Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />t <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br />I <br />I <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br />other workers experience in implantation procedures, and 2) provide a serial <br />numbering system to track individual brood fish and their offspring for <br />genetics management in a propagation program. <br />6. Abandon PIT-tag studies with circular tanks at the Grand Junction field <br />station complex. Although, maintaining a facility here may be more cost <br />effective and would allow routine monitoring and observation of test fish, <br />obtaining large quantities of meaningful data is probably unachievable in the <br />area of culture-related studies because of the constraints of professional <br />knowledge and facilities available to us. <br />7. Results of the PIT-tag field study being conducted for wild humpback chub in <br />the lower Colorado River basin should be incorporated into future <br />recommendations for use of this tag. <br />8. We recommend that the manufacturer make the following modifications to the <br />scanner/decoder model that we evaluated 1) a longer coiled power cord be <br />made optional, 2) replacing the present male electrical connector on the <br />power cord with a more durable metal male connector, and 3) designing a <br />smaller and more compact hand-held scanner. <br />9. PIT tags and the related equipment required to detect and read the tags are <br />expensive. PIT tags range from $3.75 to $6.00 per tag depending on the <br />quantity of tags ordered per lot. The cost for the field scanner and detector <br />unit is about $1,750. The use of this tagging system may not be suitable for <br />projects with limited or restricted budgets. Because of the costs related to this <br />27 <br />