کانی‌شناسی، میکرومورفولوژی و پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی متأثر از تشکیل و تحول خاک در شمال کرمان

نوع مقاله : مقاله کامل علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری ، گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران.

2 استاد، گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران.

3 دانشیار ، گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران.

چکیده

مقدمه: تغییر و تحول خاک‌ها در طول تکامل آن‌ها بر ترکیبات کانی‌شناسی، خصوصیات میکرومورفولوژیکی و میزان پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی خاک‌ها تأثیر می‌گذارد. بنابراین به‌منظور تکمیل مطالعات موروفولوژی و تکامل خاک‌ها بهره‌گیری از مطالعات میکرومورفولوژی برای مطالعه رده‌بندی و مدیریت خاک ضروری می‌باشد. بررسی کانی‌شناسی برای فهم چگونگی تشکیل خاک نیز امری ضروری است. ویژگی‌های مغناطیسی خاک، بازتابی از برهم‌کنش‌های پیچیده شیمیایی، زمین‌شناسی و زیستی موجود در آن می‌باشند؛ بنابراین آگاهی از عوامل مؤثر بر پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی خاک به درک و تفسیر هرچه بهتر نتایج کمک می‌کند. بررسی پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی به پدولوژی، نقشه‌برداری خاک، تغییرات فرایندهای خاک، تأثیر مواد مادری، فهم فرایندهای رسوبی، شرایط زهکشی خاک، آلودگی خاک، تفکیک و شناسایی محدوده‌های خاک خدمت کند. مطالعه حاضر با هدف بررسی تغییرات میزان پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی، کانی‌شناسی رس و میکرومورفولوژی متأثر از تشکیل و تحول خصوصیات خاک انجام گرفته است.
مواد و روش‌ها: تعداد هفت خاکرخ در منطقه مطالعاتی، در کاربری بایر و واحدهای فیزیوگرافی تپه، دشت دامنه‌ای، دشت آبرفتی و اراضی پست در دو بخش مواد مادری آذرین و رسوبی حفر و تشریح شدند. پس از نمونه‌برداری از افق‌های ژنتیکی هر کدام از خاکرخ‌ها، اندازه‌گیری خصوصیات فیزیکی و شیمیایی آن‌ها با استفاده از روش‌های استاندارد انجام شد. غلظت آهن پدوژنیک (Fed) و بی‌شکل (Feo) با استفاده از دستگاه جذب اتمی Vario (AAS) تعیین گردید. همچنین، کلوخه‌های دست‌نخورده خاک برای تهیه مقاطع نازک و مطالعات میکرومورفولوژی انتخاب شدند. از طرف دیگر، سه نمونه خاک برای آنالیز پراش پرتو ایکس (XRD) تهیه گردید. برای تعیین نوع کانی‌های رسی از روش‌های جکسون (1975) و کیتریک و هوپ (1963) به‌منظور حذف املاح محلول، کربنات‌ها، مواد آلی و آهن و جداسازی ذرات رس استفاده گردید. در نهایت، پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی نمونه‌های خاک با استفاده از دستگاه Bartington MS2 dual frequency sensor و حسگر MS2B در دو فرکانس بالا ( در 6/4 کیلوهرتز) و پایین ( در 46/0 کیلوهرتز) اندازه‌گیری شد.
بحث و نتایج: در خاکرخ‌های مورد مطالعه، فرایندهای شور شدن، انتقال مکانیکی مواد و آبشویی و تجمع گچ و کربنات‌ها مشاهده گردید. با توجه به حضور افق‌های مشخصه کلسیک، ژیپسیک، سالیک، آرجیلیک و ناتریک، خاک‌ها در رده اریدی‌سول (سامانه رده‌بندی خاک امریکایی) و گروه‌های مرجع سولونچاک، سولونتز، کلسی‌سول و ژیپسی‌سول (سامانه WRB) قرار می‌گیرند. حضور گچ، کربنات‌ها، شوری، تجمع رس و مشاهده افق آرجیلیک، سبب کاهش می‌شود. توالی‌های مشاهده شده از پوشش رس و کربنات‌ها در حاشیه حفرات می‌تواند دلیل وجود توالی دوره‌های ترسالی و خشکسالی از زمان گذشته باشد. مقادیر پذیرفتاری مغناطیسی اندازه‌گیری شده در نمونه‌ها از 3/4 تا 1264 (10-8 m3 kg-1×) متغیر می‌باشد. در بررسی مقاطع نازک نیز فراوانی اشکال مختلف و پرشدگی گچ، پوشش‌ها و تجمعات رسی و کربنات‌های در حال تجزیه غالب می‌باشد. کانی‌های مونت‌موریلونیت، کلریت، ایلیت، کائولینیت، کوارتز و ورمیکولیت در خاکرخ‌های مورد مطالعه مشاهده شد. کلریت و ایلیت کانی غالب بخش رس این خاکرخ‌ها می‌باشند. با توجه به انقطاع‌های مشاهده شده در خاکرخ 2، احتمال وجود دوره مرطوب در گذشته، دور از انتظار نخواهد بود. رطوبت سبب خروج پتاسیم و تبدیل کانی‌های ایلیت و کلریت به ورمی‌کولیت می‌شود‌. غالبیت ایلیت و کلریت در سایر خاکرخ‌های مطالعاتی می‌تواند شاهدی بر احتمال آغاز هوادیدگی و تکامل خاکرخ‌ها باشد.
نتیجه‌گیری: تغییر در مقادیر با تغییر عمق و همسو با تغییر خصوصیات فیزیکوشیمیایی مشاهده گردید؛ به‌طوری‌که مقادیر در حضور افق آرجیلیک، مقادیر گچ، کربنات کلسیم و شوری کاهش محسوسی نشان داد. منشأ اغلب کانی‌های رسی موجود، موروثی و به‌ندرت حاصل فرایندهای خاکسازی می‌باشد. همچنین، بین مقادیر و آهن، رابطه مستقیم مشاهده شد. به‌طور کلی، نتایج بیانگر جوانی و آغاز مراحل تکامل خاکرخ‌های مورد مطالعه می‌باشد که خاکرخ 2 با وجود خاک چندتشکیلی و افق‌های مدفون قدیمی، یک مورد استثنا می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Mineralogy, Micromorphology and Magnetic Susceptibility Affected by Soils Evolution and Genesis, Northern Kerman

نویسندگان [English]

  • Elham Soleimani Sardoo 1
  • Mohammad Hady Farpoor 2
  • Majid Mahmoodabadi 2
  • Azam Jafari 3
1 PhD student, Department of Soil Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Soil Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Department of Soil Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Mineralogical composition, soil morphological properties, and magnetic susceptibility were affected along soil evolution in soils. That is why micromorphology helps in performing soil classification and evolution studies, as well as making soil management practices much more efficient. Clay mineralogy is a useful tool that helps in better understanding soil forming factors and processes. Soil magnetic properties are complex reflections of chemical, geological, and biological soil characteristics. Thus, knowledge about factors affecting magnetic susceptibility can help in better understanding and interpreting the results obtained in an area. Assessment of soil magnetic behavior might be used in pedology, soil mapping, investigation of soil process variations, parent material composition, sedimentary processes, soil drainage conditions, soil pollution, and separation and identification of soil unit boundaries. The present study was performed to investigate the effects of magnetic susceptibility, clay mineralogy, and micromorphology on soil characteristics, genesis, and evolution.
