The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative inverse analysis of satellite (MOPITT) and aircraft (TRACE‐P) observations to estimate Asian sources of carbon monoxide
Open accessAbstract
We use an inverse model analysis to compare the top‐down constraints on Asian sources of carbon monoxide (CO) in spring 2001 from (1) daily MOPITT satellite observations of CO columns over Asia and the neighboring oceans and (2) aircraft observations of CO concentrations in Asian outflow from the TRACE‐P aircraft mission over the northwest Pacific. The inversion uses the maximum a posteriori method (MAP) and the GEOS‐CHEM chemical transport model (CTM) as the forward model. Detailed error characterization is presented, including spatial correlation of the model transport error. Nighttime MOPITT observations appear to be biased and are excluded from the inverse analysis. We find that MOPITT and TRACE‐P observations are independently consistent in the constraints that they provide on Asian CO sources, with the exception of southeast Asia for which the MOPITT observations support a more modest decrease in emissions than suggested by the aircraft observations. Our analysis indicates that the observations do not allow us to differentiate source types (i.e., anthropogenic versus biomass burning) within a region. MOPITT provides ten pieces of information to constrain the geographical distribution of CO sources, while TRACE‐P provides only four. The greater information from MOPITT reflects its ability to observe all outflow and source regions. We conducted a number of sensitivity studies for the inverse model analysis using the MOPITT data. Temporal averaging of the MOPITT data (weekly and beyond) degrades the ability to constrain regional sources. Merging source regions beyond what is appropriate after careful selection of the state vector leads to significant aggregation errors. Calculations for an ensemble of realistic assumptions lead to a range of inverse model solutions that has greater uncertainty than the a posteriori errors for the MAP solution. Our best estimate of total Asian CO sources is 361 Tg yr−1, over half of which is attributed to east Asia.
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
Evidence for Substantial Variations of Atmospheric Hydroxyl Radicals in the Past Two Decades
Prinn, R. G., Huang, J., Weiss, R. F., Cunnold, D. M., Fraser, P. J., Simmonds, P. G., McCulloch, A., Harth, C., Salameh, P., O'Doherty, S., et al. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1058673 · Cited by 695
Cited by
Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific assessment
Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T., DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., et al. (2013) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1002/jgrd.50171 · Cited by 6,385
Satellite observations of atmospheric methane and their value for quantifying methane emissions
Jacob, D. J., Turner, A. J., Maasakkers, J. D., Sheng, J., Sun, K., Liu, X., Chance, K., Aben, I., McKeever, J., & Frankenberg, C. (2016) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-16-14371-2016 · Cited by 506
Self-citationPaulot, F., Jacob, D. J., Pinder, R. W., Bash, J. O., Travis, K., & Henze, D. K. (2014) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1002/2013jd021130 · Cited by 455
Self-citationGlobal wildland fire emissions from 1960 to 2000
Schultz, M. G., Heil, A., Hoelzemann, J. J., Spessa, A., Thonicke, K., Goldammer, J. G., Held, A. C., Pereira, J. M. C., & van het Bolscher, M. (2008) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/2007gb003031 · Cited by 445
Young, P. J., Naik, V., Fiore, A. M., Gaudel, A., Guo, J., Lin, M. Y., Neu, J. L., Parrish, D. D., Rieder, H. E., Schnell, J. L., et al. (2018) · Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene · doi:10.1525/elementa.265 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Heald, C. L., Jacob, D. J., Jones, D. B. A., Palmer, P. I., Logan, J. A., Streets, D. G., Sachse, G. W., Gille, J. C., Hoffman, R. N., & Nehrkorn, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2004-12-11
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- D23
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2139206491
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Comparative inverse analysis of satellite (MOPITT) and aircraft (TRACE‐P) observations to estimate Asian sources of carbon monoxide. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2004jd005185
- The paper
- Heald, C. L., Jacob, D. J., Jones, D. B. A., Palmer, P. I., Logan, J. A., Streets, D. G., Sachse, G. W., Gille, J. C., Hoffman, R. N., & Nehrkorn, T. (2004). Comparative inverse analysis of satellite (MOPITT) and aircraft (TRACE‐P) observations to estimate Asian sources of carbon monoxide. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005185
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.