Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34362967›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Fully-automated root image analysis (faRIA).

Narendra Narisetti, Michael Henke, Christiane Seiler, Astrid Junker, Jörn Ostermann, Thomas Altmann, Evgeny Gladilin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Awn Image Analysis and Phenotyping Using BarbNet.Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2023
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Narendra NarisettiLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, OT Gatersleben, Corrensstr. 3, 06466, Seeland, Germany. narisetti@ipk-gatersleben.de.
Michael HenkeLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, OT Gatersleben, Corrensstr. 3, 06466, Seeland, Germany.
Christiane SeilerLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, OT Gatersleben, Corrensstr. 3, 06466, Seeland, Germany.
Astrid JunkerLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, OT Gatersleben, Corrensstr. 3, 06466, Seeland, Germany.
Jörn OstermannInstitute for Information Processing (TNT), Leibniz University of Hannover, Appelstr. 9A, 30167, Hannover, Germany.
Thomas AltmannLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, OT Gatersleben, Corrensstr. 3, 06466, Seeland, Germany.
Evgeny GladilinLeibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, OT Gatersleben, Corrensstr. 3, 06466, Seeland, Germany.
Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research · DELeibniz University Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-throughput root phenotyping in the soil became an indispensable quantitative tool for the assessment of effects of climatic factors and molecular perturbation on plant root morphology, development and function. To efficiently analyse a large amount of structurally complex soil-root images advanced methods for automated image segmentation are required. Due to often unavoidable overlap between the intensity of fore- and background regions simple thresholding methods are, generally, not suitable for the segmentation of root regions. Higher-level cognitive models such as convolutional neural networks (CNN) provide capabilities for segmenting roots from heterogeneous and noisy background structures, however, they require a representative set of manually segmented (ground truth) images. Here, we present a GUI-based tool for fully automated quantitative analysis of root images using a pre-trained CNN model, which relies on an extension of the U-Net architecture. The developed CNN framework was designed to efficiently segment root structures of different size, shape and optical contrast using low budget hardware systems. The CNN model was trained on a set of 6465 masks derived from 182 manually segmented near-infrared (NIR) maize root images. Our experimental results show that the proposed approach achieves a Dice coefficient of 0.87 and outperforms existing tools (e.g., SegRoot) with Dice coefficient of 0.67 by application not only to NIR but also to other imaging modalities and plant species such as barley and arabidopsis soil-root images from LED-rhizotron and UV imaging systems, respectively. In summary, the developed software framework enables users to efficiently analyse soil-root images in an automated manner (i.e. without manual interaction with data and/or parameter tuning) providing quantitative plant scientists with a powerful analytical tool.

Identifiers

PMID34362967
PMCPMC8346561
OpenAlexW3189312206

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.