% 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{SuazoHernndez:911251,
      author       = {Suazo-Hernández, Jonathan and Klumpp, Erwin and
                      Arancibia-Miranda, Nicolás and Jara, Alejandra and
                      Poblete-Grant, Patricia and Sepúlveda, Pamela and Bol,
                      Roland and de la Luz Mora, María},
      title        = {{C}ombined {E}ffect of {S}oil {P}article {S}ize {F}ractions
                      and {E}ngineered {N}anoparticles on {P}hosphate {S}orption
                      {P}rocesses in {V}olcanic {S}oils {E}valuated by {E}lovich
                      and {L}angmuir–{F}reundlich {M}odels},
      journal      = {Journal of soil science and plant nutrition},
      volume       = {22},
      number       = {3},
      issn         = {0717-635X},
      address      = {[Cham]},
      publisher    = {Springer International Publishing},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2022-04547},
      pages        = {3685 - 3696},
      year         = {2022},
      abstract     = {Engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) released into the
                      environment can affect phosphate (Pi) availability in soils.
                      In this study, we evaluated the effect of silver (Ag) or
                      copper (Cu) ENPs (3 and $5\%,$ w/w) on Pi sorption processes
                      in soil particle size fractions. The 2000–32 μm,
                      32–2 μm, and < 2 μm fractions were obtained from
                      an agricultural volcanic soil by wet-sieving and
                      sedimentation methods. The Elovich kinetic and
                      Langmuir–Freundlich (L-F) isotherm models were used to
                      describe the adsorption data obtained from batch
                      experiments. The initial adsorption rate (α) was determined
                      from the Elovich model to be $105\%$ higher for the
                      2000–32 μm fraction and $203\%$ higher for the
                      32–2 μm fraction than for the < 2 μm fraction
                      (671 mmol kg−1 min−1). Meanwhile, with both doses of
                      Cu ENPs, the α values are increased for the soil size
                      fractions, resulting in the formation of adsorption sites
                      for Pi. However, with Ag ENPs, the α values are both
                      increased and decreased for the different soil fractions;
                      therefore, they can block or generate adsorption sites. The
                      maximum adsorption capacity (qmax) was determined from the
                      L-F model to be $17\%$ higher for the 32–2 μm fraction
                      and $47\%$ higher for the < 2 μm fraction compared to
                      that for the 2000–32 μm fraction (180 mmol kg−1).
                      With both ENPs, the qmax values are found to be between 1.1
                      and 1.9 times higher with respect to the 2000–32 μm
                      fraction without ENPs. In the absence of ENPs, the highest
                      Pi desorption was found in the 32–2 μm fraction followed
                      by 2000–32 μm fraction, and finally < 2 μm
                      fraction. Moreover, the Pi desorption decreased for soil
                      size fractions with increasing Ag or Cu ENPs content, which
                      was found to be more pronounced in the 32–2 μm fraction
                      in the presence of Cu ENPs. The presence of Ag and Cu ENPs
                      increases Pi retention in soil size fractions, which can
                      decrease soil fertility. Thus, future studies are
                      recommended to find out the critical amounts of ENPs, which
                      may favor Pi retention without any negative effects on
                      agricultural soils.},
      cin          = {IBG-3},
      ddc          = {570},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
      pnm          = {2173 - Agro-biogeosystems: controls, feedbacks and impact
                      (POF4-217)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-2173},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000835156800003},
      doi          = {10.1007/s42729-022-00919-4},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/911251},
}