Laserfiche WebLink
injected tattoo artist's ink into fish intracutaneously (Laufle et al. 1990), or <br />used different application techniques (Williamson 1986). Both of these studies <br />reported high mark retention for short-term studies. <br />This marking system may have utility as an inexpensive, rapid marking <br />technique for batch marking endangered fish to distinguish groups for short-term <br />periods. It may not be practical for long-term individual identification of <br />endangered fish. Obviously, for this marking system to have utility and to be <br />practical for endangered fishes, a different method of applying the dye, such as <br />subcutaneous injection, would have to investigated. <br />Razorback Sucker <br />Broodstock. Of the 526 fish originally PIT tagged, 280 were transferred <br />to another facility and were not monitored for PIT-tag retention. However, the <br />245 fish that remained at Dexter NFHTC were all verified as having a PIT tag 18 <br />months following tagging. <br />PIT Tag: Dorsal Musculature. Tag verification was 100~o for fish held in <br />pond and raceway environments through day 511, and was not significantly (P > <br />0.05) different than razorback sucker PIT tagged in the body cavity (Appendix; <br />Table 9)(Figure 4). Survival declined steadily throughout the evaluation period <br />for experimental fish held in the pond and raceway but was greater than control <br />fish (Appendix; Table 9). <br />PIT Tag: Body Cavity. Tag verification was slightly less than those fish <br />implanted in the dorsal musculature but never was less than 95% for fish held in <br />either the pond or raceway (Appendix; Table 9)(Figure 4). Survival of fish in <br />the pond and raceway was greater than the control group. At the termination of <br />the study, survival of pond and raceway fish implanted in the body cavity was not <br />significantly (P > 0.05) different than fish implanted in the dorsal musculature <br />17 <br />