Population parameter estimates from mark–recapture studies are dependent on individuals retaining marks or tags. Therefore, tag retention estimates are needed for different tag types and anatomical tagging locations. Few studies have empirically quantified the bias from tag retention on fish population parameters that are derived from mark–recapture studies. We examined differences in retention between T‐bar anchor tags and PIT tags as well as among four anatomical locations for PIT tags in Brown Trout Salmo trutta in a tailwater fishery in Arkansas, USA. We also estimated the relative bias of tag type and PIT tag location on apparent survival estimates from Cormack–Jolly–Seber models. Tag retention for the anchor tags was 15.1% lower than that for the PIT tags after 1 year and 46.1% lower after 4 years. Greater PIT tag retention resulted in less biased estimates of apparent survival for PIT tags (average −7.1%) than for anchor tags (average −37.8%). However, PIT tags that were placed in different anatomical locations had varying retention rates, so the degree of relative bias that was associated with their apparent survival estimates also varied. Inserting the PIT tags in the cheek or dorsal musculature provided the greatest retention for Brown Trout and may provide the least biased apparent survival estimates from future mark–recapture studies.

中文翻译：

---

标签类型和位置相关的保留权重标记-捕获参数估计值上的偏差偏差水平

标记回收研究的总体参数估计值取决于保留标记或标签的个人。因此，对于不同的标签类型和解剖学标签位置，需要标签保留估计。很少有研究从经验上量化标签保留对鱼类种群参数的偏见，而这些种群参数是从标记捕获研究中得出的。我们检查了T型锚锚标签和PIT标签之间的保留差异，以及Brown Trout Salmo trutta中PIT标签的四个解剖位置之间的保留差异在美国阿肯色州的尾水捕捞中。我们还根据Cormack–Jolly–Seber模型的表观存活率估计值估算了标签类型和PIT标签位置的相对偏差。锚标签的标签保留率在1年后比PIT标签低15.1％，在4年后降低46.1％。与保留锚标签（平均-37.8％）相比，PIT标签保留率更高，导致对PIT标签的表观存活率（平均-7.1％）的估计偏差较小。但是，放置在不同解剖位置的PIT标签具有不同的保留率，因此与它们的表观存活率估计值相关的相对偏倚程度也有所不同。在脸颊或背部肌肉组织中插入PIT标签可为褐鳟提供最大的保留力，并可能为将来的标记回收研究提供最少的明显表观存活率估计值。