Dai Nene Pe ee pe SS Oe FS Sr. Webae haenon aiinten bitin bn yt a ke bn Td avhige Mn Elstatg et Cone} Nir py She meen in iri oh ; a 2 aie tats ete tating eve tir a PT He pont eis os Siitetncee ites (tees See Li Reman? hai TRU obe ncaa tt AL ea Brose Hyit a elenoye ki Py ‘ % z ee eerste rrereeeeet wesigae ? : Sr sietarss on mois hi S Soon epee ena te pier paeeyt Nawal yt tatty “ “ tated oe Siete ch Steed ished Tae Pod Hee DNigwes Dae aaa uh POH EE te ta to Te ee i f bet elney Oar tia ewe ey ets Pe ee Ea ai pu oe a Parra) un : LA ld i ‘ Paine ete f eu HAAS) ac siee pastas Vetere , * dT Wergtiren otaieber ene ot ” ly sha liye " BO SS WE erecrae 2 ae. ie ny aba) oe TARR YUE 5 myer Mi erayereraeg aby 38 t vy ne Sees ramen Wah Ao at yg eta linn bites zy eee tes H Peer era LtuXishtposssdegs snysayar a sea ee A Rr MESS deetai Ay ae TG Waa anes one a sae ane Tey gaeatg ioe uabey oly end A Sea Be Tittant iy o Peay a4 sone sages teed : Hi ona aie Sb tay oats Digs Sends Viet hits asia i A} p sae Eo cn J x Ne i wii hh (i 4, " wi vines - mailed var | Ry oT i = BRUCE B. GOLLETTE 766 _papttin 3st a Cee E a may 28 8 NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF—766 Ng An Ailas of the Distribution 24% and Abundance of Dominant =<} s Benthic Invertebrates in the New York Bight Apex with Reviews of Their Life Histories Janice V. Caracciolo and Frank W. Steimle, Jr. March 1983 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA TECHNICAL REPORTS National Marine Fisheries Service, Special Scientific Report—Fisheries The major responsibilities of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are to monitor and assess the abundance and geographic distribution of fishery resources, to understand and predict fluctuations in the quantity and distribution of these resources, and to establish levels for optimum use of the resources. NMFS is also charged with the development and implementation of policies for managing national fishing grounds, development and enforcement of domestic fisheries regulations, surveillance of foreign fishing off United States coastal waters, and the development and enforcement of international fishery agreements and policies. NMFS also assists the fishing industry through marketing service and economic analysis programs, and mortgage insurance and vessel constnuc- ~ tion subsidies. It collects, analyzes, and publishes statistics on various phases of the industry. The Special Scientific Report—Fisheries series was established in 1949. The series carries reports on scientific investigations that document long-term continuing programs of NMFS, or intensive scientific reports on studies of restricted scope. The reports may deal with applied fishery problems. The series is also used as a medium for the publication of bibliographies of a specialized scientific nature. NOAA Technical Report NMFS Circulars are available free in limited numbers to governmental agencies, both Federal and State. They are also available in exchange for other scientific and technical publications in the marine sciences. Individual copies may be obtained from Publications Services Branch (E/AI 13), National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 11400 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. Recent Circulars are: 726. The Gulf of Maine temperature structure between Bar Harbor, Maine, and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, June 1975-November 1976. By Robert J. Pawlowski. December 1978, iii+10 p., 14 figs., 1 table. 727. Expendable bathythermograph observations from the NNMFS/MARAD Ship of Opportunity Program for 1975. By Steven K. Cook, Barclay P. Collins, and Chnistine S. Carty. January 1979, iv+93 p., 2 figs., 13 tables, 54 app. figs. 728. Vertical sections of semimonthly mean temperature on the San Francisco- Honolulu route: From expendable bathythermograph observations, June 1966-December 1974. By J. F. T. Saur, L. E. Eber, D. R. McLain, and C. E. Dor- man. January 1979, iii +35 p., 4 figs., 1 table. 729. References for the identification of marine invertebrates on the southern Atlantic coast of the United States. By Richard E. Dowds. April 1979, iv +37 p. 730. Surface circulation in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico as deduced from drift bottles. By Robert F. Temple and John A. Martin. May 1979, iii+13 p., 8 figs., 4 tables. : 731. Annotated bibliography and subject index on the shortnose sturgeon, Acipen- ser brevirostrum. By James G. Hoff. April 1979, iii +16 p. 732. Assessment of the Northwest Atlantic mackerel, Scomber scombrus, stock. By Emory D. Anderson. April 1979, iv+13 p., 9 figs., 15 tables. 733. Possible management procedures for increasing production of sockeye salmon smolts in the Naknek River system, Bristol Bay, Alaska. By Robert J. Ellis and William J. McNeil. April 1979, iii+9 p., 4 figs., 11 tables 734. Escape of king crab, Paralithodes camtschatica, from derelict pots. By Wil- liam L. High and Donald D. Worlund. May 1979, iii+11 p.. 5 figs., 6 tables. 735. History of the fishery and summary statistics of the sockeye salmon, Onco- rhynchus nerka, runs to the Chignik Lakes, Alaska, 1888-1966. By Michael L. Dahlberg. August 1979, iv+16 p., 15 figs., 11 tables. 736. A historical and descriptive account of Pacific coast anadromous salmonid rearing facilities and a summary of their releases by region, 1960-76. By Roy J. Whale and Robert Z. Smith. September 1979, iv +40 p.. 15 figs., 25 tables. 737. Movements of pelagic dolphins (Stenella spp.) in the eastern tropical Pacific as indicated by results of tagging, with summary of tagging operations, 1969-76. By W. F. Perrin, W. E. Evans, and D. B. Holts. September 1979, iii +14 p-, 9 figs., 8 tables. 738. Environmental baselines in Long Island Sound, 1972-73. By R_N. Reid, A. B. Frame, and A. F. Draxler. December 1979, iv +31 p., 40 figs., 6 tables. 739. Bottom-water temperature trends in the Middle Atlantic Bight during spring and autumn, 1964-76. By Clarence W. Davis. December 1979, iii +13 p., 10 figs., 9 tables. 740. Food of fifteen northwest Atlantic gadiform fishes. By Richard W. Langton and Ray E. Bowman. February 1980, iv +23 p., 3 figs., 11 tables. 741. Distribution of gammaridean Amphipoda (Crustacea) in the Middle Atlantic Bight region. By John J. Dickinson, Roland L. Wigley, Richard D. Brodeur, and Susan Brown-Leger. October 1980, vi+46 p., 26 figs., 52 tables. 742. Water structure at Ocean Weather Station V, northwestern Pacific Ocean, 1966-71. By D. M. Husby and G. R. Seckel. October 1980, 18 figs., 4 tables. 743. Average density index for walleye pollock, Theragra chalcogramma, in the Bering Sea. By Loh-Lee Low and Ikuo Ikeda. November 1980, iii+11 p., 3 figs., 9 tables. 744. Tunas, oceanography and meteorology of the Pacific, an annotated bibliogra- phy, 1950-78, by Paul N. Sund. March 1981, iii+123 p. 745. Dorsal manu length-total weight relationships of squids Loligo pealei and Illex illecebrosus from the Atlantic coast of the United States, by Anne M. T. Lange and Karen L. Johnson. March 1981, iii+17 p., 5 figs., 6 tables. 746. Distribution of gammaridean Amphipoda (Crustacea) on Georges Bank, by John J. Dickinson and Roland L. Wigley. June 1981, iii+25 p., 16 figs., | table. 747. Movement, growth, and mortality of American lobsters, Homarus ameri- canus, tagged along the coast of Maine, by Jay S. Krouse. September 1981, ili+12 p.. 10 figs., 8 tables. 748. Annotated bibliography of the conch genus Strombus (Gastropoda, Strombi- dae) in the western Atlantic Ocean, by George H. Darcy. September 1981, iii+16 p. 749. Food of eight northwest Atlantic pleuronectiform fishes, by Richard W. Langton and Ray E. Bowman. September 1981, iii+16p., 1 fig., 8 tables. 750. World literature to fish hybrids with an analysis by family, species, and hybrid: Supplement 1, by Frank J. Schwartz. November 1981, iii +507 p. 751. The barge Ocean 250 gasoline spill, by Carolyn A. Griswold (editor). November 1981, iv +30 p., 28 figs., 17 tables. 752. Movements of tagged summer flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, off southern New England, by F. E. Lux and F. E. Nichy. December 1981, iii+16 p., 13 figs., 3 tables. 753. Factors influencing ocean catches of salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., off Wash- ington and Vancouver Island, by R. A. Low, Jr. and S. B. Mathews. January 1982, iv+12 p., 6 figs., 7 tables. po ATM OSPy, Kx, " a € SS, © Le) z z Q a Zz €o 4, Ww 4TMENT OF © A me NOlwusS NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF-766 An Atlas of the Distribution and Abundance of Dominant Benthic Invertebrates in the New York Bight Apex with Reviews of Their Life Histories Janice V. Caracciolo and Frank W. Steimle, Jr. March 1983 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration John V. Byrne, Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service William G. Gordon, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) does not approve, rec- ommend or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned in this publication. No reference shall be made to NMFS, or to this publication furnished by NMFS, in any advertising or sales pro- motion which would indicate or imply that NMFS approves, recommends or endorses any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned herein, or which has as its purpose an intent to cause directly or indirectly the advertised product to be used or purchased because of this NMFS publication. CONTENTS liarateliCUOlnl Somoeuns oh babdoo oo eer dcURe ONO od He OOUGEOGOoEO Cash b ONO CqudsaLomegboeGMeGmnoroapoaddnmovccuBeK 1 IMIGGIGES. SS BR he a e'Sla PRB DD OD hee wenicln aekG eriENeey bo HUTA wh a SEEaI cen Gee is euUTba idl arekG one TEESE eR RAPS aed Orch He a SOO Re 1 LEMON chee ee Sees A CaO Oo oe a tkcia sD EOD ORG Soe DIMA UES Ginan Ont aoe On Cae eoeentts.o a oman Marinette cox tec 2 Sec FSIS polouta eis oan 8.6 Oo etore tc te ete a ol RTI Oo RIO ern. Sian enone Ie Ochs eee Et le eas mir EEO areca eae REL IRE Ps 10 1365 9 on BLO O AS 3 INeWwaYOIkeBightapexistdy,areals rst wry tea ire ayer ebm Oa scat ek ekonone chsh ceea nhsysbeseieeucieshs teense Piano anes fele te Tone 3 Environmentalicharactenstics ase trvstyueesnt- cree soe cover: isan Vanna Mae pete ate soe kets saate casi Sie ousted VAL IK Vee Oe Ra R ST ort = 3 iteinstonesandidistmbutionsofdominantibenthic invertebrates -eaccepotesete ciepete ts teeteye ister els erste ele tees catepeer-t era eearered ete o) if Bhylum\G@oelenteratas py-us sr-vettovs tact avons Poucysy ol fog Weve toy snes cre ohgcd ster sehs Peas agente act sRsi ca Stenson gerewalaqouoTe PR Ce Remen erro cd ete 7 CIERS/Nilitoysor aga Gia etna Ge DI AEN 0 oC eH Sn ete atta er Gir Peirce a ee ee een nene mers O moa oe Seeds oq ate of Edwarastaisppsaciegansandtsipuncul Gide s wrpy eens Tate ey PNR eee ee ent ee eee Meer ae q (COPAY DS CHUTTGAU Dos Goro oun aban aghans Bokeh h tee Dae MOAeMOO Oud OH Sue eORe en dadooo baer socosaduaG7 7 BhylumvPhoronidarey acne ech atcn rer ey At ae eete eRe Cte enriches eheed erie mec Ranke koe er eT rchees 9 IHG UMC TAG mis ene aed cae on he eG oto eo tn er Ota arcs er cle G oro ce mda cs cio Sarciola 0.0 vce 9 TNA NY Co) Miter he ee enim orcad yess aan oie ao RON CTA cane cei on ae Chore sclera te CUM Micon pinata co Smee 10 GlassiGastropod arses vaycceps cto topes sneusycyssias ate cp ay ecelgeus fouenay ated lead reste y Seva psws genes seyar leletatoys, se sus teu ca, See ey nee ote ar 10 INGSSCULUS) LYEVELLQTUS NM ieee doy cpa oy oes hoses yes Sa Se aT Cea eso SUT a ge ASIST oa See Me eee Mae eer TEE Rete ee ee EMT MEF eee rae 10 GClaSSIBival Viale sieves canes tactsyclouer secret ttbs= ata ceaenabe obtewemae aN a Litt ts euliay ticle ier Lon Cia nine PariN Dea wake RAEN a eeaieaey oh 11 INDLTGE ios dh (ela, I ASO rica ae RIE ero tc aero a cei OS Ce RR a a error e Recs Urea Flolo nl Ha oo Saito nn 1] CATON PTAC RHAL AGN Gee arte Coat Beale Reet ere Corr A eT erreur tte ty SaaS eee EME eee) Peat aera. MG cua Dire Re aa eG ee EiceeeS 12 PAT. GLECQULS QNCI GC 4 wen he Net SNP (ee 2 ate eae area meee la a ee SU 2, cls 3 ene RRG IMUM ey NAIC aE es 12 Egrastodermajpinnul atu’ 5. ivy sccis ese eo epee ASO ER IOS IE EUS eek Re eee 13 TAPIA EA Oe PRS CRO See ERR Se Ie Scie. Od Geena cre att TORE aT Bere Gee SERRE SISENG a Olas Gls chkaiirs aco Gea ei 14 SDE SELLS OLICISS LTC: 5, ci rane y usa se pce he eM ae ops US METAR Yes Ne MNS AEE TO aS RTO OC NE Ee OOo okey NI ROT Te re 14 GIN DECK Ge coe e os ORO RA rate eT RAE ano an atip dia Glee eee R a eae avanesetamodouDe ose gb oGdy cue 15 ISTRY CU ott acre Re eB Cree Gray a hee SRO NG BOR O.clo AIG othe eto ce Mencia Aalila are D EES ao hoa dnd ac anocoumen 16 LUN ALT TaN Te WoL ein meses Sarees Otro aces erat ee eisai t ote a oat Ore eater ter Fie Pleat rc bee a oeeeedn erento ola ol iic.a-o aaeaiy tora cc ee il7/ (JESS HOM cliR TE FE haeatns Seem Gate aid oan aecurceeelad 5 ata mitaaet a cei one aaa renee RaRV ORT TG 3 a nala aicwralginG o Hitt 17 (Oinilse/Nicd WETS ICES Sora acts cca oa con SOE Ra eo CaM GOD EK enn Om eros Malta Od oomae or Aero eae 17 [HOM ZONA ATULD Sora oe Coe Aaa gs CCS e BAe Ob mR Ine hid oO ACI oeeR ee Sea a we Un Adena Aalenico.5 o'9G 17 (Ojealeirl ay Noyelorestakl Sete taco cues mela Scrat aca tro hy ee Nem n no A ts MUTE EEN gasses oom y bib aioe s bomationd dp oG 18 Hy LOA OCERATENG EH axa evap tate stevens fest the dk eon specle Ua yet Wane Weuo 2h 42 RSs on Te pa adGtke el oek es eata ye eer EA ae 18 JEL ROPP UME YT Wa a TOS MOA OME Ae HORE DOR MOOT RAGB OTS COR CUIO RS Mar Ene Mott C PH tcrad aa aus mab-odo 18 ELAR ANA AULA DIG aya oa AE eee seep oe ee y. AIMOT OrOn 6 ag cro D URE Eee LO Crean ante Hoa es Gey onc bad 19 SATA GUSH MOOILER eM esons SRR AE Baty EAT eS Vee SiH E MERE PACED. 0 SS ACE EaC TEs CoE aa CASPER ao eS 20 Gly cer aidibranch iataistan. Sepia Rese pao Pepe W er ta o he ty EL 5 ae ea ele AM Le area nee, otc ye ee eel eens 20 (SUR OLUEM SAUD Cocaaes aOR eS COSCO SO OS ORE Rie CARIES Be au OT CoO TRO EG Sn OO UE oe OARS B08 O0 2] INGHED EN ANGAT CC! Sean BeOS PDE ESE eee TC A Ong COT Ace Coe Gee Le UE ee Oe CORO ER Coan Ene Toone 22 INGAUSRUTIKIN aoe es tn Roan UO eOUEO ES CEU RG Uae ES ED SE Tonner bes Coo or oe cor ore rom Oceano e noo ce se ertes aes 23 NGAI TEC dog be RUSE COURS SD Ed DUC UEOA DOM ON OR EMOa iE aon 1 TORO E Ope eEom Oar rds mmae boro ot orate ccoRD Gale 23 IWephtys\(Aglaophamus \CINCIN Alien yeast pat re aero eee ae ICE hoe ie eee 24 CONICET GE emgeriae cpa ty cos Sr Oe Re mt ne RE COTTE Am ae crane ama ay Racer mele iets Ce aerate creas oe a aes 24 (CUT CILHTATICICE On ee e aa BE OR OR FEMA A NE GR PE REE HOT ooh oee oe heron oe ene E DOE ene co oh oe a ode 24 WEA IOMASTUS(AMDIS CI eat teres apt Wey EVA SSEEES EF ER LAL Pgs Ne SN ETE APS OER PEN 26 LF AVESTORCO NEG erges crete Nt ett Meee le Yoo) oc NE Sok ME SL a Pogue: an SPAN ON ali tele Leech 26 OrdemSpionidamee eee ieee eyetspctlasee yrs ee eS SCT NWSI peo LSTA ere tI Mia at agree game ey led gc 27 I Lel HH OA IRIS rrecrocatnrerc piciayiee Hid fick ced Hen obra ooicee Cia 8 Lon ae ap dio in WE EE Ue eh eR oon s OR ee osseous 2a Ue GIO SPIORSTCEMSTUP lie Wma Motes bene apeele Chea hel ake A EN EPL LEE LR TLR OER Ie oes 28 LONE AN ISATP Naty c PEA BOS OCS E SI RPE Ce Hog ERIE Oe etre BTC cbc oe Es Baa eos BRS Sere gee a aie 28 SPLIOPHANES DOIMDY Naa Pv eRe stk ca pe RP Tae Ay TR ME Tate EL 2 ey RD A oe ne Er 2S din ld ar 29 HATO AMOUR GU SORE OOO OO OES DO OED BOD ND EAE OO OE oOo Ma B ee homeo sas abe Bab embed Seneee 30 PA TICIA CC CAIN CHING Caray Py Meg Nes ty ot ase AE EN TROT VO hop Eee 30 (COCR G Chere sr ommend aod gad Saran GAD OE cco See oR Os CED CoO TOE Coe ne rend dot oso eb eaten so does 31 ETD LCN ICS ACUI G waar. ela: er skaNeteN see UP RTA FECES OT eae ee 31 LETTE IGA on, Some seers pete COORE LT ae wera Ao Oe a OCR CORD OT HD Sao a cde gh oe eanre ae Aosta 31 LEELA SUG LA a ie oc REO REO TOS OG BES AO GO EE OF CoS ONE DO ORO eo be OEE EEO On boat abe ono eS pu naaS 32 WOE THTIRA oe hae Oe ECAC MESA Ce BO HOU aU Lae Re BES ODE REE aa e Cao. Cate oaeb nae aaEe 33 DEI UHATS SORES BOG Oo 0 CC GRO AT EOE © 6 OH CERAO CTO COR TIE OT OAR Ore NORE ne soe SAN e ak ne nee ee 33 CORWSIV ERICH S Seneca ted Gai ae SHE a eRS Coe oe OCC Sem Rae eee Cte Gs ci EN 8 Sly ta eae el SENS ae 34 GOSH EUGUT GT ore olencie CaS Tee AES AOE SE OC CET DOC cE oR DE TOME Oar Ue Mae ood nan Ren D SARE aa 34 ill (COynalae Chinean Wolk ee ae te ee eh ita ye Oe Sema cailoé ial nannigaoie tcGdggdd.coocas 35 HPI TAIRA GUIUS Seetyestehe ssa cases ses Sie es alee ic noo Ole aye orecshays aveincyoucieitvel ls ellelaio eA ORI CEN OCP RTT OC et eee 35 RGR E CLAN OR TOS ica cad ocn nce qe ade Sau Rane Sia COSCO R EE nG tacos coocosuods Sooo Re goo NReedagDD Oc oSSs 35) GCauilleriellaikillariensis feces oe he ecareete Berm ashlee exe tenaya fa yo ls feu see Oe ok eae OTTO Oe aS ORT eRe Oe 36 (GOSSUTANONGOGITTAIA= yo tecr cits wie eee idea act ais oie HEE Sraieiev sl SAO Ro ee Sle Hele Oe CERES he EOE Ee eee eee 36 Onlarltidoa litho pac co sdaddcoenoeie tae neo SOMO CHIH A cdo Houmooemog elo bacbndegescoses S7/ DUT AC CO GUC aag and nae Hanae an Soe co omg ence OUo Sd eso UG Upocaccudccoo Caos aeeacceos 37 VAS ADE llidestOGULAL ame ratewatcy sts << lsl'si se alasesm flac be's thn fos olidhatapastevaediny svavebalers jx al Sualatct) SHonege pers sp oeE PER Ren eae omeaaa gdas Bil; OrdemRlabelli Seria eyyve pe l— ore ese ra Gao seo ee sessele + ialeseneler orehot ste siete eee tets Col sais PAIGE fated ea oe 38 PRET USCHAPUTIS feapte ate en eve fa orbits, 5 ao rae ou Ao 4 lelinl te GUE wie dave of ve ellews [EIT ALS ESET -1 OO oe eee 38 phy lummAmth no pOd dewevs terete lace cee aves e ayes eve ce die ar soa Na 08 Sis loyactre alors cee Neetent ete) AVR, lose) Mant Te NSE Ree ee eee ee 39 GASH mUStaCe ares craps reeieraye Sis clove Krewe wv eilsve late eln clove 6 'oiershallersy abate) Shel s rehe Se STORER TATU TI RS nee ee se PE eee 39 Ordenlsopodareenn, eee oem lias. SN Sa Pee eee ctene Seas terayeee nee Seoe eo ae sey EER ee Ree ees 39 Ee dotear tr lobia: eke te ieee cojate hg Steen IS. se URGE WE RT eh elo od Manet ase ee Cee 39 OrdemrAm ph pod aye pepe e tse saa Rae eMail Se lett a misstep see ee beles selec dove qNC UPC Rar Ea ote etree St Se eee eee 39 AIMPELISCOVENTILLE Fees ca So Wc a aa acaba SE ota Sn ba aharar th aisha: lave fay 20a Oso ay SUS as Ie af oe soe oe 39 (ORCA OCHS i Coe ee ee ee Ie AME BAe Pre non Ann OG Ss apidcaddooIAG6S jab seccaces 40 PseuduniGiolaiODliquua ars... hia cine etree diene wie sore Hie ee Be He OT eT eS RE Ee Soe ee 40 IPROTONGUSTOTIUSIAEICHMANNGE. os oiare.e soe. aa5 1088 os wade 40 Bis son gale Saas; ere leehs tes ee PE abe etd eae eee 41 POLONGUSLOTIUSIWIGLOYIs oroscicca <5 50005 6 00 6 008isie sions 9a vise rake «oe Sie seals) 1s TeeIek ee a1 Se) ede Re eee: SEA eee 42 He DtOGHELTUS) DIN QUIS seis ca\exoisie 12810) 5 esis avaradive fayayaras's valiaie soars, aus Jae late bib [Eyahadaye sats oats ie See SPSS eee 42 IRR EDONVMIUS| CP ISTOMUS Me eis 24's 50st ia 0S eile SV IATCTE IIS LSC Ne Tabs ree eta syed sane 6 SIS oT eg nee ee ree 43 OrdemMysidaceay.c.5).ersreveve ian eeie seas c's eve ere'e & wnsesererg eve sie breyeueeeve ce eieda. ay ase snchevs aye) ane tes) SSOP Pee 43 INCOMYSISIAMETICANG wets ossreiie ce v's 0's iatsy'os3 in 25 sated lonely ste f2leiona lanaie osbasiehsreie ren ete ghee sas eyes lesen feyse eae ether eRe 43 OrdemDecapod ar cisieriinsieicisic sere se we win ie Ge wwllnse 6 ANS ERER Tere © seers wide eK Cone ed IS IEE Che iekeane eer een eR Ieee 44 GrANZONISEPLEMSPINOSG es oc. ins erwin s silvia Shsvacaive Dyamesape a ie Haielnayeuaie Bayard wie adealane eee EME ESET eee 44 CANCE TUTTONALUS) Fo sarej0 ces sssheserds are oye oo! shai lore tenth (oetaps tess o')< ois a eros 4c WERE oiarsisele eet at ni ocr ee ee eee 45 PHYLUMIECHINOPERMACA. isis. vie caie. isco ie wraiere @levenens sehsyeae Popsicle lee vs fous va reeeeles ebsyeyevend 7 vous ear AePsTere Rut ete ke Tey Teo eee 47 GClassyEChinOidearse sieve sefatsavs ais Haase ars cosa dedauovaaidyalae Was telfelevsye ioe a. -e00 i kMloyeiat Sky mie sel eye ala oy. o cy ye ee 47 EEGRINGRACHMIUS|PQP ING: 6.5 ented besninse qog.anade rep Sieke ME ELS cian oS Ie reer He Lae) shone Cae nie eee OEE EEE eee 47 IDINCURS Cs hoo. ch GO ae nae ini enete ty ie a te een aera sen Pen ariAcao ima Gcandnos.o' ooo ac 06 48 RatmaliCOMpPOsition OF the APEX: <<. <.<:<-e::ejaissaie oo eeresdeyeveteisievore.5 bole a1 shi. sue ioxstlon daar (ovate era re leis eset rae Geeta ee ea 48 ANHhLOPOSENICHOAUENCES: 5,2. o-.- oceseyace. w euctensin is Susteuthelenaumie vouavelen 5 eieuckeye-) sie: eae ecauersasueist eyauane cee Coleone aes Seo 50 PSCKNOW Ed SMEMES sfsysccne sy 01s) eve) « ies cysbaye nieve rai/eiaire exe acua reve derejorelece i! wsieimuat Ss arans Mess cunt th ake eye nig ane Oe Oe sneer ee 31 JENETAtUTe CLUE cevayer yeysr ays, 15cav Sie doo eid als we dug epsaerora kee Pe pone ARI hehe bode eter egeteios Lennie rs ale Se as a a 51 Figures lewNewayvorkoBishtapexjand Surroundingiarea\... 42h. noe 2 < » oo eee eee ie eee hace Oe eee 72 2. New York Bight apex study area with station positions. dredging spoils, and sewage sludge dump sites indicated.......... 3 SerAverage:speciesidiversities of benthicinvertebrates .. 2... 0... 2... ss ae ee eee sees lone ene 4 4~average numbers of benthic invertebrates per square meter .. <. 2... <.--12: seu sisee a sdee se) neni 4 5. Mean grain size of sediments averaged over five quarterly cruises (August 1973-September 1974) ..................--- 4 Gs Averageipercentage of digestible organic materials in'sediments <.....:5% represents high organic areas (Fig. 6). Average concentrations (ppm) for five heavy metals—chromium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc—are presented in Figures 7-11. The data file and benthic samples, upon which much of the infor mation presented in this paper is based, are stored at the Northeast Fisheries Center, Sandy Hook Laboratory. NEW YORK BIGHT APEX STUDY AREA Environmental Characteristics The oceanography of the New York Bight depends on larger scale processes of the entire Middle Atlantic Bight. Water depths in the Bight apex range from intertidal to approximately 62 m in the Hud- son Shelf Valley. East coast continental shelf waters. in general, flow to the south at average speeds between 5 and 10 cm/s, how- ever, storms can cause movements of 25-30 cm/s. Waters of the inner New York Bight exhibit estuarine circulation typical of coastal areas where discharge of river water exceeds evaporation. Near-surface waters move generally seaward, while nearbottom waters move generally landward (Beardsley et al. 1976). TU Ral ler tte / []<100/0.1 m2 [J>100/0.1 m? ——k 74°00" 73°50" 73°40" Fj eS Figure 3.—Average species diversities (H’) of benthic invertebrates. In the Bight apex, surface salinities during January and February increase to the annual maximum of >34% ). Bottom salinities are > 34%» over most of the apex. Salinities begin to slowly decrease in March as river discharges increase. The spring (April, May) river runoff and penetration of slope water tend to increase vertical salinity gradients, however, these gradients vary greatly, even over a few days. Summer (June, July, August) surface salinities range from about 25-27%, near the apex mouth to about 30-31% at the southeast corner. Bottom salinities range from 27-29%, along the Sandy Hook-Rockaway transect to 30-32%, at the outer edge of the apex. The seasonal minima occur in June. Vertical mixing during autumn (September, October) reduces vertical salinity gradients and leads to a steady increase in surface salinity, often as large as 0.8% between July and October. Surface and subsurface salinities continue to increase through early winter (November, December) until the winter maxima are attained in January. A large range between summer and winter surface temperatures is characteristic of the Bight. River runoff into the apex is low in winter when strong vertical mixing unstratifies the water column and temperatures drop to their annual minimum, often <2°C in mid-January. Bottom temperatures during November through Feb- ruary tend to be slightly higher than surface temperatures because f # Saas : soe . : = 2 oe i = z vertical mixing does not keep pace with rapid surface cooling. Win- Clie coarse-Coarse sand ter minima persist into late February or early March. During April, i | Eedinsctum sna surface temperatures warm to =7°-8°C, with bottom tempera- i Fes] +2 to+ae: 58 ° / g Fine -Very fine sand tures usually remaining at <4°C except near the coast. A thermo- AA arr cline appears in May and intensifies during June when surface Cosree Medium Figure 5.—Mean grain size (o units) of sediments averaged over five quarterly cruises (August 1973-September 1974). 4 / \ pres east NEW JERSEY inl <50ppm Idry weight) [] 50-100 ppm f >100ppm Figure 6.—Average percentage of digestible organic materials in sediments. Figure 7.—Average concentrations of chromium in New York Bight apex sedi- ments. temperatures reach 17°C at the outer edges of the apex. Bottom water temperatures remain relatively unchanged at <6°C in the shelf valley. Surface temperatures reach their annual maximum value of about 26°C in August and bottom temperatures also show a steady rise to ~ 10°C in the shelf valley. Surface cooling during early autumn begins to break down the summer thermocline. By the end of October, surface temperatures have dropped to ~ 16°-18°C over much of the apex, while heat loss and vertical overturning increase the bottom water temperatures to ~ 12°C inside the shelf valley. Vertical mixing down to about 30 m is usually complete by early or mid-November when water temperatures are 12°-14°C. Bottom temperatures attain their annual maximum in this period. Vertical mixing continues through December and surface and bot- tom temperatures decline and approach their winter minima (Bow- man and Wunderlich 1976; Bowman 1977). The dominant bottom feature of the New York Bight is the Hud- son Shelf Valley, apparently cut by the ancestral Hudson River dur- ing times of low sea level. The center of the Christiaensen Basin (the landward terminus of the Hudson Shelf Valley Channel) is a natural collecting area for fine grained sediments. The apex outside the Christiaensen Basin is floored primarily by sand ranging from silty fine to coarse with small areas of sandy gravel, artifact gravel, and mud. In deeper water, in the Hudson Shelf Valley, where wave action is less pronounced, silt is the dominant sediment (Williams and Duane 1974: Freeland et al. 1976). Figure 5 shows mean grain size of sediments in the apex. a ees ed / / 4030+ NEW JERSEY [_]<15ppmidry weight] I] 15-50ppm [] 50-100ppm i | >100 ppm 401075 Figure 8.—Average concentrations of copper in New York Bight apex sedi- ments. TA_ SUE SVenl 4 4 BS \ isi seen ang 40:30 { \ i | l N | \ \ ] ] / i | | 40°20 | H \ y Be 4 NEW f \ _ fe ' JERSEY ‘ Ye ee, } 26 AWS is x / AS < | ee . ee ra / { H i O <10ppmidry weight] ‘ )3 me \ ()10-15ppm / >15 , i al ppm 4010+ a E =) aS ? Ya H i “i 74°00 73°50" 73°40’ Figure 9.—Average concentrations of nickel in New York Bight apex sediments. Sources of oxygen-consuming organic matter in the New York Bight have been analyzed by Segar and Berberian (1976). They reported that locally produced carbon from phytoplankton accounted for most of the oxygen demand in the apex, especially in summer. Sewage sludge and river-borne organic materials were generally of equal importance. The major contaminants of the New York Bight originate from the highly populated New York metro- politan area and the Hudson River drainage basin. Sources include offshore barged discharges from sewage treatment plants. indus- trial outfalls, and storm water runoff and overflows. Hatcher and Keister (1976) analyzed organic matter in the New York Bight sediments using the ratio of total carbohydrates (TCH) to total organic carbon (TOC). TCH:TOC ratios were ~40 in the sewage sludge disposal site and 50 or more in the axis of the Hud- son Shelf Channel. High TCH:TOC values (=>30) may be attrib- uted to sewage-derived organic material in sediment deposits. Figure 6 gives a detailed representation of the percentage of total digestible organic material in apex sediments based on our data from five seasonal cruises. Figure 11.—Average concentrations of zinc in New York Bight apex sediments. 6 NEW JERSEY NE JERSEY TURES PISS Zz any} ae N | <20ppm dry weight! ; ‘\ | [20-50 ppm ! J 50-100ppm 4010 e >100ppm | § Th i 2 i i . | 73°50" 73°40 O <50ppm dry weight! [)50-100 ppm / 7 100 -200ppm 4010 é i | >200 ppm : 1 73°50° 73°40" Life Histories and Distributions of Dominant Benthic Invertebrates Phylum Coelenterata Class Anthozoa Edwardsia spp.: elegans Verrill, 1869 and sipunculoides Stimp- son, 1854 DESCRIPTION: Small, slender, solitary anemones between 75 and 150 mm in length. They burrow in the sediment with their tapering “foot” and are often encrusted with sand and other foreign material. Sixteen to 36 mobile tentacles surround the mouth (Miner 1950). DISTRIBUTION: These two species of Edwardsia occur from the Bay of Fundy to at least Chesapeake Bay (Boesch et al. 1977). HABITAT: Gosner (1971) reported that Edwardsia elegans occurs between the littoral and 117 m, while Edwardsia sipuncu- loides is found in deeper water of 87-117 m. In this study, these species were found in depths between 23 and 46 m in abundances of 10-60/m*. They were most abundant in high organic fine sands or silts (Fig. 12; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Anemones, in general, feed on live or dead animal material ranging from plankton and detritus, collected Figure 12.—Distribution and abundance of Edwardsia spp. (E. elegans and E. stpunculoides) in the New York Bight apex. by ciliary currents, to larger organisms, captured by mucous secre- tions or nematocysts (Barnes 1963; Gosner 1971). No specific information on Edwardsia spp. was available. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No information specific to E. elegans or E. sipunculoides was available in this category. However, anemones can reproduce both asexually and sexually. Asexual reproduction is chiefly by longitudinal fission (budding). Sexual reproduction can involve individuals which are males, females, or protandnic hermaphrodites. A free-living larval form called the planula is produced in sexual reproduction. This larva eventually attaches to a substrate and metamorphoses into the adult benthic form (Barnes 1963; Gosner 1971). The larvae of some species of Edwardsia are parasitic on the sur face or in the gastrovascular system of medusae and ctenophores (Mnemiopsis sp.), adhering by means of the mouth margin and tak- ing food particles from their hosts by means of the siphonoglyph current (Hyman 1940; Gosner 1971). Ceriantheopsis americanus [Cerianthus americanus] (Verrill, 1866) DESCRIPTION: A smooth-bodied, brownish, elongate (up to 200 mm), burrowing anemone. It inhabits a distinctive heavy mucous tube, constructed in part with its own nematocysts. The inner surfaces of the tubes are purple or lavender. One hundred or more tentacles, in each of two circlets, surround the mouth (Miner 1950; Gosner 1971). DISTRIBUTION: Gosner (1971) considered Ceriantheopsis americanus to be a Virginian species, occurring from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras. However, Pratt (1935) and Miner (1950) gave its range as Cape Cod to Florida. HABITAT: Gosner (1971) reported occurrence of this species from the littoral zone to 21 m. Sanders (1956) reported it to be part of the typical soft bottom community in Long Island Sound; the species was also common in the sewage sludge disposal area of the New York Bight apex (National Marine Fisheries Service footnote 2). In the present study, C. americanus was collected in depths up to about 46 m in all sediment types. However, it was most abun- dant, occurring in numbers up to 340/m~’, in high organic fine sands to silt (Fig. 13; Table 1). The Cerianthidae are often found buried in the sediment with only the tentacles and oral disc protruding: their tubes may confer some protection from stressed environments. FEEDING ECOLOGY: C. americanus, like most smaller anem- ones, is thought to be a suspension feeder, with its mucous secre- tions and nematocysts aiding in the capture of small planktonic organisms. An extracellular and extracorporeal contact digestion has also been demonstrated in species of Ceriantheopsis. This digestion occurs when prey come into contact with enzymes pro- duced in the ectodermal layer of the labial tentacles (Barnes 1963: Tiffon 1975). Since C. americanus is able to withdraw rapidly into its mucous tube, it avoids being preyed upon by many finfish. However, it has been shown by Wobber (1970) that California species of genus Cerianthus, closely related to genus Ceriantheopsis, are often the prey of a nudibranch, Dendronotus iris. Dendronotus iris feeds on Cerianthus spp. tentacles, but because it consumes an average of only 2-10 tentacles per anemone, it does minor damage to the anemone. Table 1.—Total number of individuals per square meter averaged over five quarterly cruises (August 1973-September 1974). Sediment type Very Abs Sediment Organicileve IEEE coarse: Depth (m) High Medium ~— Low coarse Medium Taxonomic group 0-24 25-49 >5% 3-5 % <3% sand sand Phylum Coelenterata 470 2,170 1,910 340 390 60 120 Class Anthozoa 470 2,170 1,910 340 390 60 120 Edwardsia spp. (E. elegans and E. sipunculoides) 10 190 130 30 40 0 10 Ceriantheopsis americanus 460 1,980 1,780 310 350 60 110 Phylum Phoronida 360 1,080 930 210 300 10 170 Phoronis architecta 360 1,080 930 210 300 10 170 Phylum Mollusca 12,390 42,154 44,810 1,247 8,487 1,150 2,500 Class Gastropoda 50 60 20 20 70 0 30 Nassarius trivittatus 50 60 20 20 70 0 30 Class Bivalvia 12,340 42,094 44,790 L227 8,417 1,150 2,470 Nucula proxima 7,500 39,840 43,970 620 2,750 560 550 Astarte castanea 510 110 0 0 620 390 70 Arctica islandica 10 144 80 47 27 0 0 Cerastoderma pinnulatum 30 170 110 50 40 30 20 Pitar morrhuanus 190 690 400 110 370 20 50 Spisula solidissima 630 20 0 20 630 10 260 Tellina agilis 3,450 1,080 220 380 3,930 140 1,490 Ensis directus 20 40 10 0 50 0 30 Phylum Annelida 47,943 65,380 30,234 14,237 68,852 21,770 23,264 Class Polychaeta 43,782 64,016 30,207 13,147 64,444 = 19,980 20,537 Order Archiannelida Polvgordius triestinus 4.161 1,364 27 1,090 4,408 1,790 DIT 2h, Order Phyllodocida Phyllodoce arenae 208 215 31 30 362 17 101 Eteone longa 7 194 110 50 81 50 20 Harmothoe extenuata 141 189 6l 54 215 87 101 Sthenelais limicola 372 187 40 47 472 N7/ 151 Glycera dibranchiata 1,117 1,287 40 187 2,177 147 610 Goniadella gracilis 1,477 107 17 110 1,457 600 737 Nephtys bucera 1,017 188 30 27 1,148 200 507 Nephtys incisa 597 1,990 1,980 267 340 130 47 Nephtys picta 538 121 0 27 632 44 291 Nephtys (Aglaophamus) circinata 280 194 0 20 454 10 150 Order Capitellida Capitella capitata 34 6,145 5,028 20 1,131 0 1,027 Mediomastus ambiseta 546 7,334 6,430 380 1,070 320 308 Travisia carnea 137 71 0 0 208 24 48 Order Spionida Spio filicornis 349 862 By | 440 720 87 228 Prionospio steenstrupi 1,165 2,780 610 1,460 1,875 977 944 Polydora ligni 228 208 81 40 15 20 161 Spiophanes bombyx 9.511 9,080 460 590 «17,54 400 3,901 Paraonis gracilis 54 1,128 1,097 14 7\ 10 24 Aricidea catherinae 924 401 47 74 1,204 590 217 Order Eunicida Lumbrinerides acuta 351 80 10 10 411 287 107 Lumbrineris fragilis 622 594 67 310 839 490 278 Lumbrineris tenuis 564 1,537 600 410 1,091 410 327 Ninoe nigripes 344 1,484 470 300 1,058 340 120 Drilonereis longa 222 351 130 100 343 48 107 Order Magelonida Magelona riojai 238 1 0 0 245 10 88 Order Cirratulida Tharyx acutus 19,048 17,927 7,880 6,680 22,415 14,070 8,381 Tharyx annulosus 748 2,957 1,540 860 1,305 310 247 Caulleriella killariensis 297 97 10 10 374 37 190 Cossura longocirrata 40 370 400 10 0 0 0 Order Terebellida Ampharete arctica 322 224 67 130 349 57 107 Asabellides oculata 1,712 3,370 1,010 20 3,952 81 801 Order Flabelligerida Pherusa affinis $72 2,707 2,310 380 589 110 211 Phylum Arthropoda 4,230 1,340 380 270 4,920 410 1,740 Class Crustacea 4,230 1,340 380 270 4.920 410 1,740 Order Isopoda Edotea triloba 150 240 30 40 320 10 100 Fine- very fine sand 1,710 1,710 110 1,600 970 970 37,954 80 80 37,874 33,600 160 124 120 640 380 2,820 30 mw pm ew p= 168 147 13,304 918 167 260 i) 365 4,090 1,638 120 120 Le WwW 260 Coarse- medium silt 750 750 80 670 290 290 12,940 0 0 12,940 12,630 0 30 30 Table 1.—Continued. Depth (m) Taxonomic group 0-24 25-49 Order Amphipoda Ampelisca verrilli 810 (0) Unciola irrorata 280 450 Pseudunciola obliquua 640 10 Protohaustorius deichmannae 920 0 Protohaustorius wigleyi 520 Leptocheirus pinguis 0 330 Rhepoxynius epistomus 350 60 Order Mysidacea Neomysis americana 200 0 Order Decapoda Crangon septemspinosa 160 40 Cancer irroratus 200 210 Phylum Echinodermata 350 310 Class Echinoidea 350 310 Echinarachnius parma 350 310 Sediment type Very Fine- Sediment organic level Ronee very Corres High Medium Low coarse Medium fine medium >5% 3-5% <3% sand sand sand silt 0 0 810 0 140 670 0 20 80 630 180 190 360 0 0 0 650 60 280 310 0 0 0 920 0 370 550 0 0 0 520 70 240 210 0 290 0 40 0 10 60 260 0 30 380 10 160 240 0 10 10 180 0 50 140 10 0 20 180 20 70 110 0 30 90 290 60 130 210 10 0 0 660 20 240 400 0 0 0 660 20 240 400 0 0 0 660 20 240 400 0 REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: The Cerianthidae are pro- tandrous hermaphrodites. The young sea anemone lives as a cili- ated ball, unattached and free-swimming. During the Edwardsia stage, the larva usually settles and attaches to a variety of surfaces, develops tentacles, and adopts a benthic existence (Barnes 1963; Gosner 1971). C] 1-99/ m2 ie 100—349/ m2 Figure 13.—Distribution and abundance of Ceriantheopsis americanus in the New York Bight apex. Hyman (1940) stated that the life span of species of Cerianthus could range from 10 to 40 yr. Attempts at determining growth rates in the New York Bight apex have been unsuccessful (Fallon).° Phylum Phoronida Phoronis architecta (Andrews, 1890) DESCRIPTION: Slender, flesh colored, wormlike tube dwell- ers; adults reach 50 mm in length. No annulations or setae present on the body; at the anterior end, the lophophore, two parallel horseshoe-shaped ridges, bears tentacles and a central mouth. The cylindrical, straight tube, more than twice as long as the worm itself, is produced as a chitinous secretion, and, being intially sticky, becomes covered with sand (Gosner 1971). Emig (1969. 1971) has synonymized Phoronis architecta with Phoronis psam- mophila Cori, but this synonomy has been the subject of debate. A count of longitudinal muscle bundles is the only method of posi- tively separating P. architecta from P. psammophila (Paine 1961). DISTRIBUTION: Both coasts of North America (Emig 1969): Florida Gulf coast to Biscayne Bay (Paine 1961); Gulf of Mexico (Louisiana and Texas) (Hedgpeth 1954). HABITAT: Gosner (1971) reported the species as being found on sandy substrata from the lower littoral to depths of at least 18 m. Stancyk et al. (1976) stated that P. architecta occurred from sand to mud, from the intertidal to depths of 4 m. Wass (1972) reported densities of 90 individuals/m? in Chesapeake Bay. He also reported their occurrence in polyhaline waters with salinities as low as 18%. Boesch (1973), however, believed P. architecta may occur in much higher densities than reported by Wass (1972) in Chesapeake Bay. In the New York Bight apex, P. architecta occurred in depths ranging from 17 to 37 m. The species was collected from all sedi- ment types but was most common in fine-sand, high organic areas, where densities reached 290 individuals/m? (Fig. 14; Table 1). Phillip Fallon, Equitable Environmental Health, 333 Crossways Park Drive, Woodbury, NY 11797, pers. commun. April 1979. Figure 14.—Distribution and abundance of Phoronis architecta in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: Phoronids, like other lophophorates, are ciliary mucous suspension feeders, subsisting on plankters or detri- tus fragments (Gosner 1971). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: P. architecta has been regarded as a protandric hermaphrodite, but Hyman (1959) has questioned this view. Fertilization is external. No brooding occurs, with eggs hatching as an actinotroch larva (Gosner 1971). Typical actinotroch larvae were taken in plankton tows in Florida waters by Paine (1961) in December and February—August when towing was discontinuous. Adults reared in November had ova floating in their coelomic spaces, indicating a long, if not continuous, breeding sea- son. Davis (1950) also collected actinotrochs in Florida in Decem- ber and September and Hedgpeth (1954) recorded their presence during winter months in Louisiana and Texas. After several weeks of a free-swimming planktonic existence, the actinotroch undergoes a rapid metamorphosis and sinks to the bottom, where it secretes a tube and begins its adult existence (Barnes 1963). Phylum Mollusca Class Gastropoda Nassarius trivittatus (Say, 1822) DESCRIPTION: 1.9 cm in length; rather light shelled, 8-9 whorls, nuclear whorls smooth. Whorls in spire with 4-5 rows of strong, distinct beads. Color light ash to yellowish gray (Abbott 1974). The Nassariidae are gregarious, often occurring in great numbers (Abbott 1968). DISTRIBUTION: Newfoundland to off northeast Florida (Abbott 1974). HABITAT: Common from shallow water to about 82 m (Abbott 1974). Franz (1976) stated that Nassarius trivittatus is characteris- tic of the medium sand community in Long Island Sound. How- ever, N. trivittatus has also been recorded in muddy sediments in Delaware Bay (Kinner et al. 1974) and in high silt-clay sediments in northwestern Buzzards Bay (Driscoll and Brandon 1973). Nassarius trivittatus was the only abundant gastropod, occurring in numbers up to 20/m-, collected in the New York Bight apex. It was found in depths of 11-27 m and was most characteristic of low organic fine sands (Fig. 15; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: N. trivittatus, as all nassa snails (Nassa- riidae), is one of the most active and responsive scavengers among marine invertebrates. It has a keen ability to detect the products of chemical decomposition of dead flesh. Within a few seconds of sensing such a stimulus, the snail heads directly for its source. Nas- sas eat decaying fish and invertebrates; polychaete egg masses; eggs of the moon snail, Lunatia heros; benthic diatoms; and detri- tus on the sediment surface (Clarke 1956; Scheltema 1964; Abbott 1968). They, in turn, are preyed upon by fish such as haddock, Melanogrammus aeglefinus (Wigley 1956). Figure 15.—Distribution and abundance of Nassarius trivittatus in the New York Bight apex. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Sexes are separate, with shells of males usually being smaller. Egg capsules, containing about 50 eggs, are laid in rows on algae, shells, stones, or some- times on the underside of moon snail “sand collar” egg masses (Abbott 1968, 1974). In deeper waters of the continental shelf, N. trivittatus spawn during May and June when seawater temperatures are between 8° and 13°C. Intertidally, at Barnstable Harbor, Mass., spawning began in early May when seawater temperatures rose rapidly from about 9° to 15°C (Scheltema and Scheltema 1965). Pechenik (1978) reported spawning in the laboratory to occur at 7.4°C in December. Egg cases have been observed by Scheltema and Scheltema (1965) in Barnstable Harbor in early autumn. After about 1 wk at room temperature in the laboratory, 225 um long free-swimming veliger larvae emerged from egg cap- sules. Under favorable conditions of laboratory culture, metamor- phosis into snails occurred at 22 d following emergence, with most specimens between 0.9 and 1.1 mm in length at this stage. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Unlike many marine snails, nassas are attracted toward light (Abbott 1968). Class Bivalvia Nucula proxima Say, 1822 DESCRIPTION: Atlantic nut clam; 0.6 cm in length, obliquely ovate, smooth. Color greenish gray with microscopic, embedded, axial gray lines and prominent, irregular, brownish concentric rings (Abbott 1974). DISTRIBUTION: Nova Scotia to Florida and Texas; Bermuda (Abbott 1974). HABITAT: Common in mud and sand, 0.9-30 m (Abbott 1968, 1974). Menzel (1964) listed Nucula proxima as a subtidal mud dweller occurring at salinities >25%, in Florida. In Virginia, it occurs in sand to silty sand, at salinities >20%, (Wass 1965). In samples taken near the mouth of Delaware Bay, N. proxima was among the three most abundant species collected; there, it was a member of a high silt-clay facies (>50% silt-clay) (Kinner et al. 1974). In the soft-bottom community of Buzzards Bay, Mass., N. proxima and Nephtys incisa dominated the fauna (Sanders 1958, 1960; Driscoll and Brandon 1973). Ina prior apex study, Pearce (1972) found N. proxima in greater abundance around sludge deposits than in natural communities. In the present study, N. proxima was again clearly most abundant in high organic fine sands and silt, although it was present in all sedi- ment types. It occurred in numbers between 10 and about 22,000/ m° and was by far the most abundant bivalve collected (Fig. 16; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Nucula spp. are sporadically mobile, normally lying at or just below the sediment surface feeding on the sediment just beneath them by means of long appendages derived from the palp. Only fine particles are moved along the groove to the palps where they are passed by cilia to the mouth. Nucula spp. are thus selective deposit feeders (Abbott 1968: McCall 1977). Nucula spp. are a source of food for several species of bottom- feeding fish (Abbott 1968). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: N. proxima exhibits no egg protection; larvae are lecithotrophic with a short pelagic devel- opment. Time to maturity is unknown (Chanley 1969; Scheltema 1972). The size, shape, and coloration of this species vary according to substrate and water temperature. Among the probable forms are: truncula Dall, 1878; ovata Verrill and Bush, 1898; and annulata Hampson, 1971 (Abbott 1974). Allen (1953, 1954) showed precise year-classes for five English species of this genus. He postulated that the largest individual in his samples was 12-20 yr old, depending on the species, and that the yearly increment in length varied from 0.94 to 1.01 mm, regardless of species or age. Blake and Jeffries (1971) grew N. proxima in tanks. They estimated 2.0 mm/yr growth for the first size-class of N. proxima and 1.0 mm/yr for the second size-class. These esti- mates are greater than Carey's (1962) estimate of 0.38 mm/yr for N. proxima in Long Island Sound, but are similar to Allen’s (1953, 1954) estimates for British species. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Levinton (1972) found N. proxima in Long Island Sound to be randomly distributed with a tendency toward aggregation in some cases. Juveniles were distrib- uted essentially the same as adults. It is argued that the lack of defense mechanisms, the instability of the substrate. the small “reach” of the feeding organ, and the lack of advantage of territori- ality to a mobile deposit feeder, all contribute to the observed ran- dom patterns of N. proxima. In experiments using a radioactive tracer, cadmium-109 ('°°Cd), Jackim et al. (1977) showed that an increase in temperature or a decrease in salinity increased the '°Cd uptake rate of N. proxima. Figure 16.—Distribution and abundance of Nucula proxima in the New York Bight apex. The infaunal filter feeder Mulinia lateralis accumulated about five times more '°Cd than the deposit feeder NV. proxima. Evidence pre- sented indicated that early uptake rates might be indicative of sub- sequent acquired body burdens after long-term exposure. Astarte castanea (Say, 1822) DESCRIPTION: Commonly called the smooth Astarre; 2.5 cm in length and height, trigonal in shape, quite compressed. Shell almost smooth, except for weak, low concentric lines. Color a glossy light brown (Abbott 1974). DISTRIBUTION: Nova Scotia to off New Jersey (Abbott 1974). Miner (1950) and Gosner (1971) recorded the range to Cape Hat- teras. HABITAT: Characteristic of coarse sand (Franz 1976); in mud, in fairly shallow water to 30 m (Abbott 1968). Gosner (1971) reported it in depths to 119 m. Astarte castanea was collected in depths up to 25 m in the New York Bight apex. It occurred in all grades of sand but was most abundant in coarse sands. It was found only in low organic areas (Fig. 17; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: A. castanea has no siphons and is a sus- pension feeder (Sanders 1956; Abbott 1968). Astarte castanea is eaten especially by haddock, other ground- fishes, and predator snails. According to Wigley and Theroux Figure 17.—Distribution and abundance of Astarte castanea in the New York Bight apex. (1965), Astarte sp. is the third most important mollusk, behind Nucula tenuis and Cerastoderma pinnulatum, as food for haddock. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Sexes are separate, with male and female clams occurring in equal numbers (Abbott 1968). Astarte castanea begins producing mature viable gametes when 15-16 mm in length. Production of gametes is neither seasonal nor cyclic since mature gametes have been found in abundance in these animals throughout the year (Ruddell 1977). Arctica islandica (Linné, 1767) DESCRIPTION: The ocean quahog or mahogany clam; 8-13 cm in length, almost circular in outline, with a rather strong, porcela- neous shell which is commonly chalky. Arctica islandica is the only living species in its family (Arcticidae); there are numerous fossil species. Superficially, A. islandica resembles the hard clam, Mer- cenaria mercenaria, however, the dark brown to black periostra- cum (horny external covering) of A. islandica is the most obvious distinguishing characteristic (Abbott 1974). DISTRIBUTION: Newfoundland to off North Carolina, north- ern Europe, Iceland (Pratt 1973; Abbott 1974). HABITAT: The ocean quahog is a common, commercially dredged species, most abundant on silty sand and stable fine sand (Turner 1949; Parker and McRae 1970), but occasionally found on silt-clay bottoms (Arcisz and Sandholzer 1947; Bureau of Commercial Fisheries 1970°). Results of National Marine Fisheries Service surveys show that it is found at depths from 18-27 m to the shelf edge off New Jersey and the Delmarva Peninsula, and in scat- tered patches from 37 m off Virginia; it is also landed in small quan- tities in southern New England. While the shoreward boundary has been well established, distribution and abundance offshore is not well known. High temperatures limit the shoreward distribution of A. islandica; in the southern part of its range it is rarely found within the 17.5°C maximum isotherm as drawn by Walford and Wicklund (1968). In the laboratory, the upper lethal limit for fully acclimated Rhode Island animals is about 24°C; the ocean quahog is active at temperatures as low as 0°C, but activity decreases above 18°C (Saila and Pratt 1973). Almost all A. islandica collected in New York Bight apex grab samples were juveniles. They were taken from depths between 23 and 37 m. Arctica islandica were most common in fine sands but occurred in low numbers in silt. Highest total numbers were in high organic sediments with fewer in medium and low organic areas (Fig. 18; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: A. islandica has very short siphons and is a shallow burrower (Saleuddin 1964). It is a filter feeder with the capacity to filter large and variable amounts of water (Winter 1969). Merrill et al. (1969) stated that many dredged quahog shells have been found drilled by predatory, naticid gastropods. Caloric values of Canadian specimens follow a seasonal trend, with a summer maximum and winter minimum (4,276 to 3,684 cal/ g dry weight) (Tyler 1973). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: The reproduction of an ocean quahog population off Rhode Island was studied by *Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. 1970. Ocean quahog survey. Cruise Report, Delaware I] Cruise 70-5. National Marine Fisheries Service, Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base, Woods Hole, Mass., 6 p. JUVENILES [1-392 ADULTS Me <10/m? Figure 18.—Distribution and abundance of Arctica islandica in the New York Bight apex. Loosanoff (1953). Rapid gonad growth took place dumng spring and spawning began at a temperature of 13.5°C in late June or early July and continued into October. Landers (1973) found that the planktonic larvae reared at 10°C metamorphosed in about 60 d when they were about 200 ym in length. His attempts to ripen clams out of season met with limited success. Mermill et al. (1969) stated that it is not possible to estimate the age of adults. However, obvious annual rings indicate that commercial size individuals are over 10 yr old. Thompson’ sug- gested that this species may even live over 60 yr, an estimate based on refined growth ring analysis. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: In laboratory tanks and in the sea, it has been shown that A. islandica can exhibit a high degree of respiratory independence under hypoxic conditions. Under these conditions, the periods the clam spends at the surface alternate with periods when it is buried several centimeters below the surface of the sand, during which the animal respires anaerobically. There is no obvious rhythmicity to this behavior; the durations of periods spent beneath the surface are variable, even in the same animal, but they normally last between 1 and 7 d. As in other species studied, respiratory independence in A. islandica increases markedly with increasing body size and can also be modified by temperature and physiological condition (Taylor and Brand 1975a, b; Taylor 1976). The ocean quahog industry has developed more slowly than that of the surf clam, Spisula solidissima. It was not until the 1970’s that ‘da Thompson, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, pers. commun. October 1979. a vigorous commercial ocean quahog fishery developed, primarily to supplement diminishing supplies of the more desirable surf clams. Cerastoderma pinnulatum (Conrad, 1831) DESCRIPTION: Northern dwarf cockle; 0.6-1.3 cm in length, thin, with 22-28 wide, flat ribs which have delicate, arched scales on the anterior slope of the shell. Exterior cream colored, interior glossy and white (Abbott 1974). Cockles are active animals, with larger species able to leap several inches off the bottom (Abbott 1968). DISTRIBUTION: Labrador to off North Carolina (Abbott 1974). HABITAT: Because of their very short siphons, cockles must live near the surface of the substrate and consequently are affected by shifting sands and, in shallow water, by great temperature changes. They are commonly collected from 6 to 183 m (Abbott 1968, 1974). Franz (1976) stated that Cerastoderma pinnulatum is char- acteristic of coarse sand in Long Island Sound. In the apex of the New York Bight, C. pinnulatum was collected from depths of 22-37 m. It occurred in all sediment types but was most common in high organic fine sands (Fig. 19; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: C. pinnulatum possesses short separate siphons and feeds on organic matter suspended in water (Sanders oS 7) L ea hee er os'o 0 Vie > PN NEA 20 we } ' | i Se / \ | ¥ i \ 7 | pod ‘ yo) i a. ON i he eR } \! Bh nS \! { - A) 8 bone y 1 y \ i \ H a oes i a 40°20 es ONG x \ . aN ‘ i %y 1) \ peal t \ 20. / ~ f / Sex ‘ i / x Sw ae i H ) ae o> / Hi i / We J ; i 3 1-—69/m- 4010 a E | aN ef S We i a “a 74°00’ 73°50' 73°40° Figure 19.—Distribution and abundance of Cerastoderma pinnulatum in the New York Bight apex. 1956). Wigley (1956) reported that C. pinnulatum is the main prey item of haddock. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Cockles grow steadily except during the coldest months. Most are hermaphroditic (Abbott 1968). Pitar morrhuanus Linsley, 1848 DESCRIPTION: Morrhua Venus clam; 2.5-3.8 cm in length, oval-elongate, moderately plump; numerous heavy lines of growth. Color dull-grayish to brownish red (Abbott 1974). DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to North Carolina (Abbott 1974). HABITAT: Fairly common; dredged from sand at 6-183 m (Abbott 1968). In the New York Bight apex, Pitar morrhuanus was collected from depths between 19 and 37 m. It inhabited all sediment types but was most common in fine sands; total counts in high and low organic areas were almost equal, however, the largest concentration of P. morrhuanus was found at a high organic station. Pitar mor- rhuanus was the third most abundant bivalve, after Nucula proxima and Tellina agilis, collected in the Bight apex (Fig. 20; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: P. morrhuanus is a suspension feeder, drawing in food-laden seawater. Young Veneridae, including P. Figure 20.—Distribution and abundance of Pitar morrhuanus in the New York Bight apex. morrhuanus, are important food sources of both the blue, Callinec- tes sapidus, and green, Carcinus maenas, crabs and the drilling moon snails, Polinices spp. (Abbott 1968). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: The Venendae are prolific and are adapted to survival under difficult conditions. Sexes are separate and fertilization is external (Gosner 1971). In general, they spawn when the tide is out and usually during a part of the month when the tidal fluctuation is small. The larvae swim and crawl over the bottom until a suitable mud-covered, hard surface is found. They then secrete a byssus and remain attached for about a week until siphons develop (Abbott 1968). Spisula solidissima (Dillwyn, 1817) DESCRIPTION: Atlantic surf clam; commercial size individ- uals are approximately 12-15 cm in length, the largest bivalve in the Middle Atlantic Bight. Shell is strong, oval and smooth except for light irregular growth lines; color is yellowish white with a thin yellowish brown periostracum (Abbott 1974). Over 70% of all clams harvested in North America are the Atlantic surf clam from the Middle Atlantic Bight. DISTRIBUTION: Nova Scotia to South Carolina (Abbott 1968). HABITAT: The surf clam is common below the low water mark on ocean beaches. After violent winter storms, they are cast ashore in numbers estimated as high as 50 million clams along a 10 mi stretch (Abbott 1974). NMFS surveys show Spisula solidissima to be abundant north of Hudson Channel in depths of not more than 18 m. It also occurs on coarse bottoms of Georges Bank. From New Jersey south, populations extend to depths of 46 m. Very dense beds at an average depth of 12 m occur off Point Pleasant and Cape May, N.J. The beds of the Delmarva Peninsula form a bank 24-28 km off the coast at a depth of 27-35 m, and currently support the bulk of the U.S. fishery. Abundance of this clam is strongly correlated with coarse sedi- ments. Parker (1967) and Parker and Fahlen (1968) reported that catches in gravel were 2.5 and 2 times those in sand, and 5.5 and 3 times those in silt-clay. Their size and burrowing ability give them advantages over other bivalves in unstable sediments. In the New York Bight apex, primarily juvenile S. solidissima were collected in depths between 9 and 25 m. They were most abundant in medium and fine low organic sands. Very few occurred in coarse sand and none occurred in silt or high organic areas (Fig. 21; Table 1). Wass (1965) stated that S. solidissima only occurs at salinities > 28%, under natural conditions, but may be able to tolerate much lower salinities. Schechter (1956) placed the minimum tolerance of both eggs and sperm of S. solidissima at “40% seawater” or about 15% -. Eggs in the polar body stage, however, disintegrate at this salinity. In laboratory experiments, Castagna and Chanley (1973) found that some surf clams survived direct transfer to salinities between 15 and 30% . After acclimation, many survived salinities as low as 10% . The authors believe that S. solidissima does not inhabit the lower extremes of its potential salinity range because of larval predation, not salinity intolerance. They state that when lar vae of this species colonize inshore areas, they rarely develop because of intense predation by crabs, carnivorous gastropods, and bottom-feeding fish; this prevents the establishment of permanent populations of S. solidissima in estuanine areas. Figure 21.