Evaluation of VIE (Visible Implant Elastomer) and PIT (Passive Integrated Transponder) physical tagging systems for the identification of red porgy fingerlings (Pagrus pagrus)

The effect of two physical tagging systems, Visible Implant Elastomer (VIE) and Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT), was evaluated in red porgy (Pagrus pagrus) fingerlings, at different sizes. For VIE tagging, the weight classes were <1 and 1–5 g and no tag effect was detected on fish growth. There was a significant difference in mortality between tagged and untagged <1 g fish, but not for the 1–5 g fish. The tag loss rate was null for all sizes, however, tags showed fragmentation. This partial tag loss was evaluated and quantified. Seven VIE colours were compared and arranged from best to worst visibility: green, red, pink, orange, yellow, white and blue. For PIT tagging, 2–6 g, 5–10 g and 10–20 g weight classes were analysed. There was no significant tag effect on fish growth, for any size, nor on mortality from 10 g. Tag loss rate ranged from 2.9 to 5.9%. These results demonstrate that, in red porgy, VIE is a successful tagging system from 2 g onwards whereas PIT system is successful from 10 g onwards. The combination of both systems allows traceability of fish from a very small size on, which is necessary for the implementation of genetic breeding programmes.

[1]  Hiram W. Li,et al.  Hepatic Heat Shock Protein 70 and Plasma Cortisol Levels in Rainbow Trout after Tagging with a Passive Integrated Transponder , 2008 .

[2]  Benjamin H. Letcher,et al.  Tag Retention and Survival of Age‐0 Atlantic Salmon following Surgical Implantation with Passive Integrated Transponder Tags , 2002 .

[3]  Darren M. Parsons,et al.  Evidence for long‐term site fidelity of snapper (Pagrus auratus) within a marine reserve , 2001 .

[4]  Ronald L. Johnson,et al.  Visible Implant Elastomer as a Tool for Marking Etheostomine Darters (Actinopterygii: Percidae) , 2008 .

[5]  A. Götz,et al.  A comparative evaluation of three methods used to tag South African linefish , 2006 .

[6]  S. Zigler,et al.  An Evaluation of Fluorescent Elastomer for Marking Bluegills in Experimental Studies , 1996 .

[7]  M. Izquierdo,et al.  Evaluation of PIT system as a method to tag fingerlings of gilthead seabream (Sparus auratus L.): Effects on growth, mortality and tag loss , 2006 .

[8]  N. Giles,et al.  Retention of visible implant and visible implant elastomer tags in brown trout in an English chalk stream , 2006 .

[9]  J. Bell,et al.  Effect of intraperitoneal passive implantable transponder (PIT) tags on the growth and survival of juvenile snapper, Pagrus auratus (Bloch and Schneider) , 1992 .

[10]  Morten Rye,et al.  Tagging: on the use of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags for the identification of fish , 2001 .

[11]  M. Dare.  Mortality and Long-Term Retention of Passive Integrated Transponder Tags by Spring Chinook Salmon , 2003 .

[12]  J. F. Cordes,et al.  DNA marker technologies and their applications in aquaculture genetics. , 2004 .

[13]  Charles Mélard,et al.  The effect of PIT tags on growth and physiology of age-0 cultured Eurasian perch Perca fluviatilis of variable size , 2000 .

[14]  A. Lymbery,et al.  Visible implant fluorescent elastomer tags as pedigree markers for applied aquaculture: an evaluation using black bream Acanthopagrus butcheri , 2003 .

[15]  Juan M. Afonso,et al.  Development of two new microsatellite multiplex PCRs for three sparid species: Gilthead seabream (Sparus auratus L.), red porgy (Pagrus pagrus L.) and redbanded seabream (P. auriga, Valenciennes, 1843) and their application to paternity studies , 2008 .

[16]  G. Stunz,et al.  Evaluation of Visible Implant Elastomer for Marking Juvenile Red Drum , 2007 .

[17]  J. Frederick.  Evaluation of fluorescent elastomer injection as a method for marking small fish , 1997 .

[18]  W. Hoback,et al.  Successful application of visible implant elastomer tags on crappies, Pomoxis spp., without the use of anaesthetic , 2007 .

