Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:57:29.648Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of iron oxides on positive and negative charges in clays and soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

M. E. Sumner
M. E. Sumner*
Affiliation:
Soil Science Laboratory, University of Oxford
Get access

Abstract

The contribution of free iron oxides to positive and negative charge distribution has been studied on soils and synthetic kaolinite-iron oxide complexes over a wide range of pH values. The charge on the iron oxides is pH-dependent, being positive at low and negative at high pH values, respectively, and accounts for a considerable proportion of the pH-dependent negative charge in soils. Iron oxides increase the buffer capacities of all soils and kaolinite-iron oxide complexes. A considerable proportion of the surface of the clay fraction is covered by iron oxides, resulting in a decreased negative charge on the clay. The isoelectric points of iron oxides in soils are considerably higher than those reported for pure iron oxides. A number of the soils studied were isoelectric at their field pH values, so that under field conditions they would be expected to be extremely infertile. Evidence is presented to show that kaolinite has a permanent negative charge, confirming the view that isomorphous substitutions occur.

Type
Research Article
Information
Clay Minerals Bulletin , Volume 5 , Issue 29 , July 1963 , pp. 218 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Darby, G. D., and Orchard, E. R., 1956. Trans. 6th Int. Congr. Soil Sci., 5, 263.Google Scholar
Fripiat, J. J., and Gastuche, M. C., 1952. Publ. Ineac Ser. sci., No. 54.Google Scholar
Holdridge, D. A., 1959. The A. T. Green Book (Astbury, N. F., editor). British Ceramic Research Association, Stoke-on-Trent.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, R. C., 1954. J. Soil Sci., 5, 167.Google Scholar
Mitchell, B. D., and Mackenzie, R. C., 1954. Soil Set, 77, 173.Google Scholar
Norrish, K., and Taylor, R. M., 1961. J. Soil Sci., 12, 294.Google Scholar
Orchard, E. R., and Darby, G. D., 1956. Trans. 6th Int. Congr. Soil Sci., 4, 263.Google Scholar
Qtnrk, J. P., 1960. Nature, Lond., 188, 253.Google Scholar
Robertson, R. H. S., Brindley, G. W., and Mackenzie, R. C., 1954. Amer. Min., 39, 118.Google Scholar
Schofield, R. K., 1939. Soils and Fert., 2, 1.Google Scholar
Schofield, R. K., 1949. J. Soil Sci., 1, 1.Google Scholar
Schofield, R. K., and Samson, H. R., 1954. Disc. Faraday Soc., No. 3, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Schuylenborgh, J., 1950. Trans. 4th Int. Congr. Soil Sci., 1, 89.Google Scholar
van Schuylenborgh, J., and Sanger, A., 1950. Rec. Tray. chim. Pays-Bas, 68, 999.Google Scholar
Sumner, M. E., 1962. Agrochimica, 6, 183.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. W., 1959. J. Soil Mech. and Found. Div., 85, 19.Google Scholar
Wiklander, L., 1955. Chemistry of the Soil (Bear, F. E., editor). American Chemical Society Monograph No. 126. Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Worrall, W. E., Grimshaw, R. W., and Roberts, A. L., 1958. Res. Pap. Brit. Ceram. Res. Ass., No. 405.Google Scholar