Observer differences in individual identification of feral cats from camera trap images

被引:1
作者
Sparkes, Jessica [1 ]
Fleming, Peter J. S. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Wagga Wagga Agr Inst, New South Wales Dept Primary Ind, Vertebrate Pest Res Unit, Pine Gully Rd, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia
[2] Orange Agr Inst, New South Wales Dept Primary Ind, Vertebrate Pest Res Unit, Forest Rd, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia
[3] Univ New England, Sch Environm & Rural Sci, Ecosyst Management, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia
[4] Univ Southern Queensland, Ctr Sustainable Agr Syst, Inst Agr & Environm, Toowoomba, Qld 4350, Australia
来源
AUSTRALIAN MAMMALOGY | 2023年 / 45卷 / 01期
关键词
citizen science; conservation; Felis catus; management; monitoring; pelage; pest animal; population estimates; Reconyx; PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION; CAPTURE-RECAPTURE; DENSITY; POPULATIONS;
D O I
10.1071/AM21030
中图分类号
Q95 [动物学];
学科分类号
071002 ;
摘要
Feral cats are a key threat to many Australian native fauna, with camera traps increasingly used to identify individuals for evaluation of management actions. However, observer bias and camera trap settings can affect individual identification rates. We compared feral cat individual identification by two observers with extremes of experience. Arrays of 39-50 camera traps were deployed continuously for 22 months at four sites in the Western Division of New South Wales. Where possible, feral cats were individually identified from phenotypic characteristics by an expert and naive lay observer. We obtained 10 465 feral cat images, with 72 cats individually identified across the sites. The experienced observer attributed more feral cat events to a known individual compared with the lay observer (21.3 vs 12.9%, respectively). Forty three percent of cat images were similarly tagged by both observers. Daytime events yielded higher identification rates and match success (28.1 vs 19.5 and 17.9 vs 11.8% for day vs night events for the expert and lay observer, respectively). Lack of congruence between observers, combined with a small number of events where cats could be individually identified, and differences in identification accuracy over time and between sites, makes estimation of detection probabilities and errors difficult.
引用
收藏
页码:32 / 40
页数:9
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [1] How camera traps work and how to work them
    Apps, Peter
    McNutt, John
    [J]. AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, 2018, 56 (04) : 702 - 709
  • [2] Ballard G, 2014, CAMERA TRAPPING: WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH, P189
  • [3] Estimating and indexing feral cat population abundances using camera traps
    Bengsen, Andrew
    Butler, John
    Masters, Pip
    [J]. WILDLIFE RESEARCH, 2011, 38 (08) : 732 - 739
  • [4] Braysher M., 2017, Managing Australias Pest Animals: A Guide to Strategic Planning and Effective Management
  • [5] Claridge AW, 2014, CAMERA TRAPPING: WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH, P205
  • [6] Aerial mark-recapture estimates of wild horses using natural markings
    Dawson, Michelle J.
    Miller, Cameron
    [J]. WILDLIFE RESEARCH, 2008, 35 (04) : 365 - 370
  • [7] The challenges of recognising individuals with few distinguishing features: Identifying red foxes Vulpes vulpes from camera-trap photos
    Dorning, Jo
    Harris, Stephen
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (05):
  • [8] Fleming PJS, 2017, RANGELAND J, V39, P523, DOI [10.1071/rj17046, 10.1071/RJ17046]
  • [9] Factors affecting the identification of individual mountain bongo antelope
    Gibbon, Gwili E. M.
    Bindemann, Markus
    Roberts, David L.
    [J]. PEERJ, 2015, 3
  • [10] Harvey, 2015, EXIFTOOL 999