An interlaboratory comparison of aerosol inorganic ion measurements by ion chromatography: implications for aerosol pH estimate
Authors
Xu, Jingsha
Song, Shaojie

Harrison, Roy M.

Song, Congbo

Wei, Lianfang

Zhang, Qiang
Sun, Yele

Lei, Lu
Zhang, Chao
Yao, Xiaohong
Chen, Dihui
Li, Weijun

Wu, Miaomiao
Tian, Hezhong

Luo, Lining
Tong, Shengrui
Li, Weiran
Wang, Junling
Shi, Guoliang

Huangfu, Yanqi
Tian, Yingze
Ge, Baozhu

Su, Shaoli
Peng, Chao
Chen, Yang

Yang, Fumo
Mihajlidi-Zelić, Aleksandra

Đorđević, Dragana

Swift, Stefan J.

Andrews, Imogen
Hamilton, Jacqueline F.
Sun, Ye
Kramawijaya, Agung
Han, Jinxiu
Saksakulkrai, Supattarachai
Baldo, Clarissa

Hou, Siqi
Zheng, Feixue
Daellenbach, Kaspar R.

Yan, Chao

Liu, Yongchun

Kulmala, Markku

Fu, Pingqing

Shi, Zongbo
Article (Published version)
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Water-soluble inorganic ions such as ammonium, nitrate and sulfate are major components of fine aerosols in the atmosphere and are widely used in the estimation of aerosol acidity. However, different experimental practices and instrumentation may lead to uncertainties in ion concentrations. Here, an intercomparison experiment was conducted in 10 different laboratories (labs) to investigate the consistency of inorganic ion concentrations and resultant aerosol acidity estimates using the same set of aerosol filter samples. The results mostly exhibited good agreement for major ions Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+. However, F−, Mg2+ and Ca2+ were observed with more variations across the different labs. The Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) data of nonrefractory SO2−4, NO−3 and NH+4 generally correlated very well with the filter-analysis-based data in our study, but the absolute concentrations differ by up to 42 %. Cl− from the two methods are correlated, but the concentration differ... by more than a factor of 3. The analyses of certified reference materials (CRMs) generally showed a good detection accuracy (DA) of all ions in all the labs, the majority of which ranged between 90 % and 110 %. The DA was also used to correct the ion concentrations to showcase the importance of using CRMs for calibration check and quality control. Better agreements were found for Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+ across the labs after their concentrations were corrected with DA; the coefficient of variation (CV) of Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+ decreased by 1.7 %, 3.4 %, 3.4 %, 1.2 % and 2.6 %, respectively, after DA correction. We found that the ratio of anion to cation equivalent concentrations (AE / CE) and ion balance (anions–cations) are not good indicators for aerosol acidity estimates, as the results in different labs did not agree well with each other. In situ aerosol pH calculated from the ISORROPIA II thermodynamic equilibrium model with measured ion and ammonia concentrations showed a similar trend and good agreement across the 10 labs. Our results indicate that although there are important uncertainties in aerosol ion concentration measurements, the estimated aerosol pH from the ISORROPIA II model is more consistent.
Keywords:
ion chromatography / pH / ammonium / nitrate / sulfate / aerosol acidity / Sample analysis / Quality assurance / quality control / inorganic ions / ion concentrationsSource:
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 2020, 13, 11, 6325-6341Publisher:
- Copernicus GmbH
DOI: 10.5194/amt-13-6325-2020
ISSN: 1867-8548
WoS: 000595528700002
Scopus: 2-s2.0-85097419614
Collections
Institution/Community
IHTMTY - JOUR AU - Xu, Jingsha AU - Song, Shaojie AU - Harrison, Roy M. AU - Song, Congbo AU - Wei, Lianfang AU - Zhang, Qiang AU - Sun, Yele AU - Lei, Lu AU - Zhang, Chao AU - Yao, Xiaohong AU - Chen, Dihui AU - Li, Weijun AU - Wu, Miaomiao AU - Tian, Hezhong AU - Luo, Lining AU - Tong, Shengrui AU - Li, Weiran AU - Wang, Junling AU - Shi, Guoliang AU - Huangfu, Yanqi AU - Tian, Yingze AU - Ge, Baozhu AU - Su, Shaoli AU - Peng, Chao AU - Chen, Yang AU - Yang, Fumo AU - Mihajlidi-Zelić, Aleksandra AU - Đorđević, Dragana AU - Swift, Stefan J. AU - Andrews, Imogen AU - Hamilton, Jacqueline F. AU - Sun, Ye AU - Kramawijaya, Agung AU - Han, Jinxiu AU - Saksakulkrai, Supattarachai AU - Baldo, Clarissa AU - Hou, Siqi AU - Zheng, Feixue AU - Daellenbach, Kaspar R. AU - Yan, Chao AU - Liu, Yongchun AU - Kulmala, Markku AU - Fu, Pingqing AU - Shi, Zongbo PY - 2020 UR - https://cer.ihtm.