See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/349858096

Assessment of pedestrian exposure and deposition of PM10, PM2.5 and

ultrafine particles at an urban roadside: A case study of Xi'an, China

Article  in  Atmospheric Pollution Research · April 2021

DOI: 10.1016/j.apr.2021.02.018

CITATIONS READS

28 330

5 authors, including:

Huitao Lv Haojie Li
Southeast University (China) Southeast University (China)
15 PUBLICATIONS   179 CITATIONS    53 PUBLICATIONS   715 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Zhaowen Qiu Fan Zhang

Chang'an University Southeast University
45 PUBLICATIONS   500 CITATIONS    18 PUBLICATIONS   152 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Covid-19 delivery behaviour View project

Layout optimization and intelligent induction of electric vehicle charging and swapping facilities View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Huitao Lv on 16 September 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Atmospheric Pollution Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apr

Assessment of pedestrian exposure and deposition of PM10, PM2.5 and

ultrafine particles at an urban roadside: A case study of Xi’an, China
Huitao Lv a, Haojie Li a, b, c, Zhaowen Qiu d, *, Fan Zhang a, Jianhua Song a
a
School of Transportation, Southeast University Southeast University Road 2#, Jiangning District, Nanjing, 211189, Jiangsu, China
b
Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Urban ITS, China
c
Jiangsu Province Collaborative Innovation Center of Modern Urban Traffic Technologies, China
d
School of Automobile, Chang’an University Chang’an Road, Xi’an, 710064, Shaanxi, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Assessment of pedestrian exposure and lung deposition is critical to better understanding the health risks
Exposure assessment resulting from exposure to ambient particles, and to develop site-specific risk control countermeasures. In this
Particulate matter (PM) study, real-time mobile-monitoring campaigns of three different PM size fractions (PM10, PM2.5 and UFP) were
Ultrafine particles (UFP)
performed during morning and evening peak hours in two seasons (summer and winter), along road sections with
Deposition dose
MPPD
differing characteristics (commercial and residential) in Xi’an, China. The Multiple-Path Particle Dosimetry
model (MPPD) was utilized to quantify the total and regional depositions for both adults and teens of different
genders. Observed PM10, PM2.5 and UFP concentrations showed pronounced regional, seasonal, and diurnal
variabilities. The total deposition dose was higher in males than in females for all particle-size fractions in both
age groups, except for UFPs in the teen group, the total deposition dose was higher in females. As for regional
depositions, these were observed to be highest in the head region, compared with the tracheobronchial and
pulmonary regions, regardless of a participant’s age or gender. PM10 and PM2.5 showed the highest depositions in
the head region for all age groups (PM10: 90%; PM2.5: 67%), while UFP was highly deposited in the pulmonary
region (66%). The dominant percentage of UFP deposition in the pulmonary regions strengthens the need to
incorporate UFP into the current air-quality index.

1. Introduction mentioned in existing research (HEI, 2013; Ohlwein et al., 2019).

Exposure to particulate matter (PM) is considered a major environ­
mental risk in most of the metropolises in China (Guo et al., 2014; Jia
et al., 2020). Epidemiological studies have shown positive associations
between short- and long-term exposure to PM and numerous adverse
health effects, especially respiratory and cardiovascular health events
(Pope et al., 2004; Wu et al., 2016; Yoshizaki et al., 2017). PM is clas­
sified into categories based on particle size: coarse (≤10 μm), fine (≤2.5
μm), and ultrafine (≤0.1 μm) (Guevara, 2016). The health effects of
ultrafine particles (UFPs) are drawing great concern from both the
general public and health authorities, as PM’s cytotoxic effects increase
as its size decreases (Avino et al., 2016; Li et al., 2016). However, the
mobile monitoring of ultrafine particles and a comprehensive under­
standing of their epidemiological effects are still rare, and are seldom
The health effects of particulate emissions from urban road traffic
have drawn the worldwide attention of the scientific community
because (a) the distribution of these emissions fluctuates rapidly over
both space and time, and (b) the particles generally fall into the finer size
range, which is more harmful to human health (HEI, 2010). Urban
motor-vehicle traffic often passes close to pedestrians, who walk along
busy streets with no buffer between them and the vehicles, creating a
significant probability of pedestrian direct exposure to traffic-related
hazardous air (Tran et al., 2020; Rakowska et al., 2014). The urban
roadside microenvironment has become a high pollution risk area for
pedestrian exposure to particulate matter, with a high source emission
rate and high pollution concentration (HEI, 2010). Moreover, although
the duration of transit exposure may be relatively short, a high con­
centration of pollutants and higher inhalation parameters (such as

Peer review under responsibility of Turkish National Committee for Air Pollution Research and Control.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: huitao114@126.com (H. Lv), h.li@seu.edu.cn (H. Li), qzw@chd.edu.cn (Z. Qiu), 1435551970@qq.com (F. Zhang), 871302763@qq.com
(J. Song).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2021.02.018
Received 28 October 2020; Received in revised form 18 February 2021; Accepted 19 February 2021
Available online 1 March 2021
1309-1042/© 2021 Turkish National Committee for Air Pollution Research and Control. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
H. Lv et al.
ventilation rate) can be especially harmful to pedestrians with deterio­
rating health, highlighting the need for evaluating short-term exposure
levels for high-risk pedestrians (those with compromised respiratory
health) at urban roadsides (Polednik and Piotrowicz, 2020). Several
studies on pedestrian exposure reported that the potential air pollution
hotspots where people walking on sidewalks along urban roads are al­
ways exposed to higher concentrations (Tran et al., 2020; Menon and
Nagendra, 2018). Also, Manigrasso et al., (2017) found that those pe­
destrians with compromised respiratory health are more susceptible to
roadside particles emitted from combustion sources than healthy in­
dividuals. Yet such studies on pedestrian exposure levels, are still quite
limited.
PM health risks to humans are caused by the inhalation of particles
through the nose or mouth followed by deposition in the respiratory
system. The extent of this particle deposition is determined by respira­
tory parameters, lung morphology and particle characteristics (Hof­
mann, 2011; Hussein et al., 2013; Li et al., 2016; Manojkumar et al.,
2019; Madureira et al., 2020). The relationship between PM inhalation
and adverse health outcomes has been widely studied. However, it is
equally (or even more) important to evaluate the PM deposition in the
human respiratory tract regions: head (H), tracheobronchial (TB) and
pulmonary (P) (Kecorius et al., 2019; Rajput et al., 2019). To date, there
are only a few focusing on the PM deposition among pedestrian exposure
measurements (Menon and Nagendra, 2018; Manigrasso et al., 2017).
Hence, it is imperative to determine the particle deposition both in total
and in various regions while simultaneously conducting epidemiological
studies related to outdoor PM pollution.
The existing data on PM lung deposition primarily focus on the adult
male subject (Avino et al., 2016; Li et al., 2016; Jia et al., 2020; Menon
and Nagendra, 2018; Prabhu et al., 2019; Rajput et al., 2019; Voliotis
et al., 2017); less attention has been paid to PM deposition in the more
susceptible populations (Sánchez-Soberón et al., 2015; Hussein et al.,
2013; Kecorius et al., 2019; Madureira et al., 2020), who are particularly
vulnerable to PM pollution effects (WHO, 2013). Furthermore, the ma­
jority of research studies involved in particle deposition in the lungs
have been restricted to only total deposition, with less attention on
regional deposition. However, regional deposition within the lungs is
critical for assessing the potential health risks of inhaled particles
(Hofmann, 2011; Rajput et al., 2019; Prabhu et al., 2019).
To the authors’ knowledge, no studies exist on PM deposition among
Fig. 1. Location of study area and mobile monitoring route, including a school, traffic intersections, residential areas and pedestrian bridge along the route.
113
Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121
pedestrians utilizing real-life exposure measurements at urban roadsides
in China. In addition, data on UFP deposition in the human respiratory
tract, of susceptible subgroups such as children, are lacking, compared
to data on other PM fractions (Madureira et al., 2020). For this reason,
the objectives of the present study were to (1) investigate PM variability
in different seasons, periods of the day and types of road sections, and
(2) evaluate the total and regional deposition fractions and doses of
different PM mass or number size fractions in the human respiratory
system of four age/gender groups (male teens, female teens, male adults
and female adults) coupled with a lung deposition modeling tool, the
MPPD (multiple-path particle dosimetry model), in order to more
comprehensively reveal the adverse effects of high ambient concentra­
tion levels of PM on human health in Xi’an city, China.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Sampling and ambient meteorology
The sampling site (34.23◦ N, 108.95◦ E, Fig. 1) is located in the busiest
commercial area (Xiaozhai) of Xi’an City, the capital and the largest city
of Shaanxi province, with a population exceeding 10 million (Qiu et al.,
2019b). The mobile monitoring was performed during runs in both di­
rections along a 1.65-km route from point A to point B and then
returning to point A. The sampling route for PM measurements repre­
sents a typical route for commuters, with no industrial pollution sources
within 5 km; it includes a commercial section with dense traffic (S-II,
0.53 km) and a residential section with lighter traffic (S-I, 1.12 km), in
order to study exposure levels for different land use patterns.
The personal mobile monitoring campaigns were conducted on
several consecutive days from 28 August to September 23, 2018 (8 days
in the warm season) and between 24 February and March 9, 2019 (5
days in the cold season) at two time periods—morning peak hours
(7:30–9:30 a.m.) and evening peak hours (5:30–7:30 p.m.)—to compare
the PM variations by season and time of day. On each sampling day four
trips were carried out at the same time in the morning and afternoon
peak hours. On average, one complete trip took approximately 40 min;
however, the duration varied depending on the participants’ walking
speed, the time of day and the traffic conditions.
Mass concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 were measured with a
portable particle-size analyzer (Model 11-A, Grimm 1.109, Germany) at
H. Lv et al. Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121

6-s resolution. The number concentration of UFP in the size range of caused by personal factors. All participants were healthy non-smokers,
20–1000 nm was collected using hand-held ultrafine particle counters and no subject had any related respiratory disease that was expected
(P-Track, Model 8525, TSI Inc. MN, USA) with a logging interval of 1-s. to affect PM deposition. The participants’ data (age, weight, height and
The above-assembled equipment was placed at the waist heights of body mass index (BMI)) are shown in Table 1. Two same age subjects (1
participants, as close as possible to the average pedestrian breathing male, 1 female) participated in sequence each day. Each participant
zone. Concurrently, a GPS watch (Runner 2 Cardio, TomTom, Holland) completed the designated route twice in both morning and evening peak
with integrated heart rate (HR) monitor was used to obtain real-time hours. A written informed consent was obtained from all participants
location and HR at 1-s resolution. Traffic flow data and pollution hot­ prior to this study.
spots were recorded with an active camera (Model YAS.1117, XIAOYI,
China). 2.3. Human respiratory tract deposition model
Meteorological parameters (T, RH, wind speed and direction) were
collected from a micro weather station (Model 4500, Kestrel, USA) with The deposition fractions of different sizes of inhaled particles (PM10,
5-s resolution in an open space adjacent to the sampling route. All ex­ PM2.5 and UFP) in each region of the respiratory tract (head (H),
periments were taken under relatively stable meteorological conditions tracheobronchial (TB) and pulmonary (P)) were calculated using the
with a small variation in temperature and wind speed. The average multiple-path particle dosimetry model (MPPD, v3.04). The MPPD
temperatures in warm and cold seasons were 26.8 ◦ C and 11.1 ◦ C, model is capable of calculating overall and regional lung deposition
respectively, and the relative humidities were 52.6% and 47.7%, fractions and clearance by various mechanisms (diffusion, impaction,
respectively (see Supplementary Materials, Table S1). The dominant and sedimentation) at the different parts of respiratory system. The
wind direction in both seasons was southeast, and the wind speed in the deposition fraction is the ratio of number of specific size particles
warm season varied greatly (Fig. 2). deposited in a particular region (head, TB, and pulmonary) to the
All instruments utilized for our measurements were calibrated by number of same size particles entering the airways (Cheng and Swift,
their manufacturer prior to the experiments, and they had been suc­ 1995). The MPPD model is also ideally suited for estimating particle
cessfully used in our other studies in recent years (Qiu et al., 2019a, dosimetry using size-resolved chemical aerosol speciation data (Li et al.,
2019b). Validation tests were performed to evaluate the difference be­ 2016; Voliotis et al., 2017). In the present study, the age-specific 5-lobe
tween the instruments, with no statistically significant differences found model was adopted, as it is closest to the real structure of the human
(r > 0.95, p < 0.05 for PM10 and PM2.5; and r > 0.95, p < 0.05 for UFP). airway morphology, considering that the lung structure of children is
A self-test and zero calibration check were performed at the beginning of significantly different from that of adults in terms of airway size and
each monitoring campaign. The filters used for collecting particles in the respiratory parameters (Ménache et al., 2008). The input parameters
instrument were replaced at each experiment to avoid filter overloading. included: 1) airway morphology (functional residual capacity volume
The GPS watch logged time was cross-calibrated with the PM and UFP
instruments logs to confirm a time and location of each mobile
Table 1
monitoring. Study participants’ main characteristics, and parameters for calculated per-
minute ventilation. All values are in mean ± SD. SD represents standard
deviation.
2.2. Study population characteristics
Characteristics Adult males Adult females Teen males Teen females
(n = 7) (n = 7) (n = 3) (n = 3)
The study participants included 10 adults (5 males, 5 females) and 6
Age (years) 25 ± 6.7 25 ± 6.1 12 ± 0.5 12 ± 0.5
teens (3 males, 3 females) in the warm sampling period, 8 adults (4 Weight (kg) 65.1 ± 4.9 50.3 ± 5.2 39.2 ± 1.0 36.9 ± 1.4
males, 4 females) and 2 teens (1 male, 1 female) in the cold period. This Height (cm) 175.2 ± 3.2 163.3 ± 4.0 147.8 ± 2.1 153.3 ± 1.5
study selected the same participants in order to better compare indi­ BMI (kg/m2) 21.2 ± 1.8 18.9 ± 1.8 17.9 ± 0.7 15.8 ± 0.8
vidual exposure levels between different seasons. It is important to HR (bpm) 103.1 ± 8.2 118.3 ± 8.4 124.3 ± 3.1 129.8 ± 4.5
FVC (L) 5.1 ± 0.3 3.8 ± 0.2 2.7 ± 0.1 2.8 ± 0.1
mention here that the cold-period participants were not identical to the
VE (L min− 1) 24.4 ± 2.8 22.7 ± 2.1 24.5 ± 0.9 23.2 ± 1.5
warm-period participants because the sampling period in winter and the Walking time 38.2 ± 2.0 40.1 ± 2.0 47.8 ± 1.8 49.0 ± 1.4
opening date of the school spring semester did coincide, and because of (min)
individuals’ unique circumstances; however, it was ensured that as far as
HR: heart rate; FVC: forced vital capacity; VE: per-minute ventilation.
possible similar individuals were selected, in order to reduce any error

Fig. 2. Wind rose diagrams in different seasons during the sampling period.

114
H. Lv et al. Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121

(FRC) and upper respiratory tract volume (URT)), 2) particle properties
(such as density, shape, and distribution), and 3) exposure scenarios
(such as breathing frequency (BF), tidal volume (TV), and body orien­
tation). Additionally, model assumptions utilized in the calculation
were: 1) the respiratory physiological parameters for teens and adults
were provided under light outdoor exercise conditions and upright po­
sition; 2) inhaled particles were spherical with uniform density of 1
g/cm3 despite their varying chemical composition (Goel et al., 2018);
and 3) the particles were hydrophobic. It is worth noting here that the
modeling results in this study overestimated the actual deposition level
for pedestrians to some extent, as they were based on Löndahl et al.
(2007), who reported that hydrophobic particles may have 2–4 times
higher deposition probability compared to hygroscopic particles. The
input parameter values were taken from different references (Brown
et al., 2013; ICRP, 1994; Yin et al., 2017); these are given in Table 2. We
distinguished participants into four categories for the deposition
modeling: female teens, male teens, female adults and male adults.
The outcome of MPPD model analysis (i.e., DF, the DF means the
ratio of number of specific size particles deposited in a particular region
(head, TB, and pulmonary) to the number of same size particles entering
the airways is a relative value) was further applied to evaluate the
deposition (in μg or particles) as per the below equation (Goel et al.,
2018).
Deposition = DF*C*T*VE
Table 2
Input parameters and their values specified for the MPPD model.
Input Options/values
parameters
Teens Adults
where DF represents the deposition fraction of particles, C represents the
average concentration of the particles measured in each trip (μg m− 3 or
pt cm− 3), T represents the duration of each complete trip (min) and VE
represents per-minute ventilation (L min− 1), which is calculated with
easy-to-measure variables using the following equation developed by
Greenwald et al. (2019):
Ve = e − 8.57
HR1.72 fB0.611 age0.298 sex− 0.206
FVC0.614 (2)
where heart rate (HR) is in beats per minute (bpm); breath frequency (fB)
is in breaths per minute; and forced vital capacity (FVC) is in liters (L),
which were estimated using the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI)-
2012 reference values; age is in years, sex is 1 for males and 2 for
females.
2.4. Statistical analysis
All data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0 and Origin
2018. A p-value < 0.05 was considered at a statistical significance. The
processing corrected the outliers by replacing those with averages in
each trip collected PM or PN concentrations data (excluding erroneous
readings). Descriptive analysis was used to illustrate differences be­
tween seasonal, spatial, and temporal variables on trip averages for each
pollutant. Independent sample t-test was used to compare differences in
(1)
means between the different groups. Age (or gender)-specific DFs of
PM2.5, PM10 and UFP in different regions of respiratory tract were
estimated using the MPPD (v3.04) model.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Particulate matter exposure variability

Females Males Females Males

Observed time series of PM mass or number size fraction (PM2.5,
Airway PM10, UFP) concentrations and ratios of PM2.5/PM10 during the sam­
morphology
pling period are shown in Fig. 3. The average mass concentrations of
Species Human
Model Age-specific 5 lobe
PM2.5 and PM10 were observed at high levels as compared to the
FRC (mL or L)a 0.286 × 10− 3 × 0.125 × 2.24 × 2.34 × permissible thresholds (PM2.5: 35 μg m− 3 and PM10: 70 μg m− 3) for the
height (cm)3.136 10− 3 × h height(m)+ height (m)+ Chinese ambient air quality standard (NAAQS: GB3095-2012). About
Height 0.001 × age 0.01 × age 69% and 85% of sampling days exceeded the PM2.5 and PM10 NAAQS
(cm)3.298 (years)-1 (years)-1.09
annual limit values, respectively. Summary statistics of spatial and
URT (ml)b 25 25 40 50
Particle temporal variations of PM and PN concentrations are given in Table 3.
properties Notable variability was found at different route sections, with higher
Density (g/cm3) 1 1 1 1 concentrations observed at S-II (commercial) than at S-I (residential).
Aspect ratio 1 1 1 1
One reason for this result may be compact high-rise street layout closer
Diameter CMD CMD CMD CMD
Particle Single Single Single Single
to that of a street canyon at S-II as compared to open midrise configu­
distribution ration at S-I resulting in poor dispersion conditions at S-II. On the other
Inhalability PM10 values PM10 PM10 values PM10 values hand, the differing vehicle operational environment, including the
adjustment values number of traffic lanes, traffic volume and vehicle speed, maybe also the
GSD (diameter/ 1 1 1 1
reason for the difference between the two types road sections (traffic
length)
Exposure volume can be found in Table S1) (Wang et al., 2008).
scenario The measured PM and PN concentrations show a pronounced sea­
Constant Yes sonal variation, with clearly higher concentrations during the cold
exposure season when compared to the warm season (P < 0.05), consistent with
Concentration Seasonal average
Body orientation Upright
previous studies (Jia et al., 2020; Qiu et al., 2019b). This difference
BF (breaths/ 32 32 21 20 could be ascribed to greater atmospheric stability (less vertical mixing)
min)c and increased fuel consumption during the cold season in Xi’an (Prabhu
TV (ml)c 583 583 992 1250 et al., 2019). Further, the presence of haze in winter contributes to a
Inspiration 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
higher concentration (Guo et al., 2014). The average ratio of PM2.5 to
fraction
Breathing Nasal PM10 was found to be higher in winter (0.65) than in summer (0.40),
scenario indicating more secondary organic aerosol emitted from combustion
sources, contributing to higher ambient concentrations during the cold
FRC:functional residual capacity; URT: upper respiratory tract; CMD: count
median diameter; GSD: geometric standard deviation; BF: breathing scenario; season (Menon and Nagendra, 2018). The average ratio of PM2.5/PM10
TV: tidal volume. for summer was observed to be less than 0.5, probably because of the
a
(Yin et al., 2017). substantial contribution from primary sources such as particles and road
b
(Brown et al., 2013). dust resuspension (Goel et al., 2018; Prabhu et al., 2019).
c
(ICRP, 1994). It can be seen that the observed PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations were

115
H. Lv et al. Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121

Fig. 3. Time-series stacked plot of different PM mass or number size fraction (PM2.5, PM10, UFP) concentrations, and ratios of PM2.5/PM10, during the sam­
pling period.

Table 3
Summary statistics of PM and PN concentrations and ratios of PM2.5/PM10 on the S-I and S-II route sections during morning and evening peak hours in summer and
winter seasons.
Study season time period Route section Mass concentration (μg m− 3) Number concentration (103 pt cm− 3) PM Ratio

PM2.5±SD (min-max) PM10±SD (min-max) UFP±SD (min-max) PM2.5/PM10

Summer (28 August to September 23, 2018)

Morning peak (7:30–9:30 a.m.) S-I 39.3 ± 5.1 (7.1–111.2) 90.8 ± 25.5 (8.3–281.9) 11.7 ± 4.3 (4.8–27.9) 0.4 ± 0.1 (0.3–0.5)
S-II 41.5 ± 4.8 (8.4–120.9) 96.1 ± 25.1 (14.9–294.0) 14.8 ± 5.3 (5.5–27.4) 0.4 ± 0.1 (0.3–0.5)
Evening peak (5:30–7:30 p.m.) S-I 30.2 ± 5.81 (6.2–102.6) 72.2 ± 23.9 (7.4–222.0) 18.5 ± 6.8 (8.5–34.1) 0.4 ± 0.1 (0.3–0.5)
S-II 33.0 ± 7.63 (7.4–173.7) 80.3 ± 29.4 (13.9–299.1) 21.1 ± 7.8 (10.3–38.3) 0.4 ± 0.1 (0.3–0.5)
Winter (24 February to March 9, 2019)
Morning peak (7:30–9:30 a.m.) S-I 110.7 ± 4.8 (73.1–197.4) 161.8 ± 18.4 (95.1–325.1) 18.8 ± 5.1 (10.6–32.1) 0.7 ± 0.1 (0.6–0.8)
S-II 113.1 ± 5.1 (77.3–189.3) 167.7 ± 18.8 (46.2–324.7) 23.1 ± 4.9 (14.4–34.3) 0.7 ± 0.1 (0.5–0.8)
Evening peak (5:30–7:30 p.m.) S-I 83.1 ± 6.7 (23.8–186.5) 136.5 ± 24.9 (100.1–378) 19.7 ± 5.0 (10.1–28.1) 0.6 ± 0.2 (0.4–0.8)
S-II 85.5 ± 8.8 (31.1–244.5) 147.9 ± 28.7 (55.3–387.2) 22.5 ± 4.8 (12.2–34.5) 0.6 ± 0.2 (0.4–0.7)

significantly higher during morning peak hours as compared with eve­
ning peak hours, in both winter and summer (P < 0.05). One reason for
this result may be higher traffic density (Table S1) and meteorological
conditions, with low wind speed and layer mixing height in the morning
(see Supplementary Materials, Table S1; Pateraki et al., 2012). In
contrast, the observed UFP concentration was slightly lower in the
morning. There are two possible explanations for this difference. For one
thing, Pateraki et al. (2012) reported that relative humidity was nega­
tively correlated with fine particles, and the agglomeration effect of fine
or ultrafine particles on large particles will be weakened when accom­
panied by the decrease of humidity in the afternoon. For another,
escalated human particle-generating activities toward evening lead to
higher UFP levels (Menon and Nagendra, 2018). The variability in PM or
PN concentrations were primarily influenced by meteorological condi­
tions; mixed traffic and land-use types; and varying emission sources
and human activities. Given that the PM and PN concentrations in the
vicinity of urban roadside depend strongly on the traffic flow. In
particular, relevant literature evidences that, in urban areas, UFP pri­
marily derive from diesel and automobile exhaust particles (Avino et al.,
2016). Thus, it is fundamental to measure traffic-related particles in
order to evaluate pedestrian exposure and related health risks.
3.2. Particulate matter deposition fractions
The total and regional deposition fractions of PM10, PM2.5, and UFP
in each age category are presented in Table 4; these have been calculated
with specific values for different age groups, for functional residual
capacity (FRC), upper respiratory tract volume (URT), breathing fre­
quency (BF) and tidal volume (TV). With respect to total deposition
fractions (DFtotal=DFhead+DFTB+DFP), the particle size representing the
major inhaled proportion deposited in the human respiratory tract was
PM10 (98–99%), followed by PM2.5 (66–93%) and UFP (38–43%). As
expected, the total percentage deposition was found to be higher for
PM10 compared to PM2.5 and UFP. Further, the highest deposition
fractions for PM10 and PM2.5 were observed in the airways of adult
males, while their lowest deposition fractions were observed in the
airways of female teens. A different trend was observed for UFP: the
highest and lowest deposition fractions were observed in the airways of

Table 4
Total and regional deposition fractions of PM2.5, PM10 and UFP, by gender and age.
Gender Age PM2.5 PM10 UFP

Total Head TB P Total Head TB P Total Head TB P

Teens Male 0.676 0.369 0.076 0.231 0.983 0.799 0.182 0.002 0.425 0.107 0.067 0.251
Female 0.664 0.373 0.069 0.222 0.982 0.800 0.179 0.003 0.417 0.108 0.067 0.242
Adults Male 0.925 0.748 0.035 0.142 0.999 0.990 0.009 0 0.384 0.033 0.066 0.285
Female 0.907 0.708 0.039 0.160 0.998 0.986 0.012 0 0.394 0.032 0.067 0.295

116
H. Lv et al. Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121

male teens and male adults, respectively. When considering all particle
sizes, the following vulnerability order of deposition fractions was
deduced from the superposition of the total DFs in each particle size:
adult males > adult females > teen males > teen females. It is worth
noting that estimated DFs in males in both age groups were higher than
those of females in the same age group. Similar results in total DFs have
been reported in the available literature (Hofmann, 2011; Hussein et al.,
2013; Manojkumar et al., 2019; Madureira et al., 2020; Rajput et al.,
2019; Yamada et al., 2007; Yin et al., 2017). An earlier study, though,
found no gender differences in total DFs, for UFPs (Daigle et al., 2003).

Fig. 4. Deposition doses of PM fractions (PM2.5, PM10, UFP) for four age/gender-groups in three respiratory tract regions: head, tracheobronchial (TB) and pul­
monary (P), at S-I and S-II during morning and evening peak hours in winter and summer seasons. M/T = male, teen; F/T = female, teen; M/A = male, adult; F/A =
female, adult.

117
H. Lv et al.
As for physiological regional deposition, PM sizes deposited in the
head, tracheobronchial (TB) and pulmonary regions varied over a
considerable range. PM10 and PM2.5 had the highest depositions in the
head region, for all age groups (PM10: 90%; PM2.5: 67%). The dominant
depositions of PM10 and PM2.5 in the head region were in agreement
with results from other studies (Rajput et al., 2019; Salma et al., 2002).
By contrast, UFPs had the lowest deposition in the head region (17%).
UFP was heavily deposited in the pulmonary region (66%), however,
and was followed by PM2.5 (25%); PM10 had the lowest percentage in
this region (0.3%). The deposition fractions in the TB region were much
smaller than those in the head region—mainly UFP (17%), followed by
PM10 (9.7%) and PM2.5 (8%). It can be seen from the above figures that a
high fraction of coarse particles was deposited in the head region
whereas the fine particles were at relatively high concentrations in the
TB and pulmonary regions. This result is consistent with those reported
in other studies (Behera et al., 2015; Manojkumar et al., 2019). For
coarse particles (PM10), this could be explained as a combination of
impaction and sedimentation mechanisms in the upper respiratory air­
ways. In contrast to PM10, deposition of PM2.5 and UFP are governed by
Brownian diffusion, and penetrate into deeper airways (Behera et al.,
2015; Hofmann, 2011).
As for differences between age groups, the deposition percentages of
PM10 and PM2.5 in the head region were higher for adults than for teens,
while DFs in the lung regions (P and TB) were higher for teens than for
adults. However, opposite trends were observed for UFP. These differ­
ences in the regional DFs, between the two age groups in this study, were
also observed in a previous study by Sánchez-Soberón et al. (2015). By
comparing DF differences between adults and teens, it was also found
that for all particle size fractions, for teens, DFs were greater in the head
region for females than for males, whereas DFs were greater in the TB
and pulmonary regions for males than for females. The DF distributions
in the three regions for adults were opposite to those for teens. The DFs
of each particle size in the head region was higher in males than in fe­
males. The inverse trend was observed for DFs in the TB and pulmonary
regions; these were higher in females. Yin et al. (2017) estimated the DFs
for PM2.5 in the three regions for different ages and genders. They
observed maximum deposition rates in the head and pulmonary regions
for male adults and female adults, respectively. The overall results show
that particle size and breathing rate are the parameters most applicable
to the region of the tract where particles are most likely to be deposited
(Sánchez-Soberón et al., 2015). Therefore, the consideration of different
breathing rates, based on the gender and age of the participants,
enhanced the particle deposition assessment (Salma et al., 2002). The
variation in deposition percentage, among different studies, can be
attributed mainly to the different airway-geometry and breathing pat­
terns used in the deposition model, as well as the different PM fractions
and their deposition mechanisms. These model differences cause the
relevance of these studies to be extremely limited.
3.3. Particulate matter deposition doses
The three calculated particle size fraction absolute deposition doses
(Eq. (1), total and regional deposition) in the three regions of the res­
piratory airway (head, tracheobronchial (TB) and pulmonary (P)) for all
age groups at S-I and S-II during morning and evening peak hours in
winter and summer seasons are shown in Fig. 4. The per-minute venti­
lation rates by age and sex during light exercise were calculated based
on Eq. (2) (Table 1). We observed greater deposition values at S-II than
at S-I. At S-II, the deposition doses were observed to be 61.6 μg, 134.8
μg, and 87.5 pt × 108 for PM2.5, PM10 and UFP, respectively, whereas at
S-I, the deposition doses were found to be 59.8 μg, 127.5 μg, and 74.77
pt × 108 for PM2.5, PM10 and UFP, respectively (see Supplementary
Materials, Table S2), which also highlights the strong contribution of
traffic exhaust to particle generation, especially for ultrafine particles.
Notable differences can be found between winter and summer seasons,
results in line with the elevated PM concentrations measured in winter
118
Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121
as compared to summer. In addition, the highest and lowest deposition
doses of PM2.5 and PM10 in the three regions of the respiratory tract were
during winter mornings and summer evenings, respectively, for all age
groups and route sections, while the corresponding values of UFP
occurred during winter evenings and summer mornings. This result
confirmed that the morning peak hour in winter had more harmful
health impacts than any other period, in most cases (Gupta and Elu­
malai, 2017).
The total deposition dose was higher in males than in females for all
particle size fractions in both adult and teen age groups, except for UFP
in teens (see Supplementary Materials, Table S2). This difference may be
related to the elevated per-minute ventilation rates and larger bodies of
males (Gupta and Elumalai, 2017; Qiu et al., 2019a). For instance, the
total depositions of PM2.5 were about 53.3 and 49.7 μg in adult males
and females, respectively. As for regional deposition doses, which means
quantified three particle size fraction deposition in the head, TB, and
pulmonary regions, respectively, these showed the same trend as the
deposition fractions (in Section 3.2) between males and females in
different age groups, other than UFP in the TB and pulmonary regions.
The deposition doses in the head region were mainly contributed by
PM10. This trend can be observed in Fig. 4, where teens were the group
with the highest PM10 dose deposited in the TB region; the deposition
values were 28.3 and 1.3 μg for teens and adults, respectively, in good
agreement with observations in a previous study (Sánchez-Soberón
et al., 2015). That study reported that the depositions in the TB region
were 16.8 and 1.2 μg/day for children and adults, respectively. As for
the PM2.5 deposition, it was higher in the pulmonary region than in the
TB region for all the groups considered. Depositions in the TB and pul­
monary regions were nearly twice as high for teens as for adults. An
opposite trend was observed for UFP deposition distributions; the
deposition dose of UFP was more significant in the pulmonary region.
Overall, PM10 and PM2.5 total deposition doses followed the same trend
regarding age groups: namely teen males > teen females > adult mal­
es> adult females, while the following was the order for UFP: teen fe­
males > teen males > adult males> adult females. These hierarchies
imply greater vulnerabilities of teens to air pollution, consistent with
results from other relevant studies (Jia et al., 2020; Patterson et al.,
2014). In general, the variation in deposition doses between different
age groups could be explained by the discrepancies in per-minute
ventilation, walking time, and deposition fractions calculated in the
present study (Table 1).
Next we focus on the percentage contributions (%) of different PM
fractions in the total deposition doses in the head, TB and pulmonary
regions, between teens and adults (Fig. 5). These percentages were
derived from the data presented in Fig. 4. The percentage deposition
doses (teen values in parentheses) of UFP were observed to be 8.22%
(25.32%), 17.30% (15.82%), and 74.48% (58.86%) in the head, TB and
pulmonary regions, respectively. These results restated that ultrafine
particle deposition was highest (particularly for adults) in the pulmo­
nary region, followed by the TB region, consistent with the studies by
Avino et al. (2016) and Vu et al. (2016). Although the percentage
deposition of PM2.5 was more significant in the head region, the per­
centage in the pulmonary region was much higher than that of PM10.
Overall, the deposition values in the pulmonary region were higher for
UFP (66.67%) compared with PM2.5 (25.15%) and PM10 (0.13%), in all
periods. Many researchers have demonstrated that the adverse effects of
PM increase as particle size decreases, thereby highlighting the negative
effects of UFPs (Daigle et al., 2003; Li et al., 2016). The dominant per­
centage deposition of UFPs in the pulmonary region can cause severe
respiratory health problems and lung injury (Pope et al., 2004).
According to the age-specific deposition doses, some kind of long-
term health effects could be expected. The deposition doses of PM2.5
and PM10 in the head region were the highest regardless of a partici­
pant’s age or gender, and average PM10 deposited in the head region of
teen females (126.4 μg) in four age/gender-groups were highest than
those others, likely indicating a higher probability of upper respiratory
H. Lv et al.
Fig. 5. Percentage contributions of PM fractions (PM2.5, PM10, UFP) in total deposition doses in head, tracheobronchial (TB) and pulmonary (P) regions, for teens
and adults.
tract diseases such as rhinitis and pharyngitis for this age group (Vin­
cent, 2005). Several researchers found a similar tendency (Salma et al.,
2002; Prabhu et al., 2019). Additionally, the deposition of PM2.5 and
PM10 in the TB region for teens was much higher (PM2.5:7.6 μg;
PM10:28.4 μg) than that for adults (PM2.5:2.1 μg; PM10:1.2 μg), and that
of teen males (PM2.5:8.1 μg; PM10:28.4 μg) was higher than that of fe­
males (PM2.5:7.2 μg; PM10:28.2 μg), suggesting a greater risk of asthma
in teen males group (Sánchez-Soberón et al., 2015) (Sánchez-Soberón
et al., 2015). As expected, the pulmonary region in the teens had higher
deposition, which are the vulnerable groups of population, rather than
adults. The reason may be ascribed to individuals aged below 12 years
with short-term traffic-related particles exposure were at higher risk of
cardiovascular mortality. Also, the difference of three particle fractions
absolute deposition amount in summer and winter was higher for teens
than that for adults (Table S2). Specifically, the deposition doses in
winter for teens (adults) were 3.1(1.3), 1.4 (0.6), and 0.9 (0.02) times
higher than deposition in summer for PM2.5, PM10, and UFP, respec­
tively. This implies that the effect of haze and increased fuel consump­
tion in winter on health could be more significant for teens than for
adults (P < 0.05), which was agreement with the previous results (Jia
et al., 2020). Importantly, deposition dose values reported by various
researchers were calculated utilizing different particle dosimetry models
(i.e. ICRP, MPPD, etc.), input parameters, and lung morphology of
subjects, making data comparisons difficult (Patterson et al., 2014;
Yamada et al., 2007).
3.4. Implications and limitations of this study
Based on the results of the present research work, short-term expo­
sure to traffic-related particles increases exposure health risks, espe­
cially under adverse conditions such as peak hours or high traffic density
roads. Certainly, studies have shown that moderate-intensity activity
associated with active commuting (such as walking or cycling) can
partially offset the negative effects of exposure to air pollution (An et al.,
2020). However, considering the pulmonary region deposition of teens
and females were substantially more susceptible to the impact of PM
pollution than the general adult population and, therefore, may need to
reduce their duration of outdoor activity under elevated PM exposure.
Teens are a particularly vulnerable group, and the implementation of
off-peak school commute hours is necessary, mainly in downtown areas.
At the same time, it is necessary for concerned authorities to take steps
to alleviate traffic congestion in commercial areas, such as establishing
119
Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121
congestion charging regimes and multi-story parking lots. Moreover,
spraying the road surface regularly can prevent resuspension of roadside
dust.
Nevertheless, there are still some limitations in the present study.
Only deposition calculations were performed without considering any
clearance mechanisms, which reflects the fact that these estimations are
also only reflecting one trip time exposure and not the cumulative
exposure over a larger period (a year, e.g., or several years). Also, the
exposure and deposition doses could be expected to increase during
outdoor exercise and from traffic on neighboring roadsides (Daigle et al.,
2003; Hussein et al., 2013). Consequently, the estimated DFs and de­
positions doses provided in the present study represent the worst-case
scenario for pedestrian exposure assessment. Furthermore, only a
nasal breathing pattern was found to be associated with lower regional
deposition in TB and pulmonary regions (Jia et al., 2020). Moreover, due
to constraints related to the cost of PM mobile monitoring, a relatively
low sample size of two age groups (adults vs. teens) was measured
during the summer and winter seasons, as it is difficult to recruit and
measure a large number of subjects during a limited time period. Hence,
in future work individual variability based on age and gender should be
better considered, and as much as possible conducted on a larger sample,
to obtain long-term pedestrian exposure data.
4. Conclusions
This study collected real-time mobile monitoring data of PM10, PM2.5
and UFP measurements involving about 36 h and 176 km of walking on
several consecutive days, and evaluated the potential respiratory
deposition in the three regions (head (H), tracheobronchial (TB), and
pulmonary (P)) of the human respiratory tract for different age groups,
in an environment that accurately reflected real conditions. It also
analyzed health risks from PM exposure to the study population, in the
city of Xi’an. Several relevant conclusions were as follows.
Observed PM concentrations were found at higher concentrations at
S-II (commercial) than at S-I (residential), which might be attributed to
the different vehicle operational environments and a street canyon
layout with poor dispersion conditions. The significant seasonal vari­
ability in exposure concentrations was mainly caused by greater atmo­
spheric stability (less vertical mixing) and increased fuel consumption
caused by the heating period in winter. Moreover, much higher PM10
and PM2.5 concentrations were found during the morning peak hours
than during the evening, while the opposite was observed for UFP.
H. Lv et al.
Therefore, these results highlight the fact that heterogeneous traffic,
meteorological conditions, mixed land use types, and human activities
have a significant impact on PM exposure variability.
The MPPD dosimetry model suggested that the total deposition
fractions were found to be higher for PM10 compared to PM2.5 and UFP.
PM2.5 and PM10 had higher regional deposition fractions in the head
region (90% and 67%, respectively), while UFP was higher in the pul­
monary region (66%). The total deposition dose was higher in males
than in females for all particle size fractions, except for UFP in the teen
group, a result that may be related to the elevated per-minute ventila­
tion rates and larger bodies of males. Age also plays a vital role in the
total deposition dose. For the three particle-size fractions considered,
teens inhaled higher deposition doses than adults. Overall, high vari­
ability in the PM deposition doses could be explained by the discrep­
ancies in exposure concentrations, per-minute ventilation rate, walking
time, and deposition fractions calculated in the present study. The head-
and pulmonary-region depositions were primarily dominated by PM10
and UFP, respectively. The higher accumulation deposition percentage
in the lung regions (P and TB) was in teens, which was the group more
susceptible than adults since their immune and lung functions are not
fully developed.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the National Natural Science Founda­
tion of China (Program No. 52072045) and the Natural Science Basic
Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (Program No. 2020JM-225),
and the Postgraduate Research and Practice Innovation Program of
Jiangsu Province, China (Grant No. KYCX20_0129).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apr.2021.02.018.
Credit author statement
Huitao Lv: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Writing –
original draft preparation. Zhaowen Qiu: Conceptualization, Writing-
Reviewing and Editing, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Project
administration. Haojie Li: Writing- Reviewing and Editing. Fan Zhang:
Investigation, Writing- Reviewing and Editing. Jianhua Song: Investi­
gation, Writing-Reviewing and Editing.
References
An, R., Kang, H., Cao, L., Xiang, X., 2020. Engagement in outdoor physical activity under
ambient fine particulate matter pollution: a risk-benefit analysis. J. Sport Heal. Sci.
20, S2095–S2546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2020.09.008, 30127-7.
Avino, P., Protano, C., Vitali, M., Manigrasso, M., 2016. Benchmark study on fine-mode
aerosol in a big urban area and relevant doses deposited in the human respiratory
tract. Environ. Pollut. 216, 530–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2016.06.005.
Behera, S.N., Betha, R., Huang, X., Balasubramanian, R., 2015. Characterization and
estimation of human airway deposition of size-resolved particulate-bound trace
elements during a recent haze episode in Southeast Asia. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
22, 4265–4280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3645-6.
Brown, J.S., Gordon, T., Price, O., Asgharian, B., 2013. Thoracic and respirable particle
definitions for human health risk assessment. Part. Fibre Toxicol 10, 1–12. https://
doi.org/10.1186/1743-8977-10-12.
Cheng, K.H., Swift, D.L., 1995. Calculation of total deposition fraction of ultrafine
aerosols in human extrathoracic and intrathoracic regions. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 22,
194–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829509508887.
120
Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121
Daigle, C.C., Chalupa, D.C., Gibb, F.R., Morrow, P.E., Oberdörster, G., Utell, M.J.,
Frampton, M.W., 2003. Ultrafine particle deposition in humans during rest and
exercise. Inhal. Toxicol. 15, 539–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/08958370304468.
Goel, A., Izhar, S., Gupta, T., 2018. Study of environmental particle levels, its effects on
lung deposition and relationship with human behaviour. In: Environmental
Contaminants, pp. 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7332-8_4.
Greenwald, R., Hayat, M.J., Dons, E., Giles, L., Villar, R., Jakovljevic, D.G., Good, N.,
2019. Estimating minute ventilation and air pollution inhaled dose using heart rate,
breath frequency, age, sex and forced vital capacity: a pooled-data analysis. PloS One
14, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218673.
Guevara, M., 2016. Emissions of primary particulate matter. In: Airborne Particulate
Matter: Sources, Atmospheric Processes and Health. The Royal Society of Chemistry,
pp. 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781782626589-00001.
Guo, S., Hu, M., Zamora, M.L., Peng, J., Shang, D., Zheng, J., Du, Z., Wu, Z., Shao, M.,
Zeng, L., Molina, M.J., Zhang, R., 2014. Elucidating severe urban haze formation in
China. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A 111, 17373–17378. https://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.1419604111.
Gupta, S.K., Elumalai, S.P., 2017. Size-segregated particulate matter and its association
with respiratory deposition doses among outdoor exercisers in Dhanbad City, India.
J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 67, 1137–1145. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10962247.2017.1344159.
HEI, 2013. Understanding the Health Effects of Ambient Ultrafine Particles (Boston, MA).
HEI, 2010. Traffic-related Air Pollution: A Critical Review of the Literature on Emissions,
Exposure, and Health Effects. Health Effects Institute (HEI), Boston, MA.
Hofmann, W., 2011. Modelling inhaled particle deposition in the human lung-A review.
J. Aerosol Sci. 42, 693–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2011.05.007.
Hussein, T., Löndahl, J., Paasonen, P., Koivisto, A.J., Petäjä, T., Hämeri, K., Kulmala, M.,
2013. Modeling regional deposited dose of submicron aerosol particles. Sci. Total
Environ. 458, 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.04.022.
ICRP, 1994. Human respiratory tract model for radiological protection. A report of a task
group of the international commission on radiological protection. Ann. ICRP 24,
1–482.
Jia, S., Zhang, Q., Sarkar, S., Mao, J., Hang, J., Chen, W., Wang, X., Yuan, L., Yang, L.,
Ye, G., Zhou, S., 2020. Size-segregated deposition of atmospheric elemental carbon
(EC) in the human respiratory system: a case study of the Pearl River Delta, China.
Sci. Total Environ. 708, 134932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134932.
Kecorius, S., Madueño, L., Löndahl, J., Vallar, E., Galvez, M.C., Idolor, L.F., Gonzaga-
Cayetano, M., Müller, T., Birmili, W., Wiedensohler, A., 2019. Respiratory tract
deposition of inhaled roadside ultrafine refractory particles in a polluted megacity of
South-East Asia. Sci. Total Environ. 663, 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2019.01.338.
Li, X., Yan, C., Patterson, R.F., Zhu, Yujiao, Yao, X., Zhu, Yifang, Ma, S., Qiu, X., Zhu, T.,
Zheng, M., 2016. Modeled deposition of fine particles in human airway in Beijing,
China. Atmos. Environ. Times 124, 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2015.06.045.
Löndahl, J., Massling, A., Pagels, J., Swietlicki, E., Vaclavik, E., Loft, S., 2007. Size-
resolved respiratory-tract deposition of fine and ultrafine hydrophobic and
hygroscopic aerosol particles during rest and exercise. Inhal. Toxicol. 19, 109–116.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08958370601051677.
Madureira, J., Slezakova, K., Silva, A.I., Lage, B., Mendes, A., Aguiar, L., Pereira, M.C.,
Teixeira, J.P., Costa, C., 2020. Assessment of indoor air exposure at residential
homes: inhalation dose and lung deposition of PM10, PM2.5 and ultrafine particles
among newborn children and their mothers. Sci. Total Environ. 717, 137293.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137293.
Manigrasso, M., Natale, C., Vitali, M., Protano, C., Avino, P., 2017. Pedestrians in traffic
environments: ultrafine particle respiratory doses. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health
14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030288.
Manojkumar, N., Srimuruganandam, B., Shiva Nagendra, S.M., 2019. Application of
multiple-path particle dosimetry model for quantifying age specified deposition of
particulate matter in human airway. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 168, 241–248. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.10.091.
Ménache, M.G., Hofmann, W., Ashgarian, B., Miller, F.J., 2008. Airway geometry models
of children’s lungs for use in dosimetry modeling. Inhal. Toxicol. 20, 101–126.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08958370701821433.
Menon, J.S., Nagendra, S.M.S., 2018. Personal exposure to fine particulate matter
concentrations in central business district of a tropical coastal city. J. Air Waste
Manag. Assoc. 68, 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2017.1407837.
Ohlwein, S., Kappeler, R., Joss, M.K., Kunzli, N., Hoffmann, B., 2019. Health effects of
ultrafine particles: a systematic literature review update of epidemiological
evidence. Int. J. Public Health 64, 547–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-019-
01202-7.
Pateraki, S., Asimakopoulos, D.N., Flocas, H.A., Maggos, T., Vasilakos, C., 2012. The role
of meteorology on different sized aerosol fractions (PM10, PM2.5, PM2.5-10). Sci.
Total Environ. 419, 124–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.12.064.
Patterson, R.F., Zhang, Q., Zheng, M., Zhu, Y., 2014. Particle deposition in respiratory
tracts of school-aged children. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 14, 64–73. https://doi.org/
10.4209/aaqr.2013.04.0113.
Polednik, B., Piotrowicz, A., 2020. Pedestrian exposure to traffic-related particles along a
city road in Lublin, Poland. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 11, 686–692. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apr.2019.12.019.
Pope 3rd, C.A., Burnett, R.T., Thurston, G.D., Thun, M.J., Calle, E.E., Krewski, D.,
Godleski, J.J., 2004. Cardiovascular mortality and long-term exposure to particulate
air pollution: epidemiological evidence of general pathophysiological pathways of
disease. Circulation 109, 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.
CIR.0000108927.80044.7F.
H. Lv et al.
Prabhu, V., Gupta, S.K., Madhwal, S., Shridhar, V., 2019. Exposure to atmospheric
particulates and associated respirable deposition dose to street vendors at the
residential and commercial sites in dehradun city. Saf. Health Work 10, 237–244.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2019.01.005.
Qiu, Z., Lv, H., Zhang, F., Wang, W., Hao, Y., 2019a. Pedestrian exposure to PM2.5, BC
and UFP of adults and teens: a case study in Xi’an, China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 51,
101774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101774.
Qiu, Z., Wang, W., Zheng, J., Lv, H., 2019b. Exposure assessment of cyclists to UFP and
PM on urban routes in Xi’an, China. Environ. Pollut. 250, 241–250. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.129.
Rajput, P., Izhar, S., Gupta, T., 2019. Deposition modeling of ambient aerosols in human
respiratory system: health implication of fine particles penetration into pulmonary
region. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 10, 334–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apr.2018.08.013.
Rakowska, A., Wong, K.C., Townsend, T., Chan, K.L., Westerdahl, D., Ng, S., Močnik, G.,
Drinovec, L., Ning, Z., 2014. Impact of traffic volume and composition on the air
quality and pedestrian exposure in urban street canyon. Atmos. Environ. 98,
260–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.073.
Salma, I., Balásházy, I., Winkler-Heil, R., Hofmann, W., Záray, G., 2002. Effect of particle
mass size distribution on the deposition of aerosols in the human respiratory system.
J. Aerosol Sci. 33, 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-8502(01)00154-9.
Sánchez-Soberón, F., Mari, M., Kumar, V., Rovira, J., Nadal, M., Schuhmacher, M., 2015.
An approach to assess the Particulate Matter exposure for the population living
around a cement plant: modelling indoor air and particle deposition in the
respiratory tract. Environ. Res. 143, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2015.09.008.
Tran, P.T.M., Ngoh, J.R., Balasubramanian, R., 2020. Assessment of the integrated
personal exposure to particulate emissions in urban micro-environments: a pilot
study. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 20, 341–357. https://doi.org/10.4209/
aaqr.2019.04.0201.
V Vu, T., Ondráček, J., Ždímal, V., Schwarz, J., Delgado-Saborit, J.M., Harrison, R., 2016.
Physical properties and lung deposition of particles emitted from five major indoor
121
View publication stats
Atmospheric Pollution Research 12 (2021) 112–121
sources. Air Qual. Atmos. Heal. 10, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11869-016-
0424-1.
Vincent, J., 2005. Health-related aerosol measurement: a review of existing sampling
criteria and proposals for new ones. J. Environ. Monit. 7, 1037–1053. https://doi.
org/10.1039/b509617k.
Voliotis, A., Karali, I., Kouras, A., Samara, C., 2017. Fine and ultrafine particle doses in
the respiratory tract from digital printing operations. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24,
3027–3037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-8047-5.
Wang, Y., Zhu, Y., Salinas, R., Ramirez, D., Karnae, S., John, K., 2008. Roadside
measurements of ultrafine particles at a busy urban intersection. J. Air Waste Manag.
Assoc. 58, 1449–1457. https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.58.11.1449.
WHO, 2013. Health Effects of Particulate Matter. Policy Implications for Countries in
Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia. World Health Organization. https://doi.
org/10.3904/kjm.2016.91.2.106.
Wu, C.-F., Shen, F.-H., Li, Y.-R., Tsao, T.-M., Tsai, M.-J., Chen, C.-C., Hwang, J.-S., Hsu, S.
H.-J., Chao, H., Chuang, K.-J., Chou, C.C.K., Wang, Y.-N., Ho, C.-C., Su, T.-C., 2016.
Association of short-term exposure to fine particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide
with acute cardiovascular effects. Sci. Total Environ. 569, 300–305. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.084.
Yamada, Y., Fukutsu, K., Kurihara, O., Momose, T., Miyabe, K., Akashi, M., 2007.
Influences of biometrical parameters on aerosol deposition in the ICRP 66 human
respiratory tract model: Japanese and caucasians. Earozoru Kenkyu 22, 236–243.
https://doi.org/10.11203/jar.22.236.
Yin, W., Hou, J., Xu, T., Cheng, J., Wang, X., Jiao, S., Wang, L., Huang, C., Zhang, Y.,
Yuan, J., 2017. Association of individual-level concentrations and human respiratory
tract deposited doses of fine particulate matter with alternation in blood pressure.
Environ. Pollut. 230, 621–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.07.006.
Yoshizaki, K., Brito, J.M., Silva, L.F., Lino-dos-Santos-Franco, A., Frias, D.P., e Silva, R.C.,
Amato-Lourenco, L.F., Nascimento Saldiva, P.H., Lopes Calvo Tiberio, I. de F.,
Mauad, T., Macchione, M., 2017. The effects of particulate matter on inflammation
of respiratory system: differences between male and female. Sci. Total Environ. 586,
284–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.221.