Molecular insights into organic particulate formation

ABSTRACT Carboxylic acids have been detected in particles collected in various regions of the world. Here, we use experiments and Born–Oppenheimer molecular dynamics simulations to better

understand the mechanism of particle formation from gas phase mixtures of formic acid (HCOOH), (CH3)3N, and water vapor. A flow reaction cell coupled to two scanning mobility particle sizers

has been used to measure particle size, absolute number of particles and kinetics of particle formation. Experimental results show that the addition of (CH3)3N to a mixture of HCOOH and

water vapor results in a dramatic increase in particle formation. Simulation results indicate that the ion-pair formation on the water surface involves direct proton transfer between HCOOH

and (CH3)3N. The HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair remains at the air–water interface due to hydrogen bonding and the interfacial hydration shell. This experiment-theory study shows the formation of

aerosol particles from the organic acid-amine interactions, which may aid in understanding the role of organics in haze and cloud droplet formation and nanoparticle growth. SIMILAR CONTENT

BEING VIEWED BY OTHERS UPTAKE OF N2O5 BY AQUEOUS AEROSOL UNVEILED USING CHEMICALLY ACCURATE MANY-BODY POTENTIALS Article Open access 10 March 2022 HYGROSCOPIC BEHAVIOR AND AEROSOL CHEMISTRY

OF ATMOSPHERIC PARTICLES CONTAINING ORGANIC ACIDS AND INORGANIC SALTS Article Open access 30 August 2024 PREDICTING THE INFLUENCE OF PARTICLE SIZE ON THE GLASS TRANSITION TEMPERATURE AND

VISCOSITY OF SECONDARY ORGANIC MATERIAL Article Open access 16 September 2020 INTRODUCTION Atmospheric aerosols affect air quality, human health, and the global climate1,2,3. Aerosols act as

cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and ice nuclei, and impact frequency of occurrence, and lifetime of clouds4,5,6,7. Despite their broad impact, the exact formation pathways for the

atmospheric particles remain largely unknown8. Sulfuric acid (H2SO4) is recognized as perhaps the most important nucleating species in the atmosphere9,10,11. However, binary homogenous

nucleation of H2SO4 and water (H2O) is insufficient to explain the nucleation events under actual atmospheric conditions12, suggesting that other species may also participate in nucleation

events13,14,15. Amines and carboxylic acids are an important class of compounds that have recently been found to contribute to the particle formation under certain conditions8,16. It is

noted that molecules with high vapor pressures, which includes certain carboxylic acids, would be unlikely to contribute to new particle formation. However, recent field studies from a

variety of locations around the world have found evidence of carboxylic acids contributing to new particle formation. For example, the mass spectra of nanoparticles obtained during new

particle formation events in Hyytiala, Finland is suggestive of the presence of alkylaminium and carboxylate ions in the particles17. Organic species are also predicted to play an important

role in the particle growth in Tecamac, Mexico13. Zhang et al. observed a marked increase in the particle concentration when benzoic, _p_-toluic, _m_-toluic, or _cis_-pinonic acid vapor was

added to the H2SO4–H2O vapor system18,19. Additional measurements in Shanghai, China observed increased rates of particle formation containing markers for the sulfuric acid dimer,

H2SO4-dimethylamine (DMA) clusters and H2SO4-DMA-H2O nucleation20. The role of oxalic acid in particle formation from vapor phase methanesulfonic acid, methylamine, and H2O has been recently

examined experimentally21. The addition of water to the mixture of oxalic acid and methylamine enhanced the rate of particle formation by an order of magnitude. Although the amine

concentrations are 1–3 orders of magnitude lower than that of NH3 in the atmosphere22, amines are experimentally found to be more effective than NH3 in enhancing particle

formation11,23,24,25,26. For example, the CLOUD chamber experiments at CERN have demonstrated the superior particle forming efficacy of DMA compared to NH311. The vapor pressure of

monocarboxylic acids is higher, by a factor of 102 to 104 than that of the corresponding dicarboxylic acids27, suggesting that the latter is likely to play a bigger role in the new particle

formation. Despite that, monocarboxylic acids have been detected in aerosol particles collected in various regions of the world28,29,30,31,32,33,34. Supplementary Table 1 summarizes the

concentration of HCOOH and CH3COOH measured in air samples collected in a variety of environments. In the urban environment of New Mexico City, HCOOH and CH3COOH were predominantly detected

in the particulate phase35. On average, 53% of HCOOH and 67% of CH3COOH were present in particulate matter. The presence of particulate organic salts was also raised as a possible

explanation for the relatively high aerosol hygroscopicity and CCN concentrations observed in the Amazon basin36. Despite being ubiquitous in diverse environments, the mechanism of organic

particulate formation is yet to be fully established. Specifically, identifying key organic species and the underlying chemical mechanisms responsible for the nucleation and growth of

atmospheric particles remains a significant challenge. Our current understanding about the role of organics in initial atmospheric nucleation events is based on quantum chemical

calculations8,37,38,39,40,41,42, which are typically limited to few atom clusters. This hampers the generalization of gas-phase results to the water surfaces, such as fog, snow, clouds and

water microdroplets, which are present in the troposphere and are believed to impact the chemistries occurring there43,44,45,46,47,48,49. We have performed experiments and BOMD simulations

to explore the particle formation from HCOOH, TMA ((CH3)3N), and water. The BOMD simulations and performed experiments provide a further understanding as to the mechanism behind high vapor

pressure molecules contributing to new particle formation. The results of this experiment-theory study also help in understanding the role of organics in both haze and cloud droplet

formation, and to nanoparticle growth in urban, rural and remote regions. RESULTS EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF PARTICLE FORMATION ENHANCED BY TRIMETHYLAMINE Experiments were conducted by flowing

gas mixtures of formic acid, water vapor, and TMA in a flow reaction cell. The instrumental set-up is shown in Supplementary Fig. 1. Three sets of conditions were analyzed for each

precursor, which resulted in 27 conditions (Supplementary Table 2), each analyzed at 6 different reaction times (8, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48 s). The analysis of the 8 minimal and maximal

concentrations are discussed in the following figures. However, it should be noted that the additional 19 conditions agree with the minimal and maximal results. The size distribution and

total number of particles at each reaction time under each reaction condition was measured. Figure 1a compares particle formation and particle size distributions as a result of flowing a

mixture of formic acid (140 ppm) and water vapor (630 ppm) in the absence and presence of 200 ppb TMA. The total number of particles and particle size distribution is plotted for both 8 and

48 s reaction times. Figure 1b offers a closer look at particle concentrations vs particle diameters ranging from 300–500 nm. Figure 1c shows particle concentrations vs diameter from 0–100 

nm. No particles are observed while flowing only N2, 630 ppm H2O, 140 ppm formic acid or 200 ppb TMA. Particles did form as a result of flowing a mixture of formic acid (140 ppm) and water

vapor (630 ppm); however, with the addition 200 ppb of TMA to the mixture, there is a dramatic increase in the formation of smaller particles at both reactions. The mixture of formic acid

(140 ppm) and water vapor (630 ppm) without any TMA, generated a maximum of 3.3 ± 0.3 × 106 particles cm−3 at a diameter of 1.29 nm and a total number of particles of 7.2 ± 0.3 × 106

particles ranging in diameter from 1.09–498 nm. 99.4 % of the particles were <40 nm in diameter and 0.6% of particles were >40 nm. Inclusion of 200 ppb TMA to this formic acid/water

vapor mixture resulted in an increase in the total number of particles to 7.1 ± 0.05 × 107 particles between 1.09 and 498 nm in diameter with a maximum of 3.4 ± 0.3 × 106 particles cm−3

generated at a diameter of 1.09 nm at 8 s of reaction time. The percentage of particles formed at 8 s with a diameter of <40 nm decreased to 98.7 % while the percentage of particles with

a diameter of >40 nm rose to 1.3%. With an increase of reaction time to 48 s, the total number of particles rose to 4.1 ± 0.11 × 108 particles with a maximum concentration of 7.3 ± 0.9 × 

106 particles cm−3 generated at a diameter of 1.54 nm. The percentage of particles formed <40 nm in diameter dropped to 98.6 % while the percentage of particles >40 nm rose to 1.4%. By

comparison, the formic acid/water vapor mixture containing 200 ppb TMA shows an increased formation of both smaller diameter particles, <40 nm, and larger diameter particles (>300 

nm), compared to the formic acid/water vapor mixture without TMA. The difference in the number of total particles and formation of particles (>300 nm) increases with longer reaction times

for mixtures that include TMA. Table 1 lists the conditions probed for each trial and the measured rate of particle formation. Figure 2 compares particle formation as a function of initial

formic acid, water vapor, and TMA concentrations. Additional comparisons of Table 1 conditions are found in the supplemental data. See Supplementary Fig. 2 and Supplementary Note 1. Figure 

2a shows that the particle formation occurs even at the lowest concentration of formic acid (140 ppm), water vapor (630 ppm) and TMA (200 ppb) in the reaction cell shown in red compared to

increased TMA concentration (400 ppb) shown in black. The rate of particle formation under these conditions is measured to be 1.0 ± .02 × 106 particles cm−3 s−1. The rate of particle

formation under higher concentrations could not be determined due to the aggregation of smaller sized particles leading to an increased concentration of larger particles, which skewed the

calculations needed to determine the rate of particle formation. Figure 2a compares trials A and C (shown in black) with lower formic acid concentrations and an increase concentration of TMA

from 200 ppb to 400 ppb, which shows a definite increase in the smaller particles at the shorter reaction times. Increasing the TMA concentration by a factor of 2 results in a 6.6% increase

in the number of particles formed with diameters <20 nm at 8 s. A shift in the size distribution of smaller particles (<20 nm) and an increase in the number of particles >40 nm is

also observed. In Fig. 2b, trials B (red) and D (black) are shown. The formic acid (140 ppm) and higher water vapor (1550 ppm) concentrations were kept constant but the concentration of TMA

was double in trial D compared to B. The total number of particles grown in trial D at 8 s was 36% larger compared to that in B. In addition, evaluation of the particle size distribution

shows 3.9% of the total particles in B are >20 nm in diameter but upon doubling of the concentration of TMA the total number of particles >20 nm in trial D increased to 4.2%. Figure 

2c, which shows trials E (red) and G (black), the formic acid (540 ppm) and water concentrations (630 ppm) were kept constant but the TMA concentration was double in trial G compared to E.

The total number of particles in trial G at 8 s was 17% smaller compared to that in E. In addition, evaluation of the particle size distribution shows that 3.1% of the total particles in E

are >20 nm in diameter but upon increasing the concentration of TMA, the total number of particles >20 nm in trial G increased to 3.3%. In Fig. 2d, which shows trials F (red) and H

(black), the formic acid (540 ppm) and water concentrations (630 ppm) were kept constant but the TMA concentration was double in trial H compared to F. The total number of particles grown in

trial F at 8 s was 4.8% larger compared to that in H. In addition, evaluation of the particle size distribution shows that 4.1% of the total particles in F are >20 nm in diameter but

upon increasing the concentration of TMA, the total number of particles >20 nm in trial H increased to 4.5%. Comparison of Fig. 2a–d (Supplementary Table 4) indicate an increase in the

concentration of TMA increases the rate of particle formation and perturbs the particle size distribution a table of the values is found in supplemental materials. However, due to the high

concentrations of formic acid and TMA in these trials, nucleation was not the only mechanism contributing to particle formation as is discussed later. The effect of TMA on the kinetics of

particle formation was next measured by changing the TMA concentrations and comparing the changed rates of particle formation. To overcome a secondary mechanism via aggregation and to

determine the rate of particle formation via nucleation, the formic acid and TMA concentrations were decreased minimizing aggregation in the flow cell. A gas mixture of 60 ppm formic acid

and 630 ppm water vapor with varying concentrations of TMA was introduced into the reaction cell. The concentration of TMA was varied in the reaction mixture between 12 and 20 ppb and the

total number of particles >2.5 nm in diameter was measured at reaction times ranging between 8 and 48 s. These experiments allowed for measurement of the reaction rate coefficient, _k_ 

> 2.5 nm, for new particle formation. The rate of particle formation was determined by finding the linear slope between the reaction times (8–48 s) and the total number of particles.

Figure 3 shows a comparison of _k_ > 2.5 nm for three different formic acid, water vapor, TMA mixtures. A linear relationship between total number of particles formed >2.5 nm in

diameter and increasing concentration of TMA is observed. The rate of particle formation is observed to increase with the TMA concentration. The only anomaly observed in these series of

experiments occurred when 200–400 ppb of TMA was introduced into the reaction cell. Under these conditions, the total number of particles formed, and shift in the particle size distribution

did not follow the linear trend (Fig. 4), but instead, a decrease in rate of particle formation was measured. This rate decrease can be associated to the inability to measure particles with

a diameter >500 nm using the SMPS’s used in this project. Figure 4a compares formation of particles >300 nm in diameter as a function of the reaction time under conditions of flowing

140 ppm formic acid, 630 ppm water vapor and 200 ppb TMA. At 8 s, the shortest reaction time probed, particle concentration peaks at 1.9 ± 0.4 × 104 particles cm−3 at 332 nm in diameter. As

the reaction time increases to 24 s, the maximum concentration increases to 4.7 ± 0.1 × 104 particles cm−3 at a particle diameter of 332 nm. A long, shallow tail is observed in the observed

particle diameters for both reaction times, 8 and 24 s. As the reaction time increases to 32 s the previously observed maximum in particle concentration observed in reaction times 8 and 24 s

at 332 nm disappears, and a strong, broad distribution of particles >375 nm forms. At 48 s reaction time, a large peak in concentration is measured at 375 nm and a second broad tail is

observed rising from 440 nm in diameter. Fine particles are classified into three distinct ranges: the ultrafine particle range (<10 nm), the transient nuclei range (10–100 nm) and the

accumulation range (100 nm–1.2 μm) 50. Figure 4b separates particle diameters for each reaction time into these three modes versus particle concentration. At the earliest reaction time,

there is a high particle concentration for the ultrafine particle range and a constant particle concentration for the accumulation range with an increase in reaction time. However, at the

next shortest reaction time, there is an unexpected decrease in particle concentration in the ultrafine particle range followed by a slow increase in the ultrafine particle concentration

with an increase in reaction time. In contrast, there is still an increase in the total number of particles in the accumulation range. The sudden decrease and subsequent increase in smaller

diameter particles (<10 nm) along with the continuous increase in larger diameter particles indicates a two-fold nature of particle growth occurring in the reaction cell via nucleation

and aggregation. To better comprehend the influence of TMA and H2O on the two-fold mechanism of particle growth, Fig. 5 compares the change in particle diameter distribution versus either a

change in TMA or H2O concentration. Figure 5a analyzes particle concentration versus particle diameter distribution with 140 ppm formic acid, 630 ppm water vapor, 200 ppb TMA. Figure 5b

shows a change in particle distribution with an increase in TMA. While Fig. 5c shows the change in particle distribution with an increase in H2O. The concentrations of H2O and TMA were

respectively increased from 630 ppm to 1550 ppm, and 200 ppb to 400 ppb. Figure 5b indicates that with increased TMA concentrations particles with a diameter between 2.5 and 10 nm decreased

and increased the number of particles with diameters between 100 and 500 nm six-fold at 8 s. Compared with Fig. 5c, there is a decrease in the number of particles with in diameter range

diameters between 2.5 and 10 nm and a three-fold increase in particles with diameters between 100 and 500 nm at 8 s. Increased reaction times show the expected decrease in the overall

particle concentration followed by an increase in the larger sized particles. The overall decrease is attributed to the inability to measure particles large than 500 nm in diameter. The

aggregation of smaller sized particles leading to the formation particles with diameters 100–500 nm may be enhanced by the dipole moment caused by the TMA complexing with formic acid which

in turn forms a hydrophobic/hydrophilic interaction as stated in the computational section. A similar enhancement may occur with increased H2O concentration, however to a lesser extent due

to the smaller dipole moment. Ultrafine particles are formed as formic acid/water/TMA clusters grow with increasing reaction time in the cell. As the concentration of these particles

increases the probability that these particles will collide with one another and aggregate to form a larger diameter particle increases. Aggregation of particles in the ultrafine and

accumulation size range results in a decrease in the total number of these particles but an increase in the formation of particles >100 nm in diameter. We see both particle growth as

water adheres to the nucleating site but also observe aggregation as small particles collide into one another to produce larger diameter particles. SIMULATION EVIDENCE OF THE FORMIC ACID–TMA

INTERACTION AT AIR–WATER INTERFACE The BOMD simulations provide useful information into the time scale, molecular mechanism of the ion-pair formation as well as the dynamic behavior of the

ion-pair formed on the aqueous surface. The BOMD simulations were performed on a water droplet of 191 H2O molecules probing the nature of the interaction between HCOOH and (CH3)3N. The

details of the simulation procedure are provided in the Methods section. The initial configuration of the HCOOH··(CH3)3N complex adsorbed on the water droplet surface are given in the

Supplementary Fig. 3. We initiated BOMD simulations from hydrogen-bonded and non-hydrogen-bonded complexes of HCOOH with (CH3)3N. Surprisingly, only the hydrogen-bonded configurations

resulted in the ion-pair formation on the water surface, implying that the formation of hydrogen-bonded HCOOH··(CH3)3N complex in the gas-phase constitutes a crucial step in the particle

formation on the water surface. In a recent experimental study48, Eugene et al. also observed interfacial proton transfer from simpler carboxylic acids. Though the role of gas-to-particle

partitioning in the particle formation has been speculated before8, our simulations provide a mechanistic rationale why the gas-to-particle conversion is actually required for the particle

formation. The HCOOH··(CH3)3N interaction follows a typical trajectory of acid-base chemistry and involves a proton transfer between HCOOH and (CH3)3N without the direct involvement of

surface water molecules. This results in the formation of HCOO—· ·(CH3)3NH + ion-pair on a picosecond (ps) time scale (Fig. 6). As just described, Eugene et al. have recently also observed

interfacial proton transfer from simpler carboxylic acids that can play an important role in aerosol formation48. The role of water droplet here is to stabilize the ion-pair particle by

forming a hydration shell around it. These findings are also consistent with field measurements predicting the presence of aminium salts in aged organic carbon particles in certain regions

of California51,52. The reactive uptake of NH3 onto slightly soluble organic acid particle is also found to enhance the CCN activity and the formation rates of these particles53. For the

reaction between HCOOH and (CH3)3N, the transition state like complex is formed at 5.18 ps (Fig. 6a and Supplementary Movie 1). In this complex, the hydroxyl proton of HCOOH is partially

dissociated and transferred towards (CH3)3N, i.e., the O1–H1 bond is 1.33 Å long whereas the H1–N1 bond is 1.29 Å long. This complex is converted into the HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion pair at 5.23 

ps. The O1–H1 bond is now lengthened to 1.70 Å, indicative of a hydrogen bonding interaction whereas the H1–N1 bond has become a true covalent bond (H1–N = 1.06 Å). DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF

HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ION-PAIR AT THE AIR–WATER INTERFACE To gain deeper insights into the dynamic behavior of the HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair, we next analyzed its locus on the water droplet.

Supplementary Fig. 4 shows the distance between the center of mass of the ion-pair and that of the water droplet as a function of the simulation time. The HCOO— ··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair is

situated at 10–13 Å distance from the center of the water droplet, implying that it preferentially resides at the air-water interface. There are two main interactions responsible for the

interfacial locus of the HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair: (i) intraparticle hydrogen bonding (O1··H1–N1), and (ii) interfacial hydration shell. The intraparticle hydrogen bond in HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+

ion-pair is quite strong as is evidenced from the combined distribution functions shown in Fig. 6c, d, respectively. The calculated average number of hydrogen bonds formed by the

HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair with interfacial water molecules provides useful insight into its interfacial hydration shell. Our model specified a hydrogen bond between a formate oxygen and H2O,

if the O1/O2··H-O or O··H1–N1 distance was <2.5 Å and the ∠O1/O2··H-O or ∠O··H1–N1 hydrogen bond angle was >150°. The COO— group forms 1.9 hydrogen bonds whereas the aminium proton

does not form any hydrogen bond with H2O molecules. The hydrophobicity of trimethyl group in the HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair prevents any interaction between the aminium proton and interfacial

water molecules. To deeply understand the solvation structure of HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair at the air-water interface, we next identified key [m,n] configurations and calculated their

probabilities (Fig. 7). Here m and n are the number of interfacial H2O molecules bound to the HCOO— and (CH3)3NH+, respectively. The configurations, in which only the HCOO— group of

HCOO—··(CH3)3NH+ ion-pair binds to one, two and three interfacial H2O molecules, are the most probable ones and account for 31%, 38, and 26% of the total configurations, respectively (Fig. 

7). Since there remains significant uncertainty about the exact composition of the particle in air8,37,38,39,40,41,42, our results may play a crucial role in revealing a fundamental yet

vital piece of information on the particle formation on the water surfaces. ATMOSPHERIC IMPLICATIONS The growth of atmospheric nanoparticles was initially proposed to occur via direct

condensation of organic acids54. However, the high saturation pressure of organic acids over nanoparticles55 negates the possibility of such a mechanism. On contrary, thermal desorption

chemical ionization mass spectrometry (TDCIMS) analysis of the particles formed in Tecamac, Mexico shows the presence of carboxylic and hydroxycarboxylic organic acids13, suggesting that

organics play a key role in the nanoparticle growth. Our experimental and theoretical results may help in resolving the discrepancy in the role of organic acids in nanoparticle growth. The

