Dissolved organic carbon in soil solutions: a comparison of collection methods

被引:22
作者
Buckingham, S. [1 ,2 ]
Tipping, E. [1 ]
Hamilton-Taylor, J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Lancaster Environm Ctr, Ctr Ecol & Hydrol, Lancaster LA1 4AP, England
[2] Univ Lancaster, Dept Environm Sci, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, England
基金
英国自然环境研究理事会;
关键词
dissolved organic carbon; soil solution; collection methods;
D O I
10.1111/j.1475-2743.2007.00130.x
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
A field study was undertaken to compare dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations in soil solutions obtained with three different sampling methods over a range of soil types. The sampling devices used were a tension-free collector, a tension Prenart collector and a tension Rhizon collector. Samples were collected fortnightly for a year at seven sites in northern England, each collection being replicated three times. The soil solution DOC ranged from 1.3 g m(-3) in an acid ranker to 34.7 g m(-3) in a peat. The DOC concentrations obtained with the three methods correlated reasonably well (r(2) - 0.6-0.8) but with an indication of bias, as the best fit line differed from the 1:1 line. The tension-free collector gave generally higher DOC concentrations except at very low concentrations (in the acid ranker soil). The DOC concentrations measured with the tension-free collectors were significantly (P < 0.05) higher than those obtained with Prenart and Rhizon collectors at four and six sites, out of seven, respectively. Subsequent laboratory tests on tension-free collected samples showed no DOC loss on filtration through 0.1 and 0.22-mu m membranes, whereas a significant loss of DOC occurred when tension-free collected samples were subsequently passed through Prenart and Rhizon collectors, indicating a probable sampling artefact with the tension devices. The difficulties of acquiring representative soil solution samples are discussed, together with the advantages and disadvantages of tension and tension-free methods.
引用
收藏
页码:29 / 36
页数:8
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
Andersen MK, 2002, J ENVIRON QUAL, V31, P168, DOI 10.2134/jeq2002.0168
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2002, SOIL PHYS COMPANION
[3]   Transport of dissolved organic matter through a sandy forest soil [J].
Dosskey, MG ;
Bertsch, PM .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 1997, 61 (03) :920-927
[4]   THE EXTRACTION OF SOIL-WATER BY THE SUCTION-CUP METHOD - A REVIEW [J].
GROSSMANN, J ;
UDLUFT, P .
JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, 1991, 42 (01) :83-93
[5]   SOIL SOLUTION NUTRIENT CONCENTRATIONS SAMPLED WITH TENSION AND ZERO-TENSION-LYSIMETERS - REPORT OF DISCREPANCIES [J].
HAINES, BL ;
WAIDE, JB ;
TODD, RL .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 1982, 46 (03) :658-661
[6]   VALIDITY OF SOIL-WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED WITH POROUS CERAMIC CUPS [J].
HANSEN, EA ;
HARRIS, AR .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 1975, 39 (03) :528-536
[7]   COMPARISON OF SOIL SOLUTION CHEMISTRY IN ZERO TENSION AND CERAMIC-CUP TENSION LYSIMETERS [J].
HENDERSHOT, WH ;
COURCHESNE, F .
JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE, 1991, 42 (04) :577-583
[8]   Storm flow flushing in a structured soil changes the composition of dissolved organic matter leached into the subsoil [J].
Kaiser, K ;
Guggenberger, G .
GEODERMA, 2005, 127 (3-4) :177-187
[9]   Controls on the dynamics of dissolved organic matter in soils: A review [J].
Kalbitz, K ;
Solinger, S ;
Park, JH ;
Michalzik, B ;
Matzner, E .
SOIL SCIENCE, 2000, 165 (04) :277-304
[10]   COMPARISON OF LYSIMETER TYPES IN COLLECTING MICROBIAL CONSTITUENTS FROM SEWAGE EFFLUENT [J].
KREJSL, J ;
HARRISON, R ;
HENRY, C ;
TURNER, N ;
TONE, D .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 1994, 58 (01) :131-133