Effect of Zinc Oxide Nano-Particles (ZnO) on some Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils with Different Textures

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• S. Rezaei ¹
• H. Bayat ²

¹ Department of Soil Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran.

² Department of Soil Science and Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.2022.75234.1143

Abstract

Introduction
 Given the energy crisis in the world, increasing environmental pollution, clean, renewable energy and the reduction of environmental pollution are needed. Soil is the main source of agricultural production. Therefore, maintaining soil health and fertility is very important for sustainable food production. Nanotechnology is a good way to reduce soil issues in agriculture, a promising method to improve soil properties and significant capacity to increase yield. Nanotechnology is one of the newest technologies that is used in all fields of science and research due to its high potential and unique features, including natural resources and soil protection. Nanoparticles have the ability to change some physical, mechanical and chemical properties of soil due to their very high specific surface area and activity. Nanoparticles increase the cation exchange capacity of soil and soil porosity. Among all nanoparticles, zinc oxide (ZnO) is one of the most widely used nanoparticles. Zinc oxide nanoparticles due to their high specific surface area can act as a bonding agent between particles and stabilize the soil structure by flocculating soil particles. Although many studies have used zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO) in the field of heavy metal contamination in soil, aqueous solutions and plants, the effect of one nanoparticle on soils with different textures has been less reported. Therefore, objective of this study was to investigate the effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on some physical and chemical properties of soils with different textures.
Materials and Methods
 In this study, three soil samples with different textures, including sandy loam, loam and clay were collected from three locations as Malayer, Abbasabad and Nahavand, in Hamedan province, respectively. Samples were taken from soil surface (0-20 cm depth). The soil samples were transferred to the Soil Physics Laboratory. After  air drying, they were passed through a 4 mm sieve and mixed with specific weight percentages of zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles (zero, 0.5, 1 and 3 % W/W) in three replications. After preparing the treated samples, the soils were homogeneously poured into plastic containers measuring 18 × 5.5 × 18 cm with a specific bulk density related to the field. The treated soils in plastic containers, were wetted and dried with municipal water for 120 consecutive incubation period. After 120 days from the start of incubation, the samples were taken from the containers. Some physical and chemical properties including pH, cation exchange capacity, organic matter, calcium carbonate and electrical conductivity were measured.
Results and Discussion
 The results showed that the use of nanoparticles increased the cation exchange capacity in two textures of loamy and clay soils. The increment was significant compared to the control in loamy soil at two levels of 1 and 3% and in clay soil in all three levels of 0.5, 1 and 3%. Electrical conductivity increased and decreased (P <0.05) at 3% level for loamy soil and at 3% for sandy loam and clay soils, respectively. In contrast, the application of nanoparticles led to a decrease in pH and organic matter content (P <0.05) in sandy loam and clay soils, respectively. At the level of zero and 0.5%, the order of pH was: sandy loam> clay> loamy soil, with significant differences. But at the level of 1%, the order of pH was: sandy loamy> loamy> clay, with significant differences. At 3% level, the order of pH was: loamy> sandy loam> clay, with significant differences. At all levels of zero, 0.5, 1 and 3% of zinc oxide nanoparticles, the amount of organic matter was significantly in loamy> clay> sandy loam. Application of different levels of zinc oxide nanoparticles in clay soil reduced the percentage of calcium carbonate (P <0.05) (at the 3% by weight level), but had no effect on the amount of this variable in sandy loam and loamy soils. At all levels of zero, 0.5, 1 and 3%, the amount of soil calcium carbonate was significantly in the following order: clay> sandy loam> loam.
Conclusion
 According to the results obtained in this study, it can be concluded that the use of nanoparticles can be a good solution to reduce the harmful environmental effects of chemical fertilizers. In addition to the positive effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on physical and chemical parameters in different textures, the selection of the most optimal level of zinc oxide nanoparticles should be economically applicable. This requires further studies to determine the significant effects of nanoparticles on the physicochemical properties of the soils in different conditions to determine the optimal amount of nanoparticles, in order to save costs.

Keywords

• Metal oxides
• Zinc oxide
• Nanoparticles
• Cation exchange capacity
• Organic matter

20.1001.1.20084757.1401.36.3.2.8

Main Subjects

• Soil science

References

1. Abdoli 2015. Removal of phosphorus from aqueous solutions by bare and modified nano oxide particles (MgO, ZnO & TiO₂). Masters Thesis. Malayer College of Agriculture 124-1. (In Persian)
2. Agha Alizadeh , Samadi  K., Azizian  Y., and Khodayari  A. 2012. Synthesis of ZnO nanoparticles under ultrasound and evaluation of their effect on phosphate removal from contaminated waters. National Conference on Water and Wastewater Science and Engineering 1-8. (In Persian)
3. Bayat , Kolahchi Z., Valaey S., Rastgou M., and Mahdavi S. 2019. Iron and magnesium nano-oxide effects on some physical and mechanical properties of a loamy Hypocalcic Cambisol Geoderma 335: 57-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.08.007.
4. Ben-Moshe , Frenk S., Dror I., Minz D., and Berkowitz B. 2013. Effects of metal oxide nanoparticles on soil properties. Chemosphere 90:640-646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.09.018.
5. Bian W., Mudunkotuwa I.A., Rupasinghe T., and Grassian V.H. 2011. Aggregation and dissolution of 4 nm ZnO nanoparticles in aqueous environments: influence of pH, ionic strength, size, and adsorption of humic acid. Langmuir 27(10): 6059-6068. https://doi.org/10.1021/la200570n.
6. Bohn L., Myer R.A., and O'Connor G.A. 2002. Soil chemistry. John Wiley & Sons.
7. Boroghani , Mirnia S.K., Vahhabi J., and Ahmadi S.J. 2014. Investigation of Nanozeolite Effects on Soil Erosion Decreasing using FEL3 Rainfall Simulator. Journal of Watershed Management Research 5(9): 95-106. (In Persian)
8. Bower A., Reitemeier  R.F., and Fireman  M. 1952. Exchangeable cation analysis of saline and alkali soils. Soil Science 73(4): 251-262. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/1952SoilS..73..251B/doi:10.1097/00010694-195204000-00001.
9. Bruce C., and Rayment G.E. 1982. Analytical methods and interpretations used by the Agricultural Chemistry Branch for Soil and Land Use Surveys. Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Bulletin QB8 (2004), Indooroopilly, Queensland. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.610108.
10. Conway J.R., and Keller A.A. 2016. Gravity-driven transport of three engineered nanomaterials in unsaturated soils and their effects on soil pH and nutrient release. Water Research 98: 250-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.04.021.
11. Charman E.V., and Roper M.M. 2007. Soil organic matter. In ‘Soils – their properties and management’. 3rd edn. (Eds P. E. V. Charman and B. W. Murphy.)pp. 276–285. (Oxford University Press: Melbourne.)
12. Essington E. 2015. Soil and water chemistry: an integrative approach. CRC press.
13. Fierer , and Schimel J.P. 2002. Effects of drying–rewetting frequency on soil carbon and nitrogen transformations. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 34(6): 777-787. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00007-X.
14. Fiol N., and Villaescusa I. 2009. Determination of sorbent point zero charge: usefulness in sorption studies. Environmental Chemistry Letters 7(1): 79-84.Gee GW and Or D, 2002. Particle- Size analysis. Pp. 225-295. In: Warren AD, (ed). Methods of Soil Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-008-0139-0.
15. Gee GW., and Or D. 2002. Particle- Size analysis. Pp. 225-295. In: Warren AD, (ed). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods. Soil Science Society of America Inc. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.4.c12.
16. Gimbert L.J., Hamon R.E., Casey P.S., and Worsfold P.J. 2007. Partitioning and stability of engineered ZnO nanoparticles in soil suspensions using flow field-flow fractionation. Environmental Chemistry 4(1): 8-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EN06072.
17. Horneck D.A., Sullivan D.M., Owen J.S., and Hart J.M. 2011. Soil test interpretation guide.1-12.
18. Kah M. 2015. Nanopesticides and nanofertilizers: emerging contaminants or opportunities for risk mitigation? Frontiers in Chemistry 64(3): 1-6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2015.00064.
19. Kananizadeh N., Ebadi T., Khoshniat S.A., and Mousavirizi S.E. 2011. The positive effects of nanoclay on the hydraulic conductivity of compacted Kahrizak clay permeated with landfill leachate. Clean–Soil, Air, Water 39(7): 605-611. https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201000298.
20. Kim J. (Ed.). 2016. Advances in Nanotechnology and the Environment. CRC Press.
21. Lal R. 2008. Promise and limitation of soils to minimize climate change. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 63(4): 113-118. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.63.4.113A.
22. Liang P., Ding Q., and Song F. 2005. Application of multiwalled carbon nanotubes as solid phase extraction sorbent for preconcentration of trace copper in water samples. Journal of Separation Science 28(17): 2339-2343. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200500154.
23. Lindsay W.L. 1979. Chemical equilibria in soils: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
24. Mahdavi S., Jalali M., and Afkhami A. 2012. Removal of heavy metals from aqueous solutions using Fe3O4, ZnO, and CuO nanoparticles. In Nanotechnology for Sustainable Development (pp. 171-188). Springer. Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-012-0846-0.
25. Mahdavi S., Afkhami A., and Merrikhpour H. 2015. Modified ZnO nanoparticles with new modifiers for the removal of heavy metals in water. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 17(6): 1645-1661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0898-9.
