<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJSS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Soil Science</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2162-5360</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojss.2015.511024</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJSS-61340</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  An Integrated Geochemical and Mineralogical Approach for the Evaluation of Zn Distribution in Long-Term Sludge-Amended Soil
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ominique</surname><given-names>Proust</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sub>1</sub></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><addr-line>LIENSs UMR 7266 CNRS, La Rochelle, France</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>dominique.proust@univ-lr.fr</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>23</day><month>11</month><year>2015</year></pub-date><volume>05</volume><issue>11</issue><fpage>251</fpage><lpage>265</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>16</day>	<month>October</month>	<year>2015</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>accepted</day>	<month>20</month>	<year>November</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>23</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2015</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  This research work was designed to compare the Zn distribution in a long-term sludge-amended soil with that in a control soil. Two complementary approaches were performed: 1) a geochemical approach at the metric scale of the bulk soil horizons and 2) a mineralogical approach at the micrometric scale of the primary minerals weathering microsites. The geochemical approach revealed that Zn in the control soil was inherited from the weathering parent-rock. Its concentration was always lower than in the amended soil where Zn was supplied at the surface by the spread sludges and moves downwards. The mineralogical approach showed that the clay minerals, produced by the weathering of the primary minerals (amphiboles and plagioclases), or filling the fissure network were made up of smectites (saponite and montmorillonite) at the bottom and kaolinite at the top of the two soil profiles. Each clay mineral, with its specific sorption capacity, controlled the Zn distribution within the soil: the smectites produced by the amphiboles had high sorption capacity and favored Zn retention in the upper horizons of the soil. Conversely, the kaolinites produced by the plagioclases had lower sorption capacity, did not retain Zn in the surface horizons, and allowed it to migrate to deeper horizons where it was sorbed onto the montmorillonites.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Weathering</kwd><kwd> Soil</kwd><kwd> Clay Minerals</kwd><kwd> Heavy Metal</kwd><kwd> Zinc</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body>
<sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>The spreading of sewage sludges onto farmlands can be a beneficial method for soil amendment because the sludges can be a source of plant nutrients (especially N, P) and organic matter. However, much of these sludges results from the treatment of industrial and urban by-products and may contain toxic organic and inorganic compounds. Among the inorganic components, the heavy metals have been critically examined since some of them can be toxic to the biosphere at very low concentrations: for instance, Cd concentration cannot exceed 2 &#181;g・g<sup>−1</sup> for soils to be selected for sludge spreading [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref1">1</xref>] . The origin of the heavy metals in a soil is either geogenic if they are inherited from the weathering of the parent-rock [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref2">2</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref4">4</xref>] , or anthropogenic if they come, among other sources, from contamination by repeated application of inorganic fertilizers [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref5">5</xref>] , sludge spreading [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref6">6</xref>] , and/or diffuse atmospheric contamination [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref7">7</xref>] . One of the most valuable properties of soil as regards sludge-spreading is its ability to absorb and retain the heavy metals ions. The heavy metals adsorption/desorption reactions occur at the soil solid/solution interface and involve especially the clay minerals which are the essential reactive solid components in soils. These clay minerals, with their natural sorptive capacities for heavy metals, are of particular relevance for sludge spreading and have received considerable attention in the last decades [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref8">8</xref>] -[<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref10">10</xref>] .</p><p>The adsorption of heavy metals onto clay minerals operates in particular sites with permanent or variable negative charges [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref11">11</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref12">12</xref>] . The sites with permanent charges are located at the interlayer basal surfaces of the clay minerals and result from the isomorphic substitutions of Al<sup>3+</sup> for Si<sup>4+</sup> in the silica tetrahedral sheet and/or Fe<sup>2+</sup>/Mg<sup>2+</sup> for Al<sup>3+</sup> in the alumina octahedral sheet. These interlayer negative charges are neutralized by pH-in- dependent adsorption of cations as outer-sphere complexes (cation exchange reactions). The sites with variable charges are located at the crystal edge surfaces and originate in the protonation or deprotonation of surface hydroxyl (SOH) groups. These sites promote pH-dependent adsorption attributed to surface complexation reactions with silanol and aluminol groups to form inner-sphere complexes.