Effect of visible implant elastomers on the growth, survival and tag retention in juvenile Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus ) in laboratory conditions

Abstract

This study identifies the possibility of using visible implant elastomers (VIE) to tag juvenile Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus). The mean body weight was 2.4 AE 0.4 g, and mean body length 5.5 AE 0.5 cm. Markers in three colours were used: blue, orange and green. Implant elastomers were injected in the rostrum and in the tail shaft. The experiment was conducted over a period of 10 weeks and included also a control group, that is, no tagging. No significant effect of tagging on the specific growth rate, feed conversion ratio and condition factor of juvenile Atlantic sturgeon was observed. The fish in all groups increased their body weight more than 10 times, reaching body weight of 25-28 g. The final survival in all of the groups was approximately 40%. The final tag retention varied depending on the implant colour. The highest retention of 100% was obtained with orange VIE and was significantly different from blue and green. Tag retention was dependent on the place of marking (P > 0.05). A correlation was observed between the applied dye and the place of marking (P = 0.0166). The best results were obtained when marking with orange VIE in the rostrum as all markers were visible after 70 days even without the use of UV light. According to our research, marking with VIE does not negatively affect growth and survival of juvenile Atlantic sturgeon and can be recommended for fish with an initial body weight of approximately 2.5 g in the case of short-term research.

Subcutaneous injection of visible implant elastomer in sterlet (Acipenser ruthenusLinnaeus, 1758): a study on compatibility and retention

“…Kozlowski et al. () reported 100% retention after 70 days for A. oxyrinchus tagged with orange coloured VIE in the rostrum. Randall, Dittman, Chalupnicki, and Kehler () tested VIE (injected in the ventral subcutis of the rostrum) along with calcein marking in A. fulvescens for 12 months and reported a tag retention of 67%.…”

“…In sturgeons, VIE is applied to distinguish test groups in laboratory experiments ( A. oxyrinchus: Niklitschek & Secor, ) as well as for mark‐recapture studies (lake sturgeon A. fulvescens: Caroffino, Sutton, & Lindberg, ), sometimes in combination with other tags, such as dart tags, PIT or CWT ( A. dabryanus: Wu et al., ; A. fulvescens: Crossman, Forsythe, Scribner, & Baker, ; S. albus: Steffensen et al., ). VIE tags were evaluated, for example, in A. oxyrinchus by Kapusta, Duda, Wiszniewski, and Kolman () and Kozlowski, Szczepkowskj, Wunderlich, Piotrowka, and Szczepkowska (), who stated that VIE did not negatively affect growth or survival. However, information is still lacking on the durability of this marking method as well as on the possible health effects, which are limitations to the wider application of VIE in sturgeon.…”

“…albus: Steffensen et al, 2010). VIE tags were evaluated, for example, in A. oxyrinchus by Kapusta, Duda, Wiszniewski, and Kolman (2015) and Kozlowski, Szczepkowskj, Wunderlich, Piotrowka, and Szczepkowska (2016), who stated that VIE did not negatively affect growth or survival. However, information is still lacking on the durability of this marking method as well as on the possible health effects, which are limitations to the wider application of VIE in sturgeon.…”

Retention of loop, monel, and passive integrated transponder tags by wild, free‐ranging Lake Sturgeon ( Acipenser fulvescens Rafinesque, 1817)

“…Tag retention studies have been conducted on numerous sturgeon species using many different tag types and locations. Tags examined for retention in sturgeon species have included Archer tags (Smith, Lamprecht, & Hall, 1990), Carlin tags (Smith et al, 1990), monel tags (Smith et al, 1990), T-bar anchor tags (Clugston, 1996;Collins, Smith, & Heyward, 1994;Hamel, Hammen, & Pegg, 2012), passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags (Clugston, 1996;Hamel et al, 2012;Hamel, Steffensen, Hammen, & Pegg, 2013), coded wire tags (Collins et al, 1994;Isely & Fontenot, 2000), dart tags (Collins et al, 1994), disk tags (Collins et al, 1994;Rien, Beamesderfer, & Foster, 1994), spaghetti tags (Rien et al, 1994), tattoos (Rien et al, 1994), visual implant elastomer (VIE) tags (Kozlowski, Szczepkoski, Wunderlich, Piotrowska, & Szczepkowska, 2017), and external radio transmitters (Sutton & Benson, 2003). However, most of these studies have been conducted in a laboratory or pond setting for a short duration of time (less than one year) and few have been conducted on Lake Sturgeon.…”

A question of scale: Replication and the effective evaluation of conservation interventions

“…However, making the comparison presumes that there are wild-hatched juveniles in the population, which may not be the case when natural recruitment is effectively zero (e.g., Ontario Wood Turtle Recovery Team 2010) or when re-establishing populations within a historical range (e.g., Amaral 2007). Furthermore, headstarted and wild-hatched individuals must be distinguishable in the field, e.g., through non-harmful marking such as passive integrated transponders (Gibbons and Andrews 2004), visible implant elastomer (Davy et al 2010;Antwis et al 2014;Simon and Dörner 2014;Kozłowski et al 2017), or other tools (Auger-Méthé and Whitehead 2007;Parker et al 2013;Schoen et al 2015). For example, short-term survival rates have been compared in wild and headstarted plains garter snakes (Thamnophis radix) of similar size (King and Stanford 2006), Mona Island iguanas (Cyclura cornuta stejnegeri; Pérez- Buitrago et al 2008), and European pond turtles (Emys orbicularis; Mitrus 2005).…”