<?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" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Research article}?>
  <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-22-10023-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Secondary aerosol formation in marine Arctic environments: a model
measurement <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>comparison at Ny-Ålesund</article-title><alt-title>Secondary aerosol formation in marine Arctic environments</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Secondary aerosol formation in marine Arctic environments}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{C.~Xavier et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Xavier</surname><given-names>Carlton</given-names></name>
          <email>carlton.xavier@helsinki.fi</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8120-0431</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Baykara</surname><given-names>Metin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Wollesen de Jonge</surname><given-names>Robin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Altstädter</surname><given-names>Barbara</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3216-550X</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Clusius</surname><given-names>Petri</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5 aff6">
          <name><surname>Vakkari</surname><given-names>Ville</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Thakur</surname><given-names>Roseline</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3238-4171</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Beck</surname><given-names>Lisa</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3700-5895</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7">
          <name><surname>Becagli</surname><given-names>Silvia</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3633-4849</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7">
          <name><surname>Severi</surname><given-names>Mirko</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1511-6762</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7">
          <name><surname>Traversi</surname><given-names>Rita</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9790-2195</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff8 aff9">
          <name><surname>Krejci</surname><given-names>Radovan</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9384-9702</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff8 aff9">
          <name><surname>Tunved</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff10">
          <name><surname>Mazzola</surname><given-names>Mauro</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8394-2292</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff11">
          <name><surname>Wehner</surname><given-names>Birgit</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0611-4466</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Sipilä</surname><given-names>Mikko</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Kulmala</surname><given-names>Markku</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3464-7825</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff12">
          <name><surname>Boy</surname><given-names>Michael</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Roldin</surname><given-names>Pontus</given-names></name>
          <email>pontus.roldin@nuclear.lu.se</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4223-4708</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Institute for Atmospheric and Earth Systems Research, University of
Helsinki, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>P.O. Box 64, 00014 Helsinki, Finland</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Climate and Marine Sciences Department, Eurasia Institute of Earth
Sciences, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Istanbul Technical University, Maslak 34469, Istanbul, Turkey</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Division of Nuclear Physics, Department of Physics, Lund University,
P.O. Box 118, 221 00 Lund, Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Institute of Flight Guidance, Technische Universität Braunschweig,
38108 Braunschweig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Atmospheric Chemistry Research Group, Chemical Resource Beneficiation,
<?xmltex \hack{\break}?>North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 503, 00101 Helsinki,
Finland</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>Department of Chemistry, University of Florence, Sesto Fiorentino,
50019 Florence, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff8"><label>8</label><institution>Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, Stockholm,
Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff9"><label>9</label><institution>Bolin Centre for Climate Research, Stockholm University, Stockholm,
Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff10"><label>10</label><institution>National Research Council of Italy, Institute of Polar Sciences
(CNR-ISP), Bologna, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff11"><label>11</label><institution>Institute of Tropospheric Research, 04318 Leipzig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff12"><label>12</label><institution>LUT School of Engineering Science, Lappeenranta-Lahti University of
Technology, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>P.O. Box 20, 53851 Lappeenranta, Finland</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Carlton Xavier (carlton.xavier@helsinki.fi) and Pontus Roldin (pontus.roldin@nuclear.lu.se)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>4</day><month>August</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>15</issue>
      <fpage>10023</fpage><lpage>10043</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>11</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>18</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>2</day><month>July</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>12</day><month>July</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</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="d1e336">In this study, we modeled the aerosol particle formation along air mass
trajectories arriving at the remote Arctic research stations Gruvebadet (67 m a.s.l.) and Zeppelin (474 m a.s.l.), Ny-Ålesund, during May 2018. The aim
of this study was to improve our understanding of processes governing
secondary aerosol formation in remote Arctic marine environments. We run the
Lagrangian chemistry transport model ADCHEM, along air mass trajectories
generated with FLEXPART v10.4. The air masses arriving at Ny-Ålesund
spent most of their time over the open ice-free ocean. In order to capture
the secondary aerosol formation from the DMS emitted by phytoplankton from
the ocean surface, we implemented a recently developed comprehensive DMS and
halogen multi-phase oxidation chemistry scheme, coupled with the widely used
Master Chemical Mechanism (MCM).</p>

      <p id="d1e339">The modeled median particle number size distributions are in close agreement
with the observations in the marine-influenced boundary layer near-sea-surface Gruvebadet site. However, while the model reproduces the
accumulation mode particle number concentrations at Zeppelin, it
overestimates the Aitken mode particle number concentrations by a factor of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. We attribute this to the deficiency of the model to
capture the complex orographic effects on the boundary layer dynamics at
Ny-Ålesund. However, the model reproduces the average vertical particle
number concentration profiles within the boundary layer (0–600 m a.s.l.)
above Gruvebadet, as measured with condensation particle counters (CPCs) on
board an unmanned aircraft system (UAS).</p>

      <p id="d1e352">The model successfully reproduces the observed Hoppel minima, often seen in
particle number size distributions at Ny-Ålesund. The model also
supports the previous experimental findings that ion-mediated
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>–NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> nucleation can explain the observed new particle
formation in the marine Arctic boundary layer in the vicinity of
Ny-Ålesund. Precursors resulting from gas- and aqueous-phase DMS
chemistry contribute to the subsequent growth of the secondary aerosols. The
growth of particles is primarily driven via H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> condensation and
formation of methane sulfonic acid (MSA) through the aqueous-phase
ozonolysis of methane sulfinic acid (MSIA) in cloud and deliquescent
droplets.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e409">Earth's radiation budget is influenced both directly and indirectly by
aerosols, which scatter and absorb the incoming short-wave radiation (direct
effect) and serve as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN, indirect effect),
affecting both short- and long-wave radiation (Gantt et al., 2014; Oshima et
al., 2020; Park et al., 2017; Scott et al., 2014). The Arctic environments
are susceptible to perturbations in the radiation balance, with some
estimates suggesting that, compared to the global average, the Arctic is
warming at 3 times the rate, a phenomenon termed Arctic amplification
(AMAP, 2011, 2017, 2021; Lenssen et al., 2019; Tunved et al., 2013). The
warming of the Arctic polar environment has accelerated sea ice loss,
leading to a rapid decline in the extent and duration of snow cover and an
increase in permafrost thaw (AMAP, 2011, 2017; Bengtsson et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e412">The Arctic aerosol number concentration shows a pronounced seasonal
variation, where the late winter and early spring period is characterized by
elevated accumulation mode aerosol concentrations, accompanied by trace
gases (mostly anthropogenic with long-range-transported trace elements such
as sulfates, soot, and peroxy acyl nitrates (PANs)). This annually recurring
phenomenon in late winter and spring is termed the Arctic haze (Barrie,
1986; Lupi et al., 2016; Tunved et al., 2013). This contrasts with the
summer period, when the atmospheric new particle formation is observed at
Arctic sites, most likely due to low background aerosol concentrations and
increased photo-chemistry and biological activity (Engvall et al., 2008;
Heintzenberg et al., 2017; Tunved et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e415">The climate-change-driven Arctic sea ice loss has a profound impact on
natural aerosol production. Arrigo and van Dijken (2015) found that
decreasing and thinning of sea ice increased the rates of phytoplankton net
primary production by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % between the years 1998 and
2009. This can lead to an increase in the emissions of primary biogenic
precursors such as dimethyl sulfide (DMS), nitrogen volatiles (e.g., alkyl-amines) (Dall'Osto et al., 2017a, b), and
biological iodine species (Cuevas et al., 2018). DMS is emitted into the
atmosphere via air–sea gas exchanges (Park et al., 2017; Uhlig et al.,
2019) and accounts for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of global natural sulfur
emissions (Kettle and Andreae, 2000; Uhlig et al., 2019). Methane
sulfonic acid (MSA) and sulfuric acid (H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) are formed via DMS
gas-phase oxidation by OH and halogen species (Cl, Br) (Hoffmann et al.,
2016; Kim et al., 2021; Wollesen de Jonge et al., 2021). MSA and
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, together with ammonia (NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) or amines, act as
precursors contributing to new particle formation (NPF) and subsequently to
CCN production, influencing cloud formation and radiative balance (Berndt et
al., 2020; Dall'Osto et al., 2017a; Hoffmann et al., 2016; Kim et al., 2021;
Jang et al., 2021; Park et al., 2021). NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> plays a major role in
particle formation through stabilization of sulfuric acid clusters (Beck et
al., 2021; Jokinen et al., 2018; Olenius et al., 2013). Depending on local
parameters such as ocean pH, salinity, and temperature, global oceans can act
as either a source or sink of NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Paulot et al., 2015). Apart from
participating in cluster formation, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> influences the pH of marine
aerosols by neutralizing the acid (H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and MSA) in the particles
(Paulot et al., 2015). Though a few potential sources of NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are
known, for example coastal seabird colonies, pockets of open water, and
melting sea ice in summertime Arctic, the magnitude of the emissions remains
uncertain (Dall'Osto et al., 2019; Riddick et al., 2012; Wentworth et al.,
2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e539">DMS oxidation chemistry has been under focus, but uncertainties in climate
predictions persist since the chemical transport models (CTMs) and global
climate models (GCMs) employ fixed MSA and SO<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> yields from gas-phase
oxidation of DMS to calculate aerosol formation (Hertel et al., 1994;
Hoffmann et al., 2016; Kloster et al., 2006; Wollesen de Jonge et al.,
2021). Including a detailed multi-phase (aqueous-phase chemistry coupled
with gas-phase chemistry) DMS chemistry in numerical models can overcome
these uncertainties (Barnes et al., 2006; Campolongo et al., 1999).
Reaction intermediates such as dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), dimethyl sulfone
(DMSO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), and methane sulfinic acid (MSIA) are water-soluble, and
experiments have shown that neglecting aqueous-phase chemistry leads to
either an under-estimation of modeled MSA (Campolongo et al., 1999) or an
over-estimation of gaseous SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to measured values (Hoffmann et
al., 2016). For example, the temperature-dependent ratio of
MSA-to-non-sea-salt SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> (nss-SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>) is often used
to estimate the contribution of DMS to sulfate budget (Ayers et al., 1999;
Barnes et al., 2006). Campolongo et al. (1999) showed that modeling
studies which included a multi-phase DMS chemistry can bridge the gap
between temperature-dependent observations and modeled
MSA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> nss-SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>. Incorporating reactive halogen species over marine
environments is crucial in determining the DMS oxidation pathways to either
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> or MSA, the aging of marine aerosols, and the radiative properties
of marine clouds (Hoffmann et al., 2016). Modeling studies have shown that
Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and BrO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> radicals in the gas phase act as important DMS sinks
(Chen et al., 2018; Wollesen de Jonge et al., 2021), further underlining
the role of halogen–DMS chemistry in the marine boundary layer.</p>
      <p id="d1e650">Recent DMS <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> OH oxidation experiments performed in the AURA chamber at
Aarhus University show that MSA dominates the secondary aerosol mass
formation (Rosati et al., 2021). Aerosol dynamics model simulations which
intended to replicate the observations during these AURA experiments, using
the DMS gas-phase chemistry scheme from the Master Chemical Mechanism,
MCMv3.3.1 (Jenkin et al., 1997, 2015; Saunders et al., 2003),
substantially underestimate the particle mass and number concentrations and
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MSA</mml:mi><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:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio (Rosati et al., 2021; Wollesen de
Jonge, 2021). Based on these findings, Wollesen de Jonge et al. (2021)
developed a new DMS multi-phase chemistry scheme based on MCM v3.3.1, CAPRAM
DMS module 1.0 (DM1.0) (Hoffmann et al., 2016), a subset of the multi-phase
halogen chemistry mechanism CAPRAM Halogen Module 2.0 (HM2.0) (Bräuer et
al., 2013), and new reactions leading to the formation of hydroperoxymethyl
thioformate (HPMTF). With the new DMS multi-phase chemistry mechanism, the
aerosol dynamics model could capture the observed particle number
concentrations and secondary PM MSA and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> during DMS
oxidation experiments performed at both dry and humid conditions at 0 and 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in the AURA chamber. For more
details on the DMS, halogen, and multi-phase chemistry scheme used in ADCHEM,
the reader is referred to the article and Supplement of Wollesen de Jonge et
al. (2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e704">The aim of this work is to understand the processes and DMS oxidation
products governing the formation and growth of the secondary aerosol in
the pristine remote marine Arctic region. To facilitate this, we have
implemented the abovementioned DMS multi-phase chemistry mechanism into
ADCHEM (see Methods section) and modeled the aerosol formation along air
mass trajectories arriving at Ny-Ålesund. We compared the model results
with observations from Zeppelin (78<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>56<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 11<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>53<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 474 m a.s.l.)
and Gruvebadet (78<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>92<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 11<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 67 m a.s.l.). These two sites
represent remote marine Arctic conditions. Gruvebadet represents
ground-level concentrations as it is well within the boundary layer (BL).
Zeppelin on the other hand, is most often above the BL in winter months and
sometimes below the BL during spring and summer months (Traversi et al.,
2020). This implies that Zeppelin is more influenced by long-range
transport and Gruvebadet by more local effects (Traversi et al., 2020).
This demonstrates the complexity involved in capturing the atmospheric
mixing and secondary aerosol concentrations at Ny-Ålesund. The reason is
that Svalbard has an orographically complex terrain comprising of mountains,
glaciers, fjords, and flat lands that introduce various micro-meteorological
phenomena (Rader et al., 2021; Schemann and Ebell, 2020).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e788">Using the combined multi-phase DMS chemistry mechanism by Wollesen de Jonge
et al. (2021), MCMv3.3.1, and the monoterpene peroxy radical autoxidation
mechanism (PRAM, Roldin et al., 2019; Xavier et al., 2019), we simulated
aerosol particle formation within the marine boundary layer (MBL) upwind and
at Ny-Ålesund between 1–25 May 2018, using the Aerosol
Dynamics, gas- and particle-phase CHEMistry and radiative transfer model
(ADCHEM; Öström et al., 2017; Roldin et al., 2011, 2019). We ran
ADCHEM as a Lagrangian model along the air mass trajectories arriving at
Zeppelin every 3 h during the selected period (in total 200 trajectory
simulations). FLEXPART v10.4 was used to calculate the air mass trajectories
and potential emission sensitivity fields (Pisso et al., 2019; Stohl et al.,
2005). The simulation results for the vertical distribution of newly
formed aerosol (particle diameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm) were validated against
concurrent measurement data available from the ALADINA (Application of
Light-Weight Aircraft for Detecting in situ Aerosol) campaign, wherein an UAS
was used to investigate horizontal and vertical distribution of aerosol
profiles in the marine boundary layer (ABL) (Lampert et al., 2020).
Additionally, modeled particle number size distributions and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
chemical compositions were compared to the available measured particle
number size distributions and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> filter samples at both Gruvebadet
and Zeppelin measurement stations.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Air mass trajectories and potential emission sensitivity fields</title>
      <p id="d1e826">We employed the Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXible PARTicle
(FLEXPARTv10.4) to assess the emission sensitivities or “footprints” of
air masses arriving at Zeppelin during the simulation period.
FLEXPART is a stochastic model used to compute dispersion of hypothetical
particles, based on mean, turbulent, and diffusive flows which can be run
backwards in time to estimate air mass history at a site (Pisso et al.,
2019). European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) ERA5
reanalysis meteorology with 137 height levels 1 h temporal and 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> spatial resolution was used as an input to FLEXPART (Hersbach et al., 2018a, b).
The air mass history was simulated 7 d backwards in time and arriving at
Zeppelin (474 m a.s.l.) every 3 h (at 00:00, 03:00, 06:00, 09:00, 12:00,
15:00, 15:00, and 21:00 UTC) for the entire simulation period (1–25 May 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e854">FLEXPART-calculated normalized emission sensitivity fields were combined
with oceanic emissions (DMS, dibromomethane, tribromomethane, iodomethane),
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from seabird colonies, and anthropogenic emissions (NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) derived from global inventories (see Sect. 2.2).
This was done to obtain representative emissions that consider the complete
emission source regions along the trajectories, upwind of the measurement
station. Additional meteorological parameters such as temperature, pressure,
sea surface temperature, specific humidity, and cloud liquid water content
from the ERA5 reanalysis dataset were extracted along the trajectories and
provided as inputs to ADCHEM.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Gas and primary particle emissions</title>
      <p id="d1e901">Emissions of gas-phase biogenic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-pinene, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-pinene <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>3-carene, limonene, isoprene, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-caryophyllene were modeled with a one-dimensional version of MEGAN v2.04
(Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature 2.04) (Guenther et
al., 2006). Gas-phase emissions of marine halogens such as tribromomethane
(CHBr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), dibromomethane (CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>Br<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>), and iodomethane (CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>I)
were retrieved from CAMS-OCE global oceanic emissions (CAMS-GLOB-OCE), which
are available as daily means with a spatial resolution of
0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Granier et al., 2019; Ziska et al., 2013).
CAMS-GLOB-OCE also provides gas-phase DMS emissions with the same temporal
and spatial resolution (Granier et al., 2019) calculated with the air–sea
flux parameterization and emission fluxes described in Lana et al. (2011) and
Nightingale et al. (2000). NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from seabird colonies were
acquired from a global emission inventory (Riddick et al., 2012). To
account for additional NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes from the open ocean, we used an
estimated sea surface equilibrium NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> saturation concentration of
0.5 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (12.2 ppt at standard temperature and pressure (STP)), which
approximately corresponds to a surface ocean ammonium concentration of 0.125 mmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb, calculated based on Eqs. 3 and
4 from Wentworth et al., 2016) at a sea surface temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. The sea surface temperature for the study period varied
between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–23 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C along the trajectories.
The estimated surface ocean ammonium concentrations are in close agreement
with the concentration estimated by the global ocean biogeochemical model
COBALT (Stock et al., 2014) in the North Atlantic Ocean, but up to a
factor of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> higher than the concentrations simulated with
other ocean biogeochemical models and/or model setups (Paulot et al.,
2015). Therefore, we performed model sensitivity runs with a sea surface
equilibrium NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration of 0.1 and 1 nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" 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>. The
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> equilibrium saturation concentrations represent the ambient
surface gas-phase concentration at which the air–sea flux changes direction,
with a net downward flux from air to sea if the ambient NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> exceeds
the equilibrium gas concentrations and vice versa (Wentworth et al.,
2016). For the anthropogenic trace gas and primary particle emissions, we
used the CAMS-GLOB-ANT v2.1 inventory, with a spatial resolution of
0.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Granier et al., 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e1198">In this work, we used the sea surface temperature (SST) and wind-speed-dependent sea spray aerosol (SSA) emission parameterization by Sofiev et al. (2011) (further referred to as Sofiev11). Sofiev11 used a modified source
function based on the parameterization of Monahan et al. (1986), experiments by Mårtensson et al. (2003), and SEAS campaign by Clarke et
al. (2006). The modified source function in Sofiev11 provides extrapolated
SSA emissions between size ranges of 10 nm–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with appropriate
correction functions employed for SST deviating from 298.15 K (Sofiev et
al., 2011). Sofiev11 SSA parameterization shows that with increasing
temperatures, emission flux for larger particles increases while the
emission fluxes for smaller particles decreases (Barthel et al., 2019;
Sofiev et al., 2011). We performed sensitivity tests using the temperature-
and wind-speed-dependent SSA parameterization by Salter et al. (2015)
(further referred to as Salter15). Both Salter15 and Sofiev11 are
valid between 10 nm–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Model simulation comparisons between
Sofiev11 and Salter15 have shown that the SSA parameterization from
Sofiev11 has a stronger temperature dependence and higher particle number
concentration emissions in the Aitken mode but results in lower PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions at temperatures below 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (Barthel et al.,
2019).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>ADCHEM</title>
      <p id="d1e1247">For this study, ADCHEM was employed as a one-dimensional column model with
40 logarithmically vertical layers, extending up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2600</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m.
The model time step used for simulations was 30 s. The vertical
atmospheric turbulent diffusion was solved using a modified Grisogono
turbulent diffusivity scheme (Jeričević et al., 2010; Öström
et al., 2017; Roldin et al., 2019). The ADCHEM aerosol module includes new
particle formation, Brownian coagulation, condensation and evaporation of
particles, and finally the dry and wet deposition of both particles and
gases. The particle number size distributions were represented using 100
size bins ranging from 1.07 nm to 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> dry diameter. Clouds were
assumed to be present in the model grid cells when the bulk liquid water
content (LWC, extracted along the trajectory from ERA5 datasets) was greater
than 0.01 g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" 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>. As a default, we used a constant cloud supersaturation
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) of 0.25 %, and the particles were activated into cloud droplets if the
calculated water vapor supersaturation above the particle surface
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, calculated using Köhler theory) was smaller than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. For
sulfate-dominated aerosol particles this corresponds to a minimum dry
particle activation diameter of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm (see Fig. S10).
During the cloud processing, each activated cloud droplet was assumed to
take up an equal amount of liquid water corresponding to the total bulk LWC
divided by the calculated number concentration of activated cloud droplets.
The gas–liquid droplet mass transfer and dissolution of 50 species in total,
including HCl, HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, OH, BrO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, DMSO, MSIA, MSA, and HPMTF, and
their irreversible reactions in the interstitial and activated cloud
droplets are treated by the multi-phase chemistry mechanism (see Wollesen de
Jonge et al. (2021) for details). The kinetic pre-processor (KPP) (Damian et
al., 2002) was used to generate the multi-phase chemistry mechanism used in
this study.</p>
      <p id="d1e1400">Recent observations of NPF at Ny-Ålesund have confirmed the importance
of ion-mediated H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>–NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> nucleation in spring with MSA and
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> condensation contributing to the subsequent growth of
particles (Beck et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2020). In this work, the
Atmosphere Cluster Dynamics Code (ACDC) (McGrath et al., 2012; Olenius et
al., 2013) was coupled with ADCHEM (Roldin et al., 2019). ACDC was used
to model NPF, which involved H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> clustering with NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> via
both neutral and ion-induced pathways with an ionization rate of 1.7 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" 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> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. ACDC was used to solve the evolution of molecular
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>–NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> clusters by considering the loss of clusters by
collisions, evaporation, or coagulation scavenging onto larger aerosol
particles. At each time step, the flux of clusters (up to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and 5 NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> each) growing out of the ACDC
molecule-cluster domain represents the NPF rate. These newly formed clusters
are assigned to the corresponding smallest particle size bin at 1.07 nm in
diameter in ADCHEM, which then simulates the condensational growth of
particles and losses due to evaporation, coagulation, and wet and dry
deposition.</p>
      <p id="d1e1565">For all simulations, we used model output from the closest height levels
that can represent Gruvebadet (model height of 73.5 m a.s.l.) and Zeppelin
(model height of 486.0 m a.s.l.).</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3.SSSx1" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Sensitivity tests</title>
      <p id="d1e1573">Alongside the main ADCHEM simulations, <italic>BaseCase</italic>, we performed nine complementary
scenario runs to assess the impact of different processes on the modeled
aerosol concentrations. We performed simulations without aerosol in-cloud
processing (<italic>Cloudoff</italic>) to check the impact of in-cloud processing on the growth of
aerosols. We investigated the effect of higher PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> particle emissions
on the chemical composition of secondary aerosols, using the sea spray
emission parameterization based on Salter et al. (2015) (<italic>SalterSSA</italic>). Simulations were
conducted to assess the impact of lower and higher ammonia sources over the
open ocean (<italic>LowNH</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <italic>HighNH</italic><inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>). A sensitivity test without precipitation
(<italic>NoPrecip</italic>) was performed to test the influence of precipitation on number
concentration and particle composition. Since cloud supersaturation is
critical to the activation of particles and is highly uncertain, we
performed two simulations with low and high cloud supersaturation
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to test its impact on the modeled
particle distributions. This corresponds to minimum dry particle activation
diameters of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm, respectively,
for sulfate-rich aerosol particles (see Fig. S10). We performed a
simulation without new particle formation (<italic>NPFoff</italic>) and finally one simulation
without the dissolution and irreversible aqueous chemistry of the
intermediate DMS oxidation products, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and halogens
(<italic>woDissolution</italic>), implying that MSA, H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are only formed in the
gas phase. Table 1 summarizes the setup for different model sensitivity
tests.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1741">Model sensitivity tests performed alongside the main BaseCase simulations
to test the effect of different parameters on secondary aerosol formation.
These sensitivity tests focus on the role of in-cloud processing and aqueous-phase chemistry, the NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from open ocean, SSA
parameterization, and cloud supersaturation. The sea surface equilibrium
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in parts per trillion are provided in the brackets.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="5cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Simulation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">In-cloud processing</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">eq</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (nmol m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" 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>, ppt)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">SSA parameterization</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Precipitation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BaseCase</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SalterSSA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Salter15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cloudoff</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LowNH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1 (2.4)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HighNH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0 (24)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NoPrecip</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Off</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SSat0.4, SSat0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NPFoff</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">WoDissolution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On, but no dissolution and irreversible chemistry of intermediate DMS oxidation products</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5 (12.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sofiev11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e2024">We utilized comprehensive measurements from the Ny-Ålesund research
station sites, Zeppelin observatory (Platt et al., 2022), and Gruvebadet
during the period of 1–25 May 2018. Since 2017, the
atmospheric observatory at Gruvebadet, which is located about 700 m
southwest of Ny-Ålesund village at almost sea level (67 m.s.l.), hosted
the Neutral cluster and Air Ion Spectrometer (NAIS, Manninen et al., 2010; Mirme
and Mirme, 2013) for semi-permanent measurements. Here we use NAIS-measured
number size distribution of naturally charged (ions) in diameter size ranges
between 0.8–40 nm and neutral particles in the size range of 2.5–42 nm, with a temporal resolution of 2 s.</p>
      <p id="d1e2027">During the measurement period, a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS)
was operated to measure particle number size distribution in the diameter
size range of 10–470 nm at Zeppelin. Concurrent SMPS data (TSI 3034, 54
channels) with diameter size ranging from 10 to 470 nm from Gruvebadet were
also available (Dall'Osto et al., 2019; Moroni et al., 2020), thus
enabling us to compare the modeled particle number size distribution with
the measured size distributions at both measurement stations. Daily-resolution continuous aerosol samples with PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> cutoff were collected
at Gruvebadet using a Tecore Skypost low-volume sampler (Amore et al.,
2022). The detection limit for Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> was 0.0001 and
0.0002 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>. Since the field blank medians at Gruvebadet were less than
1 % of sampled values, the field blanks were not subtracted from
the sampled values (Amore et al., 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e2104">Vertical particle number concentration profiles were obtained using UAS
ALADINA (Bärfuss et al., 2018; Lampert et al., 2020), which was
operated during the simulation period. ALADINA was operated up to a height
of 850 m a.s.l. and thus can be used for a potential closure between the two
different research sites of Gruvebadet and Zeppelin. ALADINA is equipped
with two condensation particle counters (CPCs model 3007, TSI Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA), measuring in the size ranges of 3 nm–2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (CPC1) and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm–2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (CPC2) (Lampert et al., 2020;
Petäjä et al., 2020). The difference between CPC1 and CPC2
provides an estimate of particle number concentrations in the size of 3–12 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), which was used as an indicator of NPF. Alongside the CPCs, a
host of other instruments measuring meteorological parameters were operated
in unison, the description of which can be found in Bärfuss et al. (2018) and Lampert et al. (2020).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4.SSSx1" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Evaluating temporal aspects of model performance</title>
      <p id="d1e2160">The modeled PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> inorganic chemical composition was evaluated against
the measured PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> inorganic chemical composition using statistical
estimates such as normalized mean bias (NMB), Pearson correlation
coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), root-mean-squared error (RMSE), and fraction of predictions
within a factor of 2 of the observed values (FAC2). These tests were used to
evaluate modeled values (M<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) against observation values (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) at
both the measurement sites.</p>
      <p id="d1e2206">Pearson correlation coefficient was calculated using the formula
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M152" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</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:munderover><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">M</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">M</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are standard deviations of the
observed and modeled values, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e2311">Normalized mean bias (NMB) indicates if the predictions are over- or
underestimating the observed values, with the factor representing the under-
or overestimation. NMB was calculated using Eq. (2):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M155" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>NMB</mml:mtext><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:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</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:mo>)</mml:mo></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:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            Root-mean-squared error (RMSE) was calculated using Eq. (3):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M156" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>RMSE</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</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:munderover><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</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:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            FAC2 is a robust metric defined as the percentage of predictions that are
within a factor of 2 of the observed values (Eq. 4):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M157" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>Fac2</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi>O</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e2460">In the following sections, we analyze and evaluate the model results against
comprehensive measurements in Ny-Ålesund. In Sect. 3.1, we focus
on the particle number size distributions at both sites, followed by
gas-phase concentrations and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> inorganic chemical composition
(Sect. 3.2) and the vertical nano-particle concentration profiles
(Sect. 3.3). Finally, in Sect. 3.4, we analyze the results from
the model sensitivity tests.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e2474">Particle number size distribution at Gruvebadet for BaseCase. Panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows the measurement data for the period 1–25 May from SMPS (10–470 nm) and NAIS (2.5–10 nm), panel <bold>(b)</bold> provides the modeled
particle size distribution, and panel <bold>(c)</bold> shows the total measured and
simulated number concentrations. The black line at 10 nm denotes the
boundary above which SMPS data start and NAIS data end. The abscissa
indicates the time for the entire simulated duration. The ordinate in Fig. 1 for both panels <bold>(a)</bold> and <bold>(b)</bold> indicates the particle diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, nm).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Particle number size distributions</title>
      <p id="d1e2517">Figure 1a and b show the observed and predicted particle number size
distributions at Gruvebadet for the BaseCase simulation. Figure 1a includes SMPS
observations starting from 10 to 470 nm and NAIS observations for neutral
particles in the range 2.5–10 nm (boundary marked by the black line)
since NAIS data below 2.5 nm cannot be relied upon, owing to the presence of
corona-generated ions (Jayaratne et al., 2017; Manninen et al., 2011,
2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e2520">In the BaseCase simulations the model captures particle formation on 2 May followed by an increasing number of Aitken and accumulation mode particles
during the days of 3–4 May, which is the result of more
polluted air masses arriving at Ny-Ålesund from the European continent
(Fig. S1 in the Supplement). Similarly, the model reproduces the particle formation on 20 May, specifically in the size range 2–8 nm, but overestimates
the Aitken mode and accumulation mode particle concentration on
21 May. However, the model tends to underestimate the nucleation
mode particle number concentrations between 10–25 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
around noon and overestimate the concentrations during the morning and
evening (Fig. S2a). The model and measurements show an apparent time delay
in the formation of new particles larger than 10 nm. While the measurements
show a peak at 11:00 CEST (for all times throughout) the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> shows a maximum at 03:00
and 18:00. The modeled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> maximum around 18:00 is likely a
result of the formation of new particles around noon, which grow to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm in diameter during the afternoon and evening by
condensation of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The predicted Aitken (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
accumulation mode particle concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) which form a few
days upwind of the station are overall in good agreement with the
measurements, which show a minor diurnal trend (Fig. 2b and c). The
measurements indicate that at Gruvebadet <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> contributes the
most significant fraction of measured total number concentrations with
45.3 %, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">470</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> contribute 30.5 %
and 23.94 %, respectively. However, the simulations predict a greater
contribution of Aitken mode (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">53.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) to total number
concentration, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">470</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accounting for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">36.58</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 9.57 %, respectively (Fig. S2).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2763">Particle size distribution at Zeppelin. Panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows the
measurement data for the period 1–25 May from the SMPS, panel <bold>(b)</bold> provides the simulated particle size distribution, and panel <bold>(c)</bold> shows the
total measured and simulated number concentrations for the BaseCase simulations. The
abscissa and ordinates are similar to Fig. 1.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2782">Figure 2 shows the measured size distribution in panel (a) and simulated
size distribution in panel (b) for Zeppelin. At Zeppelin, the model
overestimates the number concentration in nucleation and Aitken modes (also
see Fig. S3). The particle number size distribution
measurements at Zeppelin indicate that the relative contribution of the
three modes (nucleation, Aitken, and accumulation) varies to some extent when
compared to Gruvebadet. Measurements show that at Zeppelin <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> contributes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">33.46</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 46.43 %, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 20.11 % to the total particle number concentrations. The
model predicts a lower relative contribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (26.94 %) and a greater contribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (63.44 %)
to the total simulated particle number concentrations. The diurnal trends at
Zeppelin agree well with earlier measurements conducted at Zeppelin in
spring by Ström et al. (2009). Additionally, the measured diurnal
pattern at Zeppelin varies in comparison to Gruvebadet. At Zeppelin, the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations peak in the afternoon and evening. The
modeled
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> shows only a weak diurnal trend. It should be noted that
the measurements show a time delay of around 3 h in the peak <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at the two sites (Figs. S2 and S3). This is
possibly a result of vertical mixing and dilution effects modulating the
observed particle number concentrations at sites situated at different
altitudes, similar to observations made at Zeppelin and Corbel by Ström
et al. (2009).</p>
      <p id="d1e2946">ADCHEM considers the formation of new particles via both the ion-mediated
and neutral H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>–NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> clustering pathways. Beck et al. (2021) observed a dominant contribution of negatively charged H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>–NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> clusters to secondary particle formation in May 2017 at
Ny-Ålesund, with HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> playing a small role in the initial particle
formation. However, the discrepancy in the modeled and observed diurnal
trends of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> could indicate that there are other
sources or vapors that might potentially contribute to the particle
formation. Other possible NPF mechanisms may involve amines (Olenius et al.,
2013) and pure biogenic highly oxidized molecules (HOMs) (neutral and ion
induced) nucleation (Kirkby et al., 2016). We speculate that the exclusion
of these other mechanisms (HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> amines, and HOM-driven
particle formation) might result in the discrepancies in the modeled and
observed diurnal particle number concentration trends. HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-induced
particle formation could, for example, play an important role if the air masses
upwind of Ny-Ålesund traverse the sea-ice-covered regions
(Baccarini et al., 2020; Beck et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e3069">Figure 3 presents the median particle number size distribution for the
BaseCase simulation at both Zeppelin and Gruvebadet, with the respective 25th and
75th percentiles, for the entire selected period. At Gruvebadet, the
modeled and measured median particle number size distributions are in
reasonable agreement for both Aitken and accumulation modes. However, the
model overpredicts the median Aitken mode concentrations at Zeppelin by a
factor of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The modeled Aitken mode peak at both measurement
sites is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 nm, while the measured Aitken mode peak is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm. Though the modeled accumulation mode peak is at
a larger size (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm), compared to the measured
accumulation mode peak (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">110</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm), the predicted value is
slightly lower than the monthly averaged accumulation mode peak location
measured at Zeppelin in earlier studies (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">160</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–170 nm,
Dall'Osto et al., 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e3130">The discrepancy between the modeled and measured particle concentrations at
Zeppelin can be caused by the underlying complexity of modeling the boundary
layer dynamics at an elevated site, such as Zeppelin. The vertical mixing of
aerosols along the up-slope or down-slope of a mountain site is difficult,
if not impossible, for a one-dimensional column model, since it is unable to
capture the topographical influence on locally varying wind speeds or latent
and sensible heat fluxes (Mikkola, 2020; Wainwright et al., 2012).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3135">Median particle number size distribution at Gruvebadet and
Zeppelin for both modeled (BaseCase simulations) and measured values. The shaded
areas indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles for both model and
measured median particle number size distribution. At Zeppelin, the
simulated median size distribution is calculated for periods only when SMPS
data were available.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3145">Another detectable feature in the median particle number size distribution
is the diameter of the Hoppel minimum (Hoppel et al., 1985, 1986) and the
role of in-cloud processing in forming this minimum. A Hoppel minimum is
often observed in marine air masses (Fossum et al., 2018; Tunved et al.,
2013; Zheng et al., 2018) and is attributed to in-cloud processing of
aerosols, with chemical processing (e.g., sulfate production via oxidation
of dissolved SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Feingold and Kreidenweis, 2000; Hoppel et al.,
1986) and coalescence of droplets playing a key role (Flossmann and
Wobrock, 2019; Hoppel et al., 1986; Hoppel and Frick, 1990; Noble and
Hudson, 2013). It has been estimated that, on average, aerosols take part in
about 10 non-precipitating cloud cycles before they are removed from the
atmosphere by wet scavenging (Hoose et al., 2008; Hoppel et al., 1986;
Rosenfeld et al., 2014). These non-precipitating cloud cycles facilitate the
formation of hygroscopic accumulation mode particles, with low critical
supersaturation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) that readily activates to cloud droplets during
subsequent cloud cycles, thus growing to larger sizes. This is because the
activated particles undergo chemical processing, gas-to-particle
conversions, coalescence, and coagulation with other interstitial particles.
Upon evaporation of water, the emerging dry particles have a larger size and
lower <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, leading to a minimum being formed between the un-activated and
activated cloud droplets (Herenz et al., 2018; Hudson et al., 2015; Noble
and Hudson, 2013). The diameter at which the Hoppel minimum is observed
varies depending on the cloud supersaturation and particle composition
(Hoppel et al., 1986; Hudson et al., 2015), with Hoppel minimum sizes
observed in ranges from 60 nm at Zeppelin Ny-Ålesund to around 90 nm at
Tuktoyaktuk, Canada (Herenz et al., 2018; Tunved et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e3179">The median particle number size distribution in Fig. 3 shows that at both
stations the measured Hoppel minima is around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm, while
the simulated Hoppel minima are around the size of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm at
both sites. This difference in location of Hoppel minima can be attributed
to the assumed value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in the model. The value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> used in the
model lies in the range of typical marine stratocumulus clouds, which can
vary between 0.1 %–1 % (Fossum et al., 2018; Quinn et al., 2017). With
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % the sulfate-dominating particles in the Arctic marine boundary
layer will be activated into cloud droplets if their diameter is greater
than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm in diameter (Fig. S10).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Gas- and particle-phase chemical composition of important precursors</title>
      <p id="d1e3253">Figure 4 shows the range of simulated gas-phase concentrations of DMS
oxidation products H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, MSA, and HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> for the entire period
at height levels representing Gruvebadet. The mean measurement values (red
dots) represent gas-phase concentrations for the same species from an
earlier 2017 May campaign performed at Gruvebadet by Beck et al. (2021).
Measurements of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at Gruvebadet from May 2017 indicate
monthly mean concentrations around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" 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> (Beck et al., 2021). The modeled H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at
Gruvebadet are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" 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>, implying a reasonably
good model performance in predicting gaseous precursor concentrations. The
simulated gas concentrations of MSA (10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>–10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" 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>) also agree well with the measurements made at Gruvebadet in May 2017 by
Beck et al. (2021), wherein they measured daily averages of MSA gas
concentrations on the order of 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> molec. cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" 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>. The low modeled
values of MSA and DMSO gas-phase concentrations at the height representing
Zeppelin (see Fig. S4, e.g., between 15–17 May) coincide
with the period where the planetary boundary layer height (PBLH) is below
the altitude of Zeppelin station (see Fig. S5). Overall, we
can conclude that the modeled precursor gas concentrations at the two
measurement sites are, in general, in good agreement with earlier measurements
at the two sites.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e3426">Gas-phase concentrations at Gruvebadet for the BaseCase simulations. The
red dots indicate the mean measured values from an earlier 2017 May campaign
conducted at Gruvebadet by Beck et al. (2021).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3437">Simulated median mass size distribution for BaseCase simulations. The
upper panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows the median mass size distribution for compounds
Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, MSA, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the entire size distribution ranging from 1.07 nm–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The lower panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows the relative mass fractions or
contribution of compounds Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, MSA, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>,
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to total non-refractory PM
at different sizes.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3597">Figure 5a shows the simulated median mass size distribution of compounds
Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, MSA, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
for the BaseCase runs in the lowest model layer. Figure 5a indicates that the
nucleation mode particles are composed mainly of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, while MSA, Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> dominate PM for larger
particles. The observed and modeled high MSA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations in
comparison to H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> at Ny-Ålesund is not reflected in the
respective vapor contribution to the nano-particle growth. This is because,
in contrast to H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, MSA is not a non-volatile condensable
compound. The gas-to-particle partitioning of MSA requires co-condensation
and dissolution of (NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Hodshire et al., 2019) or the existence of
cations such as Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, which decreases the particle acidity ([H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>]).
Figure 5b shows the relative mass fraction of the abovementioned
compounds to PM at different sizes. SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
dominate the mass for particles in the nucleation and Aitken modes.
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> contributes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to nucleation and Aitken mode PM, with its contribution decreasing
for accumulation (100 nm–1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and coarse (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) mode
PM (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 3.36 %, respectively) (Table S1).
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> contribution follows a similar trend, as SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>,
with 12.34 % and 6.95 % contribution to nucleation and Aitken mode PM,
but is insignificant for accumulation and coarse mode PM (Table S1). The loss
of primary sea spray aerosols due to wet scavenging promoted the growth of
secondary aerosol particles in the nucleation and Aitken modes by
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> as seen in Fig. 5b.
Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %), Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %),
and MSA (20.45 %) are the dominant contributors to accumulation and coarse
mode PM. In the BaseCase simulations, gas-phase SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> dissolves in the cloud
droplets and is oxidized by H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> into SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> (Wollesen
de Jonge et al., 2021). Previous modeling studies have shown that a
very small fraction of MSA is formed in the gas phase. Instead, most MSA is
formed via ozonolysis of MSIA in the aqueous phase (Hoffmann et al., 2016;
Wollesen de Jonge et al., 2021). It should be noted that HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> have an insignificant contribution to total PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
amounting to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 0.17 %, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e4074">PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> comparison of BaseCase simulations with daily filter samples
from Gruvebadet and Zeppelin for the entire modeled period. Panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(b)</bold> shows PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(c)</bold> shows PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(d)</bold> shows PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> filter samples. The dotted
lines in each panel indicate measurement values, and the solid line denotes
simulated values. The ordinate is plotted at log scale to better visualize
the low values.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4187">Figure 6 compares the daily PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> filter measurements to the modeled
values at both measurement stations. The model prediction of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was evaluated using
statistical metrics such as NMB, FAC2, correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), and RMSE
(Table 3). Though the model does well in simulating the trends of PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at Zeppelin (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values of 0.35, 0.51,
and 0.6, respectively), it is unable to predict the NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> trends
accurately (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <p id="d1e4337">Pearson correlation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values) at Gruvebadet is in the range of 0.29–0.34
for PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
implying that the model trends are reasonably consistent with the measured
trends. However, at Gruvebadet the NMB values for PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> are underpredicted (NMB <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.88</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively), while PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> show a large
overprediction (1.81 and 1.05) in the modeled values. In contrast, at
Zeppelin, the modeled PM SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> is overestimated (NMB <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.96).
Likewise, large RMSE and negligible FAC2 values, for PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and
Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, imply discrepancies between the predicted and measured values,
indicating that the model is overestimating PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>,
Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at Gruvebadet and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> at
Zeppelin. In summary, the model tends to overpredict PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 but, on the other hand, does
reasonably well in predicting the daily measured trends. Additionally, the
modeled PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Cl</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Na</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molar ratio at Gruvebadet and
Zeppelin is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.79</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.95</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.
This is much higher than the observed PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Cl</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Na</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molar
ratio at both sites (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.39</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). One likely reason for this is
the overestimated sea spray aerosol emissions. The PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Cl</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Na</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molar ratios give a measure of the acidic nature of
aerosol, since increased condensation of strong acid MSA and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
increases acidity of aerosols, thereby causing loss of Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(dechlorination) as HCl (Ayers et al., 1999; Frey et al., 2020). Thus,
increased availability of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and MSA in the particle phase in
Aitken mode particles results in acid-induced Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> loss from sea spray
particles.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e4818">Evaluation of modeled PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> values at both sites of Gruvebadet
(G) and Zeppelin (Z) for the four particle-phase species Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <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:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Species</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Normalized mean bias factor (NMB)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">RMSE (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">FAC2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.88</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.76</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.34<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.09<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.02<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.04<inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.28</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 1.96<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.33<inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.35<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.27<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.26<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.6<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.24<inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.81<inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.36<inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.29<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.51<inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.67<inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.55<inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.48<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.05<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.39<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.24<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.08<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.74<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.24<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Z</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e5343">Comparison of vertical profiles of measured particle number
concentration and BaseCase simulation. Panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows measured particle number
concentration between 3–12 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, triangles), from CPC on board
the UAS during the four periods 1–2 May, 14–16 May, 19–22 May, and
23–24 May (in legend) overlaid onto the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for
the same periods. Panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows the simulated and measured mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and panel <bold>(c)</bold> shows the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the selected period.
Additionally, panel <bold>(c)</bold> also shows the mean SMPS particle concentrations at
both Gruvebadet and Zeppelin. The horizontal bars for the mean SMPS values
represent the standard deviation.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e5441">Median size distribution at Gruvebadet <bold>(a)</bold> and Zeppelin <bold>(b)</bold> for all the sensitivity tests Cloudoff, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (colored dashed
lines) including BaseCase (blue solid line) and observations (black solid line).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Vertical profiles of ultra-fine particle</title>
      <p id="d1e5494">Figure 7a shows the measured vertical <inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
from CPC on board the UAS for four measurement periods overlaid onto
simulated vertical profiles. Figure 7b and c show the mean vertical
profiles for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for both the BaseCase simulation and
UAS measurements for the entire selected period. The model underestimates
the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical particle number
concentrations below 200 m a.s.l. The NMB for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.28</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, implying that the model
underestimates the particle number concentrations. Both the modeled and
measured mean particle number concentrations for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are in good agreement between the heights of 200–600 m a.s.l. The
lower calculated concentrations of modeled mean particle number
concentrations above 600 m a.s.l. are most likely affected by higher
turbulence in the transition zone from the boundary layer to the free
troposphere, which might cause a large mixing of aerosol particles. It
should be noted that, at Gruvebadet, the mean SMPS particle number
concentrations are in good agreement with the modeled particle number
concentrations. However, at the altitude of the Zeppelin station, both the
model and UAS measurements of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are substantially higher (factor of
4) than the mean particle number concentrations measured with the SMPS at
Zeppelin. This finding further strengthens the conclusion that the complex
orography at Ny-Ålesund highly affects the variability in the vertical
scale, which may cause this discrepancy in the observed and modeled particle
number concentrations at Zeppelin (see Sect. 3.1). The UAS measurements
were carried out at the airport on Ny-Ålesund (and the UAS was flown
around Ny-Ålesund) where the boundary layer measurements, like the
model, most likely resemble the general Arctic marine boundary layer
conditions. Figure S9 shows the influence of different sensitivity
simulations on the modeled vertical particle number concentrations. The
large spread in the modeled vertical particle number concentrations in
Fig. S9 highlights the importance of constraining uncertain parameters
such as cloud supersaturation and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> gas emissions, to better simulate
secondary aerosol formation in marine polar regions.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Sensitivity tests</title>
      <p id="d1e5716">In this section, we will discuss the results from the sensitivity tests that
we performed to complement the main BaseCase simulations. The settings of different
sensitivity tests are described in Table 1.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSSx1" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Median particle size distribution for sensitivity tests</title>
      <p id="d1e5724">The sensitivity study Cloudoff was performed to test how in-cloud processing affects
the formation of larger particles, especially the accumulation mode (Fig. 8). In the Cloudoff test, in-cloud processing was switched off in the model, and the
RH was set to just below supersaturation (99.9999 %) in the model grid
cell where clouds (RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 100.5 %) exist in the BaseCase runs. The aim of the
Cloudoff simulation was to investigate if the model can capture the observed
accumulation mode without aerosol cloud processing. It is clear from Fig. 8a and b that in Cloudoff simulations, the median size distribution lacks the
accumulation mode and Hoppel minima and has a higher Aitken mode particle
concentration compared to either BaseCase or the measured median size distribution.
This further emphasizes the importance of in-cloud processing in activation
of particles to CCN sizes and their growth to larger sizes. However, it
should be noted that other processes such as Brownian scavenging by larger
cloud droplets could result in the shift in particles from the Aitken mode
to accumulation mode (as seen in median measured size distribution, Fig. 8, Noble and Hudson, 2019). Another noteworthy point in Cloudoff simulations is
the larger number concentration of particles <inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm compared to
other cases. One plausible reason is the lack of activated cloud droplets,
since the large surface areas of activated droplets are efficient at
Brownian scavenging of smaller particles (Hudson et al., 2015). Likewise,
the median particle number size distribution from the sensitivity tests with
lower cloud supersaturation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) of 0.1 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sat</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> reduces the accumulation mode
particles, since there are fewer particles with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> available
for activation. Increasing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to 0.4 % increases accumulation mode
particles, since more particles with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are activated to cloud droplets
(Aitken mode concentration decreases with respect to BaseCase simulations, since
more smaller particles are activated into cloud droplets). Therefore,
simulated results show that increasing the cloud supersaturation results in
a higher number of smaller particles being activated into cloud droplets and
shifts the simulated Hoppel minima close to the measured sizes. Figure S6 shows median particle size distribution for all sensitivity
tests.</p>
      <p id="d1e5804">The SalterSSA sensitivity test underestimates both the Aitken and accumulation mode
concentrations at Gruvebadet (Fig. S5). The Salter
sea spray parameterization produces <inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> magnitudes fewer
Aitken mode particles compared to Sofiev et al. (2011), while the coarse mode
particle emissions using SalterSSA parameterization are higher than Sofiev et al. (2011). This can cause MSA, H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to partition onto
coarse mode particles rather than contributing to NPF and growth of the
nucleation and Aitken mode particles, which substantially lowers the Aitken
and accumulation mode number concentrations. The NPFoff simulation from Fig. S6
shows lower Aitken mode concentrations, implying that the main contributor
to Aitken mode particle number concentrations is the secondary aerosols
rather than the primary sea-salt particles.</p>
      <p id="d1e5844">Another parameter of uncertainty is the concentration of NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
marine atmosphere. The LowNH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> simulations, as expected, result in
lower Aitken mode particles, whereas HighNH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> simulations show an
overprediction of Aitken mode concentrations (Fig. S6).
This underlines the necessity of constraining ocean and marine emissions of
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to better predict the aerosol particle formation in marine polar
environments.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4.SSSx2" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Particle-phase comparison for sensitivity tests</title>
      <p id="d1e5889">Figure 9 shows the contribution of constituent compounds to PM at different
particle sizes with respect to the BaseCase simulation. The overall mean
contribution of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 MSA to total PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased by
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 11 %, respectively, in Cloudoff runs compared to the
BaseCase simulations. It is expected that in non-cloud conditions there is a
reduction in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 MSA PM contribution because of the reduced
partitioning of gaseous SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> to the cloud droplets (for PM
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> formation) and inhibition of MSIA ozonolysis in the cloud
droplets (leading to PM MSA formation) (Chen et al., 2018; Hoffmann et al.,
2016; Wollesen de Jonge et al., 2021). This is observed for accumulation
mode particles between size ranges of 100 nm to1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is
characterized by lower SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 MSA PM. On the other hand, PM
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 MSA increase for coarse mode particles (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Without cloud droplet activation the deliquescent sea spray coarse
mode particles become a major liquid water reservoir where MSIA and to a
lesser extent SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> are dissolved and oxidized into MSA and
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>, which partly explains the increase in PM MSA and
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> for sizes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The results from the
Cloudoff simulation agree with the findings from Wollesen de Jonge et al. (2021),
who found that MSA was almost exclusively formed in the aqueous phase via
MSIA ozonolysis in cloud droplets and deliquescent particles during and in
between in-cloud periods. PM SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> in Cloudoff runs is mainly driven via
condensation of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, since an increase in SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> gas-phase
concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">42</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % with respect to BaseCase) promoted gas-phase
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> production (increase of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">44</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % with respect
to BaseCase), and therefore H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-derived PM SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>.</p>
      <p id="d1e6201">In the woDissolution simulation, all the PM MSA and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> are a result of the
condensation of MSA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<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>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, since irreversible
aqueous-phase chemistry is switched off. The overall contribution of PM
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> to the total PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> increases by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %
relative to the BaseCase run, while on the other hand, the contribution of PM MSA
decreases by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % (relative to BaseCase). The lower PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> MSA
in the woDissolution simulation emphasizes the importance of aqueous-phase formation of MSA
to the growth of particles. The effect of precipitation on modeled PM
(NoPrecip) indicates an increase in PM Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">112</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % and 119 %, respectively, compared to BaseCase (Fig. S8). This is
because of the decrease in the wet deposition of aerosol and sea spray
particles by rain events and below-cloud scavenging. The consequence of
neglecting precipitation results in increased condensation sink for
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (increase of 62 % and 22 % in PM
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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 NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively), but since sea spray
aerosols are not scavenged by the wet removal process, the overall
fractional contribution to PM by SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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>, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and MSA is
lower relative to BaseCase runs.</p>
      <p id="d1e6423">SalterSSA simulation results in higher PM Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (470 % and 371 %
increase, respectively) compared to BaseCase runs. This is because the Salter15 SSA
parameterization produces larger mass emission fluxes in size ranges
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to the Sofiev11 SSA parameterization (Barthel et
al., 2019). Additionally, there is an increase of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in
PM MSA, largely due to formation of MSA in larger deliquescent coarse mode
particles.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e6476">Contribution of constituent compounds, namely MSA <bold>(a)</bold>,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> <bold>(b)</bold>, Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(c)</bold>, Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(d)</bold>, and
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(e)</bold> to PM with respect to BaseCase (the black dotted line).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/10023/2022/acp-22-10023-2022-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e6556">In this work, we attempt to simulate secondary aerosol formation at the remote
Arctic sites of Gruvebadet and Zeppelin, Ny-Ålesund, during the period
of 1–25 May 2018. We used the one-dimensional column model
ADCHEM which was run along FLEXPART-generated Lagrangian trajectories. Since
the air masses spend most of their time over the open ocean upwind of
Ny-Ålesund, we use a comprehensive multi-phase DMS chemistry scheme
coupled with MCMv3.3.1 and PRAM.</p>
      <p id="d1e6559">In the model, new particles are formed via ion-mediated
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>–NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> nucleation, with the initial particle growth mainly
driven by condensation of H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, while the secondary PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> MSA
and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><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> contribution was mainly formed by oxidation of MSIA and
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the aqueous phase. At Gruvebadet, the modeled median particle
number size distribution agrees reasonably well with the measurements;
however, at Zeppelin, the simulated Aitken mode median concentration is
overestimated by a factor of 5.5. This relatively large discrepancy in
modeled and measured particle size distributions at Zeppelin, and likewise
the large difference between the measured particle number size distributions
at Gruvebadet and Zeppelin, can to a large extent be explained by the
orographic effects at Zeppelin, which distort the atmospheric boundary layer
dynamics. Thus, while the model generally is able to capture the particle
number size distribution dynamics in the marine boundary layer, as measured
at the near-sea-level Gruvebadet site, it generally cannot capture the
observations at the mountain station of Zeppelin, which often lies above the
boundary layer and may experience free-tropospheric conditions. This is also
supported by the fact that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations measured with the
UAS above Ny-Ålesund airport agree well with the modeled particle
number concentrations, at the same altitude as Zeppelin. However, both the
model and UAS <inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations are a factor of 4 higher than the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observation at Zeppelin.</p>
      <p id="d1e6692">Both the measured and modeled particle size distributions, at both stations,
show a distinct Hoppel minimum, which can be explained by in-cloud
processing. Model sensitivity runs with varying cloud supersaturation
indicate that a cloud supersaturation of 0.4 % or higher is required for
the model to capture the observed Hoppel minima. Furthermore, model
sensitivity runs show that the Aitken mode particle number concentrations
are dominated by contribution of secondary aerosols rather than primary
emissions. The modeled PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Cl<inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is positively
correlated when compared to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> filter samples. The main driver for
secondary aerosol particle growth is the formation of MSA via aqueous-phase
ozonolysis of the DMS oxidation product MSIA. This demonstrates the
importance of multi-phase DMS chemistry in capturing the size-resolved
secondary aerosol growth in marine polar regions.</p>
      <p id="d1e6731">The sensitivity studies indicate that it is important to limit the
uncertainties in parameters such as cloud supersaturation and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions over open oceans to get a better constraint on secondary aerosol
formation and its subsequent climatic effects. This work was a first attempt
to simulate new particle and secondary aerosol formation in marine polar
regions using a process-based chemistry transport model that includes a
comprehensive multi-phase DMS and halogen chemistry mechanism, detailed
gas-molecular cluster, and aerosol dynamics. In future studies, we aim to
implement ADCHEM for extended studies in polar marine and remote continental
regions where different atmospheric constituents such as HIO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, terpenes,
and amines drive secondary aerosol formation.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codedataavailability"><title>Code and data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e6757">All source codes, including the complete ADCHEM model version and plotting
programs used to conduct the analysis presented in this paper, can be obtained by contacting the
corresponding authors Carlton Xavier and Pontus Roldin. The measurement and simulated data used
in this study are available upon request by contacting the corresponding author Carlton Xavier.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e6760">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10023-2022-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-10023-2022-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e6769">CX, PR, MBo, BA, and BW planned and designed the study. PR, RWdJ, and CX
developed and set up the ADCHEM model. CX, MB, and VV performed the FLEXPART
model simulations. RK, PT, MM, BA, BW, RTh, and RTr provided the measurement
data. Resources were provided by PR and MBo. CX, PR, and MBo wrote the
original draft, which included visualizations made by CX and PR. All other
authors discussed the results and contributed to the final paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e6775">At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of <italic>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</italic>. The peer-review process was guided by an independent editor, and the authors also have no other competing interests to declare.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e6784">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e6790">This article is part of the special issue “Pan-Eurasian Experiment (PEEX) – Part II”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e6796">The ALADINA study was funded by the German Research Foundation under grants
LA 2907/5-3 and WI 1449/22-3. Mikko Sipilä acknowledges the Academy of Finland
(296628) and the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's
Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (GASPARCON, grant agreement
no. 714621). The presented research has also been funded by the Academy of
Finland (Center of Excellence in Atmospheric Sciences) grant no. 4100200.</p><p id="d1e6798">The authors would like to thank Tinja Olenius from the Swedish
Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) for help with the implementation of
ACDC in ADCHEM. We would also like to acknowledge the invaluable
contribution of computational resources from CSC-IT Center for Science,
Finland. The authors would like to thank Noora Hyytinen from the University
of Oulu and University of Eastern Finland for providing the Henry law
coefficient and dissolution constants that were used in the multi-phase
chemistry.</p><p id="d1e6800">Observations at Zeppelin station were supported by the Swedish Environmental
Protection Agency (Naturvårdsverket) and by the “Arctic Climate Across
Scales (ACAS)” project funded by the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation and
by project IWCAA funded by the agency FORMAS. The authors would like to also thank
the Norwegian Polar Institute (NPI) for their support.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e6805">This project has received funding from the Swedish Research Council (Formas (project no.
2018-01745-COBACCA) and VR (project no. 2019-05006)) and the Crafoord
foundation (project no. 20210969). The presented research has been also been funded by
the Academy of Finland (Center of Excellence in Atmospheric Sciences) (grant no. 4100200).<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>Open-access funding was provided by the Helsinki<?xmltex \notforhtml{\newline}?> University Library.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e6816">This paper was edited by Dominick Spracklen and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
AMAP: Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA): Climate
Change and the Cryosphere. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo,
Norway. xii + 538 pp.,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>AMAP: AMAP, 2017. Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA)
2017, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. xiv
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 269 pp.,
<uri>https://www.amap.no/documents/doc/snow-water-ice-and-permafrost-in-the-arctic-swipa-2017/1610</uri> (last access: 9 July 2021),
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>AMAP: AMAP Arctic Climate Change Update 2021: Key Trends and Impacts, 16
pp.,
<uri>https://www.amap.no/documents/download/6759/inline</uri> (last access: 20 May 2022), 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Amore, A., Giardi, F., Becagli, S., Caiazzo, L., Mazzola, M., Severi, M., and
Traversi, R.: Source apportionment of sulphate in the High Arctic by a 10
yr-long record from Gruvebadet Observatory (Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard
Islands), Atmos. Environ., 270, 118890,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118890" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118890</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Arrigo, K. R. and van Dijken, G. L.: Continued increases in Arctic Ocean
primary production, Prog. Oceanogr., 136, 60–70,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2015.05.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.pocean.2015.05.002</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ayers, G. P., Gillett, R. W., Cainey, J. M., and Dick, A. L.: Chloride and
bromide loss from sea-salt particles in Southern Ocean air, J. Atmos. Chem.,
33, 299–319, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006120205159" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1023/A:1006120205159</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Baccarini, A., Karlsson, L., Dommen, J., Duplessis, P., Vüllers, J.,
Brooks, I. M., Saiz-Lopez, A., Salter, M., Tjernström, M.,
Baltensperger, U., Zieger, P., and Schmale, J.: Frequent new particle
formation over the high Arctic pack ice by enhanced iodine emissions, Nat.
Commun., 11, 1–11, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18551-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-020-18551-0</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bärfuss, K., Pätzold, F., Altstädter, B., Kathe, E., Nowak, S.,
Bretschneider, L., Bestmann, U., and Lampert, A.: New setup of the UAS
ALADINA for measuring boundary layer properties, atmospheric particles and
solar radiation, Atmosphere-Basel, 9, 28, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9010028" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos9010028</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Barnes, I., Hjorth, J., and Mihalapoulos, N.: Dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl
sulfoxide and their oxidation in the atmosphere, Chem. Rev., 106,
940–975, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/cr020529+" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/cr020529+</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Barrie, L. A.: Arctic air pollution: An overview of current knowledge,
Atmos. Environ., 20, 643–663, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(86)90180-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0004-6981(86)90180-0</ext-link>, 1986.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Barthel, S., Tegen, I., and Wolke, R.: Do new sea spray aerosol source
functions improve the results of a regional aerosol model?, Atmos. Environ.,
198, 265–278, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.10.016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.10.016</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Beck, L. J., Sarnela, N., Junninen, H., Hoppe, C. J. M., Garmash, O.,
Bianchi, F., Riva, M., Rose, C., Peräkylä, O., Wimmer, D., Kausiala,
O., Jokinen, T., Ahonen, L., Mikkilä, J., Hakala, J., He, X. C.,
Kontkanen, J., Wolf, K. K. E., Cappelletti, D., Mazzola, M., Traversi, R.,
Petroselli, C., Viola, A. P., Vitale, V., Lange, R., Massling, A.,
Nøjgaard, J. K., Krejci, R., Karlsson, L., Zieger, P., Jang, S., Lee, K.,
Vakkari, V., Lampilahti, J., Thakur, R. C., Leino, K., Kangasluoma, J.,
Duplissy, E. M., Siivola, E., Marbouti, M., Tham, Y. J., Saiz-Lopez, A.,
Petäjä, T., Ehn, M., Worsnop, D. R., Skov, H., Kulmala, M.,
Kerminen, V. M., and Sipilä, M.: Differing Mechanisms of New Particle
Formation at Two Arctic Sites, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, 1–11,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091334" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GL091334</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bengtsson, L., Hodges, K. I., Koumoutsaris, S., Zahn, M., and Berrisford, P.:
The changing energy balance of the polar regions in a warmer climate, J.
Climate, 26, 3112–3129, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00233.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00233.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Berndt, T., Chen, J., Møller, K. H., Hyttinen, N., Prisle, N. L.,
Tilgner, A., Hoffmann, E. H., Herrmann, H., and Kjaergaard, H. G.:
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> formation and peroxy radical isomerization in the atmospheric reaction of
OH radicals with dimethyl disulfide, Chem. Commun., 56, 13634–13637,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/d0cc05783e" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1039/d0cc05783e</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bräuer, P., Tilgner, A., Wolke, R., and Herrmann, H.: Mechanism
development and modelling of tropospheric multiphase halogen chemistry: The
CAPRAM Halogen Module 2.0 (HM2), J. Atmos. Chem., 70, 19–52,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10874-013-9249-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10874-013-9249-6</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Campolongo, F., Saltelli, A., Jensen, N. R., Wilson, J., and Hjorth, J.: The
role of multiphase chemistry in the oxidation of dimethylsulphide (DMS). A
latitude dependent analysis, J. Atmos. Chem., 32, 327–356,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006154618511" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1023/A:1006154618511</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chen, Q., Sherwen, T., Evans, M., and Alexander, B.: DMS oxidation and sulfur aerosol formation in the marine troposphere: a focus on reactive halogen and multiphase chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 13617–13637, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13617-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-13617-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Clarke, A. D., Owens, S. R., and Zhou, J.: An ultrafine sea-salt flux from
breaking waves: Implications for cloud condensation nuclei in the remote
marine atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D06202,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006565" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD006565</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cuevas, C. A., Maffezzoli, N., Corella, J. P., Spolaor, A., Vallelonga, P.,
Kjær, H. A., Simonsen, M., Winstrup, M., Vinther, B., Horvat, C.,
Fernandez, R. P., Kinnison, D., Lamarque, J. F., Barbante, C., and
Saiz-Lopez, A.: Rapid increase in atmospheric iodine levels in the North
Atlantic since the mid-20th century, Nat. Commun., 9, 1–6,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03756-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-018-03756-1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dall'Osto, M., Beddows, D. C. S., Tunved, P., Krejci, R., Ström, J.,
Hansson, H. C., Yoon, Y. J., Park, K. T., Becagli, S., Udisti, R., Onasch,
T., Ódowd, C. D., Simó, R., and Harrison, R. M.: Arctic sea ice melt
leads to atmospheric new particle formation, Sci. Rep.-UK, 7, 1–10,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03328-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-017-03328-1</ext-link>, 2017a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dall'Osto, M., Ovadnevaite, J., Paglione, M., Beddows, D. C. S., Ceburnis,
D., Cree, C., Cortés, P., Zamanillo, M., Nunes, S. O., Pérez, G. L.,
Ortega-Retuerta, E., Emelianov, M., Vaqué, D., Marrasé, C., Estrada,
M., Sala, M. M., Vidal, M., Fitzsimons, M. F., Beale, R., Airs, R., Rinaldi,
M., Decesari, S., Facchini, M. C., Harrison, R. M., O'Dowd, C., and Simó,
R.: Antarctic sea ice region as a source of biogenic organic nitrogen in
aerosols, Sci. Rep.-UK, 7, 1–10, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06188-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-017-06188-x</ext-link>, 2017b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dall'Osto, M., Beddows, D. C. S., Tunved, P., Harrison, R. M., Lupi, A., Vitale, V., Becagli, S., Traversi, R., Park, K.-T., Yoon, Y. J., Massling, A., Skov, H., Lange, R., Strom, J., and Krejci, R.: Simultaneous measurements of aerosol size distributions at three sites in the European high Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 7377–7395, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7377-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-7377-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Damian, V., Sandu, A., Damian, M., Potra, F., and Carmichael, G. R.: The
kinetic preprocessor KPP – A software environment for solving chemical
kinetics, Comput. Chem. Eng., 26, 1567–1579,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-1354(02)00128-X" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0098-1354(02)00128-X</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Engvall, A.-C., Krejci, R., Ström, J., Treffeisen, R., Scheele, R., Hermansen, O., and Paatero, J.: Changes in aerosol properties during spring-summer period in the Arctic troposphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 445–462, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-445-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-445-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Feingold, G. and Kreidenweis, S.: Does cloud processing of aerosol enhance
droplet concentrations?, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 24351–24361,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900369" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD900369</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: Cloud processing of aerosol particles in
marine stratocumulus clouds, Atmosphere-Basel, 10, 520,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10090520" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos10090520</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fossum, K. N., Ovadnevaite, J., Ceburnis, D., Dall'Osto, M., Marullo, S.,
Bellacicco, M., Simó, R., Liu, D., Flynn, M., Zuend, A., and O'Dowd, C.:
Summertime Primary and Secondary Contributions to Southern Ocean Cloud
Condensation Nuclei, Sci. Rep.-UK, 8, 1–14, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32047-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-018-32047-4</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Frey, M. M., Norris, S. J., Brooks, I. M., Anderson, P. S., Nishimura, K., Yang, X., Jones, A. E., Nerentorp Mastromonaco, M. G., Jones, D. H., and Wolff, E. W.: First direct observation of sea salt aerosol production from blowing snow above sea ice, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 2549–2578, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-2549-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-2549-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gantt, B., He, J., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., and Nenes, A.: Incorporation of advanced aerosol activation treatments into CESM/CAM5: model evaluation and impacts on aerosol indirect effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7485–7497, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7485-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-7485-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Granier, C., Darras, S., Gon, H. D. van der, Jana, D., Elguindi, N., Bo, G.,
Michael, G., Marc, G., Jalkanen, J.-P., Kuenen, J., Liousse, C., Quack, B.,
Simpson, D., and Sindelarova, K.: The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring
Service global and regional emissions (April 2019 version),
<uri>https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02322431</uri> (last access: 10 April 2021),
2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guenther, A., Karl, T., Harley, P., Wiedinmyer, C., Palmer, P. I., and Geron, C.: Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3181–3210, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heintzenberg, J., Tunved, P., Galí, M., and Leck, C.: New particle formation in the Svalbard region 2006–2015, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6153–6175, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6153-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-6153-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Herenz, P., Wex, H., Henning, S., Kristensen, T. B., Rubach, F., Roth, A., Borrmann, S., Bozem, H., Schulz, H., and Stratmann, F.: Measurements of aerosol and CCN properties in the Mackenzie River delta (Canadian Arctic) during spring–summer transition in May 2014, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 4477–4496, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-4477-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-4477-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on single levels from 1959 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47" ext-link-type="DOI">10.24381/cds.adbb2d47</ext-link>, 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1959 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.24381/cds.bd0915c6</ext-link>, 2018b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hertel, O., Christensen, J., and Hov, Ø.: Modelling of the end products of
the chemical decomposition of DMS in the marine boundary layer, Atmos.
Environ., 28, 2431–2449, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(94)90395-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/1352-2310(94)90395-6</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hodshire, A. L., Campuzano-Jost, P., Kodros, J. K., Croft, B., Nault, B. A., Schroder, J. C., Jimenez, J. L., and Pierce, J. R.: The potential role of methanesulfonic acid (MSA) in aerosol formation and growth and the associated radiative forcings, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3137–3160, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3137-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-3137-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoffmann, E. H., Tilgner, A., Schrödner, R., Bräuer, P., Wolke, R.,
and Herrmann, H.: An advanced modeling study on the impacts and atmospheric
implications of multiphase dimethyl sulfide chemistry, P. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA, 113, 11776–11781, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1606320113" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1606320113</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoose, C., Lohmann, U., Bennartz, R., Croft, B., and Lesins, G.: Global simulations of aerosol processing in clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 6939–6963, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-6939-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-6939-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoppel, W. A. and Frick, G. M.: Submicron aerosol size distributions
measured over the tropical and South Pacific, Atmos. Environ. Part A, 24, 645–659, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-1686(90)90020-N" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0960-1686(90)90020-N</ext-link>, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoppel, W. A., Fitzgerald, J. W., and Larson, R. E.: Aerosol size
distributions in air masses advecting off the east coast of the United
States., J. Geophys. Res., 90, 2365–2379, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/JD090iD01p02365" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/JD090iD01p02365</ext-link>,
1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hoppel, W. A., Frick, G. M., and Larson, R. E.: Effect of nonprecipitating
clouds on the aerosol size distribution in the marine boundary layer,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 13, 125–128, 1986.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hudson, J. G., Noble, S., and Tabor, S.: Cloud supersaturations from CCN
spectra Hoppel minima, J. Geophys. Res., 120, 3436–3452,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022669" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD022669</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jang, S., Park, K.-T., Lee, K., Yoon, Y. J., Kim, K., Chung, H. Y., Jang, E., Becagli, S., Lee, B. Y., Traversi, R., Eleftheriadis, K., Krejci, R., and Hermansen, O.: Large seasonal and interannual variations of biogenic sulfur compounds in the Arctic atmosphere (Svalbard; 78.9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M500" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 11.9<inline-formula><mml:math id="M501" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9761–9777, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9761-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-9761-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jayaratne, R., Pushpawela, B., He, C., Li, H., Gao, J., Chai, F., and Morawska, L.: Observations of particles at their formation sizes in Beijing, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 8825–8835, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8825-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-8825-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jenkin, M. E., Saunders, S. M., and Pilling, M. J.: The tropospheric
degradation of volatile organic compounds: A protocol for mechanism
development, Atmos. Environ., 31, 81–104,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00105-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00105-7</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jenkin, M. E., Young, J. C., and Rickard, A. R.: The MCM v3.3.1 degradation scheme for isoprene, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11433–11459, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11433-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-11433-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jericevic, A., Kraljevic, L., Grisogono, B., Fagerli, H., and Vecenaj, Ž.: Parameterization of vertical diffusion and the atmospheric boundary layer height determination in the EMEP model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 341–364, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-341-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-341-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jokinen, T., Sipilä, M., Kontkanen, J., Vakkari, V., Tisler, P.,
Duplissy, E. M., Junninen, H., Kangasluoma, J., Manninen, H. E.,
Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., Worsnop, D. R., Kirkby, J., Virkkula, A.,
and Kerminen, V. M.: Ion-induced sulfuric acid–ammonia nucleation drives
particle formation in coastal Antarctica, Sci. Adv., 4, 1–7,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat9744" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/sciadv.aat9744</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kettle, A. J. and Andreae, M. O.: Flux of dimethylsulfide from the oceans: A
comparison of updated data sets and flux models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
105, 26793–26808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900252" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD900252</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kim, I., Zhang, M., Kim, K., and Park, K.: First high-frequency underway
observation of dms distribution in the southern ocean during austral autumn,
Atmosphere-Basel, 12, 1–10, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12010122" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos12010122</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kirkby, J., Duplissy, J., Sengupta, K., Frege, C., Gordon, H., Williamson,
C., Heinritzi, M., Simon, M., Yan, C., Almeida, J., Trostl, J., Nieminen,
T., Ortega, I. K., Wagner, R., Adamov, A., Amorim, A., Bernhammer, A. K.,
Bianchi, F., Breitenlechner, M., Brilke, S., Chen, X., Craven, J., Dias, A.,
Ehrhart, S., Flagan, R. C., Franchin, A., Fuchs, C., Guida, R., Hakala, J.,
Hoyle, C. R., Jokinen, T., Junninen, H., Kangasluoma, J., Kim, J., Krapf,
M., Kurten, A., Laaksonen, A., Lehtipalo, K., Makhmutov, V., Mathot, S.,
Molteni, U., Onnela, A., Perakyla, O., Piel, F., Petaja, T., Praplan, A. P.,
Pringle, K., Rap, A., Richards, N. A. D., Riipinen, I., Rissanen, M. P.,
Rondo, L., Sarnela, N., Schobesberger, S., Scott, C. E., Seinfeld, J. H.,
Sipila, M., Steiner, G., Stozhkov, Y., Stratmann, F., Tomé, A.,
Virtanen, A., Vogel, A. L., Wagner, A. C., Wagner, P. E., Weingartner, E.,
Wimmer, D., Winkler, P. M., Ye, P., Zhang, X., Hansel, A., Dommen, J.,
Donahue, N. M., Worsnop, D. R., Baltensperger, U., Kulmala, M., Carslaw, K.
S., and Curtius, J.: Ion-induced nucleation of pure biogenic particles,
Nature, 533, 521–526, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17953" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature17953</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kloster, S., Feichter, J., Maier-Reimer, E., Six, K. D., Stier, P., and Wetzel, P.: DMS cycle in the marine ocean-atmosphere system – a global model study, Biogeosciences, 3, 29–51, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-3-29-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-3-29-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lampert, A., Altstädter, B., Bärfuss, K., Bretschneider, L.,
Sandgaard, J., Michaelis, J., Lobitz, L., Asmussen, M., Damm, E.,
Käthner, R., Krüger, T., Lüpkes, C., Nowak, S., Peuker, A.,
Rausch, T., Reiser, F., Scholtz, A., Sotomayor-Zakharov, D., Gaus, D.,
Bansmer, S., Wehner, B., and Pätzold, F.: Unmanned aerial systems for
investigating the polar atmospheric boundary layer-technical challenges and
examples of applications, Atmosphere-Basel, 11, 416,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ATMOS11040416" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/ATMOS11040416</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lana, A., Bell, T. G., Simó, R., Vallina, S. M., Ballabrera-Poy, J.,
Kettle, A. J., Dachs, J., Bopp, L., Saltzman, E. S., Stefels, J., Johnson,
J. E., and Liss, P. S.: An updated climatology of surface dimethlysulfide
concentrations and emission fluxes in the global ocean, Global Biogeochem.
Cycles, 25, 1–17, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GB003850" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GB003850</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lee, H., Lee, K., Lunder, C. R., Krejci, R., Aas, W., Park, J., Park, K.-T., Lee, B. Y., Yoon, Y. J., and Park, K.: Atmospheric new particle formation characteristics in the Arctic as measured at Mount Zeppelin, Svalbard, from 2016 to 2018, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13425–13441, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13425-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-13425-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lenssen, N. J. L., Schmidt, G. A., Hansen, J. E., Menne, M. J., Persin, A.,
Ruedy, R., and Zyss, D.: Improvements in the GISTEMP Uncertainty Model, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 6307–6326, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029522" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018JD029522</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lupi, A., Busetto, M., Becagli, S., Giardi, F., Lanconelli, C., Mazzola, M.,
Udisti, R., Hansson, H. C., Henning, T., Petkov, B., Ström, J., Krejci,
R., Tunved, P., Pietro, V. A., and Vitale, V.: Multi-seasonal ultrafine
aerosol particle number concentration measurements at the Gruvebadet
observatory, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard Islands, Rend. Lincei, 27, 59–71,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-016-0532-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s12210-016-0532-8</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Manninen, H. E., Nieminen, T., Asmi, E., Gagné, S., Häkkinen, S., Lehtipalo, K., Aalto, P., Vana, M., Mirme, A., Mirme, S., Hõrrak, U., Plass-Dülmer, C., Stange, G., Kiss, G., Hoffer, A., Törő, N., Moerman, M., Henzing, B., de Leeuw, G., Brinkenberg, M., Kouvarakis, G. N., Bougiatioti, A., Mihalopoulos, N., O'Dowd, C., Ceburnis, D., Arneth, A., Svenningsson, B., Swietlicki, E., Tarozzi, L., Decesari, S., Facchini, M. C., Birmili, W., Sonntag, A., Wiedensohler, A., Boulon, J., Sellegri, K., Laj, P., Gysel, M., Bukowiecki, N., Weingartner, E., Wehrle, G., Laaksonen, A., Hamed, A., Joutsensaari, J., Petäjä, T., Kerminen, V.-M., and Kulmala, M.: EUCAARI ion spectrometer measurements at 12 European sites – analysis of new particle formation events, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7907–7927, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7907-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7907-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Manninen, H. E., Franchin, A., Schobesberger, S., Hirsikko, A., Hakala, J., Skromulis, A., Kangasluoma, J., Ehn, M., Junninen, H., Mirme, A., Mirme, S., Sipilä, M., Petäjä, T., Worsnop, D. R., and Kulmala, M.: Characterisation of corona-generated ions used in a Neutral cluster and Air Ion Spectrometer (NAIS), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2767–2776, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2767-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-4-2767-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Manninen, H. E., Mirme, S., Mirme, A., Petäjä, T., and Kulmala, M.: How to reliably detect molecular clusters and nucleation mode particles with Neutral cluster and Air Ion Spectrometer (NAIS), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 3577–3605, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-3577-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-9-3577-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mårtensson, E. M., Nilsson, E. D., de Leeuw, G., Cohen, L. H., and
Hansson, H.-C.: Laboratory simulations and parameterization of the primary
marine aerosol production, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002263" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002263</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McGrath, M. J., Olenius, T., Ortega, I. K., Loukonen, V., Paasonen, P., Kurtén, T., Kulmala, M., and Vehkamäki, H.: Atmospheric Cluster Dynamics Code: a flexible method for solution of the birth-death equations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 2345–2355, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2345-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-2345-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mikkola, J.: Slope and valley winds in the Himalayas as
simulated by the Weather Research and Forecasting model, master thesis, 42 pp., <uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10138/322406</uri> (last access: 2 March 2022), 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mirme, S. and Mirme, A.: The mathematical principles and design of the NAIS – a spectrometer for the measurement of cluster ion and nanometer aerosol size distributions, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 1061–1071, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-1061-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-6-1061-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Monahan, E. C., Spiel, D. E., and Davidson, K. L.: A Model of Marine Aerosol
Generation Via Whitecaps and Wave Disruption, in: Oceanic Whitecaps: And
Their Role in Air-Sea Exchange Processes, edited by: Monahan, E. C. and Mac
Niocaill, G., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 167–174, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4668-2_16" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-94-009-4668-2_16</ext-link>, 1986.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Moroni, B., Ritter, C., Crocchianti, S., Markowicz, K., Mazzola, M.,
Becagli, S., Traversi, R., Krejci, R., Tunved, P., and Cappelletti, D.:
Individual Particle Characteristics, Optical Properties and Evolution of an
Extreme Long-Range Transported Biomass Burning Event in the European Arctic
(Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard Islands), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, 1–17,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031535" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019JD031535</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nightingale, P. D., Liss, P. S., and Schlosser, P.: Measurements of air-sea
gas transfer during an open ocean algal bloom, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27,
2117–2120, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL011541" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000GL011541</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Noble, S. and Hudson, J. G.: Cloud supersaturations and Hoppel minima, AIP
Conf. Proc., 1527, 706–709, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4803368" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1063/1.4803368</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Noble, S. R. and Hudson, J. G.: Effects of Continental Clouds on Surface
Aitken and Accumulation Modes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 5479–5502,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030297" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019JD030297</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Olenius, T., Kupiainen-Määttä, O., Ortega, I. K., Kurtén, T.,
and Vehkamäki, H.: Free energy barrier in the growth of sulfuric
acid-ammonia and sulfuric acid-dimethylamine clusters, J. Chem. Phys.,
139, 084312, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4819024" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1063/1.4819024</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Oshima, N., Yukimoto, S., Deushi, M., Koshiro, T., Kawai, H., Tanaka, T. Y.,
and Yoshida, K.: Global and Arctic effective radiative forcing of
anthropogenic gases and aerosols in MRI-ESM2.0, Prog. Earth Planet. Sci.,
7, 38, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-020-00348-w" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s40645-020-00348-w</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Öström, E., Putian, Z., Schurgers, G., Mishurov, M., Kivekäs, N., Lihavainen, H., Ehn, M., Rissanen, M. P., Kurtén, T., Boy, M., Swietlicki, E., and Roldin, P.: Modeling the role of highly oxidized multifunctional organic molecules for the growth of new particles over the boreal forest region, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 8887–8901, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8887-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-8887-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Park, K.-T., Jang, S., Lee, K., Yoon, Y. J., Kim, M.-S., Park, K., Cho, H.-J., Kang, J.-H., Udisti, R., Lee, B.-Y., and Shin, K.-H.: Observational evidence for the formation of DMS-derived aerosols during Arctic phytoplankton blooms, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 9665–9675, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9665-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-17-9665-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Park, K. T., Yoon, Y. J., Lee, K., Tunved, P., Krejci, R., Ström, J.,
Jang, E., Kang, H. J., Jang, S., Park, J., Lee, B. Y., Traversi, R.,
Becagli, S., and Hermansen, O.: Dimethyl Sulfide-Induced Increase in Cloud
Condensation Nuclei in the Arctic Atmosphere, Global Biogeochem. Cycles,
35, 1–15, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GB006969" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2021GB006969</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Paulot, F., Jacob, D. J., Johnson, M. T., Bell, T. G., Baker, A. R., Keene,
W. C., Lima, I. D., Doney, S. C., and Stock, C. A.: Global oceanic emission
of ammonia: Constraints from seawater and atmospheric observations, Global
Biogeochem. Cycles, 29, 1165–1178, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005106" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015GB005106</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petäjä, T., Duplissy, E.-M., Tabakova, K., Schmale, J., Altstädter, B., Ancellet, G., Arshinov, M., Balin, Y., Baltensperger, U., Bange, J., Beamish, A., Belan, B., Berchet, A., Bossi, R., Cairns, W. R. L., Ebinghaus, R., El Haddad, I., Ferreira-Araujo, B., Franck, A., Huang, L., Hyvärinen, A., Humbert, A., Kalogridis, A.-C., Konstantinov, P., Lampert, A., MacLeod, M., Magand, O., Mahura, A., Marelle, L., Masloboev, V., Moisseev, D., Moschos, V., Neckel, N., Onishi, T., Osterwalder, S., Ovaska, A., Paasonen, P., Panchenko, M., Pankratov, F., Pernov, J. B., Platis, A., Popovicheva, O., Raut, J.-C., Riandet, A., Sachs, T., Salvatori, R., Salzano, R., Schröder, L., Schön, M., Shevchenko, V., Skov, H., Sonke, J. E., Spolaor, A., Stathopoulos, V. K., Strahlendorff, M., Thomas, J. L., Vitale, V., Vratolis, S., Barbante, C., Chabrillat, S., Dommergue, A., Eleftheriadis, K., Heilimo, J., Law, K. S., Massling, A., Noe, S. M., Paris, J.-D., Prévôt, A. S. H., Riipinen, I., Wehner, B., Xie, Z., and Lappalainen, H. K.: Overview: Integrative and Comprehensive Understanding on Polar Environments (iCUPE) – concept and initial results, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8551–8592, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8551-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-8551-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pisso, I., Sollum, E., Grythe, H., Kristiansen, N. I., Cassiani, M., Eckhardt, S., Arnold, D., Morton, D., Thompson, R. L., Groot Zwaaftink, C. D., Evangeliou, N., Sodemann, H., Haimberger, L., Henne, S., Brunner, D., Burkhart, J. F., Fouilloux, A., Brioude, J., Philipp, A., Seibert, P., and Stohl, A.: The Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 10.4, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4955–4997, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4955-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-4955-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Platt, S. M., Hov, Ø., Berg, T., Breivik, K., Eckhardt, S., Eleftheriadis, K., Evangeliou, N., Fiebig, M., Fisher, R., Hansen, G., Hansson, H.-C., Heintzenberg, J., Hermansen, O., Heslin-Rees, D., Holmén, K., Hudson, S., Kallenborn, R., Krejci, R., Krognes, T., Larssen, S., Lowry, D., Lund Myhre, C., Lunder, C., Nisbet, E., Nizzetto, P. B., Park, K.-T., Pedersen, C. A., Aspmo Pfaffhuber, K., Röckmann, T., Schmidbauer, N., Solberg, S., Stohl, A., Ström, J., Svendby, T., Tunved, P., Tørnkvist, K., van der Veen, C., Vratolis, S., Yoon, Y. J., Yttri, K. E., Zieger, P., Aas, W., and Tørseth, K.: Atmospheric composition in the European Arctic and 30 years of the Zeppelin Observatory, Ny-Ålesund, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3321–3369, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3321-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-22-3321-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Quinn, P. K., Coffman, D. J., Johnson, J. E., Upchurch, L. M., and Bates, T.
S.: Small fraction of marine cloud condensation nuclei made up of sea spray
aerosol, Nat. Geosci., 10, 674–679, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo3003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo3003</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rader, F., Traversi, R., Severi, M., Becagli, S., Müller, K.-J.,
Nakoudi, K., and Ritter, C.: Overview of Aerosol Properties in the European
Arctic in Spring 2019 Based on In Situ Measurements and Lidar Data,
Atmosphere-Basel, 12, 271, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12020271" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos12020271</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Riddick, S. N., Dragosits, U., Blackall, T. D., Daunt, F., Wanless, S., and
Sutton, M. A.: The global distribution of ammonia emissions from seabird
colonies, Atmos. Environ., 55, 319–327, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.02.052" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.02.052</ext-link>,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Roldin, P., Swietlicki, E., Schurgers, G., Arneth, A., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Boy, M., and Kulmala, M.: Development and evaluation of the aerosol dynamics and gas phase chemistry model ADCHEM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5867–5896, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5867-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-5867-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Roldin, P., Ehn, M., Kurtén, T., Olenius, T., Rissanen, M. P., Sarnela,
N., Elm, J., Rantala, P., Hao, L., Hyttinen, N., Heikkinen, L., Worsnop, D.
R., Pichelstorfer, L., Xavier, C., Clusius, P., Öström, E.,
Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., Vehkamäki, H., Virtanen, A., Riipinen,
I., and Boy, M.: The role of highly oxygenated organic molecules in the
Boreal aerosol-cloud-climate system, Nat. Commun., 10, 4370,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12338-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-019-12338-8</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rosati, B., Christiansen, S., Wollesen de Jonge, R., Roldin, P., Jensen, M.
M., Wang, K., Moosakutty, S. P., Thomsen, D., Salomonsen, C., Hyttinen, N.,
Elm, J., Feilberg, A., Glasius, M., and Bilde, M.: New Particle Formation and
Growth from Dimethyl Sulfide Oxidation by Hydroxyl Radicals, ACS Earth Sp.
Chem., 5, 801–811, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.0c00333" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/acsearthspacechem.0c00333</ext-link>,
2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rosenfeld, D., Andreae, M. O., Asmi, A., Chin, M., de Leeuw, G., Donovan, D.
P., Kahn, R., Kinne, S., Kivekäs, N., Kulmala, M., Lau, W., Schmidt, K.
S., Suni, T., Wagner, T., Wild, M., and Quaas, J.: Global observations of
aerosol-cloud-precipitation-climate interactions, Rev. Geophys., 52,
750–808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000441" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013RG000441</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Salter, M. E., Zieger, P., Acosta Navarro, J. C., Grythe, H., Kirkevåg, A., Rosati, B., Riipinen, I., and Nilsson, E. D.: An empirically derived inorganic sea spray source function incorporating sea surface temperature, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11047–11066, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Saunders, S. M., Jenkin, M. E., Derwent, R. G., and Pilling, M. J.: Protocol for the development of the Master Chemical Mechanism, MCM v3 (Part A): tropospheric degradation of non-aromatic volatile organic compounds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 161–180, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-161-2003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-3-161-2003</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schemann, V. and Ebell, K.: Simulation of mixed-phase clouds with the ICON large-eddy model in the complex Arctic environment around Ny-Ålesund, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 475–485, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-475-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-475-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Scott, C. E., Rap, A., Spracklen, D. V., Forster, P. M., Carslaw, K. S., Mann, G. W., Pringle, K. J., Kivekäs, N., Kulmala, M., Lihavainen, H., and Tunved, P.: The direct and indirect radiative effects of biogenic secondary organic aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 447–470, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-447-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-447-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sofiev, M., Soares, J., Prank, M., De Leeuw, G., and Kukkonen, J.: A
regional-to-global model of emission and transport of sea salt particles in
the atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014713" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JD014713</ext-link>,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stock, C. A., Dunne, J. P., and John, J. G.: Global-scale carbon and energy
flows through the marine planktonic food web: An analysis with a coupled
physical–biological model, Prog. Oceanogr., 120, 1–28,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2013.07.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.pocean.2013.07.001</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stohl, A., Forster, C., Frank, A., Seibert, P., and Wotawa, G.: Technical note: The Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 6.2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2461–2474, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2461-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-2461-2005</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ström, J., Engvall, A. C., Delbart, F., Krejci, R., and Treffeisen, R.:
On small particles in the Arctic summer boundary layer: Observations at two
different heights near Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, Tellus B, 61, 473–482, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00412.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00412.x</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Traversi, R., Becagli, S., Severi, M., Caiazzo, L., Mazzola, M., Lupi, A.,
Fiebig, M., Hermansen, O., Krejci, R., and Unit, A. S.: Arctic haze in a
climate changing world: the 2010–2020 trend (HAZECLIC) 4, in: SESS report 2020 – The State of Environmental Science in Svalbard – an annual
report, Svalbard Integrated Arctic Earth Observing System,
104–117,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4293826" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.4293826</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tunved, P., Ström, J., and Krejci, R.: Arctic aerosol life cycle: linking aerosol size distributions observed between 2000 and 2010 with air mass transport and precipitation at Zeppelin station, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3643–3660, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3643-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-3643-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Uhlig, C., Damm, E., Peeken, I., Krumpen, T., Rabe, B., Korhonen, M., and
Ludwichowski, K. U.: Sea ice and water mass influence dimethylsulfide
concentrations in the central arctic ocean, Front. Earth Sci., 7,
1–15, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00179" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/feart.2019.00179</ext-link>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wainwright, C. D., Pierce, J. R., Liggio, J., Strawbridge, K. B., Macdonald, A. M., and Leaitch, R. W.: The effect of model spatial resolution on Secondary Organic Aerosol predictions: a case study at Whistler, BC, Canada, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10911–10923, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10911-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-10911-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wentworth, G. R., Murphy, J. G., Croft, B., Martin, R. V., Pierce, J. R., Côté, J.-S., Courchesne, I., Tremblay, J.-É., Gagnon, J., Thomas, J. L., Sharma, S., Toom-Sauntry, D., Chivulescu, A., Levasseur, M., and Abbatt, J. P. D.: Ammonia in the summertime Arctic marine boundary layer: sources, sinks, and implications, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 1937–1953, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1937-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-1937-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wollesen de Jonge, R., Elm, J., Rosati, B., Christiansen, S., Hyttinen, N., Lüdemann, D., Bilde, M., and Roldin, P.: Secondary aerosol formation from dimethyl sulfide – improved mechanistic understanding based on smog chamber experiments and modelling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9955–9976, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wollesen de Jonge, R., Elm, J., Rosati, B., Christiansen, S., Hyttinen, N., Lüdemann, D., Bilde, M., and Roldin, P.: Secondary aerosol formation from dimethyl sulfide – improved mechanistic understanding based on smog chamber experiments and modelling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9955–9976, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xavier, C., Rusanen, A., Zhou, P., Dean, C., Pichelstorfer, L., Roldin, P., and Boy, M.: Aerosol mass yields of selected biogenic volatile organic compounds – a theoretical study with nearly explicit gas-phase chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13741–13758, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13741-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-13741-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Aiken, A. C., Gallo, F., Jensen, M. P., Kollias, P., Kuang, C., Luke, E., Springston, S., Uin, J., Wood, R., and Wang, J.: Marine boundary layer aerosol in the eastern North Atlantic: seasonal variations and key controlling processes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17615–17635, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ziska, F., Quack, B., Abrahamsson, K., Archer, S. D., Atlas, E., Bell, T., Butler, J. H., Carpenter, L. J., Jones, C. E., Harris, N. R. P., Hepach, H., Heumann, K. G., Hughes, C., Kuss, J., Krüger, K., Liss, P., Moore, R. M., Orlikowska, A., Raimund, S., Reeves, C. E., Reifenhäuser, W., Robinson, A. D., Schall, C., Tanhua, T., Tegtmeier, S., Turner, S., Wang, L., Wallace, D., Williams, J., Yamamoto, H., Yvon-Lewis, S., and Yokouchi, Y.: Global sea-to-air flux climatology for bromoform, dibromomethane and methyl iodide, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 8915–8934, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-8915-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-8915-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Secondary aerosol formation in marine Arctic environments: a model measurement comparison at Ny-Ålesund</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
AMAP: Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA): Climate
Change and the Cryosphere. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo,
Norway. xii + 538 pp.,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
AMAP: AMAP, 2017. Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA)
2017, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. xiv
+ 269 pp.,
<a href="https://www.amap.no/documents/doc/snow-water-ice-and-permafrost-in-the-arctic-swipa-2017/1610" target="_blank"/> (last access: 9 July 2021),
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
AMAP: AMAP Arctic Climate Change Update 2021: Key Trends and Impacts, 16
pp.,
<a href="https://www.amap.no/documents/download/6759/inline" target="_blank"/> (last access: 20 May 2022), 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Amore, A., Giardi, F., Becagli, S., Caiazzo, L., Mazzola, M., Severi, M., and
Traversi, R.: Source apportionment of sulphate in the High Arctic by a 10
yr-long record from Gruvebadet Observatory (Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard
Islands), Atmos. Environ., 270, 118890,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118890" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118890</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Arrigo, K. R. and van Dijken, G. L.: Continued increases in Arctic Ocean
primary production, Prog. Oceanogr., 136, 60–70,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2015.05.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2015.05.002</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Ayers, G. P., Gillett, R. W., Cainey, J. M., and Dick, A. L.: Chloride and
bromide loss from sea-salt particles in Southern Ocean air, J. Atmos. Chem.,
33, 299–319, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006120205159" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006120205159</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Baccarini, A., Karlsson, L., Dommen, J., Duplessis, P., Vüllers, J.,
Brooks, I. M., Saiz-Lopez, A., Salter, M., Tjernström, M.,
Baltensperger, U., Zieger, P., and Schmale, J.: Frequent new particle
formation over the high Arctic pack ice by enhanced iodine emissions, Nat.
Commun., 11, 1–11, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18551-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18551-0</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bärfuss, K., Pätzold, F., Altstädter, B., Kathe, E., Nowak, S.,
Bretschneider, L., Bestmann, U., and Lampert, A.: New setup of the UAS
ALADINA for measuring boundary layer properties, atmospheric particles and
solar radiation, Atmosphere-Basel, 9, 28, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9010028" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9010028</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Barnes, I., Hjorth, J., and Mihalapoulos, N.: Dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl
sulfoxide and their oxidation in the atmosphere, Chem. Rev., 106,
940–975, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/cr020529+" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/cr020529+</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Barrie, L. A.: Arctic air pollution: An overview of current knowledge,
Atmos. Environ., 20, 643–663, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(86)90180-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(86)90180-0</a>, 1986.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Barthel, S., Tegen, I., and Wolke, R.: Do new sea spray aerosol source
functions improve the results of a regional aerosol model?, Atmos. Environ.,
198, 265–278, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.10.016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.10.016</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Beck, L. J., Sarnela, N., Junninen, H., Hoppe, C. J. M., Garmash, O.,
Bianchi, F., Riva, M., Rose, C., Peräkylä, O., Wimmer, D., Kausiala,
O., Jokinen, T., Ahonen, L., Mikkilä, J., Hakala, J., He, X. C.,
Kontkanen, J., Wolf, K. K. E., Cappelletti, D., Mazzola, M., Traversi, R.,
Petroselli, C., Viola, A. P., Vitale, V., Lange, R., Massling, A.,
Nøjgaard, J. K., Krejci, R., Karlsson, L., Zieger, P., Jang, S., Lee, K.,
Vakkari, V., Lampilahti, J., Thakur, R. C., Leino, K., Kangasluoma, J.,
Duplissy, E. M., Siivola, E., Marbouti, M., Tham, Y. J., Saiz-Lopez, A.,
Petäjä, T., Ehn, M., Worsnop, D. R., Skov, H., Kulmala, M.,
Kerminen, V. M., and Sipilä, M.: Differing Mechanisms of New Particle
Formation at Two Arctic Sites, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, 1–11,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091334" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091334</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Bengtsson, L., Hodges, K. I., Koumoutsaris, S., Zahn, M., and Berrisford, P.:
The changing energy balance of the polar regions in a warmer climate, J.
Climate, 26, 3112–3129, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00233.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00233.1</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Berndt, T., Chen, J., Møller, K. H., Hyttinen, N., Prisle, N. L.,
Tilgner, A., Hoffmann, E. H., Herrmann, H., and Kjaergaard, H. G.:
SO<sub>2</sub> formation and peroxy radical isomerization in the atmospheric reaction of
OH radicals with dimethyl disulfide, Chem. Commun., 56, 13634–13637,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/d0cc05783e" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1039/d0cc05783e</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Bräuer, P., Tilgner, A., Wolke, R., and Herrmann, H.: Mechanism
development and modelling of tropospheric multiphase halogen chemistry: The
CAPRAM Halogen Module 2.0 (HM2), J. Atmos. Chem., 70, 19–52,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10874-013-9249-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10874-013-9249-6</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Campolongo, F., Saltelli, A., Jensen, N. R., Wilson, J., and Hjorth, J.: The
role of multiphase chemistry in the oxidation of dimethylsulphide (DMS). A
latitude dependent analysis, J. Atmos. Chem., 32, 327–356,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006154618511" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006154618511</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, Q., Sherwen, T., Evans, M., and Alexander, B.: DMS oxidation and sulfur aerosol formation in the marine troposphere: a focus on reactive halogen and multiphase chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 13617–13637, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13617-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-13617-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Clarke, A. D., Owens, S. R., and Zhou, J.: An ultrafine sea-salt flux from
breaking waves: Implications for cloud condensation nuclei in the remote
marine atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 111, D06202,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006565" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006565</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Cuevas, C. A., Maffezzoli, N., Corella, J. P., Spolaor, A., Vallelonga, P.,
Kjær, H. A., Simonsen, M., Winstrup, M., Vinther, B., Horvat, C.,
Fernandez, R. P., Kinnison, D., Lamarque, J. F., Barbante, C., and
Saiz-Lopez, A.: Rapid increase in atmospheric iodine levels in the North
Atlantic since the mid-20th century, Nat. Commun., 9, 1–6,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03756-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03756-1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Dall'Osto, M., Beddows, D. C. S., Tunved, P., Krejci, R., Ström, J.,
Hansson, H. C., Yoon, Y. J., Park, K. T., Becagli, S., Udisti, R., Onasch,
T., Ódowd, C. D., Simó, R., and Harrison, R. M.: Arctic sea ice melt
leads to atmospheric new particle formation, Sci. Rep.-UK, 7, 1–10,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03328-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03328-1</a>, 2017a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Dall'Osto, M., Ovadnevaite, J., Paglione, M., Beddows, D. C. S., Ceburnis,
D., Cree, C., Cortés, P., Zamanillo, M., Nunes, S. O., Pérez, G. L.,
Ortega-Retuerta, E., Emelianov, M., Vaqué, D., Marrasé, C., Estrada,
M., Sala, M. M., Vidal, M., Fitzsimons, M. F., Beale, R., Airs, R., Rinaldi,
M., Decesari, S., Facchini, M. C., Harrison, R. M., O'Dowd, C., and Simó,
R.: Antarctic sea ice region as a source of biogenic organic nitrogen in
aerosols, Sci. Rep.-UK, 7, 1–10, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06188-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-06188-x</a>, 2017b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Dall'Osto, M., Beddows, D. C. S., Tunved, P., Harrison, R. M., Lupi, A., Vitale, V., Becagli, S., Traversi, R., Park, K.-T., Yoon, Y. J., Massling, A., Skov, H., Lange, R., Strom, J., and Krejci, R.: Simultaneous measurements of aerosol size distributions at three sites in the European high Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 7377–7395, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7377-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-7377-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Damian, V., Sandu, A., Damian, M., Potra, F., and Carmichael, G. R.: The
kinetic preprocessor KPP – A software environment for solving chemical
kinetics, Comput. Chem. Eng., 26, 1567–1579,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-1354(02)00128-X" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-1354(02)00128-X</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Engvall, A.-C., Krejci, R., Ström, J., Treffeisen, R., Scheele, R., Hermansen, O., and Paatero, J.: Changes in aerosol properties during spring-summer period in the Arctic troposphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 445–462, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-445-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-445-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Feingold, G. and Kreidenweis, S.: Does cloud processing of aerosol enhance
droplet concentrations?, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 24351–24361,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900369" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900369</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: Cloud processing of aerosol particles in
marine stratocumulus clouds, Atmosphere-Basel, 10, 520,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10090520" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10090520</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Fossum, K. N., Ovadnevaite, J., Ceburnis, D., Dall'Osto, M., Marullo, S.,
Bellacicco, M., Simó, R., Liu, D., Flynn, M., Zuend, A., and O'Dowd, C.:
Summertime Primary and Secondary Contributions to Southern Ocean Cloud
Condensation Nuclei, Sci. Rep.-UK, 8, 1–14, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32047-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32047-4</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Frey, M. M., Norris, S. J., Brooks, I. M., Anderson, P. S., Nishimura, K., Yang, X., Jones, A. E., Nerentorp Mastromonaco, M. G., Jones, D. H., and Wolff, E. W.: First direct observation of sea salt aerosol production from blowing snow above sea ice, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 2549–2578, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-2549-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-2549-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Gantt, B., He, J., Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., and Nenes, A.: Incorporation of advanced aerosol activation treatments into CESM/CAM5: model evaluation and impacts on aerosol indirect effects, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 7485–7497, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7485-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-7485-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Granier, C., Darras, S., Gon, H. D. van der, Jana, D., Elguindi, N., Bo, G.,
Michael, G., Marc, G., Jalkanen, J.-P., Kuenen, J., Liousse, C., Quack, B.,
Simpson, D., and Sindelarova, K.: The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring
Service global and regional emissions (April 2019 version),
<a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02322431" target="_blank"/> (last access: 10 April 2021),
2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Guenther, A., Karl, T., Harley, P., Wiedinmyer, C., Palmer, P. I., and Geron, C.: Estimates of global terrestrial isoprene emissions using MEGAN (Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3181–3210, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3181-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Heintzenberg, J., Tunved, P., Galí, M., and Leck, C.: New particle formation in the Svalbard region 2006–2015, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 6153–6175, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6153-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-6153-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Herenz, P., Wex, H., Henning, S., Kristensen, T. B., Rubach, F., Roth, A., Borrmann, S., Bozem, H., Schulz, H., and Stratmann, F.: Measurements of aerosol and CCN properties in the Mackenzie River delta (Canadian Arctic) during spring–summer transition in May 2014, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 4477–4496, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-4477-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-4477-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on single levels from 1959 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47</a>, 2018a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1959 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6</a>, 2018b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Hertel, O., Christensen, J., and Hov, Ø.: Modelling of the end products of
the chemical decomposition of DMS in the marine boundary layer, Atmos.
Environ., 28, 2431–2449, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(94)90395-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(94)90395-6</a>, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Hodshire, A. L., Campuzano-Jost, P., Kodros, J. K., Croft, B., Nault, B. A., Schroder, J. C., Jimenez, J. L., and Pierce, J. R.: The potential role of methanesulfonic acid (MSA) in aerosol formation and growth and the associated radiative forcings, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 3137–3160, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3137-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-3137-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Hoffmann, E. H., Tilgner, A., Schrödner, R., Bräuer, P., Wolke, R.,
and Herrmann, H.: An advanced modeling study on the impacts and atmospheric
implications of multiphase dimethyl sulfide chemistry, P. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA, 113, 11776–11781, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1606320113" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1606320113</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Hoose, C., Lohmann, U., Bennartz, R., Croft, B., and Lesins, G.: Global simulations of aerosol processing in clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 6939–6963, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-6939-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-6939-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Hoppel, W. A. and Frick, G. M.: Submicron aerosol size distributions
measured over the tropical and South Pacific, Atmos. Environ. Part A, 24, 645–659, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-1686(90)90020-N" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-1686(90)90020-N</a>, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Hoppel, W. A., Fitzgerald, J. W., and Larson, R. E.: Aerosol size
distributions in air masses advecting off the east coast of the United
States., J. Geophys. Res., 90, 2365–2379, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/JD090iD01p02365" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/JD090iD01p02365</a>,
1985.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Hoppel, W. A., Frick, G. M., and Larson, R. E.: Effect of nonprecipitating
clouds on the aerosol size distribution in the marine boundary layer,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 13, 125–128, 1986.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Hudson, J. G., Noble, S., and Tabor, S.: Cloud supersaturations from CCN
spectra Hoppel minima, J. Geophys. Res., 120, 3436–3452,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022669" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022669</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Jang, S., Park, K.-T., Lee, K., Yoon, Y. J., Kim, K., Chung, H. Y., Jang, E., Becagli, S., Lee, B. Y., Traversi, R., Eleftheriadis, K., Krejci, R., and Hermansen, O.: Large seasonal and interannual variations of biogenic sulfur compounds in the Arctic atmosphere (Svalbard; 78.9°&thinsp;N, 11.9°&thinsp;E), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9761–9777, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9761-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9761-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Jayaratne, R., Pushpawela, B., He, C., Li, H., Gao, J., Chai, F., and Morawska, L.: Observations of particles at their formation sizes in Beijing, China, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 8825–8835, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8825-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8825-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Jenkin, M. E., Saunders, S. M., and Pilling, M. J.: The tropospheric
degradation of volatile organic compounds: A protocol for mechanism
development, Atmos. Environ., 31, 81–104,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00105-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00105-7</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Jenkin, M. E., Young, J. C., and Rickard, A. R.: The MCM v3.3.1 degradation scheme for isoprene, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11433–11459, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11433-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11433-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Jericevic, A., Kraljevic, L., Grisogono, B., Fagerli, H., and Vecenaj, Ž.: Parameterization of vertical diffusion and the atmospheric boundary layer height determination in the EMEP model, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 341–364, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-341-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-341-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Jokinen, T., Sipilä, M., Kontkanen, J., Vakkari, V., Tisler, P.,
Duplissy, E. M., Junninen, H., Kangasluoma, J., Manninen, H. E.,
Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., Worsnop, D. R., Kirkby, J., Virkkula, A.,
and Kerminen, V. M.: Ion-induced sulfuric acid–ammonia nucleation drives
particle formation in coastal Antarctica, Sci. Adv., 4, 1–7,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat9744" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat9744</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Kettle, A. J. and Andreae, M. O.: Flux of dimethylsulfide from the oceans: A
comparison of updated data sets and flux models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
105, 26793–26808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900252" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900252</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Kim, I., Zhang, M., Kim, K., and Park, K.: First high-frequency underway
observation of dms distribution in the southern ocean during austral autumn,
Atmosphere-Basel, 12, 1–10, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12010122" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12010122</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Kirkby, J., Duplissy, J., Sengupta, K., Frege, C., Gordon, H., Williamson,
C., Heinritzi, M., Simon, M., Yan, C., Almeida, J., Trostl, J., Nieminen,
T., Ortega, I. K., Wagner, R., Adamov, A., Amorim, A., Bernhammer, A. K.,
Bianchi, F., Breitenlechner, M., Brilke, S., Chen, X., Craven, J., Dias, A.,
Ehrhart, S., Flagan, R. C., Franchin, A., Fuchs, C., Guida, R., Hakala, J.,
Hoyle, C. R., Jokinen, T., Junninen, H., Kangasluoma, J., Kim, J., Krapf,
M., Kurten, A., Laaksonen, A., Lehtipalo, K., Makhmutov, V., Mathot, S.,
Molteni, U., Onnela, A., Perakyla, O., Piel, F., Petaja, T., Praplan, A. P.,
Pringle, K., Rap, A., Richards, N. A. D., Riipinen, I., Rissanen, M. P.,
Rondo, L., Sarnela, N., Schobesberger, S., Scott, C. E., Seinfeld, J. H.,
Sipila, M., Steiner, G., Stozhkov, Y., Stratmann, F., Tomé, A.,
Virtanen, A., Vogel, A. L., Wagner, A. C., Wagner, P. E., Weingartner, E.,
Wimmer, D., Winkler, P. M., Ye, P., Zhang, X., Hansel, A., Dommen, J.,
Donahue, N. M., Worsnop, D. R., Baltensperger, U., Kulmala, M., Carslaw, K.
S., and Curtius, J.: Ion-induced nucleation of pure biogenic particles,
Nature, 533, 521–526, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17953" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17953</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Kloster, S., Feichter, J., Maier-Reimer, E., Six, K. D., Stier, P., and Wetzel, P.: DMS cycle in the marine ocean-atmosphere system – a global model study, Biogeosciences, 3, 29–51, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-3-29-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-3-29-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Lampert, A., Altstädter, B., Bärfuss, K., Bretschneider, L.,
Sandgaard, J., Michaelis, J., Lobitz, L., Asmussen, M., Damm, E.,
Käthner, R., Krüger, T., Lüpkes, C., Nowak, S., Peuker, A.,
Rausch, T., Reiser, F., Scholtz, A., Sotomayor-Zakharov, D., Gaus, D.,
Bansmer, S., Wehner, B., and Pätzold, F.: Unmanned aerial systems for
investigating the polar atmospheric boundary layer-technical challenges and
examples of applications, Atmosphere-Basel, 11, 416,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ATMOS11040416" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/ATMOS11040416</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Lana, A., Bell, T. G., Simó, R., Vallina, S. M., Ballabrera-Poy, J.,
Kettle, A. J., Dachs, J., Bopp, L., Saltzman, E. S., Stefels, J., Johnson,
J. E., and Liss, P. S.: An updated climatology of surface dimethlysulfide
concentrations and emission fluxes in the global ocean, Global Biogeochem.
Cycles, 25, 1–17, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GB003850" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GB003850</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, H., Lee, K., Lunder, C. R., Krejci, R., Aas, W., Park, J., Park, K.-T., Lee, B. Y., Yoon, Y. J., and Park, K.: Atmospheric new particle formation characteristics in the Arctic as measured at Mount Zeppelin, Svalbard, from 2016 to 2018, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 13425–13441, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13425-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-13425-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Lenssen, N. J. L., Schmidt, G. A., Hansen, J. E., Menne, M. J., Persin, A.,
Ruedy, R., and Zyss, D.: Improvements in the GISTEMP Uncertainty Model, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 6307–6326, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029522" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029522</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Lupi, A., Busetto, M., Becagli, S., Giardi, F., Lanconelli, C., Mazzola, M.,
Udisti, R., Hansson, H. C., Henning, T., Petkov, B., Ström, J., Krejci,
R., Tunved, P., Pietro, V. A., and Vitale, V.: Multi-seasonal ultrafine
aerosol particle number concentration measurements at the Gruvebadet
observatory, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard Islands, Rend. Lincei, 27, 59–71,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-016-0532-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-016-0532-8</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Manninen, H. E., Nieminen, T., Asmi, E., Gagné, S., Häkkinen, S., Lehtipalo, K., Aalto, P., Vana, M., Mirme, A., Mirme, S., Hõrrak, U., Plass-Dülmer, C., Stange, G., Kiss, G., Hoffer, A., Törő, N., Moerman, M., Henzing, B., de Leeuw, G., Brinkenberg, M., Kouvarakis, G. N., Bougiatioti, A., Mihalopoulos, N., O'Dowd, C., Ceburnis, D., Arneth, A., Svenningsson, B., Swietlicki, E., Tarozzi, L., Decesari, S., Facchini, M. C., Birmili, W., Sonntag, A., Wiedensohler, A., Boulon, J., Sellegri, K., Laj, P., Gysel, M., Bukowiecki, N., Weingartner, E., Wehrle, G., Laaksonen, A., Hamed, A., Joutsensaari, J., Petäjä, T., Kerminen, V.-M., and Kulmala, M.: EUCAARI ion spectrometer measurements at 12 European sites – analysis of new particle formation events, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7907–7927, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7907-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7907-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Manninen, H. E., Franchin, A., Schobesberger, S., Hirsikko, A., Hakala, J., Skromulis, A., Kangasluoma, J., Ehn, M., Junninen, H., Mirme, A., Mirme, S., Sipilä, M., Petäjä, T., Worsnop, D. R., and Kulmala, M.: Characterisation of corona-generated ions used in a Neutral cluster and Air Ion Spectrometer (NAIS), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2767–2776, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2767-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2767-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Manninen, H. E., Mirme, S., Mirme, A., Petäjä, T., and Kulmala, M.: How to reliably detect molecular clusters and nucleation mode particles with Neutral cluster and Air Ion Spectrometer (NAIS), Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 3577–3605, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-3577-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-3577-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Mårtensson, E. M., Nilsson, E. D., de Leeuw, G., Cohen, L. H., and
Hansson, H.-C.: Laboratory simulations and parameterization of the primary
marine aerosol production, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002263" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002263</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
McGrath, M. J., Olenius, T., Ortega, I. K., Loukonen, V., Paasonen, P., Kurtén, T., Kulmala, M., and Vehkamäki, H.: Atmospheric Cluster Dynamics Code: a flexible method for solution of the birth-death equations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 2345–2355, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2345-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-2345-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Mikkola, J.: Slope and valley winds in the Himalayas as
simulated by the Weather Research and Forecasting model, master thesis, 42 pp., <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/10138/322406" target="_blank"/> (last access: 2 March 2022), 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Mirme, S. and Mirme, A.: The mathematical principles and design of the NAIS – a spectrometer for the measurement of cluster ion and nanometer aerosol size distributions, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 1061–1071, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-1061-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-1061-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Monahan, E. C., Spiel, D. E., and Davidson, K. L.: A Model of Marine Aerosol
Generation Via Whitecaps and Wave Disruption, in: Oceanic Whitecaps: And
Their Role in Air-Sea Exchange Processes, edited by: Monahan, E. C. and Mac
Niocaill, G., Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 167–174, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4668-2_16" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4668-2_16</a>, 1986.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Moroni, B., Ritter, C., Crocchianti, S., Markowicz, K., Mazzola, M.,
Becagli, S., Traversi, R., Krejci, R., Tunved, P., and Cappelletti, D.:
Individual Particle Characteristics, Optical Properties and Evolution of an
Extreme Long-Range Transported Biomass Burning Event in the European Arctic
(Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard Islands), J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, 1–17,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031535" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031535</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Nightingale, P. D., Liss, P. S., and Schlosser, P.: Measurements of air-sea
gas transfer during an open ocean algal bloom, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27,
2117–2120, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL011541" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL011541</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Noble, S. and Hudson, J. G.: Cloud supersaturations and Hoppel minima, AIP
Conf. Proc., 1527, 706–709, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4803368" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4803368</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Noble, S. R. and Hudson, J. G.: Effects of Continental Clouds on Surface
Aitken and Accumulation Modes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 5479–5502,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030297" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030297</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Olenius, T., Kupiainen-Määttä, O., Ortega, I. K., Kurtén, T.,
and Vehkamäki, H.: Free energy barrier in the growth of sulfuric
acid-ammonia and sulfuric acid-dimethylamine clusters, J. Chem. Phys.,
139, 084312, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4819024" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4819024</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Oshima, N., Yukimoto, S., Deushi, M., Koshiro, T., Kawai, H., Tanaka, T. Y.,
and Yoshida, K.: Global and Arctic effective radiative forcing of
anthropogenic gases and aerosols in MRI-ESM2.0, Prog. Earth Planet. Sci.,
7, 38, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-020-00348-w" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-020-00348-w</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Öström, E., Putian, Z., Schurgers, G., Mishurov, M., Kivekäs, N., Lihavainen, H., Ehn, M., Rissanen, M. P., Kurtén, T., Boy, M., Swietlicki, E., and Roldin, P.: Modeling the role of highly oxidized multifunctional organic molecules for the growth of new particles over the boreal forest region, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 8887–8901, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8887-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8887-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Park, K.-T., Jang, S., Lee, K., Yoon, Y. J., Kim, M.-S., Park, K., Cho, H.-J., Kang, J.-H., Udisti, R., Lee, B.-Y., and Shin, K.-H.: Observational evidence for the formation of DMS-derived aerosols during Arctic phytoplankton blooms, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 9665–9675, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9665-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-9665-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Park, K. T., Yoon, Y. J., Lee, K., Tunved, P., Krejci, R., Ström, J.,
Jang, E., Kang, H. J., Jang, S., Park, J., Lee, B. Y., Traversi, R.,
Becagli, S., and Hermansen, O.: Dimethyl Sulfide-Induced Increase in Cloud
Condensation Nuclei in the Arctic Atmosphere, Global Biogeochem. Cycles,
35, 1–15, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GB006969" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GB006969</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Paulot, F., Jacob, D. J., Johnson, M. T., Bell, T. G., Baker, A. R., Keene,
W. C., Lima, I. D., Doney, S. C., and Stock, C. A.: Global oceanic emission
of ammonia: Constraints from seawater and atmospheric observations, Global
Biogeochem. Cycles, 29, 1165–1178, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005106" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005106</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Petäjä, T., Duplissy, E.-M., Tabakova, K., Schmale, J., Altstädter, B., Ancellet, G., Arshinov, M., Balin, Y., Baltensperger, U., Bange, J., Beamish, A., Belan, B., Berchet, A., Bossi, R., Cairns, W. R. L., Ebinghaus, R., El Haddad, I., Ferreira-Araujo, B., Franck, A., Huang, L., Hyvärinen, A., Humbert, A., Kalogridis, A.-C., Konstantinov, P., Lampert, A., MacLeod, M., Magand, O., Mahura, A., Marelle, L., Masloboev, V., Moisseev, D., Moschos, V., Neckel, N., Onishi, T., Osterwalder, S., Ovaska, A., Paasonen, P., Panchenko, M., Pankratov, F., Pernov, J. B., Platis, A., Popovicheva, O., Raut, J.-C., Riandet, A., Sachs, T., Salvatori, R., Salzano, R., Schröder, L., Schön, M., Shevchenko, V., Skov, H., Sonke, J. E., Spolaor, A., Stathopoulos, V. K., Strahlendorff, M., Thomas, J. L., Vitale, V., Vratolis, S., Barbante, C., Chabrillat, S., Dommergue, A., Eleftheriadis, K., Heilimo, J., Law, K. S., Massling, A., Noe, S. M., Paris, J.-D., Prévôt, A. S. H., Riipinen, I., Wehner, B., Xie, Z., and Lappalainen, H. K.: Overview: Integrative and Comprehensive Understanding on Polar Environments (iCUPE) – concept and initial results, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8551–8592, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8551-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8551-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Pisso, I., Sollum, E., Grythe, H., Kristiansen, N. I., Cassiani, M., Eckhardt, S., Arnold, D., Morton, D., Thompson, R. L., Groot Zwaaftink, C. D., Evangeliou, N., Sodemann, H., Haimberger, L., Henne, S., Brunner, D., Burkhart, J. F., Fouilloux, A., Brioude, J., Philipp, A., Seibert, P., and Stohl, A.: The Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 10.4, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 4955–4997, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4955-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-4955-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Platt, S. M., Hov, Ø., Berg, T., Breivik, K., Eckhardt, S., Eleftheriadis, K., Evangeliou, N., Fiebig, M., Fisher, R., Hansen, G., Hansson, H.-C., Heintzenberg, J., Hermansen, O., Heslin-Rees, D., Holmén, K., Hudson, S., Kallenborn, R., Krejci, R., Krognes, T., Larssen, S., Lowry, D., Lund Myhre, C., Lunder, C., Nisbet, E., Nizzetto, P. B., Park, K.-T., Pedersen, C. A., Aspmo Pfaffhuber, K., Röckmann, T., Schmidbauer, N., Solberg, S., Stohl, A., Ström, J., Svendby, T., Tunved, P., Tørnkvist, K., van der Veen, C., Vratolis, S., Yoon, Y. J., Yttri, K. E., Zieger, P., Aas, W., and Tørseth, K.: Atmospheric composition in the European Arctic and 30 years of the Zeppelin Observatory, Ny-Ålesund, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3321–3369, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3321-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3321-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Quinn, P. K., Coffman, D. J., Johnson, J. E., Upchurch, L. M., and Bates, T.
S.: Small fraction of marine cloud condensation nuclei made up of sea spray
aerosol, Nat. Geosci., 10, 674–679, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo3003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo3003</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Rader, F., Traversi, R., Severi, M., Becagli, S., Müller, K.-J.,
Nakoudi, K., and Ritter, C.: Overview of Aerosol Properties in the European
Arctic in Spring 2019 Based on In Situ Measurements and Lidar Data,
Atmosphere-Basel, 12, 271, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12020271" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12020271</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Riddick, S. N., Dragosits, U., Blackall, T. D., Daunt, F., Wanless, S., and
Sutton, M. A.: The global distribution of ammonia emissions from seabird
colonies, Atmos. Environ., 55, 319–327, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.02.052" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.02.052</a>,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Roldin, P., Swietlicki, E., Schurgers, G., Arneth, A., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Boy, M., and Kulmala, M.: Development and evaluation of the aerosol dynamics and gas phase chemistry model ADCHEM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 5867–5896, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5867-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-5867-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Roldin, P., Ehn, M., Kurtén, T., Olenius, T., Rissanen, M. P., Sarnela,
N., Elm, J., Rantala, P., Hao, L., Hyttinen, N., Heikkinen, L., Worsnop, D.
R., Pichelstorfer, L., Xavier, C., Clusius, P., Öström, E.,
Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., Vehkamäki, H., Virtanen, A., Riipinen,
I., and Boy, M.: The role of highly oxygenated organic molecules in the
Boreal aerosol-cloud-climate system, Nat. Commun., 10, 4370,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12338-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12338-8</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Rosati, B., Christiansen, S., Wollesen de Jonge, R., Roldin, P., Jensen, M.
M., Wang, K., Moosakutty, S. P., Thomsen, D., Salomonsen, C., Hyttinen, N.,
Elm, J., Feilberg, A., Glasius, M., and Bilde, M.: New Particle Formation and
Growth from Dimethyl Sulfide Oxidation by Hydroxyl Radicals, ACS Earth Sp.
Chem., 5, 801–811, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.0c00333" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.0c00333</a>,
2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Rosenfeld, D., Andreae, M. O., Asmi, A., Chin, M., de Leeuw, G., Donovan, D.
P., Kahn, R., Kinne, S., Kivekäs, N., Kulmala, M., Lau, W., Schmidt, K.
S., Suni, T., Wagner, T., Wild, M., and Quaas, J.: Global observations of
aerosol-cloud-precipitation-climate interactions, Rev. Geophys., 52,
750–808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000441" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000441</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Salter, M. E., Zieger, P., Acosta Navarro, J. C., Grythe, H., Kirkevåg, A., Rosati, B., Riipinen, I., and Nilsson, E. D.: An empirically derived inorganic sea spray source function incorporating sea surface temperature, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11047–11066, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Saunders, S. M., Jenkin, M. E., Derwent, R. G., and Pilling, M. J.: Protocol for the development of the Master Chemical Mechanism, MCM v3 (Part A): tropospheric degradation of non-aromatic volatile organic compounds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 161–180, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-161-2003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-161-2003</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Schemann, V. and Ebell, K.: Simulation of mixed-phase clouds with the ICON large-eddy model in the complex Arctic environment around Ny-Ålesund, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 475–485, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-475-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-475-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Scott, C. E., Rap, A., Spracklen, D. V., Forster, P. M., Carslaw, K. S., Mann, G. W., Pringle, K. J., Kivekäs, N., Kulmala, M., Lihavainen, H., and Tunved, P.: The direct and indirect radiative effects of biogenic secondary organic aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 447–470, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-447-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-447-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Sofiev, M., Soares, J., Prank, M., De Leeuw, G., and Kukkonen, J.: A
regional-to-global model of emission and transport of sea salt particles in
the atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014713" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014713</a>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Stock, C. A., Dunne, J. P., and John, J. G.: Global-scale carbon and energy
flows through the marine planktonic food web: An analysis with a coupled
physical–biological model, Prog. Oceanogr., 120, 1–28,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2013.07.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2013.07.001</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
Stohl, A., Forster, C., Frank, A., Seibert, P., and Wotawa, G.: Technical note: The Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 6.2, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2461–2474, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2461-2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2461-2005</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
Ström, J., Engvall, A. C., Delbart, F., Krejci, R., and Treffeisen, R.:
On small particles in the Arctic summer boundary layer: Observations at two
different heights near Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, Tellus B, 61, 473–482, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00412.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00412.x</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
Traversi, R., Becagli, S., Severi, M., Caiazzo, L., Mazzola, M., Lupi, A.,
Fiebig, M., Hermansen, O., Krejci, R., and Unit, A. S.: Arctic haze in a
climate changing world: the 2010–2020 trend (HAZECLIC) 4, in: SESS report 2020 – The State of Environmental Science in Svalbard – an annual
report, Svalbard Integrated Arctic Earth Observing System,
104–117,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4293826" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4293826</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation>
Tunved, P., Ström, J., and Krejci, R.: Arctic aerosol life cycle: linking aerosol size distributions observed between 2000 and 2010 with air mass transport and precipitation at Zeppelin station, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3643–3660, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3643-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3643-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><mixed-citation>
Uhlig, C., Damm, E., Peeken, I., Krumpen, T., Rabe, B., Korhonen, M., and
Ludwichowski, K. U.: Sea ice and water mass influence dimethylsulfide
concentrations in the central arctic ocean, Front. Earth Sci., 7,
1–15, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00179" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00179</a>, 2019.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><mixed-citation>
Wainwright, C. D., Pierce, J. R., Liggio, J., Strawbridge, K. B., Macdonald, A. M., and Leaitch, R. W.: The effect of model spatial resolution on Secondary Organic Aerosol predictions: a case study at Whistler, BC, Canada, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10911–10923, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10911-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10911-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><mixed-citation>
Wentworth, G. R., Murphy, J. G., Croft, B., Martin, R. V., Pierce, J. R., Côté, J.-S., Courchesne, I., Tremblay, J.-É., Gagnon, J., Thomas, J. L., Sharma, S., Toom-Sauntry, D., Chivulescu, A., Levasseur, M., and Abbatt, J. P. D.: Ammonia in the summertime Arctic marine boundary layer: sources, sinks, and implications, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 1937–1953, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1937-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1937-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><mixed-citation>
Wollesen de Jonge, R., Elm, J., Rosati, B., Christiansen, S., Hyttinen, N., Lüdemann, D., Bilde, M., and Roldin, P.: Secondary aerosol formation from dimethyl sulfide – improved mechanistic understanding based on smog chamber experiments and modelling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9955–9976, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><mixed-citation>
Wollesen de Jonge, R., Elm, J., Rosati, B., Christiansen, S., Hyttinen, N., Lüdemann, D., Bilde, M., and Roldin, P.: Secondary aerosol formation from dimethyl sulfide – improved mechanistic understanding based on smog chamber experiments and modelling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 9955–9976, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-9955-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><mixed-citation>
Xavier, C., Rusanen, A., Zhou, P., Dean, C., Pichelstorfer, L., Roldin, P., and Boy, M.: Aerosol mass yields of selected biogenic volatile organic compounds – a theoretical study with nearly explicit gas-phase chemistry, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13741–13758, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13741-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13741-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Aiken, A. C., Gallo, F., Jensen, M. P., Kollias, P., Kuang, C., Luke, E., Springston, S., Uin, J., Wood, R., and Wang, J.: Marine boundary layer aerosol in the eastern North Atlantic: seasonal variations and key controlling processes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17615–17635, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><mixed-citation>
Ziska, F., Quack, B., Abrahamsson, K., Archer, S. D., Atlas, E., Bell, T., Butler, J. H., Carpenter, L. J., Jones, C. E., Harris, N. R. P., Hepach, H., Heumann, K. G., Hughes, C., Kuss, J., Krüger, K., Liss, P., Moore, R. M., Orlikowska, A., Raimund, S., Reeves, C. E., Reifenhäuser, W., Robinson, A. D., Schall, C., Tanhua, T., Tegtmeier, S., Turner, S., Wang, L., Wallace, D., Williams, J., Yamamoto, H., Yvon-Lewis, S., and Yokouchi, Y.: Global sea-to-air flux climatology for bromoform, dibromomethane and methyl iodide, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 8915–8934, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-8915-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-8915-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
