Identification of threatened rodent species using infrared and white-flash camera traps
Phoebe A. Burns A B D , Marissa L. Parrott C , Kevin C. Rowe B and Benjamin L. Phillips A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, 3010.
B Sciences Department, Museum Victoria, GPO Box 666, Melbourne, Victoria, 3001.
C Wildlife and Conservation Science, Zoos Victoria, Elliott Ave, Parkville, Victoria, 3010.
D Corresponding author. Email: pburns@museum.vic.gov.au
Australian Mammalogy 40(2) 188-197 https://doi.org/10.1071/AM17016
Submitted: 18 March 2017 Accepted: 24 July 2017 Published: 21 August 2017
Abstract
Camera trapping has evolved into an efficient technique for gathering presence/absence data for many species; however, smaller mammals such as rodents are often difficult to identify in images. Identification is inhibited by co-occurrence with similar-sized small mammal species and by camera set-ups that do not provide adequate image quality. Here we describe survey procedures for identification of two small, threatened rodent species – smoky mouse (Pseudomys fumeus) and New Holland mouse (P. novaehollandiae) – using white-flash and infrared camera traps. We tested whether observers could accurately identify each species and whether experience with small mammals influenced accuracy. Pseudomys fumeus was ~20 times less likely to be misidentified on white-flash images than infrared, and observer experience affected accuracy only for infrared images, where it accounted for all observer variance. Misidentifications of P. novaehollandiae were more common across both flash types: false positives (>0.21) were more common than false negatives (<0.09), and experience accounted for only 31% of variance in observer accuracy. For this species, accurate identification appears to be, in part, an innate skill. Nonetheless, using an appropriate setup, camera trapping clearly has potential to provide broad-scale occurrence data for these and other small mammal species.
Additional keywords: Muridae, Pseudomys fumeus, P. novaehollandiae, sensitivity, small mammals, specificity.
References
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 in Wildlife Research and Management’. (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.)Burns, P. A., Rowe, K. M. C., Holmes, B. P., and Rowe, K. C. (2015). Historical resurveys reveal persistence of smoky mouse (Pseudomys fumeus) populations over the long-term and through the short-term impacts of fire. Wildlife Research 42, 668–677.
| Historical resurveys reveal persistence of smoky mouse (Pseudomys fumeus) populations over the long-term and through the short-term impacts of fire.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Burton, A. C., Neilson, E., Moreira, D., Ladle, A., Steenweg, R., Fisher, J. T., Bayne, E., and Boutin, S. (2015). Wildlife camera trapping: a review and recommendations for linking surveys to ecological processes. Journal of Applied Ecology 52, 675–685.
| Wildlife camera trapping: a review and recommendations for linking surveys to ecological processes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chadès, I., McDonald-Madden, E., McCarthy, M. A., Wintle, B., Linkie, M., and Possingham, H. P. (2008). When to stop managing or surveying cryptic threatened species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105, 13936–13940.
| When to stop managing or surveying cryptic threatened species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clemann, N., Rowe, K. M. C., Rowe, K. C., Raadik, T. A., Gomon, M., Menkhorst, P. W., Sumner, J., Bray, D., Norman, M., and Melville, J. (2014). Value and impacts of collecting vertebrate voucher specimens, with guidelines for ethical collection. Memoirs of the Museum of Victoria 72, 141–153.
| Value and impacts of collecting vertebrate voucher specimens, with guidelines for ethical collection.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 |
Diefenbach, D. R., Brauning, D. W., and Mattice, J. A. (2003). Variability in grassland bird counts related to observer differences and species detection rates. The Auk 120, 1168–1179.
| Variability in grassland bird counts related to observer differences and species detection rates.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Falzon, G., Meek, P. D., and Vernes, K. (2014). Computer-assisted identification of Australian rodents in camera trap imagery. In ‘Camera Trapping in Wildlife Research and Management’. (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.)
Fancourt, B. A., Sweaney, M., and Fletcher, D. B. (2017). More haste, less speed: pilot study suggests camera trap detection zone could be more important than trigger speed to maximise species detections. Australian Mammalogy , .
| More haste, less speed: pilot study suggests camera trap detection zone could be more important than trigger speed to maximise species detections.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Farmer, R. G., Leonard, M. L., and Horn, A. G. (2012). Observer effects and avian-call-count survey quality: rare-species biases and overconfidence. The Auk 129, 76–86.
| Observer effects and avian-call-count survey quality: rare-species biases and overconfidence.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Field, S. A., Tyre, A. J., Jonzen, N., Rhodes, J. R., and Possingham, H. P. (2004). Minimizing the cost of environmental management decisions by optimizing statistical thresholds. Ecology Letters 7, 669–675.
| Minimizing the cost of environmental management decisions by optimizing statistical thresholds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Foster, R. J., and Harmsen, B. J. (2012). A critique of density estimation from camera-trap data. The Journal of Wildlife Management 76, 224–236.
| A critique of density estimation from camera-trap data.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, e67940.
| Optimising camera traps for monitoring small mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhtFaku7bN&md5=7a077c4259aab72b8032d1e0a1a11ad5CAS |
Gu, W., and Swihart, R. K. (2004). Absent or undetected? Effects of non-detection of species occurrence on wildlife–habitat models. Biological Conservation 116, 195–203.
| Absent or undetected? Effects of non-detection of species occurrence on wildlife–habitat models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Harley, D. K. P., Holland, G. J., Hradsky, B. A., and Antrobus, J. A. (2014). The use of camera traps to detect arboreal mammals: lessons from targeted surveys for the cryptic Leadbeater’s possum (Gymnobelideus leadbeateri). In ‘Camera Trapping in Wildlife Research and Management’. (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. 233–243. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Hollis, G. J. (1999). Pre- and post-fire trapping in Gippsland Lakes Coastal Park: an update on monitoring of Pseudomys novaehollandiae and other small mammals. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Warragul, Victoria.
Holmes, B. (2012). Detection and distribution of smoky mice (Pseudomys fumeus) using remote digital cameras in the Grampians National Park 2012. Parks Victoria, Halls Gap, Victoria.
Lock, M., and Wilson, B. A. (2017). Influence of rainfall on population dynamics and survival of a threatened rodent (Pseudomys novaehollandiae) under a drying climate in coastal woodlands of south-eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 65, 60–70.
| Influence of rainfall on population dynamics and survival of a threatened rodent (Pseudomys novaehollandiae) under a drying climate in coastal woodlands of south-eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lotz, A., and Allen, C. R. (2007). Observer bias in anuran call surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management 71, 675–679.
| Observer bias in anuran call surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Manzo, E., Bartolommei, P., Rowcliffe, J. M., and Cozzolino, R. (2012). Estimation of population density of European pine marten in central Italy using camera trapping. Acta Theriologica 57, 165–172.
| Estimation of population density of European pine marten in central Italy using camera trapping.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McCall, C., Reside, J., and Collyer, A. (2015). An assessment of the status of New Holland mouse populations in Gippsland: surveys for the New Holland mouse at Providence Ponds Flora and Fauna Reserve and Gippsland Lakes Coastal Park. Autumn 2015. Wildlife Unlimted Pty Ltd, Bairnsdale, Victoria.
McClintock, B. T., Bailey, L. L., Pollock, K. H., and Simons, T. R. (2010). Experimental investigation of observation error in anuran call surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management 74, 1882–1893.
| Experimental investigation of observation error in anuran call surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McDonald, P. J., Griffiths, A. D., Nano, C. E. M., Dickman, C. R., Ward, S. J., and Luck, G. W. (2015). Landscape-scale factors determine occupancy of the critically endangered central rock-rat in arid Australia: the utility of camera trapping. Biological Conservation 191, 93–100.
| Landscape-scale factors determine occupancy of the critically endangered central rock-rat in arid Australia: the utility of camera trapping.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., and Vernes, K. (2016). Can camera trapping be used to accurately survey and monitor the Hastings River mouse (Pseudomys oralis)? Australian Mammalogy 38, 44–51.
| Can camera trapping be used to accurately survey and monitor the Hastings River mouse (Pseudomys oralis)?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Vernes, K., and Falzon, G. (2013). 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 photos.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Ballard, G.-A., Vernes, K., and Fleming, P. J. S. (2015a). The history of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Australian Mammalogy 37, 1–12.
| The history of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meek, P. D., Ballard, G.-A., and Fleming, P. J. S. (2015b). 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 |
Miller, D. A. W., Weir, L. A., McClintock, B. T., Grant, E. H. C., Bailey, L. L., and Simons, T. R. (2012). Experimental investigation of false positive errors in auditory species occurrence surveys. Ecological Applications 22, 1665–1674.
| Experimental investigation of false positive errors in auditory species occurrence surveys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nelson, J., Menkhorst, P. W., Howard, K., Chick, R. R., and Lumsden, L. (2009). The status of smoky mouse populations at some historic sites in Victoria, and survey methods for their detection. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Melbourne.
Nelson, J. L., Main, M. L., Chick, R. R., and Scroggie, M. P. (2010). The status of smoky mouse populations at historic sites in Victoria, and an assessment of two non-invasive survey techniques. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Melbourne.
Oliveira-Santos, L. G. R., Zucco, C. A., Antunes, P. C., and Crawshaw, P. G. (2010). Is it possible to individually identify mammals with no natural markings using camera-traps? A controlled case-study with lowland tapirs. Mammalian Biology - Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 75, 375–378.
| Is it possible to individually identify mammals with no natural markings using camera-traps? A controlled case-study with lowland tapirs.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.
| Effective detection methods for medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals: a comparison between infrared digital cameras and hair tunnels.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Quin, B. R. (1996). New Holland mouse Pseudomys novaehollandiae (Rodentia: Muridae) in south Gippsland, southern Victoria part one – distribution and status. Victorian Naturalist 113, 236–246.
Quin, B. R., and Williamson, R. C. (1996). New Holland mouse Pseudomys novaehollandiae (Rodentia: Muridae) in south Gippsland, southern Victoria part two – conservation and management. Victorian Naturalist 113, 281–288.
R Core Team (2016). ‘R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.’ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna.)
Roberts, N. J. (2011). Investigation into survey techniques of large mammals: surveyor competence and camera-trapping vs. transect-sampling. Bioscience Horizons 4, 40–49.
| Investigation into survey techniques of large mammals: surveyor competence and camera-trapping vs. transect-sampling.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rovero, F., Zimmermann, F., Berzi, D., and Meek, P. (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.
| ‘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.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Russell, R., Duchaine, B., and Nakayama, K. (2009). Super-recognizers: people with extraordinary face recognition ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16, 252–257.
| Super-recognizers: people with extraordinary face recognition ability.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Swan, M., Di Stefano, J., Christie, F., Steel, E., and York, A. (2014). Detecting mammals in heterogeneous landscapes: implications for biodiversity monitoring and management. Biodiversity and Conservation 23, 343–355.
| Detecting mammals in heterogeneous landscapes: implications for biodiversity monitoring and management.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 |
Taylor, B. L., and Gerrodette, T. (1993). The uses of statistical power in conservation biology: the vaquita and northern spotted owl. Conservation Biology 7, 489–500.
| The uses of statistical power in conservation biology: the vaquita and northern spotted owl.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tyre, A. J., Tenhumberg, B., Field, S. A., and Possingham, H. P. (2003). Improving precision and reducing bias in biological surveys: estimating false-negative error rates. Ecological Applications 13, 1790–1801.
| Improving precision and reducing bias in biological surveys: estimating false-negative error rates.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Villette, P., Krebs, C. J., Jung, T. S., and Boonstra, R. (2016). Can camera trapping provide accurate estimates of small mammal (Myodes rutilus and Peromyscus maniculatus) density in the boreal forest? Journal of Mammalogy 97, 32–40.
| Can camera trapping provide accurate estimates of small mammal (Myodes rutilus and Peromyscus maniculatus) density in the boreal forest?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
