Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 68, Issue 2, pp 343–350 | Cite as

Measuring terrestrial movement behavior using passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags: effects of tag size on detection, movement, survival, and growth

Methods

Abstract

Movement behaviors have broad ecological and evolutionary implications, affecting individual fitness, metapopulation dynamics, the distribution and abundance of species, as well as gene flow and thus adaptation and speciation. However, movement behaviors such as dispersal, station keeping, and ranging are poorly understood in many taxa due to the incompatibility of traditional tracking methods with long-term observations. This is particularly true for small-bodied life history stages and species. While the introduction of smaller passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags and the development of PIT telemetry have removed some barriers, the trade-offs between different tag sizes are unknown. Through a series of experiments, we tested for effects of PIT tag size on detection, movement, tag retention, growth, and survival of a juvenile amphibian. We found no effect of PIT tag size on initial movement distance, survival, or growth; and all individuals retained their tag for the course of the experiment. Detection and recapture rates, however, were increased with PIT tag size. The orientation of the tag relative to the vertical axis of the antenna also affected the size of the detection field, which was 15.78–43.90 % smaller when the antenna was moved perpendicular rather than parallel to the long axis of the tag. We conclude that PIT telemetry is a suitable technique for marking previously untraceable species or life history stages and may offer insight into the behaviors of these individuals. Investigations using multiple PIT tag sizes should include this in statistical analyses to account for tag size biased detection differences.

Keywords

Ambystoma annulatum Detection depth Mark–recapture PIT telemetry Subterranean tracking 

References

  1. Acolas ML, Roussel JM, Lebel JM, Baglinière JL (2007) Laboratory experiment on survival, growth and tag retention following PIT injection into the body cavity of juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta). Fish Res 86:280–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Bateman DS, Gresswell RE (2006) Survival and growth of age-0 steelhead after surgical implantation of 23-mm passive integrated transponders. N Am J Fish Manag 26:545–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates DM, Maechler M, Bolker BM (2012) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0. http://cran.r-project.org/package=lme4. Accessed 16 May 2013
  5. Bowler DE, Benton TG (2005) Causes and consequences of animal dispersal strategies: relating individual behaviour to spatial dynamics. Biol Rev 80:205–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breen MJ, Ruetz CR, Thompson KJ, Kohler SL (2009) Movements of mottled sculpins (Cottus bairdii) in a Michigan stream: how restricted are they? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 66:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cabarle KC, Henry FD, Entzel JE (2007) Experimental analysis of RFID antennas for use in herpetological studies using PIT tagged salamanders (Amybstoma tigrinum). Herpetol Rev 38:406–409Google Scholar
  8. Charney ND, Letcher BH, Haro A, Warren PS (2009) Terrestrial passive integrated transponder antennae for tracking small animal movements. J Wildl Manag 73:1245–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clobert J, Le Galliard J-F, Cote J, Meylan S, Massot M (2009) Informed dispersal, heterogeneity in animal dispersal syndromes and the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Ecol Lett 12:197–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connette GM, Semlitsch RD (2012) Successful use of a passive integrated transponder (PIT) system for below-ground detection of plethodontid salamanders. Wildl Res 39:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connette GM, Semlitsch RD (2013) Context-dependent movement behavior of woodland salamanders (Plethodon) in two habitat types. Zoology 116:325–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Conradt L, Zollner PA, Roper TJ, Frank K, Thomas CD (2003) Foray search: an effective systematic dispersal strategy in a fragmented landscape. Am Nat 161:905–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cucherousset J, Roussel J-M, Keeler R, Cunjak RA, Stump R (2005) The use of two new portable 12-mm PIT tag detectors to track small fish in shallow streams. N Am J Fish Manag 25:270–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cucherousset J, Marty P, Pelozuelo L, Roussel J-M (2008) Portable PIT detector as a new tool for non-disruptively locating individually tagged amphibians in the field: a case study with Pyrenean brook salamanders (Calotriton asper). Wildl Res 35:780–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cucherousset J, Britton JR, Beaumont WRC, Nyqvist M, Sievers K, Gozlan RE (2010) Determining the effects of species, environmental conditions and tracking method on the detection efficiency of portable PIT telemetry. J Fish Biol 76:1039–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cunjak RA, Roussel J-M, Gray MA, Dietrich JP, Cartwright DF, Munkittrick KR, Jardine TD (2005) Using stable isotope analysis with telemetry or mark–recapture data to identify fish movement and foraging. Oecologia 144:636–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Drenner SM, Clark TD, Whitney CK, Martins EG, Cooke SJ, Hinch SG (2012) A synthesis of tagging studies examining the behaviour and survival of anadromous salmonids in marine environments. PLoS ONE 7:e31311PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fahrig L (2007) Non-optimal animal movement in human-altered landscapes. Funct Ecol 21:1003–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garroway CJ, Bowman J, Wilson PJ (2012) Complex social structure of southern flying squirrels is related to spatial proximity but not kinship. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gibbons JW, Andrews KM (2004) PIT tagging: simple technology at its best. Bioscience 54:447–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hamed MK, Leford DP, Laughlin TF (2008) Monitoring non-breeding habitat activity by subterranean detection of ambystomatid salamanders with implanted passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags and radio frequency identification (RFID) antenna system. Herpetol Rev 39:303–306Google Scholar
  22. Hammerschlag N, Gallagher AJ, Lazarre DM (2011) A review of shark satellite tagging studies. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 398:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanski I (1999) Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes. Oikos 87:209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hanski I, Kuussaari M, Nieminen M (1994) Metapopulation structure and migration in the butterfly Melitaea cinxia. Ecology 75:747–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Johnson JR, Mahan RD, Semlitsch RD (2008) Seasonal terrestrial microhabitat use by gray treefrogs (Hyla versicolor) in Missouri oak-hickory forests. Herpetologica 64:259–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Madison DM, Shoop CR (1970) Homing behavior, orientation, and home range of salamanders tagged with tantalum-182. Science 168:1484–1487PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marsh DM, Thakur KA, Bulka KC, Clarke LB (2004) Dispersal and colonization through open fields by a terrestrial, woodland salamander. Ecology 85:3396–3405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mougey K (2009) Radio transmitter mass: impacts on home range, daily displacement, and endurance in Texas horned lizards and bearded dragons. Dissertation, Texas TechGoogle Scholar
  29. Murray DL, Fuller MR (2000) A critical review of the effects of marking on the biology of vertebrates. In: Boitani L, Fuller TK (eds) Research techniques in animal ecology: controversies and consequences, 2nd edn. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 15–64Google Scholar
  30. Nathan R, Getz WM, Revilla E, Holyoak M, Kadmon R, Saltz D, Smouse PE (2008) A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:19052–19059PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Osbourn MS (2012) Initial juvenile movement of pond-breeding amphibians in an altered forest habitat. Dissertation, University of MissouriGoogle Scholar
  32. Ousterhout BH, Liebgold EB (2010) Dispersal versus site tenacity of adult and juvenile red-backed salamanders (Plethodon cinereus). Herpetologica 66:269–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Petranka JW (1998) Salamanders of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Institution Press, WasingtonGoogle Scholar
  34. Pinheiro JC, Bates DM (2000) Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Pittman SE (2013) The role of juvenile movement behavior in the conservation and management of pond-breeding amphibian populations. Dissertation, University of MissouriGoogle Scholar
  36. Planes S, Lemer S (2011) Individual-based analysis opens new insights into understanding population structure and animal behaviour. Mol Ecol 20:187–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. R Core Team (2012) R: A language and environment for statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 16 May 2013
  38. Rehmeier RL, Kaufman GA, Kaufman DW (2006) An automatic activity-monitoring system for small mammals under natural conditions. J Mammal 87:628–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Richards SJ, Sinsch U, Alford RA (1994) Radio tracking. In: Heyer WR, Donnelly MA, McDiarmid RW, Hayek LC, Foster MS (eds) Measuring and monitoring biological diversity standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institute Press, Wasington, pp 155–158Google Scholar
  40. Rittenhouse TAG, Semlitsch RD (2006) Grasslands as movement barriers for a forest-associated salamander: migration behavior of adult and juvenile salamanders at a distinct habitat edge. Biol Conserv 131:14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roe AW, Grayson KL (2008) Terrestrial movements and habitat use of juvenile and emigrating adult eastern red-spotted newts, Notophthalmus viridescens. J Herpetol 42:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roussel J-M, Haro A, Cunjak RA (2000) Field test of a new method for tracking small fishes in shallow rivers using passive integrated transponder (PIT) technology. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:1326–1329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roussel J-M, Cunjak RA, Newbury R, Caissie D, Haro A (2004) Movements and habitat use by PIT-tagged Atlantic salmon parr in early winter: the influence of anchor ice. Freshw Biol 49:1026–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rubenstein DR, Hobson KA (2004) From birds to butterflies: animal movement patterns and stable isotopes. Trends Ecol Evol 19:256–263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Semlitsch RD (1981) Terrestrial activity and summer home range of the mole salamander (Ambystoma talpoideum). Can J Zool 59:315–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Semlitsch RD (1983) Burrowing ability and behavior of salamanders of the genus Ambystoma. Can J Zool 61:616–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Semlitsch RD (2008) Differentiating migration and dispersal processes for pond-breeding amphibians. J Wildl Manag 72:260–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Steele MA, Bugdal M, Yuan A, Bartlow A, Buzalewski J, Lichti N, Swihart R (2011) Cache placement, pilfering, and a recovery advantage in a seed-dispersing rodent: could predation of scatter hoarders contribute to seedling establishment? Acta Oecol 37:554–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Suselbeek L, Jansen PA, Prins HHT, Steele MA (2013) Tracking rodent-dispersed large seeds with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags. Methods Ecol Evol 4:513–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Templeton AR, Brazeal H, Neuwald JL (2011) The transition from isolated patches to a metapopulation in the eastern collared lizard in response to prescribed fires. Ecology 92:1736–1747PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Webster MS, Marra PP, Haig SM, Bensch S, Holmes RT (2002) Links between worlds: unraveling migratory connectivity. Trends Ecol Evol 17:76–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. White JA, Geluso K (2012) Seasonal link between food hoarding and burrow use in a nonhibernating rodent. J Mammal 93:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zollner PA, Lima SL (1997) Landscape-level perceptual abilities in white-footed mice: perceptual range and the detection of forested habitat. Oikos 80:51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brittany H. Ousterhout
    • 1
  • Raymond D. Semlitsch
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Biological SciencesUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations