Comparison of modelled and experimental PM10 source contributions for mapping source-specific oxidative potential

To effectively reduce the health burden of particulate matter (PM) pollution requires indicators more directly linked to adverse health effects than total PM mass alone. Oxidative potential (OP)—the ability of PM to induce oxidative stress based on its chemical composition—is gaining recognition as a health-relevant metric. Integrating source-specific OP values from field measurements into Chemical Transport Models (CTMs) enables the mapping of source-specific OP with broad spatiotemporal coverage. A critical step is ensuring alignment between CTM-derived and observation-based source contributions. This study evaluates and optimises the consistency between the LOTOS-EUROS CTM and Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) source profiles, using PM 10 data from 15 French sites (2013–2016). While total PM 10 shows reasonable correlation with observations (r 2 =0.35–0.66), source-specific comparisons vary across source-types and locations. Promising results are obtained for residential biomass burning (r 2 =0.34–0.75), secondary inorganic aerosols (r 2 =0.30–0.71), and sea salt (r 2 =0.18–0.71), whereas road traffic shows weaker alignment (r 2 =0.01–0.40). Using the optimized source matching, OP maps are generated over France, showing stronger contributions from anthropogenic sources to OP than to PM 10 mass. The study highlights key challenges in matching CTM and PMF sources for OP modelling, due to secondary aerosol formation, source mixing within PMF profiles, and spatiotemporal representation differences. Refining emission data, incorporating secondary organic aerosol and aging processes in CTMs, and expanding source-specific OP measurements, particularly for uncharacterized sources like agriculture are identified as essential next steps. Despite current limitations, this approach offers a promising framework for advancing health-oriented air quality management. • PM source contributions from CTM and PMF matched to model Oxidative Potential (OP) • Biomass burning, secondary inorganic aerosols, and seasalt show good agreement • Source-specific OP mapping promising for health-focused air quality management • Refine emissions and aging processes in CTMs to improve OP modelling

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Atmospheric Environment X
Published
2025-06-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeaoa.2025.100339
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.30

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of modelled and experimental PM10 source contributions for mapping source-specific oxidative potential

Olivier Favez, Richard Kranenburg, Janot P. Tokaya, Gaëlle Uzu et al.
1 citations
Atmospheric Environment X
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
1.30
article

Comparison of modelled and experimental PM10 source contributions for mapping source-specific oxidative potential

Olivier Favez, Richard Kranenburg, Janot P. Tokaya, Gaëlle Uzu, Jean‐Luc Jaffrezo, Martijn Schaap, Renske Timmermans, Samuël Weber, Pamela Dominutti, Floris Pekel
article en
1 citations

Abstract

To effectively reduce the health burden of particulate matter (PM) pollution requires indicators more directly linked to adverse health effects than total PM mass alone. Oxidative potential (OP)—the ability of PM to induce oxidative stress based on its chemical composition—is gaining recognition as a health-relevant metric. Integrating source-specific OP values from field measurements into Chemical Transport Models (CTMs) enables the mapping of source-specific OP with broad spatiotemporal coverage. A critical step is ensuring alignment between CTM-derived and observation-based source contributions. This study evaluates and optimises the consistency between the LOTOS-EUROS CTM and Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) source profiles, using PM 10 data from 15 French sites (2013–2016). While total PM 10 shows reasonable correlation with observations (r 2 =0.35–0.66), source-specific comparisons vary across source-types and locations. Promising results are obtained for residential biomass burning (r 2 =0.34–0.75), secondary inorganic aerosols (r 2 =0.30–0.71), and sea salt (r 2 =0.18–0.71), whereas road traffic shows weaker alignment (r 2 =0.01–0.40). Using the optimized source matching, OP maps are generated over France, showing stronger contributions from anthropogenic sources to OP than to PM 10 mass. The study highlights key challenges in matching CTM and PMF sources for OP modelling, due to secondary aerosol formation, source mixing within PMF profiles, and spatiotemporal representation differences. Refining emission data, incorporating secondary organic aerosol and aging processes in CTMs, and expanding source-specific OP measurements, particularly for uncharacterized sources like agriculture are identified as essential next steps. Despite current limitations, this approach offers a promising framework for advancing health-oriented air quality management. • PM source contributions from CTM and PMF matched to model Oxidative Potential (OP) • Biomass burning, secondary inorganic aerosols, and seasalt show good agreement • Source-specific OP mapping promising for health-focused air quality management • Refine emissions and aging processes in CTMs to improve OP modelling

Atmospheric Environment XVol. 27
Institut polytechnique de Grenoble (FR), École de l'air et de l'espace (FR), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (NL), Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR), Institut des Géosciences de l'Environnement (FR), Institut national de l'environnement industriel et des risques (FR), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (FR), Université Grenoble Alpes (FR)
Fondation Université Grenoble Alpes, European Commission, Agence Nationale de la Recherche, Ministry of Environment
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
1.30
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.