Wildlife research often requires marking and tagging animals to collect data on survival, reproduction, movement, behaviour and physiology. Identification of individual marine mammals can be carried out using tags, brands, paint, dye, photogrammetry, telemetry and other techniques. An analysis of peer-reviewed articles published from January 1980 to April 2011 addressing the effects of marking revealed a preponderance of studies focussed on short-term effects such as injuries and behavioural changes. Some marking techniques were reported to cause pain and to change swimming and haul-out behaviour, maternal attendance, and duration of foraging trips. However, marking has typically not been found to affect survival. No published research has addressed other possible long-term effects of marking related to injuries or pain responses. Studies of the more immediate effects of marking (mostly related to externally attached devices such as radio-transmitters) have shown a variety of different types and magnitudes of responses. It is important to note that studies failing to find treament differences are less likely to be published, meaning that the present and any other reviews based on published literature may be a biased sample of all research conducted on the topic. Publishing results that found no or low impacts (i.e. best practices) as well as those that found significant impacts on animals should both be encouraged. Future research under more controlled conditions is required to document acute effects of marking, including injury and pain, and to better understand longer-term effects on health, reproduction and survival. We recommend that studies using marked animals standardise their reports, with added detail on methodology, monitoring and sampling design, and address practices used to minimise the impact of marking on marine mammals.

Engagement involves students' investment in learning activities, as well as interrelated affective (emotive responses), behavioral (active responses), and cognitive (mental effort) components. This study assessed undergraduate student and instructor perceptions of the interrelated components of engagement during and after the rapid online transition of teaching in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Fifteen courses-including laboratory, discussion-based, large lecture, tutorial, and problem-based learning-within a multidisciplinary faculty at a large researchintensive Canadian university were surveyed to: (a) assess student and instructor perceptions of students' levels of engagement during and after the rapid transition to online teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic; (b) describe which aspects of engagement were enhanced or diminished due to the rapid online transition; and (c) identify which learning activities students would find most engaging in an online setting so as to assist in developing student-centered online pedagogical techniques. Student engagement was lower after the rapid online transition. Students who engaged by connecting with peers and instructors through in-class discussion (affective engagement) had diminished engagement, whereas students who engaged by listening to lectures, reading course materials, and reviewing slides (cognitive engagement) had enhanced engagement. Overall, students found synchronous activities more engaging. Students experienced positive and negative outcomes related to classroom engagement when transitioning rapidly to online learning during a global pandemic.

Hot-iron branding is painful for cattle, but little is known about the duration of or effective methods to control this pain. This work quantified pain sensitivity and healing in branded and unbranded animals. In addition, the effects of a single injection of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) were also considered; this has been suggested as practical method of mitigating pain in the hours after the procedure. Calves (mean±SE, 126±2.2 d and 112±2.8 kg) were hot-iron branded and allocated to 1 of 4 treatments: branded with or without flunixin meglumine (intravenous; 1.1 mg/kg) and unbranded with or without this NSAID (n=12/treatment). Pain sensitivity was assessed by applying a known and increasing force with a von Frey anesthesiometer in the center of the brand (or equivalent area in nonbranded treatments) until animals showed a behavioral response. Healing was measured with a 6-point scale (1=fresh brand and 6=no scabbing and fully repigmented). These measures, along with weight gain and surface temperature, were recorded 1, 2, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, 56, and 71 d after branding. Lying behavior was recorded with loggers from the day before to d 27 after branding. Brand wounds were more painful than nonbranded tissue (P<0.001). These differences were most pronounced in the days immediately after branding (e.g., d 7; 113±36 g of force for Brand vs. 449±23 g force for No brand, mean±SE) but persisted until d 71 (380±37 g force for Brand vs. 453±23 g of force for No brand, mean±SE); only 67% of brands were fully regimented or healed by this time. The first fully healed brand was identified 8 wk after the procedure. Giving a single injection of flunixin had no brand-specific effects on sensitivity, surface temperature, or healing but improved weight gain in the days after branding in all treated groups (flunixin×brand×day, P<0.001). Flunixin-treated animals also spent 0.7 h less time lying down on the day of branding but tended to spend more time lying on d 15 and 26 after the procedure. The magnitude of these differences is small, less than the day-to-day variation, and not brand specific. In summary, brand wounds take at least 8 wk to heal. These wounds remain painful for a least this long, and a single injection of NSAID has no measurable effect in mitigating pain associated with branding, even in days immediately after the procedure.

Previous studies have shown that surgical castration wounds take between 10 and 61 d to heal. The objectives of this work were to describe healing, inflammation, lying behavior, and serum concentration of substance P after surgical castration in beef calves and to evaluate the effect of a possible intervention, a single injection of flunixin meglumine (1.1 mg/kg IV, a NSAID), on the healing process. Calves (mean±SE: 25±2.0 d of age; 54±1.4 kg BW) were surgically castrated with or without an injection of flunixin immediately before the procedure (n=24/treatment). Healing was measured with a 5-point scale (1=fresh wound, 5=no visible incision or inflammation) as well as weight gain, scrotal size, and scrotal surface temperature, on d 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 49, and 63 after castration. Serum concentration of substance P was recorded on all d, including d 0, but not d 63. Lying behavior was recorded with loggers from 2 d before to 29 d after castration. Inflammation, as measured by scrotal size, peaked on d 2 and 3 after the procedure (e.g., 51±1.0 mm on d 2 versus 28±1.3 mm before castration) and then declined with time (P<0.001). The first wound to score as fully healed (i.e., 5/5) was seen on d 28; by d 63, 98% of wounds were fully healed. The greatest changes in healing score occurred between d 21 and 35; this was also the peak of wound surface temperature and may correspond with revascularization. Serum concentration of substance P was highest before castration (41±1.2 pg/mL), possibly because the sample was collected after the lidocaine ring block was administered, which was likely painful, and because of separation from the dam and restraint. Values began to drop by d 3 (34±1.2 pg/mL) and leveled out by d 21 (30±1.2 pg/mL; P<0.001). Calves given flunixin had more lying bouts than those that received saline (flunixin by time interaction; P=0.052), but this pattern emerged on and after d 8, well after the 3 to 8 h half-life of this NSAID. In conclusion, castration caused inflammation in the days that followed, and the wounds required a minimum of 4 wk to heal. Provision of an NSAID had no effect on these outcomes.

Electronic telemetry devices have enabled many novel and important data collection and experimental opportunities for difficult to observe species. Externally attached devices have limited retention and may affect thermoregulation, energetics, social and reproductive behavior, visibility, predation risk and entanglement. Internally placed, surgically implanted devices can mitigate some of these effects and may open additional experimental opportunities. However, improper implementation can significantly affect animals and data. From a review of recent studies using fully implanted tags and studying their effects, we present 15 specific best practice recommendations for the use of such tags in pinnipeds. Recommendations address issues including device size, coating and sterilization, implantation surgery and effect assessment, within the framework of the Three R's: Reduction, Refinement, Replacement. While developed for pinnipeds, these recommendations could apply to other aquatic mammals and vertebrates and to partially implanted or even external tags.