2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.11.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Noninvasive dissection of mouse sleep using a piezoelectric motion sensor

Abstract: Background Changes in autonomic control cause regular breathing during NREM sleep to fluctuate during REM. Piezoelectric cage-floor sensors have been used to successfully discriminate sleep and wake states in mice based on signal features related to respiration and other movements. This study presents a classifier for noninvasively classifying REM and NREM using a piezoelectric sensor. New Method Vigilance state was scored manually in 4-second epochs for 24-hour EEG/EMG recordings in twenty mice. An unsuperv… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
63
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
63
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This level of agreement is better than that previously reported using a different non-invasive technique (video recordings), for which the overall error rate was 23.3% 28 . Our WBP-method showed slightly lower specificity (−5%, −7% and −7% for W, NREMS and REMS detection, respectively) compared with another non-invasive (piezoelectric sensor-based) behavioral scoring method 29 , but performed much better in terms of sensitivity (+6%, +17%, and +14%, for W, NREMS and REMS detection, respectively). The WBP and piezoelectric sensor technologies are, however, very different: the latter relies on physical contact between the mouse and detector on the cage floor whereas the former does not.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…This level of agreement is better than that previously reported using a different non-invasive technique (video recordings), for which the overall error rate was 23.3% 28 . Our WBP-method showed slightly lower specificity (−5%, −7% and −7% for W, NREMS and REMS detection, respectively) compared with another non-invasive (piezoelectric sensor-based) behavioral scoring method 29 , but performed much better in terms of sensitivity (+6%, +17%, and +14%, for W, NREMS and REMS detection, respectively). The WBP and piezoelectric sensor technologies are, however, very different: the latter relies on physical contact between the mouse and detector on the cage floor whereas the former does not.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
“…However, in HKA system, simple A/D converter directly detects animal's natural behavior without any additional devices. The simplicity of data acquisition process is where HKA system has huge benefits over other recording systems that uses specific sensors [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have been several approaches proposed to monitor natural activities, including vibration detecting system [ 16 17 18 ], home cage system [ 16 19 20 ], beam break system [ 16 ], video monitoring system [ 16 21 ], RFID recording system [ 16 22 ], and piezo-sensor system [ 23 ]. While these systems were successful in terms of detecting natural animal behaviors, none of these systems seems to achieve noticeable cost reduction compared to WRA system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The differences in sleep/wake as determined by EEG/EMG and piezoelectric monitoring in the current study are likely due to the different environments used for recording. Future studies are needed in which simultaneous piezoelectric EEG/EMG recordings are collected during the dark period from narcoleptic mice to assess cataplexy detection using an unsupervised algorithm that has been tuned to extract features of REM sleep (32) to determine if cataplexy can be identified by piezoelectric monitoring.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%