<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/acp-20-4275-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>Quantification and evaluation of atmospheric ammonia emissions with
different methods: a case study for the Yangtze<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> River Delta region, China</article-title><alt-title>Quantification and evaluation of atmospheric ammonia emissions</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Quantification and evaluation of atmospheric ammonia emissions}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{Y. Zhao et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Yu</given-names></name>
          <email>yuzhao@nju.edu.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Yuan</surname><given-names>Mengchen</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>Xin</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0922-5014</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Feng</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Jie</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control &amp; Resource Reuse and School of the Environment, Nanjing University, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>163 Xianlin Ave., Nanjing, Jiangsu 210023, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Jiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center of Atmospheric Environment and Equipment Technology (CICAEET), <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Nanjing University of Information Science &amp; Technology, Jiangsu 210044, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>School of Atmospheric Science, Nanjing University, 163 Xianlin Ave., Nanjing, Jiangsu 210023, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Jiangsu Provincial Academy of Environmental Science, 176 North Jiangdong Rd., Nanjing, Jiangsu 210036, China</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Yu Zhao (yuzhao@nju.edu.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>9</day><month>April</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>20</volume>
      <issue>7</issue>
      <fpage>4275</fpage><lpage>4294</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>31</day><month>July</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>12</day><month>November</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>28</day><month>February</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>11</day><month>March</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</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="d1e143">To explore the effects of data and method on emission estimation, two
inventories of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions of the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region in
eastern China were developed for 2014 based on constant emission factors
(E1) and those characterizing agricultural processes (E2).
The latter derived the monthly emission factors and activity data
integrating the local information of soil, meteorology, and agricultural
processes. The total emissions were calculated to be 1765 and 1067 Gg with E1 and E2, respectively, and clear differences existed in seasonal and spatial
distributions. Elevated emissions were found in March and September in E2,
attributed largely to the increased top dressing fertilization and to the
enhanced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization under high temperature, respectively.
A relatively large discrepancy between the inventories existed in the northern YRD
with abundant croplands. With the estimated emissions 38 % smaller in E2,
the average of simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations with an air quality model
using E2 was 27 % smaller than that using E1 at two ground sites in the YRD.
At the suburban site in Pudong, Shanghai
(SHPD), the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations with E1
were generally larger than observations, and the modeling performance was
improved, indicated by the smaller normalized mean errors (NMEs) when E2 was applied. In contrast,
very limited improvement was found at the urban site JSPAES, as E2 failed to
improve the emission estimation of transportation and residential
activities. Compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the modeling performance for inorganic
aerosols was better for most cases, and the differences between the
simulated concentrations with E1 and E2 were clearly smaller, at 7 %,
3 %, and 12 % (relative to E1) for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. Compared to the satellite-derived <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
column, application of E2 significantly corrected the overestimation in
vertical column density for January and October with E1, but it did not improve
the model performance for July. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions might be
underestimated with the assumption of linear correlation between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
volatilization and soil pH for acidic soil, particularly in warm seasons.
Three additional cases, i.e., 40 % abatement of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 40 % abatement
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 40 % abatement of both species, were applied to test the
sensitivity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and inorganic aerosol concentrations to precursor
emissions. Under an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich condition, estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions was detected to be more effective on simulation of secondary
inorganic aerosols compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Reduced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> would restrain the
formation of (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thereby enhance the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations. To improve the air quality more effectively and efficiently,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions should be substantially controlled along with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the future.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      <?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<?pagebreak page4276?><sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e442">As the most important alkaline composition in the atmosphere, ammonia
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) exerts crucial influences on atmospheric chemistry and the nitrogen
cycle. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> participates in chemical reactions with sulfuric acid
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and nitric acid (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HNO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and contributes to formation
of secondary inorganic aerosols (SIAs) including sulfate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),
nitrate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and ammonium (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and thereby to the
elevated concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM). In developed
regions in eastern China, for example, SIA was observed to account for over
50 % of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentrations (Yang et al., 2011; Zhang et al.,
2012; Huang et al., 2014), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were estimated to
contribute 8 %–11 % of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Wang et al., 2011). Recent studies
reported that the existence of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> could accelerate the heterogeneous
oxidation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thereby sulfate formation by neutralizing
aerosol acidity (Wang et al., 2016; Cheng et al., 2016; Paulot et al.,
2017). Deposition of gaseous <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosols results in
soil acidification and water eutrophication. Reduced nitrogen
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was monitored to contribute over 70 % of total
nitrogen deposition in China, revealing the importance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
ecosystem (Pan et al., 2012). Recently <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions have
gradually decreased due to implementation of air pollution control measures
in China; thus <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were found to play a greater role in
secondary aerosol formation and nitrogen deposition compared to previous
years (Liu et al., 2013; Fu et al., 2017; Pan et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e678">Quantification of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sources helps better understanding its
atmospheric and ecosystem effects. In contrast to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that
are largely from industrial plants, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> comes mainly from agricultural
activities that are more difficult to track, including livestock farming and
fertilizer use, and relatively large uncertainty in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission
inventories exists. Given the intensive agriculture across the country,
various methods were developed to estimate China's <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions at
the national level for the last 20 years, but clear discrepancies exist
between studies, as summarized by Zhang et al. (2018). With meteorology,
soil property, the method of fertilizer application, and different processes
of manure management considered in emission factor (emissions per unit level
of activity) determination in particular, the national <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
estimated by the Peking University group (Huang et al., 2012; Kang et al., 2016)
were 39 %–46 % smaller than those by the Tsinghua University group (Dong et al.,
2010; Zhao et al., 2013). Emissions of certain sectors differed
significantly between various methods. For example, Zhao et al. (2013) and
Kurokawa et al. (2013) calculated China's <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from fertilizer
use at 9.5–9.8 Tg, over 3 times the estimation by Kang et al. (2016).
With a fertilizer modeling system that couples an air quality model and an
agroecosystem model, Fu et al. (2015) made an estimate at 3.0 Tg, similar
to Kang et al. (2016). Besides the annual emission level, discrepancies also
exist in the interannual trend in emissions. Kang et al. (2016)
estimated that the national <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions reached a peak in 1996 and
declined thereafter, while Zhang et al. (2017) and Kurokawa et al. (2013)
expected a continuous growth till 2008 and 2015, respectively. The growth in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions was supported by satellite observation. Based on the
measurement of Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS), for example, Warner et al. (2017) suggested an annual increasing rate of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at
2.3 % from 2002 to 2016 in China, and it was partly attributed to the
elevated emissions from fertilizer use.</p>
      <p id="d1e803">Although varied methods and data resulted in discrepancies between
inventories and big uncertainty in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimation, very little
attention has been paid to those discrepancies and the underlying reasons.
At the regional scale, in particular, inclusion of high-resolution
information on meteorology and land use would potentially improve the
spatial and seasonal distribution of agricultural <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in the
inventory. Previous studies have demonstrated that including meteorology could improve <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimation for both Europe and North
America compared to simple static methodology (Bash et al., 2013;
Gyldenkaerne et al., 2005; Skjøth et al., 2011; Wichink Kruit et al.,
2012), and intercomparison studies have not been sufficiently
conducted for China. Moreover, few studies were conducted to evaluate
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission inventories incorporating air quality models and available
ground and satellite observations. One possible reason is the lack of
sufficient ground observation data on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosols
open to the public, as they are currently not regulated air pollutants in China
and thus not regularly monitored by the government. In addition, uncertainty
also exists in satellite observation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> columns and the retrieved
data need further validation (Van Damme et al., 2015). Without comparison
of different inventories in detail and appropriate assessment based on
model performance, the limitations of current emission estimates and the
future steps for inventory improvement remain unclear.</p>
      <?pagebreak page4277?><p id="d1e886">In this study, therefore, we chose the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region to
develop and evaluate the emission inventories of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with different
methods and data sources. Located in eastern China, the YRD region contains
the city of Shanghai and the provinces of Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Anhui (see
Fig. 1 for its location and prefectural cities) and is one of China's
most developed and heavily polluted regions (Xiao et al., 2011; Cheng et al.,
2014; Guo et al., 2017). It is an important area of agriculture production
and was identified as an “<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich” region regarding SIA formation
(Wang et al., 2011). We developed two <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission inventories for 2014
based on constant emission factors (E1) and those characterizing
agricultural processes (E2). The two inventories were compared
to each other to reveal the differences in spatial and seasonal
patterns of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and their origins. Evaluation of the two
inventories was further conducted using the Models-3/Community Multiscale Air
Quality (CMAQ) system and available observations from ground stations and
satellites. Environmental parameters that might influence <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> simulation
were identified through the model performance. Finally, the effects of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimates on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosol
simulation were evaluated through sensitivity analysis, and the policy
implications of air quality improvement are accordingly detailed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e994">Research domain. The blue dots and red triangles indicate the
locations of 43 meteorological monitoring sites and 2 air quality monitoring
sites, respectively, and the numbers 1–41 represent the prefectural
cities of Fuyang, Bozhou, Huaibei, Suzhou, Lu'an, Hefei, Huainan, Bengbu,
Chuzhou, Anqing, Tongling, Wuhu, Ma'anshan, Chizhou, Xuancheng, Huangshan,
Xuzhou, Suqian, Lianyungang, Huai'an, Yancheng, Yangzhou, Taizhou, Nanjing,
Zhenjiang, Changzhou, Wuxi, Suzhou, Nantong, Huzhou, Jiaxing, Hangzhou,
Shaoxing, Ningbo, Zhoushan, Quzhou, Jinhua, Taizhou, Lishui, Wenzhou, and
Shanghai. The map data provided by Resource and Environment Data Cloud
Platform are freely available for academic use (<uri>http://www.resdc.cn/data.aspx?DATAID=201</uri>, last access:  4 April 2020), © Institute of Geographic Sciences &amp; Natural Resources Research, Chinese
Academy of Sciences.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Data and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Emission inventory based on constant emission factors (E1)</title>
      <p id="d1e1021">The annual <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions of the YRD region for 2014 were estimated with
a bottom-up method based on the constant emission factors and then
allocated to the monthly level based on the previously investigated temporal
profile of emissions. The inventory contained eight source categories, i.e.,
fertilizer application, livestock–poultry breeding, fuel combustion, biomass
burning, transportation, sewage–waste treatment, industrial processes, and
human metabolization (see Table 1 for the details). Note that the emissions
from pets were not included in the current work, due to lack of detailed
information. Given their relatively small fraction in total emissions, e.g.,
less than 2 % in the United Kingdom (Sutton et al., 1995, 2000), we believe
that the uncertainty was limited. The annual emissions were calculated by
prefectural city with Eq. (1):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M73" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munder><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:munder><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AL</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EF</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the emissions (metric tons, t); <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> indicate the
prefectural city and source type, respectively; AL is the activity level,
which indicates the amount of livestock, the amount of used fertilizer, the
fuel burned, or the industrial production, depending on the source type; and
EF is the annual emission factor (kg-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> per unit of AL).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1120">Anthropogenic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission source categories.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Category</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Subcategory</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Category</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Subcategory</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fertilizer application</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">urea</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Fuel combustion</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">industrial coal combustion</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ammonium bicarbonate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">industrial oil combustion</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ammonium nitrate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">industrial gas combustion</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ammonium sulfate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">domestic coal combustion</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">compound fertilizer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">domestic oil combustion</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">domestic gas combustion</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Livestock   Farming</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">beef cattle</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Biomass burning</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">straw burning</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">dairy cow</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">domestic firewood</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">horse/donkey/mule</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">open</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">sow</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">hog</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Transportation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">light-duty gasoline vehicle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">goat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">heavy-duty gasoline vehicle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">sheep</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">light-duty diesel vehicle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">layer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">heavy-duty diesel vehicle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">laying duck</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">motorcycle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">broiler</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">duck</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sewage and waste treatment</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">waste landfill</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">goose</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">waste incineration</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rabbit</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">waste compost</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">cattle/buffalo</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">sewage treatment</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Human being</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">human sweat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Industry sources</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">ammonium synthesis</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">human breath</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">nitrogenous fertilizer</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">human excretion</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">phosphate fertilizer</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">baby excretion</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">coking</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page4278?><p id="d1e1490">The activity data were mainly taken or estimated from official statistics at
the prefectural city level (if available) or provincial level. For
livestock–poultry breeding, the year-end stock and slaughter numbers were
used for animals with a breeding cycle respectively more and less than 1
year. If the city-level stock was unavailable, the output of livestock
products by prefectural city was applied as the scaling factor to calculate
the number from the provincial data. Table S1 in the Supplement summarizes
the annual numbers of livestock and poultry by prefectural city in the YRD. The
amount of fertilizer used by prefectural city and type was calculated as the
product of sown area of cropland and fertilizer rate per unit area of
cropland. The sown area by crop type was taken from city-level statistics,
and the application rate by fertilizer type was obtained at the provincial level
from a national investigation by NDRC (2015). The detailed results of
fertilizer activity data are summarized in Table S2. As
can also be seen in the table, the aggregated amount of fertilizer used
by province was close to the provincial-level statistics, and the deviation
relevant to the official statistics was 2.3 % for the whole YRD. The
methods and data sources for activity levels of other source categories were
provided in our previous studies (Zhou et al., 2017; Zhao et al., 2017; Yang
and Zhao, 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e1494">The annual <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission factors were obtained based on a thorough
literature review and summarized by source category in Table S3. The results from domestic field measurements were preferentially
selected. For sources without suitable domestic measurements, the emission
factors were also obtained from previous inventories that shared a similar
study period as this work. The values from the US and Europe, e.g., AP-42
database (USEPA, 2002) and the EMEP/EEA guidebook (EEA, 2013a, b), were
adopted when the above information was lacking.</p>
      <p id="d1e1508">The monthly distribution of emissions by source was taken from domestic
investigations in the YRD (Li, 2012; Zhao et al., 2015; Zhou et al., 2017). For
the purpose of air quality modeling, the emissions by sector were allocated
into a grid system with a horizontal resolution at 9 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 km based on
selected proxies. Those proxies included the distribution of land use (for
fertilization), density of total population (for human metabolization and
sewage–waste treatment) and rural population (for livestock–poultry breeding
and residential solid fuel burning), gross domestic product (for industrial
fuel combustion and processes), road network (for transportation), and
satellite-derived fire points from the Moderate Resolution Imaging
Spectroradiometer (MODIS, for open biomass burning; Davies et al., 2009).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>The method characterizing agricultural processes (E2)</title>
      <p id="d1e1526">The livestock–poultry breeding emissions were
recalculated integrating the detailed regional information of soil,
meteorology, and agricultural processes. The same annual activity data as E1
(e.g., livestock–poultry numbers in Table S1 and fertilizer use in Table S2) were applied.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>2.2.1</label><title>Fertilizer use</title>
      <p id="d1e1536">The growing seasons of crops affect the temporal distribution of fertilizer
use and thereby that of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. We investigated the growing and
farming cycles by crop type in the YRD from the regional farming database by the
Ministry of Agriculture (MOA, <uri>http://202.127.42.157/moazzys/nongshi.aspx</uri>, last access: 31 July 2019) and other publications (Zhang
et al., 2009). Taking early-season rice as an example, the basal
dressing was usually conducted in mid-April, with all the complex fertilizer
and half of the other nitrogen fertilizer used. The top dressing was
conducted three times, i.e., 10 % and 10 % of nitrogen fertilizer used 7 d<?pagebreak page4279?> and 14 d after transplanting, and the 30 % used for
sprouting. With that information incorporated, we estimated
the monthly amount of fertilizer usage by prefectural city and fertilizer
type based on the annual amount in Table S2.</p>
      <p id="d1e1553">Emission factors of fertilization were expected to be influenced by soil
acidity, temperature, and the fertilization rate. We assumed a linear
correlation between the soil pH and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization rate (Huang et
al., 2012), and we calculated the monthly emission factors of two fertilization
types (basal dressing and top dressing) with Eqs. (2) and (3):

                  <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M83" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" columnspacing="1em" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">basal</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">basal</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rate</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">method</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>3</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.5}{9.5}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rate</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where EF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">basal</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and EF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are the emission factors for basal dressing
and top dressing, respectively; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the slope and
intercept depending on soil pH; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the reference
temperature and the slope depending on temperature, respectively;
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">basal</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the monthly average temperature of basal
dressing and top dressing, respectively; and  CF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rate</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and CF<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">method</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are
the correction factors for fertilization rate and application method (basal
dressing), respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e1843">The spatial distribution of soil pH at a horizontal resolution of
1 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 km was obtained from a world soil database by the International
Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA, <uri>http://webarchive.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/External-World-soil-database/HTML/</uri>, last access: 4 April 2020).
The correlation data between temperature and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization rate
were obtained from EEA (2009). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">basal</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">top</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were determined
combining the information of farming season by MOA and the daily temperature
data from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF,
<uri>http://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/data/interim-full-daily/levtype=sfc/#userconsent#</uri>, last access: 4 April 2020). All the relevant data for emission factor
correction were summarized in Table S4. The monthly
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization rates of urea and ammonium bicarbonate (ABC), the
two most applied types of fertilizer over the YRD region, are illustrated
by season in Fig. S1 in the Supplement. Larger volatilization rates were
found in the northern YRD for both fertilizer types, consistent with the
distribution of soil pH across the region. Taking urea as an example, the
volatilization rates in April and October were commonly smaller than the
uniform value applied in E1 at 17.4 %, while those in July were larger.
This discrepancy came partly from the consideration of fertilization types
in E2. In April and October, basal dressing fertilization was commonly
applied at the soil depth of 15–20 cm, restraining the NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>volatilization. In contrast, the relatively high temperature and top
dressing fertilization conducted in July elevated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
volatilization. It should be noted that the local fertilizer application
introduced some bias to the soil pH from the global database by IIASA. Basal
dressing would increase the soil pH (particularly for acidic soils) as
indicated in a previous domestic study (Zhong et al., 2006). Due to a lack of
the quantitative relation between the fertilizer application and soil pH at
the regional scale in China, we ignored the interaction between them in
Eq. (2).</p>
      <p id="d1e1926">Through the methodology mentioned above, the gridded emission factors and
monthly activity levels were obtained to improve the spatial and temporal
distributions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from fertilization. Figure 2 compares
the spatial distribution of the monthly fertilizer usage between E1 and E2,
indicated by the relative deviation (RD):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M102" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RD</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            In January and July, top dressing fertilization was conducted with limited
crop types like rapeseed, corn, and paddy rice, while considerable basal dressing
fertilization was investigated in April and October. Inclusion of those
details in E2 resulted in smaller estimates of fertilizer use in winter and
summer but larger estimates in spring and autumn compared to E1.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1994">Differences of fertilizer application between the two inventories
in YRD (RD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f02.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>2.2.2</label><title>Livestock–poultry breeding</title>
      <p id="d1e2060">In contrast to E1 that calculated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions based on livestock
numbers and annual EFs, a mass-flow approach was applied in E2 considering
the nitrogen transformation at different stages of manure management (Beusen
et al., 2008; EEA, 2013a; Huang et al., 2012). Commonly applied at the
global or national scale, the approach calculated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions of
manure management processes from a pool of total ammoniacal nitrogen (TAN)
for three main raising systems, as shown in Fig. S2. In
the YRD region, only intensive and free-range systems were considered, and
the TAN was calculated by livestock–poultry type based on the breeding
duration, the amount and nitrogen contents of urine and feces, and the mass
fraction of TAN. The parameters were taken from Yang (2008) and Huang et al. (2012), as summarized in Table S5. According to the
nitrogen flow and phase of manure management, the activity levels were then
classified into seven categories, including outdoor, housing solid,
housing liquid, storage solid, storage liquid, spreading solid, and
spreading liquid. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from livestock are calculated as the
product of TAN of each category and the corresponding emission factors. As
provided in Table S6, the temperature-dependant emission
factors by stage and phase were taken from Huang et al. (2012), and the gridded
emission factors can then be derived over the YRD region combining the
meteorology data from ECMWF.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Configuration of air quality modeling</title>
      <p id="d1e2105">The Models-3/Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model system version 4.7.1 was
applied to evaluate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission inventories for the YRD. CMAQ is a
three-dimensional Eulerian model designed for understanding the<?pagebreak page4280?> complex
interactions of atmospheric chemistry and physics (UNC, 2010). The model has
been widely applied and tested in China (Qin et al., 2015; Zhou et al.,
2017; Zheng et al., 2019). As shown in Fig. 1, two nested domains were
applied with the spatial resolutions of 27 and 9 km, on a
Lambert conformal conic projection centered at (34<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 110<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E). The
mother domain (D1, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">177</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">127</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cells) covered most parts of China, and
the second domain (D2, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">118</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">121</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cells) covered the whole YRD
region. The two inventories of YRD <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions developed in this work
were applied in D2. Emissions from other pollutants of anthropogenic origin
in D1 and D2 outside Jiangsu were obtained from the Multi-resolution
Emission Inventory for China (MEIC, <uri>http://www.meicmodel.org/</uri>,  last access: 4 April 2020) with an
original spatial resolution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Population density was applied to relocate MEIC to each modeling domain. A
high-resolution inventory that incorporates more information of local
emission sources was applied for Jiangsu (JS; Zhou et al., 2017). Both MEIC
and JS inventories are for 2012. The emissions for 2014 were obtained using
a simple scaling method based mainly on changes in activity levels (e.g.,
energy consumption and industrial production) between the 3 years.
The biogenic emission inventory was from the Model of Emissions of Gases and
Aerosols from Nature 2.1 (MEGAN2.1; Guenther et al., 2012; Sindelarova et
al., 2014), and the emission inventories of Cl, HCl, and lightning <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
were from the Global Emissions Initiative (GEIA; Price et al., 1997).
Meteorological fields were provided by the Weather Research and Forecasting
Model (WRF) version 3.4, a state-of-the-art atmospheric modeling system
designed for both meteorological research and numerical weather prediction
(Skamarock et al., 2008), and the gas-phase Carbon Bond (CB05) mechanism and
AERO5 aerosol module were adopted. Other details on model configuration and
parameters were given in Zhou et al. (2017). The simulations were conducted
for January, April, July, and October to represent the four typical seasons
in 2014. A 5 d spin-up period of each month was used to minimize the
influences of initial conditions in the simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e2207">Using the observation data of the US National Climate Data Center (NCDC) at 43
stations in the YRD (see Fig. 1 for the locations of the stations), the WRF
modeling performance was evaluated with statistical indicators including
averages of simulations and observations, bias, normalized mean bias (NMB),
normalized mean error (NME), root-mean-squared error (RMSE), and index of
agreement (IOA). As can be found in Table S7,
discrepancies between simulation and observation met the criteria by Emery
et al. (2001) for most cases, implying the reliability of meteorological
simulation. However, bigger errors were found for the simulation of wind
direction.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Ground-based and satellite observations</title>
      <p id="d1e2218">There were very limited continuous ground measurement data available for
ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosol in the YRD region in 2014,
particularly at rural–remote sites that are more representative for the
regional atmospheric environment. We conducted online hourly measurements
using MARGA (Monitor for AeRosols and Gases in ambient Air, ADI2080) at
an urban site in the western downtown of Nanjing (32.03<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N,
118.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) from August 2014. MARGA is a state-of-the-art
instrument which monitors near-real-time water-soluble ions in aerosols and
their gaseous precursors (Lanciki, 2018), and it was able to capture rapid
compositional changes in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Chen et al., 2017). The site was on the
roof of the building of the Jiangsu Provincial Academy of Environmental Science
(30 m above the ground) surrounded by residential and commercial buildings
and heavy traffic (JSPAES; Li et al., 2015; Chen et al., 2019). The data of
October 2014 were applied in this work to evaluate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories
through air quality simulation. In addition, the hourly data of online
measurement with MARGA were available at a suburban site in Pudong, Shanghai
(SHPD), for April, July, and October 2014 (unpublished data from Shanghai
Environmental Monitoring Center).</p>
      <p id="d1e2284">Regarding satellite observation, the daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical column
densities (VCDs) measured through the<?pagebreak page4281?> Infrared Atmospheric Sounding
Interferometer (IASI) were downloaded from the ESPRI data center (<uri>http://cds-espri.ipsl.upmc.fr/etherTypo/index.php?id=1700&amp;L=1</uri>,  last access: 4 April 2020). We used the data in the domain
(26.1–35.4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 114.2–124.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)
with a 9:30 local time Equator crossing time to evaluate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions. Only pixels with radiative cloud fraction &lt; 25 %,
relative error &lt; 100 %, and absolute error &lt; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" 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>  were used following the criteria of previous
studies (Van Damme et al., 2014, 2015). The monthly average VCDs for
January, April, July, and October 2014 were calculated and allocated into a
grid system of 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (longitude) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(latitude) using the Kriging interpolation method, as shown in Fig. 3.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2387">The spatial distribution of monthly average of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical
columns over the YRD region from IASI satellite observation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" 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>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussions</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Comparison between the two inventories</title>
      <p id="d1e2446">Table 2 summarizes the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions estimated with E1 and E2 by source
category and province for the YRD region in 2014. Agricultural activities
(livestock farming and fertilizer) were identified as the most important
sources of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with the fraction of total emissions ranging from 74 % to 84 %
in the two methods. Applying the constant emission factors, E1 derived a
total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimate 60 % larger than that by E2 that
characterized the agricultural processes. In particular, emissions from
agricultural activities in E1 were calculated as twice those in E2. At
the national scale, similarly, Dong et al. (2010) applied the constant
emission factors and estimated the total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions to be 16.1 Tg for
China, 64 % larger than 9.8 Tg by Huang et al. (2012) with the
agricultural processes characterized. The clearly larger estimation by
constant emission factors was due partly to the fact that most domestic
measurements on the emission factors of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from fertilizer application
were conducted in hot seasons (late spring and summer), when the basal
dressing of single-season rice and maize and top dressing of wheat were
usually conducted (Cai et al., 2002; Huo et al., 2015; Su et al., 2006).
However, the crop rotation varied a lot in China, and part of the nitrogen
fertilizer was actually not applied in hot seasons. Emission estimation
based on those emission factors may thus overestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission
intensity (Huo et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2010). Among
the provinces, the fraction from Jiangsu of YRD emissions ranged from 45 % to 47 %
in the two methods, followed by Anhui with around 37 %. Agricultural activities
were relatively intensive in the two provinces: Jiangsu and Anhui
contributed 46 % and 33 % of the economic output of agriculture and
livestock–poultry farming in the YRD, and the collective fraction of fertilizer
use by the two provinces reached 84 %. In contrast, agricultural
activities were limited in Shanghai and Zhejiang, with smaller emissions
estimated in both inventories.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2519">Two anthropogenic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission inventories in the YRD region
in 2014 (Gg).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="11">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis: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:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Method</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Livestock</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Fertilizer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Chemical</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Biomass</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Waste</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Traffic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Fuel</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Human</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">Total</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">industry</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">burning</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">disposal</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">combustion</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">beings</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shanghai</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">5.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">44.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">33.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Jiangsu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">340.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">357.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">8.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">5.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">30.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">791.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">145.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">257.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">496.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zhejiang</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">115.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">93.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">4.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">28.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">270.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">37.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">49.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">147.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anhui</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">241.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">314.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">35.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">37.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">658.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">102.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">185.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">389.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">712.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">778.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">31.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">75.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">20.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">21.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">22.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">102.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1764.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">291.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">501.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">1067.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2971">The monthly distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in the two inventories is
illustrated in Fig. 4. Both inventories indicated relatively large
emissions in summer (from June to August), and elevated emissions were
also found in March and September in E2. The difference comes mainly from
the effect of farming season on fertilization process. For example, the top
dressing fertilization for winter wheat was conducted mostly during the
seedling establishment and elongation stage in the following spring,
resulting in enhanced use of nitrogen fertilizer in March. Moreover,
September was the month with the highest temperature following summer in the YRD in
2014, and the elevated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization led to large emissions in E2.
Compared to the fertilizer use, less variation in monthly emissions was
found for livestock–poultry breeding, as very limited change in livestock
amount was detected in both inventories.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2999">Monthly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from fertilizer use and livestock
farming in E1 and E2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page4282?><p id="d1e3019">Illustrated in Fig. 5 are the spatial distributions of emissions from
fertilizer use, livestock–poultry breeding, and all categories in the two
inventories. Both inventories indicated large emission intensities in
northern Jiangsu (Xuzhou and Yancheng) and northern Anhui (Fuyang, Bozhou,
and Suzhou) with abundant agricultural production. Xuzhou and Yancheng
collectively contributed 36 %, 31 %, and 41 % of the provincial
fertilizer use, agricultural economic product, and livestock–poultry farming
product in Jiangsu, respectively. Similarly, Fuyang, Bozhou, and Suzhou
collectively contributed 36 %, 36 %, and 35 % of the provincial sown
area, agricultural economic product, and livestock–poultry farming product
in Anhui, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3024">Spatial distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from fertilizer use,
livestock farming, and all categories in E1 and E2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3044">The differences in spatial pattern between the two inventories were further
investigated for total and fertilizer use emissions by month, through the
indicator  RD calculated with Eq. (4). As shown in Fig. 6, larger RD was found
in northern Jiangsu, northern Anhui, and eastern Zhejiang, while smaller RD was found in
western Zhejiang. The emissions in E1 were commonly larger than those in E2
across the YRD region for January and April. In contrast, larger emissions
in E2 were found in northern Jiangsu (e.g., Xuzhou and Yancheng) and
northern Anhui for July and October. The discrepancy resulted from the
combined effect of varied activity data and emission factors as described in
Sect. 2.2: top dressing fertilization and high temperature led to enhanced
volatilization rate and thereby emissions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in E2, and the
abundant fertilizer use in the cropland in the northern YRD was the main
reason for the high emissions in October.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3060">Differences of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from fertilizer use and all
categories between the two inventories (RD <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">E</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3130">Figure 7 compares the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by province and source category in
this work and other available downscaled national (MEIC) or provincial
inventories in the YRD region. Results from other studies commonly
ranged between E1 and E2 for agriculture, the most important <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
source. With constant emission factors applied, the MEIC estimates were
similar to those in E1. Most current provincial inventories made some
corrections for emissions from fertilizer use or livestock–poultry breeding,
but the local geographical and meteorological information was seldom applied
in the emission estimation. For example, Liu and Yao (2016) calculated the
emissions from livestock–poultry breeding for Jiangsu based on TAN but did
not consider the impacts of varied monthly temperatures on the emissions.
Zheng et al. (2016) calculated the agricultural <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for Anhui
based on a national guideline of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission inventory development
(MEP, 2014) and ignored the impact of soil condition (e.g., pH) on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
volatilization from fertilizer use.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3190">Comparison between the estimated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in this work
and other studies by province and source category. “Others” indicates Fang et al. (2015), Liu and Yao (2016), Yu et al. (2016), and Zheng et al. (2016)
for Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Anhui, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Evaluation of the inventories with transport modeling and ground observations</title>
      <?pagebreak page4283?><p id="d1e3218">Figure 8 illustrates the observed and simulated hourly concentrations for
gaseous <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and inorganic aerosol species (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for April, July, and
October at SHPD and October at JSPAES. The normalized mean biases (NMBs) and
normalized mean errors (NMEs) between observed and simulated concentrations
and the monthly average concentrations from observation and simulation are
summarized in Table 3. The simulated monthly average concentrations were
close to the observed ones at both sites. The biggest discrepancy was found
at SHPD for April, where the monthly average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was simulated to be 56 %
larger than observations with E1, and the smallest was at JSPAES for October,
where the simulation was 1.7 % smaller than observations with E1. The
simulated temporal variation, however, was much larger than the observed variation,
leading to relatively large NME, particularly at SHPD for April. A clear
difference was found for the simulation under two <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories. In
general, the average of simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at the two sites
for available months was 27 % smaller in E2 than that in E1 (note the
total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in E2 were 38 % smaller than those in E1 for the
whole YRD region). At the SHPD site, application of E1 in CMAQ overestimated the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration, indicated by the positive NMB values and the larger
simulated concentrations than observed concentrations. Such overestimation was corrected
when E2 was applied, and the NMEs with E2 were substantially reduced as
well, as shown in Table 3. The better modeling performance implies
improved estimation and spatiotemporal distribution of emissions. At JSPAES,
the air quality modeling with both inventories underestimated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations, and the simulated monthly average concentration with E1 was
much closer to observation than that with E2. The close NMEs between the two
inventories indicated very limited improvement at the site, in contrast to
SHPD. Located in an urban area, JSPAES might be largely affected by the local
sources like transportation and residential activities. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
of such source categories, however, were not improved in E2.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e3364">The observed and simulated hourly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SIA concentrations
with the two inventories at the JSPAES and SHPD sites.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3387">Model performance statistics for the hourly concentrations of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SIA from observation and CMAQ simulation
with the two inventories at the SHPD and JSPAES sites for available months.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="13">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Indicator</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">SHPD_Apr </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">SHPD_July </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col9" nameend="col10" align="center">SHPD_Oct </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col12" nameend="col13" align="center">JSPAES_Oct </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">E2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">75.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">32.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">141.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">103.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">88.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">78.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">98.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">76.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">56.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">53.68</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.33</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean sim. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" 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="col3">7.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">8.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">5.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">7.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">5.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean obs. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" 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 namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">4.58  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">9.25  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col9" nameend="col10" align="center">5.58  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col12" nameend="col13" align="center">7.62 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>19.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">84.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">74.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">15.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">9.53</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">40.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">40.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">64.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">61.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">100.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">91.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">42.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">40.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.57</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean sim. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" 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="col3">6.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">7.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">10.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">10.45</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean obs. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" 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 namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">7.58  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">6.23  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col9" nameend="col10" align="center">4.14  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col12" nameend="col13" align="center">9.54 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">50.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">46.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">91.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">90.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">14.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">12.53</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">57.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">51.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">84.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">81.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">110.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">108.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">43.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">42.31</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.36</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean sim. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" 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="col3">14.75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">13.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">14.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">14.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">14.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">14.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">15.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">15.25</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean obs. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" 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 namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">11.89  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">9.68  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col9" nameend="col10" align="center">7.57  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col12" nameend="col13" align="center">13.56 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>59.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>65.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>78.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>94.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">29.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">12.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">65.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">70.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">141.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">142.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">93.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">70.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">44.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">44.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">0.61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean sim. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">17.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">16.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean obs. (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" 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 namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">12.05  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">9.01  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col9" nameend="col10" align="center">5.65  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col12" nameend="col13" align="center">18.76 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e3401">Note: obs. and sim. indicate the results from observation and simulation,
respectively. The NMB and NME were calculated
using the following equations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> indicate the results from modeling
prediction and observation, respectively):
<disp-formula id="Ch1.Ex1"><mml:math id="M169" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NMB</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NME</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced close="|" open="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page4284?><p id="d1e4758">To reduce the impact of the highly uncertain hourly meteorology simulation
and emission data on air quality modeling, the daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
derived from simulation and observation were further compared for October at
JSPAES. As illustrated in Fig. S3, better agreement
between observation and simulation was achieved for the daily concentrations
than the hourly concentrations, and the NMEs for E1 and E2 were reduced from
56.9 % and 53.7 % to 37.0 % and 32.5 %, respectively. Besides the
emission data, uncertainty in meteorology simulation also contributed to the
discrepancy between simulation and observation. For example, both
inventories overestimated the concentration on 7 October but
underestimated that on 21–22 October. In contrast to the southeasterly
wind observed at the ground meteorology station in Nanjing, the simulated wind
direction on 7 October was from the north, enhancing the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> transport from
Yancheng and Xuzhou in northern Jiangsu with intensive agricultural
activities. On 21–22 October, the underestimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration resulted largely from the overestimation in wind speed by WRF.</p>
      <p id="d1e4794">Compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the modeling performance for inorganic aerosols
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is better for most
cases, indicated by the smaller NMEs and larger correlation coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)
in Table 3. Some exceptions exist at SHPD for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in October and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in January.<?pagebreak page4285?> Application
of E2 reduced the NMEs and improved the simulation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> moderately, but there were no significant changes between the
modeling results with E1 and E2. The averages of simulated concentrations at
the two sites for available months were 7 %, 3 %, and 12 % smaller in E2
than those in E1 for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively, and the differences were clearly smaller than for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 27 %. As a large fraction of inorganic aerosols come from
secondary chemistry reaction, they are more representative for the regional
atmosphere condition than the local environment around the measurement
site. Therefore, the air quality modeling at a horizontal resolution of
9 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 km is expected to be able to better simulate the
concentrations for SIA than the primary gaseous pollutants, particularly
when emissions from some local sources are not sufficiently quantified. The
simulated concentrations were commonly larger than observations for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, particularly at SHPD in July and
October. The uncertainty of the model could be an important source of the
discrepancy, as the recent reported mechanisms of gas-to-particle conversion
were not sufficiently applied in the CMAQ version we used (Wang et al., 2016; Cheng
et al., 2016). In addition, positive or negative artifacts also existed in
ground observations with MARGA, resulting from the unexpected reaction
between acid gaseous pollutants and nitrate aerosol (Chen et al., 2017;
Schaap et al., 2011; Stieger et al., 2018; Wei et al., 2015). From an
emissions perspective, the overestimation was partly corrected when smaller
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in E2 were applied instead of E1 in the model. Moreover, due to
missing information on individual industrial plants, the inventory
we used in CMAQ failed to fully capture the progress of emission control in
the YRD region and probably overestimated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Zhang et
al., 2019). The formation of sulfate ammonium aerosols could then be
enhanced through the irreversible reaction between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
The process simultaneously reduced the amount of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reacted with
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HNO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, further leading to the underestimation of nitrate aerosols. As
shown in Table 3, application of E2 with less <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions than E1
could not improve the modeling performance of nitrate aerosols. The impact
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on SIA modeling will be further discussed
in Sect. 3.4.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page4286?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Evaluation of the inventories with transport modeling and satellite
observations</title>
      <p id="d1e5123">To be consistent with the local crossing time of IASI at 09:30 local time, the average
of simulated hourly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at 09:00 and 10:00 local time was
applied to calculate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs, using the following equations:

                <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M236" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>5</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>6</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs from the CMAQ model (molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" 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>);
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at the vertical layer <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
CMAQ (molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" 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>); <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the height of layer <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (m); <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mi>H</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the height
when the pressure of atmosphere declines to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>e</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the original value; and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the air pressure. Figure 9 illustrates the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs with
E1 and E2 for January, April, July, and October. Similar spatial patterns
are found with the two inventories; i.e., relatively large <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs
were simulated mostly in northern Jiangsu and northern Anhui Province,
consistent with the hot spot of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. The simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
VCDs with E1 were 53 % larger than those with E2 across the whole YRD
region, with the maximum and minimum monthly differences calculated at 73 %
and 31 % for April and October, respectively. The NMB, NME, and
correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) between the observed and simulated VCDs and the
monthly average VCDs from observation and simulation are summarized in Table 4. Application of both inventories resulted in larger <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs than
those from satellite observation for January and October, while the
simulated VCDs for April and July were smaller. Besides the uncertainty from
monthly distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, the bias from WRF modeling on
temperature might also contribute to the discrepancy between simulated and
observed VCDs. As shown in Table S7, WRF overestimated the
monthly temperature in January and October, with the NMBs calculated at
26.6 % and 0.34 %, and underestimated it in April and July, with the NMBs
calculated at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.51</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, respectively. Compared to E1,
application of E2 significantly reduced the NMEs from 83.8 % to 37.5 %
for January and largely corrected the overestimation in VCD simulation for
January and October. The simulated VCDs were 4.3 % larger and 1.4 %
smaller than observations for the 2 months, respectively. The results
implied satisfying agreement between the simulated and observed VCDs over
the YRD region. Improvement in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCD simulation was also found for
April when E2 instead of E1 was applied in the air quality modeling, with
the NME reduced from 65.8 % to 60.7 %. For July, however, application of
E2 did not improve the model performance, implying that the current method in E2
could possibly underestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization when the actual
ambient temperature was high. Besides the emissions, the discrepancy could
result from various factors including the uncertainty in chemical mechanisms
in CMAQ and environmental conditions. Errors from satellite retrieval could
also contribute to the inconsistency between simulation and observation. In their study, van
Damme et al. (2014), for example, estimated an error of 19 % for the total
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> columns in Asia. As the ESPRI product of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs we applied
in the study does not provide the averaging kernel, however, uncertainty in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> column retrieval could result from the reduced sensitivity of
satellite measurement towards the surface.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e5524">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs in the YRD region simulated with the two
inventories by month.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e5547">Model performance statistics for the daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs from IASI
observation and CMAQ simulation using the two inventories by month.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="12">
     <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="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">January </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">April </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center">July </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col11" nameend="col12" align="center">October </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">E2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NMB (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">77.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">28.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>59.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">12.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>34.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">29.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.77</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NME (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">83.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">37.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">65.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">60.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">43.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">51.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">46.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">43.17</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.50</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.55</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mean sim.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">6.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">10.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">7.61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">IASI obs.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">7.96 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">7.54 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center">10.23 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col11" nameend="col12" align="center">7.72 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e5873">To further investigate the impact of soil pH on the emissions and thereby
the modeling performance on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs, the soil in the YRD region was
classified to three types, acidic soil (pH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), neutral soil
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pH</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and alkali soil (pH &gt; 7.5), and the
NMBs and NMEs between the simulated and observed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs were
calculated by soil type and month, as summarized in Table 5. For neutral and
acidic soil, application of E2 that considers the effect of farming season,
geophysical condition, and manure management on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rates
resulted in clearly smaller NMEs than E1, implying the improvement in
emission estimation. For acidic soil, however, the NMBs were negative for
all the months when E2 was applied, and the NMEs were elevated compared to
E1 except for January. Moreover, application of E2 resulted in negative NMBs
for neutral and alkali soil in April and July as well. Those results implied
that E2 possibly underestimated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for acidic soil
in particular for warm seasons. With the correction of pH and temperature,
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization rate from basal dressing fertilization was
relatively low, indicating that the current linear assumption between the
soil pH and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization rate might not be appropriate for soil
with low pH values for eastern China. As shown in Fig. S4, the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization rates from urea and ABC
fertilizer use under relatively high soil pH (Zhang et al., 2002; Zhong et
al., 2006) were close to the estimated values in E2, but the measured
results for acidic soil were clearly larger than those in E2.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e5985">The NMBs and NMEs between the simulated and observed daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
VCDs by soil pH and month.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="13">
     <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="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="13" colname="col13" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">pH</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Statistics (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">January </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">April </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col9" nameend="col10" align="center">July </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col12" nameend="col13" align="center">October </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">E2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">pH &gt; 7.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">114.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">28.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">81.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>38.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">43.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">4.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">67.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">46.95</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">117.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">49.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">89.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">44.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">56.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">48.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">71.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">57.44</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">7.5 &lt; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> pH &lt; 6.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">92.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">44.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>54.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">39.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>10.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">44.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">11.13</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">95.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">34.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">64.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">54.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">52.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">45.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">52.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">37.69</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">pH &lt; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NMB</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">41.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>67.41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>12.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>55.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">8.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>25.48</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NME</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">54.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">36.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">60.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">68.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">34.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">56.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">35.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col13">43.68</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page4287?><p id="d1e6413">Limitation should be acknowledged in the emission comparison and evaluation.
Besides those we paid extra attention to in E2 (e.g., temperature, soil
property, fertilizer application method, and manure management process),
other factors could also be influential on air-surface exchange of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and thereby <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, including meteorology parameters (wind
speed, precipitation, and leaf surface wetness), surface layer turbulence,
air and surface heterogeneous-phase chemistry, and plant physiological
conditions (Flechard et al., 2013; Gyldenkaerne et al., 2005, Skjøth et al.,
2011). With those factors integrated in a bidirectional surface–atmosphere
exchange module in air quality modeling, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission inventories
were improved and the biases in simulation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
aerosol concentrations were reduced for both the US and Europe (Bash et al.,
2013; Wichink Kruit et al., 2012). The fact that we ignored given parameters and processes
in the current work could thus partly explain the discrepancy between the
simulation and observations. Applying the bidirectional <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exchange
module, for example, Wichink Kruit et al. (2012) found increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations for agricultural source areas due to the elevated lifetime
and transport distance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the model. The result implied a
possible correction on the underestimation in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, as
shown in Tables 3 and 4. Therefore, a more comprehensive evaluation and
comparison in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions is thus suggested for the future, including
the bidirectional <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exchange and the top-down constraint with
inverse modeling.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Impacts of {$\protect\chem{SO_{{2}}}$} and {$\protect\chem{NO_{\mathit{x}}}$} emission estimates on simulated {$\protect\chem{NH_{3}}$} and
aerosols}?><title>Impacts of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimates on simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
aerosols</title>
      <p id="d1e6582">Besides the meteorology condition, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, and soil pH, the
estimates of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions could influence the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and SIA simulation as well. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can be transformed to S (IV) through
liquid-phase reaction and then be oxidized to S (VI) by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, or it can be
directly oxidized to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or the hydroxyl radical
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal" class="Radical">⚫</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OH). HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> can be formed through <inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> oxidation
by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal" class="Radical">⚫</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>OH in daytime or through hydrolysis of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at
the aerosol surface at night. Normally <inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> preferentially reacts with
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and relatively stable (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is produced,
while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> could easily be decomposed under high-temperature
or low-humidity conditions. Therefore, the ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
and formation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosols are influenced by the balance
between acidic (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and alkaline component (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
emissions.</p>
      <p id="d1e6867">As described in Sect. 2.3, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for 2014
used in this work were scaled from those for 2014 based on the changes in
activity data. Ignorance of emission control progress during 2012–2014 would
probably result in overestimation in emissions. The bias was evaluated
through satellite observation. The daily planetary boundary layer (PBL)
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and tropospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs were obtained from the OMSO2 Level-3
product
(<uri>http://disc.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/Aura/data-holdings/OMI/omso2e_v003.shtml</uri>, last access: 4 April 2020) and the POMINO Level-3 product from<?pagebreak page4288?> the Ozone Monitoring Instrument
(OMI), respectively. As shown in Table S8, all the
provinces in the YRD had their <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs substantially reduced
during 2012–2014, and the VCDs declined by 48 % and 31 %, respectively,
for the whole region. From a recent unpublished emission study, however, the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were estimated to decrease by only 16 % and
8 % in the YRD region for the 2 years (personal communication with Cheng Huang from Shanghai Research Academy of Environmental Science, 2019). It can be
inferred that the overestimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions might enhance their
reaction with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thereby the formation of (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the air quality modeling. The formation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, in contrast,
might be suppressed accordingly.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS1">
  <label>3.4.1</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Identification of {$\protect\chem{NH_{3}}$}-rich and {$\protect\chem{NH_{3}}$}-poor conditions in the YRD region}?><title>Identification of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-poor conditions in the YRD region</title>
      <p id="d1e7058">To evaluate the nonlinear relation between gaseous pollutant emissions
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and SIA concentrations for the YRD region,
we follow Ansari and Pandis (1998) and calculated the gas ratio (GR) based
on the modeling results:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M346" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GR</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HNO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where the species in brackets indicate the simulated ambient
concentration. A negative GR indicates an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-poor condition, and the
enhanced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions strengthen the oxidation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and lead to
increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Wang et al., 2011). A GR larger than 1 indicates
an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich condition. Enhanced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions have smaller effects
on growth of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, and elevated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions may accelerate the formation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosols, as the
increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reduce the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> capacity in the liquid phase. A
neutral condition is judged when GR is between 0 and 1.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e7344">The GR values in the YRD region simulated with the two
inventories by month.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/4275/2020/acp-20-4275-2020-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e7353">Figure 10 illustrates the spatial distribution of simulated GR for the YRD
region by month with E1 and E2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories. Implied by the GR
values larger than 1.0 for most of the areas, the YRD region was identified
under the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich condition when E1 was applied, except for southwest
Zhejiang. The judgment is consistent with previous studies (Wang et al.,
2011; Dong et al., 2014). With the reduced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in E2, the
areas under neutral or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-poor conditions expanded in particular for
January and April. The common <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich condition suggested potentially
high sensitivity of SIA formation to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSS2">
  <label>3.4.2</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Sensitivities of {$\protect\chem{NH_{3}}$} and SIA to {$\protect\chem{SO_{{2}}}$} and {$\protect\chem{NO_{\mathit{x}}}$} changes}?><title>Sensitivities of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SIA to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> changes</title>
      <p id="d1e7477">Three more cases were developed to test the effect of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emission estimates on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SIA simulation: Cases 1, 2, and 3 assumed
40 % abatement of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, 40 % abatement of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions, and 40 % abatement of emissions of both species, respectively. E1
was applied for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimates in all the cases. Table 6
summarizes the modeling performance at JSPAES and SHPD for different cases
in October. Clear changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SIA simulation were found with
varied <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, while the effect of varied <inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions on
air quality modeling was much smaller. The bias between the simulation and
observation was partly corrected for most cases, indicated by the smaller
NMBs. Indicated by NMEs, however, the modeling performance was less
conclusive. NMEs for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were reduced for
Cases 1 and 3, while increased NMEs were found for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Limitation in the mechanisms of SIA formation can be an
important reason for the discrepancy. Under <inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich conditions,
abatement of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Case 1) would reduce the formation of
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thereby lead to growth of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations. This is consistent with the situation in the North China Plain,
another region typically suffering from aerosol pollution in China (Liu et al.,
2018). The simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations were 10.1 % and 11.7 % larger than those
in the base case at JSPAES and SHPD, and the simulated SIAs
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) were 7.9 % and
11.0 % smaller than those in the base case at JSPAES and SHPD, respectively.
