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 Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rousseau, M. Articles by Cabibel, B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Rousseau, M. Articles by Cabibel, B. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Rousseau, M. Articles by Cabibel, B. Related Collections Colloids Vadose Zone Processes and Chemical Transport

Preferential Transport of Soil Colloidal Particles

Physicochemical Effects on Particle Mobilization

^a Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique–Unité Climat, Sol et Environnement, Domaine St. Paul, 84914 Avignon Cedex 9, France
^b Laboratoire d'étude des Transferts en Hydrologie et Environnement, Domaine Universitaire, B.P. 53, 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France
^c Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique–Unité de Science du Sol, Route de Saint Cyr, 78026 Versailles Cedex, France

View larger version (84K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. (a) Two-dimensional soil column lagging for a fixed radius (reconstructed from X-ray tomography pictures) before infiltration experiments. (b) Three-dimensional reconstruction of the macropore network before the infiltration experiments. The network corresponds to the spatial distribution of porosity above a certain threshold, defined by the number of pixels necessary to build an object and the gray level intensity to distinguish soil matrix and porosity. The foreground is yellow and the background is blue. (c) Two-dimensional soil column lagging for a fixed radius after infiltration experiments. (d) Three-dimensional reconstruction of the macropore network after infiltration experiments.

View larger version (36K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Experimental set-up of the particle leaching experiments.

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Drainage hydrographs for rainfall events 4, 10, and 12.

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. (a) Tensiometer data provide capillary pressure head evolution, and (b) time domain reflectometry probes provide volumetric water content evolution during Run 5, at different depths. The beginning of infiltration experiment corresponds to t = 0. Data for horizon H1 are represented by diamonds, data for H2 by triangles, data for H3 by circles, and data for H4 by squares.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Particle-size distribution measured by laser diffraction. (a) Size distribution evolution during infiltration experiments (in percentage of particle volume). The unbroken line represents the size distribution for the first effluent samples, just after breakthrough, and the dotted line is for effluent samples collected after about one hour of draining. (b) Size distribution in percentage of total number of particles.

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Mineralogical composition of several effluent samples.

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Total organic C content evolution during infiltration time for all experiments: (a) as a function of rainfall intensity, (b) as a function of initial moisture content, (c) as a function of the ionic strength, and (d) as a function of temporal evolution and soil surface tillage.

View larger version (31K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Particle breakthrough curves: (a) as a function of the rainfall intensity, (b) as a function of initial moisture content, (c) as a function of the ionic strength, and (d) as a function of temporal evolution.

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. (a) Cumulative mass of particles in the effluent vs. the square root of dimensionless time, for all the experiments. (b) An enlargement of (a) for cumulative mass of eluted particles ranges from 0 to 2000 mg. (c) Cumulative mass of particles in the effluent vs. draining volume expressed in effective pore volume. (d) An enlargement of (c) for cumulative mass of eluted particles ranges from 0 to 2000 mg.