2021
DOI: 10.1139/cjfas-2020-0222
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

From 95 to 59 millimetres: a new active acoustic tag size guideline for salmon

Abstract: Two laboratory studies evaluated small Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (36–99 mm fork length [FL], 0.7–26.7% tag burden) survival, tag retention, and growth (n = 539), and critical swimming speed (Ucrit; n = 241). Fish were implanted with a new active acoustic tag and compared to untagged controls at 12 °C and 17 °C. Across studies no temperature differences were detected. All control fish survived. All tagged fish ≥ 58 mm FL survived and retained their tags. Regression models predicted ≥ 98.6% surviva… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The SPT and PIT groups were compared to check for differences in FL or weight at the beginning of the study (day 0) using a t test. Survival was defined by survival and tag retention, as a dead fish or a dropped tag in a field study would terminate active tracking [11]. Survival rates were quantified per group using proportions (i.e., the number of fish that survived and retained their PIT tag [PIT group] or all three tags in the SPT group, compared to the total number of fish in each group) and a Fisher's exact test [33].…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The SPT and PIT groups were compared to check for differences in FL or weight at the beginning of the study (day 0) using a t test. Survival was defined by survival and tag retention, as a dead fish or a dropped tag in a field study would terminate active tracking [11]. Survival rates were quantified per group using proportions (i.e., the number of fish that survived and retained their PIT tag [PIT group] or all three tags in the SPT group, compared to the total number of fish in each group) and a Fisher's exact test [33].…”
Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A current challenge in tagging studies is finding a tag size that balances battery life and fish size-at-tagging, to minimize a potential size bias. A size bias occurs when only the larger individuals in a population are tagged (to minimize tag burden), but they may not be representative of the entire size range of the population [1,5,11]. Studies monitoring long-term populations and habitat distributions have typically been restricted to tagging larger fish [2,12,13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Regardless of how the tag is attached, tag burden (the weight of the tag relative to the individual animal) is an important consideration to minimize potential loading on the animal (Wolcott 1995). General 'rules of thumb' exist in telemetry studies (Wolcott 1995, Smircich & Kelly 2014), but the impacts of tag burden appear taxa-specific at least in fishes (Brown et al 1999, Liss et al 2021). Due to their general reliance on crawling or walking on substrate, it is sometimes suggested that decapods can withstand higher tag burdens (Krieger et al 2012).…”
Section: Tag Attachmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Migration mechanisms, including orientation, behavior and route architecture throughout the entire life of anguillid eels have been revealed by means of the recent advanced technologies like agent-based model, ABM, particle tracking model of upstream migrating juvenile eels (Padgett et al, 2020;Benson et al, 2021), motion analysis of glass eels (Eldrogi et al, 2018), tiny acoustic transmitters (Fischer et al, 2019;Mueller et al, 2019;Liss et al, 2021), satellite tracking for migrant adults (e.g., Aarestrup et al, 2009;Westerberg et al, 2014;Wysujack et al, 2015;Amilhat et al, 2016; for the European eel; Manabe et al, 2011;Higuchi et al, 2018 for the Japanese eel Anguilla japonica; Schabetsberger et al, 2013;2019 for Pacific eels A. marmorata and A. megastoma;Beguer-Pon et al, 2015 for the American eel Anguilla rostrata).…”
Section: Juveniles' Migration and Orientationmentioning
confidence: 99%