2041-210X.13560.pdf 1,39MB
1000 Titel
  • Detection dogs in nature conservation: A database on their world-wide deployment with a review on breeds used and their performance compared to other methods
1000 Autor/in
  1. Grimm-Seyfarth, Annegret |
  2. Harms, Wiebke |
  3. Berger, Anne |
1000 Erscheinungsjahr 2021
1000 LeibnizOpen
1000 Publikationstyp
  1. Artikel |
1000 Online veröffentlicht
  • 2021-03-01
1000 Erschienen in
1000 Quellenangabe
  • 12(4):568-579
1000 FRL-Sammlung
1000 Copyrightjahr
  • 2021
1000 Lizenz
1000 Verlagsversion
  • |
1000 Ergänzendes Material
  • |
1000 Publikationsstatus
1000 Begutachtungsstatus
1000 Sprache der Publikation
1000 Abstract/Summary
  • Over the last century, dogs have been increasingly used to detect rare and elusive species or traces of them. The use of wildlife detection dogs (WDD) is particularly well-established in North America, Europe and Oceania, and projects deploying them have increased world-wide. However, if they are to make a significant contribution to conservation and management, their strengths, abilities and limitations should be fully identified. We reviewed the use of WDD with particular focus on the breeds used in different countries and for various targets, as well as their overall performance compared to other methods, by developing and analysing a database of 1,220 publications, including 916 scientific ones, covering 2,464 individual cases?most of them (1,840) scientific. With the world-wide increase in the use of WDD, associated tasks have changed and become much more diverse. Since 1930, reports exist for 62 countries and 408 animal, 42 plant, 26 fungi and six bacteria species. Altogether, 108 FCI-classified and 20 non-FCI-classified breeds have worked as WDD. While certain breeds have been preferred on different continents and for specific tasks and targets, they were not generally better suited for detection tasks than others. Overall, WDD usually worked more effectively than other monitoring methods. For each species group, regardless of breed, detection dogs were better than other methods in 88.71% of all cases and only worse in 0.98%. It was only for arthropods that Pinshers and Schnauzers performed worse than other breeds. For mono- and dicotyledons, detection dogs did less often outperform other methods. Although every breed can be trained as a WDD, choosing the most suitable dog for the task and target may speed up training and increase the chance of success. Albeit selection of the most appropriate WDD is important, excellent training, knowledge about the target density and suitability, and a proper study design all appeared to have the highest impact on performance. Moreover, an appropriate area, habitat and weather are crucial for detection dog work. When these factors are taken into consideration, WDD can be an outstanding monitoring method.
1000 Sacherschließung
lokal pointing dogs
lokal working dogs
lokal protected species dogs
lokal monitoring methods
lokal wildlife detection dogs
lokal scat detection dogs
lokal conservation dogs
lokal species monitoring
1000 Fächerklassifikation (DDC)
1000 Liste der Beteiligten
1000 Label
1000 Fördernummer
  1. -
1000 Förderprogramm
  1. -
1000 Dateien
1000 Objektart article
1000 Beschrieben durch
1000 @id frl:6427032.rdf
1000 Erstellt am 2021-04-22T13:33:31.184+0200
1000 Erstellt von 122
1000 beschreibt frl:6427032
1000 Bearbeitet von 122
1000 Zuletzt bearbeitet Thu Apr 22 13:34:53 CEST 2021
1000 Objekt bearb. Thu Apr 22 13:34:36 CEST 2021
1000 Vgl. frl:6427032
1000 Oai Id
  1. |
1000 Sichtbarkeit Metadaten public
1000 Sichtbarkeit Daten public
1000 Gegenstand von

View source