Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40468779›Full record

ArticleThe New phytologist2026

Using reflectance spectra and Pl@ntNet to identify herbarium specimens: a case study with Lithocarpus.

Barbara M Neto-Bradley, Pierre Bonnet, Hervé Goëau, Alexis Joly, Jeannine Cavender-Bares, David A Coomes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The New phytologist, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Barbara M Neto-BradleyDepartment of Plant Sciences and Conservation Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB23EA, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6061-208X
Pierre BonnetAMAP, University of Montpellier, IRD, CNRS, CIRAD, INRAE, Montpellier, 34980, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2828-4389
Hervé GoëauAMAP, University of Montpellier, IRD, CNRS, CIRAD, INRAE, Montpellier, 34980, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3296-3795
Alexis JolyInria, LIRMM, University of Montpellier, CNRS, Montpellier, 34095, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2161-9940
Jeannine Cavender-BaresDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3375-9630
David A CoomesDepartment of Plant Sciences and Conservation Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB23EA, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8261-2582

Funding

Division of Biological Infrastructure 2021898Fondation FrankliniaGates Cambridge Trust OPP1144
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The digitisation of plant collections is bringing large quantities of information into accessible electronic databases. However, in recent decades, traditional taxonomic work in collections has declined, meaning that more specimens are only determined to family or genus, particularly when lacking key identification structures. If unaddressed, large-scale digitisation risks widening the gap between well-studied species and those lacking data. Hyperspectral reflectance and computer vision are two emerging approaches for identifying species, but these have yet to be cross-compared for herbarium-based taxonomy. Using Lithocarpus species as a case study, we compared classification accuracy obtained from leaf reflectance spectra with computer vision (implemented via Pl@ntNet), a RGB (red, green, blue) image-based approach known to work well on specimens presenting reproductive structures. In the spectral approach, we assessed how much data are needed to optimise classification accuracy, how many species could be discriminated between, and whether close relatives were more frequently confounded. We found that Lithocarpus herbarium specimens were accurately identified to species from relatively small spectral datasets. Despite not incorporating reproductive structures, this was only 14% less accurate than Pl@ntNet. We suggest these rapid, nondestructive leaf reflectance measurements, paired with computer vision, could fill identification gaps in collections, particularly for specimens lacking reproductive features.

Indexed as

Spectrum AnalysisPlant LeavesSpecies Specificityherbarium specimensindeterminate specimensleaf reflectance spectraLithocarpusPl@ntNetspecies identification

Identifiers

PMID40468779
PMCPMC13278665

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.