An Enhanced Methodology for Estimating Disease Infection Rates in Plants Using Unequal Group Size Testing: A Statistical Approach

References

[1] Burrow, P. M. (1987). Improved estimation of pathogen transmission rates by group testing. Phytopathology, 77, 363-365.

[2] Campbell, C. L., & Madden, L. V. (1990). Introduction to plant disease epidemiology. New York: Wiley and Sons.

[3] Chen, C. L., & Swallow, W. H. (1990). Using group testing to estimate a proportion, and to test the binomial model. Biometrics, 46, 1035-1046.

[4] Chiang, C. L., & Reeves, W. C. (1962). Statistical estimation of virus infection rates in mosquito vector populations. American Journal of Hygiene, 75, 377-391.

[5] Dorfman, R. (1943). The detection of defective members of large populations. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 14, 436-440.

[6] Hepworth, G., & Watson, R. (2009). Debiased estimation of proportions in group testing. Applied Statistics, 58, 105-121.

[7] Hwang, F. K. (1976). Group testing with a dilution effect. Biometrika, 63, 611-613.

[8] Lin, Y., Liu, W., & Zhou, X. (2020). Group testing designs for COVID-19 testing: A systematic review. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 29(7), 1935-1947.

[9] Madden, L. V., Hughes, G., & Van den Bosch, F. (2007). The study of plant disease epidemics. American Phytopathological Society.

[10] Nyongesa, L. K. (2012). Hierarchical estimation. Journal of Biometrics & Biostatistics, 3(4), 1-8.

[11] Otim-Nape, G. W., et al. (2000). The current pandemic of cassava mosaic virus disease in East Africa and its control. NARO/NRI Publication.

[12] Rardin, R., & Santos, D. (2021). Advanced group testing methods for plant disease detection using machine learning. Plant Pathology Journal, 70(2), 145-158.

[13] Singh, M., & Kumar, V. (2022). Artificial intelligence-enhanced group testing for agricultural disease surveillance. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 193, 106632.

[14] Swallow, W. H. (1985). Group testing for estimating infection rates and probabilities of disease transmission. Phytopathology, 75(8), 882-889.

[15] Tebbs, J. M., & Swallow, W. H. (2003). Estimating ordered binomial proportions with the use of group testing. Biometrika, 90, 471-477.

[16] Thompson, K. H. (1962). Estimation of the proportion of vectors in a natural population of insects. Biometrics, 18, 568-578.

[17] Thresh, J. M., et al. (1998). The mosaic diseases of cassava in Africa and India caused by whitefly-borne geminiviruses. Review of Plant Pathology, 77, 935-945.

[18] Wang, D., McMahan, C., & Gallagher, C. (2020). A general regression framework for group testing data, which incorporates population heterogeneity. Statistics in Medicine, 39(4), 391-408.

[19] Yang, Y., & Chen, X. (2023). Deep learning approaches in agricultural disease detection: A group testing perspective. IEEE Transactions on Agricultural Engineering, 16(4), 789-801.

[20] Zhang, L., & Liu, J. (2021). Bayesian group testing methods for plant disease surveillance networks. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 26(1), 73-91.

@article{1706641,
      author = {Sirengo John Luca},
      title = {An Enhanced Methodology for Estimating Disease Infection Rates in Plants Using Unequal Group Size Testing: A Statistical Approach},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2024},
      volume = {8},
      number = {6},
      pages = {76-82},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1706641.pdf},
      abstract = {Group testing has emerged as a crucial methodology for efficient disease detection in plant populations, particularly when dealing with unequal group sizes. This study presents an enhanced statistical framework for estimating disease infection rates in plants using unequal group size testing, building upon Dorfman's (1943) foundational work. The research develops and analyzes a maximum likelihood estimator for unequal group sizes, expressed as ?? = 1-(1-x_i/n_i)^(1/k_i), where x_i represents positive groups, n_i the number of groups, and k_i the group size. Through extensive simulation studies, we demonstrate that this estimator exhibits minimal bias (< 0.001) for infection rates below 0.30 and achieves significant reductions in mean square error (67% reduction compared to one-at-a-time testing for ? = 0.10 and k = 15). Our findings reveal remarkable improvements in testing efficiency, with asymptotic relative efficiency values ranging from 34.0 to 80.27 across different infection rates and group sizes. The optimal group size analysis indicates that larger groups (k > 10) are most efficient for infection rates below 0.15, leading to a 78% reduction in testing costs while maintaining statistical power above 0.90. Additionally, the study demonstrates that moderate variation in group sizes (CV ? 0.3) has minimal impact on efficiency, making the methodology practically applicable in real-world scenarios where equal group sizes may not be feasible.},
      keywords = {Unequal Group Size, Plant Disease Detection, Maximum Likelihood Estimation, Asymptotic Relative Efficiency, Optimal Group Size},
      month = {December},
  }