The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Iron Solubility Related to Particle Sulfur Content in Source Emission and Ambient Fine Particles
Abstract
The chemical factors influencing iron solubility (soluble iron/total iron) were investigated in source emission (e.g., biomass burning, coal fly ash, mineral dust, and mobile exhaust) and ambient (Atlanta, GA) fine particles (PM2.5). Chemical properties (speciation and mixing state) of iron-containing particles were characterized using X-ray absorption near edge structure (XANES) spectroscopy and micro-X-ray fluorescence measurements. Bulk iron solubility (soluble iron/total iron) of the samples was quantified by leaching experiments. Major differences were observed in iron solubility in source emission samples, ranging from low solubility (<1%, mineral dust and coal fly ash) up to 75% (mobile exhaust and biomass burning emissions). Differences in iron solubility did not correspond to silicon content or Fe(II) content. However, source emission and ambient samples with high iron solubility corresponded to the sulfur content observed in single particles. A similar correspondence between bulk iron solubility and bulk sulfate content in a series of Atlanta PM2.5 fine particle samples (N = 358) further supported this trend. In addition, results of linear combination fitting experiments show the presence of iron sulfates in several high iron solubility source emission and ambient PM2.5 samples. These results suggest that the sulfate content (related to the presence of iron sulfates and/or acid-processing mechanisms by H(2)SO(4)) of iron-containing particles is an important proxy for iron solubility.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Shafer, M. M., Perkins, D. A., Antkiewicz, D. S., Stone, E. A., Quraishi, T. A., & Schauer, J. J. (2010) · J. Environ. Monit. · doi:10.1039/b915008k · Cited by 131
Self-citation
Cited by
Fang, T., Guo, H., Zeng, L., Verma, V., Nenes, A., & Weber, R. J. (2017) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b06151 · Cited by 584
Self-citationFang, T., Verma, V., Bates, J. T., Abrams, J., Klein, M., Strickland, M. J., Sarnat, S. E., Chang, H. H., Mulholland, J. A., Tolbert, P. E., et al. (2016) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-16-3865-2016 · Cited by 373
Self-citationGuo, H., Liu, J., Froyd, K. D., Roberts, J. M., Veres, P. R., Hayes, P. L., Jimenez, J. L., Nenes, A., & Weber, R. J. (2017) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-17-5703-2017 · Cited by 267
Self-citationEarth, wind, fire, and pollution: aerosol nutrient sources and impacts on ocean biogeochemistry
Hamilton, D. S., Perron, M. M. G., Bond, T. C., Bowie, A. R., Buchholz, R. R., Guieu, C., Ito, A., Maenhaut, W., Myriokefalitakis, S., Olgun, N., et al. (2022) · Annual Review of Marine Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-marine-031921-013612 · Cited by 160
Masiol, M., Squizzato, S., Formenton, G., Khan, M. B., Hopke, P. K., Nenes, A., Pandis, S. N., Tositti, L., Benetello, F., Visin, F., et al. (2020) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135287 · Cited by 77
Metadata
- Authors
- Oakes, M., Ingall, E. D., Lai, B., Shafer, M. M., Hays, M. D., Liu, Z. G., Russell, A. G., & Weber, R. J.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2012-06-07
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 6637-6644
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2334728923
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
