COMPARISON OF TWO METHODS OF SOIL ORGANIC CARBON DETERMINATION

• Authors: Gabriela Barančíková , Jarmila Makovníková
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Soil organic carbon (SOC) is one of the basic soil parameters which takes part in many biological, chemical and physical soil processes and the SOC is currently considered as a key indicator of soil quality. For this reason determination of the SOC is a part of soil complex monitoring which has been performed in Slovakia since 1993. From 1993 until 2007 the “wet” method of determination of the SOC was used. Since 2008 the “dry” method for determination of the SOC has been applied. The goal of this work has been to evaluate and compare two methods of the SOC determination; the “wet”(Ťiurin method in modification of Nikitin (TN)) and the “dry” determination of the SOC by means of the CN analyser (EA), which was performed on 95 soil samples of topsoil coming from 17 sampling sites with a wide range of the SOC (1–15%). Sampling sites include arable lands and grasslands and represent main soil types and subtypes of Slovakia. On the basis of statistical processing it has been found that in soils with the SOC content up to 3%, differences between two methods are minimal. However, in the case of a higher content of the SOC, the EA method reaches a higher value than the TN method. Obtained data shows that in the case of soil samples with a higher content of the SOC, when changing an analytical method, the PTF function that reduces differences and allows to use all time series monitoring data should be used for the purpose of the tracking trends of the SOC monitoring. Celem pracy było porównanie wyników oznaczania węgla organicznego (SOC) w próbkach gleb dwoma metodami: spalania „na mokro“ (Tiurina) oraz spalania „na sucho“ w autoanalizatorzee CN. Analizowano 95 próbek gleb z 17 miejsc kompleksowego monitoringu gleb Słowacji, o zwawartości węgla organicznego od 1 do 15%. Analiza statystyczna wykazała, że różnice wyników oznaczania SOC dwoma metodami w próbkach o zawarości węgla do 3% nie były istotne statystycznie. Dla próbek o wyższej zawartości SOC, wyniki uzyskane metodą spalania „na sucho“ były istotnie wyższe niż uzyskane metodą Tiurina, dlatego do celów porównawczych zawartości SOC w tych glebach oznaczonych różnymi metodami należy stosować odpowiednie przeliczniki.

Keywords

EN

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
• Journal: Polish Journal of Soil Science
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 48
• Issue: 1

Dates

published

2015

online

09 - 02 - 2016

Contributors

author

Gabriela Barančíková

author

Jarmila Makovníková

References

• [1] Barančíková G., Bezák P., Dodok R., Chlpík, J., Kobza J., Makovníková J., Píš V.: Methods of determining indicators of agrochemical soil properties. [In:] Hrivňáková, K., Makovníková, J. (Eds.): Integrated Procedures of Soil Analyses. VUPOP, Bratislava, 136, 2011.
• [2] Commission of the European Communities: Proposal for a Directive of the European parliament and of the council establishing a framework for the protection of soil amending Directive 2004/35/EC, Brussels, 2006.
• [3] Fiala K., Barančíková G., Brečková V., Búrik V., Houšková B., Chomaničová A., Kobza J., Litavec T., Makovníková J., Matúšková L., Pechová B., Váradiová D.: Partial Monitoring System – Soil. Relevant Methods. VUPOP, Bratislava,135,1999.
• [4] Hansen H.C.B., Kobza J., Schmidt R., Szákal P., Borgaard O.K., Holm P.E., Kanianska R., Bognarova S., Makovníková J., Matúšková L, Mičuda R., Styk J.: Environmental Soil Chemistry. Univerzita Mateja Bela, Banská Bystrica, 2001.
• [5] Kobza J., Barančíková G., Čumová L., Dodok R., Hrivňáková K., Makovníková J., Náčiniaková-Bezáková Z., Pálka B., Pavlenda P., Schlosserová J., Širáň M., Tóthová G.: Soil Monitoring of the Slovak Republic. Actual state and development of monitoring soil properties as the basis for their protection and land use (2007–2012). VUPOP, Bratislava. 251, 2014.
• [6] Kononova M.M.: Soil Organic Matter. Izdatelstovo Akademiji Nauk, Moskva, 312, 1963.
• [7] Lettens S., De Vos B., Quataert P., Van Wesemael B., Muys B., Van Orshoven J.: Eur. J. Soil Sci., 58, 1244, 2007.
• [8] Makovníková J. Barančíková G. : Agrochemia, 8, 27, 2004.
• [9] Meersmans J., Van Wesemael B., Van Molle M.: Soil Use Management, 25, 346, 2009.
• [10] Meloun M., J. Militký J.: Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data. Academia, Praha, 953, 2004.
• [11] Ogle M.S. , Paustian K. : Can. J. Soil Sci., 85, 531, 2005.
• [12] Pansu M., Gautheyrou J. : Handbook of Soil Analysis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 993, 2006.
• [13] Sotáková S.: Organic Matter and Soil Fertility. Príroda, Bratislava, 234, 1982.
• [14] Stolbovoy V., Montanarella L. : Application of soil organic carbon status indicators for policy-decision making in the EU. [In:] Toth, G., Montanarella, L., Rusco, E. (eds.): Threats to Soil Quality in Europe. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports, 87, 2008.
• [15] Walkley A., Black I.A.: Soil Sci., 37, 29, 1934.

Identifiers

DOI

10.17951/pjss.2015.48.1.47