The neglected impact of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods

Abstract

Tracking devices have become small enough to be widely applied to arthropods to study their movement. However, possible side effects of these devices on arthropod performance and behaviour are rarely considered. We performed a systematic review of 173 papers about research in which tracking devices—radio frequency identification (RFID), harmonic radar and radio telemetry tags—were attached to terrestrial arthropods. The impact of such tags was quantified in only 12% of the papers, while in 40% the potential impact was completely disregarded. Often‐cited rules of thumb for determining appropriate tag weight had either no empirical basis or were misconstrued. Several properties of a tracking device (e.g. weight, balance, size, drag) can affect different aspects of an arthropod's life history (e.g. energy, movement, foraging, mating). The impact can differ among species and environments. Taken together, these tag effects can influence the reliability of obtained movement data and conclusions drawn from them. We argue that the impact of tracking devices on arthropods should be quantified for each (a) study species, (b) tag type, and (c) environmental context. As an example, we include a low‐effort impact study of the effect of an RFID tag on a digger wasp. Technological advancements enable studying the movement of arthropods in unprecedented detail. However, we should adopt a more critical attitude towards the use of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods. The benefits of tracking devices should be balanced against their potential side effects on arthropods and on the reliability of the resulting data.

Individual decisions drive the changes in movement patterns of ground beetles between forestry management types

“…We further investigated the potential influence of the tag's weight on beetles, and found that body/tag mass ratio was 14 % in average (Table 1) which is far below as it was in previous findings for the same species (50 % in Riecken and Raths 1996). Although there is no direct suggestion for body/tag mass ratio for walking insect, a recent study suggests 23-33 % limits for these thresholds for flying species (Batsleer et al 2020), thus we believe that tags used in this study apparently did not bias beetles' movement. Although we tagged only six individuals, we found that the quality of the data is suitable to draw relevant consequences.…”

What is our power to detect device effects in animal tracking studies?

“…The reality that individual studies of device effects typically have low power places an increased focus on the results of meta‐analyses as a means of understanding the impacts of device attachment. Fortunately, a range of such studies are available to aid the development of tagging studies across multiple animal groups (Barron et al., 2010; Batsleer et al., 2020; Matthews et al., 2013). One of the main justifications for conducting a meta‐analysis is to increase statistical power (Cohn & Becker, 2003).…”

The welfare and ethics of research involving wild animals: A primer

“…Threshold rules are often not considered for invertebrates, with insect biologgers weighing anything from 2% to 100% of the insect's body mass (Kissling, Pattemore, & Hagen, 2014). Few studies have examined the impacts on insect welfare, particularly regarding the energetic costs of carrying such loads and impacts on social behaviour and survival (12% studies quantified impact: Batsleer et al., 2020). Tagged individuals are often the largest in the population and have better inherent survival (Le Gouar, Dubois, Vignon, Brustel, & Vernon, 2015), but further research is needed to fill the knowledge gap and inform best practice (Batsleer et al., 2020).…”

“…Few studies have examined the impacts on insect welfare, particularly regarding the energetic costs of carrying such loads and impacts on social behaviour and survival (12% studies quantified impact: Batsleer et al., 2020). Tagged individuals are often the largest in the population and have better inherent survival (Le Gouar, Dubois, Vignon, Brustel, & Vernon, 2015), but further research is needed to fill the knowledge gap and inform best practice (Batsleer et al., 2020). Additionally, for all species, it is important to consider the standard fluctuations in body mass that individuals may experience even within relatively short time‐scales (e.g.…”