<?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">
  <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-19-3833-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Cloud droplet activation properties and scavenged fraction of black carbon
in liquid-phase clouds at the high-alpine research station Jungfraujoch
(3580 m a.s.l.)</article-title><alt-title>Droplet activation and scavenged fraction of black carbon in liquid clouds</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Droplet activation and scavenged fraction of black carbon in liquid clouds}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G. Motos et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Motos</surname><given-names>Ghislain</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Schmale</surname><given-names>Julia</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1048-7962</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Corbin</surname><given-names>Joel C.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2584-9137</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Modini</surname><given-names>Rob. L.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2982-1369</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Karlen</surname><given-names>Nadine</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Bertò</surname><given-names>Michele</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9182-6427</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Baltensperger</surname><given-names>Urs</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0079-8713</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Gysel-Beer</surname><given-names>Martin</given-names></name>
          <email>martin.gysel@psi.ch</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7453-1264</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Laboratory of Atmospheric Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5232
Villigen PSI, Switzerland</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>a</label><institution>now at: Metrology Research Centre, National Research Council
Canada, 1200 Montreal Road,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R6, Canada</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>b</label><institution>now at: Institute for Sensors and Electronics, University of Applied
Sciences (FHNW), Windisch, Switzerland</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Martin Gysel-Beer (martin.gysel@psi.ch)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>25</day><month>March</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>19</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>3833</fpage><lpage>3855</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>2</day><month>October</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>7</day><month>November</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>22</day><month>February</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>6</day><month>March</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2019 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2019</copyright-year>
      <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/.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e159">Liquid clouds form by condensation of water vapour on aerosol particles in
the atmosphere. Even black carbon (BC) particles, which are known to be
slightly hygroscopic, have been shown to readily form cloud droplets once they
have acquired water-soluble coatings by atmospheric aging processes.
Accurately simulating the life cycle of BC in the atmosphere, which strongly
depends on the wet removal following droplet activation, has recently been
identified as a key element for accurate prediction of the climate forcing of
BC.</p>
    <p id="d1e162">Here, to assess BC activation in detail, we performed in situ measurements
during cloud events at the Jungfraujoch high-altitude station in Switzerland
in summer 2010 and 2016. Cloud droplet residual and interstitial
(unactivated) particles as well as the total aerosol were selectively sampled
using different inlets, followed by their physical characterization using
scanning mobility particle sizers (SMPSs), multi-angle absorption photometers
(MAAPs) and a single-particle soot photometer (SP2). By calculating cloud
droplet activated fractions with these measurements, we determined the roles
of various parameters on the droplet activation of BC. The half-rise
threshold diameter for droplet activation
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), i.e. the size above which aerosol
particles formed cloud droplets, was inferred from the aerosol size
distributions measured behind the different inlets. The effective peak
supersaturation (SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) of a cloud was derived from
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by comparing it to the supersaturation
dependence of the threshold diameter for cloud condensation nuclei (CCN)
activation measured by a CCN counter (CCNC). In this way, we showed that the
mass-based scavenged fraction of BC strongly correlates with that of the
entire aerosol population because SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> modulates the critical
size for activation of either particle type. A total of 50 % of the
BC-containing particles with a BC mass equivalent core diameter of 90 nm
was activated in clouds with SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.21</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %,
increasing up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % activated fraction at
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. On a single-particle basis, BC
activation at a certain SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is controlled by the BC core size
and internally mixed coating, which increases overall particle size and
hygroscopicity. However, the resulting effect on the population averaged and
on the size-integrated BC scavenged fraction by mass is small for two
reasons: first, acquisition of coatings only matters for small cores in
clouds with low SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>; and, second, variations in BC core size
distribution and mean coating thickness are limited in the lower free
troposphere in summer.</p>
    <p id="d1e266">Finally, we tested the ability of a simplified theoretical model, which
combines the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory with the Zdanovskii–Stokes–Robinson
(ZSR) mixing rule under the assumptions of spherical core–shell particle
geometry and surface tension of pure water, to predict the droplet activation
behaviour of BC-containing particles in real clouds. Predictions of BC
activation constrained with SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and measured BC-containing
particle size and mixing state were compared with direct cloud observations.
These predictions achieved closure with the measurements for the particle
size ranges accessible to our instrumentation, that is, BC core diameters<?pagebreak page3834?> and
total particle diameters of approximately 50 and 180 nm, respectively. This
clearly indicates that such simplified theoretical models provide a
sufficient description of BC activation in clouds, as previously shown for
activation occurring in fog at lower supersaturation and also shown in
laboratory experiments under controlled conditions. This further justifies
application of such simplified theoretical approaches in regional and global
simulations of BC activation in clouds, which include aerosol modules that
explicitly simulate BC-containing particle size and mixing state.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e292">Natural and anthropogenic atmospheric aerosol particles cause a global
cooling of the Earth's surface, partially compensating for the warming caused by
greenhouse gases (Boucher et al., 2013). Black carbon (BC), formed when
fossil and biogenic fuels undergo incomplete combustion, is emitted by a
large range of anthropogenic and natural sources and has unique properties
leading to complex climate effects. BC is a strong light absorber, resulting
in a positive industrial-era forcing (warming) via aerosol–radiation
interactions (ari; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 90 % uncertainty range: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; Bond et al., 2013). BC can also activate to cloud
droplets but can cause evaporation of droplets by releasing heat due to
absorption of light; this also results in a positive industrial-era forcing
via aerosol–cloud interactions (aci; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 90 %
uncertainty range: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.47</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; Bond et al., 2013). With
aging, organic and inorganic matter can condense or coagulate to form a
coating surrounding BC cores. This transition from external to internal
mixing of BC results in two climate-relevant effects: firstly, the coating
modifies the particle absorption with effects that are still under debate.
Some studies reported an absorption enhancement assuming that the coating
focuses the solar radiation towards the BC core. This is known as the lensing
effect (e.g. Fuller et al., 1999; Bond et al., 2006). Other studies
hypothesized that the coatings block the radiation, resulting in a reduction
of the absorption by BC (e.g. Luo et al., 2018). Secondly, it increases the
size and the hygroscopicity of the BC-containing particle, decreasing its
critical supersaturation, i.e. the minimum supersaturation required for a
particle to activate to a droplet. This latter effect was shown for diesel
soot coated with secondary organic aerosol in a laboratory study by Tritscher
et al. (2011) and also for atmospheric BC mainly coated with organic
compounds (Kuwata et al., 2009). The overall climate forcing induced by the
coating acquisition of BC is still poorly understood because it entangles the
contributions of both aci and ari. The enhanced formation of cloud droplets
increases the lifetime and the brightness of clouds (Twomey, 1974). Likely
more important in most environments is that it reduces the lifetime of BC in
the atmosphere by favouring its wet removal (Moteki et al., 2012), thus
diminishing the time window available for absorption of solar radiation
(Stier et al., 2006; Boucher et al., 2016). Lund et al. (2017) performed
global model simulations testing the sensitivity of radiative forcing to the
assumed threshold amount of coating needed for a BC-containing particle to be
transferred from the unactivated to the activated mode. Varying this
threshold resulted in changes of up to 25 %–50 % in ari-induced
radiative forcing compared to the baseline simulation. Understanding and
quantifying the links between mixing state of BC and its activation behaviour
is therefore one of the main challenges that will help to assess the climate
impact of BC. Alongside a better knowledge of the preindustrial
concentrations of BC, the accurate simulation of the criteria required for
activation together with realistic timescales for coating acquisition will
help to reduce the uncertainties related to the radiative forcing of BC.</p>
      <p id="d1e404">Two main mechanisms can explain the incorporation of a particle into a
droplet: impaction scavenging, which involves collision and coalescence; and
nucleation scavenging, i.e. droplet activation occurring when supersaturation
of the air surrounding the particle exceeds its critical supersaturation.
Theoretical studies (e.g., Flossmann and Wobrock, 2010) and field work (Ohata
et al., 2016) have shown that the latter is predominant over the former, at
least for accumulation mode particles, and this applies also for BC. The
present study focuses on the parameters influencing the nucleation scavenging
process for BC.</p>
      <p id="d1e407">The Kelvin effect describes the influence of particle size on its critical
supersaturation for activation as a water droplet: a large particle has a
lower critical supersaturation than a smaller one with identical chemical
composition. Henning et al. (2002) used in situ cloud measurements at the
Jungfraujoch, a high-altitude site at 3580 m a.s.l. in central Switzerland,
to show that the dry particle diameter is indeed the main parameter
determining whether a particle activates to a droplet upon cloud formation.
The threshold diameter at the Jungfraujoch is typically around 90 nm (Hoyle
et al., 2016).</p>
      <?pagebreak page3835?><p id="d1e410">Raoult's law describes the influence of the chemical composition of an
aqueous solution on water activity. The Köhler theory combines the Kelvin
effect and Raoult's law, thereby relating particle dry size, particle
composition and critical supersaturation to each other. Since many cloud condensation nuclei
(CCN) closure studies confirmed the applicability of the Köhler theory to
predict CCN activation of laboratory-generated and ambient aerosols (e.g.
Snider et al., 2003; Bougiatioti et al., 2009), Hammer et al. (2014a)
proposed a method to infer the effective peak supersaturation
(SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) of a cloud from the droplet activation cut-off diameter
observed in that cloud. In this context, SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is to be
interpreted as “the maximum supersaturation encountered by a particle for a
sufficiently long time that it grows into a stable droplet”. We make use of
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> observations to investigate the supersaturation-dependent
scavenging of BC in clouds in this study.</p>
      <p id="d1e441">BC is an insoluble solid; thus no reduction of water activity through
Raoult's law occurs, resulting in high critical supersaturation for CCN
activation at a given dry particle size (or high critical diameter for CCN
activation at a given supersaturation). However, a water-soluble coating
around a BC core makes it a better CCN for the size and hygroscopicity
reasons explained above. Highly aged atmospheric BC has been shown to be
scavenged to the same extent as the total aerosol in clouds at the
Jungfraujoch (Cozic et al., 2007). However, which factors control the
fraction of BC mass that activates to cloud droplets is a question that still
needs to be addressed. Recently, field studies focusing on size-resolved
analyses of the droplet activation behaviour of BC have tried to quantify the
influence of mixing state and chemical composition on nucleation scavenging.
Schroder et al. (2015) specified the minimum coating thicknesses required for
droplet activation of BC in two cloud events on the Californian coast and
related it to retrieved supersaturations. However, the coating thickness
calculation was heavily simplified and represented a lower limit because of
technical issues, which did not allow for a comprehensive description of the
conditions required for activation. Roth et al. (2016) applied
single-particle mass spectrometry to interstitial and cloud droplet residual
particles sampled at a mountain site in central Germany (peak Schmücke;
905 m a.s.l.) to show that internally mixed inorganic salts made BC
particles act as nuclei for cloud droplet formation. Zhang et al. (2017)
confirmed the ability of coated BC to activate to droplets at a mountain site
in southern China (1690 m a.s.l.) and found that high fractions of sulfate
in the coatings facilitated activation compared to organic coatings, which
are less hygroscopic than sulfate. While these studies provide information on
parameters influencing the droplet activation of BC on a qualitative level,
the relative contribution of each of these parameters to droplet activation
remains to be elucidated more quantitatively. Moreover, there is a need for a
direct assessment of the level of complexity that is required in the
description of these parameters in order to predict droplet activation of BC
and realistically simulate it in climate models.</p>
      <p id="d1e444">Comparing the theoretically calculated critical supersaturation of particles
that do or do not form droplets at a certain supersaturation offers the
opportunity to assess the predictability of the droplet activation of BC.
Such an approach was conducted in a laboratory study by Dalirian et
al. (2018), who coated BC particles with known amounts of identified organic
species and showed that they could accurately predict the CCN activity of the
mixed particles. Matsui (2016) and Matsui et al. (2013) utilized the
Köhler theory considering the size and mixing state of BC-containing
particles in modelling studies to show an improved simulation of BC
concentrations over East Asia compared to simulations in which the mixing
state was not resolved and to observations from field measurements. However,
it remains to be shown that BC activation in atmospheric clouds indeed obeys
such theoretical predictions.</p>
      <p id="d1e447">In this study, we selectively sampled and characterized interstitial
(unactivated) particles, cloud droplet residual particles and the total
aerosol (sum of interstitial plus droplet residual particles) at the
high-alpine research station Jungfraujoch. Firstly, we used this approach to
determine the relationship between the scavenged fraction of total BC mass
and SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Secondly, we compared the observed cloud droplet
activation of individual BC-containing particles with the theoretically
predicted behaviour, with the latter being constrained with single-particle
measurements of particle size and mixing state. We could show, to our
knowledge for the first time for ambient cloud droplet activation of BC, that
simplified <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory (Petters and Kreidenweis, 2007)
combined with the Zdanovskii–Stokes–Robinson (ZSR; Stokes and Robinson, 1966)
mixing rule and assumption of a spherical core–shell morphology adequately
describes the nucleation scavenging threshold of BC.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Measurement site</title>
      <p id="d1e477">A field campaign was conducted at the high-alpine research station
Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l. in central Switzerland) from 12 June to
6 August 2016. Additional results are included from measurements conducted
during the Cloud and Aerosol Characterization Experiment 2010 (CLACE2010)
campaign at the same site during the same period of the year (19 June 2010 to
17 August 2010). The exact same instruments were used during both campaigns.
Over the last 20 years, the Sphinx laboratory at the Jungfraujoch has hosted
numerous field experiments on aerosol-related research (Bukowiecki et al.,
2016), specifically addressing aerosol–cloud interactions during CLACE
campaigns (e.g. Sjogren et al., 2008; Zieger et al., 2012), new particle
formation (e.g. Bianchi et al., 2016; Tröstl et al., 2016), and
continuous characterization of aerosol properties and trends (Collaud Coen et
al., 2013). In 1995, the aerosol monitoring became part of the Global
Atmosphere Watch (GAW) programme of the World Meteorological Organization
(WMO). Further environmental research comprises for example a thorough study of the
aerology and air mass dynamics around this site (e.g. Poltera et al., 2017),
which is important to understand aerosol transport phenomena.</p>
      <p id="d1e480">The Jungfraujoch is located on a mountain pass oriented in the direction
southwest–northeast between the Jungfrau (4158 m a.s.l) and Mönch
(4107 m a.s.l.) peaks. Owing to this, two main wind directions are observed
from the southeast and the northwest. The relative proximity of the
Jungfraujoch to lower-altitude pollution sources as well as its presence
within clouds about 40 % of the time (Baltensperger et al., 1997) makes
it an appropriate site to study<?pagebreak page3836?> black-carbon–cloud interactions. According to
Herrmann et al. (2015), free tropospheric (FT) conditions prevail for
39 % of the time at the Jungfraujoch but only around 20 % in summer.
Pollution injections from the planetary boundary layer (PBL) increase the
number concentration of particles larger than 90 nm from typical levels
under FT conditions of around 40 up to 1000 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" 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>; these injections are
the dominant source of CCN at the Jungfraujoch in summer, when mostly liquid
clouds form (mixed-phase clouds can occur in the case of low temperatures).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Inlets and instruments</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Inlets</title>
      <p id="d1e506">Aerosols were sampled through three different inlets during the whole
campaign (Fig. 1): a total inlet, an interstitial inlet and a pumped
counterflow virtual impactor (PCVI). We used stainless steel lines and short
sections of electrically conductive tubing close to the instruments. The
total inlet sampled interstitial (unactivated) particles, cloud droplets and
ice crystals when mixed-phase clouds were present. This inlet was designed
for sampling droplets with diameters up to 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m at wind speeds of
up to 20 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" 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> (Weingartner et al., 1999) and is also used for
continuous GAW aerosol monitoring. It was heated to around 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C to
decrease the relative humidity in the lines below 20 %. The interstitial
inlet consisted of an aerodynamic size discriminator (Very Sharp Cut Cyclone,
BGI, Butler, NJ, USA; described in Kenny et al., 2000) to sample unactivated
aerosol with a flow rate of 16.7 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" 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>. Laboratory tests prior to
the campaign indicated that variations of the flow rate by 1 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" 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>
had little influence on the cut-off, which varied between 2.2 and
2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. In order to characterize the different line losses between
the interstitial and the total inlet, their corresponding number size
distributions were compared during clear-sky conditions, for which they
should be identical in the submicron size range. The PCVI (Brechtel, Hayward,
CA, USA) samples cloud droplets and ice crystals in the case of mixed-phase
clouds and provides the dry residual particles to the aerosol instruments.
Detailed information about the PCVI can be found in Boulter et al. (2006) and
<?xmltex \hack{\mbox\bgroup}?>Kulkarni<?xmltex \hack{\egroup}?> et al. (2011). All three inlets were located on the roof of the
laboratory, connected to the instruments via 3 to 4 m long vertical lines.
The redundancy of aerosol sampling by the three inlets allowed us to verify
that very similar results were obtained for droplet activation behaviour by
comparing concentrations and particle number size distributions of the
interstitial aerosol with the total aerosol, or cloud droplet residues with
the total aerosol (Sect. 3.7).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e577">Instrumental set-up. Green rectangles indicate inlets and black
rectangles indicate instruments. Acronyms: PCVI, pumped counterflow virtual
impactor; CPC, condensation particle counter; MAAP, multi-angle absorption
photometer; SMPS, scanning mobility particle sizer; SP2, single-particle soot
photometer; CCNC, cloud condensation nuclei counter. Drying of the sample air occurs
through the temperature increase from outdoor to indoor.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f01.png"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>BC instruments</title>
      <p id="d1e594">Measurements of the refractory BC (rBC) mass and optical sizing of BC-free
and BC-containing particles were done by a single-particle soot photometer
(SP2, upgraded to eight-channel revision C version, Droplet Measurement
Technologies, Longmont, CO, USA). The SP2 detects incandescent and scattered
light from particles passing through a high-intensity intra-cavity Nd:YAG
laser (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1064</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm). This was the only instrument switching
(automatically) between all three inlets. The SP2 provides, within its
detection limits, the number size distributions and concentrations of both
BC-containing and BC-free particles as well as the mass size distributions
and concentrations of BC-containing particles only. Here we emphasize that
“BC-free” and “BC-containing” particles are operational definitions based
on whether the SP2 detects an incandescence signal or not. Accordingly, a
subset of the particles classified as “BC-free” may still contain a tiny BC
core with an rBC mass equivalent diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rBC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) smaller than
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm. The rBC mass is inferred from the laser-induced incandescence
signal empirically calibrated with fullerene soot, and the optical diameter is
inferred from the scattering signal calibrated with spherical polystyrene
latex size standards, as described in Laborde et al. (2012b). Moreover, the
thickness of the coating surrounding the BC core was retrieved under the
assumption of spherical core–shell morphology by subtracting the rBC core
mass equivalent diameter from the total particle optical diameter on a
single-particle basis. BC-free particles do not evaporate while crossing the laser
beam, making optical sizing straightforward. By contrast, BC-containing
particles evaporate, which results in a perturbed scattering signal. The
total particle optical diameters of BC-containing particles were thus
determined by the leading-edge-only fit (LEO-fit) method (Gao et al., 2007;
Laborde et al., 2012a). Briefly, the leading edge of the scattering signal
remains unperturbed, which makes it possible to reconstruct the unperturbed
maximum scattering amplitude with additional information provided by a
position-sensitive split scattering detector. The reconstructed scattering
amplitude is then used to infer the total particle optical diameter, for
particles larger than around 180 nm only. Here we define the leading edge to
be the part of the signal with an intensity less than 3 % of the maximum
signal intensity. A refractive index of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.50</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.60</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for CLACE2010
data) was chosen to convert the scattering cross-section measurements of
BC-free particles to optical diameters, which brought the SP2- and scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS)-derived
size distributions in agreement in the overlapping size range (the
optical sizing is only weakly sensitive to the choice of refractive index as
shown by Taylor et al., 2015). For BC-containing particles, the same
refractive index was used for the coatings, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.00</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.00</mml:mn><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.26</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.26</mml:mn><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
for CLACE2010 data) was chosen for the BC cores. This choice resulted in
agreement between the optical diameters of the bare BC cores measured<?pagebreak page3837?> just
before incandescence onset and the corresponding rBC mass equivalent
diameters.</p>
      <p id="d1e687">A second, qualitative method for BC mixing state analysis classifies the
BC-containing particles into two classes: one exclusively for “thickly”
coated BC and the other including all remaining degrees of coating thickness
from “none” through “thin” to “moderate”. This “delay time” method,
described in Schwarz et al. (2006), is based on the measurement of the time
difference between the scattering signal peak and the incandescence signal
peak of a particle. Delay time histograms were characterized by two distinct
modes corresponding to the two above-mentioned classes. The measurements of
BC core mass equivalent diameter and coating thickness are based on the
assumption of a spherical core and a concentric coating surrounding the core.</p>
      <p id="d1e690">The incandescence and scattering detectors of the SP2 were calibrated three
times during the CLACE2016 campaign: on 3 June, 17 July and 3 August 2016. A
fourth calibration of the scattering detector took place on 1 July. The BC
counting efficiency of the SP2 was checked against a CPC at the beginning and
the end of the campaign. On 11 July, the YAG crystal had to be changed; this
caused an interruption in the SP2 operation until 17 July. After that date,
the SP2 was switched on only during cloud events to preserve laser power.
During the CLACE2010 campaign, the scattering detector was calibrated four
times: on 16 and 27 January, 8 February and 3 March. The incandescence
detector was calibrated on 27 January.</p>
      <p id="d1e693">Multi-angle absorption photometers (MAAPs, model 5012, Thermo Fisher
Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) were installed downstream of the total and
interstitial inlets (two MAAPs in total). This instrument determines the
aerosol absorption coefficient at a wavelength of 637 nm by collecting
particles on a fibre filter and measuring the transmission and back
scattering of laser light at multiple angles (Petzold and Schönlinner,
2004). The firmware output at 1 min time resolution of the equivalent black
carbon (eBC) mass concentration was used, which is calculated from the
measured absorption coefficient using a mass absorption cross-section (MAC)
value of 6.6 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> g<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" 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 agreement between the two MAAPs was
checked during out-of-cloud conditions and discrepancies were less than
5 % throughout the whole campaign.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS3">
  <title>Particle number concentration and size distribution</title>
      <p id="d1e723">One condensation particle counter (CPC, TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN, USA) was
installed downstream of each inlet in order to measure the particle number
concentration. Three different CPC models were used: model 3010 for<?pagebreak page3838?> the
interstitial inlet (with a 50 % detection efficiency reached at 10 nm),
model 3022 for the PCVI (7 nm) and model 3025 for the total inlet (3 nm). The quality
of total and interstitial CPC data was controlled by comparing them during
out-of-cloud conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e726">Two custom-built SMPS systems, each consisting of a differential mobility
analyser (Model 3081 Long DMA, TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN, USA) and a CPC (TSI model 3775 for the total inlet and 3022A for the interstitial inlet),
measured aerosol number size distributions at a time resolution of 6 min.
The measured mobility diameters ranged from 22 to 604 nm. One SMPS
was placed downstream of the total inlet (it is used for the continuous GAW
measurements) while the other switched every 12 min (2 scans) between the
interstitial inlet and the PCVI. The sizing and counting efficiencies of both
SMPS systems were checked using 150 and 269 nm polystyrene latex spheres
(PSL) every 2 weeks during the campaign. Quality assurance further included
an intercomparison of all five CPCs at the beginning and at the end of the
campaign: their number concentration readings agreed within 10 %.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS4">
  <title>CCNC</title>
      <p id="d1e735">Cloud condensation nuclei number concentrations in polydisperse aerosol
samples were measured at four different supersaturations (0.35 %,
0.40 %, 0.50 % and 0.70 %; total measurement cycle of 225 min)
with a cloud condensation nuclei counter (DMT model CCN-100, Droplet
Measurement Technologies, Longmont, CO, USA; see details in Roberts and
Nenes, 2005). Calibrations of the cloud condensation nuclei counter (CCNC) took place on 10 June and
4 August 2016 and gave very similar results, with less than 5 %
difference between the supersaturation calibration curves. Concerning the
CLACE2010 campaign, the CCNC was calibrated on 16 June 2010.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS5">
  <title>Cloud microphysics and meteorological parameters</title>
      <p id="d1e745">In order to detect the presence of clouds and measure the liquid water
content (LWC), a particulate volume monitor (PVM-100, Gerber Scientific Inc.,
Reston, VA, USA; described in Gerber, 1991) was installed on the roof of the
laboratory, at the same height and around 3 m away from the inlets. The PVM
detects light scattered by the cloud droplets in forward direction at
multiple angles to infer the LWC. It was calibrated every week with a
calibration disk provided by the manufacturer.</p>
      <p id="d1e748">Measurements of air temperature 2 m above the ground, wind speed and
direction are continuously conducted at the Jungfraujoch and are part of the
SwissMetNet network of MeteoSwiss.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Theory and data analysis approaches</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Identification of cloud events and stable cloud periods</title>
      <p id="d1e764">The occurrence of in-cloud conditions during the campaign was determined with
the LWC measurements of the PVM. The criterion for defining a cloud event was
a minimum LWC of 0.1 g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" 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 at least 1 h. Cloud events
typically lasted 2 to 15 h. Very short periods (a few minutes) during the
cloud events, during which the LWC dropped below 0.1 g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" 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>, were
likely caused by entrainment of dry air near the edge of a cloud and were
excluded from the analysis. Cloud presence was independently confirmed based
on significant differences in the particle number concentrations measured
behind the total and interstitial inlets. In total, 24 cloud events were
sampled in 2016 (see Table S1).</p>
      <p id="d1e791">As discussed below, aerosol hygroscopicity and cloud peak supersaturation
often varied substantially over the full duration of a cloud event.
Therefore, stable periods within a cloud event were identified as periods
with limited variability in key aerosol and cloud parameters. Sometimes even
two distinct stable periods were identified in a single cloud event,
resulting in a total of 11 “stable cloud periods” from the CLACE2016
campaign which were chosen for further detailed analysis (see Table 1). The
analyses of three stable cloud periods extracted from the CLACE2010 campaign
are also shown. Combining both campaigns, these periods add up to a total
duration of 14.1 h.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e797">Parameters for all 14 stable cloud periods further analysed
in this study (3 from CLACE2010 where names are associated with an asterisk,
11 from CLACE2016). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
number concentration of potential CCN, i.e. particles with a mobility
diameter larger than 90 nm. The droplet number concentration is estimated
based on the difference between the particle number concentrations measured
behind the total and the interstitial inlets.  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
refers to the moving average the CCN-derived hygroscopicity parameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> time series (see Sect. 3.5). The 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
uncertainties are indicated by the symbol “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>”.
Values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">base</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the
temperatures that were used for calculating SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.75}[.75]?><oasis:tgroup cols="14">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <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:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="14" colname="col14" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Stable cloud</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Duration</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Median</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Median</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Median droplet</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Activation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">JFJ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">base</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(min)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">LWC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">concentration</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">plateau</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(–)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">(SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">(min/max)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">(min/max)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" 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="col4">(cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" 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="col5">(cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" 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="col6">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">(%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">16 June<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">100</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">100</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">33</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">Not calc. (0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">22 July<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">140</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">611</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">348</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">Not calc. (0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">28 July<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">120</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">149</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">190</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">46</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">38</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14">Not calc. (0)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">18–19 June</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">58.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.9</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">25 June</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">528</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">523</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">135.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">26–27a June</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">197</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">195</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">112.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">26–27b June</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">129</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">68.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">31</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5 July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">486</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">499</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">77.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">8–9 July</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">600</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">607</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">78.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2a August</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">38.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">37</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">42</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2b August</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">134</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">100</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">41.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4 August</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">779</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">474</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">125.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5–6a August</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">77.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">5–6b August</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">113</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">56.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col14"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Activated fraction, activation diameters and activation plateau</title>
      <p id="d1e2578">For in-cloud conditions, we define the size-dependent activated fraction,
AF(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), as the number fraction of particles with diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that
formed a cloud droplet. The activation spectrum is inferred from size
distribution measurements behind two different inlets. A first option is to
use the interstitial (int) and total inlets (tot), e.g. as done by Hammer et
al. (2014b):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M141" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">int</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">int</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          Here, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula> is the particle number
size distribution with respect to diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measured behind the inlet
type “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>”, where “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>” is a placeholder indicating the diameter type,
i.e. dry particle mobility diameter, dry particle optical diameter or BC core
mass equivalent diameter.</p>
      <?pagebreak page3839?><p id="d1e2756">Alternatively, the activation spectrum is inferred from the data measured
behind the PCVI inlet and the total inlet:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M146" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PCVI</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PCVI</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The activated fraction typically follows an S-shape curve, as seen in Figs. 2
and 3, starting with null activation at sufficiently small diameter and
reaching a plateau value at sufficiently large diameters. We define the
threshold dry diameter for activation to cloud droplets,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as the diameter at which the activated
fraction reaches half of the activated fraction at the plateau.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2850">Fraction of particles that activated to cloud droplets as a function
of particle dry diameter as derived from the measurements behind the total
and interstitial inlets for four example cloud events (averaged over the
complete stable period). SMPS-derived activated fractions are shown against
mobility diameter and include all particles, whereas SP2-derived data are
separately shown for BC-free and BC-containing particles, both against
optical diameter. BC-free particles are shown against optical diameter
determined with standard optical sizing and against optical diameter
determined using the LEO-fit approach in order to confirm consistency between
the two. Each panel shows a different cloud event. The vertical dashed line
marks the SMPS-derived half-rise threshold diameter for activation. Note that
these activation spectra are averaged over a duration of 36 to 54 min, which
may have resulted in a smearing of the activation transition if the cut-off
diameter varied slightly in time.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2862">Cloud droplet residual particle measurements using the PCVI inlet
for the example of the 4 August cloud event. <bold>(a)</bold> Particle number size
distributions measured behind the total and PCVI inlets and corresponding
activated fraction (Eq. 2). The corrections applied to the PCVI data are
illustrated with the blue shadings. <bold>(b)</bold> Comparison between
PCVI-derived and interstitial-derived activated particle fractions.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2877">We use the term “activated fraction” in the context of particle number,
whereas we use the term “scavenged fraction” when presenting mass fractions
of particulate matter incorporated into cloud droplets relative to the total
aerosol. Size-resolved activated fraction and scavenged fraction of BC are
identical in the special case of choosing the BC core mass equivalent
diameter for the diameter scale. However, activated fraction and scavenged
fraction integrated over a certain diameter range are not identical due to
the different size dependence of the weighting factor when integrating number
or mass.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{$\kappa$-K\"{o}hler theory}?><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory</title>
      <p id="d1e2893">The equilibrium size of an aerosol particle under subsaturated relative
humidity (RH) conditions and its activation threshold to a cloud droplet at
supersaturated RH conditions depend primarily on the particle dry diameter
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dry</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and chemical composition. The Köhler theory
(Köhler, 1936) describes equilibrium vapour pressure (RH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">eq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)
over a solution droplet by combining the Kelvin effect, capturing the
influence of size, and Raoult's law, capturing the influence of particle
composition. Parameterizing Raoult's law is complicated by nonideal
interactions between water and solutes and by the presence of both inorganic
and organic compounds in internally mixed particles. Petters and
Kreidenweis (2007) proposed the use of a single hygroscopicity parameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to describe Raoult' law, i.e. to describe the dependence of water
activity on solution concentration for a given particle composition. This
approach, commonly referred to as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory, allows the
equilibrium supersaturation over the solution to be expressed as a function
of droplet diameter, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">drop</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M154" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">eq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">drop</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>:</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RH</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">eq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">drop</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">drop</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dry</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">drop</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dry</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><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:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>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:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">drop</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" 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> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" 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 density and the molar mass
of water, respectively; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" 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 (hereafter assumed to be equal to the surface tension
of pure water); <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the universal gas constant; and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the absolute
temperature. From Eq. (3), it follows that SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">eq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> has a global
maximum at the droplet diameter above which the particle is considered to be
activated to a cloud droplet. Equation (3) further implies an unambiguous
relationship between the dry diameter of a particle, its hygroscopicity
parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and the maximum supersaturation. Knowing two of these
parameters makes it possible to infer the third one using Eq. (3) and
numerical approaches. For example, knowing the supersaturation and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
implies a critical dry diameter above which all particles activate to cloud
droplets.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Retrieval of the aerosol hygroscopicity parameter
$\kappa$}?><title>Retrieval of the aerosol hygroscopicity parameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></title>
      <p id="d1e3177">The combination of total CCN number concentration at a defined
supersaturation, measured by the CCNC in a polydisperse set-up, with total
particle number size distribution, measured by the SMPS, makes it possible to
infer the critical dry diameter of the ambient aerosol for the
supersaturation set in the CCNC (Kammermann et al., 2010b). This approach was
applied for the first time at the Jungfraujoch by Jurányi et al. (2011)
under the assumption that the aerosol is internally<?pagebreak page3840?> mixed. Specifically, the
particle number size distribution was integrated from the maximum diameter to
the diameter at which the integrated particle number concentration is equal
to the simultaneously measured CCN number concentration. The lower limit of
integration matching this condition corresponds to the critical dry diameter
for CCN activation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">crit</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CCN</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. As the CCNC was
repeatedly stepped through a sequence of four different supersaturations between
0.70 % and 0.35 %, this provided the relationship between
the supersaturation and corresponding critical dry diameter for CCN activation of
the ambient aerosol. This was converted to the corresponding relationship
between particle dry diameter and the hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
based on Eq. (3). Figure 4a and b show these relationships for two example
cloud periods. The data points are located along the dotted lines because
only two free parameters are left in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory for a
fixed supersaturation applied in the CCNC.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e3209">Hygroscopicity parameter as a function of the critical diameter
during the <bold>(a)</bold> 8–9 July and <bold>(b)</bold> 25 July cloud events.
Single dots are data points extracted from a 6 min SMPS scan and
simultaneous polydisperse CCNC measurement behind the total inlet. The thin
dashed lines indicate the theoretical relationships between hygroscopicity
and size for the supersaturation applied in the CCNC.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <title>Retrieval of cloud effective peak supersaturation</title>
      <p id="d1e3231">The activation of aerosol particles in an ambient cloud depends on the peak
supersaturation reached during cloud formation. We applied the method
introduced by Hammer et al. (2014a) to retrieve the effective peak
supersaturation (SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) of clouds observed at the Jungfraujoch.
Briefly, the half-rise threshold diameter for activation to cloud droplets
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) during a cloud event was inferred from
the SMPS particle number size distribution measurements behind the total and
interstitial inlets as explained in Sect. 3.2 and shown in Fig. 2. The
corresponding SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of a cloud was then retrieved by inputting
this <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the corresponding
CCNC-retrieved aerosol hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Sect. 3.4) into
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler equation (Eq. 3). In the present<?pagebreak page3841?> study, the
hygroscopicity parameter was, on average, found to be independent of particle
size (Fig. 6), while it varied in time (Fig. 5b). Therefore, we simply
considered the moving average, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (black open circles
in Fig. 5b), of the time-resolved <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values at different particle
sizes to be representative of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value at the diameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This is slightly different from the
approach chosen by Hammer et al. (2014a) and Motos et al. (2019), in which
case the size dependence was considered by interpolation or extrapolation of
size-dependent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values to the diameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (at the expense of time averaging over a
whole CCNC measurement cycle).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3354">The 31 July–1 August full cloud event under northwestern wind
conditions. <bold>(a)</bold> Time series of LWC, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">base</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">JFJ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <bold>(b)</bold> Hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> as
derived from polydisperse CCNC and SMPS measurements behind the total inlet.
Values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, determined using the moving average of
the time series of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, are also shown. <bold>(c)</bold> Half-rise
threshold dry diameter for cloud droplet activation
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <bold>(d)</bold> Cloud effective
peak supersaturation SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3451">Hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> as a function of critical
diameter retrieved from CCNC and SMPS measurements behind the total inlet.
Data points represent values averaged over the whole campaign with a
different colour for each supersaturation set in the CCNC. The grey shadings
indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value. An example of
underlying time-resolved data is shown in Fig. 4.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3475">The apparently circular calculation in the above approach, i.e. using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory to obtain a value of the hygroscopicity parameter and then
reusing this value in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory,
is required to account for the temperature difference between droplet formation processes occurring in
the CCN counter and at cloud base. Cloud base temperature,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloudbase</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which was used as input to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler
equation during CLOUD2016 but not CLOUD2010 because of the need of a PVM, was
not directly measured. Instead it is chosen to be equal to the dew point
corresponding to the total water content at the Jungfraujoch with a
correction for the pressure difference between the Jungfraujoch and the cloud
base (see Hammer et al., 2014a).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS6">
  <title>Calculation of the critical supersaturation of individual
BC-containing particles</title>
      <p id="d1e3516">The critical supersaturation for droplet activation is calculated for
individual BC-containing particles detected by the<?pagebreak page3842?> SP2 behind the different
inlets, following the approach described in Motos et al. (2019). Briefly, the
approach entails combining <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory (Sect. 3.3) with the
ZSR mixing rule as introduced by Petters and Kreidenweis (2007). The
calculation requires the total particle diameter, the volume fractions and
corresponding hygroscopicity parameters of each of the components of the
particle. We treat the BC-containing particles as two-component particles
with total size (and volume) taken from the optical diameter of the particle
measured with the SP2 (Sect. 2.2.2). The BC volume is inferred from the rBC
mass measured by the SP2. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of BC is chosen to be zero as
BC is insoluble. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of the coating is assumed to be equal to
the mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value inferred from the CCNC measurements at all
supersaturations during the cloud event under investigation (the size
dependence of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values inferred by the process described in
Sect. 3.4 was typically small, thus justifying this type of averaging). The
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of the mixed particle is calculated as the volume-weighted
mean of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of the BC core and its coating (ZSR mixing
rule). For the CLACE2010 campaign, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values were taken from the
annual data set of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values at the Jungfraujoch published by
Jurányi et al. (2011), with interquartile ranges used for error
propagation. These theoretical calculations of BC-containing particle
critical supersaturation are based on the assumption of spherical core–shell
morphology – a simplification that is tested in the BC activation closure
presented below.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page3843?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS7">
  <title>Correction of data downstream of the PCVI and comparison with
interstitial inlet data</title>
      <p id="d1e3589">The PCVI, described in Sect. 2.2.1, was not operational during all but two
cloud events due to technical issues linked to flow rate adjustments and
icing of the inlet (Table S1 in the Supplement). During the cloud events on
22 July and 4 August, when the PCVI functioned, the input and output flow
rates were set to 11.8 and 1.5 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" 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, resulting in a
calculated particle enrichment factor in the outflow of 7.9 (ratio of input
to output flow rate). Particle losses along the PCVI inlet line were
estimated to be as high as 67 % based on total concentration measured by
the CPC behind the total inlet compared to the concentration measured with
the PCVI-inlet CPC when bypassing the PCVI during out-of-cloud conditions.
The transmission efficiency of the PCVI was around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, based on
laboratory tests prior to the campaign. These PCVI corrections for enrichment
factor, line losses and transmission efficiency were applied to the raw
number size distributions measured behind the PCVI, as illustrated in
Fig. 3a. The absolute uncertainties in the corrected cloud droplet residual
number size distributions were considerable as the loss corrections amount to
a factor of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in total. Nevertheless, good agreement with the total
number size distribution was reached for large particle diameters, where most
particles are activated to cloud droplets. Furthermore, the size-dependent
activated fractions inferred from PCVI and total inlet data agreed well with
those inferred from the interstitial and total inlet data (Eqs. 1 and 2,
respectively; shown in Figs. 3b and S2b). This shows, firstly, that the PCVI
and the interstitial inlets indeed sampled exclusively cloud droplet residual
and interstitial particles, respectively; and, secondly, that the
interstitial- and PCVI-based approaches provided consistent results with
respect to measured threshold diameters for activation to cloud droplets.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS8">
  <title>Measurement uncertainties</title>
      <p id="d1e3632">In the present work, the uncertainties associated with MAAP- and SMPS-derived
scavenged fractions are based on propagating differences between measurements
conducted behind the interstitial and total inlets during out-of-cloud
conditions, immediately before and after each cloud event. The same approach
applies for SMPS-derived activated fractions of the total aerosol (and the
corresponding activation diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and SP2-derived activated fractions of
BC-free particles. Uncertainties related to the SP2-derived activated
fractions of BC-containing particles result from the propagation of
Poisson-based counting uncertainties related to the BC core number size
distributions with a sample volume uncertainty assumed to be 5 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e3648">The uncertainties in the retrieval of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were estimated
using the deviation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values around the moving average of these
values representing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Sect. 3.5 and Fig. 5). A
Monte Carlo simulation was used to propagate the uncertainties estimated for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.
These uncertainties are listed in Table 1.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Overview of cloud and aerosol properties</title>
      <p id="d1e3722">The aerosol properties observed during this study will not be discussed in
detail as several comprehensive data sets of the Jungfraujoch aerosol
observations have already been published (e.g. Bukowiecki et al., 2016, and
references therein). By contrast, only limited data on BC properties have
been published at the Jungfraujoch so far (e.g. Liu et al., 2010; Kupiszewski
et al., 2016), but a more comprehensive manuscript on this topic is currently
in preparation (Motos et al., 2019). Here, we focus
only on the aerosol properties that are directly relevant for determining the
activation behaviour of BC in clouds.</p>
      <p id="d1e3725">The hygroscopicity parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was inferred for the bulk aerosol from
the polydisperse CCN measurements combined with the size distribution
measurements using the method described in Sect. 3.4. This provides a time
series of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values as shown in Fig. 5b for the 31 July–1 August
cloud event. These <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values are representative of different particle
diameters
because the CCN measurements were done at different
supersaturations. The aerosol hygroscopicity varied during the cloud event.
However, the short-term fluctuations were sometimes dominated by random noise
due to limited counting statistics from the low particle number
concentrations, e.g. during the first part of the cloud event shown in Fig. 5
from about 16:00 to 22:00. By contrast, the size dependence at a given time
was often small, e.g. during the last part of the 31 July–1 August event
after 02:00 on 1 August. Results for two more cloud events are shown in
Fig. 4. The first event (Fig. 4a) is an example where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> varied
strongly over the cloud period, while the second event (Fig. 4b) is
representative of the conditions during the campaign, i.e. rather stable
hygroscopicity. In both of these and other cases, temporal variability
typically dominated over size dependence. This justifies the use of a simple
running mean of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> data points from all supersaturations (i.e.
neglecting the size dependence) in the further data analysis of droplet
activation processes in clouds (see also Sect. 3.5).</p>
      <p id="d1e3763">The statistics of aerosol hygroscopicity over the whole CLACE2016 campaign
are shown in Fig. 6. Mean values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the
interquartile range overlap well with the range of aerosol hygroscopicity
observed at the Jungfraujoch during previous long-term campaigns (Kammermann
et al., 2010a: mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.24 over 13 months; Jurányi et al.,
2011: mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.20 over 17 months; Schmale et al., 2018: mean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.29 over 35 months). This indicates that CLACE2016 was
representative in terms of aerosol hygroscopicity.</p>
      <p id="d1e3799">The size distribution measurements behind the total and interstitial inlets
were used to determine the size-resolved<?pagebreak page3844?> fraction of particles that activated
to cloud droplets during cloud events (Eq. 1; Sect. 3.2). The half-rise
threshold diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for droplet
activation was then inferred from these data as illustrated in Fig. 2. The
resulting time series of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the
31 July–1 August cloud event is shown in Fig. 5c, with 6 min time
resolution. Large variations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, by a
factor of 2 or more, were found during this and most other cloud events.</p>
      <p id="d1e3842">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory was then used to infer the effective cloud
peak supersaturation (SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) from the time-resolved
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values (see Sect. 3.6 for
details). The variations in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> translate to
variations in SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> by factors of up to 4 during individual
cloud events (see Fig. 5d for the 31 July–1 August cloud event). Such
variations in SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are primarily driven by variations in
atmospheric dynamics (i.e. updraft) at the cloud base and to a lesser extent
by the number concentration of potential CCN, as demonstrated for the
Jungfraujoch site by Hoyle et al. (2016). Variations in effective cloud peak
supersaturation are a priori unrelated to the cloud LWC (Fig. 5a and
Table 1), which depends only on the air parcel's height above the cloud base.
The tendency of convective clouds (mostly of the cumulus type) to
create highly spatially and temporally variable supersaturations was reported
by Politovich and Cooper (1988). Such clouds form by convection of warm air
in contact with mountain faces and are often found in mountainous regions in
summer.</p>
      <p id="d1e3913">Table S1 shows that the variations in SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were large during
all cloud events. In order to study the activation of aerosol particles to
cloud droplets under well-defined conditions, only continuous in-cloud
periods with limited variability in SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were retained for
further analysis. Additional criteria were sufficiently stable values of
hygroscopicity, particle number concentrations and BC mass concentration. A
total of 14 stable cloud periods adding up to a total of 14.1 h of
in-cloud measurements were identified (11 from CLACE2016, 3 from CLACE2010).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3936">Fraction of particles activated to cloud droplets for each stable
cloud period of the CLACE2016 campaign as derived from particle number size
distributions measured by the SMPS behind the total and interstitial inlets.
The lines are coloured by SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> inferred from
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">smooth</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
during the corresponding period. Periods of mixed-phase clouds are symbolized
by dashed lines. For image clarity, error bars are not shown on this graph
but can be found in Fig. 2 for three of these cloud periods.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3978">The size-resolved activated fractions averaged separately for all stable
cloud periods of the CLACE2016 campaign are plotted in Fig. 7. The mean peak
supersaturation, indicated for each period by the line colour, decreases
monotonically with increasing activation threshold diameter. This is not
surprising as the SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> value of each stable cloud period was
calculated from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value. However, it
does imply that variations in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were
mainly driven by variations in updraft velocities and resulting
supersaturations, whereas differences in aerosol hygroscopicity only caused
minor additional modulation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The key
parameters for each selected cloud period are summarized in Table 1,
including the droplet number concentration inferred from the difference in
particle number concentration between the total and the interstitial inlet,
as well as the median number concentration of potential CCN, i.e. particles with a
mobility diameter larger than 90 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; e.g. Hammer et al., 2014a).
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 0.15 % to 0.96 % and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 39 to 150 nm. The selected periods
of in-cloud measurements are representative of clouds typically encountered
at the Jungfraujoch in summer. This is shown with Fig. S1, in which the
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> values observed during CLACE2016 are compared with results
from previous studies at the Jungfraujoch. The distribution of
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during CLACE2016 largely overlaps with the temporally more
extensive observations reported by Hammer et al. (2014a). Furthermore, the
systematic difference between northwestern and southeastern wind direction,
explained with differences in orographic uplifting by Hammer et al. (2014a),
was also found during CLACE2016.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Bulk analysis of BC scavenging</title>
      <p id="d1e4087">The scavenging of BC, i.e. the mass fraction of BC incorporated into cloud
droplets, has previously been investigated at the Jungfraujoch. Cozic et
al. (2007) applied the same combination of interstitial and total inlets to
determine the scavenged fraction of BC (based on eBC mass measured by two
MAAPs), as well as the scavenged fraction of the total aerosol (derived from
SMPS measurements). They found close agreement between the scavenged
fractions of BC and that of the total aerosol for warm clouds with
temperature at Jungfraujoch (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">JFJ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) above <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, i.e.
high correlation and almost identical values on average. Such close agreement
is a priori not expected because BC is insoluble in water; however, the
authors attributed it to the high degree of internal mixing of BC in the aged
aerosol at the Jungfraujoch. Figure 8a presents an equivalent analysis of BC
and total aerosol volume scavenged fractions for the CLACE2016 data set of
this study, which confirms the close agreement. Note that the MAAP-derived
eBC mass-based scavenged fractions are consistent with SP2-derived rBC mass
scavenged fractions. However, the eBC data were chosen for Fig. 8 as they are
available at higher time resolution because the SP2 was switched between
three inlets.</p>
      <p id="d1e4120">Going a step further, we examined the dependence of the scavenged fractions
on SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> by colouring the data points in Fig. 8a accordingly.
The fact that data points are systematically ordered by colour indicates that
the scavenged fractions of both BC and the total aerosol volume are primarily
controlled by variations in SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, as previously suggested by
Ohata et al. (2016). Indeed, plotting the same data set as scavenged fraction
against log(SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in Fig. 8b reveals an S-shaped
relationship for both the total aerosol volume and BC, which is well
represented by manually fitted Hill equations (green and black dashed lines).
Scavenged fractions are on average equal for BC and the total aerosol, as
already shown in Fig. 8a, and reach values of 50 %, 75 % and
&gt; 90 % at supersaturations of 0.13 %–0.17 %,
0.25 %–0.31 % and &gt; 0.55 %, respectively. This
implies that the peak supersaturation at cloud formation must be considered
to correctly describe the fraction of BC incorporated into cloud droplets
through nucleation scavenging, as also shown by Ching et al. (2018) using
particle-resolved model simulations. For example, the systematic difference
in the mean SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> between northwesterly and southeasterly<?pagebreak page3845?> wind
conditions at the Jungfraujoch, as shown in Fig. S1, results in systematic
differences for the scavenged fractions of both BC and the total aerosol
volume. This result also confirms that nucleation scavenging is the dominant
mechanism resulting in the incorporation of particles (BC-free or
BC-containing) into cloud droplets at the Jungfraujoch. If impaction, a
process unrelated to SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, were to dominate, we would not
observe such a relationship between the scavenged fractions and
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4178">The SS dependence of the scavenged fraction of a hypothetical, internally
mixed aerosol with log-normal size distribution and size-independent
hygroscopicity (composition) will follow a Hill curve such as the dashed
lines in Fig. 8b. Variations in modal size would shift the position of the
Hill curve, whereas deviations from the log-normal size distribution shape would
distort the shape of the curve. Similarly, variations and size dependence of
aerosol hygroscopicity would also modulate the scavenging curve but are
probably too small to cause modifications to the same extent. Such variations
are the reasons for the substantial scatter around the Hill curves in
Fig. 8b. The reverse conclusion is that size distribution and mean
hygroscopicity must be known to accurately describe the supersaturation
dependence of the scavenged fraction.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e4183">eBC mass scavenged fractions derived from the two MAAPs and aerosol
volume scavenged fractions derived from the two SMPSs during all liquid
clouds. <bold>(a)</bold> Correlation of these two scavenged fractions with cloud
effective peak supersaturation indicated by the colour, when available.
<bold>(b)</bold> Dependence of scavenged fraction on cloud effective peak
supersaturation. This panel additionally contains equivalent data from
measurements in fog at an urban site (Motos et al., 2019). The coefficients
of the manually fitted Hill equations (dashed lines) are provided in the
Supplement. Open symbols are used in both panels for data points with
concentrations close to the detection limits of the MAAP or SMPS (BC mass in
the range 10–40 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" 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> or total volume <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">200</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" 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>). Both panels are based on liquid clouds
only. Potential mixed-phase clouds were filtered by excluding all data at
temperatures below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=469.470472pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4270">The scavenged fraction of BC mass is only expected to be equal to the total
aerosol volume scavenged fraction for all peak supersaturations if BC
contributes an equal fraction to the aerosol volume at any particle size and
if the critical activation diameters of the BC-containing particles and total
aerosol are equal. While the latter condition is closely fulfilled if BC is
internally mixed with substantial coatings, size-independent BC volume
fractions are a priori not expected. Nevertheless, the scavenged fractions
of total aerosol volume and BC mass are essentially equal on average.
However, deviations of several data points in Fig. 8a from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" 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> line
are greater than the measurement uncertainty, indicating that even at remote
locations the BC scavenged fraction can differ from the total aerosol volume
scavenged fraction in individual cloud events. This is likely due to some
size dependence of the contribution of BC to the aerosol volume and/or
disagreement between the critical activation diameters of BC-free and
BC-containing particles. For example, new particle formation events followed
by growth to sizes remaining below the droplet activation cut-off diameter,
e.g. as reported in Tröstl et al. (2016), are one possible mechanism that
can result in the BC scavenged fraction becoming greater than that of the
total aerosol volume.</p>
      <p id="d1e4285">The scavenged fractions of BC and the aerosol volume observed in fog events
in Zurich by Motos et al. (2019) are also included in Fig. 8b. The peak
supersaturation in fog is<?pagebreak page3846?> much lower than that of typical clouds at the
Jungfraujoch. Nevertheless, one cloud during the CLACE2016 campaign had a
peak supersaturation as low as the fog data (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %). The
scavenged fractions of BC and total aerosol volume are very low at such low
peak supersaturations because the activation cut-off is in the upper tail of
the size distributions. However, during the fog events, the scavenged
fraction of BC was found to be consistently lower by a factor of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
compared to that of the total aerosol volume. The presence of externally
mixed fresh BC-containing particles at the urban location might explain this
difference. Below we will show that the BC mixing state is indeed among the
parameters controlling activation on the single-particle level. However, more
comprehensive data sets would be required to confirm that differences in
resulting bulk scavenged fractions, which also depend on size distribution
and mean mixing state, are indeed systematic in urban fog.</p>
      <p id="d1e4308">Matsui (2016) used a mixing-state-resolved 3-D model to simulate the mixing
state of BC-containing particles over East Asia and to estimate the critical
supersaturation required for CCN activation of these particles. He concluded
that almost all BC-containing particles activate to form droplets at
1.0 % supersaturation while 20 % to 50 % by number stay in the
interstitial phase at 0.1 % supersaturation. He applied a theoretical
approach equivalent to the one verified in the present study (see Sect. 4.4).
These model results are in qualitative agreement with our observations.
However, a direct, quantitative comparison of number-based activated
fractions of BC over East Asia with mass-based scavenged fractions of BC at
the Jungfraujoch is not justified because mass- and number-based activated
fractions can differ for the same aerosol population and because the sources
and levels of air pollution are different in central Europe and East Asia.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <title>Influence of core size and mixing state on the activation of BC
in clouds</title>
      <p id="d1e4317">The SMPS measurements behind the interstitial and total inlets and Eq. (1)
were used to infer the size-dependent activation of aerosol particles as
discussed above in Sect. 4.1 and shown in Fig. 2. The SP2 measurements behind
these inlets were used in an equivalent manner to specifically investigate
the activation of BC-containing particles to cloud droplets. Figure 2 shows,
on the basis of four example cloud events, that the SP2-based results for
BC-free particles (blue and green lines) agree with the SMPS-based results
for all particles (pink lines). This comparison is appropriate as the BC-free
particles represent around 70 %–95 % of all particles by number (see
Sect. 2.2.2 for our operational definition of “BC-free” particle). These
independent measurements of activated fractions agree well because the
optical diameters provided by the SP2 for BC-free particles are equal to the
respective mobility diameters measured by the SMPS, which was tested by
comparing corresponding size distributions from these two instruments (not
shown). Such consistency in sizing is expected for spherical particles if
appropriate calibration and data processing procedures are applied to the SP2
light-scattering signals. The optical sizing of BC-containing particles by
the SP2 requires the more sophisticated LEO-fit technique (see Sect. 2.2.2),
which was limited to optical diameters greater than 180 nm. The
SP2-LEO-fit-derived size-dependent activated fractions of BC-free and BC-containing
particles shown in Fig. 2 as green and black<?pagebreak page3847?> lines, respectively, are in
agreement within experimental uncertainty. Such agreement indicates that the
majority of the BC-containing particles with a diameter greater than 180 nm
consist of small BC cores with substantial coating acquired through various
processes during atmospheric transport to the remote Jungfraujoch site
(through for example condensation of oxidized organic compounds, coagulation with
particles or in-cloud processes). Such small insoluble cores hardly alter the
hygroscopicity of the entire particle compared to a BC-free particle. Using
single-particle mass spectrometry, Zhang et al. (2017) performed an
equivalent comparison in southern China and also found that the activated
fraction of BC-containing particles was similar or slightly lower compared to
that of the total aerosol in the vacuum aerodynamic diameter range from about
200 to 1300 nm.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e4322">Activation of BC to cloud droplets. <bold>(a)</bold> Activated fraction
of all BC cores as a function of rBC mass equivalent diameter for all stable
cloud periods with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">JFJ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C,
coloured by SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. One fog event, extracted from the study of
Motos et al. (2019), is also shown. Two variants of this figure, including
clouds with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">JFJ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (Fig. S3a) and
SMPS-derived activation plateau (Fig. S3b), are shown in the Supplement.
<bold>(b)</bold> BC core mass size distribution behind the total inlet.
<bold>(c)</bold> Number fraction of BC cores with thin to moderate or thick
coatings as determined with the delay time method behind the total inlet. The
most thickly coated particles, which caused saturation of the scattering
signal, were included in the subset of BC-containing particles with thick
coatings. The grey shadings indicate ranges of mass equivalent diameter for
which the detection limits of the SP2 may introduce biases.
<bold>(d)</bold> Activated fraction of all BC cores (same as in panel <bold>a</bold>)
differentiated for the subsets of cores with thin to moderate coatings or
thick coatings. This is only shown for three representative example stable cloud
periods and one fog event.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4417">The scavenged fraction of BC mass can be more directly understood by
analysing activated fractions as a function of BC core size rather than total
particle diameter. The finding that the BC scavenged fraction is primarily
controlled by cloud peak supersaturation, as shown in Fig. 8 and discussed in
Sect. 4.2, is also clearly shown in Fig. 9a, which shows the BC activated
fraction as a function of the rBC mass equivalent diameter for all stable
liquid cloud periods: the activated fraction increases with increasing
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at a given BC core diameter. The 2b August stable cloud
period seems to be an outlier as the activated fraction is particularly high
in relation to the corresponding SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. However, the fact that
the activation plateau was particularly high during this period explains this
singularity (see Fig. S3b). A total of 50 % activation is reached at a BC core
diameter of approximately 100 nm during the cloud periods with lowest
supersaturations of around 0.2 %–0.25 %. By contrast, the activated
fraction is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % all the way down to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rBC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm
for the clouds with the highest peak supersaturations
(&gt; 0.7 %). This explains why the mass fractions of scavenged
BC at the Jungfraujoch vary between roughly 60 % and 100 % for
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> ranging from 0.2 % to 1 % (Fig. 8) given the fact
that the BC core mass size distribution typically peaks in the range
120 nm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rBC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">170</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm (illustrated by the mode shown in
Fig. 9b and Motos et al., 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e4490">Mixed-phase or even completely glaciated clouds may occur at lower
temperatures. Mixed-phase clouds may result in the conversion of particles
from droplets (activated particles) to interstitial aerosol through the
Wegener–Bergeron–Findeisen process (e.g. Cozic et al., 2007), thereby
potentially obscuring the causal relationship between SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
droplet activation. However, Verheggen et al. (2007) showed that
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> remains well-defined and that only small
differences in average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exist between
mixed-phase and liquid clouds. This suggests that the
Wegener–Bergeron–Findeisen process does not affect the inferred
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The fact that the Wegener–Bergeron–Findeisen process evaporates
some cloud droplets, whereby the droplet nuclei are released back to the
interstitial aerosol, explains that the activated fraction was lower in most
clouds at temperatures below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C compared to that in warm clouds
at comparable SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (see the dashed lines in Fig. S3a). The
26–27b June stable cloud period is an exception in so far as the activated
fraction of BC was comparable to warm cloud results despite low
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">JFJ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This cloud may have been a supercooled liquid cloud rather
than a mixed-phase cloud. The fact that a supercooled liquid cloud was an
exception at the Jungfraujoch for temperatures below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C may
indicate that cloud glaciation is only rarely limited by ice nuclei
concentrations. No in situ measurements of cloud properties were performed
to determine the phase of the clouds in order to test this hypothesis.</p>
      <p id="d1e4597">According to the Köhler theory (Sect. 3.3), the BC core diameter of an
internally mixed BC-containing particle is not the decisive parameter for its
critical supersaturation (even for a hypothetical spherical core–shell
morphology). Instead, in the absence of surfactants, the overall particle
diameter and the mean hygroscopicity are important: the acquisition of
water-soluble coatings on BC cores is expected to decrease the critical
supersaturation. In addition to the LEO-fit technique, we also applied the
delay time method, described in Sect. 2.2.2, to investigate the influence of
BC mixing state using SP2 data. This method makes it possible to split
BC-containing particles with a certain core size into two distinct classes,
one containing exclusively thickly coated BC particles and the other one
containing BC particles with thin to moderate coatings, with a
classification threshold at a BC volume fraction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. This
binary mixing state analysis was applied to the BC data from three example
stable cloud periods covering the range of SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> typically
encountered at the Jungfraujoch. Figure 9c shows the number fractions of
particles in these two classes as a function of BC core diameter: the
majority of BC-containing particles are thinly or moderately coated. It is
important to note that this is not necessarily in contradiction to the
expectation that BC at the Jungfraujoch is mostly internally mixed because
the threshold between these two classes represents BC volume fractions as low
as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % (i.e. a coating thickness of 40–50 nm on a core with
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rBC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">185</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm). Figure 9d shows the BC activated fraction curves
segregated into the two coating thickness classes for the three cloud periods
shown in Fig. 9c. No coating effect on cloud droplet activation was found for
the cloud with SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.86 % (yellow lines). This
indicates that at high supersaturation, essentially all BC-containing
particles within the core size range covered by the SP2 activated to cloud
droplets, even without substantial coating. By contrast, a distinct coating
effect was found at lower SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> when the activated fraction of
smaller BC cores drops below the plateau values reached at larger cores. For
the 5 July and 4 August periods, the activated fractions for the thickly
coated class are always greater than or equal to the activated fractions for
the thinly to moderately coated class. This clearly shows that acquisition of
coating increases the ability of a BC-containing particle with a certain BC
core size to form a cloud droplet. This result qualitatively confirms<?pagebreak page3848?> the
expectation from the Köhler theory that coating acquisition reduces the
critical supersaturation for droplet activation of BC-containing particles
through the combined effects of particle hygroscopicity (Raoult's law) and
size (Kelvin effect). The relative influence of each of these two effects can
however not be distinguished here, because a particle classified as thickly
coated is both larger and more hygroscopic than another classified as
thinly to moderately coated, for a fixed BC core size. It needs to be noted
that the observed effect on the integrated BC mass scavenged fraction is
small for the BC properties and clouds encountered at the Jungfraujoch,
because the core size range in which activation is sensitive to the BC mixing
state is clearly below the peak of the BC core mass size distribution
(Fig. 9a) in most cases.</p>
      <p id="d1e4663">The size-segregated activation of BC cores observed in a previous study
during a fog event at an urban site in Zurich, Switzerland, is also shown in
Fig. 9 (Motos et al., 2019). The peak supersaturations in this fog event were
in the range 0.040 %–0.051 %, which is typical for mid-latitude fog
(Hammer et al., 2014b) and almost an order of magnitude lower than the
supersaturations in most of the clouds at the Jungfraujoch site. Accordingly,
the activation onset diameter above which BC cores are activated to fog
droplets is much greater, i.e. as large as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">130</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm for thickly coated
BC cores and above around 230 nm for thinly to moderately coated BC. This
explains the low BC scavenged fraction at the low fog supersaturations shown
in Fig. 8.</p>
      <p id="d1e4676">Ching et al. (2018) used the particle-resolved aerosol model PartMC-MOSAIC to
simulate the aging of BC-containing particles in urban plumes. They modelled
two-dimensional BC core size and mixing state distributions, and they then inferred
size-segregated activation curves and integrated scavenged fractions for BC
using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory. It is not possible to directly compare
the results of their model simulations with our experimental observations
because of potential differences in BC size distributions and mixing states
between the different environments. Nevertheless, our results confirm several
of their findings in a qualitative manner. First, the simulated and observed
activated fractions as a function of BC core diameter (e.g. the curves shown
in Fig. 9a) are of very similar shape and exhibit the same dependence on
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Second, our observation that SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
main parameter controlling the BC scavenged fraction and that the
sensitivity to the BC mixing state increases with decreasing supersaturation
was reproduced in their simulations.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e4706"><bold>(a)</bold> Histograms of coating thickness for BC cores with rBC
core mass equivalent diameter between 170 and 200 nm as inferred from the
SP2 data for the 4 August stable cloud period. <bold>(b)</bold> Activated
fractions derived from the histograms shown in panel <bold>(a)</bold> and shown
for the range of coating thicknesses between 0 and 60 nm, for which counting
statistics are sufficient. The three calculations of activated fractions are
redundant (based on data behind three inlets); this explains why the orange
line is an average of the light blue and the green lines. Note that
unphysical negative coating thickness values are caused by random noise
for BC-containing particles with no or very little coating.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4723">The delay time method, which was applied to the SP2 data for the analyses
presented above, only provides a binary mixing state classification.
Quantitative mixing state information can be retrieved from the SP2 data
using the LEO-fit<?pagebreak page3849?> approach described in Sect. 2.2.2, though at the expense of
limiting the accessible size range. Coating thickness distributions for BC
cores with mass equivalent diameters in the range 170 nm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rBC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">200</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm are shown in Fig. 10a for unactivated particles
(interstitial inlet), droplet residual particles (PCVI inlet) and all
particles (total inlet) sampled for a short period during the 4 August stable
cloud period. Results are only available for this short period due to
problems with the PCVI inlet discussed in Sect. 3.7. Fortunately,
supersaturations were low during this cloud period (0.20 %; Table 1),
which meant some BC stayed in the interstitial aerosol (Fig. 8). Figure 10a
shows that, on average, the droplet residual BC-containing particles were
more thickly coated than the interstitial BC-containing particles.
Corresponding activated fractions as a function of coating thickness are
shown in Fig. 10b, segregated by the inlet pairs used to perform the
calculation with either Eq. (1) or (2). A robust trend of gradually
increasing activated fraction with increasing coating thickness was observed
despite considerable uncertainty of these data points due to limited counting
statistics and comparing measurements that were taken with minor difference
(switching valves approach). This shows that acquisition of coatings
facilitates activation, consistent with the delay time method results shown
in Fig. 9d.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <title>Closure between predicted and observed cloud droplet activation
of BC</title>
      <p id="d1e4749">The results presented in the previous section demonstrate qualitatively that
the acquisition of coatings by BC particles increases their ability to form
cloud droplets. Here we go a step further by comparing calculated and
observed droplet activation thresholds on a single BC-containing particle
level. Combining the SP2 data with the CCN measurements makes it possible to
predict the critical supersaturation of individual BC-containing particles as
described in Sect. 3.6. This prediction can then be compared with the actual
activation to cloud droplets, which is inferred from the SP2 measurements
behind the total and interstitial inlets. Motos et al. (2019) performed such
a closure study for the activation of BC in fog. Here we investigate
activation of BC in clouds at the Jungfraujoch, which typically have much
higher peak supersaturations than fog.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e4754">Activation of BC-containing and BC-free particles during the 25 June
<bold>(a)</bold> and 26–27a June <bold>(b)</bold> stable cloud periods. Panels
<bold>(a1)</bold> and <bold>(b1)</bold> show the critical supersaturation of
individual BC-containing particles as a function of rBC mass equivalent
diameter coloured by coating thickness for the interstitial inlet and in grey
for the total inlet. Note that the coating thickness can only be determined
for BC-containing particles with an overall diameter greater than 180 nm,
which explains the missing data points in the top left part of panels
<bold>(a1)</bold> and <bold>(b1)</bold>. Panels <bold>(a2)</bold> and
<bold>(b2)</bold> depict the corresponding activated fraction of BC-containing
particles as well as that of BC-free particles (SP2-derived) and bulk aerosol
(SMPS-derived). Only one-fourth of the data points is shown in panel
<bold>(a1)</bold> in order to visualize the fraction of points originating from
interstitial inlet data compared to points from the total inlet data.
Horizontal light blue lines indicate the value of SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
retrieved using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (method explained
in Sect. 3.5). Note that values of SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for both cases
<bold>(a)</bold> and <bold>(b)</bold> are at a level above which the SP2 detects only
almost bare BC because small cores with substantial coating are outside the
detection limits of the SP2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4829">Results for two example cloud periods are shown in Fig. 11. The properties of
individual BC-containing particles are shown in Fig. 11a1 and b1 for the
samples taken behind the total inlet (grey data points) and the interstitial
inlet (coloured by coating thickness). The cloud peak supersaturations are
shown as light blue horizontal lines. In an ideal case, i.e. perfectly well defined
and homogeneous peak supersaturation and aerosol composition, and
negligible measurement noise and bias, one would expect that no interstitial
particles show up below the light blue lines (i.e. activated
fraction <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 100 % since
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">crit</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> &lt; SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and that the numbers of
BC-containing particles behind the interstitial and total inlets are equal
above the light blue lines (i.e. activated fraction <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0 %). A trend
in this direction can be seen in Fig. 11a1 and b1. Aggregating
the data and calculating activation curves as a function of predicted
critical supersaturation (black lines in Fig. 11a2 and b2) reveal that,
within experimental uncertainty, the supersaturation corresponding to the
half-activation threshold for BC-containing particles indeed coincides with
the peak supersaturation for both cloud events. This demonstrates that closure
between predicted and observed activation of the BC-containing particles is
achieved with the combination of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory, the ZSR
mixing rule and SP2 measurements of particle properties.</p>
      <p id="d1e4871">An alternative but equivalent method of performing this closure exercise is
to compare the observed activation spectrum of the BC-containing particles
(black lines in Fig. 11a2 and b2) with that of the total aerosol based on
SMPS measurements (green lines; inferred from the size-segregated activation
spectra shown in Fig. 7). The activated fraction of the total aerosol reaches
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">half</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cloud</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exactly at the cloud peak
supersaturation, because this is nothing less than the approach used to infer
the peak supersaturation. The activation curves of BC-containing particles
closely follow those of the total aerosol, indicating successful closure. The
simple combination of the spherical core–shell morphology assumption,<?pagebreak page3850?> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory and the ZSR rule is a sufficiently detailed approach to
predict how insoluble BC alters the droplet activation behaviour of
BC-containing particles compared to that of BC-free particles.</p>
      <p id="d1e4895">The two stable cloud periods shown in Fig. 11 have an SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at the
low end of the range of typical supersaturations observed at the
Jungfraujoch. They were chosen because the BC-containing particle size range
accessible to the SP2 LEO-fit approach is limited and some fraction of
analysable particles remaining in the interstitial aerosol was required to
perform the analysis. The influence of BC mixing state on cloud droplet
activation at different supersaturations was further assessed independently
of particle size by calculating the activated fractions as a function of the
coating thickness for BC-containing particles with a fixed overall optical
diameter of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">opt</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">200</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm. Results for seven example cloud periods
from both the CLACE2016 and CLACE2010 campaigns are shown in Fig. 12. In
clouds with high SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, the activated fraction of BC-containing
particles (coloured solid lines) equals that of BC-free particles of the same
size (triangles attached to horizontal dashed lines), regardless of whether
or not the BC-containing particles are coated. This is in agreement with the
theoretically expected behaviour: the threshold coating thickness, calculated
with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory and the ZSR mixing rule and indicated
with a cross at half-rise activated fraction for each cloud period in
Fig. 12, is negligible at SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % for
BC-containing particles with an overall diameter of 200 nm. During the cloud
periods with low to medium SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the range from 0.15 % to
0.3 %, the activation plateau at thick coatings is clearly less than
100 %. However, this is a result of temporal variations in
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and not due to properties of the BC-containing particles,
since the activated fractions of BC-free particles with a diameter of 200 nm
agree with the activation plateaus of BC-containing particles with thick
coatings. The BC cores with no or very thin coatings do not activate at these
low to medium SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> values. Furthermore, the coating thickness at
half-rise activated fraction (open circles in Fig. 12) agrees with the
theoretically expected threshold coating thickness within measurement
uncertainty. This successful closure between predicted and observed
activation thresholds again confirms that, under the simplifying assumptions
applied in this study (spherical core–shell morphology, surface tension of
pure water), the combination of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory and the ZSR
mixing rule is a suitable method of predicting the activation of
BC-containing particles of known size and mixing state.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e4991">Activated fractions as a function of coating thickness for
BC-containing particles with an optical diameter of 200 nm during four
stable cloud periods of the CLACE2016 campaign and three periods of the
CLACE2010 campaign. Triangles accompanied by horizontal dashed lines
correspond to the activated fraction of 200 nm BC-free particles, derived
from Fig. 2 (four example figures shown). The triangles are plotted at
100 nm coating thickness because this corresponds to 200 nm optical
diameter if no BC core is present (BC-free particle). Dashed lines attached
to activated fraction lines indicate the difference between experimentally
observed (open circles) and theoretically predicted (crosses) coating
thicknesses required for 200 nm BC-containing particles to reach activation
up to half of the activation plateau.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/19/3833/2019/acp-19-3833-2019-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page3851?><p id="d1e5000">It has to be noted that, in the present study, we have tested the validity of
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory and the ZSR mixing rule for only a small
subset of large BC cores with very thin coatings at medium to high
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, due to the limited size range of particles accessible to
the SP2 LEO-fit analysis. Motos et al. (2019) used the same approach in fog
and showed that this simplified theoretical approach is also valid at very
low supersaturations and for a wider range of BC core sizes. Therefore, the
method still remains to be examined against field observations of small to
medium BC core sizes at medium to high SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (e.g.
SS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 0.3 %). However, the scavenged fraction
of BC in atmospheric clouds is only weakly sensitive to the exact behaviour
of small to medium BC cores in this supersaturation range (e.g. Fig. 8), such
that potential errors in the simplified theoretical model would be of little
consequence. The closure achieved in this study for atmospheric BC is in line
with a recent controlled laboratory study using a similar theoretical model
and SP2 measurements of BC size and mixing state (Dalirian et al., 2018).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e5045">Two field experiments with in situ cloud measurements were performed at the
high-altitude research station Jungfraujoch, central Switzerland, in summer
2010 and 2016. We selectively sampled the interstitial aerosol (unactivated
particles), cloud droplet residual particles, and the total aerosol (sum of
interstitial and droplet residual particles) using three different inlets
with the aim of investigating the influence of size and mixing state on the
activation of BC-containing particles to droplets in ambient clouds. We
showed that the cloud peak supersaturation is the main parameter controlling
the BC mass scavenged fraction. Variations in BC core size distribution and
BC mixing state also have a minor influence on the scavenged fraction,
particularly at higher supersaturations. It was qualitatively shown that, as
expected, acquisition of coating increases the ability of BC cores of a
certain size to activate to cloud droplets. Furthermore, quantitative closure
between predicted and observed threshold coating thicknesses was achieved.
Successful closure for the activation of BC was also achieved in a previous
study in fog with lower peak supersaturations (Motos et al., 2019). These
findings validate the approach of combining the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">κ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-Köhler theory and
the ZSR mixing rule, under the simplifying assumptions of spherical
core–shell morphology and surface tension of pure water, to predict the
droplet activation of BC-containing particles of known size and mixing state.
This theoretical approach has recently been applied in regional- and
global-scale simulations with mixing-state-resolved aerosol schemes to more
accurately simulate nucleation scavenging and the life cycle of BC (Matsui,
2016; Ching et al., 2018). The experimental and closure-model results
achieved in this study support such model simulations and imply that
simulated BC scavenged fractions are accurate to the degree that other
controlling parameters such as BC core size distribution, BC mixing state and
cloud peak supersaturation are correctly simulated.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e5059">Data used in this article are
available in the Supplement. Reconstructed overall particle diameter and
coating thickness data on a single-particle level (using the LEO-fit
analysis) are available upon request to the corresponding author.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><?pagebreak page3852?><p id="d1e5062">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3833-2019-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3833-2019-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5071">MG and UB acquired the funding. MG
conceptualized the study and the experiment was designed with JS and GM. MG
supervised the study together with JS and UB. GM, JS and NK performed the
field campaign and JCC contributed to instrument preparation and
maintenance. GM analysed and validated the experimental data with support
from RM, JCC, JS, MG and NK. GM prepared the manuscript and all co-authors
contributed to the interpretation of the results as well as manuscript review
and editing.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e5077">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5083">This article is part of the special issue “BACCHUS – Impact of
Biogenic versus Anthropogenic emissions on Clouds and Climate: towards a
Holistic UnderStanding (ACP/AMT/GMD inter-journal SI)”. It is not associated
with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5089">We thank Nicolas Bukowiecki and Erik Herrmann for
their help during the CLACE2016 campaign, as well as Ernest Weingartner, Zsofia
Jurányi and Emanuel Hammer for their contributions to the CLACE2010
campaign. We also thank the International Foundation High Altitude Research
Station Jungfraujoch and Gornergrat (HSFJG) for giving us the opportunity to
perform an intensive campaign in addition to the continuous measurements in
the Sphynx laboratory of the Jungfraujoch. This work was supported by the
ERC under grant ERC-CoG-615922-BLACARAT and the EU FP7 project BACCHUS
(grant no. 603445). Part of the observations included in this work originate
from the continuous aerosol measurements at the Jungfraujoch site, which are
supported by MeteoSwiss in the framework of the Swiss contributions (GAW-CH
and GAW-CH-Plus) to the Global Atmosphere Watch programme of the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO) and are also supported by the ACTRIS2 project
(funded by the EU H2020-INFRAIA-2014-2015 grant agreement no. 654109 and by
the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation, SERI,
under contract number 15.0159-1; the opinions expressed and arguments
employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Swiss
Government). Meteorological measurements from the SwissMetNet network were
obtained through MeteoSwiss.</p></ack><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5094">This paper was edited by Allan Bertram and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Baltensperger, U., Gäggeler, H. W., Jost, D. T., Lugauer, M.,
Schwikowski, M., and Weingartner, E.: Aerosol climatology at the high-alpine
site Jungfraujoch, Switzerland, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 19707–19715,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00928" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97JD00928</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Bianchi, F., Tröstl, J., Junninen, H., Frege, C., Henne, S., Hoyle, C.
R., Molteni, U., Herrmann, E., Adamov, A., Bukowiecki, N., Chen, X.,
Duplissy, J., Gysel, M., Hutterli, M., Kangasluoma, J., Kontkanen, J.,
Kürten, A., Manninen, H. E., Münch, S., Peräkylä, O.,
Petäjä, T., Rondo, L., Williamson, C., Weingartner, E., Curtius, J.,
Worsnop, D. R., Kulmala, M., Dommen, J., and Baltensperger, U.: New particle
formation in the free troposphere: a question of chemistry and timing,
Science, 352, aad5456,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad5456" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.aad5456</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Bond, T. C., Habib, G., and Bergstrom, R. W.: Limitations in the enhancement
of visible light absorption due to mixing state, J. Geophys. Res.,
111, D20211,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007315" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007315</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T.,
DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne,
S., Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M.,
Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K.,
Hopke, P. K., Jacobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U.,
Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender, C.
S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific
assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50171</ext-link>,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster,
P., Kerminen, V. M., Kondo, Y., Liao, Y., and Lohmann, U.: Clouds and
Aerosols, in: Climate change 2013: the physical science basis, Contribution
of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental
panel on climate change, pp. 571–567, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Balkanski, Y., Hodnebrog, Ø., Myhre, C. L., Myhre, G., Quaas,
J., Samset, B. H., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., and Wang, R.: Jury is still out
on the radiative forcing by black carbon, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113,
5092–5093, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607005113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1607005113</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Bougiatioti, A., Fountoukis, C., Kalivitis, N., Pandis, S. N., Nenes, A., and
Mihalopoulos, N.: Cloud condensation nuclei measurements in the marine
boundary layer of the Eastern Mediterranean: CCN closure and droplet growth
kinetics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7053–7066,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7053-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-7053-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Boulter, J. E., Cziczo, D. J., Middlebrook, A. M., Thomson, D. S., and
Murphy, D. M.: Design and performance of a pumped counterflow virtual
impactor, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 40, 969–976, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820600840984" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820600840984</ext-link>,
2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Bukowiecki, N., Weingartner, E., Gysel, M., Collaud Coen, M., Zieger, P.,
Herrmann, E., Steinbacher, M., Gäggeler, H. W., and Baltensperger, U.: A
review of more than 20 years of aerosol observation at the high altitude
research station Jungfraujoch, Switzerland (3580 m a.s.l.), Aerosol Air
Qual. Res., 16, 764–788, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2015.05.0305" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4209/aaqr.2015.05.0305</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Ching, J., West, M., and Riemer, N.: Quantifying impacts of aerosol mixing
state on nucleation-scavenging of black carbon aerosol particles, Atmosphere,
9, 17,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9010017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos9010017</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Collaud Coen, M., Andrews, E., Asmi, A., Baltensperger, U., Bukowiecki, N.,
Day, D., Fiebig, M., Fjaeraa, A. M., Flentje, H.,<?pagebreak page3853?> Hyvärinen, A.,
Jefferson, A., Jennings, S. G., Kouvarakis, G., Lihavainen, H., Lund Myhre,
C., Malm, W. C., Mihapopoulos, N., Molenar, J. V., O'Dowd, C., Ogren, J. A.,
Schichtel, B. A., Sheridan, P., Virkkula, A., Weingartner, E., Weller, R.,
and Laj, P.: Aerosol decadal trends – Part 1: In-situ optical measurements
at GAW and IMPROVE stations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 869–894,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-869-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-869-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Cozic, J., Verheggen, B., Mertes, S., Connolly, P., Bower, K., Petzold, A.,
Baltensperger, U., and Weingartner, E.: Scavenging of black carbon in mixed
phase clouds at the high alpine site Jungfraujoch, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7,
1797–1807, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1797-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-1797-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Dalirian, M., Ylisirniö, A., Buchholz, A., Schlesinger, D., Ström,
J., Virtanen, A., and Riipinen, I.: Cloud droplet activation of black carbon
particles coated with organic compounds of varying solubility, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 18, 12477–12489, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12477-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-12477-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: A review of our understanding of the
aerosol–cloud interaction from the perspective of a bin resolved cloud scale
modelling, Atmos. Res., 97, 478–497, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008</ext-link>,
2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Fuller, K. A., Malm, W. C., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Effects of mixing on
extinction by carbonaceous particles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104,
15941–15954, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JD100069" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1998JD100069</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Gao, R. S., Schwarz, J. P., Kelly, K. K., Fahey, D. W., Watts, L. A.,
Thompson, T. L., Spackman, J. R., Slowik, J. G., Cross, E. S., Han, J.-H.,
Davidovits, P., Onasch, T. B., and Worsnop, D. R.: A novel method for
estimating light-scattering properties of soot aerosols using a modified
single-particle soot photometer, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 41, 125–135,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820601118398" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820601118398</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Gerber, H.: Supersaturation and droplet spectral evolution in fog, J. Atmos.
Sci., 48, 2569–2588, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1991)048&lt;2569:SADSEI&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1991)048&lt;2569:SADSEI&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Hammer, E., Bukowiecki, N., Gysel, M., Jurányi, Z., Hoyle, C. R., Vogt,
R., Baltensperger, U., and Weingartner, E.: Investigation of the effective
peak supersaturation for liquid-phase clouds at the high-alpine site
Jungfraujoch, Switzerland (3580 m a.s.l.), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14,
1123–1139, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1123-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-1123-2014</ext-link>, 2014a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Hammer, E., Gysel, M., Roberts, G. C., Elias, T., Hofer, J., Hoyle, C. R.,
Bukowiecki, N., Dupont, J.-C., Burnet, F., Baltensperger, U., and
Weingartner, E.: Size-dependent particle activation properties in fog during
the ParisFog 2012/13 field campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 10517–10533,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10517-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-10517-2014</ext-link>, 2014b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Henning, S., Weingartner, E., Schmidt, S., Wendisch, M., Gäggeler, H. W.,
and Baltensperger, U.: Size-dependent aerosol activation at the high-alpine
site Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l.), Tellus B, 54, 82–95, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Herrmann, E., Weingartner, E., Henne, S., Vuilleumier, L., Bukowiecki, N.,
Steinbacher, M., Conen, F., Collaud Coen, M., Hammer, E., Jurányi, Z.,
Baltensperger, U., and Gysel, M.: Analysis of long-term aerosol size
distribution data from Jungfraujoch with emphasis on free tropospheric
conditions, cloud influence, and air mass transport: Six years of SMPS data
from Jungfraujoch, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 9459–9480,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023660" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD023660</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Hoyle, C. R., Webster, C. S., Rieder, H. E., Nenes, A., Hammer, E., Herrmann,
E., Gysel, M., Bukowiecki, N., Weingartner, E., Steinbacher, M., and
Baltensperger, U.: Chemical and physical influences on aerosol activation in
liquid clouds: a study based on observations from the Jungfraujoch,
Switzerland, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4043–4061,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4043-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-4043-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Jurányi, Z., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., Bukowiecki, N., Kammermann, L.
and Baltensperger, U.: A 17 month climatology of the cloud condensation
nuclei number concentration at the high alpine site Jungfraujoch, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D10204,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015199" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JD015199</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Kammermann, L., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., and Baltensperger, U.: 13-month
climatology of the aerosol hygroscopicity at the free tropospheric site
Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l.), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 10717–10732,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-10717-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-10717-2010</ext-link>, 2010a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</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., 115, D04202, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012447" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD012447</ext-link>, 2010b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Kenny, L. C., Gussman, R., and Meyer, M.: Development of a sharp-cut cyclone
for ambient aerosol monitoring applications, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 32,
338–358, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/027868200303669" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/027868200303669</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets, T.
Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1039/TF9363201152</ext-link>, 1936.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Kulkarni, G., Pekour, M., Afchine, A., Murphy, D. M., and Cziczo, D. J.:
Comparison of experimental and numerical studies of the performance
characteristics of a pumped counterflow virtual impactor, Aerosol Sci. Tech.,
45, 382–392, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2010.539291" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2010.539291</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Kupiszewski, P., Zanatta, M., Mertes, S., Vochezer, P., Lloyd, G., Schneider,
J., Schenk, L., Schnaiter, M., Baltensperger, U., Weingartner, E., and Gysel,
M.: Ice residual properties in mixed-phase clouds at the high-alpine
Jungfraujoch site, J. Geophys. Res., 121, 12343–12362,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024894" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD024894</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Kuwata, M., Kondo, Y., and Takegawa, N.: Critical condensed mass for
activation of black carbon as cloud condensation nuclei in Tokyo, J. Geophys.
Res., 114, D20202,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012086" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD012086</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Laborde, M., Mertes, P., Zieger, P., Dommen, J., Baltensperger, U., and
Gysel, M.: Sensitivity of the Single Particle Soot Photometer to different
black carbon types, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 1031–1043,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1031-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-5-1031-2012</ext-link>, 2012a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Laborde, M., Schnaiter, M., Linke, C., Saathoff, H., Naumann, K.-H.,
Möhler, O., Berlenz, S., Wagner, U., Taylor, J. W., Liu, D., Flynn, M.,
Allan, J. D., Coe, H., Heimerl, K., Dahlkötter, F., Weinzierl, B.,
Wollny, A. G., Zanatta, M., Cozic, J., Laj, P., Hitzenberger, R., Schwarz, J.
P., and Gysel, M.: Single Particle Soot Photometer intercomparison at the
AIDA chamber, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 3077–3097,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-3077-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-5-3077-2012</ext-link>, 2012b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Liu, D., Flynn, M., Gysel, M., Targino, A., Crawford, I., Bower, K.,
Choularton, T., Jurányi, Z., Steinbacher, M., Hüglin, C.,<?pagebreak page3854?> Curtius,
J., Kampus, M., Petzold, A., Weingartner, E., Baltensperger, U., and Coe, H.:
Single particle characterization of black carbon aerosols at a tropospheric
alpine site in Switzerland, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7389–7407,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7389-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7389-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Lund, M. T., Berntsen, T. K., and Samset, B. H.: Sensitivity of black carbon
concentrations and climate impact to aging and scavenging in OsloCTM2-M7,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6003–6022, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6003-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-6003-2017</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Luo, J., Zhang, Y., Wang, F., and Zhang, Q.: Effects of brown coatings on the
absorption enhancement of black carbon: a numerical investigation, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 18, 16897–16914, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-16897-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-16897-2018</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Matsui, H.: Black carbon simulations using a size- and mixing-state-resolved
three-dimensional model: 2. Aging timescale and its impact over East Asia:
Size- and Mixing-State-Resolved BC Simulation 2, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
121, 1808–1821, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023999" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD023999</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Matsui, H., Koike, M., Kondo, Y., Moteki, N., Fast, J. D., and Zaveri, R. A.:
Development and validation of a black carbon mixing state resolved
three-dimensional model: aging processes and radiative impact, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 118, 2304–2326, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018446" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD018446</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Moteki, N., Kondo, Y., Oshima, N., Takegawa, N., Koike, M., Kita, K., Matsui,
H., and Kajino, M.: Size dependence of wet removal of black carbon aerosols
during transport from the boundary layer to the free troposphere, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 39, L13802, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052034" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL052034</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Motos, G., Corbin, J. C., Schmale, J., Modini, R. L., Bertò, M., Kupiszewski, P., Baltensperger, U., and Gysel-Beer, M.: Mixing state of
black carbon at the free tropospheric site Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l.) is substantially different in winter compared to summer, in preparation, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Motos, G., Schmale, J., Corbin, J. C., Zanatta, M., Baltensperger, U., and
Gysel-Beer, M.: Droplet activation behaviour of atmospheric black carbon
particles in fog as a function of their size and mixing state, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 19, 2183–2207, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2183-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-2183-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Ohata, S., Moteki, N., Mori, T., Koike, M., and Kondo, Y.: A key process
controlling the wet removal of aerosols: new observational evidence, Sci.
Rep., 6,  L13802,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep34113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/srep34113</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</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.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Petzold, A. and Schönlinner, M.: Multi-angle absorption photometry - a
new method for the measurement of aerosol light absorption and atmospheric
black carbon, J. Aerosol Sci., 35, 421–441,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2003.09.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jaerosci.2003.09.005</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Politovich, M. K. and Cooper, W. A.: Variability of the supersaturation in
cumulus clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 1651–1664,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045&lt;1651:VOTSIC&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045&lt;1651:VOTSIC&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Poltera, Y., Martucci, G., Collaud Coen, M., Hervo, M., Emmenegger, L.,
Henne, S., Brunner, D., and Haefele, A.: PathfinderTURB: an automatic
boundary layer algorithm. Development, validation and application to study
the impact on in situ measurements at the Jungfraujoch, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
17, 10051–10070, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10051-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-10051-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Roberts, G. C. and Nenes, A.: A continuous-flow streamwise thermal-gradient
CCN chamber for atmospheric measurements, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 39, 206–221,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/027868290913988" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/027868290913988</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Roth, A., Schneider, J., Klimach, T., Mertes, S., van Pinxteren, D.,
Herrmann, H., and Borrmann, S.: Aerosol properties, source identification,
and cloud processing in orographic clouds measured by single particle mass
spectrometry on a central European mountain site during HCCT-2010, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 16, 505–524, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-505-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-505-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Schmale, J., Henning, S., Decesari, S., Henzing, B., Keskinen, H., Sellegri,
K., Ovadnevaite, J., Pöhlker, M. L., Brito, J., Bougiatioti, A.,
Kristensson, A., Kalivitis, N., Stavroulas, I., Carbone, S., Jefferson, A.,
Park, M., Schlag, P., Iwamoto, Y., Aalto, P., Äijälä, M.,
Bukowiecki, N., Ehn, M., Frank, G., Fröhlich, R., Frumau, A., Herrmann,
E., Herrmann, H., Holzinger, R., Kos, G., Kulmala, M., Mihalopoulos, N.,
Nenes, A., O'Dowd, C., Petäjä, T., Picard, D., Pöhlker, C.,
Pöschl, U., Poulain, L., Prévôt, A. S. H., Swietlicki, E.,
Andreae, M. O., Artaxo, P., Wiedensohler, A., Ogren, J., Matsuki, A., Yum, S.
S., Stratmann, F., Baltensperger, U., and Gysel, M.: Long-term cloud
condensation nuclei number concentration, particle number size distribution
and chemical composition measurements at regionally representative
observatories, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 2853–2881,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2853-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-2853-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Schroder, J. C., Hanna, S. J., Modini, R. L., Corrigan, A. L., Kreidenwies,
S. M., Macdonald, A. M., Noone, K. J., Russell, L. M., Leaitch, W. R., and
Bertram, A. K.: Size-resolved observations of refractory black carbon
particles in cloud droplets at a marine boundary layer site, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 15, 1367–1383, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-1367-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-1367-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R. S., Fahey, D. W., Thomson, D. S., Watts, L. A.,
Wilson, J. C., Reeves, J. M., Darbeheshti, M., Baumgardner, D. G., Kok, G.
L., Chung, S. H., Schulz, M., Hendricks, J., Lauer, A., Kärcher, B.,
Slowik, J. G., Rosenlof, K. H., Thompson, T. L., Langford, A. O.,
Loewenstein, M., and Aikin, K. C.: Single-particle measurements of
midlatitude black carbon and light-scattering aerosols from the boundary
layer to the lower stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D16207, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007076" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007076</ext-link>,
2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</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.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Snider, J. R., Guibert, S., Brenguier, J.-L., and Putaud, J.-P.: Aerosol
activation in marine stratocumulus clouds: 2. Köhler and parcel theory
closure studies, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 8629,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002692" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002692</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Stier, P., Seinfeld, J. H., Kinne, S., Feichter, J., and Boucher, O.: Impact
of nonabsorbing anthropogenic aerosols on clear-sky atmospheric absorption,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D18201, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007147" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JD007147</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Stokes, R. H. and Robinson, R. A.: Interactions in aqueous nonelectrolyte
solutions, I, Solute-solvent equilibria, J. Phys. Chem., 70, 2126–2131,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/j100879a010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/j100879a010</ext-link>, 1966.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page3855?><ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Taylor, J. W., Allan, J. D., Liu, D., Flynn, M., Weber, R., Zhang, X., Lefer,
B. L., Grossberg, N., Flynn, J., and Coe, H.: Assessment of the sensitivity
of core/shell parameters derived using the single-particle soot photometer to
density and refractive index, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 1701–1718,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1701-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-8-1701-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Tritscher, T., Jurányi, Z., Martin, M., Chirico, R., Gysel, M., Heringa,
M. F., DeCarlo, P. F., Sierau, B., Prévôt, A. S. H., Weingartner, E.,
and Baltensperger, U.: Changes of hygroscopicity and morphology during ageing
of diesel soot, Environ. Res. Lett., 6, 034026,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034026" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034026</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Tröstl, J., Herrmann, E., Frege, C., Bianchi, F., Molteni, U.,
Bukowiecki, N., Hoyle, C. R., Steinbacher, M., Weingartner, E., Dommen, J.,
Gysel, M., and Baltensperger, U.: Contribution of new particle formation to
the total aerosol concentration at the high-altitude site Jungfraujoch
(3580 m a.s.l., Switzerland), J. Geophys. Res., 121, 11692–11711,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024637" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD024637</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Twomey, S.: Pollution and the planetary albedo, Atmos. Environ., 8,
1251–1256, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(74)90004-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0004-6981(74)90004-3</ext-link>, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>Verheggen, B., Cozic, J., Weingartner, E., Bower, K., Mertes, S., Connolly,
P., Gallagher, M., Flynn, M., Choularton, T., and Baltensperger, U.: Aerosol
partitioning between the interstitial and the condensed phase in mixed-phase
clouds, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D23202, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008714" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD008714</ext-link>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>Weingartner, E., Nyeki, S., and Baltensperger, U.: Seasonal and diurnal variation of aerosol size distributions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">750</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm)
at a high-alpine site (Jungfraujoch 3580 m asl), J. Geophys. Res., 104,
D21,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900170" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999JD900170</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, G., Lin, Q., Peng, L., Bi, X., Chen, D., Li, M., Li, L., Brechtel, F.
J., Chen, J., Yan, W., Wang, X., Peng, P., Sheng, G., and Zhou, Z.: The
single-particle mixing state and cloud scavenging of black carbon: a case
study at a high-altitude mountain site in southern China, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
17, 14975–14985, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-14975-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-14975-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>Zieger, P., Kienast-Sjögren, E., Starace, M., von Bismarck, J.,
Bukowiecki, N., Baltensperger, U., Wienhold, F. G., Peter, T., Ruhtz, T.,
Collaud Coen, M., Vuilleumier, L., Maier, O., Emili, E., Popp, C., and
Weingartner, E.: Spatial variation of aerosol optical properties around the
high-alpine site Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l.), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12,
7231–7249, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7231-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-7231-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Cloud droplet activation properties and scavenged fraction of black carbon in liquid-phase clouds at the high-alpine research station Jungfraujoch (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.)</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Liquid clouds form by condensation of water vapour on aerosol particles in
the atmosphere. Even black carbon (BC) particles, which are known to be
slightly hygroscopic, have been shown to readily form cloud droplets once they
have acquired water-soluble coatings by atmospheric aging processes.
Accurately simulating the life cycle of BC in the atmosphere, which strongly
depends on the wet removal following droplet activation, has recently been
identified as a key element for accurate prediction of the climate forcing of
BC.</p><p>Here, to assess BC activation in detail, we performed in situ measurements
during cloud events at the Jungfraujoch high-altitude station in Switzerland
in summer 2010 and 2016. Cloud droplet residual and interstitial
(unactivated) particles as well as the total aerosol were selectively sampled
using different inlets, followed by their physical characterization using
scanning mobility particle sizers (SMPSs), multi-angle absorption photometers
(MAAPs) and a single-particle soot photometer (SP2). By calculating cloud
droplet activated fractions with these measurements, we determined the roles
of various parameters on the droplet activation of BC. The half-rise
threshold diameter for droplet activation
(<i>D</i><sub>half</sub><sup>cloud</sup>), i.e. the size above which aerosol
particles formed cloud droplets, was inferred from the aerosol size
distributions measured behind the different inlets. The effective peak
supersaturation (SS<sub>peak</sub>) of a cloud was derived from
<i>D</i><sub>half</sub><sup>cloud</sup> by comparing it to the supersaturation
dependence of the threshold diameter for cloud condensation nuclei (CCN)
activation measured by a CCN counter (CCNC). In this way, we showed that the
mass-based scavenged fraction of BC strongly correlates with that of the
entire aerosol population because SS<sub>peak</sub> modulates the critical
size for activation of either particle type. A total of 50&thinsp;% of the
BC-containing particles with a BC mass equivalent core diameter of 90&thinsp;nm
was activated in clouds with SS<sub>peak</sub> ≈ 0.21&thinsp;%,
increasing up to  ∼ 80&thinsp;% activated fraction at
SS<sub>peak</sub> ≈ 0.50&thinsp;%. On a single-particle basis, BC
activation at a certain SS<sub>peak</sub> is controlled by the BC core size
and internally mixed coating, which increases overall particle size and
hygroscopicity. However, the resulting effect on the population averaged and
on the size-integrated BC scavenged fraction by mass is small for two
reasons: first, acquisition of coatings only matters for small cores in
clouds with low SS<sub>peak</sub>; and, second, variations in BC core size
distribution and mean coating thickness are limited in the lower free
troposphere in summer.</p><p>Finally, we tested the ability of a simplified theoretical model, which
combines the <i>κ</i>-Köhler theory with the Zdanovskii–Stokes–Robinson
(ZSR) mixing rule under the assumptions of spherical core–shell particle
geometry and surface tension of pure water, to predict the droplet activation
behaviour of BC-containing particles in real clouds. Predictions of BC
activation constrained with SS<sub>peak</sub> and measured BC-containing
particle size and mixing state were compared with direct cloud observations.
These predictions achieved closure with the measurements for the particle
size ranges accessible to our instrumentation, that is, BC core diameters and
total particle diameters of approximately 50 and 180&thinsp;nm, respectively. This
clearly indicates that such simplified theoretical models provide a
sufficient description of BC activation in clouds, as previously shown for
activation occurring in fog at lower supersaturation and also shown in
laboratory experiments under controlled conditions. This further justifies
application of such simplified theoretical approaches in regional and global
simulations of BC activation in clouds, which include aerosol modules that
explicitly simulate BC-containing particle size and mixing state.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Baltensperger, U., Gäggeler, H. W., Jost, D. T., Lugauer, M.,
Schwikowski, M., and Weingartner, E.: Aerosol climatology at the high-alpine
site Jungfraujoch, Switzerland, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 19707–19715,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00928" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD00928</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Bianchi, F., Tröstl, J., Junninen, H., Frege, C., Henne, S., Hoyle, C.
R., Molteni, U., Herrmann, E., Adamov, A., Bukowiecki, N., Chen, X.,
Duplissy, J., Gysel, M., Hutterli, M., Kangasluoma, J., Kontkanen, J.,
Kürten, A., Manninen, H. E., Münch, S., Peräkylä, O.,
Petäjä, T., Rondo, L., Williamson, C., Weingartner, E., Curtius, J.,
Worsnop, D. R., Kulmala, M., Dommen, J., and Baltensperger, U.: New particle
formation in the free troposphere: a question of chemistry and timing,
Science, 352, aad5456,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad5456" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad5456</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bond, T. C., Habib, G., and Bergstrom, R. W.: Limitations in the enhancement
of visible light absorption due to mixing state, J. Geophys. Res.,
111, D20211,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007315" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007315</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T.,
DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne,
S., Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M.,
Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K.,
Hopke, P. K., Jacobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U.,
Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender, C.
S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific
assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171</a>,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster,
P., Kerminen, V. M., Kondo, Y., Liao, Y., and Lohmann, U.: Clouds and
Aerosols, in: Climate change 2013: the physical science basis, Contribution
of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental
panel on climate change, pp. 571–567, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Balkanski, Y., Hodnebrog, Ø., Myhre, C. L., Myhre, G., Quaas,
J., Samset, B. H., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., and Wang, R.: Jury is still out
on the radiative forcing by black carbon, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113,
5092–5093, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607005113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607005113</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Bougiatioti, A., Fountoukis, C., Kalivitis, N., Pandis, S. N., Nenes, A., and
Mihalopoulos, N.: Cloud condensation nuclei measurements in the marine
boundary layer of the Eastern Mediterranean: CCN closure and droplet growth
kinetics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7053–7066,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7053-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7053-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Boulter, J. E., Cziczo, D. J., Middlebrook, A. M., Thomson, D. S., and
Murphy, D. M.: Design and performance of a pumped counterflow virtual
impactor, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 40, 969–976, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820600840984" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820600840984</a>,
2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bukowiecki, N., Weingartner, E., Gysel, M., Collaud Coen, M., Zieger, P.,
Herrmann, E., Steinbacher, M., Gäggeler, H. W., and Baltensperger, U.: A
review of more than 20 years of aerosol observation at the high altitude
research station Jungfraujoch, Switzerland (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.), Aerosol Air
Qual. Res., 16, 764–788, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2015.05.0305" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2015.05.0305</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Ching, J., West, M., and Riemer, N.: Quantifying impacts of aerosol mixing
state on nucleation-scavenging of black carbon aerosol particles, Atmosphere,
9, 17,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9010017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9010017</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Collaud Coen, M., Andrews, E., Asmi, A., Baltensperger, U., Bukowiecki, N.,
Day, D., Fiebig, M., Fjaeraa, A. M., Flentje, H., Hyvärinen, A.,
Jefferson, A., Jennings, S. G., Kouvarakis, G., Lihavainen, H., Lund Myhre,
C., Malm, W. C., Mihapopoulos, N., Molenar, J. V., O'Dowd, C., Ogren, J. A.,
Schichtel, B. A., Sheridan, P., Virkkula, A., Weingartner, E., Weller, R.,
and Laj, P.: Aerosol decadal trends – Part 1: In-situ optical measurements
at GAW and IMPROVE stations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 869–894,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-869-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-869-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Cozic, J., Verheggen, B., Mertes, S., Connolly, P., Bower, K., Petzold, A.,
Baltensperger, U., and Weingartner, E.: Scavenging of black carbon in mixed
phase clouds at the high alpine site Jungfraujoch, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7,
1797–1807, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1797-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-1797-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Dalirian, M., Ylisirniö, A., Buchholz, A., Schlesinger, D., Ström,
J., Virtanen, A., and Riipinen, I.: Cloud droplet activation of black carbon
particles coated with organic compounds of varying solubility, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 18, 12477–12489, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12477-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12477-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: A review of our understanding of the
aerosol–cloud interaction from the perspective of a bin resolved cloud scale
modelling, Atmos. Res., 97, 478–497, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008</a>,
2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Fuller, K. A., Malm, W. C., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Effects of mixing on
extinction by carbonaceous particles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 104,
15941–15954, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JD100069" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JD100069</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Gao, R. S., Schwarz, J. P., Kelly, K. K., Fahey, D. W., Watts, L. A.,
Thompson, T. L., Spackman, J. R., Slowik, J. G., Cross, E. S., Han, J.-H.,
Davidovits, P., Onasch, T. B., and Worsnop, D. R.: A novel method for
estimating light-scattering properties of soot aerosols using a modified
single-particle soot photometer, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 41, 125–135,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820601118398" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820601118398</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Gerber, H.: Supersaturation and droplet spectral evolution in fog, J. Atmos.
Sci., 48, 2569–2588, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1991)048&lt;2569:SADSEI&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1991)048&lt;2569:SADSEI&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Hammer, E., Bukowiecki, N., Gysel, M., Jurányi, Z., Hoyle, C. R., Vogt,
R., Baltensperger, U., and Weingartner, E.: Investigation of the effective
peak supersaturation for liquid-phase clouds at the high-alpine site
Jungfraujoch, Switzerland (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14,
1123–1139, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1123-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1123-2014</a>, 2014a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hammer, E., Gysel, M., Roberts, G. C., Elias, T., Hofer, J., Hoyle, C. R.,
Bukowiecki, N., Dupont, J.-C., Burnet, F., Baltensperger, U., and
Weingartner, E.: Size-dependent particle activation properties in fog during
the ParisFog 2012/13 field campaign, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 10517–10533,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10517-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-10517-2014</a>, 2014b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Henning, S., Weingartner, E., Schmidt, S., Wendisch, M., Gäggeler, H. W.,
and Baltensperger, U.: Size-dependent aerosol activation at the high-alpine
site Jungfraujoch (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.), Tellus B, 54, 82–95, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Herrmann, E., Weingartner, E., Henne, S., Vuilleumier, L., Bukowiecki, N.,
Steinbacher, M., Conen, F., Collaud Coen, M., Hammer, E., Jurányi, Z.,
Baltensperger, U., and Gysel, M.: Analysis of long-term aerosol size
distribution data from Jungfraujoch with emphasis on free tropospheric
conditions, cloud influence, and air mass transport: Six years of SMPS data
from Jungfraujoch, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 9459–9480,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023660" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023660</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Hoyle, C. R., Webster, C. S., Rieder, H. E., Nenes, A., Hammer, E., Herrmann,
E., Gysel, M., Bukowiecki, N., Weingartner, E., Steinbacher, M., and
Baltensperger, U.: Chemical and physical influences on aerosol activation in
liquid clouds: a study based on observations from the Jungfraujoch,
Switzerland, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 4043–4061,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4043-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-4043-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Jurányi, Z., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., Bukowiecki, N., Kammermann, L.
and Baltensperger, U.: A 17 month climatology of the cloud condensation
nuclei number concentration at the high alpine site Jungfraujoch, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D10204,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015199" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015199</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Kammermann, L., Gysel, M., Weingartner, E., and Baltensperger, U.: 13-month
climatology of the aerosol hygroscopicity at the free tropospheric site
Jungfraujoch (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 10717–10732,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-10717-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-10717-2010</a>, 2010a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</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., 115, D04202, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012447" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012447</a>, 2010b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Kenny, L. C., Gussman, R., and Meyer, M.: Development of a sharp-cut cyclone
for ambient aerosol monitoring applications, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 32,
338–358, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/027868200303669" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/027868200303669</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets, T.
Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152</a>, 1936.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Kulkarni, G., Pekour, M., Afchine, A., Murphy, D. M., and Cziczo, D. J.:
Comparison of experimental and numerical studies of the performance
characteristics of a pumped counterflow virtual impactor, Aerosol Sci. Tech.,
45, 382–392, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2010.539291" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2010.539291</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Kupiszewski, P., Zanatta, M., Mertes, S., Vochezer, P., Lloyd, G., Schneider,
J., Schenk, L., Schnaiter, M., Baltensperger, U., Weingartner, E., and Gysel,
M.: Ice residual properties in mixed-phase clouds at the high-alpine
Jungfraujoch site, J. Geophys. Res., 121, 12343–12362,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024894" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024894</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Kuwata, M., Kondo, Y., and Takegawa, N.: Critical condensed mass for
activation of black carbon as cloud condensation nuclei in Tokyo, J. Geophys.
Res., 114, D20202,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012086" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012086</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Laborde, M., Mertes, P., Zieger, P., Dommen, J., Baltensperger, U., and
Gysel, M.: Sensitivity of the Single Particle Soot Photometer to different
black carbon types, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 1031–1043,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1031-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-1031-2012</a>, 2012a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Laborde, M., Schnaiter, M., Linke, C., Saathoff, H., Naumann, K.-H.,
Möhler, O., Berlenz, S., Wagner, U., Taylor, J. W., Liu, D., Flynn, M.,
Allan, J. D., Coe, H., Heimerl, K., Dahlkötter, F., Weinzierl, B.,
Wollny, A. G., Zanatta, M., Cozic, J., Laj, P., Hitzenberger, R., Schwarz, J.
P., and Gysel, M.: Single Particle Soot Photometer intercomparison at the
AIDA chamber, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 5, 3077–3097,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-3077-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-5-3077-2012</a>, 2012b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, D., Flynn, M., Gysel, M., Targino, A., Crawford, I., Bower, K.,
Choularton, T., Jurányi, Z., Steinbacher, M., Hüglin, C., Curtius,
J., Kampus, M., Petzold, A., Weingartner, E., Baltensperger, U., and Coe, H.:
Single particle characterization of black carbon aerosols at a tropospheric
alpine site in Switzerland, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7389–7407,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7389-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7389-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Lund, M. T., Berntsen, T. K., and Samset, B. H.: Sensitivity of black carbon
concentrations and climate impact to aging and scavenging in OsloCTM2-M7,
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6003–6022, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6003-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6003-2017</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Luo, J., Zhang, Y., Wang, F., and Zhang, Q.: Effects of brown coatings on the
absorption enhancement of black carbon: a numerical investigation, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 18, 16897–16914, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-16897-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-16897-2018</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Matsui, H.: Black carbon simulations using a size- and mixing-state-resolved
three-dimensional model: 2. Aging timescale and its impact over East Asia:
Size- and Mixing-State-Resolved BC Simulation 2, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
121, 1808–1821, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023999" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023999</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Matsui, H., Koike, M., Kondo, Y., Moteki, N., Fast, J. D., and Zaveri, R. A.:
Development and validation of a black carbon mixing state resolved
three-dimensional model: aging processes and radiative impact, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 118, 2304–2326, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018446" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD018446</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Moteki, N., Kondo, Y., Oshima, N., Takegawa, N., Koike, M., Kita, K., Matsui,
H., and Kajino, M.: Size dependence of wet removal of black carbon aerosols
during transport from the boundary layer to the free troposphere, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 39, L13802, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052034" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052034</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Motos, G., Corbin, J. C., Schmale, J., Modini, R. L., Bertò, M., Kupiszewski, P., Baltensperger, U., and Gysel-Beer, M.: Mixing state of
black carbon at the free tropospheric site Jungfraujoch (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.) is substantially different in winter compared to summer, in preparation, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Motos, G., Schmale, J., Corbin, J. C., Zanatta, M., Baltensperger, U., and
Gysel-Beer, M.: Droplet activation behaviour of atmospheric black carbon
particles in fog as a function of their size and mixing state, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 19, 2183–2207, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2183-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-2183-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Ohata, S., Moteki, N., Mori, T., Koike, M., and Kondo, Y.: A key process
controlling the wet removal of aerosols: new observational evidence, Sci.
Rep., 6,  L13802,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep34113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/srep34113</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</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.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Petzold, A. and Schönlinner, M.: Multi-angle absorption photometry - a
new method for the measurement of aerosol light absorption and atmospheric
black carbon, J. Aerosol Sci., 35, 421–441,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2003.09.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2003.09.005</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Politovich, M. K. and Cooper, W. A.: Variability of the supersaturation in
cumulus clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 1651–1664,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045&lt;1651:VOTSIC&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045&lt;1651:VOTSIC&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Poltera, Y., Martucci, G., Collaud Coen, M., Hervo, M., Emmenegger, L.,
Henne, S., Brunner, D., and Haefele, A.: PathfinderTURB: an automatic
boundary layer algorithm. Development, validation and application to study
the impact on in situ measurements at the Jungfraujoch, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
17, 10051–10070, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10051-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10051-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Roberts, G. C. and Nenes, A.: A continuous-flow streamwise thermal-gradient
CCN chamber for atmospheric measurements, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 39, 206–221,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/027868290913988" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/027868290913988</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Roth, A., Schneider, J., Klimach, T., Mertes, S., van Pinxteren, D.,
Herrmann, H., and Borrmann, S.: Aerosol properties, source identification,
and cloud processing in orographic clouds measured by single particle mass
spectrometry on a central European mountain site during HCCT-2010, Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 16, 505–524, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-505-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-505-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Schmale, J., Henning, S., Decesari, S., Henzing, B., Keskinen, H., Sellegri,
K., Ovadnevaite, J., Pöhlker, M. L., Brito, J., Bougiatioti, A.,
Kristensson, A., Kalivitis, N., Stavroulas, I., Carbone, S., Jefferson, A.,
Park, M., Schlag, P., Iwamoto, Y., Aalto, P., Äijälä, M.,
Bukowiecki, N., Ehn, M., Frank, G., Fröhlich, R., Frumau, A., Herrmann,
E., Herrmann, H., Holzinger, R., Kos, G., Kulmala, M., Mihalopoulos, N.,
Nenes, A., O'Dowd, C., Petäjä, T., Picard, D., Pöhlker, C.,
Pöschl, U., Poulain, L., Prévôt, A. S. H., Swietlicki, E.,
Andreae, M. O., Artaxo, P., Wiedensohler, A., Ogren, J., Matsuki, A., Yum, S.
S., Stratmann, F., Baltensperger, U., and Gysel, M.: Long-term cloud
condensation nuclei number concentration, particle number size distribution
and chemical composition measurements at regionally representative
observatories, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 2853–2881,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2853-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2853-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Schroder, J. C., Hanna, S. J., Modini, R. L., Corrigan, A. L., Kreidenwies,
S. M., Macdonald, A. M., Noone, K. J., Russell, L. M., Leaitch, W. R., and
Bertram, A. K.: Size-resolved observations of refractory black carbon
particles in cloud droplets at a marine boundary layer site, Atmos. Chem.
Phys., 15, 1367–1383, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-1367-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-1367-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R. S., Fahey, D. W., Thomson, D. S., Watts, L. A.,
Wilson, J. C., Reeves, J. M., Darbeheshti, M., Baumgardner, D. G., Kok, G.
L., Chung, S. H., Schulz, M., Hendricks, J., Lauer, A., Kärcher, B.,
Slowik, J. G., Rosenlof, K. H., Thompson, T. L., Langford, A. O.,
Loewenstein, M., and Aikin, K. C.: Single-particle measurements of
midlatitude black carbon and light-scattering aerosols from the boundary
layer to the lower stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D16207, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007076" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007076</a>,
2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</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.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Snider, J. R., Guibert, S., Brenguier, J.-L., and Putaud, J.-P.: Aerosol
activation in marine stratocumulus clouds: 2. Köhler and parcel theory
closure studies, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 8629,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002692" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002692</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Stier, P., Seinfeld, J. H., Kinne, S., Feichter, J., and Boucher, O.: Impact
of nonabsorbing anthropogenic aerosols on clear-sky atmospheric absorption,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D18201, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007147" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007147</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Stokes, R. H. and Robinson, R. A.: Interactions in aqueous nonelectrolyte
solutions, I, Solute-solvent equilibria, J. Phys. Chem., 70, 2126–2131,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/j100879a010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/j100879a010</a>, 1966.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Taylor, J. W., Allan, J. D., Liu, D., Flynn, M., Weber, R., Zhang, X., Lefer,
B. L., Grossberg, N., Flynn, J., and Coe, H.: Assessment of the sensitivity
of core/shell parameters derived using the single-particle soot photometer to
density and refractive index, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 1701–1718,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1701-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1701-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Tritscher, T., Jurányi, Z., Martin, M., Chirico, R., Gysel, M., Heringa,
M. F., DeCarlo, P. F., Sierau, B., Prévôt, A. S. H., Weingartner, E.,
and Baltensperger, U.: Changes of hygroscopicity and morphology during ageing
of diesel soot, Environ. Res. Lett., 6, 034026,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034026" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034026</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Tröstl, J., Herrmann, E., Frege, C., Bianchi, F., Molteni, U.,
Bukowiecki, N., Hoyle, C. R., Steinbacher, M., Weingartner, E., Dommen, J.,
Gysel, M., and Baltensperger, U.: Contribution of new particle formation to
the total aerosol concentration at the high-altitude site Jungfraujoch
(3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l., Switzerland), J. Geophys. Res., 121, 11692–11711,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024637" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024637</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Twomey, S.: Pollution and the planetary albedo, Atmos. Environ., 8,
1251–1256, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(74)90004-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(74)90004-3</a>, 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Verheggen, B., Cozic, J., Weingartner, E., Bower, K., Mertes, S., Connolly,
P., Gallagher, M., Flynn, M., Choularton, T., and Baltensperger, U.: Aerosol
partitioning between the interstitial and the condensed phase in mixed-phase
clouds, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D23202, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008714" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008714</a>, 2007.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Weingartner, E., Nyeki, S., and Baltensperger, U.: Seasonal and diurnal variation of aerosol size distributions (10 &lt; <i>D</i> &lt; 750&thinsp;nm)
at a high-alpine site (Jungfraujoch 3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;asl), J. Geophys. Res., 104,
D21,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900170" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900170</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, G., Lin, Q., Peng, L., Bi, X., Chen, D., Li, M., Li, L., Brechtel, F.
J., Chen, J., Yan, W., Wang, X., Peng, P., Sheng, G., and Zhou, Z.: The
single-particle mixing state and cloud scavenging of black carbon: a case
study at a high-altitude mountain site in southern China, Atmos. Chem. Phys.,
17, 14975–14985, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-14975-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-14975-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Zieger, P., Kienast-Sjögren, E., Starace, M., von Bismarck, J.,
Bukowiecki, N., Baltensperger, U., Wienhold, F. G., Peter, T., Ruhtz, T.,
Collaud Coen, M., Vuilleumier, L., Maier, O., Emili, E., Popp, C., and
Weingartner, E.: Spatial variation of aerosol optical properties around the
high-alpine site Jungfraujoch (3580&thinsp;m&thinsp;a.s.l.), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12,
7231–7249, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7231-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-7231-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
