ArticleEcology and evolution2017
Comparison of photo-matching algorithms commonly used for photographic capture-recapture studies.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Photo-based individual identification is more reliable than visible implant elastomer tags or toe-tipping in young agile frogs.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Semi-automated identification of individual big brown bats via collagen-elastin patterns in the wing membrane.Journal of mammalogy · 2025Article
- Spatial Variation in Abundance Parameters of a Federally Threatened Groundwater Salamander Within and Among Central Texas Headwater Creeks.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Performance of different automatic photographic identification software for larvae and adults of the European fire salamander.PloS one · 2024Article
- Optimizing the automated recognition of individual animals to support population monitoring.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- PolarBearVidID: A Video-Based Re-Identification Benchmark Dataset for Polar Bears.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- SealID: Saimaa Ringed Seal Re-Identification Dataset.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Post-epizootic salamander persistence in a disease-free refugium suggests poor dispersal ability of Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Fragile coexistence of a global chytrid pathogen with amphibian populations is mediated by environment and demography.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2017Article
- Comparison of photo-matching algorithms commonly used for photographic capture-recapture studies.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Photographic capture-recapture is a valuable tool for obtaining demographic information on wildlife populations due to its noninvasive nature and cost-effectiveness. Recently, several computer-aided photo-matching algorithms have been developed to more efficiently match images of unique individuals in databases with thousands of images. However, the identification accuracy of these algorithms can severely bias estimates of vital rates and population size. Therefore, it is important to understand the performance and limitations of state-of-the-art photo-matching algorithms prior to implementation in capture-recapture studies involving possibly thousands of images. Here, we compared the performance of four photo-matching algorithms; Wild-ID, I3S Pattern+, APHIS, and AmphIdent using multiple amphibian databases of varying image quality. We measured the performance of each algorithm and evaluated the performance in relation to database size and the number of matching images in the database. We found that algorithm performance differed greatly by algorithm and image database, with recognition rates ranging from 100% to 22.6% when limiting the review to the 10 highest ranking images. We found that recognition rate degraded marginally with increased database size and could be improved considerably with a higher number of matching images in the database. In our study, the pixel-based algorithm of AmphIdent exhibited superior recognition rates compared to the other approaches. We recommend carefully evaluating algorithm performance prior to using it to match a complete database. By choosing a suitable matching algorithm, databases of sizes that are unfeasible to match "by eye" can be easily translated to accurate individual capture histories necessary for robust demographic estimates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.