| Literature DB >> 35264674 |
Siyou Xia1,2, Xiaojie Liu3, Qing Liu4, Yannan Zhou1,2, Yu Yang5,6.
Abstract
Haze has reached epidemic levels in many Chinese cities in recent years. Few studies have explored the determinants and heterogeneity of PM2.5. This paper investigates the spatiotemporal characteristics of PM2.5 through spatial analytical methods based on aerosol optical depth data from the Yangtze River Economic Belt (YREB) between 2000 and 2017. Geographically weighted regression and geodetector models were applied to assess the heterogeneity of key factors influencing PM2.5. The results indicate that the annual concentrations of PM2.5 in the YREB were 23.49-37.37 μg/m3, with an initial increase and a later decrease. PM2.5 pollution showed a diagonal high spatial distribution pattern in the northeast and a low spatial distribution in the southwest, as well as a noticeable spatial convergence. The spatial variability of PM2.5 was enlarged, and its main fractal dimension was in the northeast-southwest direction. There were clear spatiotemporal variations in the impacts of natural and anthropogenic factors on PM2.5. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the impact mechanisms of PM2.5 and the geographic factors that form persistent and highly polluted areas and imply that more specific coping strategies need to be implemented in various areas toward successful particulate pollution prevention and control.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35264674 PMCID: PMC8907361 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-08086-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1General overview of the YREB. Standard map services are provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources of China (http://bzdt.ch.mnr.gov.cn/), GS (2020)4619.
Types of interaction between two covariates.
| Diagram | Criterion | Interaction |
|---|---|---|
|
| Nonlinear weakening | |
|
| Min( | Univariate nonlinear weakening |
|
| Bivariate enhancement | |
|
| Independent | |
|
| Nonlinear enhancement |
Min(q(X1), q(X2)) is the minimum value between q(X1) and q(X2); Max(q(X1), q(X2)) is the maximum value between q(X1) and q(X2); q(X1) + q(X2) is the sum of q(X1) and q(X2); q(X1 ∩ X2) is the interaction between q(X1) and q(X2).
Figure 2Variation in the PM2.5 concentration and Moran’s I value in the YREB.
Figure 3Spatial patterns of PM2.5 in the YREB between 2000 and 2017.
Fitting parameters of the PM2.5 concentration variogram.
| Year | Residual sum of squares | Optimal fitting model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 625.27 | 0.0029 | 0.0543 | 0.0534 | 0.960 | 2.061E−04 | Gaussian |
| 2007 | 737.85 | 0.0036 | 0.0492 | 0.0732 | 0.963 | 1.444E−04 | Gaussian |
| 2017 | 635.66 | 0.0011 | 0.0484 | 0.0227 | 0.987 | 5.271E−05 | Gaussian |
Variable difference dimension of PM2.5 concentrations.
| Year | Isotropic | South–North (0°) | Northeast–Southwest (45°) | East–West (90°) | Southeast–Northwest (135°) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 1.536 | 0.959 | 1.517 | 0.847 | 1.430 | 0.985 | 1.603 | 0.918 | 1.527 | 0.922 |
| 2007 | 1.482 | 0.977 | 1.554 | 0.763 | 1.409 | 0.997 | 1.464 | 0.914 | 1.520 | 0.756 |
| 2017 | 1.453 | 0.936 | 1.509 | 0.774 | 1.292 | 0.985 | 1.258 | 0.787 | 1.567 | 0.611 |
Figure 4Evolution of PM2.5 concentrations in the YREB based on variograms.
Fitting results of the GWR model.
| Variables and parameters | 2000 | 2007 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|
| − 0.2792 to 0.4534* | − 0.1764 to 0.6815** | − 0.1982 to 0.4392* | |
| − 0.2327 to 1.2928** | 0.0070–0.9061*** | − 0.0448 to 1.4807*** | |
| − 0.2099 to 0.5177** | − 0.0996 to 0.3314* | − 0.1814 to 0.1884** | |
| − 0.1569 to 0.1629* | − 0.1711 to 0.2928* | − 0.0612 to 0.1158*** | |
| − 1.5755 to 0.2788*** | − 0.6810 to 0.1470*** | − 0.4908 to 0.3147* | |
| − 0.8223 to 0.4898*** | − 0.3110 to 0.0518* | − 0.2301 to 0.3349** | |
| − 0.6251 to 0.0474*** | − 0.7815 to 0.0027*** | − 0.5942 to − 0.0026** | |
| − 0.6420 to 0.1005*** | − 0.7488 to − 0.1018*** | − 1.1785 to − 0.1100*** | |
| Bandwidth | 3.321 | 3.627 | 3.289 |
| AICc | 118.931 | 51.926 | 16.542 |
| 0.949 | 0.966 | 0.977 | |
| Adjusted | 0.913 | 0.944 | 0.960 |
*, ** and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5% and 1% levels, respectively.
Figure 5Spatial distribution of regression coefficients of the GWR model.
Results of interaction detecting.
| Factors | 2000 | 2007 | 2017 | Factors | 2000 | 2007 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NE (0.682) | NE (0.745) | BE (0.709) | NE (0.624) | NE (0.488) | NE (0.749) | ||
| NE (0.281) | NE (0.420) | BE (0.421) | NE (0.570) | NE (0.486) | NE (0.814) | ||
| NE (0.370) | NE (0.225) | NE (0.472) | NE (0.666) | NE (0.794) | BE (0.843) | ||
| NE (0.654) | BE (0.757) | BE (0.748) | NE (0.442) | NE (0.427) | NE (0.373) | ||
| BE (0.657) | NE (0.747) | BE (0.762) | NE (0.602) | BE (0.757) | NE (0.841) | ||
| NE (0.397) | NE (0.432) | NE (0.516) | NE (0.649) | NE (0.842) | BE (0.847) |
NE nonlinear enhancement, BE bifactor enhancement.