International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 1

ISSN 2229-5518

Compost Adsorption Desdorption of Picloram in the Presence of Surfactant on Six Agricultural Soils

Rounak M. Shariff

(Dept. of Chemistry, College of Scince, University of Salahaddin - Hawler-Iraq)

Abstract— To investigate the effect of different types of surfactants on adsorption behavior of pesticide, picloram [4-amino-3, 5,

6-trichloropicolinic acid] which is an ionic herbicide on six agricultural soil samples, picloram soil –water system-surfactant. The Freundlich adsorption coefficients Ks values for picloram adsorption in the presences of surfactant in three concentration of critical micelles concentration (cmc), batch equilibrium experiments performed of cationic surfactant Hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide (HDTMA). The Ks values of picloram range between 0.940-1.344, 0.943-1.407, and

0.952-1.434 ml/g, for cmc/10, cmc and cmc*20 respectively. Freundlich adsorption coefficients of picloram in the presence of

anionic surfactant sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) was determined, the values of Ks obtained were in the range 0.761-1.151,

0.654-1.141, and 0.631-1.099ml/g, for cmc/10, cmc, and cmc*20 respectively. The Ks values for polyoxyethylene sorbitanmonooleate ( tween-80) were in the range 0.971 -1.229, 1.104-1.303, and 1.189-1.404 ml/g, for cmc/10, cmc, and cmc*20 respectively. The values of Freundlich desorption coefficients (Ksdes), linearity factor for desorption (nsdes) and regression

factor for desorption (R2) ranged from 0.839-1.286, 0.267-0.619, and 0.889-0.993 respectively with HDTMA. The values of Ksdes,

nsdes and R2 values ranged from 0.895-1.289, 0.494-0.818, and 0.889-0.999 for desorption process respectively by anionic surfactant SDS, the values of Ksdes, nsdes and R2 ranged from 0.953-1.270, 0.429-0.650, and 0.888-0.995 respectively for non-

ionic surfactant Tween-80.

Index Terms — Adsorption - desorption kinetics, Adsorption isotherms, HPLC, Picloram, Surfactant.

—————————— • ——————————

1 INTRODUCTION

He use of kinetic models in the study of adsorption and desorption processes in heterogenous system is important. Three reasons for the use of kinetic or time- dependent models in soils have been suggested. First, many reactions in soil are slow; yet, they proceed at mea- surable rates. Second, non-equilibrium conditions can exist as a result of the physical transport of gases and so- lutes. Third, information about reaction mechanisms and processes occurring may be obtained from such data [1], [2]. The sorption pattern indicates an initial fast sorption that occurs within the first 24h tail it attainted the equili- brium within 48h. This was followed by slow reactions that appear to be the dominant processes i.e desorption of picloram if compared to the amount of picloram still sorbed on the soil. Picloram; is anionic herbicide is used to control unwanted woody plants and to prepare sites for planting trees and used to control broad-leaf plants and trees [3], [4]. Its adsorption involved ionic interaction with positive charges in soil and also the less energetic Van der Waals forces and charge transfer [5], [6]. A two step adsorption-desorption mechanism was used to mod- el the observed behavior that can be described in terms of external and internal sorption sites. Desorption from ex-

————————————————

Rounak M.Shariff, Departmen of Chemistry, College of Science, University of Salahaddin- Hwaler-Iraq. E-mail: rounakm2000@yahoo.com

ternal sites is relatively fast, taking place in about 5h and is characterized by a first-order rate constant. Many stu- dies have indicated that the sorption and desorption of the organic chemicals in soils are not rapid, reversible process, despite past assumption to the contrary [7], [8]. A study of picloram desorption isotherms show positive hysteresis coefficients H in the six selected soil samples [9], [10]. Hysteresis coefficients H1, where Na /Ndes ratio for Ferundlich adsorption and desorption constants, re- spectively, indicating the greater or lesser irreversibility of adsorption in all samples, the highest values corres- ponding for which the highest adsorption constant was obtained. The coefficient H1 is a simple one and easy to use, indicating an increase in the irreversibility of the ad- sorption of herbicid as the clay content increases [8].

2 METHODLOGY

2.1 Soils

Fresh soil samples were taken from plough layer (0-15 cm depth), after removal of stones and debris, air dried un- der shade, ground then sieved through 2mm sieve and stored in black plastic container in dark[11], [12]. The six soil samples were collected from six main agricultural, representing a range of physico-chemical properties. Sub- samples of homogenized soils were analyzed for moisture content, organic matter content, particle size distribution, texture, pH, loss on ignition and exchangeable basic ca- tions were listed in Table 1 a & b.

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 2

ISSN 2229-5518

2.2 Pesticide and Surfactant

Analytical grad substituted picloram herbicide was pur- chased from Riedal-de Haen, Sigma-Aldrich company ltd. With following purities expressed in weight percent pic- loram >97.4% [CAS-No.1918-02-1] respectively. The three different surfactants employed in this study comprised; the cationic Hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide (HDTMA), the anionic sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) and nonionic polyoxyethylene sorbitanmonooleate (Tween-80). These compounds were purchased at reagent grade purity from BDH, and were used without further treatments. The critical micelles concentration cmc of the three surfactants are shown in Table 2. The three surfac- tants were studied at three concentrations: the critical micelles concentration (cmc), twenty-fold higher than cmc (20cmc), and 10-fold lower than cmc (cmc/10). All chemi- cals used were of analytical grade reagents and used without pre-treatments. Standard stock solutions of the pesticides were prepared in deionised water.

2.3 Adsorption Experiments

Adsorption of picloram from aqueous solution was de- termined at laboratory temperature (25±1 Co) employing a standard batch equilibrium method [13], [14]. Duplicate air-dried soil samples were equilibrated with different pesticide concentrations (2, 5, 10, and 15 µg ml-1) were for the pesticide at the soil solution ratios 4:8, in 16 ml glass tube fitted with Teflon-lined screw caps. The samples plus blanks (no pesticide) and control (no soil) were thermostated and placed in shaker for 0.5, 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24,
48h. The tubes were centrifuged for 20 min. at 3500 rpm. One ml of the clear supernatant was removed and ana- lyzed for the pesticide concentration [15]. Pesticide identi- fication was done by PerkinElmer series 200 USA family high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) equipped with a changed loop (20µl), C18 reversed phase column, flow rate 1.0 ml min-1, and a variable wave length UV detector at wavelength 220 nm . Separation of picloram in aqueous phase was achieved with a mobile phase of 40% acetonitrile and 60% water (acidified with
0.1% phosphoric acid). Each sample was injected twice to determine the pesticide content by integrating the ob- tained peak with the respective standard pesticides. The pesticide content was average of two measurements, with
no more than 5% deviation between the measurements.
the six selected soil samples, initially treated with differ- ent concentrations alone (2, 5, 10 and 15) pgml-1 in pres- ence of surfactant, after equilibrium had been reached for
24h, 5ml were removed from the solution and immediate- ly replaced by 5ml of the surfactant suspension used in the study. The resuspended samples were shaken for 24h, after sufficient time, were centrifuged and the desorbed picloram was measured as reported previously, this de- sorption procedure was repeated two times for each soil. The amount of picloram at each desorption stage was calculated as the difference between the initial amount adsorbed and the amount desorbed, all determinations were carried out in duplicate. Competitive picloram ad- sorption-desorption between soil and surfactant in the soil-picloram-water-surfactant system, in the presence HDTMA, SDS, and Tween-80 at concentrations of cmc/10, cmc, and cmc*20 were conducted adsorption- desorption isotherms [16].

3 DATA ANALYSIS

3.1 Adsorption Isotherms

During adsorption studies, equilibrium concentration of pesticide in solution (Ce) was determined by direct analy- sis of the solution and amount of pesticide adsorbed on soil (Cs) was computed by the difference between the initial and the equilibrium concentration in the aqueous phase. Analysis of control samples showed that, in the absent of soil, pesticide concentration remained constant during the course of the batch experiments [17].

3.2 Freundlich Adsorption-Desorption Isotherms

Adsorption isotherm parameters were calculated using the linearized form of Freundlich equation [18]. Cs and Ce were defined previously, KF is Freundlich adsorption coefficients, and n is a linearity factor, it is also known as adsorption intensity, 1/n is the slope and logKF is the in- tercept of the straight line resulting from the plot of logCs versus logCe shown in Fig-1. The values of KF and 1/n calculated, from the regression equation showed that Freundlich adsorption model effectively describes iso- therms for the pesticides in all cases were listed in Table
3.

1 (1)

The same procesure is repeted in precence of surfactants.

log Cs

= log K F +

n log Ce

2.4 Desorption Experiments

Desorption processes were done as each test tube was placed in a thermostated shaker at 25ºC after equilibra- tion for 48 h with different pesticide concentrations (2, 5,
10 and 15 µg ml-1) the samples were centrifuged, 5ml of
Desorption isotherms of picloram were fitted to the li- nearzed form of the Freundlich equation [19], [20].

1

supernatant was removed from the adsorption equili- brium solution and immediately replaced by 5ml of water and was this repeated for four times. The resuspended

logCs = log KFdes +

ndes

logCe

(2)
samples were shaken for 0.5, 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, and 48h for the kinetic study. Desorption of picloram was studied in
The values of KFdes is Freundlich desorption coefficients,
and 1/ ndes is a linearity factor, it is also known as desorp-

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 3

ISSN 2229-5518

tion intensity and from the regression equation showed that Freundlich desorption model effectively describes isotherms for the pesticides in all cases, [21], [22] were

H 1 =

N a

N des

(5)
listed in Table 4. To investigate the effect of different types of surfactants on adsorption behavior of pesticides [23], [24].The Freundlich adsorption equation in the pres- ence of surfactant used to determined follows as [8], [25].
Where Na /Ndes ratio for Ferundlich adsorption and de- sorption constants, respectively, indicating the greater or lesser irreversibility of adsorption in all samples, the highest values corresponding for which the highest ad- sorption constant was obtained. The coefficient H1 is a simple one and easy to use, Data in Table 5 demonstrated

logCs = log Ks +

1

logCe

s

(3)
H1 values for picloram from the selected soil samples in the range from 0.223-0.553 for desorption process, indicat-
ing an increase in the irreversibility of the adsorption of
Where Cs is the amount of adsorbed herbicide equation in the presence of surfactant (pg ml-1), Ce is the equilibrium concentration of herbicide in solution of herbicides in solution equation in the presence of surfactant (pg ml-1), and Ks and ns are the Freundlich affinity and nonlinearity coefficients respectively in the presence of surfactant. The Freundlich equation for desorption in the presence of sur- factant, values of Ksdes for all experiments were calculated using the following equations

1 (4)

herbicide as the clay content increases [8].

4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

2.1 Adsorption – Desorption Isotherms

Previously work indicated that the linear model not fitted properly most experimental data with the pesticides [12]. The non-linear adsorption isotherms might be expected for the compounds for which competition for a limited number of cation exchange sites contributes significantly
to adsorption process. Data from batch equilibrium me-

logCs = logKsdes +

nsdes

logCe

thod revealed that the adsorption of herbicides on the selected soil samples followed the first order rate law. To

Where Cs is the amount of picloram still adsorbed (pg g-1), Ce is the equilibrium concentration of picloram in solution after desorption equation in the presence of surfactant (pg mL-1), and KFdes (pg g1-nfdes /mlnfdes g-1) and nfd are the Freundlich desorption affinity and nonlinearity coeffi- cients, respectively equation, for all the three surfactant at the three different concentrations.

Fig.1. Fitted adsorption isotherm models (Ferundlich model) for picloram selected soils (• S1, • S2, .t. S3, x S4, * S5, •S6).

3.3 Hystersis ceofficient

A study of picloram desorption isotherms show positive hysteresis coefficients H in the six selected soil samples [8], [10]. Hysteresis coefficients H1, can be determined by using the following equation.
investigate the effect of different types of surfactants on adsorption behavior of pesticides [26], [27]. The Ks values for picloram adsorption in the presences of cationic sur- factant (HDTMA) The Ks values of picloram range be- tween 0.940-1.344, 0.943-1.407, and 0.952-1.434 ml/g, for cmc/10, cmc, and cmc*20 respectively. Freundlich ad- sorption coefficients of picloram in the presence of anio- nic surfactant (SDS) was determined and summarized in table 3, the Ks values obtained were in the range 0.761-
1.151, 0.654-1.141, and 0.631-1.099 ml/g, for cmc/10, cmc,
and cmc*20 respectively. Batch equilibrium experiments
performed for tween-80, picloram soil –water system and
Ks values were determined and summarized in table 3. The Ks values were in the range 0.971 -1.229, 1.104-1.303,
and 1.189-1.404 ml/g, for cmc/10, cmc, and cmc*20 re-
spectively. The values of KF, n and R2 ranged from 1.078-
1.211, 0.344-0.966, and 0.882-0.993 respectively for adsorp-
tion picloram without surfactant, while the values of
KFdes, n and R2 ranged from 1.045-1.586, 0.718-1.947, and
0.987-0.999 respectively for desorption of picloram with-
out surfactant. The desorption isotherms of picloram with HDTMA treatment was lower. Data demonstrated in ta- ble 4 represents the values of Ksdes, nsdes and R2 for desorp- tion of picloram from the selected soil samples. The val- ues of Ksdes, nsdes and R2 ranged from 0.839-1.286, 0.267-
0.619, and 0.889-0.993 respectively. However sorption of anionic herbicides picloram was almost unaffected by anionic surfactant SDS, slightly decrease in adsorption, with slightly increased in desorption of picloram was de- tected. Data demonstrated in table 4. Ksdes, nsdes and R2 for desorption of picloram from the selected soil samples.

