Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35502325›Full record

ArticleJournal of plant diseases and protection : scientific journal of the German Phytomedical Society (DPG)2022

Digital plant pathology: a foundation and guide to modern agriculture.

Matheus Thomas Kuska, René H J Heim, Ina Geedicke, Kaitlin M Gold, Anna Brugger, Stefan Paulus

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of plant diseases and protection : scientific journal of the German Phytomedical Society (DPG), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Sustainable Management of Major Fungal Phytopathogens in Sorghum (Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matheus Thomas Kuska *North Rhine-Westphalia Chamber of Agriculture, Gartenstraße 11, 50765 Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3432-9504
René H J Heim *Institute of Sugar Beet Research, Holtenser Landstraße 77, 37079 Göttingen, Germany.
Ina GeedickeInstitute of Sugar Beet Research, Holtenser Landstraße 77, 37079 Göttingen, Germany.
Kaitlin M GoldPlant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology College of Agriculture and Life Science, Cornell University, Cornell AgriTech, 15 Castle Creek Drive, Geneva, 14456 USA.
Anna BruggerBildungs- und Beratungszentrum Arenenberg, Arenenberg 8, 8268 Salenstein, Switzerland.
Stefan PaulusInstitute of Sugar Beet Research, Holtenser Landstraße 77, 37079 Göttingen, Germany.
Cornell University · USLandwirtschaftskammer Niedersachsen · DESonneberg Observatory · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, researchers in the field of digital plant pathology have chased the goal to implement sensors, machine learning and new technologies into knowledge-based methods for plant phenotyping and plant protection. However, the application of swiftly developing technologies has posed many challenges. Greenhouse and field applications are complex and differ in their study design requirements. Selecting a sensor type (e.g., thermography or hyperspectral imaging), sensor platform (e.g., rovers, unmanned aerial vehicles, or satellites), and the problem-specific spatial and temporal scale adds to the challenge as all pathosystems are unique and differ in their interactions and symptoms, or lack thereof. Adding host-pathogen-environment interactions across time and space increases the complexity even further. Large data sets are necessary to enable a deeper understanding of these interactions. Therefore, modern machine learning methods are developed to realize the fast data analysis of such complex data sets. This reduces not only human effort but also enables an objective data perusal. Especially deep learning approaches show a high potential to identify probable cohesive parameters during plant-pathogen-environment interactions. Unfortunately, the performance and reliability of developed methods are often doubted by the potential user. Gaining their trust is thus needed for real field applications. Linking biological causes to machine learning features and a clear communication, even for non-experts of such results, is a crucial task that will bridge the gap between theory and praxis of a newly developed application. Therefore, we suggest a global connection of experts and data as the basis for defining a common and goal-oriented research roadmap. Such high interconnectivity will likely increase the chances of swift, successful progress in research and practice. A coordination within international excellence clusters will be useful to reduce redundancy of research while supporting the creation and progress of complementary research. With this review, we would like to discuss past research, achievements, as well as recurring and new challenges. Having such a retrospect available, we will attempt to reveal future challenges and provide a possible direction elevating the next decade of research in digital plant pathology.

Indexed as

DigitalizationDigital plant pathologyImagingMachine learningOptical sensorsRobots

Identifiers

PMID35502325
PMCPMC9046714
OpenAlexW4224979950

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.