Pre-screening acoustic and other natural signatures for use in noninvasive individual identification

Journal of Applied Ecology

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1103-1109

  Pollard, Kimberly A ^a,c   Blumstein, Daniel T ^a   Griffin, Suzanne C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA   (United States)

^c U S ARMY RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Censusing; Individual discrimination; Individuality; Information theory; Marking; Signature; Vocalization

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; ACOUSTIC METHOD; ANIMAL; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; CENSUS; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; PARAMETERIZATION; POPULATION ESTIMATION; SURVIVAL; VOCALIZATION; WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 77956101858     PISSN: 00218901     EISSN: 13652664     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01851.x     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Aldrich BC, Molleson L, Nekaris KAL. Vocalizations as a conservation tool: an auditory survey of the Andean titi monkey Callicebus oenanthe Thomas, 1924 (Mammalia: Primates: Pitheciidae) at Tarangue, Northern Peru. Contributions to Zoology 2008, 77:1-6.
2. Anderson CJR, Roth JD, Waterman JM. Can whisker spot patterns be used to identify individual polar bears? Journal of Zoology 2007, 273:333-339.
3. Baptista LF, Gaunt LL. Bioacoustics as a tool in conservation studies. Behavioral Approaches to Conservation in the Wild 1997, 212-242. Clemmons JR, Buchholz R. eds, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
4. Beecher MD. Signature systems and kin recognition. American Zoologist 1982, 22:477-490.
5. Beecher MD. Signalling systems for individual recognition: an information theory approach. Animal Behaviour 1989, 38:248-261.
6. Beecher MD. Successes and failures of parent-offspring recognition in animals. Kin Recognition 1991, 94-124. Hepper PG. ed, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
7. Blumstein DT, Armitage KB. Life history consequences of social complexity: a comparative study of ground-dwelling sciurids. Behavioral Ecology 1998, 9:8-19.
8. Blumstein DT, Munos O. Individual, age and sex-specific information is contained in yellow-bellied marmot alarm calls. Animal Behaviour 2005, 69:353-361.
9. Bonin A, Bellemain E, Eidesen PB, Pompanon F, Brochmann C, Taberlet P. How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies. Molecular Ecology 2004, 13:3261-3273.
10. Cattet M, Boulanger J, Stenhouse G, Powell RA, Reynolds-Hogland ML. An evaluation of long-term capture effects in ursids: implications for wildlife welfare and research. Journal of Mammalogy 2008, 89:973-990.
11. Caughley G, Sinclair ARE. Wildlife Ecology and Management 1994, Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford
12. Charif RA, Mitchell S, Clark CW. Canary 1.2 User's Manual 1995, Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, New York
13. Creel S, Spong G, Sands JL, Rotella J, Zeigle J, Joe L, Murphy KM, Smith D. Population size estimation in Yellowstone wolves with error-prone noninvasive microsatellite genotypes. Molecular Ecology 2003, 12:2003-2009.
14. Evans PGH, Hammond PS. Monitoring cetaceans in European waters. Mammal Review 2004, 34:131-156.
15. Fernandez-Juricic E, del Nevo AJ, Poston R. Identification of individual and population-level variation in vocalizations of the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Auk 2009, 126:89-99.
16. Friday N, Smith TD, Stevick PT. Measurement of photographic quality and individual distinctiveness for the photographic identification of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae. Marine Mammal Science 2000, 16:355-374.
17. Galeotti P, Sacchi R. Turnover of territorial scops owls Otus scops as estimated by spectrographic analyses of male hoots. Journal of Avian Biology 2001, 32:256-262.
18. Gallardo-Escarate C, Goldstein-Vasquez J, Thiel M. Individual identification of decapod crustaceans I: color patterns in rock shrimp (Rhynchocinetes typus). Journal of Crustacean Biology 2007, 27:393-398.
19. Gilbert G, McGregor PK, Tyler G. Vocal individuality as a census tool: practical considerations illustrated by a study of two rare species. Journal of Field Ornithology 1994, 65:335-348.
20. Gilkinson AK, Pearson HC, Weltz F, Davis RW. Photo-identification of sea otters using nose scars. Journal of Wildlife Management 2007, 71:2045-2051.
21. Hare JF. Group member discrimination by Columbian ground squirrels via familiarity with substrate-borne chemical cues. Animal Behaviour 1994, 47:803-813.
22. Hartwig S. Individual acoustic identification as a non-invasive conservation tool: An approach to the conservation of the African wild dog Lycaon pictus (Temminck, 1820). Bioacoustics-The International Journal of Animal Sound and Its Recording 2005, 15:35-50.
23. Holschuh CI, Otter KA. Using vocal individuality to monitor Queen Charlotte saw-whet owls (Aegolius acadicus brooksi). Journal of Raptor Research 2005, 39:134-141.
24. Jones DN, Smith GC. Vocalisations of the marbled frogmouth II: an assessment of vocal individuality as a potential census technique. Emu 1997, 97:296-304.
25. Lubow BC, Ransom JI. Validating aerial photographic mark-recapture for naturally marked feral horses. Journal of Wildlife Management 2009, 73:1420-1429.
26. SoundEdit 16 1995, Macromedia, Macromedia, San Francisco
27. Markowitz TM, Harlin AD, Würsig B. Digital photography improves efficiency of individual dolphin identification. Marine Mammal Science 2003, 19:217-223.
28. Mathevon N, Charrier I, Jouventin P. Potential for individual recognition in acoustic signals: a comparative study of two gulls with different nesting patterns. Comptes Rendus Biologies 2003, 326:329-337.
29. McGregor PK, Peake TM. The role of individual identification in conservation biology. Behavioral Ecology and Conservation Biology 1998, 31-55. Caro T, ed, Oxford University Press, New York
30. McGregor PK, Peake TM, Gilbert G. Communication behaviour and conservation. Behaviour and Conservation 2000, 261-279. Gosling LM, Sutherland WJ, eds, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
31. McGregor PK, Westby GWM. Discrimination of individually characteristic electric organ discharges by a weakly electric fish. Animal Behaviour 1992, 43:977-986.
32. Medvin MB, Stoddard PK, Beecher MD. Signals for parent-offspring recognition: a comparative analysis of the begging calls of cliff swallows and barn swallows. Animal Behaviour 1993, 45:841-850.
33. Microsoft Excel version 2002 SP3 2001, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA
34. Mills LS, Citta JJ, Lair KP, Schwartz MK, Tallmon DA. Estimating animal abundance using noninvasive DNA sampling: promise and pitfalls. Ecological Applications 2000, 10:283-294.
35. Mundry R, Sommer C. Discriminant function analysis with nonindependent data: consequences and an alternative. Animal Behaviour 2007, 74:965-976.
36. Nichols JD, Williams BK. Monitoring for conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2006, 21:668-673.
37. Peake TM, McGregor PK, Smith KW, Tyler G, Gilbert G, Green RE. Individuality in corncrake Crex crex vocalizations. Ibis 1998, 140:120-127.
38. Pennycuick CJ. Identification using natural markings. Animal Marking: Recognition Marking of Animals in Research 1978, 147-159. Stonehouse B. ed, University Park Press, Baltimore
39. Pennycuick CJ, Rudnai J. A method of identifying individual lions Panthera leo with an analysis of the reliability of identification. Journal of Zoology 1970, 160:497-508.
40. Pollard KA. Causes and consequences of sociality: time allocation, individuality, and the evolution of group size in mammals 2009, PhD Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles
41. Saunders DA, Wooller RD. Consistent individuality of voice in birds as a management tool. Emu 1988, 88:25-32.
42. Schwartz MK, Luikart G, Waples RS. Genetic monitoring as a promising tool for conservation and management. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2007, 22:25-33.
43. Shannon CE, Weaver W. The Mathematical Theory of Communication 1949, University of Illinois Press, Urbana
44. Soulsbury CD, Iossa G, Edwards KJ, Baker PJ, Harris S. Allelic dropout from a high-quality DNA source. Conservation Genetics 2007, 8:733-738.
45. SPSS version 13.0 2004, SPSS Inc., SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL
46. Terry AMR, McGregor PK, Peake TM. A comparison of some techniques used to assess vocal individuality. Bioacoustics - The International Journal of Animal Sound and Its Recording 2001, 11:169-188.
47. Tibbetts EA. Complex social behaviour can select for variability in visual features: a case study in Polistes wasps. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 2004, 271:1955-1960.
48. Tripp TM, Otter KA. Vocal individuality as a potential long-term monitoring tool for Western Screech-owls, Megascops kennicottii. Canadian Journal of Zoology/Revue Canadienne de Zoologie 2006, 84:744-753.
49. Uitenbroek DG. SISA Random Number Generator. 1998, http://www.quantitativeskills.com/sisa/calculations/random.htm, Date accessed: 2/18/08
50. Wilkinson GS. Social and vocal complexity in bats. Animal Social Complexity: Intelligence, Culture, and Individualized Societies 2003, 322-341. de Waal FBMTyack PL. eds, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
51. Williams BK, Nichols JD, Conroy MJ. Analysis and Management of Animal Populations 2001, Academic Press, San Diego