» Articles » PMID: 34326537

A Review of 28 Free Animal-tracking Software Applications: Current Features and Limitations

Overview
Journal Lab Anim (NY)
Date 2021 Jul 30
PMID 34326537
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Well-quantified laboratory studies can provide a fundamental understanding of animal behavior in ecology, ethology and ecotoxicology research. These types of studies require observation and tracking of each animal in well-controlled and defined arenas, often for long timescales. Thus, these experiments produce long time series and a vast amount of data that require the use of software applications to automate the analysis and reduce manual annotation. In this review, we examine 28 free software applications for animal tracking to guide researchers in selecting the software that might best suit a particular experiment. We also review the algorithms in the tracking pipeline of the applications, explain how specific techniques can fit different experiments, and finally, expose each approach's weaknesses and strengths. Our in-depth review includes last update, type of platform, user-friendliness, off- or online video acquisition, calibration method, background subtraction and segmentation method, species, multiple arenas, multiple animals, identity preservation, manual identity correction, data analysis and extra features. We found, for example, that out of 28 programs, only 3 include a calibration algorithm to reduce image distortion and perspective problems that affect accuracy and can result in substantial errors when analyzing trajectories and extracting mobility or explored distance. In addition, only 4 programs can directly export in-depth tracking and analysis metrics, only 5 are suited for tracking multiple unmarked animals for more than a few seconds and only 11 have been updated in the period 2019-2021.

Citing Articles

Zebrafish identification with deep CNN and ViT architectures using a rolling training window.

Puchalla J, Serianni A, Deng B Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):8580.

PMID: 40074729 PMC: 11903894. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-86351-x.


Tracking puppy development: automated analysis and qualitative behavioral assessment in repeated open field tests.

Kockaya M, Isparta S, Reinhardt P, Kilic K, Gulec E, Karaagac A Vet Res Commun. 2024; 49(1):35.

PMID: 39585512 DOI: 10.1007/s11259-024-10581-z.


Segmentation tracking and clustering system enables accurate multi-animal tracking of social behaviors.

Tang C, Zhou Y, Zhao S, Xie M, Zhang R, Long X Patterns (N Y). 2024; 5(11):101057.

PMID: 39568468 PMC: 11573910. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2024.101057.


Metabolic plasticity drives mismatches in physiological traits between prey and predator.

Affinito F, Kordas R, Matias M, Pawar S Commun Biol. 2024; 7(1):653.

PMID: 38806643 PMC: 11133466. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-024-06350-y.


Learning Rich Feature Representation and State Change Monitoring for Accurate Animal Target Tracking.

Yin K, Feng J, Dong S Animals (Basel). 2024; 14(6).

PMID: 38539999 PMC: 10967546. DOI: 10.3390/ani14060902.


References
1.
Dell A, Bender J, Branson K, Couzin I, de Polavieja G, Noldus L . Automated image-based tracking and its application in ecology. Trends Ecol Evol. 2014; 29(7):417-28. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2014.05.004. View

2.
Hajar R . Animal testing and medicine. Heart Views. 2011; 12(1):42. PMC: 3123518. DOI: 10.4103/1995-705X.81548. View

3.
Carola V, DOlimpio F, Brunamonti E, Mangia F, Renzi P . Evaluation of the elevated plus-maze and open-field tests for the assessment of anxiety-related behaviour in inbred mice. Behav Brain Res. 2002; 134(1-2):49-57. DOI: 10.1016/s0166-4328(01)00452-1. View

4.
Olton D . Mazes, maps, and memory. Am Psychol. 1979; 34(7):583-96. DOI: 10.1037//0003-066x.34.7.583. View

5.
Silverman J, Babineau B, Oliver C, Karras M, Crawley J . Influence of stimulant-induced hyperactivity on social approach in the BTBR mouse model of autism. Neuropharmacology. 2012; 68:210-22. PMC: 3522798. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2012.07.042. View