02087naa a2200277 a 450000100080000000500110000800800410001910000210006024501370008126000090021852012760022765000100150365000140151365000170152765000230154465000090156765000210157665000080159765000160160565300190162165300220164070000220166270000220168470000220170677300810172818645202019-06-11       2010    bl uuuu     u00u1 u    #d1 aNOGUEIROL. R. C.  aSequential extraction and availability of copper in Cu fungicide-amended vineyard soils from Southern Brazil.h[electronic resource]  c2010  aThree laboratory column experiments were performed to test the suitability of two different MgO-rich reagents for removal of Mn and Al from the out-?owing waters of Shilbottle passive treatment system (Northumberland, UK). The input water was doped with 100mg/L Zn in order to extrapolate results to waters in sulphide mining districts. One column was ?lled with a Dispersed Alkaline Substrate (DAS) containing 12.5% (v/v) causticmagnesia precipitator dust (CMPD) fromSpainmixedwithwood shavings, two columns were ?lled with DAS containing wood shavings and 12.5% or 25% (v/v), respectively, of dolomitic lime precipitator dust (DLPD) from Thrislington, UK. The two columns containing 12.5% of CMPD or DLPD completely removed the contaminants from the in?ow water during the ?rst 6 weeks of the experiment (mean removal of 88mg/L Al, 96mg/L Zn and 37mg/LMn), operating at an acidity load of 140 g acidity/m2 day. At thismoment, a substantial increase of theAl andMnwater concentration in the out-?owingwaters of Shilbottle occurred (430 g acidity/m2 day), leading to passivation of the reactive material and to the development of preferential ?ow paths within less than another 6 weeks, probably mainly due to Al precipitates. Al should be removed prior to MgO treatment.  aCobre  aFungicida  aMetal Pesado  aNutrição vegetal  aSolo  aSulfato de Cobre  aUva  aViticultura  aConcentração  aRio Grande do Sul1 aALLEONI, L. R. F.1 aNACHTIGALL, G. R.1 aMELO, G. W. B. de  tJournal of Hazardous Materials, Amsterdamgv. 181, n. 1/3, p. 931-937, 2010.