Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, 59:1367 | Cite as

Geochemical background in soils: a linear process domain? An example from Istria (Croatia)

  • Zoran PehEmail author
  • Slobodan Miko
  • Ozren Hasan
Original Article

Abstract

Definition of geochemical background in exploration and environmental geochemistry has always been regarded as contingent upon scale and investigated locality but mostly under assumption that hosts of processes that produce the data more or less conform individually to Gaussian law of “central tendencies”. Recently, understanding of pedogenesis as synergetic process being characterized by non-linear dynamics renders thermodynamic approach directly applicable in assessment of geochemical thresholds, with concepts of linearity and normality set alongside in solving the problems of soil geochemistry. Seen from this perspective the work is an attempt to relate conceptual fundamentals of non-linear dynamical theory to basic statistical methods in order to elucidate the nature and origins of element subpopulations hidden in the original geochemical data from the soils of Istrian Peninsula (western Croatia). To this purpose the two major groups of soils were selected for analysis depending on the type of bedrock as one of the main soil-forming factors. Geochemical data were subjected to the trimming procedure by which the outliers were removed from the total data collective and attributed to non-linear causes precluding simple cause-and-effect relationships as the sine qua non of Gaussian distribution. Geochemical background is then defined as the normal range of data of the remaining (trimmed) dataset indicating the “thermodynamic branch” of the specific soil processes as opposed to outliers being described as dissipative structures.

Keywords

Soil-forming processes Non-linear dynamics Geochemical background Normal distribution Dissipative structures Istria Croatia 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was founded by the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports, Republic of Croatia (projects: 181-1811096-1181, The Basic Geochemical Map of The Republic of Croatia; 181-1811096-1104, The Map of Mineral Resources of the Republic of Croatia). Their support is greatly appreciated.

