| Literature DB >> 25426712 |
Lisu Chen1, Lin Lin1, Guangzhe Cai1, Yuanyuan Sun1, Tao Huang1, Ke Wang1, Jinsong Deng1.
Abstract
Establishing an accurate, fast, and operable method for diagnosing crop nutrition is very important for crop nutrient management. In this study, static scanning technology was used to collect images of a rice sample's fully expanded top three leaves and corresponding sheathes. From these images, 32 spectral and shape characteristic parameters were extracted using an RGB mean value function and using the Regionprops function in MATLAB. Hierarchical identification was used to identify NPK deficiencies. First, the normal samples and non-normal (NPK deficiencies) samples were identified. Then, N deficiency and PK deficiencies were identified. Finally, P deficiency and K deficiency were identified. In the identification of every hierarchy, SVFS was used to select the optimal characteristic set for different deficiencies in a targeted manner, and Fisher discriminant analysis was used to build the diagnosis model. In the first hierarchy, the selected characteristics were the leaf sheath R, leaf sheath G, leaf sheath B, leaf sheath length, leaf tip R, leaf tip G, leaf area and leaf G. In the second hierarchy, the selected characteristics were the leaf sheath G, leaf sheath B, white region of the leaf sheath, leaf B, and leaf G. In the third hierarchy the selected characteristics were the leaf G, leaf sheath length, leaf area/leaf length, leaf tip G, difference between the 2nd and 3rd leaf lengths, leaf sheath G, and leaf lightness. The results showed that the overall identification accuracies of NPK deficiencies were 86.15, 87.69, 90.00 and 89.23% for the four growth stages. Data from multiple years were used for validation, and the identification accuracies were 83.08, 83.08, 89.23 and 90.77%.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25426712 PMCID: PMC4245116 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113200
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1The different characteristics of rice leaves under NPK deficiencies.
Figure 2The different characteristics of rice sheaths under NPK deficiencies.
The formulas and explanations of different characteristics.
| Characteristic | Formula | Explanation |
| A/L |
| The ratio of leaf area to leaf length |
| A/P |
| The ratio of leaf area to leaf perimeter |
| Eccentricity |
| The ratio of leaf length to leaf width |
| Rectangularity |
| The ratio of leaf area to the area of the smallest box encasing the leaf |
| Area Convexity |
| The ratio leaf area to the area of the convex hull of leaf |
| Circularity |
| The ratio of an inscribed circle radius to a circumcircle radius |
| Form Factor |
| P and A are the leaf perimeter and area, respectively |
Characteristic parameters of the scanned images.
| NO. | Parameter | No. | Parameter | No. | Parameter | No. | Parameter |
| 1 | LR | 8 | EC | 15 | L/LS | 22 | B23 |
| 2 | LG | 9 | RE | 16 | A/L | 23 | LS12 |
| 3 | LB | 10 | AC | 17 | A/P | 24 | LS23 |
| 4 | LL | 11 | CI | 18 | L23 | 25 | LS12–LS23 |
| 5 | LW | 12 | FF | 19 | L1/3 | 26 | LTR |
| 6 | LA | 13 | LI | 20 | R23 | 27 | LTG |
| 7 | LP | 14 | LSL | 21 | G23 | 28 | LTB |
Figure 3The segmentation of the rice sheath image.
Additional color features of the rice sheath.
| No. | Parameter | No. | Parameter |
| 29 | LSR | 31 | LSB |
| 30 | LSG | 32 | WRA |
Figure 4Hierarchical identification of the different nutrition deficiencies.
Figure 5Color features of the rice sheath under different nutrition deficiencies.
Figure 6Rice characteristics under different types of nutrition stress.
Selected feature subsets of rice leaves in different positions.
| Growth Stage | Leaf Position | Subset |
| 4/8/13 | 1st leaf | 1, 2, 4, 14, 15, 18, 19, 22, 24 |
| 2nd leaf | 2, 4, 6, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 25, 28 | |
| 3rd leaf | 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 26 | |
| 18/8/13 | 1st leaf | 2, 6, 14, 16, 17, 18, 27, 28 |
| 2nd leaf | 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 18, 20, 28 | |
| 3rd leaf | 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19, 24, 26 | |
| 27/8/13 | 1st leaf | 2, 3, 8, 13, 26, 27, 28 |
| 2nd leaf | 2, 3, 7, 10, 20, 22, 26, 27, 28 | |
| 3rd leaf | 2, 3, 13, 16, 20, 21, 26, 27, 28 | |
| 8/9/13 | 1st leaf | 1, 2, 8, 10, 12, 14, 19, 23, 26, 27 |
| 2nd leaf | 2, 3, 10, 14, 16, 17, 19, 26, 27 | |
| 3rd leaf | 1, 2, 4, 14, 15, 18, 19, 22, 24 | |
| Universal characteristics | 2, 4, 6, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 26 | |
Note: 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages (August 4th, August 18th, August 27th, and September 8th, respectively).
