Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29963079›Full record

ArticleAtmospheric chemistry and physics2018

Southeast Atmosphere Studies: learning from model-observation syntheses.

Jingqiu Mao, Annmarie Carlton, Ronald C Cohen, William H Brune, Steven S Brown, Glenn M Wolfe, Jose L Jimenez, Havala O T Pye, Nga Lee Ng, Lu Xu and 15 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Atmospheric chemistry and physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Rapid hydrolysis of tertiary isoprene nitrate efficiently removes NOProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors.

Jingqiu MaoGeophysical Institute and Department of Chemistry, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA.
Annmarie CarltonDepartment of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Ronald C CohenDepartment of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
William H BruneDepartment of Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Steven S BrownDepartment of Chemistry and CIRES, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Glenn M WolfeChemical Sciences Division, NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, CO, USA.
Jose L JimenezDepartment of Chemistry and CIRES, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Havala O T PyeNational Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Nga Lee NgSchool of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Lu XuSchool of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
V Faye McNeillDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Columbia University, New York, NY USA.
Kostas TsigaridisCenter for Climate Systems Research, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Brian C McDonaldCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Carsten WarnekeCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Alex GuentherDepartment of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Matthew J AlvaradoAtmospheric and Environmental Research, Lexington, MA, USA.
Joost de GouwDepartment of Chemistry and CIRES, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Loretta J MickleyJohn A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Eric M LeibenspergerCenter for Earth and Environmental Science, SUNY Plattsburgh, Plattsburgh, NY, USA.
Rohit MathurNational Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Christopher G NolteNational Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Robert W PortmannCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Nadine UngerCollege of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Mika ToscaSchool of the Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC), Chicago, IL 60603, USA.
Larry W HorowitzGeophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Princeton, NJ, USA.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concentrations of atmospheric trace species in the United States have changed dramatically over the past several decades in response to pollution control strategies, shifts in domestic energy policy and economics, and economic development (and resulting emission changes) elsewhere in the world. Reliable projections of the future atmosphere require models to not only accurately describe current atmospheric concentrations, but to do so by representing chemical, physical and biological processes with conceptual and quantitative fidelity. Only through incorporation of the processes controlling emissions and chemical mechanisms that represent the key transformations among reactive molecules can models reliably project the impacts of future policy, energy and climate scenarios. Efforts to properly identify and implement the fundamental and controlling mechanisms in atmospheric models benefit from intensive observation periods, during which collocated measurements of diverse, speciated chemicals in both the gas and condensed phases are obtained. The Southeast Atmosphere Studies (SAS, including SENEX, SOAS, NOMADSS and SEAC4RS) conducted during the summer of 2013 provided an unprecedented opportunity for the atmospheric modeling community to come together to evaluate, diagnose and improve the representation of fundamental climate and air quality processes in models of varying temporal and spatial scales. This paper is aimed at discussing progress in evaluating, diagnosing and improving air quality and climate modeling using comparisons to SAS observations as a guide to thinking about improvements to mechanisms and parameterizations in models. The effort focused primarily on model representation of fundamental atmospheric processes that are essential to the formation of ozone, secondary organic aerosol (SOA) and other trace species in the troposphere, with the ultimate goal of understanding the radiative impacts of these species in the southeast and elsewhere. Here we address questions surrounding four key themes: gas-phase chemistry, aerosol chemistry, regional climate and chemistry interactions, and natural and anthropogenic emissions. We expect this review to serve as a guidance for future modeling efforts.

Identifiers

PMID29963079
PMCPMC6020695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.