Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Photographic capture-mark-recapture (CMR) permits individual recognition whilst avoiding many of the concerns involved with marking animals. However, the construction of capture histories from photographs is a time-consuming process. Furthermore, matching accuracy is determined based on subjective judgements of the person carrying out the matching, which can lead to errors in the resulting datasets – particularly in long-term projects where multiple observers match images. We asked 63 volunteers to carry out two photographic-matching exercises using a database of known individuals of the yellow-bellied toad ( Bombina variegata ). From these exercises, we quantified the matching accuracy of volunteers in terms of false-acceptance and false-rejection rates. Not only were error rates greatly reduced with the use of photographic-matching software, but variation in error rates among volunteers was also lowered. Furthermore, the use of matching software led to substantial increases in matching speeds and an 87% reduction in the false-rejection rate. As even small error rates have the potential to bias CMR analyses, these results suggest that computer software could substantially reduce errors in CMR datasets. The time-savings and reduction in variance among observers suggest that such methods could be particularly beneficial in long-term CMR projects where a large number of images may be matched by multiple observers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cruickshank et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: