CATENA-01927; No of Pages 11

Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Catena
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/catena

The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification

Balázs Madarász a,⁎, Tibor Németh b, Gergely Jakab a, Zoltán Szalai a
a
Geographical Institute, Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 45. Budaörsi St., Budapest, Hungary
b
Institute for Geological and Geochemical Research, Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 45. Budaörsi St., Budapest, Hungary

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study the erubáz soil, a shallow soil influenced by volcanic parent rocks is examined with special
Received 18 October 2011 emphasis on its clay content and clay-mineral-composition. Fifteen profiles at seven study areas and with
Received in revised form 28 January 2013 four different parent material types are analysed. Bulk soil mineralogical and clay-mineralogical properties
Accepted 4 February 2013
are examined by X-ray diffractometry (XRD). According to the mineralogical analysis the presence of the un-
Available online xxxx
stable mafic silicates indicates that the composition of the parent rock is still well reflected in the examined
Keywords:
soil profiles. Illite is the most common clay mineral followed by kaolinite and smectite. Kaolinite and illite
Volcanic soil contain ca. 15–20% and 10% interlayered of smectite, respectively. Poor crystallisation and composition of
Classification secondary minerals suggest that these soils are in an early stage of their pedogenic evolution, but are more
X-ray diffractometry developed than the typical Andosols. Presence of opal-C and cristobalite in the andesitic samples is characteristic.
Phaeozems Our study revealed that the erubáz soil type is not as homogeneous as it was suggested before. According to
Andosols our analysis, mainly on the basis of their mineralogy, these soils can be divided into two well-defined groups.
These two groups (erubáz soils formed on intermediate-acidic and on basic lithology) can be regarded as
subtypes of the erubáz soil type. Moreover, two varieties (black and brown), mostly based on colour and
SOM content, are distinguished. In these varieties the conditions of the decomposition of organic material
are very different due to the moisture content, temperature and pH-conditions of the soil.
The studied soil profiles were included into the WRB-system. On the basis of threshold-values of their diagnostic
horizons, the studied profiles did not fulfil the criteria of the Andosol group and were inserted into the assem-
blage of Phaeozems.
© 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In the Hungarian genetic soil classification system the shallow soil
type influenced by the volcanic parent rock is called erubáz. This
name was created by the amalgamation of the attributes “eruptive”
and “basic”, which refers to the typical occurrence of this soil on
basic volcanic rocks (however, it occurs on intermediate and acidic
rocks as well). It was utilised first by Hoyningen–Huehne (1931) and
Kubiëna (1953). In Hungary the name erubáz was adapted when
the basis of the Hungarian soil classification system was created
(Stefanovits, 1951, 1956, 1959; Stefanovits and Szücs, 1961).
According to the former definition (Agrotopo, 1982; Stefanovits
and Szücs, 1961) the smectite group is the predominant clay mineral
of the erubáz soils. There are significant differences between the
properties of the smectites and illites (Vaughan and Wogelins, 2000;
White, 2006). Contrary to illites, smectites have significant cation ex-
change, expansion and adhesion capacity. These features influence
substantially the soil physical properties.
Despite the detailed soil studies of the last decade (Barczi, 2000;
Fehér, 2007; Fehér et al., 2006; Madarász, 2009; Michéli et al., 2006),
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +36 13092686.
E-mail address: madarasz.balazs@csfk.mta.hu (B. Madarász).
this soil type remained one of the least studied and most neglected
soils. Formerly no subtypes and varieties were distinguished within
the erubáz soil type. The present tendency to reconsider national and
international soil classification systems brings about new requirements
on the recognition of soil-genetic processes and their evaluation. In the
World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB, 2006) the volcanic soils
form the so called Andosols reference group. Several studies recognised
Andosols on older volcanic material recently (Kleber and Jahn, 2007;
Kleber et al., 2004; Quantin, 2004, 2007). Besides, numerous studies
identified Andosols in the inner volcanic arc of the Carpathians (Fehér,
2007; Füleky et al., 2006; Jakab et al., 2004; Jurani, 2002; Juráni and
Blackovič, 2007; Perepelita et al., 1986).
Secondary minerals in typical Andosols are generally non-crystalline
or poorly crystalline. The most characteristic secondary minerals formed
in volcanic ash soils are imogolite and allophane. These nano-crystalline
phases are intermediate products in the usual weathering sequence
volcanic glass → allophane → kaolinite and other 2:1 clay minerals,
which is the most characteristic mineral transformation in volcanic
soils (Ping, 2000).
Our study aims at a detailed field and laboratory examination of
this barely known soil type. We analyse several soil profiles from dif-
ferent locations, with special emphasis on their clay mineral content,
which is crucial concerning soil characteristics. We define types and

0341-8162/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004

Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
2 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

subtypes of the erubáz soil group. Finally, on the basis of these data
we show whether this soil formed on volcanic material may be clas-
sified into the Andosol or into another reference group of the WRB.
Madarász (2010) deals with the problematic WRB classification of
the erubáz soils, thus detailed description of this procedure is out of
the scope of this study. Here we aim at presenting the result of the
WRB classification of each profile.
cover (Csontos and Vörös, 2002; Karátson, 1999; Pécsi, 1993; Székely,
1997). Accordingly, erubáz soils occur in small spots in forested, hilly re-
gions in a mosaic-like pattern on a large variety of volcanic rocks dis-
persed throughout the country. These areas are mostly unsuitable for
agriculture, thus they were out of the focus of soil research of the last
century.

2.2. Climate and environment of the study area

2. The studied area
2.1. Volcanic rocks in Hungary and location of erubáz soils
Volcanism had a special role in the Miocene–Pliocene evolution of
the Pannonian Basin. Volcanic rocks occur in a more or less continuous
arch following the inner side of the Carpathian mountain chain, but they
occur in small patches in most of the area of the basin system (Karátson,
1997, 2007; Martin and Németh, 2004; Szabó et al., 1992).
The volcanism was triggered by the Neogene subduction zone de-
veloped along the Carpathians. Two main types of the volcanism are
distinguished: (1) the calc–alkaline volcanism can be directly connected
to the subduction (North Hungarian Mountain Range, NHM) and
(2) the alkali–basaltic volcanism, which occurred in the back-arc region
of the subduction zone (Balaton Highland, BH; Fig. 1). The calc–alcaline
volcanism is divided into two types: acidic and intermediate (Szakács
and Karátson, 2002). Today, the formerly extensive volcanic fields are
restricted to smaller areas due to subsequent erosion and sedimentary
In general, the climatic conditions are controlled by elevation and
topography. The NHM (200–1000 m asl.) belong to the humid conti-
nental climate zone. The mean annual temperature is around 9.3 °C
in the lower region and 6–7 °C in the higher zone. The mean annual
precipitation varies between 600 and 900 mm (Dövényi, 2010). On
the territory of the BH (150–500 m asl.) the climate is mild, with a
mean annual temperature of 10–10.5 °C and mean annual precipita-
tion of 600–700 mm (Dövényi, 2010).
Soil temperature regime at the study sites is Mesic. Soil moisture
regime in the NHM is Ustic. In the BH it is dominantly Ustic, however,
on the southern slopes it shows elements of Xeric moisture regime,
which is related to the Mediterranean climatic influence. Extreme mi-
croclimatic conditions are controlling soil formation: in summer erubáz
soils dry out, in winter they are frozen. This microclimate is reflected by
the vegetation. Erubáz soils occur under forested areas, mostly under
oak and beech forests at higher elevations and at lower altitudes under
closed meadow patched in otherwise forested areas.

Fig. 1. Location of the sampled soil profiles. NH1. Börzsöny 1, NH2 Börzsöny 2, NH3 Börzsöny 3, NH4. Keserűs-Hill., NH5. Öreg-Pap-Hill, NH6. Markaz, NH7. Domoszló, NH8.
Andornaktálya, NH9. Tokaj-Hill, NH10. Tolcsva, BH1. Szent-György-Hill, BH2. Badacsony, BH3. Csobánc, BH4. Fekete-Hill, BH5. Tihany.

Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 3

3. Materials and methods
3.1. Sample sites
Fifteen soil profiles were selected to represent all varieties of parent
rocks of the erubáz soils (Fig. 1). Miocene andesite and ignimbrite was
the parent rock of the samples from the NHM: NH1–NH10 in Table 1
and Fig. 1. Soil profiles developed on Pliocene basalt and basalt tuff
were sampled in the BH (BH1–BH5 in Table 1 and Fig. 1). Most of the
soil profiles were located on the higher, undisturbed and forest-covered
regions of the volcanic hills. Nevertheless, three profiles (NH6, NH7,
NH8) were situated at the edge vineyards abandoned for 5 years.
3.2. Laboratory methods
The colour of the samples was identified by the Munsell colour
scale in dry and wet state. CaCO3 content of the samples was mea-
sured by the Scheibler gas-volumetric method and soil pH (pH [H2O];
pH [KCl]) was determined by the potentiometric method (Buzás,
1988, 1993). The bulk density was determined on undisturbed core
samples of known volume using a drying oven (Buzás, 1988, 1993).
Particle size distribution was determined by the laser diffractometry
method after the oxidation of organic matter with H2O2 (Buurman et
al., 1996). Exchangeable cation determination was done by Mehlich-
method (Mehlich, 1953). Base saturation was estimated following
Beery and Wilding (1971). Inorganic carbon content of the samples
was determined by using NDIR spectrometry by Tekmar-Dohrman
9000 N. The Soil Organic Matter (SOM) content was calculated according
to the equation SOM% = Total Organic Carbon% × 1.72 (Stefanovits et
al., 1999). Pedogenic Fed- and Ald-components were extracted using
sodium–dithionite solution (Mehra and Jackson, 1960).
Components of amorphous and weakly crystallised oxides (Alo,
Feo, Sio) were dissolved using ammonium–oxalate (Schwertmann,
1964). Alp- and Fep-content attached to the organic phase of the soil
was assessed by a solution created by pyrophosphate-selective ex-
traction (Blakemore et al., 1987). The Fe-, Al- and Si-contents were
selectively dissolved and determined using atomic adsorption spec-
trophotometer (AAS).
3.3. Bulk soil mineralogical and clay-mineralogical analysis
Eighteen samples taken from 8 profiles were utilised for the anal-
ysis of soil mineralogy (NH1, 2, 3, 6, 7, BH1, 3, 4). We analysed clay
mineralogy of 11 soil profiles (NH1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, BH1-5) on 27 samples
altogether. Mineral composition of the soil samples was determined by
X-ray diffraction (XRD) performed on a Philips PW-1730 diffractometer
using CuKα radiation (applying an acceleration voltage of 45 kV, and
a tube current of 35 mA), at a data collection speed of 1 s/0.05 2θ.
The mineral composition of the bulk soil was determined on random-
powdered samples by semi-quantitative phase analysis according to
the modified direct method of Bárdossy et al. (1980). Clay fraction
(b2 μm) of the soil samples was separated by sedimentation. Clay min-
erals were identified by XRD diagrams obtained from parallel-oriented
specimens. Swelling clay minerals were diagnosed by ethylene glycol
solvation. Smectite was differentiated from vermiculite by Mg saturation
followed by glycerol solvation, and by estimating the layer charge by K
saturation. Heating at 350 and 550 °C was used to chlorite–kaolinite
differentiation and to detect hydroxy-interlayering. The Green-Kelly
(1953) test (Li saturation) was used to distinguish between montmo-
rillonite and beidellite.
Clay mineralogy of three samples (NH9, BH2, BH9) were studied
in Halle (Institut für Bodenkunde und Pflanzenernährung) by a Siemens
D5005 diffractometer using CuKα radiation at 40 kV and 30 mA.
The semi-quantitative mineral composition of the clay fraction
was determined by the method of Tributh (1991) using Gjems (1967)
and Laves and Jähn (1972) intensity factors.
3.4. Data processing
The World Reference Base for Soil Resources (2006) guidebook
was used for the WRB classification of the profiles. Groups of different
types of the erubáz soils were created using cluster-analysis with the
SPSS program. For the classification of the soil profiles, a hierarchic
cluster-analysis was done by the nearest neighbour method. Squared
Euclidean Distance and Z score standardizing were applied for the
measurements. After Z score standardizing, a non-hierarchic K-Means
Cluster-analysis was performed by 2 cluster setting (Sajtos and Mitev,
2007).
4. Results
4.1. Profile morphology
Parent material of the studied erubáz soils was basalt, basalt tuff,
andesite and loose ignimbrite. Depth of the profiles was less than
50–60 cm regardless of the underlying lithology.
The morphology of the profiles developed on basalt, basalt tuff
and andesite was quite uniform. Their A-horizon could be divided in
an upper part (Ah1) with a dense network of very fine roots, it is loose
with a high porosity and it contains only a few small size weathered
rock fragments. Its bulk density is somewhat below 1 g/cm 3. The
lower Ah2 horizon is more compacted, contains less very fine roots

Table 1
Description of the sample locations.

Profile Location Coordinate Parent material Altitude Aspect Slope gradient

(asl)
N E %

NH1 Börzsöny 47° 56′ 42″ 18° 56′ 37″ Andesite 833 – 0
NH2 Börzsöny 47° 56′ 40″ 18˚ 56′ 42″ Andesite 798 SE 20
NH3 Börzsöny 47° 56′ 56″ 18° 56′ 55″ Andesite 932 E–SE 2–5
NH4 Visegrád Mts. 47° 44′ 07″ 18° 55′ 20″ Andesite 620 – 0–1
NH5 Visegrád Mts. 47° 44′ 39″ 18° 58′ 32″ Andesite 560 – 1–2
NH6 Mátra 47° 49′ 36″ 20° 04′ 07″ Andesite 227 S 2–5
NH7 Mátra 47° 49′ 38″ 20° 06′ 23″ Andesite 215 S 2–5
NH8 Bükk 47° 51′ 22″ 20° 24′ 49″ Ignimbrite 219 N–NW 5–10
NH9 Zemplén Mts. 48° 07′ 16″ 21° 22′ 46″ Andesite 482 W 10
NH10 Zemplén Mts. 48˚ 16′ 22″ 21° 22′ 25″ Ignimbrite 308 E–SE 10
BH1 Szt. György Hill 46° 50′ 28″ 17° 26′ 53″ Basalt 414 SE 1–2
BH2 Badacsony Hill 46° 48′ 00″ 17° 29′ 46″ Basalt 420 S 5–10
BH3 Csobánc Hill 46° 52′ 19″ 17° 30′ 16″ Basalt 370 – 1–2
BH4 Fekete Hill 46° 54′ 13″ 17° 35′ 39″ Basalt 359 SW 0–1
BH5 Tihany Peninsula 46° 54′ 33″ 17° 51′ 23″ Basalt piroklastit 162 SE 2–5

Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
4 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Table 2
Selected physical and chemical properties of the pedons under study.

Profile Horizon Depth pH SOM C/N CaCO3 Bulk density Fine earth Sand Clay BS Exchangeable cations
cmol(+) kg−1

cm H2O KCl % % % g cm−3 % % % Ca Mg K Na

NH1 Ah1 0–25 5.60 4.60 13.01 14.93 0.00 0.98 83.05 65.02 17.47 64 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 25–32 6.00 4.70 9.84 9.83 0.00 1.02 62.23 61.67 19.41 71 nd nd nd nd
NH2 Ah1 0–20 5.70 4.50 5.61 10.20 0.00 0.97 86.19 57.75 22.70 66 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 20–40 6.30 5.20 3.08 8.57 0.00 1.00 73.48 51.58 26.17 76 nd nd nd nd
NH3 Ah1 5–20 5.60 4.80 12.61 13.83 0.00 0.98 85.02 57.92 21.77 64 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 20–40 6.00 4.90 7.56 9.03 0.00 1.05 70.98 51.48 25.57 71 nd nd nd nd
NH4 Ah1 0–20 5.90 4.65 5.36 15.65 0.00 0.97 96.85 63.12 19.56 69 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 20–40 6.00 4.74 2.92 9.12 0.00 1.03 81.56 60.01 21.72 71 nd nd nd nd
NH5 Ah1 0–16 5.43 4.52 8.26 17.23 0.00 0.99 91.64 59.32 20.47 62 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 16–34 5.66 4.77 3.93 9.86 0.00 1.05 79.23 54.85 24.68 65 nd nd nd nd
NH6 Ah1 0–8 7.60 6.15 2.43 9.48 1.70 nd 75.32 35.33 22.51 97 11.05 7.24 1.99 0.90
Ah2 8–15 7.42 6.12 2.12 9.93 0.00 nd 70.03 32.98 44.11 94 9.57 6.94 1.73 0.84
AC 15–22 7.59 6.26 2.48 10.14 0.00 nd 59.64 25.54 48.92 97 9.57 5.82 1.60 0.90
NH7 Ah1 0–20/25 6.43 5.37 4.37 12.25 0.00 nd 81.43 34.29 22.87 78 9.90 9.59 0.92 0.73
Ah2 20/25–55 6.80 5.47 2.92 11.24 0.00 nd 73.91 32.64 44.89 84 12.72 11.83 0.52 0.92
AC 55+ 6.90 5.90 0.31 5.34 0.00 nd 32.85 36.48 42.02 86 18.32 19.88 0.43 1.73
NH8 Ah 5–25 6.29 5.72 1.87 nd 0.00 1.09 nd 32.78 17.62 76 nd nd nd nd
AC 25–44 6.56 5.41 0.52 nd 0.00 0.88 nd 70.80 2.35 80 nd nd nd nd
C 44+ 6.65 5.20 0.21 nd 0.00 nd nd 81.48 0.06 82 nd nd nd nd
NH9 Ah1 0–12/20 5.14 4.57 7.81 11.70 0.00 0.97 90.47 7.00 25.00 57 13.17 0.08 0.69 0.09
Ah2 12/20–45 5.34 4.74 6.62 12.00 0.00 1.05 90.73 15.00 27.00 60 13.17 0.16 0.47 0.09
AC 45–60 5.80 5.07 2.32 nd 0.00 1.20 31.32 61.00 3.00 68 8.06 0.07 0.37 0.07
NH10 A 0–12 6.49 5.67 4.47 nd 0.00 0.98 nd 50.46 14.05 79 nd nd nd nd
AC1 12–25 6.20 5.04 0.96 nd 0.00 0.98 nd 42.00 23.62 74 nd nd nd nd
AC2 25–55 6.37 5.06 0.64 nd 0.00 nd nd 59.93 9.47 77 nd nd nd nd
BH1 Ah1 2–15 6.60 5.50 14.93 11.70 0.00 0.93 72.71 56.66 22.40 81 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 15–30 6.20 6.00 11.66 9.94 0.00 1.02 71.47 57.06 22.41 74 nd nd nd nd
BH2 Ah1 0–7 5.57 5.21 7.66 13.86 0.00 0.97 93.51 69.69 13.52 64 17.91 1.31 0.69 0.16
Ah2 7–25 5.20 4.72 4.52 10.80 0.00 1.02 95.05 62.58 17.91 58 16.71 0.44 0.46 0.12
A+R 25–50 5.61 4.84 4.80 14.40 0.00 1.08 86.79 nd nd 65 13.61 0.27 0.25 0.11
BH3 Ah1 10–15 5.60 5.21 14.75 16.19 0.00 0.92 85.14 55.19 23.51 64 13.39 4.19 1.32 0.73
Ah2 15–22 5.80 5.28 14.42 16.79 0.00 1.02 73.95 54.09 22.70 68 23.19 3.80 1.20 0.68
BH4 Ah1 0–20 6.10 5.10 7.86 14.54 0.00 1.05 93.57 41.64 24.74 73 nd nd nd nd
Ah2 20–26 6.50 5.60 4.30 10.84 0.00 1.07 87.64 36.74 37.45 79 nd nd nd nd
BH5 Ah1 0–15 6.67 5.78 10.72 11.27 0.00 0.98 73.67 33.57 39.29 82 21.43 9.85 1.02 0.21
Ah2 15–35 7.41 5.81 6.89 11.28 0.60 0.97 71.64 35.92 38.32 94 21.43 9.89 0.53 0.23

Fine earth = b2 mm; clay = b2 μm; silt = 2–20 μm; sand = 20–2000 μm; nd = no data; BS = base saturation.

Table 3
Ratios of selectively dissolved components.

Profile Horizon Dithionite-extractable Oxalate-extractable Pyrophosphate-extractable Alo%+ 0.5Feo% Alp/Alo Feo/Fed

Ald% Fed% Sid% Alo% Feo% Sio% Alp% Fep% Sip% % % %

NH6 Ah1 0.12 0.72 0.38 0.12 0.17 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.01 0.20 0.43 0.23
Ah2 0.12 0.75 0.41 0.13 0.16 0.05 0.11 0.07 0.23 0.21 0.87 0.22
AC 0.11 0.71 0.40 0.13 0.15 0.06 0.15 0.09 0.21 0.21 1.17⁎ 0.22
NH7 Ah1 0.18 1.65 0.41 0.20 0.40 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.40 0.56 0.24
Ah2 0.17 1.69 0.47 0.19 0.32 0.07 0.11 0.09 0.03 0.34 0.59 0.19
AC 0.10 0.65 0.42 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.01 0.10 0.18 0.22 0.09
NH8 Ah 0.10 0.85 nd 0.11 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.05 nd 0.17 0.55 0.13
AC 0.04 0.31 nd 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 nd 0.07 0.17 0.06
C 0.02 0.14 nd 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 nd 0.03 0.33 0.00
NH9 Ah1 0.17 0.92 0.08 0.23 0.21 0.00 0.10 0.18 nd 0.34 0.43 0.23
Ah2 0.16 1.06 0.10 0.21 0.29 0.00 0.07 0.65 nd 0.36 0.33 0.27
AC 0.12 0.93 0.10 0.17 0.19 0.00 0.04 0.40 nd 0.27 0.24 0.20
NH10 A 0.08 0.48 nd 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.16 0.09 nd 0.12 1.98⁎ 0.16
AC1 0.07 0.49 nd 0.09 0.03 0.03 0.67 0.31 nd 0.10 7.44⁎ 0.07
AC2 0.06 0.42 nd 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.30 0.15 nd 0.09 3.75⁎ 0.07
BH1 Ah1 0.02 0.14 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.33 0.00
Ah2 0.24 1.78 0.47 0.36 0.88 0.13 0.67 0.65 0.23 0.80 1.86⁎ 0.49
BH2 Ah1 0.21 1.27 0.11 0.32 0.58 0.05 0.11 0.29 nd 0.61 0.34 0.46
Ah2 0.24 1.45 0.12 0.34 0.73 0.05 0.15 0.49 nd 0.71 0.44 0.50
A+R 0.24 1.78 0.16 0.36 0.88 0.06 0.10 0.49 nd 0.80 0.28 0.49
BH3 Ah1 0.17 0.75 0.30 0.17 0.32 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.06 0.33 0.89 0.43
Ah2 0.11 0.76 0.33 0.14 0.32 0.13 0.14 0.12 0.08 0.30 1.00 0.42
BH5 Ah1 0.23 2.08 0.43 0.35 0.49 0.10 0.06 0.17 nd 0.60 0.17 0.24
Ah2 0.23 2.28 0.49 0.40 0.50 0.13 0.05 0.06 nd 0.65 0.13 0.22

Data are missing for the NH1-5, BH4 profiles; Alo% +0.5Feo% = Allophane; * Alp/Alo ≥1 values are indicative of dispersion problems.

Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/

Table 4
Mineral composition of the clay fraction and the composition of the bulk soil samples, %.

Clay mineralogy Bulk soil mineralogy

Profile Smectite Vermiculite Chlorite HIS-HIV Illite, Kaolinite, Quartz Cristobalite Feldspars Others Smektite 10 Å Chlorite Kaolinite Sum of Quartz Feldspars Amfibole Pyroxene Cristobalite, Others
horizon I/S K/S mica, clay Opal–C
illite minerals*

NH1 Ah1 10 10 17 7 16 35 am: 5 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd

Ah2 5 15 17 4 22 35 am: 2, 1 6 5 7 40 15 25 goethite: 2
goethite: hematite: 1, am
itr
NH2 Ah1 5 15 24 12 20 20 am: 2, 1 9 2 32 25 6 24 goethite: b1
goethite: 2 hematite: 3, am
Ah2 8 20 27 11 17 15 am: 2, 2 7 2 25 33 10 20 goethite: b1
goethite: hematite: 2,

B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

itr am
NH3 Ah1 10 15 20* 10 15 25 am: 2, 11 21 35 10 16 goethite: 3,
goethite: 3 hematite: 1
zeolite: 2, am
Ah2 10 20 22* 8 15 20 am: 2, 9 17 40 5 20 goethite: 3,
goethite: 3 hematite:? am
NH6 Ah1 20 10 22 35 6 4 am: 3 7 3 8 60 19 2 2
Ah2 18 14 8 15 35 5 3 am: 2 14 7 9 59 8 3
AC 80 16 itr 2 am: 2 68 7 3 10 12 amorphous
NH7 Ah1 40 8 30 5 10 2 am: 5 15 3 8 55 10 12
Ah2 43 4 34 3 10 1 am: 5 14 3 9 54 8 2 calcite: 1
AC 42 6 30 2 12 3 am: 5 23 3 12 37 10 15
NH9 Ah1 90 5 2 3 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
Ah2 88 4 5 3 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
Bw 1 1 78 6 4 6 4 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
BH1 Ah1 52 17 10 18 am: 3 13 6 28 46 7 magnetite: b1
Ah2 36 22 3 36 am: 3 18 8 18 38 10 magnetite: b1
BH2 Ah1 2 8 70 7 7 7 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
Ah2 2 7 70 9 6 7 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
AR 7 5 70 6 4 7 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
BH3 Ah1 9 55 10 12 10 am: 4, 3 10 3 60 12 8 hematite,
rutile?: itr magnetite: 3
am
Ah2 4 60 10 10 12 am: 4 itr 7 55 25 6 hematite,
magnetite: 4
am
BH4 Ah1 12 20 15 30 20 am: 3 b1 4 3 53 35 3 magnetite: b1
Ah2 20 30 27 10 10 am: 3 1 5 5 48 38 5 magnetite: b1
BH5 Ah1 16 2 74 3 3 2 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
Ah2 19 2 74 3 2 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd

*It can be clorite as well;. **It was impossible to determine the quantity of clay minerals, it was only possible to assess their total amount (illite, kaolinite, clorite, smectite).; itr: in traces; am: amorphous; nd: not determined.

5
6 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Fig. 2. SOM content of 15 profiles.
and some weathered rock fragments. Its bulk density is usually
1–1.05 g/cm 3 (Table 2). Their transition is gradual. Their structure is
granular, texture is loam. Clay content of the horizons is usually similar
and signs of clay migration are missing. Under the Ah1 and Ah2 hori-
zons (AC) the proportion of rock fragments is increasing abruptly, it
can reach 40–80%.
The morphology of the profiles developed on loose ignimbrite
(NH8, NH10) is different because of the high porosity of the parent
material. Their humic horizon is well developed but it could not be
divided into upper and lower parts. Its material is loam with a granu-
lar structure and contains small ignimbrite “crumbs”. The transition
between the soil and the parent rock is gradual, with a well observable
weathering front. Proportion and size of the coarse rock fragments,
similar to the basaltic and andesitic profiles, are increasing with depth,
but their size remains below 2–3 cm. Growth of the roots is scarcely
limited by the parent rock, which they penetrate as deep as 1.5–2 m.
4.2. Physical and chemical properties
SOM content of the erubáz soils is variable, which is reflected by
their colour. According to our study, two groups of the erubáz soil
can be distinguished on the basis of their colour: black and brown
erubáz soils. Colour of the black erubáz in air-dry state is very dark
brown/greyish–brown (10YR 2/2 and 10YR 3/2), in wet state it is
also very dark brown and black (10YR 2/2 and 10YR 2/1). The brown
erubáz soils are dark brown/greyish–brown (10 YR 4/2, 4/3, 5/3)
when air dry and very dark brown/greyish–brown (10 YR 3/2, 3/3) in
wet state (Table 2).
According to their colour, the profiles can be divided into the two
groups as follows:
Black erubáz: NH1, NH3, NH6, NH9; BH1, BH2, BH3, BH4, BH5;
Brown erubáz: NH2, NH4, NH5, NH7, NH8, NH10.
Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
Most of the studied profiles are slightly acidic. The average pH of
the samples is 6.2 (pHwater). The BH5 Ah2 horizon has an outstanding
pH value (Table 2), which is due to its CaCO3 content. This profile is
situated on a tuff ring of a former maar volcano, and the carbonate
content is originated from the carbonate rocks exploded from the
basement (e.g. Triassic limestone) and deposited in the tuff ring
mixed with the volcanic material. The other outstanding pH value
was measured in the Ah1 of the NH6 profile, which also contains
CaCO3 coming from the liming of the former vineyard. There is no
CaCO3 in the other profiles.
Texture of the profiles is usually (sandy-, sandy–clay-, clay-) loam
(Table 2). Clay content of the profiles is usually 10–40%, only two pro-
files belong to the clay category (NH6, NH7). In most of the samples a
secondary grain size maximum is observed at 20–50 μm, probably
due to aeolian dust mixing into the soil material.
4.3. Mineralogy and clay mineralogy
4.3.1. Samples of North Hungarian Mountains
4.3.1.1. NH1–NH3 (Börzsöny Hills). It is a common feature that mineral
composition of the parent rock is reflected in the soil mineralogy.
Soils from the Börzsöny Hills were formed on andesite, thus contain
significant amount of plagioclase feldspars and amphiboles as inherited
rock constituents (Table 4). One of the most considerable mineralogical
peculiarities of the andesitic soil samples is their cristobalite content.
It might be the weathering product of the fine sized matrix of the
andesite. Cristobalite is a characteristic component in the red clayey
superficial alteration product of andesite accompanied by smectite,
kaolinite/smectite (K/S) mixed layer minerals and hematite (Berényi
Üveges et al., 2002). The Börzsöny soil samples contain small amount
of goethite.
Generally, the amount of clay minerals is not high, and the clay
minerals are poorly crystallised with very broad and low intensity
basal reflection, and with a usually intense 020, 110 reflection at
around 4.5 Å (Fig. 3a,b; Table 4). The clay mineralogy of NH1, NH2
and NH3 samples is very similar, the clay fraction is dominated by
low crystallinity 7 Å phase (disordered kaolinite or halloysite) and
less illite and minor amount of smectite. It is noteworthy that the less
than 2 μm fraction is abundant in non-clay minerals: plagioclase feld-
spar, quartz, cristobalite and occasionally goethite. Quartz is present
only in the uppermost horizons. Generally there is no considerable
difference between the clay mineralogy of Ah1 and Ah2 horizons.
However, the clay mineral content increases downward in NH4 pro-
file, and is substantially heightened in AC horizon, mainly due to
smectite. Cristobalite also increases downward, while quartz content
decreases from 60% in Ah1 and Ah2 horizons to less than 5% in AC
horizon. Feldspar content remains constant with depth. Clay mineral
character of the AC horizon markedly differs from that of the Ah hori-
zons. Ah1 and Ah2 horizons contain illite, illite/smectite (I/S) mixed
layer mineral, kaolinite/smectite, smectite. In addition, a high-charge
layer charged vermiculitic phase appears besides low charged smectite,
presumably formed during the soil evolution. On the contrary, low layer
charged smectite is the dominant clay mineral in the AC horizon, with
minor amount of kaolinite, K/S. According to the Green-Kelly test the
smectite in the whole profile is montmorillonite (Fig. 3).
4.3.1.2. NH6, NH7 (Mátra foreland). The examined soil profiles in the
foreland of the Mátra Hills have developed on slope debris of andesitic
lithology. The bulk samples contain dominantly quartz, and a significant
amount of cristobalite/opal-C and amorphous phase. Surprisingly, the
amount of feldspar is relatively low. Quartz content is higher in the
upper Ah1 and Ah2 horizons than in the AC horizon.
The proportion of the clay fraction is higher than that of the other
NH profiles (42–49% in the Ah2 and AC horizons). This is due to the
parent rock weathered and reworked by slope movements. Mineralogy
 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx 7

