تأثیر مواد نفتی و هوادیدگی فیزیکی بر آب گریزی و ویژگی های هیدرولیکی دو خاک لوم شنی و لوم رسی

نویسندگان

1 گروه علوم خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد اصفهان (خوراسگان)، اصفهان، ایران

2 گروه علوم خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه صنعتی اصفهان، اصفهان

3 گروه علوم خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه بوعلی‌سینا، همدان، ایران

4 دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه صنعتی اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران

چکیده

در این پژوهش تأثیر مواد نفتی و هوادیدگی فیزیکی بر آب‌گریزی و ویژگی‌های هیدرولیکی دو خاک لوم شنی و لوم رسی بررسی شد. خاک‌ها با سه سطح مواد نفتی (0، 5/0 و 1%) و با دو شرایط ساختمانی خاک (دست‌خورده و هوادیده فیزیکی) تیمار شدند. سپس آب‌گریزی خاک به روش زمان نفوذ قطره آب (WDPT)، و منحنی مشخصه رطوبتی و هدایت هیدرولیکی اشباع خاک در تیمارهای آزمایشی اندازه‌گیری شد. داده‌های منحنی مشخصه رطوبتی خاک با معادله ون‌گنوختن مدل‌سازی شد. نتایج نشان داد به دلیل افزایش آب‌گریزی (WDPT) در اثر افزودن مواد نفتی، نگهداشت آب خاک کاهش یافت. با افزایش درجه آب‌گریزی خاک (ناشی از افزودن نفت)، هدایت هیدرولیکی اشباع (K_S) (از مقدار 98/7 در شاهد به cm h-1 64/5 در تیمار 1%) و رطوبت اشباع (θ_s) (از مقدار 547/0 در شاهد به cm3 cm-3 457/0 در تیمار 1%) و رطوبت باقی‌مانده (θ_r) (از مقدار 122/0 در شاهد به cm3 cm-3 112/0 در تیمار 1%) کاهش معنی‌داری یافته و پارامترهای مقیاس () (از مقدار 130/0 در شاهد به cm-1 240/0 در تیمار 1%) و شکل (n) (از مقدار 36/1 در شاهد به 56/1 در تیمار 1%) افزایش معنی‌داری یافتند. هیدروکربن‌های نفتی سبب کاهش آب فراهم خاک برای گیاه (از مقدار 084/0 در شاهد به cm3 cm-3 049/0 در تیمار 1%) شدند. درجه آب‌گریزی (WDPT) در خاک هوادیده فیزیکی (s 2/30) نسبت به خاک دست‌خورده (s 9/23) به طور معنی‌داری بیش‌تر بود. نتایج این پژوهش در مدیریت خاک‌های آلوده به نفت در شرایط مختلف (بافت و ساختمان خاک) قابل استفاده خواهد بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Impact of Oil Contamination and Physical Weathering on Water Repellency and Hydraulic Properties of Sandy Loam and Clay Loam Soils

نویسندگان [English]

  • Azam Moradi 1
  • Mohammad Reza Mosaddeghi 2
  • Elham Chavoshi 1
  • Azadeh Safadoust 3
  • Mohsen Soleimani 4
1 Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
3 Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamadan 65174, Iran
4 Department of Natural Resources, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and Objectives: Soil and groundwater contamination by petroleum hydrocarbons might cause negative environmental impacts. It may adversely affect soil physical conditions and quality such as hydraulic properties via raising soil water repellency. Soil structure is an important physical characteristic depending on pore size distribution and continuity, and it can affect several soil physical and chemical processes. Soil structure might be affected by physical weathering processes such as wetting/drying and freezing/thawing cycles. It is possible to reproduce the natural soil structure in the laboratory by imposing wetting/drying and freezing/thawing cycles on the repacked soil samples. This would minimize the possible changes in soil structure during core sampling from the field. Few studies have been conducted about the interactive effect of oil contamination, soil texture and structure on soil water repellency and hydraulic properties. The present study aims to investigate the interaction effects of crude oil application, soil texture and weathering-induced structure on soil water repellency and hydraulic properties.
Methodology: In this study, the effect of crude oil application and physical weathering on water repellency and hydraulic properties of two soils (sandy loam and clay loam) was studied in a factorial experiment of completely randomized design with three replicates. Soil samples were collected from 025 cm layer of agricultural lands in Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari province, central Iran (sandy loam and clay loam soils were located in 32° 43' N 51° 59' E and 32° 29' N 50° 42' E, respectively). The soil was ground and sieved through a 4-mm mesh to exclude the gravel particles and plant residues. Crude oil was solved in the n-hexane and added to soil with the concentrations of 0.5 and 1 %w/w of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs). Besides, a control without crude oil addition was included in the experiment. The treated soils were then poured into stainless cylinders (height and diameter of 5 cm) and packed to natural bulk density of 1.45 and 1.43 g cm-3 for sandy loam and clay loam soils, respectively. Half of the prepared soil samples were tested immediately and named “repacked” treatment and the rest wetted and dried for five months under normal conditions in the greenhouse and was named “physical weathering” treatment. Thus, a total of 36 soil samples were prepared (2 soil types × 3 levels of water repellency × 2 weathering treatments × 3 replicates). Then, water repellency was determined by water drop pentetration time (WDPT) on the treated soil cores. Soil water characteristic curve and saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) were measured on the soil cores and modeled by van Genuchten equation. Soil physical quality indicators including field capacity (FC), permanent wilting point (PWP), available water colntent (AWC), macroporosity (Macro-P), mesoporosity (Meso-P), microporosity (Micro-P), and Dexter’s index for soil physical quality (SDexter) were calculated as well.
Findings: The results showed that soil hydraulic properties were significantly affected by the experimental treatments. Water retention was greater in the clay loam soil compared to the sandy loam soil. Oil contamination reduced soil water retention at all matric suctions (0 to 15000 cm) due to oil-induced water repellency and soil resistance against wetting (as observed by an increment in WDPT). The effect of oil contamination on water retention was greated in the sandy loam soil than in the clay loam soil due to lower specific surface area of coarse-textured soils. The Ks, saturated water content (s) and residual water content (r) decreased, and scaling () and shape (n) parameters increased significantly due to oil-induced water repellency. The Ks of 1% TPHs-treated samples (i.e., 5.64 cm h-1) was significantly lower than that of control (i.e., 7.98 cm h-1). The s and r significantly decreased by 1% oil contamination (i.e., 0.457 and 0.112 cm3 cm-3) compared to the control (i.e., 0.547 and 0.122 cm3 cm-3), respectively. However, the parameters  and n were significantly greater in the 1% TPHs-treated samples (i.e., 0.240 cm-1 and 1.56) compared to the control (i.e., 0.130 cm-1 and 1.36), respectively. Physical weathering significantly increased s. The The Ks and Macro-P were significantly greater in the sandy loam soil whereas the Meso-P and Micro-P were significantly greater in the clay loam soil. The FC, PWP and AWC were significantly greater in the clay loam soil than in the sandy loam soil. The FC, PWP, Meso-P and Micro-P decreased but the Macro-P and SDexter increased in the oil-contaminated soil samples. The AWC significantly decreased from 0.084 (control) to 0.049 cm3 cm-3 due to 1% oil contamination. Physical weathering intensified the oil-induced water repellency (i.e., an incement in WDPT from 23.9 in repacked soil to 30.2 s in weathered soil), and reduced water retention in the sandy loam soil more than in the clay loam soil. The Ks, Macro-P and Micro-P were significantly greater in the weathered soil samples than in the repacked ones.
Conclusion: As coarse-textured soils with low specific surface area are more prone to water repellency compared to fine-textured soils, they became water-repellent quicker upon physical weathering. It seems that physical weathering stimulated soil structure formation and intensified the oil-induced water repellency. The findings of this study are important for the management of oil contamination in different soil (texture and structure) conditions.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Scaling parameter
  • Shape parameter
  • Soil water characteristic curve
  • Soil water repellency
  • van Genuchten model
Adams RH, Osorio FG and Cruz JZ, 2008. Water repellency in oil contaminated sandy and clayey soils. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 5: 445–454.
Arcenegui V, Mataix-Solera J, Gueuero C, Zomoza R, Malaix-Beneyto J and Garcia-Orenes F, 2008. Intermediate effects of wildfires on water repellency and aggregate stability in Mediterranean calcareous soils. Catena 74: 219–226.
Bauters TWJ, Steenhuis TS, Dicarlo DA, Nieber JL, Dekker LW, Ritsema CJ, Parlange JY and Haverkamp R 2000. Physics of water repellent soils. Journal of Hydrology 231-232 : 233–243.
Black GR, 1986. Bulk density. Pp. 374–380 In: Klute A, (Ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods. American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America, Agronomy Monograph 9, 2nd Ed., Madison, WI.
Blackwell PS, 2000. Management of water repellency in Australia, and risks associated with preferential flow, pesticide concentration and leaching. Journal of Hydrology 231–232: 384–395.
Caravaca F and Rolda'n A, 2003. Assessing changes in physical and biological properties in a soil contaminated by oil sludges under semiarid Mediterranean conditions. Geoderma 117: 53–61.
Clement CR, 1966. A simple and reliable tension table. Soil Science 17: 133–135.
Clothier BE, 2004. Soil pores. Pp. 693–699 In: Chesworth W, (Ed.) Encyclopaedia of Soil Science. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
DeBano FL, 1981. Water Repellent Soils: A State of the Art. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, General Technical, Report (PSW-46).
Dekker LW and Jungerius PD, 1990. Water repellency in the dunes with special reference to The Netherlands. Catena 18: 173–183.
Dexter AR, 2004a. Soil physical quality. Part I: Theory, effects of soil texture, density, and organic matter, and effects on root growth. Geoderma 120: 201–214.
Dexter AR, 2004b. Soil physical quality. Part III: Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity and general conclusions about S-theory. Geoderma 120: 227–239.
Diamanntopoulos E, Durner W, Reszkowska A and Bachmann J. 2013. Effect of soil water repellency on soil Hydraulic properties estimated under dynamic conditions. Journal of Hydrology 486: 175–186.
Doerr SH, Ritsema CJ, Dekker  LW, Scott DF and Carter  D,  2007. Water repellence of soils: new insights and emerging research needs. Hydrological Processes 21: 2223–2228.
Doerr SH, Shakesby RA and Walsh RPD, 2000. Soil water repellency: its causes, characteristics and hydro-geomorphological significance. Earth-Science Reviews 51(1–4): 33–65.
Durner W and Flühler H, 2005. Soil hydraulic properties. Pp. 1089–1102 In: Anderson. MG, McDonnell J, (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
Gee GW and Bauder JW, 1986. Particles size analysis. Pp. 383–411 In: Klute A, (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods. American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America, Agronomy Monograph 9, 2nd Ed., Madison, WI.
Goebel MO, Bachmann J, Reichstein M and Janssens IA, 2011. Soil water repellency and its implications for organic matter decomposition- is there a link to extreme climatic events? Global Change Biology 17: 2640–2656.
Hewelke E and Gozdowski D, 2020. Hydrophysical properties of sandy clay contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbon. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 27: 9697–9706.
Hubbert KR, Busse M, Overby S, Shestak C and Gerrard R, 2015. Pile burning effects on soil water repellency, infiltration, and downslope water chemistry in the Lake Tahoe Basin, USA. Fire Ecology. 11: 100–118.
Kay BD and Angers DA, 1999. Soil structure. Pp: A229–A276 In: Handbook of Soil Science. Chapter 7. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp: A229–A276.
Kermanpour M, 2014. Effect of petroleum  on soil hydraulic properties, available water and and water repellency in Bakhtiardasht, Isfahan. Master's Thesis in Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology. (In Persian with English abstract)
Kermanpour M and Mosaddeghi MR, 2014. Effect of petroleum pollution of water and soil on  the stability and intensity of soil water repellency in Bakhtiardasht Plain. Journal of Soil Management 3(1): 51–43. (In Persian with English abstract)
Kermanpour M, Mosaddeghi MR, Afyuni M and Hajabassi MA, 2015. Effect of petroleum pollution on soil water repellency and structural stability in Bakhtiardasht Plain, Isfahan. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Techniques and Natural Resources, Water and Soil Sciences 19(73): 139–149. (In Persian with English abstract)
Kirkham MB, 2005. Principles of Soil and Plant Water Relations. Elsevier Academic Press, 500 pp.
Klute A, 1986. Water retention: laboratory methods. Pp. 635–662 In: Klute A, (Ed.) Method of Soil Analysis. Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods. American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America, Agronomy Monograph 9, 2nd Ed., Madison, WI.
Lal R and Shukla, MK, 2004. Principles of Soil Physics. Marcel Dekker, USA.
Lamparter A, Deurer M, Bachmann J and Duijnisveld WHM, 2006. Effect of subcritical hydrophobicity in a sandy soil on water infiltration and mobile water content. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 169: 38–46.
Liu H, Ju Z, Bachmann J, Horton R and  Ren T, 2012. Moisture-dependent wettability of artificial hydrophobic soils and its relevance for soil water desorption curves. Soil Science Society of America Journal 76: 342–349.
Moradi A, Mosaddeghi MR, Chavoshi E, Safadoust A and Soleimani M, 2019. Effect of crude oil-induced water repellency on transport of Escherichia coli and bromide through repacked and physically weathered soil columns. Environmental Pollution 255: 113230.
Marín-García DC, Adams RH and Hernández-Barajas R, 2016. Effect of crude petroleum on  water repellency in a clayey alluvial soil. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 13: 55–64.
Newman ACD, and Thomasson AJ, 1979. Rothamsted studies of soil structure. III. Pore size distributions and shrinkage processes. Journal of Soil Science 30: 415–439.
Nourmahnad N, Tabatabei SH, Nouri Imamzadei MH and Ghorbani Dashtaki Sh, 2013. Determining the moisture curve and parameters of the Van Gnouchten equation in hydrophilic and hydrophobic soils due to heat. Soil and Water Sciences 27 (4): 573-582. (In Persian with English abstract)
Page AL, Miller RH and Keeney DR, 1986. Methods of soil Analysis. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America, Agronomy Monograph 9, 2nd Ed., Madison, WI.
Pagliai M, Rousseva S, Vignozzi  N, Piovanelli C, Pellegrini S and Miclaus N, 1998. Tillage impact on soil quality – I. Soil porosity and related physical properties. Italian Journal of Agronomy 2: 11–20.
Pan F, Pachepsky Y, Jacques D, Guber A and Hill RL, 2012. Data assimilation with soil water content sensors and pedotransfer functions in soil water flow modeling. Soil Science Society of America Journal 76(3): 829–844.
Rahimkhani Y, 2012. Efficiency of moisture curve measured with pressure plate device for simulating water movement in hydrophobic soil. Master's Thesis. Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Iran. (In Persian with English abstract)
Rhoades JD, 1996. Salinity electrical conductivity and total dissolved solid. Pp: 417–436 In: Page, AL, Somner, CE and Nelson PW, (Eds.) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3: Chemical Methods. American Society of Agronomy/Soil Science Society of America, Agronomy Monograph 9, 2nd Ed., Madison, WI.
Rowell DL, 1994. Soil Science: Methods and Applications. Longman Group, Harlow, 345 pp.
Roy J L and McGill WB, 2000. Investigation into mechanisms leading to the development, spread and persistence of soil water repellency following contamination by crude oil. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 80(4): 595–606.