Biological Conservation 238 (2019) 108235

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Biological Conservation
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon

The use of drones for conservation: A methodological tool to survey caimans T

nests density
⁎
Leonardo J. Scarpaa, Carlos I. Piñaa,b,
a
Centro de Investigación Científica y de Transferencia Tecnológica a la Producción (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Provincia de Entre Ríos,
Universidad Autónoma de Entre Ríos), Calle España 149, 3105 Diamante, Argentina
b
Facultad de Ciencia y Tecnología, Universidad Autónoma de Entre Ríos, Argentina

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The use of drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), is a burgeoning facet of conservation biology with the
Aerial photo potential to revolutionize the way in which animals and habitats are monitored. Recently, the location and
Nest estimation distribution of caiman nests were mainly carried out by helicopters, paramotoring, and small plane for the
Population identification and validation of nesting sites. The methods chosen for counting caimans are limited by inter-
Sustainable harvest
pretation difficulties when comparing densities observed in different habitats or with different visibility con-
ditions or environmental variables. In this research, flights with drones were conducted in order to estimate the
density amount of the caiman nests, quantify the nests potential in the monitored areas, and evaluate whether
the current nest harvest in Corrientes Province is within the acceptable limits for a sustainable program. The use
of this technology allows researchers to sample the presence of nests, their quantification, and georeferentiation,
but also to find an absolute density of nests and to extrapolate it to other areas with similar habitat conditions.

1. Introduction population density were centered on the use of helicopters, para-

The use of drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), is a bur-
geoning facet of conservation biology with the potential to re-
volutionize the way in which animals and habitats are monitored
(Evans et al., 2015; Hodgson et al., 2018). A further advantage of UAVs
that is seldom raised is that the aerial photographs provide a bank of
images from which individual species can be independently counted,
verified, and archived for future analysis or audit. This creates a
transparent census technique that increases the usability and cost ef-
fectiveness of information gathered (McEvoy et al., 2016). One example
of a taxon whose biology and ecology can be much better investigated
and understood by applying drone technology is Caiman latirostris and
Caiman yacare. This is particularly so in the detection and mapping of
caiman nesting behavior (Evans et al., 2015, 2016). Nowadays, two
main techniques are used during day-light time for counting and esti-
mating the caiman population: land and aerial census. As the crocodi-
lians are more visible from above, especially in some habitats, a tech-
nique of aerial prospecting was initiated and developed for counting
them (Graham, 1987). Caiman aerial censuses are generally considered
more precise and accurate than night spotlight censuses (Jacobsen,
1984; Graham, 1987). These aerial censuses used to estimate caiman
motoring, and aircraft, though they are financially expensive
(Magnusson et al., 1978; Harvey and Hill, 2003).
UAV technology provides the next logic step in the methodology of
monitoring population density of caimans by estimating the number of
nests, due to relatively low initial cost, repeatability, and flexibility
(Koh and Wich, 2012; Elsey and Trosclair, 2016; Evans et al., 2016;
Hodgson et al., 2016, 2018), as well as the location and distribution of
nests.
In Argentina there are two species of the Order Crocodylia, Caiman
yacare (Daudin, 1802) and Caiman latirostris (Daudin, 1802) (Verdade
et al., 2010). The existing management programs in the country for
these species are based on egg ranching, where caiman nests are
identified and the eggs are collected for artificial incubation, and then
these specimens are raised in farms. At 9 months of age, a percentage of
the animals hatched are reintroduced in the same sites where they were
collected (Larriera, 1998). The aims of caiman population management
range from conservation to regulation of population. Regardless of
these aims, more innovative and adequate study methodologies are
required in order to determine in a more efficient way the distribution
and abundance of the species and to monitor long−term changes in
these parameters.

⁎
Corresponding author at: Centro de Investigación Científica y de Transferencia Tecnológica a la Producción (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y
Técnicas, Provincia de Entre Ríos, Universidad Autónoma de Entre Ríos), Calle España 149, 3105 Diamante, Argentina.
E-mail address: cidcarlos@infoaire.com.ar (C.I. Piña).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108235
Received 10 July 2019; Received in revised form 23 August 2019; Accepted 30 August 2019
Available online 04 September 2019
0006-3207/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L.J. Scarpa and C.I. Piña
Previous land surveys conducted in Corrientes Province 1991–1992
determined densities of 6.4 ind·km−1. Later on, these values increased
to 14.8 ind·km−1 in 1999–2000 (Ross and Godshalk, 2003). In the
monitoring carried out during 2008, the relative densities of caiman
populations in Corrientes Province were almost to 20 ind·km−1 (Piña,
2009), values higher than the ones recorded a decade ago and with
variations in the last years, though without a clear trend (Piña, 2015).
However, none of the previous studies have carried out an evaluation of
the portion of nests harvested from the wild by the ranching programs.
In this context, it is proposed to make flights with UAV with the aim
of (1) being able to estimate the density of caiman nests (C. yacare and
C. latirostris) in the monitored areas; (2) quantifying nests potentiality
in the monitored area; (3) evaluating if harvesting of nests in Corrientes
Province by Yacaré Porá Company is within the acceptable limits for a
sustainable program.
2. Materials and methods
The methods more frequently used for counting caiman are subject
to many interpretation difficulties when comparing densities observed
in several habitats or with different visibility conditions and environ-
mental variables (Magnusson, 1994; Larriera, 1998; Verdade, 2004;
Portelinha, 2016). In this research, nest density was evaluated using a
Phantom 4 Pro Drone in the southwestern region of Corrientes Pro-
vince, Argentina (Fig. 1A). The sampling area is part of the sites where
nest harvesting is carried out by Yacaré Porá based on an agreement
between the Department of Natural Resources of Corrientes Province
(Dirección de Recursos Naturales de la Provincia de Corrientes) and
Fig. 1. Area of study. A. Shows the Province of Corrientes, Argentina. B. Shows the zone of Nueve de Julio; in red, the polygons flew (36 of 180) are shown, in white
the polygons not flown. C. Shows Malvina's area; in red, the flown polygons (16 of 60) are shown, in white the polygons not flown. (For interpretation of the
references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
2
Biological Conservation 238 (2019) 108235
Garruchos S.A. to implement and develop the project “Eggs harvest for
ranching, of the genus Caiman, in Corrientes Province, Argentina, for
management purposes”.
In order to evaluate nest density, firstly, 240 polygons were gen-
erated (Fig. 1A and B) including the nests collecting areas of Yacaré
Porá (Malvinas, on Route 30, and Nueve de Julio, in the north of Goya
city). These 240 polygons covered an area of 12,082 ha (for calculation
12,000 ha were considered) and were located on both sides of the roads
and up to 2 km from them. The generation of the grids was done in
GoogleEarth, in favorable places for caiman nesting. In the Malvinas
area (Route 30), 60 polygons were created with a total of 2853 ha (for
calculation 2800 ha were considered); 16 of those 60 polygons were
flown (27%; Fig. 3; with a flight zone of 769 ha). In Nueve de Julio area,
180 polygons were created with a total of 9229 ha (for calculation
9200 ha were considered) from which 36 were flown (20%; Fig. 2; with
a flight zone of 1856 ha). Polygons to be flown were chosen at random
among the 240 polygons. Once chosen, we checked that at least 20% of
the polygons located in each place were flown.
Flights were configurated in DroneDeploy at 100 m high from the
takeoff, with a lateral overlap of at least 40% and a frontal overlap of
70%. The drone was configurated for autonomous flights (Fig. 2). Ac-
cording to data generated by the work group, nests are identifiable
using this configuration. From every polygon flown, a georeferenced
image was generated (Fig. 3A–C), then nests were counted and the
flight zone was determined. With these values it was possible to de-
termine nest density in each polygon, in order to calculate the mean
density, the confidence interval for the nest density, and the estimated
quantity of existing nests in the 240 total polygons (12,000 ha). In our
L.J. Scarpa and C.I. Piña Biological Conservation 238 (2019) 108235