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 4

ISSN 2229-5518

Ksdes, nsdes and R2 values ranged from 0.895-1.289, 0.494-
0.818, and 0.889-0.999 for the desorption process respec-
tively. The non-ionic surfactant Tween-80 at different
concentrations enhanced desorption of herbicides from
soils. All desorption isotherms showed that hysteresis
coefficients were decreased. These variations were de- pendent on surfactant concentration and soil OM and the clay contents. The effect of tween-80 on desorption of the picloram was very low in soil with a high clay content.
The results indicate the potential use of tween-80 to facili- tate desorption of these herbicides from soil to the water- surfactant system. Values of Ksdes, nsdes and R2 for desorp- tion of picloram from the selected soil samples. Data in Table 4 listed the values of Ksdes, nsdes and R2 ranged from
0.953-1.270, 0.429-0.650, and 0.888-0.995 respectively. Im- portant aspect to be considered is the interaction of sur- factant with soil, since it may, on one hand, alter the sur- factant concentration in solution, thereby decreasing its efficiency for desorption, and on the other, alter the soil surface, where surfactant molecules may be adsorbed in the form of monomer or forming hemicelles or admi- celles. Thus surfactant adsorption increases the organic content of the soil and increased hydrophobic surfaces, which may contribute to decrease in the organic com- pound desorption. Of all the above processes, the study of surfactant-enhanced desorption for organic pollutants adsorbed on soil has been addressed by many investiga- tors in recent years although such information can only be considered a beneficial effect in the context of major engi- neered remediation processes. In the study of surfactant- enhanced desorption it is necessary to take into account the characteristics of the surfactant (e.g., chemical struc- ture, hydrophilic-lipophilic balance [HLB], or cmc), its concentration in the soil-water system, the solubility and hydrophobicity of the characteristics of soil (e.g., OM, clay content). Enhanced solubility of pollutants has been clearly indicated by several authors at surfactant concen- trations higher than the cmc. However, at surfactant con- centrations below the cmc competitive adsorption of or- ganic compound by soil and/or by a surfactant in solu- tion may occur, and hence an increase or decrease in de- sorption of compound from soil, depending on the cha- racteristics of soil and organic compound [28], [29].

4.2 Hystersis Coefficients

Desorption isotherms of picloram show a positive hyste- resis coefficients H1. Values of hysteresis coefficient for adsorption –desorption of picloram on the selected soil samples in the presence of HDTMA, SDS and tween-80 were summarized in Table 5. The results of present study, which show the decrease in H1 values indicated higher hysteresis at lower pesticide concentration in presence of HDTMA, exhibited a higher sorption affinity and higher resistance for desorption[30]. Data in Table5 demonstrat- ed that H1 for desorption of picloram from the selected soil samples in the presence of HDTMA were in the range S3> S6> S5>S4 >S1> S2, values of H1 ranged from 0.693-
2.594. The increase or decrease in hysteresis of the adsorp- tion-desorption isotherms in the presence of SDS solu- tions depend on the SDS concentration and on OM con- tent of the soils .Below the cmc, SDS only increase the desorption of picloram in the highest OM con- tent(3.196%). However, above the cmc*20 desorption of picloram increases in all soils while the efficiency of de- sorption increasing with OM content of the Soil [31], [32]. Data in Table 4 demonstrated the value of H1 for desorp- tion of picloram from the selected soil samples in the presence of SDS were in the range S5> S4>S6 > S1> S2> S3, and values of H1 ranged from 0.493-1.667. Consistent with the previous study [33], [34]. The H1 values for tween-80 decrease indicated higher hysteresis at lower picloram concentration. OM considered as the primary soil com- ponent responsible for the adsorption of non-ionic pesti- cides. Desorption of the neutral form was completely re- versible, however, the charged species exhibited desorp- tion-resistance fraction. The difference in sorption and desorption between the neutral and charged species is attributed to the fact that the neutral form partition by the hydrophobic binding to the soil, while anionic sorbs by a more specific exothermic adsorption reaction [35], [36]. Data in Table 4 demonstrated that H1 for adsorption- desorption of picloram from the selected soil samples in the presence of tween-80 were in the range S2> S1>S5 >S4> S6> S3, and values of H1 ranged from 0.331-2.741. Desorp- tion of soil-associated pesticides, hysteresis, and possible mechanisms have received considerable attention in lite- rature [37], [38]. Desorption rates of pesticides can be cha- racterized by three types of processes, rapid desorption, rate-limited desorption, and a fraction that does not de- sorbed over experimental time scale. Many factors affect the adsorption-desorption of pesticides such as pesticide type; soil properties, organic matter, clay content, soil pH and environmental conditions [39], [40]. Equation 5 shows the main effect of surfactant at concentrations close to cmc is to increase the affinity of picloram for the soil with, except for soils high in clay content where the sur- factant effect is to enhance the affinity of picloram for aqueous phase [41].

5 CONCLUTION

Desorption rates of pesticides can be characterized by three types of processes, rapid desorption, rate-limited desorption, and a fraction that does not desorbed over experimental time scale. Many factors affect the adsorp- tion-desorption of pesticides such as pesticide type; soil properties, organic matter, clay content, soil pH and envi- ronmental conditions. The batch kinetics experiments were used to differentiate the behavior of the pesticide in six agricultural soil samples. The desorption studies demonstrated that picloram has stronger affinity to all the selected soil samples than adsorption, and the soils varied widely in their adsorption capacities for picloram. We have further found that soil OC and clay content and the

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 5

ISSN 2229-5518

chemical nature of the constituents determined the ad- sorption affinity of the soil. Soil characteristics as solubili- ty and hydrophobicity (e.g., OM, clay content). Enhanced solubility of pollutants has been clearly indicated by sev- eral authors at surfactant concentrations higher than the cmc.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to thank all the chemistry staff in Sala- haddin University. I express my gratitude to Assit proff Dr. Kasim and Dr. Kaffia.

REFERENCES

[1] S.A. Wasay, W. Parker, P. J. Van Geel, S. Barrington and S. To- kunaga., "Arsenic Pollution of a Loam soil: Retention from and Decontamination". Journal of Soil Contamination. 9 (2000): 51-

64.

[2] Kahan, S. "Equilibrium and Kinetic Studies of the Adsorption Studies of the Adsorption of 2, 4-D and Picloram on Humic Ac- id". Canadian Journal of soil Science. 53 (1973):429-434.

[3] Nearpass, D.C. "Adsorption of Picloram by Humic Acids and

Humin". Soil Sci. 121 (1976):272-277.

[4] Grover, R. "Influence of Properties on Phytotoxicity of 4- Amino-3, 5, 6-Trichloropicolinic acid (Picloram)". Weed Res. 8 (1968):226-232.

[5] Massaroppi, M.R.C.; Machado, S.A.S.; Avaca, .A. J. Braz. chem.

Soc. 14 (2003):113.

[6] Tan L.K; Humphries D; Yeung PYp; Florence LZ. "Determina- tions of Clopyralid, Picloram, and Silvex at Low Concentration in Soils by Calcium Hydroxide-Water Extraction and Gas Chromatography Measurement". J. Agricult. Food Chem. 44 (1996):1135-1143.

[7] James W. Bigger, Uri Mingelgrin, and Max W. Cheung. "Equili- brium and Kinetics of Adsorption of Picloram and Parathion with Soils" J, Agric. Food Chem. 26( 1978):1306-1312

[8] M.S. Rodriguz-Cruz, M. J. Sanchez-Martin, and M. Sanchez- Camazano,. "Enhanced Desorption of Herbicides Sorbed on Soils by Addition of TritonX-100". J. Environ. Qual. 33 (2004):920-929.

[9] DiCesare, D., and J. A. Simth. "Surfactant Effects on Desorption of Nonionic Compounds". Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.134 (1994):1-29.

[10] R.Celies, M. Real, M. C, Hermosin, and J. Crnejo, “Desorption, persistence, and leaching of dibenzofuran in European soils,” Soil Sci. Soc.Am. J. 70 (2006):1310-1317.

[11] R. Ahmad, R. S. Kookana, and A.M. Alston, Bulletin of Environ

Contaminat and toxicol, 66 (2001):313-318.

[12] Rounak M. Shariff,” The Study of adsorption and desorption of Picloram on Six Agricultural Soils” Journal of Al-anbar un.iversity for Pure Scince, 3(2009):13-24.

[13] Aekseeva T., Besse P., Binet F. Delort A-M., Forano C., San- celme M. "Effect of Earthworms by Soil Ingestion on Atrazine Adsorption and Biodegradation” Applied and Environmental Microbiology", 49 (2004):582-587.

[14] Piccolo, A. & Celano, G. "Hydrogen-Bonding Interactions be-

tween the Herbicide Glyphosate and Water- Soluble Humic

Substances". Envirinmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 13 (1994):1737-1741.

[15] White, J.L., "Clay-Particle Interactions" In: Kaufman, D.D., Still, G.G., Paulson, G.D., Bandal, S.K. (Eds.), Bound and Conjugated pesticide Residues. ACS Symposium Series, Washington, (1976):208-218.

[16] Thanh H. Dao "Competitive Anion Sorption Effects on Dairy

West Water Dissolved phosphorus Extraction with Zeolite- based Sorbents". Food, Agriculture & Environment., 4 (2003):263-269.

[17] Murphy, E. M. and Zachara, J.M. "The Role of Sorbed Humic Substances on the Distribution of Organic and Inorganic Con- taminants in Groundwater", Geoderma. 67(1995): 103-124.

[18] Stearman, G.K., R.J. Ewis, L.J. Tortorelli, and D.D. Tyler. "Her- bicide Reactivity of Soil Organic Matter Fraction in No-Tilled Cotton". Soil Sci. Am. J. 53 (1989): 1690-1694.

[19] Suman, G., Gajbhiye, v. T. "Adsorption –Desorption, Preses- tance, and Leaching Beahavior of Dithiopyr in an Auuvial soil of India". J. Environ. Sci. and Health. B 37(2002):573-586.

[20] Mohammed A Ali and Peter J. Baugh. "Sorption, Desorption Studies of Six Pyerethroids and Mirex on Soils using GC/ MS- NICI" Internet. J. Environ. Anal. Chem., 83 (2003):923-933.

[21] Soledad M.; Andades R.; Sonia Rodri Guez-Cruz M.; Jesus San- chez-Martin M., & Maria Sanchez-Camazano, January-March, "Effect of the Modification of Natural Clay Minerals with Hex- adecylpyridinium Cation on the Adsorption-Desorption of Fungicides" Intern.J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 84 (2004):133-141.

[22] R. Ahmad., R. S. Kookona, A. M. Alston, and R. H. Bromilow, " Difference in Sorption Behavior of Carbaryl and Phosalone in Soils from Australia", Pakistan, and the United Kingdom. Aust. J. Soil Res., 39 (2001): 893-908.

[23] Baoshan Xing, Joseph J. Pingnatello, and Barbara Giglitti. "Competitive Sorption between Atrazine and other Organic Compounds in Soils and Model Sorbents". Environ. Sci. Tech- nol.30 (1996): 2432-2440

[24] Werkheiser, W.O. and Anderson, S.J. "Effect of Soil Properties and Surfactant on Primisulfuron Sorption". Journal of Envi- ronmental Quality, 25 (1996): 809-814.

[25] J. Park, S.D. Comfort, P. J. Shea, and T. A. Machacek. "Reme- diating Munitions-Contaminated Soil with Zerovalent Iron and Cationic Surfactants". J. Environ. Qual. 33 (2004): 1305-1313.

[26] Maria Jose Carrizosa, Pamela J. Rice, William C. Koskinen.

Ignacio Carrizosa and Maria del Carmen Hermosin. Camazano. "Sorption of Isoxaflutole and DKN on Organoclays". Clay Min- erals Socity. 52 (2004):341-349.

[27] Spalding, R.F., M.E. Exner, D.D. Snow, D.A. Cassada, M.E.

Burbach, and S.J. Monson. "Herbicides in ground water beneath Nebraskas management systems evaluation area". J. Environ. Qual. 32 (2003):92-99.

[28] Rosen, M.J. 1989. "Sufactants and Interfacial Phenomena". 2 nd

Edition. John Wily and Sons. New York

[29] J. W. Bowden, A. M. Posner. And J. P. Quirk. "Ionic Adsorption on Variable Charge Mineral Surfaces. Theoretical – Charge De- velopment and Titration Curves". Aust. J. Soi Res. l5 (1977):

121-124.

[30] M. Sanchez-camazano, M., M.J. Sanchej-Martin, M.S. Rodri- guez-Curz. "Sodium Dodycyl Sulphate-Enhanced Desorption of

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 6

ISSN 2229-5518

Atrazine: Effect of Surfactant Concentration and Organic Mat- ter Content of Soil". Chemosphere, 41 (2000):1310-1305.

[31] Rafael Celis and William C. Koskinen Aamaned. "Characteriza- tion of Pesticide Desorption from Soil by the Isotopic Exchange Technique" Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63 (1999):1659-1666.

[32] Uan –Boh cheah, Ralph C. Kirkwood, Keng-Yeang Lum. "Ad- sorption, Desorption and Mobility of four Commonly used Pes- ticides in Malaysian Agricultural soils" Pesticide Science. 50 (1999):53-63.

[33] Locke, Martin A. Reddy, Krishan N., Gaston, lewis A., Zablo- towicz, Robert. "Adjuvant Modification of Herbicide Interac- tions in Aqueouse Soil Suspensions" Soil Science. 2002.

167(7):444-452.

[34] Nelson, P. N., Baldock, A., Clarke, P., J. M., and Churchman, G.

J. "Dispersed Clay and Organic Matter in Soil: their Nature and

Associations". Australian Journal of Soil Research. 1999. 37: 289-

316.

[35] Mah Yew keong, K. Hidajat and M. S Uddin. "Surfactant en- haned electro-Kinetic remedation of contaminated soil". Journal of the Institution of Engineers, 45 (2005):61-70.

