4.3 Article

Paraquat adsorption, degradation, and remobilization in tropical soils of Thailand

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/03601230600701635

关键词

gramoxone; herbicide; pesticide; sorption isotherm; Thailand tropical soils

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Paraquat adsorption, degradation, and remobilization were investigated in representative tropical soils of Yom River Basin, Thailand. Adsorption of paraquat in eight soil samples using batch equilibration techniques indicated that adsorption depended on soil characteristics, including exchangeable basic cations and iron content. Multiple regression analysis indicated significant contribution of exchangeable calcium percentage (ECP), total iron content (TFe) and exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) to paraquat sorption (Q). ESP and TFe were significant at all adsorption stages, whereas ESP was significant only at the initial stage of paraquat adsorption. Adsorption studies using two soils representing clay and sandy loam textures showed that paraquat adsorption followed the Freundlich model, exhibiting a nonlinear sorption curve. Paraquat adsorption was higher in the clay soil compared to the sandy loam soil with K-f values of 787 and 18, respectively. Desorption was low with 0.04 to 0.17% and 0.80 to 5.83% desorbed in clay and sandy loam soil, respectively, indicating some hysteresis effect. Time-dependent paraquat adsorption fitted to the Elovich kinetic model indicated that diffusion was a rate-limiting process. Paraquat mobility and degradation studies conducted using both field and laboratory soil column experiments with clay soil showed low mobility of paraquat with accumulation only in the surface 0-5 cm layer under field conditions and in the 0-1 cm layer in a laboratory soil column experiment. Degradation of paraquat in soil was faster under field conditions than at ambient laboratory conditions. The degradation rate followed a first-order kinetic model with the DT 50 at 36-46 days and DT 90 around 119-152 days.

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

4.3
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