Fig. 2. The image shows the planning of one of the missions using DroneDeploy software. The flights were performed in a grid formation with transects separated by
a predetermined distance. The image shows the actual route taken by the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a single flight covering about 36 ha.

case, it was only extrapolated to the area of polygons generated, and
not to the potential area of the region, which is much larger.
Because nest densities were not uniform in all the distribution area,
monitoring results are presented for Malvinas and Nueve de Julio sites,
and then for the whole area. Subsequently, the mean density was es-
S
timated from the formula x ± Zα /2 ∗ n (where S is the variance, n is
the quantity of polygons flown, x is the mean of densities, and y Zα/2 is
the value table at 95% for the quantity of polygons flown. We calcu-
lated the minimum and maximum density to make the extrapolation.
The study was carried out at the end of January 2018, to carry out the
flights of the drawn polygons demanded us 5 days. Carrying out the
censuses at this time of the year guaranteed us that the nesting phase

Fig. 3. The result of the drone flight and the location of a nest are observed. A. Shows the image generated from the flight with the drone. The red dot indicates the
presence of a Caiman nest. B. Shows with zoom the location of the nest. C. Shows the nest in greater detail. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

3
L.J. Scarpa and C.I. Piña Biological Conservation 238 (2019) 108235

14

12

10

0
0.00
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.12
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.17
0.18
0.22
0.23
0.28
0.29
0.48
0.86
Malvinas Nueve de Julio

Fig. 4. The histogram shows the accumulated frequency of nests/ha (density) for the study area. In black the zone of Nueve de Julio is represented and in gray the
zone of Malvinas, in the Province of Corrientes.

had already been completed. In this way, we ensured the highest
availability of nests. In the present study the identity of the nests in the
field was not confirmed, due to the fact that in previous censuses made
by the work team we had already carried out this visual training and
the corresponding validation in the field.
3. Results
A total of 52 flights were made; 36 flights in Nueve de Julio location
and 16 in Malvinas location. In Nueve de Julio 104 nests were observed
from the mosaics. The highest density was of 0.3 nests·ha−1, approxi-
mately 1 nest every 3 ha. The polygon with the highest number of nests
contained 13 nests. In 11 polygons no nests were identified, 10 had a
density of less than 0.05 nests·ha−1, 6 had densities between 0.05 and
0.1 nest.ha−1, and 9 between 0.1 and 0.3 nests·ha−1 (Fig. 4). The mean
area of the polygons in Nueve de Julio was 50 ha (Fig. 5).
In Malvinas 145 nests were found, even though less than 50% of the
polygons in the Nueve de Julio were flown. The highest density ob-
served was of 0.86 nests·ha−1, slightly more than 3 nests/4 ha. In 2
polygons no nests were identified, 2 had a density lower than
0.05 nests·ha−1, 3 between 0.05 and 0.1 nests·ha−1, 7 between 0.1 and
0.3 nests·ha−1, and 2 higher than 0.3 nests·ha−1 (Fig. 4). The polygons
surface in the Malvinas had a mean of 48 ha (Fig. 5).
A mean density of 0.055 ± 0.010 nests·ha−1 was estimated for
Nueve de Julio (0.045 nests·ha−1–0.065 nests·ha−1). Extrapolating this
to the 9200 ha included in the 180 polygons of that area, we estimate
between 396 and 616 nests might be present.
For Malvinas the mean nest density observed was
0.18 ± 0.023 nests·ha−1, reaching a minimum density of
0.157 nests·ha−1 and a maximum of 0.203 nests·ha−1. Considering the
2800 ha of the 60 polygons generated at the area, a minimum of 440
nests and a maximum of 568 nests were estimated.
Considering the totality of flights and polygons, the mean density
observed was 0.09 ± 0.005, achieving a minimum estimate of
0.085 nests·ha−1 and a maximum of 0.095 nests·ha−1. Extrapolating
that density to the 12,000 ha comprising the 240 polygons over which
the flights were randomly chosen, there would be a minimum of 1020
nests and a maximum of 1140 nests.
4. Discussion
Yacaré Porá started collecting nests for their subsequent egg

0
27 32 39 40 42 43 44 45 46 48 49 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 61 62 63 65

Malvinas Nueve de Julio

Fig. 5. The histogram shows the accumulated frequency of hectares for the study area. In black the zone of Nueve de Julio is represented and in gray the zone of
Malvinas, in the Province of Corrientes.

4
L.J. Scarpa and C.I. Piña
incubation and controlled rearing in the summer of 2004–2005. From
that season up to the 2017–2018 harvest, about 5600 nests have been
collected in the harvesting sites of Corrientes Province. Throughout this
time period, ups and downs were observed, in some years harvesting
approximately 600 nests. This variation in the harvesting numbers is
reportedly linked to the climatic variation between seasons in correla-
tion with the reproductive effort (Simoncini et al., 2011) This shows
that in recent years, nest harvest rate has remained stable, possibly
compensating for changes in reproduction rate increasing the collection
effort (Piña, 2014, 2015). Due to the presence of Class I specimens in
the harvesting areas, as shown in previous reports (Leiva et al., 2018),
and the observation of intact nests during this and previous seasons, it is
concluded that many easy−access nests, and especially those of diffi-
cult−access places, were not reached by the egg ranching program
(Piña, 2014, 2015, 2017).
Using the harvesting data of Yacaré Porá we can calculate a median
of approximately 500 nests collected per season in the entire Corrientes
Province. According to the nest estimation present in this research (a
minimum of 1020 nests and a maximum of 1140 nests) in just
12,000 ha (i.e. 0.13% of the surface of the province) it is shown that this
resource is being under−utilized by Yacaré Porá in relation to the
potential caiman populations that Corrientes has.
Yacaré Porá harvested just 113 nests in 2018, when the study was
carried out (26% of the minimum number of nests estimated); in Nueve
de Julio area 69 nests were collected (17% of the minimum number of
nests). Other ranching programs, similar to the one in Corrientes, adopt
different nest harvesting strategies. Australia has intensive use without
reintroducing juveniles. The harvest of eggs is carried out through a
combination of aerial surveys, boat surveys, and on foot searches (Webb
et al., 1994). Zimbabwe allows the harvest of every nest found, but
requires returning and repopulating of up to 2% of the captive–raised
stock (Rice et al., 1999). Louisiana makes intensive use and collects a
portion of nests detected, also, implements a managed hunting on males
(Elsey et al., 1994; Elsey and Kinler, 2004), historically 12% of the
animals raised in captivity are returned to the wild as juveniles, but
recently reintroduce decreased 10% in 2017 of the allowed numbers of
eggs harvest (Louisiana's Alligator Management Program 2017–2018
Annual Report, 2018; Elsey and Woodward, 2010). The State of Florida
imposes a maximum collection rate of 50% of the total nests detected,
harvest quotas are based on monitoring nest density and population
density, and does not impose any kind of return to the environment
(Rice et al., 1999), and they also have a hunting program. These pro-
grams have reported very satisfactory results over time. The quantity of
nests and populations continue to grow despite the utilization pro-
grams, and at the same time, providing strong economic incentive in
the wetlands and rural populations.
Yacaré Porá harvested during this season approximately 18% of the
nests, according to the most conservative estimate in this study (113
nests on Route 30 + 69 nests in Nueve de Julio, out of an estimated
minimum of 1020 nests). We can say, regarding the harvest, on one
hand that Corrientes has a similar program strategy to the one carried
out in the state of Florida, but failing to reach the number of collection
quotas of the latter. On the other hand, regarding the reintroduction of
juveniles, the program developed in Corrientes is similar to the one in
Louisiana, where juveniles of approximately 1.2 m are reintroduced to
the wild (5–10% of eggs harvested, depending on the area). This
comparison emphasizes the fact that limited nest harvests in Corrientes
do not affect natural populations and an even larger collection of eggs
could be take place in the researched area. At the same time, the
number of nests that we observed in the 52 flights was 249, meaning in
just those 52 polygons there would be more than enough potential for
the type of management Yacaré Porá carries out, that of harvesting and
reintroducing juveniles to the environment.
It is noteworthy that, to complete the analysis, the number of nests
reported in this study should include nests found at roadsides (which is
not an insignificant number as we have observed) and in forests that are
5
Biological Conservation 238 (2019) 108235
usually close to wetlands, and the method of aerial counting does not
allow us to identify or quantify them. In short, just the estimated nests
in floating marshes in the 12,000 ha in which polygons were built,
would be sufficient to demonstrate that the harvest carried out by
Yacaré Porá is insignificant considering the potential of Corrientes
Province.
Vegetation height could influence in detection rate of caiman nest.
In this kind of habitats predominant vegetation height does not exceed
60 cm (obs. per.); in specific areas the plants of the family Typhaceae,
which grow up to approximately 2 m, are well separated from each
other and present a low density in the landscape. In order to increase
detection rate we recommend flying as close as possible to mid-day in
areas with high vegetation in order to minimize shades.
As inferred from the data obtained, we can consider using the
counting of caiman nests by drone as an approximate population index.
In addition, this type of census−based methodology using drones
generates a photographic record that can be consulted again. The use of
drones in conservation and biological management programs has
proven to be very efficient for monitoring the state of populations and
making decisions based on this technology (Getzin et al., 2012; Evans
et al., 2015, 2016; Puttock et al., 2015; Weissensteiner et al., 2015).
This research is the first of its kind for this field of study and sets out the
methodological basis used on which the potential use of drones to find
and quantify caiman nests was examined.
To complement the study, we perform an economic analysis of cost
that should be assumed if we want to perform the same study using a
helicopter. The acquisition of two drones and ten batteries to perform
the necessary flights (4500US$), cost of personnel in the field and the
fuel needed to travel to the sampling sites (700US$) amounts to US$
5200 for the first year. If we consider repeating the work over a period
of 3 years the cost would be US$ 6600, or 2200US$ a year. Then with
US$ 5200 we would be able to fly approximately 6 h only for the first
season, but considering the 3 years period (US$ 2200 per year) results
in only 2.5 h of helicopter flight. Clearly this amount of flight hours is
not enough to match the sampling effort made in this paper, indeed we
consider that the cost for only one year would be less than the cost of
helicopter flight to do the same work.
5. Conclusion
The study confirms that the density of caiman nests can be esti-
mated using drones. Nest harvesting in Corrientes Province carried out
by Yacaré Porá is underexploited. The use of this technology allows us
to sample the presence of nests, their quantification and georefer-
entiation, but the most interesting thing is that it can be treated as a
guide to nest density and extrapolate to other sites that present similar
conditions.
Acknowledgments
We thank PICT 2014 No. 2138 (to CIP) and YACARÉ PORÁ for
partial funding of this study; and Guzmán María Magalí and Rossier
Agustín for the first English translation.
Declaration of competing interest
We declare here that we have no direct financial benefits that could
result from publication, and that we do not have any conflicts of in-
terest related to the MS.
References
Louisiana's Alligator Management Program 2017–2018 Annual Report. Louisiana
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (32 pp).
Elsey, R.M., Kinler, N., 2004. Louisiana's alligator program: adapting management as
populations recover and risk of unsustainable use decreases. In: in Crocodile
L.J. Scarpa and C.I. Piña
Specialist Group, I.U.C.N. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 17th Working Meeting of the
IUCN-SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. IUCN The World Conservation Union, Gland,
Switzerland, pp. 92–101.
Elsey, R., Trosclair, P., 2016. The use of an unmanned aerial vehicle to locate Alligator
nests. Southeast. Nat. 15, 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1656/058.015.0106.
Elsey, R.M., Woodward, A.R., 2010. American alligator Alligator mississippiensis.
Crocodiles. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan, 3rd ed. Crocodile Specialist
Group, Darwin, Australia, pp. 1–4.
Elsey R.M., Joanen T., McNease L. 1994. Louisiana's alligator research and management
program: An update. Pp. 199–229, in Crocodile Specialist Group IUCN (Eds).
Proceedings of the 12th Working Meeting of the IUCN-SSC Crocodile Specialist Group,
IUCN−The World Conservation Union, Gland., Switzerland.
Evans, L., Hefin, T., Pang, K., Evans, M., Saimin, S., Goossens, B., 2015. Use of drone
technology as a tool for behavioral research: a case study of crocodilian nesting.
Herpetol. Conserv. Biol. 10, 90–98.
Evans, L., Hefin, T., Pang, K., Evans, M., Saimin, S., Goossens, B., 2016. Spatial ecology of
Estuarine Crocodile (Crocodylus porosus) nesting in a fragmented landscape. Sensors
16, 1527. https://doi.org/10.3390/s16091527.
Getzin, S., Wiegand, K., Schöning, I., 2012. Assessing biodiversity in forests using very
high-resolution images and unmanned aerial vehicles. Methods Ecol. Evol. 3,
397–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2011. 00158.x.
Graham A. 1987. Methods of surveying and monitoring crocodiles. Pp.74–101, in
Crocodile Specialist Group IUCN (Eds) Proceedings of SADCC Workshop on
Management and Utilization of Crocodiles in the SADCC Region of Africa. (Kariba,
Zimbabwe).
Harvey, R., Hill, G., 2003. Mapping the nesting habitats of saltwater crocodiles Crocodylus
porosus in Melacca Swamp and the Adelaide River wetlands, Northern Territory: an
approach using remote sensing and GIS. Wildl. Res. 30, 365–375.
Hodgson, J.C., Baylis, S.M., Mott, R., Herrod, A., Clarke, R.H., 2016. Precision wildlife
monitoring using unmanned aerial vehicles. Sci. Rep. 6, 22574. https://doi.org/10.
1038/srep22574.
Hodgson, J.C., Mott, R., Baylis, S.M., Pham, T.T., Wotherspoon, S., Kilpatrick, A.D., Koh,
L.P., 2018. Drones count wildlife more accurately and precisely than humans.
Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 1160–1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12974.
Jacobsen, N.H.G., 1984. The distribution and status of crocodile populations in the
Transvaal outside the Kruger National Park. Biol. Conserv. 29, 191–200. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0006-3207(84)90098-3.
Koh, L.P., Wich, S.A., 2012. Dawn of drone ecology: low-cost autonomous aerial vehicles
for conservation. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 5, 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/
194008291200500202.
Larriera A. 1998. The Caiman latirostris ranching program in Santa Fe, Argentina. The first
commercial rearing. Pp. 379–385, in: Crocodile Specialist Group IUCN (Eds)
Proceedings of the 14th Working Meeting of the CSG-IUCN - The World Conservation
