More than rapid identification—Free plant identification apps can also be highly accurate

Abstract Hart et al. (2023) conducted a study to evaluate the accuracy of five plant identification apps based on snapshot images as used in practice by field ecologists. Their results revealed varying accuracies per app, ranging from 86.9% to 46.4%. We explore the reasons why apps failed to deliver the expected result. We re‐evaluated the image dataset using another plant identification app (Flora Incognita) in order to understand the discrepancies between ground truth and app predictions. We found that mismatches between the given and returned labels can arise due to incorrect app prediction, incorrect ground truth, multiple species per image or taxonomical inconsistencies. For some images depicting early developmental plant stages, the ground truth could not be verified, resulting in some cases where both the ground truth and the app predictions could neither be confirmed nor refuted. After accounting for these aspects, Flora Incognita reached an accuracy of 98.8% on the same image dataset. Our results highlight the untapped potential of plant ID apps, as they can be highly accurate. As shown here, one area of application could be spotting misidentifications in scientific image collections, especially if multiple apps disagree with the given label. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
People and Nature
Published
2024-10-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10676
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Plant Virus Research Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.80

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

More than rapid identification—Free plant identification apps can also be highly accurate

Jana Wäldchen, Michael Rzanny, David Boho, Alice Fritz et al.
8 citations
People and Nature
Plant Virus Research Studies
4.80
article

More than rapid identification—Free plant identification apps can also be highly accurate

Jana Wäldchen, Michael Rzanny, David Boho, Alice Fritz, Patrick Mäder, Hans Christian Wittich, Anke Bebber
article en
8 citations

Abstract

Abstract Hart et al. (2023) conducted a study to evaluate the accuracy of five plant identification apps based on snapshot images as used in practice by field ecologists. Their results revealed varying accuracies per app, ranging from 86.9% to 46.4%. We explore the reasons why apps failed to deliver the expected result. We re‐evaluated the image dataset using another plant identification app (Flora Incognita) in order to understand the discrepancies between ground truth and app predictions. We found that mismatches between the given and returned labels can arise due to incorrect app prediction, incorrect ground truth, multiple species per image or taxonomical inconsistencies. For some images depicting early developmental plant stages, the ground truth could not be verified, resulting in some cases where both the ground truth and the app predictions could neither be confirmed nor refuted. After accounting for these aspects, Flora Incognita reached an accuracy of 98.8% on the same image dataset. Our results highlight the untapped potential of plant ID apps, as they can be highly accurate. As shown here, one area of application could be spotting misidentifications in scientific image collections, especially if multiple apps disagree with the given label. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

People and NatureVol. 6(6)
Technische Universität Ilmenau (DE), German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (DE), Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (DE), Friedrich Schiller University Jena (DE)
Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, nukleare Sicherheit und Verbraucherschutz
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Plant Virus Research Studies
4.80
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.