• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    The Marking Technology in Motion Capture for the Complex Locomotor Behavior of Flexible Small Animals (Gekko gecko)

    2019-09-27 00:47:04ZhouyiWANGWeijiaZONGBingchengWANGJunjieZHUKaiQINandZhendongDAI
    Asian Herpetological Research 2019年3期

    Zhouyi WANG, Weijia ZONG, Bingcheng WANG, Junjie ZHU, Kai QIN and Zhendong DAI*

    1 Institute of Bio-inspired Structure and Surface Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 29 Yudao Street, Nanjing 210016, Jiangsu, China

    2 Shanghai Institute of Aerospace System Engineering, 3888 Yuanjiang Road, Shanghai 201109, China

    Abstract Animals have evolved a variety of behavior patterns to adapt to the environment. Motion-capture technology is utilized to quantify and characterize locomotor behaviors to reveal the mechanisms of animal motion. In the capture of flexible, small animals with complex locomotor behaviors, the markers interfere with each other easily, and the motion forms (bending, twisting) of the moving parts are obviously different; thus, it is a great challenge to realize accurate quantitative characterization of complex locomotor behaviors. The correlation between the marker properties, including the size and space length, and the precision of the system are revealed in this paper, and the effects of diverse marker shapes on the capturing accuracy of the captured objects in different motion forms were tested. Results showed that the precision of system is significantly improved when the ratio of the space length to the diameter of the markers is larger than four; for the capture of the spatial twisting motion of the flexible object, the hexagon markers had the lowest spatial lost-marker rate relative to the circle, triangle, and square. Customized markers were used to capture the locomotor behavior of the gecko-inspired robot (rigid connection) and the gecko (flexible connection). The results showed that this marking technology can achieve high accuracy of motion capture for geckos (the average deviation was approximately 0.32 mm, and the average deviation’s variation rate was approximately 0.96%). In this paper, the marking technology for the motion capture of flexible, small animals with complex motion is proposed; it can effectively improve the system precision as well as the capture accuracy, and realize the quantitative characterization of the complex motion of flexible, small objects. It provides a reliable technical means to deeply study the evolution of the motion function of small animals and advance systematic research of motion-capture technology.

    Keywords small flexible animals, marking technology, motion capture, quantification of locomotor behavior, gecko

    1. Introduction

    Animals have evolved a variety of behavior patterns (flight, swimming, running) to adapt to the environment (Deetjenet al., 2017; Hoytet al., 1981; Webb, 1984). These behavior patterns reflect the internal structures and functional components of the entire motion system, as well as its interaction with the environment. Locomotor behavior is an external representation of the interaction of these motion systems and intrinsic properties (Dickinsonet al., 2000). Motion-capture technology is the most intuitive method for quantitative representation of locomotor behavior; it can obtain various kinematic parameters such as the speed, acceleration, and trajectory of animal motion (Gleicher, 1999; Xianget al., 2013). Therefore, the systematic advancement of motioncapture technology provides powerful technical support for the revelation of coordination mechanisms of animal motion components, which aids understanding of the development of animal movement function and inspires the design of new biomimetic robots. In recent years, motion-capture technology has been systematically developed from system layout (camera layout (Liet al., 2008; Yuanet al., 2009), scene planning (Mittalet al., 2004)), data acquisition and processing (camera calibration (Heikkilaet al., 2002; Wanget al., 2007), data processing (Shenget al., 2009)), object recognition and tracking (markers feature (Alexandersonet al., 2017), tracking algorithm (Jr, 2003)), and many other aspects. Marker-based technology and markerless technology are generally used for object identification and tracking. Markerless technology simplifies the marking process of the experiment and avoids the impact of the markers on the object’s motion. However, it has higher requirements for the object structure and the capturing environment, and it is typically used for 2D joint kinematics indoors (Sureret al., 2011). At present, marking technology is still used extensively. The capturing accuracy of the objects according to the data acquisition mode based on markers depends on the recognition and tracking of the markers, and the recognition and traceability of the markers on the objects should relate closely to the shape, size, color, numbers, placements, etc. (Hedrick, 2008; Medina-Carniceret al., 2009).

    In the motion capture of human limb joints, markers with diameters of not less than 10 mm are placed at each joint (Menache, 1999). In the study of human pelvic stress deformation, 80 markers of 6.5 mm in diameter are used (G?pfertet al., 2011). A total of 79 markers of 6.5 mm diameter are adopted to capture human facial motion (Sifakiset al., 2005). It can be seen that the size and number of the selected markers are closely related to the feature size and complex structure of the captured objects. In addition, studies show that the obtained capture accuracy is quite different (Eichelbergeret al., 2016) despite the two markers adopted for motion capture in different body parts (hip joint, knee joint and foot) having the same diameter and fixed spacing. The large size of the markers allows for a higher accuracy of the motioncapture system through motion-capture tests for different diameter (9.5 mm, 15 mm, 25 mm) markers (Windolfet al., 2008). In particular, the precision in capturing fine movement is significantly affected by the size of the marker (Smith, 1997). According to another study, by testing the system precision with different space lengths between two fixed-size markers, the space length resulting in the error recognition of the motion-capture system is 10 mm (Milleret al., 2002; Richards, 1999). Therefore, the size and relative position of the markers has a significant effect on the lost-marker rate and accuracy of the motioncapture system.

    Currently, the researches on marking technology in motion capture systems are generally targeted towards large/medium-sized captured objects with a fixed relative marker position. There are insufficient studies on the complex locomotor behavior of small-sized, flexible animals. For geckos with the characteristics of adhesive climbing movement (Wanget al., 2015a; Wanget al., 2015b), the accurate capture and quantification of their movement is of great importance to reveal the mechanism of adhesion movement and the evolution of movement function. However, the gecko has a small-sized body, great flexibility, and agile locomotion, resulting in the locomotor behavior with higher complexity. For example, the high joint overlap in motion leads to easy interference of joint markers, and the motion amplitude (plane bending, spatial twisting) of various moving parts is obviously different (Wanget al., 2018; Zonget al., 2018). The marking technology faces new challenges in the complex behavior of flexible small animals: how do we mark so that the markers in the motion capture are highly recognizable and do not interfere with each other to achieve the accurate capture of complex movements of the animal? Specifically, what is the principle of selection of the marker on small animals’ joints? With a great flexible moving part, how do we determine the discrete position of the markers on it to accurately capture and characterize its locomotor behavior? Does the marking method need to be adjusted to the different locomotor behavior of each body part?

    With respect to these issues, this paper attempts to promote the development of marking technology and provide a more accurate, stable, and reliable technical support to accurately capture the adhesion movement of flexible geckos by means of studying the size, relative position, and shape of the markers on the objects. In particular, the motion capture for different shapes of marker on flexible motion objects was tested, and the marker shape which is the optimum to improve the capture accuracy for complex locomotor behavior of flexible targets is proposed. Aiming at two objects of the gecko-inspired robot (rigid connection) and the gecko (flexible connection), the size, shape, and relative position of the markers were customized. The capture results of different markers on these two kinds of objects were compared and analyzed. The effectiveness and applicability of the customization-based marking technology were verified. The marking technology for flexible, small animals with complex locomotor behavior was advanced and the systematic study of motion-capture technology was improved and perfected.

    2. Materials and Methods

    2.1. Experimental equipment and setupThe self-built motion capture system (Figure 1) in this study comprised of four motion capture cameras obtained from OptiTrack Ltd., USA, (Prime 17 W, 200 FPS), markers, motion plane, data acquisition and processing software, signal transmission equipment, and a camera-fixed frame. The size of the motion plane was 700 mm × 550 mm within a three-dimensional force-measuring platform (300 mm×100 mm) in the inter-position (Daiet al., 2011) while the camera-fixed frame was approximately 820 mm×900 mm×400 mm. Data acquisition and processing were carried out using motion analysis software and DLTdv6 tools.

    The motion capture system was configured and deployed based on the shape and locomotive range of the experimental objects including small animals with a large range of locomotion and gecko-inspired robots (Zonget al., 2018). The experimental platform was 3.85×105mm2in area. Because the shape of geckos and robots were similar to flat and long squares and the range of their motion was in a long channel, a half-annular layout was suitable for the experimental procedure. Because of the limited size of the platform and camera-fixed frame, the working distance was determined to be about 500 mm; the pitch angleαwas 30° ± 5°, the camera angleθwas 30° ± 5°; the motion length of the gecko was ~300 mm. The platform was placed horizontally, and the fourcamera system was focused on the one-third position of the 300-mm length (Figure 2).

    2.2. System calibration and data acquisitionA halfannular layout of the multi-camera was employed, and circular markers were used to calibrate the motion capture system to determine the relative positional relationship between the cameras, the positional relationship between each camera and the ground plane, in order to reconstruct the three-dimensional coordinates of the markers in space (Heikkila and Silvén, 2002). To compare the responses of different marking techniques for different modes of data acquisition, two kinds of data acquisition modes were used for the camera calibration experiment. a) Post-processing calibration based on image acquisition mode: the movement of the calibration bar (three fixed markers on the same line) in three-dimensional cartesian coordinate system were recorded by the multiple cameras (Figure 3A). The image processing software and the calibration algorithm program were used to calibrate the cameras so that the data could be edited appropriately to obtain optimized calibration results (Hedrick, 2008). b) Automatic calibration based on the object acquisition mode: the object acquisition mode was used to obtain the stable motion of the calibration bar within the intersecting volume of the cameras’ field of view (Figure 3B) so that the computer could automatically obtain the available data required to obtain the calibration results. An L-shaped calibration plate (which consists of three markers arranged at planar right angles) was then used to determine the position of the camera relative to the ground.

    To explore the effects of different marker sizes and their relative positions on the accuracy of the motion capture system, the ratio of the diameter of two markers to their space length (P)was defined. A calibration bar was then designed to freely adjust the space length of the markers in Figure 4A and the circular markers with different sizes (3 mm, 4.5 mm, 6 mm, 7.5 mm, 9 mm) (Table 1). By comparing the average standard deviation rate (ASDR)of the system calibration for a series ofPvalues (1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), the correlation between thePvalues and the accuracy of the motion capture system was obtained. In the same vein, the correlation between the size of the markers and the accuracy of the capture system could also be obtained by comparing the root mean square error (RMSE) of the markers of different diameters in the same space length.

    2.3 Experiments

    2.3.1. Motion-capture experiments of a flexible object

    To simulate and verify the multi-dimensional complex motion (spatial twisting and plane bending) of the object in space, a rod with high elasticity (E= 1.2 GPa) was selected (Figure 4B). Because the system’s tracking identification was based on pixel matching, a set of pixels were used as the marker. The space length (L) between two markers was related to the maximum contour spacing (S). Four identical shapes of markers were selected in the experiment and the maximum contour spacing (S) was the same (Table 2). To compare the effect of different marker shapes on the capturing effect of different motion forms, 10 markers of the same shape were attached to a generatrix of the flexible rod at equal intervals, thereby replacing the shape of the markers. The experimental process involved plane bending (similar to the swinging motion of theGekko gecko’s spine and tail) and spatial twisting which occurs by fixing one end of the rod and moving it around the fixed end (similar to the movement of theGekko gecko’s legs). It was ensured that all markers on the flexible rod were within the focus of the multicamera system. However, this research did not discuss the color of the markers, as there were no difference in the recognition and tracking of the marker’s color by the different data-acquisition modes. Therefore, the color of the marker had no effect on the accuracy of the system.

    Figure 1 The self-built multi-camera motion-capture system.

    Figure 2 The multi-cameras in a half-annular layout pattern.

    Figure 3 A: Post-processing calibration based on image mode; B: Automatic calibration based on object mode (white points were markers, black was background).

    2.3.2. Motion-capture experiments of gecko and gecko-inspired robotGecko: Three geckos (Gekko gecko, Linnaeus) (N= 3, mass: 60.5 ± 5.2 g, snout-vent length: 141.2 ± 3.2 mm, tail length: 140.4 ± 8.3 mm, mean ± s.d.) were obtained from a gecko feeding base in Guangxi Province, China for use in the experiment. The animals were kept in an artificial chamber with controlled humidity (65%-75%) and temperature (26 ± 2 °C). The markers were attached to the geckos’ snout, head, cervical vertebrae, caudal vertebrae, tail, and limbs (hip, knee, ankle) (Figure 5A). Four shapes of markers (circle, hexagon, square and triangle) were then marked on the joints of the limbs respectively.

    Gecko-inspired robot: This was a robot mimicking the gecko’s sprawling structure. The rigid body system was constructed of a bilaterally symmetrical aluminum-alloy structure (overall size: 358 mm×189.4 mm×55 mm, thigh length: 50.35 ± 0.35 mm, crus length: 60.2 ± 0.48 mm, mean ± s.d.). Four types of markers were attached to the thigh rotating joint-R1, the crus rotating joint-R2, and the wrist joint-R3 of the gecko robot (Figure 5B).

    2.4. Data filteringIn this research, 336 sets of calibration trials with different markers and spacing lengths were carried out, out of which 84 sets of samples were selected for statistical analysis. For 280 trials of the motion capture of flexible object (70 sets of each shaped marker), 48 samples were selected for statistical analysis. Also, 60 sets of verification trials were performed on the gecko and the robot, from which 10 sets of samples were selected for statistical analysis. The number of samples selected accounted for 10%-20% of the total number of experiments, in line with statistical requirements. The movements of the calibration bar and the flexible rod in their respective experiments were close to a smooth uniform motion while the range of motion of all the markers was within the focus of the multi-camera. TheASDRandRMSEof the rigid connection of the two markers in the calibration test were calculated while the lost-marker’s rate in time (TLMP) and spatial lostmarker’s rate (SLMR) of the markers in different motion forms of the flexible objects were also calculated (Support Documents-S1).

    Figure 4 A: The self-made calibration bar that can change the calibration markers and adjust the space length (L); B: A rod with high flexibility attached by ten same markers.

    Figure 5 Experimental objects with markers A: Gecko; B: Geckoinspired robot.

    The experiments involving the gecko and robot moving along a straight line were selected. The velocity was almost uniform and its value was 15% of the average velocity. At least one complete gait cycle was included in the selected video segment, and the motion range of the capturing objects was closest to the center of the volume captured by the multi-camera. The markers on the wrist and knee joints of the right rear leg of the gecko were selected as samples from which the average deviation (AD), average deviation variation rate (ADVR), and trajectory deviation rate (TDR) were calculated (Support Documents-S1). Similarly, the markers on the wrist joint, crus rotating joint and thigh rotating joint of the geckoinspired robot’s right rear leg were selected as samples from which theADand theADVRwere also calculated (Support Documents-S1).

    2.5. StatisticsSPSS software was used in the analysis of the samples (SPSS 22.0 version, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Correlation analysis was used to analyze the ratio of the markers’ space length to the diameter and the corresponding system precision (ASDR). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was also carried out to study the motion capture results of different markers and data acquisition modes on different capture objects (flexible small animal and rigid robot), with the average deviation and the variable rate of the average deviation used as the dependent variables. WhenP< 0.05, the factor variables “capture objects” and “data-acquisition modes” were significant for the dependent variables “capture deviation” and “average deviation variation rate” at 0.05 significance level.

    Table 1 Parameter definition of markers.

    Table 2 Definition of parameters for four shapes of markers.

    3. Results

    3.1. Effect of the space length and dimension of different markers on system accuracyTheASDRdecreased with the increase in thePvalue and therefore had a negative correlation with thePvalues (R= -0.65) (Figure 6A). However, it was much larger whenP= 1 was compared withP= 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Figure 6). WhenPwas 1.5 and 2, there was no significant difference in the corresponding values ofASDR. WhenPwas 3, 4, 5 and 6, there was also no significant difference inASDR. However whenPwas 5 and 6, theASDRwas near a steady state and was smallest (Figure 6B). In addition, theRSMEof the rigid body calibration experiment decreased as the diameter of the marker decreased (Figure 6C), while theASDRof the marker of 9-mm diameter was 16% higher than that of the 6-mm and 4.5-mm marker diameters.

    3.2. Lost-markers’ rate (LMR) of different shaped markers on a flexible objectTheSLMRof the hexagonal marker on the flexible body had the lowest value in the spatial twisting motion. The circular marker had the highestSLMRwhich was 2.21 times theSLMRof the hexagonal marker. The triangular marker had the second highestSLMR, which 7.23% higher than that of the square marker. On the other hand, theSLMRof the square marker was 3.21% higher than theSLMRof the hexagonal marker (Figure 7A). In the same vein, theSLMRof the flexible rod used for bending motion in plane was significantly smaller than that in the space movement. TheSLMRof the bending motion in plane was 2.03%, which was 26.52% smaller than the twisting motion in space. TheSLMRof the hexagonal marker was smallest when the two motion forms were compared. TheSLMRwas 15.58% smaller in the plane motion when compared with the space motion. When the flexible rod performed spatial twisting locomotion, the result was displayed by theTLMRof 10 markers (P1-P2) (Figure 7B) in which the differences in theTLMRof the markers at different placements was maximum. P1 and P2 had the smallestTLMRof 9%. P3-P10 had theTLMRabove 10%. P3 had aTLMRof ~49%. P5 and P6 hadTLMRabove 30% while P7-P10 hadTLMRranging from 25%-30%.

    Figure 6 A: The standard deviation rate (ASDR) for different marker diameters (D); B: The ASDR for different P (1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) values; C: The root mean square error (RMSE) of calibration experiment for different D.

    Figure 7 The lost markers rate of different shape markers on the flexible rod. A: The SLMR for spatial twisting motion and plane bending motion for four different shape markers; B: The TLMR of 10 markers on flexible body performing spatial twisting motion.

    3.3. Results of motion-capture experiment of gecko and gecko-inspired robotThe average lost-markers’ rate (ALMR) and the average rate of automatic recovery (ARAR) of the gecko were ~90% and ~50% respectively for the object mode, while they were ~25% and ~80% for the image mode (Figure 8B). TheADandADmaxof the gecko in the object mode were 1.75 mm and 3.85 mm respectively, while theADandADmaxin the image mode were 0.32 mm and 0.86 mm respectively. Similarly, theADandADmaxof the robot in object mode were ~0.53 mm and 1.26 mm respectively, while theADandADmaxin image mode were ~0.88 mm and 1.21 mm respectively. Moreover, theADVRof the gecko in the object mode and image mode were 3.46% and ~0.96% respectively, while theADVRof the robot in the object mode and image mode were ~0.58% and 1.24% respectively (Figure 9). There were significant differences between the two data acquisition and processing methods for the capture of the locomotor behavior of gecko (P<0.05), besides, significant differences which were not as obvious as that in gecko were also observed in the movement of the gecko-inspired robot (P=0.047). In addition, there was a significant difference in theADVRcaptured by the gecko in these two ways (P=0.002), whereas theADVRobtained by the two methods did not have a significant difference (P=0.134).

    3.4. Trajectory deviation rate of gecko using markers with different shapesIn our previous research, we found that theADVRof the motion capture of the gecko’s leg was significantly larger than that of the head and dorsal parts of the body (Supporting Document-Table S5). Therefore, markers of different shapes were used to capture the movement of the legs. The trajectory of the marker on the gecko’s right rear wrist joint was obtained in image mode (Figure 10A). The results revealed that the circular marker had the highestTDRof ~27%, the square and triangular markers both had the TDR of ~23% and the hexagonal marker had the leastTDRof 16% (Figure 10B). However, there was no significant difference in theTDRobtained by the gecko-inspired robot using four markers with different shapes (Figure 10B).

    4. Discussion

    4.1. Customization of marker size and placement for flexible small animal’s motion captureThe selection of the diameter of the markers for small-sized animals at a fixed joint position could be guided through this study. Some studies carried out motion-capture tests on two markers with different dimensions (50, 40, 30, 20, 10, 0 mm) and proposed that the higher the spacing, the higher the recognition degree of the markers, and that the minimum spacing between two markers that can be identified automatically is 10 mm (Richards, 1999). In addition, studies have been conducted on markers with different diameters (9.5 mm, 15 mm, 25 mm), suggesting that the larger marker size had a higher capture accuracy (Windolfet al., 2008), and that the marker size may be a determining factor in the capture of very fine movement (Smith, 1997). The calibration testing results of the markers of different sizes with the same space lengthLdemonstrated that small-size markers were more conducive to improving the capture accuracy of the system (Figure 7). This was mainly because the small size of the capture object inevitably leads to a shorter space length of the markers, which results in mutual interference and occlusion. In this manner, the recognition of the markers is reduced. Therefore, the size and space length of the markers can be regarded as two interrelated key factors of the precision of a system. Of course, the best possibility is to maximize the size of the markers while ensuring that the two markers are identifiable. Therefore, this paper explores the relationship between the size of the markers and their space length. According to the results of the calibration tests under differentPvalues, whenPwas larger than four, the system had the best capture accuracy (ASDRwas approximately 1.48%). The size of the joints of small-sized animals was very small. For example, the length of the thigh of the gecko was approximately 22.5±0.8 mm, and the maximum outer contour spacing (S) of the markers should be 1/5 of the thigh length.

