% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{CalabiFloody:279745,
      author       = {Calabi-Floody, M. and Rumpel, C. and Velásquez, G. and
                      Violante, A. and Bol, R. and Condron, L. M and Mora, M. L},
      title        = {{R}ole of {N}anoclays in {C}arbon stabilization in
                      {A}ndisols and {C}ambisols},
      journal      = {Journal of soil science and plant nutrition},
      volume       = {15},
      number       = {3},
      issn         = {0718-9516},
      address      = {Temuco},
      publisher    = {Sociedad Chilena de la Ciencia del Suelo},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2015-07627},
      pages        = {587-604},
      year         = {2015},
      abstract     = {Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and their consequent effect
                      on global warming are an issue of global environmental
                      concern. Increased carbon (C) stabilization and
                      sequestration in soil organic matter (SOM) is one of the
                      ways to mitigate these emissions. Here we evaluated the role
                      of nanoclays isolated from soil on C stabilization in both a
                      C rich Andisols and C depleted Cambisols. Nanoclays were
                      analyzed for size and morphology by transmission electron
                      microscopy, for elemental composition and molecular
                      composition using pyrolysis-GC/MS. Moreover, nanoclays were
                      treated with H2O2 to isolate stable SOM associated with
                      them. Our result showed better nanoclay extraction
                      efficiency and higher nanoclay yield for Cambisol compared
                      to Andisols, probably related to their low organic matter
                      content. Nanoclay fractions from both soils were different
                      in size, morphology, surface reactivity and SOM content.
                      Nanoclays in Andisols sequester around 5-times more C than
                      Cambisols, and stabilized 6 to 8-times more C than Cambisols
                      nanoclay after SOM chemical oxidation. Isoelectric points
                      and surface charge of nanoclays extracted from the two soils
                      was very different. However, the chemical reactivity of the
                      nanoclay SOM was similar, illustrating their importance for
                      C sequestration. Generally, the precise C stabilization
                      mechanisms of both soils may be different, with nanoscale
                      aggregation being more important in Andisols. We can
                      conclude that independent of the soil type and mineralogy
                      the nanoclay fraction may play an important role in C
                      sequestration and stabilization in soil-plant systems.},
      cin          = {IBG-3},
      ddc          = {580},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
      pnm          = {255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction
                      (POF3-255)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      doi          = {10.4067/S0718-95162015005000026},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/279745},
}