Dry Deposition of Fine Particulate Matter by City-Owned Street Trees in a City Defined by Urban Sprawl
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban expansion intensifies population exposures to fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Trees mitigate pollution by dry deposition, in which particles settle on plants. However, city-scale models frequently overlook differences in tree species and structure. This study assesses PM2.5 removal by individual city-owned street trees in Mississauga, Canada, throughout the 2019 leaf-growing season (May to September). 27.8 tons of PM2.5 were removed from 200,560 city-owned trees (245 species). Coniferous species (14.37% of trees) removed 25.62 tons (92% of total), much higher than deciduous species (85.63%, 2.18 tons). Picea pungens (18.33 tons, 66%), Pinus nigra (3.29 tons, 12%), and Picea abies (1.50 tons, 5%) are three key species. Conifers' removal efficiency originates from the faster deposition velocities, larger tree size, and dense foliage, all of which enhance particle deposition. The findings indicate interspecies differences in PM2.5 mitigation, emphasizing the importance of smart urban forestry. This study emphasizes species-specific approaches for improving urban air quality through targeted tree planting. Prioritizing coniferous species such as spruce and pine can improve pollution mitigation, providing actionable strategies for Mississauga and other cities worldwide to develop green infrastructure planning for air pollution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".