ArticleAnimal biotelemetry2026
Methods for tagging whale sharks: insights into performance and best practices with a focus on clamp attachments.
Article in Animal biotelemetry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
61 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biologging and telemetry have transformed our understanding of marine megafauna movement ecology. Yet, methodological constraints continue to limit data quality and deployment duration. Devices recording whale shark ( Results: Whale shark researcher responses to the survey highlighted clamp-based systems as a practical and more widely applicable approach than drill-based methods, which are often used to secure tags to other large sharks. They also noted that clamps have greater retention potential and are suitable for a wider range of tags compared to dart-based methods, but are still constrained by design, placement, and deployment conditions. Researchers used a variety of materials and designs to build their own clamps, often facilitated by direct collaboration with each other or key manufacturers. Clamps produced highly variable outcomes, ranging from successful long-term satellite transmissions over 200 days and short-term biologging for 48 h at 20 Hz, to premature detachment and cases of fin damage. For long-term clamps, changes in position on the fin allowed for more stable satellite transmissions over time. Some clamp designs achieved data quantity and quality close to that of drilled deployments, demonstrating their potential to rival traditional methods while offering a less invasive approach. Results emphasised the ongoing need for technological refinement and rigorous evaluation of clamp performance and associated impacts. Conclusions: Based on collective insights, we present a unified approach to clamp design and positioning, and identify key priorities for advancing this attachment technology, such as aiming for positions b-2 and c-2 on the fin and ensuring the clamp bridge distance (always between 30 and 50 mm) and tension are matched to shark size. Optimising clamp systems could substantially improve our ability to generate high-quality, long-duration movement data while minimising tagging impacts on the animal where possible. This could enhance ecological and conservation research outcomes for endangered whale sharks, with broader implications for tagging other large-bodied marine megafauna. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40317-026-00462-4.
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.