The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia
Paul D. Meek A B E , Guy-Anthony Ballard A C and Peter J. S. Fleming A D
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Ecosystem Management, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
B NSW Department of Primary Industries, PO Box 530, Coffs Harbour, NSW 2450, Australia.
C Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Ring Road North, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
D Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, 1447 Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email: paul.meek@dpi.nsw.gov.au
Australian Mammalogy 37(1) 13-22 https://doi.org/10.1071/AM14023
Submitted: 25 August 2014 Accepted: 17 January 2015 Published: 23 February 2015
Abstract
Camera trapping is a relatively new addition to the wildlife survey repertoire in Australia. Its rapid adoption has been unparalleled in ecological science, but objective evaluation of camera traps and their application has not kept pace. With the aim of motivating practitioners to think more about selection and deployment of camera trap models in relation to research goals, we reviewed Australian camera trapping studies to determine how camera traps have been used and how their technological constraints may have affected reported results and conclusions. In the 54 camera trapping articles published between 1991 and 2013, mammals (86%) were studied more than birds (10%) and reptiles (3%), with small to medium-sized mammals being most studied. Australian camera trapping studies, like those elsewhere, have changed from more qualitative to more complex quantitative investigations. However, we found that camera trap constraints and limitations were rarely acknowledged, and we identified eight key issues requiring consideration and further research. These are: camera model, camera detection system, camera placement and orientation, triggering and recovery, camera trap settings, temperature differentials, species identification and behavioural responses of the animals to the cameras. In particular, alterations to animal behaviour by camera traps potentially have enormous influence on data quality, reliability and interpretation. The key issues were not considered in most Australian camera trap papers and require further study to better understand the factors that influence the analysis and interpretation of camera trap data and improve experimental design.
Additional keywords: camera trap constraints, critical review, remote cameras.
References
Allen, L., Engeman, R., and Krupa, H. (1996). Evaluation of three relative abundance indices for assessing dingo populations. Wildlife Research 23, 197–205.| Evaluation of three relative abundance indices for assessing dingo populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ballard, G., Meek, P. D., Doak, S., Fleming, P. J. S., and Sparkes, J. (2014). Camera traps, sand plots and known events: what do camera traps miss? In ‘Camera Trapping’. (Eds P. D. Meek, A. G. Ballard, P. B. Banks, A. W. Claridge, P. J. S. Fleming, J. G. Sanderson, and D. E. Swann.) pp. 189–202. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Belcher, C. A. (1998). Susceptibility of the tiger quoll, (Dasyurus maculatus), and the eastern quoll, (D. viverrinus), to 1080-poisoned baits in control programmes for vertebrate pests in eastern Australia. Wildlife Research 25, 33–40.
| Susceptibility of the tiger quoll, (Dasyurus maculatus), and the eastern quoll, (D. viverrinus), to 1080-poisoned baits in control programmes for vertebrate pests in eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Belcher, C. A. (2003). Demographics of tiger quoll (Dasyurus maculatus maculatus) populations in south-eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 51, 611–626.
| Demographics of tiger quoll (Dasyurus maculatus maculatus) populations in south-eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bengsen, A. J., Leung, L. K. P., Lapidge, S. J., and Gordon, I. J. (2010). Artificial illumination reduces bait-take by small rainforest mammals. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 127, 66–72.
| Artificial illumination reduces bait-take by small rainforest mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bengsen, A. J., Leung, L. K. P., Lapidge, S. J., and Gordon, I. J. (2011a). Using a General Index Approach to analyze camera-trap abundance indices. Journal of Wildlife Management 75, 1222–1227.
| Using a General Index Approach to analyze camera-trap abundance indices.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bengsen, A. J., Leung, L. K. P., Lapidge, S. J., and Gordon, I. J. (2011b). Target-specificity of feral pig baits under different conditions in a tropical rainforest. Wildlife Research 38, 370–379.
| Target-specificity of feral pig baits under different conditions in a tropical rainforest.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXht12gs7jK&md5=34f39cc2c2c9743a350e0bf0f6be82c2CAS |
Bengsen, A., Butler, J., and Masters, P. (2011c). Estimating and indexing feral cat population abundances using camera traps. Wildlife Research 38, 732–739.
| Estimating and indexing feral cat population abundances using camera traps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bluff, L. A., Clausen, L., Hill, A., and Bramwell, M. D. (2011). A decade of monitoring the remnant Victorian population of the brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata). Australian Mammalogy 33, 195–201.
| A decade of monitoring the remnant Victorian population of the brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Borchard, P., Eldridge, D. J., and Wright, I. A. (2012). Sarcoptes mange (Sarcoptes scabiei) increases diurnal activity of bare-nosed wombats (Vombatus ursinus) in an agricultural riparian environment. Zeitschrift für Saugetierkunde 77, 244–248.
Breitenmoser, U., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Molinari, P., Ryser, A., von Arx, M., Molinari-Jobin, A., Zimmermann, F., Siegenthaler, A., Angst, C., and Weber, J. (2005). ‘Balkan Lynx Field Book.’ (KORA and Cat Specialist Group: Bern.)
Caughley, G. (1974). Bias in aerial surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management 38, 921–933.
| Bias in aerial surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., Misfud, G., Dawson, J., and Saxon, M. J. (2004). Use of infrared digital cameras to investigate the behaviour of cryptic species. Wildlife Research 31, 645–650.
| Use of infrared digital cameras to investigate the behaviour of cryptic species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., Paull, D. J., and Barry, S. C. (2010). Detection of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals using infrared digital cameras: an alternative way forward? Australian Mammalogy 32, 165–171.
| Detection of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals using infrared digital cameras: an alternative way forward?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
De Bondi, N., White, J. G., Stevens, M., and Cooke, R. (2010). A comparison of the effectiveness of camera trapping and live trapping for sampling terrestrial small-mammal communities. Wildlife Research 37, 456–465.
| A comparison of the effectiveness of camera trapping and live trapping for sampling terrestrial small-mammal communities.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dixon, V., Glover, H. J. K., Winnell, J., Treloar, S. M., Whisson, D. A., and Weston, M. A. (2009). Evaluation of three remote camera systems for detecting mammals and birds. Ecological Management & Restoration 10, 156–157.
| Evaluation of three remote camera systems for detecting mammals and birds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Engeman, R. M. (2005). Indexing principles and a widely applicable paradigm for indexing animal populations. Wildlife Research 32, 203–210.
| Indexing principles and a widely applicable paradigm for indexing animal populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ernst, A., and Küblbeck, C. (2011). ‘Fast Face Detection and Species Classification of African Great Apes, Advanced Video and Signal-Based Surveillance (AVSS), 2011 8th IEEE International Conference on ‘ Klagenfurt, Germany.
Falzon, G., Meek, P. D., and Vernes, K. (2014). Computer-assisted identification of Australian rodents in camera trap imagery. In ‘Camera Trapping’. (Eds P. D. Meek, A. G. Ballard, P. B. Banks, A. W. Claridge, P. J. S. Fleming, J. G. Sanderson, and D. E. Swann.) pp. 299–306. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Foster, R. J., and Harmsen, B. J. (2012). A critique of density estimation from camera-trap data. Journal of Wildlife Management 76, 224–236.
| A critique of density estimation from camera-trap data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gardner, J. L. (1998). Experimental evidence for edge-related predation in a fragmented agricultural landscape. Australian Journal of Ecology 23, 311–321.
| Experimental evidence for edge-related predation in a fragmented agricultural landscape.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gibeau, M.L., and McTavish, C. (2009). Not-so-candid cameras: how to prevent camera traps from skewing animal behaviour. Wildlife Professional Fall 2009, 35–37.
Glen, A. S., and Dickman, C. R. (2003). Monitoring bait removal in vertebrate pest control: a comparison using track identification and remote photography. Wildlife Research 30, 29–33.
| Monitoring bait removal in vertebrate pest control: a comparison using track identification and remote photography.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Glen, A.S., Cockburn, S., Nichols, M., Ekanayake, J., and Warburton, B. (2013). Optimising camera traps for monitoring small mammals. Plos One 8, 1–7.
| Optimising camera traps for monitoring small mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gormley, A. M., Forsyth, D. M., Griffioen, P., Lindeman, M., Ramsey, D. S. L., Scroggie, M. P., and Woodford, L. (2011). Using presence-only and presence–absence data to estimate the current and potential distributions of established invasive species. Journal of Applied Ecology 48, 25–34.
| Using presence-only and presence–absence data to estimate the current and potential distributions of established invasive species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21339812PubMed |
Green, B. (1976). The use of etorphine hydrochloride (M99) in the capture and immobilization of wild dingoes, Canis familiaris dingo. Wildlife Research 3, 123–128.
| The use of etorphine hydrochloride (M99) in the capture and immobilization of wild dingoes, Canis familiaris dingo.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaE2sXksVOqu7w%3D&md5=a20a7c5bcb562da5d8205fe0d348abc5CAS |
Greenville, A., Wardle, G., Tamayo, B., and Dickman, C. (2014). Bottom-up and top-down processes interact to modify intraguild interactions in resource-pulse environments. Oecologia 175, 1349–1358.
| Bottom-up and top-down processes interact to modify intraguild interactions in resource-pulse environments.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24908053PubMed |
Hanke, P. U., and Dickman, C. R. (2013). Sniffing out the stakes: hair-snares for wild cats in arid environments. Wildlife Research 40, 45–51.
| Sniffing out the stakes: hair-snares for wild cats in arid environments.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hiby, L., Lovell, P., Patil, N., Samba Kumar, N., Gopalaswamy, A. M., and Karanth, K. U. (2009). A tiger cannot change its stripes: using a three-dimensional model to match images of living tigers and tiger skins. Biology Letters 5, 383–386.
| A tiger cannot change its stripes: using a three-dimensional model to match images of living tigers and tiger skins.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19324633PubMed |
Hohnen, R., Ashby, J., Tuft, K., and McGregor, H. (2013). Individual identification of northern quolls (Dasyurus hallucatus) using remote cameras. Australian Mammalogy 35, 131–135.
| Individual identification of northern quolls (Dasyurus hallucatus) using remote cameras.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hone, J. (2008). On bias, precision and accuracy in wildlife aerial surveys. Wildlife Research 35, 253–257.
| On bias, precision and accuracy in wildlife aerial surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hughson, D. L., Darby, N. W., and Dungan, J. D. (2010). Comparison of motion-activated cameras for wildlife investigations. California Fish and Game 96, 101–109.
Kays, R. W., and Slauson, K. M. (2008). Remote cameras. In ‘Noninvasive Survey Methods for Carnivores: Methods and Analyses’. (Eds R. A. Long, P. MacKay, W. J. Zielinski, and J. C. Ray.) pp. 110–140. (Island Press: Washington.)
Kirmani, S., Banks, P., and McArthur, C. (2010). Integrating the costs of plant toxins and predation risk in foraging decisions of a mammalian herbivore. Oecologia 164, 349–356.
| Integrating the costs of plant toxins and predation risk in foraging decisions of a mammalian herbivore.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20652597PubMed |
Küblbeck, C., and Ernst, A. (2006). Face detection and tracking in video sequences using the modifiedcensus transformation. Image and Vision Computing 24, 564–572.
| Face detection and tracking in video sequences using the modifiedcensus transformation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kucera, T. E., and Barrett, R. H. (2011). A history of camera trapping. In ‘Camera Traps in Animal Ecology’. (Eds A. F. O’Connell, J. D. Nichols, and K. U. Karanth.) pp. 9–26. (Springer: New York.)
Laurance, W., and Grant, J. (1994). Photographic identification of ground-nest predators in Australian tropical rainforest. Wildlife Research 21, 241–247.
| Photographic identification of ground-nest predators in Australian tropical rainforest.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lerone, L., Carpaneto, G. M., and Loy, A. (2011). Why camera traps fail to record otter presence. In ‘IUCN XIth International Otter Colloquium ‘Otters in a Warming World’, Italy’. (Eds C. Prigioni, A. Loy, A. Balestrieri, L. Remonti.) Volume Hystrix p. 32. (Associazione Teriologica Italiana.)
Loos, A., and Ernst, A. (2012). Detection and identification of chimpanzee faces in the wild. In ‘IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia’. pp. 116–119. (IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC.)
Loos, A., and Ernst, A. (2013). An automated chimpanzee identification system using face detection and recognition. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing 2013, 1–17.
| An automated chimpanzee identification system using face detection and recognition.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mahon, P. S. (2009). Targeted control of widespread exotic species for biodiversity conservation: the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in New South Wales, Australia. Ecological Management & Restoration 10, S59–S69.
| Targeted control of widespread exotic species for biodiversity conservation: the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in New South Wales, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Major, R., and Gowing, G. (1994). An inexpensive photographic technique for identifying nest predators at active nests of birds. Wildlife Research 21, 657–665.
| An inexpensive photographic technique for identifying nest predators at active nests of birds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D. (2010). Remote camera monitoring of the Hastings River mouse (Pseudomys oralis): trial of a novel technique for monitoring populations. Unpublished Report for Gondwana Rainforests of Australia.
Meek, P. D., and Pittet, A. (2012). User-based design specifications for the ultimate camera trap for wildlife research. Wildlife Research 39, 649–660.
| User-based design specifications for the ultimate camera trap for wildlife research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Ballard, A. G., and Fleming, P. J. S. (2012a). ‘An Introduction to Camera Trapping for Wildlife Surveys in Australia.’ (Invasive Animals CRC: Canberra.)
Meek, P. D., Zewe, F., and Falzon, G. (2012b). Temporal activity patterns of the swamp rat (Rattus lutreolus) and other rodents in north-eastern New South Wales, Australia. Australian Mammalogy 34, 223–233.
| Temporal activity patterns of the swamp rat (Rattus lutreolus) and other rodents in north-eastern New South Wales, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Ballard, G. A., and Fleming, P. J. S. (2013a). A permanent security post for camera trapping. Australian Mammalogy 35, 123–127.
| A permanent security post for camera trapping.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Vernes, K., and Falzon, G. (2013b). On the reliability of expert identification of small–medium sized mammals from camera trap photos Wildlife Biology in Practice 9, 1–19.
| On the reliability of expert identification of small–medium sized mammals from camera trap photosCrossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Ballard, A. G., Banks, P. B., Claridge, A. W., Fleming, P. J. S., Sanderson, J. G., and Swann, D. E. (Eds) (2014a). ‘Camera Trapping.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Meek, P. D., Fleming, P. J. S., Ballard, A. G., Banks, P. B., Claridge, A. W., McMahon, S., Sanderson, J. G., and Swann, D. E. (2014b). Putting contemporary camera trapping in focus. In ‘Camera Trapping’. (Eds P. D. Meek, A. G. Ballard, P. B. Banks, A. W. Claridge, P. J. S. Fleming, J. G. Sanderson, and D. E. Swann.) pp. 349–356. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Meek, P. D., Ballard, G. A., Vernes, K., and Fleming, P. J. S. (2015). The history of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Australian Mammalogy 37, .
| The history of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nelson, J. E., and Scroggie, M. P. (2009). Remote cameras as a mammal survey tool – survey design and practical considerations. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research unpublished report no. 2009/17. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg, Victoria, internal publication.
Nelson, J. E., Menkhorst, P., Howard, K., Chick, R., and Lumsden, L. (2009). The status of smoky mouse populations at some historical sites in Victoria, and survey methods for their detection. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research unpublished report no. 2009/17. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg, Victoria, internal publication.
O’Connell, A. F., Nichols, J. D., Karanth, K. U. (2011). Camera Traps in Animal Ecology Methods and Analyses. (Springer: New York).
Othman, N., and Amiruddin, M.H. (2010). Different perspectives of learning styles from VARK model. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 7, 652–660.
| Different perspectives of learning styles from VARK model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Paull, D. J., Claridge, A. W., and Barry, S. C. (2011). There’s no accounting for taste: bait attractants and infrared digital cameras for detecting small to medium ground-dwelling mammals. Wildlife Research 38, 188–195.
| There’s no accounting for taste: bait attractants and infrared digital cameras for detecting small to medium ground-dwelling mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Paull, D. J., Claridge, A. W., and Cunningham, R. B. (2012). Effective detection methods for medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals: a comparison between infrared digital cameras and hair tunnels. Wildlife Research 39, 546–553.
Phillips, M., and Catling, P. (1991). Home range and activity patterns of red foxes in Nadgee Nature Reserve. Wildlife Research 18, 677–686.
| Home range and activity patterns of red foxes in Nadgee Nature Reserve.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Robley, A., Gormley, A., Woodford, L., Lindeman, M., Whitehead, B., Albert, R., Bowd, M., and Smith, A. (2010). Evaluation of camera trap sampling designs used to determine changes in occupancy rate and abundance of feral cats. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series 201, 1–23.
Rovero, F., Zimmerman, F., Berzi, D., and Meek, P. D. (2013). Which camera trap type and how many do I need? A review of camera features and study designs for a range of wildlife research applications. Hystrix. The Italian Journal of Mammalogy 24, 148–156.
Rowcliffe, J. M., Field, J., Turvey, S. T., and Carbone, C. (2008). Estimating animal density using camera traps without the need for individual recognition. Journal of Applied Ecology 45, 1228–1236.
| Estimating animal density using camera traps without the need for individual recognition.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schipper, J. (2007). Camera-trap avoidance by kinkajous Potos flavus: rethinking the “non-invasive” paradigm. Small Carnivore Conservation 36, 38–41.
Séquin, E. S., Jaeger, M. M., Brussard, P. F., and Barrett, R. H. (2003). Wariness of coyotes to camera traps relative to social status and territory boundaries. Canadian Journal of Zoology 81, 2015–2025.
| Wariness of coyotes to camera traps relative to social status and territory boundaries.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Silver, S. (2004). ‘Assessing Jaguar Abundance Using Remotely Triggered Cameras.’ (Wildlife Conservation Society.)
Smith, J. K., and Coulson, G. (2012). A comparison of vertical and horizontal camera trap orientations for detection of potoroos and bandicoots. Australian Mammalogy 34, 196–201.
| A comparison of vertical and horizontal camera trap orientations for detection of potoroos and bandicoots.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Somaweera, R., Webb, J., and Shine, R. (2011). It’s a dog-eat-croc world: dingo predation on the nests of freshwater crocodiles in tropical Australia. Ecological Research 26, 957–967.
| It’s a dog-eat-croc world: dingo predation on the nests of freshwater crocodiles in tropical Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Swann, D. E., Kawanishi, K., and Palmer, J. (2011). Evaluating types and features of camera traps in ecological studies: guide for researchers. In ‘Camera Traps in Animal Ecology. Methods and Analyses.’ (Eds A. F. O’Connell, J. D. Nichols, and K. U. Karanth.) pp. 27–44. (Springer: New York.)
Taylor, B. D., and Goldingay, R. L. (2012). Restoring connectivity in landscapes fragmented by major roads: a case study using wooden poles as “stepping stones” for gliding mammals. Restoration Ecology 20, 671–678.
| Restoring connectivity in landscapes fragmented by major roads: a case study using wooden poles as “stepping stones” for gliding mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Taylor, B. D., Goldingay, R. L., and Lindsay, J. M. (2014). Horizontal or vertical? Camera trap orientations and recording modes for detecting potoroos, bandicoots and pademelons. Australian Mammalogy 36, 60–66.
| Horizontal or vertical? Camera trap orientations and recording modes for detecting potoroos, bandicoots and pademelons.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
TeamNetwork (2011). ‘Terrestrial Vertebrate Protocol Implementation Manual.’ (Tropical Ecology Assessment and Monitoring Network.)
Towerton, A. L., Penman, T. D., Blake, M. E., Deane, A. T., Kavanagh, R. P., and Dickman, C. R. (2008). The potential for remote cameras to monitor visitation by birds and predators at malleefowl mounds. Ecological Management & Restoration 9, 64–67.
| The potential for remote cameras to monitor visitation by birds and predators at malleefowl mounds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Towerton, A. L., Penman, T. D., Kavanagh, R. P., and Dickman, C. R. (2011). Detecting pest and prey responses to fox control across the landscape using remote cameras. Wildlife Research 38, 208–220.
| Detecting pest and prey responses to fox control across the landscape using remote cameras.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vernes, K., and Jarman, P. (2011). The mammal fauna of the Peter Murrell Reserves, Tasmania, as revealed by truffle-baited camera traps. The Tasmanian Naturalist 133, 51–61.
Vine, S. J., Crowther, M. S., Lapidge, S. J., Dickman, C. R., Mooney, N., Piggott, M. P., and English, A. W. (2009). Comparison of methods to detect rare and cryptic species: a case study using the red fox (Vulpes vulpes). Wildlife Research 36, 436–446.
Wang, Y., and Fisher, D. O. (2012). Dingoes affect activity of feral cats, but do not exclude them from the habitat of an endangered macropod. Wildlife Research 39, 611–620.
| Dingoes affect activity of feral cats, but do not exclude them from the habitat of an endangered macropod.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wegge, P., Pokheral, C. P., and Jnawali, S. R. (2004). Effects of trapping effort and trap shyness on estimates of tiger abundance from camera trap studies. Animal Conservation 7, 251–256.
| Effects of trapping effort and trap shyness on estimates of tiger abundance from camera trap studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Weingarth, K., Zimmermann, F., Knauer, F., and Heurich, M. (2013). Evaluation of six digital camera models for the use in capture–recapture sampling of Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx). Waldökologie. Landschaftsforschung und Naturschutz 13, 87–92.
Welbourne, D. (2013). A method for surveying diurnal terrestrial reptiles with passive infrared automatically triggered cameras. Herpetological Review 44, 247–250.
Wellington, K., Bottom, C., Merrill, C., and Litvaitis, J. A. (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 |
Zewe, F., Meek, P. D., Ford, H., and Vernes, K. (2014). A vertical bait station for black rats (Rattus rattus) that reduces bait take by a sympatric native rodent. Australian Mammalogy 36, 67–73.
| A vertical bait station for black rats (Rattus rattus) that reduces bait take by a sympatric native rodent.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
