Factors conditioning the camera-trapping efficiency for the Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus)

Guil, Francisco; Agudín, S.; El-Khadir, Nuria; Fernández-Olalla, Mariana; Figueredo, Juan; Domínguez, Francisco G.; Garzón, Paloma; González, Gregorio Montero; Múñoz-Igualada, Jaime; Oria, Javier; Silvestre, Fernando

doi:10.1007/s10344-009-0353-5

Cited by 28 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the set of factors influencing the detection probability of species (e.g., Yasuda 2004, Larrucea et al 2007, Guil et al 2010, Harmsen et al 2010, there is a growing demand for the use of camera traps as a tool for estimating population parameters or monitoring the population tendencies of threatened species. When the same http://www.biotaneotropica.org.br http://www.biotaneotropica.org.br/v13n2/en/abstract?article+bn02013022013…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The detection of mammals may vary depending on the animal's sex, age, social status (alpha or beta and resident or transient) and territoriality (Larrucea et al 2007), the distribution of reproductive females, the local abundance of prey (Guil et al 2010), intraspecific and interspecific interactions (Harmsen et al 2010), human pressure and the physical environment (Guil et al 2010). Furthermore, the seasonality of the species can change the intensity with which a given species is recorded (Yasuda 2004), and the capture rate is influenced by the temporal and seasonal activity patterns of the species (Larrucea et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of camera-trap sampling design on mammal species capture rates and community structures in southeastern Brazil

Srbek‐Araujo

Chiarello

2013

Biota Neotrop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distribution of species and population attributes are critical data for biodiversity conservation. As a tool for obtaining such data, camera traps have become increasingly common throughout the world. However, there are disagreements on how camera-trap records should be used due to imperfect species detectability and limitations regarding the use of capture rates as surrogates for abundance. We evaluated variations in the capture rates and community structures of mammals in camera-trap surveys using four different sampling designs. The camera traps were installed on internal roads (in the first and fourth years of the study), at 100-200 m from roads (internal edges; second year) and at 500 m from the nearest internal road (forest interior; third year). The mammal communities sampled in the internal edges and forest interior were similar to each other but differed significantly from those sampled on the roads. Furthermore, for most species, the number of records and the capture success varied widely among the four sampling designs. A further experiment showed that camera traps placed on the same tree trunk but facing in opposing directions also recorded few species in common. Our results demonstrated that presence or non-detection and capture rates vary among the different sampling designs. These differences resulted mostly from the habitat use and behavioral attributes of species in association with differences in sampling surveys, which resulted in differential detectability. We also recorded variations in the distribution of records per sampling point and at the same spot, evidencing the stochasticity associated with the camera-trap location and orientation. These findings reinforce that for species whose specimens cannot be individually identified, the capture rates should be best used as inputs for presence and detection analyses and for behavior inferences (regarding the preferential use of habitats and activity patterns, for example). Comparisons between capture rates or among relative abundance indices, even for the same species, should be made cautiously.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of camera-trap sampling design on mammal species capture rates and community structures in southeastern Brazil

Srbek‐Araujo

Chiarello

2013

Biota Neotrop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cameras were baited with lynx urine from captive breeding programmes or with live animals (pigeons or domestic rabbits) in cages with abundant water, food and protection against sun and rain. Use of lure not only increases the capture rates (Trolle and Kery 2003;Guil et al 2010) but also increase the time spent in front of the camera and the number of pictures obtained during each visit. This allows for both lateral sides of the animal to be registered and the individual properly identified, as has been the case with 100% of detected individuals in our long-term study.…”

Section: Description Of the Monitoring Programmentioning

confidence: 98%

The use of camera trapping for estimating Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) home ranges

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of non-invasive long-term monitoring data to estimate home ranges of the critically endangered Iberian lynx has been evaluated. This programme began in 2002 and consisting of both annual latrine and camera-trap surveys, with the aims of detecting and individually identifying the maximum number of individuals and delineating female home range boundaries. Radio-tracking data were used to evaluate the accuracy of home range estimates constructed with camera-trapping data. There was little overlap of camera-trapping home ranges (7.0%±1.47), which suggests the existence of real territories consistent with the land tenure system expected for the species. Camera trapping home range estimates were half the size of radio-tracking data (54.1%±6.0 of overlapping). When comparing core areas, only the radio-tracking data did not yield improved results (36.7±5.4 of overlapping). Estimation of territories, which escaped detection each year, ranged from 0.0% to 5.7%. The results produced by camera-trapping data in this non-intrusive monitoring programme could be considered precise, and are therefore well suited to provide the knowledge required for appropriate conservation of this endangered species.

show abstract

“…, ; Guil et al . ; Harmsen, Foster & Doncaster ; Foster & Harmsen ). Although some authors have discussed the importance of carefully selecting the sampling design of camera‐traps (O'Connell, Nichols & Karanth ), no study was devoted at investigating the influence of the camera‐sampling design on detection probability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards good practice guidance in using camera‐traps in ecology: influence of sampling design on validity of ecological inferences

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. The development of camera-traps has provided an opportunity to study ecological relationships and population dynamics of species that are rare, difficult to observe or capture. Their use has seen a major increase recently, particularly with the recent progress in methods adapted to species for which individuals cannot be identified. 2. We took advantage of extensive camera-trap data sets from large spatiotemporal-scale studies of a diverse assemblage of avian and mammalian scavengers in subarctic/arctic tundra to determine sampling designs that minimize detection errors (false-negative) and to evaluate the influence of sampling design on estimation of site occupancy. 3. Results showed that raw error rates in daily presence varied between 5 and 30% among species when using time-triggered cameras with a 5-min interval. Using movement-triggered cameras resulted in larger raw error rates, between 30 and 70%, as well as a lower number of daily presences detected. Increasing the time interval from 5 to 20 min greatly increased the raw error rate in daily presence, but it had negligible impacts on estimates and precision of occupancy and detection probability. 4. Occupancy estimates were mostly influenced by variation in the number of days included during the sampling period. For most species, a threshold of between 20 and 30 problem-free days (i.e. without camera-related technical problems) was required to stabilize occupancy and detection probability, as well as to maximize their precision. 5. Based on the results, we discuss guidelines for establishing sampling designs according to the different ecological questions researchers might want to answer. To our knowledge, our study is the first to directly test the influence of sampling design in camera-trap studies, providing guidelines that are likely to be directly applicable to a large range of species and ecosystems.

show abstract

Factors conditioning the camera-trapping efficiency for the Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus)

Cited by 28 publications

References 25 publications

Influence of camera-trap sampling design on mammal species capture rates and community structures in southeastern Brazil

Influence of camera-trap sampling design on mammal species capture rates and community structures in southeastern Brazil

The use of camera trapping for estimating Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) home ranges

Towards good practice guidance in using camera‐traps in ecology: influence of sampling design on validity of ecological inferences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About