International Journal of Biometeorology

, Volume 58, Issue 6, pp 1317–1325 | Cite as

Do urban canyons influence street level grass pollen concentrations?

  • Robert George Peel
  • Roy Kennedy
  • Matt Smith
  • Ole Hertel
Original Paper

Abstract

In epidemiological studies, outdoor exposure to pollen is typically estimated using rooftop monitoring station data, whilst exposure overwhelmingly occurs at street level. In this study the relationship between street level and roof level grass pollen concentrations was investigated for city centre street canyon environments in Aarhus, Denmark, and London, UK, during the grass pollen seasons of 2010 and 2011 respectively. For the period mid-day to late evening, street level concentrations in both cities tended to be lower than roof-level concentrations, though this difference was found to be statistically significant only in London. The ratio of street/roof level concentrations was compared with temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, and solar radiation. Results indicated that the concentration ratio responds to wind direction with respect to relative canyon orientation and local source distribution. In the London study, an increase in relative humidity was linked to a significant decrease in street/roof level concentration ratio, and a possible causative mechanism involving moisture mediated pollen grain buoyancy is proposed. Relationships with the other weather variables were not found to be significant in either location. These results suggest a tendency for monitoring station data to overestimate exposure in the canyon environment.

Keywords

Monitoring Station Pollen Concentration Street Canyon Grass Pollen Street Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The first author would like to extend special thanks to Stine Rødjajn for help with sample collection, to Janne Sommer at Astma-Allergi Danmark for providing access to data and facilities, and to Dr. Harry Morrow Brown for generously lending equipment. The Danish Air Quality Monitoring Programme, and in particular Thomas Ellermann, are also thanked for contributing meteorological data.

References

  1. Alcázar P, Comtois P (2000) The influence of sampler height and orientation on airborne Ambrosia pollen counts in Montreal. Grana 39(6):303–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcázar P, Galán C, Cariñanos P, Domíguez-Vilches E (1999) Effects of sampling height and climatic conditions in aerobiological studies. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 9(4):253–261Google Scholar
  3. Aylor DE (2002) Settling speed of corn (Zea mays) pollen. J Aerosol Sci 33(11):1601–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aylor DE (2003) Rate of dehydration of corn (Zea mays L.) pollen in the air. J Exp Bot 54(391):2307–2312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berkowicz R, Palmgren F, Hertel O, Vignati E (1996) Using measurements of air pollution in streets for evaluation of urban air quality - meteorological analysis and model calculations. Sci Total Environ 189(190):259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkowicz R, Hertel O, Larsen SE, Sørensen NN, Nielsen M (1997) Modelling traffic pollution in streets. Ministry of Environment and Energy. National Environmental Research Institute, RoskildeGoogle Scholar
  7. British Aerobiology Federation (1994) Airborne pollens and spores: a guide to trapping and counting. British Aerobiology FederationGoogle Scholar
  8. Bryant RH, Emberlin JC, Norris-Hill J (1989) Vertical variation in pollen abundance in North-Central London. Aerobiology 5(2):123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colls JJ, Micallef A (1999) Measured and modelled concentrations and vertical profiles of airborne particulate matter within the boundary layer of a street canyon. Sci Total Environ 235(1–3):221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dabberdt WF, Hoydysh WG (1991) Street canyon dispersion: sensitivity to block shape and entrainment. Atmos Environ Part A Gen Top 25(7):1143–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Danish Geodata Agency (2012) Conditions for use of open public geographic data [Online]. Available at: http://www.gst.dk/NR/rdonlyres/AD386601-C92E-479F-8BE8-FD9878B193A7/0/Conditionsforuseofopenpublicgeographicdata.pdf, [Accessed 23 September 2012]
  12. Edina (2011) Digimap collections [Online]. Available at: http://edina.ac.uk/digimap, [Accessed 17 February 2011]
  13. Emberlin J, Norris-Hill J (1991) Spatial variation of pollen deposition in North London. Grana 30(1):190–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ESRI (2011) ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  15. Feo Brito F, Mur Gimeno P, Martínez C, Tobías A, Suárez L, Guerra F, Borja JM, Alonso AM (2007) Air pollution and seasonal asthma during the pollen season. A cohort study in Puertollano and Ciudad Real (Spain). Allergy 62(10):1152–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fitzgerald JW (1975) Approximation formulas for the equilibrium size of an aerosol particle as a function of its dry size and composition and the ambient relative humidity. J Appl Meteorol 14:1044–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hajat S, Haines A, Atkinson RW, Bremner SA, Anderson HR, Emberlin J (2001) Association between air pollution and daily consultations with general practitioners for allergic rhinitis in London, United Kingdom. Am J Epidemiol 153(7):704–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hertel O, Goodsite ME (2009) Urban air pollution climates throughout the world. In: Hester RE, Harrison R (eds) Air quality in urban environments. Issues in Environmental Science and Technology, vol 28, RSC Publishing, pp 1–22Google Scholar
  19. Hertel O, Ellermann T, Palmgren F, Berkowicz R, Løfstrøm P, Frohn LM, Geels C, Skjøth CA, Brandt J, Christensen J, Kemp K, Ketzel M (2007) Integrated air-quality monitoring - combined use of measurements and models in monitoring programmes. Environ Chem 4(2):65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hirst JM (1952) An automatic volumetric spore trap. Ann Appl Biol 39(2):257–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Käpylä M (1983) The variation of airborne pollen concentrations around a big building in a town. In: 5th Nordic Symposium on Aerobiology, Session III, pp 39–42 Google Scholar
  22. Lacey J, Venette J (1995) Outdoor air sampling techniques. In: Cox CS, Wathes CM (eds) Bioaerosols handbook, 1st edn. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 407–471Google Scholar
  23. MATLAB (2008) MATLAB version 7.7.0.471 (R2008b). The MathWorks, Natick, MAGoogle Scholar
  24. McDonald JE (1962) Collection and washout of airborne pollens and spores by raindrops. Science 135(3502):435–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Momas I, Nikasinovic L, Seta N, Callais F, Just J, Sahraoui F, Grimfeld A (2003) Personal exposure to outdoor urban air pollution and nasal inflammation in asthmatic and healthy children: an epidemiological study in Paris. Epidemiology 14(5):S62–S63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nakamura Y, Oke TR (1988) Wind, temperature and stability conditions in an East–west orientated urban canyon. Atmos Environ 22(12):2691–2700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Norris-Hill J, Emberlin J (1991) Diurnal variation of pollen concentration in the air of north-central London. Grana 30(1):229–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oke TR (1988) Street design and urban canopy layer climate. Energy Build 11:103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Palmgren F, Berkowicz R, Hertel O, Vignati E (1996) Effects of reduction of NOx on the NO2 levels in urban streets. Sci Total Environ 189/190:409–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peel RG, Kennedy R, Smith M, Hertel O (2013) Relative efficiencies of the Burkard 7-day, Rotorod and Burkard Personal samplers for Poaceae and Urticaceae pollen under field conditions. Ann Agric Environ Med (in press)Google Scholar
  31. Pryor SC, Barthelmie RJ (2000) Particle dry deposition to water surfaces: processes and consequences. Mar Pollut Bull 41(1–6):220–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rantio-Lehtimäki A, Koivikko A, Kupias R, Mäkinen Y, Pohjola A (1991) Significance of sampling height of airborne particles for aerobiological information. Allergy 46(1):68–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Raynor GS, Ogden EC, Hayes JV (1973) Variation in ragweed pollen concentration to a height of 108 meters. J Allergy Clin Immunol 51(4):199–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sampling Technologies (1998) Operating instructions for the Rotorod sampler. Sampling Technologies, MinnetonkaGoogle Scholar
  35. Skjøth CA, Ørby PV, Becker T, Geels C, Schlünssen V, Sigsgaard T, Bønløkke JH, Sommer J, Søgaard P, Hertel O (2013) Identifying urban sources as cause to elevated grass pollen concentrations using GIS and remote sensing. Biogeosciences 10:541–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Spieksma FTM, van Noort P, Nikkels H (2000) Influence of nearby stands of Artemisia on street-level versus roof-top-level ratio’s of airborne pollen quantities. Aerobiology 16(1):21–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stach A, Emberlin J, Smith M, Adams-Groom B, Myszkowska D (2008) Factors that determine the severity of Betula spp. pollen seasons in Poland (Poznań and Krakow) and the United Kingdom (Worcester and London). Int J Biometeorol 52:311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. UK Meteorological Office (2010) MIDAS Land Surface Stations data (1853-current), [Internet]. NCAS British Atmospheric Data Centre, 2006. Available from: http://badc.nerc.ac.uk/view/badc.nerc.ac.uk__ATOM__dtaent_ukmo-midas
  39. Warner FE, McCartney HA, Emberlin J (2000) Wind tunnel comparison of the collection efficiency of three Hirst-type volumetric sampler drum coatings. Aerobiology 16(1):25–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert George Peel
    • 1
    • 2
  • Roy Kennedy
    • 2
  • Matt Smith
    • 2
  • Ole Hertel
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Environmental ScienceAarhus UniversityRoskildeDenmark
  2. 2.National Pollen and Aerobiology Research UnitUniversity of WorcesterWorcesterUK
  3. 3.Department for Environmental, Social and Spatial Change (ENSPAC)Roskilde UniversityRoskildeDenmark

Personalised recommendations