<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-18-16419-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>The size-resolved cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) activity and its
prediction based on aerosol hygroscopicity and composition in the Pearl
Delta River (PRD) region during wintertime 2014</article-title><alt-title>The CCN activity based on hygroscopicity and composition</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{The CCN activity based on hygroscopicity and composition}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{M.~Cai et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Cai</surname><given-names>Mingfu</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Tan</surname><given-names>Haobo</given-names></name>
          <email>hbtan@grmc.gov.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Chan</surname><given-names>Chak K.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9687-8771</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4 aff5">
          <name><surname>Qin</surname><given-names>Yiming</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>Hanbing</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Fei</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7950-7044</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Schurman</surname><given-names>Misha I.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Li</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Jun</given-names></name>
          <email>zhaojun23@mail.sysu.edu.cn</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9954-9471</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>School of Atmospheric Sciences, Guangdong Province Key Laboratory
for Climate Change and Natural Disaster Studies, and Institute of Earth
Climate and Environment System, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou,
China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Institute of Tropical and Marine Meteorology/Guangdong Provincial
Key Laboratory of Regional Numerical Weather Prediction, CMA, Guangzhou,
China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>School of Energy and Environment, City University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong SAR, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong SAR, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University,
Cambridge, MA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Haobo Tan (hbtan@grmc.gov.cn) and Jun Zhao (zhaojun23@mail.sysu.edu.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>20</day><month>November</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>18</volume>
      <issue>22</issue>
      <fpage>16419</fpage><lpage>16437</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>30</day><month>March</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>4</day><month>June</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>30</day><month>September</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>2</day><month>November</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e183">A hygroscopic tandem differential mobility analyzer (HTDMA), a
scanning mobility cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) analyzer (SMCA), and an Aerodyne high-resolution
time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer (HR-ToF-AMS) were used to,
respectively, measure the hygroscopicity, condensation nuclei activation, and
chemical composition of aerosol particles at the Panyu site in the Pearl
River Delta region during wintertime 2014. The distribution of the size-resolved
CCN at four supersaturations (SSs of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula> %,
0.2 %, 0.4 %, and 0.7 %) and the aerosol particle size distribution
were obtained by the SMCA. The hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>HTDMA</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was,
respectively, calculated based upon the SMCA, HTDMA, and AMS measurements. The results
showed that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>HTDMA</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value was slightly smaller than the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> one at all diameters and for particles larger than
100 nm, and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value was significantly smaller than the others
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>HTDMA</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), which could be attributed to
the underestimated hygroscopicity of the organics (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The
activation ratio (AR) calculated from the growth factor – probability
density function (Gf-PDF) without surface tension correction was found to be
lower than that from the CCN measurements, due most likely to the
uncorrected surface tension (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) that did not consider the
surfactant effects of the organic compounds. We demonstrated that better
agreement between the calculated and measured ARs could be obtained by
adjusting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Various schemes were proposed to predict the
CCN number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) based on the HTDMA and AMS
measurements. In general, the predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> agreed reasonably well
with the corresponding measured ones using different schemes. For the HTDMA
measurements, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value predicted from the real-time AR
measurements was slightly smaller (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) than that from
the activation diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) method due to the assumed internal mixing
in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values predicted from bulk
chemical composition of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were higher (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) than
those from size-resolved composition measured by the AMS because a
significant fraction of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was composed of inorganic matter. The
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values calculated from AMS measurement were underpredicted at
0.1 % and 0.2 % supersaturations, which could be due to underestimation of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and overestimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For SS values of 0.4 %
and 0.7 %, slight overpredicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were found because of
the internal mixing assumption. Our results highlight the need for
accurately evaluating the effects of organics on both the hygroscopic
parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and the surface tension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in order to accurately
predict CCN activity.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<?pagebreak page16420?><sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e509">Aerosol particles can directly impact global climate by scattering and
absorbing solar radiation (Stocker, 2013), while they can influence cloud
formation, lifetime, and optical properties by acting as cloud condensation
nuclei (CCN), indirectly exerting climatic forcing on the Earth's
atmosphere. In general, aerosol particles increase the CCN concentration and
hence cause cooling effects on the global radiation balance. However, to
what extent aerosol particles contribute to the radiation forcing is still
highly uncertain (Stocker, 2013). It is hence important to measure chemical
composition and properties of aerosol particles in order to assess their
abilities of acting as CCN and contribution to cloud formation, further
facilitating our understanding of the impacts of atmospheric aerosols on
regional and global climate.</p>
      <p id="d1e512">The extent to which aerosol particles can affect cloud formation is
dependent on their fraction that can be activated to become CCN. This
fraction of activation is termed as CCN activity that is determined by the
chemical composition, sizes, and the water saturation ratio of the particles
(Farmer et al., 2015). The size-dependent saturation ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) can be
calculated from the Köhler equation (Köhler, 1936):
          <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M31" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the water activity in solution, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is surface
tension of the solution/air interface, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the mole weight of water,
R is the universal gas constant, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is temperature in Kelvin, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
diameter of the droplet. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the Raoult effect, which means
that the activation potential increases with the concentration of the
solution. The term
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">exp</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
represents Kelvin effect, which relates the surface curvature to the
saturation vapor pressure of the droplet. The activation potential increases
with increase of the droplet diameter or decrease of surface tension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value is sensitive to the organic surfactant
effect. The two important parameters, the water activity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
surface tension (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), are dependent on the composition of the
aerosol particles, assuming those particles have the same properties as
their corresponding bulk solutions. The effects of organics on the CCN
activity have been extensively investigated; however, many outstanding
questions still remain. Sorjamaa et al. (2004) suggested that the
partitioning of surfactants had to be considered when evaluating the Kelvin
effect and the Raoult effect. According to their experimental results, the
surfactant partitioning could alter the Raoult effect and the change is
large enough to depress CCN activity. However, another experiment conducted
by Engelhart et al. (2008) revealed that the organics in aged monoterpene
aerosols could depress surface tension by about 0.01 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and hence
increase CCN activity. Ovadnevaite et al. (2017) also presented
observational and theoretical evidence that the decrease of surface tension
could prevail over the Raoult effect, which led to the increase of CCN
activity. Salma et al. (2006) isolated humic-like substances (HULIS) from
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> fraction aerosol samples and investigated the surface tension
properties of the HULIS pure solutions. The results show that thermodynamic
equilibrium on surface could only be reached after several hours. Because
the depression of surface tension was controlled by diffusion of surfactants
from the bulk of the droplet to its surface, the extent of the actual
decrease of surface tension was hence kinetically limited. A hybrid model
proposed by Petters and Kreidenweis (2013) was used to predict the effects
of surfactants on the CCN activity. The model predicted strong effects of
the surfactants on ternary systems where common ions were present. However,
due to the limited measurement techniques, the available laboratory data
were still not sufficient to support this prediction and more solid data
were needed to validate the surfactant effects on the CCN activity.</p>
      <p id="d1e766">The CCN activity can be characterized by the hygroscopicity parameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> that was initially proposed by Petters and Kreidenweis (2007).
Aerosol hygroscopicity represents the ability of the particles to grow by
absorbing water vapor from the atmosphere and the extent to which the
particles are hygroscopic can be evaluated by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values, which
can be determined from the HTDMA or cloud condensation nuclei counter (CCNc) measurements. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values
were measured worldwide extensively either in field measurements or in
laboratory experiments and depending on the organic content of the
particles, a wide range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values was reported in the
literature. Cerully et al. (2011) showed that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values measured
in 2007 by a continuous-flow streamwise thermal gradient CCN (CFSTGC) chamber  ranged
mostly between 0.1 and 0.4 in a forest environment in Finland.
Hong et al. (2014) obtained the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 0.15 (110 nm) and 0.28 (102 nm)
measured by the HTDMA at the same site in 2010. Chang et al. (2010) used an
AMS to measure aerosol chemical composition and a mole ratio of atomic
oxygen to atomic carbon (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) at a rural site in Canada. They reported a
relationship between the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of organics and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio as
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.29</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Tritscher et al. (2011)
conducted smog chamber experiments for measurements of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values
of aging secondary organic aerosols and they found that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was a
sensitive indicator of the secondary organic aerosol (SOA) properties.</p>
      <?pagebreak page16421?><p id="d1e895">Although the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values were reported under different environments in
many locations, only a few studies were conducted to measure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in
the Pearl River Delta (PRD) region (Cheung et al., 2015; Schurman et al.,
2017). Jiang et al. (2016) compared the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values between wintertime
(0.18–0.22) and summertime (0.17–0.21) in Guangzhou. Cai et al. (2017)
reported the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of about 0.4–0.6 and 0.2–0.3 measured by the
HTDMA, respectively, in Cape Hedo (Japan) and Guangzhou (China).
Alternatively, the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values can be predicted by the
Zdanovskii–Stokes–Robinson (ZSR) mixing rule (Zdanovskii, 1948; Stokes and Robinson, 1966) which is based on
the chemical composition of the aerosol particles from the AMS measurements.
Liu et al. (2014) reported the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 0.22 to 0.32 using the
ZSR mixing rule, consistent with the values (0.25 to 0.34) based on the
HTDMA measurements.</p>
      <p id="d1e942">Once the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values were determined, they could then be employed to
predict the CCN activity that was characterized by two important parameters:
activation diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and activation ratio (AR). Until now, the CCN
activity (thus the above three parameters) can be determined using the
following three methods:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e965"><italic>The combination of CCNc and scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS).</italic> The CCN number was measured by the CCNc at
different supersaturation (SS, typically 0.05 %–1 %) ratios.
Meanwhile, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and size-resolved activation ratios could be
measured by combining the CCNc with a differential mobility analyzer (DMA)
and a condensation particle counter (CPC) (Moore et al., 2011; Deng et al.,
2011), referred to as scanning mobility CCN analysis (SMCA) based on
measurements from a SMPS (DMA plus CPC) and a CCNc. This method can measure the
size-resolved CCN distributions at a high time resolution (Moore et al.,
2010) and has been applied in lab experiments (Asa-Awuku et al., 2009) and
field campaigns (Moore et al., 2008) to measure CCN activity.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e982"><italic>The ZSR method based on chemical composition measurements.</italic> The CCN
concentrations were inverted from the chemical composition and the size
distribution of the aerosol particles measured, respectively, from the aerosol
mass spectrometer (AMS) and SMPS (Moore et al., 2012; Meng et al., 2014).
The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was then calculated from the ZSR mixing rule. In general, the
particles were assumed to be internally mixed, which might lead to a large
uncertainty (up to 80 %) in predicting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in some cases (Wang et
al., 2010).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1006"><italic>The HTDMA method.</italic> The size-resolved CCN distribution and activation
ratios could be determined from hygroscopicity and size distribution
measured using the HTDMA (Good et al., 2010; Wu et al., 2013). The HTDMA
measured the distribution of hygroscopic growth factor (Gf) at a fixed
relative humidity for a selected diameter of aerosol particles.
Väisänen et al. (2016) reported that the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the
HTDMA agreed well with that from in-cloud prediction, where the sample was
collected from a tower approximately 224 m above the surrounding lake level.
On the other hand, Chan et al. (2008) attributed differences in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> from
HTDMA and CCN measurements to sparingly soluble organics that did not easily
deliquesce in the previous measurements.</p></list-item></list>
The PRD region is one of the most economically invigorating regions in
China. This region is subjected to severe air pollution due to intensive
human activities and insufficient pollution control measures. High particle
loading leads to both visibility degradation and large cooling effects due
to decrease of solar radiation. During wintertime, high concentrations of
fine particles also cause severe haze events that pose health risks for people
at the regional scale. It is hence an ideal location to investigate the
influence of local anthropogenic emissions on the particles properties.
However, there is still lack of understanding on the relationship between
the CCN activity and its controlling factors (e.g., chemical composition and
hygroscopicity of aerosol particles), hindering policy makers to propose
effective measures for climate-related policy making.</p>
      <p id="d1e1030">In this study, we used the SMCA, HTDMA, and HR-ToF-AMS to, respectively,
measure CCN activity, hygroscopicity, and chemical composition. We reported
the relationship between CCN activity and hygroscopicity/chemical
composition of aerosol particles in the PRD region, where only a few studies
on such a relationship were available in the literature. The measurements were
performed during wintertime 2014 (November and December). The CCN properties
were predicted based on the combined SMCA, HTDMA, and HR-ToF-AMS
measurements. The methods employed to predict the CCN concentrations were
evaluated and the impact of organics on CCN concentrations was discussed.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Experiments and data analysis</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Measurement site</title>
      <p id="d1e1044">The field measurements were conducted at the Chinese Meteorological
Administration (CMA) Atmospheric Watch Network (CAWNET) station in Panyu,
Guangzhou, China, during wintertime 2014 (November and December). The Panyu
station is located at the center of the PRD region and at the top of the
Dazhengang mountain (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">00</mml:mn><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">113</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21</mml:mn><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> E) with an
altitude of about 150 m. No significant local emission sources were around
the site. Detailed description of the measurement site and instruments
(i.e., the HTDMA and the AMS) can be found elsewhere (Cai et al., 2017; Qin
et al., 2017).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Instrumentation</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Aerosol hygroscopicity measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e1092">Size-resolved aerosol hygroscopicity and particle number size distribution
(PNSD) were measured by a HTDMA which was developed by Tan et al. (2013a).
The hygroscopicity data were only available in November due to the failure
of the HTDMA during December. An aerosol sampling port equipped with a
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> impactor inlet was used during the measurement period. Ambient
sampling flow first passed through a Nafion dryer (model PD-70T-24ss, Perma
Pure Inc., USA) to achieve a relative humidity (RH) of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. We considered the
particles to be dry when the RH<?pagebreak page16422?> values were less than 10 %. The particles
were subsequently charged by a neutralizer (Kr85, TSI Inc.) and
size selected by a differential mobility analyzer (DMA1, model 3081L, TSI
Inc.). The monodisperse particles with a specific diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) were
then introduced into a Nafion humidifier (model PD-70T-24ss, Perma Pure
Inc., USA) under a fixed RH of (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.44</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) %. Another differential
mobility analyzer (DMA2, model 3081L, TSI Inc.) and a condensation particle
counter (CPC, model 3772, TSI Inc.) were used to measure the number size
distribution of the humidified particles (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Thus, Gf of
the particles can be calculated:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M77" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            During the campaign, we selected five dry mobility diameters (40, 80, 110,
150, and 200 nm) for the HTDMA measurements. The measurements were
performed continuously except for regular calibration of the instrument. We
used standard polystyrene latex spheres and ammonium sulfate to perform the
DMA calibration to ensure the instrument functioned normally.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Size-resolved CCN activity measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e1181">Size-resolved CCN spectra and activation ratios were measured with the SMCA
initially proposed by Moore et al. (2010). In this work, the SMCA consisted
of a CCNc-100 (DMT Inc.), a differential mobility analyzer (DMA, model
3081L, TSI Inc.), and a condensation particle counter (CPC, model 3787, TSI
Inc.). In the SMCA system, the combined DMA and CPC were used as a SMPS during the measurements. The dry particles
after the Nafion dryer were neutralized by the Kr85 neutralizer and were
subsequently classified by the DMA. The monodisperse particles were split
into two streams: one to the CPC for measurement of total particle number
concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and another to the CCNc-100 for measurements of the
CCN number concentration. The aerosol and CPC flow rates were both 1.0 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for the DMA and the CPC (0.5 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> makeup flow and 0.5 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
sample flow), respectively. The CCNc-100 drew another aerosol
flow rate of 0.5 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The SMCA was protocolled to measure particles
at a mobility diameter range of 10–400 nm. The supersaturation in the
CCNc-100 was set to be 0.1 %, 0.2 %, 0.4 %, and 0.7 %, respectively,
for each measurement cycle. The CCNc-100 was regularly calibrated with
ammonium sulfate particles at the four SSs (0.1 %, 0.2 %, 0.4 %, and
0.7 %). Previous studies showed that different parameterizations in the
Köhler theory can retrieve different critical supersaturations (Rose et
al., 2008; Wang et al., 2017). When performing the CCNc calibration, we
assumed the density and molecular weight of ammonium sulfate to be 1770 kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
and 0.132141 kg mol<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. In the CCNc calibration,
the water activity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was approximated according to Rose et
al. (2008):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M86" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the van 't Hoff factor, molality of
solute, and the molar mass of water (0.01802 kg mol<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), respectively.
The van 't Hoff factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is calculated from a polynomial fit to Pitzer
model output data (Moore et al., 2010). In this study, we adopted the
simplest parameterization of the surface tension of the solution (Rose et
al., 2008); that is, it was simply approximated by the surface tension of
pure water (0.072 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) according to Seinfeld and Pandis (2006).</p>
      <p id="d1e1386">We also set the temperature and the pressure to 298.15 K and 1026 hPa,
respectively. A temperature gradient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of about 3–8 K in
the CCNc column was also used in the calibrations. Similarly, the DMA was
calibrated with standard polystyrene latex spheres before and after the
campaign for quality assurance and control.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS3">
  <title>Aerosol chemical composition measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e1405">An Aerodyne high-resolution time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer
(HR-ToF-AMS) was employed in the campaign to measure non-refractory PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
chemical composition (bulk and size-resolved) including sulfate, nitrate,
ammonium, chloride, and organics. The refractory components such as black
carbon, sea salts, and crustal species cannot be measured by this instrument.
Detailed description of the HR-ToF-AMS can be found elsewhere (DeCarlo et
al., 2006; Jimenez et al., 2003). Here, only a brief description relevant to
the measurements is given. The instrument was operated in three modes (pToF,
V, and W modes). Particle size distribution could be obtained based on the
time of flight of the particles in pToF mode. In V and W modes, the
resolving power of the mass spectrometer was approximately 2000 and 4000,
respectively. The instrument collected alternatively 5 min average mass
spectra for the V plus pToF modes and the W mode. The monodisperse pure
ammonium nitrate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) particles selected by a DMA (400 nm)
were used weekly in the ionization efficiency (IE) calibration. Background
signals were obtained daily for about 30 min by introducing filtered
ambient air with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter in the sample flow. Before and after the
measurement, the sampling flow rate was calibration with a Gilian
gilibrator. We also generated polystyrene latex (PSL) (Duke Scientific) and ammonium nitrate
particles in a size range of 178–800 nm to calibrate the pToF
size. Note that the mass concentrations were too low for particle diameters
smaller than 65 nm and data for those particles were hence discarded in this
study. A more detailed description of the AMS performance during the
measurements can be found in Qin et al. (2017) and Cai et al. (2017).</p>
      <?pagebreak page16423?><p id="d1e1433">The AMS measured size-resolved chemical composition of particles in a vacuum
aerodynamic diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">va</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). It is hence necessary to convert
aerodynamic diameter to mobility diameter in order to compare the AMS data
and the SMCA data. We adopted the equation derived by DeCarlo et al. (2004)
to do the conversion. Here, we assume a density of 1700 kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for
particles measured by the AMS (DeCarlo et al., 2004).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <title>Data processing and methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS1">
  <title>Hygroscopicity</title>
      <p id="d1e1471">Due to the effects of diffusing transfer function, the measured distribution
function (MDF) given by the HTDMA is only a skewed and smoothed integral
transform of the actual growth factor – probability density function (Gf-PDF)
of the particles (Gysel et al., 2009). Here, the TDMAfit algorithm
(Stolzenburg and McMurry, 2008) was applied to narrow the uncertainties
caused by the diffusion broadening. The TMDAfit algorithm describes the
Gf-PDF as a combination of several (usually smaller than three) lognormal
distribution functions, in which the parameters of each mode are considered
as mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, standard deviation, and number fraction. The detailed
data inversion process of the HTDMA instrument can be found in
Tan et al. (2013b). Note that we include multiply charged correction for the SMCA,
SMPS, and HTDMA data when the data were inverted so that the contributions of the
multiply charged particles were accounted for all the measured particle
data.</p>
      <p id="d1e1481">As mentioned in the introduction, the CCN activity can be represented by a
widely used hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Petters and Kreidenweis,
2007). According to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory, for a known temperature,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and Gf can be related via Eq. (4) (Petters and Kreidenweis, 2007):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M102" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RH</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the density of water (about 997.04 kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at
298.15 K), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the molecular weight of water (0.018 kg mol<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>),
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the surface tension of the solution/air interface and
here pure water is tentatively assumed for the solution (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0728</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 298.15 K), R is the universal gas constant (about
8.31 J mol<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> K<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is thermodynamic temperature in Kelvin (298.15 K),
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the particle diameter (in meter).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS2">
  <title>CCN activation</title>
      <p id="d1e1720">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> data were, respectively, measured by the SMPS and
the CCNc-100 and they were used to calculate the size-resolved CCN
ARs which was defined as the ratio of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at each particle size. The activation ratio can be obtained by
fitting the ratio with the sigmoidal function with respect to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M119" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the particle dry diameter, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are fitting
coefficients that represent the asymptote, the slope, and the inflection
point of the sigmoid, respectively (Moore et al., 2010). Note that the
parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (in Eq. 5) is a fitting coefficient with no specific physical meaning.
However, a small <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value indicates a steep activation curve. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
also called the critical diameter or the activation diameter, that is, the
diameter at which 50 % of the particles are activated at a specific SS.</p>
      <p id="d1e1895">Alternatively, the hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> can be calculated from
the critical saturation ratio (Sc) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the following equation
(Petters and Kreidenweis, 2007):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M129" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sc</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="1em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">R</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSS3">
  <title>CCN prediction based on HTDMA and AMS measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e2001">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can be predicted based on either the aerosol hygroscopicity
data (measured by the HTDMA) or the AMS data. Figure 1 is the schematic
diagram of the four approaches we followed to predict <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> based on the
above two measured datasets. In the first approach (I in Fig. 1), the mixing
state and size dependence were taken into account. We assumed the critical
hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to be a function of the
particle diameter and the supersaturation ratio (denoted as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, SS)). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was hence defined as the
point at which all the particles were activated at a specific diameter and a
specific SS. Here, we measured hygroscopicity using the HTDMA at five dry
diameters and the CCN concentrations at four SSs. We calculated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, SS) using Eq. (6) for a known diameter and SS. A particle
with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value higher than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, SS) was
considered to be activated as CCN (Fig. 1a) and the shadow area
represented the particles which can be activated as CCN for a known diameter
and SS. The activation ratio for a specific diameter at a specific SS was
obtained by integrating the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-PDF for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, SS).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2158">A schematic representation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction based on the
HTDMA and the AMS measurements. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can be predicted based on the
fitted activation ratio (approach I) and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (approach II), both
obtained from the HTDMA measurement, the size-resolved composition
(approach III), and the bulk PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> composition (approach IV), both obtained
from the AMS measurements. Panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows the representation of calculating
the activation ratio for a specific diameter and SS, and the shadow area
represents the particles which can be activated as CCN; panels <bold>(b)</bold> and <bold>(c)</bold> show the
representations of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values obtained, respectively, from
size-resolved chemical composition and bulk chemical composition; panel <bold>(d)</bold> shows the
representation of fitting the activation ratio to the particle diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(red dot); panels <bold>(e)</bold>, <bold>(f)</bold>, <bold>(g)</bold>, and <bold>(h)</bold> show the representations
of predicting the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using the four approaches, respectively, and the shadow area
represents the particles which can be activated as CCN.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f01.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page16424?><p id="d1e2264">This approach is similar to the one employed in Kammermann et al. (2010);
however, we used the size-resolved activation ratio (AR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) to calculate
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The AR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was determined by fitting the AR(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,SS) to the
diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using Eq. (5) for the five measured diameters (Fig. 1d). Thus, the
calculated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using the activation ratio can be expressed as (Fig. 1e)
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M157" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            In the second approach (II in Fig. 1), the particles were assumed to be
internally mixed. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was determined by fitting the AR(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,SS) to
the diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 1d). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was obtained by integrating the
cloud nuclei concentration for particles larger than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> based on the
particle size distribution (Fig. 1f), according to the following equation
(Eq. 8):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M163" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            In the third and fourth approaches (III and IV in Fig. 1), the particles
were also assumed to be internally mixed. We then calculated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
value according to the ZSR rule (Eq. 9) based on the AMS measurements.
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E9" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M165" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munder><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:munder><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the volume fraction of each
component in the particles; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of each
component.</p>
      <p id="d1e2572">The AMS only provided the ion concentrations during the measurements, while
the ZSR rule required the volume fraction and hygroscopicity of each
component. A simplified ion pairing scheme developed by Gysel et al. (2007)
was used to reconstruct the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measured by the AMS:<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M172" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E10"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E11"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">max⁡</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E12"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.1}{9.1}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HSO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">min⁡</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E13"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">max⁡</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E14"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HNO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the number of moles of each component (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Here, we used the uncoupled diameter-dependent
thermodynamic equilibrium model (ADDEM) proposed by
Topping et al. (2005) to calculate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of the inorganic
species and those of the organics were tentatively assumed to be 0.1 (Meng
et al., 2014). Table 1 lists the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of the relevant species
used in the study based on the calculations and the above assumption.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><caption><p id="d1e2998">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of the related species in the study.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.58<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HSO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.56<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.48<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Organics</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e3008"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of inorganic compounds is derived from ADDEM (Topping et
al., 2005). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of organics is from Meng et al. (2014).</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3219">Here, instead of being determined from fitting of AR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> used in the
second approach, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was calculated from the above <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values
using Eq. (6). In the third approach, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values were size resolved
because the chemical composition of the particles was size dependent (Fig. 1b).
In the<?pagebreak page16425?> fourth approach, the particles were assumed to have the same
chemical composition and hygroscopicity as those in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 1c). The
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was then predicted using Eq. (8) (Fig. 1g and h).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Overview</title>
      <p id="d1e3301">Table 2 summarizes the observed CCN activity during the campaign. Overall,
the average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 0.1 %, 0.2 %, 0.4 %, and 0.7 % SS were about 3100,
5100, 6500, and 7900 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. The average ARs at the above four SSs were 0.26, 0.41, 0.53, and 0.64, respectively. The
average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values at the above four SSs were 156, 107, 78, and 58 nm,
respectively. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 0.7 % SS was, respectively, lower than those
of the previous measurements (10 731 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 0.67 % SS) in July 2006
in Guangzhou (Rose et al., 2010) but much higher than those measured (2085 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
at 0.7 % SS) in May 2011 in Hong Kong (Meng et al., 2014), while
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
was lower than that from the previous
measurements (at 0.67 % SS) in Guangzhou (0.59; Rose et al., 2010) and
similar to that from the measurements (at 0.7 % SS) in Hong Kong (0.64;
Meng et al., 2014). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was larger than that in the previous
measurements in Guangzhou (49 nm) and in Hong Kong (47 nm), due to the lower
particle hygroscopicity in Guangzhou. The differences of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values between the two measurements (0.21 in this winter campaign
vs. 0.28 during the summer season in Guangzhou both at 0.7 % SS) suggested
that the particles in the summer were in general more hygroscopic and hence
were more readily activated than those in the winter, implying different
chemical composition of the particles between the two distinct seasons.
Mochida et al. (2010) measured the size-resolved CCN activity in Cape Hedo,
a remote marine site rarely affected by anthropogenic emissions. The results
showed that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 0.1 % SS in Cape Hedo was about 130 nm, much
smaller than that in Guangzhou, leading to higher hygroscopicity of
atmospheric particles in Cape Hedo than that in Guangzhou.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p id="d1e3432">The mass fraction of the bulk NR-PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> composition <bold>(a)</bold> and the
mass fraction of the size-resolved composition <bold>(b)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3459">Summary of the measured CCN concentration, activation ratio, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the four supersaturations during the campaign.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col2">SS </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.2 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.4 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.7 %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (no. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">15 165</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19 989</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">25 964</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">26 208</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">258</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">361</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">408</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">502</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3103</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1913</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5095</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2972</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6524</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3783</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7913</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4234</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CN</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.28</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.26</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.41</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.53</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.64</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">268.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">194.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">145.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">97.17</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">112.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">76.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">43.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">24.21</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">156.02</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19.48</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">106.66</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.99</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">77.96</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.86</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">58.45</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.68</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3903">Figure 2 shows the average mass fraction of NR-PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> bulk composition and
size-resolved (64–731 nm) composition. The organics were dominant in the bulk
NR-PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (50 %), followed by sulfate (26 %) and nitrate (12 %)
(Fig. 2a). The mass fraction of the organics decreased with the size (Fig. 2b)
from 73 % at 64 nm to 42 % at 397 nm. The mass fraction of organics
at 397 nm was close to that of NR-PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> bulk, due to the fact that the
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass is dominated by particles in a diameter range of
200–500 nm (Tan et al., 2016). In comparison, the dominant
NR-PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> species observed in Hong Kong were sulfate (51.0 %) and
organics (28.2 %) (Lee et al., 2013), which is significantly different from our
measurements, due probably to different origins of the dominant air masses
between the two seasons. The measurement site in Guangzhou was impacted
predominantly by the air mass from the north, where straw burning contributes to
a high mass fraction of organic matter (Cao et al., 2008).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p id="d1e3953">The median and interquartile PNSD, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> obtained from HTDMA,
AMS, and CCN measurements during the campaign. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was pointed
against their corresponding median <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (SMCA and AMS) or measured
diameter (HTDMA). Dots represent the median value and the bars
represent the interquartile range. The blue, red, and green colors represent
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HTDMA</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page16426?><p id="d1e4021"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>Figure 3 shows the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values based, respectively, on the CCN (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), AMS (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and HTDMA (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HTDMA</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
measurements, along with the measured PNSD (10–400 nm) during the campaign. The shadow area represents the
interquartile range of the PNSD. A distinct peak at around 90 nm was
observed from the PNSD (Fig. 3). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was calculated based
on the size-resolved chemical composition, assuming the particles are
internally mixed. At 0.7 % SS, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was about 58 nm. Hence, no
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was reported at this SS since we only measured particle
composition above 63 nm using the AMS in this study. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values
were shown in the interquartile range, with the largest variation from the
CCN measurements (Fig. 3). As shown in Fig. 3, the difference between
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HTDMA</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is statistically insignificant
at all employed diameters, while the one between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> became statistically significant at larger sizes of the
particles. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value between the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ccn</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was close to 0, indicating that the correlation between them is
significant. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HTDMA</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were lower than those of the
corresponding <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at most of the particle sizes, consistent
with the previous observation (Pajunoja et al., 2015). This was probably due
to the fact that particles contain a certain fraction of low-solubility
composition, such as SOA, contributing
differently to hygroscopic growth and CCN activation. The available AMS data
(Fig. 3) show that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were lower than the
corresponding <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HTDMA</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values at all size
ranges, and the differences become larger with increasing particle sizes.
This was probably due to underestimated hygroscopicity in the organic
composition when using the AMS data, since we assumed a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of
0.1 for all organics at all particle sizes. The hygroscopicity increased
with particle diameters due to aerosol aging which increased the hygroscopic
organic contents. Previous studies showed that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values
of larger particles are lower than those for smaller particles (Lance et
al., 2013; Zhao et al., 2015), and hygroscopicity of organics is often found
to be related to its chemical composition (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">44</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in both field and
laboratory studies (Chang et al., 2010; Massoli et al., 2010; Lambe et al.,
2011; Mei et al., 2013, and other references therein). We showed that the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">44</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increased with the particle size from the AMS data (Fig. S1 in the Supplement). Note that
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">44</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for particle diameters smaller than 100 nm was discarded due to the
data quality. The results indicate that the degree of oxidation of the
organics was higher for larger size particles and the hygroscopicity for
larger particles is higher (Chang et al., 2010). The measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values fall in a range of 0.22–0.30 for the particle sizes of
40–200 nm measured by the HTDMA in this study. The other aerosol hygroscopicity
measurement in PRD (Jiang et al., 2016) reported the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
values ranging from 0.18 to 0.22 in the 2012 winter season and 0.17 to 0.21 in
the 2013 summer season, suggesting an increase of the aerosol hygroscopicity,
which might result from an increasing mass fraction of nitrate in recent
years (Zhang et al., 2015; Itahashi et al., 2018), although the fraction
decrease of less hygroscopic compounds is not as significant as the fraction
increase of the nitrate. However, the fraction of the non-hydroscopic
compounds (i.e., EC) decreases more rapidly than the organic compounds.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p id="d1e4324">The size-resolved activation ratios measured by the SMCA at four
different supersaturations. Note that the curves were fitted according to
the SMCA measurements.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4333"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>Figure 4 shows the ARs measured by SMCA at four
supersaturation ratios (0.1 %, 0.2 %, 0.4 %, 0.7 %) for particles below 300 nm.
The activation curves obtained in this study were segmented into three
sections: a steady rise at low ARs, a middle sharp increase, and a plateau
at almost 100 % AR. We defined the steepness as the rate at which the AR
increased with the particle sizes. Figure 4 shows the steepness increased
with the SS, indicating that th<?pagebreak page16427?>e curves became steeper with the SS and a
larger variation of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was expected. In addition, the CCN activity
was more sensitive to particle diameters at higher SS, which can be seen
from partial derivative of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Eq. 15):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E15" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M274" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lnSc</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          For a certain SS, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">critical</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value became more sensitive to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with decrease of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Meanwhile, a high SS usually led to
a low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Therefore, the AR would vary with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> more readily at higher
SS and the curve would become steeper. A higher SS allowed a smaller
particle to be activated and the activation curve became steeper, and vice
versa for a lower SS.</p>
      <p id="d1e4490">The steepness of activation curve was also associated with the heterogeneity
of aerosol chemical composition; that is, a steeper activation curve meant
that aerosol particles had higher similarity in hygroscopicity. A bimodal
distribution (peaks at about 1–1.1 and 1.5–1.7 Gf) of the Gf-PDFs was
observed along the Gf coordinate at all five sizes of the particles
measured by the HTDMA in this study (Fig. 5), corresponding, respectively, to the
less- and more-hygroscopic modes. Larger size particles contain higher
fractions of more-hygroscopic inorganic matter which leads to the increase
of Gf of the more-hygroscopic mode. The less-hygroscopic mode usually represents
externally mixed black carbon or fresh organics. Thus, the less-hygroscopic
mode for larger size particles more likely represents the external mixing
non-hygroscopic black carbon with a Gf value of 0.8–1.1, indicating that the
Gf of the less-hygroscopic mode decreased and that of the more-hygroscopic mode
increased with the particle diameter (Fig. 5). Since less-hygroscopic
particles were usually associated with externally mixed black carbon (BC) or
fresh organics and more-hygroscopic particles usually represent the
inorganic matter or BC coated with inorganic matter (internally mixed).
The decrease of peak area of less-hygroscopic mode and the increase of
more-hygroscopic mode indicate that the number fraction of less-hygroscopic
particles decreased while the more-hygroscopic particles fraction increased.
Thus, the particles became more internally mixed. Here, a parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
is introduced to illustrate the deviation of Gf-PDF (Gysel et al.,
2009):<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M281" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E16"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dGf</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E17"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dGf</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Gf</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes Gf-PDF and Gf<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes number weighted
mean Gf. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was employed as a measure of the spread of Gf-PDF
which represents the heterogeneity of aerosol chemical composition (Sjogren
et al., 2008; Liu et al., 2011). A small <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> indicated that the
heterogeneity of aerosol chemical composition was low and aerosol particles
had higher similarity in hygroscopicity. The parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (in Eq. 5) determined the
shape of the activation curve which was segmented into steep and smooth
parts. A small <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value means a steep activation curve, and vice versa. Here,
an activation curve was assumed to be steep when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values were lower
than the lower quartile of all the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values, while the activation curve
was considered to be smooth when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values were higher than the upper
quartile of all the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values. Table 3 summarizes the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of
Gf-PDF for the corresponding steep and smooth activation curve at the four
supersaturations. In general, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> increased with the diameter,
indicating that larger particles had higher heterogeneity of aerosol
chemical composition. Meanwhile, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values for smooth curve were
generally higher than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values for steep curve. The results
implied that the shapes of activation curves were related to the
heterogeneity of aerosol chemical composition. Cai et al. (2017) compared
the Gf-PDF between Guangzhou and Cape Hedo and the results showed that only
more-hygroscopic  particles were observed in Cape Hedo, indicating that
atmospheric particles tend to be more internally mixed in Cape Hedo than in
Guangzhou. Meanwhile, atmospheric particles in Guangzhou have a higher
degree of external mixing affected by more anthropogenic emissions, which in
turn affect the CCN activity.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e4707">The average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of Gf-PDF measured by the HTDMA for
five diameters for the steep and smooth activation ratio at four
supersaturations.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SS (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">0.1 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">0.2 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">0.4 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center">0.7 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Steep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Smooth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Steep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Smooth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Steep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Smooth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Steep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Smooth</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.19</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.20</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">110</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.20</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.21</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.23</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><caption><p id="d1e4964">The Gf-PDF as a function of Gf measured by the HTDMA for the five
diameters.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Impact of organics on CCN activity</title>
      <p id="d1e4979">Figure 6 shows the relationship between the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> obtained from the SMCA
measurements and the size-resolved mass fractions of organics (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) at
three supersaturation ratios (0.1 %, 0.2 %, and 0.4 % SS). In general,
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increased with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the three SSs, with slopes of 127,
66, and 21, and fitting coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) of 0.47, 0.31, and
0.1 at 0.1 %, 0.2 %, and 0.4 % SS, respectively. The particles usually became less
hygroscopic with increase of the organic fractions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), which then
required larger particles to be activated. At lower SS, better correlations
were found between the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> because the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
more sensitive to hygroscopicity (the activation ratios increase slower
with particle sizes at lower SS as shown in Fig. 4). It was hence more
obvious at lower SS that the modification of the particle<?pagebreak page16428?> hygroscopicity
caused by the change of the mass fraction of organic matter could greatly
modify the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> which might further affect the CCN activity. At higher
SS, according to Eq. (6), particles were more easily activated as CCN and the
change of particle hygroscopicity would not significantly alter the CCN
activity.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><caption><p id="d1e5095">The relationship between size-resolved mass fraction of organics and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at three supersaturations. The red, blue, and green dots and line
represent 0.1 %, 0.2 %, and 0.4 % SSs, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5115">Organics can affect the CCN activity via two opposite ways: they can
decrease the CCN activity by increasing the less hygroscopic organic
fraction of the particles and thus increase the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as shown in Fig. 6;
they can also increase the CCN activity by decreasing the surface tension of
the particles. The latter effect has been demonstrated experimentally. For
example, an increase of CCN activity was observed when organics were added
to sulfate ammonium (Engelhart et al., 2008). In this study, we investigated
the impacts of organics on CCN activity through adjusting the value of
surface tension until the calculated AR values based on HTDMA measurements
agreed with those obtained from SMCA measurements (measured AR). The
calculated AR values were systematically lower than the corresponding
measured ones because here the surface tension of bulk pure water
(0.072 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) was assumed when calculating the AR from the HTDMA measurements
(Fig. 7). Note that the surface tension is not the only factor that
determines the AR and other factors such as the sparingly soluble compounds
in the particles may contribute to the AR, although they are currently not
understood. Previous studies found that the hygroscopicity of the particles
measured by the HTDMA could be lower than that measured by the CCNc (Chan
et al., 2008; Pajunoja et al., 2015; Petters et al., 2009; Hansen et al.,
2015; Hong et al., 2014) which might be attributed to low soluble compounds
in the particles. The deviation of the calculated AR from the measured AR is
probably dependent on the degree of dissolution of particles and the
oxidative state of the organics in the particles.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e5144">The predicted activation ratio based on HTDMA measurement vs. the
measured activation ratio at 0.1 %, 0.2 %, 0.4 %, and 0.7 % SS for
40, 80, 110, 150, and 200 nm particles.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page16429?><p id="d1e5153">The surface tension of a nanoparticle was substantially different from that
of its bulk solution due to the curvature effect (Ahn et al., 1975; Bogdan,
1997). The effects of size and composition on the surface tension were
currently not well understood. Here, we proposed an approach to evaluate the
impact of organics on the surface tension (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) based on the
fraction change of the calculated AR to the measured AR. We defined this
fraction change (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) as a function of surface tension,
diameter, and supersaturation:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M313" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E18"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="1em"/><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the measured AR for a certain
diameter and SS, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the calculated AR for a
certain diameter, SS, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. We excluded particles at the
size of 200 nm because they were easily activated even at 0.1 % SS and the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was expected to be independent of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Here, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value varied between 0.03 and 0.072 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(surface tension of pure water). Figure 8 shows the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as a
function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the four particle diameters (40, 80, 110,
150 nm). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased with increase of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for all given particle sizes, changing more rapidly for smaller
particles (i.e., from 200 % to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for 40 nm) than bigger particles
(i.e., from 20 % to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for 150 nm). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values between measured AR
and predicted AR for a certain diameter and four supersaturations at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.072</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were 0.35, 0.93, 0.95, and 0.91, respectively.
The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AR</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values reached zero when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
set to be about 0.054 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for 40, 80, and 110 nm particles, and 0.062 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for 150 nm particles, with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.88, 0.94, 0.94, and 0.88,
respectively. As a compromise, here we adopt a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value of
0.058 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (denoted as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to predict AR.
This <inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value significantly increased  the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
compared to that based on the pure water assumption (0.072 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for 40 nm
particles, while it was reasonably well for other sizes of particles (80,
110, 150 nm). The AR was then recalculated using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value and the prediction was significantly improved
(Fig. 9). We calculated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value between the measured and predicted AR
and the results showed that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value is close to 0, indicating a
significant correlation between the two variables. The results demonstrated
that partitioning of organics into aerosol particles would decrease their
surface tension. Therefore, the pure water assumption for surface tension
would lead to high uncertainties when it was applied to predict the activation
ratios of the aerosol particles at a certain size. Note that we did not
consider the effects of individual organics due to the limited data from the
chemical composition measurements. How chemical composition affects the
surface tension of the particles is yet to be investigated.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e5744">The relative deviation between predicted AR and measured AR at
different assumed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; the color code represents <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
between calculated AR and measured AR.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e5782">The predicted activation ratio using the new surface tension assumption
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) based on HTDMA measurement vs. the measured
activation ratio at 0.1 %, 0.2 %, 0.4 %, and 0.7 % SS for 40, 80,
110, 150, and 200 nm particles.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{The $N_{\mathrm{CCN}}$ prediction}?><title>The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{The $N_{\mathrm{CCN}}$ prediction based on the HTDMA
measurements}?><title>The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction based on the HTDMA
measurements</title>
      <?pagebreak page16430?><p id="d1e5844">In this study, we used several approaches to predict the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> based on
the HTDMA measurements, from either the activation curve or the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Table 4 summarizes the methods that were used to predict the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
along with the slope and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between the predicted and the measured
values. The mixing state of the aerosol particles is an important parameter
in determining the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The prediction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using the activation
curve means the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was calculated based on Eq. (7). Meanwhile, the
prediction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> means that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
calculated based on Eq. (8) and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was determined from fitting the
size-resolved activation ratio by Eq. (5). The activation curve represented
actual mixing state, while the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> approach assumed that all particles
were internally mixed. Scheme 5 in Table 4 was the method based on the
activation curve with the new <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.058 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Equations (7)
and (8) were, respectively, used to calculate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
following schemes 1, 2, 5, and the rest of the schemes. Scheme 5 (real-time
activation curve using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) provided the best
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> predicted value (closest to the measured one), followed by scheme
3 (real-time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> scheme 4 (average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> scheme 1
(real-time activation curve) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> scheme 2 (average
activation curve). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values for all the approaches were in general
high (around 0.93). The CCN prediction based on scheme 2 led to the largest
underestimation over the measured values. In general, the real-time data
(schemes 1 and 3) gave better predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> than the corresponding
average data (schemes 2 and 4).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4"><caption><p id="d1e6121">The overview of different schemes used in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction
based on HTDMA measurements.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.95}[.95]?><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scheme</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Method</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Slope</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Real-time activation curve</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8275</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Average activation curve</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8183</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Real-time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8869</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8738</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Real-time activation curve using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.9377</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page16431?><p id="d1e6291">Figure 10 shows the correlation between the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the
predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from schemes 1–5 at the four SSs. For schemes 1–4, the
predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were found to be the largest deviation from the
corresponding measured ones at 0.1 % SS among all the approaches, probably
due to the pure water assumption for surface tension (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.072</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). Meanwhile, because the CCN activity was sensitive to
hygroscopicity of the particles at low SS, the uncertainties of
hygroscopicity data would lead to large errors in the prediction of CCN. As
discussed in the previous section, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was more sensitive to the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at lower supersaturations, leading to a large deviation of
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the measured value. The best agreement between the
calculated AR and the measured AR was seen using scheme 5, as the slopes at
the four SSs were close to 1 (Fig. 10q–t).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e6401">The relationship between measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
based on schemes 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The black lines represent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> lines.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{The $N_{\mathrm{CCN}}$ prediction based on AMS measurements}?><title>The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction based on AMS measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e6462">We proposed five approaches based on HTDMA measurements to predict the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the previous section. Alternatively, we can calculate the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> based on AMS measurements. Here, we proposed four methods based on
either size-resolved chemical composition or bulk PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> chemical
composition from the AMS measurements (Table 5). Here, we assumed that the
particles were internally mixed and the median <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
obtained from bulk composition was 0.28, higher than those from
size-resolved composition (0.24–0.26 in Fig. 3), probably due to a higher
mass fraction of inorganic matter in bulk NR-PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 2). We excluded
the size-resolved data at 0.7 % SS due to their poor quality. Note that
the impact on the calculated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values and the
predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was minor using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value (0.53) of
ammonium sulfate from Petters and Kreidenweis (2007). For example, the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values slightly increased from 0.27 to 0.28 at
0.1 % SS; the slopes for schemes 6, 8, and 9 in Table 5 slightly increased
from 0.9859 to 0.9898, 0.9721 to 0.9834, and 0.9742 to 0.9973, respectively,
while the one for scheme 7 did not change. Figure 11 shows the correlation
between the measured and predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from schemes 6–9. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
was underpredicted at 0.1 % SS and was overpredicted at 0.7 % SS. We
proposed three potential factors that might impact <inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction
based on AMS measurements. (1) The assumed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were
probably underestimated for particles larger than 100 nm, leading to the
underestimated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at low SS. As shown in Fig. 3, the predicted
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> shows a larger deviation from the measured value for a larger
particle. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were more sensitive to particle hygroscopicity
at lower SS, as discussed in the previous section. (2) Pure water was
assumed for surface tension. As we have shown in the previous section,
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values for the aerosol particles were found to be much
smaller than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for pure water (0.072 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). As a
result, the pure water assumption for surface tension led to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
underestimation. In addition, again the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was more sensitive to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the low SS. (3) Black carbon (BC) particles were not
included and the particles were assumed to be internally mixed. The BC particles were known to be
non-hygroscopic and had a low CCN activity. During the campaign period, the
average BC concentration was about 5.91 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
which accounts for 7 % in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The assumption of no BC particles would lead to the
overestimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Here, the particles were assumed to be
internally mixed in the AMS measurements. This would lead to an
overestimation of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> when the ambient particles tend to be
externally mixed (Wang et al., 2010; Sánchez Gácita et al., 2017).
However, the internal mixing assumption seems to play a minor role in
predicting the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 0.1 % SS since the particles at about
140–180 nm tend to be internally mixed, as shown in Fig. 5. In this case, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> assumption and the pure water assumption played more important
roles than the mixing state assumption at low SS (i.e., 0.1 % SS). Figure 11
shows significant underestimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 0.1 % SS (Fig. 11a,
e, i, m), while more or less comparable to the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at
higher SS (i.e., 0.2 %, 0.4 %, 0.7 %). The difference between the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> became smaller and the corresponding
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value decreased with the increase of the SS so that the impacts of
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> assumption and the pure water assumption became minor
with the increase of the SS. Instead, the internal mixing state assumption
would play a more important role in the prediction (Meng et al., 2014). As
shown in Fig. 5, the peak height and area of the less-hygroscopic mode
became larger for the smaller size particles (i.e., 40 nm particles),
implying that small particles were likely to be externally mixed; that is,
the non-hygroscopic or less hygroscopic species including BC and insoluble organics were
less likely coated with inorganic salts. Hence, the internal mixing
assumption could lead to an overestimated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5"><caption><p id="d1e6869">The overview of methods used in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction based on
AMS measurements.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.95}[.95]?><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scheme</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Method</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Slope</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Real-time bulk composition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.9859</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.91</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Average bulk composition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0108</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.91</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Real-time size-resolved composition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.9721</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.87</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Average size-resolved composition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.9742</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.86</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e6989">The relationship between measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
based on schemes 6, 7, 8, and 9. The black lines represent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> lines.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f11.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e7033">As discussed above, the two important parameters (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) had significant impacts on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction. We
denoted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as
important representations, respectively, for hygroscopicity and surface
tension contributed from organics. We also pointed out that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was<?pagebreak page16432?> dependent on the particle size, and hence here we further
assumed the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values to be 0.15 and 0.1,
respectively, for particles larger and smaller than 100 nm. Note that we
previously assumed the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to be 0.1 for all particle sizes.
Here, we gave an example of the improvements at 0.1 % SS when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values were, respectively, replaced with the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ones (Fig. 12).
The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value calculated at 0.1 % SS based on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was 0.288, very close to the corresponding
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value (0.30), indicating that an improvement was made
for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction when including the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
value. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> prediction could be greatly improved when including both
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
calculation. For example, the underestimate of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased from
44 % (Fig. 11a) to 4 % (Fig. 12b). In addition, we also investigated the
effects of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values in a range of 0.054 to 0.062 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
as discussed in Sect. 3.2. The shadow area in Fig. 12b
represents the variation of linear fit between the measured and predicted
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. An under- and overestimated value of 16 % ( slope of 0.84) and
8 % (slope of 1.08) was obtained for the predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to the
measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value of 0.054 and
0.062 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, indicating that the predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> agreed
reasonably with the measured ones when the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values between
0.054 and 0.062 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were used in this study. We conclude that the
predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can agree better with the measured one when including
both <inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
calculation at low SS.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><caption><p id="d1e7487">The relationship between measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
at SS 0.1 % based on size-resolved chemical composition using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(a)</bold> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(b)</bold>. The shadow area represents the variation of the
linear fit using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values from 0.054 to 0.062 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/18/16419/2018/acp-18-16419-2018-f12.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e7605">The CCN activity is an important parameter that determines the extent to
which atmospheric particles can influence cloud formation. It is hence
essential to predict CCN activity so that a quantitative assessment of
atmospheric particles on cloud formation can be made. While numerous studies
were performed to investigate the CCN activity under different atmospheric
conditions around the world, only a few of them were made in the PRD region
in China. In this study, several advanced instruments (i.e., the SMCA, AMS,
and HTDMA) were used to, respectively, measure CCN activity, chemical
composition, and hygroscopicity in PRD during wintertime 2014. A variety of
schemes was proposed to determine the CCN activity based on the
measurements. Here, two important properties were considered when evaluating
the CCN activity: the hygroscopic parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and the surface
tension of the particles. Three methods (i.e., the SMCA, the AMS plus ZSR, and
the HTDMA) were employed to calculate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values based on our
measurements. The results show that the deviation between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> became larger at low supersaturation ratios,
indicating that the organic components<?pagebreak page16433?> in larger size particles were more
aged and hygroscopic. The activation curve became smoother at the low SS,
which could be partly attributed to the higher heterogeneity of chemical
composition for larger particles. In general, the Gf-PDF measured by the HTDMA
exhibited a bimodal distribution with a less-hygroscopic mode and a
more-hygroscopic mode. The less-hygroscopic mode was more significant at
smaller diameters, indicating a more external mixing for smaller particles,
while the more-hygroscopic mode increased with diameter and became broader,
implying higher hygroscopicity and more complex chemical composition for
larger particles. The shapes of activation curve were related to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of the Gf-PDF. The higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values suggest the higher
heterogeneity of chemical composition and smooth activation curve. A <inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
value of 0.22–0.30 measured by the HTDMA was obtained for 40–200 nm
particles in this study during the measurement period, larger than those
previously measured in the PRD region, indicating an increasing mass
fraction of nitrate in recent years.</p>
      <p id="d1e7666">Organic compounds could influence CCN activity through modifying the
hygroscopicity and surface tension of the particles. The impacts of organics
on CCN activity were also investigated in this study. The increase of
organic mass fraction in the particles could lead to the decrease of the
aerosol hygroscopicity and hence increase the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, especially at low
supersaturation. In addition, organics could decrease the surface tension
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This could lead to the underestimated CCN activity if
the pure water solution is assumed when<?pagebreak page16434?> inverting the HTDMA data. We evaluated
the impact of the surface tension on the activation ratios over a wide range
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values (0.03–0.07 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) for several measured
size particles (40, 80, 110, and 150 nm) and found that a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
value of 0.058 N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> was the best fit between predicted AR and measured
AR, which could then be used to predict the CCN activity in the PRD region.
Based on the hygroscopicity and chemical composition measured in this study,
we proposed several schemes to predict the CCN activity. Overall, the
predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> agreed well with the measure one. The slope and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> predicted from average data were similar to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
predicted from real-time data. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> obtained from HTDMA
measurement was underpredicted if the pure water assumption was used, and
better agreement with the measured values can be achieved by using the
adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.058</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> N m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>).
Similarly, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> predicted from AMS measurement was
underestimated at low supersaturations and overestimated at high
supersaturations, due to an assumption of fixed 0.1 for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and the external mixing state. Better predicted CCN concentrations can be
obtained by using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">org</mml:mi><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the calculation, especially at low supersaturations. For high
supersaturations, the effect of internal mixing assumption should be taken
into consideration. We concluded that better agreement between predicted and
measured CCN concentrations could be achieved by taking the effects of
organics into account on the hygroscopicity, surface tension, and the mixing
state of the particles. More work on the roles of organics in the CCN
activity is obviously needed in order to better understand the impacts of
atmospheric particles on cloud formation and hence climate.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e7918">The field observational and the lab experimental data used in
this study are available from one of the corresponding authors (HT)
upon request (Haobo Tan via hbtan@grmc.gov.cn).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e7921">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-16419-2018-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-16419-2018-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e7930">MC, HT, and JZ designed the research; MC, HT, CC, YQ, HX, FL,
MS, and LL performed the field work. MC, HT, and JZ analyzed the data; MC, HT, and JZ wrote the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e7936">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement">

      <p id="d1e7942">This article is part of the special issue “Multiphase chemistry of secondary
aerosol formation under severe haze”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e7948">The authors acknowledge the support from the following funding agencies:
National Key R&amp;D Program of China
(2016YFC0201901, 2017YFC0209500, 2016YFC2003305), National Natural Science
Foundation of China (NSFC) (91644225, 21577177, 41775117), and Guangdong
provincial scientific planning project (2014A020216008, 2016B050502005).
Jun Zhao also acknowledges the funding from the “111 Plan” Project of China
(grant B17049).<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>Edited by: Hang Su
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: three anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Ahn, W. S., Shin, K. C., and Chang, S.: The effect of curvature dependency correction for
the surface tension on the result of pore distribution analysis,
J. Colloid Interf. Sci., 51, 232–238, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(75)90108-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0021-9797(75)90108-3</ext-link>, 1975.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Asa-Awuku, A., Engelhart, G. J., Lee, B. H., Pandis, S. N., and Nenes, A.:
Relating CCN activity, volatility, and droplet growth kinetics of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-caryophyllene secondary organic aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9,
795–812, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-795-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-795-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Bogdan, A.: Thermodynamics of the curvature effect on ice surface tension
and nucleation theory, J. Chem. Phys., 106, 1921–1929, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Cai, M., Tan, H., Chan, C. K., Mochida, M., Hatakeyama, S., Kondo, Y.,
Schurman, M. I., Xu, H., Li, F., and Shimada, K.: Comparison of Aerosol
Hygroscopcity, Volatility, and Chemical Composition between a Suburban Site
in the Pearl River Delta Region and a Marine Site in Okinawa, Aerosol Air
Qual. Res., 17, 3194–3208, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Cao, G., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., and Zheng, F.: Estimation of emissions from
field burning of crop straw in China, Chinese Sci. Bull., 53, 784–790, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Cerully, K. M., Raatikainen, T., Lance, S., Tkacik, D., Tiitta, P., Petäjä,
T., Ehn, M., Kulmala, M., Worsnop, D. R., Laaksonen, A., Smith, J. N., and
Nenes, A.: Aerosol hygroscopicity and CCN activation kinetics in a boreal
forest environment during the 2007 EUCAARI campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11,
12369–12386, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12369-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-12369-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Chan, M. N., Kreidenweis, S. M., and Chan, C. K.: Measurements of the
hygroscopic and deliquescence properties of organic compounds of different
solubilities in water and their relationship with cloud condensation nuclei
activities, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 3602–3608, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Chang, R. Y.-W., Slowik, J. G., Shantz, N. C., Vlasenko, A., Liggio, J.,
Sjostedt, S. J., Leaitch, W. R., and Abbatt, J. P. D.: The hygroscopicity
parameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) of ambient organic aerosol at a field site subject to
biogenic and anthropogenic influences: relationship to degree of aerosol
oxidation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 5047–5064,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-5047-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-5047-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Cheung, H., Yeung, M., Li, Y., Lee, B., and Chan, C.: Relative Humidity-Dependent
HTDMA Measurements of Ambient Aerosols at the HKUST Supersite in Hong Kong,
China, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 49, 643–654, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1058482" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2015.1058482</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page16435?><ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>DeCarlo, P. F., Slowik, J. G., Worsnop, D. R., Davidovits, P., and Jimenez,
J. L.: Particle Morphology and Density Characterization by Combined Mobility
and Aerodynamic Diameter Measurements. Part 1: Theory, Aerosol Sci. Technol.,
38, 1206–1222, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>DeCarlo, P. F., Kimmel, J. R., Achim, T., Northway, M. J., Jayne, J. T.,
Aiken, A. C., Marc, G., Katrin, F., Thomas, H., and Docherty, K. S.:
Field-deployable, high-resolution, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer,
Anal. Chem., 78, 8281–8289, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Deng, Z. Z., Zhao, C. S., Ma, N., Liu, P. F., Ran, L., Xu, W. Y., Chen, J.,
Liang, Z., Liang, S., Huang, M. Y., Ma, X. C., Zhang, Q., Quan, J. N., Yan,
P., Henning, S., Mildenberger, K., Sommerhage, E., Schäfer, M., Stratmann,
F., and Wiedensohler, A.: Size-resolved and bulk activation properties of
aerosols in the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3835–3846,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3835-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-3835-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Engelhart, G. J., Asa-Awuku, A., Nenes, A., and Pandis, S. N.: CCN activity
and droplet growth kinetics of fresh and aged monoterpene secondary organic
aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 3937–3949,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-3937-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-3937-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Farmer, D. K., Cappa, C. D., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Atmospheric Processes
and Their Controlling Influence on Cloud Condensation Nuclei Activity, Chem.
Rev., 115, 4199–4217, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/cr5006292" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/cr5006292</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Good, N., Topping, D. O., Allan, J. D., Flynn, M., Fuentes, E., Irwin, M.,
Williams, P. I., Coe, H., and McFiggans, G.: Consistency between
parameterisations of aerosol hygroscopicity and CCN activity during the
RHaMBLe discovery cruise, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3189–3203,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3189-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-3189-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Gysel, M., Crosier, J., Topping, D. O., Whitehead, J. D., Bower, K. N.,
Cubison, M. J., Williams, P. I., Flynn, M. J., McFiggans, G. B., and Coe, H.:
Closure study between chemical composition and hygroscopic growth of aerosol
particles during TORCH2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 6131–6144,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-6131-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-6131-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Gysel, M., McFiggans, G. B., and Coe, H.: Inversion of tandem differential
mobility analyser (TDMA) measurements, J. Aerosol Sci., 40, 134–151, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Hansen, A. M. K., Hong, J., Raatikainen, T., Kristensen, K., Ylisirniö, A.,
Virtanen, A., Petäjä, T., Glasius, M., and Prisle, N. L.: Hygroscopic
properties and cloud condensation nuclei activation of limonene-derived
organosulfates and their mixtures with ammonium sulfate, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
15, 14071–14089, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-14071-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-14071-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Hong, J., Häkkinen, S. A. K., Paramonov, M., äijälä, M., Hakala, J.,
Nieminen, T., Mikkilä, J., Prisle, N. L., Kulmala, M., Riipinen, I., Bilde,
M., Kerminen, V.-M., and Petäjä, T.: Hygroscopicity, CCN and volatility
properties of submicron atmospheric aerosol in a boreal forest environment
during the summer of 2010, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4733–4748,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4733-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-4733-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Itahashi, S., Yumimoto, K., Uno, I., Hayami, H., Fujita, S.-I., Pan, Y., and
Wang, Y.: A 15-year record (2001–2015) of the ratio of nitrate to
non-sea-salt sulfate in precipitation over East Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18,
2835–2852, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2835-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-2835-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Jiang, R., Tan, H., Tang, L., Cai, M., Yin, Y., Li, F., Liu, L., Xu, H.,
Chan, P. W., and Deng, X.: Comparison of aerosol hygroscopicity and mixing
state between winter and summer seasons in Pearl River Delta region, China,
Atmos. Res., 169, 160–170, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Jimenez, J. L., Jayne, J. T., Shi, Q., Kolb, C. E., Worsnop, D. R.,
Yourshaw, I., Seinfeld, J. H., Flagan, R. C., Zhang, X., and Smith, K. A.:
Ambient aerosol sampling using the aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 8425–8438, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001213" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD001213</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Kammermann, L., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., Herich, H., Cziczo, D. J.,
Holst, T., Svenningsson, B., Arneth, A., and Baltensperger, U.: Subarctic
atmospheric aerosol composition: 3. Measured and modeled properties of cloud
condensation nuclei, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, D04202,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012447" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD012447</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets,
T. Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, 1936.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Lambe, A. T., Onasch, T. B., Massoli, P., Croasdale, D. R., Wright, J. P.,
Ahern, A. T., Williams, L. R., Worsnop, D. R., Brune, W. H., and Davidovits,
P.: Laboratory studies of the chemical composition and cloud condensation
nuclei (CCN) activity of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) and oxidized primary
organic aerosol (OPOA), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 8913–8928,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-8913-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-8913-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Lance, S., Raatikainen, T., Onasch, T. B., Worsnop, D. R., Yu, X.-Y.,
Alexander, M. L., Stolzenburg, M. R., McMurry, P. H., Smith, J. N., and
Nenes, A.: Aerosol mixing state, hygroscopic growth and cloud activation
efficiency during MIRAGE 2006, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5049–5062,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5049-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-5049-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Lee, B. P., Li, Y. J., Yu, J. Z., Louie, P. K., and Chan, C. K.: Physical
and chemical characterization of ambient aerosol by HR-ToF-AMS at a suburban
site in Hong Kong during springtime 2011, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118,
8625–8639, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Liu, H. J., Zhao, C. S., Nekat, B., Ma, N., Wiedensohler, A., van Pinxteren,
D., Spindler, G., Müller, K., and Herrmann, H.: Aerosol hygroscopicity
derived from size-segregated chemical composition and its parameterization in
the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 2525–2539,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-2525-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-2525-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Liu, P. F., Zhao, C. S., Göbel, T., Hallbauer, E., Nowak, A., Ran, L., Xu, W.
Y., Deng, Z. Z., Ma, N., Mildenberger, K., Henning, S., Stratmann, F., and
Wiedensohler, A.: Hygroscopic properties of aerosol particles at high
relative humidity and their diurnal variations in the North China Plain,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3479–3494, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3479-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-3479-2011</ext-link>,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Massoli, P., Lambe, A., Ahern, A., Williams, L., Ehn, M., Mikkilä, J.,
Canagaratna, M., Brune, W., Onasch, T., and Jayne, J.: Relationship between
aerosol oxidation level and hygroscopic properties of laboratory generated
secondary organic aerosol (SOA) particles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L24801,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045258" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL045258</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Mei, F., Setyan, A., Zhang, Q., and Wang, J.: CCN activity of organic
aerosols observed downwind of urban emissions during CARES, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 13, 12155–12169, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-12155-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-12155-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Meng, J. W., Yeung, M. C., Li, Y. J., Lee, B. Y. L., and Chan, C. K.:
Size-resolved cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) activity and closure analysis
at the HKUST Supersite in Hong Kong, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 10267–10282,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10267-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-10267-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page16436?><ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Mochida, M., Nishita-Hara, C., Kitamori, Y., Aggarwal, S. G., Kawamura, K.,
Miura, K., and Takami, A.: Size-segregated measurements of cloud condensation
nucleus activity and hygroscopic growth for aerosols at Cape Hedo, Japan, in
spring 2008, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, D21207, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013216" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD013216</ext-link>,
2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Moore, R., Ingall, E., Sorooshian, A., and Nenes, A.: Molar mass, surface
tension, and droplet growth kinetics of marine organics from measurements of
CCN activity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L07801,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033350" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GL033350</ext-link>,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Moore, R., Nenes, A., and Medina, J.: Scanning Mobility CCN Analysis – A
Method for Fast Measurements of Size-Resolved CCN Distributions and
Activation Kinetics, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 44, 861–871, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Moore, R., Cerully, K., Bahreini, R., Brock, C., Middlebrook, A., and Nenes,
A.: Hygroscopicity and composition of California CCN during summer 2010, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00V12, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017352" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD017352</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Moore, R. H., Bahreini, R., Brock, C. A., Froyd, K. D., Cozic, J., Holloway,
J. S., Middlebrook, A. M., Murphy, D. M., and Nenes, A.: Hygroscopicity and
composition of Alaskan Arctic CCN during April 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11,
11807–11825, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11807-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-11807-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Ovadnevaite, J., Zuend, A., Laaksonen, A., Sanchez, K. J., Roberts, G.,
Ceburnis, D., Decesari, S., Rinaldi, M., Hodas, N., Facchini, M. C.,
Seinfeld, J. H., and O'Dowd, C.: Surface tension prevails over solute effect
in organic-influenced cloud droplet activation, Nature, 546, 637–641, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Pajunoja, A., Lambe, A. T., Hakala, J., Rastak, N., Cummings, M. J., Brogan,
J. F., Hao, L., Paramonov, M., Hong, J., and Prisle, N. L.: Adsorptive uptake
of water by semisolid secondary organic aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett. 42,
3063–3068, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Petters, M. D. and Kreidenweis, S. M.: A single parameter representation of
hygroscopic growth and cloud condensation nucleus activity, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 7, 1961–1971, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1961-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-1961-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Petters, M. D. and Kreidenweis, S. M.: A single parameter representation of
hygroscopic growth and cloud condensation nucleus activity – Part 3:
Including surfactant partitioning, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1081–1091,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1081-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-1081-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Petters, M. D., Wex, H., Carrico, C. M., Hallbauer, E., Massling, A.,
McMeeking, G. R., Poulain, L., Wu, Z., Kreidenweis, S. M., and Stratmann, F.:
Towards closing the gap between hygroscopic growth and activation for
secondary organic aerosol – Part 2: Theoretical approaches, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 9, 3999–4009, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3999-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-3999-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Qin, Y. M., Tan, H. B., Li, Y. J., Schurman, M. I., Li, F., Canonaco, F.,
Prévôt, A. S. H., and Chan, C. K.: Impacts of traffic emissions on
atmospheric particulate nitrate and organics at a downwind site on the
periphery of Guangzhou, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 10245–10258,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10245-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-10245-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Rose, D., Gunthe, S. S., Mikhailov, E., Frank, G. P., Dusek, U., Andreae, M.
O., and Pöschl, U.: Calibration and measurement uncertainties of a
continuous-flow cloud condensation nuclei counter (DMT-CCNC): CCN activation
of ammonium sulfate and sodium chloride aerosol particles in theory and
experiment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1153–1179,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1153-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-1153-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Rose, D., Nowak, A., Achtert, P., Wiedensohler, A., Hu, M., Shao, M., Zhang,
Y., Andreae, M. O., and Pöschl, U.: Cloud condensation nuclei in polluted air
and biomass burning smoke near the mega-city Guangzhou, China – Part 1:
Size-resolved measurements and implications for the modeling of aerosol
particle hygroscopicity and CCN activity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3365–3383,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3365-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-3365-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Sánchez Gácita, M., Longo, K. M., Freire, J. L. M., Freitas, S. R., and
Martin, S. T.: Impact of mixing state and hygroscopicity on CCN activity of
biomass burning aerosol in Amazonia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 2373–2392,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-2373-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-2373-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Salma, I., Ocskay, R., Varga, I., and Maenhaut, W.: Surface tension of
atmospheric humic-like substances in connection with relaxation, dilution,
and solution pH, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D23205, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD007015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD007015</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Schurman, M. I., Kim, J. Y., Cheung, H. H. Y., and Chan, C. K.: Atmospheric
particle composition-hygroscopic growth measurements using an in-series
hybrid tandem differential mobility analyzer and aerosol mass spectrometer,
Aerosol Sci. Tech., 51, 694–703, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Seinfeld, J. H. and  Pandis, S. N.:
Atmospheric chemistry and physics-from air pollution to climate change, Wiley Interscience,
2nd Edn., 1232 pp., 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Sjogren, S., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., Alfarra, M. R., Duplissy, J., Cozic,
J., Crosier, J., Coe, H., and Baltensperger, U.: Hygroscopicity of the
submicrometer aerosol at the high-alpine site Jungfraujoch, 3580 m a.s.l.,
Switzerland, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 5715–5729,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-5715-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-5715-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Sorjamaa, R., Svenningsson, B., Raatikainen, T., Henning, S., Bilde, M., and
Laaksonen, A.: The role of surfactants in Köhler theory reconsidered,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 2107–2117, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-4-2107-2004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-4-2107-2004</ext-link>,
2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Stocker, D. Q.: Climate change 2013: The physical science basis, Working
Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, Summary for Policymakers, IPCC, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Stokes, R.  and Robinson, R.: Interactions in aqueous nonelectrolyte
solutions. I. Solute-solvent equilibria, J. Phys. Chem., 70, 2126–2131,
1966.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Stolzenburg, M. R. and McMurry, P. H.: Equations Governing Single and
Tandem DMA Configurations and a New Lognormal Approximation to the Transfer
Function, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 42, 421–432, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Tan, H., Xu, H., Wan, Q., Li, F., Deng, X., Chan, P. W., Xia, D., and Yin,
Y.: Design and Application of an Unattended Multifunctional H-TDMA System, J.
Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 1136–1148, 2013a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Tan, H., Yin, Y., Gu, X., Li, F., Chan, P. W., Xu, H., Deng, X., and Wan,
Q.: An observational study of the hygroscopic properties of aerosols over the
Pearl River Delta region, Atmos. Environ., 77, 817–826, 2013b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Tan, H., Yin, Y., Li, F., Liu, X., Chan, P. W., Deng, T., Deng, X., Wan, Q.
and Wu, D.: Measurements of particle number size distributions and new
particle formation events during winter in the pearl river delta region,
China, J. Trop. Meteorol., 22, 191–199, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page16437?><ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Topping, D. O., McFiggans, G. B., and Coe, H.: A curved multi-component
aerosol hygroscopicity model framework: Part 1 – Inorganic compounds, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 5, 1205–1222, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1205-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-1205-2005</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>Tritscher, T., Dommen, J., DeCarlo, P. F., Gysel, M., Barmet, P. B., Praplan,
A. P., Weingartner, E., Prévôt, A. S. H., Riipinen, I., Donahue, N. M.,
and Baltensperger, U.: Volatility and hygroscopicity of aging secondary
organic aerosol in a smog chamber, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11477–11496,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11477-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-11477-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>Väisänen, O., Ruuskanen, A., Ylisirniö, A., Miettinen, P., Portin, H.,
Hao, L., Leskinen, A., Komppula, M., Romakkaniemi, S., Lehtinen, K. E. J.,
and Virtanen, A.: In-cloud measurements highlight the role of aerosol
hygroscopicity in cloud droplet formation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16,
10385–10398, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10385-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-10385-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>Wang, J., Cubison, M. J., Aiken, A. C., Jimenez, J. L., and Collins, D. R.:
The importance of aerosol mixing state and size-resolved composition on CCN
concentration and the variation of the importance with atmospheric aging of
aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7267–7283,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7267-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7267-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Z., Cheng, Y., Ma, N., Mikhailov, E., Pöschl, U., and Su, H.:
Dependence of the hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> on particle size, humidity
and solute concentration: implications for laboratory experiments, field
measurements and model studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2017-253" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-2017-253</ext-link>, in review, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>Wu, Z. J., Poulain, L., Henning, S., Dieckmann, K., Birmili, W., Merkel, M.,
van Pinxteren, D., Spindler, G., Müller, K., Stratmann, F., Herrmann, H.,
and Wiedensohler, A.: Relating particle hygroscopicity and CCN activity to
chemical composition during the HCCT-2010 field campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
13, 7983–7996, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7983-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-7983-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>Zdanovskii, A.: New methods for calculating solubilities of electrolytes in
multicomponent systems, Zhur. Fiz. Khim., 22, 1475–1485, 1948.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, X. Y., Wang, J. Z., Wang, Y. Q., Liu, H. L., Sun, J. Y., and Zhang, Y.
M.: Changes in chemical components of aerosol particles in different haze
regions in China from 2006 to 2013 and contribution of meteorological
factors, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 12935–12952,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12935-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-12935-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, D. F., Buchholz, A., Kortner, B., Schlag, P., Rubach, F.,
Kiendler-Scharr, A., Tillmann, R., Wahner, A., Flores, J. M., Rudich, Y.,
Watne, Å. K., Hallquist, M., Wildt, J., and Mentel, Th. F.:
Size-dependent hygroscopicity parameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M500" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and chemical composition
of secondary organic cloud condensation nuclei, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42,
10920–10928, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>The size-resolved cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) activity and its prediction based on aerosol hygroscopicity and composition in the Pearl Delta River (PRD) region during wintertime 2014</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>A hygroscopic tandem differential mobility analyzer (HTDMA), a
scanning mobility cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) analyzer (SMCA), and an Aerodyne high-resolution
time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer (HR-ToF-AMS) were used to,
respectively, measure the hygroscopicity, condensation nuclei activation, and
chemical composition of aerosol particles at the Panyu site in the Pearl
River Delta region during wintertime 2014. The distribution of the size-resolved
CCN at four supersaturations (SSs of 0.1&thinsp;%,
0.2&thinsp;%, 0.4&thinsp;%, and 0.7&thinsp;%) and the aerosol particle size distribution
were obtained by the SMCA. The hygroscopicity parameter <i>κ</i> (<i>κ</i><sub>CCN</sub>, <i>κ</i><sub>HTDMA</sub>, and <i>κ</i><sub>AMS</sub>) was,
respectively, calculated based upon the SMCA, HTDMA, and AMS measurements. The results
showed that the <i>κ</i><sub>HTDMA</sub> value was slightly smaller than the
<i>κ</i><sub>CCN</sub> one at all diameters and for particles larger than
100&thinsp;nm, and the <i>κ</i><sub>AMS</sub> value was significantly smaller than the others
(<i>κ</i><sub>CCN</sub> and <i>κ</i><sub>HTDMA</sub>), which could be attributed to
the underestimated hygroscopicity of the organics (<i>κ</i><sub>org</sub>). The
activation ratio (AR) calculated from the growth factor – probability
density function (Gf-PDF) without surface tension correction was found to be
lower than that from the CCN measurements, due most likely to the
uncorrected surface tension (<i>σ</i><sub>s∕a</sub>) that did not consider the
surfactant effects of the organic compounds. We demonstrated that better
agreement between the calculated and measured ARs could be obtained by
adjusting <i>σ</i><sub>s∕a</sub>. Various schemes were proposed to predict the
CCN number concentration (<i>N</i><sub>CCN</sub>) based on the HTDMA and AMS
measurements. In general, the predicted <i>N</i><sub>CCN</sub> agreed reasonably well
with the corresponding measured ones using different schemes. For the HTDMA
measurements, the <i>N</i><sub>CCN</sub> value predicted from the real-time AR
measurements was slightly smaller ( ∼ 6.8&thinsp;%) than that from
the activation diameter (<i>D</i><sub>50</sub>) method due to the assumed internal mixing
in the <i>D</i><sub>50</sub> prediction. The <i>N</i><sub>CCN</sub> values predicted from bulk
chemical composition of PM<sub>1</sub> were higher ( ∼ 11.5&thinsp;%) than
those from size-resolved composition measured by the AMS because a
significant fraction of PM<sub>1</sub> was composed of inorganic matter. The
<i>N</i><sub>CCN</sub> values calculated from AMS measurement were underpredicted at
0.1&thinsp;% and 0.2&thinsp;% supersaturations, which could be due to underestimation of
<i>κ</i><sub>org</sub> and overestimation of <i>σ</i><sub>s∕a</sub>. For SS values of 0.4&thinsp;%
and 0.7&thinsp;%, slight overpredicted <i>N</i><sub>CCN</sub> values were found because of
the internal mixing assumption. Our results highlight the need for
accurately evaluating the effects of organics on both the hygroscopic
parameter <i>κ</i> and the surface tension <i>σ</i> in order to accurately
predict CCN activity.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Ahn, W. S., Shin, K. C., and Chang, S.: The effect of curvature dependency correction for
the surface tension on the result of pore distribution analysis,
J. Colloid Interf. Sci., 51, 232–238, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(75)90108-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(75)90108-3</a>, 1975.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Asa-Awuku, A., Engelhart, G. J., Lee, B. H., Pandis, S. N., and Nenes, A.:
Relating CCN activity, volatility, and droplet growth kinetics of
<i>β</i>-caryophyllene secondary organic aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9,
795–812, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-795-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-795-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Bogdan, A.: Thermodynamics of the curvature effect on ice surface tension
and nucleation theory, J. Chem. Phys., 106, 1921–1929, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Cai, M., Tan, H., Chan, C. K., Mochida, M., Hatakeyama, S., Kondo, Y.,
Schurman, M. I., Xu, H., Li, F., and Shimada, K.: Comparison of Aerosol
Hygroscopcity, Volatility, and Chemical Composition between a Suburban Site
in the Pearl River Delta Region and a Marine Site in Okinawa, Aerosol Air
Qual. Res., 17, 3194–3208, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Cao, G., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., and Zheng, F.: Estimation of emissions from
field burning of crop straw in China, Chinese Sci. Bull., 53, 784–790, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Cerully, K. M., Raatikainen, T., Lance, S., Tkacik, D., Tiitta, P., Petäjä,
T., Ehn, M., Kulmala, M., Worsnop, D. R., Laaksonen, A., Smith, J. N., and
Nenes, A.: Aerosol hygroscopicity and CCN activation kinetics in a boreal
forest environment during the 2007 EUCAARI campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11,
12369–12386, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12369-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-12369-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Chan, M. N., Kreidenweis, S. M., and Chan, C. K.: Measurements of the
hygroscopic and deliquescence properties of organic compounds of different
solubilities in water and their relationship with cloud condensation nuclei
activities, Environ. Sci. Technol., 42, 3602–3608, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Chang, R. Y.-W., Slowik, J. G., Shantz, N. C., Vlasenko, A., Liggio, J.,
Sjostedt, S. J., Leaitch, W. R., and Abbatt, J. P. D.: The hygroscopicity
parameter (<i>κ</i>) of ambient organic aerosol at a field site subject to
biogenic and anthropogenic influences: relationship to degree of aerosol
oxidation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 5047–5064,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-5047-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-5047-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Cheung, H., Yeung, M., Li, Y., Lee, B., and Chan, C.: Relative Humidity-Dependent
HTDMA Measurements of Ambient Aerosols at the HKUST Supersite in Hong Kong,
China, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 49, 643–654, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1058482" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1058482</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>DeCarlo, P. F., Slowik, J. G., Worsnop, D. R., Davidovits, P., and Jimenez,
J. L.: Particle Morphology and Density Characterization by Combined Mobility
and Aerodynamic Diameter Measurements. Part 1: Theory, Aerosol Sci. Technol.,
38, 1206–1222, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>DeCarlo, P. F., Kimmel, J. R., Achim, T., Northway, M. J., Jayne, J. T.,
Aiken, A. C., Marc, G., Katrin, F., Thomas, H., and Docherty, K. S.:
Field-deployable, high-resolution, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer,
Anal. Chem., 78, 8281–8289, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Deng, Z. Z., Zhao, C. S., Ma, N., Liu, P. F., Ran, L., Xu, W. Y., Chen, J.,
Liang, Z., Liang, S., Huang, M. Y., Ma, X. C., Zhang, Q., Quan, J. N., Yan,
P., Henning, S., Mildenberger, K., Sommerhage, E., Schäfer, M., Stratmann,
F., and Wiedensohler, A.: Size-resolved and bulk activation properties of
aerosols in the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3835–3846,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3835-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3835-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Engelhart, G. J., Asa-Awuku, A., Nenes, A., and Pandis, S. N.: CCN activity
and droplet growth kinetics of fresh and aged monoterpene secondary organic
aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 3937–3949,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-3937-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-3937-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Farmer, D. K., Cappa, C. D., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Atmospheric Processes
and Their Controlling Influence on Cloud Condensation Nuclei Activity, Chem.
Rev., 115, 4199–4217, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/cr5006292" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/cr5006292</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Good, N., Topping, D. O., Allan, J. D., Flynn, M., Fuentes, E., Irwin, M.,
Williams, P. I., Coe, H., and McFiggans, G.: Consistency between
parameterisations of aerosol hygroscopicity and CCN activity during the
RHaMBLe discovery cruise, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3189–3203,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3189-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3189-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Gysel, M., Crosier, J., Topping, D. O., Whitehead, J. D., Bower, K. N.,
Cubison, M. J., Williams, P. I., Flynn, M. J., McFiggans, G. B., and Coe, H.:
Closure study between chemical composition and hygroscopic growth of aerosol
particles during TORCH2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 6131–6144,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-6131-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-6131-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Gysel, M., McFiggans, G. B., and Coe, H.: Inversion of tandem differential
mobility analyser (TDMA) measurements, J. Aerosol Sci., 40, 134–151, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hansen, A. M. K., Hong, J., Raatikainen, T., Kristensen, K., Ylisirniö, A.,
Virtanen, A., Petäjä, T., Glasius, M., and Prisle, N. L.: Hygroscopic
properties and cloud condensation nuclei activation of limonene-derived
organosulfates and their mixtures with ammonium sulfate, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
15, 14071–14089, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-14071-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-14071-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hong, J., Häkkinen, S. A. K., Paramonov, M., äijälä, M., Hakala, J.,
Nieminen, T., Mikkilä, J., Prisle, N. L., Kulmala, M., Riipinen, I., Bilde,
M., Kerminen, V.-M., and Petäjä, T.: Hygroscopicity, CCN and volatility
properties of submicron atmospheric aerosol in a boreal forest environment
during the summer of 2010, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4733–4748,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4733-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4733-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Itahashi, S., Yumimoto, K., Uno, I., Hayami, H., Fujita, S.-I., Pan, Y., and
Wang, Y.: A 15-year record (2001–2015) of the ratio of nitrate to
non-sea-salt sulfate in precipitation over East Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18,
2835–2852, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2835-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2835-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Jiang, R., Tan, H., Tang, L., Cai, M., Yin, Y., Li, F., Liu, L., Xu, H.,
Chan, P. W., and Deng, X.: Comparison of aerosol hygroscopicity and mixing
state between winter and summer seasons in Pearl River Delta region, China,
Atmos. Res., 169, 160–170, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Jimenez, J. L., Jayne, J. T., Shi, Q., Kolb, C. E., Worsnop, D. R.,
Yourshaw, I., Seinfeld, J. H., Flagan, R. C., Zhang, X., and Smith, K. A.:
Ambient aerosol sampling using the aerodyne aerosol mass spectrometer, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 8425–8438, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001213" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001213</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Kammermann, L., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., Herich, H., Cziczo, D. J.,
Holst, T., Svenningsson, B., Arneth, A., and Baltensperger, U.: Subarctic
atmospheric aerosol composition: 3. Measured and modeled properties of cloud
condensation nuclei, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, D04202,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012447" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012447</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets,
T. Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, 1936.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Lambe, A. T., Onasch, T. B., Massoli, P., Croasdale, D. R., Wright, J. P.,
Ahern, A. T., Williams, L. R., Worsnop, D. R., Brune, W. H., and Davidovits,
P.: Laboratory studies of the chemical composition and cloud condensation
nuclei (CCN) activity of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) and oxidized primary
organic aerosol (OPOA), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 8913–8928,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-8913-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-8913-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Lance, S., Raatikainen, T., Onasch, T. B., Worsnop, D. R., Yu, X.-Y.,
Alexander, M. L., Stolzenburg, M. R., McMurry, P. H., Smith, J. N., and
Nenes, A.: Aerosol mixing state, hygroscopic growth and cloud activation
efficiency during MIRAGE 2006, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 5049–5062,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5049-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-5049-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Lee, B. P., Li, Y. J., Yu, J. Z., Louie, P. K., and Chan, C. K.: Physical
and chemical characterization of ambient aerosol by HR-ToF-AMS at a suburban
site in Hong Kong during springtime 2011, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118,
8625–8639, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, H. J., Zhao, C. S., Nekat, B., Ma, N., Wiedensohler, A., van Pinxteren,
D., Spindler, G., Müller, K., and Herrmann, H.: Aerosol hygroscopicity
derived from size-segregated chemical composition and its parameterization in
the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 2525–2539,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-2525-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-2525-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, P. F., Zhao, C. S., Göbel, T., Hallbauer, E., Nowak, A., Ran, L., Xu, W.
Y., Deng, Z. Z., Ma, N., Mildenberger, K., Henning, S., Stratmann, F., and
Wiedensohler, A.: Hygroscopic properties of aerosol particles at high
relative humidity and their diurnal variations in the North China Plain,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 3479–3494, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3479-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-3479-2011</a>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Massoli, P., Lambe, A., Ahern, A., Williams, L., Ehn, M., Mikkilä, J.,
Canagaratna, M., Brune, W., Onasch, T., and Jayne, J.: Relationship between
aerosol oxidation level and hygroscopic properties of laboratory generated
secondary organic aerosol (SOA) particles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L24801,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045258" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045258</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Mei, F., Setyan, A., Zhang, Q., and Wang, J.: CCN activity of organic
aerosols observed downwind of urban emissions during CARES, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 13, 12155–12169, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-12155-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-12155-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Meng, J. W., Yeung, M. C., Li, Y. J., Lee, B. Y. L., and Chan, C. K.:
Size-resolved cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) activity and closure analysis
at the HKUST Supersite in Hong Kong, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 10267–10282,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10267-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10267-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Mochida, M., Nishita-Hara, C., Kitamori, Y., Aggarwal, S. G., Kawamura, K.,
Miura, K., and Takami, A.: Size-segregated measurements of cloud condensation
nucleus activity and hygroscopic growth for aerosols at Cape Hedo, Japan, in
spring 2008, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, D21207, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013216" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013216</a>,
2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Moore, R., Ingall, E., Sorooshian, A., and Nenes, A.: Molar mass, surface
tension, and droplet growth kinetics of marine organics from measurements of
CCN activity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L07801,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033350" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL033350</a>,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Moore, R., Nenes, A., and Medina, J.: Scanning Mobility CCN Analysis – A
Method for Fast Measurements of Size-Resolved CCN Distributions and
Activation Kinetics, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 44, 861–871, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Moore, R., Cerully, K., Bahreini, R., Brock, C., Middlebrook, A., and Nenes,
A.: Hygroscopicity and composition of California CCN during summer 2010, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00V12, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017352" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017352</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Moore, R. H., Bahreini, R., Brock, C. A., Froyd, K. D., Cozic, J., Holloway,
J. S., Middlebrook, A. M., Murphy, D. M., and Nenes, A.: Hygroscopicity and
composition of Alaskan Arctic CCN during April 2008, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11,
11807–11825, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11807-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11807-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Ovadnevaite, J., Zuend, A., Laaksonen, A., Sanchez, K. J., Roberts, G.,
Ceburnis, D., Decesari, S., Rinaldi, M., Hodas, N., Facchini, M. C.,
Seinfeld, J. H., and O'Dowd, C.: Surface tension prevails over solute effect
in organic-influenced cloud droplet activation, Nature, 546, 637–641, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Pajunoja, A., Lambe, A. T., Hakala, J., Rastak, N., Cummings, M. J., Brogan,
J. F., Hao, L., Paramonov, M., Hong, J., and Prisle, N. L.: Adsorptive uptake
of water by semisolid secondary organic aerosols, Geophys. Res. Lett. 42,
3063–3068, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Petters, M. D. and Kreidenweis, S. M.: A single parameter representation of
hygroscopic growth and cloud condensation nucleus activity, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 7, 1961–1971, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1961-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1961-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Petters, M. D. and Kreidenweis, S. M.: A single parameter representation of
hygroscopic growth and cloud condensation nucleus activity – Part 3:
Including surfactant partitioning, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1081–1091,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1081-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1081-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Petters, M. D., Wex, H., Carrico, C. M., Hallbauer, E., Massling, A.,
McMeeking, G. R., Poulain, L., Wu, Z., Kreidenweis, S. M., and Stratmann, F.:
Towards closing the gap between hygroscopic growth and activation for
secondary organic aerosol – Part 2: Theoretical approaches, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 9, 3999–4009, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3999-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-3999-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Qin, Y. M., Tan, H. B., Li, Y. J., Schurman, M. I., Li, F., Canonaco, F.,
Prévôt, A. S. H., and Chan, C. K.: Impacts of traffic emissions on
atmospheric particulate nitrate and organics at a downwind site on the
periphery of Guangzhou, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 10245–10258,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10245-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10245-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Rose, D., Gunthe, S. S., Mikhailov, E., Frank, G. P., Dusek, U., Andreae, M.
O., and Pöschl, U.: Calibration and measurement uncertainties of a
continuous-flow cloud condensation nuclei counter (DMT-CCNC): CCN activation
of ammonium sulfate and sodium chloride aerosol particles in theory and
experiment, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1153–1179,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1153-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1153-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Rose, D., Nowak, A., Achtert, P., Wiedensohler, A., Hu, M., Shao, M., Zhang,
Y., Andreae, M. O., and Pöschl, U.: Cloud condensation nuclei in polluted air
and biomass burning smoke near the mega-city Guangzhou, China – Part 1:
Size-resolved measurements and implications for the modeling of aerosol
particle hygroscopicity and CCN activity, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3365–3383,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3365-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3365-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Sánchez Gácita, M., Longo, K. M., Freire, J. L. M., Freitas, S. R., and
Martin, S. T.: Impact of mixing state and hygroscopicity on CCN activity of
biomass burning aerosol in Amazonia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 2373–2392,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-2373-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-2373-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Salma, I., Ocskay, R., Varga, I., and Maenhaut, W.: Surface tension of
atmospheric humic-like substances in connection with relaxation, dilution,
and solution pH, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D23205, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD007015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD007015</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Schurman, M. I., Kim, J. Y., Cheung, H. H. Y., and Chan, C. K.: Atmospheric
particle composition-hygroscopic growth measurements using an in-series
hybrid tandem differential mobility analyzer and aerosol mass spectrometer,
Aerosol Sci. Tech., 51, 694–703, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Seinfeld, J. H. and  Pandis, S. N.:
Atmospheric chemistry and physics-from air pollution to climate change, Wiley Interscience,
2nd Edn., 1232 pp., 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Sjogren, S., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., Alfarra, M. R., Duplissy, J., Cozic,
J., Crosier, J., Coe, H., and Baltensperger, U.: Hygroscopicity of the
submicrometer aerosol at the high-alpine site Jungfraujoch, 3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.,
Switzerland, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 5715–5729,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-5715-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-5715-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Sorjamaa, R., Svenningsson, B., Raatikainen, T., Henning, S., Bilde, M., and
Laaksonen, A.: The role of surfactants in Köhler theory reconsidered,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 4, 2107–2117, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-4-2107-2004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-4-2107-2004</a>,
2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Stocker, D. Q.: Climate change 2013: The physical science basis, Working
Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, Summary for Policymakers, IPCC, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Stokes, R.  and Robinson, R.: Interactions in aqueous nonelectrolyte
solutions. I. Solute-solvent equilibria, J. Phys. Chem., 70, 2126–2131,
1966.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Stolzenburg, M. R. and McMurry, P. H.: Equations Governing Single and
Tandem DMA Configurations and a New Lognormal Approximation to the Transfer
Function, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 42, 421–432, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Tan, H., Xu, H., Wan, Q., Li, F., Deng, X., Chan, P. W., Xia, D., and Yin,
Y.: Design and Application of an Unattended Multifunctional H-TDMA System, J.
Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 1136–1148, 2013a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Tan, H., Yin, Y., Gu, X., Li, F., Chan, P. W., Xu, H., Deng, X., and Wan,
Q.: An observational study of the hygroscopic properties of aerosols over the
Pearl River Delta region, Atmos. Environ., 77, 817–826, 2013b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Tan, H., Yin, Y., Li, F., Liu, X., Chan, P. W., Deng, T., Deng, X., Wan, Q.
and Wu, D.: Measurements of particle number size distributions and new
particle formation events during winter in the pearl river delta region,
China, J. Trop. Meteorol., 22, 191–199, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Topping, D. O., McFiggans, G. B., and Coe, H.: A curved multi-component
aerosol hygroscopicity model framework: Part 1 – Inorganic compounds, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 5, 1205–1222, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1205-2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1205-2005</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Tritscher, T., Dommen, J., DeCarlo, P. F., Gysel, M., Barmet, P. B., Praplan,
A. P., Weingartner, E., Prévôt, A. S. H., Riipinen, I., Donahue, N. M.,
and Baltensperger, U.: Volatility and hygroscopicity of aging secondary
organic aerosol in a smog chamber, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11477–11496,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11477-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11477-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Väisänen, O., Ruuskanen, A., Ylisirniö, A., Miettinen, P., Portin, H.,
Hao, L., Leskinen, A., Komppula, M., Romakkaniemi, S., Lehtinen, K. E. J.,
and Virtanen, A.: In-cloud measurements highlight the role of aerosol
hygroscopicity in cloud droplet formation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16,
10385–10398, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10385-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-10385-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, J., Cubison, M. J., Aiken, A. C., Jimenez, J. L., and Collins, D. R.:
The importance of aerosol mixing state and size-resolved composition on CCN
concentration and the variation of the importance with atmospheric aging of
aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7267–7283,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7267-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7267-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Z., Cheng, Y., Ma, N., Mikhailov, E., Pöschl, U., and Su, H.:
Dependence of the hygroscopicity parameter <i>κ</i> on particle size, humidity
and solute concentration: implications for laboratory experiments, field
measurements and model studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2017-253" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2017-253</a>, in review, 2017.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, Z. J., Poulain, L., Henning, S., Dieckmann, K., Birmili, W., Merkel, M.,
van Pinxteren, D., Spindler, G., Müller, K., Stratmann, F., Herrmann, H.,
and Wiedensohler, A.: Relating particle hygroscopicity and CCN activity to
chemical composition during the HCCT-2010 field campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
13, 7983–7996, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7983-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7983-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>Zdanovskii, A.: New methods for calculating solubilities of electrolytes in
multicomponent systems, Zhur. Fiz. Khim., 22, 1475–1485, 1948.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X. Y., Wang, J. Z., Wang, Y. Q., Liu, H. L., Sun, J. Y., and Zhang, Y.
M.: Changes in chemical components of aerosol particles in different haze
regions in China from 2006 to 2013 and contribution of meteorological
factors, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 12935–12952,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12935-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12935-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>Zhao, D. F., Buchholz, A., Kortner, B., Schlag, P., Rubach, F.,
Kiendler-Scharr, A., Tillmann, R., Wahner, A., Flores, J. M., Rudich, Y.,
Watne, Å. K., Hallquist, M., Wildt, J., and Mentel, Th. F.:
Size-dependent hygroscopicity parameter (<i>κ</i>) and chemical composition
of secondary organic cloud condensation nuclei, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42,
10920–10928, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