26. Mahdavi S., Molodi P., and Zarabi M. 2018. Utilization of bare MgO, CeO₂, and ZnO nanoparticles for nitrate removal from aqueous solution. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 37(6): 1908-1917. https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.12865.
27. Metson A.J. 1961. Methods of chemical analysis for soil survey samples. Soil Bureau Bulletin No. 12, New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research 168–175. (Government Printer: Wellington, New Zealand.). https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1957.00021962004900040024x.
28. Mirkhani R., and Saadat S. 2005. Using Particle Size Distribution and Organic Carbon Percentage to Predict the Cation Exchange Capacity of Soils of Lorestan Province 19(2): 235-242.
29. Mohammadi M., and Niazian M. 2013. Investigation of nano-clay effect on geotechnical properties of Rasht clay. International Journal Advance Science Technology Research 3: 37-46.
30. Moradi N,. Rasouli-Sadaghiani M.H,. and Sepehr E. 2017. The effect of type and amount of biochar on some soil properties and usability of some nutrients in a calcareous soil. Journal of Water and Soil (Agricultural Sciences and Industries) 31: 1246-1232. (In Persian with English abstract)
31. Nair R., Varghese S.H., Nair B.G., Maekawa T., Yoshida Y., and Kumar D.S. 2010. Nanoparticulate material delivery to plants. Plant Science 179(3): 154-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.04.012.
32. Nanda K.K., Maisels A., Kruis F.E., Fissan H., and Stappert S. 2003. Higher surface energy of free nanoparticles. Physical Review Letters 91(10): 106102. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.91.106102.
33. Ostan Sh. 2004. Soil chemistry with an environmental attitude. Tabriz University Press. 454-1. (In Persian)
34. Page A.L., Miller R.H., and Keeney D.R. 1982. Chemical and microbiological properties. Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. 2nd ed.Agron.Monogor. No. 9. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
35. Rasse D.P., Rumpel C., and Dignac M.F. 2005. Is soil carbon mostly root carbon? Mechanisms for a specific stabilisation. Plant and Soil 269(1-2): 341-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-004-0907-y.
36. Razali N.M., and Wah Y.B. 2011. Power comparisons of shapiro-wilk, kolmogorov-smirnov, lilliefors and anderson-darling tests. Journal of Statistical Modeling and Analytics 2(1): 21-33.
37. Rhoades J.D. 1996. Salinity: Electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids. p. 417-435. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3.Chemical Methods. ASA and SSSA, Madison, USA. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2: 427-445. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.3.c14.
38. Salardini A. 2009. Soil fertility. University of Tehran Publications 430-1. (In Persian)
39. Samarajeewa A., Velicogna J., Princz J., Subasinghe R., Scroggins R., and Beaudette L. 2017. Effect of silver nano-particles on soil microbial growth, activity and community diversity in a sandy loam soil. Environmental Pollution 220: 504-513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.09.094.
40. Servin A., Elmer W., Mukherjee A., De la Torre-Roche R. Hamdi H., White J.C., Bindraban P., and Dimkpa C. 2015. A review of the use of engineered nanomaterials to sup-press plant disease and enhance crop yield. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 17: 1-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-015-2907-7.
41. Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making. Soil Use Manage. 8: 152-154.
42. Sparks D.L. 2003. Environmental soil chemistry. Elsevier.
43. Suresh A.K., Pelletier D.A., and Doktycz M.J. 2013. Relating nanomaterial properties and microbial toxicity. Nanoscale 5: 463-474. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2NR32447D.
44. Taha M.R., Jawad I.T., and Majeed Z.H. 2015. Treatment of Soft Soil with Nano Magnesium Oxide. 1-8.
45. Tassi E., Pini R., Gorini F., Valadão I. C.R.P., and De Castro J.A. 2012. Chemical and physical properties of soil influencing Tio2 nanoparticles availability in terrestrial ecosystems. Journal of Environmental Research and Development 6(4): 1034-1038.
46. Thomas G.W. 1996. Soil pH and soil acidity. p. 475-490. In: Page, A.L., Somner, C.E. and Nelson, P.W. (Eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3. Chemical Methods. ASA and SSSA, Madison, USA. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.3.
47. Walkley A., and Black I.A. 1934. An examination of the Digestion method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37(1): 29-38. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/1934SoilS..37...29W/doi:10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003.
48. Wu J., and Brookes P.C. 2005. The proportional mineralization of microbial biomass and organic matter caused by air-drying and rewetting of a grassland soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 37(3): 507-515. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.07.043.
49. Valaei P. S. 2014. Effect of Nanoparticles (Iron Oxide and Magnesium) on Some Soil Physical and Chemical Properties. Masters Thesis. Malayer College of Agriculture. 124-1. (In Persian with English abstract)
50. Zarei Sarabi M., and Kolahchi Z. 2016. The effect of nanoparticles on the retention and absorption coefficient of potassium. Third Conference on New Findings in the Environment and Agricultural Ecosystems. (In Persian)
51. Zhang G. 2007. Soil nanoparticles and their influence on engineering properties of soils. In Advances in Measurement and Modeling of Soil Behavior 173: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1061/40917(236)37.