The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Going deeper in the automated identification of Herbarium specimens
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Hundreds of herbarium collections have accumulated a valuable heritage and knowledge of plants over several centuries. Recent initiatives started ambitious preservation plans to digitize this information and make it available to botanists and the general public through web portals. However, thousands of sheets are still unidentified at the species level while numerous sheets should be reviewed and updated following more recent taxonomic knowledge. These annotations and revisions require an unrealistic amount of work for botanists to carry out in a reasonable time. Computer vision and machine learning approaches applied to herbarium sheets are promising but are still not well studied compared to automated species identification from leaf scans or pictures of plants in the field. RESULTS: In this work, we propose to study and evaluate the accuracy with which herbarium images can be potentially exploited for species identification with deep learning technology. In addition, we propose to study if the combination of herbarium sheets with photos of plants in the field is relevant in terms of accuracy, and finally, we explore if herbarium images from one region that has one specific flora can be used to do transfer learning to another region with other species; for example, on a region under-represented in terms of collected data. CONCLUSIONS: This is, to our knowledge, the first study that uses deep learning to analyze a big dataset with thousands of species from herbaria. Results show the potential of Deep Learning on herbarium species identification, particularly by training and testing across different datasets from different herbaria. This could potentially lead to the creation of a semi, or even fully automated system to help taxonomists and experts with their annotation, classification, and revision works.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155
Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classification
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2015) · 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2015.123 · Cited by 19,741
Cited by
Deep learning models for plant disease detection and diagnosis
Ferentinos, K. P. (2018) · Computers and Electronics in Agriculture · doi:10.1016/j.compag.2018.01.009 · Cited by 3,390
The history and impact of digitization and digital data mobilization on biodiversity research
Nelson, G., & Ellis, S. (2019) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0391 · Cited by 304
Ahmed, F., & Courville, A. (2020) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i04.5712 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Carranza-Rojas, J., Goeau, H., Bonnet, P., Mata-Montero, E., & Joly, A.
- Venue
- BMC Evolutionary Biology
- Published
- 2017-08-11
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 181-181
- ISSN
- 1471-2148 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2743583628
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 23.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Going deeper in the automated identification of Herbarium specimens. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12862-017-1014-z
- The paper
- Carranza-Rojas, J., Goeau, H., Bonnet, P., Mata-Montero, E., & Joly, A. (2017). Going deeper in the automated identification of Herbarium specimens. BMC Evolutionary Biology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-017-1014-z
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.