Thinking outside the park: recommendations for camera trapping mammal communities in the urban matrix

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Urban Ecology Pub Date : 2021-01-22 DOI:10.1093/JUE/JUAA036
D. J. Herrera, S. Moore, D. T. Flockhart, W. McShea, M. Cove
{"title":"Thinking outside the park: recommendations for camera trapping mammal communities in the urban matrix","authors":"D. J. Herrera, S. Moore, D. T. Flockhart, W. McShea, M. Cove","doi":"10.1093/JUE/JUAA036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Urbanization is increasing globally, fragmenting habitats and prompting human–wildlife conflict. Urban wildlife research is concurrently expanding, but sampling methods are often biased towards large and intact habitats in public green spaces, neglecting the far more abundant, but degraded, habitats in the urban matrix. Here, we introduce the Five P’s of Urban Ecology—Partnerships, Planning, Placements, Public participation and Processing—as a path to overcoming the logistical barriers often associated with camera-trapping in the urban matrix. Though the Five P’s can be applied to a variety of urban sampling methods, we showcase the camera-trapping efforts of the DC Cat Count project in Washington, DC, as a case study. We compared occupancy models for eight urban mammal species using broad categorizations of land cover and local land use to determine drivers of mammal occurrence within the urban matrix as compared with urban habitat patches. Many native species maintained a strong association with large, semi-natural green spaces, but occupancy was not limited to these locations, and in some cases, the use of private yards and the built environment were not notably different. Furthermore, some species exhibited higher occupancy probabilities in developed areas over green spaces. Though seemingly intuitive, we offer advice on how to greatly reduce habitat-biased sampling methods in urban wildlife research and illustrate the importance of doing so to ensure accurate results that support the formation of effective urban planning and policy.","PeriodicalId":37022,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urban Ecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Urban Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JUE/JUAA036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Urbanization is increasing globally, fragmenting habitats and prompting human–wildlife conflict. Urban wildlife research is concurrently expanding, but sampling methods are often biased towards large and intact habitats in public green spaces, neglecting the far more abundant, but degraded, habitats in the urban matrix. Here, we introduce the Five P’s of Urban Ecology—Partnerships, Planning, Placements, Public participation and Processing—as a path to overcoming the logistical barriers often associated with camera-trapping in the urban matrix. Though the Five P’s can be applied to a variety of urban sampling methods, we showcase the camera-trapping efforts of the DC Cat Count project in Washington, DC, as a case study. We compared occupancy models for eight urban mammal species using broad categorizations of land cover and local land use to determine drivers of mammal occurrence within the urban matrix as compared with urban habitat patches. Many native species maintained a strong association with large, semi-natural green spaces, but occupancy was not limited to these locations, and in some cases, the use of private yards and the built environment were not notably different. Furthermore, some species exhibited higher occupancy probabilities in developed areas over green spaces. Though seemingly intuitive, we offer advice on how to greatly reduce habitat-biased sampling methods in urban wildlife research and illustrate the importance of doing so to ensure accurate results that support the formation of effective urban planning and policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公园外的思考:城市矩阵中摄像机捕捉哺乳动物群落的建议
城市化正在全球范围内加剧,破坏了栖息地,并引发了人类与野生动物之间的冲突。城市野生动物研究也在扩大,但采样方法往往偏向于公共绿地中的大型完整栖息地,而忽视了城市基质中更丰富但退化的栖息地。在这里,我们介绍了城市生态的五个P——伙伴关系、规划、安置、公众参与和处理——作为克服城市矩阵中通常与相机陷阱相关的物流障碍的途径。尽管五个P可以应用于各种城市采样方法,但我们以华盛顿特区的DC猫计数项目为例,展示了相机捕捉工作。我们使用土地覆盖和当地土地利用的广泛分类,比较了八种城市哺乳动物物种的占用模型,以确定与城市栖息地斑块相比,城市基质中哺乳动物出现的驱动因素。许多本土物种与大型半自然绿地保持着密切的联系,但占用率并不局限于这些地方,在某些情况下,私人庭院的使用和建筑环境没有明显的差异。此外,一些物种在发达地区的绿地占有率更高。尽管看起来很直观,但我们就如何在城市野生动物研究中大幅减少有栖息地偏见的采样方法提供了建议,并说明了这样做的重要性,以确保准确的结果支持有效的城市规划和政策的形成。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Urban Ecology
Journal of Urban Ecology Social Sciences-Urban Studies
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Beyond the metropolis: street tree communities and resident perceptions on ecosystem services in small urban centers in India Comparing fear responses of two lizard species across habitats varying in human impact Perceived and desired outcomes of urban coyote management methods Garbage in may not equal garbage out: sex mediates effects of ‘junk food’ in a synanthropic species Effects of landscape cover and yard features on feral and free-roaming cat (Felis catus) distribution, abundance and activity patterns in a suburban area
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1