• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    The effects of soil sand contents on characteristics of humic acids along soil profiles

    2016-08-26 07:45:59XinyueDiHuiDongXianjinAnHaimingTangBaohuaXiao
    Acta Geochimica 2016年3期

    Xinyue Di·Hui Dong·Xianjin An·Haiming Tang·Baohua Xiao

    ?

    The effects of soil sand contents on characteristics of humic acids along soil profiles

    Xinyue Di1,2·Hui Dong1,2·Xianjin An1,2·Haiming Tang1,2·Baohua Xiao1

    ?Science Press,Institute of Geochemistry,CAS and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

    It is generally accepted that the compositions and properties of soil organic matter(SOM)are influenced by many factors.In order to reveal the effects of soil texture on characteristics and dynamics of SOM and its sub-fraction,humic acid(HA),along two soil profiles,a yellow soil profile and a purplish soil profile,under the same climate and vegetation conditions were determined.Results indicate that the decomposition and humification degrees of SOM and HA of the purplish soils are higher than those of the corresponding yellow soils indicated by A/O-A ratios of HAs,TOCs and HA yields of bulk soil samples,nevertheless,the development degree of the purplish soil is lower than that of the yellow soil.The variations of E4/E6ratios of HAs along the soil profiles indicate the overall molecular sizes of HAs decreased downward along the soil profiles. A/O-A ratios of HAs decreased downward along both the soil profiles indicate that humification processes decrease downward along both the soil profiles.Leaching of SOM shows significant effects on the distribution and characteristics of HAs in the yellow soil profile but the purplish soil profile,which is consistent with the higher hydrophobicity of HAs in purplish soils,shows that the distribution characteristics of SOM along the soil profiles are a complex result of the combination of soil texture and characteristics of SOM itself.The remarkably different sand contents are concluded tentatively as one of reasons to the different distributions and dynamics of HAs along the soil profiles,however,to profoundly understand the evolution and transport of SOM along soil profiles needs more researches.

    Soil profile·Soil organic matter·Humic acid· Characteristics·Sand content

    1 Introduction

    Humic substance,distributed ubiquitously in water,sediment and soil,is the major component of soil organic matter(SOM),usually occupying over 80%of the SOM (Conte et al.2006;Stevenson 1994),and plays an important role in the physical and chemical properties and fertility of soil(Simpson et al.2011).Humic acid(HA)takes up an important fraction of soil humic substance.HA is thought to be more distinguishable and sensitive towards environmental changes than bulk SOM or other SOM fractions(Arshad and Schnitzer 1989;Jien et al.2011;Zech et al.1997);therefore HA has been widely used as a proxy in studying the characteristics and evolution of SOM (Buurman et al.2009;Zhang et al.2011).

    The structure and composition of SOM are influenced by many factors.The decomposition of SOM is slowed in the coldandwetclimateoftheArcticecosystem(Daietal.2002;Nadelhoffer et al.1992)and is faster in tropic regions rather than in temperate regions(Bayer et al.2000;Sanchez and Logan 1992).The aromaticity of SOM is hindered in high rainfallareasduetotheleachingofligninfragments(Preston 1996).Quideau et al.(2001)suggested that the composition ofSOMislinkeddirectlywithforestvegetationtypes.Bayer et al.(2002)found that the humification degree of HA extracted from no-tillage soils was lower than that from conventional tillage soils.The influences of climate andvegetation on properties of soil HA were evaluated by several studies,and they concluded that climate is the primary factor controlling the dynamics of HA(Preston 1991,1996)and vegetation input is a minor factor influencing the characteristics of soil HA(Amalfitano et al.1995;Krosshavn etal.1990).Thepedogeneticfactorsarealsoimportanttothe structureandcompositionofSOM.Forexample,Conteetal. (2003)found that the humic matters of andic soils contained more carboxyl functional groups than those of non-andic soils due to the formation of stable complexes between humic matters and the aluminum of allophane materials;while Marinari et al.(2010)found that dynamics of FTIR characteristics of HAs along a vertisols soil profile and an alfisols soil profile were quite similar.The soil texture,including soil matrix and soil minerals,influences the stability and properties of SOM(Baldock and Skjemstad 2000;Galantini et al.2004;Schoening et al.2005;Traversa et al. 2014).It has been reported that organic materials in high sand content soils are quickly decomposed by microorganisms(Galantini et al.2004;Ladd et al.1985;Traversa et al. 2014),and that,compared to smectite dominated soils,SOMs of kaolinite and Fe-oxides dominated soils accumulate polysaccharides structures and deplete aromatic groups (Dick et al.2005;Wattel-Koekkoek et al.2001).Nevertheless,the quantitative relationships of climate,covering plant andpedogeneticfactorstothecharacteristicsofSOMremain ambiguous,and further studies are much needed.

    This study systematically investigated the characteristics and distributions of SOMs and HAs along two soil profiles from the Karst area of southwest China and tentatively distinguished the role of soil texture on the characteristics and evolution of SOMs.

    2 Materials and methods

    2.1Soil profiles

    A yellow soil and a purplish soil profile were sampled from the suburban area of Guiyang,Guizhou,China,with the straight-line distance being<12 km.The description of two sampling sites is briefed in Table 1.Both sampling sites are located on hilltops and covered by a thin layer of vegetation litter(about 3-5 cm),have the same annual mean temperature(15.3°C)and the same annual mean precipitation(1129.5 mm),and their dominant covering plants are both coniferous trees and sparse bushes.The soil samples were collected after removing the litter covering on soil surface,and three layers of soil,named as top-,middle-and bottom-layer soil,were taken along with the soil profiles.The soil samples were air dried,gently crushed to pass 2 mm sieves,and visible debris of roots and stones were picked out by hand in the laboratory and stored in the dark for later use.

    2.2Soil properties

    2.2.1TOC and TON

    The TOC and TON contents of the soil samples were determined by an elemental analyzer(Vario ElIII,Elementar Company,Germany)following the regular procedure.Briefly,the soil sample was pretreated by an overdose HCl solution(0.5 mol/L),and the slurry stood overnight to ensure the reaction completed,then the slurry was centrifuged to remove the liquid,and the residual solid was washed by Mill-Q water till neutral and then freeze-dried. The residual solid was ground carefully and a certain amount of it was wrapped in a tin capsule and then was measured on the elemental analyzer.The measured TOC and TON values were corrected to the initial soil weight.

    2.2.2Sand content

    The sand content of soil was determined according to the method described elsewhere(Jastrow 1996).Briefly,a certain amount(1 g)of the soil sample was soaked overnight in thesodiumhexametaphosphatesolution[Na6(PO3)6,5 g/L],the slurry was sonicated for 1 min,and then wet sieved by a 270#sieve(<53 μm).The sand content was determined as the ratio of the dry weight of the material retained on the sieve to the dry weight of the initial soil.

    Sandcontent(wt%)

    Table 1 Sampling site,date and horizon depth

    Table 2 Soil organic carbon (TOC)and nitrogen(TON),C/N ratio,soil sand contents(wt%),extraction yields(g·kg-1of soil),and the percentage of the ratio of organic carbon in HA fraction to the corresponding bulk soil(HAC/TOC)of the soil profiles

    2.3Humic acid extraction

    YHAs and PHAs are HA samples extracted exhaustively from the yellow soil and purplish soil samples,respectively,according to the procedure detailed elsewhere(Ma et al.2015).The total dry weight of each HA sample was weighed and applied to calculate the yield of HA(yHAs,g/kg dry soil)for the corresponding soil sample.

    2.4HA characterizations

    The ash contents of the HA samples were measured by heating the HA samples(0.5 g)in porcelain crucibles at 750°C in a muffle for 4 h.The material remained in the porcelain crucible after combustion was considered as the ashcontentoftheHAsample.TheC,H,NandOcontentsof the HA samples were measured using the same elemental analyzer and the same methods of TOC and TON measurements described above.The measured C,H,N and O contents were corrected and reported in the ash-free base.The FTIR spectra of the HA samples were recorded on Bruker VERTEX 70 FT-IR Spectrometer(Bruker Corporation,Germany)with a scanning range of 4000-400 cm-1.

    The solid-state cross-polarization magic angle-spinning13C-NMR spectra of the HA samples were measured in the Hefei Institutes of Physical Science,Chinese Academy of Sciences,using a Bruker AscendTM600WB nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometer(Bruker Corporation,Germany).About 100 mg HA powder samples were filled in a 4-mm diameter ZrO2rotor with a Kel-F cap,and the13C resonant frequency and magic angle spinning frequency were set at 150.91 MHz and 8000 Hz,respectively.Recycle time and contact time were 2 s and 2 ms,respectively.Each spectrum consisted of 2400 data points and the chemical shifts were calibrated by tetramethyl silane.

    The UV-Vis spectra of the HA samples were scanned by Cary 300 UV-V is spectrophotometer(Agilent Technologies,America)in quartz cuvettes(1 cm path length)at 200-800 nm.The HA solution was prepared by dissolving 5 mg HA solid sample in 100 mL 0.05 mol/L NaHCO3solution.The E4/E6ratio is the ratio of absorbance at 465 nm to that at 665 nm.

    3 Results

    3.1Characteristics of soils

    The properties of the soil samples are listed in Table 2. The yield of HA(yHA)represented the amount(g)of HA extracted from 1 kg of the bulk soil,and HAC/TOC was the percentage of the ratio of organic carbon in HA fraction to the corresponding bulk soil.Obviously,the TOC,yHA and HAC/TOC ratios of the three soil samples from the yellow soil profile were remarkably higher than the corresponding ones from the purplish soil profile.The yHA values of both series of soil samples fell in a range of 0.04-7.90 g/kg,which is lower than those reported in the literature(2.3-15.7 g/kg)(Spaccini et al. 2006),and the HAC/TOC ratios(2.00%-20.94%)were also lower than other reports(about 20%)(Grasset and Amble`s 1998;Grasset and Ambles 1998;Schulten and Schnitzer 1997),except Y1 whose HAC/TOC ratio was 20.94.

    The TOC contents and yHAs decreased downward along the soil profiles at both sites,and this may be due to the lower organic material input of deeper soil layers(Lawrence et al.2015;Qu et al.2009;Wu et al.2011).The C/N ratios decreased downward along the two soil profiles,which is in line with other studies,indicating a relative enrichment of organic N in the SOM of deeper layers(Dick et al.2005;Rumpel and Kogel-Knabner 2011).The sand contents decreased from 2.97%to 0.71%and from 46.20%to 9.08%downward along the yellow soil profile and the purplish soil profile,respectively,and this may be due to the translocation of clay particles from the top-layer to the deeper layers in the soil profile or the higher weathering intensity of the top-layer soil.The HAC/TOC ratios decrease downward along the both soil profiles,which are in line with the observation of the prior study (Alvarez-Arteaga et al.2012),suggesting the preservation and formation of HA are lower in deeper soil layer. However,the HAC/TOC ratios decreased significantly (from 20.94%to 3.02%)along the yellow soil profile but slightly(from 3.25%to 2.00%)along the purplish soil profile.

    Table 3 Elemental compositions(wt%),atomic ratios,ash contents(wt%),and E4/E6ratios of HA

    3.2Elemental compositions of HAs

    The elemental compositions of YHAs and PHAs are listed in Table 3.In general,the carbon contents of YHAs (50.28%-53.28%)were much lower than those of PHAs (52.01%-55.00%),which suggest that the condensation or aromatic degrees of YHAs are lower than those of PHAs.The C/N ratio of Y1HA was higher than that of P1HA,however,the C/N ratios of Y2HA and Y3HA were much lower than those of corresponding P2HA and P3HA. The changes of elemental compositions along the soil profiles are different between the two sites.The C contents of YHAs decrease from 53.28%in the top-layer to 50.28%in the bottom-layer of the yellow soil profile,while the C contents of PHAs increase from the top-layer (52.01%)to the deeper-layer(about 55.00%).The N contents of YHAs increase from 4.18%to 5.93%downward along the yellow soil profile,while they decrease from 5.03%to 4.72%downward along the purplish soil profile.The C/N ratios of HAs decreased downward along the yellow soil profile(from 14.86 to 9.89),and increased along the purplish soil profile(from 12.06 to 13.53).The changes of C/N ratios along the yellow soil profile were consistent with prior reports(Abakumov et al.2010).The C/O and C/H ratios of the yellow soil HAs changed slightly along the soil profile(1.93-1.95 and 0.80-0.82,respectively),while the C/O and C/H ratio of the purplish soil HAs increased sharply downward along the soil profile (from 1.91 to 2.04 and from 0.75 to 0.97,respectively).

    3.3FTIR-ATR spectroscopy of HAs

    The FTIR spectra of YHAs and PHAs were shown in Fig.1.It has been known that the adsorption bands around 1040 cm-1may be attributed to the C-O asymmetric stretch vibrations of carbohydrates(Giovanela et al.2010;Kalbitz et al.1999;Peschel and Wildt 1988;Stevenson and Goh 1971).The intensities of adsorption bands around 1040 cm-1of HAs increased visibly downward along the yellow soil profile but changed slightly along purplish soil profile,suggesting the carbohydrate components of YHAs increased downward along the yellow soil profile,while changed slightly along the purplish soil profile.The adsorption bands at 2920 and 2850 cm-1are usually attributed to C-H stretch vibrations of methyl or methylene components.The intensities of adsorption bands around 2850 and 2920 cm-1of YHAs were remarkably lower than those of PHAs,suggesting the contents of methyl or methylene components in YHAs were lower than those in PHAs,which is in line with the investigation by Galantini et al.(2004),in which they found finer textured soil was less aliphatic.The intensities of adsorption bands around 2850 and 2920 cm-1of HAs decreased gradually along the yellow soil profile,and also showed an obviously drop in P3HA than those in P1HA and P2HA,suggesting the amount of methyl components or methylene components in HAs were decreased downward along the two soil profiles,which is in line with the study on the Rutigliano soil profile (Traversa et al.2014).It has been suggested that the methyl or methylene components increase,while carbohydrates decrease as the decomposition degree of SOM increase (Baldock et al.1997;Dai et al.2002);the changes of the two components along the soil profiles may suggest that the decomposition degrees of HA in the bottom-layers of the two soil profiles are lower than those of the top-layers.

