This research demonstrates pugmarks' value in biodiversity and wildlife tracking, suggesting enhancements through technology.
Pugmarks—the natural impressions left by an animal’s foot—serve as crucial bio-signatures in wildlife research, conservation practices, and biodiversity surveillance. Historically rooted in indigenous tracking knowledge and later formalized through wildlife biology, pugmark-based tracking remains a non-invasive and cost-effective method for monitoring elusive and endangered fauna, especially large carnivores like tigers, leopards, wolves, and hyenas. This study presents a comprehensive exploration of pugmarks as tools for species and individual identification, behavioral analysis, movement mapping, and population estimation, drawing from advancements in digital imaging, AI-based recognition, and ecological fieldwork. While conventional methods such as camera traps and DNA sampling dominate modern wildlife studies, pugmarks continue to offer an affordable and reliable supplementary technique in regions with limited resources. This research also investigates the comparative advantages, methodological accuracy, and challenges posed by terrain, weather, and overlapping prints. The paper outlines the significance of pugmarks in preventing human-wildlife conflict, aiding anti-poaching operations, and contributing to landscape-level ecological studies. Additionally, it discusses recent innovations such as pugmark digitization, 3D modeling, and machine learning algorithms for automated identification. Through extensive fieldwork, literature review, and comparative analysis, the study advocates for an integrative tracking paradigm where pugmarks are reimagined as both scientific datasets and cultural heritage tools. The paper concludes with a policy-oriented reflection on enhancing training, standardizing protocols, and integrating traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) with modern wildlife tracking systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dinesh Singh Rawat (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: