Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30640961›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Application of convolutional neural networks for classification of adult mosquitoes in the field.

Daniel Motta, Alex Álisson Bandeira Santos, Ingrid Winkler, Bruna Aparecida Souza Machado, Daniel André Dias Imperial Pereira, Alexandre Morais Cavalcanti, Eduardo Oyama Lins Fonseca, Frank Kirchner, Roberto Badaró

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Identifying disease vector images in the Americas in the age of artificial intelligence.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

9 authors.

Daniel MottaUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Alex Álisson Bandeira SantosUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Ingrid WinklerUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Bruna Aparecida Souza MachadoUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1655-0325
Daniel André Dias Imperial PereiraUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Alexandre Morais CavalcantiUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Eduardo Oyama Lins FonsecaHealth Institute of Technologies (CIMATEC ITS), National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Frank KirchnerResearch Centre for Artificial Intelligence, DFKI, Bremen, Germany.
Roberto BadaróUniversity Center SENAI CIMATEC, National Service of Industrial Learning-SENAI, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dengue, chikungunya and Zika are arboviruses transmitted by mosquitos of the genus Aedes and have caused several outbreaks in world over the past ten years. Morphological identification of mosquitos is currently restricted due to the small number of adequately trained professionals. We implemented a computational model based on a convolutional neural network (CNN) to extract features from mosquito images to identify adult mosquitoes from the species Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus and Culex quinquefasciatus. To train the CNN to perform automatic morphological classification of mosquitoes, we used a dataset that included 4,056 mosquito images. Three neural networks, including LeNet, AlexNet and GoogleNet, were used. During the validation phase, the accuracy of the mosquito classification was 57.5% using LeNet, 74.7% using AlexNet and 83.9% using GoogleNet. During the testing phase, the best result (76.2%) was obtained using GoogleNet; results of 52.4% and 51.2% were obtained using LeNet and AlexNet, respectively. Significantly, accuracies of 100% and 90% were achieved for the classification of Aedes and Culex, respectively. A classification accuracy of 82% was achieved for Aedes females. Our results provide information that is fundamental for the automatic morphological classification of adult mosquito species in field. The use of CNN's is an important method for autonomous identification and is a valuable and accessible resource for health workers and taxonomists for the identification of some insects that can transmit infectious agents to humans.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerAedesAnimalsArbovirus InfectionsCulexDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMachine LearningMaleModels, AnatomicMosquito VectorsSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID30640961
PMCPMC6331110

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.