Development and evaluation of the remote passive integrated transponder tag reader for customizable monitoring of wildlife

Abstract Increasing the quantity and quality of mark‐reencounter data can be important when individual identification data are needed to address research or management questions. Physical recapture methods tend to be labor‐intensive and therefore expensive, while remote detection methods are not easily applied to all taxa or are proprietary and thus difficult to customize. However, partnerships between wildlife scientists and engineers have the potential to provide innovative solutions that improve data collection while reducing costs. We describe a collaborative effort to improve the collection of mark‐reencounter data on an invasive reptile, the brown treesnake ( Boiga irregularis ). In laboratory trials conducted on Guåhan (CHamoru; Guam in English) in 2021, we assessed the feasibility of detecting snakes fitted with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags using customized remote PIT‐tag readers (RePTaR) paired with baited snake traps. We evaluated differences in scanning success as a function of snake traits, location of PIT tags within snakes, and the distance of the PIT tag from the reader. We successfully scanned all individuals, on average 529 times but ranging from 3 to 6,436 times, during 12‐hour trials using a designed customizable RePTaR unit. Snake characteristics and marking location explained little of the variability in scanning success, with distance from the reader as the best‐supported covariate. By building cross‐disciplinary partnerships, we can develop customizable technological solutions and provide additional tools with which to address challenges in wildlife research and management.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Wildlife Society Bulletin
Published
2025-02-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1569
Primary Topic
Amphibian and Reptile Biology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Development and evaluation of the remote passive integrated transponder tag reader for customizable monitoring of wildlife

Atul Prakash, Shane R. Siers, Staci M. Amburgey, Sarah J. Converse et al.
Wildlife Society Bulletin
Amphibian and Reptile Biology
article

Development and evaluation of the remote passive integrated transponder tag reader for customizable monitoring of wildlife

Atul Prakash, Shane R. Siers, Staci M. Amburgey, Sarah J. Converse, Amy A. Yackel Adams
article en

Abstract

Abstract Increasing the quantity and quality of mark‐reencounter data can be important when individual identification data are needed to address research or management questions. Physical recapture methods tend to be labor‐intensive and therefore expensive, while remote detection methods are not easily applied to all taxa or are proprietary and thus difficult to customize. However, partnerships between wildlife scientists and engineers have the potential to provide innovative solutions that improve data collection while reducing costs. We describe a collaborative effort to improve the collection of mark‐reencounter data on an invasive reptile, the brown treesnake ( Boiga irregularis ). In laboratory trials conducted on Guåhan (CHamoru; Guam in English) in 2021, we assessed the feasibility of detecting snakes fitted with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags using customized remote PIT‐tag readers (RePTaR) paired with baited snake traps. We evaluated differences in scanning success as a function of snake traits, location of PIT tags within snakes, and the distance of the PIT tag from the reader. We successfully scanned all individuals, on average 529 times but ranging from 3 to 6,436 times, during 12‐hour trials using a designed customizable RePTaR unit. Snake characteristics and marking location explained little of the variability in scanning success, with distance from the reader as the best‐supported covariate. By building cross‐disciplinary partnerships, we can develop customizable technological solutions and provide additional tools with which to address challenges in wildlife research and management.

Wildlife Society BulletinVol. 49(1)
United States Geological Survey (US), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (US), University of Washington (US), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (US), National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins Science Center
University of Washington, Johns Hopkins University, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Navy
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
Amphibian and Reptile Biology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.