Plant phenotypic image recognition (PPIR) is an important branch of smart agriculture. In recent years, deep learning has achieved significant breakthroughs in image recognition.
1. IntroductionPlants are indispensable resources that are present on the earth. They play an important role in the development of the society and they have great significance in environmental protection, medical pharmaceutical, agricultural development, and food-related applications [1]. However, any plant-related work, such as plant species and diseases identification and evaluation of plant production, is becoming increasingly complex. An important starting point for any plant-related work is the identification of plant phenotype that refers to the physiological and biochemical characteristics of plants, including their color, shape, texture, and so on, which are determined by both genes and the environment. Traditional methods of plant phenotype identification include artificial identification, phytochemical classification, the anatomical method, morphological method, and genetic method, which are difficult to implement, have low efficiency, and unstable accuracy [2]. With the development and popularity of computer technology, image recognition technology is becoming increasingly mature, and it has been successfully applied in many fields, such as face recognition, object detection, medical imaging, etc. [3,4]. Plant phenotype identification tht is based on image processing technology has become a popular topic of research, leading to new breakthroughs and improved accuracy. In particular, deep learning has been proposed in order to further promote the development of PPIR [5]. Table 1 shows recent relevant reviews.
References | Review Main Points |
---|---|
Muhammad et al. [6] | This paper aims to review and analyze the implementation and performance of various methodologies (artificial neural network (ANN), probabilistic neural network (PNN), convolutional neural network (CNN), K-nearest neighbor (KNN) and support vector machine (SVM)) on plant classification. At the same time including feature extraction and preprocessing technology. Each technique has its advantages and limitations in leaf pattern recognition. The quality of leaf images plays an important role, and therefore, a reliable source of leaf database must be used to establish the machine learning algorithm prior to leaf recognition and validation. |
Weng et al. [7] | In this survey, authors elaborate the wor k from four different aspects: (1) plant morphology and physiological information extraction, (2) plant identification and weed detection, (3) pest detection, and (4) yield prediction. It focuses on the specific application of convolutional neural networks in this field. Authors also analyze the pros and cons of these methods compared to traditional approaches. The potential future trends of plant phenotyping research are discussed at the end of this survey. |
Wang et al. [1] | The review introduces the research significance and history of plant recognition technologies. Then, the main technologies and steps of plant recognition are reviewed. At the same time, more than 30 leaf features (including 16 shape features, 11 texture features, four color features), and then SVM was used to evaluate these features and their fusion features, and 8 commonly used classifiers are introduced in detail. Finally, the review is ended with a conclusion of the insufficient of plant identification technologies and a prediction of future development. |
Barbedo [8] | This paper provides an analysis of each one of those challenges, emphasizing both the problems that they may cause and how they may have potentially affected the techniques proposed in the past. Some possible solutions capable of overcoming at least some of those challenges are proposed. Focusing on plant diseases, automatic identification, visible symptoms, digital image processing, extrinsic factors (image background, image capture conditions), intrinsic factors (symptom segmentation, symptom variations, multiple simultaneous disorders, different disorders with similar symptoms), other challenges and future prospects. |
Cope et al. [9] | The authors review the main computational, morphometric and image processing methods that have been used in recent years to analyze images of plants, introducing readers to relevant botanical concepts along the way. They discuss the measurement of leaf outlines, flower shape, vein structures and leaf textures, and describe a wide range of analytical methods in use. At last, they discuss a number of systems that apply this research, including prototypes of hand-held digital field guides and various robotic systems used in agriculture. They conclude with a discussion of ongoing work and outstanding problems in the area. |
Waldchen et al. [10] | This paper is the first systematic literature review with the aim of a thorough analysis and comparison of primary studies on computer vision approaches for plant species identification. They identified 120 peer-reviewed studies, selected through a multi-stage process, published in the last 10 years (2005–2015). After a careful analysis of these studies, they describe the applied methods categorized according to the studied plant organ, and the studied features, i.e., shape, texture, color, margin, and vein structure. Furthermore, they compare methods based on classification accuracy achieved on publicly available datasets. Their results are relevant to researches in ecology as well as computer vision for their ongoing research. |
Thyagharajan et al. [11] | Authors review several image processing methods in the feature extraction of leaves, given that feature extraction is a crucial technique in computer vision. As computers cannot comprehend images, they are required to be converted into features by individually analyzing image shapes, colors, textures and moments. Images that look the same may deviate in terms of geometric and photometric variations. In their study, they also discuss certain machine learning classifiers for an analysis of different species of leaves. |
This paper | In this paper, three categories of plant image recognition algorithms are summarized, and the methods of plant image preprocessing and plant image feature extraction are summarized. Then, the advantages and disadvantages of imaging technologies are explained. At last, the specific applications of four common deep learning models in plant image recognition are described. |
2. PPIR Technology
Methodsand Techniques | Introduction | Advantages | Disadvantages |
---|---|---|---|
K-NearestNeighbor (KNN) [22] | KNN algorithm is a basic classification and regression method. In the field of plant phenotype recognition and classification, it mainly undertakes the tasks of feature information retrieval, clustering, information filtering, and species recognition. | 1. Simple algorithm and mature theory. 2. Robust with regard to search space. 3. No training is required, confidence level can be obtained. | 1. High memory and computational cost at testing stage. 2. Sometimes sensitive to noise or nonlinear input. 3. lazy learning. |
ProbabilisticNeural Network (PNN) [16] | The PNN algorithm is a neural network model based on statistical principles. It is a parallel algorithm developed based on the Bayesian minimum risk criterion. Unlike the traditional multi-layer forward network, the BP algorithm needs to be used to calculate the backward error propagation. It is a completely forward calculation process and is often used in the task of plant phenotypic image classification. | 1. Strong adaptability to noisy input and variable data. 2. Can have multiple outputs. | 1. Complexstructure. 2. Susceptible to overfitting. |
SupportVector Machines (SVM) [5] | The SVM algorithm is an excellent data mining technology. Its goal is to find the optimal hyperplane to minimize the classifier error. It is widely used in statistical classification and regression analysis. It usually assumes the role of feature classifier in plant phenotype image recognition. | 1. Good generalization. 2. Sparsity of the solution and capacity control obtained by optimizing the margin. 3. Strong fault tolerance ability, relatively stable even with training sample deviation. | 1. Complex algorithm structure. 2. Slow training speed. |
Decision Trees (DT) [27] | The DT algorithm is a tree-like decision diagram with additional probability results. It is a predictive model that intuitively uses statistical probability analysis to represent a mapping between object attributes and object values. In the field of plant phenotype classification and recognition, it often undertakes analysis the task of collecting statistics on plant phenotypic characteristics. | 1. Simple to use and easy to understand. 2. Pruning strategy eliminates a large number of weak correlations and irrelevant information to improve efficiency. 3. Fast prediction ability. | Sensitive to subtle changes in the attribute value. |
ArtificialNeural Network (ANN) [28] | ANN algorithm is a kind of simulated biological neural network, which is a kind of pattern matching algorithm. It usually used to solve classification and regression problems. It also used in plant phenotype image recognition. | 1. Strong robustness and fault tolerance. 2. Complex nonlinear relations can be modeled using one or more hidden layers. | 1. Slow convergence speed and high complexity. 2. Possibility of local overfitting. |
Random Forest (RF) [30] | In machine learning, RF is a classifier containing multiple decision trees, and its output category is determined by the mode of the category output by individual trees. It often undertakes species classification tasks in the field of plant phenotypes. | 1. The algorithm can handle very high dimensional data without feature selection. 2. Fast training speed, and easy to parallelize method. 3. The algorithm has strong anti-interference ability and strong anti-overfitting ability. | 1. When the algorithm solves regression problems, it does not perform as well as it does in classification. 2. The internal part of the model is relatively complicated, and it can only be tried between different parameters and random seeds. 3. For small data or low-dimensional, it may not produce a good classification. |
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/electronics10010081