Cargando…

Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods

Camera traps have become a ubiquitous tool in ecology and conservation. They are routinely deployed in wildlife survey and monitoring work, and are being advocated as a tool for planetary-scale biodiversity monitoring. The camera trap's widespread adoption is predicated on the assumption of its...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wearn, Oliver R., Glover-Kapfer, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6458413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31032031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181748
_version_ 1783410001755242496
author Wearn, Oliver R.
Glover-Kapfer, Paul
author_facet Wearn, Oliver R.
Glover-Kapfer, Paul
author_sort Wearn, Oliver R.
collection PubMed
description Camera traps have become a ubiquitous tool in ecology and conservation. They are routinely deployed in wildlife survey and monitoring work, and are being advocated as a tool for planetary-scale biodiversity monitoring. The camera trap's widespread adoption is predicated on the assumption of its effectiveness, but the evidence base for this is lacking. Using 104 past studies, we recorded the qualitative overall recommendations made by study authors (for or against camera traps, or ambiguous), together with quantitative data on the effectiveness of camera traps (e.g. number of species detected or detection probabilities) relative to 22 other methods. Most studies recommended the use of camera traps overall and they were 39% more effective based on the quantitative data. They were significantly more effective compared with live traps (88%) and were otherwise comparable in effectiveness to other methods. Camera traps were significantly more effective than other methods at detecting a large number of species (31% more) and for generating detections of species (91% more). This makes camera traps particularly suitable for broad-spectrum biodiversity surveys. Film camera traps were found to be far less effective than digital models, which has led to an increase in camera trap effectiveness over time. There was also evidence from the authors that the use of attractants with camera traps reduced their effectiveness (counter to their intended effect), while the quantitative data indicated that camera traps were more effective in closed than open habitats. Camera traps are a highly effective wildlife survey tool and their performance will only improve with future technological advances. The images they produce also have a range of other benefits, for example as digital voucher specimens and as visual aids for outreach. The evidence-base supports the increasing use of camera traps and underlines their suitability for meeting the challenges of global-scale biodiversity monitoring.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6458413
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64584132019-04-26 Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods Wearn, Oliver R. Glover-Kapfer, Paul R Soc Open Sci Biology (Whole Organism) Camera traps have become a ubiquitous tool in ecology and conservation. They are routinely deployed in wildlife survey and monitoring work, and are being advocated as a tool for planetary-scale biodiversity monitoring. The camera trap's widespread adoption is predicated on the assumption of its effectiveness, but the evidence base for this is lacking. Using 104 past studies, we recorded the qualitative overall recommendations made by study authors (for or against camera traps, or ambiguous), together with quantitative data on the effectiveness of camera traps (e.g. number of species detected or detection probabilities) relative to 22 other methods. Most studies recommended the use of camera traps overall and they were 39% more effective based on the quantitative data. They were significantly more effective compared with live traps (88%) and were otherwise comparable in effectiveness to other methods. Camera traps were significantly more effective than other methods at detecting a large number of species (31% more) and for generating detections of species (91% more). This makes camera traps particularly suitable for broad-spectrum biodiversity surveys. Film camera traps were found to be far less effective than digital models, which has led to an increase in camera trap effectiveness over time. There was also evidence from the authors that the use of attractants with camera traps reduced their effectiveness (counter to their intended effect), while the quantitative data indicated that camera traps were more effective in closed than open habitats. Camera traps are a highly effective wildlife survey tool and their performance will only improve with future technological advances. The images they produce also have a range of other benefits, for example as digital voucher specimens and as visual aids for outreach. The evidence-base supports the increasing use of camera traps and underlines their suitability for meeting the challenges of global-scale biodiversity monitoring. The Royal Society 2019-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6458413/ /pubmed/31032031 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181748 Text en © 2019 The Authors. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Biology (Whole Organism)
Wearn, Oliver R.
Glover-Kapfer, Paul
Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
title Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
title_full Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
title_fullStr Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
title_full_unstemmed Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
title_short Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
title_sort snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods
topic Biology (Whole Organism)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6458413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31032031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181748
work_keys_str_mv AT wearnoliverr snaphappycameratrapsareaneffectivesamplingtoolwhencomparedwithalternativemethods
AT gloverkapferpaul snaphappycameratrapsareaneffectivesamplingtoolwhencomparedwithalternativemethods