Materials and methods: Seven representative pedons were selected in sedimentary and igneous sections in uncultivated land use and physiographic units: hill, piedmont plain, alluvial plain, and lowland. Physicochemical properties measurements were performed on the collected samples from representative pedons using standard methods. The pedogenic (Fed) and amorphous (Feo) iron concentrations of the extracts were determined using a Vario Atomic Absorption Spectroscope (AAS) instrument. Undisturbed soil samples were selected for micromorphology studies and thin section preparation. Additionally, three soil samples were used for X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses after carbonates, organic matter, and Fe were removed using Jackson (1965) and Kittrik and Hope (1963) procedures. Finally, the mass-specific magnetic susceptibility of soil samples was determined using a Bartington MS2 meter equipped with the MS2B Dual Frequency sensor, capable of taking measurements at both low (χlf at 0.46 kHz) and high (χhf at 4.6 kHz) frequencies.
Results and discussion: Salinization, leaching, and illuviation processes of gypsum and carbonates were observed in the studied pedons. The soils were classified as Aridisols (Soil Taxonomy system) and Solonchacks, Solonetz, Gypsisols, and Calcisols RSGs (WRB system) due to the presence of calcic, gypsic, salic, argillic, and natric diagnostic horizons. The presence of gypsum, carbonates, salt, clay accumulation, and argillic horizon reduces χlf values. The calcite coating located on the clay coating could probably be attributed to the presence of a climate with more available humidity in the past. The range of soil magnetic susceptibility was from 4.3×10-8 to 1264×10-8 m3kg-1. Gypsum infillings, different forms of gypsum, clay accumulation and coatings, and weathered calcite crystals were among the dominant micromorphological features observed in the studied pedons. Montmorillonite, chlorite, illite, kaolinite, quartz, and vermiculite minerals were observed in the studied pedons. Chlorite and illite minerals were dominant in the clay fraction of the studied soils, whereas a portion of these minerals was probably converted to vermiculite. Discontinuities observed in pedon 2 could be accounted for as proof of more available humidity in the past compared to the present time periods. Moisture has caused the removal of potassium and transformation of illite and chlorite to vermiculite. The dominance of illite and chlorite can be proof of initial weathering and evolution in the other studied pedons.
Conclusion: The χlf variations was related to depth trend and physicochemical properties. The χlf values showed a noticeable negative correlation with argillic horizon, gypsum content, carbonate calcium, and salinity. It seems that most of the clay minerals originated from the parent material in the present study, and pedogenic source has rarely taken place. Besides, the χlf and Fe contents were directly correlated. In general, the results indicated young soils with primary development stages in the area under study. Pedon 2 with buried polygenetic soils is an exception.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Central Iran
  • Clay coating
  • Soil classification
  • Geology
  • Iron forms

مراجع

1.Khormali, F., Ghergherechi, S., Kehl, M., & Ayoubi, S. (2012). Soil formation in loess-derived soils along a subhumid to humid climate gradient, Northeastern Iran. Geoderma, 179, 113-122.
2.Khormali, F., & Ajami, M. (2011). Pedogenetic investigation of soil degradation on a deforested loess hillslope of Golestan Province, Northern Iran. Geoderma, 167, 274-283.
3.Pishgir, M., & Jafari, S. (2014). Comparison between potassium an ammonium fixation by clays in different agriculture systems. Journal of water and soil science, Isfahan university of Technology, fall, year, 18, (69). [In Persian]
4.Khormali, F., Abtahi, A., Mahmoodi, S., & Stoops, G. (2003). Argillic horizon development in calcareous soils of arid and semiarid regions of southern Iran. Catena, 53, 273-301.
5.Jafari, F., & Khademi, H. (2016). Variability of magnetic susceptibility and its correlation with selected heavy metals in atmospheric dust of Kerman. journal of water and soil conservation, 23 (1). [In Persian]
6.Ghafarpour, A. (2012). Comparison of the degree of evolution and characteristics of modern soils with old clay soils under different climatic conditions in Golestan Province. M.Sc. Thesis, Gorhan Agriculture Science and Natural Resources University. [In Persian]
7.Aliolad, J., Mahmoodi, S. h., Zarinkafsh, M., & Abtahi, A. (2005). Investigation and study of some forest soil mineralogical properties Kheyrud Kenar Nowshahr (Mazandaran province). Proceedings of the 9th Iranian Soil Science Congress. Tehran, Iran. pp. 136-142. [In Persian]
8.Stoops, G. (2003). Guidelines for Analysis and Description of Soil and Regolith Thin Sections. Soil Science Society of America. Inc. Madison, Wisconsin. 184p.
9.Farpoor, M. H., Eghbal, M. K., & Khademi, H. (2003). Genesis and micromorphology of saline and gypsiferous Aridisols of Nough area, Rafsanjan related to geomorphic surfaces. journal of science and technology of agriculture and natural resources. Water and Soil Science, 63, 71-92. [In Persian]
10.Mullins, C. E. (1977). Magnetic Susceptibility of the soil and its significant in soil science a review. Journal of Soil Science, 28, 223-246.
11.De Jong, E., Heck, R. J., & Ponamarenko, E. V. (2005). Magnetic susceptibility of soil separates of gleysolic and chernozemic soils. Canadian journal of soil science, 85, 233-243.
12.Thompson, R., & Oldfield, F. (1986). Environmental magnetism. Allen and Unwin, London, UK. 227 p.
13.Vilela, E. F., Inda, A. V., & Zinn, Y. L. (2019). Soil genesis, mineralogy and chemical composition in a steatite outcrop under tropical humid climate in Brazil. Catena, 183, 104234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.104234.
14.Grimley, D. A., Arruda, N. K., & Bramstedt, M. W. (2004). Using magnetic susceptibility to facilitate more rapid, reproducible and precise delineation of hydric soils in the midwestern USA. Catena, 58, 183-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.catena.2004. 03.001.
15.Ramos, P. V., Inda, A. V., Barr´on, V., Teixeira, D. D. B., & Marques Júnior, J. (2020). Magnetic susceptibility in the prediction of soil attributes in southern Brazil. Soil Science Society of America Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2. 20164.
16.Chaparro, M. A., del Pilar Moralejo, M., B¨ohnel, H. N., & Acebal, S. G. (2020). Iron oxide mineralogy in Mollisols, Aridisols and Entisols from southwestern Pampean region (Argentina) by environmental magnetism approach. Catena, 190, 104534. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104534.
17.Singer, M. J., Verousb, K. L., Fine, P., & Tenpas, J. (1996). A conceptual model for the enhancement of magnetic susceptibility in soils. Quaternary International, 34, 243-248.
18.Bonfatti, B. R., Demattˆe, J. A. M., Marques, K. P. P., Poppiel, R. R., Rizzo, R., de Mendes, S. W., Silvero, N. E. Q., & Safanelli, J. L. (2020). Digital mapping of soil parent material in a heterogeneous tropical area. Geomorphology, 107305. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107305.
19.César de Mello, D., Demattê José, A. M., Silvero Nélida, E. Q., Di Raimo Luis, A. D. L., Poppiel Raul, R., Mello Fellipe, A. O., Souza Arnaldo, B., Safanelli José, L., Resende Maria, E. B., & Rizzo, R. (2020). Soil magnetic susceptibility and its relationship with naturally occurring processes and soil attributes in pedosphere, in a tropical environment. Geoderma, 372.
20.Karimi, R., Haghnia, Gh. H., Ayoubi, Sh., & Safari, T. (2017). Impacts of geology and land use on magnetic susceptibility and selected heavy metals in surface soils of Mashhad plain, northeastern Iran. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 138, 127-134.
21.Moghbeli, Z., Owliaie, H. R., Adhami, E., Najafi-Ghiri, M., & Sanjari, S. (2021). Pedogenesis and spatial distribution of soil magnetic properties along a lithotoposequence in an arid region of Southern Iran. Catena, 198.
22.Shengao, L. (2000). Lithological factors affecting magnetic susceptibility of subtropical soils, Zhejiang Province, China. Catena, 40, 359-373. https:// doi. org/10.1016/S0341-8162(00)00092-8.
23.Caitcheon, G. G. (1993). Applying environmental magnetism to sediment. In: Peters, N., Hoehn, E., Leibundgut, C., Tase, N., & Walling, D. (1993). editors. Tracers in hydrology. Proceedings of an International Symposium Held at Yokohama, Japan; Jul 21–23; Wallingford: International Association of Hydrological Science, IAHS publication no, 215, 285-292.
24.Kravchenko, A. N., Bollero, G. A., Omonode, R. A., & Bullock, D. G. (2002). Quantitative mapping of soil drainage classes using topographical and soil electrical conductivity. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66, 235-243.
25.Mathe, V., & Leveque, F. (2003). High resolution magnetic survey for soil monitoring: detection of drainage and soil tillage effects. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 212, 241-251.
26.Owliaie, H. R., Heck, R. J., & Abtahi, A. (2006). Distribution of magnetic susceptibility in Kohgilouye Boyerahmad soils, southwestern Iran. Proceeding of 18th World Congress of Soil Science. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. USA.
27.Barbosa, J. Z., Poggere, G. C., Teixeira, W. W. R., Motta, A. C. V., Prior, S. A., & Curi, N. (2020). Assessing soil contamination in automobile scrap yards by portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometry and magnetic susceptibility. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 192, 46. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10661-019-8025-8.
28.Blundell, A., Dearing, J. A., Boyle, J. F., & Hannam, J. A. (2009). Controlling factors for the spatial variability of soil magnetic susceptibility across England and Wales. Earth-Science Reviews Journal, 95, 158-188.
29.Karimi, R., Ayoubi, S., Jalalain, A., Sheikh-Hosseni, A. R., & Afyuni, M. (2011). Relationships between magnetic susceptibility and heavy metals in urban topsoils in the arid region of Isfahan, central Iran. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 74, 1-7.
30.Liu, D., Ma, J., Sun, Y., & Li, Y. (2016). Spatial distribution of soil magnetic susceptibility and correlation with heavy metal pollution in Kaifeng City, China. Catena, 139, 53-60.
31.Oudeika, M. S., Figen Altinoglu, F., Akbay, F., & Aydin, A. (2020). The use of magnetic susceptibility and chemical analysis data for characterizing heavy metal contamination of topsoil in Denizli city, Turkey. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 183. DOI: 10.1016/j. jappgeo.2020.104208.
32.Rachwał, M., Kardel, K., Magiera, T., & Bens, O. (2017). Application of magnetic susceptibility in assessment of heavy metal contamination of Saxonian soil (Germany) caused by industrial dust deposition. Geoderma, 295, 10-21. https:// doi.org/10.1016/ j.geoderma. 2017.02.007.
33.Yurtseven-Sandker, A., & Cioppa, M. T. (2016). Tracking the Historical Traces of Soil Pollution from an Iron-Sintering Plant by Using Magnetic Susceptibility in Wawa, Ontario.
34.Ayoubi, S., Abazari, P., & Zeraatpisheh, M. (2018). Soil great groups discrimination using magnetic susceptibility technique in a semi-arid region, central Iran. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 11. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s12517-018-3941-4.
35.Barbosa, J. Z., Poggere, G. C., Godinho Silva, S. H., Mancini, M., Motta, A. C. V., Marques, J. J. G. M., & Curi, N. (2021). National-scale spatial variations of soil magnetic susceptibility in Brazil. Journal of south American earth science, 108, 103191.
36.Stoops, G., Marcelino, V., & Mees, F. (2010). Interpretation of Micromorphological Features of Soils and Regolith's, first ed. Elsevier Science, 752 p.
37.Karimi, A., & Khademi, H. (2012). Effects of Parent Materials, Gypsum and Carbonates on the Magnetic Susceptibility of Soils in Southern Mashhad. Journal of Water and Soil Science, Vol 16, Issue 61. [In Persian]
38.www.climate-data.org.
