Analysis of ultrasonic vocalizations from mice using computer vision and machine learning

  1. Antonio H O Fonseca  Is a corresponding author
  2. Gustavo M Santana  Is a corresponding author
  3. Gabriela M Bosque Ortiz  Is a corresponding author
  4. Sérgio Bampi  Is a corresponding author
  5. Marcelo O Dietrich  Is a corresponding author
  1. Yale University, United States
  2. Yale University School of Medicine, United States
  3. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Abstract

Mice emit ultrasonic vocalizations (USV) that communicate socially-relevant information. To detect and classify these USVs, here we describe VocalMat. VocalMat is a software that uses image-processing and differential geometry approaches to detect USVs in audio files, eliminating the need for user-defined parameters. VocalMat also uses computational vision and machine learning methods to classify USVs into distinct categories. In a dataset of >4,000 USVs emitted by mice, VocalMat detected over 98% of manually labeled USVs and accurately classified ~86% of the USVs out of eleven USV categories. We then used dimensionality reduction tools to analyze the probability distribution of USV classification among different experimental groups, providing a robust method to quantify and qualify the vocal repertoire of mice. Thus, VocalMat makes it possible to perform automated, accurate, and quantitative analysis of USVs without the need for user inputs, opening the opportunity for detailed and high-throughput analysis of this behavior.

Data availability

All the data and code used in this work is publicly available and can be found in the links below: https://osf.io/bk2uj/https://www.dietrich-lab.org/vocalmatThis information is also present in the manuscript at section 4.12 (Code and data availability).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Antonio H O Fonseca

    Comparative Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    For correspondence
    antonio.fonseca@yale.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Gustavo M Santana

    Comparative Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    For correspondence
    gustavo.santana@yale.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1897-1625
  3. Gabriela M Bosque Ortiz

    Comparative Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    For correspondence
    gabriela.borque@yale.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Sérgio Bampi

    Computer Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
    For correspondence
    bampi@inf.ufrgs.br
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Marcelo O Dietrich

    Comparative Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    For correspondence
    marcelo.dietrich@yale.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9781-2221

Funding

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (Gilliam Fellowship)

  • Gabriela M Bosque Ortiz
  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Brain and Behavior Research Foundation

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Whitehall Foundation

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Charles H. Hood Foundation

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Foundation for Prader-Willi Research

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Reginald and Michiko Spector Award in Neuroscience

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico

  • Sérgio Bampi
  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior

  • Antonio H O Fonseca
  • Gustavo M Santana
  • Sérgio Bampi
  • Marcelo O Dietrich

Yale Center for Clinical Investigation Scholar Award

  • Marcelo O Dietrich

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Tali Kimchi, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. The protocol was reviewed and approved by the Yale University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). All of the animals were handled according to the approved IACUC protocol (#2018-20042) of the Yale University School of Medicine.

Version history

  1. Received: May 21, 2020
  2. Accepted: March 30, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 31, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 20, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Fonseca et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,137
    Page views
  • 549
    Downloads
  • 29
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Antonio H O Fonseca
  2. Gustavo M Santana
  3. Gabriela M Bosque Ortiz
  4. Sérgio Bampi
  5. Marcelo O Dietrich
(2021)
Analysis of ultrasonic vocalizations from mice using computer vision and machine learning
eLife 10:e59161.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.59161

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.59161

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Kiwamu Kudo, Kamalini G Ranasinghe ... Srikantan S Nagarajan
    Research Article

    Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β and misfolded tau proteins causing synaptic dysfunction, and progressive neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. Altered neural oscillations have been consistently demonstrated in AD. However, the trajectories of abnormal neural oscillations in AD progression and their relationship to neurodegeneration and cognitive decline are unknown. Here, we deployed robust event-based sequencing models (EBMs) to investigate the trajectories of long-range and local neural synchrony across AD stages, estimated from resting-state magnetoencephalography. The increases in neural synchrony in the delta-theta band and the decreases in the alpha and beta bands showed progressive changes throughout the stages of the EBM. Decreases in alpha and beta band synchrony preceded both neurodegeneration and cognitive decline, indicating that frequency-specific neuronal synchrony abnormalities are early manifestations of AD pathophysiology. The long-range synchrony effects were greater than the local synchrony, indicating a greater sensitivity of connectivity metrics involving multiple regions of the brain. These results demonstrate the evolution of functional neuronal deficits along the sequence of AD progression.

    1. Medicine
    2. Neuroscience
    Luisa Fassi, Shachar Hochman ... Roi Cohen Kadosh
    Research Article

    In recent years, there has been debate about the effectiveness of treatments from different fields, such as neurostimulation, neurofeedback, brain training, and pharmacotherapy. This debate has been fuelled by contradictory and nuanced experimental findings. Notably, the effectiveness of a given treatment is commonly evaluated by comparing the effect of the active treatment versus the placebo on human health and/or behaviour. However, this approach neglects the individual’s subjective experience of the type of treatment she or he received in establishing treatment efficacy. Here, we show that individual differences in subjective treatment - the thought of receiving the active or placebo condition during an experiment - can explain variability in outcomes better than the actual treatment. We analysed four independent datasets (N = 387 participants), including clinical patients and healthy adults from different age groups who were exposed to different neurostimulation treatments (transcranial magnetic stimulation: Studies 1 and 2; transcranial direct current stimulation: Studies 3 and 4). Our findings show that the inclusion of subjective treatment can provide a better model fit either alone or in interaction with objective treatment (defined as the condition to which participants are assigned in the experiment). These results demonstrate the significant contribution of subjective experience in explaining the variability of clinical, cognitive, and behavioural outcomes. We advocate for existing and future studies in clinical and non-clinical research to start accounting for participants’ subjective beliefs and their interplay with objective treatment when assessing the efficacy of treatments. This approach will be crucial in providing a more accurate estimation of the treatment effect and its source, allowing the development of effective and reproducible interventions.