Cargando…

Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor

Background: Seasonal pollen is a common cause of allergic respiratory disease. In the United States, pollen monitoring occurs via manual counting, a method which is both labor-intensive and has a considerable time delay. In this paper, we report the field-testing results of a new, automated, real-ti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiang, Chenyang, Wang, Wenhao, Du, Linlin, Huang, Guanyu, McConaghy, Caitlin, Fineman, Stanley, Liu, Yang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9179988/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35682029
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116444
_version_ 1784723405399916544
author Jiang, Chenyang
Wang, Wenhao
Du, Linlin
Huang, Guanyu
McConaghy, Caitlin
Fineman, Stanley
Liu, Yang
author_facet Jiang, Chenyang
Wang, Wenhao
Du, Linlin
Huang, Guanyu
McConaghy, Caitlin
Fineman, Stanley
Liu, Yang
author_sort Jiang, Chenyang
collection PubMed
description Background: Seasonal pollen is a common cause of allergic respiratory disease. In the United States, pollen monitoring occurs via manual counting, a method which is both labor-intensive and has a considerable time delay. In this paper, we report the field-testing results of a new, automated, real-time pollen imaging sensor in Atlanta, GA. Methods: We first compared the pollen concentrations measured by an automated real-time pollen sensor (APS-300, Pollen Sense LLC) collocated with a Rotorod M40 sampler in 2020 at an allergy clinic in northwest Atlanta. An internal consistency assessment was then conducted with two collocated APS-300 sensors in downtown Atlanta during the 2021 pollen season. We also investigated the spatial heterogeneity of pollen concentrations using the APS-300 measurements. Results: Overall, the daily pollen concentrations reported by the APS-300 and the Rotorod M40 sampler with manual counting were strongly correlated (r = 0.85) during the peak pollen season. The APS-300 reported fewer tree pollen taxa, resulting in a slight underestimation of total pollen counts. Both the APS-300 and Rotorod M40 reported Quercus (Oak) and Pinus (Pine) as dominant pollen taxa during the peak tree pollen season. Pollen concentrations reported by APS-300 in the summer and fall were less accurate. The daily total and speciated pollen concentrations reported by two collocated APS-300 sensors were highly correlated (r = 0.93–0.99). Pollen concentrations showed substantial spatial and temporal heterogeneity in terms of peak levels at three locations in Atlanta. Conclusions: The APS-300 sensor was able to provide internally consistent, real-time pollen concentrations that are strongly correlated with the current gold-standard measurements during the peak pollen season. When compared with manual counting approaches, the fully automated sensor has the significant advantage of being mobile with the ability to provide real-time pollen data. However, the sensor’s weed and grass pollen identification algorithms require further improvement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9179988
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91799882022-06-10 Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor Jiang, Chenyang Wang, Wenhao Du, Linlin Huang, Guanyu McConaghy, Caitlin Fineman, Stanley Liu, Yang Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Background: Seasonal pollen is a common cause of allergic respiratory disease. In the United States, pollen monitoring occurs via manual counting, a method which is both labor-intensive and has a considerable time delay. In this paper, we report the field-testing results of a new, automated, real-time pollen imaging sensor in Atlanta, GA. Methods: We first compared the pollen concentrations measured by an automated real-time pollen sensor (APS-300, Pollen Sense LLC) collocated with a Rotorod M40 sampler in 2020 at an allergy clinic in northwest Atlanta. An internal consistency assessment was then conducted with two collocated APS-300 sensors in downtown Atlanta during the 2021 pollen season. We also investigated the spatial heterogeneity of pollen concentrations using the APS-300 measurements. Results: Overall, the daily pollen concentrations reported by the APS-300 and the Rotorod M40 sampler with manual counting were strongly correlated (r = 0.85) during the peak pollen season. The APS-300 reported fewer tree pollen taxa, resulting in a slight underestimation of total pollen counts. Both the APS-300 and Rotorod M40 reported Quercus (Oak) and Pinus (Pine) as dominant pollen taxa during the peak tree pollen season. Pollen concentrations reported by APS-300 in the summer and fall were less accurate. The daily total and speciated pollen concentrations reported by two collocated APS-300 sensors were highly correlated (r = 0.93–0.99). Pollen concentrations showed substantial spatial and temporal heterogeneity in terms of peak levels at three locations in Atlanta. Conclusions: The APS-300 sensor was able to provide internally consistent, real-time pollen concentrations that are strongly correlated with the current gold-standard measurements during the peak pollen season. When compared with manual counting approaches, the fully automated sensor has the significant advantage of being mobile with the ability to provide real-time pollen data. However, the sensor’s weed and grass pollen identification algorithms require further improvement. MDPI 2022-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9179988/ /pubmed/35682029 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116444 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Jiang, Chenyang
Wang, Wenhao
Du, Linlin
Huang, Guanyu
McConaghy, Caitlin
Fineman, Stanley
Liu, Yang
Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor
title Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor
title_full Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor
title_fullStr Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor
title_full_unstemmed Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor
title_short Field Evaluation of an Automated Pollen Sensor
title_sort field evaluation of an automated pollen sensor
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9179988/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35682029
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116444
work_keys_str_mv AT jiangchenyang fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor
AT wangwenhao fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor
AT dulinlin fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor
AT huangguanyu fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor
AT mcconaghycaitlin fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor
AT finemanstanley fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor
AT liuyang fieldevaluationofanautomatedpollensensor