Photography as a Means of Identification of Individual Eastern Photography as a Means of Identification of Individual Eastern Box Turtles, Box Turtles, Terrapene carolina carolinaTerrapene carolina carolina

Donald E. Hoss1, Carolyn R. Hoss1 and Antoinette M. Gorgone2

1Citizen Scientist, 118 Straits Haven Road, Beaufort, NC 28516. dhoss@ec.rr.com2NMFS, SEFSC, NOAA Beaufort Lab, 101 Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, NC 28516. annie.gorgone@noaa.gov

IntroductionThe ability to identify individuals over long time periods can be used for mark-recapture techniques providing information on movement, distribution

and population size. Although, the most common method of marking box turtles for identification has been to file notches in their marginal scutes, this method is invasive with potential of damage to the individual turtle. Photographic techniques to identify individuals by their natural markings have

been well established for many species. The purpose of this study was to determine if the pattern on the carapace of the Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina) can be used to identify individuals over long periods of time.

Methods•Box turtles captured opportunistically over a 12-year period on 3.4 ha mostly wooded site in eastern Carteret County, North Carolina (Figure 1). •Left side of each turtle was photographed. •The plastron length was measured for all turtles.•Two of the authors compared captured turtles to the photographic catalog of all identified individuals. •The third author confirmed turtles identified as recaptures.

Results•Forty turtles were captured and photographed (Table 1).•Sizes ranged from 2.8 to 15.2 cm straight plastron length.•Sixteen turtles were captured more than once both within year and between years.•Longest recapture interval was 9 years.•Smallest turtle recaptured was 6.4 cm at time of original capture.•Turtles >7 cm or larger in plastron length showed no change in shell patterns over time.

Figure 1. North Carolina

Discussion•Patterns on the shell were easily identified and varied among individuals (Figure 2).•Identifying marks were well-defined, with each of the 13 scutes displaying individual patterns, minimizing chance of misidentification.•Scars or deformities in several turtles allowed validation of individual ID through shell markings (Figures 3-4).

Figure 4. The shell pattern of Tc004 shown in August 2004 and seven

years later. Arrows are pointing to damage to shell which verifies the

identification.

Figure 3. The shell pattern of Tc003 shown in June 2005 and six years

later. Arrows are pointing to underbite which verifies the

identification.

Conclusion•Unique and stable shell patterns on eastern box turtles ≥7 cm allowed easy recognition of individuals over time through comparison of photographs.•Photography is inexpensive, reliable and less invasive than commonly used marginal scutes notching, making it a preferable approach.

August 2011

August 2004

July 2011

Table 1. Resight history.

Tc015

Tc028

Tc011 Tc017Tc010 Tc008

Tc028 the smallest turtle captured at 2.8 cm plastron length illustrating the different

pattern in young individuals.

Figure 2. Five individual turtles illustrating the variation in carapace patterns.

June 2005

You are here

Study area