Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Download ebook Medical Image Computing And Computer Assisted Intervention Miccai 2021 24Th International Conference Strasbourg France September 27 October 1 Part I 1St Edition Marleen De Bruijne online pdf all chapter docx epub
Download ebook Medical Image Computing And Computer Assisted Intervention Miccai 2021 24Th International Conference Strasbourg France September 27 October 1 Part I 1St Edition Marleen De Bruijne online pdf all chapter docx epub
https://ebookmeta.com/product/natural-language-processing-and-
chinese-computing-10th-ccf-international-conference-
nlpcc-2021-qingdao-china-october-13-17-2021-proceedings-part-i-
lu-wang/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/computer-vision-and-image-
processing-6th-international-conference-cvip-2021-rupnagar-india-
december-3-5-2021-revised-selected-papers-part-i-balasubramanian-
raman/
Founding Editors
Gerhard Goos
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany
Juris Hartmanis
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
123
Editors
Marleen de Bruijne Philippe C. Cattin
Erasmus MC - University Medical Center University of Basel
Rotterdam Allschwil, Switzerland
Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Nicolas Padoy
University of Copenhagen ICube, Université de Strasbourg, CNRS
Copenhagen, Denmark Strasbourg, France
Stéphane Cotin Yefeng Zheng
Inria Nancy Grand Est Tencent Jarvis Lab
Villers-lès-Nancy, France Shenzhen, China
Stefanie Speidel
National Center for Tumor Diseases
(NCT/UCC)
Dresden, Germany
Caroline Essert
ICube, Université de Strasbourg, CNRS
Strasbourg, France
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Preface
The 24th edition of the International Conference on Medical Image Computing and
Computer Assisted Intervention (MICCAI 2021) has for the second time been placed
under the shadow of COVID-19. Complicated situations due to the pandemic and
multiple lockdowns have affected our lives during the past year, sometimes perturbing
the researchers work, but also motivating an extraordinary dedication from many of our
colleagues, and significant scientific advances in the fight against the virus. After
another difficult year, most of us were hoping to be able to travel and finally meet in
person at MICCAI 2021, which was supposed to be held in Strasbourg, France.
Unfortunately, due to the uncertainty of the global situation, MICCAI 2021 had to be
moved again to a virtual event that was held over five days from September 27 to
October 1, 2021. Taking advantage of the experience gained last year and of the
fast-evolving platforms, the organizers of MICCAI 2021 redesigned the schedule and
the format. To offer the attendees both a strong scientific content and an engaging
experience, two virtual platforms were used: Pathable for the oral and plenary sessions
and SpatialChat for lively poster sessions, industrial booths, and networking events in
the form of interactive group video chats.
These proceedings of MICCAI 2021 showcase all 531 papers that were presented at
the main conference, organized into eight volumes in the Lecture Notes in Computer
Science (LNCS) series as follows:
• Part I, LNCS Volume 12901: Image Segmentation
• Part II, LNCS Volume 12902: Machine Learning 1
• Part III, LNCS Volume 12903: Machine Learning 2
• Part IV, LNCS Volume 12904: Image Registration and Computer Assisted
Intervention
• Part V, LNCS Volume 12905: Computer Aided Diagnosis
• Part VI, LNCS Volume 12906: Image Reconstruction and Cardiovascular Imaging
• Part VII, LNCS Volume 12907: Clinical Applications
• Part VIII, LNCS Volume 12908: Microscopic, Ophthalmic, and Ultrasound
Imaging
These papers were selected after a thorough double-blind peer review process. We
followed the example set by past MICCAI meetings, using Microsoft’s Conference
Managing Toolkit (CMT) for paper submission and peer reviews, with support from
the Toronto Paper Matching System (TPMS), to partially automate paper assignment to
area chairs and reviewers, and from iThenticate to detect possible cases of plagiarism.
Following a broad call to the community we received 270 applications to become an
area chair for MICCAI 2021. From this group, the program chairs selected a total of 96
area chairs, aiming for diversity — MIC versus CAI, gender, geographical region, and
vi Preface
a mix of experienced and new area chairs. Reviewers were recruited also via an open
call for volunteers from the community (288 applications, of which 149 were selected
by the program chairs) as well as by re-inviting past reviewers, leading to a total of
1340 registered reviewers.
We received 1630 full paper submissions after an original 2667 intentions to submit.
Four papers were rejected without review because of concerns of (self-)plagiarism and
dual submission and one additional paper was rejected for not adhering to the MICCAI
page restrictions; two further cases of dual submission were discovered and rejected
during the review process. Five papers were withdrawn by the authors during review
and after acceptance.
The review process kicked off with a reviewer tutorial and an area chair meeting to
discuss the review process, criteria for MICCAI acceptance, how to write a good
(meta-)review, and expectations for reviewers and area chairs. Each area chair was
assigned 16–18 manuscripts for which they suggested potential reviewers using TPMS
scores, self-declared research area(s), and the area chair’s knowledge of the reviewers’
expertise in relation to the paper, while conflicts of interest were automatically avoided
by CMT. Reviewers were invited to bid for the papers for which they had been
suggested by an area chair or which were close to their expertise according to TPMS.
Final reviewer allocations via CMT took account of reviewer bidding, prioritization of
area chairs, and TPMS scores, leading to on average four reviews performed per person
by a total of 1217 reviewers.
Following the initial double-blind review phase, area chairs provided a meta-review
summarizing key points of reviews and a recommendation for each paper. The program
chairs then evaluated the reviews and their scores, along with the recommendation from
the area chairs, to directly accept 208 papers (13%) and reject 793 papers (49%); the
remainder of the papers were sent for rebuttal by the authors. During the rebuttal phase,
two additional area chairs were assigned to each paper. The three area chairs then
independently ranked their papers, wrote meta-reviews, and voted to accept or reject
the paper, based on the reviews, rebuttal, and manuscript. The program chairs checked
all meta-reviews, and in some cases where the difference between rankings was high or
comments were conflicting, they also assessed the original reviews, rebuttal, and
submission. In all other cases a majority voting scheme was used to make the final
decision. This process resulted in the acceptance of a further 325 papers for an overall
acceptance rate of 33%.
Acceptance rates were the same between medical image computing (MIC) and
computer assisted interventions (CAI) papers, and slightly lower where authors clas-
sified their paper as both MIC and CAI. Distribution of the geographical region of the
first author as indicated in the optional demographic survey was similar among sub-
mitted and accepted papers.
Preface vii
New this year, was the requirement to fill out a reproducibility checklist when
submitting an intention to submit to MICCAI, in order to stimulate authors to think
about what aspects of their method and experiments they should include to allow others
to reproduce their results. Papers that included an anonymous code repository and/or
indicated that the code would be made available were more likely to be accepted. From
all accepted papers, 273 (51%) included a link to a code repository with the
camera-ready submission.
Another novelty this year is that we decided to make the reviews, meta-reviews, and
author responses for accepted papers available on the website. We hope the community
will find this a useful resource.
The outstanding program of MICCAI 2021 was enriched by four exceptional
keynote talks given by Alyson McGregor, Richard Satava, Fei-Fei Li, and Pierre
Jannin, on hot topics such as gender bias in medical research, clinical translation to
industry, intelligent medicine, and sustainable research. This year, as in previous years,
high-quality satellite events completed the program of the main conference: 28
workshops, 23 challenges, and 14 tutorials; without forgetting the increasingly suc-
cessful plenary events, such as the Women in MICCAI (WiM) meeting, the MICCAI
Student Board (MSB) events, the 2nd Startup Village, the MICCAI-RSNA panel, and
the first “Reinforcing Inclusiveness & diverSity and Empowering MICCAI” (or
RISE-MICCAI) event.
MICCAI 2021 has also seen the first edition of CLINICCAI, the clinical day of
MICCAI. Organized by Nicolas Padoy and Lee Swanstrom, this new event will
hopefully help bring the scientific and clinical communities closer together, and foster
collaborations and interaction. A common keynote connected the two events. We hope
this effort will be pursued in the next editions.
We would like to thank everyone who has contributed to making MICCAI 2021 a
success. First of all, we sincerely thank the authors, area chairs, reviewers, and session
viii Preface
chairs for their dedication and for offering the participants and readers of these pro-
ceedings content of exceptional quality. Special thanks go to our fantastic submission
platform manager Kitty Wong, who has been a tremendous help in the entire process
from reviewer and area chair selection, paper submission, and the review process to the
preparation of these proceedings. We also thank our very efficient team of satellite
events chairs and coordinators, led by Cristian Linte and Matthieu Chabanas: the
workshop chairs, Amber Simpson, Denis Fortun, Marta Kersten-Oertel, and Sandrine
Voros; the challenges chairs, Annika Reinke, Spyridon Bakas, Nicolas Passat, and
Ingerid Reinersten; and the tutorial chairs, Sonia Pujol and Vincent Noblet, as well as
all the satellite event organizers for the valuable content added to MICCAI. Our special
thanks also go to John Baxter and his team who worked hard on setting up and
populating the virtual platforms, to Alejandro Granados for his valuable help and
efficient communication on social media, and to Shelley Wallace and Anna Van Vliet
for marketing and communication. We are also very grateful to Anirban Mukhopadhay
for his management of the sponsorship, and of course many thanks to the numerous
sponsors who supported the conference, often with continuous engagement over many
years. This year again, our thanks go to Marius Linguraru and his team who supervised
a range of actions to help, and promote, career development, among which were the
mentorship program and the Startup Village. And last but not least, our wholehearted
thanks go to Mehmet and the wonderful team at Dekon Congress and Tourism for their
great professionalism and reactivity in the management of all logistical aspects of the
event.
Finally, we thank the MICCAI society and the Board of Directors for their support
throughout the years, starting with the first discussions about bringing MICCAI to
Strasbourg in 2017.
We look forward to seeing you at MICCAI 2022.
General Chair
Caroline Essert Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, ICube, France
Program Chairs
Marleen de Bruijne Erasmus MC Rotterdam, The Netherlands,
and University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Philippe C. Cattin University of Basel, Switzerland
Stéphane Cotin Inria, France
Nicolas Padoy Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, ICube, IHU, France
Stefanie Speidel National Center for Tumor Diseases, Dresden, Germany
Yefeng Zheng Tencent Jarvis Lab, China
Workshop Team
Amber Simpson Queen’s University, Canada
Denis Fortun Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, ICube, France
Marta Kersten-Oertel Concordia University, Canada
Sandrine Voros TIMC-IMAG, INSERM, France
Challenges Team
Annika Reinke German Cancer Research Center, Germany
Spyridon Bakas University of Pennsylvania, USA
Nicolas Passat Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, France
Ingerid Reinersten SINTEF, NTNU, Norway
Tutorial Team
Vincent Noblet Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, ICube, France
Sonia Pujol Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s
Hospital, USA
x Organization
Sponsorship Chairs
Anirban Mukhopadhyay Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany
Yanwu Xu Baidu Inc., China
Green Team
Pierre Jannin INSERM, Université de Rennes 1, France
Étienne Baudrier Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, ICube, France
Program Committee
Ehsan Adeli Stanford University, USA
Iman Aganj Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical
School, USA
Pablo Arbelaez Universidad de los Andes, Colombia
John Ashburner University College London, UK
Meritxell Bach Cuadra University of Lausanne, Switzerland
Sophia Bano University College London, UK
Adrien Bartoli Université Clermont Auvergne, France
Christian Baumgartner ETH Zürich, Switzerland
Hrvoje Bogunovic Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Weidong Cai University of Sydney, Australia
Gustavo Carneiro University of Adelaide, Australia
Chao Chen Stony Brook University, USA
Elvis Chen Robarts Research Institute, Canada
Hao Chen Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,
Hong Kong SAR
Albert Chung Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,
Hong Kong SAR
Adrian Dalca Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
Adrien Depeursinge HES-SO Valais-Wallis, Switzerland
Jose Dolz ÉTS Montréal, Canada
Ruogu Fang University of Florida, USA
Dagan Feng University of Sydney, Australia
Huazhu Fu Inception Institute of Artificial Intelligence,
United Arab Emirates
Mingchen Gao University at Buffalo, The State University
of New York, USA
Guido Gerig New York University, USA
Orcun Goksel Uppsala University, Sweden
Alberto Gomez King’s College London, UK
Ilker Hacihaliloglu Rutgers University, USA
Adam Harrison PAII Inc., USA
Mattias Heinrich University of Lübeck, Germany
Yi Hong Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China
Yipeng Hu University College London, UK
Junzhou Huang University of Texas at Arlington, USA
Xiaolei Huang The Pennsylvania State University, USA
Jana Hutter King’s College London, UK
Madhura Ingalhalikar Symbiosis Center for Medical Image Analysis, India
Shantanu Joshi University of California, Los Angeles, USA
Samuel Kadoury Polytechnique Montréal, Canada
Fahmi Khalifa Mansoura University, Egypt
Hosung Kim University of Southern California, USA
Minjeong Kim University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA
xii Organization
Reviewers
Hu Wang Ji Wu
Huan Wang Jian Wu
Kun Wang Jie Ying Wu
Li Wang Pengxiang Wu
Liansheng Wang Xiyin Wu
Linwei Wang Ye Wu
Manning Wang Yicheng Wu
Renzhen Wang Yifan Wu
Ruixuan Wang Tobias Wuerfl
Sheng Wang Pengcheng Xi
Shujun Wang James Xia
Shuo Wang Siyu Xia
Tianchen Wang Wenfeng Xia
Tongxin Wang Yingda Xia
Wenzhe Wang Yong Xia
Xi Wang Lei Xiang
Xiaosong Wang Deqiang Xiao
Yan Wang Li Xiao
Yaping Wang Yiming Xiao
Yi Wang Hongtao Xie
Yirui Wang Lingxi Xie
Zeyi Wang Long Xie
Zhangyang Wang Weidi Xie
Zihao Wang Yiting Xie
Zuhui Wang Yutong Xie
Simon Warfield Xiaohan Xing
Jonathan Weber Chang Xu
Jürgen Weese Chenchu Xu
Dong Wei Hongming Xu
Donglai Wei Kele Xu
Dongming Wei Min Xu
Martin Weigert Rui Xu
Wolfgang Wein Xiaowei Xu
Michael Wels Xuanang Xu
Cédric Wemmert Yongchao Xu
Junhao Wen Zhenghua Xu
Travis Williams Zhoubing Xu
Matthias Wilms Kai Xuan
Stefan Winzeck Cheng Xue
James Wiskin Jie Xue
Adam Wittek Wufeng Xue
Marek Wodzinski Yuan Xue
Jelmer Wolterink Faridah Yahya
Ken C. L. Wong Ke Yan
Chongruo Wu Yuguang Yan
Guoqing Wu Zhennan Yan
Organization xxv
He Zhao Bo Zhou
Jun Zhao Haoyin Zhou
Li Zhao Hong-Yu Zhou
Qingyu Zhao Kang Zhou
Rongchang Zhao Sanping Zhou
Shen Zhao Sihang Zhou
Shijie Zhao Tao Zhou
Tengda Zhao Xiao-Yun Zhou
Tianyi Zhao Yanning Zhou
Wei Zhao Yuyin Zhou
Xuandong Zhao Zongwei Zhou
Yiyuan Zhao Dongxiao Zhu
Yuan-Xing Zhao Hancan Zhu
Yue Zhao Lei Zhu
Zixu Zhao Qikui Zhu
Ziyuan Zhao Xinliang Zhu
Xingjian Zhen Yuemin Zhu
Guoyan Zheng Zhe Zhu
Hao Zheng Zhuotun Zhu
Jiannan Zheng Aneeq Zia
Kang Zheng Veronika Zimmer
Shenhai Zheng David Zimmerer
Yalin Zheng Lilla Zöllei
Yinqiang Zheng Yukai Zou
Yushan Zheng Lianrui Zuo
Jia-Xing Zhong Gerald Zwettler
Zichun Zhong Reyer Zwiggelaar
Outstanding Reviewers
Neel Dey New York University, USA
Monica Hernandez University of Zaragoza, Spain
Ivica Kopriva Rudjer Boskovich Institute, Croatia
Sebastian Otálora University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western
Switzerland, Switzerland
Danielle Pace Massachusetts General Hospital, USA
Sérgio Pereira Lunit Inc., South Korea
David Richmond IBM Watson Health, USA
Rohit Singla University of British Columbia, Canada
Yan Wang Sichuan University, China
Organization xxvii
Image Segmentation
RibSeg Dataset and Strong Point Cloud Baselines for Rib Segmentation
from CT Scans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611
Jiancheng Yang, Shixuan Gu, Donglai Wei, Hanspeter Pfister,
and Bingbing Ni
Zhe Xu1,3 , Donghuan Lu2(B) , Yixin Wang4 , Jie Luo3 , Jagadeesan Jayender3 ,
Kai Ma2 , Yefeng Zheng2 , and Xiu Li1(B)
1
Shenzhen International Graduate School, Tsinghua University, Shenzhen, China
li.xiu@sz.tsinghua.edu.cn
2
Tencent Jarvis Lab, Shenzhen, China
caleblu@tencent.com
3
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
4
Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
1 Introduction
Related Work. Due to the lack of HQ labeled data and the complex morphol-
ogy, few efforts have been made on hepatic vessel segmentation. Huang et al.
applied the U-Net with a new variant Dice loss to balance the foreground (vessel)
and background (liver) classes [8]. Kitrungrotsakul et al. used three deep net-
works to extract the vessel features from different planes of hepatic CT images
[11]. Neglecting the data with LQ annotation because of their potential mislead-
ing guidance, only 10 and 5 HQ labeled volumes were used for training in [8]
and [11], resulting in unsatisfactory performance. To introduce auxiliary image
information from additional dataset, Semi-Supervised Learning (SSL) technique
[4,22,24] is a promising method. However, the standard SSL-based methods fail
to exploit the potential useful information of the noisy label. To make full use
of the LQ labeled data, several efforts have been made to alleviate the negative
effects brought by the noisy labels, such as assigning lower weights to the noisy
labeled samples [18,28], modeling the label corrupting process [7] and confident
learning [17]. However, these studies focused on image-level noise identification,
while the localization of pixel-wise noises is necessary for the segmentation task.
Mean-Teacher-Assisted Confident Learning 5
2 Methods
The detailed explanation of the experimental materials, the hepatic CT prepro-
cessing approach, and the proposed Mean-Teacher-assisted Confident Learning
(MTCL) framework are presented in the following three sections, respectively.
2.1 Materials
Two public datasets, 3DIRCADb [1] and MSD8 [21], with obviously different
qualities of annotation (shown in Fig. 1) are used in this study, tersely referred
as Set-HQ (i.e., high quality) and Set-LQ (i.e., low quality), respectively.
1) Set-HQ: 3DIRCADb [1]. The first dataset, 3DIRCADb, maintained by
the French Institute of Digestive Cancer Treatment, serves as Set-HQ. It only
consists of 20 contrast-enhanced CT hepatic scans with high-quality liver and
vessel annotation. In this dataset, different volumes share the same axial slice
size (512 × 512 pixels), while the pixel spacing varies from 0.57 to 0.87 mm, the
slice thickness varies from 1 to 4 mm, and the slice number is between 74 and
260.
2) Set-LQ: MSD8 [21]. The second dataset MSD8 provides 443 CT hepatic
scans collected from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, serving as the Set-
LQ. The properties of the CT scans are similar to that of the 3DIRCADb dataset
but with low-quality annotations. According to the statistics [15], around 65.5%
of the vessel pixels are unlabeled and approximately 8.5% are mislabeled as
vessels for this dataset, resulting in the necessity of laborious manual refinement
in previous work [15].
In our experiments, the images in Set-HQ are randomly divided into two
groups: 10 cases for training, and the remaining 10 cases for testing, while all
the samples in Set-LQ are only used for training since their original low-quality
noisy labels are not appropriate for unbiased evaluation [15].
6 Z. Xu et al.
Student
Self-loop Update
Robust Pre-process
Img
Prob Map Student Set-LQ Pred SSDM
EMA
Prob Map
Img
… Teacher Set-HQ Pred Identified Noise Map
Abundant LQ Noisy Labeled Data (Set-LQ)
Teacher
CL: Confident Learning CL
SSDM: Smoothly Self-Denoising Module
Teacher Set-LQ Pred Set-LQ Noisy Label
With the constructed confusion matrix C ỹ,y∗ , we can further estimate the
m × m joint distribution matrix Qỹ,y∗ for p (ỹ, y ∗ ):
Cỹ,y∗ [i][j]
Cỹ,y∗ [i][j] · |Xỹ=i |
Qỹ,y∗ [i][j] =
j∈M
. (2)
Cỹ,y∗ [i][j]
i∈M,j∈M
· |Xỹ=i |
j∈M Cỹ,y ∗ [i][j]
Then, we utilize the Prune by Class (PBC) [17] method recommended by [26]
to
identify the label noises. Specifically, for each class i ∈ M , PBC selects the n ·
j∈M :j=i (Q ỹ,y ∗ [i][j]) samples with the lowest self-confidence p̂ (ỹ = i; x ∈ X i )
as the wrong-labeled samples, thereby obtaining the binary noise identification
map Xn , where “1” denotes that the pixel has a wrong label and vice versa. It is
worth noting that the adapted CL module is computationally efficient and does
not require any extra hyper-parameters.
(2) Smoothly refine the noisy labels of Set-LQ to provide rewarding super-
vision. Experimentally, the CL still has uncertainties in distinguishing the label
noises. Therefore, instead of directly imposing the hard-correction, we introduce
the Smoothly Self-Denoising Module (SSDM) to impose a soft correction [2] on
the given noisy segmentation masks ỹ. Based on the binary noise identification
map Xn , the smoothly self-denoising operation can be formulated as follows:
ẏ(x) = ỹ(x) + I(x ∈ Xn ) · (−1)ỹ · τ, (3)
where I(·) is the indicator function, and τ ∈ [0, 1] is the smooth factor, which is
empirically set as 0.8. After that, the updated soft-corrected LQ labels of Set-LQ
are used as the auxiliary CL guidance Lcl to the student model.
(3) Self-loop updating. With the proposed SSDM, we construct a self-loop
updating process that substitutes the noisy labels of Set-LQ with the updated
denoised ones for the next training epoch, so that the framework can progres-
sively refine the noisy vessel labels during training.
Table 1. Quantitative results of different methods. Best results are shown in bold.
Img Prob Map GT U-Net(i) U-Net(p) U-Net(c) U-Net(c, Mix) MTCL(c) (ours)
Fig. 3. Visualization of the fused segmentation results of different methods. The red
voxels represent the ground truth, while the green voxels denote the difference between
the ground truth and the segmented vessel of different methods. (Color figure online)
Kaga, 474
Kaiser Von Japan (syn. of Emperor of Japan), 443
Kaiser Wilhelm, 474
Kalm, Peter, quoted, 20
Kampeska, 474
Kanawha, 474
Karl Koch’s Königs Pflaume (syn. of Koch Königspflaume), 477
Kazan, 474
Keindl’s Violette Königspflaume (syn. of Royale Violette de
Keindl), 535
Keindt, 475
Keindt’s Frühdamascene (syn. of Keindt), 475
Keindt’s Violette Königspflaume (syn. of Royale Violette de
Keindl), 535
Keith, 475
Keiser (syn. of Hulings), 245
Kelley, 475
Kelbalan, 475
Kelmyro, 475
Kelroba, 475
Kelsaw, 475
Kelsey, 258
Kelsey No. 1 (syn. of Kelmyro), 475
Kelsey No. 2 (syn. of Kelroba), 475
Kelsey No. 3 (syn. of Kelbalan), 475
Kelsey Prune, 475
Kelsey’s Japan (syn. of Kelsey), 258
Kelso, 475
Kenellan, 475
Kennedy Red, 475
Kensington Prune (syn. of Holland), 462
Kent, 475
Kentish Bush (syn. of Kent), 476
Kentish Diamond (syn. of Diamond), 191
Kenyon, 476
Kerr, 259
Kerr, J. W., life of, 349-350;
quoted, 98, 115, 118, 171, 422, 495, 508;
var. orig. by, 349, 418, 446, 492, 501, 559, 562
Kester Green Gage, 476
Kester’s Green Gage (syn. of Kester Green Gage), 476
Kester’s Yellow Gage (syn. of Kester Yellow Gage), 476
Kester Yellow Gage, 476
Keyser, var. orig. by, 245
Keyser’s Plum (syn. of Hulings), 245
Kibitzenei (syn. of Small Reine Claude), 347
Kicab, 476
Kickapoo, 476
Kieth (syn. of Keith), 475
Kilpatrick, E. W., var. orig. by, 485
King, 476
King Damson, 259
King of Damsons (syn. of King Damson), 259
King of Plums (syn. of Golden Drop, 229; of Reine Claude, 327)
King of Plums (syn. of King), 476
Kings Plum (syn. of Royal), 534
Kings Plum of Tours (syn. of Royal Tours), 332
Kingston (syn. of Diamond), 191
Kingston, 476
Kirchhof’s Pflaume (syn. of Capitaine Kirchhof), 414
Kirke, 260
Kirke (syn. of Kirke), 260
Kirke’s; Kirke’s Pflaume; Kirke’s Plum; Kirk’s Plum (syns. of
Kirke), 260
Kirke’s Stoneless (syn. of Stoneless), 353
Kirschpflaume (syn. of Myrobalan), 290
Kladrauer Pflaume (syn. of Large Sugar Prune), 480
Klein Weisse Damassener Pflaume (syn. of Small White
Damson), 544
Kleine Blaue Frühzwetsche, 476
Kleine Blaue Julians Pflaume (syn. of Damson, 186; of Saint
Julien, 335)
Kleine Brisette (syn. of Late Mirabelle), 263
Kleine Dauphine (syn. of Small Reine Claude), 347
Kleine Gelbe Eierpflaume, 476
Kleine gelbe Früh Pflaume (syn. of Early Yellow), 203
Kleine Grüne Reine-Claude (syn. of Small Reine Claude), 347
Kleine Kirschpflaume, 476
Kleine Kirschpflaume (syn. of Myrobalan), 290
Kleine Kirsch Pflaume (syn. of Rote Mirabelle), 533
Kleine Mirabelle (syn. of Mirabelle), 284
Kleine Reine-Claude (syn. of Small Reine Claude), 347
Kleine Rosspauke, 476
Kleine Weisse Damascene (syn. of Small Reine Claude, 347; of
Small White Damson, 544)
Kleine Zucker Zwetsche (syn. of Petite Quetsche Sucrée), 515
Kleinste Mirabelle (syn. of Mirabelle), 284
Klondike, 477
Klondyke (syn. of Klondike), 477
Knevett’s Late Orleans (syn. of Nelson), 503
Kniedsen’s Peach (syn. of Knudson), 477
Knight, var. orig. by, 248, 436, 479
Knight’s Green Drying, Large Drying or Large Green Drying
(syns. of Large Green Drying), 479
Knight’s No. 6 (syn. of Ickworth), 247
Knudson, 477
Knudson, H., var. orig. by, 182, 422, 460, 462, 463, 477, 496
Knudson’s Peach (syn. of Knudson), 477
Koa, 477
Koa’s Imperial (syn. of Koa), 477
Kober, 477
Koch, quoted, 17, 18
Koch’s Gelbe Spät Damascene (syn. of Koch Späte
Damascene), 477
Koch Königspflaume, 477
Koch Späte Damascene, 477
Koch’s Späte Aprikosen; Koch’s Späte Damascene (syns. of
Koch Späte Damascene), 477
Koepher, 477
Koetsche (syn. of German Prune), 219
Kohlenkamp, 477
Kohlenkamp, W., var. orig. by, 477
Kohlen Kamp (syn. of Kohlenkamp), 477
Königin Claudia or Klaudia (syns. of Reine Claude), 327
Königin der Mirabellen (syn. of Reine des Mirabelles), 530
Königin Mutter (syn. of Queen Mother), 522
Königin Victoria (syn. of Victoria), 363
Königin von Tours (syn. of Royal Tours), 332
Königliche Grosse Pflaume; Königliche Pflaume von Tours;
Königs Pflaume; Königspflaume von Tours (syns. of Royal
Tours), 332
Königspflaume (syn. of Early Orleans), 198
Königspflaume (syn. of Royal), 534
Königs Pflaume aus Paris; Königspflaume von Paris (syns. of
Perdrigon Tardif), 515
Königspflaume Frühe (syn. of Royale Hâtive de Liegel), 535
Königs Pflaume von Maugerou (syn. of Maugeron), 492
Königspflaume von Trapp’s (syn. of Trapps Königspflaume), 555
König Zwetsche (syn. of Trauttenberg), 555
Kook, var. orig. by, 432
Kook’s Gelbe Diaprée; Kooks Neue Diapre (syn. of Diaprée
Nouvelle De Kook), 432
Kopp, 477
Korai, 478
K. P. 193 (syn. of Purple-leaved Hybrid), 521
Krasnaya osimaya (syn. of Red Winter), 529
Krasnaya Skorospielkaya (syn. of Early Red), 440
Kreger (syn. of Danish Damson), 428
Kreke (syn. of Damson), 186
Kreuters Zwetsche (syn. of Quetsche de Kreuter), 523
Krieche (syn. of Damson), 186
Krieke (syn. of Gemeiner Gelbe Spilling), 451
Kroh, P. H., var. orig. by, 316
Kroh (syn. of Poole Pride), 315
Kroos-Pruim, 478
Krueger (syn. of Danish Damson), 428
Kruger’s Seedling (syn. of Cruger Scarlet), 424
Kuchen Pflaume (syn. of Frankfort Peach), 447
Kume, 478