Articles | Volume 17, issue 17
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5051-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5051-2024
Research article
 | 
03 Sep 2024
Research article |  | 03 Sep 2024

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

Related authors

Automatic pollen recognition with the Rapid-E particle counter: the first-level procedure, experience and next steps
Ingrida Šaulienė, Laura Šukienė, Gintautas Daunys, Gediminas Valiulis, Lukas Vaitkevičius, Predrag Matavulj, Sanja Brdar, Marko Panic, Branko Sikoparija, Bernard Clot, Benoît Crouzy, and Mikhail Sofiev
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 3435–3452, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3435-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-3435-2019, 2019
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Technique: In Situ Measurement | Topic: Validation and Intercomparisons
A 2-year intercomparison of three methods for measuring black carbon concentration at a high-altitude research station in Europe
Sarah Tinorua, Cyrielle Denjean, Pierre Nabat, Véronique Pont, Mathilde Arnaud, Thierry Bourrianne, Maria Dias Alves, and Eric Gardrat
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3897–3915, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3897-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3897-2024, 2024
Short summary
Comparison of the LEO and CPMA-SP2 techniques for black-carbon mixing-state measurements
Arash Naseri, Joel C. Corbin, and Jason S. Olfert
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3719–3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024, 2024
Short summary
Aerosol trace element solubility determined using ultrapure water batch leaching: an intercomparison study of four different leaching protocols
Rui Li, Prema Piyusha Panda, Yizhu Chen, Zhenming Zhu, Fu Wang, Yujiao Zhu, He Meng, Yan Ren, Ashwini Kumar, and Mingjin Tang
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3147–3156, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024, 2024
Short summary
Field comparison of dual- and single-spot Aethalometers: equivalent black carbon, light absorption, Ångström exponent and secondary brown carbon estimations
Liangbin Wu, Cheng Wu, Tao Deng, Dui Wu, Mei Li, Yong Jie Li, and Zhen Zhou
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2917–2936, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024, 2024
Short summary
Comparison of the imaginary parts of the atmospheric refractive index structure parameter and aerosol flux based on different measurement methods
Renmin Yuan, Hongsheng Zhang, Jiajia Hua, Hao Liu, Peizhe Wu, Xingyu Zhu, and Jianning Sun
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2089–2102, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2089-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2089-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Brdar, S., Panić, M., Matavulj, P., Stanković, M., Bartolić, D., and Šikoparija, B.: Explainable AI for unveiling deep learning pollen classification model based on fusion of scattered light patterns and fluorescence spectroscopy, Sci. Rep.-UK, 13, 3205, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30064-6, 2023. 
Bruffaerts, N., Graf, E., Matavulj, P., Tiwari, A., Pyrri, I., Zeder, Y., Erb, S., Plaza, M., Dietler, S., Bendinelli, T., D'hooge, E., and Sikoparija, B.: Advancing automated identification of airborne fungal spores: guidelines for cultivation and reference dataset creation, Aerobiologia, in review, 2024. 
CEN: EN 16868: Ambient air - Sampling and analysis of airborne pollen grains and fungal spores for networks related to allergy - Volumetric Hirst method, CEN​​​​​​​, 2019. 
Crouzy, B., Stella, M., Konzelmann, T., Calpini, B., and Clot, B.: All-optical automatic pollen identification: Towards an operational system, Atmos. Environ., 140, 202–212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.05.062, 2016. 
Download
Short summary
We assess the suitability of a Rapid-E+ particle counter 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 one showed potential for pollen identification, but the large variability between them needs to be addressed.