Volume 25, issue 4

Volume 25, issue 4

17 Feb 2025
Evaluating present-day and future impacts of agricultural ammonia emissions on atmospheric chemistry and climate
Maureen Beaudor, Didier Hauglustaine, Juliette Lathière, Martin Van Damme, Lieven Clarisse, and Nicolas Vuichard
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2017–2046, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2017-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2017-2025, 2025
Short summary
17 Feb 2025
Impact of SO2 injection profiles on simulated volcanic forcing for the 2009 Sarychev eruptions – investigating the importance of using high-vertical-resolution methods when compiling SO2 data
Emma Axebrink, Moa K. Sporre, and Johan Friberg
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2047–2059, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2047-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2047-2025, 2025
Short summary
18 Feb 2025
Feasibility of robust estimates of ozone production rates using a synergy of satellite observations, ground-based remote sensing, and models
Amir H. Souri, Gonzalo González Abad, Glenn M. Wolfe, Tijl Verhoelst, Corinne Vigouroux, Gaia Pinardi, Steven Compernolle, Bavo Langerock, Bryan N. Duncan, and Matthew S. Johnson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2061–2086, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2061-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2061-2025, 2025
Short summary
19 Feb 2025
Tropospheric aerosols over the western North Atlantic Ocean during the winter and summer deployments of ACTIVATE 2020: life cycle, transport, and distribution
Hongyu Liu, Bo Zhang, Richard H. Moore, Luke D. Ziemba, Richard A. Ferrare, Hyundeok Choi, Armin Sorooshian, David Painemal, Hailong Wang, Michael A. Shook, Amy Jo Scarino, Johnathan W. Hair, Ewan C. Crosbie, Marta A. Fenn, Taylor J. Shingler, Chris A. Hostetler, Gao Chen, Mary M. Kleb, Gan Luo, Fangqun Yu, Mark A. Vaughan, Yongxiang Hu, Glenn S. Diskin, John B. Nowak, Joshua P. DiGangi, Yonghoon Choi, Christoph A. Keller, and Matthew S. Johnson
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2087–2121, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2087-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2087-2025, 2025
Short summary
19 Feb 2025
A new method for diagnosing effective radiative forcing from aerosol–cloud interactions in climate models
Brandon M. Duran, Casey J. Wall, Nicholas J. Lutsko, Takuro Michibata, Po-Lun Ma, Yi Qin, Margaret L. Duffy, Brian Medeiros, and Matvey Debolskiy
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2123–2146, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2123-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2123-2025, 2025
Short summary
19 Feb 2025
Spatial and temporal evolution of future atmospheric reactive nitrogen deposition in China under different climate change mitigation strategies
Mingrui Ma, Jiachen Cao, Dan Tong, Bo Zheng, and Yu Zhao
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2147–2166, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2147-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2147-2025, 2025
Short summary
19 Feb 2025
Contrasting the roles of regional anthropogenic aerosols from the western and eastern hemispheres in driving the 1980–2020 Pacific multi-decadal variations
Chenrui Diao, Yangyang Xu, Aixue Hu, and Zhili Wang
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2167–2180, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2167-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2167-2025, 2025
Short summary
19 Feb 2025
Partitioning anthropogenic and natural methane emissions in Finland during 2000–2021 by combining bottom-up and top-down estimates
Maria K. Tenkanen, Aki Tsuruta, Hugo Denier van der Gon, Lena Höglund-Isaksson, Antti Leppänen, Tiina Markkanen, Ana Maria Roxana Petrescu, Maarit Raivonen, Hermanni Aaltonen, and Tuula Aalto
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2181–2206, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2181-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2181-2025, 2025
Short summary
19 Feb 2025
Observations of high-time-resolution and size-resolved aerosol chemical composition and microphysics in the central Arctic: implications for climate-relevant particle properties
Benjamin Heutte, Nora Bergner, Hélène Angot, Jakob B. Pernov, Lubna Dada, Jessica A. Mirrielees, Ivo Beck, Andrea Baccarini, Matthew Boyer, Jessie M. Creamean, Kaspar R. Daellenbach, Imad El Haddad, Markus M. Frey, Silvia Henning, Tiia Laurila, Vaios Moschos, Tuukka Petäjä, Kerri A. Pratt, Lauriane L. J. Quéléver, Matthew D. Shupe, Paul Zieger, Tuija Jokinen, and Julia Schmale
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2207–2241, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2207-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2207-2025, 2025
Short summary
20 Feb 2025
Assessing the relative impacts of satellite ozone and its precursor observations to improve global tropospheric ozone analysis using multiple chemical reanalysis systems
Takashi Sekiya, Emanuele Emili, Kazuyuki Miyazaki, Antje Inness, Zhen Qu, R. Bradley Pierce, Dylan Jones, Helen Worden, William Y. Y. Cheng, Vincent Huijnen, and Gerbrand Koren
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2243–2268, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2243-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2243-2025, 2025
Short summary
20 Feb 2025
Satellite nadir-viewing geometry affects the magnitude and detectability of long-term trends in stratospheric ozone
Louis Rivoire, Marianna Linz, Jessica L. Neu, Pu Lin, and Michelle L. Santee
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2269–2289, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2269-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2269-2025, 2025
Short summary
21 Feb 2025
Identifying missing sources and reducing NOx emissions uncertainty over China using daily satellite data and a mass-conserving method
Lingxiao Lu, Jason Blake Cohen, Kai Qin, Xiaolu Li, and Qin He
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2291–2309, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2291-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2291-2025, 2025
Short summary
21 Feb 2025
A global dust emission dataset for estimating dust radiative forcings in climate models
Danny M. Leung, Jasper F. Kok, Longlei Li, David M. Lawrence, Natalie M. Mahowald, Simone Tilmes, and Erik Kluzek
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2311–2331, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2311-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2311-2025, 2025
Short summary
21 Feb 2025
Burning conditions and transportation pathways determine biomass-burning aerosol properties in the Ascension Island marine boundary layer
Amie Dobracki, Ernie R. Lewis, Arthur J. Sedlacek III, Tyler Tatro, Maria A. Zawadowicz, and Paquita Zuidema
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2333–2363, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2333-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2333-2025, 2025
Short summary
21 Feb 2025
| Highlight paper
Opinion: Why all emergent constraints are wrong but some are useful – a machine learning perspective
Peer Nowack and Duncan Watson-Parris
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 2365–2384, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2365-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-2365-2025, 2025
Short summary Executive editor
CC BY 4.0