39.Iran Geology Organization. (1995). Kerman, Ravar and Rafsanjan Map 1:250000 and Shahr-e-Babak Map 1:100000. Tehran Map Publication, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
40.Schoeneberger, P. J., Wysocki, D. A., Benham, E. C., & Soil Survey Staff. (2012). Field Book for 20 Describing and Sampling Soils, Version 3. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National 21 Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE.
41.Gee, G. W., & Bauder, J. W. (1986). Particle-size analysis. In: Klute A. (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 1 Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, 383-411, https://doi.org/ 10.2136/sssabookser5.1.2ed.c1.
42.Page, A., Miller, R., & Keeney, D. (1982). Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2 Chemical and microbiological properties 2nd edition Madison, Wisconsin, USA
43.Nelson, D. W., & Sommers, L. E. (1996). Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: A. L., Page, R. H., Miller & Keeney, D. R. (Eds). Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal, Madison, WI, 539-577, https://doi.org//10.2134/ agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c29.
44.Nelson, R. E. (1982). Carbonate and gypsum. In: A. L., Page, R. H.  Miller, & D. R. Keeney, (Eds), Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal, Madison, WI, 181-196. https://doi.org//10.2134/ agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c11.
45.Mehra, O., & Jackson, P. (1958). Iron oxide removal from soils and clays in a dithionite-citrate-bicarbonate system buffered with sodium. Clay Mineralogy, 7, 317-327.
46.Schwertmann, U. (1973). Use of oxalate for Fe extraction from soils. Canadian Journal Soil Science, 53, 244-246.
47.Jackson, M. L. (1975). Soil Chemical Analysis-advanced Course. Univ. of Wisonsin College of Agricultural, Department of Soils Science, Madison, WI.
48.Kittrik, J. A., & Hope, E. W. (1963). A procedure for the particle size separation of soil for X-ray diffraction analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 96, 312-325.
49.Sanjari, S., Barkhori, S., & Boroumand, N. (2014). Study Micromorphology Properties of Soils on Different Geomorphic Surfaces in South Roudbar Playa (Part of the Jazmoryan). Journal of water and soil, 28 (2), 373-382.
[In Persian]
50.Sanjari, S., Farpoor, M. H., Karimian Eghbal, M., & Efandiarpoor Boroujeni, I. (2011). Genesis, Micromorphology and Clay Mineralogy of Soils Located on Different Geomorphic Surfaces in Jiroft Area. Journal of water and soil,25 (2), 411-425. [In Persian]
51.Soil Survey Staff. (2014) & (2022). Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Twelfth Edition. United States Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.
52.IUSS Working Group. (2015). World Reference Base for Soil Resources. World Soil Resources Reports No. 106. FAO, Rome, Italy.
53.Sanjari, S., Farpoor, M. H., Mahmoodabadi, M., & Barkhori, S. (2020). Comparison of Soil Taxonomy (2014) and WRB (2015) in Classification of Soils in Iranshahr and Dalghan Regions, Sistan and Baloochestan Provinc. Journal of Water and Soil, 34 (5), 1081-1091. [In Persian]
54.Sanjari, S., Farpoor, M. H., Mahmoodabadi, M., & Barkhori, S. (2021). Soil Taxonomy and WRB comparison to classify soils with different climatic conditions in Kerman province. Agricultural Engineering. Scientific Journal of Agriculture, 43 (4). DOI:10.22055/AGEN.2021.34266.1575. [In Persian]
55.Rasooli, N., Farpoor, M. H., Mahmoodabadi, M., & Esfandiarpour Borujeni, I. (2021). Capability of Soil Taxonomy (2014) compared to updated WRB (2015) in describing Lut Desert soils. Desert, 26, 219-235. DOI:10. 22059/jdesert.2021.318248.1006804.
56.Hu, X., Xu, L., & Shen, M. (2009). Influence of the aging of Fe oxides on the decline of magnetic susceptibility
of the Tertiary red clay in the Chinese Loess Plateau. Quaternary International, 209, 22-30.
57.Ortize, I., Simon, M., Dorronsoro, C., Martin, F., & Garcia, I. (2002). Soil evolution over the Quaternery period in a Mediterranean climate (SE Spain). Catena, 48, 131-148.
58.De Jong, E., Nestor, P. A., & Pennock, D. J. (1997). The use of magnetic susceptibility to measure 5 long-term soil redistribution. Catena, 32, 23-35.
59.Dearing, J. A., Lees, J. A., & White, C. (1995). Mineral magnetic properties of acid gleyed soils under Oak and Corsican Pine. Geoderma, 68, 309-319.
60.Montakhabi Kalajahi, V., Jafarzadeh, A. A., & Rezaei, H. (2016). Comparison of different soils evolution based on Argillic horizon development. Journal of Water and Soil Science,27 (1), 253-265. [In Persian]
61.Fine, P., Singer, M. J., & Verosub, K. L. (1992). Use of magnetic susceptibility measurements in 27 assessing soil uniformity in Chrono sequences studies. Soil science society America journal,56, 1195-1199. https://doi.org//sssaj 1992.03615995005600040032x
62.Marwick, B. (2005). Element concentration and magnetic susceptibility of Anthrosols: indicator of prehistoric human occupation in the inland Pilbara, Western Australia. Journal of Archaeological Science, 32, 1357-1368.
63.Nortcliff, S. (2002). Standardization of soil quality attributes. Agric. Ecosyst. International Journal of Environmental Research, 88, 161-168.
64.Cerdan, O., Govers, G., le Bissonnais, Y., & Van Oost, K. (2010). Rates and spatial variation of soil erosion in Europe: A study based on erosion plot data. Geology, 122, 167-177.
65.Kampf, N., Scheinost, A. C., & Schuze, D. G. (1999). Oxide minerals. In: S. Malcom (ed), Handbook of soil science, CRC Press, Washington, DC.
66.De Jong, E., Kozak, L. M., & Rostad, H. P. W. (2000a). Effects of parent material and climate on the magnetic susceptibility of Saskatchewan soils. Canadian Journal Soil Science, 80, 135-142.
67.De Jong, E., Pennock, D. J., & Nestor, P. A. (2000b). Magnetic susceptibility of soils in different slope positions in Saskatchewan, Canada. Catena, 40, 291-305.
68.Dankoub, Z., Ayoubi, S., Khademi, H., & Sheng-Gao, L. U. (2012). Spatial distribution of magnetic properties and selected heavy metals in calcareous soils as affected by land use. Pedosphere, 22, 33-47.
69.Khormali, F., & Abtahi, A. (2003). Origin and distribution of clay minerals in calcareous arid and semi-arid soils of Fars provine, south Iran. Clay Mineralogy, 38, 511-527.
70.Jafari, S., Bandehelahi, F., & Khalil Moghadam, B. (2016). The study of clay and soil development that effected by drainage and land use on the Karoon River. Iranian journal of soil and water research, 47 (1), 1-12. [In Persian]
71.Bayat, O., Karimzadeh, H., & Karimi, A. R. (2017). Paleoenvironment of geomorphic surfaces of an alluvial fan in the eastern Isfahan, Iran, in the light of micromorphology and clay mineralogy. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 10 (9). DOI 10.1007/s12517-017-2848-9.
72.Nael, M., Khademi, H., Jalalian, A., & Sotohian, F. (2014). Soil-parent material relationship in forest ecosystems of western Alborz: Clay mineralogy. Journal of Water and Soil Conservation, 21 (3), 101-122. [In Persian]
مجله مدیریت خاک و تولید پایدار
دوره 13، شماره 4
دی 1402
صفحه 75-96

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار