scholarly journals The selfie trap: A novel camera trap design for accurate small mammal identification

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Gracanin ◽  
Vanja Gracanin ◽  
Katarina M. Mikac
Keyword(s):  
Small Mammal ◽  
Camera Trap ◽  
Trap Design

Can camera trapping be used to accurately survey and monitor the Hastings River mouse (Pseudomys oralis)?

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Meek ◽  
Karl Vernes
Keyword(s):  
Small Mammals ◽  
Small Mammal ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Camera Trap ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Camera Trapping ◽  
Common Element ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Survey Tool ◽  
Wide Range

Camera trapping is increasingly recognised as a survey tool akin to conventional small mammal survey methods such as Elliott trapping. While there are many cost and resource advantages of using camera traps, their adoption should not compromise scientific rigour. Rodents are a common element of most small mammal surveys. In 2010 we deployed camera traps to measure whether the endangered Hastings River mouse (Pseudomys oralis) could be detected and identified with an acceptable level of precision by camera traps when similar-looking sympatric small mammals were present. A comparison of three camera trap models revealed that camera traps can detect a wide range of small mammals, although white flash colour photography was necessary to capture characteristic features of morphology. However, the accurate identification of some small mammals, including P. oralis, was problematic; we conclude therefore that camera traps alone are not appropriate for P. oralis surveys, even though they might at times successfully detect them. We discuss the need for refinement of the methodology, further testing of camera trap technology, and the development of computer-assisted techniques to overcome problems associated with accurate species identification.

Pitfall trap designs to maximize invertebrate captures and minimize captures of nontarget vertebrates

2005 ◽  
Vol 137 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.L. Pearce ◽  
D. Schuurman ◽  
K.N. Barber ◽  
M. Larrivée ◽  
L.A. Venier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Small Mammal ◽  
Pitfall Trap ◽  
Carabid Beetle ◽  
Carabid Beetles ◽  
Pitfall Traps ◽  
Shallow Trap ◽  
Trap Design ◽  
Mesh Screen ◽  
Funnel Trap ◽  
Incidental Catch

AbstractPitfall traps containing a preservative have become the standard method of sampling for epigeal invertebrates such as carabid beetles and cursorial spiders. However, they often result in high levels of mortality for small mammals and amphibians. We compared the carabid, spider, and vertebrate captures within five pitfall trap types (conventional trap, funnel trap, shallow trap, Nordlander trap, and the ramp trap) to determine the trap type that would reduce vertebrate incidental catch without compromising the capture of invertebrates. We also examined the effect of a mesh screen over pitfall traps on carabid beetle and vertebrate catches. All modifications to the conventional trap design resulted in a reduction in both small mammal and amphibian captures. The shallow pitfall trap and the funnel trap captured a carabid beetle and spider fauna similar to that captured by the conventional trap. The species compositions of the ramp trap and the Nordlander trap were different from those of the other trap types, but these traps were more efficient, capturing more species per individual captured. The ramp trap appeared to be the method of choice for sampling epigeal spiders. Thus, the choice among trap designs for invertebrates depends on the objectives of the study. However, an alternative to the conventional trap design should always be considered to reduce small mammal mortality.

scholarly journals Using Camera Traps to Assess Mammal and Bird Assemblages in a Midwestern Forest

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 496-506
Author(s):  
Carl S. Cloyed ◽  
Laura R. Cappelli ◽  
David A. Tilson ◽  
John A. Crawford ◽  
Anthony I. Dell
Keyword(s):  
Community Composition ◽  
Bird Species ◽  
Camera Trap ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Phenotypic Traits ◽  
Agricultural Field ◽  
Dasypus Novemcinctus ◽  
Trap Design ◽  
Human Errors ◽  
Upland Forest

Abstract Ecologists are increasing the use of remote technologies in their research, as these methods are less labor intensive than traditional methods and oftentimes minimize the number of human errors. Camera traps can be used to remotely measure abundance and community composition and offer the potential to measure some phenotypic traits, such as body size. We designed a camera-trap setup that enabled us to capture images of both large and small animals and used our camera-trap design to investigate the community composition of mammals and birds and to estimate the biomass of mammals along two transects in a conservation reserve in Missouri. One transect ran from the edge of an agricultural field to an upland forest, and the other transect ran from the edge of a wetland to an upland forest. Over the 4.5-wk study, our cameras recorded 2,245 images that comprised 483 individuals of 16 species of mammals and birds. Coyotes Canis latrans and nine-banded armadillos Dasypus novemcinctus were unique to the riparian transect, as were several bird species. Fewer species used the forest immediately adjacent to the agricultural field, but more species used the forest immediately adjacent to the wetland. Biomass estimates from our camera-trap images were similar to those of published accounts. This is the first study to use camera traps to successfully estimate biomass. We showed that the value and utility of camera traps in wildlife studies and monitoring can be expanded by 1) using multiple cameras at different heights from the ground so as to capture different-sized animals and 2) obtaining phenotypic information of the captured animals.

User-based design specifications for the ultimate camera trap for wildlife research

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (8) ◽  
pp. 649 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. D. Meek ◽  
A. Pittet
Keyword(s):  
Manufacturing Industry ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Camera Trap ◽  
Camera Traps ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Market Demand ◽  
Scientific Application ◽  
Trap Design ◽  
The World

Context The adoption of camera trapping in place of traditional wildlife survey methods has become common despite inherent flaws in equipment and a dearth of research to test their fit for purpose. Overwhelmingly, the development of commercial camera traps has been driven by the needs of North American hunters. Camera-trap models and features are influenced by these market forces that drive the changes in designs as new technologies develop. This focus on recreation, rather than research has often frustrated wildlife professionals as the equipment has rarely met minimum standards for scientific application. Aims We investigated the demand for white-flash camera traps around the world to highlight the demand for such camera traps in wildlife research to the manufacturing industry. We also compiled the camera-trap specifications required by scientists through the world in an effort to influence and improve the quality of camera traps for research. Methods We carried out an internet-based survey of biologists, zoologists, conservationists and other wildlife researchers by using a questionnaire to gather baseline market data on camera-trap use and demand. We also conducted an informal survey of scientists via email and in person, asking for their preferences and features of an ultimate camera-trap design. Key result Infrared camera traps are widely used and more so than white-flash camera traps, although the demand for white flash remains significant. Cost, speed, size, ease of use, versatility and the range of settings were the key features identified in a good camera trap. Conclusions The present paper describes and discusses the desired features and specifications as defined by over 150 scientists using camera traps around the world. Data gathered also provide some insight into the market demand for camera traps by biologists, zoologists, conservationists and other wildlife researchers around the world. These design features are discussed under the guise of the ultimate camera trap for wildlife research, with the disclaimer that no such camera trap currently exists. Implications The information provided in the paper has and will be a useful guide to future camera-trap designs, although it is unlikely that all of the features required will ever be produced in a cheap camera trap.

Camera trap survey of animals in Xishuangbanna Forest Dynamics Plot, Yunnan

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhang Mingxia ◽  
Cao Lin ◽  
Quan Ruichang ◽  
Xiao Zhishu ◽  
Yang Xiaofei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Forest Dynamics ◽  
Camera Trap ◽  
Forest Dynamics Plot

Camera trap survey of mammals and birds in Huaping National Nature Reserve, Guangxi

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 785 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wang Guohai ◽  
Shi Zepan ◽  
Liu Xiuju ◽  
Zhou Qihai ◽  
Xiao Zhishu
Keyword(s):  
Nature Reserve ◽  
Camera Trap ◽  
National Nature Reserve
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document