Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36034596›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2022

Accurate species identification of food-contaminating beetles with quality-improved elytral images and deep learning.

Halil Bisgin, Tanmay Bera, Leihong Wu, Hongjian Ding, Neslihan Bisgin, Zhichao Liu, Monica Pava-Ripoll, Amy Barnes, James F Campbell, Himansi Vyas and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

13 authors.

Halil BisginDepartment of Mathematics and Applied Sciences, University of Michigan-Flint, Flint, MI, United States.
Tanmay BeraDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Leihong WuDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Hongjian DingFood Chemistry Lab 1, Arkansas Regional Laboratory, Office of Regulatory Affairs, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Neslihan BisginDepartment of Mathematics and Applied Sciences, University of Michigan-Flint, Flint, MI, United States.
Zhichao LiuDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Monica Pava-RipollOffice for Food Safety, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, US Food and Drug Administration, College Park, MD, United States.
Amy BarnesFood Chemistry Lab 1, Arkansas Regional Laboratory, Office of Regulatory Affairs, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
James F CampbellStored Product Insect and Engineering Research Unit, US Department of Agriculture, Manhattan, KS, United States.
Himansi VyasFood Chemistry Lab 1, Arkansas Regional Laboratory, Office of Regulatory Affairs, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Cesare FurlanelloHK3 Lab, Milan, Italy.
Weida TongDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Joshua XuDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

convolutional neural networksdeep learningfood-contaminating beetlefood safetyimage classificationmachine learningspecies identification

Identifiers

PMID36034596
PMCPMC9412741

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.