Identification and Prediction of the Invasion Pattern of the Mikania micrantha with WaveEdgeNet Model Using UAV-Based Images in Shenzhen
Highlights
- A high-quality dataset was initially constructed and WaveEdgeNet was proposed.
- A novel feature selection framework is proposed in this study.
- We introduced the variables representing the distance to different land use types.
- Investigated the influence of various environmental factors on Mikania micrantha.
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Study Area and Data
2.1. Research Framework
2.2. Study Area
2.3. Data Collection and Preprocessing
2.4. Identification Algorithm of Mikania micrantha
2.4.1. Structure of WaveEdgeNet
- (1)
- WCB (Wavelet-Convolution Block)
- (2)
- DCF (Dynamic Context Fusion module)
- (3)
- ERS (Edge-Refined Segmentation Head)
2.4.2. Model Training and Evaluation
2.5. Driving Factors and Prediction of the Spread of Mikania micrantha
2.5.1. Driving Factors
2.5.2. Construction of the Feature Selection Framework
- (1)
- The Point-biserial Correlation Coefficient
- (2)
- The Variance Inflation Factor
- (3)
- Pearson Correlation Coefficient
2.5.3. Mikania micrantha Expansion Potential Calculation
3. Results
3.1. Evaluation Performance of the WaveEdgeNet Model
3.1.1. Ablation Experiment
3.1.2. Module Effectiveness Experiment
3.2. The Results of Recognized Mikania micrantha
3.2.1. Assessment of the Mikania micrantha Segmentation Model
3.2.2. The Spatial Distribution of Mikania micrantha
3.3. Feature Selection Results and Analysis
3.4. Results of the Future Occurrence Probability of Mikania micrantha
4. Discussion
4.1. Comparison of WaveEdgeNet with Other Segmentation Algorithms
4.2. Analysis of Feature Selection Results
4.3. The Key Environmental Factors Obtained Based on the MaxEnt Model
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Nota, A.; Bertolino, S.; Tiralongo, F.; Santovito, A. Adaptation to bioinvasions: When does it occur? Glob. Change Biol. 2024, 30, e17362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clements, D.R.; Kato-Noguchi, H. Defensive mechanisms of Mikania micrantha likely enhance its invasiveness as one of the world’s worst alien species. Plants 2025, 14, 269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, W.; Wang, B.; Liao, W.; Li, M.; Wang, Y.; Zan, Q. Progress in studies on an exotic vicious weed mikania micrantha. Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao J. Appl. Ecol. 2002, 13, 1684–1688. [Google Scholar]
- Saranya, K.R.L.; Satish, K.V.; Reddy, C.S. Remote sensing enabled essential biodiversity variables for invasive alien species management: Towards the development of spatial decision support system. Biol. Invasions 2024, 26, 943–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müllerová, J.; Brundu, G.; Grosse-Stoltenberg, A.; Kattenborn, T.; Richardson, D.M. Pattern to process, research to practice: Remote sensing of plant invasions. Biol. Invasions 2023, 25, 3651–3676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, J.; Roberts, D.A.; Stow, D.A.; An, L.; Hall, S.J.; Yabiku, S.T.; Kyriakidis, P.C. Mapping understory invasive plant species with field and remotely sensed data in chitwan, nepal. Remote Sens. Environ. 2020, 250, 112037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kandwal, R.; Jeganathan, C.; Tolpekin, V.; Kushwaha, S.P.S. Discriminating the invasive species, ‘lantana’ using vegetation indices. J. Indian Soc. Remote 2009, 37, 275–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dash, J.P.; Watt, M.S.; Paul, T.S.H.; Morgenroth, J.; Hartley, R. Taking a closer look at invasive alien plant research: A review of the current state, opportunities, and future directions for uavs. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2019, 10, 2020–2033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaka, M.M.; Samat, A. Advances in remote sensing and machine learning methods for invasive plants study: A comprehensive review. Remote Sens. 2024, 16, 3781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rakgoale, P.B.; Ngetar, S.N. Detecting invasive alien plant species using remote sensing, machine learning and deep learning. J. Sens. 2024, 2024, 8854675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.; Li, G. Uav imagery real-time semantic segmentation with global–local information attention. Sensors 2025, 25, 1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahal, A.; Murad, S.A.; Rahimi, N. Heuristical comparison of vision transformers against convolutional neural networks for semantic segmentation on remote sensing imagery. IEEE Sens. J. 2025, 25, 17364–17373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cruz, C.; McGuinness, K.; Perrin, P.M.; O’Connell, J.; Martin, J.R.; Connolly, J. Improving the mapping of coastal invasive species using uav imagery and deep learning. Int. J. Remote. Sens. 2023, 44, 5713–5735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.F.; Cheng, M.; Xiao, X.P.; Yuan, H.B.; Zhu, J.J.; Fan, C.H.; Zhang, J.L. An image segmentation method based on deep learning for damage assessment of the invasive weed solanum rostratum dunal. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 188, 106320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ollachica, D.A.H.; Asante, B.K.A.; Imamura, H. Advancing water hyacinth recognition: Integration of deep learning and multispectral imaging for precise identification. Remote Sens. 2025, 17, 689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Tang, Q.H.; Zong, D.L.; Hu, X.K.; Wang, B.R.; Wang, T. Drivers of species distribution and niche dynamics for ornamental plants originating at different latitudes. Diversity 2023, 15, 877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visztra, G.V.; Frei, K.; Hábenczyus, A.A.; Soóky, A.; Bátori, Z.; Laborczi, A.; Csikós, N.; Szatmári, G.; Szilassi, P. Applicability of point- and polygon-based vegetation monitoring data to identify soil, hydrological and climatic driving forces of biological invasions-a case study of Ailanthus altissima, Elaeagnus angustifolia and Robinia pseudoacacia. Plants 2023, 12, 855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dai, E.F.; Wang, Y.H. Identifying driving factors of ecosystem service trade-offs in mountainous region of southwestern china across geomorphic and climatic types. Ecol. Indic. 2024, 158, 111520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Li, L.; Yu, H.N.; Zhu, W.H.; Hou, M.Z.; Yu, J.T.; Yuan, M.; Yu, Z.Q. Modeling current and future distributions of invasive Asteraceae species in northeast china. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 8379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cuddington, K.; Sobek-Swant, S.; Drake, J.; Lee, W.; Brook, M. Risks of giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum) range increase in north america. Biol. Invasions 2022, 24, 299–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sorbe, F.; Gränzig, T.; Förster, M. Evaluating sampling bias correction methods for invasive species distribution modeling in maxent. Ecol. Inform. 2023, 76, 102124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dakhil, M.A.; El-Keblawy, A.; El-Sheikh, M.A.; Halmy, M.W.A.; Ksiksi, T.; Hassan, W.A. Global invasion risk assessment of Prosopis juliflora at biome level: Does soil matter? Biology 2021, 10, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, Z.X.; Zhu, L.X. A review on unmanned aerial vehicle remote sensing: Platforms, sensors, data processing methods, and applications. Drones 2023, 7, 398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ronneberger, O.; Fischer, P.; Brox, T. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2015; Navab, N., Hornegger, J., Wells, W.M., Frangi, A.F., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 234–241. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, Z.; Rahman Siddiquee, M.M.; Tajbakhsh, N.; Liang, J. Unet++: A nested u-net architecture for medical image segmentation. In Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis and Multimodal Learning for Clinical Decision Support; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 3–11. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, L.; Li, R.; Zhang, C.; Fang, S.; Duan, C.; Meng, X.; Atkinson, P.M. Unetformer: A unet-like transformer for efficient semantic segmentation of remote sensing urban scene imagery. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2022, 190, 196–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finder, S.E.; Amoyal, R.; Treister, E.; Freifeld, O. Wavelet convolutions for large receptive fields. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2024; Leonardis, A., Ricci, E., Roth, S., Russakovsky, O., Sattler, T., Varol, G., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; pp. 363–380. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Z.X.; He, Z.W.; Lu, Z.M. Dea-net: Single image dehazing based on detail-enhanced convolution and content-guided attention. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2024, 33, 1002–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, E.; Wang, W.; Yu, Z.; Anandkumar, A.; Alvarez, J.M.; Luo, P. Segformer: Simple and efficient design for semantic segmentation with transformers. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2021, 34, 12077–12090. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, L.; Li, R.; Duan, C.; Zhang, C.; Meng, X.; Fang, S. A novel transformer based semantic segmentation scheme for fine-resolution remote sensing images. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2022, 19, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, M.-H.; Lu, C.-Z.; Hou, Q.; Liu, Z.; Cheng, M.-M.; Hu, S.-M. Segnext: Rethinking convolutional attention design for semantic segmentation. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2022, 35, 1140–1156. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, G.; Li, J.; Gao, G.; Lu, H.; Yang, J.; Yue, D. Lightweight real-time semantic segmentation network with efficient transformer and cnn. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2023, 24, 15897–15906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, S.; Wang, M.; Yuan, L.L.; Chen, H.; Yan, L.Y.; Yao, S.T.; Zhang, B.P. Local grasses for the control of the invasive vine Mikania micrantha. J. Plant Ecol. 2022, 15, 844–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buffa, G.; Gaetan, C.; Piccoli, S.; Del Vecchio, S.; Fantinato, E. Using fine-scale field data modelling for planning the management of invasions of Oenothera stucchii in coastal dune systems. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 125, 107564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fuentes-Lillo, E.; Lembrechts, J.J.; Cavieres, L.A.; Jiménez, A.; Haider, S.; Barros, A.; Pauchard, A. Anthropogenic factors overrule local abiotic variables in determining non-native plant invasions in mountains. Biol. Invasions 2021, 23, 3671–3686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Z.P.; Zhao, J.; Chen, Y.B.; Chen, H.; Lin, N.; Qiu, R.Z. Spatial variation and driving factors of invasive plants in fujian province, china. Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao J. Appl. Ecol. 2019, 30, 2682–2690. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, Y.Q.; Xie, X.R.; Weng, F.F.; Nong, L.B.; Lin, M.N.; Ou, J.Y.; Wang, Y.X.; Mao, Y.; Chen, Y.; Qian, Z.J.; et al. Distribution patterns and environmental determinants of invasive alien plants on subtropical islands (fujian, china). Forests 2024, 15, 1273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Y.Q.; Huang, H.; Xie, X.R.; Ou, J.Y.; Chen, Z.; Lu, X.X.; Kong, D.Y.; Nong, L.B.; Lin, M.N.; Qian, Z.J.; et al. Landscape, human disturbance, and climate factors drive the species richness of alien invasive plants on subtropical islands. Plants 2024, 13, 2437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, Y.; Liu, H.Y. A short note on the maximal point-biserial correlation under non-normality. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 2016, 69, 344–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saranya, K.R.L.; Lakshmi, T.V.; Reddy, C.S. Predicting the potential sites of chromolaena odorata and lantana camara in forest landscape of eastern ghats using habitat suitability models. Ecol. Inform. 2021, 66, 101455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, L.L.; Li, S.F.; Huang, W.Y.; Jin, J.H.; Oskolski, A.A. Late pleistocene glacial expansion of a low-latitude species Magnolia insignis: Megafossil evidence and species distribution modeling. Ecol. Indic. 2024, 158, 111519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kass, J.M.; Muscarella, R.; Galante, P.J.; Bohl, C.L.; Pinilla-Buitrago, G.E.; Boria, R.A.; Soley-Guardia, M.; Anderson, R.P. Enmeval 2.0: Redesigned for customizable and reproducible modeling of species’ niches and distributions. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2021, 12, 1602–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ganguly, B.; Chaudhuri, S.; Biswas, S.; Dey, D.; Munshi, S.; Chatterjee, B.; Dalai, S.; Chakravorti, S. Wavelet kernel-based convolutional neural network for localization of partial discharge sources within a power apparatus. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 17, 1831–1841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Xie, E.; Li, X.; Fan, D.-P.; Song, K.; Liang, D.; Lu, T.; Luo, P.; Shao, L. Pyramid vision transformer: A versatile backbone for dense prediction without convolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, Montreal, QC, Canada, 10–17 October 2021; pp. 568–578. [Google Scholar]
- Mukaka, M.M. Statistics corner: A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med. J. 2012, 24, 69–71. [Google Scholar]
- Salmerón, R.; García, C.B.; García, J. Variance inflation factor and condition number in multiple linear regression. J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 2018, 88, 2365–2384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vilà, M.; Espinar, J.L.; Hejda, M.; Hulme, P.E.; Jarošík, V.; Maron, J.L.; Pergl, J.; Schaffner, U.; Sun, Y.; Pyšek, P. Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: A meta-analysis of their effects on species, communities and ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 2011, 14, 702–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Huang, Q.; Kuang, Y.Z.; Clements, D.R.; Xu, G.F.; Zhang, F.D.; Shen, S.C.; Yin, L.; Day, M.D. Predicting the potential distribution of the invasive weed Mikania micrantha and its biological control agent Puccinia spegazzinii under climate change scenarios in china. Biol. Control 2025, 204, 105754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choudhury, M.R.; Deb, P.; Singha, H.; Chakdar, B.; Medhi, M. Predicting the probable distribution and threat of invasive Mimosa diplotricha suavalle and Mikania micrantha kunth in a protected tropical grassland. Ecol. Eng. 2016, 97, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, Y.Q.; Zhang, X.H.; Wei, H.Y.; Wang, D.J.; Chen, R.D.; Wang, L.K.; Gu, W. Predicting the invasive trend of exotic plants in china based on the ensemble model under climate change: A case for three invasive plants of asteraceae. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 756, 143841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rameshprabu, N.; Swamy, P.S. Prediction of environmental suitability for invasion of Mikania micrantha in india by species distribution modelling. J. Environ. Biol. 2015, 36, 565–570. [Google Scholar]













| Environmental Factor Type | Environmental Factor Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Land type proximity factor | Impervious Surface | Distance from the locations to the nearest impervious surface |
| Roads | Distance from the locations to the nearest roads | |
| Grassland | Distance from the locations to the nearest grassland | |
| Farmland | Distance from the locations to the nearest edge of farmland | |
| Bare Land | Distance from the locations to the nearest bare land | |
| Shrubland | Distance from the locations to the nearest shrubland | |
| Forest | Distance from the locations to the nearest forest | |
| Vegetation-related Factors | FRAR | Fraction of photosynthetically Active Radiation |
| NDVI | Normalized Difference Vegetation Index | |
| EVI | Enhanced Vegetation Index | |
| GPP | Gross Primary Production | |
| ET | Evapotranspiration | |
| LAI | Leaf Area Index | |
| Other types of factors | Slope | Degree of the slope at the locations ranging from 0° to 90° |
| Elevation | Elevation of the locations above sea level | |
| Water | Distance from the locations to the nearest waters | |
| LST | Land surface temperature |
| DCF | WCB | ERS | mIoU | Acc | IoU | F1score | Precision | Recall | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | 77.66 | 82.87 | 57.45 | 72.98 | 80.97 | 66.43 | |||
| R2 | √ | 80.85 | 98.12 | 63.65 | 77.79 | 77.79 | 77.79 | ||
