Cargando…

Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Camera traps are now widely used in animal research because they can monitor animals continuously. Nocturnal mammals are particularly difficult to monitor, and identification without cameras would be difficult. However, camera traps can be improved. We here compared two experimental...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Randler, Christoph, Katzmaier, Tobias, Kalb, Jochen, Kalb, Nadine, Gottschalk, Thomas K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7700128/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33266361
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10112178
_version_ 1783616206554529792
author Randler, Christoph
Katzmaier, Tobias
Kalb, Jochen
Kalb, Nadine
Gottschalk, Thomas K.
author_facet Randler, Christoph
Katzmaier, Tobias
Kalb, Jochen
Kalb, Nadine
Gottschalk, Thomas K.
author_sort Randler, Christoph
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Camera traps are now widely used in animal research because they can monitor animals continuously. Nocturnal mammals are particularly difficult to monitor, and identification without cameras would be difficult. However, camera traps can be improved. We here compared two experimental settings to increase detection and images taken of mustelids, mostly martens. Both tuna bait and glandular scents improved the detection and the number of images taken. Both methods were more successful than a control group setting without any attractants. ABSTRACT: Motion-triggered trail cameras (hereafter camera traps) are powerful tools which are increasingly used in biological research, especially for species inventories or the estimation of species activity. However, camera traps do not always reliably detect animal visits, as a target species might be too fast, too small, or too far away to trigger an image. Therefore, researchers often apply attractants, such as food or glandular scents, to increase the likelihood of capturing animals. Moreover, with attractants, individuals might remain in front of a camera trap for longer periods leading to a higher number of images and enhanced image quality, which in turn might aid in species identification. The current study compared how two commonly used attractants, bait (tuna) and glandular scent (mustelid mix), affected the detection and the number of images taken by camera traps compared to control camera sites with conventional camera traps. We used a before–after control group design, including a baseline. Attractants increased the probability of detecting the target species and number of images. Tuna experiments produced on average 7.25 times as many images per visit than control camera traps, and scent lures produced on average 18.7 times as many images per visit than the control traps.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7700128
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77001282020-11-30 Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps Randler, Christoph Katzmaier, Tobias Kalb, Jochen Kalb, Nadine Gottschalk, Thomas K. Animals (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Camera traps are now widely used in animal research because they can monitor animals continuously. Nocturnal mammals are particularly difficult to monitor, and identification without cameras would be difficult. However, camera traps can be improved. We here compared two experimental settings to increase detection and images taken of mustelids, mostly martens. Both tuna bait and glandular scents improved the detection and the number of images taken. Both methods were more successful than a control group setting without any attractants. ABSTRACT: Motion-triggered trail cameras (hereafter camera traps) are powerful tools which are increasingly used in biological research, especially for species inventories or the estimation of species activity. However, camera traps do not always reliably detect animal visits, as a target species might be too fast, too small, or too far away to trigger an image. Therefore, researchers often apply attractants, such as food or glandular scents, to increase the likelihood of capturing animals. Moreover, with attractants, individuals might remain in front of a camera trap for longer periods leading to a higher number of images and enhanced image quality, which in turn might aid in species identification. The current study compared how two commonly used attractants, bait (tuna) and glandular scent (mustelid mix), affected the detection and the number of images taken by camera traps compared to control camera sites with conventional camera traps. We used a before–after control group design, including a baseline. Attractants increased the probability of detecting the target species and number of images. Tuna experiments produced on average 7.25 times as many images per visit than control camera traps, and scent lures produced on average 18.7 times as many images per visit than the control traps. MDPI 2020-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7700128/ /pubmed/33266361 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10112178 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Randler, Christoph
Katzmaier, Tobias
Kalb, Jochen
Kalb, Nadine
Gottschalk, Thomas K.
Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps
title Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps
title_full Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps
title_fullStr Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps
title_full_unstemmed Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps
title_short Baiting/Luring Improves Detection Probability and Species Identification—A Case Study of Mustelids with Camera Traps
title_sort baiting/luring improves detection probability and species identification—a case study of mustelids with camera traps
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7700128/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33266361
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10112178
work_keys_str_mv AT randlerchristoph baitingluringimprovesdetectionprobabilityandspeciesidentificationacasestudyofmustelidswithcameratraps
AT katzmaiertobias baitingluringimprovesdetectionprobabilityandspeciesidentificationacasestudyofmustelidswithcameratraps
AT kalbjochen baitingluringimprovesdetectionprobabilityandspeciesidentificationacasestudyofmustelidswithcameratraps
AT kalbnadine baitingluringimprovesdetectionprobabilityandspeciesidentificationacasestudyofmustelidswithcameratraps
AT gottschalkthomask baitingluringimprovesdetectionprobabilityandspeciesidentificationacasestudyofmustelidswithcameratraps