The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of size and morphological measurements of coarse mode dust particles from Africa
Abstract
A multitude of sensitivity studies in the literature point to the importance of proper chemical and morphological characterization of particles when the radiative impacts of airborne dusts are modeled. However, the community data set is based on heterogeneous measurement methods relying on varying aerodynamic, chemical, morphological, and optical means. During the Puerto Rico Dust Experiment, size distributions of dust particles from Africa were measured using a variety of aerodynamic, optical, and geometric means. Consistent with the literature, comparisons of these size distributions showed quite dissimilar results. “Measured” volume median diameters varied from 2.5 to 9 μm for various geometric, aerodynamic, optical, and optical inversion methods. Aerodynamic systems showed mixed performance. Column integrated size distributions inverted from AERONET Sun/sky radiance data produced somewhat reasonable results in the coarse mode when given proper constraints and taken in the proper context. The largest systematic errors were found in optical particle counters due to insensitivities to particle size in the 4–10 μm region with further complications due to dust particle morphology and index of refraction issues. As these methods can produce quite dissimilar size distributions, considerable errors in calculated radiative properties can occur if incorrectly modeled into dust parameters. None of the methods compared in this study can adequately reproduce the measured mass extinction or mass scattering efficiency of the dust using spherical geometry methods. Given all of the uncertainties in the sizing methods, we promote the use of fundamental and quantifiable descriptors of particles such as mass as a function of aerodynamic diameter.
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
The geochemical evolution of the continental crust
Taylor, S. R., & McLennan, S. M. (1995) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/95rg00262 · Cited by 4,643
Cited by
Atmospheric global dust cycle and iron inputs to the ocean
Mahowald, N. M., Baker, A. R., Bergametti, G., Brooks, N., Duce, R. A., Jickells, T. D., Kubilay, N., Prospero, J. M., & Tegen, I. (2005) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/2004gb002402 · Cited by 1,236
Global dust model intercomparison in AeroCom phase I
Huneeus, N., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Griesfeller, J., Prospero, J., Kinne, S., Bauer, S., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., et al. (2011) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-11-7781-2011 · Cited by 1,074
Reid, E. A., Reid, J. S., Meier, M. M., Dunlap, M. R., Cliff, S. S., Broumas, A., Perry, K., & Maring, H. (2003) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/2002jd002935 · Cited by 300
Self-citationAerosol Deposition Impacts on Land and Ocean Carbon Cycles
Mahowald, N. M., Scanza, R., Brahney, J., Goodale, C. L., Hess, P. G., Moore, J. K., & Neff, J. (2017) · Current Climate Change Reports · doi:10.1007/s40641-017-0056-z · Cited by 181
Metadata
- Authors
- Reid, J. S., Jonsson, H. H., Maring, H. B., Smirnov, A., Savoie, D. L., Cliff, S. S., Reid, E. A., Livingston, J. M., Meier, M. M., Dubovik, O., & Tsay, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2003-07-12
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- D19
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2169676721
- Cited by
- 327
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 14.53
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of size and morphological measurements of coarse mode dust particles from Africa. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2002jd002485
- The paper
- Reid, J. S., Jonsson, H. H., Maring, H. B., Smirnov, A., Savoie, D. L., Cliff, S. S., Reid, E. A., Livingston, J. M., Meier, M. M., Dubovik, O., & Tsay, S. (2003). Comparison of size and morphological measurements of coarse mode dust particles from Africa. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002jd002485
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.