Simple Methods to Acutely Measure Multiple Timing Metrics among Sexual Repertoire of Male Drosophila
Curation statements for this article:-
Curated by eLife
eLife Assessment
This useful paper describes a software tool, "DrosoMating", which allows automated, high-throughput quantification of 6 common metrics of courtship and mating behaviors in Drosophila melanogaster. The validity of the tool is quite convincingly demonstrated by comparing expert human assessments with those made by DrosoMating. The work, however, does not address how DrosoMating compares with or advances on other existing tools for exactly the same purpose, whether it can be used for studies of other Drosophila species, and/or whether finer aspects of courtship response timing - which depend on proximal female signals to the male - could be extracted with more detailed analyses. Some additional statistical analyses would also help further strengthen the authors' current conclusions.
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (eLife)
Abstract
Male Drosophila courtship behavior is a key model for studying temporal decision-making. While courtship index (CI) is widely used to quantify mating activity, other timing metrics like courtship latency, copulation latency (CL), and mating duration (MD) remain understudied. Traditional methods for quantifying these behaviors are often labor-intensive and prone to human error.
In this study, we present a protocol combining a modular chamber system and automated software (DrosoMating) to quantify 6 key timing metrics during male courtship. High-resolution video tracking enable precise analysis of courtship initiation, persistence, and mating dynamics under controlled conditions. Validation shows <0.05% error rates and 98–99% agreement with manual scoring for CL, CI, and MD. The protocol supports genetic and neural circuit manipulations, detecting subtle genetic, social, and environmental behavioral variations.
By minimizing manual effort and standardizing data collection, this approach facilitates scalable, reproducible studies on adaptive trade-offs, learning, and neural mechanisms in mating behavior. This method streamlines timing analysis in male courtship, offering reproducible metrics for behavioral genetics.”
Article activity feed
-
-
-
eLife Assessment
This useful paper describes a software tool, "DrosoMating", which allows automated, high-throughput quantification of 6 common metrics of courtship and mating behaviors in Drosophila melanogaster. The validity of the tool is quite convincingly demonstrated by comparing expert human assessments with those made by DrosoMating. The work, however, does not address how DrosoMating compares with or advances on other existing tools for exactly the same purpose, whether it can be used for studies of other Drosophila species, and/or whether finer aspects of courtship response timing - which depend on proximal female signals to the male - could be extracted with more detailed analyses. Some additional statistical analyses would also help further strengthen the authors' current conclusions.
-
Reviewer #1 (Public review):
Summary:
The study of Drosophila mating behaviors has offered a powerful entry point for understanding how complex innate behaviors are instantiated in the brain. The effectiveness of this behavioral model stems from how readily quantifiable many components of the courtship ritual are, facilitating the fine-scale correlations between the behaviors and the circuits that underpin their implementation. Detailed quantification, however, can be both time-consuming and error-prone, particularly when scored manually. Song et al. have sought to address this challenge by developing DrosoMating, software that facilitates the automated and high-throughput quantification of 6 common metrics of courtship and mating behaviors. Compared to a human observer, DrosoMating matches courtship scoring with high fidelity. Further, …
Reviewer #1 (Public review):
Summary:
The study of Drosophila mating behaviors has offered a powerful entry point for understanding how complex innate behaviors are instantiated in the brain. The effectiveness of this behavioral model stems from how readily quantifiable many components of the courtship ritual are, facilitating the fine-scale correlations between the behaviors and the circuits that underpin their implementation. Detailed quantification, however, can be both time-consuming and error-prone, particularly when scored manually. Song et al. have sought to address this challenge by developing DrosoMating, software that facilitates the automated and high-throughput quantification of 6 common metrics of courtship and mating behaviors. Compared to a human observer, DrosoMating matches courtship scoring with high fidelity. Further, the authors demonstrate that the software effectively detects previously described variations in courtship resulting from genetic background or social conditioning. Finally, they validate its utility in assaying the consequences of neural manipulations by silencing Kenyon cells involved in memory formation in the context of courtship conditioning.
