How many feral cats can be individually identified from camera trap images? Population monitoring, ecological utility and camera trap settings

被引:4
|
作者
Sparkes, Jessica [1 ]
Fleming, Peter J. S. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
McSorley, Adam [5 ]
Mitchell, Bruce [5 ]
机构
[1] Wagga Wagga Agr Inst, New South Wales Dept Primary Ind, Pine Gully Rd, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia
[2] New South Wales Dept Primary Ind, Orange, NSW, Australia
[3] Univ New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
[4] Univ Southern Queensland, Darling Hts, Qld, Australia
[5] New South Wales Natl Pk & Wildlife Serv, Parramatta, NSW, Australia
关键词
conservation; mallee; population size; rangelands; survival; MARK-RESIGHT MODELS; HOME-RANGE; DENSITY; INFERENCE;
D O I
10.1111/emr.12506
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The feral cat (Felis catus) is a key threat for many Australian native critical weight range animals (i.e. species of intermediate body mass between 35 and 5,500 g that are particularly susceptible to introduced predators) and estimates of cat abundance are required for assessing changes in population size. Camera trapping is a much used tool for monitoring and estimating population sizes, including with mark-resight techniques, for which the more robust estimators require individual identification. Many feral cats are individually marked, which potentially makes them suitable for such monitoring programmes. We sought to determine what proportion of cat images captured during a commonly used field deployment of camera traps could be individually identified, and whether aspects of camera trap deployment affected the rate of individual identification. Camera trap arrays were established in four conservation areas in south-west New South Wales, Australia, during 2017 (range 39-50 camera traps per site). The unlured camera traps were continuously deployed over 26 months, with five or 10 images captured per trigger. Where possible, cats were individually identified based on phenotypic characteristics. Over the deployment period (95,413 camera trap nights; CTN), we obtained 2.25 million images, of which 13,845 contained feral cats. Feral cat events (i.e. a series of images taken <5 minutes apart on the same camera trap) ranged from 0.004 to 0.047 events per CTN across the four conservation areas, with 85 individual cats identified. Depending on camera settings, few images could be assigned to a known individual (12.2-27.4% of feral cat events per site were of identifiable individuals). Minimum number known alive were 10-46 feral cats per site, with resultant quarterly densities ranging from 0.01 to 0.16 cats/km(2). With our current deployment, individual identification of feral cats was insufficient for estimating abundance or survival using individual mark-resight methods. Such deployment deficits limit the ecological conclusions that can be drawn from ours and similar studies.
引用
收藏
页码:246 / 255
页数:10
相关论文
共 3 条
  • [1] Observer differences in individual identification of feral cats from camera trap images
    Sparkes, Jessica
    Fleming, Peter J. S.
    AUSTRALIAN MAMMALOGY, 2023, 45 (01): : 32 - 40
  • [2] Camera trap distance sampling for terrestrial mammal population monitoring: lessons learnt from a UK case study
    Mason, Samantha S.
    Hill, Russell A.
    Whittingham, Mark J.
    Cokill, Jim
    Smith, Graham C.
    Stephens, Philip A.
    Rowcliffe, Marcus
    REMOTE SENSING IN ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION, 2022, 8 (05) : 717 - 730
  • [3] Density and population structure of the jaguar (Panthera onca) in a protected area of Los Llanos, Venezuela, from 1 year of camera trap monitoring
    Jedrzejewski, Wlodzimierz
    Puerto, Maria F.
    Goldberg, Joshua F.
    Hebblewhite, Mark
    Abarca, Maria
    Gamarra, Gertrudis
    Calderon, Luis E.
    Romero, Jose F.
    Viloria, Angel L.
    Carreno, Rafael
    Robinson, Hugh S.
    Lampo, Margarita
    Boede, Ernesto O.
    Biganzoli, Alejandro
    Stachowicz, Izabela
    Velasquez, Grisel
    Schmidt, Krzysztof
    MAMMAL RESEARCH, 2017, 62 (01) : 9 - 19