<?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">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">GMD</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Geoscientific Model Development</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">GMD</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Geosci. Model Dev.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1991-9603</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/gmd-13-6215-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>In-cloud scavenging scheme for sectional aerosol modules – implementation in the framework of the Sectional Aerosol module for Large Scale Applications version 2.0 (SALSA2.0) <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>global aerosol module</article-title><alt-title>In-cloud scavenging for sectional aerosol modules</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{In-cloud scavenging for sectional aerosol modules}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{E. Holopainen et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Holopainen</surname><given-names>Eemeli</given-names></name>
          <email>eemeli.holopainen@fmi.fi</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9782-3430</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Kokkola</surname><given-names>Harri</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1404-6670</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Laakso</surname><given-names>Anton</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7055-5691</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Kühn</surname><given-names>Thomas</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5978-0601</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Atmospheric Research Centre of Eastern Finland, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Aerosol Physics Research Group, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Eemeli Holopainen (eemeli.holopainen@fmi.fi)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>7</day><month>December</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>13</volume>
      <issue>12</issue>
      <fpage>6215</fpage><lpage>6235</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>2</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>17</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>8</day><month>October</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>24</day><month>October</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Eemeli Holopainen et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</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://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020.html">This article is available from https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e115">In this study we introduce an in-cloud wet deposition scheme for liquid and ice phase clouds for global aerosol–climate models which use a size-segregated aerosol description. For in-cloud nucleation scavenging, the scheme uses cloud droplet activation and ice nucleation rates obtained from the host model. For in-cloud impaction scavenging, we used a method where the removal rate depends on the wet aerosol size and cloud droplet radii. We used the latest release version of ECHAM-HAMMOZ (ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0) with the Sectional Aerosol module for Large Scale Applications version 2.0 (SALSA) microphysics package to test and compare our scheme. The scheme was compared to a scheme that uses fixed scavenging coefficients. The comparison included vertical profiles and mass and number distributions of wet deposition fluxes of different aerosol compounds and for different latitude bands. Using the scheme presented here, mass concentrations for black carbon, organic carbon, sulfate, and the number concentration of particles with diameters larger than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are higher than using fixed scavenging coefficients, with the largest differences in the vertical profiles in the Arctic. On the other hand, the number concentrations of particles smaller than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in diameter show a decrease, especially in the Arctic region. These results could indicate that, compared to fixed scavenging coefficients, nucleation scavenging is less efficient, resulting in an increase in the number concentration of particles larger than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In addition, changes in rates of impaction scavenging and new particle formation (NPF) can be the main cause of reduction in the number concentrations of particles smaller than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Without further adjustments in the host model, our wet deposition scheme produced unrealistically high aerosol concentrations, especially at high altitudes. This also leads to a spuriously long lifetime of black carbon aerosol. To find a better setup for simulating aerosol vertical profiles and transport, sensitivity simulations were conducted where aerosol emission distribution and hygroscopicity were altered. Vertical profiles of aerosol species simulated with the scheme which uses fixed scavenging rates and the abovementioned sensitivity simulations were evaluated against vertical profiles from aircraft observations. The lifetimes of different aerosol compounds were also evaluated against the ensemble mean of models involved in the Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models (AEROCOM) project. The best comparison between the observations and the model was achieved with our wet deposition scheme when black carbon was emitted internally mixed with soluble compounds instead of keeping it externally mixed. This also produced atmospheric lifetimes for the other species which were comparable to the AEROCOM model means.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e159">The estimated radiation budget of the Earth has large uncertainties, and a majority of these uncertainties are related to the uncertainties in the direct and indirect effects of atmospheric aerosol <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="paren.1"/>. Aerosol particles can affect<?pagebreak page6216?> the climate directly by scattering and absorbing radiation and indirectly through aerosol–cloud interactions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33 bib1.bibx71 bib1.bibx2" id="paren.2"/>. Thus, in order to estimate the radiation budget of the Earth correctly, aerosols and their physical properties affecting radiation and cloud formation have to be modeled realistically.</p>
      <p id="d1e168">Black carbon (BC) is one of the aerosol compounds which has an effect on the Earth's radiation budget via absorbing solar radiation, accelerating the melting of snow and ice, and influencing cloud formation and life cycle <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.3"/>. A large fraction of BC is emitted through incomplete combustion, which is due to anthropogenic activities <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.4"/>. Due to its ability to darken snow and ice covers, BC has been found to be a major warming agent at high latitudes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.5"/>. In addition, it has been proposed that the mitigation of BC is one of the possible means to slow Arctic warming <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx65" id="paren.6"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e183">Transport of aerosol particles to remote regions with only small amounts of emitted particles affects the local aerosol size distribution and composition <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx56 bib1.bibx20" id="paren.7"/>. In these areas, e.g., the Arctic, simulated aerosol and especially BC concentrations differ from those observed, as the transport to these regions is modeled poorly <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12 bib1.bibx61 bib1.bibx46" id="paren.8"/>. In addition, BC vertical profiles affect the uncertainty of its forcing emphasizing the need to improve BC vertical profiles in global aerosol–climate models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="paren.9"/>. The vertical distribution of aerosol compounds is found to be affected by emissions, hygroscopicity, deposition, and microphysical processes, of which wet removal can be the cause of one of the major biases in the models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38 bib1.bibx76" id="paren.10"/>. Thus, one possible cause for problems in modeling long-range and vertical transport of BC is how wet removal of aerosol compounds is modeled <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12 bib1.bibx21" id="paren.11"/>. Wet deposition processes are modeled very differently among global aerosol–climate models and, therefore, more research is needed to better parameterize and constrain wet deposition in models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx20 bib1.bibx21 bib1.bibx68 bib1.bibx38" id="paren.12"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e205">Wet removal of aerosol particles from the atmosphere is a process where these particles are scavenged by hydrometeors and then carried to the surface by precipitation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx74" id="paren.13"/>. There are two kinds of wet deposition processes: in-cloud and below-cloud scavenging <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx63 bib1.bibx56 bib1.bibx79" id="paren.14"/>. In the process of in-cloud scavenging, aerosol species can enter the cloud droplets or ice crystals through a nucleation process, when they act as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) or ice nuclei (IN). This process is called in-cloud nucleation scavenging <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx55" id="paren.15"/>. In the process called in-cloud impaction scavenging, aerosol particles can be scavenged through collision with ice crystals or cloud droplets <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15 bib1.bibx48" id="paren.16"/>. Aerosol compounds are then removed from the atmosphere when these cloud droplets or ice crystals grow to precipitation sizes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx55 bib1.bibx20" id="paren.17"/>. Below-cloud scavenging is a process where rain droplets or snow crystals, which precipitate from the cloud, sweep aerosol particles below the cloud through collision <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="paren.18"/>. Observational studies have shown that below-cloud scavenging is strongly dependent on the rain droplet or snow crystal size distribution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx6" id="paren.19"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e231">In recent years it has become evident that more detailed descriptions of wet deposition in global climate models are important <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43 bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx14" id="paren.20"/>. In addition to transport, wet removal can affect the Arctic aerosol size distribution and its seasonal cycle <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43 bib1.bibx21" id="paren.21"/>. Even though the processes involved in wet removal are well known, it is still difficult to represent them well in global climate models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="paren.22"/>. In order to realistically describe the wet removal processes, a thorough knowledge of the microphysics of condensation and precipitation, as well as aerosol microphysics, is needed <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx56" id="paren.23"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e246">Here, we describe our scheme for wet deposition using physical parameterizations for nucleation and impaction scavenging in liquid and ice clouds for sectional aerosol modules. The new aspects of this scheme, compared to the modal aerosol scheme already implemented in ECHAM-HAMMOZ, are that it calculates the in-cloud nucleation scavenging rates using the activated fraction in each size class in the liquid cloud case and the surface area of particles in the ice cloud case. Similar approaches for liquid cloud cases exist in other global models which use modal aerosol modules, e.g., MIRAGE and CAM5 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx73" id="paren.24"/>.  We further tested the sensitivity of our scheme to assumptions in aerosol emission distribution and hygroscopicity. The structure of the paper is as follows. In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2"/> we present details on in-cloud nucleation and impaction scavenging in general and introduce our in-cloud nucleation scavenging scheme for liquid and ice clouds. In addition, we present details on the aerosol module SALSA (Sectional Aerosol module for Large Scale Applications) and its components, which we used to test and evaluate our scheme and its sensitivity. In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2"/> we present the modifications performed for SALSA to include in-cloud impaction scavenging and the treatment of below-cloud scavenging. In the same section, we also present the ECHAM-HAMMOZ aerosol–chemistry–climate model and its setup, which is used for testing the scheme on a global scale. In Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/> we present the evaluation of our scheme against a fixed scavenging coefficient scheme in terms of vertical profiles and wet deposition fluxes of different aerosol compounds. In addition, in the same section, we evaluate the vertical profiles of different aerosol compounds from the simulations against those from the Atmospheric Tomography (ATom) aircraft campaigns <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="paren.25"/>. We also compare the wet deposition fluxes, of different aerosol compounds, from different sensitivity simulations to each other.<?pagebreak page6217?> Finally, we compare the lifetimes from all of the simulations to the mean from several models in the Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models (AEROCOM) project.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>In-cloud wet deposition scheme</title>
      <p id="d1e269">In this section we will describe the in-cloud nucleation and impaction scavenging, for both liquid and ice phase clouds. For both of these cloud phases, the removal of aerosol particles is expressed in terms of a scavenging coefficient. The rate of change in the concentration of compound <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in size class <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> due to in-cloud nucleation and impaction scavenging, for both liquid and ice clouds, is of the form</p>
      <p id="d1e299"><disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M8" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" columnspacing="1em" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cl</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close="" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nuc</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nuc</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nuc</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nuc</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the fractions of activated particles due to nucleation scavenging in liquid and ice clouds, respectively, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the scavenging coefficients due to impaction scavenging in liquid and ice clouds, respectively <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.26"/>. Furthermore, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cl</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud fraction, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the liquid fraction of the total cloud water, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the sum of conversion rate of cloud liquid water to precipitation by autoconversion, accretion, and aggregation processes, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud liquid water content, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the equivalent variables for ice <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.27"/>. The values in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) are in-cloud values <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.28"/>.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>In-cloud scavenging scheme for liquid clouds</title>
      <p id="d1e637">The in-cloud process of nucleation scavenging refers to activation and growth of aerosol particles into cloud droplets <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39" id="paren.29"/>. When water vapor reaches supersaturation, a fraction of the aerosol population is activated to cloud droplets. After these cloud droplets have grown to precipitation size, the particles can be removed from the cloud through precipitation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx74" id="paren.30"/>. The ability of an aerosol particle to activate to a cloud droplet depends on its size, chemical composition, and the ambient supersaturation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39" id="paren.31"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e649">In aerosol modules of global climate models, the aerosol size distribution can be approximated by, for example, a modal or sectional discretization, which effectively separates the size distribution into different size classes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx41" id="paren.32"/>. In each size class the fraction of activated particles can be calculated as the portion of particles that exceed the critical diameter of activation in that size class <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39 bib1.bibx20" id="paren.33"/>. However, many models describe the nucleation scavenging by assuming a constant scavenging coefficient for different aerosol size classes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx60 bib1.bibx22" id="paren.34"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e661">The current in-cloud nucleation scavenging scheme for liquid clouds introduced here calculates the scavenging coefficients of aerosol based on the fraction of activated particles in each size class, i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nuc</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>). Thus, using the scheme requires that the atmospheric model incorporates a cloud activation parameterization that calculates size segregated cloud activation. Such parameterizations are, e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.35"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="text.36"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e692">In-cloud impaction scavenging, for liquid clouds, is a process where aerosol particles collide with existing cloud droplets and are thereby removed from the interstitial air of the cloud <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="paren.37"/>. This aerosol scavenging by cloud droplets is based on coagulation theory, which quantifies the rate of removal. This is further used to define the scavenging coefficients by impaction <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="paren.38"/>. Commonly, these scavenging coefficients, for the full aerosol particle distribution, can be calculated as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M21" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><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:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:mi>K</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:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" 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 wet diameter of the aerosol particle, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud droplet diameter, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>K</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:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the collection efficiency between aerosol particles and cloud droplets, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud droplet number distribution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="paren.39"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>In-cloud scavenging scheme for ice clouds</title>
      <p id="d1e866">In-cloud nucleation scavenging in ice clouds refers to the formation and growth of ice particles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="paren.40"/>. When ice particles are formed, they can quickly grow into precipitation sizes and be removed from the cloud <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44" id="paren.41"/>. The formation of ice particles in the atmosphere usually requires an ice nucleus (IN), but they can also be formed without IN if the temperature is very low <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34" id="paren.42"/>. Aerosol particles which can act as IN are usually insoluble <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx53" id="paren.43"/>. In addition, large particles are more efficient in acting as IN than small particles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.44"/>.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6218?><p id="d1e884">The nucleation rate, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>T</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is the total number of ice crystals formed in a unit volume of air per unit time, can be expressed as the sum of the nucleation rate in a unit volume of liquid solution, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, multiplied by the total collective volume of aerosol particles in a unit volume of air, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the nucleation rate on a unit surface area of liquid solution, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>S</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, multiplied by the total collective surface area of aerosol particles in a unit volume of air, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx66" id="paren.45"/>.
However, experimental studies and thermodynamic calculations for the ice–water–air system suggest that the total number of ice crystals formed is dominated by surface-based processes, so that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>S</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>≫</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx66" id="paren.46"/>. With this assumption the total nucleation rate can be simplified to
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M32" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>T</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ICNC</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>V</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>S</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mtext>S</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e1040">Global models usually give the total in-cloud ice nucleation rate, which is here segregated into size-resolved nucleation rates. Since we assume that the number of nucleated ice particles depends only on the aerosol surface area, the scavenging coefficient in ice-containing clouds in size class <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is proportional to the ratio between nucleation rate in the size class and the total nucleation rate. Thus, for the scavenging coefficient, for the ice-containing clouds, we get the following in each size class:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M34" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nuc</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ICNC</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the surface area concentration of size class <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ICNC</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the ice crystal number concentration obtained from the ice cloud activation scheme, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number concentration in size class <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The total surface area in each size class is derived using the associated number or mass median wet aerosol radius.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>SALSA</title>
      <p id="d1e1162">To test how the in-cloud wet deposition scheme affects simulated global aerosol concentrations, we used it with the SALSA2.0 in our ECHAM-HAMMOZ global model simulations. In addition, we tested how sensitive the simulated aerosol concentrations are to emission sizes, mixing, and aging when this scheme is used. SALSA is the sectional aerosol module of ECHAM-HAMMOZ global climate model. Details for calculations of aerosol emissions and chemistry in SALSA are presented in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="text.47"/>. SALSA is a very versatile aerosol microphysics module, which has been implemented in several models of very different spatial resolution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41 bib1.bibx70 bib1.bibx4 bib1.bibx47" id="paren.48"/>. To describe the aerosol population, SALSA uses a hybrid bin sectional approach for calculating the evolution of the size distribution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17 bib1.bibx41" id="paren.49"/>. In SALSA the aerosol population is divided into two subregions depending on their size. The first subregion is from 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the second is from 50 to 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. These subregions are further divided into size sections defining the minimum and maximum diameter of the particles. In each size section the aerosol particles are assumed to be monodisperse, and chemistry and different microphysical processes are calculated for each size section separately. In addition, the second subregion is divided into externally mixed soluble and insoluble populations. A more detailed description of the newest SALSA version, SALSA2.0, is presented in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="text.50"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1204">Originally, SALSA used fixed scavenging coefficients, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, for different size classes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, in its wet deposition calculations. These coefficients include all the processes for in-cloud and below-cloud scavenging <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.51"/>. The fixed coefficients, for stratiform and convective clouds with different phases (liquid, mixed, and ice) and solubilities, are adapted for SALSA from the calculations presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64" id="text.52"/>, and they are presented in detail in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="text.53"/>. Here we refine the entire scavenging scheme by calculating the scavenging coefficients online.</p>
      <p id="d1e1234">We used the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.54"/> cloud activation scheme to derive the fraction of activated particles in each size class for our in-cloud nucleation scavenging calculations. However, the original activation scheme considers only the soluble material in particles and therefore neglects any possible insoluble material <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.55"/>. For computing the amount of cloud droplets formed, this is a good assumption, as usually most CCN-sized particles contain a large fraction of soluble material. However, when the insoluble fraction is large (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.99), the assumption may lead to an underestimation of scavenged particles. This is because for insoluble particles larger than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with thin soluble coating (for instance mineral dust), the insoluble fraction is ignored in the cloud activation calculation, and for those particles the activation is calculated as it would be calculated for particles with an equivalent dry
size derived from of the soluble part of the particles, thus making them less prone to activation. Therefore, we modified the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.56"/> activation calculations to account for the insoluble core in particles. The calculations are otherwise the same, but the critical supersaturation for each size class is calculated using Eq. (17.38) in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="text.57"/>. The supersaturation calculations, used in the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.58"/> cloud activation, for particles containing an insoluble core are presented in Appendix <xref ref-type="sec" rid="App1.Ch1.S1"/>. As an input for the in-cloud nucleation scavenging coefficients in ice clouds, we used the ice crystal nucleation scheme described in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="text.59"/>. In our model, only particles which include mineral dust and black carbon are considered as ice nuclei <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx51" id="paren.60"/>.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6219?><p id="d1e1278">As the in-cloud nucleation scavenging was changed into a more functional method, we also needed to alter the calculation of the in-cloud impaction scavenging. We calculate the in-cloud impaction scavenging in SALSA, for liquid clouds, using the same method as described in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.61"/>. This method computes in-cloud impaction as a function of wet aerosol particle size (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), wet median aerosol particle radius (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and cloud droplet radii (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Using this same information from our monodisperse size classes for aerosol particles, we can assume that each size class is a log-normal mode, and the in-cloud impaction scavenging coefficients, for liquid clouds, are then obtained as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M50" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Λ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Λ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the mean mass scavenging coefficient, and it is defined as<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M52" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Λ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mtext>d</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mtext>d</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</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>
          and
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M53" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mtext>d</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          which is called the scavenging coefficient in inverse time <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.62"/>. In Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E6"/>) and (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the aerosol number, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud droplet radius, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the terminal velocity of cloud droplets, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the collision efficiency between the aerosol particles and cloud droplets, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">liq</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the cloud droplet number <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.63"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1673">The in-cloud impaction scavenging, for ice clouds, is calculated following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.64"/>, but as our model assumes that the ice crystals are monodisperse, there is no need to integrate over ice crystal number distribution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.65"/>. Thus, the in-cloud impaction scavenging coefficients are
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M59" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ICNC</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the radius of the ice crystal in its maximum extent, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mtext>t</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the terminal velocity of the ice crystals. and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ice</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the collection efficiency of the collisions between aerosol particles and ice crystals <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.66"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1815">For below-cloud scavenging, we used the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.67"/> method, in which we approximated each size class as a log-normal mode. The size-dependent collection efficiency for rain and snow uses an aerosol and collector drop size parameterization described in detail in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.68"/>. Several studies have found that below-cloud scavenging of aerosols does not contribute to the mass deposition budgets as much as in-cloud scavenging does <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx20 bib1.bibx27" id="paren.69"/>. Thus, we did not analyze below-cloud scavenging separately in our simulations.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>ECHAM-HAMMOZ</title>
      <p id="d1e1835">For testing the effect of the current wet-scavenging scheme on global aerosol properties, we used the latest stable version of ECHAM-HAMMOZ (ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0), a three-dimensional aerosol–chemistry–climate model. ECHAM6.3 is a general circulation model (GCM) and it solves the equations for divergence, temperature, surface pressure, and vorticity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64" id="paren.70"/>. These large-scale meteorological prognostic variables can be nudged towards data from operational weather forecast models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx41" id="paren.71"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1844">ECHAM6.3 is coupled with the Hamburg Aerosol Model (HAM), which calculates all of the aerosol properties within ECHAM-HAMMOZ. These properties include emissions, deposition, radiation, and microphysics <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx67" id="paren.72"/>. HAM has a comprehensive parameterization for both modal and sectional microphysics representations of aerosol populations. In addition to BC, the aerosol compounds included in this study are organic carbon (OC), organic aerosol (OA) (here assumed to be 1.4 times the modeled OC mass), sulfate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), mineral dust (DU), and sea salt (SS).
ECHAM6.3 is further coupled to the chemistry model MOZ (not used here), which contains a detailed stratospheric and tropospheric reactive chemistry representation for 63 chemical species, including nitrogen oxides, tropospheric ozone, and hydrocarbons <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx58 bib1.bibx36" id="paren.73"/>. The model does not include secondary organic aerosols. In addition, the model assumes the same aerosol emission size distribution per compound and emission sector throughout the whole world. The SALSA global aerosol module is coupled in the ECHAM-HAMMOZ global climate model for all of the simulations presented in this study.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Simulations</title>
      <p id="d1e1872">We used a total of six different simulations to investigate the performance of the current wet deposition scheme. The first two simulations were done with the default wet deposition scheme of SALSA (hereafter referred to as “old”) and the wet deposition scheme introduced in this study (hereafter referred to as “current”). The treatment of aerosol aging is identical in baserun_old and baserun_new; i.e., there is no artificial transfer of insoluble particles to soluble size classes. However, aerosol mass can be transferred from the soluble to the insoluble population through coagulation. As will be shown later, in the default model configuration the current scheme resulted in spurious BC vertical profiles. To investigate the reasons for this, we carried out four additional sensitivity simulations where we changed the assumptions of emission size distribution, as well as internal mixing and aging of BC. A schematic of the aerosol emission number size distribution, (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), as a function of diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, for the different simulations is presented in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>. In addition, an overview over the different simulations and their illustrative colors and line styles in the upcoming figures are presented in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1899">Schematic representation of the number size distribution, (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), of aerosols in different simulations as a function of diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1929">Overview of the simulations used in this study.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="1.7cm" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="12.5cm" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="1.5cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Setup</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Description</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Illustration</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">baserun_old</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Old ECHAM-SALSA in-cloud scavenging scheme with fixed scavenging coefficients.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{height=9.958465pt, width=28.452756pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-g01.png"/></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">baserun_new</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Current in-cloud nucleation scavenging using <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.74"/> for liquid clouds and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="text.75"/> for ice clouds. In-cloud impaction for liquid and ice clouds according to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.76"/></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{height=9.958465pt, width=28.452756pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-g02.png"/></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC_small</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">All BC emissions directed to small insoluble size class.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{height=9.958465pt, width=28.452756pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-g03.png"/></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC_large</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">All BC emissions directed to large insoluble size class.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{height=9.958465pt, width=28.452756pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-g04.png"/></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BC_soluble</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">All BC emissions directed to soluble population with the same mass distribution as for baseruns.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{height=9.958465pt, width=28.452756pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-g05.png"/></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">insol2sol</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Simulating aging of insoluble particles by moving them to soluble aerosol population after they activate at 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> supersaturation.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><?xmltex \igopts{height=9.958465pt, width=28.452756pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-g06.png"/></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2069">In the model simulations, the runs “baserun_new” and “baserun_old” are used to compare the current and old in-cloud scavenging schemes. The simulations “BC_small”, “BC_large”, “BC_soluble”, and “insol2sol” were conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of the current in-cloud scavenging scheme. These sensitivity studies were chosen based on the findings of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="text.77"/>, who studied how model processes affect the simulated aerosol vertical profiles. Their study indicated that the processes which have the strongest effect on aerosol vertical profiles in the HadGEM model are emission distribution, hygroscopicity, deposition, and microphysical processes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.78"/>.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6220?><p id="d1e2078">In the first two sensitivity runs, we altered the BC emission distribution for SALSA. This was done so that all of the BC emissions were directed to either size class of small or large insoluble particles, respectively. In the default configuration the BC emission size distributions are log-normal mass fraction distributions following AEROCOM emission recommendations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64 bib1.bibx23" id="paren.79"/>, which are remapped to the SALSA size classes. The mode radii (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>m</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and standard deviations <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for the original BC emission size distributions are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>m</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.015</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, for fossil fuel emissions and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mtext>m</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, for wild-fire emissions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.80"/>. In the BC_small simulation, we directed all BC emissions to an insoluble size class where particle diameter spans from 50 to 96.7 nm. In the BC_large simulation, we directed all BC emissions to an insoluble size class where particle diameter spans from 0.7 to 1.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p>
      <p id="d1e2191">To study the sensitivity of the wet deposition scheme to BC hygroscopicity, we conducted a simulation where all BC emissions were directed to soluble size classes. The size distribution for the emissions was the same as for the baserun simulations when they are directed to the insoluble classes. This simulation is referred to as BC_soluble in the model simulations. In the fourth sensitivity study, called insol2sol, insoluble particles are transferred to parallel size classes of soluble particles. This allows for the separation of fresh and aged particles and is a method to simulate aerosol aging used also in other global aerosol models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx64" id="paren.81"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. The criterion for transfer is that particles activate at a supersaturation of 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <label>2.6</label><title>Experimental setup</title>
      <p id="d1e2215">The simulations were performed with ECHAM-HAMMOZ for the year 2010, with the SALSA aerosol module, using 3-hourly data output, after a 6-month spin-up. The emissions were obtained from the ACCMIP (Emissions for Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model Intercomparison Project) emission inventories, which are interpolated, for the period 2000–2100 by using Representative Concentration Pathway 4.5 (RCP4.5) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx49 bib1.bibx72" id="paren.82"/>. The model vorticity, divergence, and surface pressure were nudged towards ERA-Interim reanalysis data provided by ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx62 bib1.bibx10" id="paren.83"/>, and the sea surface temperature (SST) and sea ice cover (SIC) were also prescribed. SST and SIC were obtained from monthly mean climatologies from AMIP (Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project). The analysis is made between the old and the current wet deposition scheme using the ECHAM-HAMMOZ global aerosol–climate model with the SALSA aerosol module. In addition, the sensitivity of the current scheme to emission sizes, aging, and<?pagebreak page6221?> hygroscopicity of BC-containing aerosol is tested using ECHAM-HAMMOZ with SALSA.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2226">Vertical profiles of BC <bold>(a–c)</bold>, OC <bold>(d–f)</bold>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(g–i)</bold>, simulated with old and current in-cloud wet deposition schemes at different latitude bands. Note the different units for the different compounds.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS7">
  <label>2.7</label><title>ATom aircraft measurements</title>
      <p id="d1e2263">To see how the current scheme and the sensitivity studies reproduce the vertical properties of different aerosol compounds, we compared the model simulations against aircraft measurements. The aircraft data were obtained from all NASA's ATom missions (1, 2, 3, and 4), and the dataset was merged data from all instruments which measure atmospheric chemistry, trace gases, and aerosols <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="paren.84"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2269">To get the best representative comparison between the ATom aircraft measurements and model data, the model data were sampled to the same time and locations of the aircraft measurements. For the collocation of model vertical profiles with observations, we used the Community Intercomparison Suite (CIS) tool <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx75" id="paren.85"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2275">BC concentrations were measured with a single-particle soot photometer (NOAA) (SP2) and OA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations with a CU aircraft high-resolution time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer (HR-AMS) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="paren.86"/>. The number concentration of particles with a diameter larger than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and total number concentration, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were combined from the data measured with a nucleation-mode aerosol size spectrometer (NMASS), an ultra-high-sensitivity aerosol size spectrometer (UHSAS), and a laser aerosol spectrometer (LAS) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx77" id="paren.87"/>.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Differences between simulated values of old and current wet deposition schemes</title>
      <p id="d1e2342">First, we compared how aerosol properties differ when using the old and the current wet deposition schemes. In order to assess how the two schemes affect aerosol transport and vertical profiles,
we compared the modeled aerosol vertical profiles over the tropics (0–30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N), the midlatitudes (30–60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N), and the Arctic (60–90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N). Here we focused on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, OC (or OA), and BC as they are readily available from the ATom aircraft campaign measurements.</p>
      <p id="d1e2383">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/> shows the vertical profile of BC, OC, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mass concentration simulated with the old and the current in-cloud wet deposition schemes. The different rows show different latitude bands, as horizontally averaged annual means. The figure illustrates that all three of the compounds show similar differences in the vertical profiles in all three latitude bands, between the two runs. The concentrations for each compound are higher for the current scheme compared to the old scheme for almost the entire vertical domain. The differences between the different wet deposition schemes are greatest at higher altitudes starting from approximately 900 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards. In the tropics, these differences in the profiles are smaller, compared to the other latitude bands, with a maximum relative difference of approximately 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for BC and OC and slightly exceeding 150 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. These maxima occur at approximately 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude. In the midlatitudes, the differences are slightly higher than in the tropics and the maximum differences in the values are at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 300 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude. The current method shows <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 350 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> higher concentrations at maximum for BC and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 400 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for OC. The Arctic shows the largest differences in the compound profiles in comparison to the other latitude bands. The difference is largest at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude where the concentrations in the current scheme outweigh the concentrations in the old scheme by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for BC, 650 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for OC, and 800 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. As emissions of these aerosol particles in the Arctic are low, most aerosol is transported into the Arctic from emission regions outside the Arctic. It is thus evident that the wet removal of these aerosol particles is reduced in the current scheme, which allows for the particles to be transported to higher altitudes and longer distances. In addition, we found that the model accumulates BC at the higher altitudes in simulations spanning several years (not shown), which can be considered spurious behavior.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2560">Vertical profiles of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(a–c)</bold> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(d–f)</bold> concentrations, simulated with old and current in-cloud wet deposition schemes in different latitude regions.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2598">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> shows the vertical profile of the number concentration of particles with diameters larger than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the total number concentration, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles show similar differences between the old and the current scheme as for the concentration profiles of different compounds in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>. In addition, the relative increase in the concentrations in the current wet deposition scheme is similar. This can be explained by changes in nucleation scavenging in the current scheme, which reduces the wet removal of large particles and thus increases the number concentration of large particles. Particles larger than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> act as a condensation sink for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thus an increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> leads to reduced new particle formation (NPF) and thus to decreased number concentrations of small particles. This can be seen in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles, which show a decrease in the current scheme. This difference is most pronounced in the Arctic, where the relative difference between the current and old schemes in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration reaches its maximum of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 90 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 400 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In addition, the changes in rates of NPF and impaction scavenging in our current scheme result in an increased removal of small aerosol particles and thus reduce concentrations even more. These effects become evident when looking at size-resolved wet deposition fluxes.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2737">Wet deposition flux size distributions of different aerosol compounds simulated with old (left column) and current (right column) in-cloud wet deposition schemes. The top four panels show the wet deposition flux for the mass distribution and the lower four for the number distribution. Different rows show values for the different solubility types.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page6222?><p id="d1e2746">The annual and global average size distributions of the wet deposition flux of the old and current in-cloud scavenging schemes are presented in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>.
The wet deposition size distributions confirm what has been observed in the vertical aerosol profiles. There are only modest changes in the mass fluxes between the old and the current schemes. In the soluble population the largest difference is in the size class, which spans diameters between 190–360 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where the current scheme exceeds the value of the old scheme by 0.003 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" 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>. On the other hand, in the size class 1.7–4.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the old scheme has a higher value by 0.002 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" 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>. In the insoluble population the current scheme exceeds the value of the old scheme by approximately 0.002 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" 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> in the size class 190–360 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, but in the largest size class the value of the old scheme is higher by 0.005 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" 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 in steady state the total emissions of a compound must match its total removal, these differences mostly stem from changes in the interplay between dry- and wet deposition processes. However, the number flux in smaller than 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> size classes of the soluble population is halved, affecting mainly the removal of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the smallest size classes. In addition, there is a small increase of approximately <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s)<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" 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> in the current scheme in the size class between 190 and 360 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For larger than 360 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> size classes the changes are insignificant. These results can be explained by increased concentrations of medium-sized and large particles in the current scheme, which act as a condensation sink for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This leads to fewer small particles as they are mainly formed through NPF from gaseous <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This effect can also be seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> as a slight increase in removed sulfate mass in the accumulation-sized particles of both the soluble and insoluble aerosol populations. As a consequence of the atmospheric concentration of small particles, the wet deposition flux for the smallest size classes is reduced in the current scheme compared to the old.</p>
      <p id="d1e3001">The lifetime of different aerosol compounds was calculated by dividing the annual mean global mass burden of each compound by the annual mean emissions of the same compound <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="paren.88"/>. The lifetimes for different compounds can be found in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>. The global mean lifetime for BC was 9.23 d for the old scheme and 14.62 d for the current scheme. However, experimental studies from different aircraft campaigns indicate that the BC lifetime should be less than 5.5 d <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="paren.89"/>. This is a very interesting result: the more physical wet deposition scheme produces more spurious atmospheric lifetimes for BC. Consequently, the ability of the ECHAM-HAMMOZ global climate model,<?pagebreak page6223?> with the SALSA aerosol module, to reliably simulate aerosol vertical profiles and long-range transport of aerosol is also decreased when using the more physical scheme with the default model setup. This may be due to the fact that a more physical treatment of the wet deposition processes makes the model more sensitive to influences outside of the parameterization. We therefore performed further sensitivity simulations and compared their results to observational data.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Sensitivity simulations</title>
      <p id="d1e3020">As reported in the previous section, ECHAM-HAMMOZ, using the SALSA aerosol module, with the current, more physical scheme, in its default setup, produced spuriously long lifetimes of all aerosol compounds, especially BC. With the sensitivity simulations we aimed to explore different possibilities to improve the BC vertical profiles and long-range transport in the model. In order to increase nucleation scavenging of BC, we considered three different possibilities to make BC-containing particles more susceptible to cloud droplet activation. One way to achieve this is to emit BC into larger particles, which require less aging to be activated at a given supersaturation. This was tested in simulation BC_large. Another way is to mix BC with soluble compounds in order to enhance hygroscopicity of BC-containing particles and thus their cloud activation susceptibility. This can be done in two ways: either by emitting BC directly to soluble size classes (simulation BC_soluble) or by emitting BC to insoluble size classes and transferring particles to soluble classes after aging (simulation insol2sol). A third way is to emit BC into smaller size classes in order to facilitate the transfer of BC into larger, more easily activated particles by coagulation (simulation BC_small).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3025">Mean vertical profiles of BC <bold>(a–c)</bold>, OA <bold>(d–f)</bold>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(g–i)</bold>, modeled with different studies, compared to the mean of ATom aircraft measurements at different latitude bands. To the right of every panel is the number of observations measured by the device, at each vertical level, from the ATom aircraft measurement campaigns. Note the different units for the different compounds.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3054">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/> shows vertical profiles of BC, OA, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> simulated with the current wet deposition scheme for the different sensitivity simulations and with the old scavenging scheme, together with the average values from ATom aircraft measurements. The gray shaded area shows the standard deviation for the aircraft measurements. For BC, the simulations baserun_old, BC_large, BC_soluble, and insol2sol show a<?pagebreak page6224?> better match with observed vertical profiles than the other simulations in every latitude band. These simulations fall between the standard deviation limits of the ATom aircraft simulations almost everywhere, with the exception of the tropics, where they underestimate the concentrations starting from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> downwards. In addition, in the tropics, BC_soluble and insol2sol represent the BC concentrations slightly better than BC_large and baserun_old between 500 and 300 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. BC_small and baserun_new overestimate the BC concentrations at all latitudes, except in the tropics at lower altitudes starting from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 700 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> downwards, where they represent the BC concentrations slightly better than the other sensitivity simulations. As we saw in the previous chapter, the reduced efficiency in the wet deposition increases BC concentrations at higher altitudes, which causes  baserun_new to overestimate the BC concentrations. This is because the default emission sizes of BC particles are not very susceptible to cloud activation. In addition, although BC_small aimed at increasing BC wet removal by emitting BC to small particle sizes and thus enhancing their collection by coagulation to large particles, it is apparent that coagulation is not very efficient in doing so.</p>
      <p id="d1e3110">Compared to baserun_new, most of the sensitivity studies show better agreement of the modeled BC profiles with the measurements. However, it needs to also be checked how they affect OA and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. At all latitude regions OA concentrations in all of the simulations show similar results as the measurements. Exceptions exist for<?pagebreak page6225?> insol2sol and baserun_old simulations, which underestimate OA concentrations in the midlatitudes as well as at higher altitudes in the tropics and the Arctic. In the tropics the insol2sol simulation underestimates OA concentrations starting from approximately 700 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards and baserun_old from approximately 400 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards. In addition, the old scheme underestimates the OA concentrations at higher altitudes in the midlatitudes and the Arctic. The shape of the curve of the old scheme is different compared to observations and the rest of the simulations, especially in the Arctic. The old scheme exhibits a concentration minimum between 400 and 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, while observations are near the maximum values at those altitudes. At most, insol2sol underestimates the measurements at the highest altitudes, in all of the latitude bands, where the concentrations are over 1 order of magnitude less than the measurements. As the aging of aerosol particles in insol2sol is simulated by moving all insoluble particles that can activate to cloud droplets at 0.5 % supersaturation, almost all OA that is originally emitted to insoluble size classes is moved to soluble size classes. Thus, this enhances the activation and consequently the wet deposition of OA. Faster wet removal reduces the amount of OA transported to higher altitudes and thus reduces the OA concentrations. OA concentrations from all other simulations fall between the standard deviation limits of the ATom aircraft measurements everywhere, with only a slight overestimation between approximately 900 and 800 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the tropics.</p>
      <p id="d1e3156">For <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, all of the sensitivity simulations show similar trends as the measurements but overestimate concentrations almost everywhere. In the tropics, the shape of the vertical profile in baserun_old is similar to the observations and the rest of the simulations. In the midlatitudes, the vertical profile in baserun_old shows stronger variation than observations and the rest of the simulations, overestimating the values below 800 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and overestimating them above 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Over the Arctic, baserun_old underestimates concentrations throughout the whole column, the maximum difference to observed values being almost 1 order of magnitude. The effect that insol2sol has on OA concentrations is also visible in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles, but here the effect is much weaker. In the tropics, insol2sol and baserun_old show better agreement with the measurements from 700 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards than the other simulations, with only a slight overestimation. Between approximately 900 and 700 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, all of the simulations overestimate the measurements. This may be due to simplified sulfate chemistry in the model as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is mainly formed through chemical transformation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26" id="paren.90"/>. In the midlatitudes, all simulations overestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, with the exception of insol2sol and baserun_old. The insol2sol reproduces the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profile slightly better than the other simulations from approximately 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards. However, near the surface, all simulations overestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations by approximately half an order of magnitude. In the Arctic, all of the simulations have similar <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles with a slight overestimation between approximately 700 and 300 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude, with the exception of baserun_old. In addition, at the highest altitudes all of the simulations underestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. The different sensitivity tests do not alter the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations much compared to baserun_new because most of it condenses onto soluble particles. In addition, the new particles formed through nucleation are added to the soluble aerosol population. Thus, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical profiles are similar in all of the sensitivity simulations, with the exception of insol2sol where some of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which repartitions from the insoluble to the soluble population, is activated more efficiently.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3336">Mean vertical profiles of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(a–c)</bold> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <bold>(d–f)</bold> concentrations, modeled with different studies, compared to the mean of ATom aircraft measurements in different latitude regions.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3373">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/> shows the vertical profiles of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, simulated with different studies, together with ATom aircraft measurements. From the figure we can see that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles between different sensitivity simulations are similar in the midlatitudes and the Arctic. In these latitude bands, the sensitivity simulations slightly underestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations when compared to the measurements, but the trend is similar throughout the entire vertical column. However, insol2sol underestimates the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles slightly more in the midlatitudes and the Arctic. In addition, baserun_old underestimates <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles even more than the other<?pagebreak page6226?> simulations, especially in the Arctic, where the maximum difference occurs at approximately 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude and is more than 90 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" 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> less than observed values. In the tropics, the simulations show a good correlation with the measurements as almost all of the profiles follow the shape of the profile of the ATom aircraft measurements, except for the surface concentrations, which are underestimated by a factor of approximately 2.5 compared to the measurements. In addition, in the tropics, insol2sol and baserun_old underestimate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> more than the other simulations from 800 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards. For insol2sol, this is also due to more efficient activation compared to baserun_new for medium-sized particles which reduces the transport to higher altitudes.</p>
      <p id="d1e3484">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles are similar in shape in all sensitivity simulations, with only a modest difference (600 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" 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> at maximum), mostly at higher altitudes. In the tropics the trend of the profiles varies between simulations and measurements. All of the simulations tend to overestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at the surface and at the highest altitudes by over 50 %. However, they underestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations at approximately 400–700 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with the exception of baserun_old, which overestimates these concentrations. In the midlatitudes, all of the simulations represent <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations fairly well (approximately 500 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" 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> underestimation and 4000 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" 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> overestimation at most) when compared to the measurements, with the exception of baserun_old, which overestimates these concentrations at all altitudes with almost 1 order of magnitude at maximum. However, in the Arctic, all of the sensitivity simulations underestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles. At higher altitudes, starting from approximately 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upwards, insol2sol underestimates <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> least, showing quite good agreement with the measurements with only around 300 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" 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> difference at most. The baserun_old simulation, on the other hand, shows good agreement with the measurements at highest altitudes and below 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> but overestimates the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profile between 600 and 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hPa</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by over 5000 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" 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> at most.</p>
      <p id="d1e3659">One of the reasons for the differences in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tot</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> surface concentrations may be due to a misrepresentation of the emitted particle size distribution. In ECHAM-HAMMOZ the same aerosol emission size distribution per compound and emission sector is assumed throughout the whole world, which is not very realistic for every aerosol particle source <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54" id="paren.91"/>. At higher altitudes, the aerosol microphysical processes correct the aerosol size distribution towards more realistic profiles.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3689">Wet deposition flux size distributions of different aerosol compounds simulated with different sensitivity simulations. Each column represents a different sensitivity study and each row the solubility type. The top two rows show the mass size distribution of the wet deposition flux and the bottom two rows the number size distribution.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/13/6215/2020/gmd-13-6215-2020-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3698">To investigate the effects of the different sensitivity studies further, we computed the size and mass distribution of the wet deposition flux (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>).
The mass fluxes in the soluble population do not change much between baserun_new and the different sensitivity studies, except for the insol2sol simulation, which allows for sufficiently hygroscopic particles of the insoluble population to be repartitioned to the soluble population. This leads to an increase in DU mass in the soluble population and a decrease in the insoluble population. In addition to more efficient wet removal of DU due to this process, this also increases dry deposition and sedimentation (not shown) of DU in insol2sol. For the mass fluxes in the insoluble population, BC_large and BC_soluble show an increase in the largest size class for DU. This effect is due to more efficient removal of BC-containing particles, which allows for more <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to condense on larger, DU-containing particles, which enhances the activation of these particles.</p>
      <p id="d1e3714">The number fluxes in the soluble population for the different sensitivity simulations show most change in the two smallest size classes, which increase by a factor of approx 1.3 in the insol2sol simulation and approximately 1.1 for BC_large and BC_soluble when compared to baserun_new (shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>). These differences stem from changes in medium-sized and large particle concentrations, which act as a condensation sink for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and thereby regulate the amount of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> available for new particle formation. In addition, there is a slight increase in OC in the insol2sol-simulated number distribution, which is being transferred from the insoluble population. Otherwise, there is no notable change in other compounds as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> dominates the number distribution in the soluble population. The relative BC mass contribution to the wet deposition number flux of the insoluble aerosol population reflects the assumptions made in the different sensitivity studies very well. While for BC_large and BC_soluble the BC mass fraction in the medium-sized insoluble particles disappears, in BC_small the BC fraction in the 50 to 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> insoluble particles is about 3 times larger than in baserun_new (shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>). This shows that coagulation is not effective in moving BC from these small insoluble particles to large soluble particles. In insol2sol, most of the BC is transferred from the insoluble to the soluble aerosol population before removal, which can be seen in a strong decrease in removed insoluble aerosol number for that simulation.</p>
      <p id="d1e3763">In addition to the evaluation of the simulated vertical aerosol profiles, we used the modeled atmospheric lifetimes of all aerosol compounds as an indicator of the model skill in the different simulations. Here we estimated the atmospheric lifetime of a compound as the yearly and global mean mass burden of the compound divided by its total yearly mean emission. The compiled mean lifetimes for the different simulations and compounds as well as the mean and spread of lifetimes from several AEROCOM models (CAM5-ATRAS, EC-Earth, TM5, ECHAM-HAM, ECHAM-SALSA, ECMWF-IFS, EMEP, GEOS, GFDL-AM4, GISS-OMA, INCA, NorESM2, OsloCTM3, and SPRINTARS) are presented in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.92"/>. The spread is calculated as half the difference between the first and third quantiles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.93"/>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e3778">Lifetimes of compounds from different simulations as well as mean and spread from different AEROCOM models.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <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:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">baserun_old</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">baserun_new</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">BC_small</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">BC_large</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">insol2sol</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">BC_soluble</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">AEROCOM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AEROCOM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">BC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (d)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">16.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.3</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">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">DU</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (d)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (d)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (d)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">8.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">6.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SS</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (d)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">1.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.56</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page6228?><p id="d1e4060">With the assumption that the AEROCOM mean atmospheric lifetimes are the current best guess, we can use Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/> to select a simulation that best reproduces these mean lifetimes and therefore could be regarded as the best solution to address the overestimated BC lifetimes in baserun_new. However, we must keep in mind that AEROCOM means are global-climate-model-based results, and thus it is not completely certain that these lifetimes of different compounds reflect the actual lifetimes in the real atmosphere. While baserun_old, baserun_new, and BC_small overestimate the BC lifetime by factors of 1.6, 2.5, and 2.8, respectively, BC_large, insol2sol, and BC_soluble all produce BC lifetimes within 1 d of the AEROCOM mean. In addition, the BC lifetimes should be less than 5.5 d according to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="text.94"/>. However, the different sensitivity studies also affect the atmospheric lifetimes of the other species, and some of them considerably. For instance, the lifetime of DU in insol2sol is almost 4.5 times shorter than the AEROCOM mean, while both BC_large and BC_soluble overestimate this mean only slightly by half a day. On the other hand, the atmospheric lifetime of OC in insol2sol is closest to the AEROCOM mean compared to all other simulations using the current wet deposition scheme. However, in this setup of ECHAM-HAMMOZ all OC is emitted as primary particles, while in reality a large fraction of the organic aerosol is formed as secondary organic aerosol (SOA) in the atmosphere. Modeling the processes leading to SOA formation more realistically would most likely affect the modeled OC lifetimes quite substantially. The atmospheric lifetime of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in insol2sol is also closest to the AEROCOM mean, but BC_large and BC_soluble also model the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> lifetime fairly well. For SS, the atmospheric lifetime does not change when changing the wet removal algorithm or during any of the sensitivity tests as SS is only emitted to the soluble population. The lifetimes for all simulations are more than 0.7 d higher than the AEROCOM mean (about a factor of 2). This has already been discussed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="text.95"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx67" id="text.96"/>.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e4106">We developed an in-cloud nucleation wet deposition scheme for liquid and ice clouds. For liquid clouds, the scavenging coefficients are calculated using the size-segregated fraction of activated particles from a cloud activation scheme.
For ice clouds, the scavenging coefficients are calculated based on the surface area concentration of each size class <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx66" id="paren.97"><named-content content-type="pre">see</named-content></xref>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4114">We used the SALSA microphysics scheme coupled with the ECHAM-HAMMOZ global aerosol–chemistry–climate model to evaluate the differences between the old and current wet deposition schemes. In addition, we used ECHAM-HAMMOZ with SALSA to test the sensitivity of the simulated aerosol concentrations to model assumptions of emission sizes, mixing, and aging when the current in-cloud wet deposition scheme was used. In its original setup, SALSA used fixed scavenging coefficients for modeling wet deposition. Here, we used the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.98"/> cloud activation scheme for the calculations of size-dependent nucleation scavenging coefficients in liquid clouds. For ice clouds, we used the scheme of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="text.99"/> for providing the ice nucleation rates for the nucleation scavenging scheme <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx66" id="paren.100"><named-content content-type="pre">see</named-content></xref>. The in-cloud impaction scavenging for SALSA was adapted from the method for the modal scheme by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.101"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4131">Compared to using fixed scavenging coefficients, the current scheme showed an increase in BC, OA, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical profiles almost throughout the entire vertical domain for all latitude bands. In the Arctic region this increase was most pronounced, with a maximum increase of up to 800 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The differences in vertical profiles had similar functional shapes in all latitude bands and for all three compounds. The increase was mainly due to a decrease in the nucleation scavenging of aerosol particles in the current scheme, which increased aerosol transport into the upper atmosphere and subsequently to the Arctic region. The current scheme also showed a significant increase of up to 600 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at maximum in the number concentration of particles larger than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which was similar in shape to the change in aerosol compound mass. However, the number concentration of particles smaller than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreased everywhere, with a maximum decrease of 90 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the Arctic. This could imply that new particle formation was reduced in the current scheme due to the increased concentration of large particles, which increased the condensation sink for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In addition, the changes in impaction scavenging rates in the current scheme compared to the original setup can reduce the number concentration of particles smaller than 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">nm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.102"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4208">An evaluation of the current wet deposition scheme against ATom aircraft measurements showed that, using the default setup of the host model, the current scheme overestimated BC mass concentrations, especially at higher altitudes. Additional sensitivity simulations showed that the model skill of reproducing measured vertical BC mass concentration profiles could be improved a lot by directing the BC emissions to larger or to more soluble size classes or by transferring BC-containing particles to soluble size classes after aging. These sensitivity studies also produced BC atmospheric lifetimes which were closest to the AEROCOM model mean <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.103"/>. Emitting BC to smaller size classes, on the other hand, overestimated the aerosol mass concentrations and BC atmospheric lifetime even more. However, changing the distribution of BC in the sensitivity simulations also affected the mass concentrations of other aerosol compounds. For instance, transferring insoluble particles to soluble size classes after aging led to an underestimation of the observed OA concentrations at higher altitudes, while in the other simulations OA concentrations fell between the standard deviation limits of ATom measurements almost everywhere. The modeled atmospheric lifetime of OA, on the other hand, compared best to the AEROCOM mean when transferring aged insoluble particles to soluble size classes. However, as in this study secondary processes of OA formation were neglected, we did not use OA as an indicator for the skill of our wet deposition scheme. For <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the insoluble-to-soluble transfer reproduced the observed concentrations slightly better at higher altitudes in the tropics. Nevertheless, all simulations showed similar results for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations, with only a slight overestimation when compared to the aircraft observations. In addition, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> atmospheric lifetimes did not vary much across the different sensitivity studies. All of the sensitivity studies reproduced aerosol number concentration profiles fairly well. However, the insoluble-to-soluble transfer considerably underestimated the concentrations of activation-sized particles at the highest altitudes in the tropics, which was strongly tied to the underestimation of OC at these altitudes. Furthermore, the atmospheric lifetime of atmospheric mineral dust (DU) was strongly underestimated in the simulation using insoluble-to-soluble transfer of aged particles. The atmospheric lifetimes of SS did not change between the different sensitivity studies. All in all, while reasonable BC vertical profiles and atmospheric lifetimes could be achieved with the current wet deposition scheme in three of the sensitivity studies, namely emitting BC to more hygroscopic or to larger particles or transferring insoluble, BC-containing particles, to soluble size classes, only the first option is really suitable. Emitting BC to large particles is quite unrealistic because the emission size of BC-containing particles is fairly well established <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx69 bib1.bibx45 bib1.bibx18 bib1.bibx78" id="paren.104"/> and<?pagebreak page6229?> insoluble-to-soluble transfer, on the other hand, leads to atmospheric lifetimes of DU that are too small.</p>
      <?pagebreak page6230?><p id="d1e4251">To conclude, even though the current in-cloud wet deposition scheme is more physically sound than using fixed scavenging coefficients, it failed to reproduce global aerosol fields adequately in the default setup of the host model. This can be seen from the spuriously long lifetimes of all aerosol species. In particular, the BC atmospheric lifetime was almost 3 times as large as what observations indicate <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="paren.105"/>. Based on the results of our sensitivity simulations, the ECHAM-HAMMOZ global climate model with the SALSA aerosol module produces the best vertical profiles and aerosol lifetimes with the current scheme if BC is mixed with more soluble compounds at emission time. In the future, model development should include the study of the effects of the gas-to-particle partitioning of semivolatile compounds which could have a significant impact on the modeled aerosol vertical profiles. In addition, the issue of the level of mixing of BC with soluble compounds during emissions and in the subgrid-scale processing should be further investigated.
<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?></p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title>Calculations for particles containing an insoluble core</title>
      <p id="d1e4270">The calculations for the particles containing an insoluble core are based on the technical report by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40" id="text.106"/>, where the critical supersaturation is obtained as
          <disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E9" content-type="numbered"><label>A1</label><mml:math id="M230" display="block"><mml:mtable class="split" columnspacing="1em" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>c</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{8.8}{8.8}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where
          <disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E10" content-type="numbered"><label>A2</label><mml:math id="M231" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          <disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E11" content-type="numbered"><label>A3</label><mml:math id="M232" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        and
          <disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E12" content-type="numbered"><label>A4</label><mml:math id="M233" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
diameter of the insoluble core.</p>
      <p id="d1e4664">In Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="App1.Ch1.S1.E11"/>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are obtained from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx59" id="text.107"/>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> describes the increase in water vapor pressure due to the curvature of the particle surface and is denoted as
          <disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E13" content-type="numbered"><label>A5</label><mml:math id="M238" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the molecular weight of water, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the density of water, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the surface tension of
the droplet, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the temperature, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the universal gas constant. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is called the solute effect
term and is denoted as
          <disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E14" content-type="numbered"><label>A6</label><mml:math id="M245" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mtext>s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>w</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mtext>s</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the moles of solute in a droplet.</p>
      <p id="d1e4833">Using this new expression for the critical supersaturation, the effective critical supersaturation, maximum supersaturation, and the number fraction of activated particles for each size class can be calculated using Eqs. (8), (9), and (12)–(15) from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.108"/>.</p><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e4844">The stand-alone zero-dimensional version of SALSA2.0 is distributed under the Apache-2.0 license and the code is available at <uri>https://github.com/UCLALES-SALSA/SALSA-standalone/releases/tag/2.0</uri> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="paren.109"><named-content content-type="pre">last access: 23 May 2018;</named-content></xref> with <uri>https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1251668</uri>.</p>

      <p id="d1e4858">The ECHAM6-HAMMOZ model is made available to the scientific community under the HAMMOZ Software License Agreement, which defines the conditions under which the model can be used. The license can be downloaded from <uri>https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/attachments/291/License_ECHAM-HAMMOZ_June2012.pdf</uri> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="paren.110"><named-content content-type="pre">last access: 29 June 2012;</named-content></xref>.</p>

      <p id="d1e4869">The model data can be reproduced using the model revision r5511 from the repository <uri>https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz/repository/changes/echam6-hammoz/branches/fmi/fmi_trunk</uri> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31 bib1.bibx32" id="paren.111"><named-content content-type="pre">last access: 8 March 2019;</named-content></xref>. The settings for the simulations are given in the same folder (“gmd-2020-220”).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e4883">The data for reproducing the figures and codes for the figures can be obtained directly from authors or from <uri>https://etsin.fairdata.fi/dataset/f3cb5807-66fe-4a0d-a20a-ac208d3aab5a</uri> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35" id="paren.112"><named-content content-type="pre">last access: 29 June 2020;</named-content></xref> with <uri>https://doi.org/10.23729/301df277-8147-4700-8652-ca491f2b58a6</uri>. All other input files are ECHAM-HAMMOZ standard and are available from the HAMMOZ repository <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31 bib1.bibx32" id="paren.113"><named-content content-type="pre">see <uri>https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz</uri>;</named-content></xref>.</p>

      <p id="d1e4905">ATom aircraft data can be obtained through the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) <uri>https://daac.ornl.gov/cgi-bin/dsviewer.pl?ds_id=1581</uri> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx77" id="paren.114"><named-content content-type="pre">last access: 25 November 2019;</named-content></xref> with <uri>https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581</uri>.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e4922">EH, TK, and HK designed the outline of the paper. EH wrote the majority of the paper. EH performed all the climate simulations. EH, TK, and HK developed the current wet deposition scheme. TK and HK provided the calculations for particles containing an insoluble core. EH and AL modified the emission distributions for the sensitivity simulations. EH, TK, HK, and AL performed the data analysis for the climate simulations, and EH produced the figures. All the authors contributed to the writing of the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e4928">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e4934">ECHAM-HAMMOZ is developed by a consortium composed of ETH Zürich, Max Planck Institut für Meteorologie, Forschungszentrum Jülich, University of Oxford, the Finnish Meteorological Institute, and the Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research and managed by the Center for Climate Systems Modeling (C2SM) at ETH Zürich. We thank NASA/ORNL DAAC for Atmospheric Tomography Mission (ATom) aircraft data.</p></ack><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e4940">This research has been supported by the Academy of Finland, Luonnontieteiden ja Tekniikan Tutkimuksen Toimikunta (grant nos. 317373, 308292), the European Research Council (CLIMASLOW, grant no. 678889), and the Tiina and Antti Herlin Foundation (grant no. 20190014).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e4946">This paper was edited by Jason Williams and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Abdul-Razzak and Ghan(2002)</label><?label abdulrazzak2002?><mixed-citation>Abdul-Razzak, H. and Ghan, S.: A parameterization of aerosol activation. Part 3: Sectional representation, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 1–6,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000483" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JD000483</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Albrecht(1989)</label><?label albrecht1989?><mixed-citation>Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, Cloud Microphysics, and Fractional Cloudiness,
Science, 245, 1227–1230, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.245.4923.1227</ext-link>, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>AMAP(2015)</label><?label amap?><mixed-citation>
AMAP: AMAP assessment 2015: Black carbon and ozone as Arctic climate forcers, vol. 7, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP),, Oslo, Norway, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Andersson et al.(2015)</label><?label anderson2015?><mixed-citation>Andersson, C., Bergström, R., Bennet, C., Robertson, L., Thomas, M., Korhonen, H., Lehtinen, K. E. J., and Kokkola, H.: MATCH-SALSA – Multi-scale Atmospheric Transport and CHemistry model coupled to the SALSA aerosol microphysics model – Part 1: Model description and evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 171–189, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-171-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-8-171-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Andronache(2003)</label><?label adronache2003?><mixed-citation>Andronache, C.: Estimated variability of below-cloud aerosol removal by rainfall for observed aerosol size distributions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 131–143, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-131-2003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-3-131-2003</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Andronache et al.(2006)</label><?label adronache2006?><mixed-citation>Andronache, C., Grönholm, T., Laakso, L., Phillips, V., and Venäläinen, A.: Scavenging of ultrafine particles by rainfall at a boreal site: observations and model estimations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4739–4754, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4739-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-4739-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Archuleta et al.(2005)</label><?label archuleta2005?><mixed-citation>Archuleta, C. M., DeMott, P. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Ice nucleation by surrogates for atmospheric mineral dust and mineral dust/sulfate particles at cirrus temperatures, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2617–2634, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2617-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-2617-2005</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Barahona and Nenes(2007)</label><?label barahona07?><mixed-citation>Barahona, D. and Nenes, A.: Parameterization of cloud droplet formation in
large-scale models: Including effects of entrainment, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 112, D16206, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008473" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD008473</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Bergman et al.(2012)</label><?label bergman?><mixed-citation>Bergman, T., Kerminen, V.-M., Korhonen, H., Lehtinen, K. J., Makkonen, R., Arola, A., Mielonen, T., Romakkaniemi, S., Kulmala, M., and Kokkola, H.: Evaluation of the sectional aerosol microphysics module SALSA implementation in ECHAM5-HAM aerosol-climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 845–868, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-845-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-5-845-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Berrisford et al.(2011)</label><?label berrisford2011?><mixed-citation>
Berrisford, P., Dee, D., Poli, P., Brugge, R., Fielding, K., Fuentes, M., Kållberg, P., Kobayashi, S., Uppala, S., and Simmons, A.: The ERA-Interim
archive Version 2.0, Shinfield Park, Reading, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Bond et al.(2013)</label><?label bond2013?><mixed-citation>Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T.,
DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne,
S., Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M.,
Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K.,
Hopke, P. K., J<?pagebreak page6232?>acobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U.,
Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender,
C. S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific
assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jgrd.50171</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Bourgeois and Bey(2011)</label><?label bourgeois2011?><mixed-citation>Bourgeois, Q. and Bey, I.: Pollution transport efficiency toward the Arctic:
Sensitivity to aerosol scavenging and source regions, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D08213, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015096" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JD015096</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Brock et al.(2019)</label><?label brock2019?><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.bibx14"><label>Browse et al.(2012)</label><?label browse2012?><mixed-citation>Browse, J., Carslaw, K. S., Arnold, S. R., Pringle, K., and Boucher, O.: The scavenging processes controlling the seasonal cycle in Arctic sulphate and black carbon aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6775–6798, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6775-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-6775-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Chate et al.(2003)</label><?label chate2003?><mixed-citation>Chate, D., Rao, P., Naik, M., Momin, G., Safai, P., and Ali, K.: Scavenging of aerosols and their chemical species by rain, Atmos. Environ., 37,
2477–2484, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00162-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00162-6</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Chate et al.(2011)</label><?label chate2011?><mixed-citation>Chate, D., Murugavel, P., Ali, K., Tiwari, S., and Beig, G.: Below-cloud rain
scavenging of atmospheric aerosols for aerosol deposition models, Atmospheric
Research, 99, 528–536,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.12.010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.12.010</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Chen and Lamb(1994)</label><?label chen1994?><mixed-citation>Chen, J.-P. and Lamb, D.: Simulation of Cloud Microphysical and Chemical
Processes Using a Multicomponent Framework. Part I: Description of the
Microphysical Model, J. Atmosp. Sci., 51, 2613–2630,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1994)051&lt;2613:SOCMAC&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1994)051&lt;2613:SOCMAC&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Corbin et al.(2018)</label><?label corbin2018?><mixed-citation>Corbin, J. C., Pieber, S. M., Czech, H., Zanatta, M., Jakobi, G., Massabò, D.,
Orasche, J., El Haddad, I., Mensah, A. A., Stengel, B., Drinovec, L.,
Mocnik, G., Zimmermann, R., Prévôt, A. S. H., and Gysel, M.: Brown and
Black Carbon Emitted by a Marine Engine Operated on Heavy Fuel Oil and
Distillate Fuels: Optical Properties, Size Distributions, and Emission
Factors, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 6175–6195,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD027818" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2017JD027818</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Croft et al.(2009)</label><?label croft2009?><mixed-citation>roft, B., Lohmann, U., Martin, R. V., Stier, P., Wurzler, S., Feichter, J., Posselt, R., and Ferrachat, S.: Aerosol size-dependent below-cloud scavenging by rain and snow in the ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4653–4675, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4653-2009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-9-4653-2009</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Croft et~al.(2010)Croft, Lohmann, Martin, Stier, Wurzler, Feichter,
Hoose, Heikkil\"{a}, van Donkelaar, and Ferrachat}}?><label>Croft et al.(2010)Croft, Lohmann, Martin, Stier, Wurzler, Feichter,
Hoose, Heikkilä, van Donkelaar, and Ferrachat</label><?label croft2010?><mixed-citation>Croft, B., Lohmann, U., Martin, R. V., Stier, P., Wurzler, S., Feichter, J., Hoose, C., Heikkilä, U., van Donkelaar, A., and Ferrachat, S.: Influences of in-cloud aerosol scavenging parameterizations on aerosol concentrations and wet deposition in ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1511–1543, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1511-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-1511-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Croft et al.(2016)Croft, Martin, Leaitch, Tunved, Breider, D'Andrea,
and Pierce</label><?label croft2016?><mixed-citation>Croft, B., Martin, R. V., Leaitch, W. R., Tunved, P., Breider, T. J., D'Andrea, S. D., and Pierce, J. R.: Processes controlling the annual cycle of Arctic aerosol number and size distributions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3665–3682, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3665-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-3665-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{de~Bruine et~al.(2018)de~Bruine, Krol, van Noije, Le~Sager, and
R\"{o}ckmann}}?><label>de Bruine et al.(2018)de Bruine, Krol, van Noije, Le Sager, and
Röckmann</label><?label bruine2018?><mixed-citation>de Bruine, M., Krol, M., van Noije, T., Le Sager, P., and Röckmann, T.: The impact of precipitation evaporation on the atmospheric aerosol distribution in EC-Earth v3.2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1443–1465, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1443-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-1443-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Dentener et al.(2006)</label><?label dentener2006?><mixed-citation>Dentener, F., Kinne, S., Bond, T., Boucher, O., Cofala, J., Generoso, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Hoelzemann, J. J., Ito, A., Marelli, L., Penner, J. E., Putaud, J.-P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., van der Werf, G. R., and Wilson, J.: Emissions of primary aerosol and precursor gases in the years 2000 and 1750 prescribed data-sets for AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4321–4344, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4321-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-4321-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Easter et al.(2004)</label><?label easter2004?><mixed-citation>Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zhang, Y., Saylor, R. D., Chapman, E. G.,
Laulainen, N. S., Abdul-Razzak, H., Leung, L. R., Bian, X., and Zaveri,
R. A.: MIRAGE: Model description and evaluation of aerosols and trace gases,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D20210,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004571" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD004571</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Eckhardt et al.(2015)</label><?label eckhardt2015?><mixed-citation>Eckhardt, S., Quennehen, B., Olivié, D. J. L., Berntsen, T. K., Cherian, R., Christensen, J. H., Collins, W., Crepinsek, S., Daskalakis, N., Flanner, M., Herber, A., Heyes, C., Hodnebrog, Ø., Huang, L., Kanakidou, M., Klimont, Z., Langner, J., Law, K. S., Lund, M. T., Mahmood, R., Massling, A., Myriokefalitakis, S., Nielsen, I. E., Nøjgaard, J. K., Quaas, J., Quinn, P. K., Raut, J.-C., Rumbold, S. T., Schulz, M., Sharma, S., Skeie, R. B., Skov, H., Uttal, T., von Salzen, K., and Stohl, A.: Current model capabilities for simulating black carbon and sulfate concentrations in the Arctic atmosphere: a multi-model evaluation using a comprehensive measurement data set, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9413–9433, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9413-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-9413-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Feichter et al.(1996)</label><?label feichter1996?><mixed-citation>Feichter, J., Kjellström, E., Rodhe, H., Dentener, F., Lelieveldi, J., and
Roelofs, G.-J.: Simulation of the tropospheric sulfur cycle in a global
climate model, Atmos. Environ., 30, 1693–1707,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00394-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/1352-2310(95)00394-0</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Flossmann and Wobrock(2010)</label><?label flossmann2010?><mixed-citation>Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: A review of our understanding of the
aerosol–cloud interaction from the perspective of a bin resolved cloud
scale modelling, Atmos. Res., 97, 478–497,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Garrett et al.(2010)</label><?label garret2010?><mixed-citation>Garrett, T., Zhao, C., and Novelli, P.: Assessing the relative contributions of transport efficiency and scavenging to seasonal variability in Arctic
aerosol, Tellus B, 62, 190–196,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00453.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00453.x</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Gli{\ss} et~al.(2020)}}?><label>Gliß et al.(2020)</label><?label jonas2020?><mixed-citation>Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: Multi-model evaluation of aerosol optical properties in the AeroCom phase III Control experiment, using ground and space based columnar observations from AERONET, MODIS, AATSR and a merged satellite product as well as surface in-situ observations from GAW sites, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-1214" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-2019-1214</ext-link>, in review, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>HAMMOZ consortium(2012)</label><?label hammozlic?><mixed-citation>HAMMOZ consortium: HAMMOZ Software Licence Agreement, available at:
<uri>https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/attachments/291/License_ECHAM-HAMMOZ_June2012.pdf</uri>,
last access: 29 June 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6233?><ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>HAMMOZ consortium(2019a)</label><?label hammozdataa?><mixed-citation>HAMMOZ consortium: ECHAM-HAMMOZ model data, available at:
<uri>https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz/repository/show/echam6-hammoz/branches/fmi/fmi_trunk</uri>, last access: 8 March 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>HAMMOZ consortium(2019b)</label><?label hammozdatab?><mixed-citation>HAMMOZ consortium: ECHAM-HAMMOZ input data, available at:
<uri>https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz</uri>, last access: 8 March
2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Haywood and Shine(1997)</label><?label haywood1997?><mixed-citation>Haywood, J. M. and Shine, K. P.: Multi-spectral calculations of the direct
radiative forcing of tropospheric sulphate and soot aerosols using a column
model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 123,
1907–1930, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712354307" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/qj.49712354307</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>Hobbs(1993)</label><?label hobbs1995?><mixed-citation>
Hobbs, P.: Aerosol-cloud-climate interactions, vol. 54, Academic Press, San
Diego, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Holopainen et al.(2020)</label><?label holopainen2020?><mixed-citation>Holopainen, E., Kokkola, H., Laakso, A., and Kühn, T.: In-cloud scavenging
scheme for aerosol modules 2019–2020 data, Eemeli Holopainen
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.23729/301df277-8147-4700-8652-ca491f2b58a6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.23729/301df277-8147-4700-8652-ca491f2b58a6</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Horowitz et al.(2003)</label><?label horowitz?><mixed-citation>Horowitz, L. W., Walters, S., Mauzerall, D. L., Emmons, L. K., Rasch, P. J.,
Granier, C., Tie, X., Lamarque, J.-F., Schultz, M., and Brasseur, G. P.: A
global simulation of tropospheric ozone and related tracers: Description and
evaluation of MOZART, version 2, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4784, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002853" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2002JD002853</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>IPCC(2014)</label><?label ipcc2014?><mixed-citation>IPCC: Climate Change 2013 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I
Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 659–740,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Kipling et al.(2016)</label><?label kipling2016?><mixed-citation>Kipling, Z., Stier, P., Johnson, C. E., Mann, G. W., Bellouin, N., Bauer, S. E., Bergman, T., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Ghan, S. J., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Liu, X., Luo, G., van Noije, T., Pringle, K. J., von Salzen, K., Schulz, M., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Zhang, K.: What controls the vertical distribution of aerosol? Relationships between process sensitivity in HadGEM3–UKCA and inter-model variation from AeroCom Phase II, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2221–2241, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2221-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-2221-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{K\"{o}hler(1936)}}?><label>Köhler(1936)</label><?label kohler36?><mixed-citation>Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets, Trans.
Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1039/TF9363201152</ext-link>, 1936.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Kokkola et al.(2008)</label><?label kokkolainsol?><mixed-citation>Kokkola, H., Vesterinen, M., Anttila, T., Laaksonen, A., and Lehtinen, K. E. J.: Technical note: Analytical formulae for the critical supersaturations and droplet diameters of CCN containing insoluble material, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1985–1988, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1985-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-8-1985-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><label>Kokkola et al.(2018a)</label><?label kokkola2018?><mixed-citation>Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Laakso, A., Bergman, T., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Mielonen, T., Arola, A., Stadtler, S., Korhonen, H., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Tegen, I., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Schultz, M. G., Bey, I., Stier, P., Daskalakis, N., Heald, C. L., and Romakkaniemi, S.: SALSA2.0: The sectional aerosol module of the aerosol–chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3.0-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3833–3863, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3833-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-3833-2018</ext-link>, 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><label>Kokkola et al.(2018b)</label><?label kokkola2018SALSA?><mixed-citation>Kokkola, H., Tonttila, J., Romakkaniemi, S., Bergman, T., Laakso, A., Kühn,
T., Mielonen, T., Kudzotsa, I., and Raatikainen, T.: SALSA-standalone 2.0, Zenodo,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1251669" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.1251669</ext-link>, 2018b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><label>Korhonen et al.(2008)</label><?label korhonen2008?><mixed-citation>Korhonen, H., Carslaw, K. S., Spracklen, D. V., Ridley, D. A., and Ström, J.:
A global model study of processes controlling aerosol size distributions in
the Arctic spring and summer, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
113, D08211, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009114" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007JD009114</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><label>Korolev et al.(2011)</label><?label korolev2011?><mixed-citation>Korolev, A., Emery, E., Strapp, J., Cober, S., Isaac, G., Wasey, M., and
Marcotte, D.: Small Ice Particles in Tropospheric Clouds: Fact or Artifact?
Airborne Icing Instrumentation Evaluation Experiment, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 967–973, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010BAMS3141.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010BAMS3141.1</ext-link>,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx45"><label>Krecl et al.(2017)</label><?label krecl2017?><mixed-citation>Krecl, P., Johansson, C., Targino, A. C., Ström, J., and Burman, L.: Trends in black carbon and size-resolved particle number concentrations and vehicle
emission factors under real-world conditions, Atmos. Environ., 165,
155–168, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.036</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><label>Kristiansen et al.(2016)</label><?label kristiansen2016?><mixed-citation>Kristiansen, N. I., Stohl, A., Olivié, D. J. L., Croft, B., Søvde, O. A., Klein, H., Christoudias, T., Kunkel, D., Leadbetter, S. J., Lee, Y. H., Zhang, K., Tsigaridis, K., Bergman, T., Evangeliou, N., Wang, H., Ma, P.-L., Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Liu, X., Pitari, G., Di Genova, G., Zhao, S. Y., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Faluvegi, G. S., Kokkola, H., Martin, R. V., Pierce, J. R., Schulz, M., Shindell, D., Tost, H., and Zhang, H.: Evaluation of observed and modelled aerosol lifetimes using radioactive tracers of opportunity and an ensemble of 19 global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3525–3561, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3525-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-3525-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><label>Kurppa et al.(2019)</label><?label kurppa2019?><mixed-citation>Kurppa, M., Hellsten, A., Roldin, P., Kokkola, H., Tonttila, J., Auvinen, M., Kent, C., Kumar, P., Maronga, B., and Järvi, L.: Implementation of the sectional aerosol module SALSA2.0 into the PALM model system 6.0: model development and first evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1403–1422, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1403-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-1403-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><label>Ladino et al.(2011)</label><?label ladino2011?><mixed-citation>Ladino, L., Stetzer, O., Hattendorf, B., Günther, D., Croft, B., and Lohmann,
U.: Experimental Study of Collection Efficiencies between Submicron Aerosols
and Cloud Droplets, J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 1853–1864,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-012.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JAS-D-11-012.1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><label>Lamarque et al.(2010)</label><?label lamarque2010?><mixed-citation>Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><label>Lohmann(2002)</label><?label lohmann2002?><mixed-citation>Lohmann, U.: Possible Aerosol Effects on Ice Clouds via Contact Nucleation, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 647–656,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)059&lt;0647:PAEOIC&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(2001)059&lt;0647:PAEOIC&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx51"><label>Lohmann et al.(2007)</label><?label lohmann2007?><mixed-citation>Lohmann, U., Stier, P., Hoose, C., Ferrachat, S., Kloster, S., Roeckner, E., and Zhang, J.: Cloud microphysics and aerosol indirect effects in the global climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3425–3446, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3425-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-3425-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><label>Lund et al.(2018)</label><?label lund2018?><mixed-citation>Lund, M. T., Samset, B. H., Skeie, R. B., Watson-Parris, D., Katich, J. M.,
Schwarz, J. P., and Weinzierl, B.: Short Black Carbon lifetime inferred from
a global set of aircraft observations, Clim. Atmos. Sci.,
1, 2397–3722, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0040-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41612-018-0040-x</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6234?><ref id="bib1.bibx53"><label>Marcolli et al.(2007)</label><?label marcolli2007?><mixed-citation>Marcolli, C., Gedamke, S., Peter, T., and Zobrist, B.: Efficiency of immersion mode ice nucleation on surrogates of mineral dust, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5081–5091, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5081-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-5081-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx54"><label>Paasonen et al.(2016)</label><?label paasonen2016?><mixed-citation>Paasonen, P., Kupiainen, K., Klimont, Z., Visschedijk, A., Denier van der Gon, H. A. C., and Amann, M.: Continental anthropogenic primary particle number emissions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 6823–6840, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-6823-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-16-6823-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx55"><label>Pruppacher and Klett(1997)</label><?label pruppacher1997?><mixed-citation>
Pruppacher, H. R. and Klett, J. D.: Microphysics of clouds and precipitation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx56"><label>Rasch et al.(2000)</label><?label rasch2000?><mixed-citation>Rasch, P. J., Feitcher, J., Law, J., Mahowald, N., Penner, J., Benkovitz, C., Genthon, C., Giannakopoulos, C., Kasibhatla, P.,
Koch, D., Levy, H., Maki, T., Prather, M., Roberts, D. L., Roelofs, G.-J.,
Stevenson, D., Stockwell, Z., Taguchi, S., Kritz, M., Chipperfield, M., Baldocchi,
D., McMurry, P., Barrie, L., Balkanski, Y., Chatfield, R., Kjellstrom, E.,
Lawrence, M., Lee, H. N., Lelieveld, J., Noone, K. J., Seinfeld, J., Stenchikov, G., Schwartz, S., Walcek, C., and Williamson, D.: A comparison of scavenging
and deposition processes in global models: results from the WCRP Cambridge
Workshop of 1995, Tellus B, 52, 1025–1056, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00980.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00980.x</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx57"><label>Samset et al.(2013)</label><?label samset2013?><mixed-citation>Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Penner, J. E., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Zhang, K.: Black carbon vertical profiles strongly affect its radiative forcing uncertainty, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2423–2434, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2423-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-2423-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx58"><label>Schultz et al.(2018)</label><?label schultz2018?><mixed-citation>Schultz, M. G., Stadtler, S., Schröder, S., Taraborrelli, D., Franco, B., Krefting, J., Henrot, A., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Wahl, S., Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Rast, S., Schmidt, H., Stier, P., Kinnison, D., Tyndall, G. S., Orlando, J. J., and Wespes, C.: The chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1695–1723, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1695-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-1695-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx59"><label>Seinfeld and Pandis(2006)</label><?label SP?><mixed-citation>
Seinfeld, J. H. and Pandis, S. N.: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From air pollution to climate change, 2nd edition, vol. 2, John Wiley &amp; Sons,
Hoboken, New Jersey, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx60"><label>Seland et al.(2008)</label><?label seland2008?><mixed-citation>Seland, O., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., and Storelvmo, T.: Aerosol-climate
interactions in the CAM-Oslo atmospheric GCM and investigation of associated
basic shortcomings, Tellus A, 60, 459–491,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.2008.00318.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0870.2008.00318.x</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx61"><label>Sharma et al.(2013)</label><?label sharma2013?><mixed-citation>Sharma, S., Ishizawa, M., Chan, D., Lavoué, D., Andrews, E., Eleftheriadis,
K., and Maksyutov, S.: 16-year simulation of Arctic black carbon: Transport,
source contribution, and sensitivity analysis on deposition, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 943–964, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017774" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD017774</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx62"><label>Simmons et al.(1989)</label><?label simmons1989?><mixed-citation>Simmons, A. J., Burridge, D. M., Jarraud, M., Girard, C., and Wergen, W.: The
ECMWF medium-range prediction models development of the numerical
formulations and the impact of increased resolution, Meteorol.
Atmos. Phys., 40, 28–60, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01027467" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/BF01027467</ext-link>, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx63"><label>Slinn and Hales(1971)</label><?label slinn1971?><mixed-citation>Slinn, W. G. N. and Hales, J. M.: A Reevaluation of the Role of Thermophoresis as a Mechanism of In- and Below-Cloud Scavenging, J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 1465–1471, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028&lt;1465:AROTRO&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028&lt;1465:AROTRO&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1971.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx64"><label>Stier et al.(2005)</label><?label stier?><mixed-citation>Stier, P., Feichter, J., Kinne, S., Kloster, S., Vignati, E., Wilson, J., Ganzeveld, L., Tegen, I., Werner, M., Balkanski, Y., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Minikin, A., and Petzold, A.: The aerosol-climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 1125–1156, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1125-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-1125-2005</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx65"><label>Stone et al.(2014)</label><?label stone2014?><mixed-citation>Stone, R., Sharma, S., Herber, A., Eleftheriadis, K., and Nelson, D.: A
characterization of Arctic aerosols on the basis of aerosol optical depth and
black carbon measurements, Elementa, 2,
000027, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000027" ext-link-type="DOI">10.12952/journal.elementa.000027</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx66"><label>Tabazadeh et al.(2002)</label><?label tabazadeh2002?><mixed-citation>Tabazadeh, A., Djikaev, Y. S., and Reiss, H.: Surface crystallization of
supercooled water in clouds, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99,
15873–15878, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.252640699" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1073/pnas.252640699</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx67"><label>Tegen et al.(2019)</label><?label tegen2019?><mixed-citation>Tegen, I., Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Bey, I., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stanelle, T., Schmidt, H., Rast, S., Kokkola, H., Schultz, M., Schroeder, S., Daskalakis, N., Barthel, S., Heinold, B., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 1: Aerosol evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1643–1677, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx68"><label>Textor et al.(2006)</label><?label textor2006?><mixed-citation>Textor, C., Schulz, M., Guibert, S., Kinne, S., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T., Berglen, T., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Feichter, H., Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Grini, A., Hendricks, J., Horowitz, L., Huang, P., Isaksen, I., Iversen, I., Kloster, S., Koch, D., Kirkevåg, A., Kristjansson, J. E., Krol, M., Lauer, A., Lamarque, J. F., Liu, X., Montanaro, V., Myhre, G., Penner, J., Pitari, G., Reddy, S., Seland, Ø., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Tie, X.: Analysis and quantification of the diversities of aerosol life cycles within AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1777–1813, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx69"><label>Tissari et al.(2008)</label><?label tissari2008?><mixed-citation>Tissari, J., Lyyränen, J., Hytönen, K., Sippula, O., Tapper, U., Frey, A.,
Saarnio, K., Pennanen, A., Hillamo, R., Salonen, R., Hirvonen, M.-R., and
Jokiniemi, J.: Fine particle and gaseous emissions from normal and
smouldering wood combustion in a conventional masonry heater, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 7862–7873,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.019</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx70"><label>Tonttila et al.(2017)</label><?label tonttila2017?><mixed-citation>Tonttila, J., Maalick, Z., Raatikainen, T., Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., and Romakkaniemi, S.: UCLALES–SALSA v1.0: a large-eddy model with interactive sectional microphysics for aerosol, clouds and precipitation, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 169–188, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-169-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-10-169-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx71"><label>Twomey(1991)</label><?label twomey1991?><mixed-citation>
Twomey, S.: Aerosol, clouds, and radiation., vol. 25A, Atmospheric
Environment, The University of Arizona, Tuczon, AZ, USA, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx72"><label>van Vuuren et al.(2011)</label><?label vanvuuren2011?><mixed-citation>van Vuuren, D. P., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K., Thomson, A., Hibbard,
K., Hurtt, G. C., Kram, T., Krey, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Masui, T.,
Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., Smith, S. J., and Rose, S. K.: The
representative concentration pathways: an overview, Clim. Chang., 109,
5–31, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx73"><label>Wang et al.(2013)</label><?label wang2013?><mixed-citation>Wang, H., Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Wang, M., Liu, X., Ghan, S. J., Qian, Y., Yoon, J.-H., Ma, P.-L., and Vinoj, V.: Sensitivity of remote aerosol distributions to representation of cloud–aerosol interactions in a global climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 765–782, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-765-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-6-765-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page6235?><ref id="bib1.bibx74"><label>Wang et al.(1978)</label><?label wang1978?><mixed-citation>Wang, P., Grover, S., and Pruppacher, H.: On the Effect of Electric Charges on the Scavenging of Aerosol Particles by Clouds and Small Raindrops, J. Atmos. Sci., 35, 1735–1743,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1978)035&lt;1735:OTEOEC&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0469(1978)035&lt;1735:OTEOEC&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx75"><label>Watson-Parris et al.(2016)</label><?label watson2016?><mixed-citation>Watson-Parris, D., Schutgens, N., Cook, N., Kipling, Z., Kershaw, P., Gryspeerdt, E., Lawrence, B., and Stier, P.: Community Intercomparison Suite (CIS) v1.4.0: a tool for intercomparing models and observations, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3093–3110, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx76"><label>Watson-Parris et al.(2019)</label><?label watson2019?><mixed-citation>Watson-Parris, D., Schutgens, N., Reddington, C., Pringle, K. J., Liu, D., Allan, J. D., Coe, H., Carslaw, K. S., and Stier, P.: In situ constraints on the vertical distribution of global aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 11765–11790, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx77"><label>Wofsy et al.(2018)</label><?label atom2018?><mixed-citation>Wofsy, S., Afshar, S., Allen, H., Apel, E., Asher, E., Barletta, B., Bent, J.,
Bian, H., Biggs, B., Blake, D., Blake, N., Bourgeois, I., Brock, C., Brune,
W., Budney, J., Bui, T., Butler, A., Campuzano-Jost, P., Chang, C., Chin, M.,
Commane, R., Correa, G., Crounse, J., Cullis, P., Daube, B., Day, D.,
Dean-Day, J., Dibb, J., Digangi, J., Diskin, G., Dollner, M., Elkins, J.,
Erdesz, F., Fiore, A., Flynn, C., Froyd, K., Gesler, D., Hall, S., Hanisco,
T., Hannun, R., Hills, A., Hintsa, E., Hoffman, A., Hornbrook, R., Huey, L.,
Hughes, S., Jimenez, J., Johnson, B., Katich, J., Keeling, R., Kim, M., Kupc,
A., Lait, L., Lamarque, J.-F., Liu, J., McKain, K., McLaughling, R.,
Meinardi, S., Miller, D., Montzka, S., Moore, F., Morgan, E., Murphy, D.,
Murray, L., Nault, B., Neuman, J., Newman, P., Nicely, J., Pan, X.,
Paplawsky, W., Peischl, J., Prather, M., Price, D., Ray, E., Reeves, J.,
Richardson, M., Rollins, A., Rosenlof, K., Ryerson, T., Scheuer, E., Schill,
G., Schroder, J., Schwarz, J., St.Clair, J., Steenrod, S., Stephens, B.,
Strode, S., Sweeney, C., Tanner, D., Teng, A., Thames, A., Thompson, C.,
Ullmann, K., Veres, P., Vizenor, N., Wagner, N., Watt, A., Weber, R.,
Weinzierl, B., Wennberg, P., Williamson, C., Wilson, J., Wolfe, G., Woods,
C., and Zeng, L.: ATom: Merged Atmospheric Chemistry, Trace Gases, and
Aerosols, ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx78"><label>Zhang et al.(2019)</label><?label zhang2019?><mixed-citation>Zhang, X., Chen, X., and Wang, J.: A number-based inventory of size-resolved
black carbon particle emissions by global civil aviation, Nat.
Commun., 10, 534, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08491-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-019-08491-9</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx79"><label>Zikova and Zdimal(2016)</label><?label zikova2016?><mixed-citation>Zikova, N. and Zdimal, V.: Precipitation scavenging of aerosol particles at a
rural site in the Czech Republic, Tellus B, 68, 27343, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v68.27343" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v68.27343</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>In-cloud scavenging scheme for sectional aerosol modules – implementation in the framework of the Sectional Aerosol module for Large Scale Applications version 2.0 (SALSA2.0) global aerosol module</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>In this study we introduce an in-cloud wet deposition scheme for liquid and ice phase clouds for global aerosol–climate models which use a size-segregated aerosol description. For in-cloud nucleation scavenging, the scheme uses cloud droplet activation and ice nucleation rates obtained from the host model. For in-cloud impaction scavenging, we used a method where the removal rate depends on the wet aerosol size and cloud droplet radii. We used the latest release version of ECHAM-HAMMOZ (ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0) with the Sectional Aerosol module for Large Scale Applications version 2.0 (SALSA) microphysics package to test and compare our scheme. The scheme was compared to a scheme that uses fixed scavenging coefficients. The comparison included vertical profiles and mass and number distributions of wet deposition fluxes of different aerosol compounds and for different latitude bands. Using the scheme presented here, mass concentrations for black carbon, organic carbon, sulfate, and the number concentration of particles with diameters larger than 100&thinsp;nm are higher than using fixed scavenging coefficients, with the largest differences in the vertical profiles in the Arctic. On the other hand, the number concentrations of particles smaller than 100&thinsp;nm in diameter show a decrease, especially in the Arctic region. These results could indicate that, compared to fixed scavenging coefficients, nucleation scavenging is less efficient, resulting in an increase in the number concentration of particles larger than 100&thinsp;nm. In addition, changes in rates of impaction scavenging and new particle formation (NPF) can be the main cause of reduction in the number concentrations of particles smaller than 100&thinsp;nm. Without further adjustments in the host model, our wet deposition scheme produced unrealistically high aerosol concentrations, especially at high altitudes. This also leads to a spuriously long lifetime of black carbon aerosol. To find a better setup for simulating aerosol vertical profiles and transport, sensitivity simulations were conducted where aerosol emission distribution and hygroscopicity were altered. Vertical profiles of aerosol species simulated with the scheme which uses fixed scavenging rates and the abovementioned sensitivity simulations were evaluated against vertical profiles from aircraft observations. The lifetimes of different aerosol compounds were also evaluated against the ensemble mean of models involved in the Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models (AEROCOM) project. The best comparison between the observations and the model was achieved with our wet deposition scheme when black carbon was emitted internally mixed with soluble compounds instead of keeping it externally mixed. This also produced atmospheric lifetimes for the other species which were comparable to the AEROCOM model means.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Abdul-Razzak and Ghan(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Abdul-Razzak, H. and Ghan, S.: A parameterization of aerosol activation. Part 3: Sectional representation, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 1–6,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000483" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD000483</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Albrecht(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
Albrecht, B. A.: Aerosols, Cloud Microphysics, and Fractional Cloudiness,
Science, 245, 1227–1230, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.245.4923.1227</a>, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>AMAP(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
AMAP: AMAP assessment 2015: Black carbon and ozone as Arctic climate forcers, vol. 7, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP),, Oslo, Norway, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Andersson et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Andersson, C., Bergström, R., Bennet, C., Robertson, L., Thomas, M., Korhonen, H., Lehtinen, K. E. J., and Kokkola, H.: MATCH-SALSA – Multi-scale Atmospheric Transport and CHemistry model coupled to the SALSA aerosol microphysics model – Part 1: Model description and evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 171–189, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-171-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-171-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Andronache(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Andronache, C.: Estimated variability of below-cloud aerosol removal by rainfall for observed aerosol size distributions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 3, 131–143, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-131-2003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-3-131-2003</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Andronache et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Andronache, C., Grönholm, T., Laakso, L., Phillips, V., and Venäläinen, A.: Scavenging of ultrafine particles by rainfall at a boreal site: observations and model estimations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4739–4754, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4739-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4739-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Archuleta et al.(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Archuleta, C. M., DeMott, P. J., and Kreidenweis, S. M.: Ice nucleation by surrogates for atmospheric mineral dust and mineral dust/sulfate particles at cirrus temperatures, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2617–2634, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2617-2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2617-2005</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Barahona and Nenes(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Barahona, D. and Nenes, A.: Parameterization of cloud droplet formation in
large-scale models: Including effects of entrainment, J. Geophys.
Res.-Atmos., 112, D16206, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008473" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008473</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Bergman et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Bergman, T., Kerminen, V.-M., Korhonen, H., Lehtinen, K. J., Makkonen, R., Arola, A., Mielonen, T., Romakkaniemi, S., Kulmala, M., and Kokkola, H.: Evaluation of the sectional aerosol microphysics module SALSA implementation in ECHAM5-HAM aerosol-climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 845–868, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-845-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-845-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Berrisford et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Berrisford, P., Dee, D., Poli, P., Brugge, R., Fielding, K., Fuentes, M., Kållberg, P., Kobayashi, S., Uppala, S., and Simmons, A.: The ERA-Interim
archive Version 2.0, Shinfield Park, Reading, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Bond et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Bond, T. C., Doherty, S. J., Fahey, D. W., Forster, P. M., Berntsen, T.,
DeAngelo, B. J., Flanner, M. G., Ghan, S., Kärcher, B., Koch, D., Kinne,
S., Kondo, Y., Quinn, P. K., Sarofim, M. C., Schultz, M. G., Schulz, M.,
Venkataraman, C., Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Bellouin, N., Guttikunda, S. K.,
Hopke, P. K., Jacobson, M. Z., Kaiser, J. W., Klimont, Z., Lohmann, U.,
Schwarz, J. P., Shindell, D., Storelvmo, T., Warren, S. G., and Zender,
C. S.: Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: A scientific
assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 5380–5552,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50171</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Bourgeois and Bey(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Bourgeois, Q. and Bey, I.: Pollution transport efficiency toward the Arctic:
Sensitivity to aerosol scavenging and source regions, J. Geophys.
Res., 116, D08213, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015096" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015096</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Brock et al.(2019)</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.bib14"><label>Browse et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Browse, J., Carslaw, K. S., Arnold, S. R., Pringle, K., and Boucher, O.: The scavenging processes controlling the seasonal cycle in Arctic sulphate and black carbon aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6775–6798, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6775-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6775-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Chate et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Chate, D., Rao, P., Naik, M., Momin, G., Safai, P., and Ali, K.: Scavenging of aerosols and their chemical species by rain, Atmos. Environ., 37,
2477–2484, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00162-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00162-6</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Chate et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Chate, D., Murugavel, P., Ali, K., Tiwari, S., and Beig, G.: Below-cloud rain
scavenging of atmospheric aerosols for aerosol deposition models, Atmospheric
Research, 99, 528–536,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.12.010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.12.010</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Chen and Lamb(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, J.-P. and Lamb, D.: Simulation of Cloud Microphysical and Chemical
Processes Using a Multicomponent Framework. Part I: Description of the
Microphysical Model, J. Atmosp. Sci., 51, 2613–2630,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1994)051&lt;2613:SOCMAC&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1994)051&lt;2613:SOCMAC&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Corbin et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Corbin, J. C., Pieber, S. M., Czech, H., Zanatta, M., Jakobi, G., Massabò, D.,
Orasche, J., El Haddad, I., Mensah, A. A., Stengel, B., Drinovec, L.,
Mocnik, G., Zimmermann, R., Prévôt, A. S. H., and Gysel, M.: Brown and
Black Carbon Emitted by a Marine Engine Operated on Heavy Fuel Oil and
Distillate Fuels: Optical Properties, Size Distributions, and Emission
Factors, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 6175–6195,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD027818" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD027818</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Croft et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
roft, B., Lohmann, U., Martin, R. V., Stier, P., Wurzler, S., Feichter, J., Posselt, R., and Ferrachat, S.: Aerosol size-dependent below-cloud scavenging by rain and snow in the ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 4653–4675, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4653-2009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-4653-2009</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Croft et al.(2010)Croft, Lohmann, Martin, Stier, Wurzler, Feichter,
Hoose, Heikkilä, van Donkelaar, and Ferrachat</label><mixed-citation>
Croft, B., Lohmann, U., Martin, R. V., Stier, P., Wurzler, S., Feichter, J., Hoose, C., Heikkilä, U., van Donkelaar, A., and Ferrachat, S.: Influences of in-cloud aerosol scavenging parameterizations on aerosol concentrations and wet deposition in ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 1511–1543, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1511-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-1511-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Croft et al.(2016)Croft, Martin, Leaitch, Tunved, Breider, D'Andrea,
and Pierce</label><mixed-citation>
Croft, B., Martin, R. V., Leaitch, W. R., Tunved, P., Breider, T. J., D'Andrea, S. D., and Pierce, J. R.: Processes controlling the annual cycle of Arctic aerosol number and size distributions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3665–3682, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3665-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3665-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>de Bruine et al.(2018)de Bruine, Krol, van Noije, Le Sager, and
Röckmann</label><mixed-citation>
de Bruine, M., Krol, M., van Noije, T., Le Sager, P., and Röckmann, T.: The impact of precipitation evaporation on the atmospheric aerosol distribution in EC-Earth v3.2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1443–1465, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1443-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1443-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Dentener et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Dentener, F., Kinne, S., Bond, T., Boucher, O., Cofala, J., Generoso, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Hoelzemann, J. J., Ito, A., Marelli, L., Penner, J. E., Putaud, J.-P., Textor, C., Schulz, M., van der Werf, G. R., and Wilson, J.: Emissions of primary aerosol and precursor gases in the years 2000 and 1750 prescribed data-sets for AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 4321–4344, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4321-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-4321-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Easter et al.(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zhang, Y., Saylor, R. D., Chapman, E. G.,
Laulainen, N. S., Abdul-Razzak, H., Leung, L. R., Bian, X., and Zaveri,
R. A.: MIRAGE: Model description and evaluation of aerosols and trace gases,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D20210,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004571" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004571</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Eckhardt et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Eckhardt, S., Quennehen, B., Olivié, D. J. L., Berntsen, T. K., Cherian, R., Christensen, J. H., Collins, W., Crepinsek, S., Daskalakis, N., Flanner, M., Herber, A., Heyes, C., Hodnebrog, Ø., Huang, L., Kanakidou, M., Klimont, Z., Langner, J., Law, K. S., Lund, M. T., Mahmood, R., Massling, A., Myriokefalitakis, S., Nielsen, I. E., Nøjgaard, J. K., Quaas, J., Quinn, P. K., Raut, J.-C., Rumbold, S. T., Schulz, M., Sharma, S., Skeie, R. B., Skov, H., Uttal, T., von Salzen, K., and Stohl, A.: Current model capabilities for simulating black carbon and sulfate concentrations in the Arctic atmosphere: a multi-model evaluation using a comprehensive measurement data set, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 9413–9433, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9413-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-9413-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Feichter et al.(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Feichter, J., Kjellström, E., Rodhe, H., Dentener, F., Lelieveldi, J., and
Roelofs, G.-J.: Simulation of the tropospheric sulfur cycle in a global
climate model, Atmos. Environ., 30, 1693–1707,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00394-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00394-0</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Flossmann and Wobrock(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Flossmann, A. I. and Wobrock, W.: A review of our understanding of the
aerosol–cloud interaction from the perspective of a bin resolved cloud
scale modelling, Atmos. Res., 97, 478–497,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.05.008</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Garrett et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Garrett, T., Zhao, C., and Novelli, P.: Assessing the relative contributions of transport efficiency and scavenging to seasonal variability in Arctic
aerosol, Tellus B, 62, 190–196,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00453.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00453.x</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Gliß et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Gliß, J., Mortier, A., Schulz, M., Andrews, E., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Benedictow, A. M. K., Bian, H., Checa-Garcia, R., Chin, M., Ginoux, P., Griesfeller, J. J., Heckel, A., Kipling, Z., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Laj, P., Le Sager, P., Lund, M. T., Lund Myhre, C., Matsui, H., Myhre, G., Neubauer, D., van Noije, T., North, P., Olivié, D. J. L., Sogacheva, L., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Tsyro, S. G.: Multi-model evaluation of aerosol optical properties in the AeroCom phase III Control experiment, using ground and space based columnar observations from AERONET, MODIS, AATSR and a merged satellite product as well as surface in-situ observations from GAW sites, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-1214" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2019-1214</a>, in review, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>HAMMOZ consortium(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
HAMMOZ consortium: HAMMOZ Software Licence Agreement, available at:
<a href="https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/attachments/291/License_ECHAM-HAMMOZ_June2012.pdf" target="_blank"/>,
last access: 29 June 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>HAMMOZ consortium(2019a)</label><mixed-citation>
HAMMOZ consortium: ECHAM-HAMMOZ model data, available at:
<a href="https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz/repository/show/echam6-hammoz/branches/fmi/fmi_trunk" target="_blank"/>, last access: 8 March 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>HAMMOZ consortium(2019b)</label><mixed-citation>
HAMMOZ consortium: ECHAM-HAMMOZ input data, available at:
<a href="https://redmine.hammoz.ethz.ch/projects/hammoz" target="_blank"/>, last access: 8 March
2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Haywood and Shine(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Haywood, J. M. and Shine, K. P.: Multi-spectral calculations of the direct
radiative forcing of tropospheric sulphate and soot aerosols using a column
model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 123,
1907–1930, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712354307" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49712354307</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Hobbs(1993)</label><mixed-citation>
Hobbs, P.: Aerosol-cloud-climate interactions, vol. 54, Academic Press, San
Diego, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Holopainen et al.(2020)</label><mixed-citation>
Holopainen, E., Kokkola, H., Laakso, A., and Kühn, T.: In-cloud scavenging
scheme for aerosol modules 2019–2020 data, Eemeli Holopainen
<a href="https://doi.org/10.23729/301df277-8147-4700-8652-ca491f2b58a6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.23729/301df277-8147-4700-8652-ca491f2b58a6</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Horowitz et al.(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Horowitz, L. W., Walters, S., Mauzerall, D. L., Emmons, L. K., Rasch, P. J.,
Granier, C., Tie, X., Lamarque, J.-F., Schultz, M., and Brasseur, G. P.: A
global simulation of tropospheric ozone and related tracers: Description and
evaluation of MOZART, version 2, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 108, 4784, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002853" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JD002853</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>IPCC(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
IPCC: Climate Change 2013 – The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I
Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 659–740,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.018</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Kipling et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Kipling, Z., Stier, P., Johnson, C. E., Mann, G. W., Bellouin, N., Bauer, S. E., Bergman, T., Chin, M., Diehl, T., Ghan, S. J., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Kokkola, H., Liu, X., Luo, G., van Noije, T., Pringle, K. J., von Salzen, K., Schulz, M., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Zhang, K.: What controls the vertical distribution of aerosol? Relationships between process sensitivity in HadGEM3–UKCA and inter-model variation from AeroCom Phase II, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 2221–2241, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2221-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-2221-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Köhler(1936)</label><mixed-citation>
Köhler, H.: The nucleus in and the growth of hygroscopic droplets, Trans.
Faraday Soc., 32, 1152–1161, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1039/TF9363201152</a>, 1936.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Kokkola et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Kokkola, H., Vesterinen, M., Anttila, T., Laaksonen, A., and Lehtinen, K. E. J.: Technical note: Analytical formulae for the critical supersaturations and droplet diameters of CCN containing insoluble material, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1985–1988, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1985-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-1985-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Kokkola et al.(2018a)</label><mixed-citation>
Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Laakso, A., Bergman, T., Lehtinen, K. E. J., Mielonen, T., Arola, A., Stadtler, S., Korhonen, H., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Tegen, I., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Schultz, M. G., Bey, I., Stier, P., Daskalakis, N., Heald, C. L., and Romakkaniemi, S.: SALSA2.0: The sectional aerosol module of the aerosol–chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3.0-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3833–3863, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3833-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3833-2018</a>, 2018a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>Kokkola et al.(2018b)</label><mixed-citation>
Kokkola, H., Tonttila, J., Romakkaniemi, S., Bergman, T., Laakso, A., Kühn,
T., Mielonen, T., Kudzotsa, I., and Raatikainen, T.: SALSA-standalone 2.0, Zenodo,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1251669" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1251669</a>, 2018b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Korhonen et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Korhonen, H., Carslaw, K. S., Spracklen, D. V., Ridley, D. A., and Ström, J.:
A global model study of processes controlling aerosol size distributions in
the Arctic spring and summer, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos.,
113, D08211, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009114" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009114</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Korolev et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Korolev, A., Emery, E., Strapp, J., Cober, S., Isaac, G., Wasey, M., and
Marcotte, D.: Small Ice Particles in Tropospheric Clouds: Fact or Artifact?
Airborne Icing Instrumentation Evaluation Experiment, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 92, 967–973, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010BAMS3141.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010BAMS3141.1</a>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>Krecl et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Krecl, P., Johansson, C., Targino, A. C., Ström, J., and Burman, L.: Trends in black carbon and size-resolved particle number concentrations and vehicle
emission factors under real-world conditions, Atmos. Environ., 165,
155–168, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.036</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Kristiansen et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Kristiansen, N. I., Stohl, A., Olivié, D. J. L., Croft, B., Søvde, O. A., Klein, H., Christoudias, T., Kunkel, D., Leadbetter, S. J., Lee, Y. H., Zhang, K., Tsigaridis, K., Bergman, T., Evangeliou, N., Wang, H., Ma, P.-L., Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Liu, X., Pitari, G., Di Genova, G., Zhao, S. Y., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S. E., Faluvegi, G. S., Kokkola, H., Martin, R. V., Pierce, J. R., Schulz, M., Shindell, D., Tost, H., and Zhang, H.: Evaluation of observed and modelled aerosol lifetimes using radioactive tracers of opportunity and an ensemble of 19 global models, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 3525–3561, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3525-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-3525-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Kurppa et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Kurppa, M., Hellsten, A., Roldin, P., Kokkola, H., Tonttila, J., Auvinen, M., Kent, C., Kumar, P., Maronga, B., and Järvi, L.: Implementation of the sectional aerosol module SALSA2.0 into the PALM model system 6.0: model development and first evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1403–1422, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1403-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1403-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>Ladino et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Ladino, L., Stetzer, O., Hattendorf, B., Günther, D., Croft, B., and Lohmann,
U.: Experimental Study of Collection Efficiencies between Submicron Aerosols
and Cloud Droplets, J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 1853–1864,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-012.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-012.1</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>Lamarque et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>Lohmann(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Lohmann, U.: Possible Aerosol Effects on Ice Clouds via Contact Nucleation, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 647–656,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)059&lt;0647:PAEOIC&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)059&lt;0647:PAEOIC&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>Lohmann et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Lohmann, U., Stier, P., Hoose, C., Ferrachat, S., Kloster, S., Roeckner, E., and Zhang, J.: Cloud microphysics and aerosol indirect effects in the global climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 3425–3446, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3425-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3425-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Lund et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Lund, M. T., Samset, B. H., Skeie, R. B., Watson-Parris, D., Katich, J. M.,
Schwarz, J. P., and Weinzierl, B.: Short Black Carbon lifetime inferred from
a global set of aircraft observations, Clim. Atmos. Sci.,
1, 2397–3722, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0040-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0040-x</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>Marcolli et al.(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Marcolli, C., Gedamke, S., Peter, T., and Zobrist, B.: Efficiency of immersion mode ice nucleation on surrogates of mineral dust, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7, 5081–5091, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5081-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-5081-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>Paasonen et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Paasonen, P., Kupiainen, K., Klimont, Z., Visschedijk, A., Denier van der Gon, H. A. C., and Amann, M.: Continental anthropogenic primary particle number emissions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 6823–6840, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-6823-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-6823-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>Pruppacher and Klett(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Pruppacher, H. R. and Klett, J. D.: Microphysics of clouds and precipitation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>Rasch et al.(2000)</label><mixed-citation>
Rasch, P. J., Feitcher, J., Law, J., Mahowald, N., Penner, J., Benkovitz, C., Genthon, C., Giannakopoulos, C., Kasibhatla, P.,
Koch, D., Levy, H., Maki, T., Prather, M., Roberts, D. L., Roelofs, G.-J.,
Stevenson, D., Stockwell, Z., Taguchi, S., Kritz, M., Chipperfield, M., Baldocchi,
D., McMurry, P., Barrie, L., Balkanski, Y., Chatfield, R., Kjellstrom, E.,
Lawrence, M., Lee, H. N., Lelieveld, J., Noone, K. J., Seinfeld, J., Stenchikov, G., Schwartz, S., Walcek, C., and Williamson, D.: A comparison of scavenging
and deposition processes in global models: results from the WCRP Cambridge
Workshop of 1995, Tellus B, 52, 1025–1056, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00980.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0889.2000.00980.x</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>Samset et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Schulz, M., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T. K., Bian, H., Bellouin, N., Diehl, T., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Iversen, T., Kinne, S., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F., Lin, G., Liu, X., Penner, J. E., Seland, Ø., Skeie, R. B., Stier, P., Takemura, T., Tsigaridis, K., and Zhang, K.: Black carbon vertical profiles strongly affect its radiative forcing uncertainty, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 2423–2434, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2423-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-2423-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>Schultz et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Schultz, M. G., Stadtler, S., Schröder, S., Taraborrelli, D., Franco, B., Krefting, J., Henrot, A., Ferrachat, S., Lohmann, U., Neubauer, D., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Wahl, S., Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., Rast, S., Schmidt, H., Stier, P., Kinnison, D., Tyndall, G. S., Orlando, J. J., and Wespes, C.: The chemistry–climate model ECHAM6.3-HAM2.3-MOZ1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1695–1723, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1695-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1695-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>Seinfeld and Pandis(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Seinfeld, J. H. and Pandis, S. N.: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From air pollution to climate change, 2nd edition, vol. 2, John Wiley &amp; Sons,
Hoboken, New Jersey, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>Seland et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Seland, O., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., and Storelvmo, T.: Aerosol-climate
interactions in the CAM-Oslo atmospheric GCM and investigation of associated
basic shortcomings, Tellus A, 60, 459–491,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.2008.00318.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0870.2008.00318.x</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>Sharma et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Sharma, S., Ishizawa, M., Chan, D., Lavoué, D., Andrews, E., Eleftheriadis,
K., and Maksyutov, S.: 16-year simulation of Arctic black carbon: Transport,
source contribution, and sensitivity analysis on deposition, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 943–964, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017774" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017774</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>Simmons et al.(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
Simmons, A. J., Burridge, D. M., Jarraud, M., Girard, C., and Wergen, W.: The
ECMWF medium-range prediction models development of the numerical
formulations and the impact of increased resolution, Meteorol.
Atmos. Phys., 40, 28–60, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01027467" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01027467</a>, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>Slinn and Hales(1971)</label><mixed-citation>
Slinn, W. G. N. and Hales, J. M.: A Reevaluation of the Role of Thermophoresis as a Mechanism of In- and Below-Cloud Scavenging, J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 1465–1471, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028&lt;1465:AROTRO&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1971)028&lt;1465:AROTRO&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1971.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>Stier et al.(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Stier, P., Feichter, J., Kinne, S., Kloster, S., Vignati, E., Wilson, J., Ganzeveld, L., Tegen, I., Werner, M., Balkanski, Y., Schulz, M., Boucher, O., Minikin, A., and Petzold, A.: The aerosol-climate model ECHAM5-HAM, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 1125–1156, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1125-2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1125-2005</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>Stone et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Stone, R., Sharma, S., Herber, A., Eleftheriadis, K., and Nelson, D.: A
characterization of Arctic aerosols on the basis of aerosol optical depth and
black carbon measurements, Elementa, 2,
000027, <a href="https://doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000027" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000027</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>Tabazadeh et al.(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Tabazadeh, A., Djikaev, Y. S., and Reiss, H.: Surface crystallization of
supercooled water in clouds, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99,
15873–15878, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.252640699" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.252640699</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>Tegen et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Tegen, I., Neubauer, D., Ferrachat, S., Siegenthaler-Le Drian, C., Bey, I., Schutgens, N., Stier, P., Watson-Parris, D., Stanelle, T., Schmidt, H., Rast, S., Kokkola, H., Schultz, M., Schroeder, S., Daskalakis, N., Barthel, S., Heinold, B., and Lohmann, U.: The global aerosol–climate model ECHAM6.3–HAM2.3 – Part 1: Aerosol evaluation, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1643–1677, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-1643-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>Textor et al.(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Textor, C., Schulz, M., Guibert, S., Kinne, S., Balkanski, Y., Bauer, S., Berntsen, T., Berglen, T., Boucher, O., Chin, M., Dentener, F., Diehl, T., Easter, R., Feichter, H., Fillmore, D., Ghan, S., Ginoux, P., Gong, S., Grini, A., Hendricks, J., Horowitz, L., Huang, P., Isaksen, I., Iversen, I., Kloster, S., Koch, D., Kirkevåg, A., Kristjansson, J. E., Krol, M., Lauer, A., Lamarque, J. F., Liu, X., Montanaro, V., Myhre, G., Penner, J., Pitari, G., Reddy, S., Seland, Ø., Stier, P., Takemura, T., and Tie, X.: Analysis and quantification of the diversities of aerosol life cycles within AeroCom, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 6, 1777–1813, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-1777-2006</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>Tissari et al.(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Tissari, J., Lyyränen, J., Hytönen, K., Sippula, O., Tapper, U., Frey, A.,
Saarnio, K., Pennanen, A., Hillamo, R., Salonen, R., Hirvonen, M.-R., and
Jokiniemi, J.: Fine particle and gaseous emissions from normal and
smouldering wood combustion in a conventional masonry heater, Atmos.
Environ., 42, 7862–7873,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.07.019</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>Tonttila et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Tonttila, J., Maalick, Z., Raatikainen, T., Kokkola, H., Kühn, T., and Romakkaniemi, S.: UCLALES–SALSA v1.0: a large-eddy model with interactive sectional microphysics for aerosol, clouds and precipitation, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 169–188, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-169-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-169-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>Twomey(1991)</label><mixed-citation>
Twomey, S.: Aerosol, clouds, and radiation., vol. 25A, Atmospheric
Environment, The University of Arizona, Tuczon, AZ, USA, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>van Vuuren et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
van Vuuren, D. P., Edmonds, J., Kainuma, M., Riahi, K., Thomson, A., Hibbard,
K., Hurtt, G. C., Kram, T., Krey, V., Lamarque, J.-F., Masui, T.,
Meinshausen, M., Nakicenovic, N., Smith, S. J., and Rose, S. K.: The
representative concentration pathways: an overview, Clim. Chang., 109,
5–31, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>Wang et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, H., Easter, R. C., Rasch, P. J., Wang, M., Liu, X., Ghan, S. J., Qian, Y., Yoon, J.-H., Ma, P.-L., and Vinoj, V.: Sensitivity of remote aerosol distributions to representation of cloud–aerosol interactions in a global climate model, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 765–782, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-765-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-765-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>Wang et al.(1978)</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, P., Grover, S., and Pruppacher, H.: On the Effect of Electric Charges on the Scavenging of Aerosol Particles by Clouds and Small Raindrops, J. Atmos. Sci., 35, 1735–1743,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1978)035&lt;1735:OTEOEC&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1978)035&lt;1735:OTEOEC&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1978.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>Watson-Parris et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Watson-Parris, D., Schutgens, N., Cook, N., Kipling, Z., Kershaw, P., Gryspeerdt, E., Lawrence, B., and Stier, P.: Community Intercomparison Suite (CIS) v1.4.0: a tool for intercomparing models and observations, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3093–3110, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3093-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>Watson-Parris et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Watson-Parris, D., Schutgens, N., Reddington, C., Pringle, K. J., Liu, D., Allan, J. D., Coe, H., Carslaw, K. S., and Stier, P.: In situ constraints on the vertical distribution of global aerosol, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 11765–11790, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-11765-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>Wofsy et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Wofsy, S., Afshar, S., Allen, H., Apel, E., Asher, E., Barletta, B., Bent, J.,
Bian, H., Biggs, B., Blake, D., Blake, N., Bourgeois, I., Brock, C., Brune,
W., Budney, J., Bui, T., Butler, A., Campuzano-Jost, P., Chang, C., Chin, M.,
Commane, R., Correa, G., Crounse, J., Cullis, P., Daube, B., Day, D.,
Dean-Day, J., Dibb, J., Digangi, J., Diskin, G., Dollner, M., Elkins, J.,
Erdesz, F., Fiore, A., Flynn, C., Froyd, K., Gesler, D., Hall, S., Hanisco,
T., Hannun, R., Hills, A., Hintsa, E., Hoffman, A., Hornbrook, R., Huey, L.,
Hughes, S., Jimenez, J., Johnson, B., Katich, J., Keeling, R., Kim, M., Kupc,
A., Lait, L., Lamarque, J.-F., Liu, J., McKain, K., McLaughling, R.,
Meinardi, S., Miller, D., Montzka, S., Moore, F., Morgan, E., Murphy, D.,
Murray, L., Nault, B., Neuman, J., Newman, P., Nicely, J., Pan, X.,
Paplawsky, W., Peischl, J., Prather, M., Price, D., Ray, E., Reeves, J.,
Richardson, M., Rollins, A., Rosenlof, K., Ryerson, T., Scheuer, E., Schill,
G., Schroder, J., Schwarz, J., St.Clair, J., Steenrod, S., Stephens, B.,
Strode, S., Sweeney, C., Tanner, D., Teng, A., Thames, A., Thompson, C.,
Ullmann, K., Veres, P., Vizenor, N., Wagner, N., Watt, A., Weber, R.,
Weinzierl, B., Wennberg, P., Williamson, C., Wilson, J., Wolfe, G., Woods,
C., and Zeng, L.: ATom: Merged Atmospheric Chemistry, Trace Gases, and
Aerosols, ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1581</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>Zhang et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, X., Chen, X., and Wang, J.: A number-based inventory of size-resolved
black carbon particle emissions by global civil aviation, Nat.
Commun., 10, 534, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08491-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08491-9</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>Zikova and Zdimal(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Zikova, N. and Zdimal, V.: Precipitation scavenging of aerosol particles at a
rural site in the Czech Republic, Tellus B, 68, 27343, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v68.27343" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v68.27343</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
