1970
DOI: 10.2307/2401970
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Method of Estimating Income of Nutrients in a Catch of Airborne Particles by a Woodland Canopy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
30
0

Year Published

1977
1977
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 110 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
3
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The studies showed that for Populus, when the wind speed is 3 m·s . Due to this study taking place in the same experimental area as that of Sun et al [57], we regard the deposition velocity of PM2.5 in this study as 0.9 ± 0.8 cm·s [55,58]; here we also adopted this value. With an increase in the particle size range of 0.1-10 μm, aerosol deposition velocities are greater [58].…”
Section: Urban Forest Effects Model: Air Particulate Removed By Treesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The studies showed that for Populus, when the wind speed is 3 m·s . Due to this study taking place in the same experimental area as that of Sun et al [57], we regard the deposition velocity of PM2.5 in this study as 0.9 ± 0.8 cm·s [55,58]; here we also adopted this value. With an increase in the particle size range of 0.1-10 μm, aerosol deposition velocities are greater [58].…”
Section: Urban Forest Effects Model: Air Particulate Removed By Treesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dust transport is strongly affected by individual meteorological events, leading to very high spatial and temporal variability in both transport and deposition. Atmospheric deposition collectors cannot accurately measure meaningful long-term averages of total dust deposition in a forest (Hicks et al 1980;Lindberg and Lovett 1985;Miller and Miler 1980;Stoorvogel et al 1997;White and Turner 1970). Deposition collectors lack the surface area of the forest canopy to entrain dust and aerosols and typically do not account for spatial variability (Bruijnzeel 1989;and Bruijnzeel 1991).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These methods are limited by multiple issues, including the high spatial 87 and temporal variability in both transport and deposition (Prospero, 1999). Direct collection of 88 dust using ground-based deposition collectors cannot meaningfully measure the long-term 89 average dust deposition in forested ecosystems, in part because they do not mimic the forest 90 canopy structure and surface properties of leaves (Hicks et al, 1980;Lindberg and Lovett, 1985;91 Stoorvogel et al, 1997; White and Turner, 1970). Modern deposition studies typically rely on 92 only a few years of data and are thus subject to timescale biases (Pelletier, 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%