| Literature DB >> 31333705 |
Mohsen Hesami1, Roohangiz Naderi1, Masoud Tohidfar2, Mohsen Yoosefzadeh-Najafabadi3.
Abstract
A hybrid artificial intelligence model and optimization algorithm could be a powerful approach for modeling and optimizing plant tissue culture procedures. The aim of this study was introducing an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System- Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II (ANFIS-NSGAII) as a powerful computational methodology for somatic embryogenesis of chrysanthemum, as a case study. ANFIS was used for modeling three outputs including callogenesis frequency (CF), embryogenesis frequency (EF), and the number of somatic embryo (NSE) based on different variables including 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), 6-benzylaminopurine (BAP), sucrose, glucose, fructose, and light quality. Subsequently, models were linked to NSGAII for optimizing the process, and the importance of each input was evaluated by sensitivity analysis. Results showed that all of the R2 of training and testing sets were over 92%, indicating the efficiency and accuracy of ANFIS on the modeling of the embryogenesis. Also, according to ANFIS-NSGAII, optimal EF (99.1%), and NSE (13.1) can be obtained from a medium containing 1.53 mg/L 2,4-D, 1.67 mg/L BAP, 13.74 g/L sucrose, 57.20 g/L glucose, and 0.39 g/L fructose under red light. The results of the sensitivity analysis showed that embryogenesis was more sensitive to 2,4-D, and less sensitive to fructose. Generally, the hybrid ANFIS-NSGAII can be recognized as a powerful computational tool for modeling and optimizing in plant tissue culture.Entities:
Keywords: artificial intelligence; carbohydrate; chrysanthemum; embryogenesis; in vitro culture; light quality; optimization algorithm; plant growth regulator
Year: 2019 PMID: 31333705 PMCID: PMC6624437 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00869
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Figure 1The schematic diagram of the proposed ANFIS methodology.
Figure 2Schematic diagram showing the step-by-step NSGAII optimization process.
Statistics of ANFIS models for callogenesis frequency (CF), embryogenesis frequency (EF), and number of somatic embryo (NSE) embryo of chrysanthemum (training vs. testing values).
| R2 | 0.975 | 0.956 | 0.974 | 0.947 | 0.980 | 0.912 |
| RMSE | 5.696 | 7.484 | 5.354 | 7.294 | 0.373 | 0.686 |
| MBE | −0.032 | −0.536 | 0.324 | −0.117 | 0.029 | 0.057 |
Figure 3Scatter plot of model predicted vs. observed values of callogenesis of chrysanthemum obtained by ANFIS model. (A) Training set (n = 810); (B) Testing set (n = 270). Fitted simple regression line on scatter points was indicated by a solid line.
Figure 5Scatter plot of model predicted vs. observed values of number of somatic embryo of chrysanthemum obtained by ANFIS model. (A) Training set (n = 810); (B) Testing set (n = 270). Fitted simple regression line on scatter points was indicated by a solid line.
Importance of growth factors for callogenesis frequency (CF), embryogenesis frequency (EF), and number of somatic embryo (NSE) of chrysanthemum according to sensitivity analysis on the developed ANFIS model to rank the importance of growth factors.
| CF | VSR | 5.95 | 3.13 | 1.43 | 1.24 | 1.31 | 1.17 | 1.16 | 1.10 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
| EF | VSR | 4.94 | 3.63 | 1.49 | 1.17 | 1.33 | 1.30 | 1.22 | 1.25 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 6 | |
| NSE | VSR | 6.08 | 5.80 | 1.61 | 0.91 | 1.52 | 1.48 | 1.04 | 1.41 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
Figure 6Pareto front obtained by NSGAII for the maximum embryogenesis frequency and number of somatic embryo of chrysanthemum. The red point indicates the ideal point.
Optimizing growth factors according to optimization analysis on the developed ANFIS-NSGAII in the ideal point for embryogenesis frequency (EF) and number of somatic embryo (NSE) in chrysanthemum.
| 1.53 | 1.67 | 57.20 | 0.39 | 13.74 | 254.48 | 0.57 | 18.25 | 99.10 | 13.10 |
Validation of the predicted vs. tested data for embryogenesis frequency (EF) and number of somatic embryo (NSE) of chrysanthemum.
| Predicted via ANFIS-NSGAII | 99.10 | 13.10 |
| Tested in validation experiment | 100 | 12.83 |