Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Soil Research Soil Research Society
Soil, land care and environmental research
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of some properties of soil humic acids and synthetic phenolic polymers incorporating amino derivaties

JN Ladd and JHA Butler

Australian Journal of Soil Research 4(1) 41 - 54
Published: 1966

Abstract

Twenty-three model phenolic polymers, either nitrogen-free or incorporating amino acids, peptides, or proteins, have been prepared from p-benzoquinone and catechol under mild oxidative conditions. Two lines of experimentation have demonstrated properties of soil humic acids closely similar to those of polymers incorporating proteins, but different from those of polymers incorporating amino acids: (1) fractionation of humic acids and synthetic polymers by 'Sephadex' gel filtration showed that the percentage of components of molecular weights nominally greater than 100 000 ranged from 52-76 % for eight humic acids tested, 53-59 % for benzoquinone-protein polymers (excluding polymers containing protamine), but less than 20% for all other polymers; (2) acid hydrolysis with 6M HCl resulted in a partial release of polymer nitrogen. Amino acid nitrogen in the hydrolysates accounted for 32.4-51.9 % of humic acid nitrogen, 31.2-56.3 % of the nitrogen of polymers incorporating protein, but less than 10.8% of the nitrogen of polymers incorporating individual amino acids. Experiments with model monomeric N-phenylglycine derivatives and with polymers incorporating simple peptides showed that the bond between the carbon atom of an aromatic ring and the nitrogen atom of an a-amino acid is far more stable to acid hydrolysis than peptide bonds or bonds linking amino acids in humic acids. Glycine is, however, readily released from N-phenylglycine derivatives when conditions favour their oxidation to a quinone-imine intermediate. Incorporation of proteins into phenolic polymers prevented the detection of peptide bonds by the Folin reagent.

https://doi.org/10.1071/SR9660041

© CSIRO 1966

Committee on Publication Ethics


Export Citation Get Permission

View Dimensions

View Altmetrics