Landscape and Ecological Engineering

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 281–287 | Cite as

A passive integrated transponder tag implanted by a new alternative surgical method: effects on the oriental weather loach (Misgurnus anguillicaudatus) and application in a small irrigation system

  • Yuichi Kano
  • Yôichi Kawaguchi
  • Tomomi Yamashita
  • Tsuneo Sekijima
  • Yukihiro Shimatani
  • Yoshinori Taniguchi


We validated the effects of a passive integrated transponder (PIT) tagging process on the oriental weather loach Misgurnus anguillicaudatus. Laboratory experiments were conducted to assess the effects of PIT tagging on fish survival, growth, wound healing, and tag omission. Two tagging protocols, standard syringe injection versus insertion through a small hole pierced by a fine needle-shaped awl, were compared using a 12.5 × 2.07 mm2 tag. A control group was also included. In comparison with the awl technique, syringe injection heightened the mortality of the loach and delayed healing of the wound caused by tag insertion. No effects of either PIT tagging method were detected on the growth of surviving loach. We also field-tested similarly tagged populations within a river-based irrigation system of Sado Island, Japan. Two different sized tags (long, 12.5 × 2.07 mm2; short, 8.5 × 2.12 mm2) were compared by using antenna loggers which detected fish movement through gates and automatically logged tagged fish’s tag IDs and timestamps. By comparing logged data and actual fish collection surveys both below and above the gates, 77% and 30% of actual loach movements were confirmed to have been successfully logged for the long and short tags, respectively. The awl insertion technique with the longer tag is therefore recommended for use in similar studies of smaller fish species.


Antenna gate Individual recognition Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag Population monitoring Syringe 



We sincerely thank C. Wood for English proof reading. We are also grateful for assistance provided by S. Ikematsu, M. Ishiuchi, M. Kagehira, K. Miyahara, K. Saitoh, M. Sato, W. Tanaka, and Y. Tsujimoto. This work was supported by the Global Environment Research Fund of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan (subject no. F-072), Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists B of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (subject no. 19710027), and the Global COE Program (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, Japan; Center of excellence for Asian conservation ecology as a basis of human–nature mutualism).


  1. Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Automat Control 19:716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Axel GA, Prentice EF, Sandford BP (2005) PIT-tag detection system for large-diameter juvenile fish bypass pipes at Columbia River basin hydroelectric dams. North Am J Fish Manag 25:646–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baras E, Malbrouck C, Houbart M, Kestemont P, Melard C (2000) The effect of PIT tags on growth and physiology of age-0 cultured Eurasian perch Perca fluviatilis of variable size. Aquaculture 185:159–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bateman DS, Gresswell RE (2006) Survival and growth of age-0 steelhead after surgical implantation of 23-mm passive integrated transponders. North Am J Fish Manag 26:545–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Busacker G, Adelman I, Goolish E (2006) Growth. In: Schreck CB, Moyle PB (eds) Methods for fish biology. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, pp 363–387Google Scholar
  6. Gries G, Letcher BH (2002) Tag retention and survival of age-0 Atlantic salmon following surgical implantation with passive integrated transponder tags. North Am J Fish Manag 22:219–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Knaepkens G, Maerten E, Tudorache C, De Boeck G, Eens M (2007) Evaluation of passive integrated transponder tags for marking the bullhead (Cottzis gobio), a small benthic freshwater fish: effects on survival, growth and swimming capacity. Ecol Freshw Fish 16:404–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. McCullagh P, Nelder J (1989) Generalized linear models, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Mueller RP, Moursund RA, Bleich MD (2006) Tagging juvenile pacific lamprey with passive integrated transponders: methodology, short-term mortality, and influence on swimming performance. North Am J Fish Manag 26:361–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Murtaugh PA (2009) Performance of several variable-selection methods applied to real ecological data. Ecol Lett 12:1061–1068PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ombredane D, Bagliniere JL, Marchand F (1998) The effects of Passive Integrated Transponder tags on survival and growth of juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) and their use for studying movement in a small river. Hydrobiologia 372:99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Peterson P, Prentice E, Quinn T (1994) Comparison of sequential coded wire and passive integrated transponder tags for assessing overwinter growth and survival of juvenile coho salmon. North Am J Fish Manag 14:870–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Prentice EF, Flagg TA, McCutcheon CS, Brastow DF (1990a) PIT-tag monitoring system for hydroelectric dams and fish hatcheries. Am Fish Soc Symp 7:323–334Google Scholar
  14. Prentice EF, Flagg TA, McCutcheon CS (1990b) Feasibility of using implantable passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags in salmonids. Am Fish Soc Symp 7:317–322Google Scholar
  15. Skov C, Brodersen J, Bronmark C, Hansson LA, Hertonsson P, Nilsson PA (2005) Evaluation of PIT-tagging in cyprinids. J Fish Biol 67:1195–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Summerfelt RC, Smith LS (1990) Anesthaesia, surgery, and related techniques. In: Schreck CB, Moyle PB (eds) Methods for fish biology. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, pp 213–272Google Scholar
  17. Winter JD (1983) Underwater biotelemetry. In: Nielsen LA, Johnsen DL (eds) Fisheries techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, pp 371–395Google Scholar
  18. Zydlewski GB, Horton G, Dubreuil T, Letcher B, Casey S, Zydlewski J (2006) Remote monitoring of fish in small streams: a unified approach using PIT tags. Fisheries 31:492–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Consortium of Landscape and Ecological Engineering and Springer 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuichi Kano
    • 1
  • Yôichi Kawaguchi
    • 2
  • Tomomi Yamashita
    • 1
  • Tsuneo Sekijima
    • 3
  • Yukihiro Shimatani
    • 1
  • Yoshinori Taniguchi
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Urban and Environmental EngineeringKyushu UniversityFukuokaJapan
  2. 2.Laboratory of Ecosystem Management, Division of Ecosystem Design, Institute of Technology and ScienceThe University of TokushimaTokushimaJapan
  3. 3.Graduate School of Science and TechnologyNiigata UniversityNiigataJapan
  4. 4.Department of Environmental Science and TechnologyMeijo UniversityNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations