Threatened Andean bears are negatively affected by human disturbance and free-ranging cattle in a protected area in northwest Peru

Aurich-Rodriguez, Francis; Piana, Renzo P.; Appleton, Robyn D.; Burton, A. Cole

doi:10.1007/s42991-021-00217-z

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In these circumstances, expert opinion can make a critical contribution. Regardless of the methods (whether expert opinion or data‐driven models), there is a need for studies to assess the accuracy of their HSM predictions and the effectiveness of conservation strategies based on such predictions (Aurich‐Rodriguez et al., 2022). Our study provides evidence to help improve expert‐derived models under the practical constraints faced in many species modeling projects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The correspondence of participant models with the camera detections varied from poor (AUC = 0.47) to high (AUC = 0.89), and there were clear differences among species (Figure 1). Participant's models were better at matching the detections of specialist species (i.e., forest-dependent ocelot and margay, AUC > 0.7) than they were for the generalist and (Araújo et al, 2005) (0.5-0.6, no correspondence; 0.6-0.7, poor correspondence; 0.7-0.8, fair correspondence; 0.8-0.9, good correspondence; >0.9, excellent correspondence; center line, median; box ends, first and third quartiles; whiskers, maximum and minimum; points, outliers).…”

Section: Individual Performancementioning

confidence: 93%

“…Camera traps have become a useful tool to monitor large areas and register elusive species. They also provide reliable estimates of habitat use (Aurich‐Rodriguez et al., 2022; Beirne et al., 2021); therefore, we considered them our best available estimate of habitat use against which the participant models could be compared.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We assessed the correspondence of participants’ models with empirical data with the most comprehensive camera trap data set from TR, consisting of 431 unbaited cameras from 18 localities for a total sampling effort of 33,763 camera days (Appendix S4). Some of these surveys have been published previously (Aurich‐Rodriguez et al., 2022; Cervera et al., 2016; García‐Olaechea et al., 2021; Hurtado & Pacheco, 2015). All surveys targeted medium‐ to large‐bodied mammals above 1 kg and used a systematic sampling design consisting of a grid of cameras spaced 1.5–2 km apart (Appendix S4), with the exception of 1 survey in which the minimum spacing was 300 m (García‐Olaechea et al., 2021).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing wildlife habitat suitability models based on expert opinion with camera trap detections

Hurtado

Hemming

Burton

2023

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expert knowledge is used in the development of wildlife habitat suitability models (HSMs) for management and conservation decisions. However, the consistency of such models has been questioned. Focusing on 1 method for elicitation, the analytic hierarchy process, we generated expert‐based HSMs for 4 felid species: 2 forest specialists (ocelot [Leopardus pardalis] and margay [Leopardus wiedii]) and 2 habitat generalist species (Pampas cat [Leopardus colocola] and puma [Puma concolor]). Using these HSMs, species detections from camera‐trap surveys, and generalized linear models, we assessed the effect of study species and expert attributes on the correspondence between expert models and camera‐trap detections. We also examined whether aggregation of participant responses and iterative feedback improved model performance. We ran 160 HSMs and found that models for specialist species showed higher correspondence with camera‐trap detections (AUC [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve] >0.7) than those for generalists (AUC < 0.7). Model correspondence increased as participant years of experience in the study area increased, but only for the understudied generalist species, Pampas cat (β = 0.024 [SE 0.007]). No other participant attribute was associated with model correspondence. Feedback and revision of models improved model correspondence, and aggregating judgments across multiple participants improved correspondence only for specialist species. The average correspondence of aggregated judgments increased as group size increased but leveled off after 5 experts for all species. Our results suggest that correspondence between expert models and empirical surveys increases as habitat specialization increases. We encourage inclusion of participants knowledgeable of the study area and model validation for expert‐based modeling of understudied and generalist species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Individual Performancementioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparing wildlife habitat suitability models based on expert opinion with camera trap detections

Hurtado

Hemming

Burton

2023

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used generalized linear models to investigate environmental, anthropogenic, and biological factors (predictor variables) potentially influencing the detection rates (response variable) of wild mammals [36][37][38]. First, we selected four habitat-related variables: elevation, slope, percentage of forest cover, and percentage of scrubland cover.…”

Section: Modeling Detection Rates Of Mammalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal Patterns of Wolves, and Sympatric Predators and Prey Relative to Human Disturbance in Northwestern Greece

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an era of increasing human pressure on nature, understanding the spatiotemporal patterns of wildlife relative to human disturbance can inform conservation efforts, especially for large carnivores. We examined the temporal activity and spatial patterns of wolves and eight sympatric mammals at 71 camera trap stations in Greece. Grey wolves temporally overlapped the most with wild boars (Δ = 0.84) and medium-sized mammals (Δ > 0.75), moderately with brown bears (Δ = 0.70), and least with roe deer (Δ = 0.46). All wild mammals were mainly nocturnal and exhibited low temporal overlap with human disturbance (humans, vehicles, livestock, and dogs; Δ = 0.18–0.36), apart from roe deer, which were more diurnal (Δ = 0.80). Six out of nine species increased their nocturnality at sites of high human disturbance, particularly roe deer and wolves. The detection of wolves was negatively associated with paved roads, the detection of roe deer was negatively associated with human disturbance, and the detection of wild boars was negatively associated with dogs. The detection of bears, boars, and foxes increased closer to settlements. Our study has applied implications for wolf conservation and human–wildlife coexistence.

show abstract

Optimizing functional zoning for Dalingshan Forest Park in China through microcosmic human disturbance evaluation

Chen,

Wang,

et al. 2023

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threatened Andean bears are negatively affected by human disturbance and free-ranging cattle in a protected area in northwest Peru

Cited by 7 publications

References 47 publications

Comparing wildlife habitat suitability models based on expert opinion with camera trap detections

Comparing wildlife habitat suitability models based on expert opinion with camera trap detections

Spatiotemporal Patterns of Wolves, and Sympatric Predators and Prey Relative to Human Disturbance in Northwestern Greece

Optimizing functional zoning for Dalingshan Forest Park in China through microcosmic human disturbance evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About