ライフサイエンスコーパス: vapor pressure

1 below 2 ppb (i.e., <0.02% of its saturation vapor pressure).

2 re), group 4 (PLV: highest viscosity, lowest vapor pressure).

3 lization due to the effect of temperature on vapor pressure.

4 ssociated with ambient temperature and water vapor pressure.

5 within 3 km) increased with subcooled liquid vapor pressure.

6 designed to produce no increase in gasoline vapor pressure.

7 n, with weaker influences of temperature and vapor pressure.

8 cury halides may have an appreciable partial vapor pressure.

9 face by extrapolating toward the equilibrium vapor pressure.

10 vary inversely with the analyte's saturation vapor pressure.

11 energy density, low hygroscopicity, and low vapor pressure.

12 are more desirable as they have virtually no vapor pressure.

13 per million and vary inversely with solvent vapor pressure.

14 table electrical conductivity and negligible vapor pressure.

15 followed the analyte fraction of saturation vapor pressure.

16 ed for body temperature, pressure, and water vapor pressure.

17 nose at a constant fraction of the odorant's vapor pressure.

18 lium at a constant fraction of the odorant's vapor pressure.

19 ined at a constant fraction of the odorant's vapor pressure.

20 eratures altered their protonation state and vapor pressure.

21 rounding pressure drops below the saturation vapor pressure.

22 n exposed to elevated temperatures and water vapor pressure.

23 (95% CI, 1.4%-16.9%) for a 1-hPa increase in vapor pressure.

24 d exposure are usually strongly dependent on vapor pressure.

25 pounds (VOCs) and other compounds with lower vapor pressures.

26 ch mixture was determined by the components' vapor pressures.

27 situ under near ambient conditions of water vapor pressure (1 Torr) and temperature (275-520 K).

28 tation (11%), livestock distribution (6.2%), vapor pressure (3.4%), wind speed (0.8%), and land cover

29 lution and to weather (temperature and water vapor pressure, a measure of humidity).

30 point above room temperature but with a high vapor pressure above the solid at room temperature, enab

31 served, increasing the contact angle and the vapor pressure above their values in the purely hydropho

32 Amino acids have appreciable vapor pressures above 150 degrees C and will sublime und

33 d to a residue at ~20 degrees C, while lower-vapor pressure amines like diglycolamine and n,n-bis-(3-

34 cit, the impact of temperature on saturation vapor pressure and access to groundwater muted the respo

35 vation parameters, the new relationships use vapor pressure and aqueous solubility of the organic com

36 gallium have low toxicity and essentially no vapor pressure and are therefore considered safe to hand

37 The vapor pressure and associated gas-particle partitioning

38 An exponential relationship between vapor pressure and effective temperature is determined a

39 ) system are used to estimate the saturation vapor pressure and enthalpy of vaporization of ammonium

40 lvents" because of their extraordinarily low vapor pressure and excellent solvation power, but ecotox

41 important absorber, is set by the saturation vapor pressure and hence is dependent on temperature.

42 decrease with height of the saturation water vapor pressure and hence radiative cooling by water vapo

43 t, in addition to energetic factors, analyte vapor pressure and polymer/analyte solubility play an im

44 Furthermore, the ionic liquids, with zero vapor pressure and stable chemical properties, ensure a

45 on equation to obtain a relationship between vapor pressure and temperature and to determine the heat

46 gous to the thermodynamic expression between vapor pressure and temperature found for pure liquids.

47 the solute characteristic volume, the solute vapor pressure and the solubility parameter of CO2 tend

48 r reference, the volatility, i.e. saturation vapor pressure and vaporization enthalpy, of the pure su

49 re correlated to their Henry's Law constant, vapor pressure and water solubility.

50 od is relatively simple and rapid and yields vapor pressures and heats of vaporization that are in go

51 ent factors: (1) cohesive energy (related to vapor pressure) and (2) atomic size (quantified by the W

52 to prevent self-polymerization, increase the vapor pressure, and allow linear cycle-by-cycle growth e

53 er their high solubalizing power, negligible vapor pressure, and broad liquid temperature range are a

54 energy density, lower hygroscopicity, lower vapor pressure, and compatibility with existing transpor

55 ly predicted the boiling point, flash point, vapor pressure, and viscosity of a number of volatile li

56 0O5), which is expected to have a saturation vapor pressure approximately 2 orders of magnitude highe

57 nal retention indices to estimate the liquid vapor pressures, aqueous solubilities, air-water partiti

58 elevation, (ii) temperature variability and vapor pressure are the strongest drivers of geographic s

59 the latter species by HO(*) decreases their vapor pressure as a second hydroxyl group is incorporate

60 recover, and liquefy organic compounds with vapor pressures as low as 8.3 x 10(-5) and the first tim

61 f pollutants at the poles because of reduced vapor pressure at low temperatures) is often strongly at

62 Due to the low vapor pressure at room temperature, the sorption isother

63 lic and C6-C8 dicarboxylic acids, which have vapor pressures at 25 degrees C of approximately 10(-4)

64 must be the case for the description of the vapor pressure based on the Kelvin equation.

65 eaves, e (i) approached 0.6 times saturation vapor pressure before the precipitous decline in transpi

66 Compounds of vapor pressures below 10(-7) Torr, such as tetryl, cocai

67 et PAH with the lowest subcooled equilibrium vapor pressure --benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[ghi]perylene, and

68 se of the high degree of overlap in compound vapor pressures, boiling points, and mass spectral fragm

69 r in the solution at (T, pel), including its vapor pressure, chemical potential, volume, internal ene

70 Detection of low vapor pressure chemicals (LVPCs) such as pesticides and

71 ncentrations and dynamic behavior of a lower vapor pressure compound, diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP),

72 Airborne concentrations of SVOCs with vapor pressures corresponding to C25 to C31 alkanes corr

73 e conductance (G) respond to drying soil and vapor pressure deficit (D) in complex ways.

74 ate change, including soil moisture (theta), vapor pressure deficit (D), and atmospheric CO(2) concen

75 opy ) from soil water potential (Psoil ) and vapor pressure deficit (D).

76 t increased temperature decreases growth via vapor pressure deficit (VPD) across all latitudes.

77 Vapor pressure deficit (VPD) and air temperature were ma

78 Stomatal responses to vapor pressure deficit (VPD) are a principal means by wh

79 Stomatal responses to changes in vapor pressure deficit (VPD) constitute the predominant

80 l conductance (gs ) to irradiance, CO2 , and vapor pressure deficit (VPD) for 13 phylogenetically div

81 responses of COS and CO(2) uptake, and with vapor pressure deficit (VPD) in the peak growing season,

82 We investigated gas exchange responses to vapor pressure deficit (VPD) in two gray poplar (Populus

83 We show a recent increasing trend in Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) over tropical South America

84 ent satellite-derived estimates of GPP use a vapor pressure deficit (VPD) scalar to account for the l

85 Small increases in temperature can increase vapor pressure deficit (VPD) which may increase tree wat

86 to precipitation (cumulative 2002-2003) and vapor pressure deficit (VPD), with little to no mortalit

87 ldwide, resulting in an exponential climb in vapor pressure deficit (VPD).

88 ies in mean temperature (+1.6 degrees C) and vapor pressure deficit (VPD, +0.66 kPa), annual percent

89 Antecedent air temperature (Tairant ) and vapor pressure deficit (VPDant ) effects on Amax (over t

90 between dry bean yield and leaf-to-air water vapor pressure deficit (VpdL), suggesting that VpdL is a

91 tendencies of T/ET increasing with dryness (vapor pressure deficit and days since rain) and with lea

92 temperature, precipitation, solar radiation, vapor pressure deficit and frost at a spatial resolution

93 drought stresses by raising the atmospheric vapor pressure deficit and reducing transpiration effici

94 um temperature and, upon thawing, related to vapor pressure deficit and soil temperature.

95 bles: light, temperature, CO2 concentration, vapor pressure deficit and soil water content.

96 ic records of seasonal precipitation amount, vapor pressure deficit and the Palmer Drought Severity I

97 conjunction with increasing temperatures and vapor pressure deficit due to climate change.

98 .4 degrees C, coupled with a 1.0 kPa drop in vapor pressure deficit having a 9-minute lag following t

99 negative coupling between soil moisture and vapor pressure deficit occurs globally, indicating high

100 A common vapor pressure deficit of 0.62 kilopascal was maintained

101 isture status through their influence on the vapor pressure deficit of the atmospheric boundary layer

102 tions of water potential, soil moisture, and vapor pressure deficit over 2 yr in the Northern Rocky M

103 odels that represent the response of g(s) to vapor pressure deficit performed better than correspondi

104 Anthropogenic increases in temperature and vapor pressure deficit significantly enhanced fuel aridi

105 Although vapor pressure deficit was an important driver of sap ve

106 soil moisture) and atmospheric aridity (high vapor pressure deficit) can be disastrous for natural an

107 solar radiation, diffuse light fraction, and vapor pressure deficit) that interact with model paramet

108 r vapor, photosynthetic photon flux density, vapor pressure deficit, and air temperature.

109 onses associated with competition, midsummer vapor pressure deficit, and increased growing season len

110 This led to cooler temperatures, decreased vapor pressure deficit, and increased surface soil moist

111 se to interannual variations in temperature, vapor pressure deficit, and precipitation, and responses

112 Spring precipitation, vapor pressure deficit, and summer storms had direct eff

113 tion driven by T(air) , light intensity, and vapor pressure deficit, and T(leaf) was strongly linearl

114 ture (SoilT)] and aboveground factors (e.g., vapor pressure deficit, photosynthetically active radiat

115 distinct thresholds for recruitment based on vapor pressure deficit, soil moisture, and maximum surfa

116 n dioxide concentrations, soil moisture, and vapor pressure deficit, the impact of temperature on sat

117 as functions of soil water, air temperature, vapor pressure deficit, vegetation greenness, and nitrog

118 content (SWC) and high atmospheric dryness (vapor pressure deficit, VPD) can negatively affect terre

119 ween high temperature and relative humidity (vapor pressure deficit--VPD).

120 he wetness index and was directly related to vapor pressure deficit.

121 and more responsive to short-term changes in vapor pressure deficit.

122 ze, antecedent soil moisture, and post-event vapor pressure deficit.

123 conductance, as might occur under increasing vapor pressure deficit.

124 gative effect of drought via increased water vapor pressure deficit.

125 uercus canariensis) in response to light and vapor pressure deficit.

126 Atmospheric vapor-pressure deficit (VPD) is increasing in many regio

127 Changes in diurnal cycles of temperature and vapor-pressure deficit and an increase in sensible versu

128 gulation by CO(2) and, as hypothesized here, vapor-pressure deficit.

129 trongly affected by PAR, air temperature and vapor-pressure deficit.

130 ields to drought stress associated with high vapor pressure deficits has increased.

131 , trembling aspen, and linked high midsummer vapor pressure deficits to decreased growth and increase

132 modern times, indicating that differences in vapor-pressure deficits did not impose additional constr

133 Upon exposure to acetic acid at 1% of its vapor pressure, detectors consisting of linear poly(ethy

134 ihuahuan C(4) grasses were more sensitive to vapor pressure difference (D) at night and soil water po

135 n Arabidopsis thaliana and its dependence on vapor pressure difference (VPD) and on water feed to the

136 measured the stomatal response to changes in vapor pressure difference (VPD) in two natural forms of

137 ed atmospheric vapor demand: the leaf-to-air vapor pressure difference (VPD).

138 is also lost during torpor due to a positive vapor pressure difference created by the slightly higher

139 volatility and increases homogeneity of the vapor pressure distribution, presumably because highly v

140 pons detectors in that it does not require a vapor pressure, does not require sample preparation, and

141 exchange were used to estimate intercellular vapor pressure, e (i) In wild-type leaves, there was no

142 developed to simulate the observations using vapor pressure estimates for compounds that potentially

143 Vapor pressure estimation methods, assessed in this stud

144 lity, but was strongly dependent on accurate vapor pressure estimation methods.

145 tely modeled and enable the determination of vapor pressure even when the carrier gas is not complete

146 e will be used to generate a new database of vapor pressures for low-volatility atmospheric organic c

147 Although measurements of vapor pressures for pure components make up most of the

148 halates exhibit significant variability, and vapor pressures for the various alternatives are usually

149 30 degrees C, mixtures of vapors ranging in vapor pressure from 8.6 to 76 Torr are separated in this

150 ty organic compounds (IVOCs), relatively-low-vapor-pressure gas-phase species that may generate secon

151 trometric method, online measurements of low-vapor-pressure gases were performed for exhaust of a mod

152 ortunately, ATS can promote formation of low-vapor-pressure gases, which may undergo nucleation and c

153 ter, atmospheric vapor deltaD or delta(18)O, vapor pressure gradients, or combinations of all three),

154 eaf water and its influence was dependent on vapor pressure gradients.

