Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry
<p>Pesticides have been found to be transported through the atmosphere away from fields after application. A key indicator of a pesticide's likelihood to reside in the atmosphere is its vapour pressure. Within this study we evaluate a novel method, the Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| Online Access: | https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/6257/2025/acp-25-6257-2025.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849683496863268864 |
|---|---|
| author | O. M. Jackson A. Voliotis A. Voliotis T. J. Bannan S. P. O'Meara S. P. O'Meara G. McFiggans D. Johnson H. Coe |
| author_facet | O. M. Jackson A. Voliotis A. Voliotis T. J. Bannan S. P. O'Meara S. P. O'Meara G. McFiggans D. Johnson H. Coe |
| author_sort | O. M. Jackson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Pesticides have been found to be transported through the atmosphere away from fields after application. A key indicator of a pesticide's likelihood to reside in the atmosphere is its vapour pressure. Within this study we evaluate a novel method, the Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols (FIGAERO) coupled with a chemical ionisation mass spectrometer, using a set of calibration compounds, polyethylene glycols (PEGs). Two methods of compound delivery onto the filter have been tested: atomisation and syringe deposition. Delivery results are consistent with previous studies, highlighting the lack of suitability of the syringe method. The successful calibration using the atomisation method was then used to determine the vapour pressure of six pesticides. This is the first time particle-phase pesticides have been measured with particle-phase chemical ionisation mass spectrometry (CIMS). The pesticide volatilities were compared with widely accepted standard literature values used in industry, as well as values derived from a common environmental model frequently employed in industrial applications. Results showed that measurements from the FIGAERO-CIMS were consistent with reported literature values for some compounds, while others differed by up to 2 orders of magnitude. Determinations of dicamba, MCPA, and MCPP volatility using the FIGAERO-CIMS showed them to be semi-volatile, in agreement with literature values within 1 order of magnitude. Mesotrione exhibited the largest difference in volatility, with the FIGAERO-CIMS measuring a low volatility of <span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mn mathvariant="normal">4.12</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mrow><mo>-</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">8</mn></mrow></msup><mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mrow class="unit"><mi mathvariant="normal">Pa</mi></mrow></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="72pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="31071cc4aae8604b78c347defe95587c"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00001.svg" width="72pt" height="14pt" src="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00001.png"/></svg:svg></span></span> at 298 K (compared to a literature value of <span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mn mathvariant="normal">5.7</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mrow><mo>-</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">6</mn></mrow></msup><mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mrow class="unit"><mi mathvariant="normal">Pa</mi></mrow></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="66pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="32b8f01e109ceade712f69ccac74cc66"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00002.svg" width="66pt" height="14pt" src="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00002.png"/></svg:svg></span></span>). The difference for 2,4-D of 1 order of magnitude can be explained by the smaller particles deposited on the FIGAERO filter compared to the aerosolised PEG calibration particles, leading to evaporation at higher <span class="inline-formula"><i>T</i><sub>max</sub></span> values and a lower measured vapour pressure and thus further supporting the conclusion that a calibration using the same particle size is required. The atmospheric implications of the pesticide volatilities are also discussed. A pesticide's volatility is often a key indicator of the likelihood of the potential for short- or long-range transport occurring, thus determining a pesticide's fate in the atmosphere and potential for environmental pollution from transportation in the air.</p> |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-dca65fd416e941ad90e0c488fd8af963 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1680-7316 1680-7324 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-06-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| spelling | doaj-art-dca65fd416e941ad90e0c488fd8af9632025-08-20T03:23:51ZengCopernicus PublicationsAtmospheric Chemistry and Physics1680-73161680-73242025-06-01256257627210.5194/acp-25-6257-2025Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometryO. M. Jackson0A. Voliotis1A. Voliotis2T. J. Bannan3S. P. O'Meara4S. P. O'Meara5G. McFiggans6D. Johnson7H. Coe8Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKNational Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKNational Centre for Atmospheric Science, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UKSyngenta, Jealott's Hill Research Station, Bracknell RG42 6EY, UKDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK<p>Pesticides