the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 13 Jun 2023
Molecular fingerprints and health risks of home-use incense burning smoke
Abstract. The burning of incense for home use is a widespread practice that has been shown to have significant negative impacts on human health and air quality. However, there is a lack of understanding regarding its emission profiles and associated health risks. To address this knowledge gap, we utilized a state-of-the-art thermal desorption comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometer (TD-GC×GC-MS) to (semi-)quantify the emission factors (EFs) of 317 volatile compounds and thoroughly investigate the organic profiles of incense burning smoke across a full-volatility range. Results showed that toluene (70.8 ± 35.7 μg g-1) is the most abundant compound in incensing-burning smoke, followed by benzene, furfural, and phenol. Phenol, toluene, furfural, 2-furanmethanol, benzene, and benzyl alcohol are the main contributors to ozone and secondary organic aerosol (SOA) estimation. Intermediate volatility organic compounds (IVOCs) accounted for 19.2 % of the total EFs, but 40.0 % of the estimated SOA. Additionally, a novel pixel-based method, combined with aroma analysis, revealed that furfural can act as a key tracer of incense burning, and is responsible for the distinctive flavor of incense smoke. High bioaccumulation potential (BAP) assessment using pixel-based partition coefficient estimation revealed that acenaphthylene, dibenzofuran, and phthalate esters (PAEs) are chemicals of high-risk concern and warrant further control. Our results highlight the critical importance of investigating home-use incense burning and provide new insights into the health impacts of incense burning smoke by novel approaches.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(1191 KB)
-
Supplement
(3293 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1191 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(3293 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1225', Anonymous Referee #2, 21 Jun 2023
OVERALL COMMENTS:
This paper gives us a full glimpse of incense smoke by the non-target approach of GC×GC-MS which 371 compounds are identified. Incense and I/SVOCs emissions are neglected as part of burning studies before. The emission of incense burning is an important source of contribution to ozone and SOA formation. The MIR, OFP, SOA yields, EF factors, and tracers of incense burning are also listed which can give scientific support to other studies. The potential risks of these compounds evaluated in this paper can also give an important effect to reveal and assess the epidemiological influences of incense burning in future work.
INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS:
Line 119-120: What is the quantification rule, as shown in lines 119-120? Usually, the data was calculated as 1/2 LOQ when it matched the IDL.
Lines 190-197: The Tenax-TA method is not a very efficient sorbent for VOCs as the authors showed in lines 185-188. So the result from lines 190 to 197 should be clarified the VOCs here are the part of compounds captured by Tenax-TA, not the common VOCs detected by SUMMA-GC/MS.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1225-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
We greatly thank the reviewer for the careful review of the manuscript. The comments greatly improved our manuscript. We revised our manuscript according to the reviewer’s comments and suggestions. Here are our point-to-point responses to the comments.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1225', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Jul 2023
This study provides a detailed characterization of VOC-IVOC-SVOC emissions from incense burning, estimates the OFP, SOA formation, and the toxicity risks. Furfural is proposed as the molecular marker of incense burning due to its stable emission among different types of incense materials. The intensive domestic usage of incense imposes significant health risks for a large number of Chinese residence and this works gives a valuable set of data to assess the epidemiological influences of incense burning for future work. I recommend publication in ACP before a few comments to be addressed as below.
It is well known that TA tubes are designed for sampling gaseous organics in a given volatility range. The common way is to collect samples in I/SVOCs range using TA tubes and VOCs using summa tanks. There indeed are commercially available tubes for VOC collections. In this regard, further information on the methodology section and quality assurance is needed, either in the main text or SI. How did you choose the sampling materials, and what are their adsorption efficiencies for VOCs and IVOCs. The authors also mentioned that VOCs contributed to the majority of total EFs, i.e., over 80% as shown in Figure 1. Are these numbers arising from sampling biases that tubes don’t trap IVOCs efficiently?
