bioRxivEcology
Effects of scent lure on camera trap detections vary across mammalian predator and prey species
Abstract
Camera traps are a unique survey tool used to monitor a wide variety of mammal species. Camera trap (CT) data can be used to estimate animal distribution, density, and behaviour. Attractants, such as scent lures, are often used in an effort to increase CT detections; however, the degree which the effects of attractants vary across species is not well understood. We investigated the effects of scent lure on mammal detections by comparing detection rates between 404 lured and 440 unlured CT stations sampled in Alberta, Canada over 120 day survey periods between February and August in 2015 and 2016. We used zero-inflated negative binomial generalized linear mixed models to test the effect of lure on detection rates for a) all mammals, b) six functional groups (all predator species, all prey, large carnivores, small carnivores, small mammals, ungulates), and c) four varied species of management interest (fisher, Pekania pennanti; gray wolf, Canis lupus; moose, Alces alces; and Richardsons ground squirrel; Urocitellus richardsonii). Mammals were detected at 800 of the 844 CTs, with nearly equal numbers of total detections at CTs with (7110) and without (7530) lure, and variable effects of lure on groups and individual species. Scent lure significantly increased detections of predators as a group, including large and small carnivore sub-groups and fisher specifically, but not of gray wolf. There was no effect of scent lure on detections of prey species, including the small mammal and ungulate sub-groups and moose and Richardsons ground squirrel specifically. We recommend that researchers explicitly consider the variable effects of scent lure on CT detections across species when designing, interpreting, or comparing multi-species surveys. Additional research is needed to further quantify variation in species responses to scent lures and other attractants, and to elucidate the effect of attractants on community-level inferences from camera trap surveys.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Evaluating camera trap methods for monitoring population trends in ungulates: insights from simulation
Clément Calenge, Sonia Saı̈d, … Maryline Pellerin·EcospherePeer-reviewed·Jul 1, 2026
- Double-observer approach with camera traps: Towards an unbiased density estimation of unmarked animal populations
Y. Nakashima, S. Hongo, … Z. C. B. Dzefck·bioRxiv·Apr 9, 2021
- Comparative efficiency of eDNA, camera traps and scat surveys to detect a semi-aquatic mammal across multiple catchments
Simon Lacombe, Sébastien Devillard, … Olivier Giménez·Animal ConservationPeer-reviewed·May 31, 2026
- Towards an automated protocol for wildlife density estimation using camera-traps
Andrea Zampetti, Davide Mirante, … Luca Santini·Methods in Ecology and EvolutionPeer-reviewed·Nov 11, 2024
- Image surveys, agricultural landowners and residents hold the key: optimizing local ecological knowledge to reveal carnivore communities
Elena Fernández‐Vizcaíno, Javier Fernández López·bioRxiv·Apr 29, 2026
- Using remote camera traps to assess mammal and bird assemblages across a complex environmental landscape
Carl S. Cloyed, Laura R. Cappelli, … Anthony I. Dell·bioRxiv·Feb 17, 2017