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/4050 AB - Water-soluble inorganic ions such as ammonium, nitrate and sulfate are major components of fine aerosols in the atmosphere and are widely used in the estimation of aerosol acidity. However, different experimental practices and instrumentation may lead to uncertainties in ion concentrations. Here, an intercomparison experiment was conducted in 10 different laboratories (labs) to investigate the consistency of inorganic ion concentrations and resultant aerosol acidity estimates using the same set of aerosol filter samples. The results mostly exhibited good agreement for major ions Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+. However, F−, Mg2+ and Ca2+ were observed with more variations across the different labs. The Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) data of nonrefractory SO2−4, NO−3 and NH+4 generally correlated very well with the filter-analysis-based data in our study, but the absolute concentrations differ by up to 42 %. Cl− from the two methods are correlated, but the concentration differ by more than a factor of 3. The analyses of certified reference materials (CRMs) generally showed a good detection accuracy (DA) of all ions in all the labs, the majority of which ranged between 90 % and 110 %. The DA was also used to correct the ion concentrations to showcase the importance of using CRMs for calibration check and quality control. Better agreements were found for Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+ across the labs after their concentrations were corrected with DA; the coefficient of variation (CV) of Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+ decreased by 1.7 %, 3.4 %, 3.4 %, 1.2 % and 2.6 %, respectively, after DA correction. We found that the ratio of anion to cation equivalent concentrations (AE / CE) and ion balance (anions–cations) are not good indicators for aerosol acidity estimates, as the results in different labs did not agree well with each other. In situ aerosol pH calculated from the ISORROPIA II thermodynamic equilibrium model with measured ion and ammonia concentrations showed a similar trend and good agreement across the 10 labs. Our results indicate that although there are important uncertainties in aerosol ion concentration measurements, the estimated aerosol pH from the ISORROPIA II model is more consistent. PB - Copernicus GmbH T2 - Atmospheric Measurement Techniques T1 - An interlaboratory comparison of aerosol inorganic ion measurements by ion chromatography: implications for aerosol pH estimate VL - 13 IS - 11 SP - 6325 EP - 6341 DO - 10.5194/amt-13-6325-2020 ER -
@article{ author = "Xu, Jingsha and Song, Shaojie and Harrison, Roy M. and Song, Congbo and Wei, Lianfang and Zhang, Qiang and Sun, Yele and Lei, Lu and Zhang, Chao and Yao, Xiaohong and Chen, Dihui and Li, Weijun and Wu, Miaomiao and Tian, Hezhong and Luo, Lining and Tong, Shengrui and Li, Weiran and Wang, Junling and Shi, Guoliang and Huangfu, Yanqi and Tian, Yingze and Ge, Baozhu and Su, Shaoli and Peng, Chao and Chen, Yang and Yang, Fumo and Mihajlidi-Zelić, Aleksandra and Đorđević, Dragana and Swift, Stefan J. and Andrews, Imogen and Hamilton, Jacqueline F. and Sun, Ye and Kramawijaya, Agung and Han, Jinxiu and Saksakulkrai, Supattarachai and Baldo, Clarissa and Hou, Siqi and Zheng, Feixue and Daellenbach, Kaspar R. and Yan, Chao and Liu, Yongchun and Kulmala, Markku and Fu, Pingqing and Shi, Zongbo", year = "2020", abstract = "Water-soluble inorganic ions such as ammonium, nitrate and sulfate are major components of fine aerosols in the atmosphere and are widely used in the estimation of aerosol acidity. However, different experimental practices and instrumentation may lead to uncertainties in ion concentrations. Here, an intercomparison experiment was conducted in 10 different laboratories (labs) to investigate the consistency of inorganic ion concentrations and resultant aerosol acidity estimates using the same set of aerosol filter samples. The results mostly exhibited good agreement for major ions Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+. However, F−, Mg2+ and Ca2+ were observed with more variations across the different labs. The Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) data of nonrefractory SO2−4, NO−3 and NH+4 generally correlated very well with the filter-analysis-based data in our study, but the absolute concentrations differ by up to 42 %. Cl− from the two methods are correlated, but the concentration differ by more than a factor of 3. The analyses of certified reference materials (CRMs) generally showed a good detection accuracy (DA) of all ions in all the labs, the majority of which ranged between 90 % and 110 %. The DA was also used to correct the ion concentrations to showcase the importance of using CRMs for calibration check and quality control. Better agreements were found for Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+ across the labs after their concentrations were corrected with DA; the coefficient of variation (CV) of Cl−, SO2−4, NO−3, NH+4 and K+ decreased by 1.7 %, 3.4 %, 3.4 %, 1.2 % and 2.6 %, respectively, after DA correction. We found that the ratio of anion to cation equivalent concentrations (AE / CE) and ion balance (anions–cations) are not good indicators for aerosol acidity estimates, as the results in different labs did not agree well with each other. In situ aerosol pH calculated from the ISORROPIA II thermodynamic equilibrium model with measured ion and ammonia concentrations showed a similar trend and good agreement across the 10 labs. Our results indicate that although there are important uncertainties in aerosol ion concentration measurements, the estimated aerosol pH from the ISORROPIA II model is more consistent.", publisher = "Copernicus GmbH", journal = "Atmospheric Measurement Techniques", title = "An interlaboratory comparison of aerosol inorganic ion measurements by ion chromatography: implications for aerosol pH estimate", volume = "13", number = "11", pages = "6325-6341", doi = "10.5194/amt-13-6325-2020" }
Xu, J., Song, S., Harrison, R. M., Song, C., Wei, L., Zhang, Q., Sun, Y., Lei, L., Zhang, C., Yao, X., Chen, D., Li, W., Wu, M., Tian, H., Luo, L., Tong, S., Li, W., Wang, J., Shi, G., Huangfu, Y., Tian, Y., Ge, B., Su, S., Peng, C., Chen, Y., Yang, F., Mihajlidi-Zelić, A., Đorđević, D., Swift, S. J., Andrews, I., Hamilton, J. F., Sun, Y., Kramawijaya, A., Han, J., Saksakulkrai, S., Baldo, C., Hou, S., Zheng, F., Daellenbach, K. R., Yan, C., Liu, Y., Kulmala, M., Fu, P.,& Shi, Z.. (2020). An interlaboratory comparison of aerosol inorganic ion measurements by ion chromatography: implications for aerosol pH estimate. in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques Copernicus GmbH., 13(11), 6325-6341. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6325-2020
Xu J, Song S, Harrison RM, Song C, Wei L, Zhang Q, Sun Y, Lei L, Zhang C, Yao X, Chen D, Li W, Wu M, Tian H, Luo L, Tong S, Li W, Wang J, Shi G, Huangfu Y, Tian Y, Ge B, Su S, Peng C, Chen Y, Yang F, Mihajlidi-Zelić A, Đorđević D, Swift SJ, Andrews I, Hamilton JF, Sun Y, Kramawijaya A, Han J, Saksakulkrai S, Baldo C, Hou S, Zheng F, Daellenbach KR, Yan C, Liu Y, Kulmala M, Fu P, Shi Z. An interlaboratory comparison of aerosol inorganic ion measurements by ion chromatography: implications for aerosol pH estimate. in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques. 2020;13(11):6325-6341. doi:10.5194/amt-13-6325-2020 .
Xu, Jingsha, Song, Shaojie, Harrison, Roy M., Song, Congbo, Wei, Lianfang, Zhang, Qiang, Sun, Yele, Lei, Lu, Zhang, Chao, Yao, Xiaohong, Chen, Dihui, Li, Weijun, Wu, Miaomiao, Tian, Hezhong, Luo, Lining, Tong, Shengrui, Li, Weiran, Wang, Junling, Shi, Guoliang, Huangfu, Yanqi, Tian, Yingze, Ge, Baozhu, Su, Shaoli, Peng, Chao, Chen, Yang, Yang, Fumo, Mihajlidi-Zelić, Aleksandra, Đorđević, Dragana, Swift, Stefan J., Andrews, Imogen, Hamilton, Jacqueline F., Sun, Ye, Kramawijaya, Agung, Han, Jinxiu, Saksakulkrai, Supattarachai, Baldo, Clarissa, Hou, Siqi, Zheng, Feixue, Daellenbach, Kaspar R., Yan, Chao, Liu, Yongchun, Kulmala, Markku, Fu, Pingqing, Shi, Zongbo, "An interlaboratory comparison of aerosol inorganic ion measurements by ion chromatography: implications for aerosol pH estimate" in Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 13, no. 11 (2020):6325-6341, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6325-2020 . .