Tải bản đầy đủ - 0trang
XII. Personal Encounters with Outstanding Scientists
specialized in SOM research. He traveled extensively, spoke eloquently, and was
an outstanding ambassador for SOM. I ﬁrst met him at the 7th International Congress of Soil Science in Madison, Wisconsin, in 1960. During the evening of the
ﬁrst day of meetings, we had a special session on nitrogen in SOM. Professor
Flaig argued that N was an integral part of SOM, chemically bonded to the major HA structures, while I contended that most of the N was physically adsorbed
or loosely held by the HA structural network. The debate lasted for several hours,
with many of the scientists who were present participating. It was one of the most
interesting debates in which I was ever engaged. Professor Flaig was a very skillful debator; he was conciliatory rather than confrontational. At the end of the debate we all had learned a lot and had become good friends. During the next few
days, I listened to his papers and also to his comments on other papers. As to the
synthesis of HAs, he postulated that lignin was oxidatively degraded to simple
phenolic monomers, which then polymerized oxidatively to produce HA. For this
reason, he considered HA to be highly aromatic. Essentially the same view was
also held by Professor Kononova. Thus, the two most prominent SOM specialists of that time agreed that HA consisted of aromatic (ring) structures and that
aliphatic structures were not signiﬁcant. Professor Dr. Flaig also considered heterocyclic nitrogen to be a signiﬁcant component of soil N. This has been conﬁrmed by Py-FIMS (Schulten and Schnitzer, 1998). During the congress I met
Professor Dr. Flaig frequently and I found him to be a very sensitive, gentle and
civilized person, socially very adept, a good dancer, and who loved good food
and good wine. After the congress, we decided to exchange reprints and to stay
in touch. In 1967, he invited me to a very interesting meeting on SOM that he had
organized in Vienna on behalf of the International Atomic Energy Agency. In
1976, he organized a similar meeting in Braunschweig, sponsored jointly by the
International Atomic Energy Agency and FAO, to which he also invited me. During the 1970s and also in 1987, I visited him several times in Braunschweig and
in Wurzburg where we had many interesting discussions on the chemistry of
SOM. Professor Dr. Flaig was very active in international organizations, especially in the International Society of Soil Science. He was chairman of the Soil
Chemistry Commission for three successive terms. At the congress in Edmonton
in 1978, he worked very hard on my behalf and helped me to be elected Chairman of the Soil Chemistry Commission. My successor in this position was
Michael Hayes of the University of Birmingham, England, who was elected in
New Delhi in 1982. Thus, due to Professor Dr. Flaig’s status and hard work, SOM
chemists held the chairmanship of the Chemistry Commission of the ISSS for ﬁve
successive terms. After his retirement in the late 1970s, the research direction of
his institute changed and SOM was no longer the highest priority. All SOM
chemists felt that they had lost an outstanding spokesman when he retired. He is
now living in Garbrunn near Würzburg. I wish him many happy years of retirement.
A LIFETIME PERSPECTIVE
Professor D. H. R. (Sir Derek) Barton, FRS, Nobel Laureate
In 1961, the Director of the Soil Research Institute informed me that I was eligible for a sabbatical. I decided to spend a year in an organic chemistry laboratory in England, learning how to elucidate chemical structures of complex organic
molecules. After convincing my director that this was the right thing to do, my
wife, daughter, and I sailed to England from Montreal in September 1961. Several days after our arrival, I went to see Dr. D. H. R. Barton, Professor of Organic
Chemistry, at the Imperial College of Science and Technology in London, England, who had previously accepted me for a 1-year stay in his laboratory. Professor Barton was a tall, broad-shouldered, good looking man, with prominent glasses, in his midforties. He welcomed me to England and showed me his labs and also
my lab space. I was surprised by the large number of scientists who worked in these
labs. There were 50–60 scientists in the big lab and another 30–40 in several
smaller labs. Only 10 of those who worked there were Ph.D. students, the remaining 90 were either postdoctorate fellows or visiting scientists who came from
all over the world.
A few days later, I reported to work, equipped with a glass bottle containing 200
g of puriﬁed FA that I had extracted in Ottawa from a Spodosol Bh horizon. I had
decided to work on FA because I thought at that time that FA had a simpler molecular structure than HA so that FA would be more amenable to structural analysis than HA. After I started my work, I had a discussion with Professor Barton
about what I would do. He told me that because it was completely soluble in water and had a high oxygen-containing functional group content, FA was not a very
suitable material for organic chemistry. What I should do was to block the CO2H
and phenolic OH groups by methylation so that the FA would be soluble in organic
solvents such as benzene or chloroform and behave like an organic molecule. After testing a number of methylating procedures, I found the silver oxide-methyl iodide method most suitable for FA (Barton and Schnitzer, 1963). Three successive
methylations made 73% of the FA soluble in benzene. Chromatography of the benzene-soluble FA over Al2O3 gave on elution with benzene, ethylacetate, and
methanol seven fractions ranging in molecular weights from 260 to 918, in carbon
from 59.29 to 69.26%, in oxygen from 32.33 to 37.00%, and in OCH3 content from
25.79 to 47.86%. Several of the fractions were chromatographically homogeneous
but not molecularly. A straight line relationship was found between E 212 m and
molecular weight. All fractions had very similar IR spectra and were devoid of optical activity. H NMR spectra of all fractions showed resonances at 9.10 and 8.75
, due to the presence of H in aliphatic CH3 and CH2 groups, and at 6.3 and 6.1 ,
due to OCH3 and CO2CH3, respectively. These were the ﬁrst NMR spectra ever
recorded on a humic material (Wilson, 1987) and also the ﬁrst unambiguous evidence that (CH2 )n, i.e., CH2 groups in long chains, were signiﬁcant components
of humic substances.
My work with Professor Barton clearly demonstrated that the chemistry of humic substances could be investigated by the methods of organic chemistry. During my stay at Imperial College, I had many discussions with Professor Barton on
different approaches to the chemistry of humic substances. I also had many opportunities to speak to a number of visiting scientists who were also working there
and who had many years of experience in structural organic chemistry. Professor
Barton also introduced me to many distinguished visitors who gave seminars there
and who were willing to discuss HA chemistry with me. My stay with Professor
Barton was a very rewarding experience both practically and intellectually. Imperial College was at that time a hotbed of organic chemistry, and I beneﬁted greatly from that atmosphere. I am most grateful to Professor Barton for taking so much
interest in my research and for helping me in any way he could. At the end of the
1960s, Professor Barton won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his invention of
conformational analysis. He was knighted a few months later by the Queen of
Professor M. M. Kononova
Professor Kononova became known internationally after the publication of her
book on SOM after World War II. This book was translated into many languages
and was required reading for many of us in the 1960s and 1970s. Professor
Kononova was Professor of Soil Biochemistry at the Dokuchaiev Institute of Soil
Science in Moscow and a member of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. I followed her research since the mid-1950s and was impressed by her attempts to combine chemistry and microbiology in her studies on SOM. In 1974, I attended the
10th International Congress of Soil Science in Moscow, where I had the opportunity of meeting Professor Kononova in person. I remember her as a lively, kind
lady in her early seventies, always surrounded by a large group of co-workers and
assistants. She knew me through correspondence we had in the 1960s and through
my publications. Being one of the few SOM specialists in North America gave me
a special status in the eyes of Russian soil scientists who regarded SOM very highly. After the second session of the Soil Chemistry Commission she signaled to me
to sit beside her and asked me about my impressions of the congress and whether
I liked Moscow. She then proceeded to give me a small Russian doll as a souvenir.
This procedure was repeated after each session so that I ended up collecting a number of small presents, including some of her books. One morning, she invited me
to a reception at the Dokuchaiev Institute. As I entered her ofﬁce, I was surprised
by the beautiful decorations on the walls and by the unusual abundance of delicious foods, cakes, fruits, and drinks on the table. Aside from Professor Kononova, her assistants, and the director of the Dokuchaiev Institute, a number of nonRussian scientists were present. These included Wolfgang Flaig, Jack Bremner,
and several scientists whose names escape me. We had a high-spirited discussion
A LIFETIME PERSPECTIVE
on SOM, while consuming a lot of food and drinks. All of us had a very good time.
Before leaving, we were given a tour of the institute and shown newly acquired
equipment, which included a sophisticated gas chromatograph and an amino acid
analyzer. It was obvious that Professor Kononova was well connected and that her
research was supported accordingly.
One afternoon, all attendants of the congress were scheduled to go on a sightseeing tour of Moscow. Apparently unaware of our schedule, Professor Kononova asked me to join her and co-workers for a discussion on the oxidative degradation of humic substances. My wife was accompanying me at that time because
she thought that we would join a sightseeing tour of Moscow, but she also was
invited to attend our discussion. After talking about our chosen topic for about
an hour, it was brought to Professor Kononova’s attention that my wife and I
had missed the sightseeing tour. She was very unhappy about this and assured
me that she would arrange a special tour for us. After 30 min, a large bus arrived
and the two of us plus an interpreter got on the bus. The driver plus the three of
us were the only passengers and we were given a wonderful tour of Moscow.
