All Issue

2024 Vol.57, Issue 3 Preview Page

Original research article

Effect of the combined treatment of red mud and gypsum on plant-available arsenic in acidic and alkaline soils
Mina Lee1
,
Chaw su Lwin2
,
Namhee Yi3
,
Taehee Baek3
,
Jinhwan Park4
,
Kwon-Rae Kim5*
1Research Professor, Agri-Food Bio Convergence Institute, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52725, Korea
2Researcher, Division of Soil and Fertilizer, Rural development Administration, National Institute of Agricultural Science, Wanju 55365, Korea
3Master Student, GreenBio Science, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52725, Korea
4Undergraduate Student, Department of Smart Agro-industry, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52725, Korea
5Professor, Department of Smart Agro-industry, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52725, Korea
*Corresponding Author
31 August 2024. pp. 196-204
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Red mud (RM) is noted for its ability to immobilize heavy metals by absorbing and precipitating them. However, RM's high alkalinity increases soil dissolved organic carbon (DOC), which hinders the absorption of anionic metals like arsenic (As), thereby reducing its immobilization effectiveness. Conversely, phosphogypsum (G) lowers soil pH and DOC levels. Thus, combining RM and G is proposed to enhance immobilization efficiency. This study examined their combined impact on heavy metal(loid) immobilization in 39 As-contaminated soils (19 acidic, 20 alkaline). Each soil was divided into ‘untreated’ and ‘RM+G treated’ groups in 5 L pots. After incubation, rice was cultivated for five months and harvested, with subsequent analysis of soil pH, DOC, and rice As concentrations. Results indicate that in most cases, the RM+G treatment maintained or lowered soil pH compared to untreated soils, with exceptions in 3 acidic and 3 alkaline soils. Despite RM’s alkalizing effect, G effectively countered this. Additionally, RM+G treatment reduced soil DOC levels in the majority of soils, except for 1 acidic and 2 alkaline soils. In acidic soils, the RM+G treatment significantly reduced rice As concentrations exceeding the Korean threshold (0.5 mg kg-1), from 7 instances in untreated soils to 1 instance. However, in alkaline soils, the number of instances exceeding the threshold increased from 10 in untreated soils to 15 in RM+G treated soils, indicating varied effectiveness. Overall, while RM and G combined effectively reduce plant-available As in acidic soils, their efficacy in alkaline soils shows mixed results, suggesting the need for tailored approaches based on soil characteristics.

Arsenic concentrations in rice grown in untreated and red mud+phosphogypsum (RM+G) treated soils (Redline: converted Korean threshold of arsenic in rice from inorganic arsenic into total arsenic).
Keywords
Arsenic immobilization
Dissolved organic carbon
Gypsum
Red mud
Soil pH
References
1

Abdelrhman F, Gao J, Ali U, Wan N, Nu H. 2022. Assessment of goethite‑combined/modifed biochar for cadmium and arsenic remediation in alkaline paddy soil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 29:40745-40754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17968-4

10.1007/s11356-021-17968-435083675
2

Alva AK, Sumner EM, Noble AD. 1988. Alleviation of aluminium toxicity by phospho-gypsum. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 32:385-403. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628809367947

10.1080/00103628809367947
3

Baek EJ, Kim MG, Kim HG, Sung JH, Lee YJ, Kwak SH, Lee EB, Kim HJ, Lee WJ, Lee MJ. 2022. Comparison of total and inorganic arsenic contamination in grain and processed grain foods. J. Food Hyg. Saf. 37:385-393. https://doi.org/10.13103/JFHS.2022.37.6.385

10.13103/JFHS.2022.37.6.385
4

Feigl V, Anton A, Uzigner N, Gruiz K. 2012. Red mud as a chemical stabilizer for soil contaminated with toxic metals. Water Air Soil Pollut. 223:1237-1247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-011-0940-4

10.1007/s11270-011-0940-4
5

Feng R, Qiu W, Lian F, Yu Z, Yang Y, Song Z. 2013. Field evaluation of in situ remediation of Cd-contaminated soil using four additives, two foliar fertilisers and two varieties of pakchoi. J. Environ. Manage. 124:17-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.037

10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.03723603772
6

Friesl W, Horak O, Wenzel WW. 2004. Immobilization of heavy metals in soils by the application of bauxite residues: pot experiments under field conditions. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 167:54-59. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.200320941

10.1002/jpln.200320941
7

Garau G, Silvetti M, Castaldi P, Mele E, Deiana,P, Deiana S. 2014. Stabilising metal(loid)s in soil with iron and aluminium-based products: microbial, biochemical and plant growth impact. J. Environ. Manage. 139:146-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.02.024

10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.02.02424685456
8

Garau G, Silvetti M, Deiana S, Deiana, P, Castaldi P. 2011. Long-term influence of red mud on As mobility and soil physico-chemical and microbial parameters in a polluted sub-acidic soil. J. Hazard. Mater. 185:1241-1248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.10.037

