Abstract
Introduction
Plant identification applications for use on smartphones have been increasing in availability, accuracy, and utilization. We aimed to perform an introductory study to determine if a plant identification application (ID app) used on a smartphone could identify toxic plants, and to compare apps to determine which is most reliable.
Methods
We compared three popular iPhone plant ID apps, PictureThis (PT), PlantSnap (PS), and Pl@ntNet (PN), used to identify 17 commonly encountered toxic plants. Apps were used to photograph the entire plant, leaves, and flowers of ≥ 10 different plants for each species. Two toxicologists performed plant identification with confirmation of identification performed by a botanist, and inter-researcher agreement was confirmed. For each plant species, scores for accuracy of app identification of leaves, flowers, and whole plant were combined to create an overall composite score used to compare accuracy of each app (95% C.I.).
Results
PictureThis had the best performance with 10/17 (59% [36 to 78]) plant species identified 100% correctly, as opposed to 8/17 (47% [26 to 69]) for Pl@ntNet and 1/17 for PlantSnap (5.8% [1.1 to 27]).
Conclusion
A plant identification app may be a useful tool to assist healthcare providers and the public in identifying toxic plants.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gummin DD, Mowry JB, Spyker DA, Brooks DE, Osterthaler KM, Banner W. 2017 annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers National Poison Data System (NPDS): 35th annual report. Clin Toxicol. 2018;56(12):1213–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2018.1533727.
Gummin DD, Mowry JB, Spyker DA, Brooks DE, Fraser MO, Banner W. 2016 annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers National Poison Data System (NPDS): 34th annual report. Clin Toxicol. 2017;55(10):1072–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2017.1388087.
Enfield B, Brooks DE, Welch S, Roland M, Klemens J, Greenlief K, et al. Human plant exposures reported to a regional (southwestern) poison control center over 8 years. J of Med Tox. 2018;14:74–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-017-0643-3.
Fuchs J, Rauber-Lüthy C, Kupferschmidt H, Kupper J, Kullak-Ublick GA, Ceschi A. Acute plant poisoning: analysis of clinical features and circumstances of exposure. Clin Toxicol. 2011;49(7):671–80. https://doi.org/10.3109/15563650.2011.597034.
McKinney PE, Gomez HF, Phillips S, Brent J. The fax machine: a new method of plant identification. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1993;31(4):663–5. https://doi.org/10.3109/15563659309025771.
Joly A, Goëau H, Bonnet P, Bakić V, Barbe J, Selmi S, et al. Interactive plant identification based on social image data. Ecol Inf. 2014;23:22–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2013.07.006.
Goëau H, Bonnet P, Joly A. Plant identification in an open-world (LifeCLEF 2016). Évora: CLEF: Conference and Labs of the Evaluation Forum; 2016. p. 428–39.
Sun Y, Liu Y, Wang G, Zhang H. Deep learning for plant identification in natural environment. Comput Intell Neurosci. 2017;2017:7361042 10.1155.2017/7361042.
Patil AA, Bhagat KS. Plants identification by leaf shape recognition: a review. Int J Eng Trends Tech. 2016;35(8):359–61. https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V35P273.
Lurie Y, Fainmesser P, Yosef M, Bentur Y. Remote identification of poisonous plants by cell-phone camera and online communication. Isr Med Assoc J. 2008 Nov;10(11):802–3.
Hossain J, Amin MA. Leaf shape identification based plant biometrics. In: International conference on computer and information technology, pp. 458–463, Dhaka (2010) https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCITECHN.2010.5723901.
Burrows GE, Krebs GL, Kirchoff BK. ‘Visual learning–agricultural plants of the Riverina’–a new application for helping veterinary students recognize poisonous plants. Biosci Educ. 2014;1:1–3. https://doi.org/10.11120/BEEJ.2014.00028.
Bruni I, de Mattia F, Galimberti A, Galasso G, Banfi E, Casiraghi M, et al. Identification of poisonous plants by DNA barcoding approach. Int J Legal Med. 2010 Nov;124(6):595–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-010-0447-3.
Aquila I, Ausania F, di Nunzio C, Serra A, Boca S, Capelli A, et al. The role of forensic botany in crime scene investigation: case report and review of literature. J Forensic Sci. 2014;59(3):820–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.12401.
Sandionigi A, Galimberti A, Labra M, Ferri E, Panunzi E, de Mattia F, et al. Analytical approaches for DNA barcoding data–how to find a way for plants? Plant Biosyst. 2012;146(4):805–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2012.740084.
Mezzasalma V, Ganopoulos I, Galimberti A, Cornara L, Ferri E, Labra M. Poisonous or non-poisonous plants? DNA-based tools and applications for accurate identification. Int J Legal Med. 2017;131(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-016-1460-y.
Funding
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Authors JO and CT contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by JO and CT. SM performed plant identity verification. The manuscript was written by JO and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
None.
Additional information
Supervising Editor: Mark B. Mycyk, MD
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Previous Presentations: Data from this study were presented at the American College of Medical Toxicology (ACMT) Annual Scientific Meeting in March, 2020 in New York, NY.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Otter, J., Mayer, S. & Tomaszewski, C.A. Swipe Right: a Comparison of Accuracy of Plant Identification Apps for Toxic Plants. J. Med. Toxicol. 17, 42–47 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-020-00803-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13181-020-00803-6