|
The Identification of Pike
by Means of Characteristic Marks
by Neville J. Fickling
ABSTRACT
The markings of pike (Esox lucius
L.) were found to be specific to individual fish. The subsequent
recapture of pike after 2 years of growth, indicated that the markings
could be used for the positive identification of specific pike.
INTRODUCTION
Marking or tagging studies have
frequently been employed to study the movement and growth of a variety
of fish species. A variety of tag types, subcutaneous dye injections,
fin clips and freeze brands have been used with success in such studies.
It is however, unfortunately true that many tag types will retard growth
(De Roche, 1963; Christensen, 1961; Eschmeyer, 1959; Shetter, 1967).
Tags are also prone to loss due to either removal by natural causes or
by anglers. Mutilation caused by fin clipping is not acceptable in many
fisheries, while freeze branding demands constant access to a supply of
liquid nitrogen. This is obviously impractical for small scale studies.
Dye marks are generally satisfactory, but restricted in application, due
to the limited number of permutations available for the identification
of the individual. It is suggested that the markings of the pike (Esox
lucius L.) are very specific for individual fish and a method of
identification of individual pike by these markings is described.
METHODS
One-hundred and
eighty-seven photographs of pike were examined (length 838-1118 mm; age
5-14 years), Eighteen individuals were photographed from both sides
enabling comparison between sides. Key areas were selected on the flanks
of the pike, these areas being those where markings were distinct and
easily examined. One area of fin was also selected as a key area. These
key areas are identified in Fig. 1, Initially the markings of individual
pike were compared, one side against the other.
The criteria of
similarity was noted as when three key areas showed similarity, between
pike being compared. In practice when three key areas were found to be
similar, all other key areas were also similar. Comparison of the two
sides of a pike showed that the markings, though similar in size and
shape, were not necessarily similar in position. It was therefore
concluded that comparisons of markings were only valid for pike
photographed from the same side. A standard method of photography was
therefore employed. All pike which were either hand held or laid on the
ground were photographed with the head of the pike facing the right of
the picture. This was in effect, with the pike's head facing left from
the holder's point of view.
|
|

|

RESULTS
The photographs of 187 pike, all viewed from the
same side were then studied. The types of marking varied considerably
depending on the origin of the pike. Considerable differences in
markings were also noticed in pike from the same habitat. Three basic
types of marking were noted, all typical of mature pike (small pike tend
to have transverse bar markings, which disappear with increasing
growth). These are shown in Fig. 2 and can be described as:
oval spots;
round or stellate spots;
longitudinal bars.
|

|

|
Oval spots tend to vary in size, from 10 to 25 mm depending on the
locality and size of the pike. Round or stellate spots vary similarly. The
longitudinal bar pattern is very typical of pike of Irish Loughs. It is
uncommon for pike to display more than one pattern type in one
particular environment. However, examples of all three patterns have
been noted by the present author in one of the Fenland Drains.
In order to establish the unique nature of the
markings of all the pike examined, each were compared with each other.
In no case was more than one key areas similar between individual pike.
Often the difference in spot pattern was enough to signify `no
similarity'.
A small number of pike were dye marked and
photographed. Recaptures of four different fish were made 2 years later.
Each fish was found to be similar on the basis of at least three key
areas being comparable. This indicated that the markings remain similar
for at least two years. A large number of other fish, (860-1120 min)
which have been at liberty for up to one year were also found to retain
the same markings. Figs 3 and 4 shows one such fish captured from Loch Lomond (A.), on four occasions in 1978 and
1979. Figure 3 shows the fish as captured in 1978 and Fig. 4 as
captured in 1979. The caudal area of this fish has particularly
characteristic marks. Growth increments of dye marked pike were up to a
maximum length increment of 50 mm and weight increase of 2.75 kg. Table
1 presents the weights, age & fork lengths of the four pike noted above.

|

|

|

TABLE 1. Weights, lengths and ages of four pike
recaptured after 2 years
|
Location |
Initial wt (kg) |
Initial l (mm) |
Initial age |
Final wt (kg) |
Final I (mm) |
|
Loch Lomond |
10.9 |
1092 |
12 |
11.8 |
1118 |
|
River Nar |
6.7 |
864 |
6 |
9.3 |
991 |
|
Norfolk Lake 1 |
8.4 |
991 |
9 |
10.4 |
1041 |
|
Norfolk Lake 2 |
7.4 |
914 |
8 |
9.8 |
995 |
|

|

|
DISCUSSION
The method of identifying individual pike requires
the use of photography, a relatively inexpensive method, easily
available for the study of pike. The method does not disfigure, mark or
otherwise harm the fish-an important point if the aesthetic qualities of
catching and returning fish in good condition are to be preserved. The
method has been found to be suitable for the identification of pike of
500 mm and larger which have shown percentage length increases of 5.4%
and percentage weight increases of 31.3% over a period of 2 years.
Caution should be shown when attempting to apply this method to very
young pike. Rapid growth results in the addition of more spots or marks
and it is therefore likely that the marks change beyond recognition.
Pike are at present under a prolonged investigation, with particular
reference to changes in markings with growth. The result of this study
will be presented at a later date.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank Mr D. Plummer for the photograph used in Fig.
3 and pike angling friends who supplied photographs of pike.
REFERENCES
Christensen, J.M. (1961) Survey of the Danish sole
tagging experiments with notes on the growth rate. Conseil
permanent internationale pour I'Exploration de la Mer, 1961
Meeting Northern Seas Committee Paper, No 126 14pp..
De Roche, S.E (1963) Slowed growth of lake trout following tagging.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 92, 185-186.
Eschmeyer, P.H. (1959) Survival and retention of tags, and growth
of tagged trout in rearing ponds. Progressive Fish Culturist, 21,
17-21.
Shetter, D.S. (1967) Effects of jaw tags and fin exision upon
growth, survival and exploitation of hatchery rainbow trout
fingerlings in Michigan. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 394-399.
This article first appeared in Fish Management (1982) 13, No. 2
- on this website 25/06/06
|

|
©2004 - 2008
Norfolk Fishing Network®
All Rights Reserved.
|