Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33313554›Full record

ReviewPlant phenomics (Washington, D.C.)2020

Convolutional Neural Networks for Image-Based High-Throughput Plant Phenotyping: A Review.

Yu Jiang, Changying Li

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 128 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
128citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

128 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Deep learning for three-dimensional (3D) plant phenomics.Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2025
    Review
  20. Deep learning in plant phenotyping: the first ten years.Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2025
    Review

68 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Yu JiangHorticulture Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell AgriTech, Cornell University, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4495-3033
Changying LiSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, The University of Georgia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant phenotyping has been recognized as a bottleneck for improving the efficiency of breeding programs, understanding plant-environment interactions, and managing agricultural systems. In the past five years, imaging approaches have shown great potential for high-throughput plant phenotyping, resulting in more attention paid to imaging-based plant phenotyping. With this increased amount of image data, it has become urgent to develop robust analytical tools that can extract phenotypic traits accurately and rapidly. The goal of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the latest studies using deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in plant phenotyping applications. We specifically review the use of various CNN architecture for plant stress evaluation, plant development, and postharvest quality assessment. We systematically organize the studies based on technical developments resulting from imaging classification, object detection, and image segmentation, thereby identifying state-of-the-art solutions for certain phenotyping applications. Finally, we provide several directions for future research in the use of CNN architecture for plant phenotyping purposes.

Identifiers

PMID33313554
PMCPMC7706326

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.