4.7 Article

Degradation and binding of atrazine in surface and subsurface soils

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 52, 期 24, 页码 7382-7388

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jf049830c

关键词

microbial biomass and activity; sorption; subsurface microbiology; mineralization; kinetics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the dissipation rates of chemicals in unsaturated and saturated zones of subsurface soils will help determine if reductions of concentrations to acceptable levels will occur. Chemical properties and microbial biomass and activity were determined for the surface (0-15 cm), lower root (50-105 cm), and vadose (175-220 cm) zones in a Huntington silty clay loam (Fluventic Hapludoll) collected from an agricultural field near Piketon, OH. The rates of sorption, mineralization, and transformation (formation of bound residues and metabolites) of atrazine were determined. Microbial activity was estimated from the mineralization of C-14-benzoate. We observed decreased levels of nutrients (total organic carbon, N, and P) and microbial biomass with depth, while activity as measured with benzoate metabolism was higher in the vadose zone than in either the surface or the root zones. Sorption coefficients (K-f) declined from 8.17 in the surface to 3.31 in the vadose zone. Sorption was positively correlated with organic C content. Rates of atrazine mineralization and bound residues formation were, respectively, 12-2.3-fold lower in the vadose than in the surface soil. Estimated half-lives of atrazine ranged from 77 to 101 days in the surface soil, but increased to over 900 days in the subsurface soils. The decreased dissipation of atrazine with increasing depth in the profile is the result of decreased microbial activity toward atrazine, measured either as total biomass or as populations of atrazine-degrading microorganisms. The combination of reduced dissipation and low sorption indicates that there is potential for atrazine movement in the subsurface soils.

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