<?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-23-2627-2023</article-id><title-group><article-title>Effects of transport on a biomass burning plume from Indochina during
EMeRGe-Asia identified by WRF-Chem</article-title><alt-title>Biomass burning plume from Indochina during EMeRGe-Asia</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Biomass burning plume from Indochina during EMeRGe-Asia}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{C.-Y.~Lin et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>Chuan-Yao</given-names></name>
          <email>yao435@rcec.sinica.edu.tw</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0005-7088</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Wan-Chin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Chien</surname><given-names>Yi-Yun</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Chou</surname><given-names>Charles C. K.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Chian-Yi</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Ziereis</surname><given-names>Helmut</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5483-5669</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Schlager</surname><given-names>Hans</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Förster</surname><given-names>Eric</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Obersteiner</surname><given-names>Florian</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7327-8893</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Krüger</surname><given-names>Ovid O.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3321-6655</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Holanda</surname><given-names>Bruna A.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4 aff11 aff12">
          <name><surname>Pöhlker</surname><given-names>Mira L.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5 aff7">
          <name><surname>Kaiser</surname><given-names>Katharina</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3162-2502</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Schneider</surname><given-names>Johannes</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7169-3973</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff8">
          <name><surname>Bohn</surname><given-names>Birger</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4177-3934</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff9 aff10">
          <name><surname>Pfeilsticker</surname><given-names>Klaus</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7851-6029</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff10">
          <name><surname>Weyland</surname><given-names>Benjamin</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3165-4467</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Andrés Hernández</surname><given-names>Maria Dolores</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff6">
          <name><surname>Burrows</surname><given-names>John P.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1547-8130</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Research Center for Environmental Changes, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR), Institut für Physik
der Atmosphäre, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Multiphase Chemistry Department, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz,
Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Particle Chemistry Department, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz,
Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>Institute of Environmental Physics, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>Institute for Atmospheric Physics, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz,
Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff8"><label>8</label><institution>Institute of Energy and Climate Research IEK-8, Forschungszentrum
Jülich, Jülich, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff9"><label>9</label><institution>Heidelberg Center for the Environment, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg,
Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff10"><label>10</label><institution>Institute of Environmental Physics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg,
Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff11"><label>a</label><institution>now at: Faculty of Physics and Earth Sciences, Leipzig Institute for
Meteorology, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff12"><label>b</label><institution>now at: Experimental Aerosol and Cloud
Microphysics Department, Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research,
Leipzig, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Chuan-Yao Lin (yao435@rcec.sinica.edu.tw)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>24</day><month>February</month><year>2023</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>4</issue>
      <fpage>2627</fpage><lpage>2647</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>15</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>25</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>13</day><month>December</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>20</day><month>January</month><year>2023</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2023 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2023</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="d1e328">The Indochina biomass burning (BB) season in springtime has a substantial
environmental impact on the surrounding areas in Asia. In this study, we
evaluated the environmental impact of a major long-range BB transport event
on 19 March 2018 (a flight of the <italic>High Altitude and Long Range Research Aircraft</italic> (<italic>HALO</italic>; <uri>https://www.halo-spp.de</uri>, last access: 14 February 2023) research aircraft, flight F0319)
preceded by a minor event on 17 March 2018 (flight F0317). Aircraft data
obtained during the campaign in Asia of the Effect of Megacities on the
transport and transformation of pollutants on the Regional to Global scales
(EMeRGe) were available between 12 March and 7 April 2018. In F0319,
results of 1 min mean carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" 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>, acetone (ACE),
acetonitrile (ACN), organic aerosol (OA), and black carbon aerosol (BC)
concentrations were up to 312.0, 79.0, 3.0, and 0.6 ppb and 6.4 and 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, during the flight, which
passed through the BB plume transport layer (BPTL) between the elevation of
2000–4000 m over the East China Sea (ECS). During F0319, the CO, O<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>, ACE,
ACN, OA, and BC maximum of the 1 min average concentrations were higher in
the BPTL by 109.0, 8.0, 1.0, and 0.3 ppb and 3.0 and
1.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" 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> compared to flight F0317, respectively. Sulfate
aerosol, rather than OA, showed the highest concentration at low altitudes
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) in both flights F0317 and F0319 resulting from the
continental outflow in the ECS.</p>

      <p id="d1e412">The transport of BB aerosols from Indochina and its impacts on the
downstream area were evaluated using a Weather Research Forecasting with Chemistry (WRF-Chem) model. The modeling results
tended to overestimate the concentration of the species, with examples being
CO (64 ppb), OA (0.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC (0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
(12.5 ppb) in the BPTL. Over the ECS, the simulated BB contribution
demonstrated an increasing trend from<?pagebreak page2628?> the lowest values on 17 March 2018 to
the highest values on 18 and 19 March 2018 for CO, fine particulate matter
(PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, OA, BC, hydroxyl radicals (OH), nitrogen oxides (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
total reactive nitrogen (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and O<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>; by contrast, the variation
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased as the BB plume's contribution increased over the
ECS. In the lower boundary layer (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m), the BB plume's
contribution to most species in the remote downstream areas was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %. However, at the BPTL, the contribution of the long-range transported
BB plume was as high as 30 %–80 % for most of the species (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, OH, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and CO) over southern China (SC),
Taiwan, and the ECS. BB aerosols were identified as a potential source of
cloud condensation nuclei, and the simulation results indicated that the
transported BB plume had an effect on cloud water formation over SC and the
ECS on 19 March 2018. The combination of BB aerosol enhancement with cloud
water resulted in a reduction of incoming shortwave radiation at the surface
in SC and the ECS by 5 %–7 % and 2 %–4 %, respectively, which potentially
has significant regional climate implications.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e601">Biomass burning (BB) is one of the main sources of aerosols, greenhouse
gases, and air pollutants (e.g., Ramanathan et al., 2007; Lin et al., 2009,
2014, Lin et al., 2013; Tang et al., 2003; Carmichael et al., 2003; Chi et al., 2010; Fu et al.,
2012; Chuang et al., 2016). Reid et al. (2013) and
Giglio et al. (2013) investigated the seasonal aerosol optical depth over
Southeast Asia and have indicated that Indochina is a major contributor of
carbon emissions in springtime. Galanter et al. (2000) estimated that BB
accounts for 15 %–30 % of the entire tropospheric CO background. Huang et al. (2013) indicated that the contribution of BB in Southeast Asia to the
aerosol optical depth (AOD) in Hong Kong and Taiwan could be in the range of
26 %–62 %. Moreover, BB emissions over Indochina are a significant
contributor to black carbon (BC), organic carbon (OC), and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in East
Asia (Lin et al., 2014). In their BB modeling study, Lin et al. (2014)
identified a northeast (NE) to southwest (SW) zone stretching from southern
China (SC) to Taiwan with a reduction in shortwave radiation of
approximately 20 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at the ground surface. In addition, the total
carbon emission from BB in Southeast Asia is approximately 91 Tg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" 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>, accounting for 4.9 % of the global total (Yadav et al., 2017).
According to Xu et al. (2018), BB in Indochina leads to BC production at
high concentrations of up to 2–6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" 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> in spring. The authors
reported that BC particles were transported to the glaciers in the Tibetan
Plateau, where it significantly affected the melting of the snow, causing
some severe environmental problems, such as water resource depletion. Ding
et al. (2021) indicated that BB aloft aerosols strongly increase the low
cloud coverage over both land and ocean and affect the monsoon in the
subtropical Southeast Asia.</p>
      <p id="d1e657">Although many researchers have indicated the importance of BB emissions,
their precise estimation and application in the modeling study remains
challenging (Fu et al., 2012; Huang et al., 2013; Pimonstree et al., 2018;
Marvin et al., 2021). For example, Heald et al. (2003) conducted an emission
inventory in Southeast Asia and reported that the uncertainties of BB
emission estimations could be a factor of 3 or even higher. Following an
inverse model analysis, Palmer et al. (2003) also indicated the
overestimation of regional BB emissions over Indochina. Shi and Yamaguchi (2014) pointed out BB emissions exhibited strong temporal interannual
variability between 2001 and 2010 over Southeast Asia. Satellite data can be
used to easily locate hotspots such as those where agricultural residual
burning and forest wildfires are occurring worldwide. However, accurately
quantifying the amount of BB emissions from satellite data is difficult,
because anthropogenic pollutants and BB emissions are typically mixed in the
atmosphere. During the NASA Transport and Chemical Evolution over the
Pacific (TRACE-P) aircraft mission in the spring of 2001, Jacob et al. (2003)
observed that warm conveyor belts (WCBs) lift both anthropogenic and BB
(from SE Asia) air pollution to the free troposphere, resulting in complex
chemical signatures. Wiedinmyer et al. (2011) demonstrated that the
uncertainty of emission estimation could be as high as a factor of 2 because
of the error introduced by estimates in fire hotspots, area burned, land
cover maps, biomass consumption, and emission factors in the model. In this
context, Lin et al. (2014) highlighted the uncertainty of emission
estimation in the first version of the Fire Inventory from NCAR (Wiedinmyer et
al., 2011).</p>
      <p id="d1e660">The transport of BB pollution is strongly dependent on the atmospheric
structure and weather conditions. Tang et al. (2003) noted that most BB
aerosols, having their source in Indochina (mainly south of 25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
and aloft to an altitude of 2000–4000 m) during the TRACE-P campaign
were associated with outflow in the WCB region after frontal passage. Lin et al. (2009) suggested a mountain lee-side trough as an important mechanism,
resulting in BB product transport from the surface to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m.
BB pollution is often transported from its sources to the East China Sea
(ECS), Taiwan, and the western North Pacific within a few days.</p>
      <p id="d1e682">The airborne field experiment Effect of Megacities on the transport
and transformation of pollutants on the Regional to Global scales (EMeRGe) over Asia
was led by the University of Bremen, Germany, and conducted in collaboration
with Academia Sinica during the intermonsoon<?pagebreak page2629?> period in 2018
(<uri>https://www.iup.uni-bremen.de/emerge/home/home.html</uri>, last access: 14 February 2023). The EMeRGe aircraft
mission consists of two parts. The first mission phase was conducted in
Germany in July 2017, and the second phase was conducted from Taiwan in 2018
(Andrés Hernández et al., 2022). EMeRGe in Asia aimed at
investigating the long-range transport (LRT) of local and regional
pollution originating in Asian major population centers (MPCs) from the
Asian continent into the Pacific. A central part of the project was the
airborne measurement of pollution plumes on board the <italic>High Altitude and Long Range Research Aircraft</italic> (<italic>HALO</italic>). The <italic>HALO</italic> platform was based in Tainan,
Taiwan (Fig. 1a–b), and made optimized transects and vertical profiling in
regions north or south of Taiwan, dependent on the relevant weather and
emission conditions. <italic>HALO</italic> measurements additionally provide important
information for the evaluation of the LRT of BB emissions and its potential
environmental impact in East Asia between 12 March and 7 April 2018. During
the EMeRGe-Asia campaign, <italic>HALO</italic> carried out 12 mission flights in Asia and 4
transfer flights from Europe to Asia with a total of 110 flight hours.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e707"><bold>(a)</bold> Configuration of the Weather Research and Forecasting model
domain, topography, and location of proposed study areas in East Asia,
namely Indochina area (IDCA), southern China area (SCA), Taiwan area (TWA),
and East China Sea area (ECSA). <bold>(b)</bold> The <italic>HALO</italic> flights on 17, 19,
22, 24, 26, and 30 March and 4 April during the EMeRGe-Asia campaign. Different
colors indicate different flights over East Asia. Maps and plots were
produced using the NCAR Command Language (NCL) version 6.6.2.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e724">This paper is organized as follows: the model configuration and BB emission
analysis employed in the model simulation are described in Sect. 2, and
the weather conditions and <italic>HALO</italic> measurement results are presented in Sect. 3. The model performance, as well as the evaluation of BB product transport
and effects on East-Asia-selected regions, are discussed in Sects. 4 and 5,
respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Aircraft data and model configuration</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><?xmltex \opttitle{\textit{HALO} aircraft data}?><title><italic>HALO</italic> aircraft data</title>
      <p id="d1e748">The <italic>HALO</italic> aircraft was equipped with a number of instruments, and a detailed
description of the measurement systems on board the <italic>HALO</italic> was presented in
Andrés Hernández et al. (2022). In this study, aerosol data (OA, BC,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" 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>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" 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>, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and trace gases such as
CO, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" 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="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, acetone (ACE), acetonitrile
(ACN), HCHO, HONO, and photolysis rate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were
employed in the analysis.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>WRF-Chem model and model configuration</title>
      <p id="d1e879">We used the Weather Research Forecasting with Chemistry (WRF-Chem) model
(v4.1.1) (Grell et al., 2005; Powers et al., 2017) to study the LRT of
air masses associated with BB pollutants in Indochina. The initial and
boundary meteorological conditions for WRF-Chem were obtained from the National
Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Global Data Assimilation System (GDAS) global analysis data sets
at 6 h intervals. The Mellor–Yamada–Janjic planetary boundary layer scheme
(Janjic, 1994) was applied. The horizontal resolution for the simulations
performed was 10 km, and the grid box had <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">442</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">391</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> points in the
east–west and north–south directions (Fig. 1a). A total of 41 vertical
levels were included, with the lowest level at an elevation of approximately
50 m. To improve the accuracy of the meteorological fields, a grid nudging
four-dimensional data assimilation scheme was applied using the NCEP-GDAS
global analysis data.</p>
      <p id="d1e894">The cloud microphysics used followed the Lin scheme (Morrison et al., 2005).
The rapid radiative transfer model (Zhao et al., 2011) was used for both
longwave and shortwave radiation schemes. Moreover, land surface processes
are simulated using the Noah LSM scheme (Hong et al., 2009). In terms of
transport processes, we considered advection by winds, convection by clouds,
and diffusion by<?pagebreak page2630?> turbulent mixing. The removal processes in this study were
gravitational settling, surface deposition, and wet deposition (scavenging
in convective updrafts and rainout or washout in large-scale precipitation).
The kinetic preprocessor (KPP) interface was used in both of the chemistry
schemes of the Regional Atmospheric Chemistry Mechanism (RACM, Stockwell et
al., 1990). The secondary organic aerosol formation module, the Modal
Aerosol Dynamics Model for Europe (Ackermann et al., 1998) with the volatility basis
set (VBS) approach (Ahmadov et al., 2012), was also employed in the WRF-Chem model. In
RACM, the “KET” represents acetone and higher saturated ketones (KET)
(Stockwell et al., 1997). According to Singh et al. (1994), BB and the
primary anthropogenic emissions could contribute 26 % and 3 %,
respectively, to the atmospheric acetone sources. The model configuration
and physics and chemistry options are listed in Table 1.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e900">WRF-Chem model configuration and physics and chemistry options in
this study (rapid radiative transfer model for general circulation
models: RRTMG; Fire Inventory from National Center for Atmospheric
Research: FINN).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="7cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="7cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Resolution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10 km</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Microphysics</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Lin</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cumulus parameterization</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Grell 3D ensemble scheme</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Planetary boundary layer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mellor–Yamada–Janjic TKE scheme</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Longwave radiation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RRTMG</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Shortwave radiation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RRTMG</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fire emissions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">FINNv1.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Anthropogenic emissions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">MICS-Asia III (2010) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> Taiwan Emission Data System v9.0 (2013)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Biogenic emissions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">MEGAN v2.04</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chemistry option</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">RACM chemistry with MADE/VBS aerosols using KPP library along with the volatility basis set (VBS) used for secondary organic aerosols</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Photolysis option</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Madronich</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Wet scavenging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On (Neu and Prather, 2012)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cloud chemistry</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Feedback from the aerosols to the radiation schemes</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Time interval for calling the biomass burning plume <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>rise subroutine</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">180 min</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Feedback from the parameterized convection to the <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>atmospheric radiation and the photolysis schemes</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Subgrid-scale wet scavenging</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Subgrid aqueous chemistry</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">On</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Emission inventories</title>
      <p id="d1e1101">Anthropogenic emissions, such as NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, nonmethane volatile
organic compounds, sulfate, nitrate, 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>, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, were adopted
on the basis of the emission inventory in Asia – MICS-Asia III, which is the
year in 2010 (Li et al., 2020; Kong et al., 2020). For BB emissions FINNv1.5
(<uri>https://www.acom.ucar.edu/Data/fire/</uri>, last access: 14 February 2023) was employed. FINN provided daily,
1000 m resolution global estimates of the trace gas and particle emissions
from open BB, which included wildfires, agricultural fires, and prescribed
burning but not biofuel use and trash burning (Wiedinmyer et al., 2011). The
anthropogenic emissions in Taiwan were obtained from the Taiwan Emission
Data System (TEDS) which is the emission inventory of the air-pollutant
monitoring database of the Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration.
The TEDS version used for this study was v9.0 (2013) and contained data on
eight primary atmospheric pollutants: CO, NO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, O<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>,
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</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="d1e1200"><bold>(a)</bold> MODIS fire hotspots on 17 March 2018 (source: <uri>https://modis-fire.umd.edu/guides.html</uri>, last access: 14 February 2023) and <bold>(b)</bold> composited aerosol optical
depth (AOD) from MODIS on board NASA's Terra satellite. The collection 6.1 AOD
is downloaded from NASA's Earthdata website
(<uri>https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/learn/find-data</uri>, last access: 14 February 2023) and composted for 01:10,
01:15, 01:20, 01:25, 01:30, 02:50, 02:55, 03:00, 03:05, 03:10, 04:30, 04:35, 04:40,
04:45, 06:10, 06:15, 06:20, 07:45, and 07:50 UTC data granules on 17 March 2018. <bold>(c)</bold> Weather chart at 06:00 UTC on 17 March 2018, <bold>(d)</bold> 1000 hPa streamlines at
06:00 UTC on 17 March 2018, <bold>(e)</bold> and <bold>(f)</bold> are the same as <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold> but on 19 March
2018, <bold>(g)</bold> 700 hPa streamlines at 06:00 UTC on 17 March 2018, <bold>(h)</bold> 700 hPa
geopotential height at 06:00 UTC on 17 March 2018, <bold>(i)</bold> and <bold>(j)</bold>  are the same as <bold>(g)</bold> and <bold>(h)</bold> but on 19 March 2018. Near-surface weather charts and satellite
images were provided by the Central Weather Bureau (CWB), Taiwan. The
near-surface and 700 hPa streamlines and geopotential height were deduced
from NCEP Reanalysis data. Maps and plots were produced using the NCAR Command
Language (NCL) version 6.6.2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Characteristics of the field experiment</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>MODIS aerosol optical depth and weather conditions</title>
      <p id="d1e1274">Figure 2a and b visualize the numerous fire hotspots and high aerosol
optical depth on 17 March 2018 registered by the MODIS satellite. Indeed, a
large number of BB fire hotspots frequently occurred over Indochina during
the springtime (Fig. S1a in the Supplement) and the EMeRGe-Asia campaign
(Fig. S1b). Nevertheless, a relatively weaker forest fire activity in the year 2018 (Figure S1a) was observed over Indochina compared to the other years between 2011 and 2020. On 17 March 2018 at 06:00 UTC (14:00 LT;
LT <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> UTC <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 08:00) the weather data indicated a series of high-pressure
systems in northern China and a separate high-pressure system over the Japan
Sea (Fig. 2c). At 1000 hPa, a strong northerly continental outflow was
identified over southern Japan, the ECS, and Taiwan (Fig. 2d). On 19 March
2018, a new frontal system was located from Korea to the Guangdong province
in SC (Fig. 2e). On the same day at 06:00 UTC, a discontinued flow was
identified at the frontal zone to the north of Taiwan in the ECS (Fig. 2f).
In other words, Taiwan was located at the prefrontal and warm conveyor area
due to the surrounding southerly flow on 19 March 2018 at 06:00 UTC (Fig. 2e and f, respectively). The southerly wind was gradually replaced by the
northeasterly after another frontal passage on 20 March 2018 at 00:00 UTC
(data not shown).</p>
      <p id="d1e1291">In the upper layer (700 hPa; Fig. 2g–j), the flow pattern differed from
that at the near-ground surface (1000 hPa; Fig. 2d and f). A southwesterly
strong wind, coming from the east side of the Tibetan Plateau in SC, moving
to the northeast i.e., Korea, is converted to a polar front wave flow in
northeastern China and Korea on 17 March 2018 (Fig. 2g). This high-elevation
northward strong wind belt distribution at 700 hPa was associated with a
corresponding lee-side trough at the east of the Tibetan Plateau, whereas a
ridge was noted over the east coast of China on the same day (Fig. 2h).
Consistent with the mechanism reported by Lin et al. (2009), once a
significant lee-side trough formed, it provided favorable conditions for the
upward motion over the lee side of the Tibetan Plateau and brought BB
emissions to the free troposphere layer following the strong wind belt
transport to the downwind area. After the weather system moved to the east,
the north–south trough turned to SW–NE such that the strong wind belt was
in an approximately SW–NE direction and located between 20 and 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N on 19 March 2018 (Fig. 2i and j). In conclusion, the
Indochina BB pollutants were driven by the strong wind belt from Indochina,
northward to SC on 17 March 2018 and then eastward passing over Taiwan
between 20 and 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N to the south of Japan on 19 March 2018.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1314">Simulated wind field (m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> distribution and concentration
(unit: ppb) difference with and without BB emission for CO on 17 March 2018
at 00:00 UTC <bold>(a, c)</bold> and 12:00 UTC <bold>(b, d)</bold> at a 1 km altitude <bold>(a, b)</bold> and 3 km
altitude <bold>(c, d)</bold> (unit: ppb). <bold>(e)</bold> The results of the HYSPLIT model backward-trajectory analysis at 1000 m with multiple points by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the area (17.5–22.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 110–115<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) of the
East China Sea started at 00:00 UTC, 17 March 2018.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Characteristics of LRT BB to the ECS by the WRF-Chem model</title>
      <p id="d1e1400">Figure 3 shows latitude–longitude plots of the simulated CO concentration
differences with and without BB emission at an elevation of 1000 m (Fig. 3a), mainly in Indochina, SC, and the South China Sea on 17 March 2018. The
ambient flow was easterly and then northward from the South China Sea to SC
at a 1000 m elevation between 00:00 and 12:00 UTC on 17 March 2018 (Fig. 3a–b). To identify the high CO concentration in the South China Sea at 1000 m in Fig. 3a and b, the HYSPLIT (Stein et al., 2021) backward
trajectories with multiple points by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the area
(17.5–22.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 110–115<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) in the South China Sea
started at 00:00 UTC, 17 March 2018, as shown in Fig. 3e. The locations and
dates of fire hotspots were distributed randomly in the Indochina Peninsula as
shown in Fig. S1c. The backward trajectories in the
South China Sea indicated air masses<?pagebreak page2631?> mainly transported 48–72 h and even 96 h. In other words, there could be contributions by fires occurring between 12–20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and
100–110<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E (Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam) during 13–15
March 2018. The BB plume accumulated and persisted for an extended period in
the lower part of the boundary layer on 17 and 19 March 2018 (Figs. 3a–b,
and 4a–b). In contrast, the high CO concentration followed the southwesterly
or westerly strong wind belt (Figs. 3c–d and 4c–d) and its weather
conditions (Fig. 2) at an elevation of 3000 m (700 hPa). Following the
movement of the ridge and trough at the 700 hPa geopotential height (Fig. 2h
and j), the associated strong wind belt turned to move eastward in the
SW–NE direction between 17 and 19 March 2018. The BB plume transport over
Indochina was affected by a fast-moving strong flow at 700 hPa (Fig. 2g and
i), shifting the plume toward Taiwan and the ECS, during 17–19 March 2018.
The backward trajectories in the East China Sea (ECS) started at 04:00 UTC on
19 March 2018 at 3000 m, indicating air masses mainly transported 48–72 h and
even 96 h (15–17 March) ago from Indochina as shown in Fig. 4e. The
highest CO concentration contributed by the BB plume was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb, originally sourced from Indochina, and it was mainly transported
northward on 17 March 2018 (Fig. 3c–d) and then covered a large area in
East Asia at a CO concentration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb on 19 March 2018
(Fig. 4c–d). Figure 5 indicates simulation differences for the
contribution of BB along an E–W cross section at 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N at 16:00 UTC on 18 March 2018 (Fig. 5a) and 06:00 UTC on 19 March 2018 (Fig. 5b). We
noted a strong wind at 2000 m elevation and a high CO concentration
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb) due to BB at the BPTL. Moreover, the CO concentration
attributed to BB was low at the elevation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m on 19 March
at 06:00 UTC (Fig. 5b), showing that the BB pollutants mainly affect
altitudes below 4000 m.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1509">Simulated wind field (m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and concentration (unit: ppb)
difference with and without BB emission for CO on 19 March 2018 at 00:00 UTC <bold>(e, g)</bold> and 12:00 UTC <bold>(f, h)</bold> at a 1 km altitude <bold>(e, f)</bold> and 3 km altitude <bold>(g, h)</bold>. <bold>(e)</bold> The results of the HYSPLIT model backward-trajectory analysis at
300 m with multiple points by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the area
(28–33<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 122–130<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) of the East China Sea started at
04:00 UTC, 19 March 2018.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1589">Simulated wind field (m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> distribution and the
concentration (ppb) difference with and without BB emission for CO
at cross section 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, <bold>(a)</bold> 16:00 UTC, 18 March 2018 and <bold>(b)</bold> 06:00 UTC,
19 March 2018. Wind vectors represent along-section winds, with scales shown
at the down-right corner of plot (unit: m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Aircraft measurements</title>
      <?pagebreak page2633?><p id="d1e1651">Two <italic>HALO</italic> flights were scheduled to the ECS to measure the pollutants
following the continental outflow; the flights departed on 17 (Fig. 6a) and
19 (Fig. 7a) March 2018 and followed similar tracks. To indicate the
measurement results along the flight path, the 1 min average data are shown
in Figs. 6b and 7b. On 17 March 2018, the flight departed from Tainan
(Fig. 1b) at 01:09 UTC (09:09 LT) first southbound and then northward to the
ECS (Fig. 6a). The elevation for sample collection was mainly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, where the CO concentration was found to be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">200</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb in most
cases on that day (Fig. 6b). At elevations between 2000 and 4000 m, the
concentration of the major aerosol components (i.e., OA, BC,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" 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>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" 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>, and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was mostly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" 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>, except just above western Taiwan after 08:00 UTC
(Fig. 6a–d). The peak concentrations for OA, BC, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" 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="M86" 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="M87" 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> were 3.4, 1.2, 2.1, and 0.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, at the altitude between 2000 and 4000 m.
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" 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> demonstrated the highest concentration among the aerosol
components, especially during 04:00–04:37 and 05:48–06:15 UTC (peaking at
5.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> when the flight was north of 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and at an
elevation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (Fig. 6a–c). This result could be
attributed to anthropogenic pollution from the continental outflow (C.-Y. Lin et al., 2012) or probably a part from Japan contributed to the high sulfate
concentration in the boundary layer over the ECS. As for the trace gases
such as ACE, ACN, and O<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>, their concentrations between 2000 and 4000 m
were ranging between 1–2, 0.1–0.3, and 60–70 ppb (Fig. 6b),
respectively, implying minor influence over the ECS by the BB plume in this
flight. Figure 6e illustrates the 96 h backward trajectories, which
identified the air mass origin starting at 02:00 UTC, followed by 04:00,
06:00, and 09:00 UTC. The continental outflow contributed to higher sulfate
concentrations (3–5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 33<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) at 04:00 and
06:00 UTC (Fig. 6b, c, and e) at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m along the flight path.
In contrast, south of 25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and above Taiwan, the local pollution
and continental outflow are dominating sources on 17 March 2018.</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="d1e1927"><bold>(a)</bold> The <italic>HALO</italic> flight and detailed locations on 17 March 2018. <bold>(b)</bold> Flight altitude and 1 min mean of observed concentrations for CO (upper),
organic aerosol (OA), BC aerosol (BC), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" 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>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" 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>,
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" 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> (middle), O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, acetone (ACE), and acetonitrile (ACN)
(bottom) on 17 March. <bold>(c)</bold> The observed SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" 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> mass concentration by
<italic>HALO</italic> along with height–latitude variations on 17 March 2018. <bold>(d)</bold> The observed
OA mass concentration by <italic>HALO</italic> along with height–latitude variations on 17
March 2018. <bold>(e)</bold> Result of the HYSPLIT model backward-trajectory analysis
started at the location of the <italic>HALO</italic> flight path at 02:00, 04:00, 06:00, and
09:00 UTC on 17 March 2018.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page2634?><p id="d1e2027">The <italic>HALO</italic> flight on 19 March 2018 departed at 00:19 UTC (08:19 LT). It was
bound northward and sampled air at an altitude of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m most of
the time, as shown in Fig. 7a and b. Figure 7c and d indicate the
latitude–height variation of SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" 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 OA mass concentrations
along the flight path on 19 March 2018. As the flight left Taiwan, it
maintained an elevation of 3000 m during 01:00–02:00 UTC (Fig. 7a, 121–126<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E) and then descended to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m during 02:00–02:40 UTC (Fig. 7b). The OA mass concentration was higher at 3000 m than at the
low altitude during 01:00–03:00 UTC (Fig. 7b and d). In particular, CO,
OA, and BC exhibited a substantial peak concentration of 312 ppb and 6.4 and 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 01:54 and 02:51 UTC at 26<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 125–126<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E and an altitude of 2000–4000 m,
where a BPTL was observed. The trace gases such as ACE, ACN, and even
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 7b) have consistent peak times in the BPTL with concentrations
of 3.0, 0.6, and 79 ppb, respectively. In this flight,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" 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> had the second-highest concentration among the aerosol
components (1–2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" 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>; Fig. 7b and c) upstream of Taiwan
(25–27<inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) during 01:00–03:00 UTC.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e2173"><bold>(a)</bold> The <italic>HALO</italic> flight and detailed locations on 19 March. <bold>(b)</bold> Flight
altitude and 1 min mean of observed concentrations for CO (upper), organic
aerosol (OA), BC aerosol (BC), SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" 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>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" 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>,
NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" 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> (middle), O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, acetone (ACE), and acetonitrile (ACN) (bottom)
on 19 March 2018. <bold>(c)</bold> The observed SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" 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> mass concentration by
<italic>HALO</italic> along with height–latitude variations on 19 March 2018. <bold>(d)</bold> The observed
OA mass concentration by <italic>HALO</italic> along with height–latitude variations on 19
March 2018. <bold>(e)</bold> Result of the HYSPLIT model backward-trajectory analysis
started at the location of the <italic>HALO</italic> flight path at 02:00, 04:00, 05:00, and
07:00 UTC on 19 March 2018.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2273">In the northern part of the flight between 03:00 and 05:00 UTC at an
elevation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, the aerosol component concentrations were
all at their lowest level (Fig. 7b–d). During 05:00–07:00 UTC, the <italic>HALO</italic>
aircraft flew back southward to 25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, where high OA mass
concentrations appeared again between 2000 and 4000 m (Fig. 7a, b, and d). Sulfate was the species with the highest concentration between 05:30
and 06:30 UTC (Fig. 7b and c) when the flight's elevation was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m in the lower boundary between 25 and 27<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N (upstream of
Taiwan). The reason for explaining this observation is that the transport of
anthropogenic pollutants of continental origin takes place mainly in the
boundary layer (Fig. 7b–d). Other aerosol species, such as NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" 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>
and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" 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>, demonstrated low concentrations, except when the
elevation was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, where they ranged up to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" 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>
(Fig. 7b).</p>
      <p id="d1e2372">The 96 h HYSPLIT backward trajectory starting from the flight locations at
02:00–07:00 UTC (Fig. 7e) indicated that<?pagebreak page2635?> the air masses at elevations
between 2000 and 4000 m were potentially transported from Indochina. North
of 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and at altitudes of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m at 04:00 UTC,
the concentrations of air pollutants (including OA, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" 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>,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" 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>, and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were low (Fig. 7b and e) even though
the air mass in the lower boundary was sourced from SC and the Taiwan Strait.
In general, the BPTL was mainly located south of 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N as
presented by Carmichael et al. (2003) and Tang et al. (2003). However, the
ACN still could be around 300 ppt or less as the flight at the north of 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N (during 03:30–04:30 UTC) and could be recognized as the
contribution of BB (Förster et al., 2022). In other words, it might still
have BB products being transported to the north of 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N under favorable
weather conditions, although the ACN concentration was low compared to the
south of it at the layer of the BPTL (between 2000 and 4000 m). The fact that
higher OA was observed  in the higher altitudes rather than in the lower
boundary also demonstrated the vertical distribution over the ECS.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e2465">Observed vertical distribution calculated as 1 min mean and 500 m interval with 1 standard deviation of the concentrations for the mean
profiles (red) (including 17, 19, 22, 24, 26, and 30 March and 4 April 2018)
and flights on 17 (blue) and 19 (green) March 2018. <bold>(a)</bold> CO, <bold>(b)</bold> OA, <bold>(c)</bold> BC, <bold>(d)</bold> acetonitrile (ACN), <bold>(e)</bold> acetone (ACE), <bold>(f)</bold> O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(g)</bold>  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(h)</bold> NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. The number of data points is shown in the right panel.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=312.980315pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2536">Figure 8 displays the vertical distribution of the gases and major aerosol
components found on the flights on 17 (blue) and 19 (green) March 2018, as
well as the mean concentrations noted in the seven flights (on 17, 19, 22,
24, 26, and 30 March and 4 April 2018; red) to the ECS during EMeRGe-Asia.
Figure 8 illustrates all profiles calculated as 1 min mean and every 500 m
interval with 1 standard deviation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The number of the
data points is displayed on the right side of each figure. The mean CO
concentration profile demonstrated a decreasing trend from 240 ppb near the
ground to 150 ppb at an altitude of 2500 m and 140–160 ppb at altitudes
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (Fig. 8a). The concentration for 17 March 2018 (flight
F0317) was similar to the mean concentration profile, except for that at the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m elevation in the lower boundary. However, a higher CO
concentration (40–80 ppb) enhancement was noted on 19 March 2018 (flight
F0319) than in the mean profile and flight F0317. The mean difference in CO
concentration between flights F0319 and F0317 was as high as 80 ppb at an
elevation of 3000–3500 m (Fig. 8a). Similarly, OA concentration was
significantly higher in the BPTL vertical distribution in flight F0319 than
in the mean profile and flight F0317 (Fig. 8b). The mean OA concentration
for flight F0319 peaked at an elevation of 2000–2500 m, increasing to 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" 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> more than in the mean profile and flight F0317. Other
aerosol components such as SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" 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="M150" 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="M151" 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> (Fig. S2a–c) also had a similar vertical
distribution trend, but the concentration differences were minor compared
with OA concentrations. The magnitude of the maximum differences between
flights F0319 and F0317 in the BPTL was 1.3, 0.7, and 0.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
for SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" 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="M155" 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="M156" 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>, respectively. The
maximum  concentration difference of BC can be as high as 1.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 2000–2500 m between  flights F0319 and F0317 (Fig. 8c).
Regarding the variations in ACN (Fig. 8d) and ACE (Fig. 8e) in the BPTL,
their maximum mean concentrations in flight F0319 were higher than those
in the profile of flight F0317 by 0.18 and 0.9 ppb, respectively. In
other words, flight F0319 had a more significant impact on the CO, OA, BC,
and volatile organic compound (VOC) species such as ACN and ACE in the BPTL,
which might account for the effect of BB emission transport from Indochina.
The ozone concentration was lower in both flights F0317 and F0319 than in
the mean profile at the elevations <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (Fig. 8f). The ozone
titration by NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lower boundary might also play a role. However,
it was approximately 5–7 ppb higher in flight F0319 than in  flight
F0317 between the elevations of 1500 and 3000 m. In their downwind area, LRT
of BB emissions might increase this concentration further at the BPTL (Tang
et al., 2003; Lin et al., 2014), and this is also discussed in Sect. 4. By
contrast, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value [<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>] (Fig. 8g) was higher for flight F0317
than for F0319 in the elevation range 1000–3000 m,<?pagebreak page2636?> in line with high
aerosol concentrations and associated cloud enhancement that typically lead
to decreased photolysis frequencies (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Tang et al., 2003).
Figure S3 indicated the aircraft measurement for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN; at a constant instrument
supersaturation of 0.38 %) along the flight on 19 March 2018. The CCN
number concentration (per cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was consistently increased with the
aerosol species (such as OA) as the flight passed through the BPTL
(2000–4000 m). Consistently, at altitudes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m the presence
of clouds below the aircraft led to greater <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values.</p>
      <?pagebreak page2637?><p id="d1e2833">The concentrations of other species such as NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 8h) and HONO
(Fig. S2d) were also greater in flight F0317 than in flight
F0319 by 0.4–1.2 ppb and 10–34 ppt, respectively, in the lower boundary
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1500</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m). At the BPTL, the concentration of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (1–2 ppb) in
the flight F0319 was higher than in the flight F0317, but the difference was
less than 0.6 ppb. The results from the TRACE-P campaign, which examined the
Asian outflow of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, also demonstrated large increases in NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentrations (0.5–1 ppb) downwind from Asia. The NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> consisted mainly
of HNO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and peroxyacetyl nitrate (Miyazaki et al., 2003; Talbot et al.,
2003).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2904">Observed (OBS_ave) and simulated (SIM_ave) mean values for bias (BIAS), root mean
square error (RMSE), and correlation coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) for EMeRGe <italic>HALO</italic>
flights on 17 and 19 March 2018. KET<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>: the observed acetone is applied to
compare with simulated ketones (KET).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.92}[.92]?><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">OBS_ave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">SIM_ave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">BIAS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RMSE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">THETA(K)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">304.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">304.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.99</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">WS (m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.94</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RH (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">63.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">62.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.92</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OA (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.74</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.42</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.31</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.49</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">170.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">191.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">20.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">72.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.45</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.55</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">59.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">63.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.43</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.72</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.03</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">KET<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.59</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">TOL (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.75</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XYL (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.40</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCHO (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HONO (ppt)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">15.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.56</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Simulation results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Model performance and BB transport identification</title>
      <?pagebreak page2639?><p id="d1e3631">Tables 2 and 3 and Fig. 9 plot the Pearson correlation coefficients between
5 min merged observations on board the <italic>HALO</italic> and the simulation for flights
F0317 and F0319. Meteorological parameters such as potential temperature
(theta), relative humidity (RH), and wind speed (WS) were all captured well
by the model along the <italic>HALO</italic> flight path during the 2 d. The correlation
coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) for meteorological parameters was high, ranging from 0.92 to
0.99 (Table 2). The strong correlation indicates the high representativeness
of the reanalysis of meteorological data used in the simulation. Among the
trace species and aerosol components, toluene (TOL), NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, OA,
ketones (KET), HONO, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and HCHO demonstrated an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (good correlation), and CO and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> showed an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of nearly 0.5 (Table 2). The simulation performance was investigated in the BL (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m;
Fig. 9) at 2000–4000 m altitude (Table 3 and Fig. 9) and for the whole
period of both flights (Table 2 and Fig. 9; blue dot). Even in the BPTL, the
simulated meteorological parameters presented a good correlation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), followed by OA, BC, KET, CO, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, as well
as NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" 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="M214" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Table 3). In other
words, at the BPTL, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for the simulation significantly increased for OA,
BC, CO, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and KET (Tables 2 and 3 and Fig. 9), which are
indicators for BB being a source of pollution in the model. In contrast,
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" 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>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" 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>, SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, TOL, XYL, HCHO, and HONO
had better correlation in the lower part of the boundary layer, at altitudes
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (see Fig. 9) than in the BPTL. We explain this by the
transport of anthropogenic pollutants in the continental outflow in the
lower part of the boundary layer in the ECS.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3858">Observed (OBS_ave) and simulated (SIM_ave) mean values at an elevation between 2 and
4 km for bias (BIAS), root mean square error (RMSE), and correlation
coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) during EMeRGe <italic>HALO</italic> flights on 17 and 19 March 2018. KET<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>: the observed acetone is applied to compare with simulated ketones (KET).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.91}[.91]?><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">OBS_ave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">SIM_ave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">BIAS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RMSE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">THETA (K)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">307.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">306.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.98</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">WS (m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.93</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RH (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">55.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">56.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.96</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OA (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.85</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.79</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.20</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.13</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" 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> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.52</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">164.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">228.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">64.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">85.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.58</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.07</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">60.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">72.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">15.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.55</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.53</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">KET<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.70</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">TOL (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.16</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">XYL (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.17</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCHO (ppb)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.25</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HONO (ppt)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.23</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e4579">Correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) between observation and simulation
along with the <italic>HALO</italic> flights at the elevations 0–1 km and 2–4 km and the whole
track (all) on 17 and 19 March 2018.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4599">The modeling results tended to overestimate the concentration of the
species, with examples being CO (64 ppb), OA (0.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC
(0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (12.5 ppb; Table 3) in the BPTL.
Because high concentrations of CO, BC, and OA in the BPTL are accurate indicators
of BB in the model, the BB emission from the source of FINN data is
probably also overestimated (Lin et al., 2014). Except for OA and BC, the
correlations for other aerosol components such as NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" 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> and
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" 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> were poor (0.13 and 0.2, respectively). The poor correlation
for 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> may result from the large uncertainty in the emission of
SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4709">Because the meteorological parameters were simulated well, the simulation
discrepancies for chemical species are either caused by the emission
estimation uncertainties or by inaccuracies in the simulation of chemical
oxidation processes during LRT. Because CO, OA, and BC are accurate
indicators of simulated BB transport from Indochina (Carmichael et al., 2003),
the airborne measurements on board the <italic>HALO</italic> are used as reference to
evaluate the performance of the model for  flight F0319 (Fig.10). The
5 min merged simulation of CO concentration with (blue line) and without
(green line) BB was compared to that measured on board the <italic>HALO</italic> (red line);
the concentration was mostly in the range of 100–200 ppb, with its peak
approaching 300 ppb (at 01:50, 02:50, and 04:00 UTC) at the BPTL (Fig. 10a).
In general, the simulation captured the CO variation along the flight path.
However, it overestimated the observations by nearly 100 ppb for the
simulation with BB at the BPTL during 01:00–02:00, 03:40–04:20,
05:00–05:40, and 06:30–07:20 UTC (Fig. 10a). Notably, the simulation
difference was minor when the flight was in the lower part of the boundary
layer (02:30 and 06:00 UTC) i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m or at elevations of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (03:00–03:30 and 04:20–05:00 UTC). The model
underestimated CO concentration in the lower part of the boundary (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) (02:30 and 05:50–06:30 UTC) over<?pagebreak page2640?> the ECS. In conclusion, our model
simulation overestimates BB emissions but underestimates continental CO
emissions from China due to the underestimation of the emission inventory of
the MICS-Asia III (Kong et al.,2020) that was adopted in this study.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e4750">Observed (OBS, red) and simulated concentrations (CTRL, blue) and
the simulation without indirect effect (ROCD, purple), without BB emission
(noBB, green) along with the flight altitude for <bold>(a)</bold> CO (ppb), <bold>(b)</bold> OA
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(c)</bold> BC (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on 19 March 2018.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=204.859843pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4815">OA and BC are also important BB indicators and were reasonably captured by
the model before 03:00 UTC when the flight was south of 28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N at
elevations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (Fig. 10b–c). The time series of simulated OA
and BC has peak concentrations of nearly 4–5.5 and 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, during <italic>HALO</italic> shuttle flights passing
through the BPTL (2000–4000 m) around 01:50 and 02:50 UTC. When BB emission
was not included in the simulation, the concentration peaks were not
observed (see Fig. 10b–c, green plot). Similar to the simulated CO results,
the simulated OA and BC overestimate the amounts of these species to the
north of 28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N during 03:30–04:20 UTC (Figs. 7a and 10).
Furthermore, when the simulation only considered direct effect (case ROCD,
purple), the overestimations were increased as shown in Fig. 10b–c. As
mentioned earlier, a frontal system was just located from the ECS to SC
(Fig. 2e) on 19 March 2018. In other words, the effect of wet scavenging
reduced the aerosol concentration bias in the ECS and SC, as for the frontal
system providing the moist air mass in the event flight F0319.
After 07:30 UTC in Fig. 10, the simulation high concentration was related to local emissions  over western Taiwan before <italic>HALO</italic> landed in Tainan. In general, our model simulation
captured  OA and BC reasonably well with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.61 and 0.74, respectively.
A minor mean bias for OA (BC) is 0.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" 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> (0.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the root mean square error (RMSE) of OA (BC) is 1.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" 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> (0.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Table 2). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for OA (BC) reached
0.85 (0.79), with an RMSE of 0.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" 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> (0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
when we calculated the BB transport layer only between 2000 and 4000 m (Table 3 and Fig. 9). In addition to OA and BC, simulated aerosol species
such as SO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" 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> were overestimated, whereas NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" 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> was
underestimated, although their concentrations were low (Table 3). Because the
BPTL was mainly between altitudes of 2000 and 4000 m, the subsequent
discussion focuses on the influence of the BPTL from Indochina on the
downstream areas, particularly the ECS and Taiwan.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e5047">Hourly variation of simulated mean concentration (red) and
contribution by BB (%, blue) between 2 and 4 km over the region ECSA in
Fig. 1a during 15–19 March 2018. <bold>(a)</bold> CO, <bold>(b)</bold> OA <bold>(c)</bold> BC, <bold>(d)</bold> PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<bold>(e)</bold> O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(f)</bold> OH, <bold>(g)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(h)</bold> HCHO.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e5122">Simulated biomass burning contribution (with and without BB
emission in Indochina) in percentage (%) on 17 and 19 March 2018 for
different regions: SCA, TWA, and ECSA as shown in Fig. 1a.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">SCA </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">TWA </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">ECSA </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Average</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2–4 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2–4 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2–4 km</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">13.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">72.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">39.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">83.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">14.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">69.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">58.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">71.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">51.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">46.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">55.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">34.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">41.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">48.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">28.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">79.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">81.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">47.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">OH</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">43.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">67.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">9.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">48.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" 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">18.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">34.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">23.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">39.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">9.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CO</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">38.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">11.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">32.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">KET</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">17.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">27.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">24.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCHO</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">20.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">10.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">35.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">23.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page2641?><sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Effects of LRT BB plume from Indochina on East Asia</title>
      <p id="d1e5656">To investigate the regional impacts of BB plume transport from Indochina, we
compared the simulation with and without BB emission for the events on 17
and 19 March 2018. The analysis of the calculations focused on the impact
over SC, Taiwan, and the ECS. These three selected regions are the SCA (in South
China), TWA (covered the whole Taiwan), and ECSA (in the ECS) as shown in
Fig. 1a. After being emitted the BB pollutants from Indochina were then
transported northward to China and subsequently northeastward. The exact
flow pattern depended on the weather conditions and flow types (ridge or
trough) at 700 hPa (3000 m)<?pagebreak page2642?> between 17 and 19 March 2018 (see Fig. 2).
Consequently, we investigated the hourly variation in the area mean
concentrations or mixing ratios of air pollutant trace constituents to
assess the importance of BB emissions from Indochina on the selected
downstream region e.g., the ECSA (Fig. 11), SCA, TWA, and ECSA (Table 4). The
contribution of CO (or other species) due to BB was estimated by the
difference between simulations with and without the BB emission. These
differences are then expressed as a fraction in percentage shown in Fig. 11 (blue line). The mean concentration of CO (red line) over the ECSA (Fig. 11a) was at its lowest (115 ppb) on 17 March 2018; it gradually increased to
a peak concentration of 280 ppb on 18 March 2018 and then remained stable at
260 ppb on 19 March 2018. The contribution of CO from BB (blue line) ranged
from 19 % (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb) on 17 March 2018 to a peak of 42 %
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">113</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ppb) on 18 March 2018 and then gradually declined to 26 % on 19 March 2018 (Fig. 11a). As for OA (BC), the lowest percent
contribution by BB was 14 %–16 % (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) between 16 and 17 March
2018, while the highest could be more than 40 % (80 %) during 18 and 19
March 2018 (Fig. 11b and c). The BB contribution to PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> was 19 %
(0.39 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on 17 March 2018 (Fig. 11d), increasing to 45 %
(3.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on 18–19 March 2018, because the BB plume was spread by
the strong wind to the ECSA.</p>
      <p id="d1e5745">The variation of O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 11e) depends on transport and photochemistry,
which involve the precursors NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and VOC and the photolysis frequency
of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For the elevations between 2000–4000 m, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
changes are similar to those of CO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and KET, which were mainly
contributed by the LRT BB plume and related to the ozone precursor after 18
March 2018. The lowest and highest O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations on 17 and 18 March
2018 were 56 and 75 ppb, respectively, of which we estimate that 5.6 ppb (10 %) and 34 ppb (45 %) were BB's contributions, respectively. Although
the mean NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration was relatively small (0.06–0.18 ppb), the
BB contributed 35 %–70 % (0.02–0.13 ppb) during 17–19 March 2018
(Fig. S4a). The KET concentration was in the range of 0.4 to 2.7 ppb, with BB contributing nearly 20 %–26 % (0.08–0.7 ppb) during 17–19
March 2018 (Fig. S4b).</p>
      <p id="d1e5829">The area mean OH contributed by BB increased from its lowest level
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) on 17 March 2018 to its highest (nearly 70 %) on 19
March 2018 (Fig. 11f). HO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> also has an increasing trend from 10 % to
40 % during daytime over the period 17–19 March 2018 (Fig. S4c). The amounts of the oxidizing agent, OH, and the free radical HO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
depend on the amounts of trace gases, which produce and remove these
radicals (e.g., NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, water vapor, ozone, hydrocarbons), and the
relevant photolysis frequencies <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> etc.
However, BB's contribution to photolysis frequencies (O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" 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>
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>D) (Fig. 10g), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. S4d) etc. decreased as
the mean BB aerosol concentration increased over the ECS during 17–19 March
2018. This is because photolysis calculation results used simulated aerosol
and cloud formation, which increased over the ECSA (Fig. 13).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e5954">Boxplots of simulated BB influences (%) on NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, OA, BC, OH, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, KET, HCHO, HO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over the region ECSA in Fig. 1a on 17 and 19 March 2018. <bold>(a)</bold> Below 1 km and <bold>(b)</bold> between 2 and 4 km.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6034">The NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mean concentration ranged from 1.0 to 4.5 ppb, of which BB's
contribution was from 55 % to 82 % (Fig. S4e). Such a high
contribution from BB also demonstrated the effects of long-distance
transport. Figure 11h indicates an increasing trend of HCHO concentration
from 17 to 19 March 2018. HCHO formation and destruction depend on the rate
of reaction of OH with HCHO precursors and the rate of reaction of HCHO with
OH and the photolysis frequency of HCHO. As a result, HCHO production varied
with OH concentration. The lowest and highest concentrations of HCHO were on
17 and 19 March 2018, respectively. In summary, the consistent variations in
BB contributions to CO, OA, BC, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, OH, HCHO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> peaked on 18 or 19 March 2018, whereas <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased
between 17 and 19 March 2018.</p>
      <p id="d1e6102">Figure 12 displays the fraction in % that the long-range transported BB
emission contributes to the amounts of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, OA,
BC, OH, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, KET, HO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, HCHO, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over the ECSA on
17 and 19 March 2018. Except for NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BB contribution was generally
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % at elevations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m over the ECSA. The
scatter distribution of the simulation results indicates that the effect of
BB emission at elevations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m (Fig. 12a) was significantly
lower than that between the elevations of 2000 and 4000 m (Fig. 12b). For
NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, OH,<?pagebreak page2643?> O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and CO, the BB contribution
was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % at the elevation of 2000–4000 m over the ECSA
(Fig. 12b). Table 4 further summarizes the effect of BB emission on the
downwind areas (SCA, TWA, and the ECSA) at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
2000–4000 m elevations. The contribution of BB to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>,
PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, OH, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and CO was at least 30 %–80 % at the elevation
of 2000–4000 m over the regions SCA, TWA, and the ECSA (Table 4). In the lower
boundary layer (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m), the BB contribution for most species
at the remote downstream areas was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, except for TWA.
Because of the high mountains (Lin et al., 2021) present in TWA, the BB plume
passing over Taiwan was potentially transported downward through
mountain–valley circulation to the lower boundary layer (Ooi et al., 2021).
The influence of BB over TWA was the highest among these three downstream
regions (see Table 4), as its location was directly on the transport pathway
of the BB plume on the major event day (flight F0319).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e6325"><bold>(a)</bold> Simulated vertical distribution of BB influences on cloud
water difference with and without BB emission on 17 (dash) and 19
(solid) March 2018. <bold>(b)</bold> Simulated vertical distribution of cloud water
difference with and without indirect effect in the model on 19 March
2018. Regions include IDCA, SCA, TWA, and ECSA as shown in Fig. 1a.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/2627/2023/acp-23-2627-2023-f13.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6339">Figure 13a displays the simulated cloud water difference with and without BB
emission over different regions on 17 and 19 March 2018. BB aerosols are a
potential source of cloud nuclei. The simulations show the impact of BB on
cloud water enhancement (Fig. 13a) in the vertical distribution. Cloud water
enhancement over SCA was associated with aerosol enhancement from the BB in
the altitude range of 1000–4000 m: the peak being 1.8–2.0 mg kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 2000 m<?pagebreak page2644?> on these 2 d (Fig. 13a). The abundance of BB emissions transported from
Indochina to SCA (Figs. 3 and 4) is expected to contribute to the high cloud
water formation over SCA. Furthermore, the southerly flow (Figs. 3 and 4)
that transports warm and moist air mass from the South China Sea may have
favored cloud formation in flights F0317 and F0319. High cloud water related
to BB can be seen in the simulations of these two days. In the remote ECSA
regions, the cloud water substantially increased on 19 March 2018 (Fig. 13a)
compared to 17 March 2018 because of a significant difference in BB
emissions transported to the ECSA between 17 and 19 March 2018 (Figs. 3 and
4). Similarly, the cloud water enhancement over Taiwan also only appeared on
19 March 2018 (Fig. 13a). Furthermore, nearly no difference in the cloud
water vertical distribution over the region IDCA (Fig. 1a) in Indochina was
noted, because in the Indochina region, spring is the dry season (Lin et al.,
2009) and is thus unfavorable for cloud water formation. Figure 13b shows the
cloud water difference when the aerosol indirect effect turned off in the
simulation over different regions on 19 March 2018. The significant cloud
water shortage over the ECSA and SCA could be as high as 2.4 and 1.5 mg kg<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively (Fig. 13b). In other words, the
chemistry–microphysics interactions (indirect effect) plays an important
role in the cloud water enhancement in the SCA and ECSA in this study.</p>
      <p id="d1e6367">The simulated downward shortwave flux at the noontime at the ground surface due
to BB was 2 %–4 % and a 5 %–7 % reduction over the regions ECSA and SCA,
respectively, (Fig. S5a–b, blue line) during 18–19 March 2018.
However, a significant shortwave flux reduction at the noontime at the ground
surface could be 15 %–20 % due to aerosol indirect effect in the region SCA
during 18–19 March 2018 (Fig. S5a–b, dashed blue line). The
combination of BB aerosol enhancement and increased cloud water results in
shortwave radiation reduction, implying the possibility of regional climate
change in East Asia driven by BB aerosols.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Summary</title>
      <p id="d1e6380">The BB during spring in Indochina has a significant impact on the chemistry
and composition of the troposphere in the surrounding regions of East Asia.
During the EMeRGe campaign in Asia, atmospheric pollutants were measured on
board the <italic>HALO</italic> aircraft. In this study, a minor long-range BB transport
event was observed from Indochina on 17 March 2018 (flight F0317), followed
by a major long-range BB transport event on 19 March 2018 (flight F0319).
The impact on tropospheric trace constituent composition and the environment
has been investigated.</p>
      <p id="d1e6386">During the major BB transport event F0319, the 1 min mean of the peak
concentrations of the trace constituents CO, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, ACE, ACN, OA, and BC between
the altitudes of 2000 and 4000 m over the ECS were 312.0, 79.0, 3.0, and 0.6 ppb, as well as 6.4 and 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.
In comparison during the F0317 event CO, O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, ACE, ACN, OA, and BC were 203.0, 71.0, 2.0, and 0.3 ppb, as well as 3.4 and 1.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e6448">When the elevation was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m for both the F0317 and F0319 events,
the sulfates, rather than OA, had the highest concentrations. The peak
concentration could be as high as 5.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" 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> in the lower boundary
for the event F0317 in the ECS. This observation is most likely explained by
a continental outflow from regions having fossil fuel combustion in the
lower boundary layer over the ECS.</p>
      <p id="d1e6481">In this study, the WRF-Chem model was employed to evaluate the BB plume
transported from Indochina and its influence on the downstream areas
including South China, Taiwan, and the ECS. The contribution of the BB plume
for most species in the remote downstream areas was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in the
lower boundary layer (altitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m). In comparison, the
contribution of long-range transported BB plume was 30 %–80 %, or even
higher, for many of the trace constituents (NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO, OH,
O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, BC, and PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the altitude range between 2000 and 4000 m for SC, Taiwan, and the ECS. The large influence of BB over Taiwan is most
probably because the BB transport passes directly over Taiwan.</p>
      <p id="d1e6545">BB aerosols are potential sources of cloud nuclei. The WRF simulations
estimate the effect of the BB plume on cloud water formation over SC and the
ECS. We observe in the simulations cloud water enhancement over SC at
elevations of 1000–4000 m. This increase of cloud water is consistent with
an increase in aerosol, caused by BB emissions, transported from Indochina
to SC. In remote regions of the ECS, the simulated cloud water was
significantly larger during the major BB event on 19 March 2018 than the
minor BB event on 17 March 2018. The simulated decrease of the photolysis
frequency (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is attributed to the difference in
aerosol concentrations and associated cloud enhancement between the two
events over the ECS. This we explain by the significant differences in BB
emissions transported to the ECS between the two events. The simulated
downward shortwave flux at the noontime at the ground surface due to BB was
2 %–4 % and a 5 %–7 % reduction over the regions ECS and SC, respectively. The
combination of increased BB aerosol concentration and increased amounts of
cloud water led to reductions in the amount of incoming shortwave radiation
at the surface over the ECS and SC. This influences tropospheric chemistry
and composition, regional climate, precipitation, ocean biogeochemistry,
agriculture, and human health.</p>
</sec>

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

      <p id="d1e6588">The EMeRGe data are available at the <italic>HALO</italic> database
(https://doi.org/10.17616/R39Q0T, re3data.org, 2023) and can be accessed upon
registration. Modeling data can be made available upon request to the
corresponding author.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e6594">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-2627-2023-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-2627-2023-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e6603">CYL conceived the idea, analyzed the data, and wrote and edited the
manuscript. WCC and YYC ran the model and analyzed the data. CKC joined the
manuscript discussion. CYL provided the MODIS data. HZ and HS provided
trace gas data. EF provided acetonitrile data. FO performed the ozone
measurement. OOK, BAH, and MLP were responsible for the BC measurement. KK
and JS were responsible for C-ToF-MS measurements. KP and BW provided HONO
data. JPB and MDAH led the EMeRGe-Asia experiment. All authors have read and
agree to the published version of the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e6609">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e6615">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="d1e6621">This article is part of the special issue “Effect of Megacities on the Transport and Transformation of Pollutants at Regional and Global Scales (EMeRGe) (ACP/AMT inter-journal SI)”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e6627">We thank the National Centre for
High Performance Computing (NCHC) for providing computational and storage
resources.
The <italic>HALO</italic> deployment during EMeRGe was funded by a consortium comprising the
German Research Foundation (DFG) Priority Program HALO-SPP 1294, the
Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the DLR, the Max Planck Society (MPG), and
the Helmholtz Association. Johannes Schneider and Katharina Kaiser
acknowledge funding through the DFG (project no. 316589531). The authors gratefully acknowledge the NOAA Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) for the provision of the HYSPLIT transport and dispersion model and READY website (<uri>https://www.ready.noaa.gov</uri>, last access: 14 February 2023) used in this publication.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e6638">This research has been supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (grant nos. MOST 108-2111-M-001-002, MOST 109-2111-M-001-004, and MOST 110-2111-M-001-013).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e6644">This paper was edited by Manabu Shiraiwa and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ackermann, I. J., Hass, H., Memmsheimer, M., Ebel, A., Binkowski, F. S., and
Shankar, U.: Modal aerosol dynamics model for Europe: development and first
applications, Atmos. Environ., 32, 2981–2999,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00006-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00006-5</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ahmadov, R., McKeen, S. A., Robinson, A. L., Bahreini, R., Middlebrook, A.
M., de Gouw, J. A., Meagher, J., Hsie, E.-Y. Edgerton, E., Shaw, S., and
Trainer, M.: A volatility basis set model for summertime secondary organic
aerosols over the eastern United States in 2006, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D06301,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016831" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD016831</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Andrés Hernández, M. D., Hilboll, A., Ziereis, H., Förster, E., Krüger, O. O., Kaiser, K., Schneider, J., Barnaba, F., Vrekoussis, M., Schmidt, J., Huntrieser, H., Blechschmidt, A.-M., George, M., Nenakhov, V., Harlass, T., Holanda, B. A., Wolf, J., Eirenschmalz, L., Krebsbach, M., Pöhlker, M. L., Kalisz Hedegaard, A. B., Mei, L., Pfeilsticker, K., Liu, Y., Koppmann, R., Schlager, H., Bohn, B., Schumann, U., Richter, A., Schreiner, B., Sauer, D., Baumann, R., Mertens, M., Jöckel, P., Kilian, M., Stratmann, G., Pöhlker, C., Campanelli, M., Pandolfi, M., Sicard, M., Gómez-Amo, J. L., Pujadas, M., Bigge, K., Kluge, F., Schwarz, A., Daskalakis, N., Walter, D., Zahn, A., Pöschl, U., Bönisch, H., Borrmann, S., Platt, U., and Burrows, J. P.: Overview: On the transport and transformation of pollutants in the outflow of major population centres – observational data from the EMeRGe European intensive operational period in summer 2017, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5877–5924, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5877-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-22-5877-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Carmichael, G. R., Tang, Y., Kurata, G., Uno, I., Streets, D., Woo, J.-H., Huang, H., Yienger, J., Lefer, B., Shetter, R., Blake, D., Atlas, E., Fried, A., Apel, E., Eisele, F., Cantrell, C., Avery, M., Barrick, J., Sachse, G., Brune, W., Sandholm, S., Kondo, Y., Singh, H., Talbot, R., Bandy, A., Thorton, D., Clarke, A., and Heikes, B.: Regional-scale
chemical transport modeling in support of the analysis of observations
obtained during the TRACE-P experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8823,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD003117</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Chuang, M. T., Fu, J. S., Lee, C. T., Lin, N. H., Gao, Y., Wang, S. H., Sheu,
G. R., Hsiao, T. C., Wang, J. L., Yen, M. C., Lin, T. H., and Thongboonchoo, N.:
The simulation of long-range transport of biomass burning plume and
short-range transport of anthropogenic pollutants to a mountain observatory
in East Asia during the 7-SEAS/2010 Dongsha Experiment, Aerosol Air Qual.
Res., 16, 2933–2949, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chi, K. H., Lin, C. Y., Ouyang, C. F., Lin, J., Lin, N. H., Sheu, G. R., and Lee, C. T.:
PCDD/F Measurement at a High-altitude Station in Central Taiwan: Evaluation
of Long-range Transport of PCDD/Fs during the Southeast Asia Biomass Burning
Event, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 2954–2960,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es1000984" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es1000984</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ding, K., Huang, X., Ding, A., Wang, M., Su, H., Kerminen, V. M., Petäjä, T., Tan, Z., Wang, Z., Zhou, D., Sun, J., Liao, H., Wang, H., Carslaw, K., Wood, R., Zuidema, P., Rosenfeld, D., Kulmala, M., Fu, C., Pöschl, U., Cheng, Y., and Andreae, M. O.: Aerosol-boundary-layer-monsoon interactions amplify semi-direct effect of biomass smoke on low cloud formation in Southeast Asia, Nat<?pagebreak page2646?>. Commun., 12, 6416, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26728-4, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Förster, E., Bönisch, H., Neumaier, M., Obersteiner, F., Zahn, A., Hilboll, A., Kalisz Hedegaard, A. B., Daskalakis, N., Poulidis, A. P., Vrekoussis, M., Lichtenstern, M., and Braesicke, P.: Chemical and dynamical identification of emission outflows during the <italic>HALO</italic> campaign EMeRGe in Europe and Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 1893–1918, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1893-2023" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-23-1893-2023</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fu, J. S., Hsu, N. C., Gao, Y., Huang, K., Li, C., Lin, N.-H., and Tsay, S.-C.: Evaluating the influences of biomass burning during 2006 BASE-ASIA: a regional chemical transport modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 3837–3855, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3837-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-3837-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Galanter, M., Levy, H., and Carmichael, G. R.: Impacts of biomass burning on
tropospheric CO, NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and O<inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 6633–6653, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Giglio, L., Randerson, J. T., and Werf, G. R. V. D.: Analysis of daily, monthly, and
annual burned area using the fourth-generation global fire emissions
database (GFED4), J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 118, 317–328, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W. C., and Eder, B.: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within
the WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957–6975,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heald, C. L., Jacob, D. J., Fiore, A. M., Emmons, L. K., Gille, J. C., Deeter, M. N., Warner, J., Edwards, D. P., Crawford, J. H., Hamlin, A. J., Sachse, G. W., Browell, E. V., Avery, M. A., Vay, S. A., Westberg, D. J., Blake, D. R., Singh, H. B., Sandholm, S. T., Talbot, R. W., and Fuelberg, H. E.: Asian outflow
and trans-Pacific transport of carbon monoxide and ozone pollution: An
integrated satellite, aircraft, and model perspective, J. Geophys. Res.,
108, 4804, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003507" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003507</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hong, S., Lakshmi V., Small, E. E., Chen, F., Tewari, M., and Manning, K. W.:
Effects of vegetation and soil moisture on the simulated land surface
processes from the coupled WRF/Noah model, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D18118, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011249,
2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huang, K., Fu, J. S., Hsu, N. C., Gao, Y., Dong, X., Tsay, S. C., and Lam, Y. F.:
Impact assessment of biomass burning on air quality in Southeast and East
Asia during BASE-ASIA, Atmos. Environ., 78, 291–302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.03.048, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jacob, D. J., Crawford, J. H., Kleb, M. M., Connors, V. S., Bendura, R. J.,
Raper, J. L., Sachse, G. W., Gille, J. C., Emmons, L., and Heald, C. L.: The
transport and chemical evolution over the pacific (trace-P) aircraft
mission: design, execution, and first results, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,  108, 9000, doi:10.1029/2002JD003276, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Janjic, Z. I.: The step-mountain eta coordinate model: further developments
of the convection,viscous layer, and turbulence closure schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 927–945, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kong, L., Tang, X., Zhu, J., Wang, Z., Fu, J. S., Wang, X., Itahashi, S., Yamaji, K., Nagashima, T., Lee, H.-J., Kim, C.-H., Lin, C.-Y., Chen, L., Zhang, M., Tao, Z., Li, J., Kajino, M., Liao, H., Wang, Z., Sudo, K., Wang, Y., Pan, Y., Tang, G., Li, M., Wu, Q., Ge, B., and Carmichael, G. R.: Evaluation and uncertainty investigation of the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, CO and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> modeling over China under the framework of MICS-Asia III, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 181–202, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-181-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-181-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, J., Nagashima, T., Kong, L., Ge, B., Yamaji, K., Fu, J. S., Wang, X., Fan, Q., Itahashi, S., Lee, H.-J., Kim, C.-H., Lin, C.-Y., Zhang, M., Tao, Z., Kajino, M., Liao, H., Li, M., Woo, J.-H., Kurokawa, J., Wang, Z., Wu, Q., Akimoto, H., Carmichael, G. R., and Wang, Z.: Model evaluation and intercomparison of surface-level ozone and relevant species in East Asia in the context of MICS-Asia Phase III – Part 1: Overview, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 12993–13015, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12993-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-12993-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, C.-Y., Hsu, H.-m., Lee, Y. H., Kuo, C. H., Sheng, Y.-F., and Chu, D. A.: A new transport mechanism of biomass burning from Indochina as identified by modeling studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7901–7911, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7901-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-7901-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, C. Y., Chou, C.C.K, Wang, Z., Lung, S.C., Lee, C. T., Yuan, C.S., Chen,
W. N., Chang, S. Y., Hsu, S. C., Chen, W. C., Liu, and Shaw, C.: Impact of
different transport mechanisms of Asian dust and anthropogenic pollutants to
Taiwan, Atmos. Environ., 60, 403–418,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.06.049" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.06.049</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, C. Y., Zhao, Liu, C. X, Lin, N. H., and Chen, W. N.: Modeling of long-range
transport of Southeast Asia biomass burning pollutants to Taiwan and their
radiative forcing over East Asia, Tellus B, 66, 1–17, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v66.23733" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v66.23733</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, C.-Y., Sheng, Y.-F., Chen, W.-C., Chou, C. C. K., Chien, Y.-Y., and Chen, W.-M.: Air quality deterioration episode associated with a typhoon over the complex topographic environment in central Taiwan, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16893–16910, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16893-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-16893-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lin, N. H., Tsay, S. C., Maring, H.B., Yen, M. C., Sheu, G. R., Wang, S.H., Chi, K. H., Chuang, M. T., Ou-Yang, C. F., Fu, J.S., Reid, J. S., Lee, C. T., Wang, L. C., Wang, J. L., Hsu, C. N., Sayer, A. M., Holben, B. N., Chu Y. C., Nguyen, X. A., Sopajaree, K., Chen, S. J., Cheng, M. T., Tsuang, B. J., Tsai, C. J., Peng, C. M., Schnell, R. C., Conway, T., Chang C. T., Lin K. S., Tsai, Y. I., Lee, W. J., Chang, S. C., Liu, J. J., Chiang, W. L., Huang, S. J., Lin, T. H., and Liu, G. R.: An overview of regional experiments on biomass burning
aerosols and related pollutants in Southeast Asia: From BASE-ASIA and
Dongsha Experiment to 7-SEAS, Atmos. Environ., 78, 1–19, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.04.066" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.04.066</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Marvin, M. R., Palmer, P. I., Latter, B. G., Siddans, R., Kerridge, B. J., Latif, M. T., and Khan, M. F.: Photochemical environment over Southeast Asia primed for hazardous ozone levels with influx of nitrogen oxides from seasonal biomass burning, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1917–1935, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1917-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-1917-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Miyazaki, Y., Kondo, Y., Koike, M., Fuelberg, H. E., Kiley, C. M., Kita, K.,
Takegawa, N., Sachse, G. W., Flocke, F., Weinheimer, A. J., Singh, H. B., Eisele,
F. L., Zondlo, M., Talbot, R. W., Sandholm, S. T., Avery, M. A., and Blake, D. R.:
Synoptic-scale transport of reactive nitrogen over the western Pacific in
spring, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8788, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003248." ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD003248.</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Morrison, H., Curry, J. A., and Khvorostyanov, V. I.: A new double-moment
microphysics parameterization for application in cloud and climate model,
Part I: Description, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 1665–1676,
2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page2647?><ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Neu, J. L. and Prather, M. J.: Toward a more physical representation of precipitation scavenging in global chemistry models: cloud overlap and ice physics and their impact on tropospheric ozone, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 3289–3310, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3289-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-3289-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Palmer, P. I., Jacob, D. J., Jones, D. B. A., Heald, C. L., Yantosca, R. M.,
Logan, J. A., Sachse, G. W., and Streets, D. G.: Inverting for emissions of
carbon monoxide from Asia using aircraft observations over the western
Pacific, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8828, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003397" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003JD003397</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pimonsree, S., Vongruang, P., and Sumitsawan, S.: Modified biomass burning
emission in modeling system with fire radiative power: Simulation of
particulate matter in Mainland Southeast Asia during smog episode,
Atmos. Pollut. Res., 9, 133–145,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2017.08.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.apr.2017.08.002</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Powers, G., Klemp, J. B., Skamarock, W. C., Davis, C. A., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Coen, J. L., Gochis, D. J., Ahmadov, R., Peckham, S. E., Grell, G. A., Michalakes, J., Trahan, S., Benjamin, S. G., Alexander, C. R., Dimego, G. J., Wang, W., Schwartz, C. S., Romine, G. S., Liu, Z., Snyder, C., Chen, F., Barlage, M., J., Yu, W., and Duda. M. G.: The weather research and forecasting model Overview, System Efforts,
and Future Directions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
98, 1717–1737, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ramanathan, V., Ramana, M. V., Roberts, G., Kim, D., Corrigan, C., Chung,
C., and Winker, D.: Warming trends in Asia amplified by brown cloud solar
absorption, Nature, 448, 575–575, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>re3data.org: HALO database; editing status 2021-11-17; re3data.org – Registry of Research Data Repositories, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.17616/R39Q0T" ext-link-type="DOI">10.17616/R39Q0T</ext-link>, last access: 14 February 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Reid, J. S., Hyer, E. J., Johnson, R. S., Holben, B. N., Yokelson, R.J., Zhang, J., Campbell, J. R., Christopher, S. A., Girolamo, L. D., Giglio, L., Holz, R. E., Kearney, C., Miettinen, J., Reid, E. A., Turk, F. J., Wang, J., Xian, P., Zhao, G., Balasubramanian, R., Chew, B. N., Janjai, S., Lagrosas, N., Lestari, P., Lin, N. H., Mahmud, M., Nguyen, A. X., Norris, B., Oanh, N. T. K., Oo, M., Salinas, S. V., Welton, E. J., and Liew, S. C.: Observing and understanding the Southeast Asian aeroslo
system by remote sensing: An initial review and analysis for the Seven
Southeast Asian Studies (7SEAS) program, Atmos. Res., 122, 403–468,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shi, Y. and Yamaguchi, Y.: A high-resolution and multi-year emissions inventory
for biomass burning in Southeast Asia during 2001–2010,  Atmos.
Environ., 98, 8–16, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.050" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.050</ext-link>,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Singh, H. B., Hara, D. O., Herlth, D., Sachse, W., Blake, D. R., Bradshaw, J. D.,
Kanakidou, M., and Crutzen, P. J.: Acetone in the atmosphere: Distribution,
sources, and sink, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 1805–1819, 1994.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stein, A. F., Draxler, R. R., Rolph, G. D., Stunder, B. J. B., Cohen, M. D., and
Ngan, F.: NOAA's HYSPLIT Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modeling
System, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96,
2059–2077, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Stockwell, W. R., Middleton, P., Chang, J. S., and Tang, X.: The second
generation regional acid deposition model chemical mechanism for regional
air quality modeling, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 16343–16367, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Stockwell, W. R., Kirchner F., and Kuhn M.: A new mechanism for regional
atmospheric chemistry modeling, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 25847–25879, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Talbot, R., Dibb, J., Scheuer, E., Seid, G., Russo, R., Sandholm, S., Tan, D.,
Singh, H., Blake, D., Blake, N., Atlas, E., Sachse, G., Jordan, C., and Avery, M.: Reactive nitrogen in Asian continental outflow over the western
Pacific: Results from the NASA Transport and Chemical Evolution over the
Pacific (TRACE-P) airborne mission, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8824,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003110" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD003110</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tang, Y., Carmichael, G. R., Woo, J.-H., Thongboonchoo, N., Kurata, G., Uno, I., Streets, D. G., Blake, D. R., Weber, R.J., Talbot, R.W., Kondo, Y., Singh, H. B., and Wang, T.: Influences of biomass burning during the
Transport and Chemical Evolution Over the Pacific (TRACE-P) experiment
identified by the regional chemical transport model, J. Geophys. Res.,
108, 8824,   <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003110" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD003110</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wiedinmyer, C., Akagi, S. K., Yokelson, R. J., Emmons, L. K., Al-Saadi, J. A., Orlando, J. J., and Soja, A. J.: The Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN): a high resolution global model to estimate the emissions from open burning, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 625–641, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-625-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-4-625-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Xu, R., Tie, X., Li, G., Zhao, S., Cao, J., Feng T., Long X., Effect of
biomass burning on black carbon (BC) in South Asia and Tibetan Plateau: The
analysis of WRF-Chem modeling, Sci. Total Environ., 645, 901–912, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Yadav, I. C., Devi, N. L., Li, J., Syed, J. H., Zhang, G., and Watanabe, H.:
Biomass burning in Indo-China peninsula and its impacts on regional air
quality and global climate change-a review, Environ. Pollut., 227,
414–427, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Liu, X., Ruby Leung, L., and Hagos, S.: Radiative impact of mineral dust on monsoon precipitation variability over West Africa, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1879–1893, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1879-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-11-1879-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Effects of transport on a biomass burning plume from Indochina during EMeRGe-Asia identified by WRF-Chem</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ackermann, I. J., Hass, H., Memmsheimer, M., Ebel, A., Binkowski, F. S., and
Shankar, U.: Modal aerosol dynamics model for Europe: development and first
applications, Atmos. Environ., 32, 2981–2999,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00006-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00006-5</a>, 1998.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ahmadov, R., McKeen, S. A., Robinson, A. L., Bahreini, R., Middlebrook, A.
M., de Gouw, J. A., Meagher, J., Hsie, E.-Y. Edgerton, E., Shaw, S., and
Trainer, M.: A volatility basis set model for summertime secondary organic
aerosols over the eastern United States in 2006, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D06301,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016831" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016831</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Andrés Hernández, M. D., Hilboll, A., Ziereis, H., Förster, E., Krüger, O. O., Kaiser, K., Schneider, J., Barnaba, F., Vrekoussis, M., Schmidt, J., Huntrieser, H., Blechschmidt, A.-M., George, M., Nenakhov, V., Harlass, T., Holanda, B. A., Wolf, J., Eirenschmalz, L., Krebsbach, M., Pöhlker, M. L., Kalisz Hedegaard, A. B., Mei, L., Pfeilsticker, K., Liu, Y., Koppmann, R., Schlager, H., Bohn, B., Schumann, U., Richter, A., Schreiner, B., Sauer, D., Baumann, R., Mertens, M., Jöckel, P., Kilian, M., Stratmann, G., Pöhlker, C., Campanelli, M., Pandolfi, M., Sicard, M., Gómez-Amo, J. L., Pujadas, M., Bigge, K., Kluge, F., Schwarz, A., Daskalakis, N., Walter, D., Zahn, A., Pöschl, U., Bönisch, H., Borrmann, S., Platt, U., and Burrows, J. P.: Overview: On the transport and transformation of pollutants in the outflow of major population centres – observational data from the EMeRGe European intensive operational period in summer 2017, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 5877–5924, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5877-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-5877-2022</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Carmichael, G. R., Tang, Y., Kurata, G., Uno, I., Streets, D., Woo, J.-H., Huang, H., Yienger, J., Lefer, B., Shetter, R., Blake, D., Atlas, E., Fried, A., Apel, E., Eisele, F., Cantrell, C., Avery, M., Barrick, J., Sachse, G., Brune, W., Sandholm, S., Kondo, Y., Singh, H., Talbot, R., Bandy, A., Thorton, D., Clarke, A., and Heikes, B.: Regional-scale
chemical transport modeling in support of the analysis of observations
obtained during the TRACE-P experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8823,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003117</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Chuang, M. T., Fu, J. S., Lee, C. T., Lin, N. H., Gao, Y., Wang, S. H., Sheu,
G. R., Hsiao, T. C., Wang, J. L., Yen, M. C., Lin, T. H., and Thongboonchoo, N.:
The simulation of long-range transport of biomass burning plume and
short-range transport of anthropogenic pollutants to a mountain observatory
in East Asia during the 7-SEAS/2010 Dongsha Experiment, Aerosol Air Qual.
