Which species discovers novel food sources first? A camera trap study in a natural environment

Randler, Christoph

doi:10.1186/s40657-021-00269-2

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the presented study, feeders in a given park were visited and refilled in various orders on different days, which allowed for the diversity in bird selection to be taken into account. However, this does not change the fact that to accurately describe the selectivity of all birds participating in the feeding experiment, additional methods should be used, such as recording food consumption using camera traps useful for explaining which species discover novel food sources first, affecting other birds, and successfully avoiding predators [27]. Since the decisions of the urban explorers who first discovered seed feeders certainly influenced the foraging of other birds, this is a limitation of the results discussed, suggesting that they should be treated with caution in interpretation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the reason might be much simpler, e.g., accidental preparation of feeders with divided layers later, closer to noon than in the morning, when bird explorers notice food faster [25,26]. This is an aspect of foraging experiments where camera traps would be useful [27]. Otherwise, we will never know whether novel food sources are discovered by the best-adapted or risky urban explorers, or whether it is the result of an accident, e.g., spilling seeds outside the feeder.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bird Feeder Explorers Are Not Attracted by the Seeds of Invasive Weeds in Winter

Grzędzicka

2024

Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Winter feeding of birds is one of the most widespread forms of human influence on animals in the world. Urban areas, however, contain many other food sources apart from the contents of feeders, including contaminated food and seeds of invasive plants. This research aimed to investigate whether birds exploring urban food select it, giving up potentially toxic or unknown seeds, or whether they use every available food. In the winter of the year 2022, an experiment was carried out with 18 feeders in two city parks in Kraków, Poland, which was based on feeding birds using sunflower seeds with various admixtures of the invasive Caucasian hogweeds Heracleum sp. seeds. Despite the detection of pecking marks on the hogweed seeds, only a small part of them disappeared from the feeders compared to the intensive feeding of birds on sunflower seeds. This result shows that not every new food source in the city can be used by birds. Urban explorers remain selective when choosing food, which keeps their behaviour close to non-urban populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bird Feeder Explorers Are Not Attracted by the Seeds of Invasive Weeds in Winter

Grzędzicka

2024

Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our occupancy modelling explicitly adjusted for detection probability and distance was controlled in our study, at least in part, due to a lure positioned at a standardised distance from the camera. Some species, patricularly abundant ones, discover novel food sources more rapidly than others (Randler 2021), and the role of invertebrates and differences in species attraction to them might concievably have influenced time to discovery. Factors which influence the detectability of different bird species on cameras suggest that caution should be used when inferring assemblage composition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do different camera trap lures result in different detection rates of vertebrates because of their attractiveness to invertebrates?

Weston,

Porch,

Whisson

et al. 2024

Eco Management Restoration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe type of attractant used in camera trap lures is recognised as an important methodological decision. We investigated whether the type of attractant in lures indirectly influences detectability of wildlife on cameras via differential attraction of invertebrates which themselves constitute prey of insectivorous animals. We indexed invertebrate abundance using pitfall and sticky‐traps at 36 camera stations deployed in a Latin Squares design for 5 days, with three lure options (peanut‐butter, tuna oil and control) in a coastal mosaic, at Cape Otway, Victoria, Australia. We classified vegetation types (habitat) as: low (no or sparse), medium (grass), and high (shrubs) from aerial imagery and estimated their percentage cover at each grid point (medium and high were uncorrelated and included as separate variables in models). We first examine if attractant types or the habitat influence invertebrate abundance and assemblage, and then examine whether invertebrate abundance influences vertebrate detectability on cameras. There was a trend for the composition of terrestrial invertebrate assemblages to be influenced by lure type (peanut‐butter, tuna oil and control attractants) and the proportional cover of medium height vegetation within 20 m; however, assemblage composition was clearly influenced by the proportional area of high vegetation cover within 20 m. The detection probability of insectivorous birds increased where medium‐sized (2.5–5 mm) flying invertebrates were present whereas insectivorous mammal detectability increased with terrestrial invertebrate species richness. Mammal detections are more likely associated with use of habitats that have more diverse invertebrate communities. This study provides some support to the hypothesis of the indirect mechanism whereby bird detections are influenced by invertebrate attraction to lures. Therefore, lure choice for camera traps is critical and the possibility of guild‐level biases in detection suggests that cautious interpretation of results is required.

show abstract

Circadian activity of the fat dormouse Glis glis measured with camera traps at bait stations

Randler

Kalb

2021

Mamm Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring of small nocturnal and arboreal rodents is difficult and often conducted using indirect techniques. Here, we measured the circadian activity of the fat dormouse (Glis glis) directly using camera traps. The study took place at the Spitzberg in SW Germany. Data were collected using six Bushnell Natureview cameras with a macro lens at baited feeding stations. At 14 out of 41 active camera locations, edible dormice occurred. We collected 301 events between 8th July and 5th October 2018. There were 21.5 events per camera trap (SD 30.4), ranging from 1 to 82. The edible dormouse showed a nocturnal pattern, with a mean activity around midnight at 24:15 h. The pattern shows a slightly bimodal activity. Feeding activity started around or even slightly before sunset and stopped right before sunrise. The study shows that circadian activity, in this respect feeding activity, can be captured by camera trapping, which is a non-invasive method, and can be applied easily in the field.

show abstract

Which species discovers novel food sources first? A camera trap study in a natural environment

Cited by 3 publications

References 13 publications

Bird Feeder Explorers Are Not Attracted by the Seeds of Invasive Weeds in Winter

Bird Feeder Explorers Are Not Attracted by the Seeds of Invasive Weeds in Winter

Do different camera trap lures result in different detection rates of vertebrates because of their attractiveness to invertebrates?

Circadian activity of the fat dormouse Glis glis measured with camera traps at bait stations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About