ArticleAmerican journal of primatology2025
Estimating Abundance of Crop-Foraging Primates in Anthropogenic Landscapes Using Camera Traps.
Article in American journal of primatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Estimating Abundance of Crop-Foraging Primates in Anthropogenic Landscapes Using Camera Traps.American journal of primatology · 2025Article
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
Abstract
As human populations grow, competition with wildlife increases, driving more frequent and intense negative interactions between humans and wildlife, of which crop foraging by primates like baboons (Papio spp.) is a notable example. Farmers struggle to coexist with baboons, and are particularly concerned by their abundance, with more baboons resulting in more damage. Despite extensive primate research, there are few population estimates, particularly for chacma baboons (Papio ursinus). Estimating baboon densities could inform conservation policies, including strategies to mitigate crop losses and negative human-baboon interactions. Conventional techniques for estimating density are impractical for baboons in commercial farmland or have been unsuccessful in the past, but camera trapping could provide an alternative. Through field tests of the distance sampling with camera traps (CTDS) and the random encounter model (REM) methods, we compare estimates of chacma baboon densities, assessing the potential of these methods for monitoring species that move in large and stable social groups. Chacma baboon density was 1-3 individuals/km
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.