ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2022
Accurate species identification of food-contaminating beetles with quality-improved elytral images and deep learning.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A structured literature review of computer vision methods for insect identification.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2026Review
- Article
- A Systematic Review of Species Classification Using Deep Learning Algorithms and Gender Identification ofZoological studies · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food samples are routinely screened for food-contaminating beetles (i.e., pantry beetles) due to their adverse impact on the economy, environment, public health and safety. If found, their remains are subsequently analyzed to identify the species responsible for the contamination; each species poses different levels of risk, requiring different regulatory and management steps. At present, this identification is done through manual microscopic examination since each species of beetle has a unique pattern on its elytra (hardened forewing). Our study sought to automate the pattern recognition process through machine learning. Such automation will enable more efficient identification of pantry beetle species and could potentially be scaled up and implemented across various analysis centers in a consistent manner. In our earlier studies, we demonstrated that automated species identification of pantry beetles is feasible through elytral pattern recognition. Due to poor image quality, however, we failed to achieve prediction accuracies of more than 80%. Subsequently, we modified the traditional imaging technique, allowing us to acquire high-quality elytral images. In this study, we explored whether high-quality elytral images can truly achieve near-perfect prediction accuracies for 27 different species of pantry beetles. To test this hypothesis, we developed a convolutional neural network (CNN) model and compared performance between two different image sets for various pantry beetles. Our study indicates improved image quality indeed leads to better prediction accuracy; however, it was not the only requirement for achieving good accuracy. Also required are many high-quality images, especially for species with a high number of variations in their elytral patterns. The current study provided a direction toward achieving our ultimate goal of automated species identification through elytral pattern recognition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.