Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison between the counting methods used by two aerobiology networks in southern Europe (Spain and Italy)

  • Original paper
  • Published:
Aerobiologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aerobiology studies the biological particles suspended in the atmosphere in order to know what types are present in the air and how their concentrations vary spatially or seasonally. The measurement of airborne pollen concentration requires a standardized methodology. Normally, the analysis of the slides obtained after samplings is carried out according to national network procedures. Different networks use different slide counting methods (longitudinal sweeps, transverse sweeps or random fields), and a different number of lines/fields are routinely read. In this study, we compared two slide counting methods adopted by two monitoring centres belonging to different aerobiology networks that operate in southern Europe, the University of Malaga (Spanish Aerobiology Network, the REA) and the University of Roma Tor Vergata (Rete Italiana di Monitoraggio in Aerobiologia, the RIMA). For that, the same samples were counted following the two methodologies consisting on the reading of four (REA) and six (RIMA), respectively, longitudinal sweeps at a magnification of 400X (REA). Statistical analysis was performed in order to search the degree of association between the two series of data obtained, as well as whether or not there were significant differences between them. The results showed highly significant correlation and regression coefficients. On the other hand, Wilcoxon tests, in general, did not showed significant differences between the series for the total pollen as well as for the major pollen types. This confirms that the two methods can be used indistinctly although it would be convenient for the different networks to standardize and unify methodologies in order to follow the same operating procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cariñanos, P., Emberlin, J., Galán, C., & Dominguez-Vilches, E. (2000). Comparison of two pollen counting methods of slides from a hisrt type volumetric trap. Aerobiologia, 16, 339–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comtois, P., Alcázar, P., & Neron, D. (1999). Pollen count statistics and its relevance to precision. Aerobiologia, 15, 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comtois, P., & Mandrioli, P. (1997). Pollen capture media: a comparative study. Aerobiologia, 13, 149–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felicori, M., Bordignon, G., & Billi, B. M. (2012). Migliora la qualità del monitoraggio aerobiologico. Ecoscienza, 2, 76–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galán, C., Cariñanos, P., Alcázar, P., & Domínguez-Vilches, E. (2007). Spanish Aerobiology Network (REA): Management and quality manual. Córdoba: Servicio de publicaciones, Universidad de Córdoba.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galán, C., & Domínguez-Vilches, E. (1997). The capture media in aerobiological sampling. Aerobiologia, 13, 155–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galán, C., Smith, M., Thibaudon, M., Frenguelli, G., Oteros, J., Gehrig, R., et al. (2014). Pollen monitoring: minimum requirements and reproducibility of analysis. Aerobiologia, 30, 385–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottardini, E., Cristofolini, F., Cristofori, A., Vannini, A., & Ferretti, M. (2009). Sampling bias and sampling errors in pollen counting in aerobiological monitoring in Italy. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 11, 751–755.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, J. M. (1952). An automatic volumetric spore trap. Annals of Applied Biology, 39, 257–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, S., Mandroli, P., Spieksma, F., Emberlin, J., Hjelmroos, M., Rantio-Lehtimaki, A., et al. (1995). News. Aerobiologia, 11, 69–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Käpylä, M., & Penttinen, A. (1981). An evaluation of the microscopical counting methods of the tape in Hirst-Burkard pollen and spore trap. Grana, 20, 131–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandrioli, P. (1994). Metodica di campionamento e conteggio dei granuli pollinici e delle spore fungine aerodisperse. Monitoraggio aerobiologico in Emilia Romagna. Collana Prevenzione nei luoghi di vita e di lavoro. Contributi (Biblioteca Antonio Panizzi), 30, 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandrioli, P. (1996). Il monitoraggio aerobiologico: linee guida per una standardizzazione. Atti del 15° Congresso Nazionale AIDII, Collane della Fondazione Maugeri, I Documenti n.6, pp 30–41.

  • Mandrioli, P. (2000). Metodo di campionamento e conteggio dei granuli pollinici e delle spore fungine aerodisperse. Progetto di norma proposto alla Commissione Ambiente UNI dal Dr. Paolo Mandrioli codice progetto ufficiale U53000810. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche—Istituto di Scienze dell’Atmosfera e dell’Oceano.

  • Micheli, V., Brighetti, M. A., Capucci, E., & Travaglini, A. (2009). Osservazioni sulla superficie minima di lettura nel campionamento aerobiologico. A.I.A. Atti del XII Congresso Nazionale “Salute dell’ambiente salute dell’uomo”. Firenze 7-9 maggio 2009.

  • Onorari, M., Domeneghetti, M. P., & Begliomini, V. (2007). Metodo UNI 11108:2004—Percorso per l’accreditamento. Gea, 3, 33–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oteros, J., Galán, C., Alcázar, P., & Domínguez-Vilches, E. (2013). Quality control in bio-monitoring networks, Spanish Aerobiology Network. Science of the Total Environment, 443, 559–565.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaudon, M., Monnier, S., & Berger, U. (2014). Standardization of Hirst method for airborne pollen and fungal spores measurements. “Meeting of the European Aeroallergen Network and the European Aerobiology Society”. Viena; p. 47.

  • Travaglini, A., Albertini, R., & Zieger, E. (2009). Manuale di gestione e qualità della Rete Italiana di Monitoraggio in Aerobioloiga R.I.M.A.®. Tipografia LEGO, Bologna, p.147.

  • Travaglini, A., Brighetti, M.A., Arsieni, A., & Vinciguerra, F. (2014). Atlante del polline delle principali specie allergeniche d’Italia. Il raggio verde edizioni. ISBN: 978-88-89663-79-0.

  • UNI Ente Nazionale Italiano di Unificazione. (2004). Qualità dell’Aria metodo di campionamento e Conteggio dei granuli pollinici e delle spore fungine aerodisperse. Classificazione ICS, 13(040), 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zieger, E. (2007). Linee guida e accreditamento in Aerobiologia. Gea, 3(1), 32–33.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Via della Ricerca Scientifica, 00133, Rome, Italy

    M. A. Brighetti & A. Travaglini

  2. Departamento de Biologia Vegetal, Universidad de Málaga, PO Box 59, 29080, Málaga, Spain

    D. Gharbi & M. M. Trigo

Authors
  1. D. Gharbi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. A. Brighetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Travaglini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. M. Trigo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. M. Trigo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gharbi, D., Brighetti, M.A., Travaglini, A. et al. Comparison between the counting methods used by two aerobiology networks in southern Europe (Spain and Italy). Aerobiologia 33, 87–92 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10453-016-9452-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10453-016-9452-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation