Empirical comparison of density estimators for large carnivores

137 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Impacts of People and Tigers on Leopard Spatiotemporal Activity Patterns in a Global Biodiversity Hotspot (2015, methodology): “,minimumconvex polygon), which has been shown to inflate density estimates by between 20% and 200% (Obbard et al., 2010).”
Evaluating the potential biases in carnivore capture–recapture studies associated with the use of lure and varying density estimation techniques using photographic-sampling data of the Malagasy civet (2011, methodology): “Thus, carnivore C-R studies, especially those using hair snares, often use bait (food reward) or lure (non-food reward) to attract animals to the detection device to more effectively (re)capture individuals (Gardner et al. 2010b; Obbard et al. 2010).”
Comparison of density estimation methods for mammal populations with camera traps in the Kaa‐Iya del Gran Chaco landscape (2012, methodology): “Other researchers who have recently compared density estimation methods also recommend SCR models to avoid over-estimation of population density and potentially inappropriate management actions as well as facilitating comparisons across sites and species and over time (Obbard et al., 2010; Gerber et”