“…However, in [67] geometrical features incorporating a neuro fuzzy classifier with the added advantage of its humanlike reasoning style and linguistic model, achieved an accuracy of 97.5%. Hu, shape, texture 100% [151] Back propagation neural network Shapes, Angles and sinus of leaves 111 leaves with 14 species [125] Texture and wavelet feature Grape varieties 93.3% [126] Colour Affected and Unaffected Vegetables [127] Texture of Colour Co-occurrence Disease Identification [128] Edge Features of leaf Neem, pine oak 90.33% [129] Leaf Margin Jasmine, arka, mango, neem and shigru 85% [130] Morphological features 450 leaves of 16 classes in Ayurveda and agriculture 90% [62] Texture Foxtail, crabgrass, velvet leaf, morning glory 97% [177] Fuzzy based classifiers Statistical features of leaf 97.6% [26] Texture, shape, colour 99.87% [86] K-nearest neighbour Edge, vein, ring projection wavelet feature 87.14% [120] Geometrical features 80% [134] Leaf Margin? texture 75.5% [135] Texton Costa Rican Flavia Dataset 99.1% [40] Texton 87.14% [120] Texture ICL-97.07% Plumber-72.8% Simthsonain-73.08% [37] HoCS, contour, colour, curvature Flavia 99.61% [39] Texture 97.55% [94] Run length sequence 93.17% [152] Contour-amplitude frequency descriptor Swedish-89.6% ICL-91.6% [198] Moving centre classifier Moment invariant 92.6% [137] Bayesian classifier Fourier descriptor 88% [116] Support vector machine HoCS Leafsnap [38] Wavelet features Ornamental Plants 95.83% [114] Fourier and texture Australian Federal dataset-100%, Flavia-99.7%, Foliage-99.8%, Swedish and Middle European datasets-99.2% [93] Kernel level descriptor Flavia-97.5% [110,111] Hu moments Annona Squamosa and Psidiuguajava, 86.6% [139] Lanculariity Flavia-95.048% [84] HOG?…”