The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optical properties of soot–water drop agglomerates: An experimental study
Open accessAbstract
Black carbon (BC) and organic carbon (OC) are the largest contributors to the aerosol absorption in the atmosphere, yet the absorption cross sections of BC and OC per unit mass are subject to a large uncertainty due to morphology, physicochemical properties, and the mixing state of carbonaceous particles. Theoretical studies suggest the possibility of an enhanced absorption by soot–cloud drop agglomerates; however, the magnitude of the effect has never been measured directly and remains highly uncertain. This study is a laboratory experiment aimed at the modeling of direct radiation forcing due to soot‐water interaction in the presence of glutaric acid, a water‐soluble OC. Specifically, we generate, in the laboratory, hydrophobic soot (acetylene soot) and hydrophilic soot (mixture of acetylene soot and glutaric acid) and investigate the structural and optical properties of hydrophobic and hydrophilic soot particles in dry and water‐saturated air. Hydrophobic soot (HBS) particles do not exhibit any structural or morphological differences under dry and saturated conditions, whereas hydrophilic soot (HLS) particles, i.e., BC with a monolayer of glutaric acid, collapse into globules when relative humidity (RH) is increased to saturation. The optical properties of HBS show very little dependence on RH while HLS scattering and absorption coefficient increase markedly with RH. For the cases considered here, the maximum enhancement in absorption for a soot–water drop mixture was as much as a factor of 3.5, very similar to theoretical predictions. The data provided in this study should advance the treatment of polluted cloud layers in climate models.
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
Aerosols, Climate, and the Hydrological Cycle
Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P. J., Kiehl, J. T., & Rosenfeld, D. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1064034 · Cited by 3,831
Self-citationRadiative forcing and climate response
Hansen, J., Sato, M., & Ruedy, R. (1997) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/96jd03436 · Cited by 2,241
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
Zhang, R., Khalizov, A. F., Pagels, J., Zhang, D., Xue, H., & McMurry, P. H. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0804860105 · Cited by 834
Pöschl, U., & Shiraiwa, M. (2015) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr500487s · Cited by 657
Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R. S., Spackman, J. R., Watts, L. A., Thomson, D. S., Fahey, D. W., Ryerson, T. B., Peischl, J., Holloway, J. S., Trainer, M., et al. (2008) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2008gl033968 · Cited by 466
Moffet, R. C., & Prather, K. A. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0900040106 · Cited by 432
Metadata
- Authors
- Mikhailov, E. F., Vlasenko, S. S., Podgorny, I. A., Ramanathan, V., & Corrigan, C. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2006-04-15
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- D7
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2131048314
- Cited by
- 211
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.63
- 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: Optical properties of soot–water drop agglomerates: An experimental study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2005jd006389
- The paper
- Mikhailov, E. F., Vlasenko, S. S., Podgorny, I. A., Ramanathan, V., & Corrigan, C. E. (2006). Optical properties of soot–water drop agglomerates: An experimental study. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd006389
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.