Advertisement

Aquaculture International

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 175–186 | Cite as

Evaluation of VI-alpha and PIT-tagging of the seahorse Hippocampus abdominalis

  • Chris M. C. Woods
Article

Abstract.

The suitability of visible implant alphanumeric (VI-alpha) and passive integrated transponder (PIT)-tagging to individually identify seahorses (Hippocampus abdominalis) was assessed in two trials. For each trial, 24 seahorses were tagged and mortality, growth, tag retention and tag visibility/readability assessed, together with 24 control seahorses, over a period of 3 months. For VI-alpha tagging, a single tag was inserted under the skin between the first two anterior lateral tail rings of the seahorses. There was no difference in final seahorse length, wet weight, or mean SGR in tagged seahorses, compared with control seahorses, after 3 months. Tag retention was 100%, as was survival, in both treatments. Tag detection with the naked eye was generally poor but improved using LED blue light. However, readability of tag codes was highly variable and insufficiently reliable for VI-alpha to be suitable for identification of individual seahorses. In PIT-tagged seahorses, a single FDX-B transponder was inserted into the abdominal cavity of seahorses. There was also no difference in final seahorse length, wet weight, or mean SGR, compared with control seahorses, after 3 months. Tag retention was also 100%, as was survival in both treatments. Readability of transponders was reliable and quick using a compact reader. PIT-tagging is considered suitable for individual identification of large H. abdominalis.

Keywords

Growth LED blue light PIT Syngnathid Tag retention VI-alpha 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, N.S., Rondorf, D.W., Evans, S.D., Kelly, J.E. 1998Effects of surgically and gastrically implanted radio transmitters on swimming performance and predator avoidance of juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.55781787Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, R.M. 1966Physical aspects of swim bladder functionBiol. Rev.41141176PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baras, E., Malbrouck, C., Houbart, M., Kestemont, P., Melard, C. 2000The effect of PIT tags on growth and physiology of age-0 Eurasian perch Perca fluviatilis of variable sizeAquaculture185159173Google Scholar
  4. Bruyndoncx, L., Knaepkens, G., Meeus, W., Bervoets, L., Eens, M. 2002The evaluation of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags and visible implant elastomer (VIE) marks as new marking techniques for the bullheadJ. Fish Biol.60260262Google Scholar
  5. Crook, D.A., White, R.W.G. 1995Evaluation of sub-cutaneously implanted visual implant and coded wire tags for marking and benign recovery in a small scaleless fishGalaxias truttaceus (Pisces, Galaxiidae)Mar. Freshwater Res.46943946Google Scholar
  6. Flynn, A.J., Ritz, D.A. 1999Effect of habitat complexity and predatory style on the capture success of fish feeding on aggregated preyJ. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK79487494Google Scholar
  7. Frederick, J.L. 1997Evaluation of fluorescent elastomer injection as a method for marking small fishBull. Mar. Sci.61399408Google Scholar
  8. Hammer, S.A., Blankenship, H.L. 2001Cost comparison of marks, tags, and mark-with tag combinations used in salmonid researchNorth Am. J. Aquacult.63171178Google Scholar
  9. Job, S.D., Do, H.H., Meeuwig, J.J., Hall, H.J. 2002Culturing the oceanic seahorseHippocampus kuda Aquaculture214333341Google Scholar
  10. Lourie, S.A., Vincent, A.C.J., Hall, H.J. 1999Seahorses: an identification guide to the world’s species and their conservationProject SeahorseLondon214Google Scholar
  11. Mahapatra, K.D., Gjerde, B., Reddy, P.V.G., Sahoo, M., Jana, R.K., Saha, J.N., Rye, M. 2001Tagging: on the use of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags for the identification of fishAquacult. Res.324750Google Scholar
  12. Masonjones, H.D. 2001The effect of social context and reproductive status on the metabolic rates of dwarf seahorses (Hippocampus zosterae)Comp. Biochem. Physiol., Part A129541555Google Scholar
  13. Payne, M.F., Rippingale, R.J. 2000Rearing West Australian seahorseHippocampus subelongatusjuveniles on copepod nauplii and enriched Artemia Aquaculture188353361Google Scholar
  14. Perante, N.C., Pajaro, M.G., Meeuwig, J.J., Vincent, A.C.J. 2002Biology of a seahorse species, Hippocampus comes in the central PhilippinesJ. Fish Biol.60821837Google Scholar
  15. Rikardsen, A.H. 2000Effects of floy and soft VI-alpha tags on growth and survival of juvenile Arctic charNorth Am. J. Fish. Manage.20720729Google Scholar
  16. Ross, M.J., McCormick, J.H. 1981Effects of external radio transmitters on fishProg. Fish. Cult.436772Google Scholar
  17. Vincent, A.C.J. 1996The International Trade in SeahorsesTRAFFIC InternationalCambridgeUK163Google Scholar
  18. Vincent, A.C.J., Sadler, L.A. 1995Faithful pair bonds in wild seahorses, Hippocampus whitei Anim. Behav.5015571569Google Scholar
  19. Wenburg, J.K., George, G.W. 1995Placement of visible implant tags in the anal fin of wild coastal cutthroat troutNorth Am. J. Fish. Manage.15874877Google Scholar
  20. Wilson, M.J., Vincent, A.C.J. 1998Preliminary success in closing the life cycle of exploited seahorse species, Hippocampus spp., in captivityAqua. Sci. Conserv.2179196Google Scholar
  21. Woods, C.M.C. 2000aImproving initial survival in cultured seahorses Hippocampus abdominalis Leeson, 1827 (Teleostei: Syngnathidae)Aquaculture190377388Google Scholar
  22. Woods, C.M.C. 2000bPreliminary observations on breeding and rearing the seahorse Hippocampus abdominalis (Teleostei: Syngnathidae) in captivityNew Zeal. J. Mar. Freshwater Res.34475485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Woods, C.M.C. 2002Natural diet of the seahorse Hippocampus abdominalis New Zeal. J. Mar. Freshwater Res.36655660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Woods, C.M.C. 2003Effect of stocking density and gender segregation in rearing the seahorse Hippocampus abdominalis in culture (Teleostei: Syngnathidae)Aquaculture128167176Google Scholar
  25. Woods, C.M.C., Martin-Smith, K.M. 2004Visible implant fluorescent elastomer tagging of the big-bellied seahorseHippocampus abdominalis Fish. Res.66363371Google Scholar
  26. Wydoski, R.S., Emery, L. 1983Tagging and markingNielsen, L.Johnson, D. eds. Fisheries TechniquesAmerican Fisheries SocietyBethesdaMaryland215237Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Water & Atmospheric ResearchKilbirnieNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations