HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (101) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zachara, J. M. Articles by Resch, C. T. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Zachara, J. M. Articles by Resch, C. T. Agricola Articles by Zachara, J. M. Articles by Resch, C. T.

Adsorption of Chromate by Subsurface Soil Horizons

Battelle, Pacific Northwest Lab. Environmental Sciences Dep., P.O. Box 999, K3-61, Richland, WA 99352

* Corresponding author.

ABSTRACT

Chromate adsorption was measured with and without reactive cosolutes on four subsurface soil horizons differing in pH and mineralogy, and on clay fractions from two of the oxide-containing subsoils. Chromate adsorption was greatest in lower pH materials enriched in kaolinite and crystalline iron oxides. Over a range in pH, chromate adsorption to subsoil was similar to that observed for pure-phase oxides. Chromate binding was reversible to pH and was depressed in the presence of SO^2-₄ and dissolved inorganic C, which compete for adsorption sites. A surface site density for crystalline Al-substituted iron oxides in the subsoils was estimated from chromate adsorption on the clay fractions using the model FITEQL and outer sphere surface coordination constants from Al-goethite. The estimated site density for soil crystalline iron oxides was well below that of clean oxides, suggesting surface saturation by indigenous soil ions. The calculated site density and surface binding constants for Al-goethite were used in the Triple Layer Model to calculate the effect of ionic strength, cosolutes, solids concentration, and sorbate concentration on CrO^2-₄ adsorption. Model calculations were in good qualitative agreement with experimental results.

Received for publication March 21, 1988.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. M. Garman, T. P. Luxton, and M. J. Eick Kinetics of Chromate Adsorption on Goethite in the Presence of Sorbed Silicic Acid J. Environ. Qual., September 1, 2004; 33(5): 1703 - 1708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. K. Tokunaga, J. Wan, T. C. Hazen, E. Schwartz, M. K. Firestone, S. R. Sutton, M. Newville, K. R. Olson, A. Lanzirotti, and W. Rao Distribution of Chromium Contamination and Microbial Activity in Soil Aggregates J. Environ. Qual., March 1, 2003; 32(2): 541 - 549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. S. Bolan, D. C. Adriano, R. Natesan, and B.-J. Koo Effects of Organic Amendments on the Reduction and Phytoavailability of Chromate in Mineral Soil J. Environ. Qual., January 1, 2003; 32(1): 120 - 128. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. D. Harter and R. Naidu An Assessment of Environmental and Solution Parameter Impact on Trace-Metal Sorption by Soils Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., May 1, 2001; 65(3): 597 - 612. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]