Comparison of methods to detect rare and cryptic species: a case study using the red fox (Vulpes vulpes)
Abstract
Choosing the appropriate method to detect and monitor wildlife species is difficult if the species is rare or cryptic in appearance or behaviour. We evaluated the effectiveness of the following four methods for detecting red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) on the basis of equivalent person hours in a rural landscape in temperate Australia: camera traps, hair traps (using morphology and DNA from hair follicles), scats from bait stations (using DNA derived from the scats) and spotlighting. We also evaluated whether individual foxes could be identified using remote collection of their tissues. Genetic analysis of hair samples was the least efficient method of detection among the methods employed because of the paucity of samples obtained and the lack of follicles on sampled hairs. Scat detection was somewhat more efficient. Scats were deposited at 17% of bait stations and 80% of scats were amplified with a fox-specific marker, although only 31% of confirmed fox scats could be fully genotyped at all six microsatellite loci. Camera trapping and spotlighting were the most efficient methods of detecting fox presence in the landscape. Spotlighting success varied seasonally, with fox detections peaking in autumn (80% of spotlighting transects) and being lowest in winter (29% of transects). Cameras detected foxes at 51% of stations; however, there was limited seasonality in detection, and success rates varied with camera design. Log-linear models confirmed these trends. Our results showed that t…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Camera trapping has been used successfully in studying other African mammals.
“Hence, innovative technologies, particularly camera trapping that was used successfully in studying other African mammals (Nguelet et al., 2016) appear as a good opportunity (Trolle et al., 2008;Vine et al., 2009;Conway, 2013;Garteh, 2014).”
From Habitat use in wild pygmy hippopotamus (<i>Choeropsis liberiensis</i>) in Taï National Park, Côte d’Ivoire (2019) · cites this paper as Vine et al., 2009
Cites
Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists
Quinn, G. P., & Keough, M. J. (2002) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511806384 · Cited by 10,674 · cited 2× · see citing works
“We used log-linear models with expected frequencies modelled against variables by using log-link and Poisson error terms (Agresti 1996; Quinn and Keough 2002), and maximum likelihood methods to fit the models and estimate their parameters.”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lindsø, L. K., Dupont, P., Rød-Eriksen, L., Andersskog, I. P. Ø., Ulvund, K. R., Flagstad, Ø., Bischof, R., & Eide, N. E. (2022) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s00442-021-05087-3 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Ouattara, K., Bomey, C. G., Kone, I., & Paris, M. (2019) · International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences · doi:10.4314/ijbcs.v12i6.9 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Hence, innovative technologies, particularly camera trapping that was used successfully in studying other African mammals (Nguelet et al., 2016) appear as a good opportunity (Trolle et al., 2008; Vine et al., 2009; Conway, 2013; Garteh, 2014).”
Background
- Authors
- Vine, S. J., Crowther, M. S., Lapidge, S. J., Dickman, C. R., Mooney, N., Piggott, M. P., & English, A. W.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- DInvasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, 48 Oxford Terrace, Unley, SA 5601, Australia.
- Department of Natural Resources and Environment Tasmania (AU)
- Australian National University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Crowther, M. S.
- Venue
- Wildlife Research
- Publisher
- CSIRO Publishing
- Published
- 2009-07-21
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 436-446
- ISSN
- 1035-3712 (ISSN-L)
- 1448-5494
- OpenAlex
- W2108997345
- Cited by
- 133
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Wildlife Research (publishedVersion)
- ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
- Keywords
- red fox, rare species detection, cryptic species, camera trapping, hair traps, scat DNA, microsatellite genotyping, spotlighting, wildlife monitoring, invasive species
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review