Advertisement

Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 308–319 | Cite as

Phosphorus transportation in runoff as influenced by cationic non-classic polarization: a simulation study

  • Ying Chen
  • Rui TianEmail author
  • Hang LiEmail author
Soils, Sec 3 • Remediation and Management of Contaminated or Degraded Lands • Research Article

Abstract

Purpose

Phosphorus (P) transportation from agricultural soil to surface water is a major contributor to P pollution in the environment, and particle phosphorus (PP) transportation is the major contributor to the total P transportation. The intensity of soil particle interaction and transportation is strongly influenced by ion-surface reactions; however, quantitative study regarding the influence of soil particle interactions on P transportation during runoff is still lacking.

Materials and methods

A simulation study on P transportation of an Entisol during runoff was conducted in this study. To quantitatively characterize the non-classic polarizability of cations on P transport in runoff, the soil was first saturated with Li+, Na+, and K+. The saturated soil layer (5 cm × 5 cm area, 3-cm thickness) was packed in a synthetic glass tray for each experiment, and the slope of the soil surface was set as 30°. The runoff water was replaced by electrolyte solutions of KNO3, NaNO3, and LiNO3 with concentrations of 0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, and 0.1 mol/L, respectively, and the solution temperature was set as 298 K. The height of water dropping was set to 3 cm. Each runoff simulation experiment lasted for 90 min. Runoff and sediment were collected by time, and the solids and solution in the collected suspensions were separated by a high-speed centrifuge. The dissolved P (DP) in the supernatant and the PP in the sediment were measured.

Results and discussion

The amount of PP transportation for the K+ treatment was 45 or 69 times smaller than that for the Na+ and Li+ treatment. The amount of DP transportation for the K+ treatment was 1.7 times higher than that for the Na+ and Li+ treatment. Additionally, increasing soil electrolyte concentration decreased both PP and DP transportation from soil to surface water. Cationic non-classic polarization could quantitatively explain the observed experimental results in PP transportation. Soil could strongly enhance the polarizability of cations; the observed polarizabilities of K+, Na+, and Li+ reached 507, 124, and 45.8 Å3, respectively, but their classic values are only 0.814, 0.139, and 0.0285 Å3, respectively. K+ could strongly decrease PP transportation because K+ had the strongest polarizability.

Conclusions

The cationic non-classic polarization strongly decreased the electric field around soil particles, thus strongly decreasing the electrostatic repulsive forces between adjacent soil particles in aggregate, which decreased PP transportation in runoff. K+ cation with larger non-classic polarizability, relative to Na+ and Li+, decreased the PP transportation. The soil electric field and specific ion effects were found to play an important role in DP transportation.

Keywords

Cationic polarization Phosphorous transportation Soil electric field Soil particle interaction forces Specific ion effects 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 41501241 and 41530855) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Colleges (grant numbers XDJK2019B037 and SWU116049).