Thus, being a SOM specialist in Moscow at that time had certain advantages.
What impressed me most, however, were the power and influence of Professor
Professor D. S. Orlov
In 1957, after the launching of the Sputnik by the Russians, I began to take
courses in Russian at a local university. After 2 years of studying, I could read and
understand enough Russian to read abstracts of scientiﬁc papers and to get some
understanding of the contents of the papers. Over the ensuing years, I noted that
D. S. Orlov was one of the most proliﬁc and imaginative Russian SOM researchers. After I contacted him by mail, we decided to exchange reprints. This
went on for a number of years, but I had no opportunity of meeting him in person
until 1974, when I attended the 10th International Congress of Soil Science. D. S.
Orlov at that time was Professor of Soil Biochemistry at Moscow State University. The second day after our arrival in Moscow, my wife and I proceeded to the
University to visit Professor Orlov. When we arrived at the soil science building,
I asked one of the concierges in Russian where Professor Orlov’s ofﬁce was. He
answered me that he did not know. So I asked him very politely to look up Professor Orlov’s room number on his list. His answer was that the list was incomplete. After asking another concierge the same questions and receiving the same
answers, my wife and I decided to ﬁnd Professor Orlov’s ofﬁce on our own. We
walked along the lengthy gray corridors and noticed that none of the doors showed
name plates or numbers. All doors were identical, none of them exhibited any identiﬁcation, so we kept on walking through colorless, endless corridors on the ﬁrst,
second, third, and fourth ﬂoors. It was like a scene out of Kafka. We never met
anybody who could divulge to us the secret of Professor Orlov’s ofﬁce number.
After 2 hr of fruitless searching we returned to our hotel.
The next morning, as I was sitting in one of the lecture rooms, listening to the
ﬁrst paper, a young lady tapped on my right shoulder and whispered into my right
ear: “Professor Orlov is waiting for you, please follow me quietly.” I got up and
followed her out of the lecture room, and then we proceeded to the building that
my wife and I had visited a day earlier. The young lady told me that she was Professor Orlov’s daughter and that she had graduated from the Philological Institute,
specializing in English. Again we walked along endless, gray corridors until we
entered Professor Orlov’s ofﬁce. He was a man in his forties of medium height,
blond hair, and blue eyes. He was very happy to see me, and he immediately took
a bottle of vodka out of the cupboard so that we could celebrate our encounter appropriately. Apparently, somebody had told him that we were looking for him, but
he did not mention this to me. As we were familiar with each other’s work, he began by showing me his labs. I noticed that practically all of his equipment was
homemade. He and his students had built their own gas chromatograph and IR
spectrophotometer. It was amazing to me that Professor Orlov and students were
able to publish such excellent scientiﬁc work using so much primitive and outdated equipment. He demonstrated to me how well the equipment functioned. At that
time, my group and he and his co-workers were making wide use of thermal methods such as thermogravimetry and differential thermal analysis (DTA) in our research on humic substances. He showed me his home-built thermal equipment,
which functioned as well as ours, which we had purchased at high prices. During
our discussion, I noticed that Professor Orlov was a highly intelligent and very dynamic person who got very excited when he described his work. After the lab visit, he asked me to accompany him to the greenhouses where he was conducting
some experiments. Throughout my visit I never saw any “modern” equipment, although his work and contributions to SOM chemistry were outstanding. After 3 hr,
he suggested that I return to the meeting, guided by his daughter. I returned to my
seat in the lecture room during the presentation of the last paper and sat down quietly. Apparently nobody had noticed that I had been away for 3 hr.
I felt very depressed during the rest of the day. Here was a top scientist functioning in obscurity because of poor political connections. I never found out what
his political problems were, but they must have been serious because he was not
even allowed to attend the congress in his own city. I never saw Professor Orlov
again after our meeting. A few weeks after my return to Canada I received a parcel containing four books that he had authored. Three of the books were in Russian but one was in English. The latter was entitled “Humus Acids of Soils.” In
this book he discussed each of the reprints that I had sent him over the years. Some
of his comments were favorable, whereas others were somewhat critical. After
1975, our contacts ended. I never found out why. I began to realize how difﬁcult
it was for an excellent scientist to survive in a totalitarian state, obviously was Pro-
A LIFETIME PERSPECTIVE
fessor Orlov’s problem. I hope that he is still alive and well and I wish him the
Drs. J. M. Bremner and F. J. Stevenson
I met Jack Bremner and Frank Stevenson frequently at the annual meetings of
the Soil Science Society of America. The three of us also belonged to the NCR-59
Committee, which was set up by USDA for studies on SOM and whose members
met annually for 1- to 2-day meetings at universities in the midwest of the United
States. I attended these meetings regularly over a 20-year period. There were about
15–20 of us who belonged to this committee. At the meetings, each of us reported on what we had done during the past year and then discussed plans for the future. In this way we became aware of what each member was doing. Probably the
most important point of these meetings was that it provided us with a forum where
we could talk to each other. This was especially important for those who worked
in isolated locations. Jack Bremner was our “guru” at these meetings. He was not
only an eminent authority on soil N, but was also very knowledgeable on the chemistry of SOM. He had worked on SOM at Rothamsted prior to immigrating to the
United States and was an excellent chemist. We all told him about some of our difﬁculties, and he would suggest ways of how we could overcome our problems. He
was always upbeat and positive. I also met Jack at several International Soil Science Society meetings and we always had interesting times.
The careers of Frank Stevenson and my own ran along parallel lines. We started at almost the same time and are now in the twilights of our careers. The major
difference between us was that Frank started with studies on soil N, whereas I began my research with investigations on complexes formed among fulvic acid, leaf
leachates and leaf extracts, and di- and trivalent metal ions. After that, Frank did
extensive studies on metal complexation by HA and FA, while I began working on
the structure of HAs and FAs, and then turned to soil N. Frank also made excellent contributions to SOM chemistry through the books he authored. His book entitled “Humus Chemistry” is a very important source of information on SOM and
is widely consulted by students, teachers, and researchers. It brings together an
enormous amount of information on most aspects of SOM. I have referred to it often in this chapter. It was a great pleasure for me to share with Frank the Wolf Prize
for Agriculture in 1996.
I am most grateful to the postdoctoral fellows, visiting scientists, and technicians who worked with
me for different lengths of time and who made outstanding contributions to my research. I also thank
a number of colleagues who collaborated with me on different aspects of my work. The following is a
list of all postdoctoral fellows and visiting scientists. The list shows their names and countries of domi-
cile in chronological order: U. C. Gupta (Canada), E. H. Hansen (Denmark), G. Ogner (Norway), K.
Matsuda (Japan), R. Riffaldi (Italy), M. Ortiz de Serra (Argentina), G. B. Volk (USA), J. A. Neyroud
(Switzerland), S. M. Grifﬁth (Trinidad), Y. Chen (Israel), N. Senesi (Italy), J. Cortez (France), K. Ghosh
(India), H. Kerndorff (Germany), M. Spiteller (Germany), G. Calderoni (Italy), G. Catroux (France),
M. Saharinen (Finland), E. Van Bochove (Canada), and L. Celi (Italy). I thank the following technicians: J. G. Desjardins, S. M. I. Skinner, E. Vendette, D. A. Hindle, B. S. Rauthan, P. R. Marshall, and
P. Schuppli. I am most grateful to the following colleagues: J. R. Wright, I. Hoffman, M. Lévesque,
P. A. Poapst, H. Kodama, F. J. Sowden, D. S. Gamble, S. U. Khan, K, Ivarson, S. P. Mathur, I. L. Stevenson, C. M. Preston, M. A. Arshad, J. A. Ripmeester, H.-R. Schulten, H. Dinel, C. A. Campbell, C. M.
Monreal, B. C. Liang, and T. Paré. I would like to single out Professor Dr. H.-R. Schulten for special
gratitude. He and I have collaborated very closely over the past 12 years on the development and applications of pyrolysis-mass spectrometric methods for analyses of SOM components in organic soil
extracts, HAs, FAs, humins, and whole soils and on the generation of HA, FA, and whole soil threedimensional model structures. Last but not least, I thank Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada for supporting my research over a long period of time and T. Paré for valuable assistance with proofreading
and typing of this manuscript.
Almendros, G. R., Friend, F. J., Gonzalez-Vila, K. M., Haider, K., Knicker, H., and Luedemann, H.-D.
(1991). Analysis of 13C and 15N CP-MAS NMR-spectra of soil organic matter and composts.
FEBS Lett. 282, 119 –121.
Anderson, G. (1957). Nucleic acid derivatives in soil. Nature (London) 180, 287–288.
Anderson, G. (1958). Identiﬁcation of derivatives of deoxyribonucleic acid in humic acid. Soil Sci. 86,
Anderson, G. (1961). Estimation of purines and pyrimidines in soil humic acid. Soil Sci. 91, 156 –161.
Archard, F. K. (1786). Chemische Untersuchung des Torfs. Crell’s Chem. Ann. 2, 391– 403.
Arshad, M. A., Ripmeester, J. A., and Schnitzer, M. (1988). Attempts to improve solid-state 13C NMR
spectra of whole mineral soils. Can. J. Soil Sci. 68, 593 – 602.
Atherton, N. M. (1973). “Electron Spin Resonance.” Wiley, New York.
Barton, D. H. R., and Schnitzer, M. (1963). A new experimental approach to the humic acid problem.
Nature (London) 190, 217–218.
Bedrock, C. N., Cheshire, M. V., Chudek, J. A., Goodman, B. A., and Shand, C. A. (1994). 31P NMR
studies of humic acid from a blanket peat. In “Humic Substances in the Global Environment and
Implications on Human Health” (N. Senesi and T. M. Miano, eds.), pp. 227–232. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Benzing-Purdie, L., Ripmeester, J. A., and Preston, C. M. (1983). Elucidation of the nitrogen forms in
melanoidins and humic acid by 15N cross polarization-magic angle spinning nuclear magnetic
ressonance spectroscopy. J. Agric. Food Chem. 31, 913 –915.
Benzing-Purdie, L., Cheshire, M. V., Williams, B. L., Sparling, G. P., Ratcliffe, C. I., and Ripmeester,
J. A. (1986). Fate of N-15 glycine in peat as determined by 13C and 15N-CPMAS NMR spectroscopy. J. Agric. Food Chem. 34, 170 –176.
Biederbeck, V. O. (1978). Soil organic sulfur and fertility. In “Soil Organic Matter” (M. Schnitzer and
S. U. Khan, eds.), pp. 273 – 310. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Boyd, S. A., Sommers, L. E., Nelson, D. W., and West, D. X. (1981). The mechanism of a copper (II)—
humic acid complex and some adducts with nitrogen donors. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45, 745 –749.
Bracewell, J. M., Pacey, N., and Robertson, G. W. (1987). Organic matter in on-shore Cretaceous chalks
and its variations, investigated by pyrolysis-mass spectrometry. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrol. 10, 199 –213.
A LIFETIME PERSPECTIVE
Breitmaier, E., and Voelter, W. (1978). 13C NMR spectroscopy. In “Monographs in Modern Chemistry”
(H. F. Ebel, ed.), Vol. 15, pp. 247–260. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim.
Bremner, J. M. (1967). The nitrogenous constituents of soil organic matter and their role in soil fertility. Pontif. Acad. Sci. Scr. Varia 32, 143 –193.
Celi, L., Gennari, M., Khan, S. U., and Schnitzer, M. (1997a). Mechanism of aciﬂuorfen interaction
with humic acid. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 61, 1659 –1665.
Celi, L., Schnitzer, M., and Nègre, M. (1997b). Analysis of carboxyl groups in soil humic acids by a
wet chemical method, Fourier-transform infrared spectrophotometry, and solution-state carbon13 nuclear magnetic resonance. A comparative study. Soil Sci. 162, 189 –197.
Chen, Y., and Schnitzer, M. (1976a). Water adsorption on humic substances. Can. J. Soil Sci. 56, 521–
Chen, Y., and Schnitzer, M. (1976b). Scanning electron microscopy of a humic acid and a fulvic acid
and its metal and clay complexes. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 682– 686.
Chen, Y., and Schnitzer, M. (1978). The surface tension of soil humic substances. Soil Sci. 125, 7–15.
Chen, Y., and Schnitzer, M. (1989). Sizes and shapes of humic substances by electron microscopy. In
“Humic Substances II” (M. H. B. Hayes, P. MacCarthy, R. L. Malcolm, and R. S. Swift, eds.), pp.
621–638. Wiley, New York.
Chen, Y., Banin, A., and Schnitzer, M. (1976). Use of the scanning electron microscope for structural
studies on soils and soil components. In “Proceedings of the International Symposium on Scanning Electron Microscopy” (O. Johari, ed.), pp. 425 – 432. ITT Research Institute, Chicago.
Cheshire, M. V., and Senesi, N. (1998). Electron spin resonance spectroscopy of organic and mineral
particles. In “Structure and Surface Reactions of Soil Particles” (P. M. Huang, N. Senesi, and J.
Bufﬂe, eds.), pp. 325 – 373. Wiley, New York.
Cheshire, M. V., Berrow, M. L., Goodman, B. A., and Mundie, C. M. (1977). Metal distribution and
nature of some Cu, Mu, and V complexes in humic and fulvic acid fractions of soil organic matter. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 1131–1138.
Christensen, B. T. (1996). Carbon in primary and secondary organo-mineral complexes. In “Structure
and Organic Matter Storage in Agricultural Soils” (M. R. Carter and B. A. Stewart, eds.), pp. 97–
165. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Cortez, J., and Schnitzer, M. (1979). Purines and pyrimidines in soils and humic substances. Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. J. 43, 958 – 961.
Ghosh, K., and Schnitzer, M. (1980). Macromolecular structures of humic substances. Soil Sci. 129,
Ghosh, K., and Schnitzer, M. (1982). A scanning electron microscopic study of effects of adding neutral electrolytes to solutions of humic substances. Geoderma 28, 53 – 56.
Greenland, D. J. (1971). Interaction between humic and fulvic acids and clays. Soil Sci. 111, 34 – 41.
Gregg, J. S., and Singh, K. S. W. (1967). “Adsorption Surface Area and Porosity.” Academic Press,
Grifﬁth, S. M. and Schnitzer, M. (1989). Oxidative degradation of soil humic substances. In “Humic
Substances II” (M. H. B. Hayes, P. MacCarthy, R. L. Malcolm, and R. S. Swift, eds.), pp. 69– 98.
Wiley, New York.
Grifﬁth, S. M., Sowden, F. J., and Schnitzer, M. (1976). The alkaline hydrolysis of acid-resistant soil
and humic acid residues. Soil Biol. Biochem. 8, 529 – 531.
Hansen, E. H., and Schnitzer, M. (1969). Zinc dust distillation and fusion of a soil humic and fulvic
acid. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 33, 29 – 36.
Hayes, M. B. H., and O’Callaghan, M. R. (1989). Degradations with sodium sulﬁde and phenol. In
“Humic Substances II” (M. B. H. Hayes, P. MacCarthy, R. L. Malcolm, and R. S. Swift, eds.), pp.
141–180. Wiley, New York.
Ikan, R., Ioselis, P., Rubinsztain, Y., Aizenshtat, Z., Miloslavsky, I., Yariv, S. Pugmire, R., Anderson,
L. L., Woolfenden, W. R., Kaplan, I. R., Dorsey, T., Peters, K. E., Boon, J. J., Leeuwe, J. W., Ishi-
watari, R., Morinaga, S., Yamamoto, S., Macihara, T., Muller-Vonmoos, T., and Rub, A. (1992).
Chemical, isotopic, spectroscopic and geochemical aspects of natural and synthetic humic substances. Sci. Total Environ. 117/118, 1–12.
Kerndorff, H., and Schnitzer, M. (1980). Sorption of metals on humic acid. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta
Khan, S. U. (1980). “Pesticides in the Soil Environment.” Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Khan, S. U. and Sowden, F. J. (1971). Distribution of nitrogen in the Black Solonetzic and Black Chernozemic soils of Alberta. Can. J. Soil Sci. 51, 185 –193.
Klocking, R. (1994). Humic substances as potential therapeutics. In “Humic Substances in the Global
Environment and Implications on Human Health” (N. Senesi and T. M. Miano, eds.), pp. 1245 –
1257. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Knicker, H., and Luedemann, H. D. (1995). N-15 and C-13 CPMAS and solution NMR studies of N15 enriched plant material during 600 days of microbial degradation. Org. Geochem. 23, 329 –
Knicker, H., Friend, R., and Luedemann, H.-D. (1993). The chemical nature of nitrogen in native soil
organic matter. Naturwissenschaften 80, 219 –221.
Knicker, H., Almandros, G., Gonzalez-Vila, F. J., Luedemann, H.-D., and Martin, F. (1995). 13C and
15N NMR analysis of some fungal melanins in comparison to soil organic matter. Org. Geochem.
Knicker, H., Almendros, G., Gonzalez-Vila, F. J., Martin, F., and Luedemann, H.-D. (1996). 13C and
15N-NMR spectroscopic examination of the transformation of organic nitrogen in plant biomass
during thermal treatment. Soil Biol. Biochem. 28, 1053 –1060.
Kodama, H., and Schnitzer, M. (1974). Adsorption of fulvic acid by non-expanding day minerals.
Trans. Int. Congr. Soil Sci. 10th, 1974, pp. 51– 56.
Lakatos, B., Tibai, T., and Meisel, J. (1977). EPR spectra of humic acids and their metal complexes.
Geoderma 19, 319 – 338.
Lévesque, M., and Schnitzer, M. (1967). Organo-metallic interactions in soils: 6. Preparation and properties of fulvic acid-metal phosphates. Soil Sci. 103, 183 –190.
Lowe, L. E. (1978). Carbohydrates in soils. In “Soil Organic Matter” (M. Schnitzer and S. U. Khan,
eds.), pp. 65–94. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
MacCarthy, P., and Rice, J. A. (1994). Industrial applications of humus: an overview. In “Humic Substances in the Global Environment and Implications on Human Health” (N. Senesi and T. M. Miano, eds.), pp. 1209 –1223. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Manning, P. G., and Ramamoorthy. (1973). Equilibrium studies of metal ion complexes of interest to
natural waters. VII. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 35, 1577–1581.
Martin, F., Saiz-Jimenez, C., and Cert, A. (1979). Pyrolysis-gas chromatography/mass spectrometry of
humic fractions II. The high boiling point compounds. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43, 309 – 312.
McBride, M. B. (1978). Transition metal binding in humic acid: an ESR study. Soil Sci. 126, 200 –209.
Mengel, K. (1996). Turnover of organic nitrogen in soils and its availability to crops. Plant Soil 181,
Norwood, D. L. (1988). Critical comparison of structural implications from degradative and nondegradative approaches. In “Humic Substances and their Role in the Environment” (H. F. Frimmel and R. F. Christman, eds.), pp. 133 –148. Wiley, New York.
Patience, R. I., Baxby, M., Bartle, K. D., Perry, D. L., Rees, A. G. W., and Rowland, S. J. (1992). The
functionality of organic nitrogen in some recent sediments from the Peru upswelling region. Org.
Geochem. 18, 161–169.
Preston, C. M. (1996). Applications of NMR to soil organic matter analysis: History and prospects. Soil
Sci. 161, 144–166.
Preston, C. M., and Schnitzer, M. (1984). Effect of chemical modiﬁcations and extractants on the carbon-13 NMR spectra of humic materials. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 48, 305 – 311.
A LIFETIME PERSPECTIVE
Preston, C. M., Rauthan, B. S., Rodger, C., and Ripmeester, J. A. (1982). A hydrogen-1, carbon-13, and
nitrogen-15 nuclear magnetic resonance study of p-benzo-quinone polymers incorporating amino
nitrogen compounds (“synthetic humic acids”). Soil Sci. 134, 277–293.
Preston, C. M., Schnitzer, M., and Ripmeester, J. A. (1989). A spectroscopic and chemical investigation on the de-ashing of a humin. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53, 1442–1447.
Rex, R. W. (1960). Electron paramagnetic resonance studies of stable free radicals in lignins and humic acid. Nature (London) 188, 1185 –1186.
Schnitzer, M. (1978). Humic substances: Chemistry and reactions. In: “Soil Organic Matter” (M.
Schnitzer and S. U. Khan, eds.), pp. 1– 64. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Schnitzer, M. (1986a). Binding of humic substances by soil colloids. In “Interactions of Soil Minerals
with Natural Organics and Microbes” (P. M. Huang and M. Schnitzer, eds.), Spec. Publ. No. 17,
pp. 77–101. Soil Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, WI.
Schnitzer, M. (1986b). The synthesis, chemical structure, reactions and functions of humic substances.
In “Humic Substances, Effects on Soil and Plants” (EniChem Agricoltura, eds.), pp. 14 –28. Reda,
Schnitzer, M. (1986c). Water retention by humic substances. In “Peat and Water” (C. H. Fuchsman,
ed), pp. 159–176. Elsevier Applied Science, New York.
Schnitzer, M. (1991). Soil organic matter—the next 75 years. Soil Sci. 151, 41– 58.
Schnitzer, M. (1994). A chemical structure for humic acid. Chemical, 13C NMR, colloid chemical,
and electron microscopic evidence. In “Humic Substances in the Global Environment and
Implications on Human Health” (N. Senesi and T. M. Miano, eds.), pp. 57– 69. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Schnitzer, M., and Khan, S. U. (1978). “Soil Organic Matter.” Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Schnitzer, M., and Kodama, H. (1966). Montmorillonite: Effect of pH on its adsorption of a soil humic compound. Science 153, 70 –71.
Schnitzer, M., and Preston, C. M. (1986). Analysis of humic acids by solution—and solid-state Carbon-13 nuclear magnetic resonance. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50, 326 – 331.
Schnitzer, M., and Schulten, H.-R. (1992). The analysis of soil organic matter by pyrolysis-ﬁeld ionization mass spectrometry. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 56, 1811–1817.