Line 146 a space missing before Table S3.
Lines 267&269, delete the “_”.
Lines 138&139. The sentence “Where EFi is ….” is grammatically incorrect. Please re-write it.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1225-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
We greatly thank the reviewer for the careful review of the manuscript. The comments greatly improved our manuscript. We revised our manuscript according to the reviewer’s comments and suggestions. Here are our point-to-point responses to the comments.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1225', Anonymous Referee #2, 21 Jun 2023
OVERALL COMMENTS:
This paper gives us a full glimpse of incense smoke by the non-target approach of GC×GC-MS which 371 compounds are identified. Incense and I/SVOCs emissions are neglected as part of burning studies before. The emission of incense burning is an important source of contribution to ozone and SOA formation. The MIR, OFP, SOA yields, EF factors, and tracers of incense burning are also listed which can give scientific support to other studies. The potential risks of these compounds evaluated in this paper can also give an important effect to reveal and assess the epidemiological influences of incense burning in future work.
INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS:
Line 119-120: What is the quantification rule, as shown in lines 119-120? Usually, the data was calculated as 1/2 LOQ when it matched the IDL.
Lines 190-197: The Tenax-TA method is not a very efficient sorbent for VOCs as the authors showed in lines 185-188. So the result from lines 190 to 197 should be clarified the VOCs here are the part of compounds captured by Tenax-TA, not the common VOCs detected by SUMMA-GC/MS.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1225-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
We greatly thank the reviewer for the careful review of the manuscript. The comments greatly improved our manuscript. We revised our manuscript according to the reviewer’s comments and suggestions. Here are our point-to-point responses to the comments.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1225', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Jul 2023
This study provides a detailed characterization of VOC-IVOC-SVOC emissions from incense burning, estimates the OFP, SOA formation, and the toxicity risks. Furfural is proposed as the molecular marker of incense burning due to its stable emission among different types of incense materials. The intensive domestic usage of incense imposes significant health risks for a large number of Chinese residence and this works gives a valuable set of data to assess the epidemiological influences of incense burning for future work. I recommend publication in ACP before a few comments to be addressed as below.
It is well known that TA tubes are designed for sampling gaseous organics in a given volatility range. The common way is to collect samples in I/SVOCs range using TA tubes and VOCs using summa tanks. There indeed are commercially available tubes for VOC collections. In this regard, further information on the methodology section and quality assurance is needed, either in the main text or SI. How did you choose the sampling materials, and what are their adsorption efficiencies for VOCs and IVOCs. The authors also mentioned that VOCs contributed to the majority of total EFs, i.e., over 80% as shown in Figure 1. Are these numbers arising from sampling biases that tubes don’t trap IVOCs efficiently?
Line 146 a space missing before Table S3.
Lines 267&269, delete the “_”.
Lines 138&139. The sentence “Where EFi is ….” is grammatically incorrect. Please re-write it.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1225-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
We greatly thank the reviewer for the careful review of the manuscript. The comments greatly improved our manuscript. We revised our manuscript according to the reviewer’s comments and suggestions. Here are our point-to-point responses to the comments.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Song Guo, 29 Jul 2023
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 259 | 94 | 21 | 374 | 40 | 9 | 12 |
- HTML: 259
- PDF: 94
- XML: 21
- Total: 374
- Supplement: 40
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States of America | 1 | 120 | 32 |
| China | 2 | 96 | 25 |
| undefined | 3 | 22 | 5 |
| Germany | 4 | 18 | 4 |
| India | 5 | 13 | 3 |
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 120
Kai Song
Jingshun Zhang
Zichao Wan
Yuan Zhang
Kun Hu
Yuanzheng Gong
Daqi Lv
Sihua Lu
Yu Tan
Ruifeng Zhang
Ang Li
Shuyuan Yan
Shichao Yan
Baoming Fan
Wenfei Zhu
Chak K. Chan
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1191 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(3293 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper