Smart camera traps and computer vision improve detections of small fauna

Abstract Limited data on species' distributions are common for small animals, impeding conservation and management. Small animals, especially ectothermic taxa, are often difficult to detect, and therefore require increased time and resources to survey effectively. The rise of conservation technology has enabled researchers to monitor animals in a range of ecosystems and for longer periods than traditional methods (e.g., live trapping), increasing the quality of data and the cost‐effectiveness of wildlife monitoring practices. We used DeakinCams, custom‐built smart camera traps, to address three aims: (1) To survey small animals, including ectotherms, and evaluate the performance of a customized computer vision object detector trained on the SAWIT dataset for automating object classification; (2) At the same field sites and using commercially available camera traps, we evaluated how well MegaDetector—a freely available object detection model—detected images containing animals; and (3) we evaluated the complementarity of these two different approaches to wildlife monitoring. We collected 85,870 videos from the DeakinCams and 50,888 images from the commercial cameras. For object detection with DeakinCams data, SAWIT yielded 98% Precision but 47% recall, and for species classification, SAWIT performance varied by taxa, with 0% Precision and Recall for birds and 26% Precision and 14% Recall for spiders. For object detections with camera trap images, MegaDetector returned 99% Precision and 98% Recall. We found that only the DeakinCams detected nocturnal ectotherms and invertebrates. Making use of more diverse datasets for training models as well as advances in machine learning will likely improve the performance of models like YOLO in novel environments. Our results support the need for continued cross‐disciplinary collaboration to ensure that large environmental datasets are available to train and test existing and emerging machine learning algorithms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ecosphere
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.70220
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Species Distribution and Climate Change
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.03

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Smart camera traps and computer vision improve detections of small fauna

Anthony R. Rendall, Duc Thanh Nguyen, Euan G. Ritchie, Dean M. Corva et al.
6 citations
Ecosphere
Species Distribution and Climate Change
11.03
article

Smart camera traps and computer vision improve detections of small fauna

Anthony R. Rendall, Duc Thanh Nguyen, Euan G. Ritchie, Dean M. Corva, Don A. Driscoll, Angela J. L. Pestell, Anne C. Eichholtzer, Abbas Z. Kouzani, R. Sinclair
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Abstract Limited data on species' distributions are common for small animals, impeding conservation and management. Small animals, especially ectothermic taxa, are often difficult to detect, and therefore require increased time and resources to survey effectively. The rise of conservation technology has enabled researchers to monitor animals in a range of ecosystems and for longer periods than traditional methods (e.g., live trapping), increasing the quality of data and the cost‐effectiveness of wildlife monitoring practices. We used DeakinCams, custom‐built smart camera traps, to address three aims: (1) To survey small animals, including ectotherms, and evaluate the performance of a customized computer vision object detector trained on the SAWIT dataset for automating object classification; (2) At the same field sites and using commercially available camera traps, we evaluated how well MegaDetector—a freely available object detection model—detected images containing animals; and (3) we evaluated the complementarity of these two different approaches to wildlife monitoring. We collected 85,870 videos from the DeakinCams and 50,888 images from the commercial cameras. For object detection with DeakinCams data, SAWIT yielded 98% Precision but 47% recall, and for species classification, SAWIT performance varied by taxa, with 0% Precision and Recall for birds and 26% Precision and 14% Recall for spiders. For object detections with camera trap images, MegaDetector returned 99% Precision and 98% Recall. We found that only the DeakinCams detected nocturnal ectotherms and invertebrates. Making use of more diverse datasets for training models as well as advances in machine learning will likely improve the performance of models like YOLO in novel environments. Our results support the need for continued cross‐disciplinary collaboration to ensure that large environmental datasets are available to train and test existing and emerging machine learning algorithms.

EcosphereVol. 16(3)
Deakin University (AU)
Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment, Deakin University
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Species Distribution and Climate Change
11.03
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.