Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31912306›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2020

Machine learning algorithms for forecasting the incidence of Coffea arabica pests and diseases.

Lucas Eduardo de Oliveira Aparecido, Glauco de Souza Rolim, Jose Reinaldo da Silva Cabral De Moraes, Cicero Teixeira Silva Costa, Paulo Sergio de Souza

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lucas Eduardo de Oliveira AparecidoScience and Technology of Mato Grosso do Sul - Campus of Naviraí, IFMS - Federal Institute of Education, Naviraí,, Brazil. lucas.aparecido@ifms.edu.br.
Glauco de Souza RolimDepartment of Exact Sciences, State University of São Paulo-UNESP, Jaboticabal, Brazil.
Jose Reinaldo da Silva Cabral De MoraesScience and Technology of Mato Grosso do Sul - Campus of Naviraí, IFMS - Federal Institute of Education, Naviraí,, Brazil.
Cicero Teixeira Silva CostaScience and Technology of Mato Grosso do Sul - Campus of Naviraí, IFMS - Federal Institute of Education, Naviraí,, Brazil.
Paulo Sergio de SouzaScience and Technology of Sul of Minas - Campus of Muzambinho, IFSULDEMINAS - Federal Institute of Education, Muzambinho, Brazil.
Instituto Federal do Sul de Minas · BRUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disease and pest alert models are able to generate information for agrochemical applications only when needed, reducing costs and environmental impacts. With machine learning algorithms, it is possible to develop models to be used in disease and pest warning systems as a function of the weather in order to improve the efficiency of chemical control of pests of the coffee tree. Thus, we correlated the infection rates with the weather variables and also calibrated and tested machine learning algorithms to predict the incidence of coffee rust, cercospora, coffee miner, and coffee borer. We used weather and field data obtained from coffee plantations in production in the southern regions of the State of Minas Gerais (SO

Indexed as

CoffeaAlgorithmsCoffeeIncidenceMachine LearningCoffeeArtificial intelligenceBig dataCrop modelingPhytosanitary maps

Identifiers

PMID31912306
OpenAlexW2998868568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.