    The adsorption bands at 1710 cm-1were generally attributed to C=O stretch vibrations of various groups,such as carboxyl acids,carboxylates,esters,ketones,and amides.Theintensitiesofadsorptionbandsaround 1710 cm-1of HAs decreased slightly downward along the yellow soil profile but increased visibly downward along the purplish soil profile,suggesting the C=O functional groups of HAs decreased slightly downward along the yellow soil profile but increased visibly downward along the purplish soil profile.The decreased intensities of bands around 1710 cm-1downward along the purplish soil profile were in line with the study on the Vauda di Nole soil profile(Traversa et al.2014).

    The adsorption bands around 1545 cm-1are usually attributed to C=N and C=C stretch vibrations in amide and pyrrole materials.The intensities of adsorption bands at 1545 cm-1of HAs increased gradually downward along yellow soil profile,suggesting amide groups of the HAs increased downward along the yellow soil profile,and thiswas in line with prior studies(Marinari et al.2010;Traversa et al.2011,2014).The intensities of adsorption bands at 1545 cm-1of HAs decreased downward along the purplish soil profile,and this may be due to the fact that the HAs of the purplish soil decomposed highly by microorganisms.The trends of amide groups along soil profiles were similar to the N contents of HAs.

    Fig.1 The FTIR spectra of HAs extracted from yellow and purplish soil profiles

    3.4CPMAS13C-NMR spectroscopy of HAs

    The CPMAS-13C-NMR is a powerful tool for the characterization of soil HAs.Although the resonance peaks attributed to different carbon components overlap slightly,the integrated areas of carbon regions can be used for the qualitative comparison of component contents in HAs extracted from similar samples(Dick et al.2005;Quideau et al.2001;Schnitzer and Levesque 1979;Skjemstad et al. 1994).

    The13C-NMR spectra of HAs extracted from two soil profiles are shown in Fig.2 and the relative proportion of different carbon components for HAs are listed in Table 4. In general,the main peaks of all HAs were around 30 ppm,which are consistent with other studies(Gonzalezvila and Lentz 1976;Hatcher et al.1980).For YHAs,the most pronounced carbon components of YHAs were O-alkyl-C components(29.67%-38.00%),and the second most abundant components were alkyl-C components(24.72%-29.19%),and this carbon distribution was same to another study(Fabbri et al.1998).In contrary to the yellow soil,the relative contents of O-alkyl-C components(27.65%-30.39%)werelowerthanthealkyl-Ccomponents (24.95%-31.97%)in PHAs,which is in line with the findings of Yang et al.(2011).As mentioned before,alkyl-CaccumulatesandO-alkyl-Cconsumesduringthe decomposition of SOM,so the A/O-A ratio was considered to be a suitable index for estimating the decomposition degree of HAs(Baldock et al.1997;Dai et al.2002).The A/O-A ratios of PHAs were higher than those of the correspondingYHAs,implyingthatthedecomposition degrees of PHAs are higher than those of the corresponding YHAs,and this was consistent with the better aeration condition in the purplish soil profile,which favors the degradation reactions of HA.However,A/O-A ratios showed decreasing trends along both profiles,which may mean that the decomposition levels of HA in the lower layers are higher than those in the upper layers of the two soil profiles,however the E4/E6data have showed that the molecular sizes of HAs decrease unanimously along two soil profiles.Therefore,the A/O-A ratio as an index of the decomposition degree of SOM should be applied with caution and restriction.

    The changes of O-alkyl-C contents in HAs along soil profiles may depend on the soil types.Some previous investigators observed increases of O-alkyl-C components downward along the soil profiles(Gressel et al.1996;Preston et al.1994;Ussiri and Johnson 2003),while some others observed a significant decrease(Kogelknabner et al. 1991)or slight decrease(Preston et al.1994).This study found that O-Alkyl C contents of YHAs increased from 29.67%to 38.00%and O-Alkyl C contents of PHAs decreased from 30.39%to 27.65%downward along the two soil profiles(Table 4).The changes of the aromatic-C contents of HAs along the soil profiles depended on the soil types.The aromatic-C contents of HAs decreased downward along the yellow soil profile but increased downward along the purplish soil profile.

    The ratio of Ho/Hi was introduced to indicate the hydrophobicity of HA(Spaccini et al.2006).Ho/Hi ratios of YHAs were smaller than those of the corresponding PHAs,suggesting that the hydrophobicity of YHAs waslower than that of PHAs.Ho/Hi ratios decreased downward along both soil profiles,however,the intensities of decrease were different.Ho/Hi ratios decreased significantly along yellow soil(from 1.07 to 0.79)and decreased slightly along purplish soil(from 1.09 to 1.00).

    Fig.2 CPMAS13C-NMR spectra of HAs extracted from yellow and purplish soil profiles

    Table 4 Chemical shift of CPMAS13C-NMR spectra,relative proportion of different carbon types and relative proportion ratios for the HAs extracted from yellow and purple soils

    3.5UV-Vis spectroscopy of HAs

    The characteristics of HAs could also be obtained through their UV-Vis spectra.The UV-Vis spectra of HAs extracted from yellow and purplish soil profiles are shown in Fig.3.In line with other studies(Baes and Bloom 1990;Chin et al.1994;Giovanela et al.2010;Korshin et al. 1997),the absorbance values decreased in intensity consistently from 200 to 800 nm.The‘‘shoulder''peaks were observed at around 270-280 nm in all of the spectra.This may be due to the overlap of a large number of chromophorespresentinthehumiccores(Fookenand Liebezeit 2000;Giovanela et al.2010;Peuravuori and Pihlaja 1997).The absorbance intensities of PHAs in the UV region(200-400)were higher than those of YHAs,and this may suggest the aromatic degrees of PHAs were higher than those of the YHAs(Senesi et al.1996).

    The E4/E6ratios of HAs were obtained by the absorbance ratios at wavelengths of 465 and 665 nm.The previous investigators concluded that the ranges of E4/E6ratio of HA extracted from the top-layer of soil profiles was 3.8-5.8(Kukkonen 1992)and 5.44-5.7(Chen et al.1977). Our results showed the range was from 5.63 to 11.53 (Table 3),which was much higher than the previous reports.The E4/E6ratio of Y1HAs was lower than that of P1HA,and this may be a result of the lower sand content of Y1 compared to that of P1.Prior investigators also found that the E4/E6ratio was greater in HA extracted from coarser textured soil(Galantini et al.2004;Traversa et al. 2014).The E4/E6ratios of HAs extracted from the two soilsobviously increased downward along the soil profile;this trend contrasted prior investigations(Traversa et al.2011;Gondar et al.2005),which observed that E4/E6ratios decreased downward along the soil profiles.The E4/E6ratios were 8.55,8.89 and 10.02 for P1HA,P2HA and P3HA,respectively.The E4/E6ratios of P1HA and P2HA were close and significantly different from that of P3HA;this variation pattern is very similar to that of the sand contents in the purplish soil profile,suggesting that the sand contents affected the E4/E6ratios and other characteristics related to the E4/E6ratios,such as decomposition degree and condensation degree.

    Fig.3 UV-Vis spectra of HAs extracted from yellow and purplish soil profiles

    4 Discussion

    The two soil profiles were sampled from one small geographic area with similar vegetation covers,however,while the climate conditions and the fresh organic residue inputs of the soil sites were similar,the compositions and dynamics of extracted HAs were found to be notably different along the two soil profiles.The different characteristics and dynamics of SOMs along the two soil profiles should be a result of the different textures of the soils.In terms of soil classification,these two soils are quite different.The yellow soil belongs to Ferralsol,a type of weathered soil with a yellow or red color from the accumulation of metal oxides,particularly iron and aluminum oxides;the purplish soil belongs to Cambisol,a type of soil with incipient soil formation and weak differentiation of soil horizons.The properties of a soil are influenced largely by its texture.In general,the mineral components of soil include sand,silt and clay,and their relative proportions determine the texture of a soil.Sand is the largest and the most stable mineral components of soil,and its content usually determines the volume of soil pores,influences the activity of organisms,and affects the characteristics of SOM(Hassink et al.1993).The sand contents of the yellow soil and purplish soil samples were remarkably different and their variation trends along the two profiles were also different(Table 2),showing negative correlations to TOCs and positive correlations to humification degree of HAs along the soil profiles,indicating that the sand content might be an important factor for the controlling characteristics and distribution of SOM in the two soil profiles.

    4.1Sand content effects on characteristics of HAs of the two soils

    The purplish soil samples have higher sand contents than the corresponding yellow soil samples,which might be the reason for the purplish soil sample having the much lower TOC content compared to the corresponding yellow soil sample.It has been suggested that the SOMs are decomposed quickly by microorganisms in high sand content soils (Galantini et al.2004;Ladd et al.1985;Traversa et al. 2014).The sand contents along the purplish soil profile were in the range of 9.08 wt%-46.20 wt%,which were significantly higher than those along the yellow soil profile (0.71 wt%-2.97 wt%)(Table 2).The high sand content might result in better aeration and water permeability conditions along the purplish soil profile,leading to the fast decomposition of SOM,and reducing the accumulation of SOM in soils.

    The influences of sand content on SOM were also expressed in the detailed investigation of characteristics and distributions of HA along the soil profiles.As mentioned above,the two sites were covered by similar vegetation litters,which mean similar inputs of organic matter to the soil profiles.The oxidative decomposition of vegetation litters was considered to be divided into three successivestages:firstly,thelosingofcarbohydrates,including cellulose,hemicellulose and protein;subsequently,the decomposing of lignin;and finally,the losing of highly recalcitrant alkyl-C including long chain fatty acids,lipids and waxes(Baldock et al.1997).Accordingly,the alkyl-C contents of HA will increase relatively and O-alkyl-C contents of HA will decrease relatively as the decomposition processes of HA proceed.The results of FTIR-ATR and CPMAS13C-NMR showed that methyl,methylene(or alkyl-C)components were higher and carbohydrate(or O-alkyl-C)components were lower in PHAs than in corresponding YHAs,and we concluded that thedecomposition degrees of PHAs were higher than those of YHAs,especially,in the top layers of the two soil profiles. It was also supported by the E4/E6ratios of HAs from the two soil profiles,as the E4/E6ratios were 8.55 and 5.63 for P1HA and Y1HA,respectively,implying that the molecular size of P1HA was smaller than that of Y1HA.

    Since the development degrees of yellow soils were higher than those of purplish soils,the ages of YHAs may be older than PHAs;however,the expectation contrasted to the results of study.The contradiction may partly be due to the fast decomposition of organic matters in the purplish soil profile caused by the well aeration of high sand content of purplish soil profile.

    4.2Sand contents effects on HA dynamics along two soil profiles

    Leaching has been suggested as a general way for SOM transportion along the soil profile(Kogelknabner et al. 1988).The characteristics and distribution of HA along the yellow soil profile were influenced by leaching,e.g.the hydrophobicity,indicated by the Ho/Hi ratio,of YHA decreased gradually along the soil profile;the non-polar alkyl-C components decreased gradually along the soil profile;O-alkyl-C measured by13C-NMR and carbohydrates measured by FTIR-ATR,and the relatively polar components increased gradually along the soil profile.

    The sand contents are much higher along purplish soil profile than those corresponding along the yellow soil profile,so the water permeability and aeration conditions of the purplish soil profile are better and the effects of leaching on the characteristics and distribution of SOM along the purplish soil profile should be more remarkable. Figure 1 shows a remarkable increase of C=O content along the purplish soil profile but non-significant change along the yellow soil profile;this could be an evidence of strong leaching effects on the dynamics of HA along the purplish soil profile,since C=O contents,especially carboxyl groups,are polar functional groups which tend to transport with soil water and accumulate at the lower part of the soil column.However,the hydrophobicity of PHAs and components of O-alkyl-C and carbohydrate in PHAs didn't show significant changes along the purplish soil profile.This might be a result of the high decomposition of PHAs in the sandy purplish soil.The aeration condition in the sandy purplish soil profile favors the growing of microorganisms,which prefer the utilization and decomposition of carbohydrates which led to the PHAs depletion of carbohydrates(polar)and affected the transformation of HAs along the soil profile.

    The characteristics of P3HA were significantly different from corresponding those of P1HA and P2HA,for instance,UV-Vis spectra(Fig.3)of P1HA and P2HA are quite similar but obviously different from that of P3HA,the carbon distributions,measured by13C-NMR(Table 4),of P1HA and P2HA are similar and significantly different from that of P3HA.The sand contents along the purplish soil profile showed a similar trend,and the sand contents of P1 and P2 were at the same level and were obviously higher than that of P3(Table 2).The highly consistent variations of sand contents and characteristics of PHAs along the purplish soil profile suggested that the sand content may play an important role in controlling the characteristics and dynamics of PHAs along the purplish soil profile.

    The decomposition and humification degrees are often discussed in studying the properties and dynamics of SOM along soil profiles.The SOM formed in the superficial layer of soil were found to be more stable than those formed in deeper-layers,due to the high activity of microorganisms in superficial layer(Alvarez-Arteaga et al.2012;Orlov 1998). Similarly,we found that the decomposition and humification degrees of HA in the top-layer were higher than those in the deeper-layers of the studied soils.Many indexes could be used to calculate the decomposition and humification degrees of HAs.Firstly,the E4/E6ratio was used to indicate the humification degrees of HAs(Brunetti et al. 2012;Chen et al.1977;Giovanela et al.2010;Stevenson 1994).The E4/E6ratios of HAs increased consistently downward along the two soil profiles,indicating that the humification degrees of HA decreased downward along the soil profiles at both soil sites.Secondly,prior studies had found that Alkyl-C contents increase and O-alkyl-C contents decrease as the decomposition degree of SOM increase(Baldock et al.1997;Dai et al.2002);the higher the decomposition degree of SOMs,the larger the A/O-A ratio.The A/O-A ratio could be regarded as a sensitive index of the decomposition degree of SOM.In this study,the A/O-A ratios of HAs showed a decreasing trend downward along the soil profiles,also suggesting the decreasing trend of the decomposition degree of HAs downward along the two soil profiles.

    Aromatic component contents also could be used to indicate the decomposition and humification degrees of HA.As mentioned earlier,the decomposition and humification degrees of HAs decrease downward along the two soil profiles.The variation patterns of the aromatic-C contents of HAs along the two soil profiles are completely different:aromatic-C contents of HAs decreased along the yellow soil profile but increased along the purplish soil profile(Table 4).As discussed above,the decomposition and humification degrees of HAs along the two soil profiles decrease;consequently,the inconformity of the variation patterns of the aromatic-C contents along the two soil profiles indicated a uniform decrease of the decomposition and humification degrees along the soil profiles,which maybe related to the differences of decomposition degrees of the two soils.There should be a disctinction of the decomposition stages of the SOMs when discussing the accumulation or depletion of the aromatic-C components as decomposition and humification processes.The aromatic-C components of HAs are considered to be derived from lignin(Oades 1995).The aromatic-C components accumulated as decompositions of carbohydrate,cellulose andhemicelluloseareproceeding(Baldocketal. 1992,1997;Bracewell and Robertson 1987;Hempfling et al.1987;Zech et al.1992),therefore in general,the decrease of aromatic-C component contents are suggested to be an evidence of the decrease of decomposition and humification degrees.However,as the decomposition proceeds,the aromatic-C components were also decomposed and the alkyl-C components were gradually accumulated(Baldock et al.1992).This case may occur when the easier decomposed materials,such as carbohydrate,cellulose and hemicellulose,were excessively decomposed. The high sand of purplish soil led to the fast decomposition of HAs.The HA yield values along the purplish soil profile are lower than those of the corresponding yellow soil profile,and the O-alkyl-C contents of PHAs were lower than corresponding layers of YHAs,except P1HA,which is slightly higher than that of Y1HA.As a result,the aromatic-C of HAs may be decomposed in the purplish soil,leading the aromatic-C content to decrease during the decomposition and humification process;therefore the increase of aromatic-C contents downward along the purplish soil profile may also indicate the decrease of the decomposition and humification degrees.In this way,the different patterns of the aromatic-C contents of HAs along the two soil profiles may result from the different decomposition and humification degrees of the two soil HAs,which were ultimately caused by the different sand contents.

    On the basis of the above discussions,we believed that the different levels and distributions of sand contents along the two soil profiles influence the decomposition and humification of soil HAs and therefore lead to the different characteristics and distributions of HAs in the two soil sites.Nevertheless,other factors cannot be ruled out,for instance,characteristics of Fe and Al minerals,differences of soil microflora,etc.Fe and Al minerals may affect the quantity of SOM by stabilizing SOM through sorption,entrapment and complexation processes(Guggenberger and Haider 2002)and affecting the quality of SOM by differential sorption or complexation of SOM components (Dick et al.1999,2005;Parfitt et al.1999;Wattel-Koekkoek et al.2001);the activity intensity and the major types of microflora in the soil are also important influential factors of the characteristics and distributions of SOM,all of which need careful further study.

    5 Conclusions

    Soil texture plays a significant role in the evolution of SOM along the soil profile.Although the yellow soil profile and the purplish soil profile in this study were adjacent and covered by similar vegetation covers,their SOM components showed quite different characteristics and distribution patterns along the soil profiles:SOMs in the purplish soils showed higher decomposition and humification levels compared to those of the yellow soil,SOM contents were significantly lower in the purplish soils than in the corresponding yellow soils,and the variations of SOM characteristics and contents were diminished along the purplish soil profiles compared to along the yellow soil profile.The different characteristics and distribution patterns of SOMs along the two soil profiles were attributed,mainly,to the different sand contents of the two soils and were further reinforced by the characteristics of SOM itself.

    Acknowledgments This study was financially supported by National Major Research Program of China(2013CB956702),the National Science Foundation of China(41273149,41173129),the Science Foundation of Guizhou Province(20113109)and the 100-Talent Program of CAS.

    References

    Abakumov E,Trubetskoj O,Demin D,Celi L,Cerli C,Trubetskaya O (2010)Humic acid characteristics in podzol soil chronosequence.Chem Ecol 26:59-66.doi:10.1080/02757540.2010. 497758

    Alvarez-Arteaga G,Krasilnikov P,Garcia-Calderon NE(2012)Vertical distribution and soil organic matter composition in a montanecloudforest,Oaxaca,Mexico.EurJForRes 131:1643-1651.doi:10.1007/s10342-012-0643-4

    Amalfitano C,Quezada RA,Wilson MA,Hanna JV(1995)Chemicalcomposition of humic acids-a comparison with precursor light fraction litter from different vegetations using spectroscopic techniques.SoilSci159:391-401.doi:10.1097/00010694-199506000-00004

    Arshad MA,Schnitzer M(1989)Chemical characteristics of humic acids from 5 soils in Kenya.Z Pflanzena¨hr Bodenkd 152:11-16. doi:10.1002/jpln.19891520103

    Baes AU,Bloom PR(1990)Fulvic-acid ultraviolet-visible spectrainfluence of solvent and pH.Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:1248-1254

    Baldock JA,Skjemstad JO (2000)Role of the soil matrix and minerals in protecting natural organic materials against biological attack.Org Geochem 31:697-710.doi:10.1016/s0146-6380(00)00049-8

    Baldock JA,Oades JM,Waters AG,Peng X,Vassallo AM,Wilson MA(1992)Aspects of the chemical structure of soil organic materials as revealed by solid-state13C NMR-spectroscopy. Biogeochemistry 16:1-42

    Baldock JA,Oades JM,Nelson PN,Skene TM,Golchin A,Clarke P (1997)Assessing the extent of decomposition of natural organic materials using solid-state13C NMR spectroscopy.Aust J Soil Res 35:1061-1083.doi:10.1071/s97004

    Bayer C,Martin-Neto L,Mielniczuk J,Ceretta CA(2000)Effect of no-till cropping systems on soil organic matter in a sandy clayloam acrisol from Southern Brazil monitored by electron spin resonance and nuclear magnetic resonance.Soil Tillage Res 53:95-104.doi:10.1016/s0167-1987(99)00088-4

    Bayer C,Martin-Neto L,Mielniczuk J,Saab SD,Milori DMP,Bagnato VS(2002)Tillage and cropping system effects on soil humic acid characteristics as determined by electron spin resonanceandfluorescencespectroscopies.Geoderma 105:81-92.doi:10.1016/s0016-7061(01)00093-3

    Bracewell JM,Robertson GW(1987)Characteristics of soil organicmatter in temperate soils by Curie-point pyrolysis mass-spectrometry.3.Transformations occurring in surface organic horizons. Geoderma 40:333-344.doi:10.1016/0016-7061(87)90042-5

    Brunetti G,F(xiàn)arrag K,Plaza C,Senesi N(2012)Advanced techniques for characterization of organic matter from anaerobically digested grapemarc distillery effluents and amended soils. Environ Monit Assess 184:2079-2089.doi:10.1007/s10661-011-2101-z

    Buurman P,Nierop KGJ,Kaal J,Senesi N(2009)Analytical pyrolysis and thermally assisted hydrolysis and methylation of EUROSOIL humic acid samples-a key to their source.Geoderma 150:10-22.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.12.012

    Chen Y,Senesi N,Schnitzer M (1977)Information provided on humic substances by E4/E6ratios.Soil Sci Soc Am J 41:352-358

    Chin YP,Aiken G,Oloughlin E(1994)Molecular-weight,polydispersity,and spectroscopic properties of aquatic humic substances.EnvironSciTechnol28:1853-1858.doi:10.1021/ es00060a015

    Conte P,Spaccini R,Chiarella M,Piccolo A (2003)Chemical properties of humic substances in soils of an Italian volcanic system.Geoderma117:243-250.doi:10.1016/s0016-7061(03)00126-5

    Conte P,Spaccini R,Piccolo A(2006)Advanced CPMAS-C-13 NMR techniques for molecular characterization of size-separated fractionsfromasoilhumicacid.AnalBioanalChem 386:382-390.doi:10.1007/s00216-006-0637-5

    Dai XY,Ping CL,Michaelson GJ(2002)Characterizing soil organic matter in Arctic tundra soils by different analytical approaches. Org Geochem 33:407-419.doi:10.1016/s0146-6380(02)00012-8 Dick DP,Burba P,Herzog H(1999)Influence of extractant and soil type on molecular characteristics of humic substances from two Brazilian soils.J Braz Chem Soc 10:140-145

    Dick DP,Gonc?alves CN,Dalmolin RSD,Knicker H,Klamt E,Ko¨gel-Knabnerc I,Simo?es ML,Martin-Neto L(2005)Characteristics of soil organic matter of different Brazilian ferralsols under native vegetation as a function of soil depth.Geoderma 124:319-333.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2004.05.008

    Fabbri D,Mongardi M,Montanari L,Galletti GC,Chiavari G,Scotti R(1998)Comparison between CP/MAS13C-NMR and pyrolysis-GC/MS in the structural characterization of humins and humic acids of soil and sediments.Fresenius J Anal Chem 362:299-306.doi:10.1007/s002160051078

    Fooken U,Liebezeit G(2000)Distinction of marine and terrestrial origin of humic acids in North Sea surface sediments by absorption spectroscopy.Mar Geol 164:173-181.doi:10.1016/ s0025-3227(99)00133-4

    Galantini JA,Senesi N,Brunetti G,Rosell R(2004)Influence of texture on organic matter distribution and quality and nitrogen and sulphur status in semiarid Pampean grassland soils of Argentina.Geoderma 123:143-152.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma. 2004.02.008

    Giovanela M,Crespo JS,Antunes M,Adametti DS,F(xiàn)ernandes AN,Barison A,Silva CWP,Re′gis Gue′gan,Mikael Motelica-Heino (2010)Chemical and spectroscopic characterization of humic acids extracted from the bottom sediments of a Brazilian subtropical microbasin.J Mol Struct 981:111-119.doi:10. 1016/j.molstruc.2010.07.038

    Gondar D,Lopez R,F(xiàn)iol S,Antelo JM,Arce F(2005)Characterization and acid-base properties of fulvic and humic acids isolated from two horizons of an ombrotrophic peat bog. Geoderma 126:367-374.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2004.10.006

    Gonzalezvila FJ,Lentz H(1976)FT-C13 Nuclear magnetic-resonance spectra of natural humic substances.Biochem Biophys ResCommun72:1063-1070.doi:10.1016/s0006-291x(76)80240-9

    Grasset L,Ambles A(1998)Structural study of soil humic acids and humin using a new preparative thermochemolysis technique. JAnalApplPyrolysis47:1-12.doi:10.1016/s0165-2370(98)00084-9

    Grasset L,Amble`s A(1998)Structure of humin and humic acid from an acid soil as revealed by phase transfer catalyzed hydrolysis. Org Geochem 29:881-891.doi:10.1016/S0146-6380(98)00193-4 Gressel N,McColl JG,Preston CM,Newman RH,Powers RF(1996)Linkagesbetweenphosphorus transformationsandcarbon decomposition in a forest soil.Biogeochemistry 33:97-123. doi:10.1007/bf02181034

    Guggenberger G,Haider KM (2002)Effect of mineral colloids on biogeochemical cycling of C,N,P,and S in soil.In:Huang PM,Bollag JM,Senesi N(eds)Interactions between soil particles and microorganisms,impact on the terrestrial ecosystem.Wiley,Chichester,pp 267-322

    Hassink J,Bouwman LA,Zwart KB,Brussaard L(1993)Relationships between habitable pore-space,soil biota and mineralization rates in grassland soils.Soil Biol Biochem 25:47-55.doi:10. 1016/0038-0717(93)90240-c

    Hatcher PG,Rowan R,Mattingly MA(1980)1H and13C NMR of marine humic acids.Org Geochem 2:77-85

    Hempfling R,Ziegler F,Zech W,Schulten HR (1987)Litter decomposition and humification in acidic forest soils studied by chemical degradation,IR and NMR-spectroscopy and pyrolysis field-ionization mass-spectrometry.Z Pflanzena¨hr Bodenkd 150:179-186.doi:10.1002/jpln.19871500311

    Jastrow JD (1996)Soil aggregate formation and the accrual of particulate and mineral-associated organic matter.Soil Biol Biochem 28:665-676.doi:10.1016/0038-0717(95)00159-x

    Jien SH,Chen TH,Chiu CY(2011)Effects of afforestation on soil organic matter characteristics under subtropical forests with low elevation.JForRes16:275-283.doi:10.1007/s10310-010-0231-8

    Kalbitz K,Geyer W,Geyer S(1999)Spectroscopic properties of dissolved humic substances-a reflection of land use history in a fen area.Biogeochemistry 47:219-238.doi:10.1007/bf00994924

    Kogelknabner I,Zech W,Hatcher PG(1988)Chemical-composition oftheorganic-matterinforestsoils-thehumuslayer. ZPflanzena¨hrBodenkd151:331-340.doi:10.1002/jpln. 19881510512

    Kogelknabner I,Hatcher PG,Zech W (1991)Chemical structural studies of forest soil humic acids-aromatic carbon fraction.Soil Sci Soc Am J 55:241-247

    Korshin GV,Li CW,Benjamin MM(1997)Monitoring the properties of natural organic matter through UV spectroscopy:a consistent theory.WaterRes31:1787-1795.doi:10.1016/s0043-1354(97)00006-7

    Krosshavn M,Bjorgum JO,Krane J,Steinnes E(1990)Chemicalstructure of terrestrial humus materials formed from different vegetation characterized by solid-state C-13 NMR with CP-MAS techniques.J Soil Sci 41:371-377

    Kukkonen J(1992)Effects of lignin and chlorolignin in pulp-mill effluents on the binding and bioavailability of hydrophobic organic pollutants.Water Res 26:1523-1532.doi:10.1016/0043-1354(92)90073-d

    Ladd JN,Amato M,Oades JM (1985)Decomposition of plantmaterial in Australian soils.3.Residual organic and microbial biomass-C and biomass-N from isotope-labeled legume materialand soil organic-matter,decomposing under field conditions. Aust J Soil Res 23:603-611.doi:10.1071/sr9850603

    Lawrence CR,Harden JW,Xu XM,Schulz MS,Trumbore SE(2015)Long-term controls on soil organic carbon with depth and time:a case study from the Cowlitz River Chronosequence,WA,USA. Geoderma 247:73-87.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.02.005

    Ma L,Xiao B,Di X,Huang W,Wang S(2015)Characteristics and distributions of humic acids in two soil profiles of the southwest ChinaKarstarea.ActaGeochim.doi:10.1007/s11631-015-0086-y

    Marinari S,Dell'Abate MT,Brunetti G,Dazzi C(2010)Differences of stabilized organic carbon fractions and microbiological activity along Mediterranean vertisols and alfisols profiles. Geoderma 156:379-388.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2010.03.007

    Nadelhoffer DJ,Giblin AE,Shaver GR,Linkins AE(1992)Microbial processes and plant nutrient availability in arctic soils.In:Chapin FSI,Jefferies RL,Reynolds JF,Shaver GR,Svoboda J,Chu EW (eds)Arctic ecosystems in a changing climate:an ecophysiological perspective.Academic,San Diego,pp 281-301

    Oades JM (1995)Recent advances in organomineral interactions:implications for carbon cycling and soil structure.Environ Impact Soil Compon Interact 1:119-134

    Orlov DS(1998)Organic substances of Russian soils.Eurasian Soil Sci 31:946-953

    Parfitt RL,Yuan G,Theng BKG(1999)A13C-NMR study of the interactions of soil organic matter with aluminium and allophane in podzols.Eur J Soil Sci 50:695-700.doi:10.1046/j.1365-2389. 1999.00274.x

    Peschel G,Wildt T (1988)Humic substances of natural and anthropogeneous origin.Water Res 22:105-108.doi:10.1016/ 0043-1354(88)90136-4

    Peuravuori J,Pihlaja K (1997)Molecular size distribution and spectroscopic properties of aquatic humic substances.Anal Chim Acta 337:133-149.doi:10.1016/s0003-2670(96)00412-6

    Preston C(1991)Using NMR to characterize the development of soil organic matter with varying climate and vegetation.In International Atomic Energy Agency,F(xiàn)ood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(eds)Stable isotopes in plant nutrition,soil fertility and environmental studies.International Atomic Energy Agency,Vienna

    Preston CM (1996)Applications of NMR to soil organic matter analysis:history and prospects.Soil Sci 161:144-166.doi:10. 1097/00010694-199603000-00002

    Preston CM,Hempfling R,Schulten HR,Schnitzer M,Trofymow JA,Axelson DE(1994)Characterization of organic-matter in a forest soil of coastal british-columbia by NMR and pyrolysisfield ionization mass-spectrometry.Plant Soil 158:69-82.doi:10. 1007/bf00007919

    Qu KY,F(xiàn)eng HM,Dai LM,Zhou L(2009)Profile distribution and storage of soil organic carbon of main forest types in eastern mountainous region of Liaoning.Chin J Soil Sci 40:1316-1320

    Quideau SA,Chadwick OA,Benesi A,Graham RC,Anderson MA (2001)A direct link between forest vegetation type and soil organic matter composition.Geoderma 104:41-60.doi:10.1016/ s0016-7061(01)00055-6

    Rumpel C,Kogel-Knabner I(2011)Deep soil organic matter-a key but poorly understood component of terrestrial C cycle.Plant Soil 338:143-158.doi:10.1007/s11104-010-0391-5

    Sanchez PA,Logan TJ(1992)Myths and science about the chemistry and fertility of soils in the tropics.In:Lal R,Sanchez PA(eds)Myths and science of soil of the Tropics,vol 29.SSSA,Madison,pp 35-46

    Schnitzer M,Levesque M(1979)Electron-spin resonance as a guide to the degree of humification of peats.Soil Sci 127:140-145. doi:10.1097/00010694-197903000-00003

    Schoening I,Morgenroth G,Kogel-Knabner I(2005)O/N-alkyl and alkyl C are stabilised in fine particle size fractions of forest soils. Biogeochemistry 73:475-497.doi:10.1007/s10533-004-0897-0

    Schulten HR,Schnitzer M(1997)Chemical model structures for soil organic matter and soils.Soil Sci 162:115-130.doi:10.1097/ 00010694-199702000-00005

    Senesi N,Miano TM,Brunetti G(1996)Humic-like substances in organic amendments and effects on native soil humic substances. In:Piccolo A(ed)Humic substances in terrestrial ecosystems. Elsevier,Amsterdam,pp 531-593

    Simpson AJ,McNally DJ,Simpson MJ(2011)NMR spectroscopy in environmental research:from molecular interactions to global processes.Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc 58:97-175.doi:10. 1016/j.pnmrs.2010.09.001

    Skjemstad JO,Clarke P,Taylor JA,Oades JM,Newman RH(1994)The removal of magnetic-materials from surface soils-a solidstate C-13 CP/MAS NMR-study.Aust J Soil Res 32:1215-1229. doi:10.1071/sr9941215

    Spaccini R,Mbagwu JSC,Conte P,Piccolo A(2006)Changes of humic substances characteristics from forested to cultivated soils in Ethiopia.Geoderma132:9-19.doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2005.04.015 Stevenson FJ(1994)Humus chemistry:genesis,composition,reactions,2nd edn.Wiley,New York

    Stevenson FJ,Goh KM (1971)Infrared spectra of humic acids and related substances.Geochim Cosmochim Acta 35:471.doi:10. 1016/0016-7037(71)90044-5

    Traversa A,Said-Pullicino D,D'Orazio V,Gigliotti G,Senesi N (2011)Properties of humic acids in Mediterranean forest soils (Southern Italy):influence of different plant covering Eur.J For Res 130:1045-1054.doi:10.1007/s10342-011-0491-7

    Traversa A,D'Orazio V,Mezzapesa GN,Bonifacio E,F(xiàn)arrag K,Senesi N,Brunetti G(2014)Chemical and spectroscopic characteristics of humic acids and dissolved organic matter along two alfisol profiles.Chemosphere 111:184-194.doi:10. 1016/j.chemosphere.2014.03.063

    Ussiri DAN,Johnson CE(2003)Characterization of organic matter in a northern hardwood forest soil by C-13 NMR spectroscopy and chemical methods.Geoderma 111:123-149.doi:10.1016/s0016-7061(02)00257-4

    Wattel-Koekkoek EJW,van Genuchten PPL,Buurman P,van Lagen B(2001)Amount and composition of clay-associated soil organic matter in a range of kaolinitic and smectitic soils. Geoderma 99:27-49.doi:10.1016/s0016-7061(00)00062-8

    Wu XG,Guo JP,Yanf XY,Tian XP(2011)Soil organic carbon storage and profile inventory in the different vegetation types of Luya Mountain.Acta Ecol Sin 31:3009-3019

    Yang Y,Shu L,Wang XL,Xing BS,Tao S(2011)Impact of deashing humic acid and humin on organic matter structural properties and sorption mechanisms of phenanthrene.Environ Sci Technol 45:3996-4002.doi:10.1021/es2003149

    Zech W,Ziegler F,Kogelknabner I,Haumaier L(1992)Humic substances distribution and transformation in forest soils.Sci Total Environ 118:155-174

    Zech W et al(1997)Factors controlling humification and mineralization of soil organic matter in the tropics.Geoderma 79:117-161.doi:10.1016/s0016-7061(97)00040-2

    Zhang JJ,Hu F,Li HX,Gao Q,Song XY,Ke XK,Wang LC(2011)Effects of earthworm activity on humus composition and humic acid characteristics of soil in a maize residue amended ricewheat rotation agroecosystem.Appl Soil Ecol 51:1-8.doi:10. 1016/j.apsoil.2011.08.004

    15 September 2015/Revised:23 May 2016/Accepted:17 June 2016/Published online:28 June 2016

    ? Baohua Xiao xiaobaohua@vip.skleg.cn
    1State Key Laboratory of Environmental Geochemistry,Institute of Geochemistry,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Guiyang 550081,China
    2Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,Beijing 100049,China

    少妇熟女欧美另类| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 超碰97精品在线观看| 一区二区av电影网| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 色网站视频免费| 嫩草影院入口| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 99久久人妻综合| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 黄片小视频在线播放| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 亚洲四区av| 9色porny在线观看| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 91成人精品电影| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 观看av在线不卡| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 夫妻午夜视频| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 国产一级毛片在线| 国产精品免费大片| 男女免费视频国产| 97在线人人人人妻| 国产亚洲最大av| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 精品午夜福利在线看| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 成人手机av| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲成色77777| 香蕉精品网在线| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 亚洲av福利一区| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 国产精品免费视频内射| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 曰老女人黄片| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 香蕉国产在线看| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 久久久久国产网址| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 视频区图区小说| 精品酒店卫生间| 婷婷成人精品国产| 亚洲av福利一区| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 最黄视频免费看| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 在线天堂中文资源库| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 美国免费a级毛片| 大码成人一级视频| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 亚洲国产看品久久| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 最黄视频免费看| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 美女午夜性视频免费| 中国国产av一级| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 有码 亚洲区| 成人国产麻豆网| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 日本wwww免费看| 日本av免费视频播放| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看 | 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 考比视频在线观看| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 欧美日韩精品网址| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 免费观看性生交大片5| 多毛熟女@视频| 亚洲综合色惰| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 黄色配什么色好看| 亚洲第一青青草原| 久久久欧美国产精品| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 不卡av一区二区三区| 日韩免费高清中文字幕av| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| av国产精品久久久久影院| 国产亚洲最大av| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 国产精品免费大片| 午夜久久久在线观看| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产精品.久久久| 国产在线免费精品| 捣出白浆h1v1| 欧美+日韩+精品| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 久久av网站| 久久av网站| 熟女av电影| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 捣出白浆h1v1| 国产精品.久久久| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区 | 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 另类亚洲欧美激情| 国产在线免费精品| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| a级毛片在线看网站| 亚洲国产av新网站| 有码 亚洲区| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 一区二区三区激情视频| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 国产色婷婷99| 宅男免费午夜| 五月开心婷婷网| 国产在线视频一区二区| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 成人手机av| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 久久久久国产网址| 黄色配什么色好看| 久久99一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品999| 1024香蕉在线观看| av在线app专区| 老女人水多毛片| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 一级爰片在线观看| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| www.av在线官网国产| 国产在线免费精品| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 久久99精品国语久久久| av片东京热男人的天堂| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 久久久精品免费免费高清| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 中文欧美无线码| 久久久久久伊人网av| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 天天影视国产精品| 亚洲精品一二三| 在线天堂最新版资源| 一级片免费观看大全| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 久久久精品94久久精品| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 在现免费观看毛片| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 大香蕉久久成人网| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 1024视频免费在线观看| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 大香蕉久久成人网| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 一区福利在线观看| 18在线观看网站| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 国产成人aa在线观看| h视频一区二区三区| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 婷婷成人精品国产| 欧美+日韩+精品| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 国产成人91sexporn| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 满18在线观看网站| a级毛片在线看网站| 色哟哟·www| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 亚洲av.av天堂| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 国产av国产精品国产| 日本91视频免费播放| 国产成人精品无人区| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 777米奇影视久久| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 五月开心婷婷网| 一级片'在线观看视频| 三级国产精品片| 欧美97在线视频| 麻豆av在线久日| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 欧美日韩av久久| 捣出白浆h1v1| 一级毛片 在线播放| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 黄片小视频在线播放| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 超色免费av| 久久久久视频综合| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 制服人妻中文乱码| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 熟女av电影| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 久久这里只有精品19| 三级国产精品片| 国产成人一区二区在线| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 色播在线永久视频| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 日韩中字成人| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 宅男免费午夜| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 国产av国产精品国产| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 亚洲综合色网址| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 一级毛片 在线播放| 国产视频首页在线观看| 国产精品免费视频内射| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆 | 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 在线 av 中文字幕| 日本欧美视频一区| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 超碰成人久久| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 久久狼人影院| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| a 毛片基地| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 中国国产av一级| 国产一级毛片在线| 香蕉丝袜av| 精品久久久久久电影网| 不卡av一区二区三区| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 午夜久久久在线观看| 飞空精品影院首页| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 国产成人精品一,二区| 免费人妻精品一区二区三区视频| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 黄色 视频免费看| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 99热网站在线观看| 咕卡用的链子| 香蕉精品网在线| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 性色avwww在线观看| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 精品视频人人做人人爽| 国产 一区精品| 两个人看的免费小视频| 乱人伦中国视频| 91国产中文字幕| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 七月丁香在线播放| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 久久久久久人妻| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 日本午夜av视频| av不卡在线播放| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 亚洲成色77777| 久久热在线av| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 18+在线观看网站| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 老司机影院毛片| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 久久99一区二区三区| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 久久久欧美国产精品| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区 | 少妇 在线观看| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 午夜av观看不卡| 欧美日韩精品网址| 人妻一区二区av| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 999精品在线视频| 男女免费视频国产| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 日韩中字成人| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 免费av中文字幕在线| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 国产一级毛片在线| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 综合色丁香网| 天天影视国产精品| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| a 毛片基地| 色94色欧美一区二区| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 亚洲综合色惰| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 亚洲国产av新网站| 老熟女久久久| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 天堂8中文在线网| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 久久青草综合色| 国产又爽黄色视频| 观看av在线不卡| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| av片东京热男人的天堂| 999久久久国产精品视频| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 人人澡人人妻人| 免费看不卡的av| 午夜日本视频在线| 久久久久网色| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 热re99久久国产66热| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 国产麻豆69| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 老司机影院毛片| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| av国产精品久久久久影院| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 嫩草影院入口| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| xxx大片免费视频| 一个人免费看片子| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 久热久热在线精品观看| 国产精品无大码| 久热久热在线精品观看| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 三级国产精品片| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区 | 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 咕卡用的链子| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 91成人精品电影| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 日本午夜av视频| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 亚洲人成电影观看| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 国产视频首页在线观看| 日日啪夜夜爽| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| a级毛片黄视频| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 欧美成人午夜精品| 国产 一区精品| 国产乱来视频区| 少妇人妻 视频| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 中国国产av一级| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| xxx大片免费视频| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 亚洲精品一二三| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 国产精品无大码| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 免费人妻精品一区二区三区视频| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 我的亚洲天堂| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 日本午夜av视频| 蜜桃国产av成人99| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 成年动漫av网址| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 欧美日韩av久久| 只有这里有精品99| 青春草国产在线视频| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 性色av一级|