Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35058948›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2021

Outdoor Plant Segmentation With Deep Learning for High-Throughput Field Phenotyping on a Diverse Wheat Dataset.

Radek Zenkl, Radu Timofte, Norbert Kirchgessner, Lukas Roth, Andreas Hund, Luc Van Gool, Achim Walter, Helge Aasen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Plant counting: origins, development, and future paths.Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Radek ZenklGroup of Crop Science, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Radu TimofteComputer Vision Lab, Department of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Norbert KirchgessnerGroup of Crop Science, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Lukas RothGroup of Crop Science, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Andreas HundGroup of Crop Science, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Luc Van GoolComputer Vision Lab, Department of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Achim WalterGroup of Crop Science, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Helge AasenRemote Sensing Team, Division of Agroecology and Environment, Agroscope, Zurich, Switzerland.
ETH Zurich · CHAgroscope · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robust and automated segmentation of leaves and other backgrounds is a core prerequisite of most approaches in high-throughput field phenotyping. So far, the possibilities of deep learning approaches for this purpose have not been explored adequately, partly due to a lack of publicly available, appropriate datasets. This study presents a workflow based on DeepLab v3+ and on a diverse annotated dataset of 190 RGB (350 x 350 pixels) images. Images of winter wheat plants of 76 different genotypes and developmental stages have been acquired throughout multiple years at high resolution in outdoor conditions using nadir view, encompassing a wide range of imaging conditions. Inconsistencies of human annotators in complex images have been quantified, and metadata information of camera settings has been included. The proposed approach achieves an intersection over union (IoU) of 0.77 and 0.90 for plants and soil, respectively. This outperforms the benchmarked machine learning methods which use Support Vector Classifier and/or Random Forrest. The results show that a small but carefully chosen and annotated set of images can provide a good basis for a powerful segmentation pipeline. Compared to earlier methods based on machine learning, the proposed method achieves better performance on the selected dataset in spite of using a deep learning approach with limited data. Increasing the amount of publicly available data with high human agreement on annotations and further development of deep neural network architectures will provide high potential for robust field-based plant segmentation in the near future. This, in turn, will be a cornerstone of data-driven improvement in crop breeding and agricultural practices of global benefit.

Indexed as

benchmarkbreedingdeep learninghigh resolution image analysismachine learningrandom forrestremote sensingsupport vector classification

Identifiers

PMID35058948
PMCPMC8765702
OpenAlexW4205339373

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.