Ultra-fine grinding is not essential for acid sulfate soil tests
David J. Lyons A B , Angus E. McElnea A , Niki P. Finch A and Claire Tallis AA Department of Environment and Resource Management, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: dave.lyons@derm.qld.gov.au
Soil Research 49(5) 439-443 https://doi.org/10.1071/SR10196
Submitted: 16 September 2010 Accepted: 17 March 2011 Published: 12 July 2011
Abstract
Australian Standard methods for acid sulfate soils (ASS) require the grinding of soil to <0.075 mm. A ring-mill or similar grinding apparatus is therefore needed. We investigated whether ring-mill grinding is required for accurate and reproducible test results and associated calculations (such as acid–base accounting), or if more conventional fine-grinding (i.e. <0.5 mm) is sufficient to obtain acceptable results. An initial experiment (unreplicated) was conducted on 52 soils comparing ring-mill and fine-grinding treatments, and this information was used to formulate final, more detailed experimental work on five soils from the same dataset. Soils from an ASS survey in coastal central Queensland were chosen to reflect the range of chemical properties found in ASS. Soils were analysed by the Chromium and SPOCAS suite of tests for the two grinding treatments. For those tests that follow a relatively vigorous extraction carried out with heating [such as chromium-reducible S, peroxide-oxidisable S and acid-neutralising capacity by back titration (ANCBT)], results were similar for the two grinding treatments. However, for those tests that follow a relatively mild extraction without heating (such as KCl-extractable S, HCl-extractable S and titratable actual acidity), significantly higher values (P < 0.05) were obtained for ring-mill ground soil. There was no significant difference in calculated net acidity between ring-mill grinding and fine-grinding for soils without excess ANC. For self-neutralising soils, fine-grinding gave significantly lower values of ANC than ring-mill grinding. It is uncertain whether ring-mill grinding gives a true reflection of the ANC available in the natural environment.
Additional keywords: acid sulfate soils, analysis, net acidity, ring-mill, soil grinding.
References
Ahern CR, McElnea AE, Rayment GE (2004c) Codes for acid sulphate soil analytical methods. In ‘Acid sulfate soils laboratory methods guidelines’. (Eds CR Ahern, AE McElnea, LA Sullivan) pp. F1-10–13. (Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy: Indooroopilly, Qld)Ahern CR, McElnea AE, Sullivan LA (Eds) (2004a) ‘Acid sulfate soils laboratory methods guidelines.’ (Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy: Indooroopilly, Qld)
Ahern CR, McElnea AE, Sullivan LA (2004b) Overview of analytical methods for dried and ground samples. In ‘Acid sulfate soils laboratory methods guidelines’. (Eds CR Ahern, AE McElnea, LA Sullivan) pp. A2-1–20. (Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy: Indooroopilly, Qld)
Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2002) Planning and managing development involving acid sulfate soils. State Planning Policy 2/02. Department of Natural Resources and Mines, August 2002.
Etchevers JD (1986) Chemical soil analyses—the reason for their drawbacks. In ‘Proceedings of an International Workshop on the Laboratory Methods and Data Exchange Programme’. (Ed. LK Pleijsier) pp. 16–34. (Technical Paper/International Soil Reference and Information Centre, Labex Secretariat: The Netherlands)
Isbell RF (1996) ‘The Australian Soil Classification.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
Maher CA, Sullivan LA, Ward NJ (2004) Sample pre-treatment and the determination of some chemical properties of acid sulfate soil materials. Australian Journal of Soil Research 42, 667–670.
| Sample pre-treatment and the determination of some chemical properties of acid sulfate soil materials.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXnslShu70%3D&md5=87a0164b5f3f71c8dd1fcbbbee76042cCAS |
Powell B, Ahern CR (2000) Nature, origin and distribution of acid sulfate soils: Issues for Queensland. In ‘Acid Sulfate Soils: Environmental Issues, Assessment and Management, Technical Papers’. Brisbane, 20–22 June 2000. (Eds CR Ahern, KM Hey, KM Watling, VJ Eldershaw) (Department of Natural Resources: Indooroopilly, Qld)
Rayment GE (1993) Soil analysis: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 33, 1015–1028.
| Soil analysis: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaK2MXjsVWrsr8%3D&md5=8c650ff6e81bab3b128aa58c0a598436CAS |
Rayment GE, Higginson FR (1992) ‘Australian laboratory handbook of soil and water chemical methods.’ (Inkata Press: Melbourne)
Rayment GE, Lyons DJ (2010) ‘Soil chemical methods—Australasia.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)
Standards Australia (2008) Analysis of acid sulfate soil—Dried samples—Methods of test, Method 1: Pre-treatment of samples. AS 4969.1-2008. (Standards Australia: Sydney)
Sullivan LA, Bush RT, McConchie DM (2000) A modified chromium reducible method for reduced inorganic sulfur: optimum reaction time for acid sulfate soil. Australian Journal of Soil Research 38, 729–734.
| A modified chromium reducible method for reduced inorganic sulfur: optimum reaction time for acid sulfate soil.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXktlGisrg%3D&md5=785f9e2570ea69211d82e2b3c477f060CAS |
Sullivan LA, Maher CA, Ward NJ (2002) The effect of grinding pre-treatments on the determination of acid sulfate soil chemical properties. In ‘Sustainable Management of Acid Sulfate Soils. Fifth International Acid Sulfate Soil Conference’. (Eds BCT Macdonald, AF Keene, G Carlin, LA Sullivan) Part 1, pp. 192–193. (Acid Sulfate Soil Working Group, International Union of Soil Sciences)
