4.6 Article

Detection dog efficacy for collecting faecal samples from the critically endangered Cross River gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli) for genetic censusing

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 2, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.140423

关键词

apes; primates; microsatellite; genotyping; canine; survey

资金

  1. United States Fish and Wildlife Service
  2. Margot Marsh Foundation
  3. Association of Zoos and Aquariums Conservation Endowment Fund
  4. North Carolina Zoological Society
  5. Wildlife Conservation Society
  6. Max Planck Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Population estimates using genetic capture-recapture methods from non-invasively collected wildlife samples are more accurate and precise than those obtained from traditional methods when detection and resampling rates are high. Recently, detection dogs have been increasingly used to find elusive species and their by-products. Here we compared the effectiveness of dog-and human-directed searches for Cross River gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli) faeces at two sites. The critically endangered Cross River gorilla inhabits a region of high biodiversity and endemism on the border between Nigeria and Cameroon. The rugged highland terrain and their cryptic behaviour make them difficult to study and a precise population size for the subspecies is still lacking. Dog-directed surveys located more fresh faeces with less bias than human-directed survey teams. This produced a more reliable population estimate, although of modest precision given the small scale of this pilot study. Unfortunately, the considerable costs associated with use of the United States-based detection dog teams make the use of these teams financially unfeasible for a larger, more comprehensive survey. To realize the full potential of dog-directed surveys and increase cost-effectiveness, we recommend basing dog-detection teams in the countries where they will operate and expanding the targets the dogs are trained to detect.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据