Literature DB >> 30118724

A comparison of the Avisoft (5.2) and Ultravox (2.0) recording systems: Implications for early-life communication and vocalization research.

Matthew S Binder1, Christian J Hernandez-Zegada1, Christian T Potter1, Suzanne O Nolan1, Joaquin N Lugo2.   

Abstract

Alterations in early-life communicative behaviors are a common feature of neurodevelopmental conditions, such as autism and epilepsy. One method of investigating communication in murine models is through analyzing ultrasonic vocalizations. These vocalizations are commonly recorded with either the Avisoft or the Ultravox recording programs. However, since no study has compared whether the systems are equally sensitive, the findings in one program may not be reproducible in the other. To directly compare the two programs, we elicited vocalizations from male and female 129SvEvTac and C57BL/6 mouse pups via the maternal isolation paradigm, recording vocalizations simultaneously with both systems. We held the detection parameters identical for each system and found that there was only a medium correlation between Avisoft and Ultravox overall. Further analysis indicated that Avisoft detected more total vocalizations, as well as more vocalizations at the set frequencies of 50, 60, and 70 kHz than Ultravox, p <  .05. No statistically significant difference was present at 80 kHz. These findings demonstrate that different recording systems do not detect the same quantity of vocalizations as one another, even when detection parameters are congruent. Therefore, it may be useful to revisit previous negative results obtained with Ultravox and repeat the experiments using Avisoft. Ultimately, ultrasonic vocalizations are a valuable tool, capable of examining early-life phenotypes. However, a more thorough understanding of the relationships between recording systems is necessary to achieve a more comprehensive and reproducible assessment of vocalizing behaviors.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  129SvEvTac; Autism; BL/6; Neurodevelopment; Reproducibility; Ultrasonic vocalizations

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30118724     DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2018.08.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci Methods        ISSN: 0165-0270            Impact factor:   2.390


  4 in total

1.  High seizure load during sensitive periods of development leads to broad shifts in ultrasonic vocalization behavior in neonatal male and female C57BL/6J mice.

Authors:  Suzanne O Nolan; Samantha L Hodges; Siena M Condon; Ilyasah D A Muhammed; Lindsay A Tomac; Matthew S Binder; Conner D Reynolds; Joaquin N Lugo
Journal:  Epilepsy Behav       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 2.937

2.  Capturing the songs of mice with an improved detection and classification method for ultrasonic vocalizations (BootSnap).

Authors:  Reyhaneh Abbasi; Peter Balazs; Maria Adelaide Marconi; Doris Nicolakis; Sarah M Zala; Dustin J Penn
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 4.779

3.  A comparison of the Avisoft (v.5.2) and MATLAB Mouse Song Analyzer (v.1.3) vocalization analysis systems in C57BL/6, Fmr1-FVB.129, NS-Pten-FVB, and 129 mice.

Authors:  Matthew Binder; Suzanne O Nolan; Joaquin N Lugo
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 2.390

4.  Utilizing DeepSqueak for automatic detection and classification of mammalian vocalizations: a case study on primate vocalizations.

Authors:  Daniel Romero-Mujalli; Tjard Bergmann; Axel Zimmermann; Marina Scheumann
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.