Effects of surgically implanted transmitters on anguilliform fishes: lessons from lamprey

Abstract

Passage success of adult Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata at a large, hydropower dam was negatively correlated with the size of surgically implanted transmitters. This comparatively large field study (>800 fish) found effects that were not detectable in the laboratory. Journal compilation # 2007 The Fisheries Society of the British IslesNo claim to original US government works

Advancing the surgical implantation of electronic tags in fish: a gap analysis and research agenda based on a review of trends in intracoelomic tagging effects studies

“…This is because laboratory studies enable controlled manipulations while field studies provide ecological realism. Moser et al (2007) detected differences in the field that were not detected in the lab emphasizing the potential benefits of combining lab and field studies and the problem with relying solely on lab studies to set criteria for study design and applications in the field.…”

“…Given that so many tagging effects studies have failed to document negative effects (see Bridger and Booth 2003 for overview), power analysis, even if only retrospective, seems to be particularly important. Indeed, Moser et al (2007) mused that an alternative hypothesis to the fact that most tagging effects studies fail to document significant effects is because sample sizes are too small. Another notable experimental design aspect is the frequent use of pseudoreplication in tagging effect studies.…”

“…Relying solely on tag:fish mass relationships can be misleading. For example, the physical dimensions or volume of a tag may be more important for slender fish (e.g., anguilliform) where a long tag may interfere with swimming undulations (Moser et al 2007) or in fish with small body cavities. Lacroix et al (2004) used retention, growth and swimming performance studies to determine that the length of an electronic tag should not be greater than 16% of total body length for Atlantic salmon smolts.…”

Effects of acoustic tag implantation on lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens: lack of evidence for changes in behavior

“…Though lacking the same experimental rigor of controlled laboratory studies, field movement studies like the ones used here and in [6] are superior to longitudinal analyses of individual behavior from a single release event where variability in behavior due to surgery or tagging cannot be distinguished from responses to changes in the physical environment. Our approach took advantage of the ecological realism of an ongoing field study with multiple annual tagging events that is rarely available in laboratory assessments in which observed behaviors may not be representative of behavior observed in the field (e.g., [33]). Major assumptions of the staggeredentry approach are (1) that tag presence does not permanently alter the behavioral trajectory of an individual (a consequence of the absence of a sham treatment), and (2) that the behavior of tagged and untagged individuals converges at some point during the study (a consequence of the absence of a true control).…”

Recommendations on size and position of surgically and gastrically implanted electronic tags in European silver eel

“…Unique morphological, physiological and behavioral features of eels necessitate explicit evaluation and adjustment of handling and tagging methods. In anguilliform fishes, the physical dimensions or volume of a tag may be more important than that of mass [14], due to the narrow body cavity and anguilliforme swimming undulations.…”