Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2380
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2380
08 Aug 2024
 | 08 Aug 2024
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).

Determination of the Atmospheric Volatility of Pesticides using Chemical Ionisation Mass Spectrometry

Olivia Mae Jackson, Aristeidis Voliotis, Thomas J. Bannan, Simon P. O'Meara, Gordon McFiggans, Dave Johnson, and Hugh Coe

Abstract. Pesticides have been found to be transported through the atmosphere away from fields on 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, poly-ethylene 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 6 pesticides. This is the first-time particle phase pesticides have been measured with online mass spectrometry. The pesticides have then been compared to widely accepted standard literature values used in industry as well as values determined by a common environmental model also used in industry to give an indication of pesticide volatilities. Results showed that measurements from the FIGAERO-CIMS were consistent with reported literature values for some compounds, 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 to be within an order of magnitude. Mesostrione exhibited the largest difference in volatility with the FIGAERO-CIMS measuring a low volatility of 4.12x10-8 Pa at 298 K (compared to a literature value of 5.7x10-6 Pa). The difference for 2,4-D of one order of magnitude perhaps can be explained by the smaller particles deposited on the FIGAERO filter compared to the aerosolised PEG calibration particles, leading to evaporation at lower Tmax values and a lower measured vapour pressure. 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.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Olivia Mae Jackson, Aristeidis Voliotis, Thomas J. Bannan, Simon P. O'Meara, Gordon McFiggans, Dave Johnson, and Hugh Coe

Status: open (until 19 Sep 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Olivia Mae Jackson, Aristeidis Voliotis, Thomas J. Bannan, Simon P. O'Meara, Gordon McFiggans, Dave Johnson, and Hugh Coe
Olivia Mae Jackson, Aristeidis Voliotis, Thomas J. Bannan, Simon P. O'Meara, Gordon McFiggans, Dave Johnson, and Hugh Coe

Viewed

Total article views: 152 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
121 26 5 152 1 1
  • HTML: 121
  • PDF: 26
  • XML: 5
  • Total: 152
  • BibTeX: 1
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 08 Aug 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 08 Aug 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 150 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 150 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 16 Aug 2024
Download
Short summary
The paper details a method of measuring volatility of pesticides using chemical ionisation mass spectrometry (CIMS) to calculate vapour pressure. This was then compared to current literature values and commonly used models. The exact nature of the literature values often remain uncertain due to being hidden in industrial reports. The results show that the method used primarily matches current literature values and any difference can be explained by method differences either in the methodology.