ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024
Automated Detection and Counting of Wild Boar in Camera Trap Images.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Review of You Only Look Once Algorithms in Animal Phenotyping Applications.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Evolution, Ecology and Management of Wild Boar and Deer.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Camera traps are becoming widely used for wildlife monitoring and management. However, manual analysis of the resulting image sets is labor-intensive, time-consuming and costly. This study shows that automated computer vision techniques can be extremely helpful in this regard, as they can rapidly and automatically extract valuable information from the images. Specific training with a set of 1600 images obtained from a study where wild animals approaching wild boar carcasses were monitored enabled the model to detect five different classes of animals automatically in their natural environment with a mean average precision of 98.11%, namely 'wild boar', 'fox', 'raccoon dog', 'deer' and 'bird'. In addition, sequences of images were automatically analyzed and the number of wild boar visits and respective group sizes were determined. This study may help to improve and speed up the monitoring of the potential spread of African swine fever virus in areas where wild boar are affected.
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.