4.7 Article

Seasonality and interspecies differences in particle/gas partitioning of PAHs observed by the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN)

Journal

ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 182-197

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.09.034

Keywords

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; partitioning; absorption; adsorption; soot

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study presents partitioning data from eight locations in the Laurentian Great Lakes region collected by the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) over periods ranging from I to 6 years. Particle/gas partitioning varies sufficiently between sites in the Great Lakes region to preclude the use of a uniform temperature dependence for its description. Site-specific parameters for describing partitioning as a function of inverse temperature are presented. Relationships between partitioning of appreciably semivolatile PAHs and saturated vapour pressure at Chicago (IIT) and Sturgeon Point (STP) demonstrate that anthracene, benz[a]anthracene and retene behave differently than phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene and chrysene + triphenylene. Possible reasons for these differences include interspecies variations in the fraction of atmospherically non-exchangeable, though analytically extractable, PAHs on particles and differences in soot-air partition coefficients as they relate to saturated vapour pressure. The observed interspecies differences are not consistent with sampling artefacts such as filter adsorption or sorbent breakthrough. At IIT, but not at STP, values of the slope of the relationship between the log partition coefficient and log vapour pressure vary in a manner opposing the annual temperature cycle. A comparison of partitioning calculated by a combined absorption/adsorption model shows good predictability at Chicago but underestimates values at a rural site (Eagle Harbor, EGH) by an order of magnitude. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available