10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.10.03721051138
9

Giusquiani PL, Concezzi L, Businelli M, Macchioni A. 1998. Fate of pig sludge liquid fraction in calcareous sol: agricultural and environmental implication. J. Evviron. Qual. 27:364-371. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1998.00472425002700020017x

10.2134/jeq1998.00472425002700020017x
10

Gray CW, Dunham SJ, Dennis PG, Zhao FJ, McGrath SP. 2006. Field evaluation of in situ remediation of a heavy metal contaminated soil using lime and red-mud. Envrion. Pollut. 142:530-539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.10.017

10.1016/j.envpol.2005.10.01716321462
11

Hind AR, Bhargava SK, Grocott SC. 1999. The surface chemistry of Bayer process solids: a review. Colloids Surf. 146:359-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-7757(98)00798-5

10.1016/S0927-7757(98)00798-5
12

Hua Y, Heal KV, Friesl-Hanl W. 2017. The use of red mud as an immobilizer for metal/metalloid-contaminated soil: a review. J. Hazard. Mater. 325:17-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.11.073

10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.11.07327914288
13

Huang YZ, Hao XW. 2012. Effect of red mud addition on the fractionation and bio-accessibility of Pb, Zn and As in combined contaminated soil. Chem. Ecol. 28:37-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02757540.2011.619528

10.1080/02757540.2011.619528
14

Kim DY, Kim JY, Kim KY, Kim KR, Kim HS, Kim JG, Kim WI. 2018a. Arsenic species in husked and polished rice grains grown at the non-contaminated paddy soils in Korea. J. Appl. Biol. Chem. 61:391-395. https://doi.org/10.3839/jabc.2018.055

10.3839/jabc.2018.055
15

Kim HB, Kim SH, Jeon EK, Kim DH, Tsang DCW, Alessi DS, Kwon EE, Baek K. 2018b. Effect of dissolved organic carbon from sludge, rice straw and spent coffee ground biochar on the mobility of arsenic in soil. Sci. Total Environ. 636:1241-1248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.406

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.40629913586
16

Kim HS, Seo BH, Kuppusamy S, Lee YB, Lee JH, Yang JE, Owens G, Kim KR. 2018c. A DOC coagulant, gypsum treatment can simultaneously reduce As, Cd and Pb uptake by medicinal plants grown in contaminated soil. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 148:615-619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.10.067

10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.10.06729128822
17

Klauber C, Grafe M, Power G. 2009. Review of bauxite residue "Re-use" options. CSIRO Document DMR-3609, Karawara, Australia.

18

Lee KS, Shim HY, Lee KS, Chung DY. 2015. The fate and factor determining arsenic mobility of arsenic in soil-a review. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fert. 48:73-80. https://doi.org/10.7745/KJSSF.2015.48.2.073

10.7745/KJSSF.2015.48.2.073
19

Lehoux AP, Lockwood CL, Mayes WM, Stewart DI, Mortimer RJG, Gruiz K, Burke IT. 2013. Gypsum addition to soils contaminated by red mud: implications for aluminium, arsenic, molybdenum and vanadium solubility. Environ. Geochem. Health. 35:643-656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-013-9547-6

10.1007/s10653-013-9547-623793510
20

Lombi E, Zhao FJ, Zhang G, Sun B, Fitz W, Zhang H, McGrath SP. 2002. In situ fixation of metals in soils using bauxite residue: chemical assessment. Eviron. Pollut. 118:435-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00294-9

10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00294-912009142
21

MFDS (Ministry of Food and Drug Safety). 2023. Revision of standards and specifications for food. MFDS, Cheongju, Korea.

22

Neupane G, Donahoe RJ. 2013. Calcium-phosphate treatment of contaminated soil for arsenic immobilization. Appl. Geochem. 28:145-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2012.10.011

10.1016/j.apgeochem.2012.10.011
23

Pavel P, Diacu E, Barbu CH. 2015. Long-term effects on the fractionation and mobility of heavy metals in a polluted soil treated with bauxite residues. Rev. Chim. 66:13-16.

24

Udeigwe TK, Wang JJ, Zhang H. 2009. Effectiveness of bauxite residues in immobilizing contaminants in manure-amended soils. Soil Sci. 174:676-686. https://doi.org/10.1097/SS.0b013e3181c5e4e3

10.1097/SS.0b013e3181c5e4e3
25

Wang F, Pan H, Xu J. 2020. Evaluation of red mud based binder for the immobilization of copper, lead and zinc. Environ. Pollut. 263:114416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114416

10.1016/j.envpol.2020.11441632224388
Information
  • Publisher :Korean Society of Soil Science and Fertilizer
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국토양비료학회
  • Journal Title :Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국토양비료학회 학회지
  • Volume : 57
  • No :3
  • Pages :196-204
  • Received Date : 2024-07-31
  • Revised Date : 2024-08-23
  • Accepted Date : 2024-08-26
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7745/KJSSF.2024.57.3.196
Journal Informaiton Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer
KJSSF Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref crossmark
  • crossref cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close