Evaluation of two alternative methods to ear tagging for rodent identification

Authors

  • Santiago R. Carrizo Laboratorio de Ecología de Poblaciones, Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución (DEGE). Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires (IEGEBA – UBA – CONICET). Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Malena Rospide Laboratorio de Ecología de Poblaciones, Departamento de Ecología, Genética y Evolución (DEGE). Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires (IEGEBA – UBA – CONICET). Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Isabel Elisa Gómez Villafañe Lab. Ecologia de Poblaciones (64)EGE-IEGEBA (Conicet-UBA)Universidad de Buenos Aires https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7466-6305

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31687/SaremNMS22.11.1

Keywords:

ecology, marks, rodents, tattoos

Abstract

One of the most used methods to identify rodents in field studies is the placement of ear tags; however, it is common for individuals to lose them. In this paper, we explore alternative marking forms. Ear punching, finger, tail, and ear tattoos were performed on laboratory mice. The tattoos remained in all individuals and no adverse effects appeared. The perforations showed redness and/or fall of the cartilage inhibited the wound. The application of the tattoo technique in wild rodents corroborated the feasibility of the methodology and the visibility of the marks.

References

Cover, C. E., C. M. Keenan, & G. E. Bettinger. 1989. Ear-tag–induced Staphylococcus infection in mice. Lab Animal 23:229–233. https://doi.org/10.1258/002367789780810482.

Donovan, J., & P. Brown. 2004. Animal identification. Current Protocols in Neuroscience 4:4E. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471142301.nsa04es27.

National Research Council. 2010. Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals, 8ª edición. The National Academies Press. Washington, EEUU. https://doi.org/10.17226/13250.

Pavone, L. V, & R. Boonstra. 1985. The effects of toe clipping on the survival of the meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Canadian Journal of Zoology 63:499–501. https://doi.org/10.1139/z85-072.

Percie du Sert, N., et al. 2020. Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLOS Biology 18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000411.

Métodos de marcado de roedores: oreja derecha con una sección de cartílago perdida por una infección producto de la perforación realizada, y tatuajes en el lado ventral de la cola

Downloads

Published

12/02/2022

How to Cite

Carrizo, S. R., Rospide, M., & Gómez Villafañe, I. E. (2022). Evaluation of two alternative methods to ear tagging for rodent identification. Notas Sobre Mamíferos Sudamericanos, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.31687/SaremNMS22.11.1

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2022): Volume 4 – Year 2022

Section

Notes

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Santiago R. Carrizo, Malena Rospide, Isabel Elisa Gómez Villafañe

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.