Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem:
https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/16120
Tipo
ArtículoDerechos de autor
Acceso abierto
Colecciones
- IOC - Artigos de Periódicos [12642]
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítem
COMPARING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TRACKING METHODS FOR MEDIUM TO LARGE-SIZED MAMMALS OF PANTANAL
Afiliación
University of Plymouth. School of Biomedical and Biological Sciences. Drake Circus, Plymouth, UK / Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Biologia e Parasitologia de Mamíferos Silvestres Reservatórios. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Departamento de Ecologia. Laboratório de Vertebrados. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Biologia e Parasitologia de Mamíferos Silvestres Reservatórios. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Departamento de Ecologia. Laboratório de Vertebrados. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Departamento de Ecologia. Laboratório de Vertebrados. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Biologia e Parasitologia de Mamíferos Silvestres Reservatórios. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Departamento de Ecologia. Laboratório de Vertebrados. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
Resumen en ingles
Most Neotropical mammals are not easily observed in their habitats, and few studies have been conducted
to compare the performance of methods designed to register their tracks. We compared the effectiveness of track
registry between sand plots and two tracking methods that use artificial materials to record tracks: the sooted paper,
and the plastic board methods. The latter is described here for the first time. From 2002 to 2005, we conducted two
experiments in three study sites in the Pantanal region of Brazil. We compared the artificial methods with the sand plot
by registering track presence/absence, the number of identifiable tracks, and the total number of tracks (identifiable and
unrecognizable) in each tracking plot. Individuals avoided artificial tracking plots either by not stepping on them or by
doing it fewer times than on the sand plots. The use of artificial materials to register mammal tracks resulted in underestimates
that are especially relevant to short-term ecological studies. We recommend the use of the traditional sand
plot method whenever possible and the development of detailed studies on the efficiency of artificial methods under a
variety of environmental conditions and time lengths. Despite their relatively lower efficiency, we believe that artificial
methods are useful under specific conditions and may be more efficient if used in more comprehensive sampling efforts.
Compartir