<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-15-4171-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Retrieval of the sea spray aerosol mode from submicron particle size
distributions and supermicron scattering during LASIC</article-title><alt-title>Retrieval of the sea spray aerosol mode</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Retrieval of the sea spray aerosol mode}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{J. L. Dedrick et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Dedrick</surname><given-names>Jeramy L.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3569-0235</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Saliba</surname><given-names>Georges</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Williams</surname><given-names>Abigail S.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Russell</surname><given-names>Lynn M.</given-names></name>
          <email>lmrussell@ucsd.edu</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6108-2375</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Lubin</surname><given-names>Dan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San
Diego, La Jolla, California, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>a</label><institution>now at: California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Lynn M. Russell (lmrussell@ucsd.edu)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>20</day><month>July</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>15</volume>
      <issue>14</issue>
      <fpage>4171</fpage><lpage>4194</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>7</day><month>February</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>11</day><month>February</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>28</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>7</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 Jeramy L. Dedrick et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e131">Improved quantification of sea spray aerosol
concentration and size is important for determining aerosol effects on
clouds and the climate, though attempts to accurately capture the size distribution of the
sea spray mode remain limited by the availability of supermicron size
distributions. In this work, we introduce a new approach to retrieving
lognormal mode fit parameters for a sea spray aerosol mode by combining
submicron size distributions with supermicron scattering measurements using
a Mie inversion. Submicron size distributions were measured by an ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol spectrometer (UHSAS), and supermicron scattering was
taken as the difference between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m three-wavelength integrating nephelometer measurements (NEPH). This
UHSAS-NEPH method was applied during background marine periods of the
Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Layered Atlantic
Smoke Interactions with Clouds (LASIC) campaign on Ascension Island
(November 2016–May 2017), when the contribution of sea spray aerosol was
expected to represent a large fraction of the aerosol mass and total
scattering. Lognormal sea spray modal parameters were retrieved from
comparisons between nephelometer measurements and a lookup table of Mie
theory-simulated scattering coefficients for low-error solutions that
minimized the 0.4–1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m residual in the UHSAS size distribution. We
evaluated the UHSAS-NEPH method with a set of clean marine measurements in
the North Atlantic that included supermicron size and chemical measurements,
showing that measured supermicron size distributions are needed to constrain
the sea spray number concentration but that mass concentration was reasonably
characterized using supermicron scattering. For LASIC, the UHSAS-NEPH method
retrieved sea spray mode properties for approximately 88 % of the background
marine times when the scattering variability and total particle
concentration were low (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">400</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively), with mass mean
diameter ranging from 0.6 to 1.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (1.47 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), modal width ranging from 1.1 to 3.97  (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and mass concentration ranging from 0.18 to 23.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(8.37. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The measured nephelometer scattering
at three wavelengths was found to constrain the mode width marginally at the
largest particle sizes in the absence of additional size and chemical
measurements for defining parameters for the Mie solutions. Comparing
UHSAS-NEPH retrievals to those of a fitting algorithm applied only to the
submicron UHSAS number size distribution showed that correlations between
retrieved mass concentration and the available mass-based sea spray tracers
(coarse scattering, wind speed, and chloride) are low when supermicron
measurements are not considered. This work demonstrates the added value of
supermicron scattering measurements for retrieving reasonable sea spray mass
concentrations, providing the best-available observationally constrained
estimate of the sea spray mode properties when supermicron size distribution
measurements are not available.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e319">Sea spray aerosol represents the largest natural source of particles to the
global aerosol mass budget (Lewis and Schwartz, 2004). Wind-driven
breaking waves and bubbles bursting at the ocean surface produce sea spray
particles composed of organic components and sea salts that are injected
into the atmosphere  (Russell et al., 2010; O'dowd et al., 1997). Field
measurements have shown that sea spray aerosol makes up 10 %–30 % of the
particles necessary for cloud formation, known as cloud condensation nuclei
(CCN), at low supersaturations in marine regions (Modini et al., 2015;
Quinn et al., 2017; Sanchez et al., 2021) and thus have important
implications for modeled cloud properties and climate feedbacks  (Horowitz
et al., 2020). Model predictions of sea spray concentration are determined
by a number of different emission parameterizations  (e.g., Gong, 2003; de
Leeuw et al., 2011; Salter et al., 2015), which leads to uncertainties in
the sea spray mass production (2.2–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">118</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kg yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; de
Leeuw et al., 2011), the shortwave scattering direct climate effect
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; Ayash et al., 2008), and the
aerosol-cloud indirect climate effect (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.3 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>;
Paulot et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e411">Ambient measurements of sea spray size distributions across submicron and
supermicron sizes requires merging measurements from multiple instruments,
often with a differential mobility analyzer (DMA) that measures submicron
sizes (10 nm to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m diameter) and an aerodynamic particle sizer
(APS) for coarse sizes (0.5 to 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m diameter) (Modini et al.,
2015; Saliba et al., 2019; Quinn et al., 2017). This DMA-APS-based technique
has uncertainties controlled by the limited size range, resolution, and
timing of each instrument, as well as by the ambient conditions. Merging
mobility and aerodynamic measurements requires varying the particle density
and shifting the size distribution until there is agreement between both
instruments in the overlapping diameter range (Khlystov et al., 2004)
due to uncertainties in particle densities of marine aerosol  (Tang et
al., 1997). The generally low number concentration of sea spray aerosol at
supermicron sizes also causes poor counting statistics in the largest size
bins of DMAs, which impacts the range of overlap to which the retrieval is
sensitive (Russell et al., 1996a, b).</p>
      <p id="d1e430">Coarse-mode sea spray has been retrieved using automated routines that fit a
region of the merged size distribution, typically defined as particles
larger than 0.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m diameter (0.4–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), using a single
lognormal mode  (Saliba et al., 2019; Quinn et al., 2017). This diameter
range often appears as a partial peak or “shoulder” in measured number and
mass size distributions and is largely composed of sea salt particles during
marine conditions (Quinn et al., 2017; Saliba et al., 2019; Zheng et al.,
2018; Sanchez et al., 2021; Murphy et al., 1998). Lognormal fitting routines
use parameters defining the shape of the mode (number concentration,
geometric mean diameter, and geometric standard deviation) with
observation-based constraints for the parameters  (Modini et al., 2015;
Quinn et al., 2017; Hussein et al., 2005) or an unconstrained approach
with parameters that vary freely (Saliba et al., 2019; Sanchez et al.,
2021). Correlations of the single lognormal mode to wind speed and sea salt
mass concentration provide the justification for identifying the coarse mode as
the “sea spray mode” during clean marine conditions  (Saliba et al.,
2019; Modini et al., 2015; Quinn et al., 2017; Lewis and Schwartz, 2004).
When DMA and supermicron size distribution measurements were not available,
submicron size-resolved measurements from the ultra-high sensitivity aerosol
spectrometer (UHSAS) have been used for the UHSAS-only retrieval of the sea
spray mode  (Sanchez et al., 2021; Zheng et al., 2018, 2021). These methods have provided some demonstrated skill in predicting the
number and cloud-forming properties of sea spray particles less than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in size, but may not be sufficient to adequately characterize the mass
concentration and optical properties of the supermicron fraction of the sea
spray  (Murphy et al., 1998; Chamaillard et al., 2006; Kleefeld et al.,
2002; O'Dowd et al., 2010).</p>
      <p id="d1e457">Given the uncertainties associated with merging of multiple instrument size
distributions and the limited availability of supermicron size distribution
measurements in marine regions, alternative methods should be considered to
adequately characterize the modal properties of sea spray aerosol.
Supermicron scattering measurements from nephelometers are commonly included
as part of long-term atmospheric observations  (Uin et al., 2019; Schmale
et al., 2022) and provide an attractive alternative to supermicron size
distribution measurements for constraining coarse sea spray properties
(DeMott et al., 2016; Testa et al., 2021). The premise of the approach
proposed here is the observation that the sea spray particle mass concentration
often correlates to the supermicron scattering during clean marine
conditions  (Kleefeld et al., 2002; Chamaillard et al., 2006; Quinn et
al., 1998; O'Dowd et al., 2010). Scattering measurements can be translated
to equivalent size distributions by employing Mie theory  (Mie, 1908), i.e., by
using an inverse Mie method (IMM) with assumptions for the particle size, composition, and concentration to obtain the optical properties of the particle population (Bluvshtein et al., 2017). Similar approaches that combine
observed or simulated size distributions with scattering measurements have
found that optical properties alone, without the addition of a particle
sizer, are not sufficient to estimate properties of the aerosol size
distribution (Frie and Bahreini, 2021; Shen et al., 2019; Lv et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e461">In this work, we retrieved sea spray aerosol modal properties by fitting a
single lognormal mode constrained by supermicron scattering at three wavelengths
from a nephelometer to measured mass size distributions from an ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol spectrometer, known here as the UHSAS-NEPH method. Since
sea spray aerosol concentrations are most relevant to CCN in “clean”
marine environments  (Quinn et al., 2017), and the addition of nonmarine
sources (e.g., dust) tends to mask supermicron sea spray contributions, we
directed the method at measurements that are largely reflective of clean
marine conditions on Ascension Island during the Layered Atlantic Smoke
Interactions with Clouds (LASIC) campaign. LASIC measurements provide an
example where the sea spray size distribution needs to be retrieved but no
supermicron size distributions were measured. To compare and support
UHSAS-NEPH with previously developed techniques, the method was also applied
to an additional dataset that included nephelometer and submicron size
measurements as well as size-resolved sea salt mass concentration and
supermicron size distributions for the validation of reasonable sea spray
mass retrieval.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Measurements</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>LASIC</title>
      <p id="d1e479">Measurements from the Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement
(DOE ARM) site on Ascension Island, Saint Helena (7.96696<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S,
14.34981<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W) during the Layered Atlantic Smoke Interactions with
Clouds (LASIC) campaign are used to develop the sea spray mode retrieval.
LASIC captured the annual and seasonal cycles of aerosol and cloud
properties during an 18-month (April 2016–October 2017) deployment of the
ARM Mobile Facility 1 (AMF1)  (Miller et al., 2016; Zuidema et al., 2016).
AMF1 measurements were collected at an isolated site on the windward flank
of Green Mountain, away from the island's airport and other inhabited areas
(Zhang and Zuidema, 2019). The prevailing wind direction measured by
meteorological instrumentation during the campaign was 115 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (east-southeasterly), indicating persistent sampling of
offshore maritime air. The ARM Mobile Aerosol Observing System, a component
of AMF1, housed the instruments (described in the following subsections) and sampled from an inlet situated 10 m above ground level at an altitude of 365 m above
sea level (Uin et al., 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e516">Episodic intrusions of airborne biomass-burning particles are carried into
the Ascension Island marine boundary layer from South African wildfires
annually during June–October  (Zuidema et al., 2016). These events
contrast sharply with the clean boundary layer that persists for the
remainder of the year (November–May; Pennypacker et al., 2020).
Nonmarine aerosol particles are limited during this “background” season,
though a few transport events of African dust that entrain into the boundary
layer have been documented as occurring during austral summer and fall
months (January–April) in the southeast Atlantic  (Kishcha et al.,
2015; Virkkula et al., 2006). For background (non-biomass-burning) times
without dust events, the aerosol population is expected to be largely from
marine sources, of which sea spray represents a large fraction of the aerosol
mass concentration. This work will focus on LASIC background season
observations (November 2016–May 2017) (Table 1).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star" orientation="landscape"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e522">LASIC measurements analyzed in this study.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.91}[.91]?><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="120pt"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="140pt"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="justify" colwidth="70pt"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Measured</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">relative</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Temporal</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">humidity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Variable</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Instrument</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Measurement</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">resolution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(RH) (%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Availability<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Data access</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Particle size</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">distributions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol spectrometer (UHSAS)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Dry particle size distributions <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>: 0.06–1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (optical diameter)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 Hz</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1333828" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1333828</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Dry particle size distributions <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>: 0.01–0.46 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (mobility diameter)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1225453" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1225453</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Particle scattering</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">TSI 3563 three-wavelength integrating nephelometer (NEPH)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m dry total <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>scattering coefficients at 450, 550,<?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>and 700 nm wavelengths</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 min (alternating <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>impactor size cuts approximately every 55 min)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1259232" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1259232</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Ancillary</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Aerodyne Research aerosol chemical speciation monitor (ACSM)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Mass concentration of nonrefractory submicron chloride aerosol</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Jan 2017–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1762267" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1762267</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">TSI Ultrafine condensation<?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>particle counter 3776</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Condensation nuclei concentration of particles <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1046186" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1046186</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Vaisala WXT-520</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Wind speed and rain intensity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025153" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025153</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">DMT single particle soot<?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>photometer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Refractory black carbon concentration</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://iop.archive.arm.gov/arm-iop/2016/asi/lasic/sedlacek-sp2/">https://iop.archive.arm.gov</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Los Gatos Research trace gas<?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>analyzer</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Carbon monoxide mixing ratio</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1046183" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1046183</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Radiance Research particle soot absorption photometer (PSAP)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m dry total<?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>absorption coefficients at 470, 552,<?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>and 660 nm wavelengths</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">25</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Nov 2016–May 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1339528" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1339528</ext-link></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.93}[.93]?><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e525"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Full availability defined as the typical Ascension Island background
season (November–May).
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Not reported in the dataset. Estimated from the internal temperature, ambient
temperature, and ambient RH.
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Nephelometer measurements used for retrieval were restricted to
periods when the RH was below 60 % (Sect. 2.1.2).</p></table-wrap-foot><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></table-wrap>

<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>2.1.1</label><title>Submicron particle size distributions</title>
      <p id="d1e1169">Two particle sizing instruments were operated during the LASIC campaign: a
TSI scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS; TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN, USA)
and an ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol spectrometer (UHSAS; Droplet
Measurement Techniques (DMT) Inc., Longmont, CO, USA). The SMPS measured the
aerosol size distribution in the 10 to 460 nm dry mobility
diameter range, which did not have sufficient overlap with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m diameter range relevant for retrieving the sea spray mode (Fig. 1), meaning that it did not provide constraints on the sea spray mode
retrieval and was not used here.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1192">Schematic demonstrating the sea spray mode retrieval
method using Mie-theory-simulated size distributions, three-wavelength
integrating nephelometer supermicron scattering measurements, and UHSAS
submicron mass size distributions (UHSAS-NEPH). The retrieval shown is for a
2 h averaging period beginning at 14:00 UTC on 29 November 2016. <bold>(a)</bold> Instrument size ranges and mode fitting region for size distributions.
<bold>(b)</bold> Mass size distributions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measured by the
SMPS (orange) and UHSAS (black), probable Mie-theory-simulated lognormal sea
spray mode solutions (thin blue), and best constrained Mie solution (thick
blue). Note the UHSAS instrument artifact at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (see
text for description).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f01.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1254">The UHSAS operated with 99 size channels at logarithmic spacing to cover
optical diameters from 60 nm to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m at a temporal
resolution of 1 Hz that were averaged to 1 min. The UHSAS was calibrated
using polystyrene latex spheres with a refractive index of approximately 1.59
and has a particle counting efficiency of approximately 100 % for particle
concentrations below 3000 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and sizes larger than 0.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
(Cai et al., 2008). The counts of particles per bin were converted
to number size distributions using the sample flow rate (typically 50 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the sample accumulation time (10 s). The UHSAS sample
line relative humidity (RH) was not recorded during LASIC, so the RH during
UHSAS size distribution measurements was estimated using the UHSAS internal
temperature along with the ambient temperature and relative humidity from the
Mobile Aerosol Observing System meteorological instrumentation. The UHSAS RH
was found to be 55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 % during LASIC.</p>
      <p id="d1e1318">UHSAS artifacts at large size bins have been reported for measurements in
marine air masses  (Pennypacker and Wood, 2017; Sanchez et al., 2021).
These artifacts appear as two consistent and narrow modes at optical
particle diameters of 0.6 and 0.85 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, which likely represent the
splitting of the sea spray mode by partial drying of salt that has been
sampled from high ambient relative humidity (Fig. 2). These two modes
constitute low contributions to the particle number concentration (Fig. 2a),
but contribute an appreciable amount to the mass concentration (Fig. 2b) of the
measured size distributions. We expect that the 0.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mode is the
dried part of the salt mode, similar to distributions reported by Sanchez et
al. (2021), while the narrow 0.85 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mode is the remainder of the
salt mode that is only partially dried. A treatment for these artifacts to
fit the sea spray mode is described in Sect. 3.4.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1347">Average (solid black line) and variability (1 standard
deviation; error bars) of the UHSAS <bold>(a)</bold> number (cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(b)</bold> mass
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> size distributions during the clean marine background
season of LASIC (November 2016–May 2017).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f02.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>2.1.2</label><title>Supermicron scattering</title>
      <p id="d1e1408">One-minute-averaged scattering coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were measured by a TSI
3563 three-wavelength integrating nephelometer at red (700 nm), green (550 nm),
and blue (450 nm) light wavelengths over an angular integration range of
7 to 170<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Anderson et al., 1996) and using impactor
size cuts of 1 and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m that alternated at intervals of about 1 h.
Two-hour averages of the scattering measurements for each impactor size cut were
used to derive supermicron scattering coefficients at each wavelength
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by differencing the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
at 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. Scattering coefficients were corrected to
account for known truncation errors due to significant coarse sea-salt particle forward scattering at angles of less than 7<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>  (Anderson
and Ogren, 1998). The detection limit of the nephelometer for typical
operating conditions is between 0.1 and 0.3 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, depending on the
wavelength  (Anderson et al., 1996).</p>
      <p id="d1e1535">Particle scattering measurements during LASIC were not available at standard
dry conditions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %), as operating conditions only allowed for
limited heating that typically produced 60 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4% RH at the nephelometer
inlet for ambient conditions of 88 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 % RH. This average RH of
60 % means that particles were not dried to the efflorescence point for sea
salt mixtures (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) (Ming and Russell, 2001). The
supermicron scattering (at 450 nm) did not show a significant correlation to
the instrument RH (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.22, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.19; Fig. S1 in the Supplement), but the correlation
increased to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.36</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 60 %,
indicating that the scattering may need to be corrected for
humidity at higher RH. Measurements of particle scattering at a series of preset RHs were
also collected during LASIC to provide hygroscopic growth factors (<italic>f</italic>(RH)) to
correct the scattering from 65 % RH to the heated conditions (Zieger et
al., 2010; Gasso et al., 2000). However, because the uncertainty for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(65 % RH) was estimated to be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, which was
approximately fourfold greater than the 8 % for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and
7 % for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m scattering uncertainties for the heated
measurements, we did not apply this correction. This uncertainty was driven
by the limited and nonoverlapping times for which <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(65 % RH) was
available for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m scattering,
each typically spanning only 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5% of the 2 h averaging period.
Without sufficient and simultaneous <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(RH) measurements of the humidity
dependence of scattering, and given the additional uncertainties associated
with correcting optical size distribution measurements with humidity- and
composition-dependent refractive indices  (Kassianov et al., 2015),
correcting the measurements to a standard RH was also not possible. Instead,
we restricted the measurements to include only those for which the average
nephelometer humidity matched the average UHSAS RH. Restricting nephelometer
measurements to those that had RHs below 60 % gives an average RH of 55 %
with 10 % measurement uncertainty (55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 %) while still
retaining 78 % of the measurements for this analysis.</p>
      <p id="d1e1747">Two-hour supermicron scattering during the LASIC background season had an average
value of 12.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.3 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.3–41.1 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as measured by
the nephelometer at 550 nm, and made up 70 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 % of the total
scattering for particles less than 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in diameter. The combined use
of the submicron particle size distribution from UHSAS and the supermicron
scattering coefficients from the nephelometer provides the basis for naming
this method UHSAS-NEPH.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1.SSS3">
  <label>2.1.3</label><title>Uncertainty and variability of the size distributions and scattering measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e1807">Measurement variability and instrument error are incorporated into the sea
spray mode retrieval to account for uncertainties in the Mie-theory-based
inversion of scattering and size distribution measurements (Table 2; Sect. 3).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" orientation="landscape"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1813">Scattering and size distribution measurements and the associated
uncertainties and variabilities used in the sea spray mode retrieval method.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="8">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Measurement </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col6" align="center">Variability or uncertainty  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scattering</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Range/selected value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Supermicron scattering at red (700 nm),</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Standard deviation of supermicron scattering</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.4–40.0 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">green (550 nm), and blue (450 nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">for averaging time at each wavelength</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">light wavelengths</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Instrument-defined scattering uncertainty</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Size distribution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PNSD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Particle number size distribution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">meas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Standard deviation of PNSD resolved at</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.01–300 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">each size bin</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Instrument-defined concentration <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>uncertainty</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">PNSD diameters</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Instrument-defined sizing <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>uncertainty</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.5 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2245">UHSAS sizing uncertainty is within 2.5 % of the particle size
(Uin, 2016) with variations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>10 % to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4 % based on
calibrated particles with known refractive indices between 1.44 and 1.58
(Moore et al., 2021). The reported systematic uncertainty of the number size
concentration for accumulation mode (0.1–1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) particles measured
by UHSAS has been shown to be 3.9 % due to calibration, flow, and pressure
biases (Kupc et al., 2018). This instrument error propagates to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>12.4 % for higher moments of the size distribution, such as
surface area and volume (Kupc et al., 2018; Brock et al., 2019). We
therefore adopted a size uncertainty value (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 2.5 % as
defined by the UHSAS instrument manufacturer (Uin, 2016), and
10 % for the concentration uncertainty (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which has been
used in previous inversion procedures  (Bluvshtein et al., 2017; Frie and
Bahreini, 2021). The measured size distribution variability was calculated for
the UHSAS size distribution at each diameter bin (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">meas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)) as the standard deviation of the 2 h averages.</p>
      <p id="d1e2342">Systematic uncertainties of the particle scattering are mainly due to
nonidealities at each measurement wavelength and the angular sensitivities of
the nephelometer (Anderson and Ogren, 1998). These features promote the
use of a scattering uncertainty (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value
of 5 % that has been used in previous inversion procedures  (Frie and
Bahreini, 2021; Bluvshtein et al., 2017). The measured scattering variability
was calculated for the supermicron scattering at each wavelength (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as the standard deviation during the 2 h
average. A list of the measured size distribution and scattering variables
and their associated uncertainties and variabilities is provided in Table 2. Particle losses due to aspiration and transmission in the ARM Mobile
Aerosol Observing System were assessed using the particle loss calculator
(PLC; von der Weiden et al., 2009), sample line configurations and
geometry from Bullard et al. (2017), and a particle density of
1 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Losses were found to be less than 10 % for particles
smaller than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in diameter, and greater than 50 % for particles
larger than approximately 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. We did not correct UHSAS size
distributions for these losses given the uncertainty of that correction, but
note that nephelometer supermicron scattering measurements may underestimate
retrieved sea spray number and mass concentrations at the largest diameters.
Using the mean sea spray mode statistics of UHSAS-NEPH, the particle losses
in the instruments can equate to underestimations of roughly 13 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 % in the sea spray mass and 0.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 % in number using
nephelometer scattering.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1.SSS4">
  <label>2.1.4</label><title>Ancillary variables</title>
      <p id="d1e2454">As an alternative to size-resolved filter measurements of sodium, which were
not collected during LASIC, measurements from an aerosol chemical speciation
monitor (ACSM; Aerodyne Research, Billerica, MA, USA) were used to evaluate
sea salt mass retrievals. The ACSM provided the mass and chemical composition
(organics, sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, and chloride) of nonrefractory
submicron aerosols. Since sea salt does not volatilize efficiently at
600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, the ACSM measurement of nonrefractory chloride provides a
trace signal from NaCl that is detectable in the absence of large sources of
nonrefractory chloride  (Frossard et al., 2014; Ovadnevaite et al., 2012)
and has been used as a tracer to identify sea salt aerosol contributions to
CCN  (Humphries et al., 2021). We only used chloride measurements for
January 2017 through May 2017, as these data were quality assured. The 2 h averaged ACSM chloride concentration showed statistically significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) positive correlations with two common sea spray tracers: wind
speed (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and nephelometer supermicron scattering at 550 nm (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.33</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. S2). This observation supports the potential of LASIC ACSM
chloride measurements to serve as a chemical tracer for sea spray mass in
the evaluation of UHSAS-NEPH.</p>
      <p id="d1e2502">We additionally incorporated measurements of the 1 min averaged condensation
nuclei concentration above 3 nm (CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from a TSI ultrafine
condensation particle counter (CPC) 3776, wind speed and rain intensity from
a Vaisala WXT-520, refractory black carbon (rBC) concentration from a DMT
single particle soot photometer, 470 nm particle absorption from a Radiance
Research particle soot absorption photometer (PSAP), and carbon monoxide
(CO) mixing ratio from a Los Gatos Research trace gas analyzer
(Miller et al., 2016). These measurements were used to identify
clean marine periods (Sect. 2.2), assess the environmental influence on
retrieval performance, and evaluate the retrieved sea spray masses.
Ancillary measurements were averaged to 2 h resolution to match the timing
of the supermicron scattering coefficients and size distribution averages.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2519">Time series <bold>(a–d)</bold> and box-and-whisker plots <bold>(e–h)</bold> of 2 h
average variables used to determine clean marine periods during the LASIC
background season (November 2016–May 2017). <bold>(a–d)</bold> Periods that meet the
criteria thresholds described in Sect. 2.2 are symbolized by blue dots.
<bold>(e–h)</bold> Circles within the box-and-whisker plots are the means and horizontal
lines are the medians and interquartile ranges (25 % and 75 %) for the
background season (black) and clean marine periods (blue).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Measurement screening</title>
      <p id="d1e2549">Nonmarine aerosol particles, specifically those from combustion sources,
have been shown to influence the performance of sea spray mode retrievals by
contributing number and mass concentrations that overlap with the region
used to fit a mode in ambient size distributions  (Modini et al., 2015;
Saliba et al., 2019). Here we focused on periods when boundary-layer air
masses are assumed to have a multiday marine history in order to reduce
nonmarine sources and ensure that retrieval results are consistent with sea
spray. In the case of LASIC observations, boundary-layer intrusions of
biomass-burning aerosol can affect particle optical properties by increasing
absorption and reducing scattering for sub- and supermicron particles
(Delene and Ogren, 2002; Denjean et al., 2020). In particular, UHSAS
instruments show undersizing of particles when highly absorbing biomass-burning aerosol is introduced into the particle population, due to heating
from the instrument beam and subsequent particle vaporization and shrinkage
(Howell et al., 2021). Although this effect is more likely to impact
particles smaller than the assumed sea spray size (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), any impact on potential submicron sea spray aerosol
contributions would have an influence on the sea spray mode retrievals. To
limit nonmarine influences on UHSAS-NEPH retrieval, we first isolated
measurements during “clean marine” periods of the LASIC background season
from November 2016 through May 2017 by applying the following criteria (Fig. 3):
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2577">CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration less than 600 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, which was the approximate
90th percentile particle concentration during the LASIC campaign;</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2602">CO mixing ratio (a proxy for continentally sourced air) below the limit of the
ambient marine boundary layer background levels observed during LASIC
(70 ppbv; Pennypacker et al., 2020);</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2606">rBC concentration below the combustion source threshold of 50 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
used by Saliba et al. (2020) in the remote marine North Atlantic; and</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2622"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m scattering Angstrom exponent (SAE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values less
than 1 for 450 and 700 nm nephelometer scattering (SAE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> characterizes
the wavelength dependence of particles and takes on small (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
values during periods in which coarse aerosol, such as sea salt, has a
large mass contribution; Shen et al., 2019; Mulcahy et al., 2009).</p></list-item></list>
Saharan dust and continental aerosol transport from southern Central Africa
into the remote tropical Atlantic boundary layer has been a commonly
observed contributor to the surface-level aerosol population at Ascension
Island (Swap et al., 1996). The mass concentration of transported dust
particles is largely in the supermicron size range (Miller et al., 2021;
Denjean et al., 2016) and overlaps the fitting region used in UHSAS-NEPH. To
exclude interference in the retrieval from dust particles, we used
measurements of the sub-10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m single-scattering albedo at 470 nm (SSA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">470</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from NEPH scattering and PSAP absorption to identify times
with a possible dust influence (Sect. S1 in the Supplement). An SSA<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">470</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> threshold of 0.95
was used to distinguish between sea salt and dust aerosol contributions to
coarse scattering based on the relationship of SAE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and the average SSA
reported for Saharan dust (Di Biagio et al., 2019; Von Hoyningen-Huene et
al., 2009; Haywood et al., 2003). This restriction removed 68 2 h periods.</p>
      <p id="d1e2723">We additionally removed periods when the rain intensity exceeded 1 mm h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at any hour during the 2 h average to ensure a minimal influence of
precipitation on the retrieval, namely wet scavenging of sea spray aerosol
by rain droplets. 14 periods exceeded this rain intensity restriction. The
combination of all criteria identified 909 2 h (nonraining) clean marine
periods, which accounted for approximately 40 % of all available
background season observations. The clean marine criteria reduced the
average criteria values by 12 % for CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, 7 % for CO, 70 % for
rBC, and 15 % for SAE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> after applying these restrictions. The 909
available periods provided persistent marine conditions that included a low
aerosol concentration (300 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 90 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and a low combustion influence
(15.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12.7 ng m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as well as a large scattering
contribution from coarse particles (SAE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.66</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.15).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Sea spray mode retrieval (UHSAS-NEPH)</title>
      <p id="d1e2831">This section outlines the procedure used to retrieve sea spray modes from
scattering measurements and submicron mass size distributions (Fig. 4). We
describe the relationship of particle scattering to particle size (Sect. 3.1) and how this theoretical relationship is used to identify a group of
probable sea spray mode solutions that are consistent with the measured
supermicron scattering, as well as with literature-reported ranges of modal
properties (Sect. 3.2). Mode solutions are then constrained with measured
submicron mass size distributions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) to
isolate and retrieve the most consistent sea spray modal properties
(Sects. 3.3–3.4).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2859">Flow chart describing the UHSAS-NEPH retrieval algorithm. The procedure associated with each step is described in the section cited either to the right of or below the relevant box.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f04.png"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Simulating sea spray mode scattering using Mie theory</title>
      <p id="d1e2875">A lookup table of scattering coefficients was developed by employing a
modified Mie theory code based on the algorithm for red (700 nm), green (550 nm), and blue (450 nm) wavelengths  (Bohren and Huffman, 1998;
Mätzler, 2002). These wavelengths were chosen to match those used by the
three-wavelength integrating nephelometer operated during LASIC (Sect. 2.1.2).
Each of the three red, green, and blue (RGB) scattering coefficients is
attributed to a combination of lognormal mode fitting parameters
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that describe the shape of the sea spray
mode. We use the canonical lognormal mode form to represent the number size
distribution of the sea spray aerosol with the following equation
(Seinfeld and Pandis, 2006):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M176" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:msub><mml:mi>log⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle scriptlevel="+1"><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>log⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>log⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>log⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number concentration of particles (cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
the particle diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the geometric mean diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the geometric standard deviation (or mode width;
unitless). These values are 1–99 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for number concentration, 0.05–1.19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for mean diameter, and 1–4 for mode width, which
provides over 157 000 possible sea spray mode solutions (Table 3). The range
of fitting parameters was chosen to reflect those reported in laboratory
experiments and field measurements  (Table 6; Prather et al., 2013; Modini
et al., 2010, 2015; Quinn et al., 2017; Saliba et al., 2019).
