ArticlePloS one2021
The impact of bio-logging on body weight change of the Eurasian beaver.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards a minimum reporting standard to promote animal welfare and data quality in biologging research.Animal biotelemetry · 2026Article
- Individual recognition of Eurasian beavers (Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bio-logging is a common method to collect ecological data on wild animals, but might also induce stress, reduce body condition, and alter behavior. Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber) are a semi-aquatic and nocturnal species that are challenging to observe in the wild. Bio-loggers are hence useful tools to study their behaviour and movements, but this raises concerns of potential negative impacts of tagging. To investigate the potential negative impacts of glue-on tags, we compared body weight change for tagged and untagged Eurasian beavers. We hypothesized that tagged beavers would gain less body weight compared to untagged beavers, and that weight change might be affected by tagging length, tag weight, water temperature and the season of tagging. Daily percentage body weight change in relation to initial body weight during the first capture was compared during 57 tagging periods (18±7 days) and 32 controls periods (64±47 days). Body weight change varied between the two groups, with untagged beavers on average gaining daily weight whilst tagged beavers on average lost weight daily, indicating a negative effect of tagging. The average reduction in percentage body weight change per day for tagged beavers was small (0.1 ± 0.3%), and with large individual variation. Neither tag weight, number of tagging days, nor season were important in explaining body weight change of tagged animals. In other words, we found that tagging reduced daily body weight during the tagging period but were unable to determine the mechanism(s) responsible for this decline. Detrimental effects of tagging have important implications for animal welfare and can introduce bias in data that are collected. This calls for careful consideration in the use of tags. We conclude that studies investigating the effects of tagging should consider individual variation in the effects of tagging and, where possible, compare tagged animals with a control group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.