The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Unmanned Aerial Survey of Elephants
Open accessAbstract
The use of a UAS (Unmanned Aircraft System) was tested to survey large mammals in the Nazinga Game Ranch in the south of Burkina Faso. The Gatewing ×100™ equipped with a Ricoh GR III camera was used to test animal reaction as the UAS passed, and visibility on the images. No reaction was recorded as the UAS passed at a height of 100 m. Observations, made on a set of more than 7000 images, revealed that only elephants (Loxodonta africana) were easily visible while medium and small sized mammals were not. The easy observation of elephants allows experts to enumerate them on images acquired at a height of 100 m. We, therefore, implemented an aerial strip sample count along transects used for the annual wildlife foot count. A total of 34 elephants were recorded on 4 transects, each overflown twice. The elephant density was estimated at 2.47 elephants/km(2) with a coefficient of variation (CV%) of 36.10%. The main drawback of our UAS was its low autonomy (45 min). Increased endurance of small UAS is required to replace manned aircraft survey of large areas (about 1000 km of transect per day vs 40 km for our UAS). The monitoring strategy should be adapted according to the sampling plan. Also, the UAS is as expensive as a second-hand light aircraft. However the logistic and flight implementation are easier, the running costs are lower and its use is safer. Technological evolution will make civil UAS more efficient, allowing them to compete with light aircraft for aerial wildlife surveys.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Precision wildlife monitoring using unmanned aerial vehicles
Hodgson, J. C., Baylis, S. M., Mott, R., Herrod, A., & Clarke, R. H. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep22574 · Cited by 474
Gonzalez, L., Montes, G., Puig, E., Johnson, S., Mengersen, K., & Gaston, K. (2016) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s16010097 · Cited by 470
Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems as a Rhinoceros Anti-Poaching Tool in Africa
Mulero-Pázmány, M., Stolper, R., van Essen, L. D., Negro, J. J., & Sassen, T. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083873 · Cited by 323
Unmanned aircraft systems as a new source of disturbance for wildlife: A systematic review
Mulero-Pázmány, M., Jenni-Eiermann, S., Strebel, N., Sattler, T., Negro, J. J., & Tablado, Z. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178448 · Cited by 319
Terrestrial mammalian wildlife responses to Unmanned Aerial Systems approaches
Bennitt, E., Bartlam-Brooks, H. L. A., Hubel, T. Y., & Wilson, A. M. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-38610-x · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Vermeulen, C., Lejeune, P., Lisein, J., Sawadogo, P., & Bouché, P.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2013-02-06
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e54700
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017335377
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Unmanned Aerial Survey of Elephants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0054700
- The paper
- Vermeulen, C., Lejeune, P., Lisein, J., Sawadogo, P., & Bouché, P. (2013). Unmanned Aerial Survey of Elephants. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054700
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.