</p><p>The major part of the clay minerals found in the soils results from the weathering of the parent-rock in two simultaneous processes: i) the dissolution of the primary rock-forming minerals with the release of the cations and the heavy metals; and ii) the crystallization of clay minerals from the soil solutions with the sorption of the previously released heavy metals. Mineralogical studies have shown that the chemical weathering reactions and their associated metals release are active in specific soil microsystems with their own solid and solution chemical properties [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref13">13</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref15">15</xref>] . They are typically micrometric composite aggregates of clay minerals (specific to the primary mineral being weathered), oxihydroxides, and organic matter moistened with soil solutions.</p><p>Up to now, studies dealing with polluted soils described heavy metals contaminations at the soil scale, i.e. in the fine earth (&lt;2 mm) of each soil horizon [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref16">16</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref17">17</xref>] and/or in separated soil fractions, e.g. &lt;2 &#181;m clay fraction or 2 - 50 &#181;m silt fraction [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref18">18</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref19">19</xref>] . These conventional pedological approaches, however, underestimate the influence of the individual soil components, especially the weathering microsystems, upon the adsorption and retention of heavy metals in soils.</p><p>Even though the bulk concentrations of heavy metals can be decisive in assessing global soil pollution, they result from the addition of the partial heavy metals concentrations in each of the weathering microsystems. As a consequence, the detailed analysis of a soil contaminated with heavy metals requires both the knowledge of its bulk metals concentration but also the partial metals contents in the microsystems in which they are retained. By taking advantage of a long-term spreading on soil of highly Zn concentrated sewage sludges (498 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>), this study is undertaken to estimate i) the impact of the sludge application upon Zn distribution and migration in the soil and ii) the influence of the clay mineral species upon Zn retention in the weathering microsystems.</p></sec>
<sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Soil Characteristics</title><p>The soils investigated in this study were selected and sampled during the geological and pedological field survey of the “Saint-jean-Ligoure” diorite massif in Haute-Vienne (Limousin, France), 25 km in the South of Limoges (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). They are inceptisols where wet sewage sludges were deposited during the 90’s, each year for ten years, at an application rate of 2500 kg・ha<sup>−1</sup>・year<sup>−1</sup> with mean Zn concentration of 498 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>. Two soils were sampled on the same dioritic parent-rock: the Amended Soil (AS) that received the sewage sludges for ten years and the Control Soil (CS) that is free of sludge spreading.</p><p>The two soils are moderately drained, deep with the weathered rock found at 100 - 150 cm depth and show the typical A, Bw and C horizons sequence of inceptisols (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(a), <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(b)). The R horizon, i.e. the coherent unweathered parent rock (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(c)), is a diorite which appears to the naked eye as a “salt and pepper” coarse-grained rock made up of major amphiboles, plagioclases, and minor quartz. The two soils have</p><fig id="fig1"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref></label><caption><title> Geological map of the sudied area in the Limousin region, France, and location of the sampled soil profiles; CS:control soil, AS: Amended Soil</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-1660318x6.png"/></fig><fig id="fig2"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref></label><caption><title> Sketch of the soil profiles; (a) Amended Soil (AS); (b) Control Soil (CS); (c) Parent-rock (R horizon); (d) Bulk physico-chemical properties of soils</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-1660318x7.png"/></fig><p>very similar physicochemical properties (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(d)) with slightly acidic to almost neutral pH in all horizons (6.1 - 6.8). The pH values increase with depth, suggesting some leaching of base cations or probably the effect of organic matter with 1.82% to 1.95 % organic carbon content in the A horizons, decreasing to 0.85% - 0.63 % in the Bw horizon and disappearing in the C horizon. The cation exchange capacities of the two soils are similar with medium values ranging between 26.8 and 31.9 cmol・kg<sup>−1</sup>, whereas the clay contents, typical of the clay loam texture observed in the inceptisols, increase slightly in the Bw horizon (cambic horizon).</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Sampling Methods</title><p>Each soil was carefully sampled using plastic cylindrical corers to prevent the soil metal contamination. The cylinder, 10 cm long with a diameter of 10 cm, had cutting edges. It was smoothly and continuously pushed into the soil to collect undisturbed blocks which retained the original soil structure. Each core was divided into two subsamples. The first was disaggregated by gentle shaking in water, sieved to 2 mm, air dried and reserved for the mineral grains separation, the bulk chemical and the X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses.</p><p>The second subsample was preserved undisturbed for thin sections preparation, electron probe microanalyses (EPMA) and scanning electron microscope (SEM) study.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Mineralogical Separation</title><p>The organic matter in the first &lt;2 mm subsample was removed using 33% hydrogen peroxide. 200 grams of this sample were shaken in water to destroy the aggregates, sieved into the sandy fractions 50 - 100 &#181;m, 100 - 150 &#181;m, 150 - 250 &#181;m, 250 - 500 &#181;m, and dried at 50˚C for 24 h. The observation of each sieved fraction under optical microscopy (OM) revealed that most euhedral monomineralic grains were found in the 250 - 500 &#181;m fraction. The smaller sized fractions were made up of broken primary minerals. About 500 monomineralic grains, 250 to 500 &#181;m in size, of amphiboles and plagioclases (the two most important minerals in the parent-rock and soils) were then needle-sorted under the stereomicroscope for the study of their specific weathering products. Separation efficiency was checked by XRD.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Bulk Chemical Analyses</title><p>The bulk chemical analyses were obtained from the first subsample, freed of its organic matter. An aliquot quantity of matter (5 g) was collected by quartering with a riffle splitter and crushed down to less than 50 &#181;m size into agate mortar. 300 mg were taken from the total powder, fused with LiBO<sub>2</sub> at 1050˚C and dissolved in 1N HNO<sub>3</sub> for the bulk chemical analyses. The major and trace elements were analysed using ICP-AES and ICP-MS at the Service d’Analyse des Roches et des Min&#233;raux, (SARM), CRPG-CNRS (Vendoeuvre-l&#232;s-Nancy, France). The major and trace elements concentrations were expressed in wt.% and mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>, respectively.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. X-Ray Diffraction Analyses</title><p>The bulk clay fractions, together with the clay minerals extracted from the weathered monomineralic grains by sonification, were analysed by XRD on Ca-saturated oriented preparations, air dried and glycolated. The diffractometer was a PHILIPS PW 1730 (40 kV, 40 mA) with a Fe-filtered CoKa radiation and a stepping motor driven with a DACO-MP recorder and the Diffrac-AT software (Socabim, Munich, Germany). The bulk clay fraction &lt;2 &#181;m was extracted from 10 g of the &lt;2 mm first subsample. The 10 grams sampled were first dispersed in 350 ml deionized water, sonicated for 2 min at 300 W/20 kHz, then mechanically shaken for 3 h. The stable suspension was then centrifugated at 20˚C and 1000 rpm for 2 mn 30 s with a Jouan JR4.22 centrifuge in order to separate the &lt;2 &#181;m fraction. The effectiveness of this clay separation was then checked using a laser diffraction granulometer IP Malvern Mastersizer.</p></sec><sec id="s2_6"><title>2.6. Microanalyses of the Soil Samples</title><p>The second subsample was devoted to the EPMA and the SEM studies. Thin sections were first prepared according to the procedure of Camuti and McGuire [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref20">20</xref>] . Samples were hardened under vacuum (100 mbars) with an epoxy resin (ARALDITE 2020) mixed with 20% acetone thinner. After polymerization, samples were cut and thin sections obtained through polishing with silicon carbide (17 &#181;m and 9 &#181;m particle sizes) and diamond calibrated powders (6 &#181;m, 3 &#181;m, 1 &#181;m, and 0.25 &#181;m particle sizes).</p><p>Representative pedofeatures (clay coatings, clay cutans, etc.) and weathering microsites were first located on the thin sections, marked with black circle under an optical microscope and then “in situ” analysed for major and trace elements. EPMA were obtained using a CAMECA SX 50 electron microprobe (Service CAMPARIS, Universit&#233; Paris VI) equipped with wavelength-dispersive spectrometers (WDS). The microprobe was calibrated using synthetic and natural oxides. Corrections were made with a ZAF program. A specific trace program with the electron microprobe was developed [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref21">21</xref>] to analyse heavy metals in small volumes with detection limits closed to 6 - 8 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>. Major elements analyses were performed at 15 kV and 4 nA prior to trace element analysis performed at higher voltage (30 kV) and higher beam current (100 nA and 500 nA for small and large minerals, respectively) in order to improve detection limits. The spot sizes varied from 1 to 5 - 10 &#181;m to limit beam damage. The counting time was 10 s per major element and 1000s per trace element. Major and trace elements are expressed respectively in wt% and mg・kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>.</p><p>For each dominant primary rock forming mineral, i.e. amphibole and plagioclase, ten grains were selected from the 250 - 500 &#181;m needle-sorted fraction and affixed to glass plates with double-sided adhesive tape. The two glass plates were then gold-coated for the micromorphological SEM study of the weathering products.</p></sec><sec id="s2_7"><title>2.7. Geochemical Mass Balances</title><p>The geochemical mass balances were obtained from the calculation of enrichment factors (EF) using the method of Hernandez et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref7">7</xref>] and Sterckeman et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref4">4</xref>] with the equation:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.61340-formula24"><label>(1)</label><graphic position="anchor" xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-1660318x8.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>where the content of element X is normalized to the content of the reference element R. A value of 1 for EF indicates no element enrichment or depletion. EF values &gt;1 indicate element enrichment and when &lt;1 indicate element depletion. The aluminium, with its narrow range of variation in the two soils (17.53% to 20.08% in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>) was chosen as the reference element. The CS8 sample with the lowest loss on ignition suffered very low weathering and was selected as the reference rock for major elements and Zn bulk analyses.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Chemical analyses of major elements (wt%) and Zn (mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>) in control soil (CS) and amended soil (AS) samples</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS8</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS7</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS6</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS5</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS4</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS3</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >CS1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS7</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS6</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS5</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS4</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS3</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >AS1</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Depth (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >485</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >450</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >180</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >160</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >130</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >190</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >170</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >140</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >110</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SiO<sub>2</sub></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48.79</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.99</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49.12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >52.34</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51.23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.95</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TiO<sub>2</sub></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.51</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.76</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.74</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub><sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.58</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.03</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.87</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.99</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.13</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MnO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MgO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.89</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.88</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.52</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.08</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >CaO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.52</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.26</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Na<sub>2</sub>O</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.94</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.88</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.96</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >K<sub>2</sub>O</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.64</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.63</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LOI<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.94</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.91</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.74</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.72</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.85</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.52</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.38</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >111.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >124.46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >113.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >119.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >126.08</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >120.42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >108.24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >115.56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >115.36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >103.04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >80.64</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >72.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79.64</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >69.29</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p><sup>a</sup>Total iron expressed as Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>. <sup>b</sup>LOI: Loss on ignition.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Parent-Rock Mineralogy</title><p>The two soils are derived from the same dioritic parent rock which outcrops at the bottom of the quarry exposing the control soil profile (R horizon in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>(c)). The diorite appears to the naked eye as a “salt and pepper” coarse-grained rock made up of major dark-green amphiboles, white plagioclases and minor vitreous quartz. The modal rock composition was obtained from the sample CS8, i.e. the unweathered coherent rock with high apparent density (2.92 g・cm<sup>−</sup><sup>3</sup>) and the lowest loss on ignition (3.77% in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The counting of 3000 points on thin section gives the mineralogical composition of 38% amphibole, 32% plagioclase, 12% orthoclase and minor quartz (8%), albite (7%), and titanomagn&#233;tite (3%). The EPMA of the major elements in the rock forming minerals show that the amphiboles are calcic hornblendes and plagioclases are andesine with 48% anorthite content. The EPMA of Zn (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>) reveal that the amphiboles are the major Zn-bearing minerals with high Zn concentrations of 180 mg・kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> versus lower Zn contents in the plagioclases (17 mg・kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>), orthoclase (20 mg・kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>) and albite (14 mg・kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Geochemical Mass Balances</title><p>The enrichment factors calculated using the Equation (1) and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> are plotted versus depth in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>. The chemical evolution trends from rock to saprolite and soil appear similar for the major elements in the control and amended soils. The first chemical change observed during weathering is the general increase in EF calculated for the loss on ignition (EF-L.O.I.) from bottom to top of the two soil profiles (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(a)). EF-L.O.I. increases</p><fig id="fig3"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref></label><caption><title> Variations in the enrichment factor (EF) calculated for (a) Loss on Ignition (L.O.I.); (b) CaO and MgO; (c) Zn in the amended (AS) and control (CS) soils</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-1660318x9.png"/></fig><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Mean EPMA of Zn (nanalyses, mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>) in the rock-forming minerals</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Amphibole</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Plagioclase</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Orthoclase</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Albite</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 14<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >180</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p><sup>a</sup>Each analysis is already the mean of ten measurements. <sup>b</sup>Standard error.