4.5 Article

A computer vision system for oocyte counting using images captured by smartphone

Journal

AQUACULTURAL ENGINEERING
Volume 87, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaeng.2019.102017

Keywords

Computer vision; Fish reproductive process; Fish oocyte count; Smartphone images; Astyanax bimaculatus

Funding

  1. Brazilian National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq)
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES)
  3. Federal Institute of Education Science and Technology of Mato Grosso do Sul
  4. Foundation for the Support and Development of Education, Science and Technology in the State of Mato Grosso do Sul (FUNDECT)
  5. Dom Bosco Catholic University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This work proposes a computer vision procedure for counting Twospot astyanax (Astyanax bimaculatus) oocytes in Petri dishes using images captured by smartphone. First, the proposed procedure uses simple linear iterative clustering (SLIC) to divide the images into groups of pixels (superpixels). Then, based on their color and space characteristics, the images are classified into light background, dark background, dirt, or oocyte by a machine learning algorithm. Five different types of machine learning algorithms were tested: support vector machines (SVM), decision trees using the algorithm J48 and random forest, k-nearest neighbors (k-NN), and Naive Bayes. To train the algorithms, 8.578 superpixels were classified by an expert into oocyte (n = 354), dirtiness (n = 651), dark background (n = 3.622), and light background (n = 3.951). Of the five learning algorithms, SVM obtained the best result with 97% correct oocyte recognition. Given the wide availability of smartphones, we therefore conclude that the presented procedure can be a valuable tool in future experiments and studies on fertilization and hatching success in Twospot astyanax.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available