Comparison of automated video tracking systems in the open field test: ANY-Maze versus EthoVision XT

Charmaine J M Lim; Bettina Platt; Sanna K Janhunen; Gernot Riedel

doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940

Comparison of automated video tracking systems in the open field test: ANY-Maze versus EthoVision XT

Charmaine J M Lim, Bettina Platt, Sanna K Janhunen, Gernot Riedel^* (Corresponding Author)

^*Corresponding author for this work

Forendo Pharma

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: ANY-Maze and EthoVision XT are two commonly used automated animal tracking systems employed to produce reliable and consistent results in behavioural paradigms. Data obtained with both tracking systems have presented differences, particularly when varying laboratory lighting conditions and contrasts of mice coat colour against the arena background in both water maze and tunnel maze.

METHOD: In this study, two fluorescent lighting conditions (58 and 295 lux), local to our laboratory, and different coat-coloured mouse lines (C57BL/6 J - black; CD1 - agouti; C3H/HeN - white) were used to compare reproducibility in measures of tracking systems (ANY-Maze versus EthoVision) in the open field test.

RESULTS: Differences between systems were reliant on the contrasts between coat and background colours. Surprisingly, black animals presented the greatest differences in read-outs between tracking systems, regardless of lighting conditions. Data from both video observation tools differed mainly in exploration-related parameters (distance travelled), but less in more static proxies (time in thigmotaxis zone). Overall, EthoVision XT returned higher values for most parameters analysed relative to ANY-Maze. More inconsistencies in recording and analysis can be expected from other video recording systems.

CONCLUSION: Data analysis software provides an additional source of variation in need of consideration when reproducibility in behavioural neuroscience is required.

Original language	English
Article number	109940
Number of pages	13
Journal	Journal of Neuroscience Methods
Volume	397
Early online date	9 Aug 2023
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940
Publication status	Published - 1 Sept 2023

Bibliographical note

This project included funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2/EFPIA, European Quality in Preclinical Data (EQIPD) consortium under grant agreement number 777364. We would also like to acknowledge the staff of the Medical Research Facility for their support with animal care, handling and behavioural experiments.

Data Availability Statement

All data are provided within the manuscript.

Keywords

video observation
animal tracking
mouse
light intensity

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940Licence: Unspecified

Lim_etal_JNM_Comparison_of_Automated_AAM
Accepted Manuscript has been made open access in accordance with the University of Aberdeen Rights Retention Policy. This manuscript is available on a CC BY 4.0 licencehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Final published version available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940
Accepted author manuscript, 3.45 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{c32307a4fbbd4ca484e93dc8aa34bec4,

title = "Comparison of automated video tracking systems in the open field test: ANY-Maze versus EthoVision XT",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: ANY-Maze and EthoVision XT are two commonly used automated animal tracking systems employed to produce reliable and consistent results in behavioural paradigms. Data obtained with both tracking systems have presented differences, particularly when varying laboratory lighting conditions and contrasts of mice coat colour against the arena background in both water maze and tunnel maze.METHOD: In this study, two fluorescent lighting conditions (58 and 295 lux), local to our laboratory, and different coat-coloured mouse lines (C57BL/6 J - black; CD1 - agouti; C3H/HeN - white) were used to compare reproducibility in measures of tracking systems (ANY-Maze versus EthoVision) in the open field test.RESULTS: Differences between systems were reliant on the contrasts between coat and background colours. Surprisingly, black animals presented the greatest differences in read-outs between tracking systems, regardless of lighting conditions. Data from both video observation tools differed mainly in exploration-related parameters (distance travelled), but less in more static proxies (time in thigmotaxis zone). Overall, EthoVision XT returned higher values for most parameters analysed relative to ANY-Maze. More inconsistencies in recording and analysis can be expected from other video recording systems.CONCLUSION: Data analysis software provides an additional source of variation in need of consideration when reproducibility in behavioural neuroscience is required.",

keywords = "video observation, animal tracking, mouse, light intensity",

author = "Lim, {Charmaine J M} and Bettina Platt and Janhunen, {Sanna K} and Gernot Riedel",

note = "This project included funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2/EFPIA, European Quality in Preclinical Data (EQIPD) consortium under grant agreement number 777364. We would also like to acknowledge the staff of the Medical Research Facility for their support with animal care, handling and behavioural experiments.",

year = "2023",

month = sep,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940",

language = "English",

volume = "397",

journal = "Journal of Neuroscience Methods",

issn = "0165-0270",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of automated video tracking systems in the open field test

T2 - ANY-Maze versus EthoVision XT

AU - Lim, Charmaine J M

AU - Platt, Bettina

AU - Janhunen, Sanna K

AU - Riedel, Gernot

N1 - This project included funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2/EFPIA, European Quality in Preclinical Data (EQIPD) consortium under grant agreement number 777364. We would also like to acknowledge the staff of the Medical Research Facility for their support with animal care, handling and behavioural experiments.

PY - 2023/9/1

Y1 - 2023/9/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: ANY-Maze and EthoVision XT are two commonly used automated animal tracking systems employed to produce reliable and consistent results in behavioural paradigms. Data obtained with both tracking systems have presented differences, particularly when varying laboratory lighting conditions and contrasts of mice coat colour against the arena background in both water maze and tunnel maze.METHOD: In this study, two fluorescent lighting conditions (58 and 295 lux), local to our laboratory, and different coat-coloured mouse lines (C57BL/6 J - black; CD1 - agouti; C3H/HeN - white) were used to compare reproducibility in measures of tracking systems (ANY-Maze versus EthoVision) in the open field test.RESULTS: Differences between systems were reliant on the contrasts between coat and background colours. Surprisingly, black animals presented the greatest differences in read-outs between tracking systems, regardless of lighting conditions. Data from both video observation tools differed mainly in exploration-related parameters (distance travelled), but less in more static proxies (time in thigmotaxis zone). Overall, EthoVision XT returned higher values for most parameters analysed relative to ANY-Maze. More inconsistencies in recording and analysis can be expected from other video recording systems.CONCLUSION: Data analysis software provides an additional source of variation in need of consideration when reproducibility in behavioural neuroscience is required.

AB - BACKGROUND: ANY-Maze and EthoVision XT are two commonly used automated animal tracking systems employed to produce reliable and consistent results in behavioural paradigms. Data obtained with both tracking systems have presented differences, particularly when varying laboratory lighting conditions and contrasts of mice coat colour against the arena background in both water maze and tunnel maze.METHOD: In this study, two fluorescent lighting conditions (58 and 295 lux), local to our laboratory, and different coat-coloured mouse lines (C57BL/6 J - black; CD1 - agouti; C3H/HeN - white) were used to compare reproducibility in measures of tracking systems (ANY-Maze versus EthoVision) in the open field test.RESULTS: Differences between systems were reliant on the contrasts between coat and background colours. Surprisingly, black animals presented the greatest differences in read-outs between tracking systems, regardless of lighting conditions. Data from both video observation tools differed mainly in exploration-related parameters (distance travelled), but less in more static proxies (time in thigmotaxis zone). Overall, EthoVision XT returned higher values for most parameters analysed relative to ANY-Maze. More inconsistencies in recording and analysis can be expected from other video recording systems.CONCLUSION: Data analysis software provides an additional source of variation in need of consideration when reproducibility in behavioural neuroscience is required.

KW - video observation

KW - animal tracking

KW - mouse

KW - light intensity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85166979582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940

DO - 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2023.109940

M3 - Article

C2 - 37544382

SN - 0165-0270

VL - 397

JO - Journal of Neuroscience Methods

JF - Journal of Neuroscience Methods

M1 - 109940

ER -

Comparison of automated video tracking systems in the open field test: ANY-Maze versus EthoVision XT

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Data Availability Statement

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this