1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessment of intertidal seaweed biomass based on RGB imagery

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Above Ground Biomass (AGB) of seaweeds is the most fundamental ecological parameter as the material and energy basis of intertidal ecosystems. Therefore, there is a need to develop an efficient survey method that has less impact on the environment. With the advent of technology and the availability of popular filming devices such as smartphones and cameras, intertidal seaweed wet biomass can be surveyed by remote sensing using popular RGB imaging sensors. In this paper, 143 in situ sites of seaweed in the intertidal zone of GouQi Island, ShengSi County, Zhejiang Province, were sampled and biomass inversions were performed. The hyperspectral data of seaweed at different growth stages were analyzed, and it was found that the variation range was small (visible light range < 0.1). Through Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Most of the variance is explained in the first principal component, and the load allocated to the three kinds of seaweed is more than 90%. Through Pearson correlation analysis, 24 parameters of spectral features, 9 parameters of texture features (27 in total for the three RGB bands) and parameters of combined spectral and texture features of the images were selected for screening, and regression prediction was performed using two methods: Random Forest (RF), and Gradient Boosted Decision Tree (GBDT), combined with Pearson correlation coefficients. Compared with the other two models, GBDT has better fitting accuracy in the inversion of seaweed biomass, and the highest R 2 was obtained when the top 17, 17 and 11 parameters with strong correlation were selected for the regression prediction by Pearson’s correlation coefficient for Ulva australis, Sargassum thunbergii, and Sargassum fusiforme, and the R 2 for Ulva australis was 0.784, RMSE 156.129, MAE 50.691 and MAPE 28.201, the R 2 for Sargassum thunbergii was 0.854, RMSE 790.487, MAE 327.108 and MAPE 19.039, and the R 2 for Sargassum fusiforme was 0.808, RMSE 445.067 and MAPE 28.822. MAE was 180.172 and MAPE was 28.822. The study combines in situ survey with machine learning methods, which has the advantages of being popular, efficient and environmentally friendly, and can provide technical support for intertidal seaweed surveys.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Textural Features for Image Classification

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The red edge of plant leaf reflectance

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Explainable AI: A Review of Machine Learning Interpretability Methods

              Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have led to its widespread industrial adoption, with machine learning systems demonstrating superhuman performance in a significant number of tasks. However, this surge in performance, has often been achieved through increased model complexity, turning such systems into “black box” approaches and causing uncertainty regarding the way they operate and, ultimately, the way that they come to decisions. This ambiguity has made it problematic for machine learning systems to be adopted in sensitive yet critical domains, where their value could be immense, such as healthcare. As a result, scientific interest in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), a field that is concerned with the development of new methods that explain and interpret machine learning models, has been tremendously reignited over recent years. This study focuses on machine learning interpretability methods; more specifically, a literature review and taxonomy of these methods are presented, as well as links to their programming implementations, in the hope that this survey would serve as a reference point for both theorists and practitioners.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                24 February 2022
                2022
                : 17
                : 2
                : e0263416
                Affiliations
                [1 ] College of Ecology and Environment, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai, China
                [2 ] Engineering Technology Research Center of Marine Ranching, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai, China
                [3 ] East China Sea Environmental Monitoring Center, Shanghai, China
                TDTU: Ton Duc Thang University, VIET NAM
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3113-7961
                Article
                PONE-D-21-28719
                10.1371/journal.pone.0263416
                8870495
                35202425
                1ecd25e4-0826-4491-9809-84315a562656
                © 2022 Chen et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 4 September 2021
                : 18 January 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 5, Pages: 13
                Funding
                Funded by: China Agriculture Research System
                Award ID: CARS-50
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004874, Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology;
                Award ID: MEMRT202113
                Award Recipient : wang kai
                We were supported by the “China Agriculture Research System” (cars-50) and the “Biomass monitoring technology of seaweed beds in nearshore island” (memrt202113), but I didn’t find them in the Funder Registry.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article