Characterization and identification of elemental sulphur, iron pyrite, mineral gypsum, phospho gypsum and marine gypsum using SEM-EDAX
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.5882Keywords:
marine gypsum, mineral gypsum, phospho gypsum, SEM-EDAX, sulphurAbstract
India has 6.73 million ha of salt-affected soils, of which 3.77 million ha is sodic soil. Sodicity is a serious issue in agriculture, and it prevents to meet the properties of fertile soil. Sodicity alters its physical and chemical properties, including soil structure and hydraulic conductivity. High exchangeable sodium and pH decrease soil permeability, available water capacity and infiltration rates through swelling and dispersion of clays as well as slaking of soil aggregates. Gypsum is one of the sources used for sodic soil reclamation, and the cheaper and alternative source is marine gypsum which is recovered from salt pans during production of common salt in coastal region, particularly in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu. The recovery of by-product gypsum and marine gypsum together is substantial and is comparable with the production of mineral gypsum.The amendments generally used for sodic soil reclamation should be a source of sulphates such as elemental sulphur, iron pyrite, mineral gypsum, phospho gypsum and marine gypsum. Characterization of sources by SEM–EDAX is rapid and elementary. The elemental composition revealed by the spectra of the bentonite sulphur for weight percentage and atomic percentage of sulphur is quantified as 34.04% and 18.59%, respectively, in the ZAF matrix. In iron pyrite spectra the weight percentage and atomic percentage of sulphur are 4.89% and 2.31%,respectively, in the ZAF matrix, while in mineral gypsum, the calcium weight percentage is 10.14% and atomic percentage is 04.04% while sulphur weight percentage is 6.52%, atomic percentage is 3.50%. The calcium composition in phosphogypsum is weight percentage is 14.69%; Atomic percentage is 34%, and the sulphur composition in phosphogypsum is weight percentage 10.40%, atomic percentage 5.60%, whereas in marine gypsum the calcium (weight percentage 09.10%, atomic percentage 03.58%) and sulphur (weight percentage 06.28%, atomic percentage 03.09%) proportions dominate as like two other above-mentioned gypsums, the element which makes difference in the marine gypsum from others is sodium (Weight percentage 00.18%, atomic percentage 00.12%). This helps to confirm that marine gypsum is an economic and alternate source available for sodic soil reclamation.
Downloads
References
MINES IBO. Indian Minerals Yearbook 2016: Government of India, Ministry of Mines, Nagpur; 2016.
Prather R, Goertzen J, Rhoades J, Frenkel H. Efficient amendment use in sodic soil reclamation. Soil Sci Soc Am J. 1978;42(5):782-86. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1978.03615995004200050027x
Antunes V, Candeias A, Oliveira MJ, Longelin S, Serrão V, Seruya AI, et al. Characterization of gypsum and anhydrite ground layers in 15th and 16th centuries Portuguese paintings by Raman Spectroscopy and other techniques. J Raman Spectrosc. 2014;45(11-12):1026-33. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrs.4488
La Russa MF, Ruffolo SA, Barone G, Crisci GM, Mazzoleni P, Pezzino A. The use of FTIR and micro-FTIR spectroscopy: An example of application to cultural heritage. Int J Spectrosc. 2009;2009:893528. https://doi:10.1155/2009/893528
Wei Y, Jun-Cheng L, Shu-Mei W, Sheng-Wang L, Jiang-Yong Y. The FTIR fingerprint of gypsum fibrosum. Acta Medica Mediter. 2016;32:607-11. https://doi.org/10.3964/j.issn.1000-0593(2016)07-2098-06
Palacio S, Aitkenhead M, Escudero A, Montserrat-Martí G, Maestro M, Robertson AJ. Gypsophile chemistry unveiled: Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy provides new insight into plant adaptations to gypsum soils. PLoS One. 2014;9(9):107285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107285
Rouchon V, Badet H, Belhadj O, Bonnerot O, Lavédrine B, Michard JG, et al. Raman and FTIR spectroscopy applied to the conservation report of paleontological collections: Identification of Raman and FTIR signatures of several iron sulfate species such as ferrinatrite and sideronatrite. J Raman Spectrosc. 2012;43(9):1265-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrs.4041
Lane MD. Mid-infrared emission spectroscopy of sulfate and sulfate-bearing minerals. Am Mineralog. 2007;92(1):1-18. https://doi.org/10.2138/am.2007.2170
Tang Y, Chen C, Li X, Wei Q, Guo X, Finkelman RB, et al. The evolution characteristics of organic sulfur structure in various Chinese high organic sulfur coals. Energy Explor Exploit. 2021;39(1):336-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144598720975142
Mahoney C, Marz C, Buckman J, Wagner T, Vladmir Orlando V. Pyrite oxidation in shales: Implication for paleo-redox proxies based on geochemical and SEM-EDX evidence. Sedim Geol. 2019;289:186-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.sedgeo.2019.06.006
Coates J. Interpretation of infrared spectra, a practical approach. Encyclopedia of analytical chemistry. J Wiley and Sons Ltd. Chichester. 2000; p.10815-37. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470027318.a5606
Adekola FA, Olosho AI, Baba AA, Adebayo SA. Dissolution kinetics studies of Nigerian gypsum ore in hydrochloric acid. J Chem Tech Metal. 2018;53(5):845-55.
Al Dabbas M, Eisa MY, Kadhim WH. Estimation of gypsum-calcite percentages using a Fourier transform infrared spectrophotometer (FTIR), in Alexandria Gypsiferous Soil-Iraq. Iraqi J Sci. 2014;55(4b):1916-26. https://www.ijs.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/eijs/article/view/10812
Yuan M, Sun X, Chen L, Zhang Y, Fan Y. Rapid determination of CaSO4.2H2O in gypsum by Raman spectra. Chinese Pharma. 2015;18:73-76. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac501932f
Bishop JL, Lane MD, Dyar MD, King SJ, Brown AJ, Swayze GA. Spectral properties of Ca-sulfates: Gypsum, bassanite and anhydrite. Am Mineral. 2014;99(10):2105-15. https://doi.org/10.2138/am-2014-4756
Klimchouk A. The dissolution and conversion of gypsum and anhydrite. Int J Spel. 1996;25(3):2. http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.25.3.2
Bao Y, Yang X, Wang S, Bian J, Yu Y. Difference of material base of gypsum before and after processing drugs by IR spectroscopy and ICP-MS. Chinese J Spectrosc Lab. 2012;29:3293-97.
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 28-01-2025 (2)
- 25-01-2025 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 D Janaki, P Gunavathi, P Balasubramaniam, A Alagesan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Licence details of published articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Open Access Policy
Plant Science Today is an open access journal. There is no registration required to read any article. All published articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC Attribution 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
