Action detection using a neural network elucidates the genetics of mouse grooming behavior

Abstract

Automated detection of complex animal behaviors remains a challenging problem in neuroscience, particularly for behaviors that consist of disparate sequential motions. Grooming is a prototypical stereotyped behavior and is often used as an endophenotype in psychiatric genetics. Here, we used mouse grooming behavior as an example and developed a general purpose neural network architecture capable of dynamic action detection at human observer-level performance and operating across dozens of mouse strains with high visual diversity. We provide insights into the amount of human annotated training data that are needed to achieve such performance. We surveyed grooming behavior in the open field in 2,457 mice across 62 strains, determined its heritable components, conducted GWAS to outline its genetic architecture, and performed PheWAS to link human psychiatric traits through shared underlying genetics. Our general machine learning solution that automatically classifies complex behaviors in large datasets will facilitate systematic studies of behavioral mechanisms.

Data availability

The all machine learning datasets are available here: https://www.kumarlab.org/2021/03/11/grooming-behavioral-data/ The code is available here: https://github.com/KumarLabJax/MouseGrooming Behavioral data has been deposited into Mouse Phenome Database. The access for this data will be https://mpdpreview.jax.org/projects/Project1051

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Brian Q Geuther

    Mammalian Genetics, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Asaf Peer

    Mammalian Genetics, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7577-353X
  3. Hao He

    Mammalian Genetics, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Gautam Sabnis

    Mammalian Genetics, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Vivek M Philip

    Mammalian Genetics, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Vivek Kumar

    Mammalian Genetics, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    For correspondence
    Vivek.Kumar@jax.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6643-7465

Funding

Jackson Laboratory Director's Innovation Fund

  • Vivek Kumar

National Institutes of Health (DA041668)

  • Vivek Kumar

National Institutes of Health (DA048634)

  • Vivek Kumar

National Science Foundation (TG-DBS170004)

  • Vivek Kumar

Brain and Behavioral Foundation

  • Vivek Kumar

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All studies were performed in accordance with approved protocols from The Jackson Laboratory Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee guidelines (Animal Protocol Number 14010).

Copyright

© 2021, Geuther 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

  • 4,336
    views
  • 540
    downloads
  • 47
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

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. Brian Q Geuther
  2. Asaf Peer
  3. Hao He
  4. Gautam Sabnis
  5. Vivek M Philip
  6. Vivek Kumar
(2021)
Action detection using a neural network elucidates the genetics of mouse grooming behavior
eLife 10:e63207.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63207

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63207

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Ju Kang, Shijie Zhang ... Xin Wang
    Research Article

    Explaining biodiversity is a fundamental issue in ecology. A long-standing puzzle lies in the paradox of the plankton: many species of plankton feeding on a limited variety of resources coexist, apparently flouting the competitive exclusion principle (CEP), which holds that the number of predator (consumer) species cannot exceed that of the resources at a steady state. Here, we present a mechanistic model and demonstrate that intraspecific interference among the consumers enables a plethora of consumer species to coexist at constant population densities with only one or a handful of resource species. This facilitated biodiversity is resistant to stochasticity, either with the stochastic simulation algorithm or individual-based modeling. Our model naturally explains the classical experiments that invalidate the CEP, quantitatively illustrates the universal S-shaped pattern of the rank-abundance curves across a wide range of ecological communities, and can be broadly used to resolve the mystery of biodiversity in many natural ecosystems.

    1. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Miguel Martinez-Ara, Federico Comoglio, Bas van Steensel
    Research Article

    Genes are often regulated by multiple enhancers. It is poorly understood how the individual enhancer activities are combined to control promoter activity. Anecdotal evidence has shown that enhancers can combine sub-additively, additively, synergistically, or redundantly. However, it is not clear which of these modes are more frequent in mammalian genomes. Here, we systematically tested how pairs of enhancers activate promoters using a three-way combinatorial reporter assay in mouse embryonic stem cells. By assaying about 69,000 enhancer-enhancer-promoter combinations we found that enhancer pairs generally combine near-additively. This behaviour was conserved across seven developmental promoters tested. Surprisingly, these promoters scale the enhancer signals in a non-linear manner that depends on promoter strength. A housekeeping promoter showed an overall different response to enhancer pairs, and a smaller dynamic range. Thus, our data indicate that enhancers mostly act additively, but promoters transform their collective effect non-linearly.