Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33748825›Full record

ArticleReviews of geophysics (Washington, D.C. : 1985)2020

Dry Deposition of Ozone over Land: Processes, Measurement, and Modeling.

Olivia E Clifton, Arlene M Fiore, William J Massman, Colleen B Baublitz, Mhairi Coyle, Lisa Emberson, Silvano Fares, Delphine K Farmer, Pierre Gentine, Giacomo Gerosa and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reviews of geophysics (Washington, D.C. : 1985), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
14.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 198 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Approaches to investigate crop responses to ozone pollution: from OThe Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2022
    Review
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

21 authors at 18 institutions in 5 countries.

Olivia E CliftonNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA.
Arlene M FioreDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Columbia University, and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA.
William J MassmanUSDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Colleen B BaublitzDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Columbia University, and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA.
Mhairi CoyleCentre for Ecology and Hydrology, Edinburgh, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, UK and The James Hutton Institute, Craigibuckler, Aberdeen, UK.
Lisa EmbersonStockholm Environment Institute, Environment Department, University of York, York, UK.
Silvano FaresCouncil of Agricultural Research and Economics, Research Centre for Forestry and Wood, and National Research Council, Institute of Bioeconomy, Rome, Italy.
Delphine K FarmerDepartment of Chemistry, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
Pierre GentineDepartment of Earth and Environmental Engineering, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Giacomo GerosaDipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università Cattolica del S. C., Brescia, Italy.
Alex B GuentherDepartment of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Detlev HelmigInstitute of Alpine and Arctic Research, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
Danica L LombardozziNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA.
J William MungerSchool of Engineering and Applied Sciences and Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Edward G PattonNational Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA.
Sally E PusedeDepartment of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Donna B SchwedeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Sam J SilvaDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Matthias SörgelMax Plank Institute for Chemistry, Atmospheric Chemistry Department, Mainz, Germany.
Allison L SteinerDepartment of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Amos P K TaiEarth System Science Programme, Faculty of Science, and State Key Laboratory of Agrobiotechnology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research · USLamont-Doherty Earth Observatory · USChinese University of Hong Kong · HKColorado State University · USColumbia University · USEnvironmental Protection Agency · USInstitute of Arctic and Alpine Research · USJames Hutton Institute · GBMassachusetts Institute of Technology · USMax Planck Institute for Chemistry · DENational Research Council · ITPlanetary Science Institute · USRocky Mountain Research Station · USStockholm Environment Institute · GBUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Michigan · USUniversity of Virginia · US

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dry deposition of ozone is an important sink of ozone in near surface air. When dry deposition occurs through plant stomata, ozone can injure the plant, altering water and carbon cycling and reducing crop yields. Quantifying both stomatal and nonstomatal uptake accurately is relevant for understanding ozone's impact on human health as an air pollutant and on climate as a potent short-lived greenhouse gas and primary control on the removal of several reactive greenhouse gases and air pollutants. Robust ozone dry deposition estimates require knowledge of the relative importance of individual deposition pathways, but spatiotemporal variability in nonstomatal deposition is poorly understood. Here we integrate understanding of ozone deposition processes by synthesizing research from fields such as atmospheric chemistry, ecology, and meteorology. We critically review methods for measurements and modeling, highlighting the empiricism that underpins modeling and thus the interpretation of observations. Our unprecedented synthesis of knowledge on deposition pathways, particularly soil and leaf cuticles, reveals process understanding not yet included in widely-used models. If coordinated with short-term field intensives, laboratory studies, and mechanistic modeling, measurements from a few long-term sites would bridge the molecular to ecosystem scales necessary to establish the relative importance of individual deposition pathways and the extent to which they vary in space and time. Our recommended approaches seek to close knowledge gaps that currently limit quantifying the impact of ozone dry deposition on air quality, ecosystems, and climate.

Indexed as

0315 Biosphere/atmosphere interactions0322 Constituent sources and sinks0345 Pollution: urban and regional0365 Troposphere: composition and chemistry0414 Biogeochemical cycles, processes and modelingair pollutionDry depositioneddy covarianceland-atmosphere interactionsstomatal conductancetropospheric ozone

Identifiers

PMID33748825
PMCPMC7970530
OpenAlexW3004459665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.