Short‐ and Long‐Term Evaluation of Passive Integrated Transponder and Visible Implant Elastomer Tag Performance in Muskellunge

Abstract

Fisheries professionals charged with managing muskellunge Esox masquinongy frequently seek population information that requires the ability to identify cohorts as well as individuals; hence, reliable tagging methods are needed. Our approach was to simultaneously assess multiple marking techniques on different life stages of muskellunge over short and long time scales. We evaluated the short‐term detection of visible implant elastomer (VIE) and passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags in muskellunge fingerlings in experimental ponds. We compared survival (relative to that of control fish) and tag retention for two PIT tagging locations (the cheek and dorsal musculature) and one VIE location (the jaw). Overwinter survival did not differ between tagged and untagged fish (84–98%), but overwinter PIT tag retention was lower for the cheek (92%) than the dorsal musculature (100%). We also fin‐clipped and VIE‐tagged (jaw) 1,651 muskellunge fingerlings from 1997 to 2002 to evaluate long‐term tag retention in a broodstock lake. In addition, 125 adult muskellunge were captured and PIT‐tagged from 2003 to 2006. Muskellunge were sampled annually with trap nets and electrofishing during spring and fall. Only 2 VIE tags were detected in adults marked as fingerlings. The proportion of PIT‐tagged adults recaptured ranged from 52% to 84% during the sampling period. Our results indicate that both VIE and PIT tags are viable short‐term marks for muskellunge fingerlings, while PIT tags appear to be reliable long‐term tags when implanted in the dorsal musculature of adults.

Evaluation of VIE (Visible Implant Elastomer) and PIT (Passive Integrated Transponder) physical tagging systems for the identification of red porgy fingerlings (Pagrus pagrus)

“…The advantage of PIT tagging against VIE tagging is that if the PIT tag does not get lost during the first weeks after implantation, it may be retained for the entire life of the fish (Bolland et al 2009;Younk et al 2010). In experiments using fish with a size similar to that used in the present study and tagging without a suture, a wide range of values for tag loss rate has been described.…”

“…For 2.7-11.2 cm tagged largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), Reeves and Buckmeier (2009) also described the highest mortality rate in the smallest size-groups and Frederick (1997) observed higher mortality in \2 cm than in [2 cm tagged coral reef fish. The VIE tag is not an effective long-term tagging system (Josephson and Robinson 2008;Younk et al 2010), as, frequently, tag visibility deteriorates over time. In the case of subcutaneous resin, this does not happen because the resin disappears, since if the fish is dissected, the tag can still be seen, but is caused by a thickening of the dermis that makes it invisible (Doupé et al 2003;Josephson and Robinson 2008).…”

“…Additionally, PIT tagging, which is a more invasive method than VIE, has a low stress effect on fish according to the cortisol levels (Feldhaus et al 2008). However, before incorporating tagging techniques into field research, retention and detectability of tag and survival and initial size of tagged fish should be evaluated for each tag and fish species (Bolland et al 2009;Younk et al 2010). …”

Identification of stocked muskellunge and potential for distinguishing hatchery‐origin and wild fish using pelvic fin ray microchemistry

“…However, it is often difficult to distinguish between wild and hatcheryreared fish and thus difficult to determine the contribution of current stocking practices to fish populations. T-bar anchor and passive integrated transponder [PIT]; Younk et al 2010;Rude et al 2011), and fluorescent marks in hardpart structures (e.g. fin clips and freeze branding; McNeil & Crossman 1979;Johnson & Margenau 1993;Conover & Sheehan 1999), external and internal tagging (e.g.…”

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

“…The effectiveness of VIE as a marking technique for fish and crustaceans has been thoroughly evaluated (Uglem et al 1996;Astorga et al 2005;Clark and Kershner 2006;Claverie and Smith 2007;Younk et al 2010). For example, there were no negative effects of marking with VIE on growth or survival in Mummichogs (Fundulus heteroclitus; Skinner et al 2006), and VIE marks had a 96% retention rate over 6 mo in Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walsh and Winkelman 2004).…”