| Title: | Effects of scent lure on camera trap detections vary across mammalian predator and prey species |
| Author(s): | Holinda D; Burgar JM; Burton AC; |
| Address: | "Department of Forest Resources Management, Wildlife Coexistence Lab, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada" |
| DOI: | 10.1371/journal.pone.0229055 |
| ISSN/ISBN: | 1932-6203 (Electronic) 1932-6203 (Linking) |
| Abstract: | "Camera traps are a unique survey tool used to monitor a wide variety of mammal species. Camera trap (CT) data can be used to estimate animal distribution, density, and behaviour. Attractants, such as scent lures, are often used in an effort to increase CT detections; however, the degree which the effects of attractants vary across species is not well understood. We investigated the effects of scent lure on mammal detections by comparing detection rates between 404 lured and 440 unlured CT stations sampled in Alberta, Canada over 120 day survey periods between February and August in 2015 and 2016. We used zero-inflated negative binomial generalized linear mixed models to test the effect of lure on detection rates for a) all mammals, b) six functional groups (all predator species, all prey, large carnivores, small carnivores, small mammals, ungulates), and c) four varied species of management interest (fisher, Pekania pennanti; gray wolf, Canis lupus; moose, Alces alces; and Richardson's ground squirrel; Urocitellus richardsonii). Mammals were detected at 800 of the 844 CTs, with nearly equal numbers of total detections at CTs with (7110) and without (7530) lure, and variable effects of lure on groups and individual species. Scent lure significantly increased detections of predators as a group, including large and small carnivore sub-groups and fisher specifically, but not of gray wolf. There was no effect of scent lure on detections of prey species, including the small mammal and ungulate sub-groups and moose and Richardson's ground squirrel specifically. We recommend that researchers explicitly consider the variable effects of scent lure on CT detections across species when designing, interpreting, or comparing multi-species surveys. Additional research is needed to further quantify variation in species responses to scent lures and other attractants, and to elucidate the effect of attractants on community-level inferences from camera trap surveys" |
| Keywords: | Alberta Animal Distribution/physiology Animals Carnivora/*physiology Deer/physiology Humans *Odorants Pheromones/chemistry Predatory Behavior/*physiology Video Recording Wolves/*physiology; |
| Notes: | "MedlineHolinda, Dacyn Burgar, Joanna M Burton, A Cole eng Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't 2020/05/13 PLoS One. 2020 May 12; 15(5):e0229055. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229055. eCollection 2020" |
