Genetic markers reveal high PIT tag retention rates in giant salamanders (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis)

Abstract

Estimation of population size using mark-recapture (MRR) methods are based on the fundamental assumption that individuals retain their marks throughout the course of study. Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags are useful as a cost effective, reliable marking method in many amphibian and reptile species. Few studies however, use secondary methods to evaluate tag retention rates. Failure to do so can lead to biased population estimates, erroneous conclusions, and thus poor management decisions. Surprisingly, estimates of PIT tag retention are currently lacking for the majority of amphibian species, many of which are experiencing population declines. Herein, we use genetic tagging to assess the retention of PIT tags of the eastern hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis). We captured and tagged 78 individuals across 35 sites. Recapture rate was 24% and genetic tagging revealed 100% tag retention across all recaptured individuals.

High detectability with low impact: Optimizing large PIT tracking systems for cave‐dwelling bats

“…By positioning antenna systems at key locations, individuals can be passively tracked for a lifetime with just a single trapping event. PIT‐tag technology has been used extensively in fish research since 1980s and has also been used to study birds, reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, and mammals (Gibbons & Andrews, ; Schlicht & Kempenaers, ; Soanes, Vesk, & Ree, ; Unger, Burgmeier, & Williams, ). PIT‐tag technology has advanced the study of movement patterns and survival of wildlife; however, a major limitation of this technology has been low detection distance, with tagged individuals normally needing to pass within 30 cm or less of an antenna to be detected (Adams & Ammerman, ; Gibbons & Andrews, ; Norquay & Willis, ).…”

Population Genetics of the Eastern Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis) across Multiple Spatial Scales

“…Genetic samples for range-wide assessment were collected between June 2007 and August 2011 in 77 discrete rivers across nine states (Figure 1). Genetic samples consisted of either a small tail clip, ∼2–5 mm in size, stored in 95% ethanol or blood samples collected and preserved in lysis buffer (1 M Tris, 0.5 M EDTA pH 8.0, 5 M NaCl, 20% SDS; [34]). Upon capture of each salamander, we recorded sample locations as UTM coordinates as well as age class (adult, sub-adult, juvenile).…”

“…Individuals were multiplexed across 12 microsatellite markers following the thermal profiles described in Unger et al 2012 [34]. The PCR products were analyzed on an ABI 3739XL automatic sequencer and genotyped using GENEMAPPER version 3.7.…”

“…The PCR products were analyzed on an ABI 3739XL automatic sequencer and genotyped using GENEMAPPER version 3.7. Quality-control measures followed Unger et al 2012 [34] and included re-amplification of genotypes with low signal intensity, independent scoring of a random subset (10%) of our data to identify genotyping errors and reamplification and scoring of approximately 20% of all genotypes. GENALEX 6.41 [37] was used to screen for any redundant genotypes.…”

Visible Implant Elastomer as a Viable Marking Technique for Common Mistfrogs (Litoria rheocola)

“…Toe clipping can affect behavior, survival, and recapture rates, and is controversial from an ethical perspective as it may cause pain (Parris and McCarthy 2001;May 2004;McCarthy and Parris 2004;Phillott et al 2007Phillott et al , 2008. Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags have also been used with amphibians (Ireland et al 2003), and are useful in studies with large newts and salamanders (Unger et al 2012;Ousterhout and Semlitsch 2014). Both tags and readers are relatively expensive, however, and even the smallest tags may not be suitable for smaller amphibian species (Ryan et al 2014); they can exceed even liberal limits for the mass of devices relative to body mass (i.e., 10%; Richards et al 1994).…”