Back

Botanical Digitization: Application of MorphoLeaf in 2D Shape Visualization, Digital Morphometrics, and Species Delimitation, using Homologous Landmarks of Cucurbitaceae Leaves as a Model.

Oso, O. A.; Jayeola, A. A.

2020-11-17 plant biology
10.1101/2020.11.16.384230 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Morphometrics has been applied in several fields of science including botany. Plant leaves are been one of the most important organs in the identification of plants due to its high variability across different plant groups. The differences between and within plant species reflect variations in genotypes, development, evolution, and environment. While traditional morphometrics has contributed tremendously to reducing the problems that come with the identification of plants and delimitation of species based on morphology, technological advancements have led to the creation of deep learning digital solutions that made it easy to study leaves and detect more characters to complement already existing leaf datasets. In this study, we demonstrate the use of MorphoLeaf in generating morphometric dataset from 140 leaf specimens from seven Cucurbitaceae species via scanning of leaves, extracting landmarks, data extraction, landmarks data quantification, and reparametrization and normalization of leaf contours. PCA analysis revealed that blade area, blade perimeter, tooth area, tooth perimeter, height of (each position of the) tooth from tip, and the height of each (position of the) tooth from base are important and informative landmarks that contribute to the variation within the species studied. Our results demonstrate that MorphoLeaf can quantitatively track diversity in leaf specimens, and it can be applied to functionally integrate morphometrics and shape visualization in the digital identification of plants. The success of digital morphometrics in leaf outline analysis presents researchers with opportunities to apply and carry out more accurate image-based researches in diverse areas including, but not limited to, plant development, evolution, and phenotyping.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Applications in Plant Sciences
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.2%
2
Plant Direct
95 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
9.2%
3
Plant Methods
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
4
Annals of Botany
50 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.0%
5
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 27%
6.0%
6
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.0%
7
Frontiers in Plant Science
256 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.0%
8
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
Journal of Experimental Botany
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.1%
10
American Journal of Botany
47 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.9%
11
Plants
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
12
AoB PLANTS
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
13
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.1%
14
Plant Physiology
238 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
15
Plant, Cell & Environment
78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
16
The Plant Journal
215 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
17
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.7%
18
Plant Biology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
19
Quantitative Plant Biology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
20
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
Physiologia Plantarum
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
22
Planta
18 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
23
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
176 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
24
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.8%
25
Tree Physiology
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
26
Plant Physiology and Biochemistry
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
27
The Plant Phenome Journal
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%