) Carbonate and gypsum. In: Sparks DL (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal, Madison, pp 437–474Google Scholar
  18. Lund LJ, Betty EE, Page AL, Elliott RA (1981) Occurrence of naturally high cadmium levels in soils and its accumulation by vegetation. J Environ Qual 10:551–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ma LQ, Rao GN (1997) Chemical fractionation of cadmium, copper, nickel, and zinc in contaminated soils. J Environ Qual 26:259–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Márquez CO, Garcia VJ, Cambardella CA, Schultz RC, Isenhart TM (2004) Aggregate size-stability distribution and soil stability. Soil Sci Soc Am J 68:725–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Motaghian HR, Hosseinpur AR (2013) Copper desorption kinetics in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) rhizosphere in some sewage sludge amended soils. Environ Earth Sci 70:1571–1580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Neu S, Müller I, Brackhage C, Galazka R, Siebielec G, Puschenreiter M, Dudel EG (2018) Trace elements bioavailability to Triticum aestivum and Dendrobaena veneta in a multielement-contaminated agricultural soil amended with drinking water treatment residues. J Soils Sediments 18:2259–2270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pichler M, Guggenberger G, Hartmann R, Zech W (1996) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in different forest humus types. Environ Sci Pollut Res 3:24–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Qian J, Shan XQ, Wang ZJ, Tu Q (1996) Distribution and plant availability of heavy metals in different particle-size fractions of soil. Sci Total Environ 187:131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quenea K, Lamy I, Winterton P, Bermond A, Dumat C (2009) Interactions between metals and soil organic matter in various particle size fractions of soil contaminated with waste water. Geoderma 149:217–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sposito GL, Lund J, Chang AC (1982) Trace metal chemistry in arid-zone field soils amended with sewage sludge: I. Fractionation of Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb in solid phases. Soil Sci Soc Am J 46:260–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sumner ME, Miller PM (1996) Cation exchange capacity and exchange coefficient. In: Sparks DL (ed) Methods of soil analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal, Madison, pp 1201–1230Google Scholar
  28. Tembo BD, Sichilongo K, Cernak J (2006) Distribution of copper, lead, cadmium and zinc concentrations in soils around Kabwe Town in Zambia. Chemosphere 63:497–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tessier A, Campbell PGC, Bisson M (1979) Sequential extraction procedure for the speciation of particulate trace metals. Anal Chem 51:844–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Venditti D, Durécu S, Berthelin J (2000) A multidisciplinary approach to assess history, environmental risks, and remediation feasibility of soils contaminated by metallurgical activities. Part A: chemical and physical properties of metals and leaching ability. Arch Enviro Con Tox 38(4):411–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Von Lutzow MV, Kogel-Knabner I, Ekschmitt K, Flessa H, Guggenberger G, Matzner E, Marschner B (2007) SOM fractionation methods: relevance to functional pools and to stabilization mechanisms. Soil Biol Biochem 39:2183–2207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wu J, Li H, Li F, Zhang Y, Lu H, Zhuang P, Mo Q, Li Z (2016) Distribution and fractionation of cadmium in soil aggregates affected by earthworms (Eisenia fetida) and manure compost. J Soils Sediments 16:2286–2295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xiao R, Zhang M, Yao X, Ma Z, Yu F, Bai J (2015) Heavy metal distribution in different soil aggregate size classes from restored brackish marsh, oil exploitation zone, and tidal mud flat of the Yellow River Delta. J Soils Sediments 15:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang MK, He ZL, Calvert DV, Stoffella PJ, Yang XE, Li YC (2003) Phosphorus and heavy metal attachment and release in sandy soil aggregate fractions. Soil Sci Soc Am J 67:1158–1167CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akram Farshadirad
    • 1
  • Alireza Hosseinpur
    • 1
  • Hamidreza Motaghian
    • 1
  1. 1.Soil Science DepartmentShahrekord University of IranShahrekordIslamic Republic of Iran

Personalised recommendations