Comparing standard‐ and reduced‐size passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags for monitoring juvenile wild spring Chinook Salmon

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesAnnual migration monitoring can help to discern patterns and environmental factors that impact growth, survival, and movement timing in small fish. Mark–recapture methods form the basis for such monitoring, and the standard 12‐mm passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag has emerged as an essential tool for studies of juvenile salmonids. A smaller, 9‐mm PIT tag now provides the potential to conduct mark–recapture studies on smaller fish. We evaluated relative performance of the 9‐mm tag, which is similar in design to its 12‐mm predecessor.MethodsFor this comparison, we tagged and released approximately 8400 wild spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha parr in Valley Creek, Idaho, from 2011 to 2013. Tag‐size cohorts were of similar average body size and were tagged in equal numbers. We estimated survival and detection probability for each cohort over two river segments.ResultsIn both segments, survival varied among years, but we observed no significant differences between tag‐size groups. At Valley Creek, average detection rates of fish with 9‐mm tags were a little less than one‐half the rates of fish with 12‐mm tags and were significantly lower in all 3 years. At Lower Granite Dam, detection rates were again lower for 9‐mm tags, but the differences were much smaller (3%–12%) and were not statistically significant.ConclusionWe found that 9‐mm tags can be as effective as 12‐mm tags and may allow for better inference to smaller (<55‐mm) non‐tagged fish. However, the lower detection rates of the 9‐mm tags could lead to less precise estimates, and site‐specific detection rates should be considered for studies that rely on these tags.