current BOMD simulations suggest a new gas-to-particle partitioning mechanism for the formation of organic particles that involves two steps: (i) formation of hydrogen-bonded complexes of

organic acids with amines in the gas-phase, and their adsorption on the aqueous surface, and (ii) subsequent proton transfer between hydrogen-bonded entities. The mechanistic beauty of this

new mechanism lies in the fact that it does not require direct condensation of organic acids, but rather involves hydrogen bonding between organic acids and amines. The organic-amine salts

formed in this mechanism will have reduced volatility, as has been pointed out in a recent study56. This new mechanism is supported by combined laboratory investigation and field

measurements using TDCIMS and ultrafine hygroscopicity tandem differential mobility analyzer (TDMA) confirming that carboxylate-alkylaminium salts contribute to the particle growth in

atmosphere17. Additional support for this mechanism comes from the study of Dinar et al. showing that the reactive uptake of NH3 can enhance the CCN activity and hygroscopic growth of

organic acid particles53. Our BOMD simulations suggest that the carboxylate-aminium ion-pair remained stable on the water surface over the simulated time scale of 20 ps. This is again

consistent with high thermal stability of alkylaminium carboxylate salts from the organic acid-amine reactions57. DISCUSSION Our experiments show the nanoparticle formation under conditions

that are typically outside what is expected if you use classical nucleation theory to describe particle formation. That is to say, we see nanoparticle growth under conditions of <100% RH.

Under the classical nucleation model, it is suggested that 100% RH is necessary for particle formation and growth to occur. We speculate that by adding trace amounts of amines and/or formic

acid, we may “seed” a cloud to increase the rate of particle formation. Our experimental results are consistent with what is observed around the world in terms of measuring carboxylic acids

in particles as shown in the Sao Paulo, Brazil and Tecama, Mexico studies. The conclusions from our work could be used to better understand the role of other monocarboxylic acids such as

CH3COOH, and dicarboxylic acids such as oxalic acid and malonic acid in the particle formation under diverse environmental conditions, including semiurban sites in the northeastern United

States58, urban environments59,60,61, and remote locations62. Though considered unlikely due to their high vapor pressures atmospheric gaseous- and particle-phase, carboxylic acids have been

measured in the urban environment of Sao Paulo, Brazil63. Carboxylic acids accounted for a fraction of 7% of the total organic carbon in the particle phase, with formate and oxalate being

two of the most abundant carboxylates. Though the major source of these carboxylates is suggested to be traffic emissions, the comprehensive insights into their emission source are still

lacking. Our results suggest that the acid-base chemistries between organic acids and organic nitrogens could be an overlooked source of organic particulate in urban air. The organic

nitrogens could be transported from the rural agricultural sites to the urban regions where they react with organic acids and result in the particulate formation. These new findings may help

in improving the accuracy of existing atmospheric models. METHODS EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS A flow cell set-up was used to experimentally verify the formation of particles initiated by formic

acid, water vapor, and TMA. Supplementary Fig. 1 shows the experimental setup, a 180 cm long Pyrex flow cell (5.1 cm i.d.) was connected to two aluminum boxes (26.5 cm × 26.5 cm × 26.5 cm)

that allowed for UV light to pass through the flow cell for detection of formic acid and TMA. Formic acid, water vapor, and N2 were separately introduced at the top of the cell. TMA was

introduced at varying points in the flow cell by a Teflon coated shower ring. Particle size distribution with particle diameter sizes ranging from 1.09 nm to 493.95 nm were analyzed using

two Grimm Aerosol Technik scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS, model: 5.710) each consisting of a differential mobility analyzer (DMA) Electrostatic Classifier (Vienna/Reishl type, model

55-u; 55–100) and a faraday cup electrometer (FCE, model 5.705). Prior to each experiment, the flow cell was cleaned out with ozone, N2 (2 SLM) and O2 (100 sccm) for 1 h between experiments

and overnight. This allowed for the complete removal of any formic acid or TMA that had been introduced in previous experiments. The flow cell was kept at a constant temperature (22 ± 1 °C)

and pressure (650 ± 5 Torr). In all experiments, formic acid and water vapor were introduced separately into the flow cell by bubbling N2 (100–300 sccm) through 88% proof formic acid and

purified water. Additional N2 was introduced into the flow cell for a total flow rate of 3.125 SLM. As previously mentioned TMA (25–125 sccm) was introduced at varying points in the flow

cell by a Teflon coated shower ring. The shower ring (i.d. 4.5 cm) with pin holes was attached to a stainless-steel rod which allowed for movement up and down the flow cell. This method of

introducing TMA allows for reaction times varying from 8 to 48 s. A range of concentrations for formic acid and TMA were varied by varying the flow of gases and subsequently using UV

absorption spectroscopy to determine formic acid and TMA concentrations. Using Beer’s Law and previously published cross sections from 220.16 to 250.9 nm the concentrations of TMA were

determined to be 200 and 400 ppb. Using previously published formic acid cross sections from 210.88 to 230.86 nm the formic acid concentrations were determined to be 140 and 540 ppm. A water

vapor calibration curve was determined by introducing known concentrations of water vapor via a syringe pump (KD Scientific KDS-100 Syringe Pump) at known flow rates. Water was introduced

into a stainless-steel tee packed with glass wool heated to 150 °C. N2 (3.1 SLM) passed through the glass wool into the flow cell and the absorption from the water concentration was

determined by dithering an IR diode over 1380.47 nm to 1384.6 nm and the area under the desired peak was integrated for the known concentration of water vapor. Water vapor concentrations

used were 630 and 1550 ppm. COMPUTATIONAL DETAILS Born–Oppenheimer molecular dynamics (BOMD) simulations were performed based on a density functional theory (DFT) method implemented in the

CP2K64 code. In the BOMD simulation, the droplet system contained 191 water molecules, one HCOOH molecule and one N(CH3)3 molecule. We have explored a total number of 10 different

trajectories, in which five of them started from non-hydrogen-bonded configurations of HCOOH and N(CH3)3 whereas the other five started from hydrogen-bonded configurations. The dimension of

the simulation box is _x_ = 35 Å, _y_ = 35 Å, _z_ = 35 Å, which is large enough to neglect interactions between adjacent periodic images of the water droplet. Prior to the BOMD simulation,

the system was fully relaxed using a DFT method, in which the exchange and correlation interaction is treated with the Becke-Lee-Yang-Parr (BLYP) functional65,66. The Grimme’s dispersion

correction method is applied to account for the weak dispersion interaction67,68. A double-ζ Gaussian basis set combined with an auxiliary basis set and the Goedecker-Teter-Hutter (GTH)

norm-conserved pseudopotentials were adopted to treat the valence electrons and the core electrons, respectively69,70. An energy cutoff of 280 Rydberg was set for the plane-wave basis set

and 40 Rydberg for the Gaussian basis set. The BOMD simulations were carried out in the constant volume and temperature (NVT) ensemble, with the Nose-Hoover chain method for controlling the

temperature (300 K) of the system. The integration step was set as 1fs, which had been proven to achieve sufficient energy conservation for the water system. DATA AVAILABILITY The authors

declare that all data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper or are available from the authors upon request. REFERENCES * Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change._ Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis_ (eds Solomon, S. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 2007). * Pillar-Little, E. A. & Guzman, M. I. An overview of

dynamic heterogeneous oxidations in the troposphere. _Environments_ 5, 104 (2018). Article  Google Scholar  * Liu, Z., Yim, S. H. L., Wang, C. & Lau, N. C. The impact of the aerosol

direct radiative forcing on deep convection and air quality in the Pearl river delta region. _Geophys. Res. Lett._ 45, 4410 (2018). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Fan, J. W., Zhang, R. Y.,

Li, G. H. & Tao, W. K. K. Effects of aerosols and relative humidity on Cumulus clouds. _J. Geophys. Res._ 112, D14204 (2007). Article  Google Scholar  * Zhang, R. Y., Li, G. H., Fan, J.

W., Wu, D. L. & Molina, M. L. Intensification of Pacific storm track linked to Asian pollution. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 104, 5295–5299 (2007). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Fan, J.

W., Zhang, R. Y., Tao, W. K. & Mohr, K. I. Effects of aerosol optical properties on deep convective clouds and radiative forcing. _J. Geophys. Res._ 113, D08209 (2008). Article  Google

Scholar  * Zhang, R. Getting to the critical nucleus of aerosol formation. _Science_ 328, 1366–1367 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhang, R., Khalizov, A., Wang, L., Hu, M. &

Xu, W. Nucleation and growth of nanoparticles in the atmosphere. _Chem. Rev._ 112, 1957–2011 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Sipila, M. et al. M. The role of sulfuric acid in

atmospheric nucleation. _Science_ 327, 1243–1246 (2010). Article  Google Scholar  * Chen, M. et al. Acid-base chemical reaction model for nucleation rates in the polluted atmospheric

boundary layer. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 109, 18713–18718 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Almeida, J. et al. Molecular understanding of sulphuric acid-amine particle nucleation in

the atmosphere. _Nature_ 502, 359–363 (2013). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kirkby, J. et al. Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation.

_Nature_ 476, 429–433 (2011). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Smith, J. N. et al. Chemical composition of atmospheric nanoparticles formed from nucleation in Tecamac, Mexico: evidence for an

important role for organic species in nanoparticle growth. _Geophys. Res. Lett._ 35, L04808 (2008). * Kuang, C. et al. An improved criterion for new particle formation in diverse

atmospheric environments. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 10, 8469–8480 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kulmala, M. & Kerminen, V.-M. On the growth of atmospheric nanoparticle. _Atmos.

Res._ 90, 132–150 (2008). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Barsanti, K. C., McMurry, P. H. & Smith, J. N. The potential contribution of organic salts to new particle growth. _Atmos. Chem.

Phys._ 9, 2949–2957 (2009). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Smith, J. N. et al. Observations of aminium salts in atmospheric nanoparticles and possible climatic implications. _Proc. Natl

Acad. Sci. USA_ 107, 6634–6639 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhang, R. Y. et al. Atmospheric new particle formation enhanced by organic acids. _Science_ 304, 1487–1490 (2004).

Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhang, R. et al. Formation of nanoparticles of blue haze enhanced by anthropogenic pollution. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 106, 17650–17654 (2009). Article 

CAS  Google Scholar  * Yao, L. et al. Atmospheric new particle formation from sulfuric acid and amines in a Chinese megacity. _Science_ 361, 278–281 (2018). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  *

Arquero, K. D., Gerber, R. B. & Finlayson-Pitts, B. J. The Role of oxalic acid in new particle formation from methanesulfonic acid, methylamine, and water. _Environ. Sci. Technol._ 51,

2124–2130 (2017). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Ge, X., Wexler, A. S. & Clegg, S. L. Atmospheric amines – Part I. A review. _Atmos. Environ._ 45, 524–546 (2011). Article  CAS  Google

Scholar  * Kurten, T., Loukonen, V., Vehkamaki, H. & Kulmala, M. Amines are likely to enhance neutral and ion-induced sulfuric acid-water nucleation in the atmosphere more effectively

than ammonia. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 8, 4095–4103 (2008). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Berndt, T. et al. Laboratory study on new particle formation from the reaction OH+SO2: influence of

experimental conditions H2O vapour, NH3 and the amine tert-butylamine on the overall process. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 10, 7101–7116 (2010). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Yu, H., McGraw, R.

& Lee, S.-H. Effects of amines on formation of sub-3 nm particles and their subsequent growth. _Geophys. Res. Lett._ 39, 1 (2012). Article  Google Scholar  * Glasoe, W. A. et al.

Sulfuric acid nucleation: an experimental study of the effect of seven bases. _J. Geophys. Res._ 120, 1933–1950 (2015). CAS  Google Scholar  * Makar, P. A. The estimation of organic gas

vapor pressure. _Atmos. Environ._ 35, 961–974 (2001). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Andreae, M. O., Talbot, R. W. & Li, S. M. Atmospheric measurements of pyruvic and formic acid. _J.

Geophys. Res._ 92, 6635–6641 (1987). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Andreae, M. O., Talbot, R. W., Andreae, T. W. & Harris, R. C. Formic and acetic acid over the central Amazon region,

Brazil: 1. dry season. _J. Geophys. Res._ 93, 1616 (1988). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Talbot, R. W. et al. Distribution and geochemistry of aerosols in the tropical north Atlantic

troposphere: relationships to Saharan dust. _J. Geophys. Res._ 91, 5173–5182 (1986). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Talbot, R. W., Beecher, K. M., Harris, R. C. & Cofer III, W. R.

Atmospheric geochemistry of formic and acetic acids at a mid-latitude temperate site. _J. Geophys. Res._ 93, 1638–1652 (1988). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Li, S. M. & Winchester, J.

W. Geochemistry of organic and inorganic ions of the late winter Arctic aerosol. _Atmos. Environ._ 23, 2401–2416 (1989). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kawamura, K., Steinberg, S. &

Kaplan, I. R. Homologous series of C1-C10 monocarboxylic acids and C1-C6 carbonyls in Los Angeles air and motor vehicle exhausts. _Atmos. Environ._ 34, 4175–4191 (2000). Article  CAS  Google

Scholar  * Baboukas, E. D., Kanakidou, M. & Mihalopoulos, N. Carboxylic acids in gas and particulate phase above the Atlantic Ocean. _J. Geophys. Res._ 105, 14459–14471 (2000). Article

  CAS  Google Scholar  * Limon-Sanchez, M. T., Arriaga-Colina, J. L., Escalona-Segura, S. & Ruiz-Suarez, L. G. Observation of formic and acetic acids at three sites of Mexico City. _Sci.

Total Environ._ 287, 203–212 (2002). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Mircea, M. et al. Importance of the organic aerosol fraction for modeling aerosol hygroscopic growth and activation: a

case study in the Amazon basin. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 5, 3111–3126 (2005). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhang, R. et al. Formation of urban fine particulate matter. _Chem. Rev._ 115,

3803–3855 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Xu, J., Finlayson-Pitts, B. J. & Gerber, R. B. Proton transfer in mixed clusters of methanesulfonic acid, methylamine, and oxalic acid:

implications for atmospheric particle formation. _J. Phys. Chem. B_ 121, 2377–2385 (2017). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Peng, X.-Q., Liu, Y.-R., Huang, T., Jiang, S. & Huang, W.

Interaction of gas phase oxalic acid with ammonia and its atmospheric implications. _Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys._ 17, 9552–9563 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Weber, K. H., Liu, Q.

& Tao, F.-M. Theoretical study on stable small clusters of oxalic acid with ammonia and water. _J. Phys. Chem. A_ 118, 1451–1468 (2014). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Xu, W. &

Zhang, R. Theoretical Investigation of interaction of dicarboxylic acids with common aerosol nucleation precursors. _J. Phys. Chem. A_ 116, 4539–4550 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  *

Chen, J. et al. Interaction of oxalic acid with dimethylamine and its atmospheric implications. _RSC Adv._ 7, 6374–6388 (2017). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Gerber, R. B. et al.

Computational studies of atmospherically-relevant chemical reactions in water clusters and on liquid water and ice surfaces. _Acc. Chem. Res._ 48, 399–406 (2015). Article  CAS  Google

Scholar  * Ravishankara, A. R. Heterogeneous and multiphase chemistry in the troposphere. _Science_ 276, 1058–1065 (1997). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhu, C. Q. et al. New mechanistic

pathways for Criegee-water chemistry at the air/water interface. _J. Am. Chem. Soc._ 138, 11164–11169 (2016). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Li, L. et al. Near-barrierless ammonium

bisulfate formation via a loop-structure promoted proton-transfer mechanism on the surface of water. _J. Am. Chem. Soc._ 138, 1816–1819 (2016). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhong, J.,

Kumar, M., Zhu, C. Q., Francisco, J. S. & Zeng, X. C. Surprising stability of larger Criegee intermediates on aqueous interfaces. _Angew. Chem. Int. Ed._ 56, 7740–7744 (2017). Article 

CAS  Google Scholar  * Eugene, A. J., Pillar, E. A., Colussi, A. J. & Guzman, M. I. Enhanced acidity of acetic and pyruvic Acids on the surface of water. _Langmuir_ 34, 9307–9313 (2018).

Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Eugene, A. J., Xia, S.-S. & Guzman, M. I. Negative production of acetoin in the photochemistry of aqueous pyruvic acid. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 110,

E4274–E4275 (2013). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Whitby, K. T. & Sverdrup, G. M. The aerosol size distribution of Los Angeles smog. _J. Colloid Interface Sci._ 8, 477 (1980). Google

Scholar  * Pratt, K. A., Hatch, L. E. & Prather, K. A. Seasonal volatility dependence of ambient particle phase amines. _Environ. Sci. Technol._ 43, 5276–5281 (2009). Article  CAS 

Google Scholar  * Sorooshian, A. et al. Comprehensive airborne characterization of aerosol from a major Bovine source. _Atmos. Chem. Phys._ 8, 5489–5520 (2008). Article  CAS  Google Scholar

  * Dinar, E., Anttila, T. & Rudich, Y. CCN activity and hygroscopic growth of organic aerosols following reactive uptake of ammonia. _Environ. Sci. Technol._ 42, 793–799 (2008). Article

  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kulmala, M. How particles nucleate and grow. _Science_ 302, 1000–1001 (2003). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhang, K. M. & Wexler, A. S. A hypothesis for

growth of fresh atmospheric nuclei. _J. Geophys. Res._ 107, AAC 15-1–AAC 15-6 (2002). Article  Google Scholar  * Paciga, A. L., Riipinen, I. & Pandis, S. N. Effect of ammonia on the

volatility of organic diacids. _Environ. Sci. Technol._ 48, 13769–13775 (2014). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Lavi, A., Segre, E., Gomez-Hernandez, M., Zhang, R. & Rudich, Y.

Volatility of atmospherically relevant alkylaminium carboxylates salts. _J. Phys. Chem. A_ 119, 4336–4346 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Khwaja, H. A. Atmospheric concentrations of

carboxylic acids and related compounds at a semiurban site. _Atmos. Environ._ 29, 127–139 (1995). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kawamura, K. & Ikushima, K. Seasonal changes in the

distribution of dicarboxylic acids in the urban atmosphere. _Environ. Sci. Technol._ 27, 2227–2235 (1993). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kawamura, K. & Kaplan, I. R. Motor exhaust

emissions as a primary source for dicarboxylic acids in Los Angeles ambient air. _Environ. Sci. Technol._ 21, 105–110 (1987). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Sempere, R. & Kawamura., K.

Comparative distributions of dicarboxylic acids and related polar compounds in snow, rain and aerosols from urban atmosphere. _Atmos. Environ._ 28, 449–459 (1994). Article  CAS  Google

Scholar  * Kawamura, K., Kasukabe, H. & Barrie, L. A. Source and reaction pathways of dicarboxylic acids, ketoacids and dicarbonyls in Artic aerosols: one year of observations. _Atmos.

Environ._ 30, 1709–1722 (1996). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Mkoma, S. L. et al. Major ions in PM2.5 and PM10 released from buses: the use of diesel/biodiesel fuels under real conditions.

_Fuel_ 115, 109–117 (2014). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * VandeVondele, J. et al. QUICKSTEP: Fast and accurate density functional calculations using a mixed Gaussian and plane wave

approach. _Comput. Phys. Commun._ 167, 103–128 (2005). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Becke, A. D. Density-functional exchange-energy approximation with correct asymptotic behavior. _Phys.

Rev. A_ 38, 3098 (1988). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Lee, C., Yang, W. & Parr, R. G. Development of the Colle-Salvetti correlation-energy formula into a functional of the electron

density. _Phys. Rev. B_ 37, 785 (1988). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Grimme, S. Accurate description of van der Waals complexes by density functional theory including empirical

corrections. _J. Comput. Chem._ 25, 1463–1473 (2004). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Grimme, S. Semiempirical GGA-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion

correction. _J. Comput. Chem._ 27, 1787–1799 (2006). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Goedecker, S., Teter, M. & Hutter, J. Separable dual-space Gaussian pseudopotentials. _Phys. Rev. B_

54, 1703 (1996). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Hartwigsen, C., Goedecker, S. & Hutter, J. Relativistic separable dual-space Gaussian pseudopotentials from H to Rn. _Phys. Rev. B_ 58,

3641 (1998). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  Download references ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS M. Kumar and J.S. Francisco acknowledge the computational support from the University of Nebraska Holland

Computing Center. AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS * Department of Chemistry, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA Manoj Kumar & Joseph S. Francisco *

Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, 84602, USA Emily Burrell & Jaron C. Hansen Authors * Manoj Kumar View author publications You can also

search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Emily Burrell View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Jaron C. Hansen View author publications

You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Joseph S. Francisco View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar CONTRIBUTIONS M.K. and

J.S.F. conceived the idea. E.B. and J.H. performed the experiments. M.K. and J.S.F. performed simulations. E.B. and J.H. analyzed experimental results. M.K. and J.S.F. analyzed simulation

results. E.B., J.H., M.K., and J.S.F. wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Joseph S. Francisco. ETHICS DECLARATIONS

COMPETING INTERESTS The authors declare no competing interests. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published

maps and institutional affiliations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLEMENTARY MOVIE 1 SUPPLEMENTARY MOVIE RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS OPEN ACCESS This

article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as

you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party

material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s

Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Reprints and permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE Kumar, M., Burrell, E., Hansen, J.C. _et al._

Molecular insights into organic particulate formation. _Commun Chem_ 2, 87 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42004-019-0183-7 Download citation * Received: 24 October 2018 * Accepted: 19

June 2019 * Published: 26 July 2019 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42004-019-0183-7 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get

shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative