{"title":"How many pollen grains should we count? – A basic statistical view","authors":"Chengyu Weng , Henry Hooghiemstra","doi":"10.1016/j.revpalbo.2024.105126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In pollen analysis, one question is often being asked: how many pollen grains should be counted for one sample? The proper count number should guarantee the reliability of the abundance (usually expressed as percentage) of the pollen taxa concerned in the sample. Practically, this number is usually more than 100 grains, but seldom over 1000. Most people tend to count <em>at least</em> 300 pollen grains (often of terrestrial plants)for each sample. However, this number is more likely based on the experience of earlier palynologists rather than on theoretical consideration. In this paper, we apply a simple statistical theory to evaluate the reliability of the observed pollen abundance with different total count number. The reliability is evaluated based on the error range. The results show that the reliability depends on both the true pollen abundance of the taxon concerned and the total count number: a low abundant pollen taxon needs a high count number to obtain a reliable data set. The conclusion is that there is no universal “proper” total count number for each sample. The total count number should be determined by both the abundance of the interested taxa and the research objective. The commonly used 300 grains may be good enough for most general vegetation reconstructions and for the accurate survey of pollen taxa with more than 10% abundance. For less abundant taxa, higher count numbers are suggested.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54488,"journal":{"name":"Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology","volume":"330 ","pages":"Article 105126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034666724000770","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In pollen analysis, one question is often being asked: how many pollen grains should be counted for one sample? The proper count number should guarantee the reliability of the abundance (usually expressed as percentage) of the pollen taxa concerned in the sample. Practically, this number is usually more than 100 grains, but seldom over 1000. Most people tend to count at least 300 pollen grains (often of terrestrial plants)for each sample. However, this number is more likely based on the experience of earlier palynologists rather than on theoretical consideration. In this paper, we apply a simple statistical theory to evaluate the reliability of the observed pollen abundance with different total count number. The reliability is evaluated based on the error range. The results show that the reliability depends on both the true pollen abundance of the taxon concerned and the total count number: a low abundant pollen taxon needs a high count number to obtain a reliable data set. The conclusion is that there is no universal “proper” total count number for each sample. The total count number should be determined by both the abundance of the interested taxa and the research objective. The commonly used 300 grains may be good enough for most general vegetation reconstructions and for the accurate survey of pollen taxa with more than 10% abundance. For less abundant taxa, higher count numbers are suggested.
期刊介绍:
The Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology is an international journal for articles in all fields of palaeobotany and palynology dealing with all groups, ranging from marine palynomorphs to higher land plants. Original contributions and comprehensive review papers should appeal to an international audience. Typical topics include but are not restricted to systematics, evolution, palaeobiology, palaeoecology, biostratigraphy, biochronology, palaeoclimatology, paleogeography, taphonomy, palaeoenvironmental reconstructions, vegetation history, and practical applications of palaeobotany and palynology, e.g. in coal and petroleum geology and archaeology. The journal especially encourages the publication of articles in which palaeobotany and palynology are applied for solving fundamental geological and biological problems as well as innovative and interdisciplinary approaches.