Evaluation of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags in studies of sea urchins: caution advised

Abstract

We evaluated the effect of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags on feeding, growth, movement and survival of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis in field and laboratory experiments. In cages supplied with kelp, 80% of urchins (n = 74) retained their tag during an 80 d field experiment. At the end of the experiment, tagged individuals had a lower growth rate (by 42%), lower gonad index (by 23%), lower survival rate (by 30%), and took longer to right themselves (by 30%) than untagged control urchins. In a 24 h feeding experiment in the field, the consumption rate of kelp was lower for tagged urchins (by 67%) than for untagged controls. In release and recapture experiments in the field, tagged urchins moved shorter distances over 2.5 h (by 30%) than controls. Although PIT tagging had a detrimental effect on all measures of sea urchin performance, activity and survival in the field, there was no detectable effect of PIT tagging on urchin feeding rate or survival in a 10 wk laboratory experiment. Our results suggest that natural stressors, such as wave action, may limit the utility of PIT tags in field studies of urchins.

The use of visual and automatized behavioral markers to assess methodologies: a study case on PIT-tagging in the Alpine newt

“…These results are consistent with those obtained in the framework of fish research (Moore et al, 1990;Newby et al, 2007) and sea urchins (Lauzon-Guay & Scheibling, 2008). Another essential behavioral pattern, courtship, occurred frequently during our experiment.…”

A study of two tagging methods in the Caribbean sea cucumber Holothuria mexicana

“…Tagging animals has been over time a useful tool to understand important aspects about behaviour and population dynamics (Olson & Newton, 1979;Pollock et al, 1990;Mowat & Strobeck, 2000;Williams et al, 2002;Shiell, 2006;Lauzon-Guay & Scheibling, 2008;Martínez et al, 2013). In these kinds of studies, a correct identification and high tag retention are essential to achieve a successful analysis (Caswell, 2001;Amstrup et al, 2006).…”

Use of adhesives to attach devices to invertebrates: implications for depredation by ship rats (Rattus rattus)

“…Many invertebrate species have a hardened exoskeleton, which is often moulted; a marker would need to be internal to be useful in any long-term studies (Reichling & Tabaka 2001). Additionally, it is difficult to attach tags externally, and to limit the detrimental effects of internal tags to animals in the invertebrate size range (Lauzon-Guay & Scheibling 2008). For example, Lauzon-Guay & Scheibling (2008) found that, on sea urchin, applying a PIT tag had a detrimental effect on all measures of performance, activity and survival in the field.…”

“…Additionally, it is difficult to attach tags externally, and to limit the detrimental effects of internal tags to animals in the invertebrate size range (Lauzon-Guay & Scheibling 2008). For example, Lauzon-Guay & Scheibling (2008) found that, on sea urchin, applying a PIT tag had a detrimental effect on all measures of performance, activity and survival in the field. Bubb et al (2002) established that if PIT tags were inserted too close to the ventral nerve cord within the abdominal musculature of crayfish, the tagging process could be fatal for the animal.…”