Res., 16, 2933–2949, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Chi, K. H., Lin, C. Y., Ouyang, C. F., Lin, J., Lin, N. H., Sheu, G. R., and Lee, C. T.:
PCDD/F Measurement at a High-altitude Station in Central Taiwan: Evaluation
of Long-range Transport of PCDD/Fs during the Southeast Asia Biomass Burning
Event, Environ. Sci. Technol., 44, 2954–2960,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es1000984" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es1000984</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ding, K., Huang, X., Ding, A., Wang, M., Su, H., Kerminen, V. M., Petäjä, T., Tan, Z., Wang, Z., Zhou, D., Sun, J., Liao, H., Wang, H., Carslaw, K., Wood, R., Zuidema, P., Rosenfeld, D., Kulmala, M., Fu, C., Pöschl, U., Cheng, Y., and Andreae, M. O.: Aerosol-boundary-layer-monsoon interactions amplify semi-direct effect of biomass smoke on low cloud formation in Southeast Asia, Nat. Commun., 12, 6416, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26728-4, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Förster, E., Bönisch, H., Neumaier, M., Obersteiner, F., Zahn, A., Hilboll, A., Kalisz Hedegaard, A. B., Daskalakis, N., Poulidis, A. P., Vrekoussis, M., Lichtenstern, M., and Braesicke, P.: Chemical and dynamical identification of emission outflows during the <i>HALO</i> campaign EMeRGe in Europe and Asia, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 1893–1918, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1893-2023" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-1893-2023</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Fu, J. S., Hsu, N. C., Gao, Y., Huang, K., Li, C., Lin, N.-H., and Tsay, S.-C.: Evaluating the influences of biomass burning during 2006 BASE-ASIA: a regional chemical transport modeling, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 3837–3855, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3837-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3837-2012</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Galanter, M., Levy, H., and Carmichael, G. R.: Impacts of biomass burning on
tropospheric CO, NO<sub><i>x</i></sub>, and O<sub>3</sub>, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 6633–6653, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Giglio, L., Randerson, J. T., and Werf, G. R. V. D.: Analysis of daily, monthly, and
annual burned area using the fourth-generation global fire emissions
database (GFED4), J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 118, 317–328, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Grell, G. A., Peckham, S. E., Schmitz, R., McKeen, S. A., Frost, G.,
Skamarock, W. C., and Eder, B.: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within
the WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957–6975,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.027</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heald, C. L., Jacob, D. J., Fiore, A. M., Emmons, L. K., Gille, J. C., Deeter, M. N., Warner, J., Edwards, D. P., Crawford, J. H., Hamlin, A. J., Sachse, G. W., Browell, E. V., Avery, M. A., Vay, S. A., Westberg, D. J., Blake, D. R., Singh, H. B., Sandholm, S. T., Talbot, R. W., and Fuelberg, H. E.: Asian outflow
and trans-Pacific transport of carbon monoxide and ozone pollution: An
integrated satellite, aircraft, and model perspective, J. Geophys. Res.,
108, 4804, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003507" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003507</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hong, S., Lakshmi V., Small, E. E., Chen, F., Tewari, M., and Manning, K. W.:
Effects of vegetation and soil moisture on the simulated land surface
processes from the coupled WRF/Noah model, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D18118, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011249,
2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Huang, K., Fu, J. S., Hsu, N. C., Gao, Y., Dong, X., Tsay, S. C., and Lam, Y. F.:
Impact assessment of biomass burning on air quality in Southeast and East
Asia during BASE-ASIA, Atmos. Environ., 78, 291–302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.03.048, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Jacob, D. J., Crawford, J. H., Kleb, M. M., Connors, V. S., Bendura, R. J.,
Raper, J. L., Sachse, G. W., Gille, J. C., Emmons, L., and Heald, C. L.: The
transport and chemical evolution over the pacific (trace-P) aircraft
mission: design, execution, and first results, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,  108, 9000, doi:10.1029/2002JD003276, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Janjic, Z. I.: The step-mountain eta coordinate model: further developments
of the convection,viscous layer, and turbulence closure schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 122, 927–945, 1994.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kong, L., Tang, X., Zhu, J., Wang, Z., Fu, J. S., Wang, X., Itahashi, S., Yamaji, K., Nagashima, T., Lee, H.-J., Kim, C.-H., Lin, C.-Y., Chen, L., Zhang, M., Tao, Z., Li, J., Kajino, M., Liao, H., Wang, Z., Sudo, K., Wang, Y., Pan, Y., Tang, G., Li, M., Wu, Q., Ge, B., and Carmichael, G. R.: Evaluation and uncertainty investigation of the NO<sub>2</sub>, CO and NH<sub>3</sub> modeling over China under the framework of MICS-Asia III, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 181–202, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-181-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-181-2020</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Li, J., Nagashima, T., Kong, L., Ge, B., Yamaji, K., Fu, J. S., Wang, X., Fan, Q., Itahashi, S., Lee, H.-J., Kim, C.-H., Lin, C.-Y., Zhang, M., Tao, Z., Kajino, M., Liao, H., Li, M., Woo, J.-H., Kurokawa, J., Wang, Z., Wu, Q., Akimoto, H., Carmichael, G. R., and Wang, Z.: Model evaluation and intercomparison of surface-level ozone and relevant species in East Asia in the context of MICS-Asia Phase III – Part 1: Overview, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 12993–13015, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12993-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-12993-2019</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lin, C.-Y., Hsu, H.-m., Lee, Y. H., Kuo, C. H., Sheng, Y.-F., and Chu, D. A.: A new transport mechanism of biomass burning from Indochina as identified by modeling studies, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 7901–7911, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7901-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-7901-2009</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lin, C. Y., Chou, C.C.K, Wang, Z., Lung, S.C., Lee, C. T., Yuan, C.S., Chen,
W. N., Chang, S. Y., Hsu, S. C., Chen, W. C., Liu, and Shaw, C.: Impact of
different transport mechanisms of Asian dust and anthropogenic pollutants to
Taiwan, Atmos. Environ., 60, 403–418,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.06.049" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.06.049</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lin, C. Y., Zhao, Liu, C. X, Lin, N. H., and Chen, W. N.: Modeling of long-range
transport of Southeast Asia biomass burning pollutants to Taiwan and their
radiative forcing over East Asia, Tellus B, 66, 1–17, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v66.23733" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v66.23733</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lin, C.-Y., Sheng, Y.-F., Chen, W.-C., Chou, C. C. K., Chien, Y.-Y., and Chen, W.-M.: Air quality deterioration episode associated with a typhoon over the complex topographic environment in central Taiwan, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 16893–16910, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16893-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-16893-2021</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lin, N. H., Tsay, S. C., Maring, H.B., Yen, M. C., Sheu, G. R., Wang, S.H., Chi, K. H., Chuang, M. T., Ou-Yang, C. F., Fu, J.S., Reid, J. S., Lee, C. T., Wang, L. C., Wang, J. L., Hsu, C. N., Sayer, A. M., Holben, B. N., Chu Y. C., Nguyen, X. A., Sopajaree, K., Chen, S. J., Cheng, M. T., Tsuang, B. J., Tsai, C. J., Peng, C. M., Schnell, R. C., Conway, T., Chang C. T., Lin K. S., Tsai, Y. I., Lee, W. J., Chang, S. C., Liu, J. J., Chiang, W. L., Huang, S. J., Lin, T. H., and Liu, G. R.: An overview of regional experiments on biomass burning
aerosols and related pollutants in Southeast Asia: From BASE-ASIA and
Dongsha Experiment to 7-SEAS, Atmos. Environ., 78, 1–19, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.04.066" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.04.066</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Marvin, M. R., Palmer, P. I., Latter, B. G., Siddans, R., Kerridge, B. J., Latif, M. T., and Khan, M. F.: Photochemical environment over Southeast Asia primed for hazardous ozone levels with influx of nitrogen oxides from seasonal biomass burning, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 1917–1935, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1917-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-1917-2021</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Miyazaki, Y., Kondo, Y., Koike, M., Fuelberg, H. E., Kiley, C. M., Kita, K.,
Takegawa, N., Sachse, G. W., Flocke, F., Weinheimer, A. J., Singh, H. B., Eisele,
F. L., Zondlo, M., Talbot, R. W., Sandholm, S. T., Avery, M. A., and Blake, D. R.:
Synoptic-scale transport of reactive nitrogen over the western Pacific in
spring, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8788, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003248." target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003248.</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Morrison, H., Curry, J. A., and Khvorostyanov, V. I.: A new double-moment
microphysics parameterization for application in cloud and climate model,
Part I: Description, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 1665–1676,
2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
Neu, J. L. and Prather, M. J.: Toward a more physical representation of precipitation scavenging in global chemistry models: cloud overlap and ice physics and their impact on tropospheric ozone, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 3289–3310, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3289-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3289-2012</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Palmer, P. I., Jacob, D. J., Jones, D. B. A., Heald, C. L., Yantosca, R. M.,
Logan, J. A., Sachse, G. W., and Streets, D. G.: Inverting for emissions of
carbon monoxide from Asia using aircraft observations over the western
Pacific, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8828, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003397" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003397</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
Pimonsree, S., Vongruang, P., and Sumitsawan, S.: Modified biomass burning
emission in modeling system with fire radiative power: Simulation of
particulate matter in Mainland Southeast Asia during smog episode,
Atmos. Pollut. Res., 9, 133–145,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2017.08.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2017.08.002</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Powers, G., Klemp, J. B., Skamarock, W. C., Davis, C. A., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Coen, J. L., Gochis, D. J., Ahmadov, R., Peckham, S. E., Grell, G. A., Michalakes, J., Trahan, S., Benjamin, S. G., Alexander, C. R., Dimego, G. J., Wang, W., Schwartz, C. S., Romine, G. S., Liu, Z., Snyder, C., Chen, F., Barlage, M., J., Yu, W., and Duda. M. G.: The weather research and forecasting model Overview, System Efforts,
and Future Directions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
98, 1717–1737, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ramanathan, V., Ramana, M. V., Roberts, G., Kim, D., Corrigan, C., Chung,
C., and Winker, D.: Warming trends in Asia amplified by brown cloud solar
absorption, Nature, 448, 575–575, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
re3data.org: HALO database; editing status 2021-11-17; re3data.org – Registry of Research Data Repositories, <a href="https://doi.org/10.17616/R39Q0T" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.17616/R39Q0T</a>, last access: 14 February 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
Reid, J. S., Hyer, E. J., Johnson, R. S., Holben, B. N., Yokelson, R.J., Zhang, J., Campbell, J. R., Christopher, S. A., Girolamo, L. D., Giglio, L., Holz, R. E., Kearney, C., Miettinen, J., Reid, E. A., Turk, F. J., Wang, J., Xian, P., Zhao, G., Balasubramanian, R., Chew, B. N., Janjai, S., Lagrosas, N., Lestari, P., Lin, N. H., Mahmud, M., Nguyen, A. X., Norris, B., Oanh, N. T. K., Oo, M., Salinas, S. V., Welton, E. J., and Liew, S. C.: Observing and understanding the Southeast Asian aeroslo
system by remote sensing: An initial review and analysis for the Seven
Southeast Asian Studies (7SEAS) program, Atmos. Res., 122, 403–468,
2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Shi, Y. and Yamaguchi, Y.: A high-resolution and multi-year emissions inventory
for biomass burning in Southeast Asia during 2001–2010,  Atmos.
Environ., 98, 8–16, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.050" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.050</a>,
2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
      
Singh, H. B., Hara, D. O., Herlth, D., Sachse, W., Blake, D. R., Bradshaw, J. D.,
Kanakidou, M., and Crutzen, P. J.: Acetone in the atmosphere: Distribution,
sources, and sink, J. Geophys. Res., 99, 1805–1819, 1994.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Stein, A. F., Draxler, R. R., Rolph, G. D., Stunder, B. J. B., Cohen, M. D., and
Ngan, F.: NOAA's HYSPLIT Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modeling
System, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 96,
2059–2077, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00110.1</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Stockwell, W. R., Middleton, P., Chang, J. S., and Tang, X.: The second
generation regional acid deposition model chemical mechanism for regional
air quality modeling, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 16343–16367, 1990.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Stockwell, W. R., Kirchner F., and Kuhn M.: A new mechanism for regional
atmospheric chemistry modeling, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 25847–25879, 1997.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Talbot, R., Dibb, J., Scheuer, E., Seid, G., Russo, R., Sandholm, S., Tan, D.,
Singh, H., Blake, D., Blake, N., Atlas, E., Sachse, G., Jordan, C., and Avery, M.: Reactive nitrogen in Asian continental outflow over the western
Pacific: Results from the NASA Transport and Chemical Evolution over the
Pacific (TRACE-P) airborne mission, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8824,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003110" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003110</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tang, Y., Carmichael, G. R., Woo, J.-H., Thongboonchoo, N., Kurata, G., Uno, I., Streets, D. G., Blake, D. R., Weber, R.J., Talbot, R.W., Kondo, Y., Singh, H. B., and Wang, T.: Influences of biomass burning during the
Transport and Chemical Evolution Over the Pacific (TRACE-P) experiment
identified by the regional chemical transport model, J. Geophys. Res.,
108, 8824,   <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003110" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD003110</a>, 2003.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wiedinmyer, C., Akagi, S. K., Yokelson, R. J., Emmons, L. K., Al-Saadi, J. A., Orlando, J. J., and Soja, A. J.: The Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN): a high resolution global model to estimate the emissions from open burning, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 625–641, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-625-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-625-2011</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Xu, R., Tie, X., Li, G., Zhao, S., Cao, J., Feng T., Long X., Effect of
biomass burning on black carbon (BC) in South Asia and Tibetan Plateau: The
analysis of WRF-Chem modeling, Sci. Total Environ., 645, 901–912, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yadav, I. C., Devi, N. L., Li, J., Syed, J. H., Zhang, G., and Watanabe, H.:
Biomass burning in Indo-China peninsula and its impacts on regional air
quality and global climate change-a review, Environ. Pollut., 227,
414–427, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhao, C., Liu, X., Ruby Leung, L., and Hagos, S.: Radiative impact of mineral dust on monsoon precipitation variability over West Africa, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 1879–1893, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1879-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-1879-2011</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
