More Tools Than Users: A Scoping Review of Image‐Processing Automation in Mammal Camera Trapping

ABSTRACT Introduction Camera trapping has become a cornerstone of mammal monitoring, yet the volume of images frequently exceeds the capacity for manual review. Automated image‐processing tools—like AI‐based species classifiers and on‐device alerting systems—offer scalable solutions, but uptake in applied research (field‐based ecological studies) remains poorly characterised. Aims We conducted a scoping review of AI in mammal camera‐trapping studies (2014–2026), complemented by a corresponding‐author survey, to assess adoption and synthesise the critical domains advancing the field. Methods We screened 984 records from a stratified random sample of 8725 records identified through Web of Science and Scopus, retaining 654 publications, and surveyed the corresponding authors of 121 applied studies. Results AI‐methods publications have outnumbered applied studies each year since 2023, yet only 9.1% (11 of 121) of surveyed researchers reported using AI in their applied work. Adoption emerged only after 2022 and was restricted to blank‐frame filtering alone (9.1%) or paired with species classification (90.9%). Other AI‐enabled tasks such as individual re‐identification, behaviour classification and real‐time alerting were absent from all 288 applied papers reviewed and survey responses. Their prevalence in applied work is unlikely to exceed 1.04% (97.5% upper bound). Synthesis and Outlook Most image‐processing tools, blank filtering, species classification and real‐time alerting are well developed; adoption in applied research lags, as expected for emerging technology. Implementation also hinges on two still‐underdeveloped capacities: propagating classifier uncertainty into population estimates and automated camera‐to‐animal distance measurement for density estimation of unmarked populations. Bridging these gaps requires standardised reporting, interdisciplinary collaboration and uncertainty‐aware workflows.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Mammal Review
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.70052
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

More Tools Than Users: A Scoping Review of Image‐Processing Automation in Mammal Camera Trapping

Fabiola Iannarilli, Gaspard Dussert, Magali Frauendorf, Seth Timothy Wong et al.
Mammal Review
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
article

More Tools Than Users: A Scoping Review of Image‐Processing Automation in Mammal Camera Trapping

Fabiola Iannarilli, Gaspard Dussert, Magali Frauendorf, Seth Timothy Wong, Javier Calzada, Vincent Mièle, Andreas Zedrosser, Sara Beery, Maik Henrich, Carlos Bautista, Pablo Palencia, Simone Santoro, Delia Velasco-Montero, Jorge Fernández‐Berni, Pedro Mittelman, Yorick Liefting, Santiago Gutiérrez‐Zapata
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Camera trapping has become a cornerstone of mammal monitoring, yet the volume of images frequently exceeds the capacity for manual review. Automated image‐processing tools—like AI‐based species classifiers and on‐device alerting systems—offer scalable solutions, but uptake in applied research (field‐based ecological studies) remains poorly characterised. Aims We conducted a scoping review of AI in mammal camera‐trapping studies (2014–2026), complemented by a corresponding‐author survey, to assess adoption and synthesise the critical domains advancing the field. Methods We screened 984 records from a stratified random sample of 8725 records identified through Web of Science and Scopus, retaining 654 publications, and surveyed the corresponding authors of 121 applied studies. Results AI‐methods publications have outnumbered applied studies each year since 2023, yet only 9.1% (11 of 121) of surveyed researchers reported using AI in their applied work. Adoption emerged only after 2022 and was restricted to blank‐frame filtering alone (9.1%) or paired with species classification (90.9%). Other AI‐enabled tasks such as individual re‐identification, behaviour classification and real‐time alerting were absent from all 288 applied papers reviewed and survey responses. Their prevalence in applied work is unlikely to exceed 1.04% (97.5% upper bound). Synthesis and Outlook Most image‐processing tools, blank filtering, species classification and real‐time alerting are well developed; adoption in applied research lags, as expected for emerging technology. Implementation also hinges on two still‐underdeveloped capacities: propagating classifier uncertainty into population estimates and automated camera‐to‐animal distance measurement for density estimation of unmarked populations. Bridging these gaps requires standardised reporting, interdisciplinary collaboration and uncertainty‐aware workflows.

Mammal ReviewVol. 56(4)
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Universidad de Oviedo (ES), Bavarian Forest National Park (DE), German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (DE), University of South-Eastern Norway (NO), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE), Instituto de Microelectrónica de Sevilla (ES), Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior (DE), Institute of Nature Conservation (PL), Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive (FR), Laboratoire d'Écologie Alpine (FR), Instituto Mixto de Investigación en Biodiversidad (ES), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US), Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (DE), Université Savoie Mont Blanc (FR), Universidad de Huelva (ES), Universidad de Sevilla (ES), Université Grenoble Alpes (FR), Wageningen University & Research (NL), Polish Academy of Sciences (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
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