Translator Disclaimer
1 October 2006 Keeping Tabs: Are Redundant Marking Systems Needed for Rodents?
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

We use survival analysis to compare failure of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags and loss of metal ear tags in 2,277 southern flying squirrels (Glaucomys volans), 124 house mice (Mus musculus), 112 hispid cotton rats (Sigmodon hispidus), and 374 deer (Peromyscus maniculatus) and cotton mice (P. gossypinus). With the exception of cotton rats, failure rates between ear and PIT tags differed by species. Flying squirrels exhibited the highest proportional loss of both tag types and lost ear tags more readily than PIT tags failed. The opposite was true for cotton rats and deer and cotton mice. Most PIT tags appeared to fail shortly after implantation (≤3 days), except for flying squirrels and, to a lesser extent, cotton rats. Ear tags exhibited a consistent rate of loss in flying squirrels. Body mass did not influence failure of PIT tags; however, flying squirrel body mass was associated with increased loss of ear tags. For flying squirrels PIT tag failure increased with the number of times an individual had already received a PIT tag that failed. We provide recommendations for using PIT and ear tags in marking rodents based on species-specific patterns and suggest the combined use of external and internal markers to obtain the most reliable estimates of population parameters.

H. BOBBY FOKIDIS, CHRISTY ROBERTSON, and THOMAS S. RISCH "Keeping Tabs: Are Redundant Marking Systems Needed for Rodents?," Wildlife Society Bulletin 34(3), 764-771, (1 October 2006). https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[764:KTARMS]2.0.CO;2
Published: 1 October 2006
JOURNAL ARTICLE
8 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top