Fig. 3. XRD records by treatments of the clay fraction of the (a) Ah1 and (b) Ah2 horizons of the NH3 profile.

of the clay fraction of the soils can be characterised by the dominance of
smectite (Fig. 4, Table 4). Based on the Green-Kelly test the layer charge
of this smectite is predominantly originated from the octahedral sheet,
so this is montmorillonite. This montmorillonite has low layer charge
which is typical feature of smectites deriving from the surficial alter-
ation of volcanic materials such as glass and feldspars (Thorez, 1976).
Montmorillonite reaches its maximum in the lowest, AC horizon.
Further characteristic clay minerals are badly ordered kaolinite and
K/S mixed layer minerals. Illite is subordinate in the whole NH7 pro-
file, while in NH6 soil illite occurs only in Ah1 and Ah2 horizons, be-
sides montmorillonite and kaolinite. In NH6 profile the occurrence of
a high charged swelling clay mineral besides montmorillonite sug-
gests the increase of layer charge during the soil development. In the
uppermost Ah1 or Ah2 horizons – where the pH is close to 5.0–5.5 –

Fig. 4. XRD curve of the clay fraction of the Ah1, Ah2 and AC samples of the NH6 profile.

Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
8 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Fig. 5. XRD curve of the clay fraction of the Ah1 and Ah2 samples of the (a) BH3 and (b) BH4 profiles. S = Smectite.
the smectite exhibits the typical alteration process in acidic soils of
temperate zone: it is partially hydroxy-interlayered. Based on its miner-
alogy and clay-mineralogy the NH6 profile appears to be a genetically
inhomogeneous profile. The AC horizon is lot more weathered than
the Ah1 and Ah2 horizons, thus the NH6 is most probably affected by
slope movements (Fig. 4).
4.3.1.3. NH9 (Tokaj Hill). From the soil profile developed on andesite
at Tokaj only clay mineralogical analysis was performed. The results
differ significantly from the other NH profiles (Table 4). The dominant
clay mineral is illite, with subordinate K/S and kaolinite. In the AC hori-
zon some smectite and hydroxy-interlayered smectite occur. Cristobalite
is absent in the Ah horizons, it is present only in AC. Quartz and feldspar
content is constant and minor in the whole profile.
4.3.2. Samples of Balaton Highland
4.3.2.1. BH1–BH5. The relative abundance of quartz in the uppermost
Ah1 horizon in both the bulk soil and the clay fraction is unexpected,
because BH soils are formed on basalt, which does not contain this
mineral. Primary constituents of basalt, plagioclase feldspar, pyroxene
and iron-oxides, are present in the soils in significant quantity (Table 4).
General tendency is that the proportion of primary, inherited minerals
decreases in the Ah2 horizon, giving place to the secondary minerals.
The amount of clay is usually around 20% except for the BH5 profile de-
veloped on basalt pyroclastit of a tuff ring (Table 2). The dominant clay
mineral is illite and I/S with only 10–20% swelling component (Fig. 5a,b;
Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
Table 4). Besides the illite, some percent amorphous phase and small
amount of kaolinite, K/S and chlorite are present in the clay fraction.
Smectite and smectite rich I/S occur in considerable amount only in
the clay fraction of Ah2 horizon of BH4 and BH5 soils. A common char-
acteristic of the clay minerals occurring in these samples is their low
crystallinity.
5. Discussion
5.1. Colour and soil organic matter content
One of the most important differences between the brown and
black erubáz soils (defined in Section 4.2) is their SOM content. The
black colour is probably the result of the high proportion of the
humic-acids and humin. Average SOM content of the Ah1 and Ah2
horizons of the black erubáz soils is more than 8.8%, in the case of
the brown erubáz soils it is only 4.3%. These average values cover sig-
nificant differences (Fig. 2). The variation coefficient (CV) is 0.46 at
the black and 0.43 at the brown variety. Maximum SOM values of
the black erubáz reach 15%, but in the case of the brown variety it
reaches 8% in only one profile. The smallest SOM content was 2.1%
and 1.9%, respectively. The NH6 profile, which gives the minimum
values of the black erubáz samples (2.1–2.5%) is not a typical erubáz
because its material may have been transported and re-sedimented
by slope movements. If the data of the NH6 profile is skipped, the
average SOM content of the black erubáz group is 9.7%, the minimum
is 0.04 and its CV is 0.37.
 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
5.2. Bulk soil mineralogy and clay mineralogy
The presence of the unstable mafic silicates, amphiboles and
pyroxenes, indicates that the composition of the parent material is
still well reflected in the examined soil profiles. These minerals are
usually absent, or present only in very small quantity in well-developed
soils. Among the examined soil profiles, pyroxene was characteristic
primarily in soils of basaltic rocks and amphibol was typical in soils
developed on andesite (Table 4).
A common characteristic of all samples is that they possess relatively
small amount of quartz and significantly more feldspar, which again is
indicative of the influence of the parent rock. The amount of quartz is
usually higher in the upper soil, which indicates the presence of aeolian
dust in the soil material.
Previous studies concluded that the smectite group was the predom-
inant clay mineral of the erubáz soils (Agrotopo, 1982; Stefanovits and
Szücs, 1961). Apparently, the predominance of smectites as swelling
clay minerals is supported by the fact that the erubáz soils have and
adhesive, adherent appearance but the proportion of the clay fraction
in the mechanical composition of the studied soils is relatively small
(usually 15–25%, exceptionally up to 40%; Table 2).
However, our XRD measurements suggest that the illite is the
most frequent clay-mineral of the erubáz soils, which is followed by the
kaolinite and the smectite. Illites and kaolinites are poorly crystallised,
disordered and sometimes interlayered with smectite. As a maximum
of 15–20% smectite interlayering is present in the kaolinite, while the
smectite/illite group contains only cca. 10% interstratified smectite.
The presence of the smectites is the highest in the colluvium type
soils (NH6, NH7), where it is over 40%.
As Fe-clays are common in volcanic soils (Delvaux et al., 1990),
presence of nontronite was checked in the samples. Neither the Green-
Kelly test, nor the 060 reflection indicated the occurrence of nontronite.
Nevertheless, high iron content of the montmorillonite is very probable.
The amorphous material is present in all samples, but it is prob-
lematic to quantify it because of the poorly developed clay minerals,
which may give similar XRD effects.
X-ray diffractograms of the clay fractions are very similar to those
shown for volcanic soils formed on Etna in Egli et al. (2008) with
dominant clay minerals kaolinite and illite. Although, the Etna soils
cover 115,000 year range, surprisingly no significant difference in clay
mineralogy was found during soil evolution. Volcanic soils in Hungary
are probably older, but essentially represent similar clay mineralogy,
with the only small difference that they contain more interlayered swell-
ing clay minerals. The more pronounced presence of swelling clays can
be the consequence of the older soil age, therefore smectitization can
be a later stage of clay mineral transformation sequence of volcanic soil
pedogenesis.
5.3. Cluster analysis
The cluster-analysis was done using 11 profiles for which both the
standard laboratory and the clay-mineralogical analyses were available.
Bulk soil mineralogical investigation was performed only for 8 profiles,
therefore this was not utilised during the analysis. Inner structure of the
data was revealed using non-hierarchic K-Means Cluster-analysis by 2
clusters setting. Results of the calculations are in standardized form
and can be interpreted using the
y ¼ xðSD þ MÞ
equation, where x is the standardized cluster value, SD is the scatter and
M is the average of the original variable. Two clusters were created by
the cluster analysis (Table 5):
Cluster 1: NH1, NH2, NH3, NH6, NH7, BH4
Cluster 2: BH1, BH2, BH3, BH5, NH9
Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
9
Major differences of the two clusters are manifested in their clay
mineralogy.
The major differences are in the illite, I/S and kaolinite, K/S content:
illite content of the Cluster 2 is three times higher than that of the pro-
files in Cluster 1. On the contrary, kaolinite content of the Cluster 1 is
four times more than that of the Cluster 2. Smectite content of the Clus-
ter 1 is two times higher than that of the soils in Cluster 2. The opal–
crystobalite and the crystobalite occur only in Cluster 1 samples,
Goethite is a characteristic mineral in soils forming on volcanic
