Population Ecology

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 253–259 | Cite as

Heterogeneous capture rates in low density populations and consequences for capture-recapture analysis of camera-trap data

  • Bart J. Harmsen
  • Rebecca J. Foster
  • C. Patrick Doncaster
Original Article


Closed population capture-recapture analysis of camera-trap data has become the conventional method for estimating the abundance of individually recognisable cryptic species living at low densities, such as large felids. Often these estimates are the only information available to guide wildlife managers and conservation policy. Capture probability of the target species using camera traps is commonly heterogeneous and low. Published studies often report overall capture probabilities as low as 0.03 and fail to report on the level of heterogeneity in capture probability. We used simulations to study the effects of low and heterogeneous capture probability on the reliability of abundance estimates using the Mh jack-knife estimator within a closed-population capture-recapture framework. High heterogeneity in capture probability was associated with under- and over-estimates of true abundance. The use of biased abundance estimates could have serious conservation management consequences. We recommend that studies present capture frequencies of all sampled individuals so that policy makers can assess the reliability of the abundance estimates.


Abundance estimates Capture probability Closed population model Jaguar Mark-recapture Reliability 


  1. Balme GA, Hunter LTB, Slotow R (2009) Evaluating methods for counting cryptic carnivores. J Wildl Manage 73:433–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burnham KP, Overton WS (1978) Estimation of the size of a closed population when capture probabilities vary among animals. Biometrika 65:625–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chao A, Huggins RM (2005) Modern closed capture-recapture models. In: Amstrup SC, McDonald TL, Manly BFJ (eds) Handbook of capture-recapture analysis. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, pp 58–87Google Scholar
  4. Cooch E, White GC (2002) Program MARK analysis of data from marked individuals-A gentle introduction, 2nd edn. Cornell University, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Cuellar E, Maffei L, Arispe R, Noss A (2006) Geoffroy’s cats at the northern limit of their range: activity patterns and density estimates from camera trapping in Bolivian dry forests. Stud Neotrop Fauna Environ 41:169–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cullen L Jr, Abreu KC, Sana D, Nava AFD (2005) Jaguars as landscape detectives for the upper Paraná River corridor, Brazil. Natureza Conservação 3:43–58Google Scholar
  7. Di Bitetti MS, Paviolo A, De Angelo C (2006) Density, habitat use and activity patterns of ocelots (Leopardus pardalis) in the Atlantic Forest of Misiones, Argentina. J Zool 270:153–163Google Scholar
  8. Dillon A, Kelly MJ (2007) Ocelot Leopardus pardalis in Belize: the impact of trap spacing and distance moved on density estimates. Oryx 41:469–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foster RJ (2008) The ecology of jaguars (Panthera onca) in a human-influenced landscape. PhD dissertation, University of Southampton, Southampton, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffiths M, van Schaik CP (1993) Camera-trapping: a new tool for the study of elusive rain forest animals. Trop Biodivers 1:131–135Google Scholar
  11. Haines AM, Janecka JE, Tewes ME, Grassman LI Jr, Morton P (2006) The importance of private lands for ocelot Leopardus pardalis conservation in the United States. Oryx 40:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harmsen BJ (2006) The use of camera traps for estimating abundance and studying the ecology of jaguars (Panthera onca). PhD dissertation, University of Southampton, Southampton, UKGoogle Scholar
  13. Harmsen BJ, Foster RJ, Silver S, Ostro L, Doncaster CP (2009) Spatial and temporal interactions of sympatric jaguars (Panthera onca) and pumas (Puma concolor) in a Neotropical forest. J Mammal 90:612–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harmsen BJ, Foster RJ, Silver S, Ostro L, Doncaster CP (2010) Differential use of trails by forest mammals and the implications for camera trap studies: a case study from Belize. Biotropica 42:126–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heilbrun RD, Silvy LJ, Peterson MJ, Tewes ME (2006) Estimating bobcat abundance using automatically triggered cameras. Wildl Soc Bull 34:69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson RM, Roe JD, Wangchuk R, Hunter DO (2006) Estimating snow leopard population abundance using photography and capture–recapture techniques. Wildl Soc Bull 34:772–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Karanth UK (1995) Estimating tiger Panthera tigris populations from camera-trap data using capture recapture models. Biol Conserv 71:333–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Karanth UK, Nichols JD (1998) Estimation of tiger densities in India using Photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology 79:2852–2862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karanth UK, Chundawat RS, Nichols JD, Kumar NS (2004) Estimation of tiger density in the tropical dry forests of Panna, Central India, using photographic capture-recapture sampling. Anim Conserv 7:285–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kawanishi K, Sunquist ME (2004) Conservation status of tigers in a primary rainforest of Peninsular Malaysia. Biol Conserv 120:329–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kelly MJ, Noss AJ, Di Bitetti MS, Maffei L, Arispe RL, Paviolo A, De Angelo CD, Di Blanco YE (2008) Estimating puma densities from camera trapping across three study sites: Bolivia, Argentina, Belize. J Mammal 89:408–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krebs CJ (1999) Ecological methodology, 2nd edn. Addison-Welsey Educational Publishers Inc., Menlo ParkGoogle Scholar
  23. Larrucea ES, Brussard PF, Jaeger MM, Barrett RH (2007) Cameras, coyotes, and the assumption of equal detectability. J Wildl Manage 71:1682–1689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lynam AJ, Rabinowitz A, Myint T, Maung M, Latt KT, Po SHT (2009) Estimating abundance with sparse data: tigers in northern Myanmar. Popul Ecol 51:115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maffei L, Noss AJ (2008) How small is too small? Camera trap survey areas and density estimates for ocelots in the Bolivian Chaco. Biotropica 40:71–75Google Scholar
  26. Maffei L, Cuellar E, Noss A (2004) One thousand jaguars (Panthera onca) in Bolivia’s Chaco? Camera trapping in the Kaa-Iya National Park. J Zool 262:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maffei L, Noss AJ, Cuéllar E, Rumiz DI (2005) Ocelot (Felis pardalis) population densities, activity, and ranging behaviour in the dry forests of eastern Bolivia: data from camera trapping. J Trop Ecol 21:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCarthy KP, Fuller TK, Ming M, McCarthy TM, Waits L, Jumabaev K (2008) Assessing estimators of snow leopard abundance. J Wildl Manage 72:1826–1833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Menkens GE Jr, Anderson SH (1988) Estimation of small-mammal population size. Ecology 69:1952–1959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller CM (2005) Jaguar density in Gallon Jug Estate, Belize. Report for the Wildlife Conservation Society, NYGoogle Scholar
  31. Miller CM (2006) Jaguar density in the Fireburn, Belize. Report for the Wildlife Conservation Society, NYGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller CM, Miller B (2005) Jaguar density in the Selva Maya. Report for the Wildlife Conservation Society, NYGoogle Scholar
  33. Noss AJ, Cuéllar RL, Barrientos J, Maffei L, Cuéllar E, Arispe R, Rúmiz D, Rivero K (2003) A camera trapping and radio telemetry study of lowland tapir (Tapirus terrestris) in Bolivian dry forests. Tapir Conserv 12:24–32Google Scholar
  34. Noss AJ, Peña R, Rumiz DI (2004) Camera trapping Priodontes maximus in the dry forests of Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Endang Species Update 21:43–52Google Scholar
  35. O’Brien TG, Kinnaird MF, Wibisono HT (2003) Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tiger and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape. Anim Conserv 6:131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rayan MD, Mohamad SW (2009) The importance of selectively logged forests for tiger Panthera tigris conservation: a population density estimate in Peninsular Malaysia. Oryx 43:48–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rexstad E, Burnham KP (1991) User’s guide for interactive program CAPTURE. Colorado Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
  38. Salom-Pérez R, Carrillo E, Sáenz JC, Mora JM (2007) Critical condition of the jaguar Panthera onca population in Cocovado National Park, Costa Rica. Oryx 41:51–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Silver SC, Ostro LET, Marsh LK, Maffei L, Noss AJ, Kelly MJ, Wallace RB, Gomez H, Ayala G (2004) The use of camera traps for estimating jaguar Panthera onca abundance and density using capture/recapture analysis. Oryx 38:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Soisalo MK, Cavalcanti SMC (2006) Estimating the density of a jaguar population in the Brazilian Pantanal using camera-traps and capture-recapture sampling in combination with GPS radio-telemetry. Biol Conserv 129:487–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sunquist M, Sunquist F (2002) The essence of cats. In: Sunquist M, Sunquist F (eds) Wild cats of the world. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 11–13Google Scholar
  42. Trolle M, Kéry M (2003) Estimation of ocelot density in the Pantanal using capture–recapture analysis of camera-trapping data. J Mammal 84:607–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Trolle M, Kéry M (2005) Camera-trap study of ocelot and other secretive mammals in the northern Pantanal. Mammalia 69:405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wallace RB, Gomez H, Ayala G, Espinoza F (2003) Camera trapping for jaguar (Panthera onca) in the Tuichu Valley, Bolivia. J Neotrop Mammal 10:133–139Google Scholar
  45. Wegge P, Pokheral CPD, Jnawali SR (2004) Effects of trapping effort and trap shyness on estimates of tiger abundance from camera trap studies. Anim Conserv 7:251–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. White GC, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Otis DL (1982) Capture-recapture and removal methods for sampling closed populations. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los AlamosGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Population Ecology and Springer 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bart J. Harmsen
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Rebecca J. Foster
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. Patrick Doncaster
    • 2
  1. 1.Belize Jaguar Program, PantheraNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  3. 3.Environmental Research Institute (ERI)University of BelizeBelmopanBelize

Personalised recommendations