Asking the pikas politely…
Ecologists are always interested in studying populations of a certain area. There are many reasons for this, but two reasons include to see the change in distribution over time and because it can help tell about interactions between species. A traditional way of studying small mammal populations that has been commonly used is live trapping. As useful as it has been, live trapping does have some downfalls. It requires handling animals and is time restrictive. An alternate method of collecting small mammal population data has been explored and was tested in this experiment. My results demonstrated that abundance data from hair-tube traps was significantly positively correlated with traditional live-trap mark recapture population estimates. However, hair identification was difficult, so live trapping is still necessary to identify the species.
Knowledge graph centered on Comparing Longworth live traps to hair tubes for d with 19 nodes and 58 connections. Top connected: Gothic, Colorado East River Valley, small mammals, Perymiscus species, Tamias minimus.
Items connected by shared entities, co-authorship, citations, or semantic similarity.
3 references to works outside the Knowledge Commons