Articles online

Characterization and Spatial Source Apportionments of Ambient PM10 and PM2.5 during the Heating Period in Tian’jin, China

Category: Aerosol and Atmospheric Chemistry

Accepted Manuscripts
DOI: 10.4209/aaqr.2019.06.0281

Export Citation:  RIS | BibTeX

Baoshuang Liu1, Xiaoyun Sun1, Jiaying Zhang1, Xiaohui Bi 1, Yafei Li1, Liwei Li2, Haiyan Dong2, Zhimei Xiao2, Yufen Zhang1, Yinchang Feng1

  • 1 State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Urban Ambient Air Particulate Matter Pollution Prevention and Control and Center for Urban Transport Emission Research, College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, Tian’jin 300350, China
  • 2 Tianjin Eco-Environment Monitoring Center, Tian’jin 300071, China


  • Impact of sources was assessed by the relationship between SO42−/NO3 and PM.
  • Error estimation diagnostics was applied to choose an optimal factor number.
  • The contributions of most sources show significant spatial-differences.


We collected ambient PM10 and PM2.5 samples from six sites in Tian’jin, China, from February to March 2016, then analysed their chemical compositions and identified emission sources using the positive matrix factorization model. The mean concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 were 98 and 71 μg m-3 with a mean PM2.5/PM10 ratio of 0.67. The average concentrations of the sum of SO42-, NO3- and NH4+ were 19.9–23.4 μg m-3, accounting for 72.4–77.1% of the total measured ions. The concentrations and percentages of NO3- and OC were significantly higher than those of other species. The SO42−/NO3− ratio showed a decreasing tendency with PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations increasing, implying the important influence of mobile sources. The mean OC/EC ratios for PM10 and PM2.5 were 3.1 and 3.2, with little spatial differences. Crustal elements were the most abundant elements, accounting for 73.2–84.2% of the total detected elements mass, mainly enriched in PM10. Optimal factors were selected for PM2.5 and PM10 by PMF analysis: the Q/Qexcept of PM10 and PM2.5 showed a smaller decrease when moving from five to six factors, indicating that five factors can be an optimal solution. All factors mapped in bootstrap (BS) in 100% of runs and no swaps occurring with displacement of factor elements (DISP) at five factors. Secondary inorganic aerosol, coal combustion, crustal dust, vehicle exhaust, and biomass burning contributed 28–30%, 20–21%, 18–21%, 17–20%, and 4%, respectively. The contributions of secondary inorganic aerosol showed less spatial difference than other sources. Backward trajectory and PSCF analysis showed that air masses affecting Tian’jin mainly originated in the northwest during the heating period, and the north-east of He’nan, south-western Shan’dong, Bei’jing, and Tian’jin itself were major potential source areas.


Chemical species Source apportionment Heating period Error estimation PMF

Related Article

Particle Liquid Water Content and Aerosol Acidity Acting as Indicators of Aerosol Activation Changes into Cloud Condensation Nuclei (CCN) during Pollution Eruption in Guangzhou of South China

Junyan Duan, Rui Lyu, Yanyu Wang, Xin Xie, Yunfei Wu, Jun Tao, Tiantao Cheng , Yuehui Liu, Yarong Peng, Renjian Zhang , Qianshan He, Wei Ga, Xianming Zhang, Qian Zhang

Sources and Characteristics of Particulate Matter at Five Locations in an Underground Mine

Sanna Saarikoski , Laura Salo, Matthew Bloss, Jenni Alanen, Kimmo Teinilä, Felipe Reyes, Yeanice Vázquezuez, Jorma Keskinen, Pedro Oyola, Topi Rönkkö, Hilkka Timonen