HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (16) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Seaman, J. C. Articles by Vulava, V. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Seaman, J. C. Articles by Vulava, V. M. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Seaman, J. C. Articles by Vulava, V. M. Related Collections Phosphorus Heavy Metals Soil Pollution Soil Chemistry

In Situ Treatment of Metals in Contaminated Soils with Phytate

Advanced Analytical Center for Environmental Sciences, Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, The University of Georgia, Drawer E, Aiken, SC 29802

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. The structure of phytate (IP6) in a dilute solution (redrawn from Graf [1983]).

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Effect of calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6), dodeca sodium–phytate (Na12–IP6), and hydroxyapatite (HA) addition on soluble U (A and B) and Ni (C) after equilibration for 136 h in 0.001 M CaCl2. B reflects the expanded scale for A. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the treatment means.

View larger version (14K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Effect of calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6), dodeca sodium–phytate (Na12–IP6), and hydroxyapatite (HA) on soluble Al (A), Pb (B), Ba (C), and Cu (D) after equilibration for 136 h in 0.001 M CaCl2. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the treatment means.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Effect of calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6), dodeca sodium–phytate (Na12–IP6), and hydroxyapatite (HA) on soluble Co (A), Mn (B), and Zn (C) after equilibration for 136 h in 0.001 M CaCl2. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the treatment means.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Effect of calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6), dodeca sodium–phytate (Na12–IP6), and hydroxyapatite (HA) on pH (A), P (B), and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) (C) after equilibration for 136 h in 0.001 M CaCl2. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the treatment means.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Effect of calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6), dodeca sodium–phytate (Na12–IP6), and hydroxyapatite (HA) on soluble Cr (A), As (B), and Se (C) after equilibration for 136 h in 0.001 M CaCl2. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the treatment means.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP)–extractable U (A) and Ni (B) for contaminated soil amended with calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6), dodeca sodium–phytate (Na12–IP6), and hydroxyapatite (HA). In C and D, the TCLP extractable U and Ni values were corrected for metal removal during the initial equilibration phase of the study and reported on a soil mass basis.

View larger version (69K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Typical scanning electron microscope energy dispersive X-ray analysis (EDXA) spectra (A and B) and micrograph images (C and D) for phosphorus-rich particles observed in the calcium–phytate precipitate (Can–IP6)-treated (50 g kg-1) soil.