Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 224

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

Exploring the relation between aerosol optical depth and PM 2.5 at Cabauw, the Netherlands

Open access
Schaap, M., Apituley, A., Timmermans, R. M. A., Koelemeijer, R. B. A., de Leeuw, G.·2009·Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Abstract

Abstract. Estimates of PM2.5 distributions based on satellite data depend critically on an established relation between AOD and ground level PM2.5. In this study we performed an experiment at Cabauw to establish a relation between AOD and PM2.5 for the Netherlands. A first inspection of the AERONET L1.5 AOD and PM2.5 data showed a low correlation between the two properties. The AERONET L1.5 showed relatively many observations of high AOD values paired to low PM2.5 values, which hinted cloud contamination. Various methods were used to detect cloud contamination in the AERONET data to substantiate this hypothesis. A cloud screening method based on backscatter LIDAR observations was chosen to detect cloud contaminated observations in the AERONET L1.5 AOD. A later evaluation of AERONET L2.0 showed that the most data that are excluded in the update from L1.5 to L2.0 were also excluded by our cloud screening, which provides confidence in both our cloud-screening method as well as the final screening in the AERONET procedure. The use of LIDAR measurements in conjunction with the CIMEL AOD data is regarded highly beneficial. Contra-intuitively, the AOD to PM2.5 relationship was shown to be insensitive to inclusion of the mixed layer height. The robustness of the relation improves dependent on the time window during the day towards noon. The final relation found for Cabauw is PM2.5=124.5×AOD−0.34 and is valid for fair weather conditions. The relationship found between bias corrected MODIS AOD and PM2.5 at Cabauw is very similar to the analysis based on the much larger dataset from ground based data only. We applied the relationship to a MODIS composite map to assess the PM2.5 distribution over the Netherlands for the first time. The verification of the derived map is difficult because ground level artefact free PM2.5 data are lacking. The validity and utility of our proposed mapping methodology should be further investigated.

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-9-909-2009

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 224

Metadata

Authors
Schaap, M., Apituley, A., Timmermans, R. M. A., Koelemeijer, R. B. A., & de Leeuw, G.
Venue
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Published
2009-02-05
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
909-925
ISSN
  • 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1680-7324
OpenAlex
W2158101704
Cited by
224
References
1
FWCI
12.55
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: Exploring the relation between aerosol optical depth and PM 2.5 at Cabauw, the Netherlands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/acp-9-909-2009
The paper
Schaap, M., Apituley, A., Timmermans, R. M. A., Koelemeijer, R. B. A., & de Leeuw, G. (2009). Exploring the relation between aerosol optical depth and PM 2.5 at Cabauw, the Netherlands. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-909-2009

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.