Comparative Efficiency of <scp>eDNA</scp> , Camera Traps and Scat Surveys to Detect a Semi‐Aquatic Mammal Across Multiple Catchments

ABSTRACT Semi‐aquatic mammals lie at the intersection of several key conservation issues such as wetland deterioration or species invasions, and monitoring their distribution in space and time is essential to inform conservation strategies. However, gathering information about their presence is challenging due to their elusive lifestyle and generally low abundance. The Eurasian otter ( Lutra lutra ), a near‐threatened and strictly protected species in Europe, is currently recolonizing part of its historical range. Its high conservation interest, combined with a dynamic more commonly associated with range‐expanding or invasive species, makes it a particularly compelling case study. Otter monitoring has traditionally relied on scat surveys, but recent environmental DNA (eDNA) and camera‐trapping initiatives have emerged offering promising complementary tools. Yet, these approaches have rarely been formally compared, either to one another or across regions. Here, we compared the efficiency of spraint surveys, camera traps, and eDNA for detecting otters, and assessed how their performance varied among four catchments in southern France where the species is known to be present. All three methods provided otter detections with varying efficiency. Scat surveys were the most effective method, with an average detection probability of 0.71 and no strong variability between catchments. Although camera‐traps had the lowest detection rate, they provided detections at two of the four sites where no spraint was found, highlighting the complementarity of these two approaches. Detection rates varied greatly between individual cameras rather than between catchments, underscoring sensitivity to camera placement. eDNA showed important variability between catchments, with detection probabilities differing by roughly sixfold across regions. All in all, our results highlight differences in efficiency between methods and across environmental conditions, and show the value of combining approaches for future monitoring programs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Animal Conservation
Published
2026-05-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.70076
Primary Topic
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Efficiency of eDNA , Camera Traps and Scat Surveys to Detect a Semi‐Aquatic Mammal Across Multiple Catchments

Geoffrey Didier, Raphaël Mathevet, Simon Lacombe, Eve Le Pommelet et al.
Animal Conservation
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
article

Comparative Efficiency of eDNA , Camera Traps and Scat Surveys to Detect a Semi‐Aquatic Mammal Across Multiple Catchments

Geoffrey Didier, Raphaël Mathevet, Simon Lacombe, Eve Le Pommelet, Louise d'Hollande, Serge Rouvière, Vincent Sablain, Clément Oyon, Yann Raulet, Louis Barbu, Sebastien Richarte, Nathalie Vazzoler-Antoine, Sébastien Devillard, Olivier Gimenez, Claude Miaud, Alice Valentini
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Semi‐aquatic mammals lie at the intersection of several key conservation issues such as wetland deterioration or species invasions, and monitoring their distribution in space and time is essential to inform conservation strategies. However, gathering information about their presence is challenging due to their elusive lifestyle and generally low abundance. The Eurasian otter ( Lutra lutra ), a near‐threatened and strictly protected species in Europe, is currently recolonizing part of its historical range. Its high conservation interest, combined with a dynamic more commonly associated with range‐expanding or invasive species, makes it a particularly compelling case study. Otter monitoring has traditionally relied on scat surveys, but recent environmental DNA (eDNA) and camera‐trapping initiatives have emerged offering promising complementary tools. Yet, these approaches have rarely been formally compared, either to one another or across regions. Here, we compared the efficiency of spraint surveys, camera traps, and eDNA for detecting otters, and assessed how their performance varied among four catchments in southern France where the species is known to be present. All three methods provided otter detections with varying efficiency. Scat surveys were the most effective method, with an average detection probability of 0.71 and no strong variability between catchments. Although camera‐traps had the lowest detection rate, they provided detections at two of the four sites where no spraint was found, highlighting the complementarity of these two approaches. Detection rates varied greatly between individual cameras rather than between catchments, underscoring sensitivity to camera placement. eDNA showed important variability between catchments, with detection probabilities differing by roughly sixfold across regions. All in all, our results highlight differences in efficiency between methods and across environmental conditions, and show the value of combining approaches for future monitoring programs.

Animal Conservation
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), École Pratique des Hautes Études (FR), Université de Montpellier (FR), University of Baguio (PH), Centre d'Écologie Fonctionnelle et Évolutive (FR), Institut National de l'Énergie Solaire (FR), Nature Environnement 17 (FR), Laboratoire d'Étude des Microstructures et de Mécanique des Matériaux (FR), Territoires (FR), Géosciences Montpellier (FR), Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive (FR), Electronic Product Services (Czechia) (CZ), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (FR)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
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.