Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-187
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-187
02 Apr 2024
 | 02 Apr 2024
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).

Classification accuracy and compatibility across devices of a new Rapid-E+ flow cytometer

Branko Sikoparija, Predrag Matavulj, Isidora Simovic, Predrag Radisic, Sanja Brdar, Vladan Minic, Danijela Tesendic, Evgeny Kadantsev, Julia Palamarchuk, and Mikhail Sofiev

Abstract. The study evaluated a new model of a Plair SA air flow cytometer, Rapid-E+, and assessed its suitability for airborne pollen monitoring within operational networks. Key features of the new model are compared with the previous one, Rapid-E. A machine learning algorithm is constructed and evaluated for (i) classification of reference pollen types in laboratory conditions and (ii) monitoring in real-life field campaigns. The second goal of the study was to evaluate the device usability in forthcoming monitoring networks, which would require similarity and reproducibility of the measurement signal across devices. We employed three devices and analysed (dis-)similarities of their measurements in laboratory conditions. The lab evaluation showed similar recognition performance as that of Rapid-E, but field measurements in conditions when several pollen types are present in the air simultaneously, showed a notably lower agreement of Rapid-E+ with manual Hirst-type observations than those of the older model. An exception was the total-pollen measurements. Comparison across the Rapid-E+ devices revealed noticeable differences in fluorescence measurements between the three devices tested. As a result, application of the recognition algorithm trained on the data of one device to another one led to large errors. The study confirmed the potential of the fluorescence measurements for discrimination between different pollen classes, but each monitor needed to be trained individually to achieve acceptable skills. A large uncertainty of fluorescence measurements and their variability between different devices need to be addressed to improve the device usability.

Branko Sikoparija, Predrag Matavulj, Isidora Simovic, Predrag Radisic, Sanja Brdar, Vladan Minic, Danijela Tesendic, Evgeny Kadantsev, Julia Palamarchuk, and Mikhail Sofiev

Status: open (until 08 May 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Branko Sikoparija, Predrag Matavulj, Isidora Simovic, Predrag Radisic, Sanja Brdar, Vladan Minic, Danijela Tesendic, Evgeny Kadantsev, Julia Palamarchuk, and Mikhail Sofiev
Branko Sikoparija, Predrag Matavulj, Isidora Simovic, Predrag Radisic, Sanja Brdar, Vladan Minic, Danijela Tesendic, Evgeny Kadantsev, Julia Palamarchuk, and Mikhail Sofiev

Viewed

Total article views: 137 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
109 21 7 137 4 5
  • HTML: 109
  • PDF: 21
  • XML: 7
  • Total: 137
  • BibTeX: 4
  • EndNote: 5
Views and downloads (calculated since 02 Apr 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 02 Apr 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 125 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 125 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 13 Apr 2024
Download
Short summary
We assessed suitability of a particle counter Rapid-E+ for use in pollen monitoring networks. The criterion was the ability of different devices to provide the same signal for the same pollen type, which would allow for unified reference libraries and recognition algorithms for Rapid-E+. We tested three devices and found notable differences between their fluorescence measurements. Each device showed potential for pollen identification but the large variability between them needs to be addressed