1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.

中文翻译：

---

自然保护中的侦查犬：关于其全球部署的数据库，其中对所用品种及其性能进行了比较（与其他方法相比）

1. 在上个世纪，狗越来越多地用于检测稀有和难以捉摸的物种或痕迹。在北美，欧洲和大洋洲，使用野生动物侦查犬（WDD）的方式尤其成熟，并且在世界范围内部署它们的项目也有所增加。但是，如果它们对保护和管理做出重大贡献，则应充分确定其优势，能力和局限性。
2. 通过开发和分析1,220种出版物的数据库，包括916种科学出版物，涵盖2,464个个体，我们审查了WDD的使用，特别关注在不同国家使用的品种以及用于不同目标的品种，以及与其他方法相比的整体表现。案例-其中大多数（1,840）是科学的。
3. 随着世界范围内使用WDD的增加，相关的任务已经改变并且变得更加多样化。自1930年以来，已有关于62个国家和地区的报告，涉及408种动物，42种植物，26种真菌和6种细菌。共有108个FCI分类的品种和20个非FCI分类的品种已经成为WDD。尽管某些品种在不同的大陆以及特定的任务和目标方面已成为首选，但它们通常不比其他品种更适合进行检测任务。总体而言，WDD通常比其他监视方法更有效。对于每个物种组，无论其品种如何，在所有病例中，检测犬均优于其他方法，占所有病例的88.71％，而仅差于0.98％。Pinshers和Schnauzers的节肢动物的表现仅差于其他品种。对于单子叶和双子叶植物，检测犬的表现要优于其他方法。
4. 尽管每个品种都可以作为WDD进行训练，但是根据任务和目标选择最合适的犬可能会加快训练速度并增加成功的机会。尽管选择最合适的WDD很重要，但是出色的培训，对目标密度和适用性的了解以及适当的研究设计似乎都对性能产生了最大的影响。此外，适当的区域，栖息地和天气对于侦查犬只工作至关重要。考虑到这些因素，WDD可能是一种出色的监视方法。