Snapshot of the Atlantic Forest canopy 833


Forest, which are important in nutrient cycling, soil quality and detritivore food webs (Nichols et al., 2008; Bogoni et al., 2019). Regarding the smaller body-sized species (,1 kg), our study reveals the occurrence of key species such as large rodents and marsupials of the genera Phyllomys and Caluromys, which are usually the first groups to disappear from disturbed habitats (Chiarello, 1999). Our results reinforce the important role played by pro-


tected areas for mammal conservation (Littlewood et al., 2020). It is estimated that,3% of Atlantic Forest remnants are suitable for the thin-spined porcupine (Bonvicino et al., 2018a). The occurrence of this species in Caparaó National Park is therefore important to the long-term persistence of this species. The first documentation of the tree-rat also de- monstrates the potential of the Park to host rare species. Although we were not able to identify this record to species, the rare Phyllomys lundi has been reported in a private re- serve c. 20 km from our study sites (Faria et al., 2016). This threatened species has been reported previously in only three locations in the Atlantic Forest biome (Faria et al., 2016; Bonvicino, 2018b). Caparaó National Park is also one of the four priority areas for the conservation of the Critically Endangered northern muriqui (Melo et al., 2018). This population is important because it inhabits the greatest altitudinal range of the species (up to 2,000 m; Strier et al., 2017). By using arboreal camera trapping we were able to document this species across an altitudinal gradient, in- cluding at high elevations and on slopes, where accessibility for ground-based surveys is limited. Furthermore, the nor- thern muriqui was only recently discovered to occur on the west side of the Park (Kaizer et al., 2016) and its occurrence in ombrophilous forest was reported previously in only a few locations (Mendes et al., 2005). Our findings provide new records for the occurrence of this species at two sites within the Park (Rio Preto and Rio Norte valleys). This demonstrates the importance of this protected area for safeguarding this distinct threatened species (Isaac et al., 2007). However, the high detection rate of the northern mu- riqui in our study site could have been biased by the large home range of the species (Dias & Strier, 2003; Lima et al., 2019) as it was detected along an array of arboreal cam- era traps in the same valley and/or in several independent events at distinct locations. Although c. 12% of the records of mammals in this


study were small mammals that could not be identified, in- cluding bats, rodents and opossums, our findings demon- strate the ability of arboreal camera traps to detect smaller-bodied species. The record of Phyllomys sp. is an example of the potential of arboreal camera traps to detect elusive and arboreal species that are often difficult to record using small mammal traps (Faria et al., 2016; Bonvicino et al., 2018b). However, as most of these records were nocturnal, thus hampering the recognition of some species, the use of camera traps with white flash


functionality could increase the potential effectiveness of this method (Bowler et al., 2017) despite white flashes po- tentially altering species behaviour or movements (Wearn & Glover-Kapfer, 2017). The configuration of the camera traps to hybrid mode (i.e. to record a short video after tak- ing a still photograph) also increases the likelihood of being able to identify species, and documents fast-moving species such as squirrels and marmosets (including the number of individuals and with potential for collecting data on species behaviour; Caravaggi et al., 2020). Cutting vegetation surrounding the arboreal camera trap station, avoiding facing the camera into direct sunlight and positioning the camera on a horizontal branch could also help increase the likelihood of distinguishing species and reduce the number of false triggers, which is one of the constraints of camera-trapping studies (Gregory et al., 2014; Wearn & Glover-Kapfer, 2017; Kaizer, 2019). To date, most of the studies reporting the arboreal


mammal assemblage in remnants of the Atlantic Forest have been ground-based. Our findings demonstrate the potential of arboreal camera trapping to record rare, noc- turnal and cryptic species that are difficult to detect with ground-based methods (Olson et al., 2012; Whitworth et al., 2016; Bowler et al., 2017; Moore et al., 2020). Considering the habits of some scansorial and terrestrial species, we suggest that arboreal camera traps should be paired with terrestrial cameras to reduce the likelihood of failing to detect these species. This would provide a better snapshot of the entire mammal assemblage. In addition, our results illustrate the role played by Caparaó National Park as a stronghold for the conservation of rare and threa- tened mammalian species endemic to a biodiversity hot- spot. We encourage future studies over larger spatial and temporal scales, with the aim of exploring trends in the species composition and functional diversity of the entire mammalian community using emerging biomonitoring technologies (e.g. environmental DNA; Sales et al., 2020). This would provide a more complete understanding of how mammal functional diversity and ecosystem functioning are maintained, and inform evidence-based conservation strat- egies for this protected area.


Acknowledgements We thank two anonymous reviewers for their critiques; the Brazilian Ministry of Environment/SISBIO for authoriz- ing the research in the Caparaó National Park; the Park managers for logistical support; Francisco H. Gabriel, Leandro Moreira, Rodrigo Silva and Viviane Sodré for fieldwork assistance; Aryanne Clyvia and Daniel da Silva Ferraz for logistical support; Guilherme Garbino, Michel Faria and Rayque Lanes for the identification of small mam- mals; Rodolfo Sarcinelli for design of the study area map; the Brazilian Ministry of Education/CAPES (BEX 1 298/2015-01) for the award of a PhD studentship to MCK; Idea Wild and Conquista Montanhismo for equipment grants and the Conservation Leadership Programme (No. 12455) and Mohammed bin Zayed Conservation Fund (No. 162512917) for support to the Caparaó Muriqui Project, of which this work is a part; the Conservation Leadership Programme for supporting


Oryx, 2022, 56(6), 825–836 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321001563


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164