Assessment of the effect of molecular size on the electrophoretic mobility of humic substances

European Journal of Soil Science

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 223-229

  De Nobili, M ^a   Fornasier, F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UDINE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HUMIC SUBSTANCE;

EID: 0030304944     PISSN: 13510754     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2389.1996.tb01393.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Andrews, A.T. 1986. Electrophoresis. Theory: Techniques, and Biochemical and Clinical Applications: 2nd edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
2. Cameron, R.S., Thornton, B.K., Swift, R.S. & Posner, A.M. 1972. Molecular weight and shape of humic acid from sedimentation and diffusion measurements on fractionated extracts. Journal of Soil Science, 23, 394-408.
3. Ceccanti, B., Bertolucci, M.T., Rustighi, G. & Calcinai, M. 1986. Isoelectric focusing of soil humic substances in the presence of 8 M urea. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2, 71-75.
4. Ceccanti, B. & Nannipieri, P. 1979. Concerning the reliability of the isoelectric focusing technique to separate the soil humic substances. In. Recent Development in Chromatography and Electrophoresis (eds A. Frigerio & L. Renoz), pp. 222-232. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
5. De Nobili, M. 1988. Electrophoretic evidence of the integrity of humic substances separated by means of electrofocusing. Journal of Soil Science, 39, 437-445.
6. De Nobili, M., Bragato, G., Alcaniz, J.M., Puigbo, A. & Comellas, L. 1990. Characterization of electrophoretic fractions of humic substances with different electrofocusing behavior. Soil Science, 150, 763-770.
7. De Nobili, M. & Fornasier, F. 1994. Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis of humic substances fractionated by ultrafiltration. In: Humic Substances in the Global Environment and Implications on Human Health (eds N Senesi & T. M. Miano), pp. 269-272. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
8. De Nobili, M., Gjessing, E. & Sequi, P. 1989. Sizes and shapes of humic substances by gel chromatography. In: Humic Substances II. In Search of Structure (eds M. H. B. Hayes et al.), pp. 561-591. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
9. Duxbury, J.M. 1989. Studies of the molecular size and charge of humic substances by electrophoresis. In: Humic Substances II. In Search of Structure (eds M.H.B. Hayes et al.), pp. 593-620. John Wiley and Sons, Cbichester.
10. Ferguson, K.A. 1964. Starch-gel electrophoresis - application to the classification of pituitary proteins and polypeptides. Metabolism, 13, 985-1002.
11. Ghosh, K. & Schnitzer, M 1980. Macromolecular structures of humic substances. Soil Science, 129, 266-276.
12. Hedrick, J.L. & Smith, A.J, 1968. Size and charge isomer separation and estimation of molecular weights of proteins by disc gel electrophoresis. Archives of Biochemistry, 126, 155-164.
13. Neville, D.M. 1971. Molecular weight determination of proteindodecyl sulfate complexes by gel electrophoresis in a discontinuous buffer system. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 246, 6328-6334.
14. Swift, R.S., Thornton, B.K. & Posner, A.M. 1970. Spectral characteristics of a humic acid fractionated with respect to molecular weight using an agar gel. Soil Science, 110, 93-99.
15. Trubetskoj, O.A., Trubetskaya, O.E. & Khomutova, T.E. 1992. Isolation, purification and some physico-chemical properties of soil humic substance fractions obtained by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 24, 893-896.