Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39852341›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2025

Plant Detection in RGB Images from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Using Segmentation by Deep Learning and an Impact of Model Accuracy on Downstream Analysis.

Mikhail V Kozhekin, Mikhail A Genaev, Evgenii G Komyshev, Zakhar A Zavyalov, Dmitry A Afonnikov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Mikhail V KozhekinInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia.ORCID 0009-0007-3639-8478
Mikhail A GenaevInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia.
Evgenii G KomyshevInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia.
Zakhar A ZavyalovGeosAero LLC, 440000 Penza, Russia.
Dmitry A AfonnikovInstitute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia.ORCID 0000-0001-9738-1409

Funding

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation agreement no. 075-15-2019-1662
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Crop field monitoring using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is one of the most important technologies for plant growth control in modern precision agriculture. One of the important and widely used tasks in field monitoring is plant stand counting. The accurate identification of plants in field images provides estimates of plant number per unit area, detects missing seedlings, and predicts crop yield. Current methods are based on the detection of plants in images obtained from UAVs by means of computer vision algorithms and deep learning neural networks. These approaches depend on image spatial resolution and the quality of plant markup. The performance of automatic plant detection may affect the efficiency of downstream analysis of a field cropping pattern. In the present work, a method is presented for detecting the plants of five species in images acquired via a UAV on the basis of image segmentation by deep learning algorithms (convolutional neural networks). Twelve orthomosaics were collected and marked at several sites in Russia to train and test the neural network algorithms. Additionally, 17 existing datasets of various spatial resolutions and markup quality levels from the Roboflow service were used to extend training image sets. Finally, we compared several texture features between manually evaluated and neural-network-estimated plant masks. It was demonstrated that adding images to the training sample (even those of lower resolution and markup quality) improves plant stand counting significantly. The work indicates how the accuracy of plant detection in field images may affect their cropping pattern evaluation by means of texture characteristics. For some of the characteristics (GLCM mean, GLRM long run, GLRM run ratio) the estimates between images marked manually and automatically are close. For others, the differences are large and may lead to erroneous conclusions about the properties of field cropping patterns. Nonetheless, overall, plant detection algorithms with a higher accuracy show better agreement with the estimates of texture parameters obtained from manually marked images.

Indexed as

cropdeep learningfield imageimage texture analysisplant countingsemantic segmentationUAV

Identifiers

PMID39852341
PMCPMC11766541

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.