Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 371

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Evaporation kinetics and phase of laboratory and ambient secondary organic aerosol

Open access
Vaden, Timothy D., Imre, Dan, Beránek, Josef, Shrivastava, Manish, Zelenyuk, Alla·2011·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Field measurements of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) find significantly higher mass loads than predicted by models, sparking intense effort focused on finding additional SOA sources but leaving the fundamental assumptions used by models unchallenged. Current air-quality models use absorptive partitioning theory assuming SOA particles are liquid droplets, forming instantaneous reversible equilibrium with gas phase. Further, they ignore the effects of adsorption of spectator organic species during SOA formation on SOA properties and fate. Using accurate and highly sensitive experimental approach for studying evaporation kinetics of size-selected single SOA particles, we characterized room-temperature evaporation kinetics of laboratory-generated α-pinene SOA and ambient atmospheric SOA. We found that even when gas phase organics are removed, it takes ∼24 h for pure α-pinene SOA particles to evaporate 75% of their mass, which is in sharp contrast to the ∼10 min time scale predicted by current kinetic models. Adsorption of “spectator” organic vapors during SOA formation, and aging of these coated SOA particles, dramatically reduced the evaporation rate, and in some cases nearly stopped it. Ambient SOA was found to exhibit evaporation behavior very similar to that of laboratory-generated coated and aged SOA. For all cases studied in this work, SOA evaporation behavior is nearly size-independent and does not follow the evaporation kinetics of liquid droplets, in sharp contrast with model assumptions. The findings about SOA phase, evaporation rates, and the importance of spectator gases and aging all indicate that there is need to reformulate the way SOA formation and evaporation are treated by 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1013391108

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.

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

Cited by

See all 371

Metadata

Authors
Vaden, T. D., Imre, D., Beránek, J., Shrivastava, M., & Zelenyuk, A.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2011-01-24
Volume
108
Issue
6
Pages
2190-2195
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2078555613
Cited by
371
References
0
FWCI
19.43
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: Evaporation kinetics and phase of laboratory and ambient secondary organic aerosol. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1013391108
The paper
Vaden, T. D., Imre, D., Beránek, J., Shrivastava, M., & Zelenyuk, A. (2011). Evaporation kinetics and phase of laboratory and ambient secondary organic aerosol. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1013391108

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.