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

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

5 designed to produce no increase in gasoline vapor pressure.

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

7 cury halides may have an appreciable partial vapor pressure.

8 face by extrapolating toward the equilibrium vapor pressure.

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

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

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

12 per million and vary inversely with solvent vapor pressure.

13 followed the analyte fraction of saturation vapor pressure.

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

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

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

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

18 d exposure are usually strongly dependent on vapor pressure.

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

20 ssociated with ambient temperature and water vapor pressure.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

44 0O5), which is expected to have a saturation vapor pressure approximately 2 orders of magnitude highe

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

73 A common vapor pressure deficit of 0.62 kilopascal was maintained

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

97 Vapor pressure estimation methods, assessed in this stud

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

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

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

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

102 30 degrees C, mixtures of vapors ranging in vapor pressure from 8.6 to 76 Torr are separated in this

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

141 The high vapor pressure of isobutyraldehyde allows in situ produc

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

151 The vapor pressure of water in equilibrium with sorption sit

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

165 Saturation vapor pressures often vary greatly from analyte to analy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

176 Vapor pressure osmometry indicates that 1, like bilirubi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

188 ently proposed theoretical resolution of the vapor pressure paradox.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

198 ed with analogously derived sensitivities of vapor pressure reduction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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