| Literature DB >> 30562959 |
Feng Cao1, Fei Liu2,3, Han Guo4, Wenwen Kong5,6, Chu Zhang7, Yong He8,9.
Abstract
Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, one of the major diseases infecting oilseed rape leaves, has seriously affected crop yield and quality. In this study, an indoor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) low-altitude remote sensing simulation platform was built for disease detection. Thermal, multispectral and RGB images were acquired before and after being artificially inoculated with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on oilseed rape leaves. New image registration and fusion methods based on scale-invariant feature transform (SIFT) were presented to construct a fused database using multi-model images. The changes of temperature distribution in different sections of infected areas were analyzed by processing thermal images, the maximum temperature difference (MTD) on a single leaf reached 1.7 degrees Celsius 24 h after infection. Four machine learning models were established using thermal images and fused images respectively, including support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), K-nearest neighbor (KNN) and naïve Bayes (NB). The results demonstrated that the classification accuracy was improved by 11.3% after image fusion, and the SVM model obtained a classification accuracy of 90.0% on the task of classifying disease severity. The overall results indicated the UAV low-altitude remote sensing simulation platform equipped with multi-sensors could be used to early detect Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on oilseed rape leaves.Entities:
Keywords: Sclerotinia sclerotiorum; image fusion; machine learning; multispectral technology; oilseed rape; thermal imaging technology
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30562959 PMCID: PMC6308689 DOI: 10.3390/s18124464
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Schematic diagram of data acquisition system for disease detection.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of image registration and fusion.
Figure 3Schematic view of the two experiments. Experiment 1 was concerned with temperature and disease relationship, while experiment 2 was concerned with disease severity classification.
Figure 4Flowchart of image acquisition and data analysis for detection of oilseed rape disease. Healthy, one day post infection (1DPI) and five days post infection (5DPI) oilseed rape leaves were the objects to be classified in this experiment.
Figure 5The maximum temperature difference (MTD) within leaves before and after infection. 10 leaves inoculated with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum at day zero were counted.
Figure 6The temperature change curves through the lesion area before and after infection. Three areas (necrotic, lesion and pre-infected areas) gradually appeared in the disease spot.
Figure 7Three disease severity levels: Level 0 for healthy samples, Level 1 for mild infected samples and Level 2 for severe infection samples.
The results of the support vector machine (SVM), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), random forest (RF) and naïve Bayes (NB) models on the thermal dataset, with 5 times 5-fold cross validation.
| Models | Time (s) | Training Accuracy (%) | Test Accuracy (%) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Avg | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Avg | ||
| SVM | 1290.83 | 98.96 | 100 | 99.48 | 98.44 | 100 | 99.38 | 75.00 | 83.33 | 72.92 | 81.25 | 79.17 | 78.33 |
| KNN | 1.64 | 78.13 | 73.43 | 78.13 | 83.33 | 68.75 | 76.35 | 66.67 | 72.92 | 75.00 | 75.00 | 64.58 | 70.83 |
| RF | 17.01 | 90.10 | 92.71 | 99.48 | 86.98 | 82.81 | 90.42 | 64.58 | 75.00 | 70.83 | 60.47 | 79.17 | 70.01 |
| NB | 0.07 | 82.29 | 75.52 | 79.17 | 75.52 | 80.72 | 78.64 | 68.75 | 72.92 | 70.83 | 68.75 | 70.83 | 70.41 |
The confusion matrices of the training set and test set in SVM, KNN, RF and NB models.
| Models | Training Set | Test Set | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | Accuracy (%) | 1 | 2 | 3 | Accuracy (%) | ||
| SVM | 1 | 49 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 29 | 2 | 0 | 93.55 |
| 2 | 0 | 62 | 0 | 100 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 77.78 | |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 49 | 100 | 1 | 5 | 25 | 80.65 | |
| Total | 100 | 85.00 | |||||||
| KNN | 1 | 49 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 30 | 1 | 0 | 96.77 |
| 2 | 9 | 51 | 2 | 82.26 | 4 | 13 | 1 | 72.22 | |
| 3 | 12 | 6 | 31 | 63.27 | 7 | 11 | 13 | 41.94 | |
| Total | 81.88 | 70.00 | |||||||
| RF | 1 | 46 | 1 | 2 | 93.88 | 25 | 4 | 2 | 80.65 |
| 2 | 4 | 55 | 3 | 88.71 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 77.78 | |
| 3 | 2 | 10 | 37 | 75.51 | 4 | 9 | 18 | 58.06 | |
| Total | 86.25 | 71.25 | |||||||
| NB | 1 | 46 | 3 | 0 | 93.88 | 28 | 3 | 0 | 90.32 |
| 2 | 7 | 43 | 12 | 69.35 | 3 | 11 | 4 | 61.11 | |
| 3 | 7 | 11 | 31 | 63.27 | 2 | 9 | 20 | 64.52 | |
| Total | 75.00 | 73.75 | |||||||
Figure 8The confusion matrices of SVM, KNN, RF and NB models using the thermal dataset.
Figure 9The confusion matrices of SVM, KNN, RF and NB models using the fused dataset.