ArticleeNeuro2024
Real-Time Assessment of Rodent Engagement Using ArUco Markers: A Scalable and Accessible Approach for Scoring Behavior in a Nose-Poking Go/No-Go Task.
Article in eNeuro, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Preliminary Analysis and Proof-of-Concept Validation of a Neuronally Controlled Visual Assistive Device Integrating Computer Vision with EEG-Based Binary Control.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Tailtag: A multi-mouse tracking system to measure social dynamics in complex environments.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025Article
- Investigating the spatial limits of somatotopic and depth-dependent sensory discrimination stimuli in rats via intracortical microstimulation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- A Real-Time Approach for Assessing Rodent Engagement in a Nose-Poking Go/No-Go Behavioral Task Using ArUco Markers.Bio-protocol · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In the field of behavioral neuroscience, the classification and scoring of animal behavior play pivotal roles in the quantification and interpretation of complex behaviors displayed by animals. Traditional methods have relied on video examination by investigators, which is labor-intensive and susceptible to bias. To address these challenges, research efforts have focused on computational methods and image-processing algorithms for automated behavioral classification. Two primary approaches have emerged: marker- and markerless-based tracking systems. In this study, we showcase the utility of "Augmented Reality University of Cordoba" (ArUco) markers as a marker-based tracking approach for assessing rat engagement during a nose-poking go/no-go behavioral task. In addition, we introduce a two-state engagement model based on ArUco marker tracking data that can be analyzed with a rectangular kernel convolution to identify critical transition points between states of engagement and distraction. In this study, we hypothesized that ArUco markers could be utilized to accurately estimate animal engagement in a nose-poking go/no-go behavioral task, enabling the computation of optimal task durations for behavioral testing. Here, we present the performance of our ArUco tracking program, demonstrating a classification accuracy of 98% that was validated against the manual curation of video data. Furthermore, our convolution analysis revealed that, on average, our animals became disengaged with the behavioral task at ∼75 min, providing a quantitative basis for limiting experimental session durations. Overall, our approach offers a scalable, efficient, and accessible solution for automated scoring of rodent engagement during behavioral data collection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.