Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29382093›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2018

Plant Pest Detection Using an Artificial Nose System: A Review.

Shaoqing Cui, Peter Ling, Heping Zhu, Harold M Keener

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 202 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Interactions ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Early Detection of Grapevine (Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shaoqing CuiDepartment of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University/Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave, Wooster, OH 44691-4096, USA. cui.411@osu.edu.
Peter LingDepartment of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University/Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave, Wooster, OH 44691-4096, USA. ling.23@osu.edu.
Heping ZhuUnited States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS) Application Technology Research Unit, 1680 Madison Ave, Wooster, OH 44691-4096, USA. heping.zhu@ars.usda.gov.
Harold M KeenerDepartment of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University/Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave, Wooster, OH 44691-4096, USA. keener.3@osu.edu.
The Ohio State University · USUnited States Department of Agriculture · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper reviews artificial intelligent noses (or electronic noses) as a fast and noninvasive approach for the diagnosis of insects and diseases that attack vegetables and fruit trees. The particular focus is on bacterial, fungal, and viral infections, and insect damage. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted from plants, which provide functional information about the plant's growth, defense, and health status, allow for the possibility of using noninvasive detection to monitor plants status. Electronic noses are comprised of a sensor array, signal conditioning circuit, and pattern recognition algorithms. Compared with traditional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) techniques, electronic noses are noninvasive and can be a rapid, cost-effective option for several applications. However, using electronic noses for plant pest diagnosis is still in its early stages, and there are challenges regarding sensor performance, sampling and detection in open areas, and scaling up measurements. This review paper introduces each element of electronic nose systems, especially commonly used sensors and pattern recognition methods, along with their advantages and limitations. It includes a comprehensive comparison and summary of applications, possible challenges, and potential improvements of electronic nose systems for different plant pest diagnoses.

Indexed as

PlantsElectronic NoseFruitGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryHumansPest ControlVolatile Organic CompoundsVolatile Organic Compoundselectronic nosegas sensornoninvasive detectionpest managementpest scouting

Identifiers

PMID29382093
PMCPMC5855517
OpenAlexW2792388868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.