Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 2322–2329 | Cite as

Comparison of phosphorus sorption characteristics in the soils of riparian buffer strips with different land use patterns and distances from the shoreline around Lake Chaohu

  • Xiuyun Cao
  • Xiaoyan Chen
  • Chunlei SongEmail author
  • Yiyong Zhou
Soils, Sec 3 • Remediation and Management of Contaminated or Degraded Lands • Research Article



The construction of riparian buffer strips has become increasingly important due to the effective phosphorus (P) retention of the strips, thus preventing eutrophication in freshwater ecosystems. The key mechanism is P sorption in soils. To provide some suggestions for increasing the sorption ability of P, the relationships between P sorption behavior and both land use patterns and distance from the shoreline were determined.

Materials and methods

In April, July, and October 2013, field investigations were carried out along the shoreline of Lake Chaohu. Eleven sections, including 36 sampling sites at different distances from the shoreline, were chosen, and these sections contained different types of riparian buffer strips, such as grassland, farmland, forest, wetland, and forest/grassland. The P species, sorption parameters, and dominant vegetation species were analyzed.

Results and discussion

The total P (TP) and P sorption maximum (Qmax) showed no recognizable seasonal variation and were closely correlated with the distance from the shoreline. The further the distance from the shoreline, the higher the TP and Qmax values, suggesting that soil traits could determine the P sorption extent. However, the Olsen-P content and equilibrium P concentration (EPC0) fluctuated greatly, with the peak occurring in spring and the minimum occurring in summer in the majority of the sampling sites. In addition, positive relationships existed between the TP content and the Qmax value as well as the Olsen-P content and the EPC0 value. Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) further showed that the Olsen-P content and EPC0 values were closely related to the dominant vegetation species, indicating that land use patterns played a decisive role in regulating the P sorption strength and the level of available P.


To effectively adsorb P (increase Qmax) and prevent P leaching (reduce the EPC0), we recommend changing the land use patterns (more constructed wetlands and forests with grass) in riparian buffers.


Lake Chaohu Phosphorus sorption Phosphorus species Riparian buffer strips 



We thank Siyang Wang, Zijun Zhou, Jian Xiao, and Yao Zhang for their help with sampling.

Funding information

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41877381; 41573110; 41611540341), the Major Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution Control and Treatment (2017ZX07603), and the State Key Laboratory of Freshwater Ecology and Biotechnology (2016FBZ07).


  1. Andersen DS, Helmers MJ, Burns RT (2015) Phosphorus sorption capacity of six Iowa soils before and after five years of use as vegetative treatment areas. Appl Eng Agric 31(4):611–620Google Scholar
  2. Brian M, Hickey C, Doran B (2004) A review of the efficiency of buffer strips for the maintenance and enhancement of riparian ecosystems. Water Qual Res J Can 39(3):311–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De LS, Glanville HC, Marshall MR, Prysor AW, Jones DL (2018) Quantifying the contribution of riparian soils to the provision of ecosystem services. Sci Total Environ 624:807–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Debicka M, Kocowicz A, Weber J, Jamroz E (2016) Organic matter effects on phosphorus sorption in sandy soils. Arch Agron Soil Sci 62(6):840–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ding Z, Peng H, Gao S (2011) Analysis and suggestion of soil location monitoring data in Chaohu City. Anhui Agri Sci Bull 17(13):105–107Google Scholar
  6. Giesler R, Andersson T, Lövgren L, Persson P (2005) Phosphate sorption in aluminum- and iron-rich humus soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:77–86Google Scholar
  7. Hoffmann CC, Kjaergaard C, Uusi-Kämppä J, Hansen HC, Kronvang B (2009) Phosphorus retention in riparian buffers: review of their efficiency. J Environ Qual 38(5):1942–1955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Istvanovics V (1994) Fractional composition, adsorption and release of sediment phosphorus in the Kis-Balaton reservoir. Water Res 28(3):717–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Izydorczyk K, Michalska-Hejduk D, Jarosiewicz P, Bydałek F, Frątczak W (2018) Extensive grasslands as an effective measure for nitrate and phosphate reduction from highly polluted subsurface flow-case studies from Central Poland. Agr Water Manage 203:240–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones DL (1998) Organic acids in the rhizospere – a critical review. Plant Soil 205(1):25–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaoru A, Yasuo O (1998) Comparison of useful terrestrial and aquatic plant species for removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from domestic wastewater. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 44(4):599–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kelly JM, Kovar JL, Sokolowsky R, Moorman TB (2007) Phosphorus uptake during four years by different vegetative cover types in a riparian buffer. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 78(3):239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kronvang B, Bechman M, Lundekvam H, Behrendt H, Rubæk GH, Schoumans OF, Syversen N, Andersen HE, Hoffmann CC (2005) Phosphorus losses from agricultural areas in river basins: effects and uncertainties of targeted mitigation measures. J Environ Qual 34:2129–2144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kyehan L, Isenhart TM, Schultz RC, Mickelson SK (2000) Multispecies riparian buffers trap sediment and nutrients during rainfall simulations. J Environ Qual 29(4):1200–1205Google Scholar
  15. Li M, Hou YL, Zhu B (2007) Phosphorus sorption-desorption by purple soils of China in relation to their properties. Aust J Soil Res 45:182–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mankin KR, Ngandu DM, Barden CJ, Hutchinson SL, Geyer WA (2007) Grass-shrub riparian buffer removal of sediment, phosphorus, and nitrogen from simulated runoff. J Am Water Resour As 43(5):1108–1116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Moon J, Jung Y, Lee T, Kim TC, Rho P, Shin YC, Ryu J, Lim KJ (2013) Determining the effective width of riparian buffers in Korean watersheds using the swat model. Environ Eng Manag J 12(11):2249–2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moradi N, Sadaghiani MHR, Sepehr E (2012) Effects of low-molecular-weight organic acids on phosphorus sorption characteristics in some calcareous soils. Turk J Agric For 36(4):459–468Google Scholar
  19. Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA (1954) Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. In: USDA circular. USDA, Washington DC, p 939Google Scholar
  20. Saunders WMH, Williams EG (1955) Observations on the determination of total organic phosphorus in soils. J Soil Sci 6:254–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schreeg LA, Mack MC, Turner BL (2013) Leaf litter inputs decrease phosphate sorption in a strongly weathered tropical soil over two time scales. Biogeochemistry 113:507–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shang GP, Shang JC (2005) Causes and control countermeasures of eutrophication in Chaohu Lake, China. Chin Geogr Sci 15:348–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shen C, Liao Q, Bootsma HA, Troy CD, Cannon D (2018) Regulation of plankton and nutrient dynamics by profundal quagga mussels in Lake Michigan: a one-dimensional model. Hydrobiologia 815(1):47–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stutter MI, Langan SJ, Lunsdom DG (2009) Vegetated buffer strips can lead to increased release of phosphorus to waters: a biogeochemical assessment of the mechanisms. Environ Sci Technol 43:1858–1863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Subramaniam V, Singh BR (1997) Phosphorus supplying capacity of heavily fertilized soils .1. Phosphorus adsorption characteristics and phosphorus fractionation. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 47:115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Syversen N (2005) Effect and design of buffer zones in the Nordic climate: the influence of width, amount of surface runoff, seasonal variation and vegetation type on retention efficiency for nutrient and particle runoff. Ecol Eng 24:483–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ter Braak CJF, Šmilauer P (2002) CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user’s guide: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer power, Ithaca, N.Y., USAGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang X, Chang L, Li H, Zhang Q (2011) Study on community characteristics and soil properties of typical vegetations in Chaohu hill region. Soils 43(6):981–986Google Scholar
  29. Wang XY, Zhang LP, Zhang FF, Zhang HS, Mei DL (2013) Phosphorus adsorption by soils from four land use patterns. Asian J Chem 25(1):282–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang YZ, Whalen JK, Chen X, Cao YH, Huang B, Lu CY, Shi Y (2016) Mechanisms for altering phosphorus sorption characteristics induced by organic acids. Can J Soil Sci 96:289–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Weissteiner CJ, Bouraoui F, Aloe A (2013) Reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus loads to European rivers by riparian buffer zones. Knowl Manag Aquat Ec 408:08CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Xiao WJ, Song CL, Cao XY, Zhou YY (2012) Effects of air-drying on phosphorus sorption in shallow lake sediment, China. Fresenius Environ Bull 21(3A):672–678Google Scholar
  33. Xu MQ, Cao H, Xie P, Deng DG, Feng WS, Xu H (2005) The temporal and spatial distribution, composition and abundance of Protozoa in Chaohu Lake, China: relationship with eutrophication. Eur J Protistol 41:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yang GR, Hao XY, Li CL, Li YM (2014) Effect of land use on soil phosphorus sorption-desorption under intensive agricultural practices in plastic-film greenhouses. Pedosphere 24(3):367–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zak D, Kronvang B, Carstensen MV, Hoffmann CC, Kjeldgaard A, Larsen SE, Audet J, Egemose S, Jorgensen CA, Feuerbach P, Gertz F, Jensen HS (2018) Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from agricultural runoff in integrated buffer zones. Environ Sci Technol 52:6508–6517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhang W, Faulkner JW, Giri SK, Geohring LD, Steenhuis TS (2010a) Effect of soil reduction on phosphorus sorption of an organic-rich silt loam. Soil Sci Soc Am J 74:240–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhang X, Liu X, Zhang M, Dahlgren RA, Eitzel M (2010b) Review of vegetated buffers and a meta-analysis of their mitigation efficacy in reducing nonpoint source pollution. J Environ Qual 39(1):76–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhou C, Zhou Y, Chen X, Liu Y, Cao X, Song C (2011) Linkage between land use patterns and sediment phosphorus sorption behaviors along shoreline of a Chinese large shallow lake (Lake Chaohu). Knowl Manag Aquat Ec 34(403):81–85Google Scholar
  39. Zhou H, Gao C (2011) Assessing the risk of phosphorus loss and identifying critical source areas in the Chaohu Lake watershed, China. Environ Manag 48(5):1033–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhou M, Li Y (2002) Phosphorus-sorption characteristics of calcareous soils and limestone from the southern Everglades and adjacent farmlands. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:1404–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Algal Biology, State Key Laboratory of Freshwater Ecology and Biotechnology, Institute of HydrobiologyChinese Academy of SciencesWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations