4.7 Article

Development of texture contrast soils by a combination of bioturbation and translocation

期刊

CATENA
卷 70, 期 1, 页码 92-104

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2006.08.002

关键词

texture contrast soils; translocation; bioturbation; coastal plain; soil

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soils and weathering profiles in a wide variety of parent materials and environmental settings exhibit coarse-over-fine vertical textural contrasts. Where these cannot be attributed to inherited texture contrasts or erosion-deposition, the most common explanations are based on translocation (eluviation-illuviation) which removes clays from surface layers and deposits them in the subsoil; or bioturbation, where preferentially fine material is delivered to the surface by organisms, from whence erosional winnowing creates a coarse surface layer. In some soils of the lower coastal plain of North Carolina, U.S.A., neither explanation is sufficient to explain the observed texture contrasts. A heuristic model based on a combination of translocation of fine material from surface to subsoil, and bioturbation-driven delivery and recycling of material to the surface can explain the observed vertical textural contrasts. The key elements in the model are coastal plain sediments which include some fine material; eluviation-illuviation by percolating water; delivery of additional fine and mixed grain size material to surface by bioturbation, making it available for translocation; concentration of fine material originally scattered throughout the parent material in a B horizon; and maintenance of vertical moisture fluxes by bioturbation. The model is supported by morphological evidence of the key mechanisms, argillic horizons that are finer than both the surface layers and underlying parent material, evidence that argillic horizon formation is not limited by the rate of clay synthesis, and the absence of texture contrasts in nearby soils formed from dune sands which lack fines. (C) 2006 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