Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 398

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rapid aerosol particle growth and increase of cloud condensation nucleus activity by secondary aerosol formation and condensation: A case study for regional air pollution in northeastern China

Open access
Wiedensohler, A., Cheng, Y. F., Nowak, A., Wehner, B., Achtert, P., Berghof, M., Birmili, W., Wu, Z. J., Hu, M., Zhu, T., Takegawa, N., Kita, K., Kondo, Y., Lou, S. R., Hofzumahaus, A., Holland, F., Wahner, A., Gunthe, S. S., Rose, D., Su, H., Pöschl, U.·2009·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

This study was part of the international field measurement Campaigns of Air Quality Research in Beijing and Surrounding Region 2006 (CAREBeijing‐2006). We investigated a new particle formation event in a highly polluted air mass at a regional site south of the megacity Beijing and its impact on the abundance and properties of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN). During the 1‐month observation, particle nucleation followed by significant particle growth on a regional scale was observed frequently (∼30%), and we chose 23 August 2006 as a representative case study. Secondary aerosol mass was produced continuously, with sulfate, ammonium, and organics as major components. The aerosol mass growth rate was on average 19 μ g m−3 h−1 during the late hours of the day. This growth rate was observed several times during the 1‐month intensive measurements. The nucleation mode grew very quickly into the size range of CCN, and the CCN size distribution was dominated by the growing nucleation mode (up to 80% of the total CCN number concentration) and not as usual by the accumulation mode. At water vapor supersaturations of 0.07–0.86%, the CCN number concentrations reached maximum values of 4000–19,000 cm−3 only 6–14 h after the nucleation event. During particle formation and growth, the effective hygroscopicity parameter κ increased from about 0.1–0.3 to 0.35–0.5 for particles with diameters of 40–90 nm, but it remained nearly constant at ∼0.45 for particles with diameters of ∼190 nm. This result is consistent with aerosol chemical composition data, showing a pronounced increase of sulfate.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2008jd010884

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 398

Metadata

Authors
Wiedensohler, A., Cheng, Y. F., Nowak, A., Wehner, B., Achtert, P., Berghof, M., Birmili, W., Wu, Z. J., Hu, M., Zhu, T., Takegawa, N., Kita, K., Kondo, Y., Lou, S. R., Hofzumahaus, A., Holland, F., Wahner, A., Gunthe, S. S., Rose, D., Su, H., & Pöschl, U.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
2009-01-27
Volume
114
Issue
D2
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007841777
Cited by
398
References
27
FWCI
13.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Rapid aerosol particle growth and increase of cloud condensation nucleus activity by secondary aerosol formation and condensation: A case study for regional air pollution in northeastern China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2008jd010884
The paper
Wiedensohler, A., Cheng, Y. F., Nowak, A., Wehner, B., Achtert, P., Berghof, M., Birmili, W., Wu, Z. J., Hu, M., Zhu, T., Takegawa, N., Kita, K., Kondo, Y., Lou, S. R., Hofzumahaus, A., Holland, F., Wahner, A., Gunthe, S. S., Rose, D., . . . Pöschl, U. (2009). Rapid aerosol particle growth and increase of cloud condensation nucleus activity by secondary aerosol formation and condensation: A case study for regional air pollution in northeastern China. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008jd010884

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.