Abstract
On an acid sandy soil contaminated with trace metals (Fe, Mn, Cu, Pb and Zn), three sequential extraction procedures were compared to determine the efficiency of the reagents used and the effects of the step order on the fractionation of metal species. In all cases, a magnesium nitrate solution (MgNIT) was previously used to extract exchangeable forms. In the first procedure (I), the next extraction step was performed with sodium acetate buffer (NaOAc), as used on calcareous soils, to dissolve active calcium carbonate. Then trace metals bound to different forms of oxi-hydroxides (NH2OH, TAMOx and TAMAs fractions) were extracted before organic matter/sulfide oxidation with hydrogen peroxide at pH 2.0 in nitric acid medium (OMHyd). Finally, residual bound metals (RESID) in each procedure were extracted with a nitric–hydrofluoric–perchloric acid mixture. The second procedure (II) was the same as I, but without the NaOAc step, because of the absence of carbonate in the study soil. In procedure III, the NaOAc step was omitted and the oxidizable organic/sulfide fraction was extracted with sodium hypochlorite at pH 8.5 (OMOCl) before the reducible fractions. This study first showed that NaOAc may remove considerable amounts of metals (especially Mn and Zn) in other forms than exchangeable ones. Procedures II and III give similar results for Fe, Mn and Zn forms, which were mainly found in fractions of inorganic soil components, but not for Cu and Pb. Copper distribution was affected by the position of the oxidation step in the sequence. In procedure II, where the oxidation step (OMHyd) ended the sequence, Cu was mainly recovered in the TAMOx fraction. However, in procedure III, where the oxidation step (OMOCl) preceded the NH2OH, TAMOx and TAMAs steps, Cu was found in both OMOCl and TAMOx fractions. Lead distribution varied with oxidation reagent: it was partly removed in the OMHyd fraction of procedures I and II, and to a much lower extent in the OMOCl fraction of procedure III, probably due to the alkaline pH of the reagent in the latter case.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fendorf SE, Sparks DL, Lamble GM, Kelley MJ (1994) Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1583–1595
Hargé JC (1997) PhD Thesis, University Joseph Fourier—Grenoble I
Tessier A, Campbell PGC, Bisson M (1979) Anal Chem 51:844–851
Emmerich WE, Lund LJ, Page AL, Chang AC (1982) J Environ Qual 11:178–181
Gupta SK, Chen KY (1975) Environ Lett 10:129–158
Leleyter L, Probst JL (1999) Int J Environ Anal Chem 73:109–128
McLaren RG, Crawford KV (1973) J Soil Sci 24:172–181
Miller WP, Martens DC, Zelazny LW (1986) Soil Sci Soc Am J 50:598–601
Singh BR, Karwasra SPS, Singh M (1988) Soil Sci 146:359–366
Riise G, Salbu B, Singh BR, Steinnes E (1994) Water Air Soil Pollut 73:285–295
Quevauviller P, Rauret G, Muntau H, Ure AM, Rubio R, Lopez-Sanchez JF, Fieldler HD, Griepink B (1994) Fresenius J Anal Chem 349:808–814
Davidson CM, Duncan AL, Littlejohn D, Ure AM, Garden LM (1998) Anal Chim Acta 363:45–55
Chao TT, Zhou L (1983) Soil Sci Soc Am J 47:225–232
Sanders JR, Adams TM (1987) Environ Pollut 43:219–228
Shuman LM (1983) Soil Sci Soc Am J 47:656–660
Tamm O (1922) Med Statens Skogsförsökaust 19:385–404
Shuman LM (1985) Soil Sci 140:11–22
Flores-Vélez LM, Ducaroir J, Jaunet AM, Robert M (1996) Eur J Soil Sci 47:523–532
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a Ph.D. grant from the Agence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie (ADEME) and the National Institute of Agronomy Research (INRA). We wish to thank the INRA of Bordeaux and more specially the agronomy unit, Laurence Denaix, Valérie Sappin-Didier, Monique Linères, Michel Mench and Paul Soldâ, for their collaboration. We are indebted to the two referees for their positive and subtle suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Parat, C., Lévêque, J., Dousset, S. et al. Comparison of three sequential extraction procedures used to study trace metal distribution in an acidic sandy soil. Anal Bioanal Chem 376, 243–247 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-1864-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-003-1864-7