Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 March 2009
In support and extension of the conclusions drawn in the earlier papers the following facts and deductions are submitted:
1. The only sparingly soluble substance, from a random collection examined, whose suspensions showed the same abnormal flocculation by calcium hydroxide that is shown by clay, were certain phosphates of iron aluminium and calcium. The abnormal flocculation of these phosphates is open to an explanation quite analogous to that already advanced for the flocculation of clay.
2. Until the amount of calcium hydroxide added to a suspension of clay or phosphate reaches a certain amount its abnormal flocculating power is not manifested. The amount required to produce the abnormal flocculation is greater for a fat clay than for a lean one. This is in agreement with the view that the abnormal flocculation is caused by a coagulation of emulsoid matter, for obviously such coagulation will not become dominant until a sufficient amount of the precipitant has been added.
3. The lime absorbed by a soil can be wholly and completely removed by a dilute acid treatment which cannot very appreciably decompose the unweathered minerals. It is therefore concluded that the absorption of lime by a soil is an absorption by the soil colloids and not by the unweathered minerals.
4. The ignition of a soil for a few minutes over a bunsen flame increases the amounts of iron and aluminium dissolved by acid. Evidence is brought to show that this is due to a destruction of the colloids which bind the particles together, and a consequent exposure of a larger surface.
5. The effect of a partial ignition on the base absorbing power of soils and subsoils is described and the results are claimed to be in agreement with the view that the particles in the aggregates are bound together by gelatinous colloidal matter.
page 372 note 1 Journ. Agric. Set. 1920, 10 (4); 1921, 11 (4).Google Scholar
page 373 note 1 Nine mineral phosphates were kindly supplied by Dr G. Scott Robertson.
page 375 note 1 Soil Science, 1917, 3.Google Scholar
page 375 note 2 U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1907, 312.Google Scholar
page 376 note 1 For a review of the literature see Gustapon, , Soil Science, 1922, 13.Google Scholar
page 376 note 2 Journ. Ind. Engin. Chem. 1911, 3Google Scholar; J.C.S. Abstracts, ii. 1912.Google Scholar
page 382 note 1 Compt. Rend. 1857, 44.Google Scholar
page 376 note 2 U.S. Dept. Agric. Bur. Chem. Bulletin, 1905, 92.Google Scholar
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.