4.7 Article

Influence of the Soil/Solution Ratio, Interaction Time, and Extractant on the Evaluation of Iron Chelate Sorption/Desorption by Soils

Journal

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 59, Issue 6, Pages 2493-2500

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jf104120e

Keywords

iron chelates; soil; retention; desorption; batch; column

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Synthetic Fe chelates are the most efficient agricultural practice to control Fe deficiency in crops, EDTA/Fe(3+) and o,o-EDDHA/Fe(3+) being the most commonly used. Their efficacy as Fe sources and carriers in soils can be severely limited by their retention on it. The aim of this work is to evaluate the possible bias introduced in the studies of the iron chelate retention by soils. For that purpose, results obtained for EDTA and EDDHA iron chelates from two batch studies with different soil/solution ratios were compared with data obtained for a leaching column experiment. Moreover, different extractants were tested to study the o,o-EDDHA/Fe(3+) and o,p-EDDHA/Fe(3+) desorption from a calcareous soil, and also the effect of the interaction time in their retention process has been evaluated. In summary, the mobility through a calcareous soil of the studied iron chelates differs greatly depending on the type of iron chelate and also on the procedure used to evaluate the retention and the soil/solution ratio used. In general, the leaching column method is preferred because the achieved conclusions are more representative of the natural conditions, but batch methods are very useful as a preliminary experiment, especially one with a high soil/solution ratio. The iron chelate desorption could be quantified by using a sequential extraction with water, sodium sulfate, and DTPA as extractants. Under the experimental conditions used in this study, o,o-EDDHA/Fe(3+) retention increased with interaction time.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available