These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: An operational robotic pollen monitoring network based on automatic image recognition.
    Author: Oteros J, Weber A, Kutzora S, Rojo J, Heinze S, Herr C, Gebauer R, Schmidt-Weber CB, Buters JTM.
    Journal: Environ Res; 2020 Dec; 191():110031. PubMed ID: 32814105.
    Abstract:
    There is high demand for online, real-time and high-quality pollen data. To the moment pollen monitoring has been done manually by highly specialized experts. Here we evaluate the electronic Pollen Information Network (ePIN) comprising 8 automatic BAA500 pollen monitors in Bavaria, Germany. Automatic BAA500 and manual Hirst-type pollen traps were run simultaneously at the same locations for one pollen season. Classifications by BAA500 were checked by experts in pollen identification, which is traditionally considered to be the "gold standard" for pollen monitoring. BAA500 had a multiclass accuracy of over 90%. Correct identification of any individual pollen taxa was always >85%, except for Populus (73%) and Alnus (64%). The BAA500 was more precise than the manual method, with less discrepancies between determinations by pairs of automatic pollen monitors than between pairs of humans. The BAA500 was online for 97% of the time. There was a significant correlation of 0.84 between airborne pollen concentrations from the BAA500 and Hirst-type pollen traps. Due to the lack of calibration samples it is unknown which instrument gives the true concentration. The automatic BAA500 network delivered pollen data rapidly (3 h delay with real-time), reliably and online. We consider the ability to retrospectively check the accuracy of the reported classification essential for any automatic system.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]