Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 741

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

Atmospheric HULIS: How humic-like are they? A comprehensive and critical review

Open access
Graber, E. R., Rudich, Y.·2006·Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Abstract

Abstract. A class of organic molecules extracted from atmospheric aerosol particles and isolated from fog and cloud water has been termed HUmic-LIke Substances (HULIS) due to a certain resemblance to terrestrial and aquatic humic and fulvic acids. In light of the interest that this class of atmospheric compounds currently attracts, we comprehensively review HULIS properties, as well as laboratory and field investigations concerning their formation and characterization in atmospheric samples. While sharing some important features such as polyacidic nature, accumulating evidence suggests that atmospheric HULIS differ substantially from terrestrial and aquatic humic substances. Major differences between HULIS and humic substances, including smaller average molecular weight, lower aromatic moiety content, greater surface activity, better droplet activation ability, as well as others, are highlighted. Several alternatives are proposed that may explain such differences: (1) the possibility that mono- and di-carboxylic acids and mineral acids abundant in the atmosphere prevent the formation of large humic "supramolecular associations"; (2) that large humic macromolecules are destroyed in the atmosphere by UV radiation, O3, and OH- radicals; (3) that "HULIS" actually consists of a complex, unresolved mixture of relatively small molecules rather than macromolecular entities; and (4) that HULIS formed via abiotic and short-lived oxidative reaction pathways differ substantially from humic substances formed over long time periods via biologically-mediated reactions. It should also be recalled that the vast majority of studies of HULIS relate to the water soluble fraction, which would include only the fulvic acid fraction of humic substances, and exclude the humic acid (base-soluble) and humin (insoluble) fractions of humic substances. A significant effort towards adopting standard extraction and characterization methods is required to develop a better and meaningful comparison between different HULIS samples.

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-6-729-2006

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 741

Metadata

Authors
Graber, E. R., & Rudich, Y.
Venue
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Published
2006-03-06
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
729-753
ISSN
  • 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1680-7324
OpenAlex
W2168354226
Cited by
741
References
1
FWCI
27.67
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: Atmospheric HULIS: How humic-like are they? A comprehensive and critical review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/acp-6-729-2006
The paper
Graber, E. R., & Rudich, Y. (2006). Atmospheric HULIS: How humic-like are they? A comprehensive and critical review. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-729-2006

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.