Properties of Fe-Organic Matter Associations via Coprecipitation versus Adsorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The association of organic matter (OM) with minerals is recognized as the most important stabilization mechanism for soil organic matter. This study compared the properties of Fe-OM complexes formed from adsorption (reaction of OM to postsynthesis ferrihydrite) versus coprecipitation (formation of Fe solids in the presence of OM). Coprecipitates and adsorption complexes were synthesized using dissolved organic matter (DOM) extracts from a forest little layer at varying molar C/Fe ratios of 0.3-25.0. Sample properties were studied by N2 gas adsorption, XRD, FTIR, Fe EXAFS, and STXM-NEXAFS techniques. Coprecipitation resulted in much higher maximum C contents (∼130 mg g(-1) C difference) in the solid products than adsorption, which may be related to the formation of precipitated insoluble Fe(III)-organic complexes at high C/Fe ratios in the coprecipitates as revealed by Fe EXAFS analysis. Coprecipitation led to a complete blockage of mineral surface sites and pores with ≥177 mg g(-1) C and molar C/Fe ratios ≥2.8 in the solid products. FTIR and STXM-NEXAFS showed that the coprecipitated OM was similar in composition to the adsorbed OM. An enrichment of aromatic C was observed at low C/Fe ratios. Association of carboxyl functional groups with Fe was shown with FTIR and STXM-NEXAFS analysis. STXM-NEXAFS analysis showed a continuous C distribution on minerals. Desorption of the coprecipitated OM was less than that of the adsorbed OM at comparable C/Fe ratios. These results are helpful to understand C and Fe cycling in the natural environments with periodically fluctuating redox conditions, where coprecipitation can occur.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".