Comparison and extension of three methods for automated registration of multimodal plant images

With the introduction of high-throughput multisensory imaging platforms, the automatization of multimodal image analysis has become the focus of quantitative plant research. Due to a number of natural and technical reasons (e.g., inhomogeneous scene illumination, shadows, and reflections), unsupervised identification of relevant plant structures (i.e., image segmentation) represents a nontrivial task that often requires extensive human-machine interaction. Registration of multimodal plant images enables the automatized segmentation of ’difficult’ image modalities such as visible light or near-infrared images using the segmentation results of image modalities that exhibit higher contrast between plant and background regions (such as fluorescent images). Furthermore, registration of different image modalities is essential for assessment of a consistent multiparametric plant phenotype, where, for example, chlorophyll and water content as well as disease- and/or stress-related pigmentation can simultaneously be studied at a local scale. To automatically register thousands of images, efficient algorithmic solutions for the unsupervised alignment of two structurally similar but, in general, nonidentical images are required. For establishment of image correspondences, different algorithmic approaches based on different image features have been proposed. The particularity of plant image analysis consists, however, of a large variability of shapes and colors of different plants measured at different developmental stages from different views. While adult plant shoots typically have a unique structure, young shoots may have a nonspecific shape that can often be hardly distinguished from the background structures. Consequently, it is not clear a priori what image features and registration techniques are suitable for the alignment of various multimodal plant images. Furthermore, dynamically measured plants may exhibit nonuniform movements that require application of nonrigid registration techniques. Here, we investigate three common techniques for registration of visible light and fluorescence images that rely on finding correspondences between (i) feature-points, (ii) frequency domain features, and (iii) image intensity information. The performance of registration methods is validated in terms of robustness and accuracy measured by a direct comparison with manually segmented images of different plants. Our experimental results show that all three techniques are sensitive to structural image distortions and require additional preprocessing steps including structural enhancement and characteristic scale selection. To overcome the limitations of conventional approaches, we develop an iterative algorithmic scheme, which allows it to perform both rigid and slightly nonrigid registration of high-throughput plant images in a fully automated manner.

[1]  Guy Marchal,et al.  Multi-modality image registration by maximization of mutual information , 1996, Proceedings of the Workshop on Mathematical Methods in Biomedical Image Analysis.

[2]  Peter Kovesi,et al.  Phase Congruency Detects Corners and Edges , 2003, DICTA.

[3]  Wilhelm Burger,et al.  Digital Image Processing - An Algorithmic Introduction using Java , 2008, Texts in Computer Science.

[4]  Roland Eils,et al.  On the role of spatial phase and phase correlation in vision, illusion, and cognition , 2015, Front. Comput. Neurosci..

[5]  Jiri Matas,et al.  Robust wide-baseline stereo from maximally stable extremal regions , 2004, Image Vis. Comput..

[6]  Vasileios Argyriou,et al.  A Study of Sub-pixel Motion Estimation using Phase Correlation , 2006, BMVC.

[7]  C. D. Kuglin,et al.  The phase correlation image alignment method , 1975 .

[8]  Roland Siegwart,et al.  BRISK: Binary Robust invariant scalable keypoints , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Computer Vision.

[9]  Rikard Berthilsson Affine correlation , 1998, Proceedings. Fourteenth International Conference on Pattern Recognition (Cat. No.98EX170).

[10]  Jan Flusser,et al.  Image registration methods: a survey , 2003, Image Vis. Comput..

[11]  Christian Jutten,et al.  Multimodal Data Fusion: An Overview of Methods, Challenges, and Prospects , 2015, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[12]  Hassan Foroosh,et al.  Extension of phase correlation to subpixel registration , 2002, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[13]  Arthur Ardeshir Goshtasby Theory and Applications of Image Registration , 2017 .

[14]  Zhiyong Xu,et al.  Image Registration with Hyperspectral Data Based on Fourier-Mellin Transform , 2013, SiPS 2013.

[15]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF) , 2008, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[16]  Nasir M. Rajpoot,et al.  Registration of thermal and visible light images of diseased plants using silhouette extraction in the wavelet domain , 2015, Pattern Recognit..

[17]  Christopher G. Harris,et al.  A Combined Corner and Edge Detector , 1988, Alvey Vision Conference.

[18]  B. N. Chatterji,et al.  An FFT-based technique for translation, rotation, and scale-invariant image registration , 1996, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[19]  Wilfried Philips,et al.  A non-rigid registration method for multispectral imaging of plants , 2012, Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[20]  G LoweDavid,et al.  Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints , 2004 .

[21]  David R. Haynor,et al.  Nonrigid multimodality image registration , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[22]  Yun Zhang,et al.  A critical review of image registration methods , 2010 .

[23]  Paul A. Viola,et al.  Alignment by Maximization of Mutual Information , 1997, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[24]  Philippe Lucidarme,et al.  On the use of depth camera for 3D phenotyping of entire plants , 2012 .

[25]  George Wolberg,et al.  Robust image registration using log-polar transform , 2000, Proceedings 2000 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No.00CH37101).

[26]  Michael T. Orchard,et al.  A fast direct Fourier-based algorithm for subpixel registration of images , 2001, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[27]  S. Wisetphanichkij,et al.  Fast Fourier Transform Technique and Affine Transform Estimation-Based High Precision Image Registration Method , 2005 .

[28]  William K. Pratt,et al.  Digital image processing (2nd ed.) , 1991 .

[29]  Adrien Bartoli,et al.  KAZE Features , 2012, ECCV.

[30]  Carlo Tomasi,et al.  Good features to track , 1994, 1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[31]  Christopher Hunt,et al.  Notes on the OpenSURF Library , 2009 .

[32]  Hanno Scharr,et al.  Image Analysis: The New Bottleneck in Plant Phenotyping [Applications Corner] , 2015, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[33]  Tom Drummond,et al.  Machine Learning for High-Speed Corner Detection , 2006, ECCV.

[34]  N.Arunachalam,et al.  Survey On Image Registration , 2019, International Journal of Research in Advent Technology.

[35]  Nasir M. Rajpoot,et al.  Proceedings of British machine vision conference 2007 , 2007 .

[36]  Angel Domingo Sappa,et al.  Multimodal template matching based on gradient and mutual information using scale-space , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing.

[37]  Luis Ángel Ruiz Fernández,et al.  Evaluating Fourier Cross-Correlation Sub-Pixel Registration in Landsat Images , 2017, Remote. Sens..

[38]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  SUSAN—A New Approach to Low Level Image Processing , 1997, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[39]  Guy Marchal,et al.  Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.