Cargando…
A novel camera trapping method for individually identifying pumas by facial features
Camera traps (CTs), used in conjunction with capture–mark–recapture analyses (CMR; photo‐CMR), are a valuable tool for estimating abundances of rare and elusive wildlife. However, a critical requirement of photo‐CMR is that individuals are identifiable in CT images (photo‐ID). Thus, photo‐CMR is gen...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8809426/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35136565 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8536 |
Sumario: | Camera traps (CTs), used in conjunction with capture–mark–recapture analyses (CMR; photo‐CMR), are a valuable tool for estimating abundances of rare and elusive wildlife. However, a critical requirement of photo‐CMR is that individuals are identifiable in CT images (photo‐ID). Thus, photo‐CMR is generally limited to species with conspicuous pelage patterns (e.g., stripes or spots) using lateral‐view images from CTs stationed along travel paths. Pumas (Puma concolor) are an elusive species for which CTs are highly effective at collecting image data, but their suitability to photo‐ID is controversial due to their lack of pelage markings. For a wide range of taxa, facial features are useful for photo‐ID, but this method has generally been limited to images collected with traditional handheld cameras. Here, we evaluate the feasibility of using puma facial features for photo‐ID in a CT framework. We consider two issues: (1) the ability to capture puma facial images using CTs, and (2) whether facial images improve human ability to photo‐ID pumas. We tested a novel CT accessory that used light and sound to attract the attention of pumas, thereby collecting face images for use in photo‐ID. Face captures rates increased at CTs that included the accessory (n = 208, χ (2) = 43.23, p ≤ .001). To evaluate if puma faces improve photo‐ID, we measured the inter‐rater agreement of 5 independent assessments of photo‐ID for 16 of our puma face capture events. Agreement was moderate to good (Fleiss’ kappa = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.48–0.60), and was 92.90% greater than a previously published kappa using conventional CT methods. This study is the first time that such a technique has been used for photo‐ID, and we believe a promising demonstration of how photo‐ID may be feasible for an elusive but unmarked species. |
---|