BEEtag : a low-cost, image-based tracking system for the study of animal behavior and locomotion

A fundamental challenge common to studies of animal movement, behavior, and ecology is the collection of high-quality datasets on spatial positions of animals as they change through space and time. Recent innovations in tracking technology have allowed researchers to collect large and highly accurate datasets on animal spatiotemporal position while vastly decreasing the time and cost of collecting such data. One technique that is of particular relevance to the study of behavioral ecology involves tracking visual tags that can be uniquely identified in separate images or movie frames. These tags can be located within images that are visually complex, making them particularly well suited for longitudinal studies of animal behavior and movement in naturalistic environments. While several software packages have been developed that use computer vision to identify visual tags, these software packages are either (a) not optimized for identification of single tags, which is generally of the most interest for biologist, or (b) suffer from licensing issues, and therefore their use in the study of animal behavior has been limited. Here, we present BEEtag, an open-source, image-based tracking system in Matlab that allows for unique identification of individual animals or anatomical markers. The primary advantages of this system are that it (a) independently identifies animals or marked points in each frame of a video, limiting error propagation, (b) performs well in images with complex background, and (c) is low-cost. To validate the use of this tracking system in animal behavior, we mark and track individual bumblebees (Bombus impatiens) and recover individual patterns of space use and activity within the hive. Finally, we discuss the advantages and limitations of this software package and its application to the study of animal movement, behavior, and ecology.

[1]  A. Pérez-Escudero,et al.  idTracker: tracking individuals in a group by automatic identification of unmarked animals , 2014, Nature Methods.

[2]  Rory P. Wilson,et al.  Trends and perspectives in animal‐attached remote sensing , 2005 .

[3]  A. Crespi,et al.  Tracking Individuals Shows Spatial Fidelity Is a Key Regulator of Ant Social Organization , 2013, Science.

[4]  A. Cressant,et al.  Computerized video analysis of social interactions in mice , 2012, Nature Methods.

[5]  H. Aldridge,et al.  Load Carrying and Maneuverability in an Insectivorous Bat: a Test of the 5% “Rule” of Radio-Telemetry , 1988 .

[6]  L. Chittka,et al.  The evolution of color vision in insects. , 2001, Annual review of entomology.

[7]  T. Seeley,et al.  Collective decision-making in honey bees: how colonies choose among nectar sources , 1991, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[8]  Lars Chittka,et al.  Bumblebee foraging rhythms under the midnight sun measured with radiofrequency identification , 2010, BMC Biology.

[9]  Pietro Perona,et al.  Automated image-based tracking and its application in ecology. , 2014, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[10]  S. Combes,et al.  Linking biomechanics and ecology through predator–prey interactions: flight performance of dragonflies and their prey , 2012, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[11]  Andrew A Biewener,et al.  Running over rough terrain reveals limb control for intrinsic stability , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Tyson L Hedrick,et al.  Software techniques for two- and three-dimensional kinematic measurements of biological and biomimetic systems , 2008, Bioinspiration & biomimetics.

[13]  J. Wakeling,et al.  Dragonfly flight. I. Gliding flight and steady-state aerodynamic forces. , 1997, The Journal of experimental biology.

[14]  Gordon J. Berman,et al.  Automated hull reconstruction motion tracking (HRMT) applied to sideways maneuvers of free-flying insects , 2009, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[15]  S. Combes,et al.  Rolling with the flow: bumblebees flying in unsteady wakes , 2013, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[16]  Jamey S. Kain,et al.  Leg-tracking and automated behavioural classification in Drosophila , 2012, Nature Communications.

[17]  David N. Bonter,et al.  Applications of radio frequency identification (RFID) in ornithological research: a review , 2011 .

[18]  Mickaël Henry,et al.  A Common Pesticide Decreases Foraging Success and Survival in Honey Bees , 2012, Science.

[19]  R J Full,et al.  How animals move: an integrative view. , 2000, Science.

[20]  C. J. Clark,et al.  Three-dimensional kinematics of hummingbird flight , 2007, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[21]  R. E. Page,et al.  Effect of pheromones, hormones, and handling on sucrose response thresholds of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) , 2003, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[22]  Mark Fiala,et al.  ARTag, a fiducial marker system using digital techniques , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[23]  Pietro Perona,et al.  High-throughput Ethomics in Large Groups of Drosophila , 2009, Nature Methods.

[24]  R C Newberry,et al.  Appearance matters: artificial marking alters aggression and stress. , 2008, Poultry science.

[25]  Wolfgang Heidrich,et al.  CALTag: High Precision Fiducial Markers for Camera Calibration , 2010, VMV.

[26]  William Bialek,et al.  Mapping the stereotyped behaviour of freely moving fruit flies , 2013, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[27]  H. Schwabl,et al.  Plasma corticosterone in nestling american kestrels: effects of age, handling stress, yolk androgens, and body condition. , 2001, General and comparative endocrinology.