4.0 Article

Subpollen Particles as Atmospheric Cloud Condensation Nuclei

Journal

IZVESTIYA ATMOSPHERIC AND OCEANIC PHYSICS
Volume 55, Issue 4, Pages 357-364

Publisher

MAIK NAUKA/INTERPERIODICA/SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1134/S000143381904008X

Keywords

bioaerosol; subpollen particles; condensation activity of aerosols; spectrometer of cloud condensation nuclei; hygroscopicity parameter

Funding

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [16-05-00717a]
  2. Russian Science Foundation [18-17-00076]
  3. Geomodel and Innovative Technologies of Composite Materials resource centers
  4. Russian Science Foundation [18-17-00076] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bioparticles constitute a significant fraction of atmospheric aerosol. Their size range varies from nanometers (macromolecules) to hundreds of micrometers (plant pollen and vegetation residues). Like other atmospheric aerosol particles, the degree of involvement of bioaerosols in atmospheric processes largely depends on their hygroscopic and condensation properties. This paper studies the ability of subpollen particles of pine, birch, and rape to serve as cloud condensation nuclei. Secondary particles are obtained by the aqueous extraction of biological material from pollen grains and the subsequent solidification of atomized liquid droplets. The parameters of cloud activation are determined in the size range of 20-270 nm and water-vapor supersaturations of 0.1-1.1%. Measurement data were used to determine the hygroscopicity parameter that characterizes the effect of the chemical composition of subparticles on their condensation properties. The hygroscopic parameter varies in the range from 0.12 to 0.13. In general, the results of measurements have shown that the condensation activity of subpollen particles is comparable with the condensation activity of secondary organic aerosols and depends weakly on the type of primary pollen.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available