MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151691558 · doi:10.5194/acp-12-591-2012

Gas-particle partitioning of atmospheric Hg(II) and its effect on global mercury deposition

2012· article· en· W2151691558 on OpenAlexafffund
Helen M. Amos, Daniel Jacob, Christopher D. Holmes, Jenny A. Fisher, Qiaoqiao Wang, Robert M. Yantosca, Elizabeth S. Corbitt, Elisabeth Galarneau, Andrew P. Rutter, Mae Sexauer Gustin, A. Steffen, James J. Schauer, Jennifer A. Graydon, Vincent L. St. Louis, R. W. Talbot, Eric S. Edgerton, Y. Zhang, Elsie M. Sunderland

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaManitoba HydroNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAerosolParticulatesMercury (programming language)TroposphereSnowAtmospheric sciencesChemistryDeposition (geology)Environmental chemistrySeasonalityPlumeEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Atmospheric deposition of Hg(II) represents a major input of mercury to surface environments. The phase of Hg(II) (gas or particle) has important implications for deposition. We use long-term observations of reactive gaseous mercury (RGM, the gaseous component of Hg(II)), particle-bound mercury (PBM, the particulate component of Hg(II)), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and temperature (T) at five sites in North America to derive an empirical gas-particle partitioning relationship log10(K−1) = (10±1)–(2500±300)/T where K = (PBM/PM2.5)/RGM with PBM and RGM in common mixing ratio units, PM2.5 in μg m−3, and T in K. This relationship is within the range of previous work but is based on far more extensive data from multiple sites. We implement this empirical relationship in the GEOS-Chem global 3-D Hg model to partition Hg(II) between the gas and particle phases. The resulting gas-phase fraction of Hg(II) ranges from over 90 % in warm air with little aerosol to less than 10 % in cold air with high aerosol. Hg deposition to high latitudes increases because of more efficient scavenging of particulate Hg(II) by precipitating snow. Model comparison to Hg observations at the North American surface sites suggests that subsidence from the free troposphere (warm air, low aerosol) is a major factor driving the seasonality of RGM, while elevated PBM is mostly associated with high aerosol loads. Simulation of RGM and PBM at these sites is improved by including fast in-plume reduction of Hg(II) emitted from coal combustion and by assuming that anthropogenic particulate Hg(p) behaves as semi-volatile Hg(II) rather than as a refractory particulate component. We improve the simulation of Hg wet deposition fluxes in the US relative to a previous version of GEOS-Chem; this largely reflects independent improvement of the washout algorithm. The observed wintertime minimum in wet deposition fluxes is attributed to inefficient snow scavenging of gas-phase Hg(II).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations487
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207