The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ESTIMATION OF TIGER DENSITIES IN INDIA USING PHOTOGRAPHIC CAPTURES AND RECAPTURES
Abstract
The tiger (Panthera tigris) is an endangered, large felid whose demographic status is poorly known across its distributional range in Asia. Previously applied methods for estimating tiger abundance, using total counts based on tracks, have proved unreliable. Lack of reliable data on tiger densities not only has constrained our ability to understand the ecological factors shaping communities of large, solitary felids, but also has undermined the effective conservation of these animals. In this paper, we describe the use of a field method proposed by Karanth (1995), which combines camera-trap photography, to identify individual tigers, with theoretically well-founded capture–recapture models. We developed a sampling design for camera-trapping and used the approach to estimate tiger population size and density in four representative tiger habitats in different parts of India. The field method worked well and provided data suitable for analysis using closed capture–recapture models. The results suggest the potential for applying this methodology to rigorously estimate abundances, survival rates, and other population parameters for tigers and other low-density, secretive animal species in which individuals can be identified based on natural markings. Estimated probabilities of photo-capturing tigers present in the study sites ranged from 0.75 to 1.00. Estimated densities of tigers >1 yr old ranged from 4.1 ± 1.31 to 16.8 ± 2.96 tigers/100 km2 (mean ± 1 se). Simultaneously, we used line-transect sampling to determine that mean densities of principal tiger prey at these sites ranged from 56.1 to 63.8 ungulates/km2. Tiger densities appear to be positively associated with prey densities, except at one site influenced by tiger poaching. Our results generally support the prediction that relative abundances of large felid species may be governed primarily by the abundance and structure of their prey communities.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Densities of 0.7 (± 0.2 SE) in the mid-1990s (Karanth and Nichols 1998) and densities of 0.3 (0.1-1.1, 95% CI) in 1998-1999 (Biswas and Sankar 2002) were recorded in Pench National Park, central India.”
From Bos frontalis and Bos gaurus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) (2018) · cites this paper as Karanth and Nichols 1998
In the citing paper
“4.5 (± 0.8 SE) in the mid-1990s (Karanth and Nichols 1998)”
From Bos frontalis and Bos gaurus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) (2018) · cites this paper as Karanth and Nichols 1998
Citations
Cites
Lebreton, J., Burnham, K. P., Clobert, J., & Anderson, D. R. (1992) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937171 · Cited by 4,459
The Estimation of Animal Abundance and Related Parameters.
Cormack, R. M., & Seber, G. A. F. (1984) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531423 · Cited by 3,267
Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations
Otis, D. L., Burnham, K. P., White, G. C., & Anderson, D. R. (1978) · Wildlife Monographs · Cited by 2,442
Distance Sampling-Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations.
Sprent, P., Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., & Laake, J. L. (1994) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.2307/2404172 · Cited by 1,855
Statistical Inference for Capture-Recapture Experiments.
Lawson, A. T. D.-D., Pollock, K. H., Nichols, J. D., Brownie, C., & Hines, J. E. (1992) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532321 · Cited by 1,836
Self-citationDistance Sampling: Estimating abundance of biological populations
Buckland, S. T. (1993) · Cited by 1,249
Estimation of Density from Line Transect Sampling of Biological Populations.
Gates, C. E., Burnham, K. P., Anderson, D. R., & Laake, J. L. (1981) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2530429 · Cited by 1,158
Capture-Recapture and Removal Methods for Sampling Closed Populations.
Jolly, G. M., White, G. C., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., & Otis, D. L. (1983) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531355 · Cited by 1,123
Robust Estimation of Population Size When Capture Probabilities Vary Among Animals
Burnham, K. P., & Overton, W. S. (1979) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1936861 · Cited by 909
Estimation of the Size of a Closed Population when Capture Probabilities vary Among Animals
Burnham, K. P., & Overton, W. S. (1978) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/65.3.625 · Cited by 819
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.9051127.x · DOI
- A. R. Rabinowitz, 1989 .The density and behavior of large cats in a dry tropical forest mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand., Natural History Bulletin of the Siam Society, 37 :235 -251 .
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Burton, A. C., Neilson, E. W., Moreira‐Arce, D., Ladle, A., Steenweg, R. W., Fisher, J. T., Bayne, E. M., & Boutin, S. A. (2015) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12432 · Cited by 1,273
Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tiger and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape
O’Brien, T. G., Kinnaird, M. F., & Wibisono, H. T. (2003) · Animal Conservation · doi:10.1017/s1367943003003172 · Cited by 1,118
“Photographs from camera traps have been used by Karanth (1995) and Karanth & Nichols (1998, 2000) in combination with mark–recapture models to determine tiger densities in India.”
MethodInfluentialHuman–Wildlife Conflict and Coexistence
Nyhus, P. J. (2016) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085634 · Cited by 1,149
“The application of rigorous statistical sampling methods revolutionized the use of camera traps for monitoring tigers and other wildlife (144), and progress in quantitative analyses could have a similar impact on human–wildlife conflict studies.”
BackgroundEstimating animal density using camera traps without the need for individual recognition
Rowcliffe, J. M., Field, J., Turvey, S. T., & Carbone, C. (2008) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01473.x · Cited by 907
Tobler, M. W., Carrillo‐Percastegui, S. E., Pitman, R. L., et al. (2008) · Animal Conservation · doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00169.x · Cited by 871
“…Srbek-Araujo & Garcia, 2005; Azlan & Lading, 2006) to studying activity patterns (van Schaik & Griffiths, 1996; Gómez et al., 2005; Azlan & Sharma, 2006) and estimating animal density (Mace et al., 1994; Karanth & Nichols, 1998; Sweitzer et al., 2000; Trolle & Kéry, 2003; Silver et al., 2004).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Karanth, K. U., & Nichols, J. D.
- Affiliations
- Wildlife Conservation Society (US)
- United States Geological Survey (US)
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 79
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2852-2862
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2116052220
- Semantic Scholar
- 0ec78be11655287853f8b6c34667ed41ae529260
- Cited by
- 1,176
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 61 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 69 · 2013: 68 · 2012: 67
- FWCI
- 5.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ecology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Wildlife Conservation Society
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
- Keywords
- tiger, population size estimation, ungulate prey, tiger poaching, India
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: ESTIMATION OF TIGER DENSITIES IN INDIA USING PHOTOGRAPHIC CAPTURES AND RECAPTURES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079%5B2852:eotdii%5D2.0.co;2
- The paper
- Karanth, K. U., & Nichols, J. D. (1998). ESTIMATION OF TIGER DENSITIES IN INDIA USING PHOTOGRAPHIC CAPTURES AND RECAPTURES. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079%5B2852%3Aeotdii%5D2.0.co%3B2