Evidence Hub

Application of infrared thermography coupled with Eulerian Video Magnification to monitor vital signs in wild seals, from sandy beaches to icy shores

Rzucidlo CL, Beltran RS, Robinson PW, Curry E, Klink AC, Hindle AG, Shero MR

BMC biology, 2026

23 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background: Metabolic rate is a critical indicator of animal health, with respiration and heart rate used as common proxies for energetic expenditure. Infrared thermography (IRT) was previously paired with Eulerian video magnification (EVM) to capture changes in temperature associated with exhalation and blood flow for accurate and non-invasive measurements of respiration and heart rate. These techniques have been tested in a range of taxa, but only in controlled settings at zoological institutions and with imaging conducted at short range (~ 1 m distance). This study aims to validate IRT-EVM in wild populations with minimal disturbance and under variable environmental conditions, and to determine the maximum distance that animals can be imaged for accurate vital sign measurements.

Results: Infrared videos were taken of seals in two dramatically different environments including northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris, n = 12) in North America and Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii, n = 23) in Antarctica. 'True' respiration and heart rates were collected simultaneously by visually monitoring movement of the ribcage/nostrils and stethoscope/ECG readings, respectively. Using IRT-EVM, respiration rate was extracted from 74.3% of individuals while heart rate was measured in 93.3% of individuals, both with high accuracy (mean absolute error, respiration rate: 1.3 brpm; heart rate: 7.4 bpm). Infrared-derived measurements were resilient to individual characteristics…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a experimental / empirical study, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 23 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free