Back

StomaVision: stomatal trait analysis through deep learning

Wu, T.-L.; Chen, P.-Y.; Du, X.; Wu, H.; Ou, J.-Y.; Zheng, P.-X.; Wu, Y.-L.; Wang, R.-S.; Hsu, T.-C.; Lin, C.-Y.; Lin, W.-Y.; Chang, P.-L.; Ho, C.-M. K.; Lin, Y.-C.

2024-04-28 plant biology
10.1101/2024.04.24.590919 bioRxiv
Show abstract

StomaVision is an automated tool designed for high-throughput detection and measurement of stomatal traits, such as stomatal number, pore size, and closure rate. It provides insights into plant responses to environmental cues, streamlining the analysis of micrographs from field-grown plants across various species, including monocots and dicots. Enhanced by a novel collection method that utilizes video recording, StomaVision increases the number of captured images for robust statistical analysis. Accessible via an intuitive web interface at <https://stomavision.streamlit.app/> and available for local use in a containerized environment at <https://github.com/YaoChengLab/StomaVision>, this tool ensures long-term usability by minimizing the impact of software updates and maintaining functionality with minimal setup requirements. The application of StomaVision has provided significant physiological insights, such as variations in stomatal density, opening rates, and total pore area under heat stress. These traits correlate with critical physiological processes, including gas exchange, carbon assimilation, and water use efficiency, demonstrating the tools utility in advancing our understanding of plant physiology. The ability of StomaVision to identify differences in responses to varying durations of heat treatment highlights its value in plant science research. Plain language summaryStomaVision is a tool that automatically counts and measures tiny openings on plant leaves, helping us learn how plants deal with their surroundings. It is easy to use and works well with various plant species. This tool helps scientists see how plants change under stress, making plant research easier and more accurate.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.