Overall recognition accuracy.
| Leaf position | Growth stages | |||
| 4/8/13 | 18/8/13 | 27/8/13 | 8/9/13 | |
| 1st leaf | 73.08% | 70.77% | 72.31% | 71.54% |
| 2nd leaf | 79.23% | 73.08% | 73.85% | 74.62% |
| 3rd leaf |
|
|
|
|
Note: the highest identification accuracy for every growth stage is in bold. 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Identification accuracy with the additional color characteristics of leaf sheath.
| Leaf position | Growth stages | |||
| 4/8/13 | 18/8/13 | 27/8/13 | 8/9/13 | |
| 1st leaf | 80.77% | 75.38% | 90.00% | 80.77% |
| 2nd leaf | 80.00% | 77.69% | 87.69% | 83.08% |
| 3rd leaf |
|
|
|
|
Note: the highest identification accuracy for every growth stage is in bold. 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Identification accuracy of different nutrition statuses.
| Growth stage | Normal | N | P | K |
| 4/8/13 | 90.00% | 95.00% | 85.00% | 72.50% |
| 18/8/13 | 90.00% | 95.00% | 77.50% | 62.50% |
| 27/8/13 | 90.00% | 100.00% | 87.50% | 82.50% |
| 8/9/13 | 100.00% | 97.50% | 87.50% | 65.00% |
Note: 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Identification accuracy for P and K deficiencies.
| Deficiency | N(Misjudgment) | P(Misjudgment) | K(Misjudgment) | Normal(Misjudgment) | |
| 4/8/13 | K | 2.50% | 85.00% | 2.50% | 10.00% |
| P | 7.50% | 2.50% | 72.50% | 17.50% | |
| 18/8/13 | K | 5.00% | 77.50% | 2.50% | 15.00% |
| P | 7.50% | 7.50% | 62.50% | 22.50% | |
| 27/8/13 | K | 0.00% | 87.50% | 5.00% | 7.50% |
| P | 5.00% | 2.50% | 82.50% | 10.00% | |
| 8/9/13 | K | 2.50% | 87.50% | 2.50% | 7.50% |
| P | 7.50% | 5.00% | 65.00% | 22.50% |
Note: 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Subset of selected rice characteristics in every hierarchy.
| Hierarchy | Identification type | Subset |
| 1st hierarchy | Normal and Non-normal(NPK) | 2, 6, 14, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 |
| 2nd hierarchy | N and PK | 2, 3, 30, 31, 32 |
| 3rd hierarchy | P and K | 2, 13, 14, 16, 24, 27, 30 |
Training accuracy using hierarchical identification.
| Leaf position | Growth stage | |||
| 4/8/13 | 18/8/13 | 27/8/13 | 8/9/13 | |
| 1st leaf | 85.38% | 73.85% | 84.62% | 80.00% |
| 2nd leaf | 85.38% | 83.85% | 88.46% | 83.08% |
| 3rd leaf |
|
|
|
|
Note: the highest identification accuracy in every growth stage is in bold. 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Training accuracy for the identification of different nutrition deficiencies.
| Growth stage | Normal | N | P | K |
| 4/8/13 | 80.00% | 95.00% | 80.00% | 85.00% |
| 18/8/13 | 80.00% | 100.00% | 82.50% | 82.50% |
| 27/8/13 | 90.00% | 100.00% | 80.00% | 90.00% |
| 8/9/13 | 80.00% | 95.00% | 85.00% | 90.00% |
Note: 4/8/13, 18/8/13, 27/8/13, and 8/9/13 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Validation accuracy using hierarchical identification.
| Leaf position | Growth stage | |||
| 29/7/12 | 13/8/12 | 20/8/12 | 31/8/12 | |
| 1st leaf | 76.92% | 61.54% | 80.00% | 78.46% |
| 2nd leaf | 81.54% | 67.69% | 83.08% | 83.08% |
| 3rd leaf |
|
|
|
|
Note: the highest identification accuracy for every growth stage is in bold. 29/7/12, 13/8/12, 20/8/12, and 31/8/12 indicate the 4 growth stages.
Validation accuracy for the identification of different nutrition deficiencies.
| Growth stage | Normal | N | P | K |
| 29/7/12 | 80.00% | 80.00% | 90.00% | 80.00% |
| 13/8/12 | 60.00% | 90.00% | 85.00% | 80.00% |
| 20/8/12 | 80.00% | 95.00% | 90.00% | 85.00% |
| 31/8/12 | 100.00% | 85.00% | 100.00% | 85.00% |
Note: 29/7/2012, 13/8/2012, 20/8/2012, and 31/8/2012 indicate the 4 growth stages.