</p><p>more than twice from the sample reference CS8 (EF-L.O.I. = 1) to the top of the soils (EF-L.O.I. reaches 2.41 in the sample AS2 at the top of the amended soil). This trend reflects the general increase in the bulk water content (loss on ignition at 1050˚C, i.e. the hydrate content in the absence of the CO<sub>2</sub> found in carbonates and after organic matter destruction), and is related to the increase in the hydrated clay minerals crystallizations as weathering proceeds. In the same way as aluminium that was chosen for reference element, the measured SiO<sub>2</sub> and Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> concentrations (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>) remain stable throughout the two soil profiles and give EF values close to 1 (0.91 - 1.12 for EF-SiO<sub>2</sub> and 0.93 - 1.08 for EF-Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>). Conversely, the alkaline earth elements Mg and Ca decrease regularly from the bottom to the top of the two soils: The EF-MgO and EF-CaO reach respectively 0.69 and 0.34 in the sample AS2 at the top of the amended soil (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(b)). This regular and general decrease in the two soils is indicative of the weathering processes which affect the amphiboles (EF-MgO and EF-CaO) and the plagioclases (EF-CaO) in the saprolite and soil.</p><p>The chemical analyses of Zn in the bulk soil horizons (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>) reveal that, although the sewage sludges spread on the amended soil were heavily loaded with Zn (498 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> as mean concentration), its concentration in the two soils never exceeds the threshold value for anthropogenic contamination (300 mg・kg<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref22">22</xref>] ). The Zn enrichment factors, when calculated from <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> and plotted versus depth in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>(c), reveals two different trends depending on whether the control soil or the amended soil is considered: The distribution of EF-Zn in the control soil does not show any significant variation throughout the soil profile, whereas EFs in the amended soil indicate pronounced depletion of Zn in the surface horizons that may suggest migration of this metal to depth (down to 190 cm, sample AS7). This Zn migration to depth has been already observed by Scokart et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref23">23</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Behaviour of Zn in the Soil Clay Fractions</title><p>The clay minerals identified in the &lt;2 &#181;m granulometric fractions are similar in the control and amended soils. The XRD on Ca-oriented preparations reveals the typical 001 reflections of smectite, at 15.10 &#197; in air-dried state and shifting to 17.05 &#197; after ethylene-glycol solvation. The smectite is associated with a kaolinite which is typified, in air-dried and ethylene-glycol solvated states, by 001 and 002 reflections at 7.15 &#197; and 3.55 &#197; respectively. These reflections disappear after 450˚C heating. No reflection of iron oxide or hydroxide was detected on the XRD patterns of the random powders.</p><p>The Zn contents in the soil clay fractions were measured using the electron microprobe and are given with their mean standard errors in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>. The EPMA are plotted versus depth in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(a) to follow the Zn distribution in the two soil profiles. It appears in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> that the Zn concentrations in the bulk clay fractions of the amended soil range from 144 to 203 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> and are always higher than in the control soil where they range from 10 to 24 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>. The shape of the Zn distribution profile in the amended soil (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(a)) is typically that of a downward migrating element, with Zn concentrations about ten times that measured in the control soil and a regular decrease from the top to the bottom of the amended soil. The highest Zn concentrations are measured in the surface horizons, from 195 to 203 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> at 20 cm (sample AS1) and 40 cm (sample AS2) depths, decreasing to 150 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> at the bottom of the soil (190 cm depth, sample (AS7)). For comparison, the Zn distribution profile of the control soil does not show significant variations when standard errors are considered</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Mean EPMA of Zn (n analyses, mg・kg<sup>−1</sup>) in the clay fractions of amended (AS) and control (CS) soils</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS7</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS6</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS5</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS4</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS3</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS2</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >AS1</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Depth (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >190</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >170</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >140</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >110</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >70</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"   rowspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >150</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >158</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >144</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >153</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >177</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >203</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >195</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sample</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS8</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS7</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS6</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS5</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS4</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS3</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS2</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CS1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Depth (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >485</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >450</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >180</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >160</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >130</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >65</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >20</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >n = 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >SE</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Zn</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p><sup>a</sup>Each analysis is already the mean of ten measurements. <sup>b</sup>Standard error.</p><fig id="fig4"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref></label><caption><title> Vertical distribution profile of Zn in the amended (AS) and control (CS) soils; (a) Zn concentrations in the &lt;2 &#181;m clay fraction; (b) Zn concentrations in the amphiboles and their clay minerals weathering products; (c) Zn concentrations in the plagioclases and their clay minerals weathering products; (d) Zn concentrations in the fissural clay minerals</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-1660318x10.png"/></fig><p>(<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(a)). The Zn concentrations are much lower than those measured in the amended soil, and range from 10 to 24 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> at 20 cm (sample CS1) and 40 cm (sample CS2) depths, and from 14 to 15 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> at 180 cm (sample CS6) and 485 cm (sample CS8) depths.</p></sec>
<sec id="s3_4">
<title>3.4. Behaviour of Zn in the Amphibole Weathering Microsystems</title>
<p>The first signs of amphiboles weathering are found in the C horizons of the two soils. The OM observation of the thin sections reveals that euhedral amphibole prismatic crystals begin to weather along the enlarged cleavage planes (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(a)) where SEM shows the crystallization of clay minerals with the typical honeycomb texture of the smectite (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(b)). These characteristic features are commonly observed in the weathered rocks and soils [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.61340-ref25">25</xref>] . The weathering intensity increases in the Bw horizons where amphibole crystals appears highly fragmented into 20 - 100 &#181;m organized residues by the opening of the intramineral microcracks, up to 50 &#181;m wide (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(c)). The SEM reveals that the clay minerals filling these microcracks exhibit the same honeycomb morphology of smectite clay minerals, already observed in the C horizons; they are covering the saw-tooth terminations of the dissolving amphibole crystals (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(d)). The most advanced weathering stages are found in the surface A horizons where the amphiboles crystals are almost entirely replaced by a clayey weathering plasma (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(e)) made up of smectites with the characteristic honeycomb texture (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>(f)).</p>
<p>The clay minerals, extracted from the amphiboles grains by sonication, were identified by XRD. The XRD patterns are similar in the C, Bw, and A horizons with the same typical reflections of smectite. The Ca-oriented preparations reveals strong 001 reflections ranging from 14.50 &#197; to 15.49 &#197; in air-dried state, shifting to 16.87 - 17.14 &#197; with higher orders at 8.46 &#197; and 3.40 &#197; after ethylene-glycol solvation. This expansion to 17 &#197; with ethylene-glycol is typical of smectite layers.</p>
<p>The EPMA of the amphibole weathering products characterize two chemically distinct smectite populations. The first is detected in the C horizons of soils and is made up of magnesian smectites belonging to the trioctahedral group of saponites. The second population is found in more advanced weathering stages (Bw and A horizons) as aluminous smectites belonging to the dioctahedral smectite group of montmorillonites.</p>
<p>The Zn contents in the clay minerals produced by the weathering of amphiboles were measured using the electron microprobe and are given in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> with their mean standard errors. The EPMA are plotted versus depth in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(b) to follow the behaviour of Zn in the two soil profiles. The early weathering of amphiboles into saponites (R horizon, samples CS8 and CS7) results into the partial release of Zn, from 180 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> in the</p>
<fig id="fig5"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref></label><caption><title> Optical Microscopy (OM) and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) of the amphibole weathering. (a) OM view of an early weathering microsite in the C horizon of the control soil, with 1: elongated amphibole crystal; 2: intramineralmicrocrack with clay minerals infillings. (b) SEM view of the microsite a) with 1: amphibole crystal; 2: honeycomb texture of clay minerals in a microcrack. (c) OM view of a weathering microsite in the Bw horizon of the control soil with 1: amphibole fragments; 2: dense microcrack network with clay minerals infillings. (d) SEM view of the microsite c) with 1: saw-tooth amphibole terminations; 2: honeycomb clay minerals cover. (e) OM view of a weathering microsite in the A horizon of the control soil with 1: increasing amphibole fragmentation with clay minerals crystallizations; 2: complete replacement of amphibole fragments by a clayey plasma. (f) SEM view of the microsite e) with 1: amphibole fragment; 2: honeycomb-textured clay mineral</title></caption>
<graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/1-1660318x11.png"/></fig><p>fresh amphibole (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>) to 76 - 85 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> in the saponites. Higher weathering levels in the C, Bw, and A horizons produce different Zn distributions depending on whether the control or the amended soil is considered.</p><p>When taking into account the mean standard errors, the Zn concentrations in saponites and montmorillonites appear almost constant throughout the control soil profile (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(b)). The behaviour of Zn in the amended soil appears much more complicated. Initially, the Zn concentrations measured in the saponites derived from amphiboles are very similar in the C horizons of the amended and control soil profiles: 72 to 82 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> in AS7, AS6, AS5 versus 72 to 81 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> in CS6 and CS5 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(b)). In a second stage, the Zn concentrations measured in the montmorillonites from the Bw and A horizons of the amended soil differ strongly from that in the control soil. The concentrations increase in the amended soil from 105 to 220 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> in AS4 and AS1 versus 68 to 82 mg・kg<sup>−1</sup> in CS4 and CS1 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>, <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(b)).</p>
</sec></sec></body>
<back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.61340-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Planquart, P., Bonin, G., Prone, A. and Massiani, C. (1999) Distribution, Movement and Plant Availability of Trace Metals in Soils Amended with Sewage Sludge Compost: Application to Low Metal Loadings. Science of the Total Environment, 241, 161-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(99)00338-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Baize, D. and Sterckeman, T. (2001) Of the Necessity of Knowledge of the Natural Pedo-Geochemical Background Content in the Evaluation of the Contamination of Soils by Trace Elements. Science of the Total Environment, 264, 127-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(00)00615-X</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Horckmans, L., Swennen, R., Deckers, J. and Maquil, R. (2005) Local Background Concentrations of Trace Elements in Soils: A Case Study in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Catena, 59, 279-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2004.09.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sterckeman, T., Douay, F., Baize, D., Fourier, H., Proix, N. and Schvartz, C. (2006) Trace Elements in Soils Developed in Sedimentary Materials from Northern France. Geoderma, 136, 912-929. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.06.010</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Huang, B., Kuo, S. and Bembenek, R. (2004) Availability of Cadmium in Some Phosphorous Fertilizer s to Field-Grown Lettuce. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 158, 37-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:WATE.0000044832.04770.41</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mbila, M.O., Thompson, M.L., Mbagwu, J.S.C. and Laird, D.A. (2001) Distribution and Movement of Sludge-Derived Trace Metals in Selected Nigerian Soils. Journal of Environmental Quality, 30, 1667-1674. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq2001.3051667x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hernandez, L., Probst, A., Probst, J.L. and Ulrich, E. (2003) Heavy Metal Distribution in Some French Forest Soil: Evidence for Atmospheric Contamination. Science of the Total Environment, 312, 195-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(03)00223-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kraepiel, A.M.L., Keller, K. and Morel, F.M.M. (1999) A Model for Metal Adsorption on Montmorillonite. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 210, 43-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jcis.1998.5947</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Srivastava, P., Singh, B. and Angove, M. (2005) Competitive Adsorption Behavior of Heavy Metals on Kaolinite. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 290, 28-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2005.04.036</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhu, J., Cozzolino, V., Pigna, M., Huang, Q., Caporale, A.G. and Violante, A. (2011) Sorption of Cu, Pb and Cr on Na-Montmorillonite: Competition and Effect of Major Elements. Chemosphere, 84, 484–489. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.03.020</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Farrah, H., Hatton, D. and Pickering, W.F. (1980) The Affinity of Metal Ions for Clay Surfaces. Chemical Geology, 28, 55-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0009-2541(80)90035-2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wahba, M.M. and Zaghloul, A.M. (2007) Adsorption Characteristics of Some Heavy Metals by Some Soil Minerals. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 3, 421-426.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wilson, M.J. (2004) Weathering of the Primary Rock-Forming Minerals: Processes, Products and Rates. Clay Minerals, 39, 233-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1180/0009855043930133</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Caillaud, J., Proust, D. and Righi, D. (2006) Weathering Sequences of Rock-Forming Minerals in a Serpentinite: Influence of Microsystems on Clay Mineralogy. Clays and Clay Minerals, 54, 87-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2006.0540111</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Proust, D., Caillaud, J. and Fontaine, C. (2006) Clay Minerals in Early Amphibole Weathering: Trito Dioctahedral Sequence as a Function of Crystallization Sites in the Amphibole. Clays and Clay Minerals, 54, 351-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2006.0540306</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Keller, C., McGrath, S.P. and Dunham, S.J. (2002) Trace Metal Leaching through a Soil-Grassland System after Sewage Sludge Application. Journal of Environmental Quality, 31, 1550-1560.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Martinez Cortizas, A., Garcia-Rodeja Gayoso, E., Novoa Munoz, J.C., Pontevedra Pombal, X., Burman, P. and Terribile, F. (2003) Distribution of Some Selected Major and Trace Elements in Four Italian Soils Developed from the Deposits of the Gauro and Vico Volcanoes. Geoderma, 117, 215-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00124-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Atteia, O., Thélin, P., Pfeifer, H.R., Dubois, J.P. and Hunziker, J.C. (1995) A Search for the Origin of Cadmium in the Soil of the Swiss Jura. Geoderma, 68, 149-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0016-7061(95)00037-O</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hardy, M. and Cornu, S. (2006) Location of Natural Trace Elements in Silty Soils Using Particle-Size Fractionation. Geoderma, 133, 295-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2005.07.015</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Camuti, K.S. and McGuire, P.T. (1999) Preparation of Polished Thin Sections from Poorly Consolidated Regolith and Sediment Materials. Sedimentary Geology, 128, 171-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0037-0738(99)00073-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fialin, M., Rémy, H., Richard, C. and Wagner, C. (1999) Trace Element Analysis with the Electron Microprobe: New Data and Perspectives. American Mineralogist, 84, 70-77.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Baize, D. (1997) Teneurs totales en Eléments Traces métalliques dans les sols (France). INRA, Paris, 408 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Scokart, P.O., Meeus-Verdinne, K. and De Borger, R. (1983) Mobility of Heavy Metals in Polluted Soils. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 20, 451-463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00208519</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Arslan, M., Abdioglu, E. and Kadi, S. (2010) Mineralogy, Geochemistry, and Origin of Bentonite in Upper Cretaceous Pyroclastic Units of the Tirebolu Area, Giresun, Northeast Turkey. Clays and Clay Minerals, 58, 120-141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2010.0580112</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Karakaya, M.C., Karakaya, N. and Kupeli, S. (2011) Mineralogical and Geochemical Properties of the Na- and Ca-Bentonites of Ordu (NE Turkey). Clays and Clay Minerals, 59, 75-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2011.0590109</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jeong, G.Y. (2000) The Dependence of Localized Crystallization of Halloysite and Kaolinite on Primary Minerals in the Weathering Profile of Granite. Clays and Clay Minerals, 48, 196-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2000.0480205</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Papoulis, D., Tsolis-Katagas, P. and Katagas, C. (2004) Progressive Stages in the Formation of Kaolin Minerals of Different Morphologies in the Weathering of Plagioclase. Clays and Clay Minerals, 52, 275-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2004.0520303</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Coles, C.A. and Yong, R.N. (2002) Aspects of Kaolinite Characterization and Retention of Pb and Cd. Applied Clay Science, 22, 39-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-1317(02)00110-2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Eloussaief, M. and Benzina, M. (2010) Efficiency of Natural and Acid-Activated Clays in the Removal of Pb(II) from Aqueous Solutions. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 178, 753-757. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.02.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Farrah, H. and Pickering, W.F. (1977) Influence of Clay-Solute Interactions on Aqueous Heavy Metal Ion Levels. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 8, 189-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00294042</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Veli, S. and Alyüz, B. (2007) Adsorption of Copper and Zinc from Aqueous Solutions by Using Natural Clay. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 149, 226-233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.04.109</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kirkham, M.B. (2006) Cadmium in Plants on Polluted Soils: Effects of Soil Factors, Hyperaccumulation, and Amendments. Geoderma, 137, 19-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.08.024</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ayari, F., Srasra, E. and Trabelsi-Ayadi, M. (2005) Characterization of Bentonitic Clays and Their Use as Adsorbent. Desalination, 185, 391-397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.04.046</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Srodon, J. and McCarty, D.K. (2008) Surface Area and Layer Charge of Smectite from CEC and EGME/H2O-Retention Measurements. Clays and Clay Minerals, 56, 155-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2008.0560203</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ferris, A.P. and Jepson, W.B. (1975) The Exchange Capacities of Kaolinite and the Preparation of Homoionic Clays. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 51, 245-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(75)90110-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ma, C. and Eggleton, R.A. (1999) Cation Exchange Capacity of Kaolinite. Clays and Clay Minerals, 47, 174-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.1999.0470207</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.61340-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hizal, J. and Apak, R. (2006) Modeling of Copper (II) and Lead (II) Adsorption on Kaolinite-Based Clay Minerals Individually and in the Presence of Humic Acid. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 295, 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2005.08.005</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>