Dataset Information

Single-Camera Trap Survey Designs Miss Detections: Impacts on Estimates of Occupancy and Community Metrics.

ABSTRACT: The use of camera traps as a tool for studying wildlife populations is commonplace. However, few have considered how the number of detections of wildlife differ depending upon the number of camera traps placed at cameras-sites, and how this impacts estimates of occupancy and community composition. During December 2015-February 2016, we deployed four camera traps per camera-site, separated into treatment groups of one, two, and four camera traps, in southern Illinois to compare whether estimates of wildlife community metrics and occupancy probabilities differed among survey methods. The overall number of species detected per camera-site was greatest with the four-camera survey method (P<0.0184). The four-camera survey method detected 1.25 additional species per camera-site than the one-camera survey method, and was the only survey method to completely detect the ground-dwelling silvicolous community. The four-camera survey method recorded individual species at 3.57 additional camera-sites (P = 0.003) and nearly doubled the number of camera-sites where white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) were detected compared to one- and two-camera survey methods. We also compared occupancy rates estimated by survey methods; as the number of cameras deployed per camera-site increased, occupancy estimates were closer to naïve estimates, detection probabilities increased, and standard errors of detection probabilities decreased. Additionally, each survey method resulted in differing top-ranked, species-specific occupancy models when habitat covariates were included. Underestimates of occurrence and misrepresented community metrics can have significant impacts on species of conservation concern, particularly in areas where habitat manipulation is likely. Having multiple camera traps per site revealed significant shortcomings with the common one-camera trap survey method. While we realize survey design is often constrained logistically, we suggest increasing effort to at least two camera traps facing opposite directions per camera-site in habitat association studies, and to utilize camera-trap arrays when restricted by equipment availability.

SUBMITTER: Pease BS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5130212 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Single-Camera Trap Survey Designs Miss Detections: Impacts on Estimates of Occupancy and Community Metrics.

Pease Brent S BS Nielsen Clayton K CK Holzmueller Eric J EJ

PloS one 20161130 11

The use of camera traps as a tool for studying wildlife populations is commonplace. However, few have considered how the number of detections of wildlife differ depending upon the number of camera traps placed at cameras-sites, and how this impacts estimates of occupancy and community composition. During December 2015-February 2016, we deployed four camera traps per camera-site, separated into treatment groups of one, two, and four camera traps, in southern Illinois to compare whether estimates ...[more]

PMID: 27902733

Similar Datasets

Project description:Camera traps are a unique survey tool used to monitor a wide variety of mammal species. Camera trap (CT) data can be used to estimate animal distribution, density, and behaviour. Attractants, such as scent lures, are often used in an effort to increase CT detections; however, the degree which the effects of attractants vary across species is not well understood. We investigated the effects of scent lure on mammal detections by comparing detection rates between 404 lured and 440 unlured CT stations sampled in Alberta, Canada over 120 day survey periods between February and August in 2015 and 2016. We used zero-inflated negative binomial generalized linear mixed models to test the effect of lure on detection rates for a) all mammals, b) six functional groups (all predator species, all prey, large carnivores, small carnivores, small mammals, ungulates), and c) four varied species of management interest (fisher, Pekania pennanti; gray wolf, Canis lupus; moose, Alces alces; and Richardson's ground squirrel; Urocitellus richardsonii). Mammals were detected at 800 of the 844 CTs, with nearly equal numbers of total detections at CTs with (7110) and without (7530) lure, and variable effects of lure on groups and individual species. Scent lure significantly increased detections of predators as a group, including large and small carnivore sub-groups and fisher specifically, but not of gray wolf. There was no effect of scent lure on detections of prey species, including the small mammal and ungulate sub-groups and moose and Richardson's ground squirrel specifically. We recommend that researchers explicitly consider the variable effects of scent lure on CT detections across species when designing, interpreting, or comparing multi-species surveys. Additional research is needed to further quantify variation in species responses to scent lures and other attractants, and to elucidate the effect of attractants on community-level inferences from camera trap surveys.

Project description:Statistical models supporting inferences about species occurrence patterns in relation to environmental gradients are fundamental to ecology and conservation biology. A common implicit assumption is that the sampling design is ignorable and does not need to be formally accounted for in analyses. The analyst assumes data are representative of the desired population and statistical modeling proceeds. However, if data sets from probability and non-probability surveys are combined or unequal selection probabilities are used, the design may be non-ignorable. We outline the use of pseudo-maximum likelihood estimation for site-occupancy models to account for such non-ignorable survey designs. This estimation method accounts for the survey design by properly weighting the pseudo-likelihood equation. In our empirical example, legacy and newer randomly selected locations were surveyed for bats to bridge a historic statewide effort with an ongoing nationwide program. We provide a worked example using bat acoustic detection/non-detection data and show how analysts can diagnose whether their design is ignorable. Using simulations we assessed whether our approach is viable for modeling data sets composed of sites contributed outside of a probability design. Pseudo-maximum likelihood estimates differed from the usual maximum likelihood occupancy estimates for some bat species. Using simulations we show the maximum likelihood estimator of species-environment relationships with non-ignorable sampling designs was biased, whereas the pseudo-likelihood estimator was design unbiased. However, in our simulation study the designs composed of a large proportion of legacy or non-probability sites resulted in estimation issues for standard errors. These issues were likely a result of highly variable weights confounded by small sample sizes (5% or 10% sampling intensity and four revisits). Aggregating data sets from multiple sources logically supports larger sample sizes and potentially increases spatial extents for statistical inferences. Our results suggest that ignoring the mechanism for how locations were selected for data collection (e.g., the sampling design) could result in erroneous model-based conclusions. Therefore, in order to ensure robust and defensible recommendations for evidence-based conservation decision-making, the survey design information in addition to the data themselves must be available for analysts. Details for constructing the weights used in estimation and code for implementation are provided.

Project description:The use of camera traps in ecology helps affordably address questions about the distribution and density of cryptic and mobile species. The random encounter model (REM) is a camera-trap method that has been developed to estimate population densities using unmarked individuals. However, few studies have evaluated its reliability in the field, especially considering that this method relies on parameters obtained from collared animals (i.e., average speed, in km/h), which can be difficult to acquire at low cost and effort. Our objectives were to (1) assess the reliability of this camera-trap method and (2) evaluate the influence of parameters coming from different populations on density estimates. We estimated a reference density of black bears (Ursus americanus) in Forillon National Park (Québec, Canada) using a spatial capture-recapture estimator based on hair-snag stations. We calculated average speed using telemetry data acquired from four different bear populations located outside our study area and estimated densities using the REM. The reference density, determined with a Bayesian spatial capture-recapture model, was 2.87 individuals/10km2 [95% CI: 2.41-3.45], which was slightly lower (although not significatively different) than the different densities estimated using REM (ranging from 4.06-5.38 bears/10km2 depending on the average speed value used). Average speed values obtained from different populations had minor impacts on REM estimates when the difference in average speed between populations was low. Bias in speed values for slow-moving species had more influence on REM density estimates than for fast-moving species. We pointed out that a potential overestimation of density occurs when average speed is underestimated, that is, using GPS telemetry locations with large fix-rate intervals. Our study suggests that REM could be an affordable alternative to conventional spatial capture-recapture, but highlights the need for further research to control for potential bias associated with speed values determined using GPS telemetry data.

Project description:Motion-activated cameras are a versatile tool that wildlife biologists can use for sampling wild animal populations to estimate species occurrence. Occupancy modelling provides a flexible framework for the analysis of these data; explicitly recognizing that given a species occupies an area the probability of detecting it is often less than one. Despite the number of studies using camera data in an occupancy framework, there is only limited guidance from the scientific literature about survey design trade-offs when using motion-activated cameras. A fuller understanding of these trade-offs will allow researchers to maximise available resources and determine whether the objectives of a monitoring program or research study are achievable. We use an empirical dataset collected from 40 cameras deployed across 160 km(2) of the Western Slope of Colorado, USA to explore how survey effort (number of cameras deployed and the length of sampling period) affects the accuracy and precision (i.e., error) of the occupancy estimate for ten mammal and three virtual species. We do this using a simulation approach where species occupancy and detection parameters were informed by empirical data from motion-activated cameras. A total of 54 survey designs were considered by varying combinations of sites (10-120 cameras) and occasions (20-120 survey days). Our findings demonstrate that increasing total sampling effort generally decreases error associated with the occupancy estimate, but changing the number of sites or sampling duration can have very different results, depending on whether a species is spatially common or rare (occupancy = ψ) and easy or hard to detect when available (detection probability = p). For rare species with a low probability of detection (i.e., raccoon and spotted skunk) the required survey effort includes maximizing the number of sites and the number of survey days, often to a level that may be logistically unrealistic for many studies. For common species with low detection (i.e., bobcat and coyote) the most efficient sampling approach was to increase the number of occasions (survey days). However, for common species that are moderately detectable (i.e., cottontail rabbit and mule deer), occupancy could reliably be estimated with comparatively low numbers of cameras over a short sampling period. We provide general guidelines for reliably estimating occupancy across a range of terrestrial species (rare to common: ψ = 0.175-0.970, and low to moderate detectability: p = 0.003-0.200) using motion-activated cameras. Wildlife researchers/managers with limited knowledge of the relative abundance and likelihood of detection of a particular species can apply these guidelines regardless of location. We emphasize the importance of prior biological knowledge, defined objectives and detailed planning (e.g., simulating different study-design scenarios) for designing effective monitoring programs and research studies.

Dataset Information

Single-Camera Trap Survey Designs Miss Detections: Impacts on Estimates of Occupancy and Community Metrics.

Publications

Single-Camera Trap Survey Designs Miss Detections: Impacts on Estimates of Occupancy and Community Metrics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets