<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Randi B. Trantham</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Tulley G. Trantham</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Colleen A. Caldwell</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Damon Peterson</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2018</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;One of the greatest limiting factors of studies designed to obtain growth, movement, and survival in small-bodied fishes is the selection of a viable tag. The tag must be relatively small with respect to body size as to impart minimal sub-lethal effects on growth and mobility, as well as be retained throughout the life of the fish or duration of the study. Thus, body size of the model species becomes a major limiting factor; yet few studies have obtained empirical evidence of the minimum fish size and related tagging effects. The probability of surviving a tagging event was quantified in White Sands pupfish (&lt;/span&gt;&lt;i&gt;Cyprinodon tularosa&lt;/i&gt;&lt;span&gt;) across a range of sizes (19–60&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;mm) to address the hypothesis that body size predicts tagging survival. We compared tagging related mortality, individual taggers, growth, and tag retention in White Sands pupfish implanted with 8-mm passive integrated transponder (PIT), visual&lt;span&gt; implant&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;elastomer (VIE), and control (handled similarly, but no tag implantation) over a 75 d period. Initial body weight was a good predictor of the probability of survival in PIT- and VIE-tagged fish. As weight increased by 1&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;g, the fish were 4.73 times more likely to survive PIT-tag implantation compared to the control fish with an estimated suitable tagging size at 1.1&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;g (TL: 39.29&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;±&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;0.41&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;mm). Likewise, VIE-tagged animals were 2.27 times more likely to survive a tagging event compared to the control group for every additional 1&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;g with an estimated size suitable for tagging of 0.9&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;g (TL: 36.9&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;±&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;0.36&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;mm) fish. Growth rates of PIT- and VIE-tagged White Sands pupfish were similar to the control groups. This research validated two popular tagging methodologies in the White Sands pupfish, thus providing a valuable tool for characterizing vital rates in other small-bodied fishes.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1016/j.fishres.2017.08.019</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Elsevier</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Tagging effects of passive integrated transponder and visual implant elastomer on the small-bodied white sands pupfish (Cyprinodon tularosa)</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>