Submitted:
27 May 2026
Posted:
28 May 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Otolith Image Dataset and Age Labels
2.2. Dataset Partitioning
2.3. Image Preprocessing and Data Augmentation
2.4. Convolutional Neural Network Backbones
2.5. Image Classification Model
2.6. Model Training and Optimization
2.7. Model Evaluation
3. Results
3.1. Dataset Composition
3.2. Stage 1 Backbone Comparison
3.3. Stage 2 Optimization of the Selected Image Only Backbone
3.4. Independent Test Performance of the Image Only Model
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions


Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Beamish, R.J.; McFarlane, G.A. The forgotten requirement for age validation in fisheries biology. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 1983, 112, 735–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campana, S.E. Accuracy, precision and quality control in age determination, including a review of the use and abuse of age validation methods. J. Fish. Biol. 2001, 59, 197–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Campana, S.E.; Moksness, E. Accuracy and precision of age and hatch date estimates from otolith microstructure examination. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 1991, 48, 303–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hüssy, K.; Radtke, K.; Plikshs, M.; Oeberst, R.; Baranova, T.; Krumme, U.; Sjöberg, R.; Walther, Y.; Mosegaard, H. Challenging ICES age estimation protocols: Lessons learned from the eastern Baltic cod stock. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2016, 73, 2138–2149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yamada, U.; Tokimura, M.; Horikawa, H.; Nakabo, T. Fishes and Fisheries of the East China and Yellow Seas; Tokai University Press: Kanagawa, Japan, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, D.J.; Kang, S.; Jung, K.-M.; Cha, H.K. Age and growth of jack mackerel Trachurus japonicus off Jeju Island, Korea. Korean J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2016, 49, 648–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoda, M.; Shiraishi, T.; Yukami, R.; Ohshimo, S. Age and maturation of jack mackerel Trachurus japonicus in the East China Sea. Fish. Sci. 2014, 80, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoda, M.; Tanaka, S.; Takahashi, M. Age, growth and reproductive cycle of the jack mackerel Trachurus japonicus in the Southwestern Sea of Japan. Jpn. Agric. Res. Q. 2023, 57, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fablet, R.; Le Josse, N. Automated fish age estimation from otolith images using statistical learning. Fish. Res. 2005, 72, 279–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morison, A.K.; Robertson, S.G.; Smith, D.C. An integrated system for production fish aging: Image analysis and quality assurance. N. Am. J. Fish. Manag. 1998, 18, 587–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LeCun, Y.; Bengio, Y.; Hinton, G. Deep learning. Nature 2015, 521, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LeCun, Y.; Bottou, L.; Bengio, Y.; Haffner, P. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. IEEE 1998, 86, 2278–2324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moen, E.; Handegard, N.O.; Allken, V.; Albert, O.T.; Harbitz, A.; Malde, K. Automatic interpretation of otoliths using deep learning. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0204713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martinsen, I.; Harbitz, A.; Bianchi, F.M. Age prediction by deep learning applied to Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) otolith images. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0277244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moen, E.; Vabø, R.; Smoliński, S.; Denechaud, C.; Handegard, N.O.; Malde, K. Age interpretation of cod otoliths using deep learning. Ecol. Inform. 2023, 78, 102325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Politikos, D.V.; Petasis, G.; Chatzispyrou, A.; Mytilineou, C.; Anastasopoulou, A. Automating fish age estimation combining otolith images and deep learning: The role of multitask learning. Fish. Res. 2021, 242, 106033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Politikos, D.V.; Sykiniotis, N.; Petasis, G.; Dedousis, P.; Ordoñez, A.; Vabø, R.; Anastasopoulou, A.; Moen, E.; Mytilineou, C.; Salberg, A.B.; Chatzispyrou, A.; Malde, K. DeepOtolith v1.0: An open-source AI platform for automating fish age reading from otolith or scale images. Fishes 2022, 7, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szegedy, C.; Vanhoucke, V.; Ioffe, S.; Shlens, J.; Wojna, Z. Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 2818–2826. [Google Scholar]
- Chollet, F. Xception: Deep learning with depthwise separable convolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp. 1251–1258. [Google Scholar]
- Tan, M.; Le, Q. EfficientNet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Long Beach, CA, USA, 9–15 June 2019; pp. 6105–6114. [Google Scholar]
- Yosinski, J.; Clune, J.; Bengio, Y.; Lipson, H. How transferable are features in deep neural networks? In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; 2014; Volume 27. [Google Scholar]
- Tajbakhsh, N.; Shin, J.Y.; Gurudu, S.R.; Hurst, R.T.; Kendall, C.B.; Gotway, M.B.; Liang, J. Convolutional neural networks for medical image analysis: Full training or fine tuning? IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2016, 35, 1299–1312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kingma, D.P.; Ba, J. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1412.6980. [Google Scholar]
- Loshchilov, I.; Hutter, F. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1711.05101. [Google Scholar]
- Sokolova, M.; Lapalme, G. A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Inf. Process. Manag. 2009, 45, 427–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tharwat, A. Classification assessment methods. Appl. Comput. Inform. 2021, 17, 168–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivastava, N.; Hinton, G.; Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Salakhutdinov, R. Dropout: A simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2014, 15, 1929–1958. [Google Scholar]
- Bojesen, T.A.; Denechaud, C.; Malde, K. Annotating otoliths with a deep generative model. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2024, 81, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ordoñez, A.; Eikvil, L.; Salberg, A.B.; Harbitz, A.; Elvarsson, B.P. Automatic fish age determination across different otolith image labs using domain adaptation. Fishes 2022, 7, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]





| Age class | Number of images | Percentage (%) |
| 0 | 134 | 9.3 |
| 1 | 270 | 18.7 |
| 2 | 567 | 39.3 |
| 3 | 265 | 18.4 |
| 4 | 208 | 14.4 |
| Total | 1444 | 100.0 |
| Study | Species | Augmentation | Note |
| Moen et al. [13] | Greenland halibut | Rotation 0–360°; horizontal/vertical reflection; vertical shift | Relatively strong geometric augmentation |
| Martinsen et al. [14] | Greenland halibut | Horizontal translation 10%; rotation up to 36° | Moderate augmentation |
| Present study | Japanese jack mackerel | Rotation ±10°; small brightness and contrast changes | Mild augmentation chosen to reflect realistic image acquisition variation |
| Backbone | Learning rate | Best epoch | Validation macro F1 | Validation loss | Validation exact accuracy |
| Inception v3 | 3 × 10−5 | 15 | 0.932716 | 0.219860 | 0.926407 |
| Inception v3 | 1 × 10−4 | 13 | 0.923461 | 0.230347 | 0.917749 |
| Inception v3 | 3 × 10−4 | 14 | 0.930988 | 0.233401 | 0.926407 |
| Xception | 3 × 10−5 | 27 | 0.928360 | 0.224112 | 0.922078 |
| Xception | 1 × 10−4 | 6 | 0.928362 | 0.206149 | 0.926407 |
| Xception | 3 × 10−4 | 18 | 0.930014 | 0.212586 | 0.922078 |
| EfficientNet B4 | 3 × 10−5 | 26 | 0.913933 | 0.284962 | 0.900433 |
| EfficientNet B4 | 1 × 10−4 | 21 | 0.928537 | 0.211526 | 0.926407 |
| EfficientNet B4 | 3 × 10−4 | 13 | 0.918861 | 0.254291 | 0.909091 |
| Rank | Learning rate | Weight decay | Dropout | Best epoch | Validation macro F1 | Validation loss | Validation exact accuracy | Validation ±1 accuracy |
| 1 | 1 × 10−4 | 1 × 10−4 | 0.3 | 11 | 0.944 | 0.181 | 0.935 | 1.000 |
| 2 | 1 × 10−4 | 1 × 10−5 | 0.2 | 13 | 0.941 | 0.158 | 0.935 | 1.000 |
| 3 | 3 × 10−4 | 1 × 10−4 | 0.5 | 15 | 0.934 | 0.279 | 0.931 | 0.996 |
| 4 | 3 × 10−5 | 1 × 10−4 | 0.5 | 26 | 0.932 | 0.274 | 0.926 | 0.996 |
| 5 | 3 × 10−5 | 1 × 10−5 | 0.5 | 15 | 0.931 | 0.273 | 0.926 | 1.000 |
| Model | Test exact accuracy | Test macro F1 | Test ±1 year accuracy |
| Image only Inception v3 | 0.866 | 0.873 | 1.000 |
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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).