Similar lookup tables have previously been used for optical measurement
inversions  (e.g., Lv et al., 2018; Veselovskii et al., 2002).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3118">(<bold>a</bold>, blue) Time series of the scattering error threshold
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and (<bold>b</bold>, orange) percent
reduction of the Mie lookup table solution space (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">157</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 850) for
UHSAS-NEPH retrievals during the background season of LASIC.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3179">The scattering coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are then related to
the size distribution by integrating Eq. (2) over all particle diameters
(0.01–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m),
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M191" display="block"><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.5}{9.5}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the scattering efficiency, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the light wavelength,
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the particle core refractive index (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. To match the NEPH and
UHSAS RH of 55 % during LASIC (Sect. 2.1.2), a constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.45</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was selected to simulate sea spray particle scattering. This value is
lower than the average refractive index reported for dry sea salt (real
component <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.5–1.6, imaginary component <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  (Wang
and Rood, 2008; Randles et al., 2004; Bi et al., 2018) and was calculated as
a mass-weighted mixture of salt with water, where water has a refractive
index of 1.33  (Wang and Rood, 2008) (Sect. S2). We found no substantial
variation in the retrieved fit parameters for the range of 1.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to 1.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, but correlations to sea spray tracers (chloride and wind speed) were
lower for 1.40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (high RH) and 1.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (low RH) (Sect. S2). The
midrange value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.45</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was used to approximate the scattering
of sea salt for the measured RH of 55 %.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e3485">Lognormal mode fitting parameters and resolution (step)
used to derive Mie scattering sea spray mode solutions.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Parameter</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Unit</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Minimum</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Maximum</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Step</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.015</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.075</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Selecting the most probable Mie solutions</title>
      <p id="d1e3650">Since many solutions result from the constraints imposed by performing measurements at three wavelengths, we use the error between the nephelometer scattering and the
Mie theory solutions to remove mode solutions that are not within the
calculated error. The probability of solutions that meet the error threshold
are then evaluated, and only the top 5 % most probable solutions are
selected.</p>
      <p id="d1e3653">The measured supermicron scattering coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is compared to scattering coefficients computed for each
simulated sea spray size distribution and Mie theory value of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the lookup table by calculating the absolute
error at each wavelength (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using Eq. (3):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M217" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mfenced close="|" open="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The scattering error (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is then computed by propagating the absolute error at each wavelength via Eq. (4):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M219" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:munder><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munder><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The total sample space is then reduced by selecting solutions from the
lookup table that fall below the error threshold (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
calculated for that measurement time,<?xmltex \setcounter{equation}{4}?>
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5.6" content-type="subnumberedon"><label>5a</label><mml:math id="M221" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5.7" content-type="subnumberedoff"><label>5b</label><mml:math id="M222" display="block"><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.5}{9.5}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:munder><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munder><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          This error threshold incorporates the measured scattering variability at
each wavelength for the averaging period (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and accounts for the instrument error (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is constant; Table 2). Figure 5 illustrates a time
series of these error thresholds and the percent reduction of the Mie
solution sample space (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">157</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 850) for each retrieval during the
background season of LASIC. Using these error thresholds, the solution
space is reduced by 98 % on average, with a reduction range of 83 %–99 %, resulting in approximately 1000–2000 possible solutions each
time.</p>
      <p id="d1e4063">The majority of the solutions that are below the error threshold typically have
a sea spray mode shape similar to those previously reported in the literature
(Quinn et al., 2017; Saliba et al., 2019; Bates et al., 2012), namely
mass mean diameters within or near the coarse-mode size range (1–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and mode widths of 2–3, decreasing to a number concentration of below 0.1 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
before the 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m cutoff. However, some of the
solutions that meet the error threshold criterion are either too wide or
large relative to the reported range of sea spray modes (Table 6, Fig. S4),
which is a limitation of having only three scattering wavelengths to
constrain the mode. To remove the outlier solutions and to reduce the sample
space to a more consistent group of solutions, we apply a restriction on the Mie
solutions to consider only the most probable fitting parameters (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) based on their frequency of occurrence. To
demonstrate this restriction, we consider the normalized probabilities of
the fitting parameters from Mie solutions that fall below the scattering
error threshold, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, for one retrieval during
LASIC (Fig. 6a–c). This retrieval is selected as its <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is within the average value for all LASIC observations
during the clean marine background season (3.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.1 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and is
representative of most cases assessed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e4191"><bold>(a–c)</bold> Normalized probability distributions of sea spray
mode fitting parameters obtained for one retrieval (3 December 2016 at 22:00 UTC). <bold>(a–c)</bold> Fitting parameter values with an occurrence probability of
greater than 75 % are symbolized by red circles. <bold>(d–e)</bold> Normalized joint
probabilities (color bar) for fitting parameter combinations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the
same retrieval. Mie solutions that are within the top 5th joint
probability percentile for each combination are symbolized by black crosses.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4244">Mie solutions that meet the error threshold constrain the mode number
concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mean diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the sea spray mode, as
shown by noting that the likely (probability <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">75</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
fall within narrow ranges of the low-error solutions (4 % and 10 % of
the sample space, respectively), whereas there is a less constrained range for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (45 % of the sample space) (Fig. 6a–c). Since <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has a wider range of probable values, this parameter is effectively
constrained by considering the joint probabilities of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. These
probabilities are computed as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M247" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">|</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E9" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M248" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">|</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The highest joint probability values restrict solutions to localized regions
of the solution space (Fig. 6d–e). Selecting only the upper 5th
normalized probability percentile of joint probabilities further restricts
the full Mie solution sample space by an additional 16 % and 13 % for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively (Fig. 6d, e).</p>
      <p id="d1e4507">To assess which of these joint probability restrictions provided the most
realistic sea spray mode results, retrieved mass concentrations and fitting
parameters during the clean marine background season of LASIC were compared
(Fig. S5). Restricting low-error solutions using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> joint probability led to retrieved sea spray mass concentrations
that were 20 %–30 % higher than the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> combination, had mass mean diameters smaller than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (0.68 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.08 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m vs. 1.47 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), and had
much broader mode widths (3.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.2 vs. 2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3). Although the mass mean diameters retrieved using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
joint probability were within the range of reported values from the literature
(Table 6; Quinn et al., 2017; Saliba et al., 2019; Bates et al., 2012),
the exceptionally broad widths outside of the reported range suggest that
restricting using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> does not effectively
constrain the mode width as well as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
combination. For these reasons, only sea spray modes with fitting parameters
in the top 5th percentile of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> joint
probability are used for this method, which typically results in reduction of the full sample space to 300–500 Mie solutions for each measurement time.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Perturbing the size distribution</title>
      <p id="d1e4690">Uncertainty and variability have been shown to impact the assumed size
distributions and optical properties of aerosols when using inversion techniques
(Viskari et al., 2012; Frie and Bahreini, 2021). Here, instrument
uncertainty and measurement variability are incorporated into the fitting
method by introducing random noise into the size distribution based on the
size (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and number concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">meas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uncertainties (Sect. 2.1.3; Table 2). Perturbations are simultaneously made to the measured
number size distribution and particle diameters. Each bin of the size
distribution is perturbed by introducing Gaussian noise that samples a
random number from a normal distribution. The sampled normal distribution is
defined by a mean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and a standard deviation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the measured PNSD averaged over the time interval (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">meas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the combination of the errors from
temporal variability and instrument concentration uncertainty (which is
constant):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E10" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M274" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PNSD</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">inst</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The diameters in the size distributions are perturbed by shifting the size
bins by the same value with a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> as the instrument
size uncertainty (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">D</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Size distributions are perturbed 100
times to provide a sample space of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">perturb</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (the measured size
distribution and 100 perturbations). Each probable Mie solution retrieved in
Sect. 3.2 is then tested for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">perturb</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cases within the
fitting region of the measured submicron size distribution described in
Sect. 3.4.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Fitting modes to the measured size distribution</title>
      <p id="d1e4931">The last step in retrieving sea spray modal properties is to select Mie
solutions that most closely match the shape of the measured size
distribution in a specified fitting region. Given the correlation of
supermicron scattering and sea spray mass concentration during clean marine
conditions (Chamaillard et al., 2006; Kleefeld et al., 2002; Quinn et
al., 1998), all PNSDs are converted to particle mass size distributions
(PMSDs) using
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E11" content-type="numbered"><label>9</label><mml:math id="M280" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dlog</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          with the assumptions of spherical particle homogeneity and constant sea
spray density <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. UHSAS and NEPH measurements were collected at 55 %
RH, so 1.3 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is used as the estimated sea spray particle
density by calculating a mass-weighted mixture of salt with water (Sect. S3).</p>
      <p id="d1e5008">To account for the consistent UHSAS artifacts at 0.6 and 0.85 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
(Sect. 2.1.1), we restrict the measured size distributions used to fit
the Mie-theory-simulated size distributions for diameters larger than 0.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (0.4 to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m UHSAS range) to 0.38–0.83 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (the
closest UHSAS diameter size bins within the specified range), which weights
the comparison toward smaller sizes and effectively reduces the influence of
the largest artifact while maintaining the shape of the accumulation mode
“shoulder” (Fig. 1). For each Mie solution (PMSD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MIE</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, a residual sum
of squares is computed between the measured and perturbed PMSDs as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E12" content-type="numbered"><label>10</label><mml:math id="M288" display="block"><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.2}{9.2}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Fit</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RSS</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PMSD</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PMSD</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MIE</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where the index <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents each measured or perturbed size distribution and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is
the index of the low-error Mie solution. The fit RSS provides a quantifiable
metric for comparing the scattering-retrieved mode to the expected sea spray
fitting region. Chi-square “goodness of fit” calculations were also
performed and provided similar retrieved sea spray modal properties to
those retrieved using the fit RSS minimization. The high-probability Mie
solution with the minimum fit RSS for the measured and noise-perturbed size
distributions is chosen to establish a range of mode fits. This Monte Carlo
approach allows for the selection of Mie solutions that capture the shape
of the accumulation mode “shoulder” given the uncertainties associated with
measurement variability and instrument error, and it provides a statistically
robust sample space for retrieving a unique sea spray mode solution. From
the range of fit-RSS-minimized sea spray modes, 95 % confidence intervals
of each fitting parameter are calculated to further constrain the most
probable solution that fits the measured size distribution in the expected
sea spray size range. On average, 30–40 solutions remain from this
perturbation analysis for each measurement time, with variabilities of 4 %
in number concentration, 3 % in geometric mean diameter, and 1 % in
geometric standard deviation, based on the sample means and upper and lower
limits of the 95 % confidence intervals. The low variabilities of these
fitting parameters demonstrate consistent mode retrievals within the
perturbations and stability of the retrieval procedure. Lastly, the fitting
parameter solutions that are both highly probable (Sect. 3.2) and within
the 95 % confidence interval of fit-RSS-minimized modes are averaged to
produce a single lognormal sea spray mode with the uncertainty of the solution
defined as the upper and lower bounds of the 95 % confidence interval.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e5131">Comparison of sea spray modal parameters retrieved using
measured supermicron size distributions  (SEMS-APS; Saliba et al., 2019)
and Mie inversion of nephelometer supermicron scattering (SEMS-NEPH; this
study) during clean marine periods of the NAAMES 1 cruise (6 November–30 November 2015). Two-hour-integrated <bold>(a)</bold> number (cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(d)</bold> mass (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, <bold>(b)</bold> number and <bold>(e)</bold> mass mean diameters (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), and <bold>(c)</bold> mode widths are shown. Panels <bold>(a)</bold>–<bold>(e)</bold> also show the slope of linear best fit and the Pearson
correlation coefficient at top left. Dashed red lines represent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> lines.
Sea spray mass correlations with supermicron scattering <bold>(f)</bold>, wind speed <bold>(g)</bold>,
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Na</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentration <bold>(h)</bold> for the SEMS-APS
(orange) and SEMS-NEPH (blue) methods. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Na</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mass measurements are from
offline filter analysis using ion chromatography. Sea spray mass estimates
in <bold>(h)</bold> are averaged over the filter collection times (24 h), which provided nine
samples. Pearson correlation coefficients are indicated at top right and linear
best fits are colored by method in <bold>(f)</bold>, <bold>(g)</bold>, <bold>(h)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Evaluation of NEPH-constrained sea spray retrieval using
supermicron size measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e5292">This UHSAS-NEPH method was developed for LASIC measurements because that
study lacked supermicron size distribution measurements.
To evaluate the performance of the nephelometer-constrained sea spray mode retrieval, we first compared the scattering-constrained retrieval to a retrieval constrained by measured supermicron size distributions and salt mass concentrations. This comparison was done using measurements from clean marine periods of the first North Atlantic Aerosols and Marine Ecosystems Study (NAAMES 1), deployed 6–30 November 2015 (Behrenfeld et al., 2019; Saliba et al., 2019), for which sea spray mode
retrievals using supermicron size distributions and salt mass concentrations
were also available. NAAMES 1 was selected as a case study of the
nephelometer constraint on supermicron size because it had the most
persistent clean conditions of the four ship deployments (Saliba et al.,
2020). The low particle concentrations during NAAMES 1 (median CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 94 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> also included the lowest sea spray aerosol concentrations
(mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sea</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">spray</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the four cruises (Saliba et
al., 2019).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e5363">Comparison of sea spray modal parameters retrieved using
measured supermicron size distributions (SEMS-APS; Saliba et al., 2019)
and Mie inversion of nephelometer supermicron scattering (SEMS-NEPH; this
study) during clean marine periods of the NAAMES 1 cruise (6–30 November 2015). Values of the 2 h integrated number (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration,
mass concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, number mean diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">number</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, mass
mean diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mass</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and mode width (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are provided
as the mean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 standard deviation.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">number</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mass</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SEMS-NEPH</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SEMS-APS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e5723">During NAAMES 1, submicron (0.1–0.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and supermicron (0.5–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) size distributions were measured by a scanning electrical
mobility spectrometer (SEMS, model 2002 BMI) and an aerodynamic particle
sizer (APS; model 3321 TSI), respectively. Scattering coefficients at
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m diameter size cuts were
measured by a 3-<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (450, 550, 700 nm) integrating nephelometer
(model 3563, TSI). In contrast to the LASIC measurements, the nephelometer and
size distribution measurements were performed in dry conditions (RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 40 %), meaning that dry particle properties could be assumed. Offline
analysis of filters using ion chromatography provided size-resolved
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m salt (Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentrations at a 24 h
resolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e5824">Saliba et al. (2019) retrieved the sea spray aerosol mode by fitting a
lognormal mode to the shoulder of the merged ambient size distributions
(SEMS-APS) during NAAMES 1. This method expanded upon the techniques
described in previous work for fitting lognormal modes to measured marine
size distributions (Modini et al., 2015; Quinn et al., 2017; Hussein et
al., 2005) by allowing for the diameter and width of the mode to vary
without laboratory constraints; when constrained, retrieved parameters were often close to the interval limits. Fifteen-minute-averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m SEMS-APS sea spray mode mass concentrations during NAAMES 1
were previously compared to the filter measurements of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Na</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mass and wind speed and correlations of 0.7 and 0.6 were found,
respectively (Saliba et al., 2019). These correlations support the
interpretation of the SEMS-APS-retrieved mode as sea spray aerosol. For
comparison with the UHSAS-NEPH retrieval method during 2 h NAAMES 1
measurements, SEMS was used as a replacement for UHSAS (SEMS-NEPH) with a refractive index of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and sea spray particle density of 2.0 g cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for dry conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e5916">Figure 7 and Table 4 show comparisons of the SEMS-APS and SEMS-NEPH sea
spray retrievals for 2 h averaged SEMS, APS, and nephelometer measurements.
SEMS-NEPH estimates double the number concentration for the sea spray mode,
but only a 10 % higher mass concentration on average than given by SEMS-APS (Fig. 7a, d). The main differences between these two variables can be explained by
the retrieval constraints of each method: SEMS-APS constrains the number
size distribution, while the Mie-based scattering constraint of SEMS-NEPH is
dependent upon the mass concentration. The difference in retrieved number
concentrations between the two methods may have implications for attributing
particle contributions to CCN. A factor of 2 difference between the SEMS-NEPH
and SEMS-APS estimates of particle number could modify the commonly observed
10 %–30 % contribution of sea spray to CCN at supersaturations of 0.1 %–0.4 %  (Quinn et al., 2017; Sanchez et al., 2021; Modini et al., 2015),
as more particles contribute to an already low CCN concentration during
clean marine conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e5919">The majority of the integrated mass comparisons fall within a reasonable range
of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> line, except for some periods with low SEMS-APS mass concentrations
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 7d). The larger mass concentration
estimates of SEMS-NEPH could be attributable to supermicron sea
spray mass observed by the nephelometer that is not fully resolved by the APS
number concentration estimate. This is supported by a stronger correlation
of retrieved mass with supermicron scattering for SEMS-NEPH (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
than what is observed using SEM-APS (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. 7f), although it
should be noted that supermicron scattering has been used to constrain
SEMS-NEPH solutions. Since the width of the sea spray mode from the
scattering-based retrieval has been shown to be a poorly constrained
parameter and is often narrower for SEMS-NEPH (2.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3) than for
SEMS-APS (2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3), it may be the source of discrepancies between
the other modal properties (Fig. 7c). These discrepancies are particularly
apparent for the mode diameters, which are 20 % larger in number mean size
and 30 % smaller in mass mean size for SEMS-NEPH in comparison to
SEMS-APS. The scattering-based approach uses the probability occurrence of
modal width to retrieve an optimal value, but the lack of number size
distribution measurements at larger sizes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) from
the SEMS provides insufficient information to constrain this parameter.</p>
      <p id="d1e6024">For the 2 h averaged concentrations, sea spray mass concentrations show
moderate correlations of 0.50 for SEMS-APS and 0.53 for SEMS-NEPH with wind
speed (Fig. 7g). The SEMS-APS correlation of mass to wind speed is slightly
weaker than the correlation previously reported by Saliba et al. (2019)
for 15 min averages (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), but this moderate correlation is maintained,
suggesting that the estimated mass concentration from both retrievals can be
attributed to sea spray production by wind. Ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
sodium (Na<inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mass analyzed with ion chromatography moderately
correlates with the SEMS-NEPH retrieval of sea spray mass (Fig. 7h).
Although the correlation of the mass concentration
to sodium is weaker when using SEMS-NEPH than when using SEMS-APS (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the SEMS-NEPH correlation
is consistent with other studies merging measured sub- and supermicron size
distributions to fit sea spray modes and estimate salt mass in clean marine
conditions  (Quinn et al., 2017; Modini et al., 2015). Together, these
results show the efficacy of nephelometer-constrained estimates of
supermicron sea spray particles. The moderate correlations and relative
agreement between parameters of the retrieval methodologies with sea spray
tracers indicate reasonable retrievals at dry relative humidity, even though
supermicron size distributions provide a more accurate retrieval of sea spray
number properties.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Performance of UHSAS-NEPH retrievals</title>
      <p id="d1e6090">For LASIC, sea spray modal properties were retrieved for 906 of the 909 2 h
clean marine background periods using UHSAS-NEPH. The sea spray mode could not be retrieved for three periods due to missing supermicron
scattering measurements for at least one wavelength. To ensure that the
algorithm retrievals were sufficiently consistent with both UHSAS and NEPH
and representative of marine aerosol, we restricted the results to those
with (1) low residual errors between the retrieval and measurements in the
fitting region (0.38–0.83 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), (2) low measured scattering
variability during each 2 h time period, and (3) limited influence from
potential nonmarine aerosol sources, namely CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">400</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e6132">The fit RSS (Sect. 3.4) is the difference between the measured size
distribution fitting region and the Mie solution determined from
three-wavelength supermicron scattering. Low residuals (fit RSS <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2)
indicate good agreement between the measured region of the accumulation mode
“shoulder” (0.38–0.83 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and the modal fit retrieved from
scattering; hence, a low RSS shows that the retrieved mode is well constrained by
the measured UHSAS size distribution and NEPH scattering. The average fit
RSS for the LASIC dataset that met the marine criteria was 1.26 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.89
(Fig. 8a), which indicates that the retrieved modes are generally within the
uncertainty of the measured size distribution in the 0.38–0.83 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
fitting region, but solutions that are not constrained by the UHSAS size
distribution are also retrieved, as is evident from large values of the fit RSS for
various retrieval periods (Fig. 8a). A visual inspection of the retrieved
mode fits suggested that values exceeding a residual threshold of 5 should
be rejected as there is not sufficient agreement in the overlap region to
consider the solution acceptable. Retrieved modes with fits above this
threshold tended to have solutions that were either larger than the measured
accumulation mode “shoulder” or had peaks in regions where the size
distribution was low. These high fit RSSs likely indicate that the
supermicron scattering measurements were influenced by particles other than
sea spray, which were not effectively constrained by the supermicron
scattering. We also examined RSS thresholds of 1 through 10. There were no
significant changes in correlations to wind speed or chemical signatures
(Sect. 5.2) upon lowering the threshold to values of 1–4, and there were
decreases in those correlations for thresholds above a value of 6 (Table S7).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e6167"><bold>(a)</bold> Times series of the fit residual (residual sum of
squares, RSS) between the retrieved sea spray mode and the UHSAS mass size
distribution within the 0.38–0.83 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fitting region. The
horizontal line in <bold>(a)</bold> delineates the RSS restriction threshold of 5 used in
this procedure. Note the logarithmic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis. <bold>(b, c)</bold> Selected variables used to
restrict sea spray mode retrievals defined by the fit residual (fit RSS,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axes): <bold>(b)</bold> error threshold (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<bold>(c)</bold> condensation nuclei concentration of particles <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> nm optical
diameter (CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Retrieval restriction thresholds are symbolized by
dashed red lines in <bold>(b, c)</bold>. Pearson correlation coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are provided within panels <bold>(b, c)</bold>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f08.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e6301">To assess the limitations of the algorithm due to the observed variability
in measured scattering, we examined the relationship between the scattering
error threshold and the fit RSS. The scattering error threshold, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, is defined as the combined effect of temporal
variability and instrument uncertainty and had an average value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.1</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> during LASIC. Low fit RSSs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) appear to
coincide with low values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.39</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),
which suggests well-constrained sea spray mode solutions when the
nephelometer scattering variability is low during the 2 h average (Fig. 8b). The relationship of low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with a low fit
RSS generally persists to a threshold value of about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> before the fit RSS values increase
in magnitude. Using this observed relationship between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and fit RSS as an indicator that the algorithm is sufficiently constrained to provide reasonable fits, we applied an acceptable scattering uncertainty tolerance of 5 Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> as a restriction.</p>
      <p id="d1e6474">Figure 8c illustrates a moderate correlation between fit RSS and CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.58</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Fit RSS is generally below the threshold of 5
for CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations less than 400 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Above this
concentration, the fit RSS increases to higher values more consistently. The
600 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> criterion used to screen for clean periods is above
the average and the variability of the clean marine background season after the
restriction was applied (300 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 90 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Because supermicron sea
spray particles contribute low number concentrations to the aerosol budget,
increases in particle number concentration likely indicate nonmarine
aerosol sources that were not excluded by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">600</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> clean
marine criteria applied here. Therefore, we have excluded periods when the
total aerosol concentrations exceeds 400 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> from the retrieval
evaluation.</p>
      <p id="d1e6597">This additional screening of the LASIC dataset after applying the
restriction on the fit RSS (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the scattering error tolerance (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and using CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">400</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> provided sea spray
mode retrievals for 88 % (794) of the available clean marine background
periods during LASIC. These 794 sea spray retrievals were used to evaluate
UHSAS-NEPH during LASIC.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6">
  <label>6</label><title>Evaluation of UHSAS-NEPH sea spray retrieval during LASIC</title>
      <p id="d1e6669">Since sea salt composition measurements were not collected during the LASIC
campaign, four methods were used to evaluate sea salt identification: (1) comparison of UHSAS-NEPH to a modified version of a sea spray size
distribution fitting algorithm that has been validated previously with salt
composition (Saliba et al., 2019; Modini et al., 2015; Quinn et al.,
2017); (2) correlation to the nonrefractory chloride signal measured by the
aerosol chemical speciation monitor (ACSM); (3) correlation of supermicron
scattering and sea spray mass, where coarse scattering is taken as a tracer
for sea spray during clean marine conditions (Kleefeld et al., 2002;
Chamaillard et al., 2006; Quinn et al., 1998); and (4) correlation of
retrieved mass to wind speed, since this is widely used as a proxy for sea
spray mass production (Lewis and Schwartz, 2004) and model flux
parameterization (Gong, 2003; de Leeuw et al., 2011; Ma et al., 2008).</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS1">
  <label>6.1</label><title>UHSAS-only comparison</title>
      <p id="d1e6679">We applied the SEMS-APS fitting algorithm described in Sect. 4 to measured
UHSAS number size distributions (hereafter identified as “UHSAS-only”) and
compared sea spray mode results with those retrieved using UHSAS-NEPH.
Sanchez et al. (2021) have recently applied the algorithm to submicron
UHSAS size distributions obtained from aircraft measurements in the marine
boundary layer of the Southern Ocean and found it to be a good approximation
of the sea spray contribution to the CCN number concentration by comparison to
quantified sub- and supermicron sea salt particles using electron
microscopy. The mode fitting parameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the
UHSAS-only method were converted to mass-derived values for comparison with
UHSAS-NEPH using Eq. (7) for the same particle diameter range (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m). UHSAS-only sea spray modes were fitted for 90 % of the
2 h average size distributions during the clean marine background season.
When fits could not be achieved, there was generally noise in the measured size
distribution or other common singularities (see the supplement of Saliba et al., 2019). Summary statistics comparing parameters retrieved using
UHSAS-NEPH and UHSAS-only are provided in Table 5.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e6730">UHSAS-only and UHSAS-NEPH number concentrations, mass
concentrations, and size distribution fitting parameters. Values are the mean
±1 standard deviation. Bracketed values are the minimum and maximum.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">UHSAS-only</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">UHSAS-NEPH</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0, 151]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0, 34]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0.008, 23.5]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8.37 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.1 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0.18, 23.0]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">number</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.42 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.10 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0.050, 0.54]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.51 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.10 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0.16, 1.0]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mass</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.68 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.01 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0.4, 1.6]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.47 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.17 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[0.6, 1.9]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[1.3, 5.3]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>[1.1, 3.97]</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e7022">Integrated sea spray mode mass concentrations ranged from 0.008 to 23.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> employing UHSAS-only and from 0.18 to 23.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> with UHSAS-NEPH. Average sea spray mass concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and 8.37 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were observed for UHSAS-only and UHSAS-NEPH, respectively, which indicates
that using UHSAS-only provides lower sea spray mass retrievals because
UHSAS-only fits are constrained solely by the accumulation mode shoulder.
Sea spray mass concentrations from both methods exhibit generally consistent
concentrations during the clean marine periods of LASIC with no apparent
seasonality (Fig. 9a), but there are distinct differences in the retrieved
mode diameters and widths (Fig. 9b, c).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e7128"><bold>(a)</bold> Time series of sea spray mass concentrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> retrieved from UHSAS-NEPH (blue) and UHSAS-only (orange)
during clean marine periods of the LASIC background season (see Table 5 for
summary statistics). Histograms of the <bold>(b)</bold> geometric mass mean diameter
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(c)</bold> geometric standard deviation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mode width)
for the retrieved sea spray modes using UHSAS-NEPH and UHSAS-only.
Box-and-whisker plots above the histograms represent the quartile ranges
(25th and 75th percentiles) and median (vertical line) of sea spray mode
fitting parameters reported in laboratory and field measurements (see Table 6).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e7204">Sea spray mode retrievals using UHSAS-only were much smaller in mass mean
diameter than those of UHSAS-NEPH, with averages of 0.68 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.01 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and
1.47 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, respectively (Fig. 9b). The range of mass mean
diameters was similar for both retrieval methods, 0.4 to 1.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for
UHSAS-only and 0.6 to 1.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for UHSAS-NEPH, though the majority of the
UHSAS-only mean diameters were submicron (Fig. 9b). Just over 2 % (14) of the
UHSAS-only retrievals had mass mean diameters in the coarse mode
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), compared to 91 % (723) of those of UHSAS-NEPH. The peak
in mass mean diameters at sizes within the coarse mode using UHSAS-NEPH can
be attributed to the additional contributions of supermicron mass identified
by the nephelometer supermicron scattering that are not constrained by the
UHSAS submicron size distribution. These predominately supermicron mean
diameters are consistent with the assumption that sea salt particles
contribute a large amount of mass and scattering within the coarse mode,
which is simply not captured by the submicron UHSAS distributions alone.</p>
      <p id="d1e7272">On average, UHSAS-only retrievals were narrower at 1.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4 than
those retrieved with UHSAS-NEPH at 2.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3 (Fig. 9c). The range of
mode widths using UHSAS-only varied from particularly narrow (1.3) to a
fairly broad and unconstrained width of 5.3, compared to 1.1 to 3.97 for
UHSAS-NEPH. UHSAS-only widths are determined solely by the shape of the
large accumulation mode shoulder in the UHSAS number size distribution and
include a variety of widths based on how flat or sharp the slope of this
shoulder may be. Mode widths retrieved from both methods were predominately
narrower than a value of 3, with only 2 % of UHSAS-only modes and 1 % of
UHSAS-NEPH modes greater than this value. The average UHSAS-only mode narrowness
again reflects the absence of supermicron size distribution measurements.
Sanchez et al. (2021) reported a similarly narrow average mode width
(1.44 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.25) for marine boundary layer sea spray aerosol retrieved
with UHSAS-only. Conversely, Yu et al. (2019) reported a broad mode width
(geometric standard deviation of 2.7) and a volume peak at a supermicron
diameter (approximately 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) for 24 h averaged sea salt particle
size distributions at Ascension Island using Aerosol Robotic Network
retrievals, which is more consistent with UHSAS-NEPH observations. These
results indicate that UHSAS-only may provide a good estimate of the sea spray
number concentration, which predominantly consists of submicron-sized
particles (Sanchez et al., 2021), but the lack of supermicron
measurements makes it unable to adequately identify mass contributions from
larger particles.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e7306">Selected characteristic fits to the sea spray mode.
UHSAS mass size distribution (black), UHSAS-NEPH (blue), and UHSAS-only
(orange). Panels are oriented to reflect increasing mass, size, and width of
the sea spray mode retrieved by UHSAS-NEPH from left to right <bold>(a–c, d–f)</bold>.
Mode fitting parameters – total mode mass (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, geometric mass mean diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and geometric standard deviation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> – for the UHSAS-NEPH and UHSAS-only methods are identified in text above the plots in each panel and colored by the retrieval method. 2 h average time stamps are provided at the lower right.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e7357">Comparing the sea spray mode fitting parameters to those found in the literature
shows that retrieved modal properties for both methods are within the ranges
of reported values of mass mean dry diameter (0.25–1.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) and
mode width (1.4–3) (Fig. 9b, c and Table 6), while it should be noted that these LASIC
retrievals are for 55% RH. The median reported mass diameter (0.88 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) falls in between the statistical mode values (peaks in
histograms) of the retrieval methods at the upper end of UHSAS-only and
lower end of UHSAS-NEPH (Fig. 9b), showing consistency with other ambient
sea spray mode measurements  (Quinn et al., 2017; Sanchez et al., 2021;
Modini et al., 2015). Retrievals using only the UHSAS number size
distributions generally show better agreement in terms of mode size with
laboratory-based bubble bursting and breaking wave flume studies, which had
mass mean diameters that were less than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (Prather et al.,
2013; Bates et al., 2012; Modini et al., 2010). UHSAS-NEPH retrievals are
more consistent with field observations of the sea spray size distribution
across several ocean basins, including open ocean studies in the Pacific and
Atlantic, in which measurements of supermicron size distributions were
incorporated  (Quinn et al., 2017; Saliba et al., 2019; Modini et al.,
2015). The UHSAS-NEPH retrieval of sea spray mode width was at the lower end
of the reported laboratory and field measurement values, while the narrow
UHSAS-only modes were generally outside the spread of the majority of
reported values. These differences in the ranges of the retrieved values show
that the mode width is the least constrained parameter derived by UHSAS-only
and UHSAS-NEPH, although the scattering-based constraint provides some
apparent improvement compared to UHSAS-only when supermicron mass
contributions are considered.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Table 6</label><caption><p id="d1e7388">Values of sea spray modal parameters reported in the literature.
Number mean diameters (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">number</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were converted to mass mean diameters
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mass</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using Eq. (7), integrating over particle sizes of 0.01–10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and averaging over a total particle concentration range of 1–100 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Values are averages unless labeled as an upper or lower bound.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.86}[.86]?><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Reference</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Experiment type</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Ocean basin</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col6" align="center">Parameter </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">number</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>   (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mass</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Lewis and Schwartz (2004),</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Field measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sellegri et al. (2006)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH: 80 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Keene et al. (2007),</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Laboratory-based bubble</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.05 (lower bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.25 (lower bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fuentes et al. (2010),</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">bursting (RH: variable)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.1 (upper bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.48 (upper bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Modini et al. (2010),</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bates et al. (2012),</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Zabori et al. (2012)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Prather et al. (2013)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Laboratory-based breaking</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">N.E. Pacific</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.88</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">wave flume</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH: 10 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Modini et al. (2015)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Field measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">N.E. Pacific</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.14 (lower bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.5 (lower bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.5 (lower bound)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.26 (upper bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.3 (upper bound)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3 (upper bound)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Quinn et al. (2017)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Field measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pacific, Southern,</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH: variable,</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Arctic, and</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">mostly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Saliba et al. (2019)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Field measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">N. Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sanchez et al. (2021)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Field measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Southern Ocean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> ambient)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">This study</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Field measurements</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">S. Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.4 (UHSAS-only)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.68 (UHSAS-only)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.8 (UHSAS-only)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(RH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 55 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10%)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.5 (UHSAS-NEPH)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.47 (UHSAS-NEPH)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.4 (UHSAS-NEPH)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e8028">Figure 10 displays six UHSAS-NEPH sea spray mode fits that are
characteristic of the retrieval procedure. Cases with different modal
properties (diameter, width, mass) and a comparison of this retrieval with
the UHSAS-only algorithm are presented. For both methods, the accumulation
mode (0.4–1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) is generally well characterized by the retrieved
modes, which follow the shape of this broad shoulder closely. Differences
between the UHSAS-only and UHSAS-NEPH retrieved mass size distributions
become more apparent just before the 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size limit of the UHSAS.
For narrow modes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the UHSAS-only
method appears to generally be sufficient to quantify the sea spray mode
mass concentration in the absence of supermicron scattering measurements
(Fig. 10a). In these cases, the lower contribution of coarse particles
measured by the nephelometer supermicron scattering adds little information
at the tail of the size distribution. The limitations of fitting a sea spray
mode based solely on the shape of the accumulation mode “shoulder” in the
number size distribution are illustrated in Fig. 10b, c, d. The broadness of
the shoulder at submicron sizes (0.38–0.83 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) forces the
UHSAS-only retrieval to include more particles from submicron sizes and
fewer from the supermicron regime. This leads to lower mass concentrations
in UHSAS-only compared to UHSAS-NEPH. Mode retrievals using only the UHSAS
size distribution likely underestimate much of the mass at supermicron sizes,
as seen by the sharper tailing off of the UHSAS-only modes in the coarse
regime (Fig. 10b, c, e, f), with up to 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> of sea spray mass
difference in the cases considered here.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS2">
  <label>6.2</label><title>Sea spray tracers</title>
      <p id="d1e8099">We next compared sea spray mode mass concentrations from UHSAS-only and
UHSAS-NEPH with available sea spray tracers to evaluate the extent to which
the retrieved modal properties represent realistic sea spray size
distributions.</p>
      <p id="d1e8102">The submicron mass concentration measured by the ACSM provided a trace
chloride signal that could be used to examine sea salt mass concentrations
from the UHSAS-only and UHSAS-NEPH retrievals. Comparing the retrieved submicron
sea spray mass with the ACSM chloride mass, we found correlations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.39</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for UHSAS-only and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for
UHSAS-NEPH (Fig. 11a, b). While the ACSM signal is a very indirect chemical
measurement of refractory chloride, these positive correlations provide
support for the ability of both methods to identify retrieved modes as sea
spray. The higher correlation of UHSAS-only over UHSAS-NEPH may be a result
of the submicron sampling range of the ACSM, the diameter range in which
UHSAS-only is solely constrained. Additionally, much of the sea spray mass
retrieved from UHSAS-NEPH is concentrated in the supermicron regime, which
is not observed in ACSM submicron chloride measurements.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e8155">Correlations of submicron sea spray mass (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with ACSM chloride <bold>(a, b)</bold>, supermicron sea spray
mass (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with measured supermicron
scattering at 550 nm <bold>(c, d)</bold>, and total sea spray mode mass (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M500" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M501" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with wind speed <bold>(e, f)</bold> for the UHSAS-only (left) and UHSAS-NEPH (right)
methods. Linear regressions are symbolized by red lines and correlation
coefficients are provided inside the panels.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/15/4171/2022/amt-15-4171-2022-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e8306">Correlations between sea spray mass and the supermicron scattering
coefficient were assessed for UHSAS-only and UHSAS-NEPH using retrievals
that followed the criteria discussed in previous sections. Sea spray mass
concentrations from UHSAS-only were consistently less than 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M502" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M503" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and were not able to quantitatively explain the variability in
the measured supermicron scattering at 550 nm, as indicated by a very weak
correlation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M504" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M505" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 11c). Although the stronger
correlation between sea spray mass concentration and scattering obtained with
UHSAS-NEPH (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M506" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M507" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Fig. 11d) is an expected result
given that the retrieved modes are constrained by scattering measurements,
the lack of correlation from UHSAS-only emphasizes the importance of
including supermicron particle size measurements to adequately characterize
how optical properties are influenced by the sea spray size distribution.</p>
      <p id="d1e8378">The functional relationship between sea spray mass concentration and wind
speed was evaluated using linear regression on the UHSAS-only and UHSAS-NEPH
retrievals, which resulted in correlation coefficients of 0.1 and 0.2,
respectively (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M508" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. 11e, f). These correlations were lower
than the values (in the range of 0.4 to 0.9) reported for numerous basins of the
global ocean  (Liu et al., 2021; Russell et al., 2010; Feng et al., 2017;
Saliba et al., 2019). The calm and generally invariant wind speed observed
during the LASIC background season (7.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M509" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M510" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) could explain the
poor correlations for both methods, as the lack of dynamic range in wind
speed at Ascension Island reduces the degree to which it explains the
variability in concentration. The variability may instead be impacted by
marine airmass transport of sea spray aerosol that is from source regions away from
Ascension and reaches the island, rather than local wind conditions, which
would not be resolved in the correlation  (Grythe et al., 2014). The
improved correlation of UHSAS-NEPH in comparison to UHSAS-only shows some
added value of applying the supermicron scattering constraint to
characterize the sea spray mode. Evaluation of the method using North
Atlantic measurements (Sect. 4), where more dynamic wind conditions were
observed, shows that the use of the supermicron scattering constraint could be
comparable to the constraint from measured supermicron size distributions when
estimating sea spray production from wind speed, as has been done in previous
work (Saliba et al., 2019; Modini et al., 2015; Quinn et al., 2017).
These results indicate that the incorporation of nephelometer scattering as
a constraint for supermicron particle size provides a reasonable replacement
for measured supermicron mass size distributions.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>7</label><title>Concluding remarks</title>
      <p id="d1e8421">In this work, we have presented a new method that combines measured submicron
size distributions and three-wavelength supermicron scattering to estimate
observationally constrained sea spray modal properties at a remote marine
site using a Mie inversion (UHSAS-NEPH). When the retrieval was limited to
marine periods with low aerosol concentrations (CN<inline-formula><mml:math id="M511" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">400</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M512" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, reasonable sea spray size distributions were obtained 88 % of
the time. UHSAS-NEPH had larger fit residuals for higher ambient scattering
variability (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M513" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">sca</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RGB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Mm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M514" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and high relative humidity within the nephelometer (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M515" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %), which affected the consistency with which the Mie solutions could
be constrained by scattering measurements and UHSAS submicron mass size
distributions.</p>
      <p id="d1e8501">Retrieved sea spray modes ranged in mass mean diameter from 0.6 to 1.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M516" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (1.47 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M517" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M518" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m), modal width from 1.1 to 3.9 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M519" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and mass concentration from 0.18 to 23.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M520" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M521" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
(8.37 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M522" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M523" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M524" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which are consistent with
other field-based measurements of the sea spray aerosol mode. By comparing
retrieved modes to available tracers of sea salt, we have shown that
estimates of supermicron size, such as from Mie inversion techniques, are
necessary to resolve expected sea spray mass correlations with the scattering
and wind speed at Ascension Island. The observed positive correlation of
UHSAS-NEPH submicron sea spray mode mass with the measured submicron chloride
signal (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M525" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) provided indirect chemical support of UHSAS-NEPH modes
as sea spray. UHSAS-NEPH showed stronger correlations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M526" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to the
supermicron scattering in comparison to fitting based only on the submicron
size distribution accumulation mode (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M527" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), as expected from using the
scattering measurement to constrain UHSAS-NEPH solutions. Incorporation of
scattering measurements as an estimate of supermicron mass concentration
improved the weak wind speed correlation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M528" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) relative to using only
the submicron size distribution (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M529" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for sea spray retrieval. This
result was consistent with sea spray production, even though the relationship
was not as strong as that found in prior studies with greater dynamic
ranges of wind speeds and available supermicron size distributions. Other
environmental parameters such as sea surface temperature and its impacts on
surface tension and kinematic viscosity could also be considered when
assessing the relationship between sea spray production and modal properties
relative to these retrieval methods at Ascension Island (Saliba et al.,
2019; Liu et al., 2021; Salter et al., 2014), although salt measurements
provided a more direct evaluation of the method when applied to North
Atlantic observations (Sect. 4).</p>
      <p id="d1e8651">We have demonstrated that three-wavelength scattering measurements constrained
with submicron size distributions yield sea spray mode estimates that are
consistent with sea salt during clean marine periods of LASIC. Inclusion of
additional scattering wavelengths and chemical measurements of particles
would provide additional constraints on refractive index and scattering
efficiency by allowing for temporally resolved adjustments in parameters
used for Mie simulations. The retrieval procedure outlined in this work is a
self-contained code with lookup table and is available to the broader
scientific community. The future use of this combined approach based on the size distribution and
scattering for other measured marine datasets that lack
supermicron size distributions can expand the array of sea spray
observations and improve upon the size, mass, and emission characterization of
marine aerosol in climate models, further constraining the uncertainty in
natural aerosol impacts on radiative forcing.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e8658">The sea spray mode retrieval algorithm and Mie theory scattering lookup
table are available as a MATLAB function and MATLAB matrix file at the UCSD
digital archives (<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR" ext-link-type="DOI">10.6075/J0GT5NCR</ext-link>, Dedrick et al., 2022a). The Mie
codes used to simulate sea spray scattering are available at the same
location.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e8667">All LASIC data are publicly available from the ARM (Atmospheric Radiation Measurement) data discovery
(<uri>https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/</uri>; last access: 5 January 2022, ARM, 2017). Specific directions to each measurement dataset are provided as DOI
references in Table 1. Sea spray modal parameters retrieved using LASIC and
NAAMES measurements can be found at the UCSD digital archives (<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR" ext-link-type="DOI">10.6075/J0GT5NCR</ext-link>, Dedrick et al., 2022b). Scattering and chemical measurements from NAAMES 1 are available at <uri>https://saga.pmel.noaa.gov/data/download.php?cruise=NAAMES1</uri>
(last access: 18 April 2022, Bates and Quinn, 2015); SEMS size distributions from NAAMES 1 are available at <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0736P3J" ext-link-type="DOI">10.6075/J0736P3J</ext-link> (Russell et al., 2018).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e8682">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4171-2022-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4171-2022-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e8691">JLD, GS, and LMR developed the conceptualization and methodology of this work. Code development and formal analysis was led by JLD, GS, and ASW. LMR and DL provided supervision and funding acquisition. The original draft of this manuscript was written by JLD. All authors contributed to the review and editing of the manuscript.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e8697">The contact author has declared that neither they nor their co-authors have any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e8704">Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e8710">This article is part of the special issue “New observations and related modelling studies of the aerosol–cloud–climate system in the Southeast Atlantic and southern Africa regions (ACP/AMT inter-journal SI)”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e8716">The authors graciously thank Paquita Zuidema, the LASIC science team, and
ARM instrument mentors for their assistance in the interpretation of
measured size distributions from SMPS and UHSAS and nephelometer scattering
measurements collected during the LASIC campaign. We thank Timothy Bates and
Patricia Quinn for NAAMES 1 scattering and composition measurements. We also
extend our thanks to Roya Bahreini for productive discussions on ways to
incorporate measurement uncertainties and variabilities into the Mie
inversion methodology. The authors express thanks to Ian Eisenman for
sharing computing resources that made the execution of Mie scattering
simulations and sea spray retrieval possible. Two anonymous reviewers are
thanked for their constructive comments that have helped improve the further
development of the retrieval method and presentation of results in this
study.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e8721">This research was supported by the Director, Office of Science, Office of
Biological and Environmental Research, Climate and Environmental Sciences
Division of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-SC0021045.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e8727">This paper was edited by Frank Eckardt and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Anderson, T. and Ogren, J.: Determining aerosol radiative properties using
the TSI 3563 integrating nephelometer, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 29,
57–69, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829808965551" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786829808965551</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Anderson, T., Covert, D., Marshall, S., Laucks, M., Charlson, R., Waggoner,
A., Ogren, J., Caldow, R., Holm, R., Quant, F., Sem, G., Wiedensohler, A.,
Ahlquist, N., and Bates, T.: Performance characteristics of a
high-sensitivity, three-wavelength, total scatter/backscatter nephelometer,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 13, 967–986,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0967:PCOAHS&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0967:PCOAHS&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM): Data Discovery. 2016-05-20 to 2017-10-31, ARM Mobile Facility (ASI) Ascension Island, South Atlantic Ocean; AMF1 (M1) [data set], <uri>https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/</uri> (last access: 5 January 2022), 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ayash, T., Gong, S., and Jia, C.: Direct and indirect shortwave radiative
effects of sea salt aerosols, J. Climate, 21, 3207–3220,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI2063.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2007JCLI2063.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bates, T. S. and Quinn, P. K.: Project/Cruise: NAAMES1 – Nov. 2015, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Pacific Marine Environment Laboratory (PMEL) [data set], <uri>https://saga.pmel.noaa.gov/data/download.php?cruise=NAAMES1</uri> (last access: 18 April 2022), 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bates, T. S., Quinn, P. K., Frossard, A. A., Russell, L. M., Hakala, J., Petaja, T., Kulmala, M., Covert, D. S., Cappa, C. D., Li, S.-M., Hayden, K. L., Nuaaman, I., McLaren, R., Massoli, P., Canagaratna, M. R., Onasch, T. B., Sueper, D., Worsnop, D. R., and Keene, W. C.: Measurements of ocean derived aerosol off the coast of
California, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00V15,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017588" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD017588</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Behrenfeld, M., Moore, R., Hostetler, C., Graff, J., Gaube, P., Russell, L.,
Chen, G., Doney, S., Giovannoni, S., Liu, H., Proctor, C., Bolalios, L.,
Baetge, N., Davie-Martin, C., Westberry, T., Bates, T., Bell, T., Bidle, K.,
Boss, E., Brooks, S., Cairns, B., Carlson, C., Halsey, K., Harvey, E., Hu,
C., Karp-Boss, L., Kleb, M., Menden-Deuer, S., Morison, F., Quinn, P.,
Scarino, A., Anderson, B., Chowdhary, J., Crosbie, E., Ferrare, R., Haire,
J., Hu, Y., Janz, S., Redemann, J., Saltzman, E., Shook, M., Siegel, D.,
Wisthaler, A., Martine, M., and Ziemba, L.: The North Atlantic Aerosol and
Marine Ecosystem Study (NAAMES): Science Motive and Mission Overview,
Front. Mar. Sci., 6, 122, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00122" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fmars.2019.00122</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bi, L., Lin, W., Wang, Z., Tang, X., Zhang, X., and Yi, B.: Optical Modeling
of Sea Salt Aerosols: The Effects of Nonsphericity and Inhomogeneity,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 543–558,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027869" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017JD027869</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bluvshtein, N., Lin, P., Flores, J., Segev, L., Mazar, Y., Tas, E., Snider,
G., Weagle, C., Brown, S., Laskin, A., and Rudich, Y.: Broadband optical
properties of biomass-burning aerosol and identification of brown carbon
chromophores, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 5441–5456,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026230" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD026230</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bohren, C. F., Huffman, D. R., and KGaA, W. V. V. G. C. (Ed.): Absorption and
Scattering of Light by Small Particles, John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc, 530 pp.,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527618156" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/9783527618156</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brock, C. A., Williamson, C., Kupc, A., Froyd, K. D., Erdesz, F., Wagner, N., Richardson, M., Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R.-S., Katich, J. M., Campuzano-Jost, P., Nault, B. A., Schroder, J. C., Jimenez, J. L., Weinzierl, B., Dollner, M., Bui, T., and Murphy, D. M.: Aerosol size distributions during the Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom): methods, uncertainties, and data products, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 3081–3099, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3081-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-12-3081-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bullard, R.L., Uin, J., Springston, S.R., Kuang, C., and Smith, S: Aerosol Inlet Characterization Experiment Report, United States Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1355300" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2172/1355300</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cai, Y., Montague, D., Mooiweer-Bryan, W., and Deshler, T.: Performance
characteristics of the ultra high sensitivity aerosol spectrometer for
particles between 55 and 800 nm: Laboratory and field studies, J.
Aerosol Sci., 39, 759–769, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.04.007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.04.007</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chamaillard, K., Kleefeld, C., Jennings, S., Ceburnis, D., and O'Dowd, C.:
Light scattering properties of sea-salt aerosol particles inferred from
modeling studies and ground-based measurements, J. Quant.
Spectrosc. Ra. Transf., 101, 498–511,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2006.02.062" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jqsrt.2006.02.062</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dedrick, J. L., Saliba, G., Williams, A. S., Russell, L. M., and Lubin, D.:
Retrieved Sea Spray Aerosol Fitting Parameters from LASIC and NAAMES,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR" ext-link-type="DOI">10.6075/J0GT5NCR</ext-link>, UC San Diego [data set], 2022a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dedrick, J. L., Saliba, G., Williams, A. S., Russell, L. M., and Lubin, D.:
Sea Spray Mode Retrieval and Mie Scattering Codes,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR" ext-link-type="DOI">10.6075/J0GT5NCR</ext-link>, UC San Diego [code], 2022b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>de Leeuw, G., Andreas, E., Anguelova, M., Fairall, C., Lewis, E., O'Dowd,
C., Schulz, M., and Schwartz, S.: PRODUCTION FLUX OF SEA SPRAY AEROSOL,
Rev. Geophys., 49, RG2001, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RG000349" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010RG000349</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Delene, D. and Ogren, J.: Variability of aerosol optical properties at four
North American surface monitoring sites, J. Atmos.
Sci., 59, 1135–1150, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;1135:VOAOPA&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;1135:VOAOPA&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>DeMott, P., Hill, T., McCluskey, C., Prather, K., Collins, D., Sullivan, R.,
Ruppel, M., Mason, R., Irish, V., Lee, T., Hwang, C., Rhee, T., Snider, J.,
McMeeking, G., Dhaniyala, S., Lewis, E., Wentzell, J., Abbatt, J., Lee, C.,
Sultana, C., Ault, A., Axson, J., Martinez, M., Venero, I., Santos-Figueroa,
G., Stokes, M., Deane, G., Mayol-Bracero, O., Grassian, V., Bertram, T.,
Bertram, A., Moffett, B., and Franc, G.: Sea spray aerosol as a unique
source of ice nucleating particles, P. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA, 113, 5797–5803,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1514034112" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1514034112</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Denjean, C., Cassola, F., Mazzino, A., Triquet, S., Chevaillier, S., Grand, N., Bourrianne, T., Momboisse, G., Sellegri, K., Schwarzenbock, A., Freney, E., Mallet, M., and Formenti, P.: Size distribution and optical properties of mineral dust aerosols transported in the western Mediterranean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 1081–1104, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1081-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-1081-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Denjean, C., Bourrianne, T., Burnet, F., Mallet, M., Maury, N., Colomb, A., Dominutti, P., Brito, J., Dupuy, R., Sellegri, K., Schwarzenboeck, A., Flamant, C., and Knippertz, P.: Overview of aerosol optical properties over southern West Africa from DACCIWA aircraft measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 4735–4756, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4735-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-4735-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Di Biagio, C., Formenti, P., Balkanski, Y., Caponi, L., Cazaunau, M., Pangui, E., Journet, E., Nowak, S., Andreae, M. O., Kandler, K., Saeed, T., Piketh, S., Seibert, D., Williams, E., and Doussin, J.-F.: Complex refractive indices and single-scattering albedo of global dust aerosols in the shortwave spectrum and relationship to size and iron content, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15503–15531, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15503-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-15503-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Feng, L., Shen, H., Zhu, Y., Gao, H., and Yao, X.: Insight into Generation
and Evolution of Sea-Salt Aerosols from Field Measurements in Diversified
Marine and Coastal Atmospheres, Sci. Rep., 7, 41260,  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41260" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/srep41260</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Frie, A. and Bahreini, R.: Refractive index confidence explorer (RICE): A
tool for propagating uncertainties through complex refractive index
retrievals from aerosol particles, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 55,
703–717, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2021.1895428" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2021.1895428</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Frossard, A., Russell, L., Burrows, S., Elliott, S., Bates, T., and Quinn,
P.: Sources and composition of submicron organic mass in marine aerosol
particles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 12977–13003,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021913" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD021913</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fuentes, E., Coe, H., Green, D., de Leeuw, G., and McFiggans, G.: On the impacts of phytoplankton-derived organic matter on the properties of the primary marine aerosol – Part 1: Source fluxes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 9295–9317, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-9295-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-9295-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gasso, S., Hegg, D., Covert, D., Collins, D., Noone, K., Ostrom, E., Schmid,
B., Russell, P., Livingston, J., Durkee, P., and Jonsson, H.: Influence of
humidity on the aerosol scattering coefficient and its effect on the
upwelling radiance during ACE-2, Tellus B – Chem. Phys.
Meteorol., 52, 546–567, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00055.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00055.x</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gong, S.: A parameterization of sea-salt aerosol source function for sub-
and super-micron particles, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1097,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002079" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003GB002079</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Grythe, H., Ström, J., Krejci, R., Quinn, P., and Stohl, A.: A review of sea-spray aerosol source functions using a large global set of sea salt aerosol concentration measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 1277–1297, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1277-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-14-1277-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Haywood, J., Francis, P., Osborne, S., Glew, M., Loeb, N., Highwood, E.,
Tanre, D., Myhre, G., Formenti, P., and Hirst, E.: Radiative properties and
direct radiative effect of Saharan dust measured by the C-130 aircraft
during SHADE: 1. Solar spectrum, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 108, 8577, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002687" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002687</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Horowitz, H., Holmes, C., Wright, A., Sherwen, T., Wang, X., Evans, M.,
Huang, J., Jaegle, L., Chen, Q., Zhai, S., and Alexander, B.: Effects of Sea
Salt Aerosol Emissions for Marine Cloud Brightening on Atmospheric
Chemistry: Implications for Radiative Forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
47, e2019GL085838, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085838" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL085838</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., Dobracki, A., Smirnow, N., and Sedlacek III, A. J.: Undersizing of aged African biomass burning aerosol by an ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol spectrometer, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7381–7404, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7381-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-14-7381-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Humphries, R. S., Keywood, M. D., Gribben, S., McRobert, I. M., Ward, J. P., Selleck, P., Taylor, S., Harnwell, J., Flynn, C., Kulkarni, G. R., Mace, G. G., Protat, A., Alexander, S. P., and McFarquhar, G.: Southern Ocean latitudinal gradients of cloud condensation nuclei, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12757–12782, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12757-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-12757-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hussein, T., Dal Maso, M., Petaja, T., Koponen, I., Paatero, P., Aalto, P.,
Hameri, K., and Kulmala, M.: Evaluation of an automatic algorithm for
fitting the particle number size distributions, Boreal Environ. Res.,
10, 337–355, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kassianov, E., Berg, L., Pekour, M., Barnard, J., Chand, D., Flynn, C.,
Ovchinnikov, M., Sedlacek, A., Schmid, B., Shilling, J., Tomlinson, J., and
Fast, J.: Airborne Aerosol in Situ Measurements during TCAP: A Closure Study
of Total Scattering, Atmosphere, 6, 1069–1101, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos6081069" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/atmos6081069</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Keene, W., Maring, H., Maben, J., Kieber, D., Pszenny, A., Dahl, E.,
Izaguirre, M., Davis, A., Long, M., Zhou, X., Smoydzin, L., and Sander, R.:
Chemical and physical characteristics of nascent aerosols produced by
bursting bubbles at a model air-sea interface, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 112, D21202, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008464" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD008464</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Khlystov, A., Stanier, C., and Pandis, S.: An algorithm for combining
electrical mobility and aerodynamic size distributions data when measuring
ambient aerosol, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 38, 229–238,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820390229543" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820390229543</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kishcha, P., da Silva, A., Starobinets, B., Long, C., Kalashnikova, O., and
Alpert, P.: Saharan dust as a causal factor of hemispheric asymmetry in
aerosols and cloud cover over the tropical Atlantic Ocean, Int.
J. Remote Sens., 36, 3423–3445, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2015.1060646" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/01431161.2015.1060646</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kleefeld, C., O'Dowd, C., O'Reilly, S., Jennings, S., Aalto, P., Becker, E.,
Kunz, G., and de Leeuw, G.: Relative contribution of submicron and
supermicron particles to aerosol light scattering in the marine boundary
layer, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 107, 8103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000262" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD000262</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kupc, A., Williamson, C., Wagner, N. L., Richardson, M., and Brock, C. A.: Modification, calibration, and performance of the Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer for particle size distribution and volatility measurements during the Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom) airborne campaign, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 369–383, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-369-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-369-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lewis, E. R. and Schwartz, S. E., and Union, A. G. (Ed.): Sea Salt Aerosol
Production: Mechanisms, Methods, Measurements and Models, Geophysical
Monograph Series, American Geophysical Union, 413 pp., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/GM152" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/GM152</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, S., Liu, C., Froyd, K., Schill, G., Murphy, D., Bui, T., Dean-Day, J.,
Weinzierl, B., Dollner, M., Diskin, G., Chen, G., and Gao, R.: Sea spray
aerosol concentration modulated by sea surface temperature, P. Natl. Acad.  Sci. USA, 118, e2020583118,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2020583118" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.2020583118</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lv, M., Wang, Z., Li, Z., Luo, T., Ferrare, R., Liu, D., Wu, D., Mao, J.,
Wan, B., Zhang, F., and Wang, Y.: Retrieval of Cloud Condensation Nuclei
Number Concentration Profiles From Lidar Extinction and Backscatter Data,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 6082–6098,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028102" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2017JD028102</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ma, X., von Salzen, K., and Li, J.: Modelling sea salt aerosol and its direct and indirect effects on climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1311–1327, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1311-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-1311-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Mätzler, C: MATLAB Functions for Mie Scattering and Absorption, Institut für Angewandte Physik, Bern, Switzerland, Research Report No. 2002-08, 26 pp., 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mie, G.: Articles on the optical characteristics of turbid tubes, especially
colloidal metal solutions, Ann. Phys., 25, 377–445,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19083300302" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/andp.19083300302</ext-link>, 1908.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Miller, M., Nitschke, K., Ackerman, T., Ferrell, W., Hickmon, N., Ivey, M.,
Turner, D., and Ellingson, R.: The ARM Mobile Facilities, Atmospheric
Radiation Measurement (Arm) Program: the First 20 Years, 57,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-15-0051.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-15-0051.1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Miller, R. M., McFarquhar, G. M., Rauber, R. M., O'Brien, J. R., Gupta, S., Segal-Rozenhaimer, M., Dobracki, A. N., Sedlacek, A. J., Burton, S. P., Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., and Dang, C.: Observations of supermicron-sized aerosols originating from biomass burning in southern Central Africa, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 14815–14831, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14815-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-14815-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ming, Y. and Russell, L.: Predicted hygroscopic growth of sea salt aerosol,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 28259–28274,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000454" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD000454</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Modini, R. L., Harris, B., and Ristovski, Z. D.: The organic fraction of bubble-generated, accumulation mode Sea Spray Aerosol (SSA), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 2867–2877, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-2867-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-2867-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Modini, R., Frossard, A., Ahlm, L., Russell, L., Corrigan, C., Roberts, G.,
Hawkins, L., Schroder, J., Bertram, A., Zhao, R., Lee, A., Abbatt, J., Lin,
J., Nenes, A., Wang, Z., Wonaschutz, A., Sorooshian, A., Noone, K., Jonsson,
H., Seinfeld, J., Toom-Sauntry, D., Macdonald, A., and Leaitch, W.: Primary
marine aerosol-cloud interactions off the coast of California, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 4282–4303, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022963" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014JD022963</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Moore, R. H., Wiggins, E. B., Ahern, A. T., Zimmerman, S., Montgomery, L., Campuzano Jost, P., Robinson, C. E., Ziemba, L. D., Winstead, E. L., Anderson, B. E., Brock, C. A., Brown, M. D., Chen, G., Crosbie, E. C., Guo, H., Jimenez, J. L., Jordan, C. E., Lyu, M., Nault, B. A., Rothfuss, N. E., Sanchez, K. J., Schueneman, M., Shingler, T. J., Shook, M. A., Thornhill, K. L., Wagner, N. L., and Wang, J.: Sizing response of the Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer (UHSAS) and Laser Aerosol Spectrometer (LAS) to changes in submicron aerosol composition and refractive index, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 4517–4542, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4517-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-14-4517-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mulcahy, J., O'Dowd, C., and Jennings, S.: Aerosol optical depth in clean
marine and continental northeast Atlantic air, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D20204, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD011992" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009JD011992</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Murphy, D., Anderson, J., Quinn, P., McInnes, L., Brechtel, F., Kreidenweis,
S., Middlebrook, A., Posfai, M., Thomson, D., and Buseck, P.: Influence of
sea-salt on aerosol radiative properties in the Southern Ocean marine
boundary layer, Nature, 392, 62–65, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/32138" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/32138</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>O'Dowd, C., Smith, M., Consterdine, I., and Lowe, J.: Marine aerosol,
sea-salt, and the marine sulphur cycle: A short review, Atmos.
Environ., 31, 73–80, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00106-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00106-9</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>O'Dowd, C., Scannell, C., Mulcahy, J., and Jennings, S.: Wind Speed
Influences on Marine Aerosol Optical Depth, Adv. Meteorol., 2010, 830846,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/830846" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1155/2010/830846</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ovadnevaite, J., Ceburnis, D., Canagaratna, M., Berresheim, H., Bialek, J.,
Martucci, G., Worsnop, D., and O'Dowd, C.: On the effect of wind speed on
submicron sea salt mass concentrations and source fluxes, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D16201, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017379" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JD017379</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Paulot, F., Paynter, D., Winton, M., Ginoux, P., Zhao, M., and Horowitz, L.:
Revisiting the Impact of Sea Salt on Climate Sensitivity, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL085601, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085601" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL085601</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pennypacker, S. and Wood, R.: A Case Study in Low Aerosol Number
Concentrations Over the Eastern North Atlantic: Implications for Pristine
Conditions in the Remote Marine Boundary Layer, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 122, 12393–12415, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027493" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017JD027493</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pennypacker, S., Diamond, M., and Wood, R.: Ultra-clean and smoky marine boundary layers frequently occur in the same season over the southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 2341–2351, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-2341-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-2341-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Prather, K., Bertram, T., Grassian, V., Deane, G., Stokes, M., DeMott, P.,
Aluwihare, L., Palenik, B., Azam, F., Seinfeld, J., Moffet, R., Molina, M.,
Cappa, C., Geiger, F., Roberts, G., Russell, L., Ault, A., Baltrusaitis, J.,
Collins, D., Corrigan, C., Cuadra-Rodriguez, L., Ebben, C., Forestieri, S.,
Guasco, T., Hersey, S., Kim, M., Lambert, W., Modini, R., Mui, W., Pedler,
B., Ruppel, M., Ryder, O., Schoepp, N., Sullivan, R., and Zhao, D.: Bringing
the ocean into the laboratory to probe the chemical complexity of sea spray
aerosol, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 110, 7550–7555, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1300262110" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1300262110</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Quinn, P., Coffman, D., Kapustin, V., Bates, T., and Covert, D.: Aerosol
optical properties in the marine boundary layer during the First Aerosol
Characterization Experiment (ACE 1) and the underlying chemical and physical
aerosol properties, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103,
16547–16563, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD02345" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97JD02345</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Quinn, P., Coffman, D., Johnson, J., Upchurch, L., and Bates, T.: Small
fraction of marine cloud condensation nuclei made up of sea spray aerosol,
Nat. Geosci., 10, 674–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M530" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO3003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/NGEO3003</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Randles, C., Russell, L., and Ramaswamy, V.: Hygroscopic and optical
properties of organic sea salt aerosol and consequences for climate forcing,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L16108, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL020628" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004GL020628</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Russell, L., Huebert, B., Flagan, R., and Seinfeld, J.: Characterization of
submicron aerosol size distributions from time-resolved measurements in the
Atlantic Stratocumulus Transition Experiment Marine Aerosol and Gas
Exchange, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 101, 4469–4478,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD01372" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/95JD01372</ext-link>, 1996a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Russell, L., Zhang, S., Flagan, R., Seinfeld, J., Stolzenburg, M., and
Caldow, R.: Radially classified aerosol detector for aircraft-based
submicron aerosol measurements, J. Atmos. Ocean.
Technol., 13, 598–609, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0598:RCADFA&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0598:RCADFA&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1996b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Russell, L., Hawkins, L., Frossard, A., Quinn, P., and Bates, T.:
Carbohydrate-like composition of submicron atmospheric particles and their
production from ocean bubble bursting, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 6652–6657, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908905107" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.0908905107</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Russell, L. M., Chen, C., Betha, R., Price, D. J., and Lewis, S.: NAAMES1 Research Cruise Aerosol Measurements (2015), in: Aerosol Particle Chemical and Physical Measurements on the 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 North Atlantic Aerosols and Marine Ecosystems Study (NAAMES) Research Cruises, UC San Diego Library Digital Collections, [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0736P3J" ext-link-type="DOI">10.6075/J0736P3J</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Saliba, G., Chen, C., Lewis, S., Russell, L., Rivellini, L., Lee, A., Quinn,
P., Bates, T., Haentjens, N., Boss, E., Karp-Boss, L., Baetge, N., Carlson,
C., and Behrenfeld, M.: Factors driving the seasonal and hourly variability
of sea-spray aerosol number in the North Atlantic, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 116,
20309–20314, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907574116" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.1907574116</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Saliba, G., Chen, C., Lewis, S., Russell, L., Quinn, P., Bates, T., Bell,
T., Lawler, M., Saltzman, E., Sanchez, K., Moore, R., Shook, M., Rivellini,
L., Lee, A., Baetge, N., Carlson, C., and Behrenfeld, M.: Seasonal
Differences and Variability of Concentrations, Chemical Composition, and
Cloud Condensation Nuclei of Marine Aerosol Over the North Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033145, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033145" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JD033145</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Salter, M., Nilsson, E., Butcher, A., and Bilde, M.: On the seawater
temperature dependence of the sea spray aerosol generated by a continuous
plunging jet, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 9052–9072,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021376" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013JD021376</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Salter, M. E., Zieger, P., Acosta Navarro, J. C., Grythe, H., Kirkevåg, A., Rosati, B., Riipinen, I., and Nilsson, E. D.: An empirically derived inorganic sea spray source function incorporating sea surface temperature, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11047–11066, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sanchez, K. J., Roberts, G. C., Saliba, G., Russell, L. M., Twohy, C., Reeves, J. M., Humphries, R. S., Keywood, M. D., Ward, J. P., and McRobert, I. M.: Measurement report: Cloud processes and the transport of biological emissions affect southern ocean particle and cloud condensation nuclei concentrations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3427–3446, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3427-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-3427-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schmale, J., Sharma, S., Decesari, S., Pernov, J., Massling, A., Hansson, H.-C., von Salzen, K., Skov, H., Andrews, E., Quinn, P. K., Upchurch, L. M., Eleftheriadis, K., Traversi, R., Gilardoni, S., Mazzola, M., Laing, J., and Hopke, P.: Pan-Arctic seasonal cycles and long-term trends of aerosol properties from 10 observatories, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3067–3096, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3067-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-22-3067-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Seinfeld, J. H. and Pandis, S. N.: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From
Air Pollution to Climate Change, John Wiley &amp; Sons, ISBN: 9780471720171, New York, USA, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sellegri, K., O'Dowd, C., Yoon, Y., Jennings, S., and de Leeuw, G.:
Surfactants and submicron sea spray generation, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 111, D22215, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006658" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD006658</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shen, Y., Virkkula, A., Ding, A., Luoma, K., Keskinen, H., Aalto, P. P., Chi, X., Qi, X., Nie, W., Huang, X., Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., and Kerminen, V.-M.: Estimating cloud condensation nuclei number concentrations using aerosol optical properties: role of particle number size distribution and parameterization, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15483–15502, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15483-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-15483-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Swap, R., Garstang, M., Macko, S., Tyson, P., Maenhaut, W., Artaxo, P.,
Kallberg, P., and Talbot, R.: The long-range transport of southern African
aerosols the tropical South Atlantic, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 101, 23777–23791, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD01049" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/95JD01049</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tang, I., Tridico, A., and Fung, K.: Thermodynamic and optical properties of
sea salt aerosols, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
23269–23275, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD01806" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97JD01806</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Testa, B., Hill, T., Marsden, N., Barry, K., Hume, C., Bian, Q., Uetake, J.,
Hare, H., Perkins, R., Mohler, O., Kreidenweis, S., and DeMott, P.: Ice
Nucleating Particle Connections to Regional Argentinian Land Surface
Emissions and Weather During the Cloud, Aerosol, and Complex Terrain
Interactions Experiment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035186,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035186" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2021JD035186</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Uin, J.: Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer (UHSAS) instrument
handbook, United States Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement, Technical Report No. DOE/SC-ARM-TR-163, 17 pp., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1251410" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2172/1251410</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Uin, J., Aiken, A., Dubey, M., Kuang, C., Pekour, M., Salwen, C., Sedlacek,
A., Senum, G., Smith, S., Wang, J., Watson, T., and Springston, S.:
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Aerosol Observing Systems (AOS) for
Surface-Based In Situ Atmospheric Aerosol and Trace Gas Measurements,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 36, 2429–2447,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0077.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0077.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Veselovskii, I., Kolgotin, A., Griaznov, V., Muller, D., Wandinger, U., and
Whiteman, D.: Inversion with regularization for the retrieval of
tropospheric aerosol parameters from multiwavelength lidar sounding, Appl.
Opt., 41, 3685–3699, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.003685" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1364/AO.41.003685</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Virkkula, A., Teinilä, K., Hillamo, R., Kerminen, V.-M., Saarikoski, S., Aurela, M., Viidanoja, J., Paatero, J., Koponen, I. K., and Kulmala, M.: Chemical composition of boundary layer aerosol over the Atlantic Ocean and at an Antarctic site, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3407–3421, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3407-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-3407-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Viskari, T., Asmi, E., Virkkula, A., Kolmonen, P., Petäjä, T., and Järvinen, H.: Estimation of aerosol particle number distribution with Kalman Filtering – Part 2: Simultaneous use of DMPS, APS and nephelometer measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 11781–11793, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-11781-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-11781-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>von der Weiden, S.-L., Drewnick, F., and Borrmann, S.: Particle Loss Calculator – a new software tool for the assessment of the performance of aerosol inlet systems, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 2, 479–494, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-479-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-2-479-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Von Hoyningen-Huene, W., Dinter, T., Kokhanovsky, A., Burrows, J., Wendisch,
M., Bierwirth, E., Muller, D., and Diouri, M.: Measurements of desert dust
optical characteristics at Porte au Sahara during SAMUM, Tellus
B – Chem. Phys.  Meteorol., 61, 206–215,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00405.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00405.x</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, W. and Rood, M.: Real refractive index: Dependence on relative
humidity and solute composition with relevancy to atmospheric aerosol
particles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D23305,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010165" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010165</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yu, Q., Zhang, F., Li, J., and Zhang, J.: Analysis of sea-salt aerosol size
distributions in radiative transfer, J. Aerosol Sci., 129, 71–86,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2018.11.014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jaerosci.2018.11.014</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zábori, J., Matisāns, M., Krejci, R., Nilsson, E. D., and Ström, J.: Artificial primary marine aerosol production: a laboratory study with varying water temperature, salinity, and succinic acid concentration, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10709–10724, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10709-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-10709-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, J. and Zuidema, P.: The diurnal cycle of the smoky marine boundary layer observed during August in the remote southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14493–14516, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Aiken, A. C., Gallo, F., Jensen, M. P., Kollias, P., Kuang, C., Luke, E., Springston, S., Uin, J., Wood, R., and Wang, J.: Marine boundary layer aerosol in the eastern North Atlantic: seasonal variations and key controlling processes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17615–17635, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Wood, R., Jensen, M., Kuang, C., McCoy, I., Matthews,
A., Mei, F., Tomlinson, J., Shilling, J., Zawadowicz, M., Crosbie, E.,
Moore, R., Ziemba, L., Andreae, M., and Wang, J.: New particle formation in
the remote marine boundary layer, Nat. Commun., 12,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20773-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-020-20773-1</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zieger, P., Fierz-Schmidhauser, R., Gysel, M., Ström, J., Henne, S., Yttri, K. E., Baltensperger, U., and Weingartner, E.: Effects of relative humidity on aerosol light scattering in the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3875–3890, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3875-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-3875-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zuidema, P., Redemann, J., Haywood, J., Wood, R., Piketh, S., Hipondoka, M.,
and Formenti, P.: Smoke and Clouds above the Southeast Atlantic Upcoming
Field Campaigns Probe Absorbing Aerosol's Impact on Climate, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 1131–1135, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Retrieval of the sea spray aerosol mode from submicron particle size distributions and supermicron scattering during LASIC</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, T. and Ogren, J.: Determining aerosol radiative properties using
the TSI 3563 integrating nephelometer, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 29,
57–69, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829808965551" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829808965551</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Anderson, T., Covert, D., Marshall, S., Laucks, M., Charlson, R., Waggoner,
A., Ogren, J., Caldow, R., Holm, R., Quant, F., Sem, G., Wiedensohler, A.,
Ahlquist, N., and Bates, T.: Performance characteristics of a
high-sensitivity, three-wavelength, total scatter/backscatter nephelometer,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 13, 967–986,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0967:PCOAHS&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0967:PCOAHS&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM): Data Discovery. 2016-05-20 to 2017-10-31, ARM Mobile Facility (ASI) Ascension Island, South Atlantic Ocean; AMF1 (M1) [data set], <a href="https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/" target="_blank"/> (last access: 5 January 2022), 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Ayash, T., Gong, S., and Jia, C.: Direct and indirect shortwave radiative
effects of sea salt aerosols, J. Climate, 21, 3207–3220,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI2063.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI2063.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bates, T. S. and Quinn, P. K.: Project/Cruise: NAAMES1 – Nov. 2015, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Pacific Marine Environment Laboratory (PMEL) [data set], <a href="https://saga.pmel.noaa.gov/data/download.php?cruise=NAAMES1" target="_blank"/> (last access: 18 April 2022), 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Bates, T. S., Quinn, P. K., Frossard, A. A., Russell, L. M., Hakala, J., Petaja, T., Kulmala, M., Covert, D. S., Cappa, C. D., Li, S.-M., Hayden, K. L., Nuaaman, I., McLaren, R., Massoli, P., Canagaratna, M. R., Onasch, T. B., Sueper, D., Worsnop, D. R., and Keene, W. C.: Measurements of ocean derived aerosol off the coast of
California, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D00V15,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017588" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017588</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Behrenfeld, M., Moore, R., Hostetler, C., Graff, J., Gaube, P., Russell, L.,
Chen, G., Doney, S., Giovannoni, S., Liu, H., Proctor, C., Bolalios, L.,
Baetge, N., Davie-Martin, C., Westberry, T., Bates, T., Bell, T., Bidle, K.,
Boss, E., Brooks, S., Cairns, B., Carlson, C., Halsey, K., Harvey, E., Hu,
C., Karp-Boss, L., Kleb, M., Menden-Deuer, S., Morison, F., Quinn, P.,
Scarino, A., Anderson, B., Chowdhary, J., Crosbie, E., Ferrare, R., Haire,
J., Hu, Y., Janz, S., Redemann, J., Saltzman, E., Shook, M., Siegel, D.,
Wisthaler, A., Martine, M., and Ziemba, L.: The North Atlantic Aerosol and
Marine Ecosystem Study (NAAMES): Science Motive and Mission Overview,
Front. Mar. Sci., 6, 122, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00122" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00122</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bi, L., Lin, W., Wang, Z., Tang, X., Zhang, X., and Yi, B.: Optical Modeling
of Sea Salt Aerosols: The Effects of Nonsphericity and Inhomogeneity,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 543–558,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027869" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027869</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bluvshtein, N., Lin, P., Flores, J., Segev, L., Mazar, Y., Tas, E., Snider,
G., Weagle, C., Brown, S., Laskin, A., and Rudich, Y.: Broadband optical
properties of biomass-burning aerosol and identification of brown carbon
chromophores, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 5441–5456,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026230" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD026230</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Bohren, C. F., Huffman, D. R., and KGaA, W. V. V. G. C. (Ed.): Absorption and
Scattering of Light by Small Particles, John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc, 530 pp.,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527618156" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527618156</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Brock, C. A., Williamson, C., Kupc, A., Froyd, K. D., Erdesz, F., Wagner, N., Richardson, M., Schwarz, J. P., Gao, R.-S., Katich, J. M., Campuzano-Jost, P., Nault, B. A., Schroder, J. C., Jimenez, J. L., Weinzierl, B., Dollner, M., Bui, T., and Murphy, D. M.: Aerosol size distributions during the Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom): methods, uncertainties, and data products, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 3081–3099, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3081-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3081-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Bullard, R.L., Uin, J., Springston, S.R., Kuang, C., and Smith, S: Aerosol Inlet Characterization Experiment Report, United States Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1355300" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2172/1355300</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Cai, Y., Montague, D., Mooiweer-Bryan, W., and Deshler, T.: Performance
characteristics of the ultra high sensitivity aerosol spectrometer for
particles between 55 and 800 nm: Laboratory and field studies, J.
Aerosol Sci., 39, 759–769, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.04.007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008.04.007</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Chamaillard, K., Kleefeld, C., Jennings, S., Ceburnis, D., and O'Dowd, C.:
Light scattering properties of sea-salt aerosol particles inferred from
modeling studies and ground-based measurements, J. Quant.
Spectrosc. Ra. Transf., 101, 498–511,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2006.02.062" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2006.02.062</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Dedrick, J. L., Saliba, G., Williams, A. S., Russell, L. M., and Lubin, D.:
Retrieved Sea Spray Aerosol Fitting Parameters from LASIC and NAAMES,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR</a>, UC San Diego [data set], 2022a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Dedrick, J. L., Saliba, G., Williams, A. S., Russell, L. M., and Lubin, D.:
Sea Spray Mode Retrieval and Mie Scattering Codes,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.6075/J0GT5NCR</a>, UC San Diego [code], 2022b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
de Leeuw, G., Andreas, E., Anguelova, M., Fairall, C., Lewis, E., O'Dowd,
C., Schulz, M., and Schwartz, S.: PRODUCTION FLUX OF SEA SPRAY AEROSOL,
Rev. Geophys., 49, RG2001, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RG000349" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RG000349</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Delene, D. and Ogren, J.: Variability of aerosol optical properties at four
North American surface monitoring sites, J. Atmos.
Sci., 59, 1135–1150, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;1135:VOAOPA&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059&lt;1135:VOAOPA&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
DeMott, P., Hill, T., McCluskey, C., Prather, K., Collins, D., Sullivan, R.,
Ruppel, M., Mason, R., Irish, V., Lee, T., Hwang, C., Rhee, T., Snider, J.,
McMeeking, G., Dhaniyala, S., Lewis, E., Wentzell, J., Abbatt, J., Lee, C.,
Sultana, C., Ault, A., Axson, J., Martinez, M., Venero, I., Santos-Figueroa,
G., Stokes, M., Deane, G., Mayol-Bracero, O., Grassian, V., Bertram, T.,
Bertram, A., Moffett, B., and Franc, G.: Sea spray aerosol as a unique
source of ice nucleating particles, P. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA, 113, 5797–5803,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1514034112" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1514034112</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Denjean, C., Cassola, F., Mazzino, A., Triquet, S., Chevaillier, S., Grand, N., Bourrianne, T., Momboisse, G., Sellegri, K., Schwarzenbock, A., Freney, E., Mallet, M., and Formenti, P.: Size distribution and optical properties of mineral dust aerosols transported in the western Mediterranean, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 1081–1104, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1081-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1081-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Denjean, C., Bourrianne, T., Burnet, F., Mallet, M., Maury, N., Colomb, A., Dominutti, P., Brito, J., Dupuy, R., Sellegri, K., Schwarzenboeck, A., Flamant, C., and Knippertz, P.: Overview of aerosol optical properties over southern West Africa from DACCIWA aircraft measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 4735–4756, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4735-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-4735-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Di Biagio, C., Formenti, P., Balkanski, Y., Caponi, L., Cazaunau, M., Pangui, E., Journet, E., Nowak, S., Andreae, M. O., Kandler, K., Saeed, T., Piketh, S., Seibert, D., Williams, E., and Doussin, J.-F.: Complex refractive indices and single-scattering albedo of global dust aerosols in the shortwave spectrum and relationship to size and iron content, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15503–15531, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15503-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15503-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Feng, L., Shen, H., Zhu, Y., Gao, H., and Yao, X.: Insight into Generation
and Evolution of Sea-Salt Aerosols from Field Measurements in Diversified
Marine and Coastal Atmospheres, Sci. Rep., 7, 41260,  <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41260" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41260</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Frie, A. and Bahreini, R.: Refractive index confidence explorer (RICE): A
tool for propagating uncertainties through complex refractive index
retrievals from aerosol particles, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 55,
703–717, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2021.1895428" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2021.1895428</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Frossard, A., Russell, L., Burrows, S., Elliott, S., Bates, T., and Quinn,
P.: Sources and composition of submicron organic mass in marine aerosol
particles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 12977–13003,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021913" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD021913</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Fuentes, E., Coe, H., Green, D., de Leeuw, G., and McFiggans, G.: On the impacts of phytoplankton-derived organic matter on the properties of the primary marine aerosol – Part 1: Source fluxes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 9295–9317, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-9295-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-9295-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Gasso, S., Hegg, D., Covert, D., Collins, D., Noone, K., Ostrom, E., Schmid,
B., Russell, P., Livingston, J., Durkee, P., and Jonsson, H.: Influence of
humidity on the aerosol scattering coefficient and its effect on the
upwelling radiance during ACE-2, Tellus B – Chem. Phys.
Meteorol., 52, 546–567, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00055.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00055.x</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Gong, S.: A parameterization of sea-salt aerosol source function for sub-
and super-micron particles, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1097,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002079" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002079</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Grythe, H., Ström, J., Krejci, R., Quinn, P., and Stohl, A.: A review of sea-spray aerosol source functions using a large global set of sea salt aerosol concentration measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 14, 1277–1297, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1277-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-14-1277-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Haywood, J., Francis, P., Osborne, S., Glew, M., Loeb, N., Highwood, E.,
Tanre, D., Myhre, G., Formenti, P., and Hirst, E.: Radiative properties and
direct radiative effect of Saharan dust measured by the C-130 aircraft
during SHADE: 1. Solar spectrum, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 108, 8577, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002687" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002687</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Horowitz, H., Holmes, C., Wright, A., Sherwen, T., Wang, X., Evans, M.,
Huang, J., Jaegle, L., Chen, Q., Zhai, S., and Alexander, B.: Effects of Sea
Salt Aerosol Emissions for Marine Cloud Brightening on Atmospheric
Chemistry: Implications for Radiative Forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
47, e2019GL085838, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085838" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085838</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., Dobracki, A., Smirnow, N., and Sedlacek III, A. J.: Undersizing of aged African biomass burning aerosol by an ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol spectrometer, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7381–7404, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7381-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7381-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Humphries, R. S., Keywood, M. D., Gribben, S., McRobert, I. M., Ward, J. P., Selleck, P., Taylor, S., Harnwell, J., Flynn, C., Kulkarni, G. R., Mace, G. G., Protat, A., Alexander, S. P., and McFarquhar, G.: Southern Ocean latitudinal gradients of cloud condensation nuclei, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12757–12782, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12757-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12757-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Hussein, T., Dal Maso, M., Petaja, T., Koponen, I., Paatero, P., Aalto, P.,
Hameri, K., and Kulmala, M.: Evaluation of an automatic algorithm for
fitting the particle number size distributions, Boreal Environ. Res.,
10, 337–355, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Kassianov, E., Berg, L., Pekour, M., Barnard, J., Chand, D., Flynn, C.,
Ovchinnikov, M., Sedlacek, A., Schmid, B., Shilling, J., Tomlinson, J., and
Fast, J.: Airborne Aerosol in Situ Measurements during TCAP: A Closure Study
of Total Scattering, Atmosphere, 6, 1069–1101, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos6081069" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos6081069</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Keene, W., Maring, H., Maben, J., Kieber, D., Pszenny, A., Dahl, E.,
Izaguirre, M., Davis, A., Long, M., Zhou, X., Smoydzin, L., and Sander, R.:
Chemical and physical characteristics of nascent aerosols produced by
bursting bubbles at a model air-sea interface, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 112, D21202, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008464" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008464</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Khlystov, A., Stanier, C., and Pandis, S.: An algorithm for combining
electrical mobility and aerodynamic size distributions data when measuring
ambient aerosol, Aerosol Sci. Technol., 38, 229–238,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820390229543" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820390229543</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Kishcha, P., da Silva, A., Starobinets, B., Long, C., Kalashnikova, O., and
Alpert, P.: Saharan dust as a causal factor of hemispheric asymmetry in
aerosols and cloud cover over the tropical Atlantic Ocean, Int.
J. Remote Sens., 36, 3423–3445, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2015.1060646" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2015.1060646</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Kleefeld, C., O'Dowd, C., O'Reilly, S., Jennings, S., Aalto, P., Becker, E.,
Kunz, G., and de Leeuw, G.: Relative contribution of submicron and
supermicron particles to aerosol light scattering in the marine boundary
layer, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 107, 8103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000262" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD000262</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Kupc, A., Williamson, C., Wagner, N. L., Richardson, M., and Brock, C. A.: Modification, calibration, and performance of the Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer for particle size distribution and volatility measurements during the Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom) airborne campaign, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 369–383, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-369-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-369-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Lewis, E. R. and Schwartz, S. E., and Union, A. G. (Ed.): Sea Salt Aerosol
Production: Mechanisms, Methods, Measurements and Models, Geophysical
Monograph Series, American Geophysical Union, 413 pp., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/GM152" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/GM152</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, S., Liu, C., Froyd, K., Schill, G., Murphy, D., Bui, T., Dean-Day, J.,
Weinzierl, B., Dollner, M., Diskin, G., Chen, G., and Gao, R.: Sea spray
aerosol concentration modulated by sea surface temperature, P. Natl. Acad.  Sci. USA, 118, e2020583118,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2020583118" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2020583118</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Lv, M., Wang, Z., Li, Z., Luo, T., Ferrare, R., Liu, D., Wu, D., Mao, J.,
Wan, B., Zhang, F., and Wang, Y.: Retrieval of Cloud Condensation Nuclei
Number Concentration Profiles From Lidar Extinction and Backscatter Data,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 6082–6098,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028102" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028102</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Ma, X., von Salzen, K., and Li, J.: Modelling sea salt aerosol and its direct and indirect effects on climate, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1311–1327, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1311-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1311-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Mätzler, C: MATLAB Functions for Mie Scattering and Absorption, Institut für Angewandte Physik, Bern, Switzerland, Research Report No. 2002-08, 26 pp., 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Mie, G.: Articles on the optical characteristics of turbid tubes, especially
colloidal metal solutions, Ann. Phys., 25, 377–445,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19083300302" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19083300302</a>, 1908.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Miller, M., Nitschke, K., Ackerman, T., Ferrell, W., Hickmon, N., Ivey, M.,
Turner, D., and Ellingson, R.: The ARM Mobile Facilities, Atmospheric
Radiation Measurement (Arm) Program: the First 20 Years, 57,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-15-0051.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-15-0051.1</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Miller, R. M., McFarquhar, G. M., Rauber, R. M., O'Brien, J. R., Gupta, S., Segal-Rozenhaimer, M., Dobracki, A. N., Sedlacek, A. J., Burton, S. P., Howell, S. G., Freitag, S., and Dang, C.: Observations of supermicron-sized aerosols originating from biomass burning in southern Central Africa, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 14815–14831, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14815-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14815-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Ming, Y. and Russell, L.: Predicted hygroscopic growth of sea salt aerosol,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 28259–28274,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000454" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000454</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Modini, R. L., Harris, B., and Ristovski, Z. D.: The organic fraction of bubble-generated, accumulation mode Sea Spray Aerosol (SSA), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 2867–2877, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-2867-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-2867-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Modini, R., Frossard, A., Ahlm, L., Russell, L., Corrigan, C., Roberts, G.,
Hawkins, L., Schroder, J., Bertram, A., Zhao, R., Lee, A., Abbatt, J., Lin,
J., Nenes, A., Wang, Z., Wonaschutz, A., Sorooshian, A., Noone, K., Jonsson,
H., Seinfeld, J., Toom-Sauntry, D., Macdonald, A., and Leaitch, W.: Primary
marine aerosol-cloud interactions off the coast of California, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 4282–4303, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022963" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JD022963</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Moore, R. H., Wiggins, E. B., Ahern, A. T., Zimmerman, S., Montgomery, L., Campuzano Jost, P., Robinson, C. E., Ziemba, L. D., Winstead, E. L., Anderson, B. E., Brock, C. A., Brown, M. D., Chen, G., Crosbie, E. C., Guo, H., Jimenez, J. L., Jordan, C. E., Lyu, M., Nault, B. A., Rothfuss, N. E., Sanchez, K. J., Schueneman, M., Shingler, T. J., Shook, M. A., Thornhill, K. L., Wagner, N. L., and Wang, J.: Sizing response of the Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer (UHSAS) and Laser Aerosol Spectrometer (LAS) to changes in submicron aerosol composition and refractive index, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 4517–4542, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4517-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4517-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Mulcahy, J., O'Dowd, C., and Jennings, S.: Aerosol optical depth in clean
marine and continental northeast Atlantic air, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D20204, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD011992" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD011992</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Murphy, D., Anderson, J., Quinn, P., McInnes, L., Brechtel, F., Kreidenweis,
S., Middlebrook, A., Posfai, M., Thomson, D., and Buseck, P.: Influence of
sea-salt on aerosol radiative properties in the Southern Ocean marine
boundary layer, Nature, 392, 62–65, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/32138" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/32138</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
O'Dowd, C., Smith, M., Consterdine, I., and Lowe, J.: Marine aerosol,
sea-salt, and the marine sulphur cycle: A short review, Atmos.
Environ., 31, 73–80, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00106-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(96)00106-9</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
O'Dowd, C., Scannell, C., Mulcahy, J., and Jennings, S.: Wind Speed
Influences on Marine Aerosol Optical Depth, Adv. Meteorol., 2010, 830846,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/830846" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/830846</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Ovadnevaite, J., Ceburnis, D., Canagaratna, M., Berresheim, H., Bialek, J.,
Martucci, G., Worsnop, D., and O'Dowd, C.: On the effect of wind speed on
submicron sea salt mass concentrations and source fluxes, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D16201, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017379" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017379</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Paulot, F., Paynter, D., Winton, M., Ginoux, P., Zhao, M., and Horowitz, L.:
Revisiting the Impact of Sea Salt on Climate Sensitivity, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 47, e2019GL085601, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085601" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL085601</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Pennypacker, S. and Wood, R.: A Case Study in Low Aerosol Number
Concentrations Over the Eastern North Atlantic: Implications for Pristine
Conditions in the Remote Marine Boundary Layer, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 122, 12393–12415, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027493" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027493</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Pennypacker, S., Diamond, M., and Wood, R.: Ultra-clean and smoky marine boundary layers frequently occur in the same season over the southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 2341–2351, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-2341-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-2341-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Prather, K., Bertram, T., Grassian, V., Deane, G., Stokes, M., DeMott, P.,
Aluwihare, L., Palenik, B., Azam, F., Seinfeld, J., Moffet, R., Molina, M.,
Cappa, C., Geiger, F., Roberts, G., Russell, L., Ault, A., Baltrusaitis, J.,
Collins, D., Corrigan, C., Cuadra-Rodriguez, L., Ebben, C., Forestieri, S.,
Guasco, T., Hersey, S., Kim, M., Lambert, W., Modini, R., Mui, W., Pedler,
B., Ruppel, M., Ryder, O., Schoepp, N., Sullivan, R., and Zhao, D.: Bringing
the ocean into the laboratory to probe the chemical complexity of sea spray
aerosol, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 110, 7550–7555, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1300262110" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1300262110</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Quinn, P., Coffman, D., Kapustin, V., Bates, T., and Covert, D.: Aerosol
optical properties in the marine boundary layer during the First Aerosol
Characterization Experiment (ACE 1) and the underlying chemical and physical
aerosol properties, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103,
16547–16563, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD02345" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD02345</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Quinn, P., Coffman, D., Johnson, J., Upchurch, L., and Bates, T.: Small
fraction of marine cloud condensation nuclei made up of sea spray aerosol,
Nat. Geosci., 10, 674–+, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO3003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO3003</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Randles, C., Russell, L., and Ramaswamy, V.: Hygroscopic and optical
properties of organic sea salt aerosol and consequences for climate forcing,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L16108, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL020628" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL020628</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Russell, L., Huebert, B., Flagan, R., and Seinfeld, J.: Characterization of
submicron aerosol size distributions from time-resolved measurements in the
Atlantic Stratocumulus Transition Experiment Marine Aerosol and Gas
Exchange, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 101, 4469–4478,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD01372" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD01372</a>, 1996a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Russell, L., Zhang, S., Flagan, R., Seinfeld, J., Stolzenburg, M., and
Caldow, R.: Radially classified aerosol detector for aircraft-based
submicron aerosol measurements, J. Atmos. Ocean.
Technol., 13, 598–609, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0598:RCADFA&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1996)013&lt;0598:RCADFA&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1996b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Russell, L., Hawkins, L., Frossard, A., Quinn, P., and Bates, T.:
Carbohydrate-like composition of submicron atmospheric particles and their
production from ocean bubble bursting, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 6652–6657, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908905107" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908905107</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Russell, L. M., Chen, C., Betha, R., Price, D. J., and Lewis, S.: NAAMES1 Research Cruise Aerosol Measurements (2015), in: Aerosol Particle Chemical and Physical Measurements on the 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 North Atlantic Aerosols and Marine Ecosystems Study (NAAMES) Research Cruises, UC San Diego Library Digital Collections, [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.6075/J0736P3J" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.6075/J0736P3J</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Saliba, G., Chen, C., Lewis, S., Russell, L., Rivellini, L., Lee, A., Quinn,
P., Bates, T., Haentjens, N., Boss, E., Karp-Boss, L., Baetge, N., Carlson,
C., and Behrenfeld, M.: Factors driving the seasonal and hourly variability
of sea-spray aerosol number in the North Atlantic, P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 116,
20309–20314, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907574116" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907574116</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Saliba, G., Chen, C., Lewis, S., Russell, L., Quinn, P., Bates, T., Bell,
T., Lawler, M., Saltzman, E., Sanchez, K., Moore, R., Shook, M., Rivellini,
L., Lee, A., Baetge, N., Carlson, C., and Behrenfeld, M.: Seasonal
Differences and Variability of Concentrations, Chemical Composition, and
Cloud Condensation Nuclei of Marine Aerosol Over the North Atlantic, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2020JD033145, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033145" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033145</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Salter, M., Nilsson, E., Butcher, A., and Bilde, M.: On the seawater
temperature dependence of the sea spray aerosol generated by a continuous
plunging jet, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 9052–9072,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021376" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD021376</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Salter, M. E., Zieger, P., Acosta Navarro, J. C., Grythe, H., Kirkevåg, A., Rosati, B., Riipinen, I., and Nilsson, E. D.: An empirically derived inorganic sea spray source function incorporating sea surface temperature, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11047–11066, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-11047-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Sanchez, K. J., Roberts, G. C., Saliba, G., Russell, L. M., Twohy, C., Reeves, J. M., Humphries, R. S., Keywood, M. D., Ward, J. P., and McRobert, I. M.: Measurement report: Cloud processes and the transport of biological emissions affect southern ocean particle and cloud condensation nuclei concentrations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3427–3446, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3427-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3427-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Schmale, J., Sharma, S., Decesari, S., Pernov, J., Massling, A., Hansson, H.-C., von Salzen, K., Skov, H., Andrews, E., Quinn, P. K., Upchurch, L. M., Eleftheriadis, K., Traversi, R., Gilardoni, S., Mazzola, M., Laing, J., and Hopke, P.: Pan-Arctic seasonal cycles and long-term trends of aerosol properties from 10 observatories, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 3067–3096, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3067-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-3067-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Seinfeld, J. H. and Pandis, S. N.: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From
Air Pollution to Climate Change, John Wiley &amp; Sons, ISBN:&thinsp;9780471720171, New York, USA, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Sellegri, K., O'Dowd, C., Yoon, Y., Jennings, S., and de Leeuw, G.:
Surfactants and submicron sea spray generation, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 111, D22215, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006658" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006658</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Shen, Y., Virkkula, A., Ding, A., Luoma, K., Keskinen, H., Aalto, P. P., Chi, X., Qi, X., Nie, W., Huang, X., Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., and Kerminen, V.-M.: Estimating cloud condensation nuclei number concentrations using aerosol optical properties: role of particle number size distribution and parameterization, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 15483–15502, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15483-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-15483-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Swap, R., Garstang, M., Macko, S., Tyson, P., Maenhaut, W., Artaxo, P.,
Kallberg, P., and Talbot, R.: The long-range transport of southern African
aerosols the tropical South Atlantic, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 101, 23777–23791, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD01049" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/95JD01049</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Tang, I., Tridico, A., and Fung, K.: Thermodynamic and optical properties of
sea salt aerosols, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102,
23269–23275, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD01806" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97JD01806</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Testa, B., Hill, T., Marsden, N., Barry, K., Hume, C., Bian, Q., Uetake, J.,
Hare, H., Perkins, R., Mohler, O., Kreidenweis, S., and DeMott, P.: Ice
Nucleating Particle Connections to Regional Argentinian Land Surface
Emissions and Weather During the Cloud, Aerosol, and Complex Terrain
Interactions Experiment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035186,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035186" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035186</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Uin, J.: Ultra-High Sensitivity Aerosol Spectrometer (UHSAS) instrument
handbook, United States Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement, Technical Report No. DOE/SC-ARM-TR-163, 17 pp., <a href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1251410" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2172/1251410</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Uin, J., Aiken, A., Dubey, M., Kuang, C., Pekour, M., Salwen, C., Sedlacek,
A., Senum, G., Smith, S., Wang, J., Watson, T., and Springston, S.:
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Aerosol Observing Systems (AOS) for
Surface-Based In Situ Atmospheric Aerosol and Trace Gas Measurements,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 36, 2429–2447,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0077.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0077.1</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Veselovskii, I., Kolgotin, A., Griaznov, V., Muller, D., Wandinger, U., and
Whiteman, D.: Inversion with regularization for the retrieval of
tropospheric aerosol parameters from multiwavelength lidar sounding, Appl.
Opt., 41, 3685–3699, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.003685" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.003685</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Virkkula, A., Teinilä, K., Hillamo, R., Kerminen, V.-M., Saarikoski, S., Aurela, M., Viidanoja, J., Paatero, J., Koponen, I. K., and Kulmala, M.: Chemical composition of boundary layer aerosol over the Atlantic Ocean and at an Antarctic site, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 3407–3421, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3407-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3407-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Viskari, T., Asmi, E., Virkkula, A., Kolmonen, P., Petäjä, T., and Järvinen, H.: Estimation of aerosol particle number distribution with Kalman Filtering – Part 2: Simultaneous use of DMPS, APS and nephelometer measurements, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 11781–11793, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-11781-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-11781-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
von der Weiden, S.-L., Drewnick, F., and Borrmann, S.: Particle Loss Calculator – a new software tool for the assessment of the performance of aerosol inlet systems, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 2, 479–494, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-479-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2-479-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Von Hoyningen-Huene, W., Dinter, T., Kokhanovsky, A., Burrows, J., Wendisch,
M., Bierwirth, E., Muller, D., and Diouri, M.: Measurements of desert dust
optical characteristics at Porte au Sahara during SAMUM, Tellus
B – Chem. Phys.  Meteorol., 61, 206–215,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00405.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2008.00405.x</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, W. and Rood, M.: Real refractive index: Dependence on relative
humidity and solute composition with relevancy to atmospheric aerosol
particles, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D23305,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010165" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010165</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, Q., Zhang, F., Li, J., and Zhang, J.: Analysis of sea-salt aerosol size
distributions in radiative transfer, J. Aerosol Sci., 129, 71–86,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2018.11.014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2018.11.014</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Zábori, J., Matisāns, M., Krejci, R., Nilsson, E. D., and Ström, J.: Artificial primary marine aerosol production: a laboratory study with varying water temperature, salinity, and succinic acid concentration, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 10709–10724, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10709-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10709-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, J. and Zuidema, P.: The diurnal cycle of the smoky marine boundary layer observed during August in the remote southeast Atlantic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 14493–14516, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-14493-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Aiken, A. C., Gallo, F., Jensen, M. P., Kollias, P., Kuang, C., Luke, E., Springston, S., Uin, J., Wood, R., and Wang, J.: Marine boundary layer aerosol in the eastern North Atlantic: seasonal variations and key controlling processes, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 17615–17635, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-17615-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, G., Wang, Y., Wood, R., Jensen, M., Kuang, C., McCoy, I., Matthews,
A., Mei, F., Tomlinson, J., Shilling, J., Zawadowicz, M., Crosbie, E.,
Moore, R., Ziemba, L., Andreae, M., and Wang, J.: New particle formation in
the remote marine boundary layer, Nat. Commun., 12,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20773-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20773-1</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
Zieger, P., Fierz-Schmidhauser, R., Gysel, M., Ström, J., Henne, S., Yttri, K. E., Baltensperger, U., and Weingartner, E.: Effects of relative humidity on aerosol light scattering in the Arctic, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 3875–3890, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3875-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-3875-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
Zuidema, P., Redemann, J., Haywood, J., Wood, R., Piketh, S., Hipondoka, M.,
and Formenti, P.: Smoke and Clouds above the Southeast Atlantic Upcoming
Field Campaigns Probe Absorbing Aerosol's Impact on Climate, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 97, 1131–1135, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00082.1</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