    The motion capture of animals’ highly flexible moving parts could be further guided by the results of studies on the relationship between the different space lengths and sizes of the markers. Locomotor behavior of highly flexible parts was required to determine the discrete positions of the markers on them to accurately capture and characterize their motion. For example, for multi-joint movements such as of the gecko spine and tail, the multijoint segmentation method could be attempted (Figure 11): the overall structure was discretized into a number of rigid segments (Book, 1984);nmarkers (M1, M2, ..., Mn) were used to perform equidistant segmentation according to the linear distance (l); each segment (Mi-Mi+1) approximated a rigid body as a single module for the entire multi-joint connection. The corresponding marker size was selected based on the segment length.

    Figure 8 A: Schematic diagram of the lost marker and the retrieving marker; B: The average lost marker rate ALMR in the object mode and image mode and the automatic retrieve accuracy rate ARAR of the marker on gecko wrist joint.

    Figure 9 Comparison of AD and ADVR of gecko and robot. A: The AD of gecko; B: The AD a of robot; C: The ADVR of gecko; D: The ADVR of robot.

    Figure 10 Capture trajectory results of gecko and robot under different shape markers. A: Comparison of typical trajectories of geckos using different shape markers for motion capture; B: The TDR of different shape markers in gecko and robot motion-capture experiments.

    Figure 11 Abstract schematic diagram of the selection and placement of markers for small-sized and complex moving small animals (Gecko) motion capture (bottom left: Segmentation processing diagram of multi-joint tandem structure right: Large gecko body is defined according to different joint lengths and movement patterns Different points).

    4.2. Customization of marker shape for small-size and complex motion’s captureThe behavior characteristics of different parts of small animals are quite distinct. This paper attempts to improve the capture accuracy of complex space motion by changing the shape of markers. For example, the locomotion of the gecko’s legs was the twisting movement in space, and the movement range was large; thus, the markers on the joint position of the leg were easily blocked. In contrast, the locomotion of the spine and tail was mostly plane-bending deformation motion, which is very different from the motion of a rigid connected object. This paper explores the influence of the shape of the marker on the motion capture of the gecko. Flat markers made of reflective material were used to eliminate the influence of the space volume of the marker on the motion capture. In addition, although the shape of the markers varied, four shapes, namely circle, hexagon, square, and triangle, were selected in this work. Since the principle of motion tracking was based on the center position of the markers, these four shapes were guaranteed to have a center of symmetry in nature, and they were able to be represented as typical shapes.

    The effect of marker shapes on the capture accuracy of different motion forms (plane bending and spatial twisting) of flexible targets was tested. TheSLMRof hexagonal markers in complex motion was only 16.24%, which is smaller than those of the other three shapes, and the value of the circular markers was as high as 35.82% (Figure 7A), which is most likely caused by the principle of marker recognition and tracking. In software recognition and analysis, markers were characterized by a collection of pixel points (Gleicher, 1999), and the recognition of markers was related to image sharpness. The greater the number of pixels per unit area, the higher the resolution and image sharpness. Regarding the largesized marker, the shape had no effect on the success rate and accuracy of motion capture (diameter of larger than 6.4 mm (Smith, 1997)). However, the experimental hardware system (camera resolution, etc.) and capture objects (point size, position, etc.) often had constraints; in the case of small-size markers, limited resolution was a constraint (the maximumSin this study was 4.5 mm and the camera resolution was 200 FPS). The markers were represented by a small number of pixels, and then the edges of the image and the grayscale transition become clear (Schavemakeret al., 2001). The contours of the markers in the image affect the recognition and tracking of the marker in the system. At this time, the results of motion capture using different shaped markers differed. Therefore, this paper proposes that the selection of marker shape could help to improve the capture effect (lowering the lost marker rate and improving the accuracy) for small-size, flexible objects, and the motion-capture experiment on the gecko verified that the hexagon marker achieved the smallest trajectory deviation rate (18.99%).

    4.3. Motion-capture acquisition mode selection for different objectsData acquisition methods generally include the object mode and the image mode. Object mode can quickly obtain the kinematic parameters of the object by image binarization, which is mostly limited to the motion representation and dynamics modeling of rigid body systems (human body, large animals) (Carseet al., 2013; Hutchinsonet al., 2006; Qinet al., 2008). Image mode obtains the video sequence containing a large amount of animal motion information through continuous capture and recording of motion behavior (Fanet al., 2011; Huang, 2004; Luoet al., 2002); in particular, it has good inclusiveness and adaptability to complex locomotor behavior, and is thus widely used in animal locomotor behavior research (insects, etc.) (Miller, 2017). The object mode can generate kinematic data in real time and realize automatic detection, automatic calculation, and transmission, and the original 3D data acquisition can be obtained without human operation. The image mode adopts an intelligent algorithm for image processing and prediction tracking, and has a low lost-marker rate, high capture accuracy, and low acquisition requirements for equipment relative to the object mode (see Figure 8B). Therefore, this method can clearly and accurately obtain parameters such as motion trajectory, and has been applied to the capture of many complex motions (moth, mosquito, etc.) (Zhenget al., 2013).

    TheADof the gecko in the object mode was more than twice that in the image mode. TheADof the gecko robot in both acquisition modes was small. In addition, theADVRintuitively indicates the stability of motion capture: the smaller the variation value, the higher the stability. Therefore, the image mode had a great advantage in the stability of the gecko motion capture (Figure 9C). For the rigid body system, theADVRof the object mode was approximately 50% smaller than that of the image mode (Figure 9B). Thus, the object mode had an advantage for rigid-body motion capture. It is obvious that the case of losing markers also occurs in image mode. Probable reasons are as follows: a) the markers were occluded; b) there was interference from surrounding noise; and c) the marker brightness or size was lower than the set threshold. Improvements can be made from some aspects as follows: by improving the tracking algorithm, adopting the human eye recognition, and increasing the recognition threshold (this threshold can be set according to the size of the markers and the surrounding environment).

    5. Conclusions

    Animals have evolved a variety of behavior patterns to adapt to the environment. For the complex locomotor behavior of flexible small animals--Gekko gecko, our group have systematically studied the motion-capture technology from the perspective of multi-camera structure configuration, marker recognition and tracking, and data acquisition and processing, and attempted to upgrade the motion-capture system by the matching of multi-camera layout pattern, optimization of marking technology, selection of data acquisition, processing method, etc. This work focused on advancing marking technology, improving the high accuracy of motion capture of the target from the shape, size, position, and other aspects of the marker. The design principle of markers size and relative position in the marking technology was revealed through calibration tests under different combinations of markers space length and size. It was found that for the motion-capture system utilizing small-size markers, the system precision not only relied on the sizes and placements of the markers, but also on the shapes of the marker. In the experiment of the gecko and geckoinspired robot, the use of customized markers greatly improved the accuracy and stability of motion capture of the gecko. This paper has perfected the marking technology for complex motion capture of flexible, small animals, providing a more precise technical method for the quantitative characterization of animal locomotor behavior. It provides a more reliable technical support for the study of the locomotor behavior and the movement function of small-size, flexible animals with complex locomotion behavior.

    Ethical StatementsThis manuscript adheres to the appropriate reporting guidelines and community standards for data availability. This manuscript has not been published or presented elsewhere in part or in entirety. All contributing authors are aware of and agree to the submission of this manuscript. All study participants provided informed consent, and the study design was approved by the appropriate ethics review boards. This study was carried out accordance with the Guide of Laboratory Animal Management Ordinance of China. The experimental procedures were approved by the Jiangsu Association for Laboratory Animal Science (Jiangsu, China).

    AcknowledgmentsWe would like to thank Donghao SHAO to help to translate and modify this manuscript. We are grateful to Hao WANG for his guidance at the start of this study. We also need to thank the Department of Biology of University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for the opening the software system for video processing. This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 31601870 and 51435008), Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province, China (Grant No. SBK20160800 to Zhouyi WANG) and Jiangsu Provincial Key Laboratory of Bionic Functional Materials.

    Appendix

    Table S1 Parameter definition and the abbreviation.

    Object acquisition mode: Generally, at least 2 cameras were selected to binarize the image. There were only white markers and black background on the screen. At the same time, the 3D position of the markers in space were directly obtained (Figure S1A). The 3D coordinate data can be directly exported; the image acquisition mode: real-time continuous video information of the target scene (Figure S1B) was recorded, and the 3D coordinate data of the markers was obtained by the image post-processing program.

    Figure S1 A: Acquisition interface C1, C2, C3 of the quad camera in image mode C4 is a two-dimensional image taken by four cameras. B: The data acquisition interface of the quad camera in the object mode (the white points were the markers, black was background)

    Supporting Document

    S1. Calculation of some indicators

    The lost-marker’s rateDue to occlusion, interference, etc., the markers may not be captured by at least two cameras. The probability of a system losing a marker and finding the correct lost marker directly affected the accuracy of motion capture, so the lost marker rate and the automatic recovery accuracy were defined. a) The lost-marker’s rate in time-TLMR:mwas the total number of frames in a sample experiment, andnwas the total number of frames lost by the markers; b) Spatial lost-marker’s rate-SLMR: the number of all captured markers wasv, and the number of markers which can be captured at the same time wasw; c) The average rate of automatic recovery -ARAR: the total number of frames in which the loss occurred in one experiment wasp, and the number of times the system can retrieve the exact position of the lost marker after the marker lost wasq.

    Average standard deviation rate(ASDR) The Standard Deviation (SD) is an important indicator for capturing system performance evaluation. The average standard deviation rate (ASDR) of multiple calibration results reflects the accuracy of the system under the same environment. At each time of the test, the two poWintsLmaintain the same points P1 and P2. During the motion capture process, the system will reconstruct the three-dimensional coordinates of the pointtiin space, and the space coordinates are (XP1ti,YP1ti,ZP1ti), (XP2ti,YP2ti,ZP2ti), calculate the Euclidean distanceDiof two points; see Eq. (S-4) and (S-5), wherenis the number of frames contained in a sample video, andmis the statistical number of times of sample trials.

    Average deviation (AD), Average deviation’s variation rate (ADVR) and Root mean square error (RMSE) The average deviation (AD) describes the deviation value between the measured value and the true value, which is the average value of all the errors of the measured distance between the two reference points during a motion capture time. The Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) describes the deviation between the measured value and the true value, and it describes the accuracy of the motion capture system. For the rigid body object, there are markers M1 and M2 at both ends of the rigid body. The actual reference spacing between the two points isLref. The total number of frames of the sample video isu. Assumingattitime, the 3-D coordinates obtained by the automatic mode of M1 are (xw,yw,zw), the 3-D coordinates of M2 are (xe,ye,ze), and the spatial measurement distance of these two markers can be calculated asLti.

    The change of the distance of the two markers measured by motion capture on each frame of image often changes with time, and the percentage of the difference between the measured distance of the current frame and the measured distance of the previous frame is defined as the mean deviation change rate (ADVR), which describes the stability of the system capture process; it is assumed that there are two markers M1 and M2 at both ends of a rigid body on the capture object, and the distance between the two markers isLref. At timet1, the 3-D coordinates of M1 are (x1,y1,z1), the 3-D coordinates of M2 are (x2,y2,z2); at timet2, the M1 are (x'1,y'1,z'1), the 3-D coordinates of M2 are (x'2,y'2,z'2), andurefers to the total number of frames of the selected sample video.

    Trajectory deviation rate(TDR)based on image acquisition modeThe image post-processing methods ordinarily include automatic mode and manual mode, and the manual mode relies on human recognition to determine the position of the markers’ position. The automatic mode depends on a computer system that captures and predicts markers by a predictive filtering algorithm. Generally speaking, human recognition is a more accurate way to capture. By connecting the markers on the images of all the frames, the motion trajectory of the markers could be obtained. The position of the markers captured by the system was deviated from the actual position (Fig. S1), and the root mean square error of this deviation was defined as the trajectory deviation rate (TDR) indicating the difference between the measured trajectory and the real trajectory, which describes the accuracy of the system’s motion capture process for small animals. During one period, the two trajectories appeared at the maximum deviation value (dmax) at a certain moment. Assume that at the time oft1, the true 3-D coordinates of the markers on the right rear wrist of the gecko were (xm,ym,zm), and the coordinates (xa,ya,za) were obtained by automatic mode processing. The calculation of the trajectory matching is shown in the Eq. S-10, whereurefers to the number of frames included in the selected sample video.

    Figure SS1 Schematic diagram of two typical foot trajectories based on image acquisition mode. A: A gecko’s photo of the dorsal view with the right-rear ankle joint as the sampling marker; B: Schematic diagram of the deviation between the actual trajectory and the measurement trajectory obtained by the capture system based on image acquisition mode.

    S2. Markers design for experimental objects

    Table SS1 Markers designed for experimental objects.

    S3. Result statistics

    Table SS2 The RMSE of different diameter markers in the same spacing length.

    Table SS3 The RMSE of different diameter markers in the same spacing length.

    Table SS4 The SLMR of different shaped markers for spatial twisting and planar bending motions on a flexible object (%).

    Table SS5 Statistical analysis of the motion capture experiment for geckos.

    Appendix

    Table S1 Currently recognized species of genus Scutiger and known distributional ranges.

    (Continued Table S1)

    Table S2 Specimens used for morphological comparisons. JRK refers to collection number of Janak Raj Khatiwda, CIB refers to Chengdu Institute of Biology, MMHN to Muséum national d’histoire naturelle, Paris, France and NMBS to Natural History Museum of Basel, Switzerland.

    Figure S1 Bayesian inference (BI) tree based on COI sequences. Values on branches of the tree are Bayesian posterior probabilities (bpp) followed by ML bootstrap support (bs) below. Asterisk (*) denotes bpp > 90.

    Figure S2 Maximum likelihood tree based on 16S gene sequences. Values on branches of the tree are ML bootstrap supports (bs).

    Appendix

    Table S1 Average active body temperatures (Ta), active body temperatures at open microhabitat (Ta open), active body temperatures at shaded microhabitat (Ta shade), and thermal preference (Tsel) of Phrynocephalus przewalskii, Eremias argus, and E. multiocellata. Lizards were collected at the Shierliancheng field station, Institute of Grassland Research of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (111°09′ E, 40°21′ N, elevation 1 010-1 021 m). Data are expressed as mean ± SE and follow Li et al. (2017).

    Table S2 Results of resting metabolic rate (RMR) of each species at different temperatures. RMR was calculated as the CO2 production per gram of body mass per hour (ml/g/hr)*. Data are shown as mean ± SE.

    在线观看三级黄色| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 成人无遮挡网站| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| av在线播放精品| 精品久久久噜噜| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 男女边摸边吃奶| 日日啪夜夜撸| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 一级毛片 在线播放| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 亚洲av.av天堂| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 在线看a的网站| 搞女人的毛片| 国产黄片美女视频| 中文资源天堂在线| 国产91av在线免费观看| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 色哟哟·www| 国产高潮美女av| 久久热精品热| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 99久久人妻综合| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 综合色丁香网| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 赤兔流量卡办理| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91 | 99热6这里只有精品| 中文字幕制服av| 精品一区二区三卡| 亚洲最大成人中文| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃 | 99久久精品热视频| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| av在线观看视频网站免费| 在线天堂最新版资源| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 免费看av在线观看网站| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 午夜免费观看性视频| 超碰97精品在线观看| 一级av片app| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 超碰97精品在线观看| 如何舔出高潮| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 亚洲国产av新网站| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 综合色av麻豆| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 国产成人a区在线观看| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 亚洲国产精品999| 内射极品少妇av片p| 黄色日韩在线| 欧美区成人在线视频| 国产老妇女一区| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 青春草国产在线视频| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 亚洲图色成人| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 国产淫语在线视频| 国产综合懂色| 欧美人与善性xxx| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 秋霞伦理黄片| h日本视频在线播放| 九草在线视频观看| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 午夜福利高清视频| videos熟女内射| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 精品国产三级普通话版| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 高清av免费在线| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 欧美3d第一页| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 99热6这里只有精品| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 欧美3d第一页| 美女高潮的动态| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 成年免费大片在线观看| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 久久久久九九精品影院| 91精品国产九色| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 成人二区视频| 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| 国产成人精品福利久久| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 一级片'在线观看视频| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 插阴视频在线观看视频| 春色校园在线视频观看| 国内精品宾馆在线| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 色视频www国产| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 精品久久久噜噜| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 搡老乐熟女国产| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 高清欧美精品videossex| 91精品国产九色| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 三级经典国产精品| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 日日啪夜夜撸| 日日啪夜夜撸| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 国产在视频线精品| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 亚洲图色成人| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片 精品乱码久久久久久99久播 | 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 一本久久精品| 精品一区二区免费观看| 性色avwww在线观看| 国产成人aa在线观看| 超碰97精品在线观看| 一级毛片我不卡| 国产av不卡久久| 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 亚洲在线观看片| 九九在线视频观看精品| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 六月丁香七月| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区| 秋霞伦理黄片| 久久久久久久久久成人| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 少妇丰满av| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 欧美性感艳星| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 日韩成人伦理影院| 久久久久久久久久成人| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 免费看光身美女| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 少妇人妻 视频| 久久影院123| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 国产美女午夜福利| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| 亚洲综合色惰| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 国产高潮美女av| av一本久久久久| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 黄色一级大片看看| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 超碰97精品在线观看| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 六月丁香七月| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| av免费观看日本| 国产 一区精品| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 一本久久精品| 精品一区二区三卡| www.av在线官网国产| 精品人妻视频免费看| 亚州av有码| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 国产伦精品一区二区三区四那| 搞女人的毛片| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 人妻一区二区av| 精品国产三级普通话版| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 国产精品伦人一区二区| 欧美97在线视频| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 国产精品成人在线| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 久久久色成人| 极品教师在线视频| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 免费av不卡在线播放| 欧美日韩在线观看h| 高清av免费在线| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 日本免费在线观看一区| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 赤兔流量卡办理| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 观看美女的网站| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| av一本久久久久| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 男女那种视频在线观看| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 亚洲国产av新网站| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 九色成人免费人妻av| 春色校园在线视频观看| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 在线播放无遮挡| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 亚州av有码| 久久久久性生活片| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 内地一区二区视频在线| 色网站视频免费| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| tube8黄色片| 色网站视频免费| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 中国国产av一级| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| h日本视频在线播放| 久久久成人免费电影| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| av专区在线播放| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 亚洲va在线va天堂va国产| 国产毛片在线视频| av免费观看日本| 性色avwww在线观看| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 男女那种视频在线观看| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲在久久综合| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频 | 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲内射少妇av| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 国产亚洲最大av| av在线app专区| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区 | 精品一区二区三卡| h日本视频在线播放| 亚洲最大成人av| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 日本午夜av视频| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 国产成人精品福利久久| 男女边摸边吃奶| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| av免费观看日本| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 免费看av在线观看网站| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| .国产精品久久| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 高清av免费在线| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 少妇高潮的动态图| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 国产成人福利小说| 国产美女午夜福利| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 人妻系列 视频| .国产精品久久| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 伦精品一区二区三区| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 国产高清三级在线| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 久久97久久精品| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 亚洲av.av天堂| 久久久久久久国产电影| 岛国毛片在线播放| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区 | 国产探花极品一区二区| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 亚洲综合精品二区| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 亚洲精品,欧美精品| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 亚洲国产欧美人成| 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 国产 精品1| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| av播播在线观看一区| 高清av免费在线| 99热这里只有是精品50| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| av黄色大香蕉| 欧美人与善性xxx| 亚洲最大成人av| av专区在线播放| 国产极品天堂在线| 国产 精品1| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 尾随美女入室| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线 | 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 在线观看三级黄色| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 熟女电影av网| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| h日本视频在线播放| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡 | 国产黄片美女视频| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 精品少妇久久久久久888优播| 亚洲无线观看免费| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 久久久久久久久大av| 中文字幕制服av| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 亚洲色图av天堂| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 国产视频首页在线观看| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 又粗又硬又长又爽又黄的视频| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 91精品国产九色| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频 | 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看 | 免费大片18禁| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 男女国产视频网站| 91狼人影院| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 久久6这里有精品| 三级经典国产精品| 午夜福利视频精品| 国产成人freesex在线| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 岛国毛片在线播放| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 亚洲性久久影院| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| videos熟女内射| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 亚洲在久久综合| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 免费av观看视频| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 国产欧美亚洲国产| videossex国产| 全区人妻精品视频| 免费观看的影片在线观看| av网站免费在线观看视频| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 国产视频内射| 午夜视频国产福利| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 久久久欧美国产精品| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| tube8黄色片| 97在线视频观看| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 一级片'在线观看视频| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 欧美+日韩+精品| xxx大片免费视频| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看| 成人国产av品久久久| 免费看不卡的av| 午夜免费鲁丝| av在线app专区| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 少妇的逼水好多| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| av一本久久久久| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 精品久久久久久久末码| 一级毛片我不卡| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站 | 免费观看在线日韩| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 香蕉精品网在线| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 亚洲国产精品999| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 久久久久久久久久人人人人人人| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说 | 天堂网av新在线| 搡老乐熟女国产| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 亚洲最大成人av| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| tube8黄色片| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| h日本视频在线播放| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 插逼视频在线观看| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 日韩成人伦理影院| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 午夜免费观看性视频| 日本av手机在线免费观看| av.在线天堂| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在|