References

  1. Annabi M, Houot S, Francou F, Poitrenaud M, Le Bissonnais Y (2007) Soil aggregate stability improvement with urban composts of different maturities. Soil Sci Soc Am J 71(2):413–423Google Scholar
  2. Assouline S (2004) Rainfall-induced soil surface sealing: a critical review of observations, conceptual models, and solutions. Vadose Zone J 3(2):570–591Google Scholar
  3. Canga E, Heckrath GJ, Kjaergaard C (2016) Agricultural drainage filters. II. Phosphorus retention and release at different flow rates. Water Air Soil Poll 227(8):1–13Google Scholar
  4. Conley DJ, Paerl HW, Howarth RW, Boesch DF, Seitzinger SP, Havens KE, Lancelot C, Likens GE (2009) Controlling eutrophication: nitrogen and phosphorus. Science 323(5917):1014–1015Google Scholar
  5. Du W, Li R, Liu XM, Tian R, Li H (2016) Specific ion effects on ion exchange kinetics in charged clay. Colloid Surf A 509:427–432Google Scholar
  6. Du W, Li R, Liu XM, Tian R, Ding WQ, Li H (2017) Estimating Hofmeister energy in ion-clay mineral interactions from the Gouy-Chapman theory. Appl Clay Sci 146:122–130Google Scholar
  7. Falsone G, Stanchi S, Bonifacio E (2017) Simulating the effects of wet and dry on aggregate dynamics in argillic fragipan horizon. Geoderma 305:407–416Google Scholar
  8. Firmansyah I, Spiller M, de Ruijter FJ, Carsjens GJ, Zeeman G (2017) Assessment of nitrogen and phosphorus flows in agricultural and urban systems in a small island under limited data availability. Sci Total Environ 574:1521–1532Google Scholar
  9. Gao Y, Zhu B, Zhou P, Tang J, Wang T, Miao C (2009) Effects of vegetation cover on phosphorus loss from a hillslope cropland of purple soil under simulated rainfall: a case study in China. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 85:263–273Google Scholar
  10. Gao Y, Zhu B, Wang T, Tang J, Zhou P, Miao C (2010) Bioavailable phosphorus transport from a hillslope cropland of purple soil under natural and simulated rainfall. Environ Monit Assess 171:539–550Google Scholar
  11. Gao Y, Zhu B, Yu G, Chen W, He N, Wang T, Miao C (2014) Coupled effects of biogeochemical and hydrological processes on C, N, and P export during extreme rainfall events in a purple soil watershed in southwestern China. J Hydrol 511:692–702Google Scholar
  12. Gao Y, Hao Z, Yang T, He N, Wen X, Yu G (2017) Effects of atmospheric reactive phosphorus deposition on phosphorus transport in a subtropical watershed: a Chinese case study. Environ Pollut 226:69–78Google Scholar
  13. Gonzales-Inca C, Valkama P, Lill JO, Slotte J, Hietaharju E, Uusitalo R (2018) Spatial modeling of sediment transfer and identification of sediment sources during snowmelt in an agricultural watershed in boreal climate. Sci Total Environ 612:303–312Google Scholar
  14. Haygarth PM, Hepworth L, Jarvis SC (1998) Forms of phosphorus transfer in hydrological pathways from soil under grazed grassland. Eur J Soil Sci 49(1):65–72Google Scholar
  15. Henderson R, Kabengi N, Mantripragada N, Cabrera M, Hassan S, Thompson A (2012) Anoxia-induced release of colloid- and nanoparticle-bound phosphorus in grassland soils. Environ Sci Technol 46(21):11727–11734Google Scholar
  16. Hiemenz PC, Rajagopalan R (1997) Principles of colloid and surface chemistry, Third edn. Marcel Dekker, Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Hou J, Li H, Zhu H, Wu L (2009) Determination of clay surface potential: a more reliable approach. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73(5):1658–1663Google Scholar
  18. Hu F, Li H, Liu X, Li S, Ding W, Xu C, Li Y, Zhu L (2015a) Quantitative characterization of non-classic polarization of cations on clay aggregate stability. PLoS One 10(4):e0122460Google Scholar
  19. Hu F, Xu C, Li H, Li S, Yu Z, Li Y, He X (2015b) Particles interaction forces and their effects on soil aggregates breakdown. Soil Till Res 147:1–9Google Scholar
  20. Huang XR, Li H, Li S, Xiong HL, Jiang XJ (2016) Role of cationic polarization in humus-increased soil aggregate stability. Eur J Soil Sci 67(3):341–350Google Scholar
  21. Isermann K (1990) Share of agriculture in nitrogen and phosphorus emissions into the surface waters of Western Europe against the background of their eutrophication. Fertil Res 26(1–3):253–269Google Scholar
  22. Kleinman PJA, Sharpley AN, Veith TL, Maguire RO, Vadas PA (2004) Evaluation of phosphorus transport in surface runoff from packed soil boxes. J Environ Qual 33(4):1413–1423Google Scholar
  23. Langmuir I (1938) The role of attractive and repulsive forces in the formation of tactoids, thixotropic gels, protein crystals and coacervates. J Chem Phys 6(12):873–896Google Scholar
  24. LeBissonnais Y (1996) Aggregate stability and assessment of soil crustability and erodibility .1. Theory and methodology. Eur J Soil Sci 47(4):425–437Google Scholar
  25. Leip A, Billen G, Garnier J, Grizzetti B, Lassaletta L, Reis S, Simpson D, Sutton MA, de Vries W, Weiss F, Westhoek H (2015) Impacts of European livestock production: nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus and greenhouse gas emissions, land-use, water eutrophication and biodiversity. Environ Res Lett 10(11):115004Google Scholar
  26. Li S, Li H, Xu CY, Huang XR, Xie DT, Ni JP (2013) Particle interaction forces induce soil particle transport during rainfall. Soil Sci Soc Am J 77(5):1563–1571Google Scholar
  27. Li S, Li H, Hu FN, Huang XR, Xie DT, Ni JP (2015) Effects of strong ionic polarization in the soil electric field on soil particle transport during rainfall. Eur J Soil Sci 66(5):921–929Google Scholar
  28. Li S, Li Y, Huang X, Hu F, Liu X, Li H (2018) Phosphate fertilizer enhancing soil erosion: effects and mechanisms in a variably charged soil. J Soils Sediments 18(3):863–873Google Scholar
  29. López-León T, Santander-Ortega MJ, Ortega-Vinuesa JL, Bastos-González D (2008) Hofmeister effects in colloidal systems: influence of the surface nature. J Phys Chem C 112(41):16060–16069Google Scholar
  30. Makris KC, Grove JH, Matocha CJ (2006) Colloid-mediated vertical phosphorus transport in a waste-amended soil. Geoderma 136(1–2):174–183Google Scholar
  31. Moreira L, Boström M, Ninham B, Biscaia E, Tavares F (2006) Hofmeister effects: why protein charge, pH titration and protein precipitation depend on the choice of background salt solution. Colloid Surf A 282:457–463Google Scholar
  32. Nearing MA, Bradford JM, Holtz RD (1987) Measurement of waterdrop impact pressures on soil surfaces. Soil Sci Soc Am J 51(5):1302–1306Google Scholar
  33. Parsons DF, Ninham BW (2010) Importance of accurate dynamic polarizabilities for the ionic dispersion interactions of alkali halides. Langmuir 26(3):1816–1823Google Scholar
  34. Parsons DF, Boström M, Nostro PL, Ninham BW (2011) Hofmeister effects: interplay of hydration, nonelectrostatic potentials, and ion size. Phys Chem Chem Phys 13(27):12352–12367Google Scholar
  35. Salis A, Ninham BW (2014) Models and mechanisms of Hofmeister effects in electrolyte solutions, and colloid and protein systems revisited. Chem Soc Rev 43(21):7358–7377Google Scholar
  36. Sharma R, Bell RW, Wong MTF (2017) Dissolved reactive phosphorus played a limited role in phosphorus transport via runoff, throughflow and leaching on contrasting cropping soils from southwest Australia. Sci Total Environ 577:33–44Google Scholar
  37. Sharpley AN, Rekolainen S (1997) Phosphorus in agriculture and its environmental implications. In: Tunney H, Carton OT, Brookes PC, Johnson AJ (es) Phosphorus loss from soil to water. CAB Int., Wallingford. pp 1–54Google Scholar
  38. Sposito G (1984) The Surface Chemistry of Soils. Clarendon Press/Oxford Univ. Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  39. Stutter MI, Langan SJ, Cooper RJ (2008) Spatial and temporal dynamics of stream water particulate and dissolved N, P and C forms along a catchment transect, NE Scotland. J Hydrol 350(3–4):187–202Google Scholar
  40. Stutter M, Dawson JJC, Glendell M, Napier F, Potts JM, Sample J, Vinten A, Watson H (2017) Evaluating the use of in-situ turbidity measurements to quantify fluvial sediment and phosphorus concentrations and fluxes in agricultural streams. Sci Total Environ 607:391–402Google Scholar
  41. Verwey EJW, Overbeek JTG (1948) Theory of the stability of lyophobic colloids — the interaction of sol particles having an electrical double layer. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  42. Withers PJA, Hodgkinson RA, Rollett A, Dyer C, Dils R, Collins AL, Bilsborrow PE, Bailey G, Sylvester-Bradley R (2017) Reducing soil phosphorus fertility brings potential long-term environmental gains: a UK analysis. Environ Res Lett 12(6)Google Scholar
  43. Xiao H, Liu G, Abd-Elbasit MAM, Zhang XC, Liu PL, Zheng FL, Zhang JQ, Hu FN (2017) Effects of slaking and mechanical breakdown on disaggregation and splash erosion. Eur J Soil Sci 68(6):797–805Google Scholar
  44. Xu CY, Li H, Hu FN, Li S, Liu XM, Li Y (2015) Non-classical polarization of cations increases the stability of clay aggregates: specific ion effects on the stability of aggregates. Eur J Soil Sci 66(3):15–623Google Scholar
  45. Yu TR, Wang ZQ (1988) Soil analytical chemistry. Science Press, Beijing in Chinese Google Scholar
  46. Yu Z, Liu X, Xu C, Xiong H, Li H (2016) Specific ion effects on soil water movement. Soil Till Res 161:63–70Google Scholar
  47. Yu Z, Zhang J, Zhang C, Xin X, Li H (2017) The coupling effects of soil organic matter and particle interaction forces on soil aggregate stability. Soil Till Res 174:1–260Google Scholar
  48. Zhang B, Horn R (2001) Mechanisms of aggregate stabilization in Ultisols from subtropical China. Geoderma 99(1–2):123–145Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chongqing Key Laboratory of Soil Multi-scale Interfacial Process, College of Resources and EnvironmentSouthwest UniversityChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations