Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Departments and Schools
  3. Faculty of Science
  4. Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour
  5. Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour Publications
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/30929
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSeheult SDI-
dc.contributor.authorPanchal R-
dc.contributor.authorBorisenko AV-
dc.contributor.authorBennett PJ-
dc.contributor.authorFaure PA-
dc.contributor.editorDavy C-
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-23T16:22:06Z-
dc.date.available2025-01-23T16:22:06Z-
dc.date.issued2024-05-28-
dc.identifier.issn0022-2372-
dc.identifier.issn1545-1542-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/30929-
dc.description.abstractIndividual marking techniques are critical for studying animals, especially in the wild. Current marking methods for bats (Order Chiroptera) have practical limitations and some can cause morbidity. We tested the p-Chip (p-Chip Corp.)-a miniaturized, laser light-Activated microtransponder-as a prospective marking technique in a captive research colony of Big Brown Bats (Eptesicus fuscus). We assessed long-Term readability and postimplantation effects of p-Chips injected subcutaneously above the second metacarpal (wing; n = 30) and the tibia (leg; n = 13 in both locations). Following implantation (Day 0), p-Chips were scanned with a hand-held ID reader (wand) on postimplantation days (PIDs) 1, 8, 15, 22, 32, 60, 74, 81, 88, 95, and over 1 year later (PID 464). For each trial, we recorded: (1) animal handling time; (2) scan time; (3) number of wand flashes; (4) p-Chip visibility; and (5) overall condition of the bat. Average scan times for p-Chips implanted in both the wing and leg increased over the duration of the study; however, the number of wand flashes decreased, suggesting that efficacy of p-Chip recording increased with user experience. Importantly, over 464 days both the visibility and readability of p-Chips in the wing remained high and superior to tags in the leg, establishing the second metacarpal as the preferred implantation site. Observed morbidity and mortality in captive bats with p-Chips was similar to baseline values for bats without these tags. Because scan efficiency on PID 464 was comparable with earlier days, this indicates that p-Chips implanted in the wing may be suitable as a long-Term marking method. Our provisional results suggest that p-Chips are viable for extended field testing to see if they are suitable as an effective alternative to traditional methods to mark bats.-
dc.publisherOxford University Press (OUP)-
dc.subject3109 Zoology-
dc.subject31 Biological Sciences-
dc.titleScanning efficacy of p-Chips implanted in the wing and leg of the Big Brown Bat (Eptesicus fuscus)-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.date.updated2025-01-23T16:21:59Z-
dc.contributor.departmentPsychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour-
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyae030-
Appears in Collections:Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour Publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Scanning efficacy of p-Chips implanted in the wing and leg of the Big Brown Bat (iEptesicus fuscusi).pdf
Open Access
Published version26.06 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue