Microsoft Word 唐伟祥.doc

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Microsoft Word 唐伟祥.doc"

徒河边
5 years ago
Views:

1 土壤 (Soils), 2018, 50(3): DOI: /j.cnki.tr 不同土壤有机碳测定方法的比较 * ( ) 8 / 3.4 ~ 11.5 g/kg (0.32% ~ 4.72%)(0.40% ~ 1.22%) (5.16% ~ 20.46%)(0.60% ~ 7.00%) / S151.9 A ( ) (soil organic carbon, SOC) [1] (soil inorganic carbon, SIC) [2-4] [5] [6-7] [8] ( ) [9-10] [11] [12] [13-15] ( ) [16] ( ) [17] / GSS-3 GSS-7 GSS-9 GSS-14 GSS-21 GSS-25 GSS-26 GSS ~ ~ ~ 13.7 g/kg 1.2 / 3 Walkley-Black [10] / [9] / ( ) * (mengfq@cau.edu.cn) (1993 ) cyztwx@outlook.com

2 3 553 [17] 0.1 ~ 1.0 g ( g) 20 g/kg 0.5 ~ 1.0 g 50 g/kg 0.1 g 20 ~ 50 g/kg 0.1 ~ 0.5 g 5.00 ml 0.8 mol/l K 2 Cr 2 O 7 5 ml ( ) ~ min 150 ml 60 ~ 70 ml 3 ~ mol/l FeSO 4 [10] 2 ~ 3 g(m 1 ) 50 ml 8 2 g( g) 20 ml 0.5 mol/l HCl 200 r/min 30 min 12 h r/min 3 min ph 6 ~ 7 60 ( g m 2 ) m 2 /m 1 (0.15 mm) (Vario Pyro Cube Elementar ) [9] / [17] [18] 8 (0.3 ~ 13.7 g/kg) 20 ml 1 g( g) 20 ml 3% FeCl 2 6 mol/l 2 ml 2 h CO 2 3 ~ 5 s ( ) CO 2 1 g( g) /( 1 g) 20 ml 1.3 测定值回收率 (%= ) 100% (1) 标准值测定值 - 标准值相对误差 (%= ) 100% (2) 标准值 Microsoft Excel 2010 SPSS Statistics 17.0 t t % 105.1% 109.2% % 2.65% 2.78% (GSS-14 ) 100% GSS-3 GSS-7 GSS-9 GSS-14 GSS-28 5 (>57%) (GSS-9 GSS-28 ) GSS-21 GSS-25 GSS-26 3 (<50%)

3 表 1 三种方法测定的标准物质有机碳含量 Table 1 Organic carbon contents of standard materials determined by three different methods (g/kg) (g/kg) (g/kg) (%) (%) (%) GSS ± ± 0.03 c ± 0.05 b ± 0.04 a GSS ± ± 0.03 c ± 0.21 b ± 0.23 a GSS-9 11 ± ± 0.13 ab ± 0.30 b ± 0.16 a GSS ± ± 0.06 c ± 0.30 b ± 0.07 a GSS ± ± 0.04 a ± 0.17 a ± 0.23 a GSS ± ± 0.07 b ± 0.18 a ± 0.38 a GSS ± ± 0.05 b ± 0.14 a ± 0.15 a GSS ± ± 0.08 b ± 0.13 b ± 0.18 a ±(P < 0.05) (P < 0.05)( 1) ( 1 ) (0.998)(> 10 g/kg) +2.5% Fig. 1 图 1 三种方法样品有机碳含量测定值与标准值的回归关系 Linear regressions of standard values with measured values for organic carbon contents of samples determined by three different methods

4 (< 9 g/kg) (+3.5% ~ +12.4%) (> 9 g/kg) ( 7.8%) GSS-9 ( GSS-21) +5.4% ~ +20.5% [7] [6] [19] [12] 170 ~ 180 [20] 164 ~ 170 ( FeO) K 2 Cr 2 O 7 ( MnO 2 ) K 2 Cr 2 O 7 [19] ~ g/kg 8 FeO 5.0 ~ 14.0 g/kg FeO K 2 Cr 2 O 7 / 1 g mol K 2 Cr 2 O 7 1 g FeO GSS-21 FeO 11.0 g/kg 1.68 g 表 2 八个标准物质的 FeO Cl 和 Mn 含量 (g/kg) Table 2 Contents of FeO, Cl and Mn in eight standard samples FeO Cl Mn GSS GSS GSS GSS GSS GSS GSS GSS FeO mol K 2 Cr 2 O 7 3 [21] [9] [23] [24] GSS-21 GSS g/kg [22] 2 ~ 4 [25] GSS % ~ 13.1% 12.4% (m 2 ) / / [26] [27] +5.4% ~ +20.5% ( 1) 4 / ( GSS % ~ 20.5%) /

5 [1],,,. [J]., 2016, 53(5): [2],,,. [J]., 2013, 32(5): [3],,. [J]., 2015, 47(5): [4],,,. [J]., 2013, 22(2): [5],. [J]., 2011, 39(35): [6] Dhillon G S, Amichev B Y, Freitas R. Accurate and precise measurement of organic carbon content in carbonate-rich soils[j]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 2015, 46: [7] Bisutti I, Hilke I, Raessler M. Determination of total organic carbon an overview of current methods[j]. Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2004, 23(10/11): [8],,. [J]., 2015, 47(3): [9],,,. [J]., 2014, 45(4): [10]. [M]. 3. :, 2000: [11] Gillman G P, Sinclair D F, Beech T A. Recovery of organic carbon by the walkley and black procedure in highly weathered soils[j]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 1986, 17(8): [12] Vitti C, Stellacci A M, Leogrande R, et al. Assessment of organic carbon in soils: A comparison between the Springer Klee wet digestion and the dry combustion methods in Mediterranean soils (Southern Italy)[J]. Catena, 2016, 137: [13] Yeomans J C, Bremner J M. A rapid and precise method for routine determination of organic carbon in soil[j]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 1988, 19(13): [14],,,. [J]., 2015, 42(9): [15] Islam K R, Weil R R. A rapid microwave digestion method for colorimetric measurement of soil organic carbon[j]. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 1998, 29(15/16): [16],,,. TruSpec CN [J]., 2009(3): [17] Wang X, Wang J, Zhang J. Comparisons of three methods for organic and inorganic carbon in calcareous soils of northwestern China[J]. PLoS ONE, 2012, 7(8): e44334 [18] Sherrod L A, Dunn G, Peterson G A, et al. Inorganic carbon analysis by modified pressure-calcimeter method[j]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2002, 66: [19] Walkley A. A critical examination of a rapid method for determining organic carbon in soils- effect of variations in digestion conditions and inorganic soil constituents[j]. Soil Science, 1947, 63: [20],,,. [J]., 2014, 8(16): [21] Chatterjee A, Lal R, Wielopolski L, et al. Evaluation of different soil carbon determination methods[j]. Critical Reviews in Plant Science, 2009, 28(3): [22] Nelson D W, Sommers L E. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter // Sparks D L, Page A L, Helmke P A, et el. Methods of soil analysis, part 3: Chemical methods[c]. Madison: Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, 1996: [23] Ball W P, Buehler C H, Harmon T C, et al. Characterization of a sandy aquifer material at the grain scale[j]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 1990, 5(3): [24],,,. ph [J]., 2013, 44(2): [25] Bisutti I, Hilke I, Schumacher J, et al. A novel single-run dual temperature combustion (SRDTC) method for the determination of organic, in-organic and total carbon in soil samples[j]. Talanta, 2007, 71(2): [26],,,. [J]., 2014(4): [27] Fonnesbeck B B, Boettinger J L, Lawley J R. Improving a simple pressure-calcimeter method for inorganic carbon analysis[j]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2013, 77(5):

6 3 557 Method Comparison for Determining Soil Organic Carbon TANG Weixiang, MENG Fanqiao *, ZHANG Yu, ZHAO Zichao (College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, China Agricultural University, Beijing , China) Abstract: Precise quantification of soil carbon is the prerequisite for the study of soil fertility and carbon sequestration in agriculture. This study selected eight representative soil/sediment samples with different contents of organic carbon (OC) and inorganic carbon (IC), and compared the accuracies of three analytical methods, i.e., wet oxidation method, dry combustion method with acid washing, and indirect method. The results showed that, for soil and sediment samples with OC contents of g/kg, wet oxidation method had the lowest mean relative error (0.32% 4.72%) and the lowest coefficient of variation (0.40% 1.22%), while the indirect method had the highest mean relative error (5.16% 20.46%) and the highest coefficient of variation (0.60% 7.00%). These results indicated that if a stable and accurate heating temperature was maintained, the measured results of wet oxidation method, the simplest method, are stable and accurate. Due to a difficult dissolution of inorganic carbon in the dry combustion with acid washing, or difficult total combustion of inorganic carbon in the indirect method, these two methods had a positive error of organic carbon and the coefficient of variation was also higher for most samples. Key words: Soil; Sediment; Organic carbon; Acid washing; Wet oxidation; Indirect method

115 的大量废弃物被丢弃或直接燃烧 [3] 此外, 海南省文昌鸡年产量约 8 0 只, 鸡粪年产量超过 100 万 t 这些富含养分的固体有机废弃物不进行处理, 不仅会极大浪费大量养分

115 的大量废弃物被丢弃或直接燃烧 [3] 此外, 海南省文昌鸡年产量约 8 0 只, 鸡粪年产量超过 100 万 t 这些富含养分的固体有机废弃物不进行处理, 不仅会极大浪费大量养分广东农业科学 16 43 6 114-118 Guangdong Agricultural Sciences doi 10.16768/j.issn.1004-874X.16.06.0 刘军董存明吕诗锦等. 腐熟菌剂不同添加量对鸡粪椰糠高温堆肥的影响 [J]. 广东农业科学 16 43 6 114-118. 腐熟菌剂不同添加量对鸡粪椰糠高温堆肥的影响刘军董存明吕诗锦阮云泽王蓓蓓