The effects of surgically implanted dummy tags on the survival, growth performance, and physiology of pikeperch (Sander lucioperca)

Abstract

The aim of this work was to determine the impact of surgically implanted telemetry transmitters (TTs) on the growth, survival, hematological and biochemical indexes, and wound healing in juvenile pikeperch (Sander lucioperca) (body weight 60–90 g). Two incision suturing methods were used—silk sutures (experiment I—group ST) or tissue adhesive (experiment II—group GT). After tagging, the fish were held in a recirculating system for 35 days. No statistically significant differences were noted in the growth or condition indexes analyzed among the fish tagged with TT compared with those from the control groups (untagged). Substantial individual variability was noted, however, in the parameters examined in both the control and tagged groups. Among the hematological indexes, statistically significant differences were only noted in experiment I. Lower values of mean corpuscular volume and mean corpuscular hemoglobin were noted in group ST. Among the biochemical parameters, creatinine was statistically significantly threefold lower, magnesium and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels were lower, and ammonia levels were higher in group ST than in the control group. In experiment II, significant differences were only noted for ALP. Tissue adhesive was the superior and more effective method for closing the incision after TT implantation in juvenile pikeperch. This type of suturing facilitated faster healing, and it had less of an impact on juvenile pikeperch welfare.

Surgical implantation of electronic tags does not induce medium-term effect. Insights from growth and stress physiological profile in two marine fish species

“…In our experiments, 46 and 95 days after tag implantation in sea breams and sea bass, respectively, the levels of all monitored stress indicators (cortisol, glucose and lactate) were found to be similar to those of untagged sh and consistent with the levels reported in the literature regarding these species [7,28]. Our results con rm that tag implantation does not induce chronic stress in either the sea bream or the sea bass, as observed in various other sh species [25,29]. It is thus important to emphasize that tag implantation does not exert long-term adverse effects on a high-stress responder species such as the European sea bass [30][31][32].…”

Effect of PIT tagging on hematology and plasma composition of juvenile pikeperch (Sander lucioperca (L.))

“…Tagging fish usually does not have a significant impact on hematological indicators, and if changes do occur in the blood, they are not persistent (several days) (Cooke et al 2011). However, 35 days after juvenile pikeperch (BW approximately 60 g, SL 17 cm) were surgically implanted with telemetry transmitters (TT), the values of red blood cell indices (MCV and MCH) were significantly lower than those of the control group (Rożyński et al 2017). Significant decreases in MCH values were confirmed in juvenile perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) that were tagged with PIT intramuscularly (42 days after tagging fish of BW 70 g and SL 16 cm) (Zakęś et al 2017b).…”

“…The PIT implantation wounds of the fish from which blood had been drawn were evaluated macroscopically. A 4°scale was applied: rank 0-clean wound, rank 1-some redness, rank 2-some inflammation (hematoma), rank 3-wound infected/necrotic (Rożyński et al 2017). After drawing blood and assessing the state of the implantation wounds, the fish were euthanized with an overdose of the anesthetic (150 mg MS-222 l −1 ).…”

“…These data can be supplied by analyzing the hematological and biochemical blood indicators of tagged fish. These are helpful in assessing stress, nutritional status, and fluid-electrolyte balance (Folmar 1993;Brinn et al 2012;Fazio et al 2015;Sopinka et al 2016;Rożyński et al 2017;Zakęś et al 2017b).…”

Fish Community Dynamics in the Artificial Fishways of Three Different Watersheds, and Fish Passage Evaluations Using a Multi-Metric Fishway Model

“…However, fish are highly mobile, which makes this method inefficient, as the probability of recapturing marked individuals is low. Another frequently used monitoring technique is acoustic telemetry, in which an ultrasonic transducer (PIT tag) is attached inside the fish and its movement is tracked by following signals using a hydrophone [27][28][29][30]. The disadvantage of this technique is that it is very costly and thus not suitable for large projects that cover a wide-ranging body of water [31][32][33].…”