Camera trapping photographic rate as an index of density in forest ungulates

Summary 1. Calibrating indices of animal abundance to true densities is critical in wildlife studies especially when direct density estimations are precluded by high costs, lack of required data or model parameters, elusiveness and rarity of target species. For studies deploying camera traps, the use of photographic rate (photographs per sampling time) as an index of abundance potentially applies to the majority of terrestrial mammals where individual recognition, and hence capture–recapture analysis, are unfeasible. The very few studies addressing this method have either been limited by lack of independence between trapping rates and density estimations, or because they combined different species, thus introducing potential bias in camera trap detection rates. This study uses a single model species from several sites to analyse calibration of trapping rates to independently derived estimations of density. The study also makes the first field test of the method by Rowcliffe et al. (2008) for density derivation from camera trapping rates based on modelling animal-camera contacts. 2. We deployed camera traps along line transects at six sites in the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania and correlated trapping rates of Harvey’s duiker Cephalophus harveyi with densities estimated from counts made along the same transects. 3. We found a strong, linear relationship (R 2 =0 AE90) between trapping rate and density. Sampling precision analysis indicates that camera trapping rates reach satisfactory precision when trapping effort amounts to 250–300 camera days. Density estimates using Rowcliffe et al.’s (2008) gas model conversion are higher than from transect censuses; we discuss the possible reasons and stress the need for more field tests. 4. Synthesis and applications. Subject to rigorous and periodic calibration, and standardization of sampling procedures in time and over different sites, camera trapping rate is shown to be, in this study, a valid index of density in the target species. Comparative data indicate that this may also apply to forest ungulates in general. The method has great potential for standardizing monitoring programmes and reducing the costs of wildlife surveys, especially in remote areas.

[1]  F. Rovero,et al.  Estimating the abundance of forest antelopes by line transect techniques: a case from the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania , 2004 .

[2]  James D. Nichols,et al.  Science deficiency in conservation practice: the monitoring of tiger populations in India , 2003 .

[3]  Piran C. L. White,et al.  Selection of line‐transect methods for estimating the density of group‐living animals: lessons from the primates , 2008, American journal of primatology.

[4]  M. Kelly,et al.  Camera Trapping of Carnivores: Trap Success Among Camera Types and Across Species, and Habitat Selection by Species, on Salt Pond Mountain, Giles County, Virginia , 2008 .

[5]  M. F. Fuller,et al.  Practical Nonparametric Statistics; Nonparametric Statistical Inference , 1973 .

[6]  F. Rovero,et al.  Notes on Abbott's duiker (Cephalophus spadix True 1890) and other forest antelopes of Mwanihana Forest, Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania, as revealed by camera-trapping and direct observations , 2005 .

[7]  Karl Vernes,et al.  Seasonality, dung specificity and competition in dung beetle assemblages in the Australian Wet Tropics, north-eastern Australia , 2005, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[8]  A. Bowkett.  How do you monitor rare and elusive mammals? Counting duikers in Tanzania and Zimbabwe. , 2006 .

[9]  David L. Smith,et al.  The use of photographic rates to estimate densities of tigers and other cryptic mammals , 2001, Animal Conservation.

[10]  Andrew J. Noss,et al.  The use of camera traps for estimating jaguar Panthera onca abundance and density using capture/recapture analysis , 2004, Oryx.

[11]  L. Silveira,et al.  Camera trap, line transect census and track surveys: a comparative evaluation , 2003 .

[12]  Yoan Dinata,et al.  Estimating occupancy of a data deficient mammalian species living in tropical rainforests: Sun bears in the Kerinci Seblat region, Sumatra , 2007 .

[13]  D. Bedigian.  Ecology of an African rain forest. Logging in Kibale and the conflict between conservation and exploitation , 2008, Economic Botany.

[14]  W. J. Conover,et al.  Practical Nonparametric Statistics , 1972 .

[15]  S. Buckland.  Introduction to distance sampling : estimating abundance of biological populations , 2001 .

[16]  J. Nichols,et al.  ESTIMATION OF TIGER DENSITIES IN INDIA USING PHOTOGRAPHIC CAPTURES AND RECAPTURES , 1998 .

[17]  C. Carbone,et al.  The use of photographic rates to estimate densities of cryptic mammals: response to Jennelle et al. , 2002 .

[18]  Guy Cowlishaw,et al.  How Far Do Animals Go? Determinants of Day Range in Mammals , 2004, The American Naturalist.

[19]  T. Struhsaker.  Ecology of an African Rain Forest: Logging in Kibale and the Conflict Between Conservation and Exploitation , 1999 .

[20]  Marc Kéry,et al.  ESTIMATION OF OCELOT DENSITY IN THE PANTANAL USING CAPTURE–RECAPTURE ANALYSIS OF CAMERA-TRAPPING DATA , 2003 .

[21]  A. Bowkett,et al.  The use of camera‐trap data to model habitat use by antelope species in the Udzungwa Mountain forests, Tanzania , 2008 .

[22]  M. Tobler,et al.  An evaluation of camera traps for inventorying large‐ and medium‐sized terrestrial rainforest mammals , 2008 .

[23]  Samuel T. Turvey,et al.  Estimating animal density using camera traps without the need for individual recognition , 2008 .

[24]  Margaret F. Kinnaird,et al.  Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tiger and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape , 2003 .

[25]  Margaret F. Kinnaird,et al.  Deforestation Trends in a Tropical Landscape and Implications for Endangered Large Mammals , 2003 .

[26]  Marcella J. Kelly,et al.  Design, evaluate, refine: camera trap studies for elusive species , 2008 .

[27]  Checklist of mammals of the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania , 2007 .

[28]  Jonathan Kingdon,et al.  The Kingdon field guide to African mammals , 1997 .

[29]  F. Rovero,et al.  Abundance of Diurnal Primates in Mwanihana Forest, Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania , 2006, International Journal of Primatology.

[30]  Darryl I. MacKenzie,et al.  Occupancy as a surrogate for abundance estimation , 2004, Animal Biodiversity and Conservation.

[31]  Darryl I. MacKenzie,et al.  The use of photographic rates to estimate densities of tigers and other cryptic mammals: a comment on misleading conclusions , 2002 .

[32]  J. Andrew Royle,et al.  ESTIMATING SITE OCCUPANCY RATES WHEN DETECTION PROBABILITIES ARE LESS THAN ONE , 2002, Ecology.

[33]  A. Bowkett,et al.  Genetic testing of dung identification for antelope surveys in the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania , 2009, Conservation Genetics.

[34]  J. Mitani,et al.  Primate Community Dynamics in Old Growth Forest over 23.5 Years at Ngogo, Kibale National Park, Uganda: Implications for Conservation and Census Methods , 2000, International Journal of Primatology.

[35]  M. Conroy,et al.  Analysis and Management of Animal Populations , 2002 .

[36]  Andrew J. Noss,et al.  Ocelot (Felis pardalis) population densities, activity, and ranging behaviour in the dry forests of eastern Bolivia: data from camera trapping , 2005, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[37]  A. Marshall,et al.  Monkey Abundance and Social Structure in Two High-Elevation Forest Reserves in the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania , 2005, International Journal of Primatology.