ArticlePloS one2026
Photo-based individual identification is more reliable than visible implant elastomer tags or toe-tipping in young agile frogs.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In amphibian capture-recapture studies, commonly used individual-identification methods include toe clipping as well as less invasive alternatives of varying cost. Yet, choosing the best method for a study is challenging, because both the reliability for identification and the severity of adverse effects of a given mark type can greatly vary between species as well as life stages. We compared the reliability of three identification methods in young agile frogs (Rana dalmatina): clipping a single phalanx, injecting visible-implant-elastomer (VIE) tags (one of six colours) under the skin, and photo-based identification using natural colouration. Individuals were regularly photographed from the start of metamorphosis onwards, and were marked by the other two methods soon after all of them finished metamorphosis. Subsequently, we checked mark retention by each method multiple times for more than a year. Photo-based identification was far more reliable than the other two methods: 100% identification success post-metamorphosis in all checking events within small housing groups, and 98% with computer-assisted identification across all housing groups. Post-metamorphic body colouration remained largely stable, and the major patterns were already present at metamorphosis. Based on VIE colour alone, we could correctly identify the animals in 77% of the checks. Green tags were the easiest to recognize. VIE often broke into smaller parts, and those were sometimes found only outside the originally tagged body part (15%) or not found at all (10%). VIE was better retained in the legs than in the arms. Dissection revealed that migrating VIE pieces can accumulate in the internal organs, especially the kidneys. The clipped toe tip was successfully recognized only in 41% of checks. We conclude that photo-based identification is superior to both VIE-tagging and toe tipping in young agile frogs, and this method should be preferred in future studies seeking a cost-efficient yet reliable identification method in this species.
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.