An official website of the United States government
Although research on wildlife species across taxa has shown that males and females may differentially select habitat, sex-specific habitat suitability models for endangered species are uncommon. We developed sex-specific models for Bengal tigers (Panthera tigris) based on camera trapping data collected from 20 January to 22 March 2010 within Chitwan National Park, Nepal, and its buffer zone. We compared these to a sex-indiscriminate habitat suitability model to assess the benefits of a sex-specific approach to habitat suitability modeling. Our sex-specific models produced more informative and detailed habitat suitability maps and highlighted vital differences in the spatial distribution of suitable habitats for males and females, specific associations with different vegetation types, and habitat use near human settlements. Improving and refining habitat models for this and other critically endangered species provides the necessary information to meet established conservation goals and population recovery targets.
more »
« less
Are we telling the same story? Comparing inferences made from camera trap and telemetry data for wildlife monitoring
Abstract Estimating habitat and spatial associations for wildlife is common across ecological studies and it is well known that individual traits can drive population dynamics and vice versa. Thus, it is commonly assumed that individual‐ and population‐level data should represent the same underlying processes, but few studies have directly compared contemporaneous data representing these different perspectives. We evaluated the circumstances under which data collected from Lagrangian (individual‐level) and Eulerian (population‐level) perspectives could yield comparable inference to understand how scalable information is from the individual to the population. We used Global Positioning System (GPS) collar (Lagrangian) and camera trap (Eulerian) data for seven species collected simultaneously in eastern Washington (2018–2020) to compare inferences made from different survey perspectives. We fit the respective data streams to resource selection functions (RSFs) and occupancy models and compared estimated habitat‐ and space‐use patterns for each species. Although previous studies have considered whether individual‐ and population‐level data generated comparable information, ours is the first to make this comparison for multiple species simultaneously and to specifically ask whether inferences from the two perspectives differed depending on the focal species. We found general agreement between the predicted spatial distributions for most paired analyses, although specific habitat relationships differed. We hypothesize the discrepancies arose due to differences in statistical power associated with camera and GPS‐collar sampling, as well as spatial mismatches in the data. Our research suggests data collected from individual‐based sampling methods can capture coarse population‐wide patterns for a diversity of species, but results differ when interpreting specific wildlife‐habitat relationships.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1652420
- PAR ID:
- 10382193
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Ecological Applications
- Volume:
- 33
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 1051-0761
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Ocean chlorophyll time series exhibit temporal variability on a range of timescales due to environmental change, ecological interactions, dispersal, and other factors. The differences in chlorophyll temporal variability observed at stationary locations (Eulerian perspective) or following water parcels (Lagrangian perspective) are poorly understood. Here we contrasted the temporal variability of ocean chlorophyll in these two observational perspectives, using global drifter trajectories and satellite chlorophyll to generate matched pairs of Eulerian‐Lagrangian time series. We found that for most ocean locations, chlorophyll variances measured in Eulerian and Lagrangian perspectives are not statistically different. In high latitude areas, the two perspectives may capture similar variability due to the large spatial scale of chlorophyll patches. In localized regions of the ocean, however, chlorophyll variability measured in these two perspectives may significantly differ. For example, in some western boundary currents, temporal chlorophyll variability in the Lagrangian perspective was greater than in the Eulerian perspective. In these cases, the observing platform travels rapidly across strong environmental gradients and constrained by the shelf topography, potentially leading to greater Lagrangian variability in chlorophyll. In contrast, we found that Eulerian chlorophyll variability exceeded Lagrangian variability in some key upwelling zones and boundary current extensions. In these cases, variability in the nutrient supply may generate intermittent chlorophyll anomalies in the Eulerian perspective, while the Lagrangian perspective sees the transport of such anomalies off‐shore. These findings aid with the interpretation of chlorophyll time series from different sampling methodologies, inform observational network design, and guide validation of marine ecosystem models.more » « less
-
There is an urgent need to develop global observation networks to quantify biodiversity trends for evaluating achievements of targets of Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Camera traps are a commonly used tool, with the potential to enhance global observation networks for monitoring wildlife population trends and has the capacity to constitute global observation networks by applying a unified sampling protocol. The Snapshot protocol is simple and easy for camera trapping which is applied in North America and Europe. However, there is no regional camera-trap network with the Snapshot protocol in Asia. We present the first dataset from a collaborative camera-trap survey using the Snapshot protocol in Japan conducted in 2023. We collected data at 90 locations across nine arrays for a total of 6162 trap-nights of survey effort. The total number of sequences with mammals and birds was 7967, including 20 mammal species and 23 avian species. Apart from humans, wild boar, sika deer and rodents were the most commonly observed taxa on the camera traps, covering 57.9% of all the animal individuals. We provide the dataset with a standard format of Wildlife Insights, but also with Camtrap DP 1.0 format. Our dataset can be used for a part of the global dataset for comparing relative abundances of wildlife and for a baseline of wildlife population trends in Japan. It can also used for training machine-learning models for automatic species identifications.more » « less
-
ABSTRACT Camera trap studies have become a popular medium to assess many ecological phenomena including population dynamics, patterns of biodiversity, and monitoring of endangered species. In conjunction with the benefit to scientists, camera traps present an unprecedented opportunity to involve the public in scientific research via image classifications. However, this engagement strategy comes with a myriad of complications. Volunteers vary in their familiarity with wildlife, thus, the accuracy of user‐derived classifications may be biased by the commonness or popularity of species and user‐experience. From an extensive multi‐site camera trap study across Michigan, U.S.A, we compiled and classified images through a public science platform called Michigan ZoomIN. We aggregated responses from 15 independent users per image using multiple consensus methods to assess accuracy by comparing to species identification completed by wildlife experts. We also evaluated how different factors including consensus algorithms, study area, wildlife species, user support, and camera type influenced the accuracy of user‐derived classifications. Overall accuracy of user‐derived classification was 97%; although, several canid (e.g.,Canis lupus, Vulpes vulpes) and mustelid (e.g.,Neovison vison) species were repeatedly difficult to identify by users and had lower accuracy. When validating user‐derived classification, we found that study area, consensus method, and user support best explained accuracy. To overcome hesitancy associated with data collected by untrained participants, we demonstrated their value by showing that the accuracy from volunteers was comparable to experts when classifying North American mammals. Our hierarchical workflow that integrated multiple consensus methods led to more image classifications without extensive training and even when the expertise of the volunteer was unknown. Ultimately, adopting such an approach can harness broader participation, expedite future camera trap data synthesis, and improve allocation of resources by scholars to enhance performance of public participants and increase accuracy of user‐derived data. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.more » « less
-
Abstract Network analysis of infectious disease in wildlife can reveal traits or individuals critical to pathogen transmission and help inform disease management strategies. However, estimates of contact between animals are notoriously difficult to acquire. Researchers commonly use telemetry technologies to identify animal associations, but such data may have different sampling intervals and often captures a small subset of the population. The objectives of this study were to outline best practices for telemetry sampling in network studies of infectious disease by determining (a) the consequences of telemetry sampling on our ability to estimate network structure, (b) whether contact networks can be approximated using purely spatial contact definitions and (c) how wildlife spatial configurations may influence telemetry sampling requirements.We simulated individual movement trajectories for wildlife populations using a home range‐like movement model, creating full location datasets and corresponding ‘complete’ networks. To mimic telemetry data, we created ‘sample’ networks by subsampling the population (10%–100% of individuals) with a range of sampling intervals (every minute to every 3 days). We varied the definition of contact for sample networks, using either spatiotemporal or spatial overlap, and varied the spatial configuration of populations (random, lattice or clustered). To compare complete and sample networks, we calculated seven network metrics important for disease transmission and assessed mean ranked correlation coefficients and percent error between complete and sample network metrics.Telemetry sampling severely reduced our ability to calculate global node‐level network metrics, but had less impact on local and network‐level metrics. Even so, in populations with infrequent associations, high intensity telemetry sampling may still be necessary. Defining contact in terms of spatial overlap generally resulted in overly connected networks, but in some instances, could compensate for otherwise coarse telemetry data.By synthesizing movement and disease ecology with computational approaches, we characterized trade‐offs important for using wildlife telemetry data beyond ecological studies of individual movement, and found that careful use of telemetry data has the potential to inform network models. Thus, with informed application of telemetry data, we can make significant advances in leveraging its use for a better understanding and management of wildlife infectious disease.more » « less
