concentrations were higher than for the latite. This relatively high U radiation might
be related to the existence of uranyl carbonates like liebigite (Ca 2 (UO 2 )
(CO 3 ) 3 *11H 2 O). Freshwater limestone tended to show even lower values since its
formation depends on the re-precipitation of dissolved carbonate.
Typical soils around the local springs, those which caused the freshwater
limestone to occur, were Chernozems, and these soils showed lime concentrations
between 53 % and 57 % and organic matter concentrations between 2 % and 10 %.
In the strictest sense, Chernozems do not develop from freshwater limestone but
depend on secondary lime enrichment around springs, which is why the soils here
showed a higher signal than the pure freshwater limestone. The diluting effect of
freshwater-lime is underlined by the model calculation that follows. Combining the
freshwater limestone signal with the signal from local Alisols (Alisol representing a
relative young decalcified weathering product), and using weighting factors of 0.7
and 0.3 respectively, the resulting signal approximated the one measured for
Chernozems (K 0.6, eU 1.8, eTh 5.6 for Alisol from limestone; K 0.7, eU 1.8,
eTh 5.9 for Alisol from claystone).
The higher concentration in the limestone derived soils in comparison to the
parent material was dependent on another process. These soils developed from the
limestone dissolution residue, which was comprised predominantly of layer silicates
(54 % illite and 12 % kaolinite), quartz (27 %), feldspar (albite 5 %) and oxides
(hematite 3 %). On limestone sites, good drainage is assured, which is the reason why
we found only Alisols (high activity clays inherited from the limestone dissolution
Table 2.1 (continued)
Parent rock (a)
K [dag kg
À1
]
eU [mg kg
À1
]
eTh [mg kg
À1
]
Related soil (a)
Mean Æ Std
Mean Æ Std
Mean Æ Std
comparison with Australia (b)
Range
Range
Range
Alisols (N ¼ 4)
3.4 Æ 0.4
6.9 Æ 0.4
23.6 Æ 2.6
3.1 À 3.9
6.5 À 7.4
20.1 À 26.1
Acrisols (N ¼ 43)
2.4 Æ 1.4
11.8 Æ 3.5
33.0 Æ 11.5
0.7 À 5.9
7.5 À 20.5
16.3 À 57.0
Umbrisols (N ¼ 4)
4.2 Æ 0.9
9.1 Æ 1.5
6.2 Æ 1.7
3.2 À 5.2
7.7 À 10.8
3.7 À 7.1
Gneiss, migmatite (N ¼ 6)
4.0 Æ 1.0
9.0 Æ 2.9
25.9 Æ 11.3
3.1 À 5.7
5.6 À 13.2
5.9 À 41.0
Gneiss
2.4 À 3.8
2.1 À 3.6
18 À 55
Soils thereon
0.7 À 1.9
1.6 À 3.8
6 À 19
Acrisols (N ¼ 17)
1.1 Æ 0.6
12.9 Æ 4.6
33.1 Æ 7.0
0.4 À 1.9
7.5 À 21.0
22.1 À 46.6
Cambisols (N ¼ 7)
3.2 Æ 0.8
9.6 Æ 2.8
29.2 Æ 4.2
2.2 À 4.4
5.4 À 12.7
23.9 À 36.4
Leptosols (N ¼ 3)
3.2 Æ 0.9
7.2 Æ 1.6
27.5 Æ 7.2
2.5 À 4.3
5.6 À 8.8
20.9 À 35.1
Shale (N ¼ 1)
3.0
4.8
15.6
Other shales (except Archaean)
0.1 À 4.0
1.6 À 3.8
10 À 55
2 Beyond the Horizons: Challenges and Prospects for Soil Science and Soil. . .
41
be related to the existence of uranyl carbonates like liebigite (Ca 2 (UO 2 )
(CO 3 ) 3 *11H 2 O). Freshwater limestone tended to show even lower values since its
formation depends on the re-precipitation of dissolved carbonate.
Typical soils around the local springs, those which caused the freshwater
limestone to occur, were Chernozems, and these soils showed lime concentrations
between 53 % and 57 % and organic matter concentrations between 2 % and 10 %.
In the strictest sense, Chernozems do not develop from freshwater limestone but
depend on secondary lime enrichment around springs, which is why the soils here
showed a higher signal than the pure freshwater limestone. The diluting effect of
freshwater-lime is underlined by the model calculation that follows. Combining the
freshwater limestone signal with the signal from local Alisols (Alisol representing a
relative young decalcified weathering product), and using weighting factors of 0.7
and 0.3 respectively, the resulting signal approximated the one measured for
Chernozems (K 0.6, eU 1.8, eTh 5.6 for Alisol from limestone; K 0.7, eU 1.8,
eTh 5.9 for Alisol from claystone).
The higher concentration in the limestone derived soils in comparison to the
parent material was dependent on another process. These soils developed from the
limestone dissolution residue, which was comprised predominantly of layer silicates
(54 % illite and 12 % kaolinite), quartz (27 %), feldspar (albite 5 %) and oxides
(hematite 3 %). On limestone sites, good drainage is assured, which is the reason why
we found only Alisols (high activity clays inherited from the limestone dissolution
Table 2.1 (continued)
Parent rock (a)
K [dag kg
À1
]
eU [mg kg
À1
]
eTh [mg kg
À1
]
Related soil (a)
Mean Æ Std
Mean Æ Std
Mean Æ Std
comparison with Australia (b)
Range
Range
Range
Alisols (N ¼ 4)
3.4 Æ 0.4
6.9 Æ 0.4
23.6 Æ 2.6
3.1 À 3.9
6.5 À 7.4
20.1 À 26.1
Acrisols (N ¼ 43)
2.4 Æ 1.4
11.8 Æ 3.5
33.0 Æ 11.5
0.7 À 5.9
7.5 À 20.5
16.3 À 57.0
Umbrisols (N ¼ 4)
4.2 Æ 0.9
9.1 Æ 1.5
6.2 Æ 1.7
3.2 À 5.2
7.7 À 10.8
3.7 À 7.1
Gneiss, migmatite (N ¼ 6)
4.0 Æ 1.0
9.0 Æ 2.9
25.9 Æ 11.3
3.1 À 5.7
5.6 À 13.2
5.9 À 41.0
Gneiss
2.4 À 3.8
2.1 À 3.6
18 À 55
Soils thereon
0.7 À 1.9
1.6 À 3.8
6 À 19
Acrisols (N ¼ 17)
1.1 Æ 0.6
12.9 Æ 4.6
33.1 Æ 7.0
0.4 À 1.9
7.5 À 21.0
22.1 À 46.6
Cambisols (N ¼ 7)
3.2 Æ 0.8
9.6 Æ 2.8
29.2 Æ 4.2
2.2 À 4.4
5.4 À 12.7
23.9 À 36.4
Leptosols (N ¼ 3)
3.2 Æ 0.9
7.2 Æ 1.6
27.5 Æ 7.2
2.5 À 4.3
5.6 À 8.8
20.9 À 35.1
Shale (N ¼ 1)
3.0
4.8
15.6
Other shales (except Archaean)
0.1 À 4.0
1.6 À 3.8
10 À 55
2 Beyond the Horizons: Challenges and Prospects for Soil Science and Soil. . .
41