ArticleAnnals of botany2026
Towards the automatized identification of moss species from their spore morphology.
Article in Annals of botany, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsAutomatized species identification tools have massively facilitated plant identification. In mosses, spore ultrastructure appears to be a promising taxonomic character, but has been largely under-exploited. Here, we test artificial intelligence-based approaches to identify species from their spore morphology. In particular, we determine whether the number of spores, their polarity, and variation among populations and capsules affect model accuracy.
methodsScanning electron microscopy spore images were generated for five capsules of five populations in ten species. Convolutional neural networks with a highly modularized architecture (ResNeXt) were trained to identify the species, population and capsule of origin of a spore. The training set was progressively sub-sampled to test the impact of sample size on model accuracy. To assess whether variation in spore morphology among populations affected model accuracy, one population was successively removed to test a model trained on the four remaining populations. KEY
resultsSpecies were correctly identified at average rates of 92 %, regardless of polarity. Model accuracy decreased progressively with decreasing sample size, dropping to about 80 % with 15 % of the initial dataset. The population and capsule of origin of a spore was retrieved at rates >75 %, indicating the presence of diagnostic population and capsule markers on the sporoderm. Strong population structure in some species caused a substantial drop of model accuracy when model training and testing was performed on different populations.
conclusionsSpore morphology appears to be an extremely promising tool for moss species identification and may usefully complement the suite of morphological characters used so far in moss taxonomy. The presence of spore diagnostic features at the population and capsule level raises substantial questions on the origin of this structure, which are discussed. Substantial infraspecific variation makes it necessary, however, to train an automatized identification tool from a range of populations and capsules.
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.