Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 416

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Camera trapping photographic rate as an index of density in forest ungulates

Open access
Rovero, Francesco, Marshall, Andrew R.·2009·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

Summary: 1.Calibrating indices of animal abundance to true densities is critical in wildlife studies especially when direct density estimations are precluded by high costs, lack of required data or model parameters, elusiveness and rarity of target species. For studies deploying camera traps, the use of photographic rate (photographs per sampling time) as an index of abundance potentially applies to the majority of terrestrial mammals where individual recognition, and hence capture–recapture analysis, are unfeasible. The very few studies addressing this method have either been limited by lack of independence between trapping rates and density estimations, or because they combined different species, thus introducing potential bias in camera trap detection rates. This study uses a single model species from several sites to analyse calibration of trapping rates to independently derived estimations of density. The study also makes the first field test of the method by Rowcliffe et al.(2008)for density derivation from camera trapping rates based on modelling animal‐camera contacts. 2.We deployed camera traps along line transects at six sites in the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania and correlated trapping rates of Harvey’s duiker Cephalophus harveyi with densities estimated from counts made along the same transects. 3.We found a strong, linear relationship (R2 = 0·90) between trapping rate and density. Sampling precision analysis indicates that camera trapping rates reach satisfactory precision when trapping effort amounts to 250–300 camera days. Density estimates using Rowcliffe et al.’s (2008)gas model conversion are higher than from transect censuses; we discuss the possible reasons and stress the need for more field tests. 4.Synthesis and applications. Subject to rigorous and periodic calibration, and standardization of sampling procedures in time and over different sites, camera trapping rate is shown to be, in this study, a valid index of density in the target species. Comparative data indicate that this may also apply to forest ungulates in general. The method has great potential for standardizing monitoring programmes and reducing the costs of wildlife surveys, especially in remote areas.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01705.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 416

Metadata

Authors
Rovero, F., & Marshall, A. R.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-10
Volume
46
Issue
5
Pages
1011-1017
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W2120622552
Cited by
416
References
1
FWCI
8.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Camera trapping photographic rate as an index of density in forest ungulates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01705.x
The paper
Rovero, F., & Marshall, A. R. (2009). Camera trapping photographic rate as an index of density in forest ungulates. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01705.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.