TY - JOUR
T1 - Combining camera trap surveys and IUCN range maps to improve knowledge of species distributions
AU - Chen, Cheng
AU - Granados, Alys
AU - Brodie, Jedediah F.
AU - Kays, Roland
AU - Davies, T. Jonathan
AU - Liu, Runzhe
AU - Fisher, Jason T.
AU - Ahumada, Jorge
AU - McShea, William
AU - Sheil, Douglas
AU - Mohd-Azlan, Jayasilan
AU - Agwanda, Bernard
AU - Andrianarisoa, Mahandry H.
AU - Appleton, Robyn D.
AU - Bitariho, Robert
AU - Espinosa, Santiago
AU - Grigione, Melissa M.
AU - Helgen, Kristofer M.
AU - Hubbard, Andy
AU - Hurtado, Cindy M.
AU - Jansen, Patrick A.
AU - Jiang, Xuelong
AU - Jones, Alex
AU - Kalies, Elizabeth L.
AU - Kiebou-Opepa, Cisquet
AU - Li, Xueyou
AU - Lima, Marcela Guimarães Moreira
AU - Meyer, Erik
AU - Miller, Anna B.
AU - Murphy, Thomas
AU - Piana, Renzo
AU - Quan, Rui Chang
AU - Rota, Christopher T.
AU - Rovero, Francesco
AU - Santos, Fernanda
AU - Schuttler, Stephanie
AU - Uduman, Aisha
AU - van Bommel, Joanna Klees
AU - Young, Hilary
AU - Burton, A. Cole
N1 - © 2024 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.
PY - 2024/6
Y1 - 2024/6
N2 - Reliable maps of species distributions are fundamental for biodiversity research and conservation. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) range maps are widely recognized as authoritative representations of species’ geographic limits, yet they might not always align with actual occurrence data. In recent area of habitat (AOH) maps, areas that are not habitat have been removed from IUCN ranges to reduce commission errors, but their concordance with actual species occurrence also remains untested. We tested concordance between occurrences recorded in camera trap surveys and predicted occurrences from the IUCN and AOH maps for 510 medium- to large-bodied mammalian species in 80 camera trap sampling areas. Across all areas, cameras detected only 39% of species expected to occur based on IUCN ranges and AOH maps; 85% of the IUCN only mismatches occurred within 200 km of range edges. Only 4% of species occurrences were detected by cameras outside IUCN ranges. The probability of mismatches between cameras and the IUCN range was significantly higher for smaller-bodied mammals and habitat specialists in the Neotropics and Indomalaya and in areas with shorter canopy forests. Our findings suggest that range and AOH maps rarely underrepresent areas where species occur, but they may more often overrepresent ranges by including areas where a species may be absent, particularly at range edges. We suggest that combining range maps with data from ground-based biodiversity sensors, such as camera traps, provides a richer knowledge base for conservation mapping and planning.
AB - Reliable maps of species distributions are fundamental for biodiversity research and conservation. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) range maps are widely recognized as authoritative representations of species’ geographic limits, yet they might not always align with actual occurrence data. In recent area of habitat (AOH) maps, areas that are not habitat have been removed from IUCN ranges to reduce commission errors, but their concordance with actual species occurrence also remains untested. We tested concordance between occurrences recorded in camera trap surveys and predicted occurrences from the IUCN and AOH maps for 510 medium- to large-bodied mammalian species in 80 camera trap sampling areas. Across all areas, cameras detected only 39% of species expected to occur based on IUCN ranges and AOH maps; 85% of the IUCN only mismatches occurred within 200 km of range edges. Only 4% of species occurrences were detected by cameras outside IUCN ranges. The probability of mismatches between cameras and the IUCN range was significantly higher for smaller-bodied mammals and habitat specialists in the Neotropics and Indomalaya and in areas with shorter canopy forests. Our findings suggest that range and AOH maps rarely underrepresent areas where species occur, but they may more often overrepresent ranges by including areas where a species may be absent, particularly at range edges. We suggest that combining range maps with data from ground-based biodiversity sensors, such as camera traps, provides a richer knowledge base for conservation mapping and planning.
KW - Animal Distribution
KW - Animals
KW - Biodiversity
KW - Conservation of Natural Resources/methods
KW - Ecosystem
KW - Geographic Mapping
KW - Mammals/physiology
KW - Photography
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85186425511&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/cobi.14221
DO - 10.1111/cobi.14221
M3 - Article
C2 - 37937455
AN - SCOPUS:85186425511
SN - 0888-8892
VL - 38
SP - e14221
JO - Conservation Biology
JF - Conservation Biology
IS - 3
M1 - e14221
ER -