Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5657/fas.2007.10.4.226

Evaluation of a Visible Implant Fluorescent Elastomer Tag in the Soft-shelled Turtle, Pelodiscus sinensis  

Park, Min-Ouk (Division of Marine Environment and Bioscience, College of Ocean Science and Technology, Korea Maritime University)
Seol, Dong-Won (Division of Marine Environment and Bioscience, College of Ocean Science and Technology, Korea Maritime University)
Im, Soo-Yeon (Division of Marine Environment and Bioscience, College of Ocean Science and Technology, Korea Maritime University)
Hur, Woo-June (Division of Marine Environment and Bioscience, College of Ocean Science and Technology, Korea Maritime University)
Park, In-Seok (Division of Marine Environment and Bioscience, College of Ocean Science and Technology, Korea Maritime University)
Publication Information
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences / v.10, no.4, 2007 , pp. 226-229 More about this Journal
Abstract
Survival, tag retention and tag readability were compared among the control and three treatment groups of soft-shelled turtles, Pelodiscus sinensis Crother, 2000 (mean body $weight{\pm}SD$: $182.6{\pm}13.7\;g$), marked with visible implant fluorescent elastomer (VIFE) tags for 16 months. Mortality 4 to 16 months after tagging was attributed to collection and handling stress rather than to the tagging itself. Tags applied to the web surface between the fourth and fifth dactyl of the hindfoot appeared to have the highest retention rates, while adipose eyelid tagging had high tag readability but a high loss rate. We conclude that in soft-shelled turtles, the most suitable region for VIFE tagging is on the web surface between the fourth and fifth dactyls of the hindfoot.
Keywords
Pelodiscus sinensis; Soft-shelled turtle; Survival; Tag readability; Tag retention; VIFE tag;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Anholt, B.R., S. Negovetic and C. Som. 1998. Methods for anaesthizing and marking larval anurans. Herpetol. Rev., 29,153-154
2 Kincaid, H.L. and G.T. Calkins. 1992. Retention of visible implant tags in lake trout and Atlantic salmon. Prog. Fish-Cult., 54,163-170
3 Konstantinov, K.G. 1978. Modem methods offish tagging. J. Ichthyol., 17,924-938
4 Mouring, T.E., K.D. Fausch and C. Gowan. 1994. Comparison of visible implant tags and floy anchor tags on hatchery rainbow trout. N. Am. J. Fish. Manage., 14, 636-642   DOI
5 Godin, D.M., W.H. Carr, G. Hagino, F. Segura, J.N. Sweeney and L. Blankenship. 1995. Evaluation of a fluorescent elastomer internal tag in juvenile and adult shrimp, Penaeus vannamei. Aquaculture, 139, 243248
6 Zerrener, A., D.C. Josephson and C.C. Krueger. 1997. Growth, mortality, and mark retention of hatchery brook trout marked with visible implant tags, jaw tags, and adipose fin clips. Prog. Fish-Cult., 59, 241-245
7 Jung, R.E., S. Droege, J.R. Sauer and R.B. Landy. 2000. Evaluatoin of terrestrial and streamside salamander monitoring techniques at Shenandoah National Park. Environ. Monitor. Assess, 63, 65-79   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Jung, S.-O., Y-M. Lee, Y. Kartavtsev, I.-S. Park, D.S. Kim and J.-S. Lee. 2006. The complete mitochondrial genome of the Korean soft-shelled turtle Pelodiscus sinensis (Testudines, Trionychidae). DNA Sequence, 17, 471-483   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Park, I.-S. and K.-K. Lee. 2001. The effective location of visible implant tags for short-term marking in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus: Cichlidae). J. Fish. Sci. Tech., 4, 159-161
10 Willis, T.J..and R.C. Babcock. 1998. Retention and in situ detectability of visible implant fluorescent elastomer (VIFE) tags in Pagrus auratus (Sparidae). New Zeal. J. Mar. Freshwater Res., 32, 247-254   DOI   ScienceOn
11 McFarlane, G.A., R.S. Wydoski and E.D. Prince. 1990. Historical review of the development of external tags and marks. In: Parker, N.C. et al. eds. Fish-Marking Techniques. Amer. Fish..Soc., Bethesda, Maryland, 929
12 Duncan. 1995. Multiple-range and multiple F test. Biometrics, 11, 1-42
13 Buckley, R.M., J.E. West and D.D. Doty. 1994. Internal micro-tag systems for marking juvenile reef fishes. Bull. Mar. Sci., 55, 850-895
14 Jerry, D.R., T. Stewart, I.w. Purvis and L.R. Piper. 2001. Evaluation of visible implant elastomer and alphanumeric internal tags as a method to identify juveniles of the freshwater crayfish, Cherax destructor. Aquaculture, 193, 149-154   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Uglem, I., H. Ncess, E. Farestveit and K.E. Jorstad. 1996. Tagging of juvenile lobsters (Homarus gammarus (L.)) with visible implant fluorescent elastomer tags. Aquacult. Eng., 15,499-501   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Dewey, M.R. and S.J. Zigler. 1996. An evaluation of fluorescent elastomer for marking bluegills in experimental studies. Prog. Fish-Cult., 58, 219-220   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Bailey, L.L. 2004. Evaluating elastomer marking and photo identification methods for terrestrial salamanders: marking effects and observer bias. Herpeto. Rev., 35, 38-41
18 Park, I.-S., S.H. Cho, J.W Hur, G.-C. Choi, S.-Y. Oh, D.S. Kim and J.-S. Lee. 2006. Lidocaine hydrochloridesodium bicarbonate as an anesthetic for soft-shelled turtle, Pelodiscus sinensis. Fish. Sci., 72, 115-118   DOI   ScienceOn