Identification of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust on Different Wheat Varieties Based on Image Processing Technology
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Acquisition of Single-Leaf Images of Wheat Stripe Rust and Wheat Leaf Rust
2.2. Disease Image Preprocessing and Lesion Image Segmentation
2.3. Feature Extraction from the Segmented Lesion Images
2.4. Feature Selection of the Segmented Lesion Images
2.5. Building of Disease Identification Models of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust on Different Wheat Varieties
2.5.1. Image Datasets for Building Disease Identification Models
2.5.2. Building of the Individual-Variety Disease Identification Models Based on the Disease Images of the Different Wheat Varieties Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station
2.5.3. Building of the Individual-Variety Disease Identification Models Based on the Disease Images of the Different Wheat Varieties Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions
2.5.4. Building of the Multi-Variety Disease Identification Models Based on the Disease Images of Different Wheat Varieties Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station and under Laboratory Environmental Conditions
3. Results
3.1. Feature Selection Results of the Segmented Lesion Images
3.1.1. Feature Selection Results Using the Different Feature Selection Methods Combined with the SVM Modeling Method
3.1.2. Feature Selection Results Using the Different Feature Selection Methods Combined with the BPNN Modeling Method
3.1.3. Feature Selection Results Using the Different Feature Selection Methods Combined with the RF Modeling Method
3.2. Identification Results of the Disease Identification Models of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust Built Based on Disease Images of the Different Wheat Varieties
3.2.1. Identification Results of the Individual-Variety Disease Identification Models Built Based on Disease Images of the Different Wheat Varieties Acquired in the Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station
3.2.2. Identification Results of Individual-Variety Disease Identification Models Built Based on Disease Images of the Different Wheat Varieties Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions
3.2.3. Identification Results of the Multi-Variety Disease Identification Models Built Based on Disease Images of the Different Wheat Varieties Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station and under Laboratory Environmental Conditions
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, Z.Q.; Zeng, S.M. Wheat Rusts in China; China Agriculture Press: Beijing, China, 2002; pp. 1–254. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, R.P.; Singh, P.K.; Rutkoski, J.; Hodson, D.P.; He, X.Y.; Jørgensen, L.N.; Hovmøller, M.S.; Huerta-Espino, J. Disease impact on wheat yield potential and prospects of genetic control. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2016, 54, 303–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Figueroa, M.; Hammond-Kosack, K.E.; Solomon, P.S. A review of wheat diseases–A field perspective. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2018, 19, 1523–1536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lorrain, C.; dos Santos, K.C.; Germain, H.; Hecker, A.; Duplessis, S. Advances in understanding obligate biotrophy in rust fungi. New Phytol. 2019, 222, 1190–1206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, X.L.; Ma, Z.H.; Zhao, L.L.; Li, J.H.; Wang, H.G. Early diagnosis of wheat stripe rust and wheat leaf rust using near infrared spectroscopy. Spectrosc. Spectr. Anal. 2013, 33, 2661–2665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Qin, F.; Ruan, L.; Wang, R.; Liu, Q.; Ma, Z.H.; Li, X.L.; Cheng, P.; Wang, H.G. Identification and severity determination of wheat stripe rust and wheat leaf rust based on hyperspectral data acquired using a black-paper-based measuring method. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0154648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barbedo, J.G.A. A review on the main challenges in automatic plant disease identification based on visible range images. Biosyst. Eng. 2016, 144, 52–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.Y.; Wu, R.H.; Lin, Y.Y.; Li, C.Y.; Chen, S.Y.; Yuan, Z.N.; Chen, S.W.; Zou, X.J. Plant disease recognition model based on improved YOLOv5. Agronomy 2022, 12, 365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Q.; Wang, S.T.; Wang, H.; Qin, Z.L.; Wang, H.G. Circle fitting based image segmentation and multi-scale block local binary pattern based distinction of ring rot and anthracnose on apple fruits. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 884891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schaad, N.W.; Frederick, R.D. Real-time PCR and its application for rapid plant disease diagnostics. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 2002, 24, 250–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.; McCabe, E.; Chapados, J.T.; Carey, J.; Wilson, S.K.; Tropiano, R.; Redhead, S.A.; Lévesque, C.A.; Hambleton, S. Detection and identification of selected cereal rust pathogens by TaqMan® real-time PCR. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 2015, 37, 92–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinelli, F.; Scalenghe, R.; Davino, S.; Panno, S.; Scuderi, G.; Ruisi, P.; Villa, P.; Stroppiana, D.; Boschetti, M.; Goulart, L.R.; et al. Advanced methods of plant disease detection. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 35, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bravo, C.; Moshou, D.; West, J.; McCartney, A.; Ramon, H. Early disease detection in wheat fields using spectral reflectance. Biosyst. Eng. 2003, 84, 137–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sankaran, S.; Mishra, A.; Ehsani, R.; Davis, C. A review of advanced techniques for detecting plant diseases. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2010, 72, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oerke, E.C. Remote sensing of diseases. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2020, 58, 225–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chouhan, S.S.; Singh, U.P.; Jain, S. Applications of computer vision in plant pathology: A survey. Arch. Comput. Method Eng. 2020, 27, 611–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, G.F.; He, Y.; Yang, Y.; Xu, B.B. Fine-grained image classification for crop disease based on attention mechanism. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 600854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vishnoi, V.K.; Kumar, K.; Kumar, B. Plant disease detection using computational intelligence and image processing. J. Plant Dis. Prot. 2021, 128, 19–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chouhan, S.S.; Singh, U.P.; Jain, S. Automated plant leaf disease detection and classification using fuzzy based function network. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2021, 121, 1757–1779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.Y.; Rao, Y.; Man, C.; Jiang, Z.H.; Li, S.W. Identification of cucumber leaf diseases using deep learning and small sample size for agricultural Internet of Things. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2021, 17, 15501477211007407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orchi, H.; Sadik, M.; Khaldoun, M. On using artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things for crop disease detection: A contemporary survey. Agriculture 2022, 12, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.G. Smart phytoprotection and suggestions for its development. J. China Agric. Univ. 2022, 27, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patil, J.K.; Kumar, R. Advances in image processing for detection of plant diseases. J. Adv. Bioinform. Appl. Res. 2011, 2, 135–141. [Google Scholar]
- Barbedo, J.G.A. An automatic method to detect and measure leaf disease symptoms using digital image processing. Plant Dis. 2014, 98, 1709–1716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Oberti, R.; Marchi, M.; Tirelli, P.; Calcante, A.; Iriti, M.; Borghese, A.N. Automatic detection of powdery mildew on grapevine leaves by image analysis: Optimal view-angle range to increase the sensitivity. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2014, 104, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Omrani, E.; Khoshnevisan, B.; Shamshirband, S.; Saboohi, H.; Anuar, N.B.; Nasir, M.H.N.M. Potential of radial basis function-based support vector regression for apple disease detection. Measurement 2014, 55, 512–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, F.; Liu, D.X.; Sun, B.D.; Ruan, L.; Ma, Z.H.; Wang, H.G. Identification of alfalfa leaf diseases using image recognition technology. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0168274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- DeChant, C.; Wiesner-Hanks, T.; Chen, S.Y.; Stewart, E.L.; Yosinski, J.; Gore, M.A.; Nelson, R.J.; Lipson, H. Automated identification of northern leaf blight-infected maize plants from field imagery using deep learning. Phytopathology 2017, 107, 1426–1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Shrivastava, S.; Singh, S.K.; Hooda, D.S. Soybean plant foliar disease detection using image retrieval approaches. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2017, 76, 26647–26674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.W.; Wu, X.W.; You, Z.H.; Zhang, L.Q. Leaf image based cucumber disease recognition using sparse representation classification. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 134, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, J.C.; Du, K.M.; Zheng, F.X.; Zhang, L.X.; Gong, Z.H.; Sun, Z.F. A recognition method for cucumber diseases using leaf symptom images based on deep convolutional neural network. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 154, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.H.; Qiao, Y.; Meng, F.F.; Fan, C.G.; Zhang, M.M. Identification of maize leaf diseases using improved deep convolutional neural networks. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 30370–30377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abade, A.; Ferreira, P.A.; Vidal, F.D. Plant diseases recognition on images using convolutional neural networks: A systematic review. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 185, 106125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Afifi, A.; Alhumam, A.; Abdelwahab, A. Convolutional neural network for automatic identification of plant diseases with limited data. Plants 2021, 10, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caldeira, R.F.; Santiago, W.E.; Teruel, B. Identification of cotton leaf lesions using deep learning techniques. Sensors 2021, 21, 3169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Narmadha, R.P.; Sengottaiyan, N.; Kavitha, R.J. Deep transfer learning based rice plant disease detection model. Intell. Autom. Soft Comput. 2022, 31, 1257–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, A.; Jain, K. A robust deep attention dense convolutional neural network for plant leaf disease identification and classification from smart phone captured real world images. Ecol. Inform. 2022, 70, 101725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandian, J.A.; Kumar, V.D.; Geman, O.; Hnatiuc, M.; Arif, M.; Kanchanadevi, K. Plant disease detection using deep convolutional neural network. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 6982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Z.C.; Dong, Z.X.; Jiang, W.P.; Yang, Y.Z. Recognition of rice leaf diseases and wheat leaf diseases based on multi-task deep transfer learning. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 186, 106184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishnamoorthy, N.; Prasad, L.V.N.; Kumar, C.S.P.; Subedi, B.; Abraha, H.B.; Sathishkumar, V.E. Rice leaf diseases prediction using deep neural networks with transfer learning. Environ. Res. 2021, 198, 111275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.L.; Ma, Z.H.; Wang, H.G. Image recognition of wheat stripe rust and wheat leaf rust based on support vector machine. J. China Agric. Univ. 2012, 17, 72–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Q.; Wang, L.W.; Dong, F.M.; Nie, C.W.; Sun, S.F.; Wang, J.H. Identification of wheat stripe rust and powdery mildew using orientation coherence feature. Tran. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 2015, 46, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, K.; Sun, Z.; Li, Y.; Zheng, F.; Chu, J.; Su, Y. Diagnostic model for wheat leaf conditions using image features and a support vector machine. Trans. ASABE 2016, 59, 1041–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, Y.Q.; Li, Y.B.; Li, C. Recognition of wheat leaf diseases based on image processing technology. Bull. Sci. Tech. 2016, 32, 92–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Genaev, M.A.; Skolotneva, E.S.; Gultyaeva, E.I.; Orlova, E.A.; Bechtold, N.P.; Afonnikov, D.A. Image-based wheat fungi diseases identification by deep learning. Plants 2021, 10, 1500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, J.C.; Li, S.K.; Ming, B.; Wang, N.; Wang, K.R.; Xie, R.Z.; Gao, S.J. Advances in research on computer-vision diagnosis of crop diseases. Sci. Agric. Sin. 2009, 42, 1215–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kononenko, I. Estimating attributes: Analysis and extensions of RELIEF. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 1994, 784, 171–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Witten, I.H.; Frank, E.; Hall, M.A. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, 3rd ed.; China Machine Press: Beijing, China, 2014; pp. 61–64. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, M.A. Correlation-based Feature Selection for Machine Learning. PhD Thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, P.; Ma, Z.H.; Wang, X.J.; Wang, C.Q.; Li, Y.; Wang, S.H.; Wang, H.G. Impact of UV-B radiation on aspects of germination and epidemiological components of three major physiological races of Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. Crop Prot. 2014, 65, 6–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.L.; Ma, Z.H.; Huang, C.; Chi, Y.W.; Wang, H.G. Segmentation of color images of grape diseases using K_means clustering algorithm. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2010, 26, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.L.; Ma, Z.H.; Wang, H.G. Image Recognition of Grape Downy Mildew and Grape Powdery Mildew Based on Support Vector Machine. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer and Computing Technologies in Agriculture, CCTA 2011, Beijing, China, 29–31 October 2011; Li, D., Chen, Y., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012; pp. 151–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chang, C.C.; Lin, C.J. LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 2011, 2, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, X.P.; Zhou, J.P.; Xu, Y. Recognition of field maize leaf diseases based on improved regional convolutional neural network. J. South China Agric. Univ. 2020, 41, 82–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, J.; Zhu, W.D.; Luo, Y.Q.; Shen, J.F.; Chen, Y.D.; Zhou, X. Recognizing the diseases of crop leaves in fields using improved Mobilenet-V2. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2021, 37, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Diseased leaf Collection Location | Wheat Variety | Number of Acquired Images of Wheat Stripe Rust | Number of Acquired Images of Wheat Leaf Rust |
---|---|---|---|
The wheat field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station | Beijing 0045 | 345 | 170 |
Mingxian 169 | 448 | 101 | |
Nongda 211 | 227 | 41 | |
The controlled-climate chamber | Beijing 0045 | 1035 | 1258 |
Mingxian 169 | 1473 | 1254 | |
Nongda 211 | 1224 | 1036 | |
The wheat field in Gangu Testing Station | Longjian 9822 | 198 | – |
Longjian 9825 | 145 | – | |
Tianxuan 66 | 132 | – |
Feature Name | Feature Number | Feature Name | Feature Number | Feature Name | Feature Number | Feature Name | Feature Number | Feature Name | Feature Number |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
r | 1 | Φ1RGB_R | 31 | Φ3HSV_S | 61 | Φ5Lab_b | 91 | Homogeneity Lab_L | 121 |
g | 2 | Φ2RGB_R | 32 | Φ4HSV_S | 62 | Φ6Lab_b | 92 | Contrast Lab_a | 122 |
b | 3 | Φ3RGB_R | 33 | Φ5HSV_S | 63 | Φ7Lab_b | 93 | Correlation Lab_a | 123 |
μ1RGB_R | 4 | Φ4RGB_R | 34 | Φ6HSV_S | 64 | Contrast RGB_R | 94 | Energy Lab_a | 124 |
μ2RGB_R | 5 | Φ5RGB_R | 35 | Φ7HSV_S | 65 | Correlation RGB_R | 95 | Homogeneity Lab_a | 125 |
μ3RGB_R | 6 | Φ6RGB_R | 36 | Φ1HSV_V | 66 | Energy RGB_R | 96 | Contrast Lab_b | 126 |
μ1RGB_G | 7 | Φ7RGB_R | 37 | Φ2HSV_V | 67 | Homogeneity RGB_R | 97 | Correlation Lab_b | 127 |
μ2RGB_G | 8 | Φ1RGB_G | 38 | Φ3HSV_V | 68 | Contrast RGB_G | 98 | Energy Lab_b | 128 |
μ3RGB_G | 9 | Φ2RGB_G | 39 | Φ4HSV_V | 69 | Correlation RGB_G | 99 | Homogeneity Lab_b | 129 |
μ1RGB_B | 10 | Φ3RGB_G | 40 | Φ5HSV_V | 70 | Energy RGB_G | 100 | Area | 130 |
μ2RGB_B | 11 | Φ4RGB_G | 41 | Φ6HSV_V | 71 | Homogeneity RGB_G | 101 | Perimeter | 131 |
μ3RGB_B | 12 | Φ5RGB_G | 42 | Φ7HSV_V | 72 | Contrast RGB_B | 102 | Circularity | 132 |
μ1HSV_H | 13 | Φ6RGB_G | 43 | Φ1Lab_L | 73 | Correlation RGB_B | 103 | Complexity | 133 |
μ2HSV_H | 14 | Φ7RGB_G | 44 | Φ2Lab_L | 74 | Energy RGB_B | 104 | Φ1shape | 134 |
μ3HSV_H | 15 | Φ1RGB_B | 45 | Φ3Lab_L | 75 | Homogeneity RGB_B | 105 | Φ2shape | 135 |
μ1HSV_S | 16 | Φ2RGB_B | 46 | Φ4Lab_L | 76 | Contrast HSV_H | 106 | Φ3shape | 136 |
μ2HSV_S | 17 | Φ3RGB_B | 47 | Φ5Lab_L | 77 | Correlation HSV_H | 107 | Φ4shape | 137 |
μ3HSV_S | 18 | Φ4RGB_B | 48 | Φ6Lab_L | 78 | Energy HSV_H | 108 | Φ5shape | 138 |
μ1HSV_V | 19 | Φ5RGB_B | 49 | Φ7Lab_L | 79 | Homogeneity HSV_H | 109 | Φ6shape | 139 |
μ2HSV_V | 20 | Φ6RGB_B | 50 | Φ1Lab_a | 80 | Contrast HSV_S | 110 | Φ7shape | 140 |
μ2HSV_V | 21 | Φ7RGB_B | 51 | Φ2Lab_a | 81 | Correlation HSV_S | 111 | ||
μ1Lab_L | 22 | Φ1HSV_H | 52 | Φ3Lab_a | 82 | Energy HSV_S | 112 | ||
μ2Lab_L | 23 | Φ2HSV_H | 53 | Φ4Lab_a | 83 | Homogeneity HSV_S | 113 | ||
μ3Lab_L | 24 | Φ3HSV_H | 54 | Φ5Lab_a | 84 | Contrast HSV_V | 114 | ||
μ1Lab_a | 25 | Φ4HSV_H | 55 | Φ6Lab_a | 85 | Correlation HSV_V | 115 | ||
μ2Lab_a | 26 | Φ5HSV_H | 56 | Φ7Lab_a | 86 | Energy HSV_V | 116 | ||
μ3Lab_a | 27 | Φ6HSV_H | 57 | Φ1Lab_b | 87 | Homogeneity HSV_V | 117 | ||
μ1Lab_b | 28 | Φ7HSV_H | 58 | Φ2Lab_b | 88 | Contrast Lab_L | 118 | ||
μ2Lab_b | 29 | Φ1HSV_S | 59 | Φ3Lab_b | 89 | Correlation Lab_L | 119 | ||
μ3Lab_b | 30 | Φ2HSV_S | 60 | Φ4Lab_b | 90 | Energy Lab_L | 120 |
Diseased Leaf Collection Location | Wheat Variety | Training Set | Testing Set Corresponding to the Training Set | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dataset | Image Quantity of Wheat Stripe Rust | Image Quantity of Wheat Leaf Rust | Total Quantity | Dataset | Image Quantity of Wheat Stripe Rust | Image Quantity of Wheat Leaf Rust | Total Quantity | ||
The wheat field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station | Beijing 0045 | Training Set 1 | 115 | 113 | 228 | Testing Set 1 | 57 | 57 | 114 |
Training Set 2 | 115 | 113 | 228 | Testing Set 2 | 58 | 57 | 115 | ||
Mingxian 169 | Training Set 1 | 75 | 67 | 142 | Testing Set 1 | 37 | 34 | 71 | |
Training Set 2 | 75 | 67 | 142 | Testing Set 2 | 37 | 34 | 71 | ||
Training Set 3 | 75 | 67 | 142 | Testing Set 3 | 37 | 34 | 71 | ||
Training Set 4 | 75 | 67 | 142 | Testing Set 4 | 37 | 34 | 71 | ||
Nongda 211 | Training Set 1 | 50 | 27 | 77 | Testing Set 1 | 25 | 14 | 39 | |
Training Set 2 | 50 | 27 | 77 | Testing Set 2 | 26 | 14 | 40 | ||
Training Set 3 | 50 | 27 | 77 | Testing Set 3 | 26 | 14 | 40 | ||
The controlled-climate chamber | Beijing 0045 | Training set | 690 | 839 | 1529 | Testing set | 345 | 419 | 764 |
Mingxian 169 | Training set | 982 | 836 | 1818 | Testing set | 491 | 418 | 909 | |
Nongda 211 | Training set | 816 | 691 | 1507 | Testing set | 408 | 345 | 753 |
Disease Image Dataset | Feature Selection Method | Feature Selection Results |
---|---|---|
The multi-variety disease image dataset consisting of the images acquired in the wheat field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station | ReliefF | 107, 111, 2, 110, 13, 132, 18, 106, 16, 103, 15, 95, 99, 119, 3, 17, 19, 115, 27, 1, 104, 14, 116, 127, 96, 21, 109, 100, 22, 120, 4, 29, 7, 133, 10, 87, 126, 11, 28, 25, 5, 123, 20, 8, 23, 88, 9, 24, 112, 80, 105, 108, 117, 26, 6, 113, 128, 101, 97, 121, 94, 118, 98, 114, 131, 12, 122, 129, 125, 102, 66, 30, 59, 45, 52, 31, 38, 81, 134, 124, 73, 130, 90, 53, 60, 92, 67, 32, 46, 39, 74, 89, 83, 135, 82, 48, 47, 62, 61, 136, 137, 85, 55, 54, 91, 40, 68, 33, 41, 69, 75, 34, 76, 49, 72, 138, 79, 37, 44, 56, 63, 65, 58, 35, 70, 77, 42, 140, 93, 36, 71, 57, 64, 86, 78, 43, 50, 51, 84, 139 |
1 R | 107, 21, 24, 111, 19, 9, 131, 18, 6, 13, 133, 130, 132, 95, 115, 7, 15, 119, 22, 16, 99, 4, 12, 35, 134, 127, 135, 38, 74, 56, 39, 32, 138, 73, 10, 31, 30, 66, 100, 77, 70, 28, 120, 79, 110, 41, 20, 103, 104, 67, 140, 116, 76, 42, 87, 106, 44, 137, 96, 63, 72, 34, 139, 75, 136, 78, 45, 40, 51, 46, 37, 49, 68, 48, 5, 71, 43, 50, 123, 97, 8, 69, 33, 122, 105, 36, 27, 90, 65, 26, 29, 88, 1, 47, 109, 82, 58, 101, 108, 98, 2, 52, 124, 128, 54, 55, 117, 93, 23, 53, 114, 86, 102, 121, 85, 126, 125, 84, 3, 62, 92, 118, 112, 17, 89, 64, 25, 57, 80, 94, 59, 129, 83, 61, 14, 91, 113, 11, 81, 60 | |
CFS | 64, 67, 79, 86, 138 | |
The multi-variety disease image dataset consisting of the images acquired under laboratory environmental conditions | ReliefF | 95, 115, 119, 17, 110, 123, 15, 99, 1, 13, 107, 18, 16, 103, 2, 8, 111, 3, 127, 11, 14, 23, 10, 27, 5, 134, 20, 112, 19, 31, 66, 38, 7, 73, 21, 6, 109, 132, 106, 113, 25, 22, 108, 45, 24, 117, 121, 97, 4, 80, 30, 101, 118, 131, 114, 9, 98, 94, 59, 124, 81, 88, 26, 12, 122, 104, 100, 52, 125, 116, 96, 120, 102, 105, 126, 133, 128, 129, 29, 28, 87, 82, 130, 89, 83, 135, 32, 67, 74, 39, 90, 85, 46, 92, 60, 53, 86, 84, 136, 51, 137, 44, 91, 79, 93, 72, 33, 68, 37, 34, 62, 75, 65, 69, 61, 40, 47, 58, 48, 76, 140, 41, 55, 54, 64, 57, 63, 49, 42, 77, 35, 70, 138, 56, 50, 43, 78, 71, 36, 139 |
1 R | 45, 46, 38, 39, 134, 17, 73, 135, 74, 16, 15, 67, 31, 10, 66, 32, 52, 53, 50, 60, 59, 11, 43, 123, 78, 18, 139, 36, 102, 98, 71, 1, 89, 105, 114, 118, 104, 107, 101, 121, 90, 91, 57, 94, 27, 115, 95, 97, 47, 117, 120, 13, 100, 64, 116, 8, 48, 96, 128, 40, 2, 41, 7, 129, 119, 75, 92, 93, 126, 30, 130, 88, 137, 76, 136,28,33,99,3,12, 68, 127, 23, 140, 69, 108, 26, 87, 72, 34, 19, 65, 55, 138, 37, 44, 79, 131, 54, 61, 125, 29, 22, 122, 58, 35, 77, 62, 124, 70, 113, 42, 63, 109, 14, 25, 49, 80, 106, 84, 56, 21, 112, 111, 20, 81, 82, 4, 51, 132, 6, 110, 9, 24, 133, 85, 83, 5, 103, 86 | |
CFS | 37, 41 |
Feature Selection Method | Number of Selected Features | Cbest Value | gbest Value | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Gangu Testing Station (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ReliefF | 13 | 36.758 | 0.758 | 100.00 | 98.87 | 64.31 | 99.58 |
20 | 5.278 | 0.435 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 63.90 | 99.79 | |
27 | 12.126 | 0.144 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 69.67 | 100.00 | |
1R | 13 | 1.320 | 1.320 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 56.65 | 100.00 |
20 | 1.741 | 1.000 | 100.00 | 99.55 | 59.70 | 100.00 | |
27 | 64.000 | 0.083 | 100.00 | 99.77 | 62.26 | 100.00 |
Feature Selection Method | Number of Selected Features | Cbest Value | gbest Value | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Gangu Testing Station (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ReliefF | 13 | 12.126 | 1.000 | 99.92 | 99.92 | 23.42 | 84.63 |
20 | 21.112 | 0.190 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 26.35 | 100.00 | |
27 | 4.000 | 0.574 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 23.87 | 16.63 | |
1R | 13 | 256.000 | 1.320 | 99.88 | 99.67 | 43.69 | 70.53 |
20 | 48.503 | 0.109 | 99.96 | 99.96 | 76.58 | 4.00 | |
27 | 1.320 | 0.083 | 100.00 | 99.92 | 64.64 | 99.16 |
Feature Selection Method | Number of Selected Features | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Gangu Testing Station (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ReliefF | 13 | 97.86 | 97.52 | 45.28 | 99.37 |
20 | 99.66 | 97.97 | 13.64 | 73.89 | |
27 | 99.10 | 98.20 | 3.96 | 70.32 | |
1R | 13 | 99.44 | 98.42 | 43.88 | 96.21 |
20 | 99.66 | 99.55 | 52.37 | 94.32 | |
27 | 99.32 | 99.10 | 11.37 | 77.89 |
Feature Selection Method | Number of Selected Features | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired Under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired Under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of The additional Testing Set Consisting of The Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Gangu Testing Station (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ReliefF | 13 | 99.34 | 99.18 | 22.75 | 64.42 |
20 | 98.89 | 98.76 | 22.52 | 0.84 | |
27 | 99.42 | 99.26 | 22.52 | 0.42 | |
1R | 13 | 98.83 | 98.64 | 29.50 | 66.95 |
20 | 99.48 | 99.34 | 76.35 | 17.89 | |
27 | 99.92 | 99.84 | 20.95 | 99.37 |
Feature Selection Method | Number of Selected Features | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired Under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Gangu Testing Station (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ReliefF | 13 | 100.00 | 97.07 | 48.95 | 71.37 |
20 | 99.89 | 97.52 | 51.92 | 85.47 | |
27 | 99.89 | 99.10 | 43.18 | 90.95 | |
1R | 13 | 100.00 | 99.10 | 48.21 | 93.47 |
20 | 100.00 | 99.55 | 45.04 | 95.37 | |
27 | 100.00 | 99.32 | 43.02 | 92.42 |
Feature Selection Method | Number of Selected Features | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired Under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired Under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Shangzhuang Experimental Station (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Consisting of the Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in the Wheat Field in Gangu Testing Station (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ReliefF | 13 | 100.00 | 97.36 | 39.64 | 67.16 |
20 | 99.88 | 97.32 | 39.41 | 52.00 | |
27 | 100.00 | 99.01 | 27.03 | 59.58 | |
1R | 13 | 99.92 | 99.09 | 59.91 | 88.42 |
20 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 76.58 | 1.68 | |
27 | 100.00 | 99.37 | 99.10 | 94.95 |
Model | Training Set of Beijing 0045 Acquired in Shangzhuang Experimental Station | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | The Controlled-Climate Chamber | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Acquired In Gangu Testing Station (%) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Training Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | |||
SVM | Training Set 1 | 99.56 | 99.12 | 99.13 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 66.67 | 72.50 | 77.50 | 66.75 | 68.32 | 68.39 | 99.79 |
Training Set 2 | 100.00 | 99.12 | 99.13 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 74.36 | 77.50 | 77.50 | 69.24 | 68.65 | 68.13 | 99.16 | |
BPNN | Training Set 1 | 96.93 | 96.49 | 94.74 | 91.55 | 91.55 | 91.55 | 91.55 | 27.5 | 25.00 | 25.00 | 43.59 | 51.38 | 54.32 | 89.47 |
Training Set 2 | 99.56 | 98.25 | 99.13 | 94.37 | 94.37 | 94.37 | 94.31 | 33.33 | 32.50 | 32.50 | 46.20 | 43.01 | 37.58 | 97.26 | |
RF | Training Set 1 | 100.00 | 93.86 | 94.78 | 90.14 | 95.77 | 91.55 | 87.32 | 66.67 | 77.50 | 67.50 | 53.01 | 58.20 | 63.08 | 91.37 |
Training Set 2 | 100.00 | 94.74 | 93.91 | 91.55 | 92.96 | 94.37 | 92.96 | 61.54 | 67.50 | 60.00 | 56.28 | 58.31 | 61.35 | 91.58 |
Model | Training Set of Mingxian 169 Acquired in Shangzhuang Experimental Station | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | The Controlled-Climate Chamber | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Acquired in Gangu Testing Station (%) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Training Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | |||
SVM | Training Set 1 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 100.00 | 97.18 | 98.59 | 93.86 | 93.04 | 69.23 | 65.00 | 75.00 | 66.23 | 74.04 | 65.21 | 85.26 |
Training Set 2 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 90.35 | 93.04 | 61.54 | 45.00 | 52.50 | 57.33 | 57.32 | 52.46 | 84.00 | |
Training Set 3 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 91.23 | 92.17 | 69.23 | 50.00 | 65.00 | 64.66 | 67.88 | 60.96 | 80.84 | |
Training Set 4 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 94.74 | 94.78 | 69.23 | 52.50 | 60.00 | 64.92 | 69.53 | 65.21 | 90.53 | |
BPNN | Training Set 1 | 99.30 | 98.59 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 78.95 | 77.39 | 56.41 | 45.00 | 45.00 | 49.48 | 45.21 | 43.43 | 78.11 |
Training Set 2 | 95.07 | 97.18 | 95.77 | 94.37 | 98.59 | 85.96 | 90.43 | 71.79 | 80.00 | 85.00 | 47.12 | 59.85 | 56.44 | 84.63 | |
Training Set 3 | 97.89 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 95.77 | 97.18 | 64.04 | 67.83 | 35.90 | 35.00 | 35.00 | 48.82 | 45.10 | 43.56 | 56.63 | |
Training Set 4 | 98.59 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 71.05 | 78.26 | 35.90 | 35.00 | 35.00 | 51.44 | 43.45 | 45.02 | 83.58 | |
RF | Training Set 1 | 100.00 | 94.37 | 97.18 | 94.37 | 94.37 | 77.19 | 80.00 | 92.31 | 87.50 | 92.50 | 53.66 | 60.07 | 58.96 | 91.79 |
Training Set 2 | 100.00 | 97.18 | 98.59 | 97.18 | 97.18 | 81.58 | 75.65 | 71.79 | 70.00 | 70.00 | 61.52 | 61.39 | 52.86 | 82.53 | |
Training Set 3 | 100.00 | 94.37 | 95.77 | 94.37 | 92.96 | 71.93 | 73.04 | 87.18 | 80.00 | 85.00 | 52.09 | 59.96 | 55.78 | 93.26 | |
Training Set 4 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 78.95 | 75.65 | 84.62 | 82.50 | 80.00 | 71.20 | 72.39 | 68.13 | 88.00 |
Model | Training Set of Nongda 211 Acquired in Shangzhuang Experimental Station | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | The Controlled-Climate Chamber | Identification Accuracy of the Additional Testing Set Acquired in Gangu Testing Station (%) | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Training Set of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | |||
SVM | Training Set 1 | 100.00 | 92.31 | 92.50 | 95.00 | 57.02 | 57.39 | 83.10 | 83.10 | 83.10 | 81.69 | 45.29 | 56.22 | 52.86 | 98.95 |
Training Set 2 | 94.81 | 94.87 | 95.00 | 97.50 | 55.26 | 55.65 | 77.46 | 77.46 | 77.46 | 76.06 | 48.43 | 58.64 | 54.71 | 99.58 | |
Training Set 3 | 96.10 | 89.74 | 90.00 | 92.50 | 60.53 | 60.87 | 83.10 | 83.10 | 83.10 | 83.10 | 48.56 | 57.43 | 52.72 | 98.95 | |
BPNN | Training Set 1 | 94.81 | 89.74 | 95.00 | 97.50 | 54.39 | 55.65 | 53.52 | 53.52 | 53.52 | 53.52 | 43.98 | 55.56 | 51.00 | 98.11 |
Training Set 2 | 97.40 | 92.31 | 92.50 | 95.00 | 50.88 | 50.43 | 56.34 | 56.34 | 56.34 | 56.34 | 49.21 | 58.20 | 48.34 | 98.11 | |
Training Set 3 | 98.70 | 87.18 | 90.00 | 92.50 | 50.88 | 53.04 | 71.83 | 71.83 | 71.83 | 71.83 | 44.37 | 52.19 | 55.01 | 97.89 | |
RF | Training Set 1 | 100.00 | 94.87 | 95.00 | 97.50 | 55.26 | 56.52 | 85.92 | 85.92 | 84.51 | 84.51 | 43.19 | 51.38 | 49.14 | 95.37 |
Training Set 2 | 100.00 | 97.44 | 97.50 | 100.00 | 61.40 | 62.61 | 88.73 | 88.73 | 87.32 | 87.32 | 45.16 | 54.35 | 51.39 | 98.11 | |
Training Set 3 | 100.00 | 94.87 | 95.00 | 92.50 | 62.28 | 63.48 | 88.73 | 90.14 | 88.73 | 88.73 | 45.81 | 55.67 | 52.06 | 97.89 |
Model | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set of Beijing 0045 Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | The Controlled-Climate Chamber | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Acuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | ||
SVM | 94.05 | 89.53 | 74.59 | 75.96 | 58.77 | 58.26 | 60.56 | 60.56 | 60.56 | 59.15 | 66.67 | 65 | 67.50 |
BPNN | 96.99 | 92.80 | 55.45 | 58.70 | 77.19 | 78.95 | 46.48 | 50.70 | 46.48 | 47.89 | 66.67 | 47.50 | 50.00 |
RF | 100.00 | 92.28 | 84.27 | 82.07 | 49.12 | 51.30 | 60.56 | 59.15 | 60.56 | 60.56 | 64.10 | 65.00 | 70.00 |
Model | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set of Mingxian 169 Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Condition (%) | The Controlled-Climate Chamber | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | ||
SVM | 97.96 | 92.52 | 72.25 | 76.89 | 60.53 | 59.13 | 59.15 | 59.15 | 59.15 | 59.15 | 69.23 | 65.00 | 70.00 |
BPNN | 97.08 | 94.39 | 65.84 | 66.93 | 74.56 | 73.04 | 50.70 | 49.30 | 52.11 | 46.48 | 56.41 | 57.50 | 62.50 |
RF | 100.00 | 95.82 | 83.64 | 84.06 | 57.89 | 59.13 | 63.38 | 64.79 | 64.79 | 63.38 | 66.67 | 70.00 | 67.50 |
Model | Identification Accuracy of the Training Set of Nongda 211 Acquired under Laboratory Environmental Conditions (%) | The controlled-Climate Chamber | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | ||
SVM | 94.69 | 93.49 | 75.13 | 77.23 | 57.89 | 60.00 | 59.15 | 59.15 | 59.15 | 60.56 | 74.36 | 72.50 | 70.00 |
BPNN | 93.17 | 92.30 | 59.42 | 67.77 | 27.19 | 22.61 | 81.69 | 81.69 | 80.28 | 78.87 | 61.54 | 55.00 | 65.00 |
RF | 100.00 | 92.03 | 86.39 | 83.28 | 61.40 | 60.00 | 64.79 | 63.38 | 63.38 | 61.97 | 58.97 | 65.00 | 47.50 |
Model | The Multi-Variety Disease Images Acquired in Shangzhuang Experimental Station and under Laboratory Environmental Conditions | Shangzhuang Experimental Station | The Controlled-Climate Chamber | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Identification Accuracy of the Training Set (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 4 of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 1 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 2 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of Testing Set 3 of Nongda 211 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Beijing 0045 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Mingxian 169 (%) | Identification Accuracy of the Testing Set of Nongda 211 (%) | |
SVM | 99.93 | 98.40 | 93.86 | 95.65 | 97.18 | 97.18 | 97.18 | 97.18 | 97.44 | 92.50 | 95.00 | 98.04 | 99.01 | 98.94 |
BPNN | 98.38 | 96.45 | 94.74 | 96.52 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 82.05 | 85.00 | 90.00 | 94.37 | 96.81 | 97.34 |
RF | 100.00 | 95.82 | 98.25 | 98.26 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 98.59 | 97.44 | 97.5 | 95.00 | 93.59 | 96.92 | 93.49 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, H.; Jiang, Q.; Sun, Z.; Cao, S.; Wang, H. Identification of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust on Different Wheat Varieties Based on Image Processing Technology. Agronomy 2023, 13, 260. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13010260
Wang H, Jiang Q, Sun Z, Cao S, Wang H. Identification of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust on Different Wheat Varieties Based on Image Processing Technology. Agronomy. 2023; 13(1):260. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13010260
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Hongli, Qian Jiang, Zhenyu Sun, Shiqin Cao, and Haiguang Wang. 2023. "Identification of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust on Different Wheat Varieties Based on Image Processing Technology" Agronomy 13, no. 1: 260. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13010260
APA StyleWang, H., Jiang, Q., Sun, Z., Cao, S., & Wang, H. (2023). Identification of Stripe Rust and Leaf Rust on Different Wheat Varieties Based on Image Processing Technology. Agronomy, 13(1), 260. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13010260