AICropCAM: Deploying classification, segmentation, detection, and counting deep-learning models for crop monitoring on the edge

Precision Agriculture (PA) promises to meet the future demands for food, feed, fiber, and fuel while keeping their production sustainable and environmentally friendly. PA relies heavily on sensing technologies to inform site-specific decision supports for planting, irrigation, fertilization, spraying, and harvesting. Traditional point-based sensors enjoy small data sizes but are limited in their capacity to measure plant and canopy parameters. On the other hand, imaging sensors can be powerful in measuring a wide range of these parameters, especially when coupled with Artificial Intelligence. The challenge, however, is the lack of computing, electric power, and connectivity infrastructure in agricultural fields, preventing the full utilization of imaging sensors. This paper reported AICropCAM, a field-deployable imaging framework that integrated edge image processing, Internet of Things (IoT), and LoRaWAN for low-power, long-range communication. The core component of AICropCAM is a stack of four Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (DCNN) models running sequentially: CropClassiNet for crop type classification, CanopySegNet for canopy cover quantification, PlantCountNet for plant and weed counting, and InsectNet for insect identification. These DCNN models were trained and tested with \u3e43,000 field crop images collected offline. AICropCAM was embodied on a distributed wireless sensor network with its sensor node consisting of an RGB camera for image acquisition, a Raspberry Pi 4B single-board computer for edge image processing, and an Arduino MKR1310 for LoRa communication and power management. Our testing showed that the time to run the DCNN models ranged from 0.20 s for InsectNet to 20.20 s for CanopySegNet, and power consumption ranged from 3.68 W for InsectNet to 5.83 W for CanopySegNet. The classification model CropClassiNet reported 94.5 % accuracy, and the segmentation model CanopySegNet reported 92.83 % accuracy. The two object detection models PlantCountNet and InsectNet reported mean average precision of 0.69 and 0.02 for the test images. Predictions from the DCNN models were transmitted to the ThingSpeak IoT platform for visualization and analytics. We concluded that AICropCAM successfully implemented image processing on the edge, drastically reduced the amount of data being transmitted, and could satisfy the real-time need for decision-making in PA. AICropCAM can be deployed on moving platforms such as center pivots or drones to increase its spatial coverage and resolution to support crop monitoring and field operations

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

Discutindo a educação ambiental no cotidiano escolar: desenvolvimento de projetos na escola formação inicial e continuada de professores

A presente pesquisa buscou discutir como a Educação Ambiental (EA) vem sendo trabalhada, no Ensino Fundamental e como os docentes desta escola compreendem e vem inserindo a EA no cotidiano escolar., em uma escola estadual do município de Tangará da Serra/MT, Brasil. Para tanto, realizou-se entrevistas com os professores que fazem parte de um projeto interdisciplinar de EA na escola pesquisada. Verificou-se que o projeto da escola não vem conseguindo alcançar os objetivos propostos por: desconhecimento do mesmo, pelos professores; formação deficiente dos professores, não entendimento da EA como processo de ensino-aprendizagem, falta de recursos didáticos, planejamento inadequado das atividades. A partir dessa constatação, procurou-se debater a impossibilidade de tratar do tema fora do trabalho interdisciplinar, bem como, e principalmente, a importância de um estudo mais aprofundado de EA, vinculando teoria e prática, tanto na formação docente, como em projetos escolares, a fim de fugir do tradicional vínculo “EA e ecologia, lixo e horta”.Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educació