Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 189

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Uncertainty in modeling dust mass balance and radiative forcing from size parameterization

Open access
Zhao, C., Chen, S., Leung, L. R., Qian, Y., Kok, J. F., Zaveri, R. A., Huang, J.·2013·Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Abstract

Abstract. This study examines the uncertainties in simulating mass balance and radiative forcing of mineral dust due to biases in the dust size parameterization. Simulations are conducted quasi-globally (180° W–180° E and 60° S–70° N) using the WRF-Chem model with three different approaches to represent dust size distribution (8-bin, 4-bin, and 3-mode). The biases in the 3-mode or 4-bin approaches against a relatively more accurate 8-bin approach in simulating dust mass balance and radiative forcing are identified. Compared to the 8-bin approach, the 4-bin approach simulates similar but coarser size distributions of dust particles in the atmosphere, while the 3-mode approach retains more fine dust particles but fewer coarse dust particles due to its prescribed σg of each mode. Although the 3-mode approach yields up to 10 days of longer dust mass lifetime over the remote oceanic regions than the 8-bin approach, the three size approaches produce a similar dust mass lifetime (3.2 days to 3.5 days) on quasi-global average, reflecting that the global dust mass lifetime is mainly determined by the dust mass lifetime near the dust source regions. With the same global dust emission (~4600 Tg yr−1), the 8-bin approach produces a dust mass loading of 39 Tg, while the 4-bin and 3-mode approaches produce 3% (40.2 Tg) and 25% (49.1 Tg) higher dust mass loading, respectively. The difference in dust mass loading between the 8-bin approach and the 4-bin or 3-mode approaches has large spatial variations, with generally smaller relative difference (<10%) near the surface over the dust source regions. The three size approaches also result in significantly different dry and wet deposition fluxes and number concentrations of dust. The difference in dust aerosol optical depth (AOD) (a factor of 3) among the three size approaches is much larger than their difference (25%) in dust mass loading. Compared to the 8-bin approach, the 4-bin approach yields stronger dust absorptivity, while the 3-mode approach yields weaker dust absorptivity. Overall, on quasi-global average, the three size parameterizations result in a significant difference of a factor of 2~3 in dust surface cooling (−1.02~−2.87 W m−2) and atmospheric warming (0.39~0.96 W m−2) and in a tremendous difference of a factor of ~10 in dust TOA (top of atmosphere) cooling (−0.24~−2.20 W m−2). The impact of different size representations on dust radiative forcing efficiency is smaller. An uncertainty of a factor of 2 is quantified in dust emission estimation due to the different size parameterizations. This study also highlights the uncertainties in modeling dust mass and number loading, deposition fluxes, and radiative forcing resulting from different size parameterizations, and motivates further investigation of the impact of size parameterizations on modeling dust impacts on air quality, climate, and ecosystems.

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-13-10733-2013

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 189

Metadata

Authors
Zhao, C., Chen, S., Leung, L. R., Qian, Y., Kok, J. F., Zaveri, R. A., & Huang, J.
Venue
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Published
2013-11-05
Volume
13
Issue
21
Pages
10733-10753
ISSN
  • 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1680-7324
OpenAlex
W2029468674
Cited by
189
References
0
FWCI
6.55
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: Uncertainty in modeling dust mass balance and radiative forcing from size parameterization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/acp-13-10733-2013
The paper
Zhao, C., Chen, S., Leung, L. R., Qian, Y., Kok, J. F., Zaveri, R. A., & Huang, J. (2013). Uncertainty in modeling dust mass balance and radiative forcing from size parameterization. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-10733-2013

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.