the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Speciated Measurement of Bicyclic Peroxy Radicals via Iodide-CIMS and its Implication on OH-Initiated Aromatic Oxidation
Abstract. Bicyclic peroxy radicals (BPRs) from aromatics hydrocarbons oxidation play increasingly recognized roles in the formation of secondary air pollutants. However, their reaction mechanisms remain poorly constrained, largely due to the lack of direct measurement techniques. In this study, we developed a method for quantitative measurement of BPRs using an iodide chemical ionization mass spectrometer (Vocus AIM). Following instrument optimization, the sensitivity for BPRs reached 0.2–0.4 ncps/pptv, with a detection limit of ~1 pptv and an uncertainty of ~28 %. Our flow reactor experiments revealed that the bicyclic pathway dominates the OH-initiated oxidation of aromatics under low-NOx conditions, accounting for 58.6 % and 72.0 % of the oxidation products of toluene and m-xylene, respectively. Comparative analysis further demonstrated that conventional product-yield-based approaches underestimate the branching ratio of the bicyclic pathway by 5–12 % relative to direct BPR quantification. This discrepancy suggests the presence of unaccounted reaction channels in current chemical mechanisms, even when autoxidation and accretion reactions are considered. By directly quantifying BPRs, this study provides new insights into the atmospheric oxidation of aromatics and highlights the need for further mechanistic investigation. Moreover, the reaction-pathway-controlled quantification approach proposed here effectively reduces the challenges associated with measuring functionalized RO2 radicals and demonstrates strong potential for sensitive, speciated RO2 detection using Vocus AIM in both laboratory and ambient environments.
- Preprint
(2145 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1962 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-2524', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Jul 2025
This study employs the iodide-adduct chemical ionization mass spectrometer to achieve qualitative and quantitative measurements of bicyclic peroxy radicals, key intermediates in aromatic oxidation. Three vital instrumental parameters influencing the sensitivity to BPRs were systematically identified and optimized. Then it uses direct BPRs quantification to assess uncertainties in the traditional product-yield method for elucidating aromatic oxidation mechanisms. The calculation process is rigorous, and the quantitative data quality is high, making the work a valuable contribution to understanding atmospheric oxidation processes. The manuscript is recommended for acceptance after minor revisions. Specific comments are as follows:
- Line 100: The authors stated that compounds with similar m/z values and functional groups (e.g., hydroxyl group) were selected to serve as proxies for BPRs. More error analysis would be better here.
- Line 116: Why was a residence time of 3~4 seconds chosen in the experiment? Please elaborate on the impact of the residence time on the calibration process.
- In section 2.2, it is mentioned that I- is similar to Br- and can be used to measure HO2. Has it been considered whether using HO2 radicals instead of BPRs is feasible in terms of reactivity, or whether possible error estimations can be made?
- Although figure space is limited, it is necessary to label each bar in Figure S1 with the corresponding species or to provide an extra accompanying table.
- The calibration section noted that low NO levels were chosen to avoid excessively complex RO2 However, aromatic compounds are predominantly anthropogenic and are usually accompanied by elevated NOx concentrations in the real atmosphere. Please add a statement addressing this limitation in the manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2524-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-2524', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jul 2025
General Comments
In this manuscript to authors describe an experimental study aimed at determining the branching ratio for the formation of products from bicyclic peroxy radicals (BPR) by making direct measurements of BPR using an iodide chemical ionization mass spectrometer. The measurement methods were optimized to detect BPR at concentrations of ~1 ppt, and various standards and reactions of toluene and xylene with OH radicals under variable NO and HO2 conditions were studied. The results were interpreted using a kinetic model to determine RO2 concentrations and then branching ratios for BPR formation are compared to those determined by others from product yield measurements.
The experiments were very well done, and the overall technical quality of the paper is excellent. The data analysis was also carefully conducted, and the interpretation of the results are reasonable. This is impressive work and opens the possibility for future studies of RO2 radicals that are key reactive intermediates in the atmospheric oxidation of volatile organic compounds. I recommend publication in ACP after the following minor comments are addressed.
Specific Comments
- These reactions are known to form secondary organic aerosol (SOA), which is not discussed here. How could SOA affect the quantitation of [RO2] by removing gas phase molecular products and RO2 radicals by gas-particle partitioning?
- What are the lifetimes of initially formed cyclic peroxy radicals (CPR) with regards to ring closure and O2 addition to form BPR and how does this compare to the experiment timescale? How do you know you are measuring all BPR that will be formed in the reaction, and if not, what are the consequences?
- 4: This equation does not include losses by RO2 + RO2 reactions. Berndt et al. 2018 measured rate constants for self-reactions of BPR near the collision limit, and since [BPR] in Figure 5 are ~ 1 ppb, could these reactions also be sinks?
- Figure 5: As I understand it, the values of [RO2] in Figure 5 used for calibration were determined from Eq. 6 using literature rate constants; measured [X], [OH], [NO], and [HO2]; and a branching ratio calculated from molecular product yields. Since this approach uses measured product yields, I am not sure it should be called a direct method and the other a product yield method.
- 15: How are the uncertainties in rate constants and branching ratios taken from the MCM incorporated into the calculated overall uncertainty?
- Line 404–412: Since the quoted uncertainty in RO2 sensitivities is ~30%, might not all the differences discussed in this section be buried in the errors? Does the comparison between the results here and the product yield method include uncertainties in product yield measurements?
Technical Comments
- 4: The equation should be ksinks[RO2] = …
- 13: The second parenthesis should go after [OH].
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2524-RC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
317 | 41 | 13 | 371 | 24 | 9 | 15 |
- HTML: 317
- PDF: 41
- XML: 13
- Total: 371
- Supplement: 24
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 15
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1