have been found to be transported through the atmosphere away from fields after application. A key indicator of a pesticide's likelihood to reside in the atmosphere is its vapour pressure. Within this study we evaluate a novel method, the Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols (FIGAERO) coupled with a chemical ionisation mass spectrometer, using a set of calibration compounds, polyethylene glycols (PEGs). Two methods of compound delivery onto the filter have been tested: atomisation and syringe deposition. Delivery results are consistent with previous studies, highlighting the lack of suitability of the syringe method. The successful calibration using the atomisation method was then used to determine the vapour pressure of six pesticides. This is the first time particle-phase pesticides have been measured with particle-phase chemical ionisation mass spectrometry (CIMS). The pesticide volatilities were compared with widely accepted standard literature values used in industry, as well as values derived from a common environmental model frequently employed in industrial applications. Results showed that measurements from the FIGAERO-CIMS were consistent with reported literature values for some compounds, while others differed by up to 2 orders of magnitude. Determinations of dicamba, MCPA, and MCPP volatility using the FIGAERO-CIMS showed them to be semi-volatile, in agreement with literature values within 1 order of magnitude. Mesotrione exhibited the largest difference in volatility, with the FIGAERO-CIMS measuring a low volatility of <span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mn mathvariant="normal">4.12</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mrow><mo>-</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">8</mn></mrow></msup><mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mrow class="unit"><mi mathvariant="normal">Pa</mi></mrow></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="72pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="31071cc4aae8604b78c347defe95587c"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00001.svg" width="72pt" height="14pt" src="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00001.png"/></svg:svg></span></span> at 298 K (compared to a literature value of <span class="inline-formula"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2" display="inline" overflow="scroll" dspmath="mathml"><mrow><mn mathvariant="normal">5.7</mn><mo>×</mo><msup><mn mathvariant="normal">10</mn><mrow><mo>-</mo><mn mathvariant="normal">6</mn></mrow></msup><mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mrow class="unit"><mi mathvariant="normal">Pa</mi></mrow></mrow></math><span><svg:svg xmlns:svg="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="66pt" height="14pt" class="svg-formula" dspmath="mathimg" md5hash="32b8f01e109ceade712f69ccac74cc66"><svg:image xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00002.svg" width="66pt" height="14pt" src="acp-25-6257-2025-ie00002.png"/></svg:svg></span></span>). The difference for 2,4-D of 1 order of magnitude can be explained by the smaller particles deposited on the FIGAERO filter compared to the aerosolised PEG calibration particles, leading to evaporation at higher <span class="inline-formula"><i>T</i><sub>max</sub></span> values and a lower measured vapour pressure and thus further supporting the conclusion that a calibration using the same particle size is required. The atmospheric implications of the pesticide volatilities are also discussed. A pesticide's volatility is often a key indicator of the likelihood of the potential for short- or long-range transport occurring, thus determining a pesticide's fate in the atmosphere and potential for environmental pollution from transportation in the air.</p>https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/6257/2025/acp-25-6257-2025.pdf |
| spellingShingle | O. M. Jackson A. Voliotis A. Voliotis T. J. Bannan S. P. O'Meara S. P. O'Meara G. McFiggans D. Johnson H. Coe Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| title | Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry |
| title_full | Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry |
| title_fullStr | Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry |
| title_full_unstemmed | Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry |
| title_short | Determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using Filter Inlet for Gases and AEROsols–chemical ionisation mass spectrometry |
| title_sort | determination of the atmospheric volatility of pesticides using filter inlet for gases and aerosols chemical ionisation mass spectrometry |
| url | https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/6257/2025/acp-25-6257-2025.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT omjackson determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT avoliotis determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT avoliotis determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT tjbannan determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT spomeara determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT spomeara determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT gmcfiggans determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT djohnson determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry AT hcoe determinationoftheatmosphericvolatilityofpesticidesusingfilterinletforgasesandaerosolschemicalionisationmassspectrometry |