[36] Luning Pang and Murry Close. "Afenuation and Transport of Atrazine and Picloram in an Alluvial gravel aquifer a Reacter Test and Batch Study" New Zealandd Journal of Marine and Fresh Water Research. 333(1999):279-291.

[37] Ahmed F. El-Aswad. "Effect of Organicamendments on Aldi- carb Sorption-Desorption and Soil-Bound Residue" Journal of Applied Sciences Research. 2007. 3(11) :1437-1448

[38] Zareen Khan, and Y.Anjaneyulu. "Influence of Soil Components on Adsorption-Desorption of Hazardous Organics- Development of Low Cost Technology for Reclamation of Ha- zardous Waste Duumpsites". Journal of Hazardous Materials. .

9 (2004):305-315.

[39] Liang k. Tan. David Humphries, Pauky, Y. P. Yeung and L.Zeak Fibo. "Determinations of Clopyralid, Picloram, and Sil- vex at Low Concentration in Soils by Calcium Hydroxid Water Extraction and Gas Chromatography Measurment". J. Agric. Food Chem. 44(1996):1135-1143.

[40] I. K. Konstantinon and T. A. Albanis. "Adsorption- Desorption Studies of Selected Herbicides in Soil –Fly Ash Mixture". J. Agrie. Food Chem. 48 (2000): 4780-4790.

[41] Davids. Kossen and Stephen V. Byrme. "Interaction of Aniline with Soil and Ground Water at an Industrial Spill Site". Envi-

ronmental Health Preespective. . 103(1995):932-942.

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 7

ISSN 2229-5518

TABLE 1A

SOME PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF THE SELECTED SOIL SAMPLES

pH

In D.W in CaCl2

S1

2.799

2.544

7.864

47.760

0.414

7.516

7.501

S2

1.039

1.864

3.445

54.276

0.431

6.825

6.805

S3

3.196

2.633

6.160

26.780

0.572

6.981

6.906

S4

2.356

2.604

4.058

41.133

0.388

7.651

7.621

S5

1.914

2.012

5.442

32.488

0.492

6.395

6.305

S6

1.509

3.417

2.926

55.121

0.545

6.940

6.900

TABLE 1B

PARTICALE SIZE DISTIBUTION A AND THE TEXTURE OF THE SELECTED SOIL SAMPLES

No. Soil X (m) Y (m) Sand% Silt % Clay % Texture

S1

S2

Ha- labjh Darb

45+58.905 -

45+42.31 -

35+101.166 -

35+06.39 -

4.4

37.4

39.4

46.1

56.2

20..2

Clay

Loam

nidik-

han

S3

Jam-

44+50.026 -

35+31.355 -

11.7

52.2

36.1

Silty Clay Loam

jamal

S4

Ha- labjh

45+58.786 -

45+10.338 -

20.2

48.0

31.8

Clay loam

S5

Kir- kuk

44+21.825 -

35+34.940 --

17.6

61.8

20.6

Silt Loam

S6

Duhok

42+53.944 -

36+51.185 -

11.6

45.7

42.7

Silty Clay

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 8

ISSN 2229-5518

TABLE 2

SELECTED PROPERTIES OF THE SURFACTANTS (M=6 TO 13, N=7 TO13)

Surfactant Type Formula cmc gL-1

HDTMA Cationic C16H33 N(CH3 )3Br 0.3

SDS anionic C18H29SO4Na 2.38

Tween-80 nonionic CH3(CH2)mCH2O(CH2CH2O)nH 0.04

TABLE 3

FREUNDLICH ADSORPTION COEFFICENT FOR THE ADSORPTION OF PICLORAM IN THE PRESENCE OF HDTMA, SDS AND

TW EEN-80 OF THREE DIFFERENT CONCENTRATIONS ON THE SELECTED SOIL SAMPLES

Soil

KF(ml/g) Without surfac. /n

/R2

Ks (ml/g) HDTMA /ns /R2

Ks (ml/g) SDS /ns /R2

Ks (ml/g) Tween-80/ ns /R2

Soil

KF(ml/g) Without surfac. /n

/R2

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

S1

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

1.171

0.397

0.933

1.085

0.435

0.973

1.211

0.497

0.997

1.078

0.344

0.999

1.168

0.559

0.978

1.189

0.966

0.882

1.006 1.092 1.177

0.558 0.519 0.472

0.970 0.957 0.994

0.940 0.943 0.952

0.423 0.398 0.605

0.991 0.990 0.980

1.344 1.374 1.397

0.785 0.943 1.063

0.985 0.975 0.974

1.142 1.153 1.195

0.652 0.647 0.885

0.965 0.976 0.938

1.198 1.199 1.211

0.751 0.796 0.919

0.950 0.948 0.949

1.328 1.407 1.434

1.046 1.269 1.398

0.871 0.865 0.884

1.061 1.035 0.865

0.431 0.516 0.547

0.973 0.951 0.903

0.984 0.974 0.814

0.456 0.655 0.824

0.977 0.989 0.939

0.761 0.654 0.631

0.337 0.872 0.557

0.811 0.852 0.704

0.963 0.936 0.852

0.707 0.782 0.763

0.929 0.914 0.901

1.151 1.141 1.099

0.657 0.548 0.853

0.920 0.928 0.971

0.816 0.794 0.675

0.706 0.886 0.970

0.788 0.762 0.752

1.054 1.277 1.327

0.945 0.881 1.211

0.973 0.881 0.901

1.199 1.218 1.221

0.671 0.884 0.797

0.960 0.939 0.937

1.021 1.104 1.211

0.301 0.645 0.839

0.971 0.974 0.974

0.971 1.117 1.189

0.290 0.926 1.395

0.997 0.923 0.893

1.229 1.303 1.404

0.508 0.808 1.124

0.989 0.963 0.936

1.003 1.198 1.211

0.204 0.802 0.692

0.926 0.987 0.990

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 2, Issue 5, May-2011 9

ISSN 2229-5518

TABLE 4

FREUNDLICH DESORPTION COEFFICENT FOR THE DESORPTION OF PICLORAM IN THE PRESENCE OF HDTMA, SDS AND

TW EEN-80 OF THREE DIFFERENT CONCENTRATIONS ON THE SELECTED SOIL SAMPLES

Soil

KFdes(ml/g) Without surfac. /n

/R2

Ksdes (ml/g) HDTMA /nsdes /R2

Ksdes (ml/g SDS/nsdes /R2

Ksdes (ml/g) Tween-80/ nsdes /R2

Soil

KFdes(ml/g) Without surfac. /n

/R2

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

S1

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

1.045

0.718

0.999

1.586

1.947

0.987

1.066

1.189

0.999

1.277

1.425

0.992

1.398

1.733

0.998

1.493

1.867

0.995

0.839 1.211 1.237

0.408 0.617 0.619

0.985 0.991 0.993

1.286 1.270 1.273

0.553 0.574 0.555

0.979 0.988 0.989

1.136 1.217 1.223

0.267 0.543 0.519

0.961 0.948 0.979

1.004 1.199 1.208

0.429 0.545 0.535

0.932 0.957 0.959

1.038 1.196 1.212

0.479 0.563 0.566

0.896 0.926 0.938

1.162 1.177 1.197

0.539 0.536 0.539

0.889 0.911 0.934

0.895 0.964 1.219

0.558 0.658 0.494

0.901 0.889 0.949

1.014 1.161 1.184

0.599 0.671 0.537

0.939 0.981 0.996

1.156 1.198 1.202

0.683 0.614 0.641

0.999 0.961 0.963

1.058 1.164 1.189

0.738 0.617 0.659

0.912 0.966 0.999

1.009 1.082 1.241

0.621 0.631 0.577

0.981 0.975 0.995

1.105 1.211 1.289

0.818 0.714 0.582

0.998 0.923 0.974

1.174 1.199 1.256

0.650 0.561 0.542

0.995 0.919 0.992

0.953 1.152 1.175

0.429 0.520 0.523

0.888 0.938 0.94

1.018 1.167 1.270

0.909 0.599 0.499

0.999 0.974 0.970

1.189 1.197 1.212

0.564 0.518 0.509

0.977 0.971 0.974

1.097 1.146 1.158

0.495 0.512 0.501

0.952 0.961 0.965

1.183 1.196 1.206

0.561 0.540 0.545

0.982 0.968 0.975

TABLE 5

HYSTERSIS COEFFICENT FOR ADSORPTION- DESORPTION OF PICLORAM ON THE SELECTED D SOIL SAMPLES

Soi l

H1 (HDTAM)

H1(SDS)

H1 (Tween-80)

Soi l

cmc/10 cmc cmc*

20

cmc/10 cmc cmc*20

cmc/10 cmc cmc*20

S1

S2

S3

S4

S5

S6

1.368 0.841 0.763

0.765 0.693 1.090

2.940 1.737 2.048

1.519 1.187 1.654

1.568 1.413 1.624

1.941 2.367 2.594

0.772 0.784 1.107

0.761 0.976 1.534

0.493 1.420 0.869

0.958 1.267 1.158

1.058 0.868 1.478

0.863 1.241 1.667

1.454 1.570 2.234

1.564 1.700 1.524

0.331 1.077 1.681

0.514 1.788 2.741

1.026 1.578 2.243

0.364 1.485 1.269

IJSER © 2011 http://www.ijser.org