Thinking inside and outside the box: Comparing the efficacy of camera trap designs for surveying small mammals.

IF 2.9 3区 生物学 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PeerJ Pub Date : 2026-09-23 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.7717/peerj.21654
Phoebe Williams, Xenia Green, Amelia Grass, Anthony Caravaggi
{"title":"Thinking inside and outside the box: Comparing the efficacy of camera trap designs for surveying small mammals.","authors":"Phoebe Williams, Xenia Green, Amelia Grass, Anthony Caravaggi","doi":"10.7717/peerj.21654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Small mammals are vital to ecosystem health and serve as key indicators of environmental changes. Population trends in the UK for many species have remained largely undocumented, however, emphasizing the need for more effective monitoring tools. This study evaluates the efficacy of three camera trap designs for detecting small mammals: no-box camera traps (NCTs), open box camera traps (OCTs), and closed tube camera traps (TCTs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was conducted at Silent Valley Nature Reserve, South Wales, focusing on <i>Fagus sylvatica</i> woodland. The authors thank the reserve manager for providing verbal permission to access the site managed by the Gwent Wildlife Trust. Six baited survey stations, each equipped with one NCT, OCT, and TCT, were established in low-disturbance areas, placed approximately 5 m apart. Cameras recorded 15-second videos with a five minute trigger interval. Generalised additive models (GAMs) were used to assess temporal detection patterns, while hourly detection data and overlap metrics evaluated similarities between apparent activity patterns across trap types.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mice (<i>i.e.</i>, wood <i>Apodemus sylvaticus</i> and yellow-necked <i>A. flavicollis</i> mice; <i>n</i> = 827) and bank voles (<i>Myodes glareolus</i>; <i>n</i> = 454) were the most commonly detected species in 1,874 detections of small mammals across 57 camera trap days. Both boxed designs yielded more detections of focal species and fewer false triggers than NCTs. TCTs recorded greater number of focal species detections relative to total detections (79%; compared to 58% for OCTs and 14.8% for NCTs) and the fewest unidentified species (16, compared to 51 and 49 respectively). Vole and shrew activity patterns differed between boxed and NCT designs. There was evidence of differences in detection among box designs, with shrews being more frequently detected by TCTs (<i>n</i> = 196), and voles more frequently detected by OCTs (<i>n</i> = 273).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Boxed traps aided species identification but were affected by camera focal issues, which could be mitigated with low-cost adaptations. Our study highlights the need to consider focal species ecology when designing camera trap studies and provides a basis for the development of more effective small mammal surveys, survey methods and conservation tools.</p>","PeriodicalId":19799,"journal":{"name":"PeerJ","volume":"14 ","pages":"e21654"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13615732/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PeerJ","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.21654","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Small mammals are vital to ecosystem health and serve as key indicators of environmental changes. Population trends in the UK for many species have remained largely undocumented, however, emphasizing the need for more effective monitoring tools. This study evaluates the efficacy of three camera trap designs for detecting small mammals: no-box camera traps (NCTs), open box camera traps (OCTs), and closed tube camera traps (TCTs).

Methods: The study was conducted at Silent Valley Nature Reserve, South Wales, focusing on Fagus sylvatica woodland. The authors thank the reserve manager for providing verbal permission to access the site managed by the Gwent Wildlife Trust. Six baited survey stations, each equipped with one NCT, OCT, and TCT, were established in low-disturbance areas, placed approximately 5 m apart. Cameras recorded 15-second videos with a five minute trigger interval. Generalised additive models (GAMs) were used to assess temporal detection patterns, while hourly detection data and overlap metrics evaluated similarities between apparent activity patterns across trap types.

Results: Mice (i.e., wood Apodemus sylvaticus and yellow-necked A. flavicollis mice; n = 827) and bank voles (Myodes glareolus; n = 454) were the most commonly detected species in 1,874 detections of small mammals across 57 camera trap days. Both boxed designs yielded more detections of focal species and fewer false triggers than NCTs. TCTs recorded greater number of focal species detections relative to total detections (79%; compared to 58% for OCTs and 14.8% for NCTs) and the fewest unidentified species (16, compared to 51 and 49 respectively). Vole and shrew activity patterns differed between boxed and NCT designs. There was evidence of differences in detection among box designs, with shrews being more frequently detected by TCTs (n = 196), and voles more frequently detected by OCTs (n = 273).

Discussion: Boxed traps aided species identification but were affected by camera focal issues, which could be mitigated with low-cost adaptations. Our study highlights the need to consider focal species ecology when designing camera trap studies and provides a basis for the development of more effective small mammal surveys, survey methods and conservation tools.

在盒子里和盒子外面思考:比较相机陷阱设计在调查小型哺乳动物中的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PeerJ
PeerJ MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
1665
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: PeerJ is an open access peer-reviewed scientific journal covering research in the biological and medical sciences. At PeerJ, authors take out a lifetime publication plan (for as little as $99) which allows them to publish articles in the journal for free, forever. PeerJ has 5 Nobel Prize Winners on the Board; they have won several industry and media awards; and they are widely recognized as being one of the most interesting recent developments in academic publishing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书