ArticleEcology and evolution2017
A comparison of camera trap and permanent recording video camera efficiency in wildlife underpasses.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-driven technological breakthroughs and practical pathways for biodiversity conservation and ecological management.iScience · 2026Review
- Article
- Wombat burrows are hotspots for small vertebrates in a landscape subject to gigafire.Journal of mammalogy · 2024Article
- Empirical evaluation of the spatial scale and detection process of camera trap surveys.Movement ecology · 2021Article
- Design patterns for wildlife-related camera trap image analysis.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
- Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods.Royal Society open science · 2019Article
- Effectiveness of camera traps for quantifying daytime and nighttime visitation by vertebrate pollinators.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Distance and size matters: A comparison of six wildlife camera traps and their usefulness for wild birds.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- A comparison of camera trap and permanent recording video camera efficiency in wildlife underpasses.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the current context of biodiversity loss through habitat fragmentation, the effectiveness of wildlife crossings, installed at great expense as compensatory measures, is of vital importance for ecological and socio-economic actors. The evaluation of these structures is directly impacted by the efficiency of monitoring tools (camera traps…), which are used to assess the effectiveness of these crossings by observing the animals that use them. The aim of this study was to quantify the efficiency of camera traps in a wildlife crossing evaluation. Six permanent recording video systems sharing the same field of view as six Reconyx HC600 camera traps installed in three wildlife underpasses were used to assess the exact proportion of missed events (
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.