Wildfires can cause serious imbalances in ecosystems, primarily at the soil level, making it vulnerable to degradation processes such as erosion. During and after a fire, changes occur in soil properties, including pH, which affects the solubility and availability of nutrients. Currently, there is a great diversity of protocols, some involving normalized standards, to determine soil pH, but there is no consensual or universal analytical method for this parameter, especially in burned soils, in which mineral and organic fractions could have been modified. Therefore, the objective of the present work is to evaluate the effect that variations in these analytical protocols may have on pH results. For this, five methods commonly found in the international bibliography for the analysis of pH of soil in water (pH_H2O) were selected and compared to propose the most precise procedure. The analytical methods were applied to 43 soil samples, collected in a plot subjected to prescribed burning in the Parque Natural de Montesinho (Northern Portugal). The studied methods differ in the following protocol items: water suspension ratio (1:2.5 or 1:5), mechanical stirring time in the suspension (10 min or 1 h), and in the resting time for the solid particles to settle (15 min or 8 h). The obtained results point to the suitability of the five methods used for soil pH analysis, indicating that there are no statistically significant differences. However, results also allow suggesting a more appropriate method concerning practical reasons, such as labor in a lab. Thus, to make the analysis process more profitable, M2 is a good option because it uses a small amount of sample (5 g), short agitation (10 min) and settling time (15 min). In turn, M1 and M5, which use a lower proportion of soil (1:2.5) show lower pH variation in the measurements. This fact may be explained by a smaller dilution effect. Considering that these two methods differ in the settling time, it is suggested to apply M1, because only 15 min are required. Therefore, the main conclusion reached with this work is that the measurement of soil pH using M1, i.e., a soil:water ratio of 1:2.5, with agitation of 10 min and settling time of 15 min, is a robust and more expeditious protocol to be applied to soil samples after a fire.

Bioremediation is an attractive and useful method of remediation of soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons because it is simple to maintain, applicable in large areas, is economic and enables an effective destruction of the contaminant. Usually, the autochthone microorganisms have no ability to degrade these compounds, and otherwise, the contaminated sites have inappropriate environmental conditions for microorganism’s development. These problems can be overcome by assisted bioremediation (bioaugmentation and/or biostimulation). In this study the assisted bioremediation capacity on the rehabilitation of three natural sub-soils (granite, limestone and schist) contaminated with benzene was evaluated. Two different types of assisted bioremediation were used: without and with ventilation (bioventing). The bioaugmentation was held by inoculating the soil with a consortium of microorganisms collected from the protection area of crude oil storage tanks in a refinery. In unventilated trials, biostimulation was accomplished by the addition of a nutrient mineral media, while in bioventing oxygen was also added. The tests were carried out at controlled temperature of 25 ºC in stainless steel columns where the moist soil contaminated with benzene (200 mg per kg of soil) occupied about 40% of the column’s volume. The processes were daily monitored in discontinued mode. Benzene concentration in the gas phase was quantified by gas chromatography (GC-FID), oxygen and carbon dioxide concentrations were monitored by respirometry. The results revealed that the three contaminated soils were remediated using both technologies, nevertheless, the bioventing showed faster rates. With this work it was proved that respirometric analysis is an appropriate instrument for monitoring the biological activity.