Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Iron dissolution kinetics of mineral dust at low pH during simulated atmospheric processing

Open access
Shi, Z., Bonneville, S., Krom, M. D., Carslaw, K. S., Jickells, T. D., Baker, A. R., Benning, L. G.·2011·Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Abstract

Abstract. We investigated the iron (Fe) dissolution kinetics of African (Tibesti) and Asian (Beijing) dust samples at acidic pH with the aim of reproducing the low pH conditions in atmospheric aerosols. The Beijing dust and three size fractions of the Tibesti dust (<20 μm: PM20; <10 μm: PM10; and <2.5 μm: PM2.5) were dissolved at pH 1, 2 and/or 3 for up to 1000 h. In the first 10 min, all dust samples underwent an extremely fast Fe solubilisation. Subsequently, the Fe dissolution proceeded at a much slower rate before reaching a stable dissolution plateau. The time-dependant Fe dissolution datasets were best described by a model comprising three acid-extractable Fe pools each dissolving according to first-order kinetics. The dissolution rate constant k (h−1) of each pool was independent of the source (Saharan or Asian) and the size (PM20, PM10 or PM2.5) of the dust but highly dependent on pH. The "fast" Fe pool had a k (25 h−1 at pH = 1) of a similar magnitude to "dry" ferrihydrite nanoparticles and/or poorly crystalline Fe(III) oxyhydroxide, while the "intermediate" and "slow" Fe pools had k values respectively 50–60 times and 3000–4000 times smaller than the "fast" pool. The "slow" Fe pool was likely to consist of both crystalline Fe oxide phases (i.e., goethite and/or hematite) and Fe contained in the clay minerals. The initial mass of the "fast", "intermediate" and "slow" Fe pools represented respectively about 0.5–2%, 1–3% and 15–40% of the total Fe in the dust samples. Furthermore, we showed that in systems with low dust/liquid ratios, Fe can be dissolved from all three pools, whereas at high dust/liquid ratios (e.g., in aerosols), sufficient Fe may be solubilised from the "fast" phase to dominate the Fe dissolved and to suppress the dissolution of Fe from the other Fe pools. These data demonstrated that dust/liquid ratio and pH are fundamental parameters controlling Fe dissolution kinetics in the dust. In order to reduce errors in atmospheric and climate models, these fundamental controlling factors need to be included.

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 · 10.5194/acp-11-995-2011

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Shi, Z., Bonneville, S., Krom, M. D., Carslaw, K. S., Jickells, T. D., Baker, A. R., & Benning, L. G.
Venue
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Published
2011-02-03
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
995-1007
ISSN
  • 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1680-7324
OpenAlex
W2066138066
Cited by
167
References
1
FWCI
4.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Iron dissolution kinetics of mineral dust at low pH during simulated atmospheric processing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/acp-11-995-2011
The paper
Shi, Z., Bonneville, S., Krom, M. D., Carslaw, K. S., Jickells, T. D., Baker, A. R., & Benning, L. G. (2011). Iron dissolution kinetics of mineral dust at low pH during simulated atmospheric processing. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-995-2011

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.