Wintertime organic and inorganic aerosols in Lanzhou, China: sources, processes, and comparison with the results during summer

Xu, Jianzhong; Shi, Jinsen; Zhang, Qi; Ge, Xinlei; Canonaco, Francesco; Prévôt, André S. H.; Vonwiller, Matthias; Szidat, Sönke; Ge, Jinming; Ma, Jianmin; An, Yanqing; Kang, Shichang; Qin, Dahe

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-14937-2016

Articles | Volume 16, issue 23

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-14937-2016

© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-14937-2016

© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 16, issue 23

Research article

|

05 Dec 2016

Research article |

| 05 Dec 2016

Wintertime organic and inorganic aerosols in Lanzhou, China: sources, processes, and comparison with the results during summer

Jianzhong Xu, Jinsen Shi, Qi Zhang, Xinlei Ge, Francesco Canonaco, André S. H. Prévôt, Matthias Vonwiller, Sönke Szidat, Jinming Ge, Jianmin Ma, Yanqing An, Shichang Kang, and Dahe Qin

Download

Final revised paper (published on 05 Dec 2016)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 02 May 2016)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Comments on Xu et al.', Anonymous Referee #1, 08 Jun 2016
RC2: 'Review of Xu et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Jul 2016
- AC1: 'Response to reviewers', J. Z. Xu, 23 Aug 2016

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by J. Z. Xu on behalf of the Authors (23 Aug 2016) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (12 Sep 2016) by Eleanor Browne

AR by J. Z. Xu on behalf of the Authors (23 Oct 2016) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Reconsider after minor revisions (Editor review) (10 Nov 2016) by Eleanor Browne

Dear Authors:
Thank you for your careful consideration of my earlier comments. I think that the manuscript has improved. However, I still think that the following minor corrections should be addressed/clarified prior to publication. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Browne
-----------------------
Line 222: delete “chemical”
Line 314-315: In the response to my earlier comments it was stated that 22-23 January was included in the PMF analysis. Please delete this sentence if that is true.

Fig 2b: The right axis shows the % not the accumulated data number.
Fig 5: The inconsistencies between O3 and NO (non-zero O3 at night with 50 ppb NO) need to be acknowledged in the text. This was provided in the response to earlier comments, but could be expanded upon in the text.
Line 523: Is this really a smaller peak or is there just a constant offset? It is hard to tell from the figure. It seems that an offset could be explained by background/residual aerosol being more oxidized in the summer than it is in the winter. This should be clarified in the text.
Line 660-661: Were the PAH signals observed in this data set? If so, an extended mass spec showing the PAH ions and the differences between BBOA and CCOA should be included in the supplement. Similarly, how is the PAH entry in Table 2 derived. This must be clarified.
Line 734-735: I find this wording very confusing and the figure hard to interpret. There are so many data points in this figure that it is unclear whether the reader can truly see the data points or if some points are hidden under others. Additionally, I believe the text means to say that when Org/PM is less than ~0.5 AND POA is < 15 ug/m3 there is a tighter correlation.
Line 764: The filter (PM2.5) and AMS (PM1) measure different sizes of aerosol. This needs to be addressed here. Is this agreement still good when this is taken into account?
Line 862-863 – This number is actually quite variable (44% on 23 January and 68% on 15 January). Please revise to acknowledge this, particularly given the limited variability of the C-14 measurements.

Hide

AR by J. Z. Xu on behalf of the Authors (15 Nov 2016) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (16 Nov 2016) by Eleanor Browne

AR by J. Z. Xu on behalf of the Authors (17 Nov 2016) Author's response Manuscript

Download

Article (4283 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

This study deployed an AMS field study in Lanzhou, a city in northwestern China, evaluating the chemical composition, sources, and processes of urban aerosols during wintertime. In comparison with the results during summer in Lanzhou, the air pollution during winter was more severe and the sources were more complex. In addition, this paper estimates the contributions of fossil and non-fossil sources of organic carbon to primary and secondary organic carbon using the carbon isotopic method.