155 ady state in approximately 2 h, depending on vapor pressure gradients.

156 FC), group 2 (PLV: lowest viscosity, highest vapor pressure), group 3 (PLV: mid-viscosity, mid-vapor

157 pressure), group 3 (PLV: mid-viscosity, mid-vapor pressure), group 4 (PLV: highest viscosity, lowest

158 Compounds having high vapor pressures have higher particle fractions than expe

159 aqueous or organic solutions: (i) negligible vapor pressures; (ii) low melting points; (iii) high the

160 rs, corresponding to a ~16 times increase in vapor pressure in less than 20 ms, with possible reload

161 infrared study of water uptake at controlled vapor pressure in single walled carbon nanotubes with di

162 comparisons indicate that overestimation of vapor pressures in such cases would cause us to expect t

163 Airborne concentrations of SVOCs with vapor pressures in the range of C13 to C23 alkanes were

164 correlated with congeners' subcooled liquid vapor pressure, in support of the latitudinal fractionat

165 Higher saturated vapor pressure increased risk for NTM (odds ratio = 1.06

166 As vapor pressure increases, voids fill with condensate, wh

167 in the grooves between the microposts as the vapor pressure increases, whereas water droplets are ran

168 surfaces becomes more negative as the water vapor pressure increases, while it becomes more positive

169 exploring the use of organogels that use low vapor pressure ionic liquids as their mobile phases for

170 The partial vapor pressure is crucial as it can interfere with furth

171 Both normal and inverse vapor pressure isotope effects (VPIE) have been observed

172 Because of the high molecular weight and low vapor pressure, it is relatively difficult to perform fu

173 uggest that PFCs, especially those with high vapor pressures, lead to vesicle fusion within hours.

174 al intensity of less volatile materials with vapor pressures less than 10(-4) Pa, in thin film form,

175 lone and PLV with lower viscosity and higher vapor pressure liquid.

176 , respectively, for studies of high- and low-vapor pressure liquids in vacuum.

177 cuum-compatible electrolytes - also with low-vapor pressure liquids, possibly saturated with the requ

178 icient (log KOA) < 10 and a subcooled liquid vapor pressure (log PL) > -5 (PL in Pa), as well as the

179 formation of large, multifunctional ON with vapor pressures low enough to partition to the particle

180 source due to its low pKb value (3.0), high vapor pressure, low toxicity, and low odor.

181 lower on average) with data based on mercury vapor pressure measurement results.

182 were shown to be sufficient for high-quality vapor pressure measurements at 364 K.

183 and data calculated from results of mercury vapor pressure measurements in the presence of only liqu

184 The performance of DVME was validated with vapor pressure measurements of n-eicosane (C(20)H(42)) a

185 on (DVME) is a new method that enables rapid vapor pressure measurements on large molecules with stat

186 We use vapor pressure measurements to identify aqueous liquid c

187 thod and compared to literature results from vapor pressure measurements, partition coefficients, and

188 state-of-the-art measurement uncertainty for vapor pressures near 1 Pa.

189 ions carried out resulted in several mid-low vapor pressure nitrogen-containing compounds that are po

190 The very low vapor pressure of 1-octanol results in minimal evaporati

191 veral orders of magnitude, with an estimated vapor pressure of 1.7 +/- 0.8 x 10(-6) Pa at 298 K.

192 2 mg/L at 20 degrees C) and highly volatile (vapor pressure of 6.7 mPa at 20 degrees C); these physic

193 The vapor pressure of ammonium adipate was 2.5 +/- 0.8 x 10(

194 s behaved like ammonium oxalate, which has a vapor pressure of approximately 10(-11) atm.

195 temperature and using a low plasma power, a vapor pressure of greater than 10(-4) Pa is required to

196 valley are then evaporated due to the lower vapor pressure of ice compared with water, resulting in

197 n contact with the source, regardless of the vapor pressure of investigated SVOCs, and may lead to la

198 The high vapor pressure of isobutyraldehyde allows in situ produc

199 ed by excessive vaporization due to the high vapor pressure of magnesium.

200 Ammonia dramatically lowered the vapor pressure of oxalic acid, by several orders of magn

201 h the vinyl flooring surface is close to the vapor pressure of pure DEHP, and (4) with an increase of

202 f the binary mixture and pressures above the vapor pressure of pure liquid carbon dioxide, helium and

203 P degree = 0.005-0.03, where P degree is the vapor pressure of the analyte).

204 the odorant in the gas phase divided by the vapor pressure of the odorant and because the activity c

205 ificant driver of aerosol formation than the vapor pressure of the precursor aromatic.

206 association of the H-bonded recognition, the vapor pressure of the solvent, and the solvophobic/solvo

207 behavior of the conductivity, viscosity, and vapor pressure of various binary liquid systems in which

208 stablished, because the determination of the vapor pressure of very small droplets poses a challenge

209 The vapor pressure of water in equilibrium with sorption sit

210 ud droplets, despite reducing the saturation vapor pressure of water significantly.

211 Because of the low vapor pressures of explosives and improvised explosive d

212 ng approach recently proposed to compute the vapor pressures of finite systems from molecular dynamic

213 Additionally, the vapor pressures of individual components show strong, id

214 Although direct measurements of vapor pressures of individual SVOCs exist, there are lim

215 reases (i.e. when the difference between the vapor pressures of leaf and atmosphere [VPD] increases).

216 mmed thermal desorption method for measuring vapor pressures of low-volatility organic aerosol compou

217 f organic compounds as a result of different vapor pressures of molecules containing heavy and light

218 compared to a reference correlation for the vapor pressures of n-alkanes; the deviation of the measu

219 ugh a coal-fired power plant because of high vapor pressures of oxide (SeO2) in flue gas.

220 solid and subcooled-liquid-state saturation vapor pressures of phenolic and nitro-aromatic compounds

221 aporation process was developed to determine vapor pressures of phthalates and alternate plasticizers

222 from ideality (i.e., Raoult's Law), with the vapor pressures of the smaller, more volatile compounds

223 d material and the effective condensed phase vapor pressures of the SVOCs.

224 Saturation vapor pressures often vary greatly from analyte to analy

225 ing for date, season, temperature, and water vapor pressure on the day of each visit, to estimate ass

226 In each approach, vapor pressures or environmentally relevant partition co

227 Four high molecular weight, low vapor pressure organic compounds of importance in atmosp

228 ne serum albumin (BSA) using all-gravimetric vapor pressure osmometry (VPO) and compare these results

229 C(6)H(4)-4-t-Bu, was determined to be 4.0 by vapor pressure osmometry (VPO) in THF.

230 ction coefficients (Gamma(mu1) determined by vapor pressure osmometry (VPO) over a wide range of conc

231 such as size exclusion chromatography (SEC), vapor pressure osmometry (VPO), and flow field fractiona

232 nts, isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC), vapor pressure osmometry (VPO), cross-hybridization expe

233 are characterized by a novel application of vapor pressure osmometry (VPO), which demonstrates the u

234 aqueous salt solutions are characterized by vapor pressure osmometry (VPO).

235 Vapor pressure osmometry indicates that 1, like bilirubi

236 from the 1H NMR dilution, diffusion NMR, and vapor pressure osmometry measurements, compound 1 has a

237 Dipyrrinone 1 is found by vapor pressure osmometry to be monomeric in CHCl(3), but

238 We corroborate these results using vapor pressure osmometry to probe individually the hydra

239 stic methodology that relies on contemporary vapor pressure osmometry, we elucidate how trehalose mod

240 Using the pressure probe and vapor pressure osmometry, we found little effect of unic

241 transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometry, and vapor pressure osmometry.

242 isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC), and vapor pressure osmometry.

243 ing UV-vis spectroscopy, cyclic voltammetry, vapor pressure osmommetry, and stopped-flow spectrophoto

244 heory of gases is used to calculate compound vapor pressures over the temperature range of evaporatio

245 absorption models, which relate K(ip) to the vapor pressure P(s) or the octanol/air distribution coef

246 An effective vapor pressure (p'L,eff) of approximately 10(-7) atm and

247 hemicals as a function of molar mass (M) and vapor pressure (P) that is simpler than existing correla

248 tanol-air partition coefficients (K(OA)) and vapor pressures (P(L)) of the OPEs were also measured as

249 ently proposed theoretical resolution of the vapor pressure paradox.

250 a single dose of higher viscosity and lower vapor pressure PFC, resulted in significantly improved g

251 Concentrations of higher vapor pressure phthalates correlated well with indoor te

252 of solvents that have different viscosities, vapor pressures, polarities, and ionic strengths.

253 ich lowers the boiling point due to combined vapor pressures, potentially reducing energy needs.

254 Four clinically relevant PFCs with varying vapor pressures (PP1, 294 mbar; PP2, 141 mbar; PP4, 9.6

255 smog chamber, where they were exposed to low vapor pressure products of aromatic hydrocarbon oxidatio

256 Such experiments near the equilibrium vapor pressure provide important information about eleme

257 atogram of a 36-component mixture spanning a vapor pressure range of 0.027 to 13 kPa was generated wi

258 The measured vapor pressures ranged from about 10(-2) to 10(-7) Pa.

259 Nine chemicals of vapor pressures ranging from 10(-4) to 10(-8) Torr (at r

260 een the limit set by boiling, when the total vapor pressure reaches one atm, and the difference in pK

261 vel system was used to implement CI with low vapor pressure reagents in a tabletop triple quadrupole

262 ed with analogously derived sensitivities of vapor pressure reduction.

263 d monthly minimum temperature (MIT), monthly vapor pressure, school calendar pattern, and Index of Re

264 Fe(III) decreases and Fe(II) increases the vapor pressure significantly.

265 s (e.g., UO(3) vs UO(2)) that have different vapor pressures, significantly affecting uranium transpo

266 Sensitivities vary inversely with analyte vapor pressure similarly for the two sensor types, but t

267 ty of the technique in the analysis of lower vapor pressure, solid-phase aerosols.

268 ) as a model system, high boiling point (low vapor pressure) solvents give rise to highly robust and

269 growth are attributed to condensation of low vapor pressure species following atmospheric oxidation o

270 The vapor-pressure study of the referred compounds was perfo

271 include molecules with intermediate or high vapor pressures, such as free fatty acids and semi-volat

272 utions will have fewer solutes and a greater vapor pressure than assumed by the Ross equation.

273 the fact that it has a significantly higher vapor pressure than n-hexylamine.

274 Amines, which typically have higher vapor pressures than the corresponding herbicides, could

275 l forms (i.e., alpha-UO(3)) that have higher vapor pressures than the refractory form (i.e., UO(2)) d

276 te surfaces subjected to variations in water vapor pressure that are relevant to natural systems.

277 les (PVs) are lipophilic molecules with high vapor pressure that serve various ecological roles.

278 ates are biased toward predicting saturation vapor pressures that are too high, by 5-6 orders of magn

279 control over the transition-metal-precursor vapor pressure, the first concurrent growth of two dissi

280 riables also include the logarithm of solute vapor pressure, the solubility parameters of carbon diox

281 nicity and proton exchange kinetics with low vapor pressure, the systems we describe also make excell

282 Because of their low vapor pressure, these compounds are often referred as ex

283 Because ionic liquids have extremely low vapor pressures, they are not prone to evaporation, allo

284 rmed ice particles quickly reduced the water vapor pressure to ice saturation, thereby increasing the

285 (TNT), corresponding to a parts-per-trillion vapor pressure under ambient conditions.

286 dent permittivity quickly and accurately for vapor pressures up to 7 bar.

287 ood agreement for the more volatile SVOCs of vapor pressure (VP) exceeding 10(-5) Pa and correspondin

288 halate material-phase concentration (C0) and vapor pressure (Vp) were explicitly measured and found t

289 al-phase concentration (C0) and the chemical vapor pressure (Vp) were found to have great influence o

290 ization of organic compounds with negligible vapor pressures (VP) is achieved at atmospheric pressure

291 The impact of these parameters on mercury vapor pressure was studied under controlled laboratory c

292 sters possessing high boiling points and low vapor pressures was performed using a headspace solid-ph

293 achieved by the use of solvents of different vapor pressure (water and acetonitrile), as well as by v

294 wide variety of multiclass species with low vapor pressure were tested including pesticides, pharmac

295 are apparently the result of their different vapor pressures, which affects the drying mechanism.

296 For SVOCs with higher vapor pressures, which are expected to be predominantly

297 res below 100 degrees C and, due to very low vapor pressures, which are not volatile.

298 ey offer many advantages, such as negligible vapor pressures, wide liquidus ranges, good thermal stab

299 ical properties and environmental variables (vapor pressure, wind speed, and on the affinity of aeros

300 ry emission rates were negatively related to vapor pressure within a compound class, but not consiste