Listening and watching: Do camera traps or acoustic sensors more efficiently detect wild chimpanzees in an open habitat?
| Autor: | Hjalmar S. Kühl, Alex K. Piel, Anne-Sophie Crunchant, David L. Borchers |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | University of St Andrews. School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews. Statistics, University of St Andrews. Scottish Oceans Institute, University of St Andrews. Centre for Research into Ecological & Environmental Modelling, University of St Andrews. Marine Alliance for Science & Technology Scotland |
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
0106 biological sciences
Species complex Chimpanzee Passive acoustic monitoring Occupancy QH301 Biology Troglodytes Tanzania 010603 evolutionary biology 01 natural sciences Videos QH301 Savanna-woodland mosaic habitat SF Active listening Ecology Evolution Behavior and Systematics QL Extinction T1 biology 010604 marine biology & hydrobiology Ecological Modeling DAS Seasonality biology.organism_classification Habitat Threatened species Occupancy modelling Vocalisations Cartography |
| Zdroj: | Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 11:542-552 |
| ISSN: | 2041-210X |
| Popis: | This work was supported by the Primate Society of Great Britain through the Cyril Rosen Conservation Grant. Long term funding for ongoing research at Issa is supported by the UCSD/Salk Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny (CARTA). 1. With one million animal species at risk of extinction, there is an urgent need to regularly monitor threatened species. However, in practice this is challenging, especially with wide‐ranging, elusive and cryptic species or those that occur at low density. 2. Here we compare two non‐invasive methods, passive acoustic monitoring (n=12) and camera trapping (n=53), to detect chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in a savanna‐woodland mosaic habitat at the Issa Valley, Tanzania. With occupancy modelling we evaluate the efficacy of each method, using the estimated number of sampling days needed to establish chimpanzee absence with 95% probability, as our measure of efficacy. 3. Passive acoustic monitoring was more efficient than camera trapping in detecting wild chimpanzees. Detectability varied over seasons, likely due to social and ecological factors that influence party size and vocalisation rate. The acoustic method can infer chimpanzee absence with less than ten days of recordings in the field during the late dry season, the period of highest detectability, which was five times faster than the visual method. 4. Synthesis and applications: Despite some technical limitations, we demonstrate that passive acoustic monitoring is a powerful tool for species monitoring. Its applicability in evaluating presence/absence, especially but not exclusively for loud call species, such as cetaceans, elephants, gibbons or chimpanzees provides a more efficient way of monitoring populations and inform conservation plans to mediate species‐loss. Postprint |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text