Fully automated leg tracking of Drosophila neurodegeneration models reveals distinct conserved movement signatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some neurodegenerative diseases, like Parkinsons Disease (PD) and Spinocerebellar ataxia 3 (SCA3), are associated with distinct, altered gait and tremor movements that are reflective of the underlying disease etiology. Drosophila melanogaster models of neurodegeneration have illuminated our understanding of the molecular mechanisms of disease. However, it is unknown whether specific gait and tremor dysfunctions also occur in fly disease mutants. To answer this question, we developed a machine-learning image-analysis program, Feature Learning-based LImb segmentation and Tracking (FLLIT), that automatically tracks leg claw positions of freely moving flies recorded on high-speed video, producing a series of gait measurements. Notably, unlike other machine-learning methods, FLLIT generates its own training sets and does not require user-annotated images for learning. Using FLLIT, we carried out high-throughput and high-resolution analysis of gait and tremor features in Drosophila neurodegeneration mutants for the first time. We found that fly models of PD and SCA3 exhibited markedly different walking gait and tremor signatures, which recapitulated characteristics of the respective human diseases. Selective expression of mutant SCA3 in dopaminergic neurons led to a gait signature that more closely resembled those of PD flies. This suggests that the behavioral phenotype depends on the neurons affected rather than the specific nature of the mutation. Different mutations produced tremors in distinct leg pairs, indicating that different motor circuits were affected. Using this approach, fly models can be used to dissect the neurogenetic mechanisms that underlie movement disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".