ArticleScientific reports2025
Automated underwater plectropomus leopardus phenotype measurement through cylinder.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate and non-invasive measurement of fish phenotypic characteristics in underwater environments is crucial for advancing aquaculture. Traditional manual methods require significant labor to anesthetize and capture fish, which not only raises ethical concerns but also risks causing injury to the animals. Alternative hardware-based approaches, such as acoustic technology and active structured light techniques, are often costly and may suffer from limited measurement accuracy. In contrast, image-based methods utilizing low-cost binocular cameras present a more affordable solution, although they face challenges such as light refraction between water and the waterproof enclosure, which can cause discrepancies between image coordinates and actual positions. To address these challenges, we have developed a fish keypoint detection dataset and trained both a fish object detection model and a keypoint detection model using the RTMDet and RTMPose architectures to identify keypoints on Plectropomus leopardus. Since the binocular camera must be housed in a waterproof enclosure, we correct for birefringence caused by the water and the enclosure by applying refraction corrections to the detected keypoint coordinates. This ensures that the keypoint coordinates obtained underwater are consistent with those in air, thereby improving the accuracy of subsequent stereo matching. Once the corrected keypoint coordinates are obtained, we apply the least squares method, in conjunction with binocular stereo imaging principles, to perform stereo matching and derive the actual 3D coordinates of the keypoints. We calculate the fish body length by measuring the 3D coordinates of the snout and tail. Our model achieved 98.6% accuracy in keypoints detection (AP@0.5:0.95). Underwater tests showed an average measurement error of approximately 3.2 mm (MRPE=3.50%) for fish in a tank, with real-time processing at 28 FPS on an NVIDIA GTX 1060 GPU. These results confirm that our method effectively detects keypoints on fish bodies and measures their length without physical contact or removal from the tank. By eliminating invasive procedures, our approach not only improves measurement efficiency but also aligns with ethical standards in aquaculture. Compared to existing techniques, our method offers enhanced accuracy (reducing MRPE by 53.8% compared to baseline methods) and practicality, making it a valuable tool for the aquaculture industry.
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.