Greco Ilaria, Salvatori Marco, Buonafede Elena, Pistolesi Alessandra, Corradini Andrea, Cappai Nadia, Marconi Matilde, Seidenari Lorenzo, Cagnacci Francesca, Rovero Francesco
Department of Biology, University of Florence, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
MUSE - Museo delle Scienze, Trento, Italy.
Ecol Appl. 2025 Jul;35(5):e70083. doi: 10.1002/eap.70083.
Optimizing protocols to assess and monitor mammal communities is essential to meet the current biodiversity targets of halting species loss. Camera-traps are the most effective tool for multispecies monitoring, yet their deployment strategy is debated, with two main strategies adopted: trail- and random-based camera deployment. To date, few studies have compared these two strategies and reached contrasting recommendations. Here, by simultaneously deploying 60 camera-traps for each placement strategy in a National Park in central Italy, we aimed to assess differences in species richness and composition, photographic rate, detection/occupancy probabilities, also in responses to environmental and anthropogenic variables, and temporal activity. Site species richness was greater on than off-trails, with elusive carnivores mainly detected on trails. Community composition was different, with a smaller proportion of ungulates on trails, and lower detections of carnivores off-trails. Photographic rate, detection, and occupancy probabilities were higher on trails for almost all mammals. Occupancy responses to environmental variables did not match, possibly due to the different behavioral strategy adopted by mammals (trails for movement, off-trails for resting and foraging). Thus, a mixed approach with cameras located both on- and off-trails is recommended when studying habitat use. We also found a consistent negative response of occupancy and site-use intensity to human frequentation, with mammals avoiding both highly frequented trails and adjacent random sites. Temporal activity curves were similar between designs, suggesting that the choice of the sampling strategy would not bias the inference. However, nocturnal behavior was higher on trails for some species, indicating varying degrees of temporal avoidance of humans. With faster data accumulation, easier accessibility of sampling sites, and the ability to record human activity, on-trail cameras are more efficient than off-trail cameras for monitoring mammal communities.
优化评估和监测哺乳动物群落的方案对于实现当前阻止物种丧失的生物多样性目标至关重要。相机陷阱是多物种监测最有效的工具,但其部署策略存在争议,主要采用两种策略:基于路径和随机的相机部署。迄今为止,很少有研究比较这两种策略并得出截然不同的建议。在此,我们通过在意大利中部的一个国家公园为每种放置策略同时部署60个相机陷阱,旨在评估物种丰富度和组成、拍摄率、检测/占用概率的差异,以及对环境和人为变量的响应和时间活动的差异。实地物种丰富度在路径上高于路径外,难以捉摸的食肉动物主要在路径上被检测到。群落组成不同,路径上有蹄类动物的比例较小,路径外食肉动物的检测率较低。几乎所有哺乳动物在路径上的拍摄率、检测率和占用概率都更高。对环境变量的占用响应不匹配,可能是由于哺乳动物采用了不同的行为策略(路径用于移动,路径外用于休息和觅食)。因此,在研究栖息地利用时,建议采用路径上和路径外都放置相机的混合方法。我们还发现占用率和场地使用强度对人类活动频率有一致的负面反应,哺乳动物会避开频繁有人走动的路径和相邻的随机地点。两种设计的时间活动曲线相似,这表明采样策略的选择不会影响推断。然而,一些物种在路径上的夜间活动更高,这表明它们对人类的时间回避程度不同。由于数据积累更快、采样地点更容易到达以及能够记录人类活动,路径上的相机在监测哺乳动物群落方面比路径外的相机更有效。