| R3 | √ | 82.23 | 98.24 | 66.28 | 79.72 | 78.01 | 81.51 | ||
| R4 | √ | 78.24 | 97.98 | 58.57 | 73.87 | 81.43 | 67.60 | ||
| R5 | √ | √ | 80.49 | 98.13 | 62.90 | 77.23 | 79.90 | 74.73 | |
| R6 | √ | √ | 83.97 | 98.52 | 69.47 | 81.98 | 84.60 | 79.52 | |
| R7 | √ | √ | 84.32 | 98.54 | 70.15 | 82.45 | 83.80 | 81.15 | |
| R8 | √ | √ | √ | 85.00 | 98.62 | 71.42 | 83.33 | 85.19 | 81.55 |
| ERS | mIoU | Acc | IoU | F1score | Precision | Recall | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | Add + CONV | 82.84 | 98.42 | 67.29 | 80.45 | 85.18 | 75.43 |
| C2 | Conca t+ CONV | 83.27 | 98.45 | 68.14 | 81.05 | 83.74 | 78.53 |
| C3 | Weight | 82.75 | 98.46 | 67.09 | 80.31 | 87.24 | 74.39 |
| C4 | DCF | 85.00 | 98.62 | 71.42 | 83.33 | 85.19 | 81.55 |
| Model | Year | mIoU | IoU | Acc | F1score | Precision | Recall | Flops | Params | Speed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Segformer | 2021 | 79.51 (0.270) | 61.01 (0.421) | 98.07 | 75.79 | 80.65 | 71.48 | 7.9 G | 3.7 M | 114.9 |
| LetNET | 2023 | 81.03 (0.250) | 63.89 (0.363) | 98.22 | 77.97 | 81.85 | 74.43 | 7.0 G | 0.9 M | 65.1 |
| U-mixformer | 2023 | 83.11 (0.302) | 67.88 (0.455) | 98.40 | 80.87 | 81.89 | 79.87 | 5.8 G | 6.0 M | 98.1 |
| Segnext | 2022 | 81.97 (0.267) | 65.72 (0.353) | 98.28 | 79.32 | 80.65 | 78.03 | 32.5 G | 27.5 M | 33.8 |
| Dcswin | 2021 | 82.71 (0.262) | 67.08 (0.368) | 98.40 | 80.30 | 83.67 | 77.19 | 47 G | 45.5 M | 38.0 |
| SFFNet | 2024 | 83.96 (0.239) | 69.44 (0.349) | 98.53 | 81.96 | 85.20 | 78.96 | 216 G | 71.1 M | 13.6 |
| Unetformer | 2022 | 83.68 (0.273) | 68.89 (0.432) | 98.51 | 81.58 | 85.79 | 77.77 | 118 G | 53.3 M | 22.6 |
| Twins | 2021 | 84.21 (0.235) | 69.96 (0.353) | 98.52 | 82.32 | 83.29 | 81.38 | 227 G | 53.1 M | 23.9 |
| swin-T | 2021 | 84.20 (0.266) | 69.96 (0.414) | 98.50 | 82.33 | 82.02 | 82.64 | 236 G | 58.9 M | 16.5 |
| WaveEdgeNet | - | 85.00 (0.247) | 71.42 (0.395) | 98.62 | 83.33 | 85.19 | 81.55 | 231 G | 56.2 M | 18.6 |
| Reference Model | Comparison Model | t-Value | p-Value | Significance Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WaveEdgeNet | Segformer | 26.55 | <0.0001 | **** |
| LetNET | 20.04 | <0.0001 | **** | |
| U-mixformer | 9.87 | 0.0006 | *** | |
| Segnext | 15.33 | <0.0001 | **** | |
| Dcswin | 12.09 | 0.0003 | *** | |
| SFFNet | 5.73 | 0.0026 | ** | |
| Unetformer | 7.45 | 0.0017 | *** | |
| Twins | 4.41 | 0.0044 | ** | |
| swin-T | 4.88 | 0.0041 | ** |
| Number of Features | Train AUC (%) | Test AUC (%) | Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Features | 17 | 84.50 | 83.24 | 100.00% |
| Only VIF | 14 | 84.26 | 83.17 | 63.62% |
| Only Pearson | 14 | 84.31 | 83.25 | 63.65% |
| Only Point-biserial | 13 | 82.25 | 81.26 | 45.71% |
| VIF + Pearson | 13 | 84.25 | 83.21 | 55.22% |
| VIF + Point-biserial | 10 | 82.79 | 81.98 | 25.27% |
| Point-biserial + Pearson | 11 | 83.05 | 82.09 | 31.86% |
| After Framework | 8 | 84.47 | 83.86 | 17.39% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Lin, H.; Yin, Y.; He, X.; Long, J.; Zhang, T.; Ye, Z.; Deng, X. Identification and Prediction of the Invasion Pattern of the Mikania micrantha with WaveEdgeNet Model Using UAV-Based Images in Shenzhen. Remote Sens. 2026, 18, 437. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18030437
Lin H, Yin Y, He X, Long J, Zhang T, Ye Z, Deng X. Identification and Prediction of the Invasion Pattern of the Mikania micrantha with WaveEdgeNet Model Using UAV-Based Images in Shenzhen. Remote Sensing. 2026; 18(3):437. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18030437
Chicago/Turabian StyleLin, Hui, Yang Yin, Xiaofen He, Jiangping Long, Tingchen Zhang, Zilin Ye, and Xiaojia Deng. 2026. "Identification and Prediction of the Invasion Pattern of the Mikania micrantha with WaveEdgeNet Model Using UAV-Based Images in Shenzhen" Remote Sensing 18, no. 3: 437. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18030437
APA StyleLin, H., Yin, Y., He, X., Long, J., Zhang, T., Ye, Z., & Deng, X. (2026). Identification and Prediction of the Invasion Pattern of the Mikania micrantha with WaveEdgeNet Model Using UAV-Based Images in Shenzhen. Remote Sensing, 18(3), 437. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18030437

