luise giani, university of oldenburg - sbcs · 2016-11-18 · frequency cm-1 assignment site of...
Post on 27-May-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Europes´ „Terra Pretas“?:
Plaggic Anthrosols –Plagganthrepts
Luise Giani, University of Oldenburg
Plaggic Anthrosols of Northwest Germany
(Photo: Gehrt)(Photo: Heinemann)
Plaggic Anthrosols or Plagganthrepts are terristical anthropogenic soils that have been modified
profoundly through human activities, consequently being „Cultoslols“. The anthropogenic part
buries the original soil. The anthropogenic genesis is related to the plaggen fertilisation system.
According to the German systematics Plaggic Anthrosols must
have a plaggic horizon > 40 cm depths. The characteristic
horizon combination is Ah/E/II…
According to the US Keys to Soil Taxonomy Plagganthrepts must
have a plaggen epipedon > 50 cm depths containing artefacts (not
anymore existing in actual edition 2014).
According to WRB Plaggic Anthrosols must have a Plaggic horizon
50 cm depths, containing artefacts, having textures of sand to
loam, Munsell colours with values of 4 or less (moist) or 5 (dry)
and chroma of 2 or less (moist), Corg is 0.6 % or more, base
saturation of < 50 %, P2O5 content (cidric soluble) > 250 mg kg-1,
occuring in locally raised land surfaces;
Criteria insufficient to distinguish from a Pretic horizon.
(drawn by Thierer in Höke et al., 2008)
Plaggen Management in North-West Europe
(Giani et al., 2014)
Plaggen Management in Norway
(Kvamme et al., 2004 in Eiter, 2010)
(Bt. 2715 Rastede, Oldenburger Vogteikarte 1790 (1:25000))
Distribution of Plaggic Anthrosols around the
Village of Rastede, North-west Germany
(Handrißzeichnung (Ausschnitt) 1845, Flur XXXII, (1:30000))
Partitioning of the Plaggic Anthrosol area „Hankhauser Esch“
Horizon Grain size distribution (%) pH . c. sand m. sand f. sand c. silt m. f. silt clay H2 O
1.1 Ap 2,3 29,0 54,0 6,7 2,9 5,1 5,2
1.2 E 0,7 51,7 34,4 5,9 2,7 4,8 4,8
1.3 II f Ae + Bh +Bs 0,5 24,8 62,5 6,5 2,2 3,7 4,9
1.4 Go 1,3 26,5 64,9 4,7 0,5 2,2 5,2
1.5 Go 0,5 29,8 64,1 4,0 0,4 1,4 5,2
1.6 Gr 0,5 31,7 65,4 2,2 0,1 0,2 5,5
Horizon Corg N C/N BS CEC P t Pc % % % cmolc kg mg kg
-1 mg kg
-1
1.1 Ap 2,5 0,26 9,5 19,4 10,9 1153 586
1.2 E 2,86 0,1 28,6 13,3 12,2 699 262
1.3 II f Ae + Bh +Bs 2,38 n.n n.n 6,9 13,6 518 235
1.4 Go 0,6 n.n n.n 4,1 4,4 291 12
1.5 Go 0 n.n n.n 8,8 1,6 117 41
1.6 Gr n.n n.n n.n 49,1 1,1 34 16
Selected Soil Properties of a characteristic Plaggic Anthrosol
(Bloherfelder Anger, Oldenburg, North-west Germany
(Giani et al., 2014)
Plaggic Anthrosol with Ditch System (Cross
Section) (Markhausen, Lkr. Cloppenburg)
Plaggic Anthrosol with Ditch System (Cross
Section) (Bloherfelder Anger, Oldenburg)
Part of a Ditch system below a Plaggic Anthrosol site
(Bloherfelder Anger, Oldenburg, Germany)
(Petrick 2009)
Whole Ditch system below of the Plaggic
Anthrosol site „Bloherfelder Anger“
Distibution of Plaggic Anthrosols in Europe
Plaggic Anthrosols of Norway
(Eiter, 2010)
� pH varied between 5.2 - 6.4 (H2O) and 4.3 – 5.3 (CaCl2)
� Organic carbon (Corg) concents ranged betweem 6.3 -51.6 g kg-1
� Nitrogen (N) concentrations varied between 0 – 2.9 g kg-1
� C/N ratios were between 20 – 30
� Cation excange capacity (CEC) showed a maximum of 30.1 cmolc kg-1
�Base saturation was mostly less than 50 %
� Excceeding high phosphorus (P) concentrations of up to 3,097 mg kg-1
total P and 1177 mg kg-1 citric soluble P
� Artefacts like fragments of pottery, bricks and charcoal were found
Selected properties of Norways´ Plaggic Anthrols
(Plaggic Epipedons)
(Schnepel et al., 2014)
Plaggic Anthrosols of Russia
No. Horizon Grani size disrtibution (%) Phytoliths
c. sand m. sand f. sand c. silt m.f. silt clay %
1.1.1 Ap 0.5 4.0 72.6 14.3 5.1 3.6 7.7a
1.1.2 E1 0.4 3.7 71.1 15.5 5.3 4.1 8.2a
1.2 E2 0.5 4.0 70.7 16.7 5.2 3.1 9.8a
1.3 E3 0.3 3.0 69.6 19.1 5.6 2.6 5.3a
1.4 II f Ae 0.2 2.1 66.0 24.0 6.6 1.0 1.7a
1.5 Sw Bs 0.6 2.3 81.8 9.9 2.2 3.1 n.d.
1.6 Sw 0.2 1.9 80.4 11.9 2.3 3.5 n.d.
No. Horizon pH Corg
N C/N CEC Pt Pc
H2O % % cmolc kg-1 mg kg-1 mg kg-1
1.1.1 Ap 6.9 37.1 2.7 14 11.2 1343.9 758.9
1.1.2 E1 6.8 28.3 2.3 12 9.5 1412.2 791.3
1.2 E2 6.7 20.6 1.8 12 7.6 1158.6 583.4
1.3 E3 6.8 14.9 1.3 12 5.6 864.3 456.4
1.4 II f Ae 6.8 5.2 0.7 7 1.5 123.9 58.1
1.5 Sw Bs 6.8 8.8 1.1 8 4.0 501.3 162.6
1.6 Sw 6.5 5.2 0.9 6 2.9 271.4 142.7
Selected Soil Properties of a Plaggic Anthrosol of Arkhangels, Russia
(Hubbe et al., 2007)
Frequency
cm-1 Assignment
Site of investigation
Densityfraction
d < 2 g cm-3
,%
Densityfraction
d > 2 g cm-3
,%
Oldenburg 34.9 20.9
Arkhangelsk 37.5 19.6
St. Petersburg 33.1 10.1
Oldenburg 15.2 13.3
Arkhangelsk 7.5 3.0
St. Petersburg 7.7 1.9
Oldenburg 10.0 8.6
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
Oldenburg 9.2
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
Oldenburg 10.7 10.7
Arkhangelsk 21.1 10.8
St. Petersburg 16.6 6.9
Oldenburg
Arkhangelsk 3.2
St. Petersburg 0.8
Oldenburg 6.5
Arkhangelsk 7.1
St. Petersburg 4.7
Oldenburg 22.9 36.4
Arkhangelsk 28.3 61.2St. Petersburg 45.9 80.2
Oldenburg 0.6 0.8
Arkhangelsk 2.8 3.7
St. Petersburg 2.2 3.7
Oldenburg 1.1
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
OH-stretching3400
1380OH deformation
and C-O stretchingof phenolic OH
C=O-stretchingof COOH, aldehydes and
ketons1720
The amide II band1530
Aliphatic C-H stretching2920
Aromatic C=C stretching,
COO-symmetric stretching
1620
Aliphatic C-H stretching2850
Oxidizing level1620/1720
Polysaccharidesand Si-O of
silicate impurity1030
Index of aromaticity1620/2920
Frequency
cm-1 Assignment
Site of investigation
Densityfraction
d < 2 g cm-3
,%
Densityfraction
d > 2 g cm-3
,%
Oldenburg 34.9 20.9
Arkhangelsk 37.5 19.6
St. Petersburg 33.1 10.1
Oldenburg 15.2 13.3
Arkhangelsk 7.5 3.0
St. Petersburg 7.7 1.9
Oldenburg 10.0 8.6
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
Oldenburg 9.2
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
Oldenburg 10.7 10.7
Arkhangelsk 21.1 10.8
St. Petersburg 16.6 6.9
Oldenburg
Arkhangelsk 3.2
St. Petersburg 0.8
Oldenburg 6.5
Arkhangelsk 7.1
St. Petersburg 4.7
Oldenburg 22.9 36.4
Arkhangelsk 28.3 61.2St. Petersburg 45.9 80.2
Oldenburg 0.6 0.8
Arkhangelsk 2.8 3.7
St. Petersburg 2.2 3.7
Oldenburg 1.1
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
OH-stretching3400
1380OH deformation
and C-O stretchingof phenolic OH
C=O-stretchingof COOH, aldehydes and
ketons1720
The amide II band1530
Aliphatic C-H stretching2920
Aromatic C=C stretching,
COO-symmetric stretching
1620
Aliphatic C-H stretching2850
Oxidizing level1620/1720
Polysaccharidesand Si-O of
silicate impurity1030
Index of aromaticity1620/2920
Frequency
cm-1 Assignment
Site of investigation
Densityfraction
d < 2 g cm-3
,%
Densityfraction
d > 2 g cm-3
,%
Oldenburg 34.9 20.9
Arkhangelsk 37.5 19.6
St. Petersburg 33.1 10.1
Oldenburg 15.2 13.3
Arkhangelsk 7.5 3.0
St. Petersburg 7.7 1.9
Oldenburg 10.0 8.6
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
Oldenburg 9.2
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
Oldenburg 10.7 10.7
Arkhangelsk 21.1 10.8
St. Petersburg 16.6 6.9
Oldenburg
Arkhangelsk 3.2
St. Petersburg 0.8
Oldenburg 6.5
Arkhangelsk 7.1
St. Petersburg 4.7
Oldenburg 22.9 36.4
Arkhangelsk 28.3 61.2St. Petersburg 45.9 80.2
Oldenburg 0.6 0.8
Arkhangelsk 2.8 3.7
St. Petersburg 2.2 3.7
Oldenburg 1.1
Arkhangelsk
St. Petersburg
OH-stretching3400
1380OH deformation
and C-O stretchingof phenolic OH
C=O-stretchingof COOH, aldehydes and
ketons1720
The amide II band1530
Aliphatic C-H stretching2920
Aromatic C=C stretching,
COO-symmetric stretching
1620
Aliphatic C-H stretching2850
Oxidizing level1620/1720
Polysaccharidesand Si-O of
silicate impurity1030
Index of aromaticity1620/2920
Functional groups composition in %
Obtained by IR spectroscopy in the
density fractions (d < 2 g cm-3 and
d > 2 g cm-3) in the studied Plaggic
Anthrosols of Oldenburg,
Arkhangelsk and St.Petersburg
(data are arithmetic means of all
depth epipedon samples)(Kalinina & Giani, 2005)
Similarites and differences between the Norways´, Russias´and those of Germany / Netherlands
Differences Similarities
Geology Corg enrichment
pH Anthropogenic admixtures
Base saturation P enrichment
Start of plaggen fertilisation Phytolit enrichment
Duration of plaggen fertilisation Lack of bedding materials
Kind of plaggen material Fertilisation with organo-earthy
matter from non-arable lands
(Giani et al., 2004, Hubbe et al., 2007)
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
(Glaser et al, 2001) (Foto: Gehrt)
Anthropogenic genesis
Morphological similarities
Difficulties in separation according WRB (exchangeable Ca + Mg, P)
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
(Glaser et al, 2001) (Foto: Gehrt)
Citation WRB (2014): „It cannot be excluded that a Pretic horizon fulfils also
criteria of a Plaggic horizon (and vice a verse)…Soil scientist should use
historical knowledge for making field decision…“
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
(Glaser et al, 2001) (Foto: Gehrt)
C sequestration:
in both about 250 t ha-1 m-1, pedending of horizon thickniss (here calcu-
lated for plaggic epipedon of 70-80 cm)
Carbon sequestration of the soil (1 m depth): 252 t ha-1,
in case of 140 cm plaggig epipedon:500 t ha-1
Carbon sequestration of the soil(1 m depth): 18 t ha-1
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
Carbon sequestration in comparison
to neighouring soils
c d
„Terra Preta“ (a) – Oxisol (b):
approx. 3 fold(Glaser et al., 2001)
Plaggic Anthrosol (c) – Podzol (d):
approx. 10 fold(Giani et al., 2014; Sauer et al. 2007)
Sample
depthTOC N
HCl-
resistant
OC
H2O2-
resistant
OC
HF-
soluble OC
cm
0 -10 21.9 1.2 18.2 49.3 8.2 17.8
10 - 20 19.1 1.0 19.1 61.8 6.8 20.4
20 - 30 17.1 0.7 24.4 57.3 21.0 30.4
30 - 40 26.0 1.4 18.6 53.5 15.0 30.4
40 - 50 26.8 1.3 20.6 62.7 8.2 32.1
50 - 60 25.7 1.1 23.4 63.0 3.5 37.7
60 - 70 20.1 0.8 25.1 59.7 3.5 42.3
0 - 10 25.6 2.2 11.6 64.4 11.3 9.4
10 - 20 22.0 2.1 10.5 54.1 11.4 15.4
20 - 30 19.5 1.8 10.8 64.1 7.2 10.8
30 - 40 20.3 1.9 10.7 50.2 5.9 29.1
40 - 50 10.1 0.5 20.2 62.4 4,9 50.5
0 - 10 25.4 1.5 16.9 65.3 11.4 18.9
10 - 20 24.1 1.3 18.5 74.3 14.5 7.0
20 - 30 22.5 1.3 17.3 74.2 15.0 nf
30 - 40 22.9 1.4 16.4 75.1 13.1 nf
40 - 50 22.5 1.3 17.3 54.2 10.7 nf
Profile 1. Oldenburg
Profile 2. Arkhangelsk
Profile 3. St.Petersburg
C/N
g kg-1 % TOC
Total organic carbon (TOC) and total
nitrogen contents, C/N-ratios, HCl-
resistant organic carbon (OC), H2O2-
resistant OC and HF-soluble OC of
plaggic epipedons Plaggic Anthrosols
of Oldenburg, Arkhangelsk and St.
Petersburg (Kalinina Giani, 2005)
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
Charcoal
„Terra Preta“:
approx. 70 fold (in comp. to Oxis.)
approx. 20 % of total C(Glaser et al., 2001)
Plaggic Anthrosol:
about 10 % of total C(at least even less)
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
(Glaser et al, 2001)
C Stability?
C Sustainability?
C Degradation following land use change?
pH, TOC, N and C/N ratios of two Plaggic
Anthrosol (Oldenburg site (agricultural used),
forest Rastede site (formerly agricultural used))
(Kalinina , 2006)
Sample
depth
Horizon pHTOC N
C/N
cm denom. KCl g kg-1
Profile 1 Oldenburg
0 -10 Ah 4.5 21.9 1.2 18.2
10 - 20 E1 4.2 19.1 1.0 19.1
20 - 30 E2 4.2 17.1 0.7 24.4
30 - 40 E3 4.8 26.0 1.4 18.6
40 - 50IIfAhe+Bh
s4.9 26.8
1.3 20.6
50 - 60 Bs 4.9 25.7 1.1 23.4
60 - 70 C 4.9 20.1 0.8 25.1
Profil 2 Rastede
0 - 10 Ahe 2.7 142.5 4.6 31.0
10 - 20 E1 2.8 26.6 0.3 88.7
20 - 30 E2 3.5 19.8 0.1 nd
30 - 40 E3 4.6 16.9 nf nd
Profile Oldenburg (top soil)
0
20
40
60
0
10
20
30
0
10
20
30
Profile Rastede ( 0-12 cm depth)
0
20
40
60
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
10
20
30
40
Profile Rastede (12-42 cmdepth)
0
20
40
60
0
10
20
30
0
10
20
30
c,msand f sand c silt m silt f silt clay
Grain size distribution (dotted, %
mass) and OC content (white, %
mass) and C/N ratios of the grain
size fractions of two Plaggic
Anthrosol (Oldenburg site
(agricultural used), forest Rastede
site (formerly agricultural used))(Kalinina, 2006)
Are Plaggic Anthrosols Europeans´ „Terra Pretas“?
(Glaser et al, 2001)
Conclusion. Allthough Terra Pretas and Plaggic Anthrosol show al lot of
Similarities, they differ in respect of Degradation:
To give more insight; further investigations are requested
Co working collegues:
Olga KalininaSergey Goryachkin
Dimitri LyuriOleg ChertovAlicia Hubbe
Irena NajdenkoNina KaravaevaCarolin Stasch
Thank you very much for your attention!With a view on the German coast
References:
Giani, L., O. Chertov, C. Gebhardt, O. Kalinina, M. Nadporozhskaya & E. Tolksdorf-Lienemann (2004):
Plagganthrepts in northwest Russia? Genesis, morphology and properties. Geoderma121, 113-122.
Glaser, B., L. Haumaier, G. Guggenberger & W. Zech (2001): The „Terra Preta“ phenomenon:
a model for sustainable agricuture in the humid tropis. Naturwissenschaften 88, 37-41.
Kalinina, O. & L. Giani (2005): Charakterisierung der organischen Substanz in Plaggeneschen
Nordwesteuropas, Nordwest- und Nordrusslands. Mitt. Dtsch. Bodenk. Ges., 107, 683-684.
Kalinina, O. (2006): Degradation von Plaggeneschen und Konsequenzen für ihre ökologische Bewertung.
Mitt. Dtsch. Bodenk. Ges. 108, 105-106.
Hubbe, A., O.Chertov, O. Kalinina, M. Nadporozhskaya, E. Tolksdorf-Lienemann & L. Giani (2007):
Evidence of Plaggen Soils in European North Russia (Arkhangelsk Region). J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 170,
329-334.Petrick, B. (2009): Technischer Grabungsbericht, nld. Niedersachsen.
Eiter, S. (2010):Indications of Plaggic Anthrosol in Norway: an overview. Project seminar, University of Bergen.
Giani, L., L. Makowski & K. Mueller (2014): Plaggenesch: Soil of the Year 2013 in Germany. A review onits formation, distribution, classification, function and threats. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 177, 320-329.
Schnepel, C., K. Potthoff, S. Eiter & L. Giani (2014): Evidence of plaggen soils in South-West Norway.J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 177, 638-645.
Co working collegues:
Olga KalininaSergey Goryachkin
Dimitri LyuriOleg ChertovAlicia Hubbe
Irena NajdenkoNina KaravaevaCarolin Stasch
Thank you very much for your attention!With a view on the German coast
top related