Camera-trapping as a methodology to assess the persistence of wildlife carcasses resulting from collisions with human-made structures

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (8) ◽  
pp. 717 ◽  
Author(s):  
João J. S. Paula ◽  
Regina M. B. Bispo ◽  
Andreia H. Leite ◽  
Pedro G. S. Pereira ◽  
Hugo M. R. G. Costa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infrared Camera ◽  
Wind Farms ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Survival Models ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Night Time ◽  
The Real ◽  
Removal Time ◽  
Carcass Persistence

Context To assess the real impact of human-made structures on bird and bat communities, a significant number of carcass-removal trials has been performed worldwide in recent decades. Recently, researchers have started to use camera traps to record carcasses exact removal time and better understand the factors that influence this event. Aims In our study, we endeavoured to identify the factors that significantly affect carcass-persistence time, such as (1) season, (2) scavenger guild, (3) type of carcass, (4) habitat and (5) weather conditions. Additionally, we aimed to assess the performance of camera-trapping technology in comparison to the conventional method typically used in carcass-removal trials. Methods We conducted two trials in two wind farms during early spring and during summer season. In each trial, we used 30 bird carcasses and 30 mice carcasses as surrogates for bats. Digital infrared camera traps were used to monitor each carcass. Chi-squared test was used to investigate differences between wind farms regarding the scavenger guild. A log-rank test was used to compare carcass-persistence times for both wind farms. Carcass-persistence times were analysed using both non-parametric and parametric survival models. Finally, we evaluated the percentage of carcasses removed during the day time and night time. Key results In our study area, carcass-persistence times were influenced by the scavenger guild present and by the exposure to rain. Camera traps allowed to record the exact removal time for the majority of the carcasses, reducing the number of visits to the study site about five times. However, there were also cases wherein loss of data occurred as a result of equipment flaws or camera theft. Conclusions Results demonstrated the importance of undertaking site-specific carcass-removal trials. Use of camera-trap methodology is a valid option, reducing displacement costs. Costs related to equipment purchase and the risk of camera theft should be taken into consideration. Implications When choosing camera-trapping, the main aspect to evaluate is the balance between the investment in equipment purchase and the cost savings through reduced displacement costs. Further studies are required concerning the real effects of the data collected on the accuracy of carcass-removal correction factor obtained.

Pits or pictures: a comparative study of camera traps and pitfall trapping to survey small mammals and reptiles

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon J. Dundas ◽  
Katinka X. Ruthrof ◽  
Giles E. St.J. Hardy ◽  
Patricia A. Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Community Composition ◽  
Small Mammals ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Infrared Camera ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Pitfall Traps ◽  
Pitfall Trapping ◽  
Trapping Methods

Context Camera trapping is a widely used monitoring tool for a broad range of species across most habitat types. Camera trapping has some major advantages over other trapping methods, such as pitfall traps, because cameras can be left in the field for extended periods of time. However, there is still a need to compare traditional trapping methods with newer techniques. Aims To compare trap rates, species richness and community composition of small mammals and reptiles by using passive, unbaited camera traps and pitfall traps. Methods We directly compared pitfall trapping (20-L buried buckets) with downward-facing infrared-camera traps (Reconyx) to survey small reptiles and mammals at 16 sites within a forested habitat in south-western Australia. We compared species captured using each method, as well as the costs associated with each. Key results Overall, we recorded 228 reptiles, 16 mammals and 1 frog across 640 pitfall trap-nights (38.3 animal captures per 100 trap-nights) compared to 271 reptiles and 265 mammals (for species likely to be captured in pitfall traps) across 2572 camera trap nights (20.8 animal captures per 100 trap-nights). When trap effort is taken into account, camera trapping was only 23% as efficient as pitfall trapping for small reptiles (mostly Scincidae), but was five times more efficient for surveying small mammals (Dasyuridae). Comparing only those species that were likely to be captured in pitfall traps, 13 species were recorded by camera trapping compared with 20 species recorded from pitfall trapping; however, we found significant (P<0.001) differences in community composition between the methods. In terms of cost efficacy, camera trapping was the more expensive method for our short, 4-month survey when taking the cost of cameras into consideration. Conclusions Applicability of camera trapping is dependent on the specific aims of the intended research. Camera trapping is beneficial where community responses to ecosystem disturbance are being tested. Live capture of small reptiles via pitfall trapping allows for positive species identification, morphological assessment, and collection of reference photos to help identify species from camera photos. Implications As stand-alone techniques, both survey methods under-represent the available species present in a region. The use of more than one survey method improves the scope of fauna community assessments.

Identification of threatened rodent species using infrared and white-flash camera traps

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phoebe A. Burns ◽  
Marissa L. Parrott ◽  
Kevin C. Rowe ◽  
Benjamin L. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Small Mammal ◽  
Infrared Camera ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Rodent Species ◽  
Mammal Species ◽  
Accurate Identification ◽  
Adequate Image Quality ◽  
Observer Experience ◽  
Small Mammal Species

Camera trapping has evolved into an efficient technique for gathering presence/absence data for many species; however, smaller mammals such as rodents are often difficult to identify in images. Identification is inhibited by co-occurrence with similar-sized small mammal species and by camera set-ups that do not provide adequate image quality. Here we describe survey procedures for identification of two small, threatened rodent species – smoky mouse (Pseudomys fumeus) and New Holland mouse (P. novaehollandiae) – using white-flash and infrared camera traps. We tested whether observers could accurately identify each species and whether experience with small mammals influenced accuracy. Pseudomys fumeus was ~20 times less likely to be misidentified on white-flash images than infrared, and observer experience affected accuracy only for infrared images, where it accounted for all observer variance. Misidentifications of P. novaehollandiae were more common across both flash types: false positives (>0.21) were more common than false negatives (<0.09), and experience accounted for only 31% of variance in observer accuracy. For this species, accurate identification appears to be, in part, an innate skill. Nonetheless, using an appropriate setup, camera trapping clearly has potential to provide broad-scale occurrence data for these and other small mammal species.

Sequence decision making for cabazitaxel (Cbz) versus abiraterone (Abt) or enzalutamide (Enz) post-docetaxel (Dtx) in a publicly funded health care system.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 57-57
Author(s):  
Alexander Watson ◽  
Richard Gagnon ◽  
Eugene Batuyong ◽  
Nimira S. Alimohamed ◽  
Richard M. Lee-Ying
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Patient Choice ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
First Line ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
The Real ◽  
Therapeutic Decisions ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Castrate Resistant

57 Background: The TROPIC trial demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit of Cbz after Dtx in metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, the novel anti-androgens (NAA) Abi and Enz have demonstrated similar improvements post-Dtx. The recent CARD trial suggests Cbz may provide the greatest OS benefit in selected patients who were rapid progressors ( < 12 months, RP) on first NAA, however Cbz use and efficacy in the real-world is uncertain. We sought to quantify the real-world use of Cbz and evaluate outcomes post-Dtx. Methods: mCRPC patients who received Dtx at the two tertiary referral centres in the Canadian province of Alberta from October 2012 (Cbz funding approval) to December 31st 2017 were assessed. We examined Cbz eligibility per TROPIC and CARD trial criteria, tracked therapies received, and documented objective and subjective reasoning for therapeutic decisions. OS was measured using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test was used to compare outcomes. The Chi-Square test was used to compare relative therapy utilization. Results: 463 mCRPC patients received Dtx over the study period, including 83 (18%) for castrate sensitive disease. At Dtx progression, 262 patients (56%) were eligible for Cbz per TROPIC trial criteria, while only 162 (62%) of those were RP on first NAA. Post-Dtx OS was lower among TROPIC-eligible patients receiving Cbz compared to those receiving Abi or Enz (9.1 vs 14.2 months, p = 0.001). This OS difference was not demonstrated among RP patients (11.2 vs 12 months, p = 0.664). The most common reasons for TROPIC ineligibility were Dtx intolerance (13%), serious comorbidities (12%), unacceptable blood counts (11%), performance status (9%) or, for CARD ineligible patients, no progression within 12 months on first NAA (38%). The most common agent immediately post-Dtx was Abi (n = 180, 39%), followed by Enz (n = 129, 28%). Significantly fewer patients (n = 56, 12%) received Cbz immediately post-Dtx (p = 0.001), and 149 (32%) received Cbz overall. First line post-Dtx, 286 patients (62%) did not have a documented discussion about Cbz, and in 172 cases (38%) consideration of Cbz was never documented. Patient choice against Cbz chemotherapy was recorded in 15% of discussions. Conclusions: In a real-world cohort of mCRPC patients, Cbz was a significantly less common choice than Abi or Enz after progression on Dtx. In a majority of these cases, no first line discussion of Cbz was documented, and in documented discussions, patient choice was the driving factor in a minority. OS post-Dtx in patients who met TROPIC trial criteria was lower for those receiving Cbz, noting that, unlike in TROPIC, these patients also received NAAs. This OS difference was not seen in those who also progressed rapidly on first NAA. These data suggest ongoing hesitation towards Cbz use in mCRPC and support careful selection of patients who may obtain benefit.

Camera Trapping

2014 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Biological Knowledge ◽  
Design Standards ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
Sydney Australia

Camera trapping in wildlife management and research is a growing global phenomenon. The technology is advancing very quickly, providing unique opportunities for collecting new biological knowledge. In order for fellow camera trap researchers and managers to share their knowledge and experience, the First International Camera Trapping Colloquium in Wildlife Management and Research was held in Sydney, Australia. Camera Trapping brings together papers from a selection of the presentations at the colloquium and provides a benchmark of the international developments and uses of camera traps for monitoring wildlife for research and management. Four major themes are presented: case studies demonstrating camera trapping for monitoring; the constraints and pitfalls of camera technologies; design standards and protocols for camera trapping surveys; and the identification, management and analyses of the myriad images that derive from camera trapping studies. The final chapter provides future directions for research using camera traps. Remarkable photographs are included, showing interesting, enlightening and entertaining images of animals 'doing their thing', making it an ideal reference for wildlife managers, conservation organisations, students and academics, pest animal researchers, private and public land managers, wildlife photographers and recreational hunters.

scholarly journals Can camera trapping provide accurate estimates of small mammal ( Myodes rutilus and Peromyscus maniculatus ) density in the boreal forest?

2015 ◽  
Vol 97 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Villette ◽  
Charles J. Krebs ◽  
Thomas S. Jung ◽  
Rudy Boonstra
Keyword(s):  
Boreal Forest ◽  
Small Mammals ◽  
Small Mammal ◽  
Peromyscus Maniculatus ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Deer Mice ◽  
Hit Rate ◽  
Myodes Rutilus ◽  
Feasible Alternative

Abstract Estimating population densities of small mammals (&lt; 100g) has typically been carried out by intensive livetrapping, but this technique may be stressful to animals and the effort required is considerable. Here, we used camera traps to detect small mammal presence and assessed if this provided a feasible alternative to livetrapping for density estimation. During 2010–2012, we used camera trapping in conjunction with mark–recapture livetrapping to estimate the density of northern red-backed voles ( Myodes rutilus ) and deer mice ( Peromyscus maniculatus ) in the boreal forest of Yukon, Canada. Densities for these 2 species ranged from 0.29 to 9.21 animals/ha and 0 to 5.90 animals/ha, respectively, over the course of this investigation. We determined if hit window—the length of time used to group consecutive videos together as single detections or “hits”—has an effect on the correlation between hit rate and population density. The relationship between hit rate and density was sensitive to hit window duration for Myodes with R2 values ranging from 0.45 to 0.59, with a 90-min hit window generating the highest value. This relationship was not sensitive to hit window duration for Peromyscus , with R2 values for the tested hit windows ranging from 0.81 to 0.84. Our results indicate that camera trapping may be a robust method for estimating density of small rodents in the boreal forest when the appropriate hit window duration is selected and that camera traps may be a useful tool for the study of small mammals in boreal forest habitat.

Camera Trapping Technology and Related Advances: into the New Millennium

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 392-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Meek ◽  
Guy Ballard ◽  
Greg Falzon ◽  
Jaimen Williamson ◽  
Heath Milne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Engineering Statistics ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Computational Sciences ◽  
Processing And Storage ◽  
Methods Analytical ◽  
Analytical Tools

Camera trapping has advanced significantly in Australia over the last two decades. These devices have become more versatile and the associated computer technology has also progressed dramatically since 2011. In the USA, the hunting industry drives most changes to camera traps; however the scientific fraternity has been instrumental in incorporating computational engineering, statistics and technology into camera trap use for wildlife research. New survey methods, analytical tools (including software for image processing and storage) and complex algorithms to analyse images have been developed. For example, pattern and texture analysis and species and individual facial recognition are now possible. In the next few decades, as technology evolves and ecological and computational sciences intertwine, new tools and devices will emerge into the market. Here we outline several projects that are underway to incorporate camera traps and associated technologies into existing and new tools for wildlife management. These also have significant implications for broader wildlife management and research.

Is camera-trapping an efficient method for surveying mammals in Neotropical forests? A case study in south-eastern Brazil

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Carolina Srbek-Araujo ◽  
Adriano Garcia Chiarello
Keyword(s):  
Atlantic Forest ◽  
Indirect Evidence ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Neotropical Forests ◽  
South Eastern ◽  
Eastern Brazil ◽  
Line Transects

Although highly diverse (Fonseca et al. 1996), the Atlantic forest mammal fauna is still poorly known, with very few sites exhaustively inventoried or subjected to long-term studies (Passamani et al. 2000). Although the first surveys using camera traps were carried out in the 1920s (e.g. Chapman 1927), most studies are rather recent (Karanth & Nichols 1998). This is not different in Brazil, where few studies have been published (Marques & Ramos 2001, Santos-Filho & Silva 2002, Silveira et al. 2003, Trolle 2003, Trolle & Kéry 2003). Given this, the objective of this paper is to assess the efficiency of camera trapping as an inventory technique for Neotropical forests in general and Atlantic forest in particular. The study was conducted at the Santa Lúcia Biological Station (SLBS), a biologically rich Atlantic Forest preserve located in south-eastern Brazil (Mendes & Padovan 2000) where mammals have been intensively live-trapped, observed from line-transects or had indirect evidence of their presence (faeces, footprints, scratches, etc.) recorded in earlier years (Passamani et al. 2000).

The effectiveness and cost of camera traps for surveying small reptiles and critical weight range mammals: a comparison with labour-intensive complementary methods

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dustin J. Welbourne ◽  
Christopher MacGregor ◽  
David Paull ◽  
David B. Lindenmayer
Keyword(s):  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Mammal Species ◽  
Critical Weight ◽  
Complementary Methods ◽  
Incidence Data ◽  
Trapping Method ◽  
The Difference

Context Biodiversity studies often require wildlife researchers to survey multiple species across taxonomic classes. To detect terrestrial squamate and mammal species, often multiple labour-intensive survey techniques are required. Camera traps appear to be more effective and cost-efficient than labour-intensive methods for detecting some mammal species. Recent developments have seen camera traps used for detecting terrestrial squamates. However, the performance of camera traps to survey terrestrial squamate and mammal species simultaneously has not been evaluated. Aim We compared the effectiveness and financial cost of a camera trapping method capable of detecting small squamates and mammals with a set of labour-intensive complementary methods, which have been used in a long-term monitoring program. Methods We compared two survey protocols: one employed labour-intensive complementary methods consisting of cage traps, Elliott traps and artificial refuges; the second utilised camera traps. Comparisons were made of the total number of species detected, species detectability, and cost of executing each type of survey. Key results Camera traps detected significantly more target species per transect than the complementary methods used. Although camera traps detected more species of reptile per transect, the difference was not significant. For the initial survey, camera traps were more expensive than the complementary methods employed, but for realistic cost scenarios camera traps were less expensive in the long term. Conclusions Camera traps are more effective and less expensive than the complementary methods used for acquiring incidence data on terrestrial squamate and mammal species. Implications The camera trapping method presented does not require customised equipment; thus, wildlife managers can use existing camera trapping equipment to detect cryptic mammal and squamate species simultaneously.

scholarly journals REGISTROS DEL GRISÓN (Galictis vittata), NUTRIA DE RÍO NEOTROPICAL (Lontra longicaudis) Y CONEJO (Sylvilagus sp) EN LA RESERVA DE LA BIOSFERA LA ENCRUCIJADA, CHIAPAS, MÉXICO

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Julio C. Hernández-Hernández ◽  
Fernando Ruiz-Gutiérrez ◽  
Enrique Vázquez-Arroyo ◽  
Cuauhtémoc Chávez
Keyword(s):  
Coastal Wetland ◽  
Biosphere Reserve ◽  
The State ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
River Otter ◽  
Natural Area ◽  
Protected Natural Area ◽  
Wetland System ◽  
Lontra Longicaudis

ResumenSe confirma mediante fototrampeo la presencia de grisón (Galictis vittata), nutria de río neotropical (Lontra longicaudis) y conejo (Sylvilagus sp) en la Reserva de la Biosfera La Encrucijada (REBIEN), en el estado de Chiapas, México. La presencia de estas especies refleja la importancia de la REBIEN, considerada como la única área natural protegida en el estado de Chiapas que protege las especies de flora y fauna del sistema de humedales costeros, reafirmando la necesidad de continuar realizando inventarios biológicos en México.Palabras clave: cámaras trampa, carnivora, Chiapas, distribución, lagomorpha, La Encrucijada.AbstractThe presence of greater grison (Galictis vittata), neotropical river otter (Lontra longicaudis) and cottontail (Sylvilagus sp) in La Encrucijada Biosphere Reserve (ENBIRE), in the state of Chiapas, Mexico, is confirmed by camera trapping. The presence of these records reflects the importance of the ENBIRE, considered the only protected natural area in the Chiapas state that protects the species of flora and fauna of the coastal wetland system, reaffirming the need to continue conducting biological inventories in Mexico.Key words: camera-traps, carnivora, Chiapas, distribution, lagomorpha, La Encrucijada.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document