4.7 Article

The availability and mobility of arsenic and antimony in an acid sulfate soil pasture system

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 463, 期 -, 页码 151-160

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.05.032

关键词

Antimony; Arsenic; Plant uptake; Acid sulfate soils

资金

  1. NSW Agriculture Acid Sulfate Soils program
  2. University of New England

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Macleay floodplain on the north coast of New South Wales, Australia, has surface soil concentrations of up to 40 mg kg(-1) arsenic (As) and antimony (Sb), due to historical mining practices in the upper catchment. The floodplain also contains areas of active and potential acid sulfate soils (ASS). Some of these areas are purposely re-flooded to halt oxidation processes, but the effect of this management on the metalloid mobility and phytoavailability of the metalloids present is unknown. This study investigated the changes to soil solution As and Sb, associations of metalloids with soil solid phases, and uptake into two common pasture species following 20 weeks of flooding in a controlled environment. The effect of an ASS subsoil was also investigated. The soil solution concentration and availability of the metalloids was in some instances higher in the floodplain soils than would generally be expected in soils with comparable contamination. There appeared to be few changes to soil solution concentrations or phase associations with flooding in this short term study, due to the high acid buffering and poise of the investigated soils. A strong relationship was found between the relative uptake of Sb into pastures and the oxalate extractable Fe in the soil, which was taken as a proxy for non-crystalline iron (Fe) hydroxides. This relationship was dependent on flooding and was absent for As. Further targeted investigations into metalloid speciation kinetics and the stability of soil solid phases with flooding management are recommended. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据