1. Place animal in induction chamber and anesthetize the mouse and ensure sedation. 2. Once the animal is sedated, move it to a nose cone for hair removal using cream. Only apply cream to the area of the chest that will be utilized for imaging. Once the hair is removed, wipe area with wet gauze to ensure all hair is removed. 3. Move the animal to the imaging platform and tape its paws to the ECG lead plates and insert rectal probe. Body temperature should be maintained at 36-37°C. During imaging, reduce anesthesia to maintain proper heart rate. If the animal shows signs of being awake, use a higher concentration of anesthetic.

人唾液天疱疮抗原的纯化

BACKGROUND The movement of animals makes them fascinating but difficult study subjects. Animal movements underpin many biological phenomena, and understanding them is critical for applications in conservation, health, and food. Traditional approaches to animal tracking used field biologists wielding antennas to record a few dozen locations per animal, revealing only the most general patterns of animal space use. The advent of satellite tracking automated this process, but initially was limited to larger animals and increased the resolution of trajectories to only a few hundred locations per animal. The last few years have shown exponential improvement in tracking technology, leading to smaller tracking devices that can return millions of movement steps for ever-smaller animals. Finally, we have a tool that returns high-resolution data that reveal the detailed facets of animal movement and its many implications for biodiversity, animal ecology, behavior, and ecosystem function. ADVANCES Improved technology has brought animal tracking into the realm of big data, not only through high-resolution movement trajectories, but also through the addition of other on-animal sensors and the integration of remote sensing data about the environment through which these animals are moving. These new data are opening up a breadth of new scientific questions about ecology, evolution, and physiology and enable the use of animals as sensors of the environment. High–temporal resolution movement data also can document brief but important contacts between animals, creating new opportunities to study social networks, as well as interspecific interactions such as competition and predation. With solar panels keeping batteries charged, “lifetime” tracks can now be collected for some species, while broader approaches are aiming for species-wide sampling across multiple populations. Miniaturized tags also help reduce the impact of the devices on the study subjects, improving animal welfare and scientific results. As in other disciplines, the explosion of data volume and variety has created new challenges and opportunities for information management, integration, and analysis. In an exciting interdisciplinary push, biologists, statisticians, and computer scientists have begun to develop new tools that are already leading to new insights and scientific breakthroughs. OUTLOOK We suggest that a golden age of animal tracking science has begun and that the upcoming years will be a time of unprecedented exciting discoveries. Technology continues to improve our ability to track animals, with the promise of smaller tags collecting more data, less invasively, on a greater variety of animals. The big-data tracking studies that are just now being pioneered will become commonplace. If analytical developments can keep pace, the field will be able to develop real-time predictive models that integrate habitat preferences, movement abilities, sensory capacities, and animal memories into movement forecasts. The unique perspective offered by big-data animal tracking enables a new view of animals as naturally evolved sensors of environment, which we think has the potential to help us monitor the planet in completely new ways. A massive multi-individual monitoring program would allow a quorum sensing of our planet, using a variety of species to tap into the diversity of senses that have evolved across animal groups, providing new insight on our world through the sixth sense of the global animal collective. We expect that the field will soon reach a transformational point where these studies do more than inform us about particular species of animals, but allow the animals to teach us about the world.

/pdf/terrestrial-animal-tracking-as-an-eye-on-life-and-planet-3erv6ckwp0.pdf

Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet

Summary
Reliable assessment of animal populations is a long-standing challenge in wildlife ecology. Technological advances have led to widespread adoption of camera traps (CTs) to survey wildlife distribution, abundance and behaviour. As for any wildlife survey method, camera trapping must contend with sources of sampling error such as imperfect detection. Early applications focused on density estimation of naturally marked species, but there is growing interest in broad-scale CT surveys of unmarked populations and communities. Nevertheless, inferences based on detection indices are controversial, and the suitability of alternatives such as occupancy estimation is debatable.
We reviewed 266 CT studies published between 2008 and 2013. We recorded study objectives and methodologies, evaluating the consistency of CT protocols and sampling designs, the extent to which CT surveys considered sampling error, and the linkages between analytical assumptions and species ecology.
Nearly two-thirds of studies surveyed more than one species, and a majority used response variables that ignored imperfect detection (e.g. presence–absence, relative abundance). Many studies used opportunistic sampling and did not explicitly report details of sampling design and camera deployment that could affect conclusions.
Most studies estimating density used capture–recapture methods on marked species, with spatially explicit methods becoming more prominent. Few studies estimated density for unmarked species, focusing instead on occupancy modelling or measures of relative abundance. While occupancy studies estimated detectability, most did not explicitly define key components of the modelling framework (e.g. a site) or discuss potential violations of model assumptions (e.g. site closure). Studies using relative abundance relied on assumptions of equal detectability, and most did not explicitly define expected relationships between measured responses and underlying ecological processes (e.g. animal abundance and movement).
Synthesis and applications. The rapid adoption of camera traps represents an exciting transition in wildlife survey methodology. We remain optimistic about the technology's promise, but call for more explicit consideration of underlying processes of animal abundance, movement and detection by cameras, including more thorough reporting of methodological details and assumptions. Such transparency will facilitate efforts to evaluate and improve the reliability of camera trap surveys, ultimately leading to stronger inferences and helping to meet modern needs for effective ecological inquiry and biodiversity monitoring.

https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1365-2664.12432

REVIEW: Wildlife camera trapping: a review and recommendations for linking surveys to ecological processes

Losses of natural and semi-natural forests, mostly to agriculture, are a significant concern for biodiversity. Against this trend, the area of intensively managed plantation forests increases, and there is much debate about the implications for biodiversity. We provide a comprehensive review of the function of plantation forests as habitat compared with other land cover, examine the effects on biodiversity at the landscape scale, and synthesise context-specific effects of plantation forestry on biodiversity. Natural forests are usually more suitable as habitat for a wider range of native forest species than plantation forests but there is abundant evidence that plantation forests can provide valuable habitat, even for some threatened and endangered species, and may contribute to the conservation of biodiversity by various mechanisms. In landscapes where forest is the natural land cover, plantation forests may represent a low-contrast matrix, and afforestation of agricultural land can assist conservation by providing complementary forest habitat, buffering edge effects, and increasing connectivity. In contrast, conversion of natural forests and afforestation of natural non-forest land is detrimental. However, regional deforestation pressure for agricultural development may render plantation forestry a ‘lesser evil’ if forest managers protect indigenous vegetation remnants. We provide numerous context-specific examples and case studies to assist impact assessments of plantation forestry, and we offer a range of management recommendations. This paper also serves as an introduction and background paper to this special issue on the effects of plantation forests on biodiversity.

Plantation Forests and Biodiversity: Oxymoron or Opportunity?

Animal movement is fundamental for ecosystem functioning and species survival, yet the effects of the anthropogenic footprint on animal movements have not been estimated across species. Using a unique GPS-tracking database of 803 individuals across 57 species, we found that movements of mammals in areas with a comparatively high human footprint were on average one-half to one-third the extent of their movements in areas with a low human footprint. We attribute this reduction to behavioral changes of individual animals and to the exclusion of species with long-range movements from areas with higher human impact. Global loss of vagility alters a key ecological trait of animals that affects not only population persistence but also ecosystem processes such as predator-prey interactions, nutrient cycling, and disease transmission.

/pdf/moving-in-the-anthropocene-global-reductions-in-terrestrial-34qvh08h50.pdf

Moving in the Anthropocene : global reductions in terrestrial mammalian movements

Australia's wild dogs include dingoes, introduced around 4000 years ago, feral domestic dogs and hybrids between the two. They are widely distributed throughout Australia. Predation and harassment of stock by wild dogs causes millions of dollars worth of losses to Australian sheep, cattle and goat producers each year. There are also opportunity costs in areas where sheep are not grazed because of the high risk of wild dog predation. For this reason, wild dog control is a significant expense for many pastoralists and government agencies. Yet conservation of pure dingoes is also important and is threatened by their hybridisation with feral domestic dogs on the mainland.

/pdf/managing-the-impacts-of-dingoes-and-other-wild-dogs-4w364j7fgt.pdf

Managing the impacts of dingoes and other wild dogs

This paper provides an historical review of the technological evolution of camera trapping as a zoological survey tool in Australia. Camera trapping in Australia began in the 1950s when purpose-built remotely placed cameras were used in attempts to rediscover the thylacine (Thylacinus cynocephalus). However, camera traps did not appear in Australian research papers and Australasian conference proceedings until 1989-91, and usage became common only after 2008, with an exponential increase in usage since 2010. Initially, Australian publications under-reported camera trapping methods, often failing to provide fundamental details about deployment and use. However, rigour in reporting of key methods has increased during the recent widespread adoption of camera trapping. Our analysis also reveals a change in camera trap use in Australia, from simple presence-absence studies, to more theoretical and experimental approaches related to population ecology, behavioural ecology, conservation biology and wildlife management. Practitioners require further research to refine and standardise camera trap methods to ensure that unbiased and scientifically rigorous data are obtained from quantitative research. The recent change in emphasis of camera trapping research use is reflected in the decreasing range of camera trap models being used in Australian research. Practitioners are moving away from less effective models that have slow reaction times between detection and image capture, and inherent bias in detectability of fauna, to more expensive brands that offer faster speeds, greater functionality and more reliability. Additional keywords: camera trap, remote camera, Thylacine, trail camera, wildlife research, zoology.

The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia

Camera traps are electrical instruments that emit sounds and light. In recent decades they have become a tool of choice in wildlife research and monitoring. The variability between camera trap models and the methods used are considerable, and little is known about how animals respond to camera trap emissions. It has been reported that some animals show a response to camera traps, and in research this is often undesirable so it is important to understand why the animals are disturbed. We conducted laboratory based investigations to test the audio and infrared optical outputs of 12 camera trap models. Camera traps were measured for audio outputs in an anechoic chamber; we also measured ultrasonic (n = 5) and infrared illumination outputs (n = 7) of a subset of the camera trap models. We then compared the perceptive hearing range (n = 21) and assessed the vision ranges (n = 3) of mammals species (where data existed) to determine if animals can see and hear camera traps. We report that camera traps produce sounds that are well within the perceptive range of most mammals’ hearing and produce illumination that can be seen by many species.

/pdf/camera-traps-can-be-heard-and-seen-by-animals-1wqa8vp723.pdf

Camera Traps Can Be Heard and Seen by Animals

The idea that groups of individuals may develop around resource patches led to the formulation of the Resource Dispersion Hypothesis (RDH). We tested the predictions of the RDH, within a quasi-experimental framework, using Australia’s largest terrestrial predator, the dingo Canis lupus dingo. Average dingo group sizes were higher in areas with abundant focal food sources around two mine sites compared with those in more distant areas. This supports the notion that resource richness favours larger group size, consistent with the RDH. Irrespective of season or sex, average home range estimates and daily activity for dingoes around the mine sites were significantly less than for dingoes that lived well away. Assuming that a territory is the defended part of the home range and that territory size is correlated with home range size, consistent with the RDH, the spatial dispersion of food patches therefore determined territory size for dingoes in our study. However, although sample size was small, some dingoes that accessed the supplementary food resource at the mines also spent a large proportion of their time away, suggesting a breakdown of territorial defence around the focal food resource. This, in combination with the large variation in home range size among dingoes that accessed the same supplementary food resource, limits the predictive capabilities of the RDH for this species. We hypothesize that constraints on exclusive home range occupancy will arise if a surfeit of food resources (in excess of requirements for homeostasis) is available in a small area, and that this will have further effects on access to mates and social structure. We present a conceptual model of facultative territorial defence where focal resources are available to demonstrate our findings.

Home range, activity and sociality of a top predator, the dingo: a test of the Resource Dispersion Hypothesis

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2086&context=icwdm_usdanwrc

Peter J. S. Fleming

Papers

Managing the impacts of dingoes and other wild dogs

The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia

Camera Traps Can Be Heard and Seen by Animals

Home range, activity and sociality of a top predator, the dingo: a test of the Resource Dispersion Hypothesis

As clear as mud: A critical review of evidence for the ecological roles of Australian dingoes