Estimating wildlife activity curves: comparison of methods and sample size

Sci Rep. 2018 Mar 8;8(1):4173. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-22638-6.

Abstract

Camera traps and radiotags commonly are used to estimate animal activity curves. However, little empirical evidence has been provided to validate whether they produce similar results. We compared activity curves from two common camera trapping techniques to those from radiotags with four species that varied substantially in size (~1 kg-~50 kg), diet (herbivore, omnivore, carnivore), and mode of activity (diurnal and crepuscular). Also, we sub-sampled photographs of each species with each camera trapping technique to determine the minimum sample size needed to maintain accuracy and precision of estimates. Camera trapping estimated greater activity during feeding times than radiotags in all but the carnivore, likely reflective of the close proximity of foods readily consumed by all species except the carnivore (i.e., corn bait or acorns). However, additional analyses still indicated both camera trapping methods produced relatively high overlap and correlation to radiotags. Regardless of species or camera trapping method, mean overlap increased and overlap error decreased rapidly as sample sizes increased until an asymptote near 100 detections which we therefore recommend as a minimum sample size. Researchers should acknowledge that camera traps and radiotags may estimate the same mode of activity but differ in their estimation of magnitude in activity peaks.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Animals, Wild / physiology*
  • Conservation of Natural Resources
  • Models, Biological*
  • Population Density
  • Sample Size