The effect of scent lures on detection is not equitable among sympatric species
Marlin M. Dart
A , Lora B. Perkins A , Jonathan A. Jenks A , Gary Hatfield B and Robert C. Lonsinger C *
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Department of Natural Resource Management, South Dakota State University, 1390 College Avenue, Brookings, SD 57007, USA.
B Department of Mathematics and Statistics, South Dakota State University, 905 Campanile Avenue, Brookings, SD 57007, USA.
C U.S. Geological Survey, Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Oklahoma State University, 007 Agriculture Hall, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA.
Wildlife Research 50(3) 190-200 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR22094
Submitted: 31 May 2022 Accepted: 12 October 2022 Published: 11 November 2022
© 2023 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing
Abstract
Context: Camera trapping is an effective tool for cost-efficient monitoring of species over large temporal and spatial scales and it is becoming an increasingly popular method for investigating wildlife communities and trophic interactions. However, camera trapping targeting rare and elusive species can be hampered by low detection rates, which can decrease the accuracy and precision of results from common analytical approaches (e.g., occupancy modeling, capture-recapture). Consequently, researchers often employ attractants to increase detection without accounting for how attractants influence detection of species among trophic levels.
Aims: We aimed to evaluate the influences of a commonly used non-species-specific olfactory lure (i.e. sardines) and sampling design on detection of four species (i.e. bobcat [Lynx rufus], coyote [Canis latrans], raccoon [Procyon lotor], and eastern cottontail [Sylvilagus floridanus]) that represented a range of foraging guilds in an agricultural landscape.
Methods: We set 180 camera stations, each for ∼28 days, during the summer of 2019. We set cameras with one of three lure treatments: (1) olfactory lure, (2) no olfactory lure, or (3) olfactory lure only during the latter half of the survey. We evaluated the influence of the lure at three temporal scales of detection (i.e. daily probability of detection, independent sequences per daily detection, and triggers per independent sequence).
Key results: The lure tended to positively influence detection of coyotes and raccoons but negatively influenced detection of bobcats and eastern cottontails. The influence of the lure varied among temporal scales of detection.
Conclusions: Scent lures can differentially influence detection of species within or among tropic levels, and the influence of a scent lure may vary among temporal scales.
Implications: Our results demonstrate the importance of evaluating the influence of an attractant for each focal species when using camera data to conduct multi-species or community analyses, accounting for variation in sampling strategies across cameras, and identifying the appropriate species-specific temporal resolution for assessing variation in detection data. Furthermore, we highlight that care should be taken when using camera data as an index of relative abundance (e.g. as is commonly done with prey species) when there is variation in the use of lures across cameras.
Keywords: bobcat (Lynx rufus), camera trapping, coyote (Canis latrans), detection, eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), lure, occupancy modelling, predator-prey, raccoon (Procyon lotor).
References
Anderson EM, Lovallo MJ (2003) Bobcat and Lynx. In ‘Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and conservation’. (Eds GA Feldhamer, BC Thompson, JA Chapman) pp. 758–786. (John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA)Anile, S, and Devillard, S (2016). Study design and body mass influence RAIs from camera trap studies: evidence from the Felidae. Animal Conservation 19, 35–45.
| Study design and body mass influence RAIs from camera trap studies: evidence from the Felidae.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Arnold, TW (2010). Uninformative parameters and model selection using Akaike’s Information Criterion. The Journal of Wildlife Management 74, 1175–1178.
| Uninformative parameters and model selection using Akaike’s Information Criterion.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Atwood, TC, Weeks, HP, and Gehring, TM (2004). Spatial ecology of coyotes along a suburban-to-rural gradient. Journal of Wildlife Management 68, 1000–1009.
| Spatial ecology of coyotes along a suburban-to-rural gradient.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Barding, EE, and Nelson, TA (2008). Raccoons use habitat edges in northern Illinois. The American Midland Naturalist 159, 394–402.
| Raccoons use habitat edges in northern Illinois.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Braczkowski, AR, Balme, GA, Dickman, A, Fattebert, J, Johnson, P, Dickerson, T, Macdonald, DW, and Hunter, L (2016). Scent lure effect on camera-trap based leopard density estimates. PLoS ONE 11, e0151033.
| Scent lure effect on camera-trap based leopard density estimates.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) ‘Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.’ (Springer US: New York, NY, USA)
Burton, AC, Neilson, E, Moreira, D, Ladle, A, Steenweg, R, Fisher, JT, Bayne, E, and Boutin, S (2015). REVIEW: Wildlife camera trapping: a review and recommendations for linking surveys to ecological processes. Journal of Applied Ecology 52, 675–685.
| REVIEW: Wildlife camera trapping: a review and recommendations for linking surveys to ecological processes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cepek, JD (2004). Diet composition of coyotes in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science 104, 60–64.
Chapman JA, Ceballos G (1990) The cottontails. In ‘Rabbits, hares, and pikas: status survey and conservation action plan’. (Eds JA Chapman, JEC Flux) pp. 95–110. (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN): Gland, Switzerland)
Chapman JA, Litvaitis JA (2003) Eastern cottontail. In ‘Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and conservation’. (Eds GA Feldhamer, BC Thompson, JA Chapman) pp. 101–125. (John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA)
Clare, JDJ, Anderson, EM, and MacFarland, DM (2015). Predicting bobcat abundance at a landscape scale and evaluating occupancy as a density index in central Wisconsin. The Journal of Wildlife Management 79, 469–480.
| Predicting bobcat abundance at a landscape scale and evaluating occupancy as a density index in central Wisconsin.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cove, MV, Spínola, RM, Jackson, VL, Sàenz, JC, and Chassot, O (2013). Integrating occupancy modeling and camera-trap data to estimate medium and large mammal detection and richness in a Central American biological corridor. Tropical Conservation Science 6, 781–795.
| Integrating occupancy modeling and camera-trap data to estimate medium and large mammal detection and richness in a Central American biological corridor.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dart MM (2021) Spatial and temporal patterns of sympatric bobcats (Lynx rufus) and coyotes (Canis latrans) in an agricultural landscape. MS thesis, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA.
Díaz-Ruiz, F, Caro, J, Delibes-Mateos, M, Arroyo, B, and Ferreras, P (2016). Drivers of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) daily activity: prey availability, human disturbance or habitat structure? Journal of Zoology 298, 128–138.
| Drivers of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) daily activity: prey availability, human disturbance or habitat structure?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Doherty, PF, White, GC, and Burnham, KP (2012). Comparison of model building and selection strategies. Journal of Ornithology 152, 317–323.
| Comparison of model building and selection strategies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dormann, CF, Elith, J, Bacher, S, Buchmann, C, Carl, G, Carré, G, Marquéz, JRG, Gruber, B, Lafourcade, B, Leitão, PJ, Münkemüller, T, McClean, C, Osborne, PE, Reineking, B, Schröder, B, Skidmore, AK, Zurell, D, and Lautenbach, S (2013). Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography 36, 27–46.
| Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dröge, E, Creel, S, Becker, MS, and M’soka, J (2017). Spatial and temporal avoidance of risk within a large carnivore guild. Ecology and Evolution 7, 189–199.
| Spatial and temporal avoidance of risk within a large carnivore guild.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
du Preez, BD, Loveridge, AJ, and Macdonald, DW (2014). To bait or not to bait: a comparison of camera-trapping methods for estimating leopard Panthera pardus density. Biological Conservation 176, 153–161.
| To bait or not to bait: a comparison of camera-trapping methods for estimating leopard Panthera pardus density.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Durant, SM (2000). Predator avoidance, breeding experience and reproductive success in endangered cheetahs, Acinonyx jubatus. Animal Behaviour 60, 121–130.
| Predator avoidance, breeding experience and reproductive success in endangered cheetahs, Acinonyx jubatus.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Erb, PL, McShea, WJ, and Guralnick, RP (2012). Anthropogenic influences on macro-level mammal occupancy in the Appalachian Trail corridor. PLoS ONE 7, e42574.
| Anthropogenic influences on macro-level mammal occupancy in the Appalachian Trail corridor.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fidino, M, Barnas, GR, Lehrer, EW, Murray, MH, and Magle, SB (2020). Effect of lure on detecting mammals with camera traps. Wildlife Society Bulletin 44, 543–552.
| Effect of lure on detecting mammals with camera traps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fisher, JT, Wheatley, M, and MacKenzie, D (2014). Spatial patterns of breeding success of grizzly bears derived from hierarchical multistate models. Conservation Biology 28, 1249–1259.
| Spatial patterns of breeding success of grizzly bears derived from hierarchical multistate models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Greenwood, RJ (1982). Nocturnal activity and foraging of prairie raccoons (Procyon lotor) in North Dakota. The American Midland Naturalist 107, 238–243.
| Nocturnal activity and foraging of prairie raccoons (Procyon lotor) in North Dakota.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Heilbrun, RD, Silvy, NJ, Peterson, MJ, and Tewes, ME (2006). Estimating bobcat abundance using automatically triggered cameras. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34, 69–73.
| Estimating bobcat abundance using automatically triggered cameras.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Heinlein, BW, Urbanek, RE, Olfenbuttel, C, and Dukes, CG (2020). Effects of different attractants and human scent on mesocarnivore detection at camera traps. Wildlife Research 47, 338–348.
| Effects of different attractants and human scent on mesocarnivore detection at camera traps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Henke, SE, and Bryant, FC (1999). Effects of coyote removal on the faunal community in western Texas. Journal of Wildlife Management 63, 1066–1081.
| Effects of coyote removal on the faunal community in western Texas.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hofmeester, TR, Cromsigt, JPGM, Odden, J, Andrén, H, Kindberg, J, and Linnell, JDC (2019). Framing pictures: a conceptual framework to identify and correct for biases in detection probability of camera traps enabling multi-species comparison. Ecology and Evolution 9, 2320–2336.
| Framing pictures: a conceptual framework to identify and correct for biases in detection probability of camera traps enabling multi-species comparison.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Holinda, D, Burgar, JM, and Burton, AC (2020). Effects of scent lure on camera trap detections vary across mammalian predator and prey species. PLoS ONE 15, e0229055.
| Effects of scent lure on camera trap detections vary across mammalian predator and prey species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Iannarilli, F, Erb, J, Arnold, TW, and Fieberg, JR (2021). Evaluating species-specific responses to camera-trap survey designs. Wildlife Biology 2021, wlb.00726.
| Evaluating species-specific responses to camera-trap survey designs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jacques, CN, Klaver, RW, Swearingen, TC, Davis, ED, Anderson, CR, Jenks, JA, Deperno, CS, and Bluett, RD (2019). Estimating density and detection of bobcats in fragmented midwestern landscapes using spatial capture–recapture data from camera traps. Wildlife Society Bulletin 43, 256–264.
| Estimating density and detection of bobcats in fragmented midwestern landscapes using spatial capture–recapture data from camera traps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jordan, MJ, Barrett, RH, and Purcell, KL (2011). Camera trapping estimates of density and survival of fishers Martes pennanti. Wildlife Biology 17, 266–276.
| Camera trapping estimates of density and survival of fishers Martes pennanti.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kamler, JF, Gipson, PS, and Perchellet, CC (2002). Seasonal food habits of coyotes in northeastern Kansas. The Prairie Naturalist 34, 75–83.
Karanth, KU (1995). Estimating tiger Panthera tigris populations from camera-trap data using capture–recapture models. Biological Conservation 71, 333–338.
| Estimating tiger Panthera tigris populations from camera-trap data using capture–recapture models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kays, R, Parsons, AW, Baker, MC, Kalies, EL, Forrester, T, Costello, R, Rota, CT, Millspaugh, JJ, and McShea, WJ (2017). Does hunting or hiking affect wildlife communities in protected areas? Journal of Applied Ecology 54, 242–252.
| Does hunting or hiking affect wildlife communities in protected areas?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Knowlton, FF, Gese, EM, and Jaeger, MM (1999). Coyote depredation control: an interface between biology and management. Journal of Range Management 52, 398–412.
| Coyote depredation control: an interface between biology and management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kolowski, JM, and Forrester, TD (2017). Camera trap placement and the potential for bias due to trails and other features. PLoS ONE 12, e0186679.
| Camera trap placement and the potential for bias due to trails and other features.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kucera, TE, and Barrett, RH (1993). In my experience: the Trailmaster camera system for detecting wildlife. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21, 505–508.
Lesmeister, DB, Nielsen, CK, Schauber, EM, and Hellgren, EC (2015). Spatial and temporal structure of a mesocarnivore guild in midwestern North America. Wildlife Monographs 191, 1–61.
| Spatial and temporal structure of a mesocarnivore guild in midwestern North America.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lonsinger, RC, Gese, EM, Bailey, LL, and Waits, LP (2017). The roles of habitat and intraguild predation by coyotes on the spatial dynamics of kit foxes. Ecosphere 8, e01749.
| The roles of habitat and intraguild predation by coyotes on the spatial dynamics of kit foxes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lotze, J-H, and Anderson, S (1979). Procyon lotor. Mammalian Species 119, 1.
| Procyon lotor.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
MacKenzie, DI, and Royle, JA (2005). Designing occupancy studies: general advice and allocating survey effort. Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 1105–1114.
| Designing occupancy studies: general advice and allocating survey effort.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
MacKenzie, DI, Nichols, JD, Lachman, GB, Droege, S, Royle, JA, and Langtimm, CA (2002). Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83, 2248–2255.
| Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Royle JA, Pollock KH, Bailey LL, Hines JE (2018) ‘Occupancy estimation and modeling: inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence.’ 2nd edn. (Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA)
Mann, HB, and Whitney, DR (1947). On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18, 50–60.
| On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, PD, Ballard, G-A, and Fleming, PJS (2015). The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Australian Mammalogy 37, 13–22.
| The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Melville, HIAS, Conway, WC, Hardin, JB, Comer, CE, and Morrison, ML (2020). Abiotic variables influencing the nocturnal movements of bobcats and coyotes. Wildlife Biology 2020, wlb.00601.
| Abiotic variables influencing the nocturnal movements of bobcats and coyotes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mills, D, Fattebert, J, Hunter, L, and Slotow, R (2019). Maximising camera trap data: using attractants to improve detection of elusive species in multi-species surveys. PLoS ONE 14, e0216447.
| Maximising camera trap data: using attractants to improve detection of elusive species in multi-species surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Moeller, AK, Lukacs, PM, and Horne, JS (2018). Three novel methods to estimate abundance of unmarked animals using remote cameras. Ecosphere 9, e02331.
| Three novel methods to estimate abundance of unmarked animals using remote cameras.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Moll, RJ, Ortiz-Calo, W, Cepek, JD, Lorch, PD, Dennis, PM, Robison, T, and Montgomery, RA (2020). The effect of camera-trap viewshed obstruction on wildlife detection: implications for inference. Wildlife Research 47, 158–165.
| The effect of camera-trap viewshed obstruction on wildlife detection: implications for inference.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mosby CE (2011) Habitat selection and population ecology of bobcats (Lynx rufus) in South Dakota, USA. MS Thesis. South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2020) National Centers for Environmental Information – 1991–2020 climate normals. Available at ncei.noaa.gov/access/us-climate-normals [Accessed 5 May 2021]
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2021a) Astronomical data. Available at https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/astronomical.html [Accessed 19 May 2021]
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2021b) Climate data online. Available at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/search [Accessed 5 April 2021]
Nomsen DE (1982) Food habits and placental scar counts of bobcats in South Dakota. MS Thesis. South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA.
Parsons, MH, and Blumstein, DT (2010). Familiarity breeds contempt: kangaroos persistently avoid areas with experimentally deployed dingo scents. PLoS ONE 5, e10403.
| Familiarity breeds contempt: kangaroos persistently avoid areas with experimentally deployed dingo scents.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Parsons, AW, Goforth, C, Costello, R, and Kays, R (2018). The value of citizen science for ecological monitoring of mammals. PeerJ 6, e4536.
| The value of citizen science for ecological monitoring of mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Prugh, LR, and Golden, CD (2014). Does moonlight increase predation risk? Meta-analysis reveals divergent responses of nocturnal mammals to lunar cycles. Journal of Animal Ecology 83, 504–514.
| Does moonlight increase predation risk? Meta-analysis reveals divergent responses of nocturnal mammals to lunar cycles.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rich, LN, Miller, DAW, Muñoz, DJ, Robinson, HS, McNutt, JW, and Kelly, MJ (2019). Sampling design and analytical advances allow for simultaneous density estimation of seven sympatric carnivore species from camera trap data. Biological Conservation 233, 12–20.
| Sampling design and analytical advances allow for simultaneous density estimation of seven sympatric carnivore species from camera trap data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Richmond, OMW, Hines, JE, and Beissinger, SR (2010). Two-species occupancy models: a new parameterization applied to co-occurrence of secretive rails. Ecological Applications 20, 2036–2046.
| Two-species occupancy models: a new parameterization applied to co-occurrence of secretive rails.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ridout, MS, and Linkie, M (2009). Estimating overlap of daily activity patterns from camera trap data. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics 14, 322–337.
| Estimating overlap of daily activity patterns from camera trap data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Robinson, QH, Bustos, D, and Roemer, GW (2014). The application of occupancy modeling to evaluate intraguild predation in a model carnivore system. Ecology 95, 3112–3123.
| The application of occupancy modeling to evaluate intraguild predation in a model carnivore system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Robinson, L, Cushman, SA, and Lucid, MK (2017). Winter bait stations as a multispecies survey tool. Ecology and Evolution 7, 6826–6838.
| Winter bait stations as a multispecies survey tool.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rocha, DG, Ramalho, EE, and Magnusson, WE (2016). Baiting for carnivores might negatively affect capture rates of prey species in camera-trap studies. Journal of Zoology 300, 205–212.
| Baiting for carnivores might negatively affect capture rates of prey species in camera-trap studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rockhill, AP, DePerno, CS, and Powell, RA (2013). The effect of illumination and time of day on movements of bobcats (Lynx rufus). PLoS ONE 8, e69213.
| The effect of illumination and time of day on movements of bobcats (Lynx rufus).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rolley, RE, and Warde, WD (1985). Bobcat habitat use in southeastern Oklahoma. The Journal of Wildlife Management 49, 913–920.
| Bobcat habitat use in southeastern Oklahoma.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rota, CT, Ferreira, MAR, Kays, RW, Forrester, TD, Kalies, EL, McShea, WJ, Parsons, AW, and Millspaugh, JJ (2016). A multispecies occupancy model for two or more interacting species. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7, 1164–1173.
| A multispecies occupancy model for two or more interacting species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rowcliffe, JM, Carbone, C, Jansen, PA, Kays, R, and Kranstauber, B (2011). Quantifying the sensitivity of camera traps: an adapted distance sampling approach. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 2, 464–476.
| Quantifying the sensitivity of camera traps: an adapted distance sampling approach.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Santos, F, Carbone, C, Wearn, OR, Rowcliffe, JM, Espinosa, S, Lima, MGM, Ahumada, JA, Gonçalves, ALS, Trevelin, LC, Alvarez-Loayza, P, Spironello, WR, Jansen, PA, Juen, L, and Peres, CA (2019). Prey availability and temporal partitioning modulate felid coexistence in neotropical forests. PLoS ONE 14, e0213671.
| Prey availability and temporal partitioning modulate felid coexistence in neotropical forests.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Si, X, Kays, R, and Ding, P (2014). How long is enough to detect terrestrial animals? Estimating the minimum trapping effort on camera traps. PeerJ 2, e374.
| How long is enough to detect terrestrial animals? Estimating the minimum trapping effort on camera traps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Thorn, M, Scott, DM, Green, M, Bateman, PW, and Cameron, EZ (2009). Estimating brown hyaena occupancy using baited camera traps. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 39, 1–10.
| Estimating brown hyaena occupancy using baited camera traps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tobler, MW, Carrillo-Percastegui, SE, Leite Pitman, R, Mares, R, and Powell, G (2008). An evaluation of camera traps for inventorying large- and medium-sized terrestrial rainforest mammals. Animal Conservation 11, 169–178.
| An evaluation of camera traps for inventorying large- and medium-sized terrestrial rainforest mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tobler, MW, Zúñiga Hartley, A, Carrillo-Percastegui, SE, and Powell, GVN (2015). Spatiotemporal hierarchical modelling of species richness and occupancy using camera trap data. Journal of Applied Ecology 52, 413–421.
| Spatiotemporal hierarchical modelling of species richness and occupancy using camera trap data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tycz BM (2016) Evaluation of bobcat (Lynx rufus) survival, harvest, and population size in the west-central region of South Dakota. MS Thesis. South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, USA.
Van der Weyde, LK, Mbisana, C, and Klein, R (2018). Multi-species occupancy modelling of a carnivore guild in wildlife management areas in the Kalahari. Biological Conservation 220, 21–28.
| Multi-species occupancy modelling of a carnivore guild in wildlife management areas in the Kalahari.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wait, KR, Ricketts, AM, and Ahlers, AA (2018). Land-use change structures carnivore communities in remaining tallgrass prairie. The Journal of Wildlife Management 82, 1491–1502.
| Land-use change structures carnivore communities in remaining tallgrass prairie.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wang, Y, Allen, ML, and Wilmers, CC (2015). Mesopredator spatial and temporal responses to large predators and human development in the Santa Cruz Mountains of California. Biological Conservation 190, 23–33.
| Mesopredator spatial and temporal responses to large predators and human development in the Santa Cruz Mountains of California.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Way, JG (2007). A comparison of body mass of Canis latrans (coyotes) between eastern and western North America. Northeastern Naturalist 14, 111–124.
| A comparison of body mass of Canis latrans (coyotes) between eastern and western North America.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wellington, K, Bottom, C, Merrill, C, and Litvaitis, JA (2014). Identifying performance differences among trail cameras used to monitor forest mammals. Wildlife Society Bulletin 38, 634–638.
| Identifying performance differences among trail cameras used to monitor forest mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
White, GC, and Burnham, KP (1999). Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46, S120–S139.
| Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
White GC, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Otis DL (1982) Capture–recapture and removal methods for sampling closed populations. LA-8787-NERP. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA.
Willems, EP, and Hill, RA (2009). Predator-specific landscapes of fear and resource distribution: effects on spatial range use. Ecology 90, 546–555.
| Predator-specific landscapes of fear and resource distribution: effects on spatial range use.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wilson, RR, Blankenship, TL, Hooten, MB, and Shivik, JA (2010). Prey-mediated avoidance of an intraguild predator by its intraguild prey. Oecologia 164, 921–929.
| Prey-mediated avoidance of an intraguild predator by its intraguild prey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zielinski WJ, Kucera TE (1995) American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine: survey methods for their detection. General technical report PSW-GTR-15. Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Albany, CA, USA.
