• <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

    成人欧美大片| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 有码 亚洲区| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 日本黄大片高清| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 91精品国产九色| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o | 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 国产三级在线视频| 精品午夜福利在线看| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 舔av片在线| 精品久久久久久久久av| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 欧美bdsm另类| 亚洲18禁久久av| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 美女国产视频在线观看| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 麻豆成人av视频| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 国产在视频线在精品| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 禁无遮挡网站| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 69av精品久久久久久| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 日本午夜av视频| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 看黄色毛片网站| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 国产视频内射| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 亚洲成色77777| 搞女人的毛片| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频 | 九九热线精品视视频播放| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 日本五十路高清| 国产高潮美女av| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 亚洲成色77777| 亚洲色图av天堂| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 亚洲在线观看片| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 国产精品永久免费网站| 国产乱来视频区| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 午夜精品在线福利| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 日本免费a在线| 综合色丁香网| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 99热这里只有精品一区| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 国产精品久久视频播放| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 亚洲美女视频黄频| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 国产精品一及| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 久久人妻av系列| av在线老鸭窝| 国产成人精品一,二区| 亚洲在线观看片| 久久久精品大字幕| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 亚洲不卡免费看| 日本三级黄在线观看| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 国产综合懂色| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 高清毛片免费看| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 美女国产视频在线观看| 久久久久久久久大av| 七月丁香在线播放| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 精品久久久久久久久av| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 一夜夜www| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 大香蕉97超碰在线| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 免费看日本二区| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 天堂网av新在线| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频 | 亚州av有码| 免费av毛片视频| av免费观看日本| av国产免费在线观看| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 美女黄网站色视频| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 嫩草影院精品99| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 高清视频免费观看一区二区 | 老女人水多毛片| 天堂网av新在线| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 欧美人与善性xxx| 18+在线观看网站| 欧美日本视频| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 免费av观看视频| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 色网站视频免费| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 永久网站在线| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 精品久久久久久久久av| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 欧美zozozo另类| videossex国产| 国产在视频线精品| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 中文字幕制服av| av卡一久久| 舔av片在线| av视频在线观看入口| 成人无遮挡网站| 一级毛片我不卡| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 一级毛片我不卡| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 午夜久久久久精精品| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 国产色婷婷99| 少妇的逼水好多| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 久久久久国产网址| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片 精品乱码久久久久久99久播 | 精品国产三级普通话版| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 国产精品野战在线观看| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 久久这里只有精品中国| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 久久久久性生活片| 国产在线一区二区三区精 | 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 日本黄大片高清| 深夜a级毛片| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久 | 麻豆一二三区av精品| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| av在线老鸭窝| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 美女黄网站色视频| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 久久6这里有精品| 成年av动漫网址| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 在线观看66精品国产| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 国产毛片a区久久久久| www.色视频.com| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说 | 精品久久久久久成人av| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 国产在视频线在精品| 午夜福利高清视频| 成人无遮挡网站| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 日韩高清综合在线| 91狼人影院| www.色视频.com| 三级国产精品片| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 久久久欧美国产精品| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 99热全是精品| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 在线观看一区二区三区| 久久久久性生活片| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 赤兔流量卡办理| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放 | 亚洲综合色惰| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 久久草成人影院| 亚洲图色成人| 97超碰精品成人国产| 亚洲在线观看片| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 99久久人妻综合| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影 | 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 综合色丁香网| 午夜日本视频在线| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 99热这里只有是精品50| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 亚洲无线观看免费| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 欧美97在线视频| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 美女高潮的动态| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 久久久久久久久中文| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 91精品国产九色| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 午夜精品在线福利| 欧美区成人在线视频| 69人妻影院| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 日韩大片免费观看网站 | 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 欧美性感艳星| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 日韩欧美三级三区| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 1024手机看黄色片| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 国产免费男女视频| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| av专区在线播放| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 亚洲综合精品二区| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 老司机福利观看| 国产色婷婷99| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 日韩大片免费观看网站 | 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 中文天堂在线官网| av在线播放精品| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版 | 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 老女人水多毛片| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 国产视频首页在线观看| 91精品国产九色| 免费观看在线日韩| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 美女大奶头视频| 少妇熟女欧美另类| av在线观看视频网站免费| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 国产高潮美女av| 久久久久网色| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 国产美女午夜福利| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 久久久久九九精品影院| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 九九在线视频观看精品| 国产在视频线精品| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版 | 国产一级毛片在线| 日韩欧美精品v在线| 美女高潮的动态| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 热99re8久久精品国产| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看 | 久久久久久久国产电影| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 日本与韩国留学比较| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o | 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 高清毛片免费看| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| av国产免费在线观看| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 精品午夜福利在线看| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 日韩欧美三级三区| 欧美潮喷喷水| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| kizo精华| 一个人免费在线观看电影| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 六月丁香七月| 免费av不卡在线播放| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花 | 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片 精品乱码久久久久久99久播 | 免费观看的影片在线观看| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 三级毛片av免费| 国产三级中文精品| 美女高潮的动态| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 高清毛片免费看| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 亚洲最大成人av| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 九九在线视频观看精品| 在线免费十八禁| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 嫩草影院入口| 在线播放无遮挡| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠久久av| 精品久久久久久久末码| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 日韩高清综合在线| av福利片在线观看| 国产在视频线精品| ponron亚洲| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 精品久久久久久成人av| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 级片在线观看| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 看片在线看免费视频| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| kizo精华| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 亚洲国产色片| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 欧美日韩在线观看h| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 久久这里只有精品中国| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 少妇的逼好多水| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 天堂网av新在线| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 日韩视频在线欧美| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 美女大奶头视频| av黄色大香蕉| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 亚洲不卡免费看| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 女人久久www免费人成看片 | 久久热精品热| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 天堂中文最新版在线下载 | 亚洲性久久影院| 色综合站精品国产| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 国产在视频线精品| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 久久久国产成人精品二区| av在线观看视频网站免费| 三级国产精品片| 日本与韩国留学比较| 青春草国产在线视频| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 1024手机看黄色片| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 三级国产精品片| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合 | av免费在线看不卡| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 精品久久久久久成人av| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 成人av在线播放网站| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 国产成人91sexporn| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 免费观看性生交大片5| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 99热网站在线观看| 中文资源天堂在线| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 久久精品人妻少妇| 国产在线一区二区三区精 | 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 插逼视频在线观看| 色视频www国产| 亚洲av男天堂| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 久久午夜福利片| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 高清毛片免费看| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 在现免费观看毛片| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 丝袜喷水一区| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 亚洲av一区综合| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| 欧美bdsm另类| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 综合色丁香网| 两个人的视频大全免费| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 高清av免费在线| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 成人av在线播放网站| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久 | 久久99热这里只频精品6学生 | 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 综合色丁香网| 久久热精品热| av黄色大香蕉| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生 | 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 一级av片app| 国产亚洲91精品色在线| 大香蕉久久网| 久久精品夜色国产| av免费在线看不卡| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 草草在线视频免费看| 中文资源天堂在线| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说 | 国产乱来视频区| 黑人高潮一二区| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 亚洲18禁久久av| 国产白丝娇喘喷水9色精品| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看|