ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023
Automatic acoustic recognition of pollinating bee species can be highly improved by Deep Learning models accompanied by pre-training and strong data augmentation.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acoustic Signatures of Hive: Detecting Queen Bee Absence Through Machine Learning of Short Audio Segments.Insects · 2026Article
- Advancements and prospects in key technologies for robotic pollination in greenhouse pepper breeding: a review.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- buzzdetect: an open-source deep learning tool for automated bioacoustic pollinator monitoring.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2025Article
- High-Res Acoustic and Environmental Data to Monitor Bombus dahlbomii Amid Invasive Species, Habitat Loss.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Extensive data engineering to the rescue: building a multi-species katydid detector from unbalanced, atypical training datasets.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Towards acoustic monitoring of bees: wingbeat sounds are related to species and individual traits.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Bees capable of performing floral sonication (or buzz-pollination) are among the most effective pollinators of blueberries. However, the quality of pollination provided varies greatly among species visiting the flowers. Consequently, the correct identification of flower visitors becomes indispensable to distinguishing the most efficient pollinators of blueberry. However, taxonomic identification normally depends on microscopic characteristics and the active participation of experts in the decision-making process. Moreover, the many species of bees (20,507 worldwide) and other insects are a challenge for a decreasing number of insect taxonomists. To overcome the limitations of traditional taxonomy, automatic classification systems of insects based on Machine-Learning (ML) have been raised for detecting and distinguishing a wide variety of bioacoustic signals, including bee buzzing sounds. Despite that, classical ML algorithms fed by spectrogram-type data only reached marginal performance for bee ID recognition. On the other hand, emerging systems from Deep Learning (DL), especially Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), have provided a substantial boost to classification performance in other audio domains, but have yet to be tested for acoustic bee species recognition tasks. Therefore, we aimed to automatically identify blueberry pollinating bee species based on characteristics of their buzzing sounds using DL algorithms. Methods: We designed CNN models combined with Log Mel-Spectrogram representations and strong data augmentation and compared their performance at recognizing blueberry pollinating bee species with the current state-of-the-art models for automatic recognition of bee species. Results and Discussion: We found that CNN models performed better at assigning bee buzzing sounds to their respective taxa than expected by chance. However, CNN models were highly dependent on acoustic data pre-training and data augmentation to outperform classical ML classifiers in recognizing bee buzzing sounds. Under these conditions, the CNN models could lead to automating the taxonomic recognition of flower-visiting bees of blueberry crops. However, there is still room to improve the performance of CNN models by focusing on recording samples for poorly represented bee species. Automatic acoustic recognition associated with the degree of efficiency of a bee species to pollinate a particular crop would result in a comprehensive and powerful tool for recognizing those that best pollinate and increase fruit yields.
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.