In this paper, we have conducted a holistic review of source profiles, key indicators of IPFs at source and receptor sites, and the transformation of haze during its long-range transport (aging, secondary aerosol formation) as well as source apportionment in SEA, using a comprehensive chemical component dataset. Knowledge of the chemical characteristics of PM at IPF source and receptor sites is still limited, especially regarding the controlling (e.g., burning conditions, peat composition and effects of vegetative burning on peatlands) that determine the IPF source profile of PM. Clarifying these factors can lead to more reliable and speciated emission inventories of IPFs, enabling both chemical transport and radiative forcing modeling and health risk assessments to advance. Additionally, the process of IPF-derived SOA formation during transport to receptor sites remains largely unresolved. Recently Lopez-Hilfiker et al. (2019) developed an extractive electrospray ionization time-of flight mass spectrometer (EESI-ToF) with generally insignificant decomposition of fragmentation products of OAs. Furthermore, Siemens et al. (2023) revealed aging characteristics of BBOA using multimodal MS techniques (combining AMS, EESI-ToF, offline HPLC-PDA-HRMS and tandem mass spectrometry). Measurements of aerosols emitted at peatland fire sites using cutting-edge techniques with precursors measurements and contributions of aqSOA to IPF aerosols would promote an understanding of the formation mechanism of SOA and OPOA, along with SOA source apportionment. This study was partially supported by JSPS Kakenhi As mentioned in Section 1, biomass burning aerosols, including from peatland fires, are mostly in the fine size range (Reid et al., 2005). Therefore, the total mass and chemical compositions of IPF-derived aerosols have been widely determined for PM2.5 using a high volume air sampler or impactor as in Table S8. Simple size segregation such as coarse and fine PM sampling was conducted by dichotomous114, 115 or Gent stacked filter unit particle sampler9, 14, 31, 32, 52, 87, 97. To obtain higher size-resolved (size distribution) mass and chemical compositions of IPF-derived haze, multi-stage cascade impactors such as an Andersen sampler92, MOUDI (see the “Appendix” sheet in the dataset)25, 47, 48, Nano samplers92, 96, 100, 101, 111, 119 and others have been employed. A multi-stage impactor requires a longer sampling time, especially to determine reliable size distributions of trace elements and labor-intensive. Recently, real-time characterization of organic aerosols in haze (NR-PM1) has been conducted using an AMS as described in Section 4. There are not many, but real-time number size distributions have been measured by SMPS23, 25, 53, 74, 81, 102, 109, OPC13, 74 or other Supplementary Information related to this article 46 6. Size Distributions 7. Conclusions Seinfeld and Pandis (2016). There are few reports regarding the results of PM source apportionment of IPFs by the CMB model in Indonesia28, Singapore43 or Thailand120. In brief, See et al.28 reported that IPFs contributed 51% and 18.1% of the PM2.5 mass during haze periods at receptor sites in Belakang Rumah and Pekanbaru, respectively, in Sumatra, Indonesia. In Singapore, Engling et al.43 reported that IPFs were the predominant source (75.6% of TSP mass) during a haze event, followed by diesel exhaust (18.6%) and ship emissions (5.3%). In Thailand, Promsiri et al.120 reported during a transboundary haze event, PM2.5 in Hat Yai was dominated by IPF sources (50% of the PM2.5 mass), followed by rubber wood burning (27%) and diesel combustion (4%). Several sets of data on PM source apportionment by PMF model are available in Indonesia32,115 and Malaysia31, 51, 52, 55, 60, 61, 67, 71, 88, 108, 110, 111. However, only Fujii et al.67 have discussed IPF contribution clearly. They reported throughout their sampling periods (one year) that IPFs contributed, on average, 6.1–7.0 μg m-3 to PM2.5 or ~30% of PM2.5 mass. In particular, PM2.5 was dominantly sourced from IPFs during the southwest monsoon season (51% – 55% of the PM2.5 mass on average). Other reports have mentioned potential source contributions of IPFs at receptor sites52, 55, 60, 61, 71, 88, 115. Information from studies on source contributions from CMB and PMF as well as principal component analyses the Supplementary Information (“Source Apportionment” sheet the dataset). summarized are in haze, and in time-consuming is Y. FUJII and S. TOHNO Acknowledgments Supplementary Information Alves, C.A., Gonçalves, C., Evtyugina, M., Pio, C.A., Mirante, F. and Puxbaum, H. (2010) Particulate organic compounds emitted from experimental wildland fires in a Mediterranean ecosystem. Atmospheric Environment, 44: 2750−2759. methods in field and laboratory experiments. Details on the size distributions of total mass and chemical species are provided with additional documents in the Supplementary Information. in (grant number: 21K17896). can be ( zenodo.10699445). Included are the newly created dataset and supplementary documents (for Sections 4 and 6), tables and figures. References factors found on Zenodo

元のページ  ../index.html#52