Dataset Information

Empirical evaluation of the spatial scale and detection process of camera trap surveys.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Camera traps present a valuable tool for monitoring animals but detect species imperfectly. Occupancy models are frequently used to address this, but it is unclear what spatial scale the data represent. Although individual cameras monitor animal activity within a small target window in front of the device, many practitioners use these data to infer animal presence over larger, vaguely-defined areas. Animal movement is generally presumed to link these scales, but fine-scale heterogeneity in animal space use could disrupt this relationship.

Methods

We deployed cameras at 10 m intervals across a 0.6 ha forest plot to create an unprecedentedly dense sensor array that allows us to compare animal detections at these two scales. Using time-stamped camera detections we reconstructed fine-scale movement paths of four mammal species and characterized (a) how well animal use of a single camera represented use of the surrounding plot, (b) how well cameras detected animals, and (c) how these processes affected overall detection probability, p. We used these observations to parameterize simulations that test the performance of occupancy models in realistic scenarios.

Results

We document two important aspects of animal movement and how it affects sampling with passive detectors. First, animal space use is heterogeneous at the camera-trap scale, and data from a single camera may poorly represent activity in its surroundings. Second, cameras frequently (14-71%) fail to record passing animals. Our simulations show how this heterogeneity can introduce unmodeled variation into detection probability, biasing occupancy estimates for species with low p.

Conclusions

Occupancy or population estimates with camera traps could be improved by increasing camera reliability to reduce missed detections, adding covariates to model heterogeneity in p, or increasing the area sampled by each camera through different sampling designs or technologies.

SUBMITTER: Kays R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8364038 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Camera traps are a key tool in ecological studies, and are increasingly being used to understand entire communities. However, robust inferences continue to be hampered by low detection of rare and elusive species. Attractants can be used to increase detection rates, but may also alter behaviour, and little research has evaluated short-term, localized response to the presence of attractants. We conducted three camera trap surveys in Kibale National Park, Uganda, using food baits and scent lures ("attractants") at each camera station to entice small carnivores to pass in front of camera stations. To examine the interrelationship between scavenging and response to attractants, we also placed camera traps at five food refuse pits. We modelled the effect of attractant and duration of trap placement on the detection probability of small carnivores and selected African golden cat Caracal aurata prey items. We examine transient site response of each species, by comparing our observed likelihood of detection in each 24 h period from 1-7 d following refreshing of attractants to randomly generated capture histories. African civet Civettictis civetta, rusty-spotted genet Genetta maculata, African palm civet Nandinia binotata, and marsh mongoose Atilax paludinosus detection probabilities were highest and Weyns's red duiker Cephalophus wenysi detection probability was lowest immediately after attractants were placed. Within 24 h after attractant was placed, rusty-spotted genet and African palm civet were more likely to be detected and African golden cat, red duiker, and blue duiker Philantomba monticola were less likely to be detected. Our results suggest that attractants can increase detection of small-bodied species and include some arboreal species in terrestrial camera trap sampling. However, attractants may also alter short-term visitation rates of some species, with potentially cascading effects on others. Community level and intraguild interaction studies should control for the potentially confounding effects of attractants on spatial activity patterns.

Project description:Camera traps (CTs) are an increasingly popular tool for wildlife survey and monitoring. Estimating relative abundance in unmarked species is often done using detection rate as an index of relative abundance, which assumes that detection rate has a positive linear relationship with true abundance. This assumption may be violated if movement behavior varies with density, but the degree to which movement behavior is density-dependent across taxa is unclear. The potential confounding of population-level relative abundance indices by movement would depend on how regularly, and by what magnitude, movement rate and home-range size vary with density. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify relationships between movement rate, home-range size, and density, across terrestrial mammalian taxa. We then simulated animal movements and CT sampling to test the effect of contrasting movement scenarios on CT detection rate indices. Overall, movement rate and home-range size were negatively correlated with density and positively correlated with one another. The strength of the relationships varied significantly between taxa and populations. In simulations, detection rates were related to true abundance but underestimated change, particularly for slower moving species with small home ranges. In situations where animal space use changes markedly with density, we estimate that up to thirty percent of a true change in relative abundance may be missed due to the confounding effect of movement, making trend estimation more difficult. The common assumption that movement remains constant across densities is therefore violated across a wide range of mammal species. When studying unmarked species using CT detection rates, researchers and managers should explicitly consider that such indices of relative abundance reflect both density and movement. Practitioners interpreting changes in camera detection rates should be aware that observed differences may be biased low relative to true changes in abundance. Further information on animal movement, or methods that do not depend on assumptions of density-independent movement, may be required to make robust inferences on population trends.

Project description:A time-consuming challenge faced by camera trap practitioners is the extraction of meaningful data from images to inform ecological management. An increasingly popular solution is automated image classification software. However, most solutions are not sufficiently robust to be deployed on a large scale due to lack of location invariance when transferring models between sites. This prevents optimal use of ecological data resulting in significant expenditure of time and resources to annotate and retrain deep learning models.We present a method ecologists can use to develop optimized location invariant camera trap object detectors by (a) evaluating publicly available image datasets characterized by high intradataset variability in training deep learning models for camera trap object detection and (b) using small subsets of camera trap images to optimize models for high accuracy domain-specific applications.We collected and annotated three datasets of images of striped hyena, rhinoceros, and pigs, from the image-sharing websites FlickR and iNaturalist (FiN), to train three object detection models. We compared the performance of these models to that of three models trained on the Wildlife Conservation Society and Camera CATalogue datasets, when tested on out-of-sample Snapshot Serengeti datasets. We then increased FiN model robustness by infusing small subsets of camera trap images into training.In all experiments, the mean Average Precision (mAP) of the FiN trained models was significantly higher (82.33%-88.59%) than that achieved by the models trained only on camera trap datasets (38.5%-66.74%). Infusion further improved mAP by 1.78%-32.08%.Ecologists can use FiN images for training deep learning object detection solutions for camera trap image processing to develop location invariant, robust, out-of-the-box software. Models can be further optimized by infusion of 5%-10% camera trap images into training data. This would allow AI technologies to be deployed on a large scale in ecological applications. Datasets and code related to this study are open source and available on this repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.1c59zw3tx.