Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37932745›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2023

Semantic segmentation of plant roots from RGB (mini-) rhizotron images-generalisation potential and false positives of established methods and advanced deep-learning models.

Pavel Baykalov, Bart Bussmann, Richard Nair, Abraham George Smith, Gernot Bodner, Ofer Hadar, Naftali Lazarovitch, Boris Rewald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Pavel BaykalovInstitute of Forest Ecology, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7512-5578
Bart BussmannIDLab, Department of Computer Science, University of Antwerp - Imec, Antwerp, Belgium.
Richard NairDept. Biogeochemical Integration, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany.
Abraham George SmithDepartment of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9782-2825
Gernot BodnerInstitute of Agronomy, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Vienna, Austria.
Ofer HadarSchool of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel.
Naftali LazarovitchWyler Department for Dryland Agriculture, French Associates Institute for Agriculture and Biotechnology of Drylands, Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Sede Boqer Campus, Beersheba, Israel.
Boris RewaldInstitute of Forest Ecology, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Vienna, Austria. boris.rewald@mendelu.cz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8098-0616

Funding

Horizon 2020 777222Horizon 2020 813114HORIZON EUROPE Widening Participation and Strengthening the European Research Area 101087262Universität für Bodenkultur Wien 12878
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManual analysis of (mini-)rhizotron (MR) images is tedious. Several methods have been proposed for semantic root segmentation based on homogeneous, single-source MR datasets. Recent advances in deep learning (DL) have enabled automated feature extraction, but comparisons of segmentation accuracy, false positives and transferability are virtually lacking. Here we compare six state-of-the-art methods and propose two improved DL models for semantic root segmentation using a large MR dataset with and without augmented data. We determine the performance of the methods on a homogeneous maize dataset, and a mixed dataset of > 8 species (mixtures), 6 soil types and 4 imaging systems. The generalisation potential of the derived DL models is determined on a distinct, unseen dataset.

resultsThe best performance was achieved by the U-Net models; the more complex the encoder the better the accuracy and generalisation of the model. The heterogeneous mixed MR dataset was a particularly challenging for the non-U-Net techniques. Data augmentation enhanced model performance. We demonstrated the improved performance of deep meta-architectures and feature extractors, and a reduction in the number of false positives.

conclusionsAlthough correction factors are still required to match human labelled root lengths, neural network architectures greatly reduce the time required to compute the root length. The more complex architectures illustrate how future improvements in root segmentation within MR images can be achieved, particularly reaching higher segmentation accuracies and model generalisation when analysing real-world datasets with artefacts-limiting the need for model retraining.

Indexed as

Automatic image segmentationData augmentationDeep learningFalse positivesFine rootsImage processingMinirhizotronNeural networksRoot segmentationU-Net

Identifiers

PMID37932745
PMCPMC10629126

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.