Back

Combining artificial intelligence and local ecological knowledge to document the largest ever-counted Cape buffalo mega-herd

Bennitt, E.; Costelloe, B. R.; Koger, B.; Wielgus, E.; Masunga, G.; Caron, A.

2025-11-27 ecology
10.1101/2025.11.26.689243 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Large aggregations of wild mammals are declining globally, sometimes before they can be scientifically documented and their ecological value understood, although non-scientists may be aware of these phenomena. Video recording of wildlife by non-academics is becoming more frequent with increasing activities of humans in natural habitats. This opportunistically-collected material can document rare or ecologically-important events, such as large aggregations, and thus provide potentially valuable data for ecologists and conservationists. We used footage of a large herd of Cape buffalo recorded by a wildlife film producer in the Mababe Depression, northern Botswana, and applied automated detection and tracking techniques to count individuals as they moved across the video frame. To complement this demographic snapshot, we accessed local ecological knowledge from stakeholders to provide contextual information for a more complete understanding of the ecosystem processes potentially driving population movement and trends. Manual review of the automated count resulted in a minimum group size of 3676 buffalo and a total estimated herd size of 4131 (range 3828-4446), which matched herd size estimates provided by local stakeholders. To our knowledge, this is the largest documented group of Cape buffalo, which we identify as a mega-herd and recommend research into the costs, benefits and ecological consequences of forming such large groups. This study represents an opportunistic collaboration among wildlife filmmakers, computer scientists, lay experts and ecologists, and highlights the value of combining contributions from different fields to generate information that can be used in conservation practice.

Published in Ecology and Evolution (predicted rank #4) · training set

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.