rocks, even though it occurred only in samples from the Börzsöny.
The amount of quartz in the Ah2 horizon is similar in both clusters,
while it is the double in the Ah1 horizon in the soils belonging to the
Cluster 1 with respect to the Cluster 2. The amount of feldspars is
higher in both horizons in the Cluster 1.
With one exception in each cluster, profiles developed on andesite
belong to Cluster 1 and those formed on basaltic rocks to Cluster 2.
The exceptions are NH9 and BH4, respectively. The NH9 has an ex-
traordinarily high illite and I/S content compared to the other andesit-
ic profiles, which makes it similar to the BH profiles. On the other hand
BH4 has a surprisingly low illite and I/S content and has high smectite,
kaolinite and K/S content with respect to the basaltic profiles.
The differentiation of the two clusters of the erubáz soils is
supported by the bulk soil mineralogy of the studied profiles. Namely,
the amphibole and the crystobalite occurred only in the andesitic
samples, while the pyroxene is typical in the basaltic profiles (Table 4).
5.4. Genetic classification of the erubáz soils
In the Hungarian soil classification no sub-types of the erubáz soil
existed. Our study revealed that this soil type is far from having as
uniform appearance as it was suggested by earlier studies (Stefanovits,
1951, 1956, 1959). According to our study, the erubáz soils can be divided
in two well-defined groups, where field properties (parent lithology,
colour, texture) and standard laboratory analysis conform to results
on bulk soil mineralogy and clay mineralogy. As a result erubáz soils
developed on basaltic and on andesitic lithology were distinguished.
Unfortunately, no mineralogical analysis was done on the profiles de-
veloped on ignimbrite (NH8 and NH10), but their field and standard
laboratory data showed similarity to the erubáz soils developed on
andesite.
According to the cluster analysis, two subtypes of the erubáz soils
exist: erubáz soils formed on (1) Basic- and (2) Intermediate-Acidic li-
thology. In andesitic erubáz soils opal–crystobalite and the crystobalite
are typical, while in basaltic erubáz soils they are absent. In andesitic
erubáz soils kaolinite content is 4 times, smectite content is 2 times
higher than that of the basaltic group, where the amount of illites is 3
times higher.
Besides, based on colour and SOM content, two varieties of the
erubáz soils could be distinguished – the Black and the Brown erubáz.
In these varieties the conditions of the decomposition of organic ma-
terial are very different due to the moisture content, temperature and
pH-conditions of the soil (Madarász, 2009). Both varieties exist in the
case of erubáz soils formed on Intermediate-Acidic rocks, where the
brown variety may be regarded as a transition towards the brown
forest soils, with no division into horizons yet. All of the profiles de-
veloped on Basic lithology belong to the black erubáz variety.
5.5. WRB classification of the erubáz soils
It may seem obvious to verify the andic properties of the Hungarian
erubáz soils. Kleber et al. (2004) succeeded in recognizing andic
properties on soils developed on Quaternary volcanites in Germany.
However they concluded that the areal extent of Andosols is usually
restricted on erosion-prone volcanic landscapes with undulating ter-
rain and steep slopes, indicating a topography-limited pattern, similar
to the occurrence of the erubáz soils in Hungary. Quantin (2004) found
10 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Table 5 Table 6
K-Means Cluster-analysis data of the standard laboratory analysis results and Genetic and WRB classification of the studied soil profiles.
clay-mineral composition of the soil profiles: 1. andesitic cluster; 2. basaltic cluster.
Profile Genetic classification WRB classification
Horizon Cluster
Variety Subtype Type Prefix Q. RSG Suffix Q.
1 2
NH1 Black I-A Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
Depth (cm) Ah1 + Ah2 34.0 42.0 NH2 Brown I-A Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
pH (H2O) Ah1 5.8 5.7 NH3 Black I-A Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
Ah2 6.0 6.0 NH4 Brown I-A Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
pH (KCl) Ah1 5.1 5.4 NH5 Brown I-A Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
Ah2 5.4 5.4 NH6 Humic ESD SD Mollic Leptosol Humic, Euteric
Humus Ah1 8.7 10.2 NH7 Brown I-A Erubáz Endoleptic Phaeozem Pachic, Endosiltic
% Ah2 5.9 8.1 NH8 Brown I-A Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
C/N Ah1 12.4 13.3 NH9 Black I-A Erubáz Endoleptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
Ah2 9.9 12.7 NH10 Brown I-A Erubáz Endoleptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
Fine earth Ah1 82.5 85.7 BH1 Black B Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
% Ah2 72.8 82.8 BH2 Black B Erubáz Endoleptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
Silt Ah1 28.1 33.3 BH3 Black B Erubáz Mollic Leptosol Humic, Euteric
% Ah2 22.3 31.6 BH4 Black B Erubáz Mollic Leptosol Humic, Euteric
Clay Ah1 22.1 25.3 BH5 Black B Erubáz Epileptic Phaeozem Endosiltic
% Ah2 31.4 26.5
Q: Qualifiers, RSG: Reference Soil Group, I–A: Intermediate–Acidic, B: Basic,
Smectite Ah1 13.9 6.8
SD: Slope Debris, ESD: Erubáz Slope Debris.
% Ah2 14.9 6.3
Vermikulite Ah1 1.4 0.0
% Ah2 2.0 0.0
Chlorite Ah1 0.0 2.5 The mineral composition (amount of quartz increasing upwards)
% Ah2 0.0 2.3
and a secondary grain size maximum observed at 20–50 μm of the
Illite, I/S Ah1 20.3 72.3
% Ah2 20.0 73.0 samples suggest that erubáz soils are usually affected by aeolian
Kaolinite, K/S Ah1 22.6 6.3 dust mixing into the soil material, which is not surprising as loess for-
% Ah2 26.3 6.5 mation was usual in the hilly regions of Hungary during the cold and
Quartz Ah1 11.4 6.0 dry periods of the Quaternary.
% Ah2 6.3 5.3
On the basis of the secondary mineral assemblage (poorly
Cristobalite Ah1 9.3 0.0
% Ah2 9.6 0.0 crystallised and disordered illites and kaolinites) described by the XRD
Feldspars Ah1 17.1 5.5 diffractograms we can conclude that volcanic soils in Hungary are not
% Ah2 16.7 6.0 Andosols, but more developed soils. On the other hand, the presence
Goethite Ah1 0.7 0.0
of unstable mafic silicates (amphibole, pyroxene), together with the
% Ah2 0.6 0.0
above-described secondary minerals, are still indicative of an early
stage of soil formation. In the neighbourhood of the erubáz soils
Luvisols have developed on volcanic material. In these soils the pres-
that Aluandosols have developed on weathered material of Mio-Pliocene ence of unstable mafic silicates is insignificant, thus their differentia-
lavas, and that udic or perudic moisture regime is a key factor of their tion from the erubáz soils is straightforward.
formation. Despite that in the erubáz soils the volcanic parent lithology is
The erubáz and the Andosol Reference Soil Group (RSG) have a well recognisable they could not be inserted into the Andosol RSG
number of similar characteristics (structure, SOM content, colour, of the WRB soil classification system. In the case of the erubáz soils,
mineralogy etc.). However, during the diagnostic classification no re- formation of Andic horizons probably was not possible due to (1) the
lationship could be recognised. The erubáz soils did not fulfil the less than 1000 mm/year precipitation and to (2) the extreme microcli-
criteria of the Andosols: no Andic (sil-andic or alu-andic) and/or Vitric matic conditions (freezing–drying). These conditions led to a reduced
horizons could be described in any of the erubáz profiles (Tables 2, 3) intensity of weathering and high humification atypical for Andosols.
(Madarász, 2010). Neither qualifier of the erubáz soils reflects volcanic The WRB soil classification system emphasizes these steppe-like fea-
lithology. Most of our profiles were classified in the WRB system as tures of the studied soil profiles, which mostly fell into the Phaeozems
Phaeozems and only some shallow profiles appeared to be Leptosols group.
(Table 6). The Phaeozem group is formed by steppe soils, in other
words the WRB classification system emphasizes the steppe-like fea-
tures of the erubáz soils (dark colour, high SOM content), while the ef- Acknowledgements
fect of volcanic lithology remains in the background.
In spite of the presence of volcanic material in Hungary, formation of The authors thank Prof. Ádám Kertész and Prof. György Füleky for
the Andosols is hampered by climatic conditions large amount of pre- the remarks that helped to improve the quality of this project. We are
cipitation (>1000 mm/year), high humidity and intensive weathering grateful to Mr. M. Kleber and the COST Action 622 programme for the
would be essential for the development of the Andosols (Juráni and XRD analysis of 3 profiles. The authors are thankful to Norbert Agárdi
Blackovič, 2007; Kleber and Jahn, 2007; Quantin, 2004, 2007). for his technical assistance.

6. Conclusions
Our study demonstrated that illites are the dominant clay minerals
in the erubáz soils, not the smectites as it was suggested by earlier
works (Agrotopo, 1982; Stefanovits and Szücs, 1961). On the basis of
our field-, standard laboratory-, bulk soil mineralogical- and clay-
mineralogical analyses, a distinction of sub-types (Basic, Intermediate-
Acidic) and varieties (Brown, Black) of the erubáz soils was possible.
References
Agrotopo, 1982. Agrotopográfiai térkép (M=1:100.000), Kartográfiai Vállalat, Budapest.
Barczi, A., 2000. A Tihanyi-félsziget talajai. Bakonyi Természettudományi Múzeum,
Zirc.
Bárdossy, G., Bottyán, L., Gadó, P., Griger, Á., Sasvári, J., 1980. Automated quantitative
phase analysis of bauxites. American Mineralogist 65, 135–141.
Beery, M., Wilding, L.P., 1971. The relationship between soil pH and base-saturation
percentage for surface and subsoil horizons of selected Mollisols, Alfisols, and
Ultisols in Ohio. The Ohio Journal of Science 71 (1), 43–55.

Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
 B. Madarász et al. / Catena xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Berényi Üveges, J., Németh, T., Michéli, E., Tóth, M., 2002. Mátrai vörösagyagok szerepe
a visontai paleotalajok képződésében az ásványtani és geokémiai vizsgálatok
tükrében. Földtani Közlöny 132, 283–291.
Blakemore, L.C., Searle, P.L., Daly, B.K., 1987. Methods for chemical analysis of soils.
New Zealand Soil Bureau Scientific Report 80, 103–105.
Buurman, P., van Lagen, B., Velthorst, E.J. (Eds.), 1996. Manual for Soil and Water Analysis.
Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp. 241–267.
Buzás, I. (Ed.), 1988. Talaj- és agrokémiai vizsgálati módszerkönyv 2. Mezıgazdasági
Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 37–41.
Buzás, I. (Ed.), 1993. Talaj- és agrokémiai vizsgálati módszerkönyv 1. INDA 4231 Kiadó,
Budapest, pp. 28–39.
Csontos, L., Vörös, A., 2002. A kárpát-Pannon térség lemeztektonikai modellje. In:
Karátson, D. (Ed.), Magyarország földje. Magyar Könyvklub, Budapest, pp. 70–72.
Delvaux, B., Herbillon, A.J., Vielvoye, L., Mestdagh, M.M., 1990. Surface properties and
clay mineralogy of hydrated halloysitic soil clays. II: evidence for the presence of
halloysite/smectite (H/Sm) mixed-layer clays. Clay Minerals 25, 141–160.
Dövényi, Z. (Ed.), 2010. Magyarorszák kistájainak katasztere. MTA Földrajztudományi
Kutatóintézet, Budapest.
Egli, M., Nater, M., Mirabella, M.A., Raimondi, S., Plötze, M., Alioth, L., 2008. Clay minerals,
oxyhydroxide formation, element leaching and humus development in volcanic soils.
Geoderma 143, 101–114.
Fehér, O., 2007. A talajviszonyokra ható természeti és emberi tényezők vizsgálata a
Kárpát-medence néhány jellegzetes táján, PhD, Szent István Egyetem, Gödöllő.
Fehér, O., Füleky, G., Madarász, B., Kertész, Á., 2006. Hét vulkáni kőzeten kialakult
talajszelvény morfológiai és dignosztikai jellemzői a hazai genetikai talajosztályozás
és a WRB (World Reference Base for Soil Resources, 1998) szerint. Agrokémia és
Talajtan 55, 347–366.
Füleky, G., Jakab, S., Fehér, O., Madarász, B., Kertész, Á., 2006. Soils of volcanic regions
of Hungary and the Carpathian Basin. In: Arnalds, A., Bartoli, F., Buurman, P.,
Óskarsson, H., Stoops, G., Garcío-Rodeja, E. (Eds.), Soils of Volcanic Regions in
Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp. 29–42.
Gjems, O., 1967. Studies on clay minerals and clay-mineral formation. Soil Profiles in
Scandinavia. Norwegian Forest Research Institute, Vollebekk, Norway.
Green-Kelly, R., 1953. The identification of montmorillonitoids in clays. Journal of Soil
Science 1953 (4), 233–237.
Hoyningen–Huehne, P.F. von, 1931. Die Bodentypen Nord- und Mitteldeutschlands.
Jahrbuch der Preuβischen Geologischen Landesaustalt 51, 524–564.
Jakab, S., Füleky, G., Fehér, O., 2004. Environmental conditions of Andosols formation
in Transylvania (Romania). Soils of the Gurghiu Volcanic Chain: Rala Report, 214,
pp. 65–66.
Jurani, B., 2002. Volcanic soils of Slovakia. COST 622 Meeting: Soil Resources of European
Volcanic Systems in Manderscheid/Vulkaneifel 24.–28. April 2002. Rheinische
Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Mainz, pp. 21–22.
Juráni, B., Blackovič, J., 2007. Soil of volcanic regions in Slovakia. In: Arnalds, A., Bartoli,
F., Buurman, P., Óskarsson, H., Stoops, G., Garcío-Rodeja, E. (Eds.), Soils of Volcanic
Regions in Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp. 83–100.
Karátson, D., 1997. A vulkáni működés és kalderakérdés a Börzsönyben. Földrajzi
Közlemények 121 (3–4), 151–172.
Karátson, D., 1999. Erosion of primary volcanic depressions in the Inner Carpathian
Volcanic Chain. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie 144, 49–62.
Karátson, D., 2007. A Börzsönytől a Hargitáig. Typotex, Budapest.
Kleber, M., Jahn, R., 2007. Soils of volcanic regions of Germany. In: Arnalds, A., Bartoli,
F., Buurman, P., Óskarsson, H., Stoops, G., Garcío-Rodeja, E. (Eds.), Soils of Volcanic
Regions in Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp. 13–24.
Kleber, M., Mikutta, C., Jahn, R., 2004. Andosols in Germany — pedogenesis and properties.
Catena 56, 67–83.
Kubiëna, W.L., 1953. Bestimmungsbuch und Systematik der Böden Europas. Institut für
Bodenkunde–Enke, Madrid–Stutgart.
Laves, D., Jähn, G., 1972. Zur quantitativen röntgenographischen Bodenton-
Mineralanalyse. Archiv für Acker- und Pflanzenbau und Bodenkunde 16, 735–739.
Please cite this article as: Madarász, B., et al., The erubáz volcanic soil of Hungary: Mineralogy and classification, Catena (2013), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.catena.2013.02.004
11
Madarász, B., 2009. A magyarországi erubáz talajok komplex talajtani vizsgálata,
különös tekintettel agyagásvány-összetételükre (Complex pedologic analysis of the
Hungarian erubáz soils with special reference to their clay-mineral composition)
PhD, ELTE, Budapest.
Madarász, B., 2010. Problematic WRB classification of the so called “erubáz” soil, a
volcanic soil type of Central Europe, Hungary. In: Gilkes, J.R., Prakongkep, N.
(Eds.), Proceedings, 19th World Congress of Soil Science. Brisbane 1–6 August
2010. ISBN: 978-0-646-53783-2, pp. 15–18 (DVD).
Martin, U., Németh, K., 2004. Mio/Pliocene phreatomagmatic volcanism in the Western
Pannonian Basin. Geologica Hungarica 26, 179–193.
Mehlich, A., 1953. Determination of P, Ca, Mg, K, Na, and NH4. North Carolina Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Agronomic Division. Soil Testing Division Publication No.
1–53.
Mehra, O.P., Jackson, M.L., 1960. Iron oxide removal from soils and clays by dithionite–
citrate systems buffered with sodium bicarbonate. Clays and Clay Minerals 7,
317–327.
Michéli, E., Fuchs, M., Hegymegi, P., Stefanovits, P., 2006. Classification of the major
soils of Hungary and their correlation with the World Reference Base for Soil Resources
(WRB). Agrokémia és Talajtan 55, 19–28.
Pécsi, M., 1993. Negyedkor és löszkutatás. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
Perepelita, V., Florea, N., Vlad, L., Grigorescu, A., 1986. Asupracriteriilor de diagnostic
ale andosolurilor si solurilor andice din Muntii Carpati. Bucharest Anale I.C.P.A.,
47, pp. 125–139.
Ping, C.L., 2000. Volcanic soils. In: Sigurdsson, H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Volcanoes,
pp. 1259–1270.
Quantin, P., 2004. Volcanic soils of France. Catena 56, 95–109.
Quantin, P., 2007. Volcanic soil resources in France. In: Arnalds, A., Bartoli, F., Buurman,
P., Óskarsson, H., Stoops, G., Garcío-Rodeja, E. (Eds.), Soils of Volcanic Regions in
Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp. 5–12.
Sajtos, L., Mitev, A., 2007. SPSS kutatási és adatelemzési kézikönyv. Alinea Kiadó,
Budapest.
Schwertmann, U., 1964. Differenzierung der Eisenoxide des Bodens durch Extraktion
mit saurer Ammoniumoxalat–Lösung. Zeitschrift für Pfalnzenernährung, Düngung
und Bodenkunde 105, 194–202.
Stefanovits, P., 1951. Andezittufán kialakult talajok a Börzsöny hegységben. Agrokémia
és Talajtan 1, 309–317.
Stefanovits, P., 1956. Magyarország talajai. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.
Stefanovits, P., 1959. A magyarországi erdőtalajok genetikus – talajföldrajzi osztályozása.
Agrokémia és Talajtan 8, 163–181.
Stefanovits, P., Szücs, L., 1961. Magyarország genetikus talajtérképe és magyarázó.
OMMI, Budapest.
Stefanovits, P., Filep, G., Füleky, G., 1999. Talajtan. Mezőgazda Kiadó, Budapest.
Szabó, Cs, Harangi, Sz, Csontos, L., 1992. Review of Neogene and Quaternary volcanism
of the Carpathian–Pannonian region. Tectonophysics 208, 243–256.
Szakács, S., Karátson, D., 2002. A belső-kárpáti mészalkáli vulkánosság. In: Karátson, D. (Ed.),
Magyarország földje. Kitekintéssel a Kárpát-medence egészére. Magyar Könyvklub,
Budapest, pp. 73–77.
Székely, A., 1997. Vulkánmorfológia. ELTE Eötvös Kiadó, Budapest.
Thorez, J., 1976. Practical identification of clay minerals. Editions G. Lelotte, Dison
(Belgique) .
Tributh, H., 1991. Qualitative und “quantitative” Bestimmung der Tonminerale in
Bodentonen. In: Tributh, H., Lagaly, G. (Eds.), Identifizierung und Charakterisierung
von Tonmineralen: Berichte der Deutschen Ton- und Tonmineralgruppe e.V.,
DTTG, pp. 37–85.
Vaughan, D.J., Wogelins, R.A., 2000. Environmental Mineralogy. Eötvös University
Press, Budapest.
White, R.E., 2006. Principles and Practice of Soil Science: The Soil as a Natural Resource.
Blackwell Science Ltd.
World Reference Base for Soil Resources, 2006. World Soil Resources Reports, 103. FAO,
Rome.