Evaluation of two techniques for attaching radio transmitters to turkey poults

Bowman, Jeff; Wallace, Mark C.; Ballard, Warren B.; Brunjes, John H.; Miller, Michael S.; Hellman, J. M.

doi:10.1648/0273-8570-73.3.276

Cited by 19 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Hubbard et al (1999) reported that 9 (8%) wild turkey poults with implanted transmitters failed to leave the point of release and died from exposure. Bowman et al (2002) indicated that subcutaneously implanted transmitters in captive turkey poults had a short-term (2-4-hr) negative effect on mobility. Impaired mobility could increase the risk of exposure and other mortality factors because newly marked chicks may lose contact with their brood female.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

“…The development of miniaturized radiotransmitters affords the use of telemetry to estimate survival rates, identify causes of mortality, and collect ecological data for hatchlings of precocial species. Attachment techniques for miniature transmitters include backpacks (Speake et al 1985), prong and suture (Mauser andJarvis 1991, Davis et al 1999), glue (Bowman et al 2002, Spears et al 2002, suture (Larson et al 2001, Burkepile et al 2002, and subcutaneous implants (Ewing et al 1994, Korschgen et al 1996b). The subcutaneous implant technique was one of the first methods developed to mark hatchlings of precocial birds (Korschgen et al 1996b) and originally was designed for use in waterfowl (Krementz andPendleton 1991, Korschgen et al 1996a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use of Implanted Radiotransmitters to Estimate Survival of Greater Sage‐Grouse Chicks

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reduced chick survival has been implicated in declines of greater sage‐grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) populations. Because monitoring survival of unmarked sage‐grouse chicks is difficult, radiotelemetry may be an effective technique to estimate survival rates, identify causes of mortality, and collect ecological data. Previous studies have used subcutaneous implants to attach radiotransmitters to hatchlings of several species of birds with precocial young. Previous researchers who used subcutaneous implants in free‐ranging populations removed chicks from the capture location and implanted transmitters at an alternate site. Because logistics precluded removing newly hatched greater sage‐grouse chicks from the field, we evaluated a method for implanting transmitters at capture locations. We captured 288 chicks from 52 broods and monitored 286 radiomarked chicks daily for 28 days following capture during May and June 2001–2002. Two (>1%) chicks died during surgery and we did not radiomark them. At the end of the monitoring period, 26 chicks were alive and 212 were dead. Most (98%, 207/212) radiomarked chick mortality occurred < 21 days posthatch and predation (82%, 174/212) was the primary cause of death. Necropsies of 22 radiomarked chicks did not indicate inflammation or infection from implants, and they were not implicated in the death of any chicks. Fate of 48 chicks was unknown because of transmitter loss (n = 16), radio failure (n = 29), and brood mixing (n = 3). Overall, the 28‐day chick survival rate was 0.220 (SE = 0.028). We found that mortalities related to the implant procedure and transmitter loss were similar to rates reported by previous researchers who removed chicks from capture sites and implanted transmitters at an alternate location. Subcutaneous implants may be a useful method for attaching transmitters to newly hatched sage‐grouse chicks to estimate survival rates, identify causes of mortality, and collect ecological data.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Implanted Radiotransmitters to Estimate Survival of Greater Sage‐Grouse Chicks

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We did not document any transmitter failures during this study. Bowman et al (2002) reported no failures and .29-day retention times for this transmitter model attached with these methods on pen-raised poults, and reported a mean retention time of 20.4 days for these transmitters and this technique on wild turkey poults. We therefore considered poults equipped with transmitters that were lost as unlikely to survive on their own and most likely to have been carried off by predators.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Transmitters weighed 1.8 g, were 10.5 mm long, 20 mm wide, 4 mm thick, and had a 10-cm antenna. We shaved a patch matching the footprint of the transmitter with an electric razor on each poult's back and attached a transmitter with Supergluet (Bowman et al 2002) in 2000 and Superglue or Superglue gel in 2001, both cyanoacrylate adhesives. As soon as transmitter attachment was dry (approx.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat Use and Survival of Preflight Wild Turkey Broods

et al. 2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) broods spend the first several days of life on the ground until poult flight capabilities are attained. This is a critical period of wild turkey life history, with poult survival ranging from 12% to 52%. We measured vegetation in plots used by Rio Grande wild turkey (M. g. intermedia) preflight broods at 4 sites in southwest Kansas and the Texas Panhandle, USA, to determine microhabitat selection for ground roosting and to determine if microhabitat was related to poult survival. Hens selected ground‐roost locations with more visual obstruction from multiple observation heights than random sites. Plots surrounding ground roosts had 1) greater visual obstruction; 2) increased tree decay; 3) higher percent grass, shrub, litter, and forb cover; and 4) lower percent bare ground cover than random sites. Grass, shrubs, and downed trees appeared to provide desired cover for ground‐roosting broods. Poult survival increased with age of poult, size of brood, and density of shrubs 1–2 m tall. Plots used by broods <10 days old with above average survival contained more visual obstruction and shrubs than plots used by broods 10–16 days old with above average survival, signifying a shift in habitat use by successful broods as poults attain flight abilities. Density of shrubs 1–2 m tall in brood‐use areas appears to be important for poult survival to 16 days of age on southern Great Plains rangeland habitats. Ground‐level vegetative cover appears to be a significant factor in preflight poult survival. Provisions of ground‐level vegetative cover should be considered during wild turkey brooding periods where increased poult survival is desired.

show abstract

“…The effect of device implantation on birds has been investigated in a range of studies, most of which have not reported negative effects of the devices. There was no effect of implanting a device on thermoregulation in ducklings Anas platyrhynchos (Bakken et al, 1996); no effect on growth or survival for wild turkey Meleagris gallopavo poults (Bowman et al, 2002); no effect on laying dates, clutch sizes or hatching success for female common eiders Somateria mollissima (Guillemette et al, 2002); no effect on over-wintering survival rates, arrival date or mass at the beginning of the breeding season for macaroni penguins Eudyptes chrysolophus (Green et al, 2004); higher resighting rates 2years after implantation (80% resighted) for 10 implanted great cormorants Phalacrocorax carbo compared with 15 non-implanted control birds marked with metal rings (60% resighted) (Grémillet et al, 2005); no effect on maintenance behaviours, agonistic behaviours, reproductive behaviours, blood values designed to test for infection or implant rejection, or circulating corticosterone levels in chukars Alectoris chukar (O'Hearn et al, 2005); no effect on nest initiation dates, clutch size or mean egg volume in Canada geese Branta canadensis (Hupp et al, 2006); and no effect on percentage of time spent at sea or the number and duration of overnight trips of 2-5 or 6-26days in little penguins Eudyptula minor (Ritchie et al, 2010). However, implantation can cause birds to abandon their nests (Meyers et al, 1998), and implanted birds have been shown to swim more slowly than non-implanted controls and have significantly reduced energy expenditure during swimming (Culik and Wilson, 1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Implantation reduces the negative effects of bio-logging devices on birds

White

Cassey

Schimpf

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYAnimal-borne logging or telemetry devices are widely used for measurements of physiological and movement data from free-living animals. For such measurements to be relevant, however, it is essential that the devices themselves do not affect the data of interest. A recent meta-analysis reported an overall negative effect of these devices on the birds that bear them, i.e. on nesting productivity, clutch size, nest initiation date, offspring quality, body condition, flying ability, foraging behaviours, energy expenditure and survival rate. Method of attachment (harness, collar, glue, anchor, implant, breast-mounted or tailmount) had no influence on the strength of these effects but anchored and implanted transmitters had the highest reported rates of device-induced mortality. Furthermore, external devices, but not internal devices, caused an increase in ʻdevice-induced behaviourʼ (comfort behaviours such as preening, fluffing and stretching, and unrest activities including unquantifiable ʻactiveʼ behaviours). These findings suggest that, with the exception of device-induced behaviour, external attachment is preferable to implantation. In the present study we undertake a metaanalysis of 183 estimates of device impact from 39 studies of 36 species of bird designed to explicitly compare the effects of externally attached and surgically implanted devices on a range of traits, including condition, energy expenditure and reproduction. In contrast to a previous study, we demonstrate that externally attached devices have a consistent detrimental effect (i.e. negative influences on body condition, reproduction, metabolism and survival), whereas implanted devices have no consistent effect. We also show that the magnitude of the negative effect of externally attached devices decreases with time. We therefore conclude that device implantation is preferable to external attachment, providing that the risk of mortality associated with the anaesthesia and surgery required for implantation can be mitigated. We recommend that studies employing external devices use devices that can be borne for long periods, and, wherever possible, deploy devices in advance of the time period of interest. Supplementary material available online at

show abstract

Evaluation of two techniques for attaching radio transmitters to turkey poults

Cited by 19 publications

References 13 publications

Use of Implanted Radiotransmitters to Estimate Survival of Greater Sage‐Grouse Chicks

Use of Implanted Radiotransmitters to Estimate Survival of Greater Sage‐Grouse Chicks

Habitat Use and Survival of Preflight Wild Turkey Broods

Implantation reduces the negative effects of bio-logging devices on birds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About