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.

doi:10.3390/ani10112178

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(29 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In September 2020, 16 camera traps were randomly deployed over the study site at a minimum distance of 200 m from each other, to avoid contamination between different treatments (cf. Randler et al 2020). Cameras were mounted on trees at c. 40-50 cm of height, in proximity of wildlife trails, about 1 m from wildlife trails, facing north.…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of a commercial lure to attract red fox

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In camera trap studies, attractants may be used to increase detection probabilities of wildlife, which may help to improve estimates of abundance and occupancy. Using a semi-experimental approach, we investigated if a commercial, strawberry scented lure increased detection probability and visiting time duration in red fox Vulpes vulpes, and the potential reasons for variation in these parameters. In September 2020, within the Stelvio National Park, central Italian Alps, 32 camera sites were randomly assigned to 4 different treatments: 8 to commercial lure, the target of our investigation; 8 to orange aroma, to test for the “curiosity” effect; 8 to cat kibble, to test for the “likability” effect; 8 to camera trap only, the control test. Detection probability and duration of visiting time were estimated using hurdle negative binomial regression models. Daily detection probability was significantly higher with lure (0.078), orange aroma (0.086), kibble (0.075) than with camera trap only (0.031); in the first day after treatment, the time an animal spent in front of the cameras significantly increased with orange aroma (16.61 s) and kibble (33.78 s) compared to lure (9.97 s) and camera trap only (0.38 s). Our results support the use of lures to improve detection probability and visit duration in red fox, but we could not disentangle the drivers of increased parameter estimates. When consumable costs are considered, the use of the commercial strawberry scented lure does not appear justified for both detection probability and visit duration, and cheaper alternatives may be preferable.

show abstract

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of a commercial lure to attract red fox

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Visual data are a rich source of information about wildlife and can provide strong support for wildlife conservation and ecological research. One cost-effective way to obtain visual data of wildlife is via camera traps that work in a non-disturbing [ 1 ] and round-the-clock manner [ 2 ], thus making them ideal for observing wild animals otherwise difficult to monitor [ 3 ], e.g., nocturnal mammals [ 4 ] and large animals [ 5 ]. Because camera traps are noninvasive [ 6 ], a single deployment may record a diverse range of species [ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain-Aware Neural Architecture Search for Classifying Animals in Camera Trap Images

Jia

Tian

Zhang

2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Camera traps provide a feasible way for ecological researchers to observe wildlife, and they often produce millions of images of diverse species requiring classification. This classification can be automated via edge devices installed with convolutional neural networks, but networks may need to be customized per device because edge devices are highly heterogeneous and resource-limited. This can be addressed by a neural architecture search capable of automatically designing networks. However, search methods are usually developed based on benchmark datasets differing widely from camera trap images in many aspects including data distributions and aspect ratios. Therefore, we designed a novel search method conducted directly on camera trap images with lowered resolutions and maintained aspect ratios; the search is guided by a loss function whose hyper parameter is theoretically derived for finding lightweight networks. The search was applied to two datasets and led to lightweight networks tested on an edge device named NVIDIA Jetson X2. The resulting accuracies were competitive in comparison. Conclusively, researchers without knowledge of designing networks can obtain networks optimized for edge devices and thus establish or expand surveillance areas in a cost-effective way.

show abstract

“…However, anal gland odours have been used successfully as trap lures to control another mustelid pest, the American mink (Neovison vison Schreber) [54][55][56]. Commercial lures containing unspecified polecat (Mustela putorius) and marten (M. foina) glandular secretions also increased the probability of detecting mustelids at camera-trap monitoring sites compared with no attractant [57].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Body Odours as Lures for Stoats Mustela erminea: Captive and Field Trials

Murphy

Sjoberg

Agnew

et al. 2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eradication and control methods to limit damage caused to native biota in New Zealand by the stoat (Mustela erminea) rely on effective lures for trapping and detection devices, such as cameras. Long-life semiochemical lures have the potential for targeting stoats in situations where food-based lures are of limited success. The attractiveness of body odours of captive stoats was tested in a series of captive animal and extensive field trials to investigate their potential as trapping and monitoring lures. Stoats approached and spent significantly more time sniffing stoat urine and scats and bedding from oestrous female stoats than a non-treatment control. The bedding odours were attractive in both the breeding and the non-breeding season. Stoats also spent significantly more time sniffing oestrous stoat bedding than female ferret bedding, but the ferret odour also produced a significant response by stoats. In the field trials, there were no significant differences between the number of stoats caught with food lures (long-life rabbit or hen eggs) compared with oestrous female or male stoat bedding lures. These results indicate the potential of both stoat bedding odour and the scent of another mustelid species as stoat trapping lures that likely act as a general odour attractant rather than a specific chemical signal of oestrus.

show abstract

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

Cited by 12 publications

References 23 publications

Effectiveness of a commercial lure to attract red fox

Effectiveness of a commercial lure to attract red fox

Domain-Aware Neural Architecture Search for Classifying Animals in Camera Trap Images

Body Odours as Lures for Stoats Mustela erminea: Captive and Field Trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About