Union, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Leiva, P.M., Simoncini, M.S., Portelinha, T.C.G., Larriera, A., Piña, C., 2018. Size of
nesting female Broad-snouted Caimans (Caiman latirostris Daudin 1802). Braz. J. Biol.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.180892.
Magnusson, W.E., 1994. Conservação de jacarés no Brasil. In: Larriera, A., Imhof, A., Von
Biological Conservation 238 (2019) 108235
Finck, M.C., Costa, A.L., Tourn, S.C. (Eds.), Memorias del IV Workshop sobre
conservación y manejo del yacaré overo (Caiman latirostris). Fundación Banco Bica,
Santo Tomé, Santa Fe, La Región, pp. 65–70.
Magnusson, W.E., Grigg, G.C., Taylor, J.A., 1978. An aerial survey of potential nesting
areas of the saltwater crocodile, Crocodylus porosus Schneider, on the north coast of
Arnhem Land, Northern Australia. Aust. Wildl. Res. 5, 401–415. https://doi.org/10.
1071/wr9780401.
McEvoy, J.F., Hall, G.P., McDonald, P.G., 2016. Evaluation of unmanned aerial vehicle
shape, flight path and camera type for waterfowl surveys: disturbance effects and
species recognition. PeerJ 4, e1831. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1831.
Piña, C.I., 2009. Informe Monitoreos del Género Caiman en la Provincia de Corrientes
para YACARÉ PORÁ S.A. (36 pp).
Piña, C.I., 2014. Informe Monitoreos del Género Caiman en la Provincia de Corrientes
para YACARÉ PORÁ S.A. (54 pp).
Piña, C.I., 2015. Informe Monitoreos del Género Caiman en la Provincia de Corrientes
para YACARÉ PORÁ S.A. (54 pp).
Piña, C.I., 2017. Informe Monitoreos del Género Caiman en la Provincia de Corrientes
para YACARÉ PORÁ S.A. (24 pp).
Portelinha, T., 2016. Área de vida, uso de hábitat y ciclo reproductivo de Caiman latirostris
(Crocodylia, alligatoridae) en la provincia de Santa Fe, Argentina. Tesis de doc-
torado no publicada. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina.
Puttock, A.K., Cunliffe, A.M., Anderson, K., Brazier, R.E., 2015. Aerial photography col-
lected with a multirotor drone reveals impact of Eurasian beaver reintroduction on
ecosystem structure. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 3, 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1139/
juvs-2015−0005.
Rice, K.G., Percival, H.F., Woodward, A.R., Jennings, M.L., 1999. Effects of egg and
hatchling harvest on American alligators in Florida. J. Wildl. Manag. 63, 1193–1200.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3802837.
Ross, J.P., Godshalk, R., 2003. Taller Internacional para el Manejo y Comercio de Caiman
yacare. (Octubre de 2002, Gainesville, Florida, USA. 85 pp).
Simoncini, M.S., Piña, C.I., Cruz, F.B., Larriera, A., 2011. Climatic effects on the re-
productive biology of Caiman latirostris (Crocodylia: Alligatoridae). Amphibia-
Reptilia 32, 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1163/017353711X571874.
Verdade, L.M., 2004. A exploração da fauna silvestre no Brasil: jacarés, sistemas e re-
cursos humanos. BiotaNeotropica 4, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-
06032004000200002.
Verdade, L.M., Larriera, A., Piña, C.I., 2010. Broad-snouted Caiman Caiman latirostris. In:
in Manolis, S.C., Stevenson, C. (Eds.), Crocodiles. Status Survey and Conservation
Action Plan. 3. Crocodile Specialist Group; Darwin, pp. 18–22.
Webb, G.J.W., Manolis, S.C., Ottley, B., 1994. Crocodile management and research in the
Northern Territory. In: in Crocodile Specialist Group, I.U.C.N. (Ed.), Proceedings of
the 12th Working Meeting of the IUCN[HYPHEN]SSC Crocodile Specialist Group
Pattaya, Thailand. IUCN- The World Conservation Union, Switzerland, Gland, pp.
167–180.
Weissensteiner, M.H., Poelstra, J.W., Wolf, J.B.W., 2015. Low-budget ready-to-fly un-
manned aerial vehicles: an effective tool for evaluating the nesting status of canopy-
breeding bird species. J. Avian Biol. 46, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.00619.