[19]  C. Kraft,et al.  Long‐Term Retention and Visibility of Visible Implant Elastomer Tags in Brook Trout , 2008 .

[20]  T. Refstie,et al.  Family based selection for production traits in gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) and European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) in Greece , 2007 .

[21]  J. Lebel,et al.  Laboratory experiment on survival, growth and tag retention following PIT injection into the body cavity of juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta) , 2007 .

[22]  Juan M. Afonso,et al.  Estimates of heritabilities and genetic correlations for body composition traits and G × E interactions, in gilthead seabream (Sparus auratus L.) , 2009 .

[23]  R. Gresswell,et al.  Survival and Growth of Age-0 Steelhead after Surgical Implantation of 23-mm Passive Integrated Transponders , 2006 .

[24]  K. Leber,et al.  Use of coded-wire and visible implant elastomer tags for marine stock enhancement with juvenile red snapper Lutjanus campechanus , 2007 .

[25]  C. Tatara,et al.  Size at Implantation Affects Growth of Juvenile Steelhead Implanted with 12-mm Passive Integrated Transponders , 2009 .

[26]  Benjamin H. Letcher,et al.  Electroshocking and PIT Tagging of Juvenile Atlantic Salmon: Are There Interactive Effects on Growth and Survival? , 2005 .

[27]  Evaluation of passive integrated transponder tags for marking the bullhead (Cottus gobio), a small benthic freshwater fish: effects on survival, growth and swimming capacity , 2007 .

[28]  Marcel Eens,et al.  The evaluation of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags and visible implant elastomer (VIE) marks as new marking techniques for the bullhead , 2002 .

[29]  E. Baras,et al.  Evaluation of implantation procedures for PIT tagging juvenile Nile tilapia , 1999 .

[30]  Kerry S. Reeves,et al.  Mortality, Predation, and Tag Visibility of Fish Marked with Visible Implant Elastomer Tags , 2009 .

[31]  T. S. Jones,et al.  Detection of Visible Implant Elastomer in Fingerling and Yearling Rainbow Trout , 2002 .

[32]  G. Closs,et al.  Evaluation of visible implant elastomer for individual marking of small perch and common bully , 2003 .

[33]  R. Babcock,et al.  Retention and in situ detectability of visible implant fluorescent elastomer (VIFE) tags in Pagrus auratus (Sparidae) , 1998 .

[34]  M. Lucas,et al.  Evaluation of VIE and PIT tagging methods for juvenile cyprinid fishes , 2009 .

[35]  Jonathan M. Wright,et al.  Early growth performance of Atlantic salmon full-sib families reared in single family tanks versus in mixed family tanks , 1999 .

[36]  L. A. Vøllestad,et al.  An Evaluation of Visible Implant Elastomer for Marking Age-0 Brown Trout , 2001 .

[37]  M. Izquierdo,et al.  Evaluation of visible implant elastomer tags for tagging juvenile gilthead seabream (Sparus auratus L.); effects on growth, mortality, handling time and tag loss , 2005 .

[38]  R. John H. Hoxmeier,et al.  Instream Evaluation of Passive Integrated Transponder Retention in Brook Trout and Brown Trout: Effects of Season, Anatomical Placement, and Fish Length , 2009 .

[39]  M. Jennings,et al.  One-year retention of passive integrated transponders in adult muskellunge, and applications to broodstock management. , 2009 .

[40]  Juan M. Afonso,et al.  Estimates of heritabilities and genetic correlations for growth and carcass traits in gilthead seabream (Sparus auratus L.), under industrial conditions , 2009 .

[41]  B. R. Herwig,et al.  Short- and Long-Term Evaluation of Passive Integrated Transponder and Visible Implant Elastomer Tag Performance in Muskellunge , 2010 .

[42]  C. Phillips,et al.  An Evaluation of Visible Implant Elastomer for Marking the Federally Listed Fountain Darter and the San Marcos Salamander , 2009 .

[43]  Stefan Cairns,et al.  Evaluation of Visible Implant Elastomer (VIE) for Marking Fingerling Blue Catfish , 2010 .

[44]  Jinhwan Lee,et al.  Long-term effects of passive integrated transponder tagging on the growth of olive flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus. , 2009 .