Camera Trapping and Sampling Design: A Synthesis of Current Evidence

ABSTRACT Introduction Camera trapping (CT) has revolutionized wildlife monitoring, generating an unprecedented amount of data on animal activity, occurrence and density. With the broadening scope and application of CT research, standardized evidence‐based guidelines on study design become pivotal to ensure robust inference and comparability. Aims We aimed to collect evidence on how sampling design choices affect CT‐based inference across four metrics widely used in wildlife monitoring: detection rate, diel activity, occupancy and density of unmarked populations. Methods We searched the literature using a systematic approach based on five targeted queries linking CT methodology to sampling design across the four focal metrics, retaining only studies involving CT and exploring at least one design aspect. We quantified how often each design choice–metric combination had been examined, identifying knowledge gaps. Results and Discussion Within the 75 articles obtained, coverage was uneven across metrics and design choices. Diel activity was notably underrepresented compared to the other metrics, despite its widespread use. Number of sampling locations and deployment duration were extensively assessed, especially in relation to occupancy, whereas the effects of spatial study design, camera spacing and time‐lapse settings remain largely unexplored. We synthesize available evidence on the effects of spatial study design, targeted VS untargeted deployment, number and spacing of cameras, deployment duration, attractant use, camera height and motion‐trigger VS time‐lapse settings on CT inference. Based on this evidence, we synthesize existing guidelines and provide practical, metric‐specific recommendations to guide survey planning. Outlining the key considerations for designing a camera‐trapping study, we hope to provide managers, researchers and practitioners with a best‐practice guide for sampling design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Mammal Review
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.70050
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Camera Trapping and Sampling Design: A Synthesis of Current Evidence

Fabiola Iannarilli, Marco Salvatori, Tim Ragnvald Hofmeester, Francesco Rovero et al.
Mammal Review
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
article

Camera Trapping and Sampling Design: A Synthesis of Current Evidence

Fabiola Iannarilli, Marco Salvatori, Tim Ragnvald Hofmeester, Francesco Rovero, Rahel Sollmann, Pablo Palencia, Patrick A. Jansen, Francesca Cagnacci
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Camera trapping (CT) has revolutionized wildlife monitoring, generating an unprecedented amount of data on animal activity, occurrence and density. With the broadening scope and application of CT research, standardized evidence‐based guidelines on study design become pivotal to ensure robust inference and comparability. Aims We aimed to collect evidence on how sampling design choices affect CT‐based inference across four metrics widely used in wildlife monitoring: detection rate, diel activity, occupancy and density of unmarked populations. Methods We searched the literature using a systematic approach based on five targeted queries linking CT methodology to sampling design across the four focal metrics, retaining only studies involving CT and exploring at least one design aspect. We quantified how often each design choice–metric combination had been examined, identifying knowledge gaps. Results and Discussion Within the 75 articles obtained, coverage was uneven across metrics and design choices. Diel activity was notably underrepresented compared to the other metrics, despite its widespread use. Number of sampling locations and deployment duration were extensively assessed, especially in relation to occupancy, whereas the effects of spatial study design, camera spacing and time‐lapse settings remain largely unexplored. We synthesize available evidence on the effects of spatial study design, targeted VS untargeted deployment, number and spacing of cameras, deployment duration, attractant use, camera height and motion‐trigger VS time‐lapse settings on CT inference. Based on this evidence, we synthesize existing guidelines and provide practical, metric‐specific recommendations to guide survey planning. Outlining the key considerations for designing a camera‐trapping study, we hope to provide managers, researchers and practitioners with a best‐practice guide for sampling design.

Mammal ReviewVol. 56(4)
Fondazione Edmund Mach (IT), Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (PA), Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES), Universidad de Oviedo (ES), Utrecht University (NL), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE), Museo delle Scienze (IT), Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (ES), Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior (DE), Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (DE), Instituto Mixto de Investigación en Biodiversidad (ES), University of Florence (IT), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
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.

Laika access coming soon