2022
DOI: 10.1002/ecs2.4005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Applying and testing a novel method to estimate animal density from motion‐triggered cameras

Abstract: Estimating animal abundance and density are fundamental goals of many wildlife monitoring programs. Camera trapping has become an increasingly popular tool to achieve these monitoring goals due to recent advances in modeling approaches and the capacity to simultaneously collect data on multiple species. However, estimating the density of unmarked populations continues to be problematic due to the difficulty in implementing complex modeling approaches, low precision of estimates, and absence of rigor in testing… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
(48 reference statements)
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Continuing advances in camera data analysis (e.g. Becker et al, 2022; Moeller et al, 2018) may allow for abundance or density estimations in the future.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Continuing advances in camera data analysis (e.g. Becker et al, 2022; Moeller et al, 2018) may allow for abundance or density estimations in the future.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, field verification of these models remains a work in progress and density estimates are very sensitive to study design and model assumptions (Villette et al . 2016, 2017; Becker et al . 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…components of detectability) calculated from the images. However, field verification of these models remains a work in progress and density estimates are very sensitive to study design and model assumptions (Villette et al 2016(Villette et al , 2017Becker et al 2022). A recent comparison of multiple models for estimating densities of lynx at Kluane showed five-fold difference in estimates among different models using camera trap data (Doran-Myers et al 2021).…”
Section: Fig 4 95% Bootstrapped Confidence Intervals For Different In...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The candidate models were then ranked using the Akaike information criterion corrected for small sample size (AICc) and their Akaike weights, with all models with ΔAICc <2 considered as competing models (Dyck et al, 2022). Model averaging and multimodel inference were conducted in the MuMIn package (Barton & Barton, 2015). We calculated Moran's I using the morans.I function from the R package ape to check the model residual for spatial autocorrelation across camera trap stations (Paradis & Schliep, 2019).…”
Section: Notementioning
confidence: 99%