Eurasian Soil Science

, Volume 51, Issue 8, pp 955–964 | Cite as

Transformation of Water-Soluble Organic Substances in Litters of Podzols in the Background and Technogenic Areas of the Kola Peninsula

  • P. E. Odintsov
  • E. I. Karavanova
  • A. A. Stepanov
Degradation, Rehabilitation, and Conservation of Soils


Mineralization of water-soluble organic substances in forest litters of different compositions under conditions of their pollution with heavy metals from aerogenic emissions is considered. Water-soluble organic substances of the pine forest litters are shown to be less stable than that under the spruce forests irrespective of their pollution; the portion of mineralized at 20°C carbon for a month reached 40%. In the spruce litters, mineralizable amounts of carbon are related to their pollution: in the technogenic areas, compared to the background ones, carbon losses from the litters are twice greater. In the course of decomposition, in the spruce and pine litters, phenol compounds accumulate among the water-soluble organic compounds, and this process is more intense in the contaminated areas. After the decomposition of all the litters, irrespectively of their composition and the distance from the pollution sources, the water-soluble organic substances are characterized by higher indices of humification (HIX), more intense fluorescence, and greater coefficients of specific extinction (E260). In the ultraviolet spectra, bands appear in the region of aromatic amines absorption. These changes indicate the transformation of water-soluble organic substances: the degrees of their condensation and aromaticity increase and nitrogen-containing aromatic compounds are formed.


biodegradation pollution podzol phenolic compounds forest litter heavy metals 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    E. L. Vorobeichik, “Changes in thickness of forest litter under chemical pollution,” Russ. J. Ecol. 26, 252–258 (1995).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. A. Grishina, G. N. Koptsik, and M. I. Makarov, Transformation of Soil Organic Matter (Moscow State Univ., Moscow, 1990) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. I. Karavanova, “Dissolved organic matter: Fractional composition and sorbability by the soil solid phase (review of literature),” Eurasian Soil Sci. 46, 833–844 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. N. Koptsik, Doctoral Dissertation in Biology (Moscow, 2012).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. N. Koptsik, M. S. Kadulin, and A. I. Zakharova, “The effect of technogenic contamination on carbon dioxide emission by soils in the Kola Subarctic,” Biol. Bull. Rev. 5, 480–492 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. N. Koptsik, S. V. Koptsik, I. E. Smirnova, A. D. Kudryavtseva, and K. A. Turbabina, “Response of forest ecosystems to the reduction of atmospheric industrial emissions in the Kola Subarctic,” Zh. Obshch. Biol. 77 (2), 147–165 (2016).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    N. V. Lukina and V. V. Nikonov, “Acidity of Al–Fehumus podzols in pine forests affected by atmospheric technogenic pollution,” Pochvovedenie, No. 7, 879–891 (1995).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    N. V. Lukina and V. V. Nikonov, “Content and composition of humus in the northern taiga Al–Fe–humus podzolic soils subject to atmospheric pollution,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 31, 671–678 (1998).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. N. Lutsenko, V. S. Arzhanova, and N. Yu. Kim, “Transformation of dissolved organic matter in soils of the felled areas in fir-spruce forests (Primorskii krai),” Eurasian Soil Sci. 39, 604–610 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    I. I. Seigi, Candidate’s Dissertation in Biology (Moscow, 1973).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Bartoli, A. Hatira, J. C. Andre, and J. M. Portal, “Proprietes fluorescentes et colloidales d’une solution organique de podzol au cours du processus du complexation par le cuivre,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 19, 355–362 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. C. Brookes, C. E. Heijnen, S. P. McGrath, and E. D. Vance, “Soil microbial biomass estimates in soils contaminated with metals,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 18, 383–388 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Chen, E. J. LeBoeuf, S. Dai, and B. Gu, “Fluorescence spectroscopic studies of natural organic matter fractions,” Chemosphere 50 (5), 639–647 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. G. Coble, “Characterization of marine and terrestrial DOM in seawater using excitation-emission matrix spectroscopy,” Mar. Chem. 51, 325–346 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. G. Coble, J. Lead, A. Baker, D. M. Reynolds, and R. M. Spencer, Aquatic Organic Matter Fluorescence (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    J.-P. Croué and J. A. Leenheer, “Characterizing dissolver aquatic organic matter,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 1, 18A–26A (2003).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. W. Dalenberg and G. Jager, “Priming effect of some organic additions to 14C-labeled soil,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 21, 443–448 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    N. Fierer, J. P. Schimel, R. G. Cates, and J. Zou, “Influence of balsam poplar tannin fractions on carbon and nitrogen dynamics in Alaskan taiga floodplain soils,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 33, 1827–1839 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. Freedman and T. C. Hutchinson, “Effects of smelter pollutants on forest leaf litter decomposition near a nickel–copper smelter at Sudbury, Ontario,” Can. J. Bot. 58 (15), 1722–1736 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    B. Freedman and T. C. Hutchinson, “Smelter pollution near Sudbury, Ontario, Canada and effects on forest litter decomposition,” in Effects of Acid Precipitation on Terrestrial Ecosystems, NATO Conference Ser. vol. 4 (Scarborough, 1978), pp. 395–434.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    F. H. Frimmel and H. Bauer, “Influence of photochemical reactions on the optical properties of aquatic humus substances gained from fall leaves,” Sci. Total Environ. 62, 139–148 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. Fröberg and K. Hansson, “Dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen leaching from Scots pine, Norway spruce and silver birch stands in southern Sweden,” For. Ecol. Manage. 262 (9), 1742–1747 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    U. Hamer and B. Marschner, “Priming effects of sugars, amino acids, organic acids and catechol on the mineralization of lignin and peat,” J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 165 (3), 261–268 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. C. Hutchinson, H. Insam, and H. H. Reber, “Effects of heavy metal stress on the metabolic quotient of the soil microflora,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 28, 691–694 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    J. Jaffrain, F. Gerard, M. Meyer, and J. Ranger, “Assessing the quality of dissolved organic matter in forest soils using ultraviolet absorption spectrophotometry,” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 71, 1851–1858 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    K. Kalbitz, J. Schmerwitz, D. Schwesig, and E. Matzner, “Biodegradation of soil-derived dissolved organic matter as related to its properties,” Geoderma 113, 273–291 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    O. Kiikkila, V. Kitunen, and A. Smolander, “Degradability of dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen in relation to tree species,” FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 53, 33–40 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    O. Kiikkila, V. Kitunen, and A. Smolander, “Dissolved soil organic matter from surface organic horizons under birch and conifers: Degradation in relation to chemical characteristics,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 38, 737–746 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    H.-R. Köhler, C. Wein, S. Reiss, V. Storch, and G. Alberti, “Impact of heavy metals on mass and energy flux within the decomposition process in deciduous forests,” Ecotoxicology 4 (2), 114–137 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Y. Kuzyakov, “Review: factors affecting rhizosphere priming effects,” J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 165, 382–396 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Y. Kuzyakov, J. K. Friedel, and K. Stahr, “Review of mechanisms and quantification of priming effects,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1485–1498 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    J. A. Leenheer, “Characterizing dissolved aquatic organic matter,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 37 (1), 19–26 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    A.-J. Lindroos, K. Derome, and A. Smolander, “The effect of Scots pine, Norway spruce, and silver birch on the chemical composition of stand through fall and upper soil percolation water in northern Finland,” Boreal Environ. Res. 16, 240–250 (2011).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    M. Lützow, I. Kögel-Knabner, K. Ekschmitt, E. Matzner, G. Guggenberger, B. Marschner, and H. Flessa, “Stabilization of organic matter in temperate soils: Mechanisms and their relevance under different soil conditions—a review,” Eur. J. Soil Sci. 57, 426–445 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    B. Marschner and K. Kalbitz, “Controls of bioavailability and biodegradability of dissolved organic matter in soils,” Geoderma 113, 211–235 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    F. B. Metting, “Structure and physiological ecology of soil microbial communities,” in Soil Microbial Ecology Applications in Agricultural and Environmental Management, Ed. by F. B. Metting (Marcel Decker, New York, 1993), pp. 3–24.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    E. Parlanti, K. Woerz, L. Georoy, and M. Lamotte, “Dissolved organic matter fluorescence spectroscopy as a tool to estimate biological activity in a coastal zone submitted to anthropogenic inputs,” Org. Geochem. 31, 1765–1781 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    D. Schwesig, K. Kalbitz, and E. Matzner, “Mineralization of dissolved organic carbon in mineral soil solution of two forest soils,” J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 166, 585–593 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    N. Senesi, “Molecular and quantitative aspects of the chemistry of fulvic acid and its interactions with metal ions and organic chemicals: Part II. The fluorescence spectroscopy approach,” Anal. Chem. Acta 232, 77–106 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    A. Smolander and V. Kitunen, “Soil microbial activities and characteristics of dissolved organic C and N in relation to tree species,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 34, 651–660 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    A. Traversa, V. D’Orazio, and N. Senesi, “Properties of dissolved organic matter in forest soils: Influence of different plant covering,” For. Ecol. Manage. 256, 2018–2028 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    P. A. W. van Hees, D. L. Jones, R. Finlay, D. L. Godbold, U. Lundström, et al., “The carbon we do not see—the impact of low molecular weight compounds on carbon dynamics and respiration in forest soils: a review,” Soil Biol. Biochem. 37, 1–13 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    A. G. Zavarzina, “A mineral support and biotic catalyst are essential in the formation of highly polymeric soil humic substances,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 39, S48–S53 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    A. Zsolnay, “Differentiating with fluorescence spectroscopy the sources of dissolved organic matter n soil subjected to drying,” Chemosphere 38 (1), 45–50 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    M. Zhao, J. Zhou, and K. Kalbitz, “Carbon mineralization and properties of water-extractable organic carbon in soils of the south Loess Plateau in China,” Eur. J. Soil Biol. 44, 158–165 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. E. Odintsov
    • 1
  • E. I. Karavanova
    • 1
  • A. A. Stepanov
    • 1
  1. 1.Lomonosov Moscow State UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations