Several sequential extraction procedures are widely applied for metals chemical fractionation in the literature. However, their limitations to be used in different soils and metals have not been discussed in detail. This study compares two of the most commonly used extraction methods for metals chemical fractionation: Tessier and BCR. The objectives were to i) assess the differences between concentrations of metals extracted in each fraction by both Tessier and BCR procedures; ii) elucidate if soil properties affected the extraction ability of each fraction from both procedures; and iii) evaluate how land use contributes to different chemical metal distribution. Results indicated that both methods provide similar results when were applied to the same soil, since non-significant differences were found in metal concentrations between both methods at each fraction. Conversely, when we compared among land uses, significant differences were found in the metal concentration between both methods, especially between agricultural/urban/industrial against forest soil. Redundancy analysis showed that in carbonate-rich soils, BCR extraction method could cover up the real concentration of exchangeable metals with those bound to the carbonate phase, being the Tessier method the most suitable one for this kind of soils. Therefore, although sequential extraction is a useful tool to understand the distribution of metals in soil, the method used must be selected according to the land use and specific soil characteristics, taking into account at least, soil carbonate content.
Keywords: BCR procedure; Chemical fractionation; Land use; Metals; Redundancy analysis; Tessier procedures.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.