Strengths:
(1) The authors demonstrate that for three key courtship/mating metrics, DrosoMating performs virtually indistinguishably from a human observer, with differences consistently within 10 seconds and no statistically significant differences detected. This demonstrates the software's usefulness as a tool for reducing bias and scoring time for analyses involving these metrics.
(2) The authors validate the tool across multiple genetic backgrounds and experimental manipulations to confirm its ability to detect known influences on male mating behavior.
(3) The authors present a simple, modular chamber design that is integrated with DrosoMating and allows for high-throughput experimentation, capable of simultaneously analyzing up to 144 fly pairs across all chambers.
Weaknesses:
(1) DrosoMating appears to be an effective tool for the high-throughput quantification of key courtship and mating metrics, but a number of similar tools for automated analysis already exist. FlyTracker (CalTech), for instance, is a widely used software that offers a similar machine vision approach to quantifying a variety of courtship metrics. It would be valuable to understand how DrosoMating compares to such approaches and what specific advantages it might offer in terms of accuracy, ease of use, and sensitivity to experimental conditions.
(2) The courtship behaviors of Drosophila males represent a series of complex behaviors that unfold dynamically in response to female signals (Coen et al., 2014; Ning et al., 2022; Roemschied et al., 2023). While metrics like courtship latency, courtship index, and copulation duration are useful summary statistics, they compress the complexity of actions that occur throughout the mating ritual. The manuscript would be strengthened by a discussion of the potential for DrosoMating to capture more of the moment-to-moment behaviors that constitute courtship. Even without modifying the software, it would be useful to see how the data can be used in combination with machine learning classifiers like JAABA to better segment the behavioral composition of courtship and mating across genotypes and experimental manipulations. Such integration could substantially expand the utility of this tool for the broader Drosophila neuroscience community.
(3) While testing the software's capacity to function across strains is useful, it does not address the "universality" of this method. Cross-species studies of mating behavior diversity are becoming increasingly common, and it would be beneficial to know if this tool can maintain its accuracy in Drosophila species with a greater range of morphological and behavioral variation. Demonstrating the software's performance across species would strengthen claims about its broader applicability.
-
Reviewer #2 (Public review):
This paper introduces "DrosoMating," an integrated hardware and software solution for automating the analysis of male Drosophila courtship. The authors aim to provide a low-cost, accessible alternative to expensive ethological rigs by utilizing a custom acrylic chamber and smartphone-based recording. The system focuses on quantifying key temporal metrics-Courtship Index (CI), Copulation Latency (CL), and Mating Duration (MD)-and is applied to behavioral paradigms involving memory mutants (orb2, rut).
The development of open-source behavioral tools is a significant contribution to neuroethology, and the authors successfully demonstrate a system that simplifies the setup for large-scale screens. A major strength of the work is the specific focus on automating Copulation Latency and Mating Duration, metrics …
Reviewer #2 (Public review):
This paper introduces "DrosoMating," an integrated hardware and software solution for automating the analysis of male Drosophila courtship. The authors aim to provide a low-cost, accessible alternative to expensive ethological rigs by utilizing a custom acrylic chamber and smartphone-based recording. The system focuses on quantifying key temporal metrics-Courtship Index (CI), Copulation Latency (CL), and Mating Duration (MD)-and is applied to behavioral paradigms involving memory mutants (orb2, rut).
The development of open-source behavioral tools is a significant contribution to neuroethology, and the authors successfully demonstrate a system that simplifies the setup for large-scale screens. A major strength of the work is the specific focus on automating Copulation Latency and Mating Duration, metrics that are often labor-intensive to score manually.
However, there are several limitations in the current analysis and validation that affect the strength of the conclusions:
First, the statistical rigor requires substantial improvement. The analysis of multi-group experiments (e.g., comparing four distinct strains or factorial designs with genotype and training) currently relies on multiple independent Student's t-tests. This approach is statistically invalid for these experimental designs as it inflates the family-wise Type I error rate. To support the claims of strain-specific differences or learning deficits, the data must be analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to properly account for multiple comparisons and to explicitly test for interaction effects between genotype and training conditions.
Second, the biological validation using w1118 and y1 mutants entails a potential confound. The authors attribute the low Courtship Index in these strains to courtship-specific deficits. However, both strains are known to exhibit general locomotor sluggishness (due to visual or pigmentation/behavioral defects). Since "following" behavior is likely a component of the Courtship Index, a reduction in this metric could reflect a general motor deficit rather than a specific lack of reproductive motivation. Without controlling for general locomotion, the interpretation of these behavioral phenotypes remains ambiguous.
Third, the benchmarking of the system is currently limited to comparisons against manual scoring. Given that the field has largely adopted sophisticated open-source tracking tools (e.g., Ctrax, FlyTracker, JAABA), the utility of DrosoMating would be better contextualized by comparing its performance - in terms of accuracy, speed, or identity maintenance - against these existing automated standards, rather than solely against human observation.
Finally, the visual presentation of the data hinders the assessment of the system's temporal precision. While the system is designed to capture time-resolved metrics, the results are presented primarily as aggregate bar plots. The absence of behavioral ethograms or raster plots makes it difficult to verify the software's ability to accurately detect specific transitions, such as the exact onset of copulation.
-
Author response:
Thank you very much for the constructive feedback on our manuscript, "Simple Methods to Acutely Measure Multiple Timing Metrics among Sexual Repertoire of Male Drosophila," and for the opportunity to address the reviewers' comments. We appreciate the time and effort the reviewers have invested in evaluating our work, and we agree that their suggestions will significantly strengthen the manuscript.
We are currently working diligently to address all the concerns raised in the public reviews and recommendations. Below is an outline of the major revisions we plan to implement in the revised version:
(1) Statistical Rigor and Analysis
We acknowledge the statistical limitations pointed out by Reviewer #2. We will re-analyze the multi-group data in Figures 3 and 4 using One-way and Two-way ANOVA with appropriate post-hoc tests …
Author response:
Thank you very much for the constructive feedback on our manuscript, "Simple Methods to Acutely Measure Multiple Timing Metrics among Sexual Repertoire of Male Drosophila," and for the opportunity to address the reviewers' comments. We appreciate the time and effort the reviewers have invested in evaluating our work, and we agree that their suggestions will significantly strengthen the manuscript.
We are currently working diligently to address all the concerns raised in the public reviews and recommendations. Below is an outline of the major revisions we plan to implement in the revised version:
(1) Statistical Rigor and Analysis
We acknowledge the statistical limitations pointed out by Reviewer #2. We will re-analyze the multi-group data in Figures 3 and 4 using One-way and Two-way ANOVA with appropriate post-hoc tests (e.g., Tukey's HSD), respectively, to properly account for multiple comparisons and interaction effects between genotype and training conditions.
(2) Comparison with Existing Tools
As suggested by both reviewers, we will provide a detailed comparison of DrosoMating with established automated tracking systems (e.g., FlyTracker, JAABA, Ctrax)，and specific use cases where DrosoMating offers distinct advantages in terms of cost, accessibility, and ease of use for high-throughput screening.
(3) Control for Locomotor Activity
To address the potential confound of general locomotor deficits in w1118 and y1 mutants, we will calculate and present general locomotion metrics (e.g., average velocity, total distance traveled) from our tracking data to dissociate motor defects from specific courtship deficits.
(4) Software Capabilities and Cross-Species Applicability
We will clarify how DrosoMating handles fly identification during mating (including occlusion management). We will also discuss or test the software's applicability across different *Drosophila* species, as requested.
(5) Minor Corrections
We will address all textual errors, standardize terminology (e.g., "Mating Duration" vs. "Copulation Duration"), improve figure legibility, and provide complete statistical details for all figures.
We believe these revisions will substantially improve the rigor, clarity, and utility of our manuscript. We aim to resubmit the revised version within the standard timeframe and will ensure the preprint is updated accordingly.
-