Schnitzer, M., and Schulten, H.-R. (1995). Analysis of organic matter in soil extracts and whole soils
by pyrolysis-mass spectrometry. Adv. Agron. 55, 168 –217.
Schnitzer, M., and Schuppli, P. (1989). Method for the sequential extraction of organic matter from
soils and soil fractions. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53, 1418 –1424.
Schnitzer, M., and Spiteller, M. (1986). The chemistry of the “unknown” soil nitrogen. Trans. Congr.
Int. Soil Sci. Soc., 13th, Hamburg, Vol. 3, pp. 473 – 474.
Schulten, H.-R., and Schnitzer, M. (1993). A state of the art structural concept for humic substances.
Naturwissenschaften 80, 29 – 30.
Schulten, H.-R., and Schnitzer, M. (1997). Chemical model structures for soil organic matter and soils.
Soil Sci. 162, 115–130.
Schulten, H.-R., and Schnitzer, M. (1998). The chemistry of soil organic nitrogen: A review. Biol. Fertil. Soil 26, 1–15.
Schulten, H.-R., Plage, B., and Schnitzer, M. (1991). A chemical structure for humic substances. Naturwissenschaften 78, 311– 312.
Schulten, H.-R., Monreal, C. M., and Schnitzer, M. (1995). Effect of long-term cultivation on the chemical structure of soil organic matter. Naturwissenschaften 82, 42– 44.
Schulten, H.-R., Leinweber, P., and Schnitzer, M. (1998). Analytical pyrolysis and computer modelling of humic and soil particles. In “Structure and Surface Reactions of Soil Particles” (P. M.
Huang, N Senesi, and J. Bufﬂe, eds.), pp. 282– 324. Wiley, New York.
Schulten, H.-R. Gleixner, G., Schmidt, H.-L., and Muller, R. (1999). Analytical pyrolysis of dissolved
organic matter in aquatic systems: structure, properties, and origin. Water Res. (in press).
Senesi, N., and Schnitzer, M. (1977). Effects of pH, reaction time, chemical reduction, and irradiation
on ESR spectra of fulvic acid. Soil Sci. 123, 224 –234.
Senesi, N., Grifﬁth, S. M., Schnitzer, M., and Townsend, M. G. (1977). Binding of Fe3+ by humic materials. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 969 – 976.
Sorge, C., Schnitzer, M., Leinweber, P., and Schulten, H.-R. (1994). Molecular-chemical characteristics of organic matter in whole soil and particle-size fractions of a Spodosol by pyrolysis-ﬁeld ionization mass spectrometry. Soil Sci. 158, 189 –203.
Sowden, F. J., Chen, Y., and Schnitzer, M. (1977). The nitrogen distribution in soils formed under widely differing climatic conditions. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 41, 1524 –1526.
Sprengel, C. (1826). Ueber Pﬂanzenhumus, Huminsaure und Humussaure Salze. Kastner’s Arch. Ges.
Naturlehre 8, 145 –220.
Steelink, C. (1994). Application of N-15 NMR spectroscopy to the study of organic nitrogen and humic substances in the soil. In “Humic Substances in the Global Environment and Implications on
Human Health” (N. Senesi and T. M. Miano, eds.), pp. 405 – 426. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Steelink, C., and Tollin, G. (1962). Stable free radicals in soil humic acid. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 59,
Stevenson, F. J. (1994). “Humus Chemistry.” Wiley, New York.
Stevenson, I. L., and Schnitzer, M. (1982). Transmission electron microscopy of extracted fulvic and
humic acids. Soil Sci. 133, 179 –185.
Wilson, M. A. (1987). “NMR Techniques and Applications in Geochemistry and Soil Chemistry.” Pergamon, Oxford.
Wilson, M. A. (1990). Application of nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy to organic matter in
whole soils. In “Humic Substances in Soil and Crop Sciences: Selected Readings” (P. MacCarthy,
C. E. Clapp, R. L. Malcolm, and P. R. Bloom, eds.), pp. 221–260. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.
Zhuo, S., and Wen, Q. (1992). Nitrogen forms in humic substances. Pedosphere 3, 307– 315.
Zhuo, S., Wen, Q., Du, L., and Wu, S. (1992). The nitrogen form of non-hydrolyzable residue in humic acid. Chin. Sci. Bull. 37, 508 – 511.
Zhuo, S., Wen, Q., and Cheng, L. (1995). Availability of non-hydrolyzable soil nitrogen. Pedosphere