|
|
Burke, C., Rashman, M., Wich, S., Symons, A., Theron, C., & Longmore, S. (2019). Optimizing observing strategies for monitoring animals using drone-mounted thermal infrared cameras. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 40(2), 439–467.
Abstract: ABSTRACTThe proliferation of relatively affordable off-the-shelf drones offers great opportunities for wildlife monitoring and conservation. Similarly the recent reduction in the cost of thermal infrared cameras also offers new promise in this field, as they have the advantage over conventional RGB cameras of being able to distinguish animals based on their body heat and being able to detect animals at night. However, the use of drone-mounted thermal infrared cameras comes with several technical challenges. In this article, we address some of these issues, namely thermal contrast problems due to heat from the ground, absorption and emission of thermal infrared radiation by the atmosphere, obscuration by vegetation, and optimizing the flying height of drones for a best balance between covering a large area and being able to accurately image and identify animals of interest. We demonstrate the application of these methods with a case study using field data and make the first ever detection of the critically endangered riverine rabbit (Bunolagus monticularis) in thermal infrared data. We provide a web-tool so that the community can easily apply these techniques to other studies (http://www.astro.ljmu.ac.uk/aricburk/uav_calc/).
|
|
|
|
Bonin, S. J., Clayton, H. M., Lanovaz, J. L., & Johnston, T. (2007). Comparison of mandibular motion in horses chewing hay and pellets. Equine Vet. J., 39(3), 258–262.
Abstract: Summary Reasons for performing study: Previous studies have suggested that temporomandibular joint (TMJ) kinematics depend on the type of food being masticated, but accurate measurements of TMJ motion in horses chewing different feeds have not been published. Hypothesis: The temporomandibular joint has a larger range of motion when horses chew hay compared to pellets. Methods: An optical motion capture system was used to track skin markers on the skull and mandible of 7 horses as they chewed hay and pellets. A virtual marker was created on the midline between the mandibles at the level of the 4th premolar teeth to represent the overall motion of the mandible relative to the skull during the chewing cycle. Results: Frequency of the chewing cycles was lower for hay than for pellets. Excursions of the virtual mandibular marker were significantly larger in all 3 directions when chewing hay compared to pellets. The mean velocity of the virtual mandibular marker during the chewing cycle was the same when chewing the 2 feeds. Conclusions: The range of mediolateral displacement of the mandible was sufficient to give full occlusal contact of the upper and lower dental arcades when chewing hay but not when chewing pellets. Potential relevance: These findings support the suggestion that horses receiving a diet high in concentrate feeds may require more frequent dental prophylactic examinations and treatments to avoid the development of dental irregularities associated with smaller mandibular excursions during chewing.
|
|
|
|
Genov, P. W., & Kostava, V. (1993). Untersuchungen zur zahlenmäßigen Stärke des Wolfes und seiner Einwirkung auf die Haustierbestände in Bulgarien. Zeitschrift für Jagdwissenschaft, 39(4), 217–223.
Abstract: Die Untersuchung wurde in der Zeitspanne von 1984 bis 1988 durchgeführt. Es wurden die Protokolle des Staatlichen Versicherungsinstituts benutzt, die Angaben für Raubüberfälle von Wölfen auf Haustiere beinhalten (Tabelle 1). Außerdem wurden Angaben über die während dieser Zeitspanne erlegten Wölfe zusammengefaßt. Die Abschußzahlen lauten: 1984 – 163, 1985 – 147, 1986 – 179, 1987 – 211 und 1988 – 220 Tiere. Die Anzahl der in den einzelnen Gebirgen lebenden Wölfe wurde nach einer Umfrage festgestellt. Für die in Betracht kommenden Gebirge werden folgende Bestandszahlen angenommen: Rhodopen -- 60-80 Individuen, 189 bis 264 km2 pro Tier, Rila- und Piringebirge -- 60-80 Tiere, 109 bis 145 km2 pro Tier, Ossogowo-Belassiza Gebirgssystem -- 40-50 Individuen, 57-70 km2 pro Tier, West- und Mittelbalkan -- 35-38 Wölfe, 200 km2 pro Tier. Dazu kommen noch 10-15 Wölfe im Flußbecken von Beli Lom und etwa 20 Exemplare in Strandscha- und Sakargebirge. Insgesamt lebten in Bulgarien im Jahre 1988 etwa 260-330 Wölfe (Abb. 1).
|
|
|
|
Hoppitt, W., & Laland, K. N. (2008). Social processes influencing learning in animals: a review of the evidence. Adv Study Behav, 38, 105–165.
|
|
|
|
Birch, H. G. (1945). The relation of previous experience to insightful problem-solving. J Comp Psychol, 38, 367–383.
|
|
|
|
Gehring, T. M., VerCauteren, K. C., Provost, M. L., & Cellar, A. C. (2010). Utility of livestock-protection dogs for deterring wildlife from cattle farms. Wildl. Res., 37(8), 715–721.
Abstract: Context. Livestock producers worldwide are negatively affected by livestock losses because of predators and wildlife-transmitted diseases. In the western Great Lakes Region of the United States, this conflict has increased as grey wolf (Canis lupus) populations have recovered and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) have served as a wildlife reservoir for bovine tuberculosis (Myobacterium bovis).Aims. We conducted field experiments on cattle farms to evaluate the effectiveness of livestock-protection dogs (LPDs) for excluding wolves, coyotes (C. latrans), white-tailed deer and mesopredators from livestock pastures.Methods. We integrated LPDs on six cattle farms (treatment) and monitored wildlife use with tracking swaths on these farms, concurrent with three control cattle farms during 2005-2008. The amount of time deer spent in livestock pastures was recorded using direct observation.Key results. Livestock pastures protected by LPDs had reduced use by these wildlife compared with control pastures not protected by LPDs. White-tailed deer spent less time in livestock pastures protected by LPDs compared with control pastures not protected by LPDs.Conclusions. Our research supports the theory that LPDs can be an effective management tool for reducing predation and disease transmission. We also demonstrate that LPDs are not limited to being used only with sheep and goats; they can also be used to protect cattle.Implications. On the basis of our findings, we support the use of LPDs as a proactive management tool that producers can implement to minimise the threat of livestock depredations and transmission of disease from wildlife to livestock. LPDs should be investigated further as a more general conservation tool for protecting valuable wildlife, such as ground-nesting birds, that use livestock pastures and are affected by predators that use these pastures.
|
|
|
|
Meek, P. D., Ballard, G. - A., & Fleming, P. J. S. (2015). The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Aust. Mammal., 37(1), 13–22.
Abstract: Camera trapping is a relatively new addition to the wildlife survey repertoire in Australia. Its rapid adoption has been unparalleled in ecological science, but objective evaluation of camera traps and their application has not kept pace. With the aim of motivating practitioners to think more about selection and deployment of camera trap models in relation to research goals, we reviewed Australian camera trapping studies to determine how camera traps have been used and how their technological constraints may have affected reported results and conclusions. In the 54 camera trapping articles published between 1991 and 2013, mammals (86%) were studied more than birds (10%) and reptiles (3%), with small to medium-sized mammals being most studied. Australian camera trapping studies, like those elsewhere, have changed from more qualitative to more complex quantitative investigations. However, we found that camera trap constraints and limitations were rarely acknowledged, and we identified eight key issues requiring consideration and further research. These are: camera model, camera detection system, camera placement and orientation, triggering and recovery, camera trap settings, temperature differentials, species identification and behavioural responses of the animals to the cameras. In particular, alterations to animal behaviour by camera traps potentially have enormous influence on data quality, reliability and interpretation. The key issues were not considered in most Australian camera trap papers and require further study to better understand the factors that influence the analysis and interpretation of camera trap data and improve experimental design.
|
|
|
|
Kwang Ng Aik, & Rodrigues Daphne. (2011). A Big-Five Personality Profile of the Adaptor and Innovator. J. Creativ. Behav., 36(4), 254–268.
Abstract: This study explored the relationship between two creative styles (adaptor and innovator) and the Big Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience). 164 teachers from 3 secondary and 2 primary schools in Singapore completed a self?report questionnaire, which consisted of the Kirton Adaption?Innovation Inventory and the NEO?Five Factor Inventory. It was found that adaptors were significantly more conscientious than innovators, while innovators were significantly more extraverted and open to experience than adaptors. No significant differences were found between adaptors and innovators in neuroticism and agreeableness. The study also revealed a meaningful pattern of relationships between the Big Five personality traits and the three facet scales of the KAI. Specifically, Sufficiency of Originality was negatively correlated with Openness to Experience and Extraversion; Rule Governance was positively correlated with conscientiousness but negatively correlated with openness to experience; Efficiency was positively correlated with conscientiousness. The overall findings supported the fundamental contention that different creative styles were due to different combinations of personality traits, with adaptors being more conscientious, while innovators being more extraverted and open to experience. These personality?based differences in creative styles between adaptors and innovators had resulted in much social conflict between them. One way of resolving it is to make known the nature and value of different creative styles to these two different types of creators.
|
|
|
|
Dunbar, R. I. M. (2009). The social brain hypothesis and its implications for social evolution. Annals of Human Biology, 36(5), 562–572.
Abstract: The social brain hypothesis was proposed as an explanation for the fact that primates have unusually large brains for body size compared to all other vertebrates: Primates evolved large brains to manage their unusually complex social systems. Although this proposal has been generalized to all vertebrate taxa as an explanation for brain evolution, recent analyses suggest that the social brain hypothesis takes a very different form in other mammals and birds than it does in anthropoid primates. In primates, there is a quantitative relationship between brain size and social group size (group size is a monotonic function of brain size), presumably because the cognitive demands of sociality place a constraint on the number of individuals that can be maintained in a coherent group. In other mammals and birds, the relationship is a qualitative one: Large brains are associated with categorical differences in mating system, with species that have pairbonded mating systems having the largest brains. It seems that anthropoid primates may have generalized the bonding processes that characterize monogamous pairbonds to other non-reproductive relationships (?friendships?), thereby giving rise to the quantitative relationship between group size and brain size that we find in this taxon. This raises issues about why bonded relationships are cognitively so demanding (and, indeed, raises questions about what a bonded relationship actually is), and when and why primates undertook this change in social style.
|
|
|
|
Holzapfel, M., Wagner, C., & Kluth, G. et al. (2011). Zur Nahrungsökologie der Wölfe (Canis lupus) in Deutschland. Beiträge zur Jagd- und Wildforschung, 36, 117–128.
|
|