Based on the modeling results in Table 3, as a comparison, the simulated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in E2 were calculated to be 23 %
and 28 % smaller than those with E1 at JSPAES and SHPD for October,
respectively, and the analogue number<?pagebreak page4289?> for SIA concentrations was 5 % at
both sites. While the estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions played an important
role on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> simulation, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimation could be more effective
on SIA simulation. Abatement of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Case 2) was much less
influential. Less <inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> slightly weakened the competition of SIA formation
against <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; thus enhanced formation of (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
decreased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration were simulated at both sites, as shown in
Table 6. When <inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were simultaneously reduced in the model
(Case 3), similar results were found as with Case 1, implying again that
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> could be a crucial species in SIA formation in the YRD region. In
addition, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosols were simulated to grow with the 40 %
abatement of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, and the benefits of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> control were partly weakened. To be more effective and
efficient in regional air quality improvement, therefore, the control of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions should be strengthened along with other pollutants.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Table 6</label><caption><p id="d1e7980">The modeling performance at JSPAES and SHPD in cases with different
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission estimates. The NMBs and NMEs were based on
the observed and simulated hourly concentrations.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <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:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col5" align="center">JSPAES </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col7" nameend="col9" align="center">SHPD </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Cases</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Increased/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NMB %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">NME %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Increased/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">NMB %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">NME %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">decreased %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">decreased %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Base case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">56.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">32.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">98.36</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">59.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">11.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">47.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">102.68</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">57.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">29.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">96.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">59.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">11.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">44.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">100.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Base case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">42.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">84.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">100.23</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">39.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>10.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">62.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">84.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">45.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">87.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">102.37</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">41.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>10.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">65.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">86.27</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Base case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">43.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">91.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">110.18</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>17.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">40.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>19.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">54.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">82.62</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">18.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">43.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">94.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">112.30</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">39.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>18.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">55.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">83.67</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Base case</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">44.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">29.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">93.69</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">44.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">37.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">92.51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">46.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">34.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">98.52</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Case 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">46.51</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">42.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">97.19</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e8730">We took the YRD region in eastern China as an example and developed two
inventories of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for 2014 based on constant emission
factors (E1) and those characterizing agricultural processes (E2). Available information from ground and satellite observations
was applied to evaluate the inventories through air quality modeling. Both
inventories indicated that agricultural activities (livestock farming and
fertilizer use) were the most important sources of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, but clear
differences exist in estimates and spatial and seasonal distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. The total <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in E1 were estimated to be 60 %
larger than E2, and the emissions from agriculture in E1 were double those in E2.
The information on fertilization season and type from local investigation in
E2 resulted in discrepancies in monthly distributions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
from E1, particularly in the northern YRD with abundant croplands. Differences
in emission estimates lead to varied <inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations from CMAQ
modeling. At the suburban SHPD site, the overestimation in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration from CMAQ with E1 could be largely corrected with E2, implying
the improved estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by E2. At the urban site
JSPAES, however, very limited improvement was achieved when E1 was replaced
by E2 in the model, indicating that the emission estimation of local urban
sources like transportation and residential activities was not improved in
E2. Compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the modeling performance for SIA is better for
most cases, and differences between the simulated concentrations with E1 and
E2 were clearly smaller. Application of E2 improved the simulation of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> moderately. For the comparison with
the satellite-derived <inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> column, application of E2 significantly corrected
the overestimation in VCD simulation for January and October with E1, but
it did not improve the model performance for July. Combining the soil
distribution, it can be inferred that the current method might underestimate the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization for acidic soil, particularly in warm seasons. Judged
by the simulated GR, most of the YRD region was identified as
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-rich except for southwest Zhejiang. Through the sensitivity
test in which <inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were solely or simultaneously
reduced, estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions was detected to be more effective
in SIA simulation compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Reduced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions would
suppress the formation of (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thereby lead to
growth of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. The control of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions should
be strengthened along with that of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for improving the
air quality more effectively and efficiently in the region.</p>
      <p id="d1e9027">This work is a tentative effort on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission evaluation at the regional
scale. The relations between environmental and meteorology conditions and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> volatilization were not fully considered, and the bidirectional
surface–atmosphere<?pagebreak page4290?> exchange was not included, resulting in bias in emission
estimation. Uncertainties also come from the limitations in ground and
satellite observations and the incomplete mechanism of SIA formation in the current
air quality model. For better understanding the role of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
in regional air quality, more measurements on both sources and ambient
concentrations are recommended for the future.</p>
</sec>

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

      <p id="d1e9067">The Multi-resolution Emission Inventory for China used in this study was developed by Tsinghua University (Zheng et al., 2018) and can be obtained at <uri>http://www.meicmodel.org/</uri>  (MEIC, 2019).
The high-resolution inventory for Jiangsu Province was developed by Zhou et al. (2017) and can be accessed at <uri>http://www.airqualitynju.com/En/Data/List/Data download</uri> (IASI, 2020).
The product of daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> VCDs measured through IASI was developed by the research group of Simon Whitburn at Université Libre de Bruxelles and obtained from the ESPRI data center at <uri>https://cds-espri.ipsl.upmc.fr/etherTypo/index.php?id=1700&amp;L=1</uri> (JS inventories, 2020).
The two <inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
emission inventories developed in this work (E1 and E2) are available online:
<uri>http://www.airqualitynju.com/En/Data/List/Data download</uri>.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e9105">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4275-2020-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4275-2020-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e9114">YZ developed the strategy and methodology of the work and wrote the draft.
MY ran the model and produced the figures. XH revised the method and
provided useful comments. FC and JZ conducted ground observations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and aerosols.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e9131">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e9137">This article is part of the special issue “Regional assessment of air pollution and climate change over East and Southeast Asia: results from MICS-Asia Phase III”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e9143">This work was sponsored by the Natural Science Foundation of China (91644220 and
41922052) and the National Key Research and Development Program of China
(2017YFC0210106). We would like to acknowledge Qizhen Liu and Zhong Zou from the
Shanghai Environmental Monitoring Center and Yunhua Chang from Nanjing
University of Information Science &amp; Technology for the ground measurement
data, Qiang Zhang from Tsinghua University and Cheng Huang from the Shanghai
Research Academy of Environmental Science for emission data, and Simon
Whitburn from Université Libre de Bruxelles and Yuanhong Zhao from
Peking University for satellite data processing.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e9148">This research has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 91644220 and 41922052) and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (grant no. 2017YFC0210106).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e9154">This paper was edited by Joshua Fu and reviewed by three anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ansari, A. S. and Pandis, S. N.: Response of inorganic PM to precursor
concentrations, Environ. Sci. Technol., 32, 2706–2714, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bash, J. O., Cooter, E. J., Dennis, R. L., Walker, J. T., and Pleim, J. E.: Evaluation of a regional air-quality model with bidirectional <inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> exchange coupled to an agroecosystem model, Biogeosciences, 10, 1635–1645, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1635-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-10-1635-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Beusen, A. H. W., Bouwman, A. F., Heuberger, P. S. C., van Drecht, G., and van
der Hoek, K. W.: Bottom-up uncertainty estimates of global ammonia emissions
from global agricultural production systems, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6067–6077,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Cai, G. X., Chen, D. L., Ding, H., Pacholski, A., Fan, X. H., and Zhu, Z. L.:
Nitrogen losses from fertilizers applied to maize, wheat and rice in the
North China Plain, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys., 63, 187–195, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Chen, D., Zhao, Y., Lyu, R., Wu, R., Dai, L., Zhao, Y., Chen, F., Zhang, J.,
Yu, H., and Guan, M.: Seasonal and spatial variations of optical properties of
light absorbing carbon and its influencing factors in a typical polluted
city in Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Environ., 199, 45–54, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, X., Walker, J. T., and Geron, C.: Chromatography related performance of the Monitor for AeRosols and GAses in ambient air (MARGA): laboratory and field-based evaluation, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3893–3908, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3893-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-10-3893-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cheng, Y., Zheng, G., Wei, C., Mu, Q., Zheng, B., Wang, Z., Gao, M., Zhang,
Q., He, K., Carmichael, G., Pöschl, U., and Su, H.: Reactive nitrogen chemistry
in aerosol water as a source of sulfate during haze events in China, Sci.
Adv., 2, e1601530, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601530" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/sciadv.1601530</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cheng, Z., Wang, S., Fu, X., Watson, J. G., Jiang, J., Fu, Q., Chen, C., Xu, B., Yu, J., Chow, J. C., and Hao, J.: Impact of biomass burning on haze pollution in the Yangtze River delta, China: a case study in summer 2011, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4573–4585, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4573-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-4573-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Davies, D. K., Ilavajhala, S., Wong, M. M., and Justice, C. O.: Fire
Information for Resource Management System: Archiving and Distributing MODIS
Active Fire Data, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 47, 72–79, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dong, W., Xin, J., and Wang, S.: Temporal and spatial distribution of
anthropogenic ammonia emissions in China: 1994–2006, Environ. Sci., 31,
1457–1463, 2010 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dong, X., Li, J., Fu, J. S., Gao, Y., Huang, K., and Zhuang, G.: Inorganic
aerosols responses to emission changes in Yangtze River Delta, China. Sci.
Total Environ., 481, 522–532, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Emery, C., Tai, E., and Yarwood, G.: Enhanced meteorological modeling and
performance evaluation for two Texas episodes, Report to the Texas Natural
Resources Conservation Commission, prepared by: ENVIRON, International Corp,
Novato, CA, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>European Environment Agency (EEA): EMEP/CORINAIR Air Pollutant Emission
Inventory Guidebook-2009, 4.D Crop production and agricultural soils,
available at: <uri>https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-emission-inventory-guidebook-2009/part-b-sectoral-guidance-chapters/4-agriculture/4-d/4-d-crop-production-and-agricultural-soils.pdf/view</uri>
(last access: 25 February 2020), 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>European Environment Agency (EEA): EMEP/CORINAIR Air Pollutant Emission
Inventory Guidebook-2013, 3.B Manure management, available at:
<uri>https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2013/part-b-sectoral-guidance-chapters/4-agriculture/3-b-manure-management/view</uri>
(last access: 25 February 2020), 2013a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>European Environment Agency (EEA): EMEP/CORINAIR Air Pollutant Emission
Inventory Guidebook-2013, 3.D Crop production and agricultural soils,
available at:
<uri>https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2013/part-b-sectoral-guidance-chapters/4-agriculture/3-d-crop-production/view</uri>
(last access: 25 February 2020), 2013b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fang, X., Shen, G., Xu, C., Qian, X., Li, J., Zhao, Z., Yu, S., and Zhu, K.:
Agricultural ammonia emission inventory and its distribution characteristics
in Shanghai, Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 27, 2177–2185, 2015 (in
Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Flechard, C. R., Massad, R.-S., Loubet, B., Personne, E., Simpson, D., Bash, J. O., Cooter, E. J., Nemitz, E., and Sutton, M. A.: Advances in understanding, models and parameterizations of biosphere-atmosphere ammonia exchange, Biogeosciences, 10, 5183–5225, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-5183-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-10-5183-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fu, X., Wang, S. X., Ran, L. M., Pleim, J. E., Cooter, E., Bash, J. O., Benson, V., and Hao, J. M.: Estimating <inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from agricultural fertilizer application in China using the bi-directional CMAQ model coupled to an agro-ecosystem model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 6637–6649, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-6637-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-6637-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fu, X., Wang, S., Xing, J., Zhang, X., Wang, T., and Hao, J.: Increasing ammonia
concentrations reduce the effectiveness of particle pollution control
achieved via <inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions reduction in east China,
Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett., 4, 221–227, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guenther, A. B., Jiang, X., Heald, C. L., Sakulyanontvittaya, T., Duhl, T., Emmons, L. K., and Wang, X.: The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1471–1492, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guo, H., Cheng, T., Gu, X., Wang, Y., Chen, H., Bao, F., Shi, S. Y., Xu, B.
R., Wang, W. N., Zuo, X., Zhang, X. C., and Meng, C.: Assessment of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations and exposure throughout China using ground observations, Sci.
Total Environ., 1024, 601–602, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gyldenkaerne, S., Skjøth, C., Hertel, O., and Ellermann, T. A.: Dynamical
ammonia emission parameterization for use in air pollution models, J.
Geophys. Res., 110, D07108, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005459" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD005459</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huo, Q., Cai, X., Kang, L., Zhang, H., Song, Y., and Zhu, T.: Estimating ammonia
emissions from a winter wheat cropland in North China Plain with field
experiments and inverse dispersion modeling, Atmos. Environ., 104, 1–10,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page4292?><ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huang, R., Zhang, Y., Bozzetti, C., Ho, K., Cao, J., Han, Y., Daellenbach,
K. R., Slowik, J. G., Platt, S. M., Canonaco, F., Zotter, P., Wolf, R.,
Pieber, S. M., Bruns, E. A., Crippa, M., Ciarelli, G., Piazzalunga, A.,
Schwikowski, M., Abbaszade, G., Schnelle-Kreis, J., Zimmermann, R., An, Z.,
Szidat, S., Baltensperger, U., EI Haddad, I., and Prevot, A. S. H.: High
secondary aerosol contribution to particulate pollution during haze events
in China, Nature, 514, 218–222, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Huang, X., Song, Y., Li, M., Li, J., Huo, Q., Cai, X., Zhu, T., Hu, M.,
Zhang, H.: A high-resolution ammonia emission inventory in China, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 26, GB1030, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GB004161" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011GB004161</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>IASI: available at: <uri>http://www.airqualitynju.com/En/Data/List/Data download</uri>, last access: 4 April 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>JS inventories: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> total column from IASI (Level 2), available at: <uri>https://cds-espri.ipsl.upmc.fr/etherTypo/index.php?id=1700&amp;L=1</uri>, last access: 4 April 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kang, Y., Liu, M., Song, Y., Huang, X., Yao, H., Cai, X., Zhang, H., Kang, L., Liu, X., Yan, X., He, H., Zhang, Q., Shao, M., and Zhu, T.: High-resolution ammonia emissions inventories in China from 1980 to 2012, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2043–2058, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2043-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-2043-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kurokawa, J., Ohara, T., Morikawa, T., Hanayama, S., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Fukui, T., Kawashima, K., and Akimoto, H.: Emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases over Asian regions during 2000–2008: Regional Emission inventory in ASia (REAS) version 2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 11019–11058, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11019-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-11019-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lanciki, A.: 2060 MARGA Monitor for AeRosols and Gases in ambient Air.
Metrohm Process Analytics, Switzerland, available at:
<uri>https://www.metrohm.com/en/products/process-analyzers/applikon-marga/</uri> (last
access: 10 February 2020), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Li, B., Zhang, J., Zhao, Y., Yuan, S., Zhao, Q., Shen, G., and Wu, H.: Seasonal
variation of urban carbonaceous aerosols in a typical city Nanjing in
Yangtze River Delta, China Atmos. Environ., 106, 223–231, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Li, L.: The numerical simulation of comprehensive air pollution
characteristics in a typical city-cluster, PhD thesis, Shanghai
University, Shanghai, China, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Liu, C. and Yao, L.: Agricultural ammonia emission inventory and its
distribution characteristics in Jiangsu Province, Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 44, 70–74, 2016 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, M., Huang, X., Song, Y., Xu, T., Wang, S., Wu, Z., Hu, M., Zhang, L., Zhang, Q., Pan, Y., Liu, X., and Zhu, T.: Rapid <inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission reductions significantly increase tropospheric ammonia concentrations over the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17933–17943, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17933-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-17933-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Liu, X., Zhang, Y., Han, W., Tang, A., Shen, J., Cui, Z., Vitousek, P.,
Erisman, J. W., Goulding, K., Christie, P., Fangmeier, A., and Zhang, F.:
Enhanced nitrogen deposition over China, Nature, 494, 459–463, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>MEIC: available at: <uri>http://www.meicmodel.org/</uri>,  last access: 31 July 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP): The Guideline of Emission
Inventory Development for Atmospheric Ammonia, 2014 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
National Development and Reform Commission of China (NDRC): National data on
the cost and profit of agricultural product, China Statistics Press,
Beijing, 2015 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Pan, Y., Tian, S., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Zhu, X., Gao, J., Huang, W., Zhou,
Y., Song, Y., Zhang, Q., and Wang, Y.: Identifying ammonia hotspots in China
using a national observation network, Environ. Sci. Technol., 52, 3926–3934,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pan, Y. P., Wang, Y. S., Tang, G. Q., and Wu, D.: Wet and dry deposition of atmospheric nitrogen at ten sites in Northern China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6515–6535, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6515-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-6515-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Paulot, F., Fan, S., and Horowitz, L. W.: Contrasting seasonal responses of
sulfate aerosols to declining <inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in the Eastern US:
implications for the efficacy of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission controls, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 44, 455–464, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070695" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016GL070695</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Price, C., Penner, J., and Prather, M.: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from lightning, Part I: Global
distribution based on lightning physics, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
5929–5941, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD03504" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96JD03504</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Qin, M., Wang, X., Hu, Y., Huang, X., He, L., Zhong, L., Song, Y., Hu, M.,
and Zhang, Y.: Formation of particulate sulfate and nitrate over the Pearl
River Delta in the fall: Diagnostic analysis using the Community Multiscale
Air Quality model, Atmos. Environ., 112, 81–89, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schaap, M., Otjes, R. P., and Weijers, E. P.: Illustrating the benefit of using hourly monitoring data on secondary inorganic aerosol and its precursors for model evaluation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11041–11053, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11041-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-11041-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sindelarova, K., Granier, C., Bouarar, I., Guenther, A., Tilmes, S., Stavrakou, T., Müller, J.-F., Kuhn, U., Stefani, P., and Knorr, W.: Global data set of biogenic VOC emissions calculated by the MEGAN model over the last 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9317–9341, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skamarock, W. C., Klemp, J. B., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Barker, D. M.,
Duda, M. G., Huang, X.-Y., Wang, W., and Powers, J. G.: A Description of the
Advanced Research WRF Version 3, NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475<inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>STR, 113 pp., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5065/D68S4MVH</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skjøth, C. A., Geels, C., Berge, H., Gyldenkærne, S., Fagerli, H., Ellermann, T., Frohn, L. M., Christensen, J., Hansen, K. M., Hansen, K., and Hertel, O.: Spatial and temporal variations in ammonia emissions – a freely accessible model code for Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5221–5236, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5221-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-5221-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stieger, B., Spindler, G., Fahlbusch, B. Muller, K., Gruner, A., Poulain,
L., Thoni, L., Seitler, E., Wallasch, M., and Herrmann, H.: Measurements of
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> ions and trace gases with the online system MARGA at the research
station Melpitz in Germany – A five-year study, J. Atmos. Chem., 75, 33–70,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Su, F., Huang, B., Ding, X., Gao, Z., Chen, X., Zhang, F., Kogge, M.,
and Römheld, V.: Ammonia volatilization of different nitrogen fertilizer
types, Soils, 38, 682–686, 2006 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sutton, M., Place, C., Eager, M., Fowler, D., and Smith, R.: Assessment of the
magnitude of ammonia emissions in the United-Kingdom, Atmos. Environ., 29,
1393–1411, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page4293?><ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sutton, M. A., Dragosits, U., Tang, Y. S., and Fowler, D.: Ammonia emissions
from nonagricultural sources in the UK, Atmos. Environ., 34, 855–869, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC): Operational Guidance for
the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Version 4.7.1
(June 2010 Release), available at: <uri>http://www.cmaq-model.org</uri>
(last access: 10 February 2020), 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA): Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, available at: <uri>http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html</uri>
(last access: 9 March 2019), 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Van Damme, M., Clarisse, L., Heald, C. L., Hurtmans, D., Ngadi, Y., Clerbaux, C., Dolman, A. J., Erisman, J. W., and Coheur, P. F.: Global distributions, time series and error characterization of atmospheric ammonia (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from IASI satellite observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 2905–2922, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-2905-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-2905-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Van Damme, M., Clarisse, L., Dammers, E., Liu, X., Nowak, J. B., Clerbaux, C., Flechard, C. R., Galy-Lacaux, C., Xu, W., Neuman, J. A., Tang, Y. S., Sutton, M. A., Erisman, J. W., and Coheur, P. F.: Towards validation of ammonia (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) measurements from the IASI satellite, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 1575–1591, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1575-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-8-1575-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Warner, J. X., Dickerson, R. R., Wei, Z., Strow, L. L., Wang, Y., and Liang, Q.:
Increased atmospheric ammonia over the world's major agricultural areas
detected from space, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 2875–2884, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL072305" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016GL072305</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wang, G., Zhang, R., Gomez, M. E., Yang, L., Zamora, M. L., Hu, M., Lin, Y.,
Peng, J., Guo, S., Meng, J., Li, J., Cheng, C., Hu, T., Ren, Y., Wang, Y.,
Gao, J., Cao, J., An, Z., Zhou, W., Li, G., Wang, J., Tian, P.,
Marrero-Ortiz, W., Secrest, J., Du, Z., Zheng, J., Shang, D., Zeng, L.,
Shao, M., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Hu, J., Pan, B.,
Cai, L., Cheng, Y., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Rosenfeld, D., Liss, P. S., Duce, R.
A., Kolb, C. E., and Molina, M. J.: Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog
to Chinese haze, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 13630–13635, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wang, S., Xing, J., Jang, C., Zhu, Y., Fu, J. S., and Hao, J.: Impact assessment
of ammonia emissions on inorganic aerosols in east China using response
surface modeling technique, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 9293–9300, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wei, L., Duan, J., Tan, J., Ma, Y., He, K., Wang, S., Huang, X., and Zhang, Y.:
Gas-to-particle conversion of atmospheric ammonia and sampling artifacts of
ammonium in spring of Beijing, Science China, 45, 216–226, 2015 (in
Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wichink Kruit, R. J., Schaap, M., Sauter, F. J., van Zanten, M. C., and van Pul, W. A. J.: Modeling the distribution of ammonia across Europe including bi-directional surface–atmosphere exchange, Biogeosciences, 9, 5261–5277, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-5261-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-9-5261-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Xiao, Z. M., Zhang, Y. F., Hong, S. M., Bi, X. H., Jiao, L., Feng, Y. C.,
and Wang, Y. Q.: Estimation of the main factors influencing haze, based on a
long-term monitoring Campaign in Hangzhou, China, Aerosol Air Qual. Res.,
11, 873–882, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yang, F., Tan, J., Zhao, Q., Du, Z., He, K., Ma, Y., Duan, F., Chen, G., and Zhao, Q.: Characteristics of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> speciation in representative megacities and across China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5207–5219, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5207-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-5207-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yang, Y. and Zhao, Y.: Quantification and evaluation of atmospheric pollutant emissions from open biomass burning with multiple methods: a case study for the Yangtze River Delta region, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 327–348, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-327-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-327-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Yang, Z.: Estimation of ammonia emission from livestock in China based on
mass-flow method and regional comparison, Master thesis, Peking University,
Beijing, China, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Yu, F., Chao, N., Wu, J., Tang, G., Chen, J., Wang, H., and Wu, Z.: Research on
agricultural ammonia emission inventory of Zhejiang Province in 2013,
Environmental Pollution &amp; Control, 38, 41–46, 2016 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, F, Chen, X., and Chen, Q.: The fertilization guideline for the main crop
types in China, China Agricultural University Press, Beijing, 2009 (in
Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Chen, Y., Zhao, Y., Henze, D. K., Zhu, L., Song, Y., Paulot, F., Liu, X., Pan, Y., Lin, Y., and Huang, B.: Agricultural ammonia emissions in China: reconciling bottom-up and top-down estimates, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 339–355, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-339-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-339-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Q., Zhang, M., Yang, Y., and Lu, J.: Volatilization of ammonium
bicarbonate and urea in main soil of Shandong Province, Chinese J.
Soil Sci., 33, 32–34, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X., Wu, Y., Liu, X., Reis, S., Jin, J., Dragosits, U., van Damme, M.,
Clarisse, L., Whitburn, S., Coheur, P. F., and Gu, B.: Ammonia emissions may be
substantially underestimated in China, Environ. Sci. Technol., 51, 12089–12096,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, X. Y., Wang, Y. Q., Niu, T., Zhang, X. C., Gong, S. L., Zhang, Y. M., and Sun, J. Y.: Atmospheric aerosol compositions in China: spatial/temporal variability, chemical signature, regional haze distribution and comparisons with global aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 779–799, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-779-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-779-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Dore, A. J., Ma, L., Liu, X., Ma, W., Cape, J. N., and Zhang, F.:
Agricultural ammonia emissions inventory and spatial distribution in the
North China Plain, Environ. Pollut., 158, 490–501, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Bo, X., Zhao, Y., and Nielsen, C. P.: Benefits of current and future policies on emissions of China's coal-fired power sector indicated by continuous emission monitoring, Environ. Pollut., 251, 415–424, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, B., Wang, S, Wang, J., Fu, J. S., Liu, T., Xu, J, Fu, X., and Hao, J.: Impact
of national <inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> control policies on particulate matter
pollution in China, Atmos. Environ., 77, 453–463, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Qiu, L. P., Xu, R. Y., Xie, F. J., Zhang, Q., Yu, Y. Y., Nielsen, C. P., Qin, H. X., Wang, H. K., Wu, X. C., Li, W. Q., and Zhang, J.: Advantages of a city-scale emission inventory for urban air quality research and policy: the case of Nanjing, a typical industrial city in the Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 12623–12644, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12623-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-12623-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhou, Y., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, S., Dong, Y., Xie, F., Yu, Y., and Li, W.: Improved provincial emission inventory and speciation profiles of anthropogenic non-methane volatile organic compounds: a case study for Jiangsu, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7733–7756, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page4294?><ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, H., Cai, S., Wang, S., Zhao, B., Chang, X., and Hao, J.: Development of a unit-based industrial emission inventory in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region and resulting improvement in air quality modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3447–3462, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3447-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-3447-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zheng, Z., Weng, J., Wang, S., and Wang, J.: Estimation of ammonia emission in
Anhui Province, Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 8, 73–75, 2016 (in
Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, B., Tong, D., Li, M., Liu, F., Hong, C., Geng, G., Li, H., Li, X., Peng, L., Qi, J., Yan, L., Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Zheng, Y., He, K., and Zhang, Q.: Trends in China's anthropogenic emissions since 2010 as the consequence of clean air actions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14095–14111, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018</ext-link>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Zhong, N., Zeng, Q., Zhang, L., Liao, B., Zhou, X., and Jiang, J.: Effects of
acidity and alkalinity on urea transformation in soil, Chinese J.
Soil Sci., 37, 1123–1128, 2006 (in Chinese).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhou, Y., Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., Qiu, L., and Yang, Y.: Development of a high-resolution emission inventory and its evaluation and application through air quality modeling for Jiangsu Province, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 211–233, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-211-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-211-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Quantification and evaluation of atmospheric ammonia emissions with different methods: a case study for the Yangtze River Delta region, China</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>To explore the effects of data and method on emission estimation, two
inventories of NH<sub>3</sub> emissions of the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region in
eastern China were developed for 2014 based on constant emission factors
(E1) and those characterizing agricultural processes (E2).
The latter derived the monthly emission factors and activity data
integrating the local information of soil, meteorology, and agricultural
processes. The total emissions were calculated to be 1765 and 1067&thinsp;Gg with E1 and E2, respectively, and clear differences existed in seasonal and spatial
distributions. Elevated emissions were found in March and September in E2,
attributed largely to the increased top dressing fertilization and to the
enhanced NH<sub>3</sub> volatilization under high temperature, respectively.
A relatively large discrepancy between the inventories existed in the northern YRD
with abundant croplands. With the estimated emissions 38&thinsp;% smaller in E2,
the average of simulated NH<sub>3</sub> concentrations with an air quality model
using E2 was 27&thinsp;% smaller than that using E1 at two ground sites in the YRD.
At the suburban site in Pudong, Shanghai
(SHPD), the simulated NH<sub>3</sub> concentrations with E1
were generally larger than observations, and the modeling performance was
improved, indicated by the smaller normalized mean errors (NMEs) when E2 was applied. In contrast,
very limited improvement was found at the urban site JSPAES, as E2 failed to
improve the emission estimation of transportation and residential
activities. Compared to NH<sub>3</sub>, the modeling performance for inorganic
aerosols was better for most cases, and the differences between the
simulated concentrations with E1 and E2 were clearly smaller, at 7&thinsp;%,
3&thinsp;%, and 12&thinsp;% (relative to E1) for NH<sub>4</sub><sup>+</sup>, SO<sub>4</sub><sup>2−</sup>, and
NO<sub>3</sub><sup>−</sup>, respectively. Compared to the satellite-derived NH<sub>3</sub>
column, application of E2 significantly corrected the overestimation in
vertical column density for January and October with E1, but it did not improve
the model performance for July. The NH<sub>3</sub> emissions might be
underestimated with the assumption of linear correlation between NH<sub>3</sub>
volatilization and soil pH for acidic soil, particularly in warm seasons.
Three additional cases, i.e., 40&thinsp;% abatement of SO<sub>2</sub>, 40&thinsp;% abatement
of NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>, and 40&thinsp;% abatement of both species, were applied to test the
sensitivity of NH<sub>3</sub> and inorganic aerosol concentrations to precursor
emissions. Under an NH<sub>3</sub>-rich condition, estimation of SO<sub>2</sub>
emissions was detected to be more effective on simulation of secondary
inorganic aerosols compared to NH<sub>3</sub>. Reduced SO<sub>2</sub> would restrain the
formation of (NH<sub>4</sub>)<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> and thereby enhance the NH<sub>3</sub>
concentrations. To improve the air quality more effectively and efficiently,
NH<sub>3</sub> emissions should be substantially controlled along with SO<sub>2</sub>
and NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> in the future.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Ansari, A. S. and Pandis, S. N.: Response of inorganic PM to precursor
concentrations, Environ. Sci. Technol., 32, 2706–2714, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Bash, J. O., Cooter, E. J., Dennis, R. L., Walker, J. T., and Pleim, J. E.: Evaluation of a regional air-quality model with bidirectional NH<sub>3</sub> exchange coupled to an agroecosystem model, Biogeosciences, 10, 1635–1645, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1635-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1635-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Beusen, A. H. W., Bouwman, A. F., Heuberger, P. S. C., van Drecht, G., and van
der Hoek, K. W.: Bottom-up uncertainty estimates of global ammonia emissions
from global agricultural production systems, Atmos. Environ., 42, 6067–6077,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Cai, G. X., Chen, D. L., Ding, H., Pacholski, A., Fan, X. H., and Zhu, Z. L.:
Nitrogen losses from fertilizers applied to maize, wheat and rice in the
North China Plain, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys., 63, 187–195, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, D., Zhao, Y., Lyu, R., Wu, R., Dai, L., Zhao, Y., Chen, F., Zhang, J.,
Yu, H., and Guan, M.: Seasonal and spatial variations of optical properties of
light absorbing carbon and its influencing factors in a typical polluted
city in Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Environ., 199, 45–54, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, X., Walker, J. T., and Geron, C.: Chromatography related performance of the Monitor for AeRosols and GAses in ambient air (MARGA): laboratory and field-based evaluation, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3893–3908, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3893-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3893-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Cheng, Y., Zheng, G., Wei, C., Mu, Q., Zheng, B., Wang, Z., Gao, M., Zhang,
Q., He, K., Carmichael, G., Pöschl, U., and Su, H.: Reactive nitrogen chemistry
in aerosol water as a source of sulfate during haze events in China, Sci.
Adv., 2, e1601530, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601530" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1601530</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Cheng, Z., Wang, S., Fu, X., Watson, J. G., Jiang, J., Fu, Q., Chen, C., Xu, B., Yu, J., Chow, J. C., and Hao, J.: Impact of biomass burning on haze pollution in the Yangtze River delta, China: a case study in summer 2011, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 4573–4585, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4573-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-4573-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Davies, D. K., Ilavajhala, S., Wong, M. M., and Justice, C. O.: Fire
Information for Resource Management System: Archiving and Distributing MODIS
Active Fire Data, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 47, 72–79, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Dong, W., Xin, J., and Wang, S.: Temporal and spatial distribution of
anthropogenic ammonia emissions in China: 1994–2006, Environ. Sci., 31,
1457–1463, 2010 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Dong, X., Li, J., Fu, J. S., Gao, Y., Huang, K., and Zhuang, G.: Inorganic
aerosols responses to emission changes in Yangtze River Delta, China. Sci.
Total Environ., 481, 522–532, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Emery, C., Tai, E., and Yarwood, G.: Enhanced meteorological modeling and
performance evaluation for two Texas episodes, Report to the Texas Natural
Resources Conservation Commission, prepared by: ENVIRON, International Corp,
Novato, CA, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
European Environment Agency (EEA): EMEP/CORINAIR Air Pollutant Emission
Inventory Guidebook-2009, 4.D Crop production and agricultural soils,
available at: <a href="https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-emission-inventory-guidebook-2009/part-b-sectoral-guidance-chapters/4-agriculture/4-d/4-d-crop-production-and-agricultural-soils.pdf/view" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 25 February 2020), 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
European Environment Agency (EEA): EMEP/CORINAIR Air Pollutant Emission
Inventory Guidebook-2013, 3.B Manure management, available at:
<a href="https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2013/part-b-sectoral-guidance-chapters/4-agriculture/3-b-manure-management/view" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 25 February 2020), 2013a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
European Environment Agency (EEA): EMEP/CORINAIR Air Pollutant Emission
Inventory Guidebook-2013, 3.D Crop production and agricultural soils,
available at:
<a href="https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2013/part-b-sectoral-guidance-chapters/4-agriculture/3-d-crop-production/view" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 25 February 2020), 2013b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Fang, X., Shen, G., Xu, C., Qian, X., Li, J., Zhao, Z., Yu, S., and Zhu, K.:
Agricultural ammonia emission inventory and its distribution characteristics
in Shanghai, Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 27, 2177–2185, 2015 (in
Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Flechard, C. R., Massad, R.-S., Loubet, B., Personne, E., Simpson, D., Bash, J. O., Cooter, E. J., Nemitz, E., and Sutton, M. A.: Advances in understanding, models and parameterizations of biosphere-atmosphere ammonia exchange, Biogeosciences, 10, 5183–5225, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-5183-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-5183-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Fu, X., Wang, S. X., Ran, L. M., Pleim, J. E., Cooter, E., Bash, J. O., Benson, V., and Hao, J. M.: Estimating NH<sub>3</sub> emissions from agricultural fertilizer application in China using the bi-directional CMAQ model coupled to an agro-ecosystem model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 6637–6649, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-6637-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-6637-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Fu, X., Wang, S., Xing, J., Zhang, X., Wang, T., and Hao, J.: Increasing ammonia
concentrations reduce the effectiveness of particle pollution control
achieved via SO<sub>2</sub> and NO<sub><i>X</i></sub> emissions reduction in east China,
Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett., 4, 221–227, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Guenther, A. B., Jiang, X., Heald, C. L., Sakulyanontvittaya, T., Duhl, T., Emmons, L. K., and Wang, X.: The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1471–1492, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1471-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Guo, H., Cheng, T., Gu, X., Wang, Y., Chen, H., Bao, F., Shi, S. Y., Xu, B.
R., Wang, W. N., Zuo, X., Zhang, X. C., and Meng, C.: Assessment of PM<sub>2.5</sub>
concentrations and exposure throughout China using ground observations, Sci.
Total Environ., 1024, 601–602, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Gyldenkaerne, S., Skjøth, C., Hertel, O., and Ellermann, T. A.: Dynamical
ammonia emission parameterization for use in air pollution models, J.
Geophys. Res., 110, D07108, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005459" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005459</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Huo, Q., Cai, X., Kang, L., Zhang, H., Song, Y., and Zhu, T.: Estimating ammonia
emissions from a winter wheat cropland in North China Plain with field
experiments and inverse dispersion modeling, Atmos. Environ., 104, 1–10,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, R., Zhang, Y., Bozzetti, C., Ho, K., Cao, J., Han, Y., Daellenbach,
K. R., Slowik, J. G., Platt, S. M., Canonaco, F., Zotter, P., Wolf, R.,
Pieber, S. M., Bruns, E. A., Crippa, M., Ciarelli, G., Piazzalunga, A.,
Schwikowski, M., Abbaszade, G., Schnelle-Kreis, J., Zimmermann, R., An, Z.,
Szidat, S., Baltensperger, U., EI Haddad, I., and Prevot, A. S. H.: High
secondary aerosol contribution to particulate pollution during haze events
in China, Nature, 514, 218–222, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, X., Song, Y., Li, M., Li, J., Huo, Q., Cai, X., Zhu, T., Hu, M.,
Zhang, H.: A high-resolution ammonia emission inventory in China, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 26, GB1030, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GB004161" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GB004161</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
IASI: available at: <a href="http://www.airqualitynju.com/En/Data/List/Data download" target="_blank"/>, last access: 4 April 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
JS inventories: NH<sub>3</sub> total column from IASI (Level 2), available at: <a href="https://cds-espri.ipsl.upmc.fr/etherTypo/index.php?id=1700&amp;L=1" target="_blank"/>, last access: 4 April 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Kang, Y., Liu, M., Song, Y., Huang, X., Yao, H., Cai, X., Zhang, H., Kang, L., Liu, X., Yan, X., He, H., Zhang, Q., Shao, M., and Zhu, T.: High-resolution ammonia emissions inventories in China from 1980 to 2012, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2043–2058, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2043-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2043-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Kurokawa, J., Ohara, T., Morikawa, T., Hanayama, S., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Fukui, T., Kawashima, K., and Akimoto, H.: Emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases over Asian regions during 2000–2008: Regional Emission inventory in ASia (REAS) version 2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 11019–11058, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11019-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-11019-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Lanciki, A.: 2060 MARGA Monitor for AeRosols and Gases in ambient Air.
Metrohm Process Analytics, Switzerland, available at:
<a href="https://www.metrohm.com/en/products/process-analyzers/applikon-marga/" target="_blank"/> (last
access: 10 February 2020), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Li, B., Zhang, J., Zhao, Y., Yuan, S., Zhao, Q., Shen, G., and Wu, H.: Seasonal
variation of urban carbonaceous aerosols in a typical city Nanjing in
Yangtze River Delta, China Atmos. Environ., 106, 223–231, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Li, L.: The numerical simulation of comprehensive air pollution
characteristics in a typical city-cluster, PhD thesis, Shanghai
University, Shanghai, China, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, C. and Yao, L.: Agricultural ammonia emission inventory and its
distribution characteristics in Jiangsu Province, Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 44, 70–74, 2016 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, M., Huang, X., Song, Y., Xu, T., Wang, S., Wu, Z., Hu, M., Zhang, L., Zhang, Q., Pan, Y., Liu, X., and Zhu, T.: Rapid SO<sub>2</sub> emission reductions significantly increase tropospheric ammonia concentrations over the North China Plain, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17933–17943, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17933-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17933-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, X., Zhang, Y., Han, W., Tang, A., Shen, J., Cui, Z., Vitousek, P.,
Erisman, J. W., Goulding, K., Christie, P., Fangmeier, A., and Zhang, F.:
Enhanced nitrogen deposition over China, Nature, 494, 459–463, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
MEIC: available at: <a href="http://www.meicmodel.org/" target="_blank"/>,  last access: 31 July 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP): The Guideline of Emission
Inventory Development for Atmospheric Ammonia, 2014 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
National Development and Reform Commission of China (NDRC): National data on
the cost and profit of agricultural product, China Statistics Press,
Beijing, 2015 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Pan, Y., Tian, S., Zhao, Y., Zhang, L., Zhu, X., Gao, J., Huang, W., Zhou,
Y., Song, Y., Zhang, Q., and Wang, Y.: Identifying ammonia hotspots in China
using a national observation network, Environ. Sci. Technol., 52, 3926–3934,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Pan, Y. P., Wang, Y. S., Tang, G. Q., and Wu, D.: Wet and dry deposition of atmospheric nitrogen at ten sites in Northern China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6515–6535, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6515-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6515-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Paulot, F., Fan, S., and Horowitz, L. W.: Contrasting seasonal responses of
sulfate aerosols to declining SO<sub>2</sub> emissions in the Eastern US:
implications for the efficacy of SO<sub>2</sub> emission controls, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 44, 455–464, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070695" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070695</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Price, C., Penner, J., and Prather, M.: NO<sub><i>X</i></sub> from lightning, Part I: Global
distribution based on lightning physics, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
5929–5941, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD03504" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD03504</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Qin, M., Wang, X., Hu, Y., Huang, X., He, L., Zhong, L., Song, Y., Hu, M.,
and Zhang, Y.: Formation of particulate sulfate and nitrate over the Pearl
River Delta in the fall: Diagnostic analysis using the Community Multiscale
Air Quality model, Atmos. Environ., 112, 81–89, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Schaap, M., Otjes, R. P., and Weijers, E. P.: Illustrating the benefit of using hourly monitoring data on secondary inorganic aerosol and its precursors for model evaluation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 11041–11053, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11041-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-11041-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Sindelarova, K., Granier, C., Bouarar, I., Guenther, A., Tilmes, S., Stavrakou, T., Müller, J.-F., Kuhn, U., Stefani, P., and Knorr, W.: Global data set of biogenic VOC emissions calculated by the MEGAN model over the last 30 years, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 9317–9341, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-9317-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Skamarock, W. C., Klemp, J. B., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Barker, D. M.,
Duda, M. G., Huang, X.-Y., Wang, W., and Powers, J. G.: A Description of the
Advanced Research WRF Version 3, NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475+STR, 113 pp., <a href="https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Skjøth, C. A., Geels, C., Berge, H., Gyldenkærne, S., Fagerli, H., Ellermann, T., Frohn, L. M., Christensen, J., Hansen, K. M., Hansen, K., and Hertel, O.: Spatial and temporal variations in ammonia emissions – a freely accessible model code for Europe, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5221–5236, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5221-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5221-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Stieger, B., Spindler, G., Fahlbusch, B. Muller, K., Gruner, A., Poulain,
L., Thoni, L., Seitler, E., Wallasch, M., and Herrmann, H.: Measurements of
PM<sub>10</sub> ions and trace gases with the online system MARGA at the research
station Melpitz in Germany – A five-year study, J. Atmos. Chem., 75, 33–70,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Su, F., Huang, B., Ding, X., Gao, Z., Chen, X., Zhang, F., Kogge, M.,
and Römheld, V.: Ammonia volatilization of different nitrogen fertilizer
types, Soils, 38, 682–686, 2006 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Sutton, M., Place, C., Eager, M., Fowler, D., and Smith, R.: Assessment of the
magnitude of ammonia emissions in the United-Kingdom, Atmos. Environ., 29,
1393–1411, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Sutton, M. A., Dragosits, U., Tang, Y. S., and Fowler, D.: Ammonia emissions
from nonagricultural sources in the UK, Atmos. Environ., 34, 855–869, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC): Operational Guidance for
the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Modeling System Version 4.7.1
(June 2010 Release), available at: <a href="http://www.cmaq-model.org" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 10 February 2020), 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA): Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, available at: <a href="http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 9 March 2019), 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Van Damme, M., Clarisse, L., Heald, C. L., Hurtmans, D., Ngadi, Y., Clerbaux, C., Dolman, A. J., Erisman, J. W., and Coheur, P. F.: Global distributions, time series and error characterization of atmospheric ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) from IASI satellite observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 2905–2922, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-2905-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-2905-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Van Damme, M., Clarisse, L., Dammers, E., Liu, X., Nowak, J. B., Clerbaux, C., Flechard, C. R., Galy-Lacaux, C., Xu, W., Neuman, J. A., Tang, Y. S., Sutton, M. A., Erisman, J. W., and Coheur, P. F.: Towards validation of ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) measurements from the IASI satellite, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 1575–1591, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1575-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-1575-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Warner, J. X., Dickerson, R. R., Wei, Z., Strow, L. L., Wang, Y., and Liang, Q.:
Increased atmospheric ammonia over the world's major agricultural areas
detected from space, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 2875–2884, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL072305" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL072305</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, G., Zhang, R., Gomez, M. E., Yang, L., Zamora, M. L., Hu, M., Lin, Y.,
Peng, J., Guo, S., Meng, J., Li, J., Cheng, C., Hu, T., Ren, Y., Wang, Y.,
Gao, J., Cao, J., An, Z., Zhou, W., Li, G., Wang, J., Tian, P.,
Marrero-Ortiz, W., Secrest, J., Du, Z., Zheng, J., Shang, D., Zeng, L.,
Shao, M., Wang, W., Huang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Li, Y., Hu, J., Pan, B.,
Cai, L., Cheng, Y., Ji, Y., Zhang, F., Rosenfeld, D., Liss, P. S., Duce, R.
A., Kolb, C. E., and Molina, M. J.: Persistent sulfate formation from London Fog
to Chinese haze, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 13630–13635, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, S., Xing, J., Jang, C., Zhu, Y., Fu, J. S., and Hao, J.: Impact assessment
of ammonia emissions on inorganic aerosols in east China using response
surface modeling technique, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 9293–9300, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Wei, L., Duan, J., Tan, J., Ma, Y., He, K., Wang, S., Huang, X., and Zhang, Y.:
Gas-to-particle conversion of atmospheric ammonia and sampling artifacts of
ammonium in spring of Beijing, Science China, 45, 216–226, 2015 (in
Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Wichink Kruit, R. J., Schaap, M., Sauter, F. J., van Zanten, M. C., and van Pul, W. A. J.: Modeling the distribution of ammonia across Europe including bi-directional surface–atmosphere exchange, Biogeosciences, 9, 5261–5277, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-5261-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-9-5261-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Xiao, Z. M., Zhang, Y. F., Hong, S. M., Bi, X. H., Jiao, L., Feng, Y. C.,
and Wang, Y. Q.: Estimation of the main factors influencing haze, based on a
long-term monitoring Campaign in Hangzhou, China, Aerosol Air Qual. Res.,
11, 873–882, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, F., Tan, J., Zhao, Q., Du, Z., He, K., Ma, Y., Duan, F., Chen, G., and Zhao, Q.: Characteristics of PM<sub>2.5</sub> speciation in representative megacities and across China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5207–5219, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5207-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5207-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y. and Zhao, Y.: Quantification and evaluation of atmospheric pollutant emissions from open biomass burning with multiple methods: a case study for the Yangtze River Delta region, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 327–348, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-327-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-327-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Z.: Estimation of ammonia emission from livestock in China based on
mass-flow method and regional comparison, Master thesis, Peking University,
Beijing, China, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, F., Chao, N., Wu, J., Tang, G., Chen, J., Wang, H., and Wu, Z.: Research on
agricultural ammonia emission inventory of Zhejiang Province in 2013,
Environmental Pollution &amp; Control, 38, 41–46, 2016 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, F, Chen, X., and Chen, Q.: The fertilization guideline for the main crop
types in China, China Agricultural University Press, Beijing, 2009 (in
Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, L., Chen, Y., Zhao, Y., Henze, D. K., Zhu, L., Song, Y., Paulot, F., Liu, X., Pan, Y., Lin, Y., and Huang, B.: Agricultural ammonia emissions in China: reconciling bottom-up and top-down estimates, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 339–355, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-339-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-339-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Q., Zhang, M., Yang, Y., and Lu, J.: Volatilization of ammonium
bicarbonate and urea in main soil of Shandong Province, Chinese J.
Soil Sci., 33, 32–34, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X., Wu, Y., Liu, X., Reis, S., Jin, J., Dragosits, U., van Damme, M.,
Clarisse, L., Whitburn, S., Coheur, P. F., and Gu, B.: Ammonia emissions may be
substantially underestimated in China, Environ. Sci. Technol., 51, 12089–12096,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X. Y., Wang, Y. Q., Niu, T., Zhang, X. C., Gong, S. L., Zhang, Y. M., and Sun, J. Y.: Atmospheric aerosol compositions in China: spatial/temporal variability, chemical signature, regional haze distribution and comparisons with global aerosols, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 779–799, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-779-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-779-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Dore, A. J., Ma, L., Liu, X., Ma, W., Cape, J. N., and Zhang, F.:
Agricultural ammonia emissions inventory and spatial distribution in the
North China Plain, Environ. Pollut., 158, 490–501, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Bo, X., Zhao, Y., and Nielsen, C. P.: Benefits of current and future policies on emissions of China's coal-fired power sector indicated by continuous emission monitoring, Environ. Pollut., 251, 415–424, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, B., Wang, S, Wang, J., Fu, J. S., Liu, T., Xu, J, Fu, X., and Hao, J.: Impact
of national NO<sub><i>x</i></sub> and SO<sub>2</sub> control policies on particulate matter
pollution in China, Atmos. Environ., 77, 453–463, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Qiu, L. P., Xu, R. Y., Xie, F. J., Zhang, Q., Yu, Y. Y., Nielsen, C. P., Qin, H. X., Wang, H. K., Wu, X. C., Li, W. Q., and Zhang, J.: Advantages of a city-scale emission inventory for urban air quality research and policy: the case of Nanjing, a typical industrial city in the Yangtze River Delta, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 12623–12644, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12623-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-12623-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhou, Y., Yang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, S., Dong, Y., Xie, F., Yu, Y., and Li, W.: Improved provincial emission inventory and speciation profiles of anthropogenic non-methane volatile organic compounds: a case study for Jiangsu, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7733–7756, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7733-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, H., Cai, S., Wang, S., Zhao, B., Chang, X., and Hao, J.: Development of a unit-based industrial emission inventory in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region and resulting improvement in air quality modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3447–3462, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3447-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3447-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, Z., Weng, J., Wang, S., and Wang, J.: Estimation of ammonia emission in
Anhui Province, Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 8, 73–75, 2016 (in
Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, B., Tong, D., Li, M., Liu, F., Hong, C., Geng, G., Li, H., Li, X., Peng, L., Qi, J., Yan, L., Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Zheng, Y., He, K., and Zhang, Q.: Trends in China's anthropogenic emissions since 2010 as the consequence of clean air actions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 14095–14111, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-14095-2018</a>, 2018.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Zhong, N., Zeng, Q., Zhang, L., Liao, B., Zhou, X., and Jiang, J.: Effects of
acidity and alkalinity on urea transformation in soil, Chinese J.
Soil Sci., 37, 1123–1128, 2006 (in Chinese).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Zhou, Y., Zhao, Y., Mao, P., Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., Qiu, L., and Yang, Y.: Development of a high-resolution emission inventory and its evaluation and application through air quality modeling for Jiangsu Province, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 211–233, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-211-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-211-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
