| Literature DB >> 29382093 |
Shaoqing Cui1, Peter Ling2, Heping Zhu3, Harold M Keener4.
Abstract
This paper reviews artificial intelligent noses (or electronic noses) as a fast and noninvasive approach for the diagnosis of insects and diseases that attack vegetables and fruit trees. The particular focus is on bacterial, fungal, and viral infections, and insect damage. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted from plants, which provide functional information about the plant's growth, defense, and health status, allow for the possibility of using noninvasive detection to monitor plants status. Electronic noses are comprised of a sensor array, signal conditioning circuit, and pattern recognition algorithms. Compared with traditional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) techniques, electronic noses are noninvasive and can be a rapid, cost-effective option for several applications. However, using electronic noses for plant pest diagnosis is still in its early stages, and there are challenges regarding sensor performance, sampling and detection in open areas, and scaling up measurements. This review paper introduces each element of electronic nose systems, especially commonly used sensors and pattern recognition methods, along with their advantages and limitations. It includes a comprehensive comparison and summary of applications, possible challenges, and potential improvements of electronic nose systems for different plant pest diagnoses.Entities:
Keywords: electronic nose; gas sensor; noninvasive detection; pest management; pest scouting
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29382093 PMCID: PMC5855517 DOI: 10.3390/s18020378
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Comparison of the typical technologies for plant disease detection.
| Techniques | Advantages | Disadvantages | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCR | Mature technology, easy to operate and portable | Subjected to DNA extraction, and inhibitors and polymerase activity | [ |
| FISH | Highly sensitive | Auto-fluorescence | [ |
| ELISH | Low-cost, rapid and visible results | Low-sensitivity to bacteria | [ |
| Fluorescence imaging | Sensitive to abnormalities in photosynthesis | Limited in field setting | [ |
| Hyperspectral Techniques | Rapid and highly robust | Affected by external factors, such as light, view angle; relatively expensive | [ |
| GC-MS | Providing individual VOCs information | Expensive, not real-time, expertise skills needed | [ |
| Enzymatic biosensor | Real-time and high specificity | Unstable, easily affected by pH, environment | [ |
| DNA-based biosensor | Low cost, low limit of detection | Easily affected by DAN extraction, not real-time | [ |
| Antibody-based biosensor | Low cost | Not real-time | [ |
Figure 1An E-nose system based on QCM sensor array. MFC, mass flow control; DAQ, data acquisition.
Summary of advantages and disadvantages of gas sensors applied on E-noses [65,66,67,68].
| Name | Advantage | Disadvantage |
|---|---|---|
| CP 1 | Wide range of available conducting polymers; room temperature operation; fast response; sensitive to polar compounds | High sensitivity to humidity and temperature; sensor response drift with time; short-life time |
| MOS 2 | Small size; easy to integrate into measurement circuitry; fast response and recovery time; high sensitivity | High-power-consumption; limited application on portable systems; blind with sulfur gas; limited coating materials; sensitive to humidity |
| SAW 3 | Broad applications; high sensitivity; fast response; diverse sensing materials; small size; | Relatively poor signal to noise performance; complex circuitry; unsatisfactory reproducibility |
| QCM 4 | Fast response time; easier fabrication compared to SAW; high sensitivity; diverse sensing materials; small | Unsatisfactory reproducibility; complex circuitry |
| CM 5 | High sensitivity; fast response; robustness in hazardous environment; disposable after use | Sensitive to humidity; complex supporting software and instrument; short life time; only sensitive to oxygen and VOCs |
1 CP, conducting polymer; 2 MOS, Metal Oxides Semi-conducting; 3 SAW, Surface Acoustic Wave; 4 QCM, Quartz Crystal Microbalance; 5 CM, Colorimetric.
Figure 2Illustration of VOC collection system for infected plants.
Figure 3Typical pattern recognition methods applied on E-nose system.
Summary of advantages and disadvantages of CA, ANN and RF.
| Name | Functions | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA | Classification | Reveal associations and structures in data which are not evident; results are easy to understand | Some methods are not clearly established; no satisfactory method for determining the appropriate number of clusters |
| ANN | Classification, regression and prediction | Require less formal statistical restrictions; able to model complex nonlinear relationships; able to train multiple algorithms | Big computation burden; tend to overfit |
| RF | Classification, regression and prediction | Efficient for large database; estimate the important variable in the classification; generate forests for further use | Overfitting for some datasets with noisy classification and regression tasks |
Figure 4The applications of E-nose in plants disease detection.