References

  1. Ahnert F (1994) Equilibrium, scale and inheritance in geomorphology. Geomorphology 11:125–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birkeland PV (1999) Soils and geomorphology. Oxford University Press, New York, p 430Google Scholar
  3. Bockheim JG, Gennadiyev AN, Hammer RD, Tandarich JP (2005) Historical development of key concept in pedology. Geoderma 124:23–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chadwick OA, Chorover J (2001) The chemistry of pedogenic thresholds. Geoderma 100:321–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dent EB (1999) Complexity science: a worldview shift. Emerg Complex Organ 1(4):5–19Google Scholar
  6. Durn G (2003) Terra rossa in the Mediterranean region: parent materials, composition and origin. Geol Croat 91:125–150Google Scholar
  7. Durn G, Ottner F, Slovenec D (1999) Mineralogical and geochemical indicators of the polygenetic nature of terra rossa in Istria, Croatia. Geoderma 91:125–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Durn G, Aljinović D, Crnjaković M, Lugović B (2007) Heavy and light mineral fractions indicate polygenesis of extensive terra rossa soils in Istria, Croatia. Dev Sedimentol 58:701–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huggett RJ (1998) Soil chronosequences, soil development, and soil evolution: a critical review. Catena 32(3–4):155–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ibañez JJ, Perez-Gonzalez A, Jimenez-Ballesta R, Saldana A, Gallardo-Diaz J (1994) Evolution of fluvial dissection landscapes in Mediterranean environments: quantitative estimates and geomorphic, pedologic and phytocenotic repercussions. Z Geomorphol 38:105–119Google Scholar
  11. Karcz I (1980) Thermodynamic approach to geomorphic thresholds. In: Coates DR, Vitek JD (eds) Thresholds in geomorphology. Allen & Unwin, London, pp 209–226Google Scholar
  12. Malanson GP (1999) Considering complexity. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 89(4):747–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Manson SM (2001) Simplifying complexity: a review of complexity theory. Geoforum 32:405–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Matschullat J, Ottenstein R, Reimann C (2000) Geochemical background—can we calculate it? Environ Geol 39(9):990–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McMartin I, Henderson PJ, Plouffe A, Knight RD (2002) Comparison of Cu–Hg–Ni–Pb concentrations in soils adjacent to anthropogenic point sources: examples from four Canadian sites. Geochem Explor Environ Anal 2:57–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mikulecky DC (2001) The emergence of complexity: science coming of age or science growing old? Comput Chem 25:341–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Sullivan DO (2004) Complexity science and human geography. Trans Inst Br Geogr New Ser 29:282–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Peh Z (1997) Frequency distribution curves as an indicator of evolutionary trends in geomorphological systems: a case study from the northwestern part of Hrvatsko Zagorje (Croatia). Geol Croat 50(1):79–88Google Scholar
  19. Phillips JD (1992a) The end of equilibrium. Geomorphology 5:195–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Phillips JD (1992b) Nonlinear dynamical systems in geomorphology: revolution or evolution. Geomorphology 5:219–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Phillips JD (1993a) Stability implications of the state factor model of soils as a nonlinear dynamical system. Geoderma 58:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Phillips JD (1993b) Progressive and regressive pedogenesis and complex soil evolution. Quat Res 40:169–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Phillips JD (1995) Nonlinear dynamics and the evolution of relief. Geomorphology 14:57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Phillips JD (1996) Deterministic complexity, explanation and predictability in geomorphic systems. In: Thorn CE, Rhoades B (eds) The scientific nature of geomorphology: proceedings of the 27th Binghamton symposium in geomorphology. Wiley, Chichester, pp 315–335Google Scholar
  25. Phillips JD (1998) On the relation between complex systems and the factorial model of soil formation. Geoderma 86:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Phillips JD (1999) Divergence, convergence and self-organization in landscapes. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 89(3):466–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Phillips JD (2000) Signatures of divergence and self-organization in soils and weathering profiles. J Geol 108:91–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Phillips JD (2002) Global and local factors in earth surface systems. Ecol Modell 149:257–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Phillips JD (2003) Sources of nonlinearity and complexity in geomorphic systems. Prog Phys Geogr 27(1):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Prelogović E, Kuk V, Jamièić D, Aljinović B, Marić K (1995) Seismotectonic activity of the Kvarner area. In: Vlahović I, Velić I, Šparica M (eds) First Croatian geological congress. Proceedings, vol 2. Opatija, str. 487–490 (in Croatian, with English abstract)Google Scholar
  31. Prigogine I, Stengers I (1984) Order out of chaos: man’s new dialogue with nature. Bantam, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Reimann C, de Caritat P (2005) Distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic sources for elements in the environment: regional geochemical surveys versus enrichment factors. Sci Total Environ 337:91–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reimann C, Filzmoser P (2000) Normal and lognormal data distribution in geochemistry: death of a myth. Consequences for the statistical treatment of geochemical and environmental data. Environ Geol 39(9):1001–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reimann C, Garret RG (2005) Geochemical background—concept and reality. Sci Total Environ 350:12–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reimann C, Filzmoser P, Garret RG (2005) Background and threshold: critical comparison of methods of determination. Sci Total Environ 346:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Renwick WH (1992) Equilibrium, disequilibrium and nonequilibrium landforms in the landscape. Geomorphology 5:265–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Scheidegger AE (1997) Complexity theory of natural disasters; boundaries of self-structured domains. Nat Hazards 16:103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Starostin VI, Scherbakov DR, Sakys DR (2007) Synergetics in geology. Earth Sci Front 14(1):193–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stengers I (2004) The challenge of complexity: unfolding the ethics of science in memoriam Ilya Prigogine. Emerg Complex Organ 6(1–2):92–99Google Scholar
  40. Targulian VO, Krasilnikov PV (2007) Soil system and pedogenic processes: Self-organization, time scales, and environmental significance. Catena 71:373–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tišljar J, Vlahović I, Velić I, Sokač B (2002) Carbonate platform megafacies of the Jurassic and Cretaceous deposits of the Karst Dinarides. Geol Croat 55(2):139–170Google Scholar
  42. Velić I, Tišljar J, Matièec D, Vlahović I (1995) A review of the geology of Istria. In: Vlahović I, Velić I (eds) First Croatian geological congress. Excursion guide-book, Opatija, pp 21–30Google Scholar
  43. Vlahović I, Tišljar J, Velić I, Matičec D (2002) The Karst Dinarides are composed of relics of a single Mesozoic platform: facts and consequences. Geol Croat 55(2):171–183Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Croatian Geological SurveyZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations