Field Assessment Strategies: Assessing and Classifying Blight Disease in Wild Blueberry Populations Using Multispectral and Hyperspectral Sensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: Monilinia and Botrytis blight are significant diseases affecting wild blueberry fields, leading to substantial yield losses. Traditional methods for disease assessment rely on destructive sampling, which is labor-intensive and subjective. This study explored the use of multispectral and hyperspectral sensors through simple and machine learning approaches to detect and assess Monilinia and Botrytis blight diseases. (2) Methods: In this study, we adopted two experimental approaches: plot and patch assessment trials. These were conducted using a randomized complete block design at three locations in Nova Scotia. Disease detection was performed using vegetative indices (VIs) and spectral reflectance analysis, with destructive samples also assessed. Analysis of variance, correlations and classification approaches were used in the analysis. (3) Results: Significant spectral differences were observed between healthy and diseased plants, particularly in the near-infrared region (715–1050 nm). Nine significant wavelength bands were identified for blight disease detection. Classifier analysis revealed that support vector machines (SVM) and random forests (RF) outperformed k-nearest neighbors (KNN), achieving an overall accuracy of 96.6% and 76.8% in the broad and severity disease level classifications. (4) Conclusions: Despite some limitations, these findings underscore the potential of remote sensing tools for efficient, non-destructive disease management in wild blueberry fields.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".