Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Interviews
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About JEB
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Journal Meetings
    • Workshops
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Outstanding paper prize
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JEB
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • For library administrators
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Experimental Biology
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

supporting biologistsinspiring biology

Journal of Experimental Biology

  • Log in
Advanced search

RSS  Twitter  Facebook  YouTube  

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Interviews
    • Sign up for alerts
  • About us
    • About JEB
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Journal Meetings
    • Workshops
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Outstanding paper prize
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Sign up for alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JEB
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
    • For library administrators
METHODS & TECHNIQUES
An exploratory clustering approach for extracting stride parameters from tracking collars on free-ranging wild animals
Oliver P. Dewhirst, Kyle Roskilly, Tatjana Y. Hubel, Neil R. Jordan, Krystyna A. Golabek, J. Weldon McNutt, Alan M. Wilson
Journal of Experimental Biology 2017 220: 341-346; doi: 10.1242/jeb.146035
Oliver P. Dewhirst
1Structure and Motion Laboratory, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, Hatfield AL9 7TA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Oliver P. Dewhirst
  • For correspondence: odewhirst@rvc.ac.uk
Kyle Roskilly
1Structure and Motion Laboratory, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, Hatfield AL9 7TA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tatjana Y. Hubel
1Structure and Motion Laboratory, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, Hatfield AL9 7TA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Neil R. Jordan
2Botswana Predator Conservation Trust, Maun, Botswana
3Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
4Taronga Conservation Society Australia, Applied Eco-Logic Group, Taronga Western Plains Zoo, Obley Road, Dubbo, NSW 2830, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Krystyna A. Golabek
2Botswana Predator Conservation Trust, Maun, Botswana
3Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Weldon McNutt
2Botswana Predator Conservation Trust, Maun, Botswana
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alan M. Wilson
1Structure and Motion Laboratory, Royal Veterinary College, University of London, Hatfield AL9 7TA, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Changes in stride frequency and length with speed are key parameters in animal locomotion research. They are commonly measured in a laboratory on a treadmill or by filming trained captive animals. Here, we show that a clustering approach can be used to extract these variables from data collected by a tracking collar containing a GPS module and tri-axis accelerometers and gyroscopes. The method enables stride parameters to be measured during free-ranging locomotion in natural habitats. As it does not require labelled data, it is particularly suitable for use with difficult to observe animals. The method was tested on large data sets collected from collars on free-ranging lions and African wild dogs and validated using a domestic dog.

INTRODUCTION

Changes in stride frequency and length with speed are key parameters in human locomotion research (Maculewicz et al., 2016; Muro-de-la-Herran et al., 2014) and are routinely used in quadruped locomotion research (Heglund and Taylor, 1988; Jayne and Irschick, 2000; Smith et al., 2015; Sue et al., 2011; Witte et al., 2006). Measurement of these parameters enables the locomotor strategy used by an animal to attain a particular speed to be determined. They are commonly measured in laboratory-based experiments using a treadmill or by filming trained captive animals (Hudson et al., 2012; Williams et al., 2014). These approaches provide estimates for movement over uniform terrain with a constant velocity (steady locomotion) (Bertram, 2016). They are, however, not ideal for species that are difficult to handle or observe (e.g. lions or African wild dogs). Captive animals may not show the same locomotor characteristics as wild animals (Hudson et al., 2012; Williams et al., 2014) and treadmill locomotion can modify gait patterns (Blaszczyk and Loeb, 1993).

These limitations have been overcome by the development of animal tracking collars combining Global Positioning System (GPS) and inertial measurement units (IMUs) (accelerometers/gyroscopes) which can be sampled at high data rates (>5 Hz). The detailed data these produce provide the potential to quantify how stride frequency and length vary with speed under natural conditions. In a typical deployment of several months, these collars capture large quantities of data (tens of thousands of strides), so to achieve realistic workloads an automated analysis system is required. Such a system needs to be able to remove periods of non-steady locomotion and segment the data into strides. Previous studies trained animals to move at steady speeds and removed non-steady locomotion by using a threshold based on speed (Maes et al., 2008) and velocity heading (Daley et al., 2016). Stride segmentation has been carried out using supervised machine learning (Mannini and Sabatini, 2012; Pfau et al., 2008). This method requires data to be collected while the animal is being viewed (labelled data) and this is challenging for difficult to observe wild species.

Clustering (unsupervised machine learning) is an exploratory approach that aims to find groups in data. It is ideally suited for use with the data collected from collars on difficult to observe animals as it does not require labelled data. This approach has previously been applied to characterise the behaviours of birds (Sakamoto et al., 2009) and humans (Trabelsi et al., 2013). To our knowledge, it has not been applied to the problem of stride segmentation in quadrupeds.

We developed an algorithm to estimate stride frequency and length during steady locomotion using a clustering approach. It was tested on large data sets collected from collars on African wild dogs (3290 strides) and lions (10,480 strides) and validated using a domestic dog.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data collection

Data were collected from two female adult lions, a male and a female African wild dog and a lurcher using custom-built Royal Veterinary College (RVC) GPS-enabled wildlife collars (Wilson et al., 2013) (Table S1). The lions and wild dogs are part of an ongoing study by the RVC and Botswana Predator Conservation Trust (BPCT) in Botswana (RVC CRERB 2013 1233 and a Botswana research permit EWT 8/36/4). MATLAB 2015a (Mathworks, Natick, MA, USA) was used for data analysis. The collars contained a GPS module and an IMU (Hubel et al., 2016). The current study used data from the highest resolution operating state (5 Hz GPS, 300 Hz accelerometer and 100 Hz gyroscope). The precision of the velocity and position data was improved by fusing GPS/IMU data with a Kalman filter (Wilson et al., 2013). Stride parameters were estimated from the Kalman-filtered GPS measurements and data from the y/z-axis accelerometers (Fig. 1I). Typical measurements from a wild dog are shown in Fig. 1A–C.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Examples of the signals recorded by the animal tracking collar, steady locomotion detection and gait classification. Signals were measured from a free-ranging African wild dog (male). (A–C) GPS speed (A), and y-axis (B) and z-axis (C) acceleration (see I) measured during steady slow gallop (SG), the transition to a trot and steady trotting. The modified sliding window signal segmentation approach is shown beneath the plots in C. (D–F) Steady locomotion detection. (D) The results of filtering the windowed y- and z-axis accelerometer signals with a band pass filter (pass band ±0.3 Hz around the stride frequency) for steady SG (i), the gait transition (ii) and steady trotting (iii). (E) The instantaneous phase of the filtered y and z accelerations. (F) The relative phases. The phase locking value (PLV) for steady SG and trotting is 0.984; the PLV for the gait transition is 0.802. (G) Feature space (calculated from multiple high sample rate recordings collected from African wild dog) for all locomotion types (N=1992, 4 s windows) and steady-state locomotion (N=622, 4 s windows). Features have been calculated from a 4 s window of data. (H) Result of k-means gait classification into walking (N=21, 4 s windows), trotting (N=116, 4 s windows), and slow (SG, N=396, 4 s windows) and fast (FG, N=89, 4 s windows) galloping clusters. Note the large separation between trotting and the other gaits and the clear distinction between the two galloping gaits. (I) Alignment of the three-axis accelerometer in the animal tracking collar.

Pre-processing

The reaction to gravity measured by the accelerometers was removed using a 3rd order zero-phase (Oppenheim and Schafer, 2013) high-pass Butterworth filter (0.5 Hz cut-off frequency). The remaining signal was segmented using a sliding window approach (Fig. 1B,C). Windows (4 s long) were overlapped by 0.2 s (Fig. 1C) until steady locomotion was detected. Windows containing steady locomotion were not overlapped (Fig. 1C).

Steady locomotion

We assumed that there would be little variation in the phase difference between the signals from the y/z-axis accelerometers (over 4 s) during steady locomotion. The phase locking value (PLV) was used to provide a measure of phase synchronisation between the two signals (Aydore et al., 2013): Embedded Image (1)

PLV ranges from 0 to 1, with 1 representing the case where the relative phase (RP) between signals is identical and 0 when there is no phase synchrony. Θ(t) is the relative phase, T is the number of samples and t is each discrete sample. RP is: Embedded Image (2)

where φy and φz are the instantaneous phases (IPs) of the windows of y- and z-axis accelerometer signals, respectively. IP was calculated using the Hilbert transform (Bracewell, 1999); as it is only meaningful for a narrow band signal, the windows of accelerometer signals were filtered (zero-phase, 5th order Butterworth bandpass filter; passband ±0.3 Hz the stride frequency).

Transients introduced by the Hilbert transform were removed by extracting the middle 3.6 s of the windowed signal (Fig. 1D–F). Examples of bandpass-filtered accelerometer signals from a steady slow gallop, the transition to trot and steady trot are shown in Fig. 1D (i to iii, respectively). Fig. 1E,F shows the IPs and RPs of these signals. The phase synchronisation of the accelerometer signals during steady transverse gallop and trot can clearly be seen in Fig. 1Di–Fi and Diii–Fiii (PLV for both gaits is 0.984). The lack of synchronisation that occurs during the gait transition can be seen in Fig. 1Dii–Fii (PLV=0.521). A PLV threshold of 0.98 resulted in a balance between distinct clusters and retaining sufficient data (Fig. 1G, H). The total number of strides was reduced by 83% for the lurcher, by 44% and 47% for the two wild dogs and by 20% and 32% for the two lions. Fig. S1 and Table S6 allow comparison between the PLV method and the speed threshold method used in previous studies (Maes et al., 2008; Schmidt and Biknevicius, 2014).

Window stride frequency estimation

The stride frequency for a window of data was estimated from the z-axis accelerometer signal using an autocorrelation approach. The biased autocorrelation estimate (Embedded Image) for a finite length (T) sampled signal is given by: Embedded Image (3)

where z is the window of data from the z-axis accelerometer and τ is the lag (samples). For a cyclic signal, such as that measured during locomotion (Fig. 1C), the autocorrelation coefficients peak at lags equivalent to the periodicity of the signal. The lag of the first positive peak in the autocorrelation coefficients was found to represent the stride period for galloping gaits and half the stride period for trotting and walking.

Clustering

To identify gait, clustering was performed on three features derived from the windowed accelerometer signals; features were selected using domain knowledge. The first two features were the standard deviation (s.d.) of the windowed y- and z-axis accelerometer signals, the third was the autocorrelation estimate of the stride frequency (Fig. 1G,H). Features were normalised to have zero mean and unit s.d. before they were clustered using the k-means algorithm. The number of clusters was determined using the Davis–Bouldin criterion (Davies and Bouldin, 1979) and human inspection.

Stride parameters

Once the windows of data had been assigned a gait, it was possible to extract stride segments using the MATLAB peak find method. This enabled the individual stride frequency, length (GPS position data) and speed to be estimated. The vertical accelerations in each stride were registered using dynamic time warping (Ramsay and Silverman, 2005) so they were independent of speed; their magnitude was normalised to be between −1 and 1. Statistical parametric mapping (SPM) and random field theory (RFT) were used to test for differences between registered stride traces (Pataky et al., 2013).

Validation

Validation was carried out by comparing stride parameter estimates from collar data measured on a male lurcher (moving freely off the lead) with those from video footage of the animal moving along a line at a range of speeds and gaits on a level playing field (RVC repository). Two video cameras were positioned parallel to the line (Hero3, GoPro Inc., San Mateo, CA, USA; 120 frames s−1, 720×1280 pixels). Footage was calibrated using a 0.8 m-long stick placed on the line in front of each camera. To allow gait identification and calculation of stride parameters, we recorded the foot on/off events. Two symmetrical (lateral walking and trotting) and two asymmetrical (transverse and rotary gallop) gaits were identified using anteroposterior sequence analysis (Abourachid, 2003; Maes et al., 2008).

Lines were fitted to the stride frequency versus speed data and the stride length versus speed data for each method and gait using the least squares algorithm (Heglund and Taylor, 1988; Hudson et al., 2012; Wilson et al., 2013). The slopes of the linear regressions estimated from collar and video data were compared using analysis of covariance. Further validation was carried out by fitting lines to the stride speed estimates calculated from the stride length and frequency values versus the stride speed estimate from the Kalman-filtered GPS speed data. We assumed accurate parameter estimates would result in a line with a slope not significantly different from one.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The variation of stride frequency and length with stride speed (collar data) for a lurcher, two wild dogs and two lions is shown in Fig. 2A–F. Stride frequency increased linearly with speed for the lurcher and lions within all gaits and for wild dogs during trotting and galloping but not during walking (Fig. 2A–C; Table S2). The rate of change of stride frequency decreased as the animal moved faster (Fig. 2A–C; Table S2). During galloping, stride frequency increased gradually with speed (Fig. 2A–C; Table S2). Our results are consistent with previous work (Heglund and Taylor, 1988; Maes et al., 2008). The lions used a lower stride frequency at a given speed than the smaller lurcher and wild dogs (Table S1). Stride length increased linearly with increasing speed (Fig. 2D–F; Table S2). This relationship has been found in other studies (Hudson et al., 2012; Maes et al., 2008).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Variation of stride frequency and length with speed for steady locomotion estimated from data collected using an animal tracking collar during walk, trot, and slow and fast galloping. (A–F) Stride frequency and length estimates for a lurcher (A,D), two African wild dogs (B,E) and two lions (C,F). Each point represents one stride. For the lurcher, N=49, 392, 174 and 76 for the walk, trot, slow gallop (SG) and fast gallop (FG). For the wild dogs, N1=19, 802, 1229 and 321 and N2=26, 316, 430 and 147 for the walk, trot, SG and FG. For the lions, N1=766, 3101 and 385 and N2=1865, 3928 and 435 for the walk, trot and gallop. (G–N) Comparison of stride frequency and length estimated from data collected using an animal tracking collar and from video footage for a lurcher. Note that stride parameter estimates from video data are calculated over individual strides. The anteroposterior sequence method was used to identify walking (G,K), trotting (H,L), SG (I,M) and FG (J,N) from video footage. Collar data were segmented into different gaits using the k-means algorithm. Linear regression lines are shown using solid lines, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using dash/dotted lines. We found no significant difference between the slope of the lines fitted to the stride parameter estimates from collar or video data (analysis of covariance, P>0.05). The number of strides from the video footage for walk, trot, transverse gallop (TG) and rotary gallop (RG) gaits was 25, 41, 21 and 15, respectively. cl, data collected using an animal tracking collar; v, data from video footage.

Our method was validated against estimates from video data from the lurcher (Fig. 2G–N). The slopes and intercepts of the linear regressions estimated from the two methods were compared using analysis of covariance; no significant differences in slope (P<0.05) were found (Table S3); the intercepts were significantly different (P<0.05) (note the large data variability for stride frequency, Fig. 2G–J, and the low r2 values, Table S3). While the range of speeds for each gait varies with the method used, they both return values that are reasonable compared with other work (Maes et al., 2008) and predictions from dynamic similarity (Heglund et al., 1974; Iriarte-Díaz et al., 2006). Dynamic similarity predicts that the walk to trot transition occurs at a Froude number between 0.5 and 1 and the trot to gallop transition occurs between 2 and 3 (Heglund et al., 1974; Iriarte-Díaz et al., 2006) (Table S4). Further validation was carried out by fitting regression lines to the GPS measured stride speeds and the stride speed predicted from stride length and frequency estimates obtained from GPS position data and accelerometer data (Fig. S2). The slopes of the lines were not significantly different from one (P<0.05) (Table S5).

Fig. 3 shows the mean and 2 s.d. of the stride cut vertical accelerations for each gait and animal. The traces recorded during trotting for all species are similar (Fig. 3D–F; visual comparison). The lower signal to noise ratio of the accelerometer signal during walking makes comparison between species difficult (Fig. 3A–C). The timing of the first positive and negative peaks in the traces for the slow (Fig. 3G,H; first positive peak marked by ‘a’, negative by ‘b’) and fast (Fig. 3I,J; first positive peak marked by ‘c’, negative by ‘d’) gallops in the dogs appears to be different. Analysis using SPM/RFT found significant differences (P<0.05) between the traces at these locations and over the majority of the stride (Fig. S3).

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Stride cut vertical accelerometer signals returned by the clustering algorithm. Data were recorded by an animal tracking collar. (A,D,G,I) Results from lurcher. (B,E,H,J) results from two African wild dogs (animal 1, N1, pink line; animal 2, N2, green line). (C,F,K) results from two lions (animal 1, N1, blue line; animal 2, N2, red line). The acceleration was normalised to be between −1 and 1. The animal's gait was determined using the k-means algorithm. Slow and fast gallops are represented by SG and FG, respectively. The solid lines represent the average of the strides (N1/N2 values represent the number of strides). The variability of the signal is represented by plotting two standard deviations of the values (shaded region). Features used to distinguish between slow and fast gallops are marked a–d. Analysis using statistical parametric mapping and random field theory found significant differences between SG and FG traces at these locations and over the majority of the stride (Fig. S3).

As the collared animal does not have to be directly observed, our method reduces demands on field staff and equipment, and enables the study of free-ranging locomotion at self-selected speeds. It extends the range and number of species and habitats in which locomotion can be investigated, providing a tool to improve understanding of energetics, resource selection and the impact of human intervention on animal populations. While it does not suffer the drop in performance associated with a surrogate approach (Campbell et al., 2013), it does require the correct number of clusters to be chosen. This simply requires a visual check and comparison with expected gait transition values (Heglund et al., 1974). Our results fit with previous observations (Biancardi and Minetti, 2012) that dogs perform transverse and rotary gallops at low and high speeds, respectively (Fig. 2A,D and B,E and Fig. 3G,I), and that lions perform a rotary gallop regardless of speed (Fig. 2C,F and Fig. 3K). It is unlikely, however, that our method would allow the separation of transverse and slow rotary galloping (Maes et al., 2008). Further work may enable other gait parameters, such as foot contact times, to be determined and this would allow finer gait classification and the ability to distinguish between transverse and slow rotary galloping. Our method could be extended to the classification of animal behaviour (Grünewälder et al., 2012), with the potential to reveal unseen behaviours (Brown et al., 2013), increase our understanding of elusive species and reduce observer effects.

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Lowe, S. Amos, J. Usherwood, B. Smith, S. Wilson, S. Hailes, A. R. Wilson and BPCT.

FOOTNOTES

  • Competing interests

    The authors declare no competing or financial interests.

  • Author contributions

    O.P.D. and A.M.W. conceived and designed the study. O.P.D. analysed and interpreted the data and wrote the paper with extensive input from all authors.

  • Funding

    We thank the European Research Council (Ad-G 323041), Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/H013016/1), Paul G Allen Family Foundation, Myhrvold Family Charitable Fund, Sunset Fund, Brookfield Zoo, Dallas Zoo, Woodland Park Zoo and private donors (Tusk Trust/Wild Entrust International) for financial support.

  • Supplementary information

    Supplementary information available online at http://jeb.biologists.org/lookup/doi/10.1242/jeb.146035.supplemental

  • Received July 13, 2016.
  • Accepted October 29, 2016.
  • © 2017. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd
http://www.biologists.com/user-licence-1-1/

References

  1. ↵
    1. Abourachid, A.
    (2003). A new way of analysing symmetrical and asymmetrical gaits in quadrupeds. C. R. Biol. 326, 625-630. doi:10.1016/S1631-0691(03)00170-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Aydore, S.,
    2. Pantazis, D. and
    3. Leahy, R. M.
    (2013). A note on the phase locking value and its properties. Neuroimage 74, 231-244. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    1. Bertram, J. E. A.
    (2016). Understanding Mammalian Locomotion: Concepts and Applications. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
  4. ↵
    1. Biancardi, C. M. and
    2. Minetti, A. E.
    (2012). Biomechanical determinants of transverse and rotary gallop in cursorial mammals. J. Exp. Biol. 215, 4144-4156. doi:10.1242/jeb.073031
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Blaszczyk, J. and
    2. Loeb, G. E.
    (1993). Why cats pace on the treadmill. Physiol. Behav. 53, 501-507. doi:10.1016/0031-9384(93)90144-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Bracewell, R.
    (1999). The Fourier Transform & Its Applications, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  7. ↵
    1. Brown, D. D.,
    2. Kays, R.,
    3. Wikelski, M.,
    4. Wilson, R. and
    5. Klimley, A. P.
    (2013). Observing the unwatchable through acceleration logging of animal behavior. Anim. Biotelemetry 1, 1-20. doi:10.1186/2050-3385-1-20
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Campbell, H.,
    2. Gao, L.,
    3. Bidder, O.,
    4. Hunter, J. and
    5. Franklin, C.
    (2013). Creating a behavioural classification module for acceleration data: using a captive surrogate for difficult to observe species. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 4501-4506. doi:10.1242/jeb.089805
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Daley, M.,
    2. Channon, A.,
    3. Nolan, G. and
    4. Hall, J.
    (2016). Preferred gait and walk-run transition speeds in ostriches measured using GPS-IMU sensors. J. Exp. Biol. 219, 3301-3308. doi:10.1242/jeb.142588
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Davies, D. L. and
    2. Bouldin, D. W.
    (1979). A cluster separation measure. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 1, 224-227. doi:10.1109/TPAMI.1979.4766909
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    1. Grünewälder, S.,
    2. Broekhuis, F.,
    3. Macdonald, D. W.,
    4. Wilson, A. M.,
    5. McNutt, J. W.,
    6. Shawe-Taylor, J. and
    7. Hailes, S.
    (2012). Movement activity based classification of animal behaviour with an application to data from cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus). PLoS ONE 7, 1-11. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049120
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Heglund, N. C. and
    2. Taylor, C. R.
    (1988). Speed, stride frequency and energy cost per stride: how do they change with body size and gait? J. Exp. Biol. 138, 301-318.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Heglund, N. C.,
    2. Taylor, C. R. and
    3. McMahon, T. A.
    (1974). Scaling stride frequency and gait to animal size: mice to horses. Science 186, 1112-1113. doi:10.1126/science.186.4169.1112
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Hubel, T. Y.,
    2. Myatt, J. P.,
    3. Jordan, N. R.,
    4. Dewhirst, O. P.,
    5. McNutt, J. W. and
    6. Wilson, A. M.
    (2016). Additive opportunistic capture explains group hunting benefits in African wild dogs. Nat. Commun. 7, 11033. doi:10.1038/ncomms11033
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Hudson, P. E.,
    2. Corr, S. A. and
    3. Wilson, A. M.
    (2012). High speed galloping in the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) and the racing greyhound (Canis familiaris): spatio-temporal and kinetic characteristics. J. Exp. Biol. 215, 2425-2434. doi:10.1242/jeb.066720
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Iriarte-Díaz, J.,
    2. Bozinovic, F. and
    3. Vásquez, R. A.
    (2006). What explains the trot-gallop transition in small mammals? J. Exp. Biol. 209, 4061-4066. doi:10.1242/jeb.02473
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Jayne, B. C. and
    2. Irschick, D. J.
    (2000). A field study of incline use and preferred speeds for the locomotion of lizards. Ecology 81, 2969-2983. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[2969:AFSOIU]2.0.CO;2
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Maculewicz, J.,
    2. Kofoed, L. B. and
    3. Serafin, S.
    (2016). A technological review of the instrumented footwear for rehabilitation with a focus on parkinson's disease patients. Front. Neurol. 7, 1-6. doi:10.3389/fneur.2016.00001
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. ↵
    1. Maes, L. D.,
    2. Herbin, M.,
    3. Hackert, R.,
    4. Bels, V. L. and
    5. Abourachid, A.
    (2008). Steady locomotion in dogs: temporal and associated spatial coordination patterns and the effect of speed. J. Exp. Biol. 211, 138-149. doi:10.1242/jeb.008243
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    1. Mannini, A. and
    2. Sabatini, A. M.
    (2012). Gait phase detection and discrimination between walking-jogging activities using hidden Markov models applied to foot motion data from a gyroscope. Gait Posture 36, 657-661. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.06.017
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Muro-de-la-Herran, A.,
    2. García-Zapirain, B. and
    3. Méndez-Zorrilla, A.
    (2014). Gait analysis methods: an overview of wearable and non-wearable systems, highlighting clinical applications. Sensors 14, 3362-3394. doi:10.3390/s140203362
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  22. ↵
    1. Oppenheim, A. V. and
    2. Schafer, R. W.
    (2013). Discrete Time Signal Processing, 3rd edn. Harlow: Pearson.
  23. ↵
    1. Pataky, T. C.,
    2. Robinson, M. A. and
    3. Vanrenterghem, J.
    (2013). Vector field statistical analysis of kinematic and force trajectories. J. Biomech. 46, 2394-2401. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.07.031
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Pfau, T.,
    2. Ferrari, M.,
    3. Parsons, K. and
    4. Wilson, A.
    (2008). A hidden Markov model-based stride segmentation technique applied to equine inertial sensor trunk movement data. J. Biomech. 41, 216-220. doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.08.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Ramsay, J. O. and
    2. Silverman, B. W. W.
    (2005). Functional Data Analysis (Springer Series in Statistics), 2nd edn. New York: Springer.
  26. ↵
    1. Sakamoto, K. Q.,
    2. Sato, K.,
    3. Ishizuka, M.,
    4. Watanuki, Y.,
    5. Takahashi, A.,
    6. Daunt, F. and
    7. Wanless, S.
    (2009). Can ethograms be automatically generated using body acceleration data from free-ranging birds? PLoS ONE 4, 1-12. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005379
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Schmidt, A. and
    2. Biknevicius, A. R.
    (2014). Structured variability of steady-speed locomotion in rats. J. Exp. Biol. 217, 1402-1406. doi:10.1242/jeb.092668
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. ↵
    1. Smith, B. J. H.,
    2. Cullingford, L. and
    3. Usherwood, J. R.
    (2015). Identification of mouse gaits using a novel force-sensing exercise wheel. J. Appl. Physiol. 119, 704-718. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.01014.2014
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. Sue, P.,
    2. Taylor, C. R.,
    3. Heglund, N. C.,
    4. Seeherman, H. J.,
    5. Zoology, S. P. and
    6. Jan, N.
    (2011). Locomotion in lions: energetic cost and maximum aerobic capacity maximum aerobic capacity. Physiol. Zool. 49, 1-10.
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Trabelsi, D.,
    2. Mohammed, S.,
    3. Chamroukhi, F.,
    4. Oukhellou, L. and
    5. Amirat, Y.
    (2013). An unsupervised approach for automatic activity recognition based on Hidden Markov Model regression. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 10, 829-835. doi:10.1109/TASE.2013.2256349
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  31. ↵
    1. Williams, T. M.,
    2. Wolfe, L.,
    3. Davis, T.,
    4. Kendall, T.,
    5. Richter, B.,
    6. Wang, Y.,
    7. Bryce, C.,
    8. Elkaim, G. H. and
    9. Wilmers, C. C.
    (2014). Instantaneous energetics of puma kills reveal advantage of felid sneak attacks. Science 346, 81-85. doi:10.1126/science.1254885
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. ↵
    1. Wilson, A. M.,
    2. Lowe, J. C.,
    3. Roskilly, K.,
    4. Hudson, P. E.,
    5. Golabek, K. A. and
    6. McNutt, J. W.
    (2013). Locomotion dynamics of hunting in wild cheetahs. Nature 498, 185-189. doi:10.1038/nature12295
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. ↵
    1. Witte, T. H.,
    2. Hirst, C. V. and
    3. Wilson, A. M.
    (2006). Effect of speed on stride parameters in racehorses at gallop in field conditions. J. Exp. Biol. 209, 4389-4397. doi:10.1242/jeb.02518
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Previous ArticleNext Article
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Keywords

  • Animal locomotion
  • Stride segmentation
  • Unsupervised machine learning

 Download PDF

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Experimental Biology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
An exploratory clustering approach for extracting stride parameters from tracking collars on free-ranging wild animals
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Experimental Biology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Experimental Biology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
METHODS & TECHNIQUES
An exploratory clustering approach for extracting stride parameters from tracking collars on free-ranging wild animals
Oliver P. Dewhirst, Kyle Roskilly, Tatjana Y. Hubel, Neil R. Jordan, Krystyna A. Golabek, J. Weldon McNutt, Alan M. Wilson
Journal of Experimental Biology 2017 220: 341-346; doi: 10.1242/jeb.146035
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
METHODS & TECHNIQUES
An exploratory clustering approach for extracting stride parameters from tracking collars on free-ranging wild animals
Oliver P. Dewhirst, Kyle Roskilly, Tatjana Y. Hubel, Neil R. Jordan, Krystyna A. Golabek, J. Weldon McNutt, Alan M. Wilson
Journal of Experimental Biology 2017 220: 341-346; doi: 10.1242/jeb.146035

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Alerts

Please log in to add an alert for this article.

Sign in to email alerts with your email address

Article navigation

  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgements
    • FOOTNOTES
    • References
  • Figures & tables
  • Supp info
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF + SI
  • PDF

Related articles

Cited by...

More in this TOC section

  • Continuous body 3-D reconstruction of limbless animals
  • Rhythmic auditory stimuli modulate movement recovery in response to perturbation during locomotion
  • Estimation of sinking velocity using free-falling dynamically scaled models: Foraminifera as a test case
Show more METHODS & TECHNIQUES

Similar articles

Other journals from The Company of Biologists

Development

Journal of Cell Science

Disease Models & Mechanisms

Biology Open

Advertisement

Predicting the Future: Species Survival in a Changing World

Read our new special issue exploring the significant role of experimental biology in assessing and predicting the susceptibility or resilience of species to future, human-induced environmental change.


Big Biology Podcast - Hollie Putnam and coral bleaching

Catch the next JEB-sponsored episode of the Big Biology Podcast where Art and Marty talk to Hollie Putnam about the causes of coral bleaching and the basic biology of corals in the hope of selectively breeding corals that can better tolerate future ocean conditions.

Read Hollie's Review on the subject, which is featured in our current special issue. 


Stark trade-offs and elegant solutions in arthropod visual systems

Many elegant eye specializations that evolved in response to visual challenges continue to be discovered. A new Review by Meece et al. summarises exciting solutions evolved by insects and other arthropods in response to specific visual challenges.


Head bobbing gives pigeons a sense of perspective

Pigeons might look goofy with their head-bobbing walk, but it turns out that the ungainly head manoeuvre allows the birds to judge distance.

Articles

  • Accepted manuscripts
  • Issue in progress
  • Latest complete issue
  • Issue archive
  • Archive by article type
  • Special issues
  • Subject collections
  • Interviews
  • Sign up for alerts

About us

  • About JEB
  • Editors and Board
  • Editor biographies
  • Travelling Fellowships
  • Grants and funding
  • Journal Meetings
  • Workshops
  • The Company of Biologists
  • Journal news

For Authors

  • Submit a manuscript
  • Aims and scope
  • Presubmission enquiries
  • Article types
  • Manuscript preparation
  • Cover suggestions
  • Editorial process
  • Promoting your paper
  • Open Access
  • Outstanding paper prize
  • Biology Open transfer

Journal Info

  • Journal policies
  • Rights and permissions
  • Media policies
  • Reviewer guide
  • Sign up for alerts

Contact

  • Contact JEB
  • Subscriptions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback

 Twitter   YouTube   LinkedIn

© 2021   The Company of Biologists Ltd   Registered Charity 277992