Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T01:17:09.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantitative determination of goethite and hematite in kaolinitic soils by X-ray diffraction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2018

N. Kämpf  and
N. Schwertmann
N. Kämpf
Affiliation:
Institut für Bodenkunde, Technische Universität München, 8050 Freising-Weihenstephan, FRG
N. Schwertmann
Affiliation:
Institut für Bodenkunde, Technische Universität München, 8050 Freising-Weihenstephan, FRG
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the past, two factors have impeded the quantitative estimate of Fe-oxides in soils by X-ray diffraction. First, Fe-oxides are still quite often considered X-ray amorphous, although numerous results, e.g. a low ratio of oxalate- to dithionite-soluble Fe, have indicated the opposite. Second, even if crystalline, the cocentration of Fe-oxides in many soils is low, thereby complicating their identification by XRD. Recently, however, more sensitive methods such as Mössbauer spectroscopy and Differential-XRD (Schulze, 1981) have been introduced, which substantially reduce the lower limit of detection. Because these two methods are not generally available and, especially in the case of M&oum;ssbauer spectroscopy, are rather time consuming, ordinary XRD should be adapted for quantitative estimation of Fe-oxides.

Determination can be facilitated by using samples in which the Fe-oxides are concentrated by particle-size separation and a 5 M NaOH boiling treatment (Norrish & Taylor, 1961). The latter treatment is particularly suitable for kaolinitic soils as the Fe-oxides are unaffected―provided certain precautions are taken (Käimpf & Schwertmann, 1982a). This paper gives details of a procedure for the quantitative estimation of goethite (Gt) and hematite (Hm) by XRD.

Type
Notes
Information
Clay Minerals , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , September 1982 , pp. 359 - 363
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kämpf, N. (1981) Die Eisenoxidmineralogie einer Klimasequenz von Böden aus Eruptiva in Rio Grande do Sul, Brasilien. Dissertation Techn. Univ. München.Google Scholar
Kämpf, N. & Schwertmann, U. (1982a) The 5 M NaOH concentration method for iron oxides in soils. Clays Clay Min. (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kämpf, N. & Schwertmann, U. (1982b) Goethite and hematite in a soil climosequence from volcanic rocks in southern Brazil and its usefulness for differentiating kaolinitic soils. Geoderma, (in press).Google Scholar
Klug, H.P. & Alexander, L.E. (1974) X-ray diffraction procedures. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Mehra, O.P. & Jackson, M.L. (1960) Iron oxide removal from soils and clays by a dithionite-citrate system buffered with sodium bicarbonate. Clays Clay Miner. 7, 317–327.Google Scholar
Norrisk, K. & Taylor, R.M. (1961) The isomorphous replacement of iron by aluminium in soil goethites. J. Soil Sci. 12, 294–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulze, D.G. (1981) Identification of soil iron oxide minerals by differential X-ray diffraction. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45, 437–440.Google Scholar
Schwertmann, U. & Fitzpatrick, R.W. (1977) Occurrence of lepidocrocite and its association with goethite in Natal soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 41, 1013–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinwehr, H.E.V. (1967) Gitterkonstanten im System α-(Al,Fe,Cr)2O3 und ihr Abweichen von der Vegardregel. Z. Kristallogr. Mineral. 125, 377–403.Google Scholar
Thiel, R. (1963) Zum System α-FeOOH-α-AlOOH. Z. anorg. allg. Chem. 326, 70–78.Google Scholar
Torrent, J., Schwertmann, U. & Schulze, D.G. (1980) Iron oxide mineralogy of some soils of two river terrace sequences in Spain. Geoderma 23, 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar