Evaluation of coded microwire tag retention in juvenile American lobster, Homarus americanus

The long-term effects and detection ranges of passive integrated transponders in white-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes

“…Gotteland (2013) found no significant difference in survival when using VI Alpha, but experienced 33.0% mortality during a 60-day trial using VIEs with A. pallipes. In an experiment with the American lobster, Homarus americanus (H. Milne Edwards, 1837), McMahan et al, (2012) fitted CWTs and had an average 96% retention rate, CL: 12-30 mm. Where large groups of crayfish require a group identification system at low cost, VIE could potentially be a solution.…”

“…They are very small (1.1 mm  0.25 mm), and therefore can be implanted without survival being compromised. The tags can be detected using hand-held readers; however, individual identification of live animals is difficult because the tag usually needs to be removed to be read (McMahan et al, 2012). One of the most successful methods of permanent tagging, with easy individual identification, is the use of passive integrated transponders (PIT) tags.…”

The suitability of VIE tags to assess stock enhancement success in juvenile European lobsters (Homarus gammarus)

“…Growth rate and the frequency of successful moults are important factors in juvenile recruitment and had been previously assessed in trials of CWTs on lobster juveniles, but not in trials using VIE (McMahan et al . ). Effects of tagging on shelter use and mobility in juvenile lobsters had not been previously assessed, although shelter‐seeking behaviour strongly influences the ability of hatchery‐reared lobsters to avoid predation upon wild release (van der Meeren ; Ball, Linnane, Munday, Browne & Mercer ), and high mobility is advantageous to lobsters in foraging for food, seeking shelters and mates and for predator evasion (Phillips ).…”

“…The internal coded wire tag (CWT) – a tiny magnetized stainless steel wire embossed with a numeric code – has been successfully implanted into the pereiopods (walking legs) and abdomen of juvenile clawed lobsters (Linnane & Mercer ; McMahan, Cowan, Sherwood, Grabowski & Chen ). This has facilitated the identification of hatchery‐reared lobsters in the wild up to 14 years after implantation as 3‐month‐old juveniles, and has been used in some of the most encouraging assessments of marine stocking to date, with cultured lobsters forming the majority of the landings following intensive re‐stocking of a highly depleted population around Kvitsøy in south‐western Norway (Agnalt, Jørstad, Kristiansen, Nøstvold, Farestveit, Næss, Paulsen & Svåsand ).…”

Evaluating the use of coded-wire tags in individually marking Odonata larvae

“…Coded-wire tags have been used extensively in fisheries studies (Bumgarner et al 2009) and have also been used in a variety of other animals including amphibian larvae (Martin 2011) and several malacostracan crustaceans ( e.g. , lobster, McMahan et al 2012; crayfish, de Graaf 2007; crabs, Davis et al 2004; and shrimp, Kneib and Huggler 2001). Tests of this tagging approach in larval insects have been limited but they have been demonstrated to be an effective tagging approach with larval Coleoptera (Tenebrionidae) with a relatively high rate of retention through metamorphosis to the adult stage (Schaffler and Isely 2001).…”