A new technique for marking and later recognizing small mammals in the field

Salamon, M.; Klettenheimer, B. S.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.1994.tb08592.x

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This, of course, greatly limits the suitability of ear-tattoos for marking in studies where identifying juveniles is important. Eartattoos are, however, free of errors resulting from miscutting, cannot be confused with damage resulting from natural loss or ®ghting, do not grow out or fall off and do not, to our knowledge, cause infections as reported for other methods (Fullagar & Jewell, 1965;Hugo, 1990;Salamon & Klettenheimer, 1994).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Different techniques have different effects on the animals marked, but the type and the intensity of these effects are widely debated (Fullagar & Jewell, 1965;Fairley, 1982;Pavone & Boonstra, 1985;Korn, 1987;Hugo, 1990;Wood & Slade, 1990;Salamon & Klettenheimer, 1994;Braude & Ciszek, 1998). As a contribution to this debate and to provide useful information to compare different techniques, the use and evaluation of marking small mammals by ear-tattoos during a large ®eld study is described.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Braude & Ciszek (1998), however, found a higher survival rate in toe-clipped mole rats Heterocephalus glaber than in animals with implanted transponders. Other marking methods such as leg rings (Fullagar & Jewell, 1965;Fairley, 1982), colouring the tail base (Hugo, 1990) or ear tags from metal or plastic (Salamon & Klettenheimer, 1994) caused occasional infections or trap shyness. As far as we know, only a few observations that have examined the in¯uence of ear-tattooing on the animals have been reported (Boye & Sondermann, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Marking methods in small mammals: ear‐tattoo as an alternative to toe‐clipping

Lindner

Fuelling

2002

Journal of Zoology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a ®eld study on the behavioural response of grey-sided voles Clethrionomys rufocanus to predator odour ear tattoos were used for individual marking of the voles in the ®eld. The study was conducted over three summer seasons in the tundra of northern Norway. In this paper we report our experience with eartattooing in order to compare it with other methods used for marking small mammals. Methods should be compared for their different in¯uences on physiology and behaviour and to ®nd alternatives to the widely used toe-clipping. Looking for alternatives becomes mandatory because in many countries this method needs a special permit or is totally prohibited by law. Marking a vole with ear-tattoos took us 2 min on average. The rate for the ®rst recapture after marking voles was 87%. This is much higher than reported recapture rates for toe-clipped voles. From all recaptured individuals we were able to identify > 89.9% of the codes. The time lag between marking and ®rst recapture was higher than the lag between second and third recapture, which indicates a trauma caused by the marking procedure. However, there was no evidence of any weight loss as reported for other marking methods, and most of the tattooed animals did not show any behaviour indicating irritation after being marked. It is concluded that ear-tattooing, as an alternative to other methods of marking small mammals is useful even in the ®eld. However, to assess different advantages and disadvantages in other circumstances, the chosen method should be examined critically before use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Marking methods in small mammals: ear‐tattoo as an alternative to toe‐clipping

Lindner

Fuelling

2002

Journal of Zoology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lindner and Fuelling (2002) suggested that ear tattooing was better than toe clipping for mammals, but the method, using tattoo pliers, involved the tight handling of the animal's head and offered a limited series of numbers. Similarly, ear beads involve the handling of the animals' head (Salamon and Klettenheimer 1994). Traditional tattooing methods are considered slow (Beausoleil et al 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A non-mutilating method for marking small wild mammals and reptiles

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marking animals for identification is necessary in many aspects of wildlife research. In view of cost, practicality and ethical issues associated with many methods, we aimed to develop a suitable method for marking small wild vertebrates. We injected ultraviolet (UV) fluorescent tattoo ink subcutaneously into the tail of eight small mammal species and into the ventral area of seven lizard species. The method appeared suitable for seven mammal species and all seven lizard species, although survival after release remains to be determined. The method improved survival during handling of a sensitive rodent species compared with ear notching, which involved tighter head and chest control. Sixty-two recaptures indicated that the animals were healthy and the marks had not moved. UV-fluorescent tattoo ink is a cheap and ethical way of marking many small vertebrate species, although we recommend long-term evaluations of mark retention and the impact of tattoos on animals, including a potential increase in visibility to some predators. This marking method is likely to have applications for a wide range of wildlife.

show abstract

Mark my words: experts’ choice of marking methods used in capture-mark-recapture studies of small mammals

Jung

Boonstra

2019

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crucial to the success of studies based on capture-mark-recapture (CMR) designs is the retention (permanency) and recognition (readability) of marks to identify individuals. Several marking methods for small mammals (< 60 g) are available, but their efficacy and use is not well known. We implemented a targeted survey of experts to gather their experiences and opinions regarding marking small mammals. Respondents (n = 114) stated their beliefs, perceptions, and current and future use, of marking methods, as well as factors influencing their choices, based on Likert and rank order scale questions. We compared responses based on where researchers’ studies occurred, their level of experience, and their subfield of mammalogy. Most respondents (73%) had > 5 years experience marking small mammals, with 60% each marking > 1,000 individuals. Respondents believed that ear-tagging was most preferable in terms of efficiency, impact to affected animals (survival, pain), and personal ethics, whereas passive integrated transponder (PIT)-tagging was the most preferable with regard to retention and recognition, and toe-clipping with respect to cost. Most respondents plan to use ear-tagging (78%) or PIT-tagging (70%) in the future. PIT- and genetic-tagging are expected to increase, and toe-clipping to decline, in the future. The factors influencing which marking method respondents used were ranked—in order of decreasing preference—as impact, retention, recognition, cost, efficiency, and ethics. There were few differences in the mean response or consensus among respondents, regardless of their experience, location, or subfield. Most respondents (66%) agreed that additional studies on the performance and impact of various marking methods are needed to assess their costs and benefits for CMR-based studies. Ultimately, choice of marking method will depend on the species, research question, available resources, and local legislation and permitting. Our study, however, illustrates that collective insights by experienced mammalogists may aid individual researchers in deciding on study designs and protocols, particularly early career scientists.

show abstract

A new technique for marking and later recognizing small mammals in the field

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Marking methods in small mammals: ear‐tattoo as an alternative to toe‐clipping

Marking methods in small mammals: ear‐tattoo as an alternative to toe‐clipping

A non-mutilating method for marking small wild mammals and reptiles

Mark my words: experts’ choice of marking methods used in capture-mark-recapture studies of small mammals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About