Carnivores play a vital role in ecosystem health and are thus an important focus for conservation management. Non-invasive methods have gained traction for carnivore monitoring as they are often elusive and wide-ranging, making visual counts particularly difficult. Faecal mini-barcoding combines field collection of scats with genetic analysis for species identification. Here we assessed the applicability of a mini-barcode based on the mitochondrial ATP6 gene in southern Africa. We predicted amplification success based on in silico evaluation of 34 of the 42 terrestrial carnivore species existing in southern Africa, including the Congo clawless otter (Aonyx congicus) for which we contributed a mitochondrial assembly, and tested amplification success on available reference samples of 23 species. We expanded the existing ATP6 mini-barcode reference database by contributing additional sequences for 22 species including the Cape genet (Genetta tigrina) and the side-striped jackal (Lupulella adusta), for which no complete mini-barcode sequences were available on GenBank to date. We furthermore applied the ATP6 mini-barcode to a scat-based carnivore survey conducted in 2009 in a grassland habitat in Namibia, showing a 94.9% identification success. Six carnivore species were detected from157 samples and were predicted to account for 75% of species assemblage. Black-backed jackals (Canis mesomelas) contributed the majority of faecal samples (87.2%) and were distributed evenly throughout the area. Scat samples of the remaining species, including leopard (Panthera pardus), were distributed along the edge, in proximity to dense bushland.

1. Conservation detection dogs (CDD) use their exceptional olfactory abilities to assist a range of conservation projects. CDD are generally quicker, can cover wider areas, and find more samples than humans and other analytical tools. However, their efficacy varies between studies; methodological standardisation in the field is lacking. Considering the cost of deploying a CDD team and the limited financial resources within conservation, it is vital that their performance is quantified and reliable. This review aims to summarise what is currently known about the use of detection dogs in conservation and elucidate which factors affect efficacy. 2. We describe the efficacy of CDD across species and situational contexts like training and field work. Reported sensitivities (i.e., proportion of target samples found out of total available) ranged from 23.8% to 100% and precision rates (i.e., proportion of alerts that are true positives) from 28% to 100%. CDD are consistently shown to be better than other techniques, but performance varies substantially across the literature. There is no consistent difference in efficacy between training, testing, and field work, hence we need to understand the factors affecting this. 3. We highlight the key variables that alter CDD performance. External effects include target odour, training methods, sample management, search methodology and environment, and the CDD handler. Internal effects include dog breed, personality, diet, age, and health. Unfortunately, much of the research fails to provide adequate information on the dogs, handlers, training, experience, and samples. This results in an inability to determine precisely why an individual study has high or low efficacy. 4. It is clear that CDD can be applied to possibly limitless scenarios but moving forward researchers must provide more consistent and detailed methodologies so that comparisons can be conducted, results are more easily replicated, and progress can be made in standardising CDD work.