| Literature DB >> 28417907 |
Sen Men1, Lei Yan2, Jiaxin Liu3, Hua Qian4, Qinjuan Luo5.
Abstract
This paper presents a viability assessment method for Pisum sativum L. seeds based on the infrared thermography technique. In this work, different artificial treatments were conducted to prepare seeds samples with different viability. Thermal images and visible images were recorded every five minutes during the standard five day germination test. After the test, the root length of each sample was measured, which can be used as the viability index of that seed. Each individual seed area in the visible images was segmented with an edge detection method, and the average temperature of the corresponding area in the infrared images was calculated as the representative temperature for this seed at that time. The temperature curve of each seed during germination was plotted. Thirteen characteristic parameters extracted from the temperature curve were analyzed to show the difference of the temperature fluctuations between the seeds samples with different viability. With above parameters, support vector machine (SVM) was used to classify the seed samples into three categories: viable, aged and dead according to the root length, the classification accuracy rate was 95%. On this basis, with the temperature data of only the first three hours during the germination, another SVM model was proposed to classify the seed samples, and the accuracy rate was about 91.67%. From these experimental results, it can be seen that infrared thermography can be applied for the prediction of seed viability, based on the SVM algorithm.Entities:
Keywords: classification; image processing; multi classifier; seed germination; support vector machine (SVM); thermal imaging
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28417907 PMCID: PMC5424722 DOI: 10.3390/s17040845
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Visible (a) and thermal images (b) of the experimental samples.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of infrared thermography system used to capture and analyze thermal profiles.
Figure 3Flow chart of a series of steps for analyzing thermal and visible images data. Visible images are used to acquire the edge regions information (green arrow). Thermal images are used to extract the temperature information (red arrow). Fusion parameters are acquired from fusion image of viable image and thermography image.
Viability types of the seeds.
| Seed Group | Treatment | Root Length (cm) | Seed Viability Type | Seed Amount |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 °C for three days | Total 80 | |||
| 1.6–5.0 | Viable seed (A2) | 41 | ||
| 0.1–1.5 | Aged seed (A1) | 32 | ||
| 0 | Non-viable seed (A0) | 7 | ||
| 100 °C for three days | Total 40 | |||
| 0 | Non-viable seed (B0) | 40 |
Figure 4Temperature variations of the seeds for different categories during the experiment.
Figure 5Temperature curve of an individual seed and the definitions of the characteristic parameters.
Characteristic parameters of viable, aged and non-viable seeds.
| Parameter | Viable Seed Mean ± SD | Aged Seed Mean ± SD | Non-Viable Seed Mean ± SD |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1376 ± 0.2007 | 0.1838 ± 0.2755 | 0.1770 ± 0.2858 | |
| 3.8000 ± 2.6099 | 1.7500 ± 1.7538 | 1.7000 ± 1.8952 | |
| −0.0981 ± 0.3868 | −0.1867 ± 0.3801 | −0.0248 ± 0.2927 | |
| 22.7000 ± 4.4919 | 22.8500 ± 3.7353 | 15.6000 ± 2.9637 | |
| −1.0389 ± 0.7089 | −1.4796 ± 0.7716 | −0.5591 ± 0.9178 | |
| 45.5000 ± 4.7564 | 48.5500 ± 3.9538 | 44.0000 ± 4.9593 | |
| −0.2594 ± 0.5248 | 0.2288 ± 0.6147 | 0.0467 ± 0.5589 | |
| −1.1681 ± 0.6047 | −1.3426 ± 0.6570 | −0.8700 ± 0.5835 | |
| −1.3102 ± 0.4897 | −1.2525 ± 0.5880 | −0.8813 ± 0.5870 | |
| −1.3474 ± 0.5551 | −1.2057 ± 0.5677 | −0.8976 ± 0.5751 | |
| −1.2637 ± 0.5033 | −1.1617 ± 0.5428 | −0.9496 ± 0.5408 | |
| −1.1722 ± 0.5064 | −1.1788 ± 0.5639 | −0.9661 ± 0.5038 | |
| −1.1240 ± 0.5901 | −1.1905 ± 0.6134 | −0.9680 ± 0.5092 |
Multiple comparisons of characteristic parameters in viable, aged and non-viable seeds. Std.: standard; Sig.: significance.
| Variate | Seed Viability Type (I) | Seed Viability Type (J) | Mean Difference (I-J) | Std. Error | Sig. | 95% Confidence Interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | ||||||
| Viable | Aged | 0.088575000 | 0.051886357 | 0.096 | −0.01655674 | 0.19370674 | |
| Non-viable | −0.073350000 | 0.059913204 | 0.229 | −0.19474568 | 0.04804568 | ||
| Aged | Viable | −0.088575000 | 0.051886357 | 0.096 | −0.19370674 | 0.01655674 | |
| Non-viable | −0.161925000 * | 0.051886357 | 0.003 | −0.26705674 | −0.05679326 | ||
| Non-viable | Viable | 0.073350000 | 0.059913204 | 0.229 | −0.04804568 | 0.19474568 | |
| Aged | 0.161925000 * | 0.051886357 | 0.003 | 0.05679326 | 0.26705674 | ||
| Viable | Aged | 0.440695000 | 0.249822823 | 0.086 | −0.06549412 | 0.94688412 | |
| Non-viable | −0.479800000 | 0.288470548 | 0.105 | −1.0642969 | 0.10469685 | ||
| Aged | Viable | −0.440695000 | 0.249822823 | 0.086 | −0.94688412 | 0.06549412 | |
| Non-viable | −0.920495000 * | 0.249822823 | 0.001 | −1.4266841 | −0.41430588 | ||
| Non-viable | Viable | 0.479800000 | 0.288470548 | 0.105 | −0.10469685 | 1.06429685 | |
| Aged | 0.920495000 * | 0.249822823 | 0.001 | 0.41430588 | 1.42668412 | ||
| Viable | Aged | −0.388177271 * | 0.131625596 | 0.005 | −0.65487606 | −0.12147848 | |
| Non-viable | −0.206019553 | 0.151988147 | 0.183 | −0.51397679 | 0.10193768 | ||
| Aged | Viable | 0.388177271 * | 0.131625596 | 0.005 | 0.12147848 | 0.65487606 | |
| Non-viable | 0.182157718 | 0.131625596 | 0.175 | −0.08454107 | 0.44885651 | ||
| Non-viable | Viable | 0.206019553 | 0.151988147 | 0.183 | −0.10193768 | 0.51397679 | |
| Aged | −0.182157718 | 0.131625596 | 0.175 | −0.44885651 | 0.08454107 | ||
| Viable | Aged | 0.174533924 | 0.153147282 | 0.262 | −0.13577194 | 0.48483979 | |
| Non-viable | −0.298041417 | 0.176839249 | 0.100 | −0.65635177 | 0.06026894 | ||
| Aged | Viable | −0.174533924 | 0.153147282 | 0.262 | −0.48483979 | 0.13577194 | |
| Non-viable | −0.472575341* | 0.153147282 | 0.004 | −0.78288121 | −0.16226947 | ||
| Non-viable | Viable | 0.298041417 | 0.176839249 | 0.100 | −0.06026894 | 0.65635177 | |
| Aged | 0.472575341 * | 0.153147282 | 0.004 | 0.16226947 | 0.78288121 | ||
| Viable | Aged | −0.057694319 | 0.125059184 | 0.647 | −0.31108830 | 0.19569966 | |
| Non-viable | −0.428964520 * | 0.144405907 | 0.005 | −0.72155868 | −0.13637036 | ||
| Aged | Viable | 0.057694319 | 0.125059184 | 0.647 | −0.19569966 | 0.31108830 | |
| Non-viable | −0.371270201 * | 0.125059184 | 0.005 | −0.62466418 | −0.11787622 | ||
| Non-viable | Viable | 0.428964520 * | 0.144405907 | 0.005 | 0.13637036 | 0.72155868 | |
| Aged | 0.371270201 * | 0.125059184 | 0.005 | 0.11787622 | 0.62466418 | ||
| Viable | Aged | −0.141687776 | 0.124322859 | 0.262 | −0.39358982 | 0.11021426 | |
| Non-viable | −0.449798325 * | 0.143555672 | 0.003 | −0.74066975 | −0.15892690 | ||
| Aged | Viable | 0.141687776 | 0.124322859 | 0.262 | −0.11021426 | 0.39358982 | |
| Non-viable | −0.308110548 * | 0.124322859 | 0.018 | −0.56001259 | −0.05620851 | ||
| Non-viable | Viable | 0.449798325 * | 0.143555672 | 0.003 | 0.15892690 | 0.74066975 | |
| Aged | 0.308110548 * | 0.124322859 | 0.018 | 0.05620851 | 0.56001259 | ||
* The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Figure 6Heat production during the first five hours in the experiment.
The results of cross validation of the SVM model with the whole germination temperature data.
| Definition | Fold 1 | Fold 2 | Fold 3 | Fold 4 | Fold 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training number | 96 | 96 | 96 | 96 | 96 |
| Prediction number | 24 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 24 |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number in Viable seed (Accuracy rate) | 1/9 (88.89%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 2/8 (75%) |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number in Aged seed (Accuracy rate) | 1/7 (85.71%) | 1/8 (87.5%) | 1/8 (87.5%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/1 (100%) |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number in Non-viable seed (Accuracy rate) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/15 (100%) |
| Accuracy rate | 91.67% | 95.83% | 95.83% | 100% | 91.67% |
| Accuracy rate of total | 95% | ||||
Classification results of SVM model with the whole germination temperature data.
| Definition | Viable Type | Aged Type | Non-Viable Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prediction number | 41 | 32 | 47 |
| Classification in Viable seed | 38 | 1 | 0 |
| Classification in Aged seed | 1 | 29 | 0 |
| Classification in Non-viable seed | 2 | 2 | 47 |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number | 3/41 | 3/32 | 0/47 |
| Accuracy rate | 92.68% | 90.63% | 100% |
| Accuracy rate of total | 95% | ||
The results of cross validation of the SVM model with the first three hours temperature data.
| Definition | Fold 1 | Fold 2 | Fold 3 | Fold 4 | Fold 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training number | 96 | 96 | 96 | 96 | 96 |
| Prediction number | 24 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 24 |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number in Viable seed (Accuracy rate) | 1/9 (88.89%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number in Aged seed (Accuracy rate) | 2/7 (71.43%) | 2/8 (75%) | 4/8 (50%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/1 (100%) |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number in Non-viable seed (Accuracy rate) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 0/8 (100%) | 1/15 (93.33%) |
| Accuracy rate | 87.5% | 91.67% | 83.33% | 100% | 95.83% |
| Accuracy rate of total | 91.67% | ||||
Classification results of SVM method with the first three hours temperature data.
| Definition | Viable Type | Aged Type | Non-Viable Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prediction number | 41 | 32 | 47 |
| Classification in Viable seed | 40 | 4 | 0 |
| Classification in Aged seed | 0 | 24 | 1 |
| Classification in Non-viable seed | 1 | 4 | 47 |
| Misjudgment number/Prediction number | 1/41 | 8/32 | 1/47 |
| Accuracy rate | 97.56% | 75% | 97.87% |
| Accuracy rate of total | 91.67% | ||