2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2011.12.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ETHOWATCHER: validation of a tool for behavioral and video-tracking analysis in laboratory animals

Abstract: We present a software (ETHOWATCHER(®)) developed to support ethography, object tracking and extraction of kinematic variables from digital video files of laboratory animals. The tracking module allows controlled segmentation of the target from the background, extracting image attributes used to calculate the distance traveled, orientation, length, area and a path graph of the experimental animal. The ethography module allows recording of catalog-based behaviors from environment or from video files continuously… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 105 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Locomotor activity ( total distance ) of the animals was analyzed offline by means of the digital tracking software Viewer 3 (Bioobserve GmbH). Total time spent in each compartment was evaluated by an investigator using EthoWatcher software (Crispim Junior et al, 2012). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Locomotor activity ( total distance ) of the animals was analyzed offline by means of the digital tracking software Viewer 3 (Bioobserve GmbH). Total time spent in each compartment was evaluated by an investigator using EthoWatcher software (Crispim Junior et al, 2012). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After sanitizing the arena with Quatricide TB, 70%EtOH, and distilled water, mice were individually placed inside and allowed to explore for 10 min before being returned to their home cage. Videos were analyzed offline using behavioral analysis software Ethowatcher (Crispim Junior et al, 2012) to measure indices of anxiety and locomotion.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, automated algorithms may provide better scoring than humans in some cases (Desland et al, 2014) but may also provide less accurate and detailed analysis than humans in certain other cases, as in the forced swim test (distinguishing fine transitions between swimming, climbing and immobility behaviors) and novel object recognition (distinguishing active interest toward the object vs. near vicinity of the animal's head). Several attempts have been done over the last 20 years to develop open-source or freely available computer programs for scoring animal behavior (Moraes and Ferrarezi, 1997; Ottoni, 2000; Taiwanica, 2000; Patel et al, 2006; Poirrier et al, 2006; Aguiar et al, 2007; Blumstein and Daniel, 2007; Otero et al, 2010; Crispim Junior et al, 2012; de Chaumont et al, 2012; Telonis and Margarity, 2015; Friard et al, 2016). Some of those attempts resulted in outdated and probably not under active development computer programs, some were focused on specific models that could not be easily modified for other settings, and some resulted in elaborat solutions that required a significant investment in human resources to develop, adapt and operate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%