ArticleACS earth & space chemistry2024
Chemical Fingerprinting of Biomass Burning Organic Aerosols from Sugar Cane Combustion: Complementary Findings from Field and Laboratory Studies.
Article in ACS earth & space chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Agricultural fires are a major source of biomass-burning organic aerosols (BBOAs) with impacts on health, the environment, and climate. In this study, globally relevant BBOA emissions from the combustion of sugar cane in both field and laboratory experiments were analyzed using comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography time-of-flight mass spectrometry. The derived chemical fingerprints of fresh emissions were evaluated using targeted and nontargeted evaluation approaches. The open-field sugar cane burning experiments revealed the high chemical complexity of combustion emissions, including compounds derived from the pyrolysis of (hemi)cellulose, lignin, and further biomass, such as pyridine and oxime derivatives, methoxyphenols, and methoxybenzenes, as well as triterpenoids. In comparison, laboratory experiments could only partially model the complexity of real combustion events. Our results showed high variability between the conducted field and laboratory experiments, which we, among others, discuss in terms of differences in combustion conditions, fuel composition, and atmospheric processing. We conclude that both field and laboratory studies have their merits and should be applied complementarily. While field studies under real-world conditions are essential to assess the general impact on air quality, climate, and environment, laboratory studies are better suited to investigate specific emissions of different biomass types under controlled conditions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.