—Distribution and abundance of Spisula solidissima in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: S. solidissima is a filter feeder; it lies near the sediment surface and extends short, fused siphons into the water. Stephens and Schinske (1961) reported that their experi- ments with S. solidissima indicate that, during a 16-h period, the removal of the amino acid glycine from solution took place in the mantle cavity of adult surf clams with an efficiency of 87%; the ecological significance of this remains to be fully examined. The food of larval S. solidissima consists of diatoms, green algae, and naked flagellates (Hirano and Oshima 1963). Surf clams, when under stress of crowding or predator attack, may come to the surface and perform leaps of several feet. Preda- tors of this clam include the moon snails, Lunatia heros, in deep water, and Polinices duplicatus, in shallow water. Smaller surf clams provide food for fish, including cod and haddock, and for diving ducks (Saila and Pratt 1973). Franz (1977) compared the size distribution of S. solidissima valves with and without bore holes of L. heros. In specimens collected off Long Island, he found that predation by L. heros is largely limited to clams <80 mm in size and under 5 yr of age. However, older and larger clams are not completely immune to attack, since bored valves to 160 mm in length were occasionally observed. Thorson (1957) stated that communities where Spisula elliptica is dominant may have extremely high productivities; in European waters, these areas are growth centers for young flounder. The yield to man of S. solidissima-dominated bottoms in terms of fish food is probably lower in the Middle Atlantic Bight because much of the area where S. solidissima is most abundant is south of the range of the mass marketed groundfish such as cod, haddock, and yellowtail flounder. 15 REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: According to Ropes (1968), sexes are separate in S. solidissima and it has been reported that two annual spawnings occurred in three successive years off New Jersey, a major one from mid-July to August and a minor one in mid-October to November. Ina cool year (1965), a single spawn- ing was observed during September and October (Ropes et al. 1969). Larvae took 19 d to reach setting size in the laboratory at 22°C (Loosanoff and Davis 1963). Initial growth is rapid and clams can grow to 4.4 cm by the end of their first year (Yancey and Welch 1968). Clams reach commercial size of about 12.5 cm in 5-6 yr after which they grow at a much slower rate for as long as 17 yr. Maximum length is only 7.5-10 cm for specimens off Cape Cod but is about 17.5 cm for those off Long Island and to the south. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The modern fishery which developed after World War II utilizes highly developed, efficient hydraulic dredges. Yearly landings of surf clam meats for 1978 off New Jersey totaled 6,904 t, which sold at a price of about $1,093/t (Current Fisheries Statistics 1978). This was a drop from 5 yr before when total New Jersey landings were 9,792 t, which sold for a low price of about $277/t (Current Fisheries Statistics 1973). Much of the stock in the New York Bight apex is closed to fishing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration because of bacterial and chemical contamination. The surf clam is particularly well adapted to withstand mechani- cal stress, however, little is known about its ability to withstand other types of stress, either as larvae or adults. For example, during the 1976 New York Bight oxygen depletion phenomenon, thou- sands of S. solidissima were found dead during surveys, with some recolonization by juveniles reported in the summer of 1977 (Steim- le and Sindermann 1978; Steimle and Radosh 1979). Tellina agilis Stimpson, 1857 DESCRIPTION: Northern dwarf tellin; 0.8-1.3 cm in length: moderately elongate, compressed, fairly fragile; glossy-white to rose externally with an opalescent sheen. External sculpture of faint, microscopic concentric, impressed lines (Abbott 1968, 1974). DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to Georgia (Abbott 1974). HABITAT: Common; in sandy mud, 0.9-45 m (Abbott 1968). In Long Island Sound, Franz (1976) found Tellina agilis to be charac- teristic of medium sand. In samples taken near the mouth of Dela- ware Bay, T. agilis was among the three most numerous species collected, occurring in the transition zone between pure sand and mud facies (Kinner et al. 1974). In Delaware’s coastal waters, it was the most abundant and frequently occurring bivalve in clean medium-coarse sand (Maurer, Leathem, Kinner, and Tinsman 1979). The occurrence of T. agilis in large numbers throughout a wide sediment range indicates that it has a broad tolerance for sedi- ment particle size. Wass (1965) has determined that 7. agilis prefers salinities > 18%, under natural conditions. However, in the laboratory, it tol- erates a wide salinity range (2.5-30%p»). In nature, it may not inhabit its potential salinity range because of biological interactions such as predation, competition from other species, or special envi- ronmental requirements, i.e., high levels of dissolved oxygen, low levels of suspended sediments, suitable bottom type, etc. (Castagna and Chanley 1973). Tellina agilis was found at almost all stations sampled in the New York Bight apex. Although it tolerated a wide range of sediment types, it was most characteristic of fine or medium grain, low organic sands. Tellina agilis was the second most abundant bivalve in our samples, following Nucula proxima (Fig. 22; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Tellin clams have two long, slender siphons, which can be extended several times the length of the shell, permitting the clams to live well below the surface of the sand, while deposit feeding on the sediment surface. The large foot is suitable for rapid and deep burrowing and the clams travel exten- sively under the sand, both vertically and horizontally (Abbott 1968). Stomach analyses show that 7. agilis feeds largely on diatoms and detritus (Sanders et al. 1962; Levinton 1972; Levinton and Bambach 1975). Kinner et al. (1974) stated that they may occa- sionally be suspension feeders. This dual feeding mechanism may explain the occurrence of 7. agilis in a wide range of sediment types. It has been found that the movement of siphons of Tellina spp. may attract visual predators such as the commercially important winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Gilbert 1970; Gilbert and Suchow 1977). Edwards et al. (1970) have shown that in Scotland, small flounder, Pleuronectes platessa, obtain a large part of their food by preying on siphons of Tellina tenuis da Costa, which can later be regenerated. However, more studies are needed to determine the importance of 7. agilis siphons in the diet of young winter flounder. NEW : oS — JERSEY \ Wz < ; iN pas ~ i Ne qe, aie * SS Wy ee . i F 40105 & oo a ea ! == \ 73°50’ 73°40" = Figure 22.—Distribution and abundance of Tellina agilis in the New York Bight apex. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Sexes are separate and fer- tilization is external (Gosner 1971). The larvae of T. agilis are planktotrophic with a long pelagic development. Time to maturity is unknown (Sullivan 1948; Boss 1966). Ensis directus Conrad, 1843 DESCRIPTION: Atlantic jackknife clam; up to 25 cm in length; six times as long as high, moderately curved with sharp edges. Shell white, covered with a thin, varnish-like brownish-green periostracum (Abbott 1974). In its undisturbed state, Ensis directus occupies a vertical position in its burrow with an inch or two of shell exposed. When disturbed, it burrows rapidly to safety propel- ling itself by releasing jets of water around the base of the foot; it is also a capable swimmer (Drew 1907; Abbott 1968). DISTRIBUTION: Labrador to South Carolina, Florida (Abbott 1974). HABITAT: Common on sand flats of New England, but subtidal beds in sandy mud at depths of 3-9 m are not uncommon (Abbott 1974). In Long Island Sound, Franz (1976) found E. directus to be characteristic of the medium sand assemblage. In Virginia, it is an intertidal and subtidal form found in waters above 20%p salinity (Wass 1965). Under experimental conditions, however, Chanley (1969) found that FE. directus could be acclimatized to survive at 7.5-28% , however, a rapid salinity change of 15%» within this range was lethal. In the New York Bight apex, E. directus occurred in low abun- dance, 10/m*, at each of six stations, in depths <28 m. It was present, almost exclusively, in low organic medium and fine sands (Fig. 23; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: E. directus is a suspension feeder (Wig- ley 1968). It is a food item for man as well as for invertebrates. McDermott (1976) stated that Cerebratulus lacteus (a nemertean worm) feeds on E. directus by entering its burrow from below and engulfing the anterior end of the bivalve. This predation was observed from New Jersey to North Carolina. Polinices duplicatus (a moon snail) captures E. directus by approaching it below the sur- face of the substratum and iritating its lower portion so that the clam retreats upward. The snail then coats the razor clam with an envelope of slime which appears to have an anesthetic property. Successful capture probably depends on the ability of the snail to maintain contact with its prey until anesthesia has taken place (Turner 1955). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: According to Williams and Porter (1971), planktonic juvenile E. directus occur abun- dantly from December to June in North Carolina. They exhibit long pelagic development with time to maturity unknown (Turner 1953). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: McCall (1977) characterized E. directus as an “equilibrium” species, 1.e., it is present early in colonization, but remains at low and constant abundance. Relative to more opportunistic species, equilibrium species exhibit slow development, few reproductions per year, low recruitment, and low death rate. Saila and Pratt (1973) stated that although the razor clam is abun- dant along the east coast, it has not been exploited commercially as on the west coast. Scattered fisheries for local markets in Massa- Figure 23.—Distribution and abundance of Ensis directus in the New York Bight apex. chusetts and New York and recreational clamming account for the east coast harvest. Phylum Annelida Class Polychaeta Order Archiannelida Polygordius triestinus Hempelmann, 1906 DESCRIPTION: Polygordius triestinus is a member of a group called the archiannelids, a heterogeneous assemblage of small worms that have been considered either derivatives of several poly- chaete families or specialized relicts of the ancestral polychaete stock. Polygordius triestinus, adapted for interstitial life, is a very slender worm, lacking obvious external annulation, eyes, and setae. Its only appendages are two cylindrical tentacles projecting from the head and two cirri projecting from the pygidium. Gosner (1971) reported them to be <15 mm in length; Fauvel (1927) reported them reaching Jengths up to 30 mm. DISTRIBUTION: Very little is known about the distribution of this species, however, Gosner (1971) classified it as a Virginian species, occurring from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras. Figure 24.—Distribution and abundance of Polygordius triestinus in the New York Bight apex. HABITAT: An unidentified species of Polygordius was the most abundant macrobenthic species in clean medium grain sand off the Delmarva Peninsula (Maurer et al. 1976). Figure 24 and Table 1 indicate that P. triestinus was generally associated with sandy (pri- mary medium-grain) sediments with low to medium organic con- tent in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: The antennae of this genus are actively cast about in front of it as it crawls along, very much as in some of the spionid polychaetes. Similarly, Polygordius spp. are deposit feeders (Hermans 1969). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Fauvel (1927) believed P. triestinus to be hermaphroditic. However, hermaphroditism in this species is doubted by Schroeder and Hermans (1975) because they believe that the coexistence of eggs and sperm observed in a single individual by Hempelmann (1906) was the result of fertilization, as has been shown in another archiannelid, Protodrilus sp. by Jager- sten (1952). Gosner (1971) also reported sexes to be separate in most archiannelids. Salensky (1907) pointed out that some species of Polygordius released their eggs by a breaking off of the posterior end of the spawning adult. He suggested that such behavior may represent the origin of epitoky and stolonization found in a number of polychaete families. MacBride (1914) and Hermans (1969) stated that Polygordius spp. exhibit the primitive pattern of poly- chaete development by producing well developed planktotrophic trochophore larvae. Order Phyllodocida Phyllodoce (Anaitides) arenae Webster, 1879 DESCRIPTION: An active, crawling, mucus-secreting form, which moves freely over the sediment surface or swims. Dorsal surface with dark transverse bands; length to 100 mm, width to 2.5 mm, segments to 200 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Maine to North Carolina (Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Coarse to muddy sand mixed with some shell frag- ments, intertidal to 195 m (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). In the New York Bight apex, Phyllodoce arenae occurred primarily in fine to medium, low organic sandy substrates and was sparsely rep- resented in coarse sands, silt, and medium to high organic areas (Fig. 25; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Their active habits and well-developed eyes imply that all phyllodocids are carnivorous, but no form of prey or plant remains has ever been found in the gut of P. arenae (Pettibone 1963; Day 1967). A closely related species, Phyllodoce maculata, 1s predaceous, attacking and devouring other poly- chaetes and nemerteans, being itself protected, to some extent, by its abundant, offensive mucus (Pettibone 1963). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: P. arenae has been found swarming at the water surface in June, July, and August in Woods Figure 25.—Distribution and abundance of Phyllodoce arenae in the New York Bight apex. Hole, Mass., however, they are not epitokous. Many phyllodocids lay their greenish-colored eggs in gelatinous masses. The larvae of P. arenae may have a long pelagic existence as do those of several other species of Phyllodoce (Thorson 1946; Pettibone 1963). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: McLusky and Phillips (1975) studied the effects of copper on P. maculata. They found the threshold of toxicity of copper in seawater to this polychaete to be approximately 0.08 ppm. In a 1.00 ppm solution, worms accumu- lated 437.5 ppm copper within 2 d, after which death occurred. Higher accumulations, reaching 567.8 ppm, were found in worms which had been exposed to 0.06 ppm concentrations for 3 wk with no obvious side effects. This suggests that it is not the amount of copper contained in tissues which results in death, but some other factor such as rate of uptake. At lower rates of uptake, the animals may be able to cope by depositing the copper in the tissues or possi- bly by excreting it through the nephridial system. In a 0.08 ppm solution (the lethal concentration), the rate of uptake corresponds to an increase of about 25 ppm of copper per day, which is probably the critical rate of uptake. Eteone longa (Fabricius, 1780) DESCRIPTION: A slender-bodied burrowing form; length to 160 mm, width to 5 mm, segments to 200 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Widely distributed in the Arctic, also Iceland, Norway to English Channel, Hudson Bay to off North Carolina, Chukchi Sea to Mexico, north Japan Sea, China (Pettibone 1963; Reish 1965). HABITAT: Found at low water in mud flats, muddy sand, sand, gravel, under stones, eelgrass. Also found in depths to 1,668 m in sandy mud, sand and shells, and in various combinations of soft mud, sand, gravel, pebbles, rocks, shells, and worm tubes (Petti- bone 1963). In the New York Bight apex, Eteone longa was found in all sediment types in depths = 14m, but was found in highest concentrations in high organic, silty-fine sand areas (Fig. 26; Table 1). Seasonal distributions were almost identical. FEEDING ECOLOGY: Because of their active nature and well- developed eyes, it has been assumed that all phyllodocids are carni- vores. Khlebovich (1959, cited in Fauchald and Jumars 1979) reported that FE. /onga feeds exclusively on the spionid polychaete, Spio filicornis; Michaelis (1971) found the same species to feed exclusively on another spionid polychaete, Scolelepis squamata, however, Retiére (1967) found E. longa to be less selective, feeding on a variety of small metazoans. Wigley (1956) stated that phyllodocids, in general, are among the most important foods of small (14-30 cm) Georges Bank had- dock. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Pettibone (1963) reported that some specimens of E. /onga were filled with yolky eggs during Apmil 1954 in Rye Harbor and Hampton Harbor, N.H. According to Thorson (1946), the eggs are spawned in irregular, slimy masses and the larvae have a relatively short planktonic existence. In the Danish Isefjord, Rasmussen (1956, 1973) observed adults of E. longa swimming actively near the surface of the water in Apnil and May, where eggs of 110 wm diameter were spawned. Planktonic larvae were found from late April to late May. The species is also known to reproduce at this time of year in England (Meek and Star Figure 26.—Distribution and abundance of Eteone longa in the New York Bight apex. row 1924). Rasmussen (1956, 1973) reported observing large num- bers of young E. longa swimming in a warmer (12°C) backwater of a creek in East Jutland (Denmark), while mature adults in an adja- cent colder portion (10°C) remained in the mud, indicating a possi- ble correlation between temperature and spawning. On the basis of living material, Rasmussen (1973) reported that E. longa is mature at a length of 20 mm (males) or 30 mm (females) in the Isefjord. Harmothoe (Lagisca) extenuata (Grube, 1840) DESCRIPTION: A crawling form, dorsal surface covered with elytra (scales). Body depressed, length to 74 mm, width including setae to 20 mm, segments 37-47. DISTRIBUTION: Widely distributed in the Arctic. Also Ice- land, Faroes, Norway to Mediterranean and Adriatic, Hudson Bay to Chesapeake Bay, North Carolina, Bering Sea to southern Cali- fornia, north Japan Sea, South Africa (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Harmothoe extenuata appears to have great powers of dispersal and adaptation, occurring from the intertidal to 1,830 m; euryhaline. It is often associated with two other common north- ern polynoids, Lepidonotus squamata and Harmothoe imbricata (often confused with H. extenuata). Intertidally, it is found under rocks, in tide pools with algae, sponges, etc.; on fronds of kelp; on pilings among mussels, tunicates, sponges, hydroids, etc.; abun- dant in beds of Mytilus edulis. Harmothoe extenuata is dredged on 19 Figure 27.—Distribution and abundance of Harmothoe extenuata in the New York Bight apex. all types of bottom (Pettibone 1963). Our New York Bight apex data agree with these observations in that H. extenuata occurred, usually in small numbers, in all sediment types ranging from coarse sand to silt, with high to low organic levels (Fig. 27; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: H. extenuata possesses a large probos- cis, armed distally with two pairs of amber-colored interlocking jaws. They are slow-moving predators and, despite their strong jaws, feed on small prey (Pettibone 1963; Day 1967). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Reproductive strategies of Harmothoe spp. are variable. In New Hampshire, female H. extenuata with coral-pink eggs inside the body were found in April 1954; other females were observed with eggs extruded and carried between the parapodia and on the ventral surface (Pettibone 1963). Curtis (1977) observed that gametogenesis of H. imbricata (a closely related species) occurred in Greenland throughout autumn and winter with spawning activity confined to spring (March- May). Ripe, large eggs (150-180 um) were richly supplied with yolk granules at spawning time. Maturity was reached at a length of 9-10 mm, with animals attaining a mean size of 6, 12, and 18 mm after their first, second, and third years of life, respectively; most individuals underwent reproductive development during their sec- ond year. A population of H. imbricata at Arcachon, France, is described as having a completely planktonic larval development (Cazaux 1968), and Blake (1975) has also observed planktonic larvae on the California coast, where the species broods eggs of 120-123 pm diameter, releasing them into seawater after the trochophore larvae have developed. The size of mature oocytes in the study by Curtis (1977) in Greenland was similar to that found for H. imbricata in the Ise- fjord, Denmark, where they measured 150 wm (Rasmussen 1956). In the Isefjord, the species spawns in winter and produces typical trochophore larvae with a pelagic phase after intial brooding under the female elytra. However, egg size for H. imbricata is variable and Rasmussen cited other observations ranging from 50 to 76 um. It is postulated that such small ova probably give rise directly to pelagic planktotrophic larvae without any early protection of the embryos. Daly (1972, 1974) stated that H. imbricata is capable of complet- ing its life cycle in a single year in British waters, where all survi- vors of a new year class apparently spawned at the end of their first year. The smallest specimens in the population at the time had reached a size of 9 mm, which closely coincides with the minimum size reported for the Greenland population (Curtis 1977). Each female underwent two successive spawnings, about | mo apart, releasing large oocytes (140-160 ym) to be brooded beneath the elytra. Sthenelais limicola (Ehlers, 1864) DESCRIPTION: A burrowing form, with dorsal surface covered with translucent elytra (scales). Length to 100 mm, width including setae to 4 mm, segments to 200 or more (Pettibone 1963). Figure 28.—Distribution and abundance of Sthenelais limicola in the New York Bight apex. DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to North Carolina, Nor- way to Mediterranean, Adriatic, South and West Africa (Pettibone 1963). HABITAT: Collected on sandy or muddy bottoms from the inter- tidal to 770 m (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). Kinner (1978) found Sthenelais limicola to be one of the dominant species in sand on the inner and mid-shelf from Georges Bank to Cape Hatteras. In the New York Bight apex, S. limicola was collected in all sediment types, usually in low numbers. It was most abundant in medium to fine, low organic sands (Fig. 28; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Members of this family (Sigalionidae) are, in general, burrowing predators (Day 1967). They are eaten by cod, flounder (McIntosh 1900), and haddock (Wigley 1956). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No information specific to the genus Sthenelais is available. Brooding among the Siga- lionidae has not been reported as it has been for other scale worms of the family Polynoidae (Schroeder and Hermans 1975). Glycera dibranchiata Ehlers, 1868 DESCRIPTION: Commonly known as the “bloodworm,” a commercially valuable bait worm. Active burrowers; length to 510 mm (Klawe and Dickie 1957). DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to West Indies, Gulf of Mexico, central California to the Pacific coast of Mexico (Petti- bone 1963; Hartman 1969; Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to 400 m. Found at low water and collected in deeper water on bottoms of sand, mud, mud mixed with gravel, rocks, and particularly, mud rich in detritus. Found on more exposed beaches than Glycera americana, especially where cur rents flow swiftly; found in brackish waters and tidal estuaries (Pet- tibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). From Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras, Kinner (1978) found Glycera dibranchiata to be a dominant mid- shelf sand species. Kinner and Maurer (1978) regularly collected G. dibranchiata in Delaware Bay, with increasing numbers associ- ated with sediments containing increasing amounts of silt-clay; Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers (1977a) also found it to be abundant in New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf samples. In the New York Bight apex, G. dibranchiata was found in depths ranging from 9.6 to 33.1 m. It was present in all grades of sand (none was found in silt), but was most abundant in fine sand. Glycera dibranchiata was absent or occurred in low numbers (10/ m?) in sediments having the highest organic content; it was most abundant in low organic sediments (Fig. 29; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Glycera spp. possess a strong, muscular, clavate proboscis, armed distally with four equally spaced large jaws. The proboscis serves glycerids as an organ of special sense, with a remarkably well-developed nervous system (Gravier 1898). Both Day (1967) and Fauchald (1977) agreed that glycerids appear to be mainly carnivorous, for very little sand is ever found in the gut; however, Sanders et al. (1962) believed glycerids to be omni- vores. Klawe and Dickie (1957) classified them as detritus feeders and Adams and Angelovic (1970), in a feeding experiment using a radioactive tracer, carbon-14, also found detritus to be an important food source. Studies on Glycera alba showed them to be preda- ceous (Ockelman and Vahl 1970), possesing both proteolytic and Figure 29.—Distribution and abundance of Glycera dibranchiata in the New York Bight apex. lipolytic enzymes (Vahl 1976). On the basis of morphology, it may be postulated that glycerids are primarily carnivorous, but are capa- ble of using other feeding modes under certain environmental con- ditions. Spawning bloodworms are preyed on by herring gulls, Larus argentatus, and striped bass, Morone saxatilis, while spent epi- tokes are consumed by shrimp (Crangon septemspinosa) which, in turn, are eaten by striped bass (Creaser 1973). Glycera dibranchi- ata has also been found in the stomachs of haddock off Georges Bank (Wigley 1956). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: The reproductive patterns of G. dibranchiata have been studied by several investigators. Klawe and Dickie (1957) made observations on a population of G. dibranchiata from Goose Bay at Wedgeport, Nova Scotia. They found that eggs and sperm began developing in late summer and were sexually mature by early April (fully developed eggs mea- sured between 180 and 190 ym in diameter). The peak of spawning took place in mid-May; after spawning, remains of spent worms were found on the flats, appearing as “ghost worms,” consisting of outer skin and atrophied digestive tract with everted proboscis. This indicated that life terminates after spawning (the spawning process itself was not observed). Eggs developed into planktonic larvae which, after a short time, transformed into bottom dwellers. From an analysis of distribution of size classes in the population, Klawe and Dickie (1957) determined that most of the intertidal population lives for 3 yr and that they spawn before reaching the fourth year; a small fraction spawn when 4 or 5 yr old. Growth is 21 most rapid during the second and third years, decreasing sharply thereafter. In contrast, the study by Simpson (1962) showed G. dibranchi- ata to breed twice a year in Solomons, Md., during fall and during late spring or early summer as well. She observed swarming taking place over a moderately large area in shallow water during late afternoon on 5-8 November 1960. Her data suggested that the onset of swarming may be coordinated with tidal conditions. The pelagic larvae that were produced were nearly or fully indifferent to light in their early phases. Her other findings were in general agree- ment with those of Klawe and Dickie (1957). Creaser (1973) studied a population of G. dibranchiata in Wis- casset, Maine. He found them to spawn annually in June, usually at an age of 3 or 4 yr. A bottom temperature in excess of 13°C seemed necessary for spawning to occur. Generally, between 2 h before and 1 h after high water in the afternoon, males emitted streams of sperm while swimming at the surface, while females swam rapidly at the surface and suddenly ruptured, liberating all eggs at once. Eggs usually measured 151-160 pm in diameter. Klawe and Dickie (1957) have calculated that a bloodworm measuring 22-24 cm may contain 1.5-2.0 million eggs. A Wiscasset bloodworm of this length would be expected to contain 3.0-3.5 million eggs. The emission of gametes in the Maine study was not, however, confined to surface waters. Creaser (1973) also observed a male in 3 m of water swimming in a vertical position just above the bottom emit- ting sperm. All observations agree with the belief of Klawe and Dickie (1957) that all bloodworms die after spawning, with 5 yr the maxi- mum life span. The size range of sexually mature bloodworms in Maine was between 18 and 51 cm (Creaser 1973); in Nova Scotia, 13-36 cm (Klawe and Dickie 1957); in Maryland, 7-26 cm (Simp- son 1962). These geographical differences in size of bloodworms may be attributed to the effects of temperature on growth and matu- rity or possibly to differences in races of bloodworms. An interest- ing observation made by Klawe and Dickie (1957) was that G. dibranchiata does not grow in summer months. This finding is in direct contradiction to almost every other temperate or boreal inver- tebrate studied. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: G. dibranchiata is harvested extensively from the mud flats of Maine and other Gulf of Maine areas. There, it supports a multimillion dollar bait worm industry. In the New York Bight, it is not commercially harvested, but is col- lected by recreational fishermen. Goniadella gracilis (Verrill, 1873) DESCRIPTION: Active worms making temporary burrows in sand (Dales 1963). Length to 50 mm, width to 1 mm, segments to 100 or more (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Massachusetts to Virginia; Irish Sea, Liver pool Bay, South Africa (Walker 1972; Day 1973). HABITAT: Intertidal to 450 m (Day 1973). Found burrowing in fine sand at low water; collected on bottoms of fine gravel, fine to coarse sand and soft mud (Pettibone 1963; Walker 1972). Goniadella gracilis was one of the dominant species on the mid- continental shelf in the Delaware Bay region, associated with poorly sorted, coarse sediments (>1 mm) (Kinner and Maurer 1978), and was among the 15 most abundant taxa on Georges Bank in winter (Maurer and Leathem 1980). It was also abundant in some areas on the New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf (Pearce. Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers 1977a). In the New York Bight apex, G. gracilis occurred in depths ranging from 9.6 to 34.0 m. It was most abundant in coarse to medium sand with an organic con- tent between 1.0 and 3.3%. It was not present in fine sediments with extremely high organic contents (Fig. 30; Table 1). NEW | JERSEY ee 100 —339/m? Figure 30.—Distribution and abundance of Goniadella gracilis in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Goniadidae have well-developed jaws and probably most species are predators, or at least carni- vores, for very little sand is ever found in the gut (Pettibone 1963: Day 1967). Wigley (1956) reported that G. gracilis has been found in the stomachs of haddock off Georges Bank. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Pettibone (1963) reported that, when sexually mature, the Goniadidae may become modified into an epitokous swimming form. In the postenor region, where the sex products are formed, parapodial lobes become more elon- gate. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: During the 1976 anoxic event off the coast of New Jersey, G. gracilis was abundant at heavily impacted stations, implying a high tolerance of oxygen depletion (Steimle and Radosh 1979). This was unexpected because in the New York Bight apex samples, G. gracilis was rare in high organic areas; this species is also known to be characteristic of ridge envi- ronments (Boesch et al. 1977; Radosh et al. 1978) in which anoxic episodes may be relatively rare. Nephtys bucera Ehlers, 1868 DESCRIPTION: An active burrowing species, length to 300 mm, width to 20 mm, segments to 140 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to North Carolina, Gulf of Mexico (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to 180 m; found at low water in sand bars, shifting sand, muddy sand, and collected from bottoms of sand and stones (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). Nephtys bucera was col- lected on the New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf (Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers 1977a) as well as in the New York Bight apex, where it was found in all sediment types, particularly medium to fine grained low organic sand. Nephtys bucera was rarely found in high or medium organic content sediments (Fig. 31; Table 1). TUR 4010 a — aoe s 8 Ze 74°00 73°50’ 7340° Figure 31.—Distribution and abundance of Nephtys bucera in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: N. bucera is probably a surface deposit feeder and/or carnivore (see following account of Nephtys incisa). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No specific information was available for N. bucera, however, it is probable that they pro- duce planktotrophic larvae (see N. incisa). 8Radosh, D., A. Frame, T. Wilhelm, and R. Reid. 1978. Benthic survey of the Baltimore Canyon Trough, May 1974. Northeast Fishenes Center Sandy Hook Lab- oratory, Informal Rep. SHL 78-8, 133 p. Nephtys incisa Malmgren, 1865 DESCRIPTION: A mobile, burrowing, large species, reaching a maximum length of 150 mm, width to 15 mm, segments to 75 (Pet- tibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Greenland, Davis Strait, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, North Sea, Baltic to Portugal, Mediterranean, Gulf of St. Lawrence to Virginia, Chesapeake Bay, North Carolina (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to 1,745 m; found on bottoms of soft or sticky mud, muddy sand, very fine or coarse sand, mud which con- tains gravel, shells, worm or amphipod tubes, or decaying debris (Pettibone 1963; Day 1967). Pettibone (1963) reported Nephtys incisa to be “the most common and abundant species on muddy bottoms along the New England coast, in bays and sounds as well as off the open coast.” In these situations, it is usually associated with the bivalves Nucula proxima and Yoldia limatula, members of a distinct deposit-feeding soft bottom community (Sanders 1958, 1960). From Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras, Kinner (1978) found N. incisa to be a dominant on the mid-outer shelf in silt-clay. Pearce (1972) found N. incisa in greater abundance around sludge deposits in the New York Bight apex than in relatively unpolluted habitats. In the present New York Bight apex study, N. incisa was present in all sediment types but was clearly most abundant in fine sand or silty areas having the highest percentages of sediment organic material (Fig. 32; Table 1). Figure 32.—Distribution and abundance of Nephtys incisa in the New York Bight apex. 23 FEEDING ECOLOGY: Until recently, it was thought that all nephtyids were strict carnivores, probably because they possess large jaws, but Sanders (1956, 1960) found N. incisa in Long Island Sound and in Buzzards Bay, Mass., to be nonselective deposit feeders. Sanders, however, did not deny that NV. incisa was capable of acting as a carnivore under certain conditions. Con- versely, Clark (1962) believed N. incisa is, at best, a facultative detritus feéder, primarily because its gut is almost always empty indicating a carnivorous diet and rapid digestion. Day (1967) believed them to be selective omnivores because they are found in such large numbers in certain areas. Nephtys incisa is also important as a prey item. Wigley and The- roux (1965) found it to be a principal annelid, along with Aphrodita hastata, in the diet of haddock. Tyler (1973) found Canadian specimens to have no seasonal trend in caloric value; the annual mean for N. incisa was 3,984 g cal/g dry weight. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: N. incisa spawns year round in Long Island Sound with peaks in early spring and late sum- mer (Sanders 1956). Specimens of N. incisa with coral-pink eggs have been found in August in Massachusetts and young specimens of 28-32 segments have been found in August in Maine (Pettibone 1963). Nephtys incisa does not brood its young, but produces large numbers of planktotrophic larvae (10°-10° per female) which undergo a long pelagic development. Time to maturity is unknown (Thorson 1946; Sanders 1956; Clark 1961, 1962). Relative to more opportunistic species, N. incisa exhibits slow development, few reproductions per year, low recruitment, and low death rate. Because of these factors, because they do not brood developing young, and because they produce large numbers of planktotrophic larvae, they are classified as an “equilibrium” spe- cies, present early in colonization, but remaining at low and con- stant abundance (McCall 1977). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: There is some evidence, including that provided in this study, that Nephrys spp. are highly tolerant of some environmental stresses (Jones 1955; Weber 1971). They are also physiologically equipped for infrequent feeding and long periods of starvation (Clark 1964). Mobility and size could also aid these polychaetes in both escape from predators and migra- tion to more favorable microenvironments. Nephtys picta Ehlers, 1868 DESCRIPTION: A mobile species, length to 60 mm, width to 4 mm, segments to 100 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: New England to Flonda, Gulf of Mexico (Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to 40 m (Pettibone 1963); 8-141 m, usually <50 m (Kinner 1978). Found at low water in muddy sand, sandy rubble, gravelly sand. Collected on bottoms of sand and muddy sand, with shells and sea weeds (Pettibone 1963). In the New York Bight apex, Nephtys picta was found in all grades of sand, most commonly in medium to fine sand. It was not found in high organic sediments and was rare in medium organic sediments (Fig. 33: Table 1). Kinner (1978) found N. picta to be a dominant species in sand on the inner shelf from Georges Bank to Cape Hatteras, while Kinner and Maurer (1978) reported increasing numbers of N. picta associated with sediments containing increasing amounts of silt- clay in Delaware Bay. ‘ : é Figure 33.—Distribution and abundance of Nephtys picta in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: N. picta is probably a surface deposit feeder and/or carnivore (see Nephtys incisa). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No information specific for N. picta was available, however, planktotrophic larvae are probably produced (see N. incisa for details). Nephtys (Aglaophamus) circinata Verrill, 1874 DESCRIPTION: A mobile species; length to 50 mm, width to 5 mm (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to North Carolina (Gar diner 1975). HABITAT: Collected on bottoms of mud, sand with gravel, rocks, shells (Pettibone 1963); found from Cape Cod to Cape Hat- teras in depths of 13-611 m (Kinner 1978). In Delaware Bay, Nephtys circinata was not significantly associated with any sedi- ment parameters; it was found in a range of sediment types (Kinner and Maurer 1978). On Georges Bank, it was an abundant species negatively correlated with silt-clay (Maurer and Leathem 1980). Steimle and Radosh (1979) found it to be a ubiquitous species in sandy sediments off New Jersey. In the New York Bight apex, N. circinata was present in fine to coarse sandy sediments, most com- monly in fine sands, but was absent from silty sediments and areas where sediment organic content exceeded 3.8 % (Fig. 34; Table 1). eo RN 30 * + + ' t “ Figure 34.—Distribution and abundance of Nephtys (Aglaophamus) circinata in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: N. circinata is probably a nonselective deposit feeder and/or carnivore (see Nephtys incisa). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Nothing is known of the reproductive patterns of N. circinata in this area. However, it is probable that it produces planktotrophic larvae (see N. incisa). Winter and summer distribution and abundance patterns were simi- lar in the New York Bight apex. Order Capitellida Capitella capitata (Fabricius, 1780) DESCRIPTION: Motile burrowers which form mucus-lined gal- leries; body slender, generally 30-50 mm long, dark red when alive (Day 1967; Gosner 1971). Grassle and Grassle (1976) believed that Capitella capitata is not a single species but a complex of at least six sibling species, each with a different life history. Therefore, information here reported may apply to a species complex rather than to a single species. DISTRIBUTION: A cosmopolitan species, occurring in cold, temperate, and warm waters throughout the world (Warren 1976). HABITAT: C. capitata is often used as an indicator of pollution and also of unpredictable environments all over the world (Muus 1967; S. Schultz 1969; Wolff 1973). The species becomes common in areas following a period of oxygen depletion (Leppakoski 1969; Steimle and Radosh 1979), in sludge dumps (Halcrow et al. 1973; Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers 1977b; Pearce, Rogers, Caracciolo, and Halsey 1977), and in sediments contaminated by oil (Reish 1965; Sanders et al. 1972). Henriksson (1969) demon- strated a linear correlation between counts of bacteria indicative of pollution and the abundance of C. capitata in the Oresund, Den- mark. Capitella capitata is found in numbers as high as 60,000/m> at depths up to 637 m off California in areas where the normally diverse deep-sea fauna is absent or uncommon (Hartman 1961). Similarly, it has been noted by several investigators (Leppakoski 1969: Barnard 1970; Sanders et al. 1972) working in other areas, that for C. capitata to achieve large population sizes, other species must be absent or present in low numbers; this suggests that C. cap- itata is a poor competitor. Wolff (1973) showed that C. capitata was not very responsive to sediment differences and Reish (1971) even found them settling on blocks of wood in Los Angeles Harbor. War- ren’s (1977) study of environmental variables likely to affect the distribution of C. capitata suggested that a high organic content is most important, with particle size of sediments indirectly influenc- ing the distribution of the species through its relationship with organic content, C. capitata being most common in fine sands. This appears to be true in the New York Bight apex where C. capi- tata was highly concentrated in high organic fine sand (up to 5,000/ m_-) near the center of the sewage sludge disposal site. It occurred in other areas of the apex, but at much lower concentrations (10-40/ m-*). Since fine sandy sediments with similar depth regimes and lower organic contents are common in the apex, it appears that the very high organic content and/or the lack of competitors in the sludge disposal area was the prerequisite for the dense settlement of the species (Fig. 35; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Capitellids use their eversible proboscis to burrow, and they are generally thought to be nonselective deposit feeders. Since C. capitata does not possess the enzymes to digest plant material, Warren (1977) concluded that microorganisms form the bulk of its food. Stephens (1975) reported minimal bacterial consumption in C. capitata and believes nutrition is achieved by direct absorption of microorganism-associated dissolved amino acids across the body wall, however, the net energy gain is not clear. Tenore and Hanson (1980), in an experiment using different types of radioactively labelled detritus, found that the faster the decomposition of the detritus, the greater the amount utilized in the growth of C. capitata. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: In West Greenland, small oocytes of C. capitata were formed during most of the year but these attained spawning size only in the spring (March-April 1959; April 1960) (Curtis 1977). In England, estimates of total number of oocytes produced ranged from 10,000 in young females to 14,400 in older worms, most eggs released in a single spawning (Warren 1976). However, C. capitata is able to breed throughout the year as it has been observed to do in Buzzards Bay, Mass., (Driscoll 1972) and at Warren Point, England (Warren 1976). When food is always available, their asynchronous mode of reproduction allows them to exploit their resources to the fullest without placing too heavy a demand on food supply at any one time. Muus (1967) found egg number in Danish specimens to average 130, with adults producing one to several broods. Warren (1976) found the yolky egg to require 10-14 d develop- ment in the maternal tube and a further 7 d before metamorphosis as 25 ee 2B 4030+ ae pee | | } bom | ' i\ Se ON eee il £4 Ve Se } t g ZN wa Ff Tee Nieman vs } H Re { ~ \j ~ Rice fp \ NO NS H ire Ne of i NOS i | ry i} 10, ms \! yy } - a Ae : \ aes 5 it ‘ : 40207 H i vo. 4) Ce) } \ iS j NEW i bys bd i JERSEY ‘i m Z ‘ SS i 5 : f \ SS ve i a ee { Hy \, n ea 1-99/m?2 . \ } i [2] 1000—5,009/m2 f ‘ i E S 8 ' / tf \ 73°50’ Figure 35.—Distribution and abundance of Capitella capitata in the New York Bight apex. a lecithotrophic, planktonic larva. According to Eisig (1914), these larvae are photopositive. Rasmussen (1956, 1973) found two sepa- rate modes of development in the Isefjord, Denmark, where larvae developed nonpelagically during winter within adult tubes, but in summer, eggs were protected within the brood for only 10-14 d before a free-swimming stage emerged. Reish (1965) described a single specimen from the Bering Straits which was incubating eggs within the maternal tube during July. In West Greenland, a number of specimens were found brooding eggs and early unsegmented lar vae within their tubes (Curtis 1977). Rasmussen (1956), Muus (1967), and Grassle and Grassle (1974) all agreed that larval devel- opment may be completely benthic. By this alternative mode of reproduction, C. capitata can rapidly exploit local concentrations of organic matter. Newly metamorphosed larvae have been observed in the Woods Hole, Mass., plankton in June (Simon and Brander 1967), in spring in the Isefjord (Rasmussen 1973), and in late summer and early fall in the Elbe Estuary, Germany (Giere 1968). In Wild Harbor, Mass. settlement of planktonic larvae has been observed in late winter and summer with greatest settlement from May to October. Larvae have been collected from the plankton essentially year-round in the Oslofjord, Norway (Schram 1968), at Banyuls sur Mer (Bhaud 1967), and in the Gulf of Marseilles, France (Casanova 1953). It is possible that planktonic larvae are produced only in dense popula- tions or when food is scarce. Adult size can vary from about 1 mm to a maximum of 100 mm; Curtis (1977) reported maturity to be reached at a length of about 10 mm in West Greenland. Grassle and Grassle (1974) reported that time to maturity is fairly constant at about 30-40 d, thus emphasiz- ing the importance of rapid maturation in opportunistic species. even where resources permit production of only a few eggs. Sexes are normally separate and, according to Warren (1976), occur in approximately equal proportions. Males are readily distin- guished by large copulatory setae on the eight and ninth setigers. In laboratory and field populations, Grassle and Grassle (1974) have found that some genetically distinct individuals change sex from male to female and may be self-fertilizing before the transition is complete. This is an obvious advantage where the pattern of disper- sal and the distribution of suitable habitats results in only a few indi- viduals reaching a particular unexploited habitat. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The cosmopolitan distribu- tion of C. capitata and its tolerance of wide ranges of temperature, salinity, oxygen content, and a variety of other conditions inimical to other organisms cannot fully be explained since laboratory stud- ies do not show unusual ranges of tolerance to any of these environ- mental variables. For example, Reish (1970) compared C. capitata with three other species of polychaetes on the basis of their toler ance to different concentrations of nutrients, salinity, and oxygen. Capitella capitata was most sensitive to increased concentrations of silicates, second most sensitive to reduced oxygen conditions, but most tolerant of increased phosphates and reduced salinities. Henriksson (1969) found C. capitata to be less tolerant of low oxy- gen conditions than Nereis diversicolor or Scoloplos armiger. Mangum and Van Winkle (1973) demonstrated that C. capitata had no unusual regulatory ability in decreased oxygen concentrations although C. capitata could repay an oxygen debt whereas Polydora ligni could not. Laboratory studies do not reveal any unusual toler ance to detergents or to heavy metals (Kaim-Malka 1970; Bellan et al. 1972; Reish et al. 1974). The Wild Harbor (Massachusetts) studies (Sanders et al. 1972) indicate that C. capitata is more sensi- tive to high concentrations of oil than Nereis succinea and Rossi et al. (1976) found C. capitata to be more sensitive to three of four test oils used than Nereis arenaceodonta. Results of these studies would seem to indicate that a synergistic effect of several factors, e.g., the concentrations of organic matter, dissolved oxygen, etc., may be responsible for determining popu- lation levels of C. capitata in a given situation. Another explana- tion might be that if C. capitata is indeed a complex of six sibling species (Grassle and Grassle 1976), and if all or a few of these spe- cies were present in a certain area, at a certain time, the most “fit” or tolerant of existing conditions could be selected for. Mediomastus ambiseta (Hartman, 1947) DESCRIPTION: Small burrowing, motile worms; length to about 38 mm in our collections. DISTRIBUTION: East coast of United States, southern Califor nia, and lower California (Hartman 1969; Hobson 1971). HABITAT: Intertidal and shelf depths (Hobson 1971). Mediomastus ambiseta was collected in high numbers from coarse sand and a serpulid polychaete assemblage in Delaware Bay (Maurer, Watling, Leathem, and Kinner 1979; Haines and Maurer 1980). In the New York Bight apex, M. ambiseta reached very high concentrations in high organic silty sediments (up to 8,820/m? in summer). It was also abundant in medium to high organic content fine sands (up to 840/m? in summer), but occurred in lower num- bers in coarse and medium sand and in lower organic areas (Fig. 36). FEEDING ECOLOGY: All members of this family (Capitelli- dae) are deposit feeders (Day 1967; Gosner 1971). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Although no specific information is available on the reproduction and growth of M. ambiseta , following the West Falmouth (Massachusetts) oil spill, it exhibited some degree of opportunism (Sanders et al. 1972). Therefore, it may be characterized by rapid development, many reproductions per year, high recruitment, high death rate, and some form of brood protection (McCall 1977). There were 5.9 times more M. ambiseta at the Bight apex stations during summer months than in winter (Fig. 36). Figure 36.—Distribution and abundance of Mediomastus ambiseta in the New York Bight apex (top—summer, bottom—winter). Travisia carnea Verrill, 1873 DESCRIPTION: A stout-bodied, grublike worm; length to 59 mm, width 8 mm, segments 25-29 (Pettibone 1954). (Only Alas- kan specimens reach maximum size reported.) DISTRIBUTION: Northeastern United States to Chesapeake Bay; Arctic Alaska (Verrill 1873; Pettibone 1954; Kinner and Maurer 1978). HABITAT: Found at depths between 5.4 and 34.2 m. In the apex of the New York Bight, Travisia carnea occurred in low numbers, rig, sy oern tt Figure 37.—Distribution and abundance of Travisia carnea in the New York Bight apex. primarily in fine sand, and only in the lowest organic areas (<3%) (Fig. 37; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: T. carnea is a motile deposit feeder which burrows head downward in the sediment. Its gut has often been observed to be full of sand grains ingested along with the organic matter in the substrate (Day 1967). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No information was avail- able for this species. Order Spionida Spio filicornis (Muller, 1776) DESCRIPTION: Usually tubicolous as are other spionids, but can leave tube (Remane 1933); length to 30 mm, 90 segments, usu- ally smaller (Day 1967). DISTRIBUTION: Worldwide (Hartman 1969). HABITAT: Spio filicornis often forms dense colonies on sand- banks (Day 1967). In the New York Bight apex, we found S. fili- cornis in depths ranging from 9.6 to 45.6 m. It was usually associated with medium to fine sands with low to medium organic content (Fig. 38). Dil Figure 38.—Distribution and abundance of Spio filicornis in the New York Bight apex (top—summer, bottom—winter). FEEDING ECOLOGY: S. filicornis is a tentaculate surface deposit feeder (Day 1967). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Although mating in Spio spp. has not been observed, on the basis of observations during cul- ture experiments, Greve (1974) has hypothesized that S. filicornis is unusual in that it uses the indirect transfer of pelagic sperma- tophores to fertilize its eggs. Other marine organisms exhibiting a similar behavior are members of the Halacaridae (marine mites). The reproductive activities of S. filicornis have also been studied by Curtis (1977) in Godhavn, Greenland. He reported that spawning occurs during autumn or winter with the release of large (180-300 pm) eggs. Eggs were brooded within the female tubes until late spring, when they developed into larvae with three setigers bearing long swimming setae. As is the case with members of the genus Polydora, these larvae appeared to metamorphose within the parental tubes, some juveniles (1 mm, 10 setigers) being found in an adult tube collected in April 1959. The onset of maturity occurred at a length of about 10 mm (2-3 mg). In the Gullmar Fjord, Sweden, Hannerz (1956) observed that S. filicornis laid its eggs in gelatinous masses within or on top of the substratum. Brood protection was lacking, and the pelagic larvae metamorphosed at the 15-setiger stage. Simon (1967, 1968) found that Spio setosa, a close relative of S. filicornis, exhibited poecilogony, spawning once in the late spring resulting in benthic larvae, and again in the fall with pelagic larvae. Planktotrophic pelagic larvae with from 4 to 22 setigers were col- lected between mid-October and mid-February in Great Harbor, Woods Hole, Mass. They metamorphosed generally at the 18-20 setiger stage. Following the spring spawning, development occurred entirely within the parent tube. Benthic larvae metamor phosed at the 15-17 segment stage, leaving the parent tube and bur rowing into the surrounding substratum. In response to a lack of suitable substratum, most S. seftosa metamorphosed anyway, form- ing tubes of mucus. However, some larvae did not metamorphose for periods of up to 2 mo, increasing in size and sometimes in num- ber of segments. Larvae survived and metamorphosed in 50, 75, and 100% seawater. In the New York Bight apex, during summer months, we found more widespread occurrence of S. filicornis, and higher numbers at several scattered locations (Fig. 38). Prionospio steenstrupi Malmgren, 1867 [Prionospio malmgreni var. dubia Day, 1961] DESCRIPTION: Length to 45 mm, 100 segments (Day 1967); tubicolous, but can leave tubes (Remane 1933). DISTRIBUTION: North Atlantic from Norway to Greenland and New Brunswick to Florida; Alaska to southern California; Japan, South Africa (Day 1973). so é \ eas \ Noes ; tt NEW JERSEY 40107 Figure 39.—Distribution and abundance of Prionospio steenstrupi in the New York Bight apex. HABITAT: Intertidal to 1,745 m (Day 1973). Pearce -(1972) found Prionospio steenstrupi to be more abundant in marginally polluted areas than in uncontaminated areas in the New York Bight apex. In the present samples, we also found P. steenstrupi to be most abundant in areas containing >3% organic material, occur ring in highest concentrations in high organic (>5%) areas. They were abundant in all grades of sand and moderately abundant in silty sediments (Fig. 39; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Spionidae are tentaculate, surface deposit feeders. They are probably nonselective since their guts contain many sand grains as well as detritus (Day 1967). Spionids are a major food item in the diet of haddock (Wigley and Theroux 1965). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Curtis (1977), in Green- land, found that the seasonal trend in oocyte size favored a winter or spring spawning period for Prionospio malmgreni. Hannerz (1956) reported that in the Gullmar Fjord, Sweden, mature ova measure 100 nm and development is planktotrophic with no brood protec- tion. Day (1967) stated that various species of Prionospio must be very abundant, for their larvae are present in enormous numbers in neritic plankton samples. Polydora ligni Webster, 1879 DESCRIPTION: Small, tubicolous worms; largest specimens measure 32 mm in length and have up to 80 segments (Blake 1971). DISTRIBUTION: Cosmopolitan, in all oceans at all latitudes (Hartman 1969). HABITAT: Intertidal to a few meters (Day 1973); Polydora ligni is a common inhabitant of estuaries in North America. In the New York Bight apex samples, P. /igni was found in depths to 46 m. They were present in all sediment types but were most common in medium to fine sand. Greatest abundance occurred in low organic areas: however, they were also represented in higher organic sedi- ments (Fig. 40). Hempel (1957) has studied the tubes of Spionidae and found that substrate materials used for building are not chosen at random, but are rather carefully selected. According to Kisseleva (1967), the determining factors in the selection of building materials are weight and quality of the substrate granules; for Polydora ciliata larvae, the critical factor is particle size, not composition. FEEDING ECOLOGY: P. ligni, as all other spionids, is a sur face deposit feeder (Day 1967). Breese and Phibbs (1972) found P. ligni in laboratory cultures feeding on larvae of the Manila clam, Tapes semidecussata, and the oyster Crassostrea gigas. One worm contained 20 larvae. The spionids entered the molluscan rearing tanks as larvae, and presumably fed on the algae Monochrysis lutheri and Isochrysis galliana, the food organisms used for cultur ing the molluscan larvae. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: P. ligni lays its orange eggs (120 um in diameter) in tough egg capsules. These may be protected inside the burrow, the female remaining with the develop- ing larvae, and producing a current of water through the burrow, insuring continuous oxygenation. In Maine waters, these egg cap- sules have been collected from April to July with up to 132 eggs/ capsule (Blake 1969); in the Woods Hole, Mass., area, the number Figure 40.—Distribution and abundance of Polydora ligni in the New York Bight apex (top—summer, bottom—winter). of egg capsules ranges from 4 to 29 with up to 216 eggs/capsule (Simon).° This agrees well with observations of up to 30 capsules with 25-225 eggs/capsule in the Isefjord, Denmark (Rasmussen 1973). Simon (1967) has observed developing larvae to sometimes use unfertilized eggs as a food source (adelphophagia). Two or more broods may be produced by each female in season (Blake 1969; Daro and Polk 1973). Larvae are not released into the plank- ton until they have reached the late 3-setiger stage (Hannerz 1956; Day 1967; Blake 1969). Large numbers of P. ligni larvae are present in the plankton of the Woods Hole area from March until September (Simon 1967). In the York River, Va., the occurrence of planktonic larvae of P. ligni was observed for a period of 12 wk in 1970. Larvae first appeared on 11 March and weekly samples gen- erally showed a continuous increase in mean length. Maximum size was reached on 14 April, when inspection of test panels revealed an intitial settlement of metamorphosing larvae with a mean length of 1.25 mm. Larvae reared in the laboratory at 21°C required 19-28 d to develop fully, while larvae reared at 10°C required 60-69 d (Orth 1971). In another study, Breese and Phibbs (1972) observed P. ligni in laboratory culture to complete development to the adult stage and build tubes at salinities and temperatures ranging from 25 to 34%, and 18° to 26°C. In the Oslofjord, Norway, Schram (1968, 1970) found P. ligni to be the most abundant larval species every month of the year except December. Polydora ligni was also the most abundant larval poly- chaete in the Elbe Estuary, Germany (Giere 1968). The life cycle may be completed in 5 or 6 wk (about 2 wk in the plankton and 9J. L. Simon, pers. commun., cited by Grassle and Grassle (1974). 29 about 3 wk to maturity following settlement). Some adults live for at least a year (Daro and Polk 1973). In the New York Bight apex, we found P. ligni to be much more widespread and abundant during summer months than winter months (Fig. 40). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Following the West Falmouth (Massachusetts) oil spill, P. Jigni was the second most successful opportunistic species (following Capitella capitata). It settled pri- marily on muds or muddy sands but it is also known from hard sub- strata such as shells (Sanders et al. 1972). In the repopulation of the Raritan River Estuary following pollution abatement, P. ligni was among the most abundant colonists the first year and three subse- quent years (Dean and Haskin 1964). Spiophanes bombyx (Clapareéde, 1870) DESCRIPTION: A discretely motile species which inhabits a sand tube lined with a fragile mucoid secretion. Body up to 60 mm long with 180 segments (Day 1967). DISTRIBUTION: Worldwide (Hartman 1969). HABITAT: Intertidal to 200 m. Kinner and Maurer (1978) reported Spiophanes bombyx to be one of the dominant species on the mid-continental shelf in the Delaware Bay region. Off south- west Long Island, $. bombyx was a dominant polychaete in the medium-coarse grain sand community (Steimle and Stone 1973). On Georges Bank it was the most abundant polychaete collected, increasing in density with higher percent sand and lower carbon content of sediments (Maurer and Leathem 1980). Spiophanes bombyx was also extremely abundant and widespread at New York- New Jersey outer continental shelf stations sampled by Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers (1977a). In the New York Bight apex, S. bombyx was collected at almost all stations in all sediment types, and was the second most abundant polychaete in our study. It occurred most often in fine sand, low organic areas, and showed moderate abundance in fine to medium sand, with medium to high organic contents (Fig. 41; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Spionidae are tentaculate, surface deposit feeders. Their guts contain many sand grains as well as detritus (Day 1967). Wigley and Theroux (1965) stated that spionids are important in the diet of haddock. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Day (1967) stated that most spionids lay large eggs enclosed in tough egg capsules. Depending upon environmental conditions, these may be liberated directly into seawater so that all development takes place in the plankton (remaining in the plankton for as long as 3 mo), or they may be protected inside the burrow during early developmental stages. However, Hannerz (1956) believed development in Spiophanes spp. to be entirely pelagic. The larvae can, within lim- its, delay leaving the plankton until they find and settle on a suitable substratum. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: S. bombyx, known to be a tol- erant species, often occurring in stressed environments, showed a marked increase in abundance during the 1976 New Jersey anoxic event (Steimle and Radosh 1979). Boesch et al. (1977) likewise found S. bombyx to be resistant to anoxia and found it to be oppor = NEW JERSEY He] 100-999 m2 1000— 1,909 / m= 40107 Figure 41.—Distribution and abundance of Spiophanes bombyx in the New York Bight apex. tunistic as well, showing substantial post-anoxic increases in popu- lation, possibly due to its capacity for rapid recolonization and its anoxia and sulfide tolerance. Paraonis gracilis (Tauber, 1879) DESCRIPTION: Motile burrowers; body threadlike, length to 25 mm, width to 0.5 mm, segments to 100 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Cosmopolitan (Day 1967). HABITAT: 5.4—2,002 m. Collected on bottoms of soft and sticky mud, muddy sand, mud with stones, gravel, and tubes (Pettibone 1963). In the New York Bight apex, Paraonis gracilis was almost always associated with fine sandy or silty sediments with high organic content (Fig. 42; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Paraonids burrow just below the sedi- ment surface and are classified as nonselective deposit feeders (Dales 1963; Day 1967; Gosner 1971). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: In August, in Maine, Pet- tibone (1963) has observed females of this species with large yolky, coral-pink eggs, about two per segment dorsally, and males with white sperm masses. 30 6 SO a y 1 10) / a = \ (1Q--+f---- a jee" J r é \—40°30 40°20" NEW ? JERSEY } a / } i Sei? a 2 / ty i i 1 1 Ys ‘ n | 1-99/ m2 : i / QJ 100-629 /m? [ f be 4010 so x) cE j ake » / i a ; 7400 73°50’ 73°40' Figure 42.—Distribution and abundance of Paraonis gracilis in the New York Bight apex. Aricidea catherinae (Laubier, 1967) [Aricidea jeffreysii (McIntosh, 1879)] DESCRIPTION: Motile burrowers; length to 20 mm, width to 1.5 mm, segments to 120 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Ireland, Denmark, Mediterranean, Davis Strait to Delaware, North Carolina, Florida, western Canada (Gulf of Georgia) (Pettibone 1963; Day 1967). HABITAT: Collected on bottoms of coarse to fine sand, sticky and soft mud, ooze, muddy sand, sand or mud with gravel, shells or tubes; 1.8 to 1,908 m depths (Pettibone 1963). On Georges Bank, Aricidea catherinae was abundant in coarse sand (Maurer and Leathem 1980). Aricidea catherinae was found in all sandy sedi- ment types in the New York Bight apex, but was rare or absent in silt. They were uncommon in the highest organic areas, and were present in highest concentrations in low organic coarse sands (Fig. 43; Table 1). Conversely, in Delaware Bay, Kinner and Maurer (1978) found this species to be negatively correlated with an increase in grain size of sediments. FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Paraonidae possess a simple pro- boscis for digging. They burrow just below the sediment surface | 1-99/ m2 ES 100—239/m? Figure 43.—Distribution and abundance of Aricidea catherinae in the New York Bight apex. and are nonselective deposit feeders (Dales 1963; Day 1967; Gosner 1971). Wigley (1956) has found A. catherinae in the stomachs of had- dock off Georges Bank. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Pettibone (1963) has observed female A. catherinae massed with large yolky coral-pink eggs, and males with white sperm masses in Massachusetts during July. The large size of the ova indicates that the larvae are not pelagic. This agrees with Curtis’ (1977) observation that Aricidea suecica (a related species), in Greenland, exhibits direct or lecitho- trophic larval development. Order Eunicida Lumbrinerides acuta (Verrill, 1875) DESCRIPTION: Motile burrowers; length to 40 mm, width to 1 mm. segments to 125 (Pettibone 1963; Jumars and Fauchald 1977). DISTRIBUTION: Maine to New Jersey; southern California to western Mexico (Pettibone 1963). HABITAT: Intertidal to about 185 m (Pettibone 1963); 16 to 450 m (Kinner 1978). Found at low water on mud and sand flats. Col- lected on bottoms of mud and coarse to medium sand (Pettibone 1963). In the Delaware Bay region, Kinner and Maurer (1978) found Lumbrinerides acuta to be one of the dominant species on the 31 Cae tad 7 [J 1-99/me FJ 100-139 /m? Figure 44.—Distribution and abundance of Lumbrinerides acuta in the New York Bight apex. mid-continental shelf. There, it was associated with poorly sorted coarse sediments (>1 mm). In the New York Bight apex, except for one occurrence, L. acuta was absent from silty, high organic sediments, occurring in greatest abundance in coarse to medium, low organic content (<3%) sands (Fig. 44; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Lumbrineridae are generally con- sidered to be carnivorous, with some exceptions, but it is not known whether they are mainly predaceous or scavengers. The anterior end of the prostomium is richly supplied with nerves and the jaws are very powerful (Day 1967). Lumbrinerides acuta has been found as a prey item in the stom- achs of Georges Bank haddock (Wigley 1956). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No specific information was available for L. acuta. However, it probably exhibits nonpela- gic development as do other lumbrinerids (see Lumbrineris fragilis, Lumbrineris tenuis, and Ninoe nigripes). Lumbrineris fragilis (O. F. Muller, 1776) DESCRIPTION: Burrowing, motile, length to 380 mm, width to 12 mm, segments to 340 (Pettibone 1963; Jumars and Fauchald 1977). DISTRIBUTION: Arctic, Iceland, Faroes, Norway to Azores, Madeira, Mediterranean, Hudson Bay to North Carolina, Bering Sea, Alaska, north Japan Sea (Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to 3,445 m. Found at low water on bottoms of mud, muddy sand, gravelly mud, and shifting sand. Collected on bottoms of sticky and soft mud, silty clay, various combinations of mud, sand, gravel, pebbles, stones, worm tubes, shells, and detri- tus (Pettibone 1963). In Kinner’s (1978) study from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras, Lumbrineris fragilis was a dominant species in sand on the inner and mid-shelf, and in silt-clay on the mid-outer shelf and slope. Greatest numbers occurred in medium, well-sorted sands. Steimle and Stone (1973) found L. fragilis to be a dominant species in medium-coarse grain sand off southwest Long Island. Similarly, in the New York Bight apex, L. fragilis, although present in all grades of sand, was most concentrated in medium-coarse sand with an organic content of <4%. It was absent from most stations with high organic contents or was present in very low numbers (10-20/m?) (Fig. 45; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: L. fragilis, as other lumbrinerids, is con- sidered a carnivore. Blegvad (1914) listed the gut content for L. fra- gilis as polychaetes, ophiuroids, nemerteans, small crustaceans, and bivalves. Lumbrineris fragilis has been found as a prey item in the stom- achs of cod and haddock (Pettibone 1963). Tyler (1973) found no seasonal trend in caloric value for Cana- dian specimens; the annual mean was 4,565 g cal/g dry weight. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: L. fragilis has been observed containing large eggs in August in the Woods Hole, ) Mass., area (Pettibone 1963). Figure 45.—Distribution and abundance of Lumbrineris fragilis in the New York Bight apex. We i) Within the Lumbrineris population at Disko Fjord, Greenland, Curtis (1977) observed that large oocytes (200-250 um) of L. fragi- lis were present at all times of the sampling interval (1959-60) indi- cating that the species produces larvae having a direct development. Yet, although most specimens were large and pre- sumably mature, only about 20% of those sampled were involved in gametogenesis. This suggests that a large segment of this popula- tion did not reproduce. Thorson (1946) also considered that L. fra- gilis has a direct larval development as did Pettibone (1954), who collected nonpelagic larval lumbrinenids, tentatively identified as L. fragilis, at Point Barrow, Alaska, during September. These lar- vae were found in mucus masses, sometimes attached to the tuni- cate, Boltenia echinata. Lumbrineris tenuis Verrill, 1873 DESCRIPTION: Body threadlike, length to 150 mm, width to 1 mm, segments to 200 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Maine to North Carolina, Gulf of Mexico (Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to abyssal depths. Found at low water bur rowing in mud and sand beneath stones, in compact sand mixed with mud, and in sandy mud flats close to the low water mark. Col- lected on bottoms of gravel with shells, mud, compact mixtures of mud and sand, various combinations of mud, sand, gravel, with sponges, shells, and amphipod and worm tubes. Common among NEW JERSEY Figure 46.—Distribution and abundance of Lumbrineris tenuis in the New York Bight apex. the sandy tunicates Amaroecium pellucidum (Pettibone 1963). Lumbrineris tenuis was abundant in samples collected on the New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf by Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey. and Rogers (1977a). In the New York Bight apex, L. tenuis was present in all sediment types, occurring in high concentrations in a variety of sediments, particularly those with medium to high organic contents (Fig. 46; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Lumbrineridae, in general, are thought to be carnivores, however, Sanders et al. (1962) found sand, diatoms, and detritus in the stomachs of L. tenuis, indicating that it may also be a deposit feeder. In our collections, L. tenuis has been found in the gut of the poly- chaete Tharyx acutus on three occasions (Frame).'° REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Gelatinous egg masses with large, dull greenish yolky eggs have been found in the sand in Cuttyhunk Harbor, Mass., during June. Similar large yolky eggs were found inside some individuals found in the same area. Spheri- cal gelatinous masses containing eggs and larvae were also observed attached to the surface of the mud (Pettibone 1963). The early development_of Lumbriconereis sp. from Newport, R.I., described by Fewkes (1883), may refer to this species. The eggs were found in all stages of growth in June, July, and August. Early development took place within the gelatinous egg masses, after which crawling, nonpelagic larvae emerged. In Greenland, Curtis’ (1977) collections of Lumbrineris spp. (tentatively identified as L. tenuis and L. minuta) included a num- ber of females, often bearing coelomic oocytes of 150-250 um. The appearance and size of the ripe ova seemed to him to be indica- tive of direct larval development. Spawning season could not be discerned. Ninoe nigripes Verrill, 1873 DESCRIPTION: Motile, burrowing form; body elongate, slen- der. Length to 100 mm, width to 4 mm, segments to 150 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to Florida, Gulf of Mex- ico, Chile, off northwest Spain, Antarctic (Pettibone 1963; Gar diner 1975). HABITAT: Intertidal to 1,170 m. Found at low water in mud. Collected on bottoms of soft or sticky mud, sandy mud, silty clay and fine sand. mud mixed with gravel, shells, and worm and amphipod tubes. Ninoe nigripes forms tubes of mucus mixed with mud and sand (Pettibone 1963). In Kinner’s (1978) study from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras, N. nigripes was one of the dominant species on the mid-outer shelf in silt-clay, occurring 43.8% of the time at stations with > 10% silt-clay. In the New York Bight apex, N. nigripes occurred in high concentrations in a variety of sediment types and organic levels (Fig. 47; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Lumbrineridae are generally con- sidered to be carnivorous burrowers (Day 1967). However, Sanders (1960) found N. nigripes to be a selective deposit feeder, feeding on the surface of the mud. ‘Ann Frame, Northeast Fisheries Center Sandy Hook Laboratory, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Highlands, NJ 07732, pers. commun. July 1978. 33 Figure 47.—Distribution and abundance of Ninoe nigripes in the New York Bight apex. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Males filled with white sperm masses and females with large orange yolky eggs ( ~ 160-190 pm in diameter) have been found in the Cape Cod Bay (Massachusetts) region in June, July, and August, along with numerous very small specimens. Among the specimens collected in Massachusetts Bay, fertilized eggs were present among parapodia in the branchial region. The yolky eggs were being extruded from large pores below the parapodia (Pettibone 1963). Drilonereis longa Webster, 1879 DESCRIPTION: Body threadlike, length to 710 mm, width to 1.5 mm, segments to 1,000 (Pettibone 1963). DISTRIBUTION: Massachusetts to Georgia, West Indies, Washington, southern California (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). HABITAT: Collected on bottoms of fine sand, silty clay, or mud, with worm tubes or fine gravel from the intertidal to depths of 2,450 m (Pettibone 1963; Gardiner 1975). In Kinner’s (1978) study from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras, Drilonereis longa was a domi- nant species on the inner shelf in sand and on the mid-outer shelf in silt-clay. In the New York Bight apex, D. /onga occurred in all sedi- ment types, primarily in fine sands, being absent from only the highest organic areas (Fig. 48; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Members of this family (the Arabelli- dae) are burrowers and are generally considered to be predaceous or 5 DOSER S = ——__— J q ; ie tor} j id 4010 ’ ea a 74°00 73°50’ 73°40" Figure 48.—Distribution and abundance of Drilonereis longa in the New York Bight apex. carnivorous (Pettibone 1963; Day 1967; Gosner 1971). However, Sanders et al. (1962) considered D. /onga to be a sediment ingestor after finding sand, diatoms, and algae to be the main contents of its gut. It may be that D. /onga exhibits both types of feeding behavior, each under different environmental conditions. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No information was found on the reproduction and growth of this species. However, plank- tonic larvae of this family (Arabellidae) were not found by Fewkes (1883), Thorson (1946), or Rasmussen (1956), and brooding has been recorded for another Arabellidae, Notocirrus spiniferus, (Pet- tibone 1957). These facts tend to support the idea that the Arabelli- dae exhibit nonpelagic development. Order Magelonida Magelona cf riojai Jones, 1963 DESCRIPTION: A slenderbodied, small worm with a spadelike head. DISTRIBUTION: Maine to North Carolina (Kinner and Maurer 1978). HABITAT: Jones (1968) has observed that Magelona sp. lives in a well-sorted, high energy, sand environment. In the New York Figure 49.—Distribution and abundance of Magelona cf riojai in the New York Bight apex. Bight apex, Magelona cf riojai was found in low numbers in fine to medium sandy, low organic areas (<3%), and was restricted to depths of <25 m (Fig. 49; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Jumars and Fauchald (1977) classify the Magelonidae as surface deposit feeders; Day (1967) and Jones (1968) believed them to be burrowers, using the spadelike head and large distensible proboscis to force their way through the substrate. They feed on microscopic debris, diatoms, organic particles, and small plants and animals. While feeding, Magelona sp. utilizes the papillae of its paired prostomial tentacles. Food material adheres to distal papillae and is transferred to more proximal papillae when a loop is formed by the tentacle: by repetition of this activity, food material is passed stepwise toward the mouth (Day 1967; Jones 1968). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Specimens of M. rosea (a closely related species) collected from Cape Cod, Mass., by Moore (1900)'' during the latter part of August contained nearly npe eggs in the middle segments of the body. Bhaud (1972) reported larvae of Magelona sp. present in the plankton of the Danish Oresund from January through May. '!Moore, J. 1900. The polychaetous annelids of the Woods Hole region. Unpubl. manuscr., 1032 p. U.S. Natl. Mus., Wash., D.C. Order Cirratulida Tharyx acutus Webster and Benedict, 1887 DESCRIPTION: Sluggish worms; threadlike bodies. Maximum size 15 mm by 2 mm; has a shallow, mucous-lined burrow (Webster and Benedict 1887). DISTRIBUTION: Maine to Virginia. HABITAT: Tharyx acutus was abundant in samples collected on the New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf by Pearce, Carac- ciolo, Halsey, and Rogers (1977a). It was also the most abundant polychaete collected in the New York Bight apex samples, occur ring throughout the apex in all sediment types. Although it was most common in low organic areas, it was present in concentrations as high as 3,300/m- in high organic sediments (Fig. 50; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The cirratulids, in general, are surface deposit feeders, gathering food particles from the sea bottom by means of numerous grooved tentacular filaments (Dales 1963; Day 1967). However, in some of our Baltimore Canyon Trough samples (Radosh et al. footnote 8), specimens of T. acutus were observed to have consumed the polychaetes Lumbrineris tenuis and Drilonereis magna (Frame footnote 10). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No information is avail- able for 7. acutus, however, Gibbs (1971) studied Tharyx marioni, Ree aan eee Figure 50.—Distribution and abundance of Tharyx acutus in the New York Bight apex. a closely related species, at Plymouth, England. He found that 7. marioni is capable of spawning over several years, with females breeding for the first time in the second year of life. The main spawning season extends from late October to early November when water temperatures are between 10° and 12°C. As described by Dales (1951), Tharyx spp. larvae are bottom-living, nonpelagic, and lecithotrophic. Population densities are at their highest level just after spawning has taken place; in Plymouth, the highest densi- ties recorded were approximately 100,000/m?. At that time, juve- niles of the previous year’s brood composed about two-thirds of the population and were easily distinguished from the larger adult worms. During spring and summer, population levels gradually declined so that during the breeding season a mean density of only 33,000/m? was recorded, of which about 40% were breeding adults. In the New York Bight apex, we observed T. acutus to be 1.6 times more abundant during winter months, which would indicate that this species may also breed here during fall or winter months. Tharyx annulosus Hartman, 1955 DESCRIPTION: Slow-moving, threadlike worm, slightly smaller than 7. acutus. DISTRIBUTION: New England to tropical South America; South Africa (Day 1973). Figure 51.—Distribution and abundance of Tharyx annulosus in the New York Bight apex. HABITAT: Collected in depths of 80-4,540 m (Day 1973). In the HABITAT: Reported from depths of 10-20 m (Day 1973). In the New York Bight apex, we found a few specimens of Tharyx annulo- New York Bight apex, Caulleriella killariensis was present in sus in depths as shallow as 32 m, although the majority were found depths up to 33 m in sediments ranging from coarse to fine sand. It at greater depths. Tharyx annulosus was found in all sediment was rarely present in sediments containing >3% organic material types, with largest numbers occurring in fine sand. Very high num- (Fig. 52; Table 1). bers were often found in sediments of high organic content but none were found at the station with the highest content of organic matter FEEDING ECOLOGY: C. killariensis, like other cirratulids, is a (13.9%). Tharyx annulosus was also present in large numbers in surface deposit feeder (see Tharyx acutus). medium and low organic areas (Fig. 51; Table 1). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Gibbs (1971) reported FEEDING ECOLOGY: 7. annulosus, as other cirratulids, is a Caulleriella caput-esocis to be capable of spawning over several surface deposit feeder (see Tharyx acutus for details). However, in years. He reported that the diameter of mature oocytes in Plym- a New Jersey outer continental shelf sample, a specimen of T. outh, England, was 110 wm and the main spawning season was annulosus was found to have eaten another polychaete of the genus from August to October. Caulleriella caput-esocis reached a maxi- Lumbrineris (Frame footnote 10). mum density of 22,000/m* in early summer. Females produced 1,000-5,000 oocytes. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: In winter, there were 3.3 In contrast to most species found in the New York Bight apex, times more 7. annulosus in the Bight than in summer, possibly indi- which were present in greater numbers during summer months, C. cating a fall or winter spawning period (see T. acutus). killariensis was 2.3 times more abundant in winter than in summer in terms of more individuals at the same stations. This indicates that Caulleriella killariensis (Southern, 1914) C. killariensis probably breeds here during fall or winter months (see T. acutus). DESCRIPTION: Discretely motile, body threadlike, 8-12 mm long (Day 1973). Cossura longocirrata Webster and Benedict, 1887 DISTRIBUTION: Ireland (Day 1973), New York Bight (Pearce, DESCRIPTION: Small, threadlike, motile, burrowing form; Rogers, Caracciolo, and Halsey 1977). length about 6 mm, 50-70 segments. A single, very long median 3 —— , yer °, L 40 30 AEs TaN a \ i i 10 4 ‘, Br as / : i oA rN + ZN h \ oi 7 2 / e Weaion, Ga 407 - , A i fate es eee, ONS OF \ ‘ me 1 SULA: i! Nea VV SN ii Sat 1001 ‘ \ Ht i! fea 1% { \ 2, “ faut y 40 20 if i [ io i Hee Hes H yf i os i \ Nee” % ‘ ‘ i ‘ u 5 ' SN a} x a H 1 \, i . < i ’ ‘ SS fl 1 Sa aS i i He i i \ i Wie ; °, ; °, ma | B 4010 Pan é€ | bS | at / Ke i 5 \ 7400 73°40 Figure 52.—Distribution and abundance of Caulleriella killariensis in the New York Bight apex. Figure 53.—Distribution and abundance of Cossura longocirrata in the New York Bight apex. dorsal tentacle or gill originates on setiger four (Webster and Bene- dict 1887: Laubier 1963; Day 1967). DISTRIBUTION: Listed by Gosner (1971) as a boreal species, found between Cape Cod and the Bay of Fundy. Also collected in the New York Bight and reported from Denmark, the North Atlan- tic, Greenland, the coast of Chile, and the Sea of Japan (Webster and Benedict 1887; Curtis 1977; Pearce, Rogers, Caracciolo, and Halsey 1977). HABITAT: Inhabitant of mud and sandy mud in depths of 11-22 m (Webster and Benedict 1887; Day 1967; Gosner 1971). Fauchald (1977) says cossurids are common in sand and especially in deep slope abyssal muds. In the New York Bight apex, Cossura longocirrata was collected in depths ranging from about 23 to 46 m. It was characteristic of the highest organic fine sandy and silty sediments (Fig. 53; Table 1). Summer and winter distributions were almost identical. FEEDING ECOLOGY: Cossurids appear to be burrowing deposit feeders, using the eversible, soft, unarmed pharynx in feed- ing. The dorsal tentacle also appears to be sensory and, addition- ally, may be respiratory in function since it is well equipped with blood vessels (Day 1967; Fauchald 1977). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Curtis (1977) collected C. longocirrata in Greenland, however, no gametes were seen and the reproductive biology of the species remains unknown. Order Terebellida Ampharete arctica Malmgren, 1866 DESCRIPTION: Tubicolous worms, inhabitating a membranous tube covered with mud, sand grains, or foreign matter (Day 1967; Gosner 1971). In our collections, length averaged 15-18 mm. DISTRIBUTION: Cosmopolitan (Hartman 1969). HABITAT: In the New York Bight apex, Ampharete arctica was collected in depths from 10.9 to 45.6 m. It was usually associated with fine to medium sandy sediments with low to medium organic content, although it did occur in low densities (10/m?) in high organic areas (Fig. 54; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Ampharetidae are sessile deposit feeders which gather food particles from the surface of sand or mud by means of buccal tentacles which can be extruded from the mouth (Day 1967; Jumars and Fauchald 1977). Yablonskaya (1976) has found that the food of Ampharetidae from the Azov and Caspian Seas (U.S.S.R.) consists of flocculent organic-mineral particles with some remains of diatoms, blue- green and green algae. Most small ampharetids either collected par ticles of plant detritus from the sediment surface or filtered them from the water layer immediately above the sediment. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Little information was available on the reproduction and growth of A. arctica, however, Thorson (1946) stated that its wide distribution in Arctic seas indi- cated nonpelagic development because pelagic development is sup- pressed in nearly all Arctic species. 37 Figure 54.—Distribution and abundance of Ampharete arctica in the New York Bight apex. Hutchings (1973) studied reproductive patterns of a related spe- cies, Mellina cristata. The Northumberland (England) population of M. cristata breeds annually over a period of about 2 wk at the end of December and beginning of January. Benthic larvae are pro- duced which metamorphose into juveniles within 2 to 3 wk of spawning. Mellina cristata is potentially capable of breeding for the first time when 2 yr old. The majority of worms survive spawn- ing and M. cristata probably breeds annually for several years. In this population, not all potential breeders spawn, some resorb their gametes and release another batch of gametes into the coelom. The Northumberland population of M. cristata is near the southernmost limit of the species distribution, which indicates that environmental conditions for this population are not optimum. The population appears to maintain itself by producing fewer oocytes and by only part of the population spawning. Asabellides oculata (Webster, 1880) DESCRIPTION: Sessile worms, dwelling in membranous tubes. In our collections, lengths reached 20 mm. DISTRIBUTION: Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras (Gosner 1971). HABITAT: Depths of 5-15 m (Gosner 1971). In the New York Bight apex, we found Asabellides oculata in depths of about 10-46 m. It was present in all sediment types but reached peak abundance in fine sand. Its total abundance was highest in low organic areas, reaching moderate abundance in high organic areas. However, the a 1-99/ m? {4 100 — 759.) m Figure 55.—Distribution and abundance of Asabellides oculata in the New York Bight apex. highest concentration of A. oculata occurred at a high organic con- tent station (Fig. 55; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: 4. oculata, like other Ampharetidae, is a surface deposit feeder (see A. arctica). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No specific information is available for A. oculata (see Ampharete arctica). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: It has been observed that A. oculata and several other tube dwelling polychaetes produce the enzyme protease externally. It is hypothesized by Zottoli and Carn- ker (1974) that this enzyme helps keep the internal surface of their tubes free of attaching organisms. In recolonization studies during summer 1977, following the 1976 anoxic event in the New York Bight, “blooms” of A. oculata were observed in formerly oxygen depleted areas (Steimle and Radosh 1979). Although A. oculata is not generally regarded as an opportunist, we found it in highest concentration at a high organic station in the present study and we also found it in large numbers in an earlier unpublished study at an ocean sewer outfall off Deal, N.J. Fauvel (1958) remarked that the unusual pectinate gills found in this family (Ampharetidae) are adaptations for surviving in poorly oxygenated water. Order Flabelligerida Pherusa affinis (Leidy, 1855) DESCRIPTION: A large, rather sedentary species character- ized, in part, by the possession of mucus-secreting papillae to which sand or mud particles adhere. Lengths in our collections reached 75 mm. DISTRIBUTION: Maine to Chesapeake Bay (Kinner and Maurer 1978). HABITAT: Pherusa affinis has been collected in moderately high numbers from the New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf (Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers 1977a). In a study of the New York Bight apex, Pearce (1972) found P. affinis to be more abundant around sludge deposits than in natural communties. In the present investigation of the apex, P. affinis was found in all sedi- ment types but was again clearly most abundant in high organic fine sand and silty sediments, occurring in numbers as high as 800/m? (Fig. 56; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: The Flabelligeridae are discreetly motile deposit feeders, using their large frilly palps to collect food parti- cles from the sediment surface (Jumars and Fauchald 1977). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: No specific information was available in the literature for this species. However, Fallon Lm, a 20 6-7 “ se / /, { L j ! \ \ | \ i / prmey i i i 1 1 Figure 56.—Distribution and abundance of Pherusa affinis in the New York Bight apex. (footnote 5) found the peak reproductive period for P. affinis in the New York Bight to be during spring and fall, with some recruitment almost all year. In our study of the apex, there were approximately 1.5 times more P. affinis in the Bight during summer months than during the winter in terms of higher densities at the same stations. Phylum Arthropoda Class Crustacea Order Isopoda Edotea triloba (Say, 1818) DESCRIPTION: The genus and species Edorea triloba has been revised to include the species montosa (Stimpson) and acuta (Richardson). It is a small, dorso-ventrally flattened, oval-shaped, muddy-colored isopod crustacean, which grows to about 10 mm in length (Miner 1950; G. Schultz 1969). DISTRIBUTION: Miner (1950) reported that this species is dis- tributed from Nova Scotia to New Jersey. HABITAT: Smith (1964) reported that E. rriloba is found on muddy shores, usually with dirt adhering to the carapace. Miner (1950) reported it from mud and fine sand from the surface to 46 m. In the New York Bight apex, E. triloba was widely distributed in Figure 57.—Distribution and abundance of Edotea triloba in the New York Bight apex. depths ranging from about 9 to 46 m. It occurred in all sediment types but was most common in low organic fine to medium sands (Fig. 57; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Pearse et al. (1942) considered E. tri- loba a scavenger, Sanders (1956) classified it as a selective deposit feeder, and Myers (1977) called it an epistratal feeder. G. Schultz (1969) reported finding E. triloba as a prey item in the stomachs of cod. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Sexes in isopods are sepa- rate. Eggs are brooded by the female in the marsupium. As in cumaceans and tanaidaceans, the hatching stage is a postlarva (manca stage), having the last pair of legs incompletely developed. The young usually do not remain with the female after they leave the marsupium (Barnes 1974). Order Amphipoda Ampelisca verrilli Mills, 1967 DESCRIPTION: A small amphipod, males grow to 10.5 mm in length, females to 13.5 mm. Body compressed, smooth, two pairs of eyes. Ampelisca verrilli is a domiciliary form which constructs a shallow, thin-walled tube in sand. The tubes are open only at the upper end, the inner walls solidified by glandular secretions from the peraeopods (Bousfield 1973). Figure 58.—Distribution and abundance of Ampelisca verrilli in the New York Bight apex. DISTRIBUTION: Southern side of Cape Cod to North Carolina (Bousfield 1973); Gulf of Florida from Tampa north (Bousfield).'? HABITAT: Kinner et al. (1974) reported this species to dominate a transitional zone between sand and mud in Delaware Bay. Bous- field (1973) reported it to be abundant in coarse sand from low intertidal to depths of about 50 m. Ampelisca verrilli was the sec- ond most abundant amphipod collected in the New York Bight apex, most commonly found in fine sands with some occurring in medium sands off Long Island and New Jersey. This species was present only in low organic areas in depths to 24 m (Fig. 58; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Ampelisca spp. lie upside down in their tubes, projecting their setose antennae as filtering organs (Barnard 1969). Ampelisca verrilli has been classified as a suspension feeder-surface detritivore (Bousfield).'° REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Bousfield (1973) stated that A. verrilli has an annual life cycle in New England, with ovi- gerous females present in the summer. However, in a west Florida estuary, Thoemke (1977) found ovigerous females to be present year-round, averaging 9.6% of the population. He believed them to produce several broods per year. In view of these differences, tem- perature may be of importance in regulating the life cycle of this species. In this family (Ampeliscidae), the mature male form emerges in abrupt metamorphosis from a femalelike penultimate stage (Bous- field 1973). Unciola irrorata Say, 1818 DESCRIPTION: Smooth, slender, slightly depressed body with red spots or blotches when alive. Females grow to 10 mm, males to 13 mm. Unciola irrorata usually inhabits tubes constructed by other amphipods or polychaetes, but can build a tube of its own if no others are available (Bousfield 1973). Smith (1950) reported that these amphipods have been observed swimming or roaming across the bottom, leaving their tubes for considerable lengths of time. DISTRIBUTION: Gulf of St. Lawrence to Cape Hatteras (Bous- field 1973); off South Carolina (Shoemaker 1945); also, Green- land, Norway (Holmes 1905). HABITAT: Pratt (1973) and Maurer et al. (1976) included U. irrorata as a member of the silty sand fauna of the Middle Atlantic continental shelf and estuaries. Bousfield (1973) reported it to be found in coarse to medium sands from the lower intertidal to over 55 m in New England waters. Shoemaker (1945) recorded the spe- cies in depths to 283 m, Holmes (1905) recorded it to over 914 m and Schmitz (1959)'* reported U. irrorata from muddy bottoms in North Carolina to depths of 1,500 m. Pearce (1972) found U. irrorata to be the only amphipod collected in the sewage sludge dis- posal area of the New York Bight apex. Michael (1973) called U. irrorata a cold water species which tolerates a wide range of sedi- ment types, but prefers sand. The present collections in the Bight Edward Bousfield, pers. commun., cited by Fox and Bynum (1975). '3Edward Bousfield, pers. commun., cited by Biernbaum (1979). Schmitz, E. 1959. A key to the marine Amphipoda of the Beaufort, North Caro- lina area. Unpubl. manuscr., 6 p. Duke Marine Laboratory, Beaufort, N.C. 40 a o-- - i if \ I i I I \ S Figure 59.—Distribution and abundance of Unciola irrorata in the New York Bight apex. apex show JU. irrorata to occur in all grades of sand, particularly in fine sand and in low organic areas. Unciola irrorata was wide- spread in the apex, the third most abundant amphipod collected, occurring in depths to 33 m (Fig. 59; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Smith (1950) reported U. irrorata to be a scavenger and detritus feeder, while Sanders (1956) classified it as a selective deposit feeder, which may feed on detritus or be herbivo- rous. Enequist (1949) reported members of this family to be pri- marily filter feeders, emerging from their tubes and feeding on detritus whenever concentrations of suspended material are low. Unciola irrorata is a principal forage species for haddock col- lected off Cape Cod and Georges Bank (Wigley 1956; Wigley and Theroux 1965). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Bousfield (1973) reported an annual life cycle off New England, with ovigerous females present from March to July; one brood per female. Smith (1950) stated that U. irrorata breeds 10-11 mo of the year in Block Island Sound, with mid-summer the minimal spawning season. Pseudunciola obliquua (Shoemaker, 1949) DESCRIPTION: Body smooth, slender, lacking eyes; length to 6 mm (Bousfield 1973). DISTRIBUTION: Bay of Fundy to New Jersey (Bousfield 1973). Figure 60.—Distribution and abundance of Pseudunciola obliquua in the New York Bight apex. HABITAT: Bousfield (1973) reported Pseudunciola obliquua to live in tubes in medium fine to coarse sand from just below the low water level to more than 50 m in depth off New England. In the New York Bight apex, P. obliquua was collected at several stations (9.6-25 m in depth) to the east and west of the dump sites. It was most common in fine-medium sands, but also occurred in coarse sand areas. Pseudunciola obliquua was collected only in low organic sediments (Fig. 60; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Mouthparts of P. obliquua are adapted for feeding on algae or detritus (Bousfield 1973). Shoemaker (1949) found this species as a prey item in the stom- achs of haddock. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Bousfield (1973) reported ovigerous females of this species off New England from April to August, with four-six relatively large eggs per brood. The life cycle is annual. Protohaustorius deichmannae Bousfield, 1965 DESCRIPTION: A small, free-living, burrowing amphipod. Females of the species grow to 6 mm, but males are slightly smaller (4.5 mm) (Barnard 1969: Bousfield 1973). DISTRIBUTION: Central Maine to Georgia (Bousfield 1973). 41 Figure 61.—Distribution and abundance of Protohaustorius deichmannae in the New York Bight apex. HABITAT: Bousfield (1973) reported that Protohaustorius deichmannae prefers shallow, warm water, protected bays and estu- aries, depths up to about 20 m, and fine silty sand. This species was also considered characteristic of fine sand bottoms off the Delmarva Peninsula (Maurer et al. 1976). Sameoto (1969) reported a maximum lethal temperature of 36°C and migration of the spe- cies into deeper water as temperature decreases. Protohaustorius deichmannae is tolerant of low (10% ) salinity and low dissolved oxygen levels. In the New York Bight apex, we found P. deichman- nae only in fine to medium grain, low organic sands in depths not exceeding 25 m (Fig. 61; Table 1). It was the most abundant amphi- pod collected during our study. FEEDING ECOLOGY: Members of this family filter feed while burrowing through the sand. They use their mouthparts to set up a filter current that directs food particles onto mouthpart setae and then toward the mouth (Bousfield 1973). Sameoto (1969) reported this species to feed on diatoms, unidentified green/brown matenial, ciliates, and smaller crustaceans. According to Croker (1967), it would not feed on carrion. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: P. deichmannae has an annual life cycle with ovigerous females found May to August in New England waters. There may be more than one brood per year, with brood size ranging from about 2 to 11 eggs. Copulation may take place in the substratum, mechanism as yet unknown (Sameoto 1969; Bousfield 1973). Protohaustorius wigleyi Bousfield, 1965 DESCRIPTION: This species is very similar to Protohaustorius deichmannae, but is slightly larger, males reaching a length of 6.5 mm, females, 7.5 mm (Bousfield 1973). DISTRIBUTION: Maine to North Carolina (Bousfield 1973). HABITAT: Kinner et al. (1974) reported Protohaustorius wigleyi to be an important species in the sand bottom assemblage of Dela- ware Bay, closely associated with the bivalve Tellina agilis and the amphipod Rhepoxynius epistomus; P. wigleyi was the most abun- dant amphipod in clean medium grain sands off the Delaware coast (Maurer, Leathem, Kinner, and Tinsman 1979). Bousfield (1973) reported that it prefers subtidal clean sands off New England from the shoreline to over 146 m. In the New York Bight apex, P. wigleyi was most common near shore in depths up to 21 m. It occurred only in low organic sands, primarily of medium to fine grain size (Fig. 62; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: See Protohaustorius deichmannae. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: P. wigleyi has an annual life cycle in New England waters, with ovigerous females present from April to August (Bousfield 1973). Figure 62.—Distribution and abundance of Protohaustorius wigleyi in the New York Bight apex. Leptocheirus pinguis (Stimpson, 1853) DESCRIPTION: A relatively large gammarid amphipod with a long (up to 17 mm), slender body. Leptocheirus pinguis is an epi- faunal organism, which constructs mucus and sediment tubes with one end open at the surface (Bousfield 1973). DISTRIBUTION: American Atlantic coast from Labrador south to Virginia (Bousfield 1973); North Carolina (Fox and Bynum 1975). HABITAT: Bousfield (1973) reported L. pinguis to occur from the low intertidal to > 250 m, on sand, sandy mud, or mud bottom, especially in channels of estuaries. Michael (1973) reported this species to prefer cold water and intermediate, poorly sorted sedi- ments. In the New York Bight apex, L. pinguis was found at five closely spaced stations south of the dump site. Sediments there are predominantly high organic silt-fine sand, with depths ranging from about 28 to 46 m (Fig. 63; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: This filter feeding species uses filter setae of the anterior peraeopods from which food is transferred by maxilliped palps to the mouth (Sanders 1956; Bousfield 1973). Leptocheirus pinguis is particularly important in the diet of had- dock collected from Cape Cod and the south central portion of Georges Bank (Wigley 1956; Wigley and Theroux 1965). Smith (1950) also considered it to be the dominant food species for demer sal finfish in Block Island Sound. TUR eel 4 LZ} 40°30: ' * ; ; b ‘ i ad \ pe See: \ ~~ 305) i pos an ty i La i oN * eS 40°20 i 1260\ 1) tt XY +o Owe A ae f i ‘y 7) ‘ SA lan S NN B ; : Su 2 ; j i : 7] h ye i= s ; i i ‘ ’ iy on . 9, ey J . 7400 73°50 73°40 Figure 63.—Distribution and abundance of Leptocheirus pinguis in the New York Bight apex. Tyler (1973) reported the species to have an average caloric value of 2.147 g cal/g dry weight, which is relatively low (2-50%) com- pared with values for other crustaceans. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Ovigerous females are present Apmil to June in New England (Bousfield 1973). However, Smith (1950) believed spawning can occur throughout the year, with each female spawning more than once a year. The number of eggs per brood varies from a few to 70 (¥=20). Bousfield (1973) stated that the life span of L. pinguis is probably 2 yr. Rhepoxynius epistomus (Shoemaker, 1938) [Trichophoxus epistomus (Shoemaker, 1938)] DESCRIPTION: A burrowing species, body relatively broad with a rostral hood abruptly narrowing in front of the black eyes. Females reach a length of 7-8 mm, with males slightly smaller (Barnard 1969; Bousfield 1973). DISTRIBUTION: American Atlantic between southern Maine and Georgia (Watling and Maurer 1972; Bousfield 1973); also reported from Cuban waters (Ortiz 1978). HABITAT: Kinner et al. (1974) reported Rhepoxynius epistomus to be dominant in sandy areas of Delaware Bay, closely associated with Zellina agilis and Protohaustorius wigleyi. Bousfield (1973) reported that it is found in medium-fine unstable sands off New Figure 64.—Distribution and abundance of Rhepoxynius epistomus in the New York Bight apex. 43 England, from immediately subtidal areas to depths of >50 m; males occasionally occur in the plankton. Watling and Maurer (1972) stated that this species is euryhaline in medium to fine sands (5-15 % silt-clay). Feeley (1967) suggested a preference for coarse sand. In the apex of the New York Bight, R. epistomus was charac- teristic of medium to fine sands, with a few occurring in coarse sand. It was most common in low organic areas in depths up to 30 m: a few occurred in medium organic areas and none were found in high organic sediments (Fig. 64; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Barnard (1969) believed this species to be omnivorous, while Biernbaum (1979, citing Bousfield footnote 13) classified it as a burrowing detritivore. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Bousfield (1973) reported that R. epistomus has an annual life cycle, with ovigerous females present from May to September off New England. In this family (Phoxocephalidae), the mature male form emerges in abrupt meta- morphosis from a femalelike penultimate stage. Order Mysidacea Neomysis americana (Smith, 1873) DESCRIPTION: The opossum shrimp; small shrimp-like crusta- ceans up to 12 mm in length; eyes on stalks (Gosner 1971). DISTRIBUTION: Wigley and Burns (1971) reported this spe- cies to occur from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to Chesapeake Bay, however, Gosner (1971) extended its range south to Cape Hatteras. HABITAT: Neomysis americana is the most common euryhaline mysid shrimp inhabiting the estuaries and coastal waters of the northeastern United States. Wigley and Burns (1971) regarded it as a shallow water species most commonly reported from the interti- dal zone to depths of 60 m: Gosner (1971) reported it in depths up to 214 m. Neomysis americana is essentially a bottom dweller dur ing the day, but undertakes regular vertical migrations to the surface during darkness (Herman 1963). In the apex of the New York Bight, this species was collected nearshore in depths to about 24 m and was most abundant in low organic fine sands (Fig. 65; Table 1). Because the Smith-McIntyre grab sampler is not a particularly good sampling device for this highly motile species, our estimates of its abundance and distribu- tion are probably very poor. FEEDING ECOLOGY: The food of mysids consists of small plankters or bottom forms as well as detritus filtered from currents set up by the thoracic limbs, thus, mysids might be considered to be omnivorous (Smith 1950; Clutter 1967; Richards and Riley 1967: Gosner 1971). Stickney et al. (1975) found that the estuarine sciaenid, Cynos- cion regalis, fed heavily on N. americana in the southeastern United States; of a total of 120 fish examined, N. americana occurred in 55% of their stomachs. Neomysis americana, which is often known to live in large swarms, also forms an important part of the diet of shad, flounder, and haddock (Wigley 1956; Barnes 1963). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: The sexes are separate and there is external dimorphism in this species. Females have a brood pouch and development of young is direct, occurring within the ° Sree = =- N NS a > Figure 65.—Distribution and abundance of Neomysis americana in the New York Bight apex. brood chamber (Barnes 1963; Gosner 1971). Wigley and Burns (1971) reported that although spawning in coastal populations takes place throughout the year, it is much more intensive during the warmer months. Two distinct size groups of spawning females per year are discernible, the large spring spawners (11-12 mm) that have overwintered and smaller fall spawners (6-8 mm). Egg pro- duction also varies between the two groups, the overwintering group producing about 26 eggs/individual and the summer group about 6 eggs. The life cycle is a year or less and varies per seasonal population. Richards and Riley (1967) have estimated a production to biomass ratio of 3.66 for this species in Long Island Sound. Order Decapoda Crangon septemspinosa (Say, 1818) DESCRIPTION: The common sand shrimp. Color ash-gray with numerous irregular, stellate, black or brown spots or chromato- phores, or speckled with gray, imitating the color of sand. Length to 70 mm (Price 1962; Williams 1965). DISTRIBUTION: In the Atlantic it occurs from Baffin Bay, Can- ada, to eastern Florida. It also occurs from Alaska to California on the Pacific coast and in Japan (Williams 1965). HABITAT: Crangon septemspinosa occurs in great numbers from the littoral zone to depths of 91 m. It is common on sand flats, in tidepools, in bays and inlets along the coast, and in sandy bot- Figure 66.—Distribution and abundance of Crangon septemspinosa in the New York Bight apex. toms in deeper water offshore. Its color imitates that of sand so closely that it is camouflaged when resting motionless on the bot- tom or when partially buried in the sand. Between tides, it uses its pleopods to bury itself in the moist sand to a considerable depth (Miner 1950; Williams 1965). Crangon septemspinosa can tolerate a salinity range of 4-32%,) and temperature extremes from 0.0° to 26.0°C (Price 1962). In the New York Bight apex, C. septemspinosa occurred in low abundance, 10-20/m*’, in depths from 9.6 to 29.8 m. It was col- lected in all grades of medium and low organic content sand, but was most abundant in low organic fine-medium grain sand (Fig. 66; Table 1). FEEDING ECOLOGY: Price (1962) considered this species to be an omnivore in Delaware Bay. Williams (1965) reported that it consumes planktonic crustacea and scavenged material. Sanders et al. (1962) found that C. septemspinosa ate detritus, diatoms, small crustacea (ostracods), small mollusks (Gemma gemma), nema- todes, and algae in Long Island Sound. Wilcox and Jeffries (1974) found the species to prefer and grow best on animal tissues of marine origin although it was also able to utilize food of microbial and terrestrial ongins. Creaser (1973) stated that spent epitokes of the bloodworm, G/y- cera dibranchiata, are consumed by C. septemspinosa, which in turn is eaten by the striped bass, Morone saxatilis. Crangon sep- temspinosa must utilize all of its powers of concealment, for it is actively sought and consumed by nearly all of the larger fishes which frequent its waters. It constitutes a principal food for weak- fish, Cynoscion regalis: kingfish, Menticirrhus saxatilis; bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix; flounders (Paralichtys dentatus and Pseudo- pleuronectes americanus); striped bass, Morone saxatilis; and had- dock, Melanogrammus aeglefinus (Whiteley 1948; Miner 1950; Wigley 1956). REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Price (1962), studying the biology of C. septemspinosa in Delaware Bay, made collections in a salinity range of 4.4 to 31.4% at temperature extremes of 0.0° to 26.0°C. The major breeding season was judged to be March to October, but ovigerous females were found throughout the year in salinities of 17.7-29.3%, and temperatures of 0.0°-25.0°C. He found females to mature in | yr, with egg production increasing with increasing size of the female. First egg bearers of the year were found to be large females, with smaller ovigerous females more numerous in July. An average of 300 eggs/female was pro- duced in one annual brood. In Maine waters, Haefner (1972) sug- gested that there may be more than one brood per year. In the laboratory, eggs hatched into planktonic larvae after 6 or 7 d at 21°C. Fowler (1912) reported that larvae and young maintained a planktonic existence for a long period of time after hatching. Females outnumbered the males especially during the most active spawning season in Price’s (1962) study. Growth rate was estimated to be 1.6 mm/mo, with no observed seasonal variation in the rate. Richards and Riley (1967) also reported growth rates of 1.6 mm/mo in Long Island Sound. However, Wilcox and Jeffries (1973) found that growth was temperature dependent and varied between 0.4 and 1.1 mm/wk off Rhode Island. Contrary to the appraisal of other authors, Price (1962) judged that three year classes of females and two year classes of males occur in the shoal waters of Delaware Bay in spring. Ovigerous females have been found in North Carolina from December through May and August and late fall (Hay and Shore 1918). Individuals taken in winter are larger than those found in spring. Juveniles have been found there from December to July, but from mid-summer to late fall, juveniles and adults disappear from North Carolina estuaries. Bigelow and Sears (1939) reported much the same pattern of occurrence in waters of the continental shelf from Cape Cod to Chesapeake Bay, with greatest occurrence in February dwindling to rare occurrence in July, but never abundant anywhere. On Georges Bank, where Whiteley (1948) made all collections inside the 100-fathom curve, C. septemspinosa was most common in September and January, rarest in June, and usually occurred near the bottom. He reported maximum numbers in July at Woods Hole, and in August in the Bay of Fundy. Ovigerous females were found in spring and early summer. The species was judged to produce one brood a year and to have a life span of 1 yr. In Long Island Sound, C. septemspinosa had mean abundances of 12/m? in July 1972, 1/m? in April, and 8/m? in September 1973 in grab samples taken in mud bottom areas. The species had similar abundances in sands (¥=5/m? in July 1972 and 16/m? in September 1973), and was slightly more common in sandy silts (18/m? in July 1972, 22/m? in September 1973) (Reid et al. 1979). In an April through September 1971 survey in the western Sound, using an epi- benthic sled, both larvae and adults were most abundant in July and August (National Marine Fisheries Service 1972).'5 Fish (1926) found the larvae appearing from February to May and as late as December at Woods Hole, Mass. Needler (1941) 'SNational Marine Fisheries Service. 1972. Davids Island Phase I: A short-term ecological survey of western Long Island Sound. Middle Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Center Informal Rep. 7, 29 p. 45 recorded hatching times from late spring to early summer (July) around Prince Edward Island, Canada. She described five larval stages and a postlarval stage. All these stages were obtained in July from plankton tows made about a meter below the surface along the shores of estuaries. Larvae were hatched in the laboratory, but the series of stages was worked out from plankton samples. These data indicate an extended breeding season in high lati- tudes. Variations in seasonal abundance in different localities north of Chesapeake Bay are possibly the result, in part, of varied sam- pling methods in different years by different investigators. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: In acute toxicity bioassays with CdC1,-2'!4H,0 at 20°C and 20% , Eisler (1971) found that the concentration, fatal to 50% of the organisms of various marine spe- cies in 96 h, ranged between 0.32 and 55.0 mg/1 Cd?*. Crangon septemspinosa, at 0.32 mg/1, was most sensitive of the species tested. In a study of acute toxicities of insecticides on marine decapod crustaceans, Eisler (1969) again found C. septemspinosa to be the most sensitive to 12 insecticides tested. In studies of color discrimination among crustaceans, it has been observed that the chromatophores of C. septemspinosa adapt to a background of yellow, orange, and red, chromatophore changes being mediated through the eyes (Barnes 1963). Cancer irroratus (Say, 1817) DESCRIPTION: The rock crab. The carapace reaches a length of 65 mm (Williams 1965) and a maximum reported width of 160 mm (Gosner 1971); it is yellowish in color, closely dotted with dark purplish brown, becoming reddish brown after death. The anterola- teral border is divided into nine teeth with margins granulate, not denticulate as in Cancer borealis. Crabs of the genus Cancer have been in existence since the Eocene epoch; today, there are 19 living species in the world (MacKay 1943). DISTRIBUTION: Labrador to South Carolina (Williams 1965); Jeffries (1966) listed the southernmost limit as Florida. HABITAT: Collected from the intertidal zone to depths of 574 m (Williams 1965). Cancer irroratus prefers sandy or rocky sub- strates, but has also been found on mussel beds (Jeffries 1966; Scar- ratt and Lowe 1972; Winget et al. 1974; Krouse 1976; Reilly and Saila 1978). In general, smaller individuals are found inshore and larger individuals inhabit offshore areas (Scarratt and Lowe 1972: Haefner 1976; Krouse 1976). For example, Haefner (1976), in a study of the Middle Atlantic Bight, found that rock crabs <50 mm in size were most abundant in depths of 15-150 m, and larger crabs (50-100 mm) were generally more common in depths of 150-400 m, however, the largest individuals (> 100 mm) were most abun- dant at 20-60 m. The preferred temperature range of C. irroratus is reported to be 6.8°-14°C, however, they are known to inhabit areas of 3°-20°C (Jeffries 1966). Salinities ranging from 14 to 33% 9 are tolerable (Winget et al. 1974; Haefner and Van Engel 1975). In cooler New England waters, larger individuals may emigrate into deeper, warmer offshore waters during winter (Jeffries 1966: Krouse 1976). In the New York Bight apex, small C. irroratus were collected in depths ranging from about 11.5 to 29.8 m. They were found in all sediment types, but were most common in low crganic medium- fine grain sands (Fig. 67; Table 1). 10 \ \ We Figure 67.—Distribution and abundance of Cancer irroratus in the New York Bight apex. FEEDING ECOLOGY: This species is known to be a scavenger and carnivore. MacKenzie (1977) reported that it preys upon small clams, while Scarratt and Lowe (1972) have observed that prey of rock crabs >25 mm in size consisted principally of polychaetes, mussels, starfish, and sea urchins. Rock crab juveniles and adults are preyed upon by several spe- cies of fish including cod, Gadus morhua; little skates, Raja erina- cea; red hake, Urophycis chuss; striped bass, Morone saxatilis; tautog, Zautoga onitis; and haddock, Melanogrammus aegiefinus (Field 1907; Bigelow and Schroeder 1953; Wigley 1956: Wigley and Theroux 1965; Reilly 1975; Reilly and Saila 1978). Ennis (1973) reported that in Bonavista Bay, Newfoundland, C. irroratus and other decapods make up almost 50% of the gut con- tents of the lobster Homarus americanus. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: In the Northumberland Strait, Gulf of St. Lawrence, Scarratt and Lowe (1972) found the smallest size at maturity was 60 mm for females and 69 mm for males, with breeding occurring in late summer and fall. Larvae are present in surface waters from June to September. In the Gulf of Maine, Krouse (1976) observed that most females attained sexual maturity between 70 and 80 mm carapace width, with a few at <70 mm. Spawning is believed to occur in late fall and early winter and hatching occurs in spring. In southern New England waters, Reilly and Saila (1978) reported that females in the 21-88 mm carapace width range could produce between 4,430 and 330,400 eggs/ individual. The presence of ovigerous females <50 mm in size indicated early sexual maturity. Spawning occurred in the spring with major hatching in May. July was the principal period for larval 46 settlement. In Narragansett Bay, Sastry and McCarthy (1973) found ovigerous females with eggs nearing hatching from late April to early June. Hillman (1964) first found C. irroratus larvae in Nar ragansett Bay in late May, while Frolander (1955) found larvae from April to late October in the same waters. Coastal New Jersey plankton surveys by Sage and Herman (1972) revealed C. irroratus larvae in late spring samples. In a Chesapeake Bay study, Sandifer (1975) observed that ovigerous females are infrequent in the bay and most larvae appear to hatch offshore. Although larvae are toler- ant of moderate estuarine salinities, zoeae probably are retained within the Bay only by chance. Bay or nearshore populations are apparently restocked by migration or transport by currents of late larval stages and juveniles from the inner shelf area. The optimum growth rate of C. irroratus larvae occurs at 15°C and 30%» (Sastry and McCarthy 1973). Uneven sex ratios for this species are not unusual. Large male: female ratios have been observed in Maine (Dean 1972),'° the Northumberland Strait (Scarratt and Lowe 1972), and in Virginia, where there is an absence of females in winter populations (Shotten and Van Engel 1971),!’ possibly the result of population move- ments restricted to one sex (Jones 1973). Cancer irroratus lives for 7 to 8 yr (Reilly and Saila 1978). In the Middle Atlantic Bight, active molting takes place in April and June (Haefner 1976) and growth ceases in winter. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Vargo and Sastry (1977) con- ducted an experiment to determine the tolerance limits to acute temperature and combinations of temperature and low dissolved oxygen stresses for five zoeal stages and the megalops of C. irrora- tus. Results showed that the acute temperature limits for a 120-min exposure were all approximately 29.0°C, with little interstage van- ation, while those for 240 min ranged from 27.3° to 28.5°C. Most interstage variation was shown when temperature and low dis- solved oxygen were combined, with low oxygen tolerance decreas- ing as temperature increased. The megalops is relatively insensitive to changes in oxygen concentration with temperature. It was con- cluded that larval stages have the capacity to tolerate a wider range of these variables than they experience in the natural environment. In another study, Bigford (1977) cultured larvae of C. irroratus and exposed them to 0.0, 0.1, and 1.0 ppm concentrations of a wateraccommodated fraction of No. 2 fuel oil under static condi- tions. Behavioral changes were monitored in terms of water column reponses to various conditions of light, pressure, and gravity. The most important effects of these sublethal exposures were the rever- sals of normal larval gravity responses in the water column. Results were that the normally geonegative, early stage larvae moved lower in the water column and the normally benthic megalops stage rose in the water column. This depression of typical megalopal ben- thic behavior in exposed larvae could alter recruitment to adult pop- ulations. As noted previously, Sandifer (1975) stated that C. irroratus apparently do not return to their adult habitats during planktonic stages. Instead, late larval stages and juvenile crabs join adult populations via extensive migrations. Therefore, alteration of late larval stage benthic behavior patterns could keep most larvae out of bottom shoreward currents that aid in recruitment move- ments. It was also determined that the 1.0 ppm concentration of this fuel oil is very near the lethal dose for these larvae. ‘oDean, D. (editor). 1972. The University of Maine's Sea Grant Program for | May 1971 to 30 April 1972. Univ. Maine, Orono, 25 p. '7Shotten, L., and W. Van Engel. 1971. Distribution, abundance and ecology of the rock crab (Cancer irroratus) in Virginia coastal waters of the Chesapeake Bight of the Virginia Sea. Va. Inst. Mar. Sci. Rep. 40, 3 p. ee Phylum Echinodermata Class Echinoidea Echinarachnius parma (Lamarck, 1816) DESCRIPTION: This flat, circular echinoderm is the common sand dollar. It is usually purple-brown in color when alive and unin- jured, but changes to dark green when exposed to air, injured, or recently dead. Size up to 83 mm in diameter (Lohavaniaya 1964). DISTRIBUTION: This species is discontinuously circumboreal, being found both in the North Pacific and North Atlantic, but not in Arctic regions. In the western North Atlantic, the known range extends from Cape Hatteras to Labrador and Greenland (Mortensen 1948; Durham 1955); Lohavanijaya (1964) reported specimens observed from the Bahamas and Cuba, but Virginia is the limit of the U.S. coastal population. HABITAT: Coe (1972) reported that in the northern part of its range, Echinarachnius parma is found near the low water mark, but further south it occurs only in deeper water, to 2,500 m. Lohavanijaya (1964) found them abundant in the surf zone in Maine. In the New York Bight apex, they were located in depths ranging from about 10 to 30 m (Fig. 68), however, they are known to occur in New York-New Jersey outer continental shelf samples in depths exceeding 75 m (Pearce, Caracciolo, Halsey, and Rogers 1977a). Stanley and James (1971) reported that the distribution of this species off Nova Scotia can be closely related to mean grain size of sediments. They were most abundant in fine (2-3) to medium (1-2¢) clean sands, not being found in very fine sand or in well-sorted sand. In the New York Bight apex, this species was also collected almost exclusively in fine or medium sand with an organic content of <3% (Fig. 68; Table 1). Echinarachnius parma is sensitive to anoxic conditions, and while they may be found in areas of organically enriched sediment sublayers, Parker (1927) reported that they will not burrow there. During the anoxic problem in the New York Bight in 1976, the E. parma population in a large area, over 1,000 km*, was killed (Steimle and Radosh 1979). Redford (1978) reported that E. parma may also be sensitive to sewer outfalls because of a significant decrease in occurrence and abundance in an area off southern Long Island, 5 yr after the instal- lation of a sewer outfall. FEEDING ECOLOGY: E. parma has been reported to be both a deposit and suspension feeder. Stanley and James (1971), Coe (1972), and Timko (1976) regarded this species to be a micropha- gous deposit feeder, subsisting on microscopic organisms, particu- larly diatoms and other algal material. Phelan (1977) reported little or no sand in the intestinal tract, indicating E. parma is a selective feeder. In the Pacific, Sokolova and Kuznetsov (1960) and Zenkevitch (1963) considered the species to be a suspension feeder, based on their observations of high concentrations in some areas, such that individuals touch or overlap. Feeding is accomplished by the use of some of the weak tube feet. cilia, and mucus strands (Parker and Van Alstyne 1932; Hyman 1955; Sokolova and Kuznetsov 1960; Phelan 1977), which collect and move food particles along furrows to the ventral mouth. Feeding may occur while the species is on the surface or burrowing in the sediment. Ruddell (1977) found that approximately 8% of the sand dollars he examined in the New York Bight had commensal ciliates 47 H SN q i j fh oh eth i { \\ / “5 | \ AT eat i of J \ VO i 4 | \ \ J Wee j y VPS j i fe H toy a 9 i ee j y Ne | / 5 os \\ / 402074 \ \ S077 7 ‘ Ne ae ce or AS oa c . H BN mes, & vf \ ‘ 3 7 oh [1] 1- 99/2 4070 E ea 100 —119/m2 | ; 73°40 Figure 68.—Distribution and abundance of Echinarachnius parma in the New York Bight apex. attached to their tests. Similar ciliates were noted on asteroid star fish. Coe (1972) reported that “in many localities, the species [E. parma] is so abundant as to form an important part of the food sup- ply of certain fishes, particularly the flounder, codfish and tautog.” In the northwest Atlantic, Maurer and Bowman (1975)'* found E. parma to comprise 94% by weight of the diet of Conger eel, Cor- ger oceanicus, 54-71% of the diet of ocean pout, Macrozoarces americanus, and 40-67% of the diet of American plaice, Hip- poglossoides platessoides. REPRODUCTION AND GROWTH: Cocanour and Allen (1967) reported that this species spawns during the fall (September December) in Maine, and Ruddell (1977) reported similar findings in the southern New York Bight. Fewkes (1886) reported the appearance of larvae in September in Rhode Island. Maurer et al. (1976) reported finding juveniles (<5 mm) in early November off Delaware. Graef (1977),'° after examining the size distribution of E. parma collected in New York Bight apex samples, suggested that new recruits (>10 mm) are available all year but peak in March. Ruddell (1977) found mpe females present from spring '8Maurer, R., Jr, and R. Bowman. 1975. Food habits of marine fishes of the northwest Atlantic. Northeast Fisheries Center Data Report, Woods Hole, Mass., Lab. Ref. 75-3, 90 p. '9Graef, J. 1977. A preliminary investigation of the growth rate and natural his- tory of Echinarachnius parma (Lamarck) in the New York Bight apex area. Unpubl. manuscr., 25 p. Northeast Fisheries Center Sandy Hook Laboratory, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Highlands, NJ 07732. through fall off New Jersey and Costello et al. (1957) reported spawning in the Woods Hole region to occur between March and August. Ruddell (1977) reported that sexual maturity is attained when individuals reach a size of 27 mm or larger off Delaware, while Cocanour (1969) reported gonad development at a size of about 40 mm in Maine, when the organisms are about 3 yr old. Juveniles are reported to grow very slowly during the winter (Gordon 1929). Males and females occur in equal abundance with- out any size differential. Cocanour (1969) reported that maximum growth in Maine occurs during seasons of warmest water tempera- ture, March through September. She also reports that during the winter there is some “‘negative” growth or shrinkage. The sand dol- lar may have alternating years of growth or gamete production, which may not occur simultaneously. Average growth rates were estimated at 2.0-6.4 mm/yr over a 24-30 mo period for mid-sized (30-50 mm) specimens. Durham (1955) estimated the age of a 48 mm Woods Hole specimen to be 7 yr, based on growth ring analy- sis, indicating a growth rate of almost 7 mm/yr. Graef (footnote 19) reported the maximum size E. parma found in New York Bight apex samples was 53 mm, at an age of about 6 yr, and Brykov (1975) reported a maximum age of 21 yrin specimens from the Sea of Japan, both estimates again based on growth ring analysis. This implies a growth of <9 mm/yr in the Bight apex. Younger individ- uals have a faster growth rate than mature individuals and Ebert (1975) suggested that, for many echinoids, growth is variable from season to season and from year to year. Swan (1966) reported that E. parma is fully capable of regenerat- ing nipped edges. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: E. parma has been reported to occur in numbers up to 180 individuals/m? off Nova Scotia (Stan- ley and James 1971) and over 200/m? in the North Pacific (Zenkevitch 1963). In the New York Bight apex, the maximum concentration found was 110/m*. Steimle and Stone (1973) col- lected 195 individuals (> 10 mm in diameter) in a 0.0625 m? sam- ple (or 3,120/m2) northeast of the apex boundaries. Graef (footnote 19) noted a tendency of size classes to be segregated in the New York Bight apex. Cocanour (1969) noted the tendency of larvae to aggregate together, but she believed that as animals get larger they become more evenly distributed. However, the collections reported upon above would indicate nonrandom aggregations of adults as well as larvae. An interesting phenomenon which has been discovered is the presence of dark, heavy mineral grains in the intestinal diverticula of juvenile E. parma. Gregory (1905) noticed them first and Graef (footnote 19) also noticed them in New York Bight specimens. One hypothesis for this phenomenon is that these heavy grains are used as weights by juveniles to increase stability on the bottom. Stanley and James (1971) reported that this species moves ran- domly over the sediment. In areas of high concentration, these movements are responsible for modifying ripple microridge and swale topography. Parker (1927) studied the locomotion of E. parma and found that it was a combination of rotation and progres- sion. The maximum rate of progress was 18 mm/min, with the average about 14 mm/min. They can completely bury themselves in about 10 min and are capable of righting themselves if turned upside down. Hyman (1955) reported that locomotion is chiefly or wholly accomplished by the motion of the spines, however, Parker and Van Alstyne (1932) indicated that the peripheral tube feet are also of assistance in locomotion. 48 DISCUSSION Faunal Composition of the Apex Among the species in the apex reviewed in this atlas, the Poly- chaeta were dominant, representing over 64% of total individuals, followed by the Bivalvia representing over 30%. This relative abundance also holds true for the overall species composition (Fig. 69; Table 1). These species contain elements of major benthic fau- nal types, correlated with sediment composition, reported or defined elsewhere in the Middle Atlantic Bight. The selected spe- cies exhibited four general patterns of abundance concentrations: 1) Species which appeared most often in the fine sediments of the Christiaensen Basin and upper Hudson Shelf Valley; 2) species which appeared to be ubiquitous or generally widespread; 3) spe- cies which usually inhabited the shallower sandy areas near the New Jersey-Long Island shore and Cholera Bank; and 4) a few spe- cies whose distributions were irregular. The first abundance distribution pattern included 20 species which were generally most abundant in the relatively deep, cool, silty-fine sand habitat offered by the Chnstiaensen Basin and upper Hudson Shelf Valley (Table 2). This habitat included the sewage sludge dump site and, peripherally, the dredge spoil dump site. Most of the species in this silty-sand apex assemblage show affinities to the fol- lowing generalized faunal types defined by Pratt (1973): an estua- rine silt-clay fauna (Nephtys incisa, Nucula proxima, Ninoe nigripes, Lumbrineris tenuis, Pitar morrhuanus, and Cerasto- derma pinnulatum); a marine silty-sand fauna (Pherusa affinis, Ceriantheopsis americanus, and Arctica islandica); and an estua- rine silty-sand fauna (Leptocheirus pinguis and Prionospio steen- strupi). The Nephtys incisa-Nucula proxima fauna is common in Long Island (Sanders 1956) and other southern New England sounds (Sanders 1968; Pratt 1973; Steimle et al. 1976°), Chesa- peake and Delaware Bays (Kinner and Maurer 1978). The marine silty-sand fauna is a major faunal type on the mid-continental shelf and in southern New England sounds. The estuarine silty-sand fauna is usually dominated by Ampelisca spp. and also occurs in New England sounds and in mid-Atlantic estuaries. Thus, the spe- 20Steimle, F., C. Byrne, R. Reid, and T. Azarovitz. 1976. Hydrology, sediments, macrofauna, and demersal finfish of an alternate disposal site (East Hole in Block Island Sound) for the Thames River (Conn.) dredging project. Final Report to the U.S. Navy, New London, Conn. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., Middle Atlantic Coast. Fish. Cent. Informal Rep. 110, 63 p. CRUSTACEA MOLLUSCA 312% 30.54% Peer 148% —,__ ECHINOIDEA—_ 0.37% ANNELIDA 64.49% Figure 69.—Percentages of New York Bight apex benthic invertebrates in each phylum represented. Table 2.—Species whose abundance distributions indicate an association with fine silty sands with relatively high organic contents, as found in the Chris- tiaensen Basin and upper Hudson Shelf Valley (Fig. 1). Feeding types and stress area tolerances (X=high tolerance, L=low tolerance) are also indicated. Species Dredge spoil Sewage sludge Feeding type! Edwardsia spp. L S-SD Ceriantheopsis americanus xX L S-SD Phoronis architecta L L S Nucula proxima L SD Arctica islandica L S Cerastoderma pinnulatum Ss Pitar morrhuanus X S Eteone longa L (cc Nephtys incisa L L O-SD Capitella capitata L xX D Mediomastus ambiesta xX L D Prionospio steenstrupi xX SD Paraonis gracilis D Lumbrineris tenuis X 1 Cc Ninoe nigripes L L (c Drilonereis longa Ib Cc Cossura longocirrata D Asabellides oculata L X SD Pherusa affinis L Ib, SD Leptocheirus pinguis S 'Feeding type codes: S =suspension feeder, SD =surface deposit feeder, D =sub- surface deposit feeder, C=carnivore, O=omnivore, and SV =scavenger. cies we have collected in the Christiaensen Basin and upper Hudson Shelf Valley appear to be part of a continuum, transitional, or a mixture of three previously defined major community types which prefer high levels of silt and intrude into the inshore, predominantly sand, habitat within the confines of the upper Hudson Shelf Valley, and in Raritan Bay (McGrath 1974). The two capitellids, Capitella capitata and Mediomastus ambiseta, in this group are recognized opportunists. Feeding types of the 20 species within this group are diverse. The second pattern included 17 species whose abundance and wide distribution in the apex could not be strongly correlated with a particular major habitat (Table 3). It included two species, Spio fili- cornis and Polydora ligni, that fit this category only during the summer (Fig. 38 (top), 40 (top)). Most of the species in this group (Sthenelais limicola, Nephtys bucera, Aricidea catherinae, Cancer irroratus, Lumbrineris fragi- lis, Spiophanes bombyx, Tellina agilis) have been found to be mem- bers of a medium sand fauna which predominates in inshore areas Table 3.—Species whose abundance distributions indicate a lack of strong asso- ciation with any particular habitat. Feeding types and tolerances of stress areas (X=high tolerance, L=low tolerance) are indicated. Species Dredge spoil Sewage sludge Feeding type! Tellina agilis xX xX SD Polygordius triestinus L 1E D Phyllodoce arenae Ib L Cc Harmothoe extenuata L (c Sthenelais limicola L iy Cc Glycera dibranchiata x x C-D Nephtys bucera L ib O-SD Spio filicornis (summer) x L SD Polydora ligni (summer) 4 x SD Spiophanes bombyx xX », 4 SD Aricidea catherinae L ibs D Lumbrineris fragilis L Ib, C Tharyx acutus x x SD Tharyx annulosus », 4 L SD Ampharete arctica L SD Edotea triloba x x SV-SD Cancer irroratus L L SV-C 'For feeding type codes see Table 2. 49 (Pratt 1973; Steimle and Stone 1973; Maurer et al. 1976; Maurer, Leathem, Kinner, and Tinsman 1979). Two species, Harmothoe extenuata and Edotea triloba, are members of Pratt’s silty sand assemblage, and Tharyx acutus and Polydora ligni were included as members of the estuarine Ampelisca spp. fauna. It should be noted that the collections of Cancer irroratus were dominated by juveniles. Examination of adults alone may indicate a far different abundance distribution pattern. This group of species also included a diversity of feeding types, with surface deposit feeders predomi- nating. The third pattern included those species whose abundance distri- bution indicated a strong association with the cleaner sandy sedi- ments found inshore, off both New Jersey and Long Island, as well as the Cholera Bank on the eastern edge of the apex. Nineteen spe- cies, with a wide variety of feeding types, were included in this group (Table 4). Spio filicornis had a more limited distribution in the winter, which included it in this group as well as in the previous group. Some of the species we have included in this group have been associated with sandy habitats elsewhere. Steimle and Stone (1973) included Unciola irrorata, Protohaustorius deichmannae, Rhe- poxynius epistomus, Echinarachnius parma, and Spisula solidis- sima as dominants in the medium sand assemblage identified along southwestern Long Island. Most of these same species and Mage- lona riojai, Goniadella gracilis, Nephtys picta, and Crangon sep- temspinosa are included as dominants in Pratt’s (1973) Middle Atlantic Bight sand assemblage. Maurer et al. (1976) found N. picta and Ensis directus to dominate medium to coarse clean sand stations on the inner continental shelf off the Delmarva Peninsula. Nephtys picta, Spiophanes bombyx, and M. riojai dominated sandy shoals in the Delaware Bay study of Kinner and Maurer (1978). It is interesting to note that Neomysis americana, as it was col- lected in this survey, showed a preference for the mouth of the Hudson-Ranitan Estuary. This could be an artifact of sampling, as the grab used is not particularly effective at collecting these mobile, semipelagic crustaceans. The three final species, Ensis directus, Nassarius trivittatus, and Polydora ligni (during winter), exhibited an abundance distribution which lacked a definite pattern so as to be placed in any of the above three groups (Figs. 15, 23, 40 (bottom)). Their occurrence, Table 4.—Species whose abundance distributions indicate an association with clean sand habitats. Feeding types are included. Species Feeding type! Astarte castanea S Spisula solidissima S Goniadella gracilis (cc Nephtys picta O-SD Nephtys (Aglaophamus) circinata O-SD Travisia carnea D Spio filicornis (winter) SD Lumbrinerides acuta (S Magelona riojai D-SD Caulleriella killariensis SD Ampelisca verrilli S Unciola irrorata O-SV-SD Pseudunciola obliquua SD Protohaustorius deichmannae S Protohaustorius wigleyi S Rhepoxynius epistomus oO Neomysis americana S-SD Crangon septemspinosa O-SV Echinarachnius parma S-SD 'Feeding type codes are listed in Table 2. however, may indicate a preference for a transitional habitat between the fine silty sand and cleaner sand in the New York Bight apex. Ensis directus is a suspension feeder, N. trivittatus is consid- ered a scavenger, and P. /igni is a surface deposit feeder. Pratt (1973) included F. directus in his Middle Atlantic Bight sand community, and Franz found both E. directus and N. trivitta- tus to be characteristic of the medium sand assemblage in Long Island Sound. However, N. trivittatus has also been recorded from muddy sediments in Delaware Bay (Kinner et al. 1974). The sum- mer distribution of P. ligni places it in the ubiquitous species cate- gory, however, its winter distribution is more limited. The diversity and mixing of previously defined faunal groups in the deeper areas of the apex, especially the silty sand area, is, more than anything else, probably a reflection of the heterogeneity of the sediments there, disregarding local impacts of dumping. The sedi- ments in the apex have been examined in great detail by Freeland et al. (1976), showing a complex distribution of surficial sediment types, including relic and anthropogenic deposits, as well as nor mal current and wave related distributions. Anthropogenic Influences The seabed of the New York Bight apex is influenced primarily by continental shelf water of high salinity (>32%p,) and small tem- perature fluctuations. Inshore areas are less stable and fall under the influence of ocean waves and estuarine discharges, primarily from the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. The estuarine discharges contain rela- tively high levels of suspended sediment, organic material, and nutrient and toxic pollutant loadings, all of which contribute to altering the quality of the benthic environment, both inshore and in the deeper offshore depositional basins of the apex. Waste dumping also directly and indirectly impinges upon the benthos. The net result of decades of using the Hudson-Raritan Estuary and the apex as a repository fora variety of human wastes is that the apex benthic environment, particularly the sediments in and around the dredge spoil and sewage sludge dump sites, now contains a variety of con- taminants occurring at levels that are stressful, lethal, or undesir able to many marine organisms. For example, high levels of five heavy metals have been measured, in our survey, in both the dredg- ing spoils and sewage sludge dump sites (Figs. 7-11). They are, in general, correlated with sediments of highest organic content (Fig. 6). Metal concentrations in these areas are, in some cases, almost 50 times higher than those at apex stations away from the dump sites and background levels in uncontaminated sands and silt (Table >): Koons and Thomas (1979) also reported that total C,;, hydrocar- bons are highest (3,600-6,500 ppm) in New York Bight areas where harbor dredge spoil and sewage sludge disposal occurs. Lev- els at the mouth of the Hudson-Raritan Estuary are reported as low as 6-22 ppm, with concentrations of 82 and 86 ppm reported at two locations approximately 80 km out on the mid-continental shelf. Table 5.—Concentrations of metals in sediment unaffected by waste dumping (ppm in dry sedi- ments) (Carmody et al. 1973). Coa Gul Seb INigeZn Sandy sediment of New York Bight 6 3 12 3 18 Silty sediment of Hudson Submarine (Shelf) Valley 6 5 4 8 20 Elevated levels of heavy metals and hydrocarbons are well known as being toxic to marine life. In high concentrations, they are lethal, but even in sublethal concentrations they can cause path- ological conditions, physiological disturbances, and deviations from normal behavior. Larval stages are especially sensitive to heavy metal toxicity and usually show increased abnormalities and slow growth rates when exposed to such toxins (Sprague 1964; Saunders and Sprague 1967; Shuster and Pringle 1968?'; Portmann 1970; Stirling 1970°*; Calabrese 1972; Connor 1972; Calabrese et al. 1973, 1977; Vernberg et al. 1973; Reish et al. 1974). The Christiaensen Basin and upper Hudson Shelf Valley benthic environments are also subject to frequent seasonal dissolved oxy- gen reductions to levels (<2 ml/liter) critical to many species of marine organisms common in the New York Bight (Segar and Ber- berian 1976; Steimle 1976; Thomas et al. 1976). The dissolved oxygen reduction during the summer months is probably the result of the higher oxygen demand of organic rich sediments and overly- ing water in the central apex depression, coupled with the strong seasonal thermocline which prevents reoxygenation of bottom waters. Impacts to the benthic community are strongly indicated in our data. Some abnormalities in faunal composition appear to be directly related to the dumping of dredge spoils and sewage sludge. Most of the species found in the upper Hudson Shelf Valley and Christiaensen Basin exhibited some avoidance of one or both dump sites (Tables 2-4) with a few exceptions: Capitella capitata was collected almost exclusively at the sewage sludge dump site, and Asabellides oculata occurred in greatest concentrations there; Prionospio steenstrupi and Lumbrineris tenuis showed high abun- dances at the dredge spoil dump site (Figs. 2, 35, 39, 46, 55). The very low H diversity values (Fig. 3), observed at stations within and just outside both dump sites, indicate that the overall benthic macroinvertebrate community structure in these areas has also been altered. Low H’values are often associated with highly stressed environments, where a few opportunistic or tolerant spe- cies become abundant, in part because of reduced competition. This results in a simple community, usually consisting of only a few species (Sanders 1968). In this study, the sewage sludge dump site was dominated by Capitella capitata, a highly opportunisitic spe- cies, and our data show the abundance distributions of only eight species to indicate tolerance of sewage sludge, all are deposit feed- ers. Thirteen species were observed to be tolerant of dredging spoils. Of these, 11 are deposit feeders, 1 is a suspension feeder, and 1 is a carnivore (Tables 2, 3). This predominance of deposit feeders in and around the dump sites indicates that there may also be a change in trophic composition of communities in these areas. An examination of the feeding types of all species in Groups | and 2, i.e., those which are ubiquitous or most often associated with fine sand-silt sediments with generally high organic content, shows a more equitable distribution of feeding types (Tables 2, 3). Amphipod crustaceans, found to be important elements in most faunal groups described in the Middle Atlantic Bight, are virtually absent from coarse to medium silts and medium to high organic content sediments in apex collections, an observation previously reported by Pearce (1972). The marine silty sand group defined by Pratt (1973), which intrudes up the Hudson Shelf Valley to the 2!Shuster, C., and B. Pringle. 1968. Effects of trace metals on estuarine molluscs. Jn Proceedings of the Ist Mid-Auantic Industrial Water Conference. Univ. Dela- ware, CE-5, p. 285-304. 22Stirling, E. 1970. Some observations on the response of the benthic bivalve Tel- lina tenuis to pollutants. Proc. Int. Counc. Explor. Sea, C.M. 1970/E:15, Fish. Improvement Comm., 6 p. apex, contains several species of Ampelisca which are considered important elements of this faunal group, and in the silty sand areas of southern New England sounds they are numerical dominants. Ampeliscids also dominated many estuarine silty sand faunas, e.g., in southern New England (Sanders 1958), in Great Bay, N.J. (Durand and Nadeau 1972), in Chesapeake Bay (Feeley 1967), and in the Delaware Bay area (Watling and Maurer 1972). In our apex study, however, only one species of Ampelisca (A. verrilli) was col- lected, in moderate numbers, in low organic, fine to medium sandy sediments. The one species of amphipod, Leptocheirus pinguis, which was moderately abundant in high organic, silty sediments, was collected only at the southernmost stations of the upper Hud- son Shelf Valley (Fig. 63), while Steimle and Stone (1973) col- lected it in the northern Chmistiaensen Basin in 1967. The paucity of amphipods in the New York Bight apex and Ran- tan Bay (McGrath 1974) would appear to be very good evidence that man’s use of the area has generally degraded the environment so that it is unsuitable for most amphipods. The dump sites are a part of this degradation, but a small part compared with the effects of pollution effluents in and emanating from the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. Amphipods, like other crustaceans, are known to be gener ally intolerant of pollutants (Blumer et al. 1970; Sanders et al. 1972), but they are important food items for most demersal finfish and their absence or reduction in numbers may alter normal food webs of several valuable resource species, reducing the potential harvest from the apex. Boesch (1982) has reviewed benthic-finfish trophic couplings in the apex, and also supports the hypothesis that resource potential is impaired. The apex, in the past, has been a very productive area for fish- eries, in part because of its uncontaminated shellfish and because it provided a hospitable environment for many species of demersal fish and crustaceans. If dumping in the area is reduced or termi- nated in the future, it will be important to monitor the recovery of the apex ecosystem. The amount of time required for the fauna at these dump sites to recover is unknown at this time. Dean and Haskin (1964) found that the benthic community, particularly the small amphipod crusta- ceans, showed marked recovery after pollution abatement at the mouth of the Raritan River. Dredge spoil recolonization has also been shown to be relatively rapid in Long Island and Rhode Island Sounds (Pratt 1973; Reid and Frame 19773). However, little work has been done on sewage sludge dump site recovery. Bioturbation may keep recycling some pollutants for a time before they are finally diluted to nonstressful levels or buried at a depth where they are no longer active. In conclusion, our studies show that a heterogeneous benthic fauna exists in the New York Bight apex, which appears to be adversely altered, particularly in the vicinity of two dump sites, but perhaps throughout a major portion of the apex. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank Martha Halsey, Newell Eisele, and all of our work-study aids from Cook, Jersey City State, and Trenton State Colleges for their patient work in sorting and identification of the benthic macrofauna samples upon which much of this atlas is Reid, R.. and A. Frame. 1977. Sediments and benthic macrofauna of disposal area. Section F. In Physical, chemical and biological effects of dredging in the Thames River (CT) and spoil disposal at the New London (CT) dumping ground, p. 1-44. Final report to U.S. Navy and Interagency Scientific Advisory Subcommittee on Ocean Dredging and Spoiling, NOAA, NMFS, Northeast Fisheries Center, Sandy Hook Laboratory, Highlands, N.J. 51 based; Leslie Rogers and James Thomas for field collection of macrofauna samples; and Ann Frame for taxonomic advice. We also thank John LeBaron and Suellen Craig for their assistance in data processing, Mabel Trafford for her help with literature searches, Michele Cox for preparing illustrations, and Catherine Noonan, Diane McDonnell, and Maureen Montone for typing vari- ous drafts of the manuscript. Special thanks are given to Donald Boesch, Donald Maurer, J. Kneeland McNulty, John Pearce, Robert Reid, and a journal reviewer for reviewing the manuscript. LITERATURE CITED ABBOTT, R. T. 1968. A guide to field identification: Seashells of North America. Press, N.Y., 280 p. 1974. American seashells. 663 p. ADAMS, S. M., and J. W. ANGELOVIC. 1970. Assimilation of detritus and its associated bacteria by three species of estuarine animals. Chesapeake Sci. 11:249-254. Golden Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co., Princeton, N.J., ALLEN, J. A. 1953. Observations on Nucula turgida Marshall and N. moorei Winck- worth, J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 31:515-527. 1954. A comparative study of the British species of Nucula and Nuculana. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 33:457-472. ARCISZ, W., and L. SANDHOLZER. 1947. A technological study of the ocean quahog fishery. Commer. Fish. Rev. 9(6):1-21. BARNARD, J. L. 1969. The families of genera of marine gammaridean amphipoda. Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus. 271, 535 p. 1970. Benthic ecology of Bahia de San Quintin Baja California. Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 44, 60 p. BARNES, R. D. 1963. Invertebrate zoology. W. B. Saunders Co., Phila., 632 p. 1974. Invertebrate zoology, Third ed. W. B. Saunders Co., Phila., 870 p. BEARDSLEY, R. C., W. C. BOICOURT, and D. V. HANSEN. 1976. Physical oceanography of the Middle Atlantic Bight. nol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. 2:20-34. BELLAN, G., D. J. REISH, and J. P. FORET. 1972. The sublethal effects of a detergent on the reproduction, development, and settlement in the polychaetous annelid Capitella capitata. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 14:183-188. BHAUD, M. 1967. Contribution a l’ecologie des larves pelagiques d’annélides polychetes a Banyuls-sur-Mer. Comparaison avec les régions septentrionales. Vie Milieu 18 (Ser. B): 273-315. 1972. Quelques données sur le determinisme ecologique de la reproduction des annélides polychetes. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 17:115-136. BIERNBAUM, C. K. 1979. Influence of sedimentary factors on the distribution of benthic amphi- pods of Fishers Island Sound, Connecticut. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 38:201-223. BIGELOW, H. B., and W. C. SCHROEDER. 1953. Fishes of the Gulf of Maine. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Fish. Bull. 53, 577 p. BIGELOW, H. B., and M. SEARS. 1939. Studies of the waters of the continental shelf, Cape Cod to Chesapeake Bay. III. A volumetric study of the zooplankton, Mem. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard Coll. 54:183-378. BIGFORD, T. E. Am. Soc. Lim- 1977. Effects of oil on behavioral responses to light, pressure and gravity in larvae of the rock crab Cancer irroratus. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 43:137-148. BLAKE, J. A. 1969. Reproduction and larval development of Polydora from northern New England (Polychaeta:Spionidae). Ophelia 7: 1-63. 1971. Revision of the genus Polydora from the east coast of North America (Polychaeta:Spionidae). Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 75, 32 p. 1975. The larval development of Polychaeta from the northern California coast. III. Eighteen species of Errantia. BLAKE, N. J., and H. P. JEFFRIES. 1971. The structure of an experimental infaunal community. Biol. Ecol. 6:1-14. Ophelia 14:23-84. J. Exp. Mar. BLEGVAD, H. 1914. Food and conditions of nourishment among the communities of inverte- brate animals found over or in the sea bottom in Danish waters. Rep. Danish Biol. Stn., Copenhagen 22:43-78. BLUMER, M., J. SASS, G. SOUZA, H. SANDERS, F. GRASSLE, and G. HAMP- SON. 1970. The West Falmouth Oil Spill, persistance of the pollution eight months after the accident. Woods Hole Oceanogr. Inst. Ref. 70-44, 32 p. BOESCH, D. F. 1973. Classification and community structure of macrobenthos in the Hamp- ton Roads area, Virginia. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 21:226-244. 1982. Ecosystem consequences of alterations of benthic community structure and function in the New York Bight region. /n G. Mayer (editor), Ecological stress and the New York Bight: Science and management, p. 543-568. Estua- rine Research Federation, Columbia, S.C. BOESCH, D., J. KRAEUTER, and K. SERAFY. 1977. Benthic ecological studies: megabenthos and macrobenthos. /n B. Laird (report coordinator), Chemical and biological benchmark studies on the Middle Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf. Vol. I-A, p. I-I11. Va. Inst. Mar. Sci., Gloucester Pt., Va. BOSS, K. J. 1966. The subfamily Tellininae in the western Atlantic, the genus Tel/lina (Partl). Johnsonia 4:217-272. BOUSFIELD, E. L. 1973. Shallow-water gammaridean Amphipoda of New England. Univ. Press, Ithaca, N.Y., 312 p. BOWMAN, M. J. 1977. Hydrographic Properties. MESA New York Bight Atlas Monogr. I, New York Sea Grant Inst., Albany, 78 p BOWMAN, M. J., and L. D. WUNDERLICH Cornell 1976. Distribution of hydrographic properties in the New York Bight apex. Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. 2:58-68. BREESE, W. P., and F. D. PHIBBS. 1972. Ingestion of bivalve molluscan larvae by the polychaete annelid Poly- dora ligni. Veliger 14:274 BRYKOV. V. 1975. Individual age and life span of certain species of sea urchins in the Sea of Japan. Biol. Morya (Vladivost) 1(2): 111-116 CALABRESE, A. 1972. How some pollutants affect embryos & larvae of American oyster & hard-shell clam. Mar. Fish. Rev, 34(11-12):66-77. CALABRESE, A., R. S. COLLIER, D. A. NELSON, and J. R. MacINNES 1973. The toxicity of heavy metals to embryos of the American oyster Cras- sostrea virginica. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 18:162-166. CALABRESE, A., J. R. MacINNES, D. A. NELSON, and J. E. MILLER. 1977. Survival and growth of bivalve larvae under heavy-metal stress. Biol. (Berl.) 41:179-184. CARACCIOLO, J., J. PEARCE, M. HALSEY, and L. ROGERS. 1978. Distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York Bight, first and second monitoring cruises, November 1975 and March 1976. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-40, 48 p. Mar. CAREY, A. 1962. An ecological study of two benthic animal populations in Long Island Sound. Ph.D. Thesis, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., 65 p. CARMODY, D. J., J. B. PEARCE, and W. E. YASSO. 1973. Trace metals in sediments of New York Bight. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 4:132-135. CASANOVA, L. 1953. Le Annelides du plancton dans le Golfe de Marseille. Rec. Trav. Stn. Mar. Endoume &(3):29-36. CASTAGNA, M., and P- CHANLEY. 1973. Salinity tolerance of some marine bivalves from inshore and estuarine environments in Virginia waters on the western mid-Atlantic coast. Mala- cologia 12:47-96. CAZAUX, C. 1968. Etude morphologique du developpement larvaire d’annelides poly- chetes. (Bassin d’Arcachon). I. Aphroditidae. Chrysopetalidae. [In Fr] Arch. Zool. Exp. Gen. 109:477-543. CHANLEY, P. 1969. Larval development in the Class Bivalvia. Symposium on the Mol- lusca. Mar. Biol. Assoc. India Part I1:476-481. CLARK, M. E. 1964. Biochemical studies on the coelomic fluid of Nephtys hombergi (Poly- chaeta: Nephtyidae) with observations on changes during different physiolog- ical states. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 127:63-84. in to CLARK, R. B. 1961. The origin and formation of the heteronereis. (Camb.) 36:199-236. 1962. Observations on the food of Nephrys. CLARKE, A. H., Jr 1956. Natural biological control of a Mya predator. CLUTTER, R. I. 1967. Zonation of nearshore mysids. COCANOUR, B. A. 1969. Growth and reproduction of the sand dollar, Echinarachnius parma (Echinodermata:Echinoidea). Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Maine, 96 p. COCANOUR, B., and K. ALLEN. 1967. The breeding cycles of a sand dollar and a sea urchin. Comp. Bio- chem. Physiol. 20:327-331. COE, W. 1972. east (Echinoderms of Connecticut). CONNOR, P.M. 1972. Acute toxicity of heavy metals to some marine larvae. Bull. 3:190-192. COSTELLO, D. P,, M. E. DAVIDSON, A. EGGERS, M. H. FOX, and C. HEN- LEY: 1957. Methods for obtaining and handling marine eggs and embryos. Biol. Lab., Woods Hole, Mass., 247 p. CREASER, E. P,, Jr. 1973. Reproduction of the bloodworm (Glycera dibranchiata) in the Sheeps- cot Estuary, Maine. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 30:161-166. CROKER, R. H. 1967. Niche diversity in five sympatric species of intertidal amphi- pods (Crustacea:Haustoriidae). Ecol. Monogr. 37:173-200. CURRENT FISHERIES STATISTICS. 1973. New Jersey landings, annual summary 1973. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., Curt. Fish. Stat. 6413, 7 p. 1978. New Jersey landings, December 1978. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish Serv., Curr. Fish. Stat. 7716, 4 p. CURTIS, M. A. 1977. Life cycles and population dynamics of marine benthic polychaetes from the Disko Bay area of West Greenland. Ophelia 16:9-58. Biol. Rev. Limnol. Oceanogr. 7:380-385. Nautilus 70:37-38. Ecology 48:200-208. Starfishes, serpent stars, sea urchins and sea cucumbers of the North- Dover Press, N.Y., 152 p. Mar. Pollut. Mar. DALES, R. P. 1951. Notes on the reproduction and early development of the cirratulid Tharyx marioni (St. Joseph). J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 30:113-117. 1963. Annelids. Hutchinson Univ. Library, Lond., 200 p. DALY, J. M. 1972. The maturation and breeding biology of Harmothoe imbricata (Poly- chaeta:Polynoidae). Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 12:53-66. 1974. Gametogenesis in Harmothoe noidae). Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 25:35-40. DARO, M. H., and P. POLK. 1973. The autecology of Polydora ciliata along the Belgian coast. Sea Res. 6:130-140. DAVIS, C.C. 1950. Observations of plankton taken in marine waters of Florida in 1947 and imbricata (Polychaeta:Poly- Neth. J. 1948. Q. J. Fla. Acad. Sci. 12:67-103. DAY, J. H. 1967. A monograph on the Polychaeta of southern Africa. Br. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Lond. 2 vols., 878 p. 1973. New Polychaeta from Beaufort, with a key to all species recorded from North Carolina. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS Circ. 375, 140 p. DEAN, D., and H. H. HASKIN. 1964. Benthic repopulation of the Ranitan River estuary following pollution abatement. Limnol. Oceanogr. 9:551-563. DREW, G. A. 1907. The habits and movements of the razorshell clam, Ensis directus, Con. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 12:127-140. DRISCOLL, E. G. 1972. Oxygen, salinity, pH and temperature vanation in the bottom water of Buzzards Bay. [Abstr] Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 143:459. DRISCOLL, E. G., and D. E. BRANDON. 1973. Mollusk-sediment relationships in northwestern Buzzards Bay, Massa- chusetts, U.S.A. Malacologia 12:13-46. DURAND, J., and R. NADEAU. 1972. Water resources development in the Mullica River Basin. Part |. Bio- logical evaluation of the Mullica River—Great Bay Estuary. N.J. Water Resour. Res. Inst., Rutgers Univ., 138 p. DURHAM. J. 1955. Classification of Clypeasteroid Echinoids. Sci. 31(5):73-198. EBERT, T. A. 1975. Growth and mortality of post-larval echinoids. TBS EDWARDS, R. R. C., J. H. STEELE, and A. TREVALLION. 1970. The ecology of 0-group plaice and common dabs in Loche Ewe. II. Prey-predator experiments with plaice. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 4:156-173. EISIG, H- 1914. Zur systematik, anatomie und morphologie der Ariciiden nebst Beitragen zur generellen systematik. Mitt. Zool. Stn. Neapel 21:153-600. EISLER, R. 1969. Acute toxicities of insecticides to marine decapod crustaceans. taceana 16:302-310. Univ. Calif. Publ. Geol. Am. Zool. 15:755- Crus- 1971. Cadmium poisoning in Fundulus heteroclitus (Pisces: Cyprinodonti- dae) and other marine organisms. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 28:1225-1234. EMIG, C.-C. 1969. Considerations sur la systématique des phoronidiens. II Phoronis psammophila Cori, 1889, et Phoronis architecta Andrews, 1890. Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. Ser. 2, 41:312-327. 1971. Taxonomic et systématique des phoronidiens. Paris, Zool. 8:469-568. ENEQUIST, P. 1949. Studies on the soft-bottom amphipods of the Skagerak. Bidr. Upps. 28:297-492. ENNIS, G. P. 1973. Food, feeding, and condition of lobsters, Homarus americanus, throughout the seasonal cycle in Bonavista Bay, Newfoundland. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 30:1905-1909. FAUCHALD, K. 1977. The polychaete worms. Definitions and keys to the orders, families and genera. Nat. Hist. Mus. Los Ang. Cty., Sci. Ser. 28, 188 p. FAUCHALD, K.. and P. A. JUMARS. 1979. The diet of worms: A study of polychaete feeding guilds. Mar. Biol. Annu. Rev. 17:193-284. FAUVEL, P. 1927. Polychetes sédentaires. Faune Fr. 16, 494 p. 1958. Surles Ampharetiens (Anneélides Polychétes) de la Cote Occidentale de l’Afrique. Bull. Inst. Oceanogr. Monaco 1130, 8 p. FEELEY, J. 1967. The distribution and ecology of the Gammaridea (Crustacea Amphi- poda) of the lower Chesapeake estuaries. M_-S. Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, 76 p. FEWKES, J. W. 1883. Onthe development of certain worm larvae. 11:167-208. 1886. Preliminary observations on the development of Ophiopholis and Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Zool. Oceanogr. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Echinarachnius. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., Harv. Univ. 12:105-152. FIELD, I. 1907. Unutilized fishes and their relation to the fishing industries. Spec. Pap. 6, U.S. Comm. Fish., Bur. Fish. Doc. 622, 50 p. EISH, |G: J. 1926. Seasonal distribution of the plankton of the Woods Hole region. Bull. U.S. Bur. Fish. 41:91-179. FOWLER, H. W. 1912. Crustacea of New Jersey. Annu. Rep. N.J. State Mus. 1911:35-650. FOX, R.S.. and K. H. BYNUM. 1975. The amphipod crustaceans of North Carolina estuarine waters. apeake Sci. 16:223-237. FRANZ, D. 1976. Benthic molluscan assemblages in relation to sediment gradients in northeastern Long Island Sound, Connecticut. Malacologia 15:377-399. 1977. Size and age-specific predation by Lunatia heros (Say, 1822) on the surf clam Spisula solidissima (Dillwyn, 1817) off western Long Island, New York. Veliger 20:144-150. FREELAND, G. L.. D. J. P. SWIFT, W. L. STUBBLEFIELD, and A. E. COK. 1976. Surficial sediments of the NOAA-MESA study areas in the New York Bight. Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. Spec Symp. 2:90-101. FROLANDER, H. 1955. The biology of the zooplankton of the Narragansett Bay area. Ph.D. Thesis, Brown Univ., Providence, Rhode Island, 94 p. GARDINER, S. L. 1975. Errant polychaete annelids from North Carolina. chell Sci. Soc. 91:77-220. Ches- J. Elisha Mit- 53 GIBBS, P. E. 1971. A comparative study of reproductive cycles in four polychaete species belonging to the family Cirratulidae. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 51:745-769. GIERE, O. 1968. Die fluktuationen des marinen zooplanktons im _ Elbe- Aestuar. Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 31:379-546. GILBERT, W. H. 1970. Territoriality observed in a population of Tellina agilis (Bivalvia: Mol- lusca). [Abstr.] Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 139:423-424. GILBERT, W. H., and E. F SUCHOW. 1977. Predation by winter flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus) on the siphons of the clam, Tellina agilis. Nautilus 91:16-17. GORDON, I. 1929. Skeletal development in Arbacia, Echinarachnius and Leptasterias. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 217 (Ser. B):289-334. GOSNER, K. L. 1971. Guide to identification of marine and estuarine invertebrates, Cape Hatteras to the Bay of Fundy. Wiley-Intersci., N.Y., 693 p. GRASSLE, J. F.,, and J. RP GRASSLE. 1974. Opportunistic life histories and genetic systems in marine benthic poly- chaetes. J. Mar. Res. 32:253-284. GRASSLE, J. P., and J. F GRASSLE. 1976. Sibling species in the marine pollution indicator Capitella (Poly- chaeta). Science (Wash., D.C.) 192:567-569. GRAVIER, C. 1898. Contribution a l’etude de la trompe des glycériens. Bull. Sci. Fr. Belg. 31:421-448. GREGORY, E. R. 1905. An unnoticed organ of the sand-dollar, Echinarachnius parma. Science (Wash., D.C.) 21:270. GREIG, R. A., D. R. WENZLOFF, and J. B. PEARCE. 1976, Distribution and abundance of heavy metals in finfish, invertebrates and sediments collected at a deepwater disposal site. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 7:185-187. GREVE, W. 1974. Planktonic spermatophores found in a culture device with spionid poly- chaetes. Helgol. wiss. Meeresunters. 26:370-374. HAEFNER, P.A., Jr. 1972. The biology of the sand shrimp, Crangon septemspinosa, at Lamoine, Maine. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 88:36-42. 1976. Distribution, reproduction and moulting of the rock crab Cancer trroratus Say, 1917, in the mid-Atlantic Bight. J. Nat. Hist. 10:377-397. HAEFNER, P. A., Jr., and W. A. VAN ENGEL. 1975. irroratus, in Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Sci. 16:253-265. HAINES, J. L., and D. MAURER. 1980. Quantitative faunal associates of the serpulid polychaete Hydroides Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 56:43-47. HALCROW, W., D. W. MacKAY, and I. THORNTON. 1973. The distribution of trace metals and fauna in the Firth of Clyde in rela- tion to the disposal of sewage sludge. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 53:721- 739. HANNERZ, L. 1956. Larval development of the polychaete families Spionidae Sars, Disomi- dae Mesnil, and Poecilochaetidae n. fam. in the Gullmar Fjord (Sweden). Zool. Bidr. Upps. 31:1-204. HARTMAN, O. 1957. Orbiniidae, Apistobranchidae, Paraonidae and Longosomidae. Hancock Found, Pac. Exped. 15:211-393. 1961. Anew monstrillid copepod parasitic in capitellid polychaetes in south- ern California. Zool. Anz. 167:325-334. 1968. Atlas of the errantiate polychaetous annelids from California. Hancock Found., Los Ang., Calif., 828 p. 1969. Atlas of the sedentariate polychaetous annelids from California. lan Hancock Found., Los Ang., Calif., 812 p. HATCHER, P.G., and L. E. KEISTER. 1976. Carbohydrates and organic carbon in New York Bight sediments as pos- sible indicators of sewage contamination. Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. 2:240-248. HAY, W. P., and C. A. SHORE. 1918. The decapod crustaceans of Beaufort, N.C., and the surrounding region. Bull. U.S, Bur. Fish. 35:369-475. HEDGPETH, J. W. 1954. Gulf of Mexico, its origin, waters, and marine life. Serv., Fish. Bull. 55:367. Aspects of molting, growth and survival of male rock crabs, Cancer dianthus. Allan Allan Al- U.S. Fish Wildl. HEMPEL, C. 1957. Uber den Rohrenbau und die Nahrungsaufnahme einiger Spioniden (Polychaeta sedentaria), der deutschen Kusten. Helgol. wiss. Meeresun- ters. 6:100-135. HEMPELMANN, F. 1906. Zur morphologie non Polygordius lacteus and P. triestinus, nov. Spec. Z. wiss. Zool. 84:527-618. HENRIKSSON, R. 1969. Influence of pollution on the bottom fauna of the Sound (Oresund). Oikos 20:507-523. HERMAN, S. S. 1963. Vertical migration of the opossum shrimp, Neomysis americana Smith. Limnol. Oceanogr. 8:228-238. HERMANS, C. 1969. The systematic position of the Archiannelida. Syst. Zool. 18:85-102. HILLMAN, N. 1964. Studies on the distribution and abundance of decapod larvae in Narra- gansett Bay, Rhode Island, with consideration of morphology and mortali- ty. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Rhode Island, Kingston, 74 p. HIRANO, R., and Y. OSHIMA. 1963. Rearing of larvae of marine animals with specific reference to their food organisms. [In Jpn.] Nihon Suisan Gakkai Shi (Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish.) 29:282-297. HOBSON, K. D. 1971. Polychaeta new to New England, with additions to the description of Aberranta enigmatica Hartman. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 84:245-252. HOLMES, S. J. 1905. The Amphipoda of southern New England. Bull. U.S. Bur. Fish. 24:457-529. HUTCHINGS, P. A. 1973. Age structure and spawning of a Northumberland population of Melinna cristata (Polychaeta: Ampharetidae). Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 18:218- 227. HYMAN, L.H. 1940. The invertebrates: Protozoa through Ctenophora. Vol. 1, 726 p. McGraw-Hill, N.Y. 1955. The invertebrates: Echinodermata, the coelomate Bilateria. Vol. IV, 763 p. McGraw-Hill, N-Y. 1959. The invertebrates: Smaller coelomate groups, Chaetognatha, Hemi- chordata, Pogonophora, Phoronida, Ectoprocta, Brachipoda, Sipunculida, the coelomate Bilateria. Vol. V, 783 p. McGraw-Hill, N.Y. JACKIM, E. G. MORRISON, and R. STEELE. 1977. Effects of environmental factors on radiocadmium uptake by four spe- cies of marine bivalves. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 40:303-308 JAEGERSTEN, G. 1952. Studies on the morphology, larval development and biology of Proto- drilus. Zool. Bidr. Upps. 29:427-511. JEFFRIES, H. P. 1966. Partitioning of the estuarine environment by two species of Can- cer. Ecology 47:477-481. JONES. C. 1973. The ecology and metabolic adaptation of Cancer irroratus Say. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Rhode Island, Kingston, 83 p. JONES, J. D. 1955. Observations on the respiratory physiology and on the haemoglobin of the polychaete genus Nephthys, with special reference to N. hombergii (Aud. etM.-Edw.). J. Exp. Biol. 32:110-125. JONES, M. L. 1968. On the morphology, feeding, and behavior of Magelona sp. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 134:272-297. JUMARS, P. A., and K. FAUCHALD. 1977. Between-community contrasts in successful polychaete feeding strate- gies. Jn B.C. Coull (editor), Ecology of marine benthos, p. 1-20. Univ. S. Carolina Press, Columbia. KAIM-MALKA, R.A. 1970. Biologie et ecologie de quelques Ampelisca (Crustacea~Amphipoda) de la région de Marseille. [In Fr, Engl. summ.] Tethys 1:977-1022. KHLEBOVICH, V. V. 1959. A new occurrence of predation in polychaete worms. 1959(9): 118. KINNER, P. 1978. The distribution and ecology of errantiate polychaetes on the continen- tal shelf from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Delaware. Newark, 159 p. Priroda 54 KINNER, P., and D. MAURER. 1978. Polychaetous annelids of the Delaware Bay region. 76:209-224. KINNER, P., D. MAURER, and W. LEATHEM. 1974. Benthic invertebrates in Delaware Bay: Animal-sediment associations of the dominant species. Int. Rev. Gesamten Hydrobiol. 59:685-701. KISSELEVA, G. 1967. WVlijanic substrata na osedanie i metamorfroz lichinokbentosnykh zhivotnykh. Jn Donnyie Biochenozy i Biologia Bentosnykh Organizmov Chernovo Mona, Kiev, p. 71-84. KLAWE, W. L., and L. M. DICKIE. 1957. Biology of the bloodworm, Glycera dibranchiata Ehlers, and its rela- tion to the bloodworm fishery of the Maritime Provinces. Fish. Res. Board Can. Bull. 155, 37 p. KOONS, C. B., and J. RP THOMAS. 1979. C,5, hydrocarbons in the sediments of the New York Bight. Jn Proceed- ings 1979 Oil Spill Conference (Prevention, Behavior, Control, Cleanup), p. Fish. Bull., U.S. 625-628. Am. Petrol. Inst., Wash., D.C. KROUSE. J. S. 1976. Size composition and growth of young rock crab, Cancer irroratus, on a rocky beach in Maine. Fish. Bull., U.S. 74:949-954. LANDERS, W. S. 1973. Early development in the ocean quahog, Arctica islandica (L.) [Abstr] Proc. Natl. Shellfish. Assoc. 63:3. LAUBIER, L. 1963. Decouverte du genre Cossura (Polychaéte, Cossuridae) en Mediterra- née: Cossura soyeri sp. n. Vie Milieu 14:833-842. LEPPAKOSKI, E. 1969. Transitory return of the benthic fauna of the Bornholm Basin after extermination by oxygen insufficiency. Cah. Biol. Mar. 10:163-172. LEVINTON, J. 1972. Spatial distribution of Nucula proxima Say (Protobranchia): an experi- mental approach. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 143:175-183. LEVINTON, J. S.. and R. K. BAMBACH. 1975. A comparative study of Silurian and Recent deposit-feeding bivalve communities. Paleobiology 1:97-124. LOHAVANIJAYA, P. 1964. Variation in growth pattern in the sand dollar, Echinarachnius parma (Lamarck). Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. New Hampshire, Durham, 152 p. LOOSANOFF, V. L. 1953. Reproductive cycle in Cyprina islandica. 104:146-155. LOOSANOFF, V. L., and H. C. DAVIS. 1963. Rearing of bivalve mollusks. MacBRIDE, E. 1914. Textbook of embryology. Vol. 1. Invertebrata, 692 p. MacMillan, Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) Adv. Mar. Biol. 1:1-136-. N-Y. McKAY, D. C. G. 1943. Temperature and the world distribution of crabs of the genus Can- cer. Ecology 24:113-115. MacKENZIE, C. L., Jr. 1977. Predation on hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) populations. Am. Fish. Soc. 106:530-537. MANGUM, C., and W. VAN WINKLE. 1973. Responses of aquatic invertebrates to declining oxygen conditions. Am. Zool. 13:529-541. MAURER, D., P. KINNER, W. LEATHEM, and L. WATLING. 1976. Benthic faunal assemblages off the Delmarva Peninsula. Coastal Mar. Sci. 4:163-177. MAURER, D., and W. LEATHEM. 1980. Ecological distribution of polychaeteous annelids of Georges Bank. CMS-1-80. CMS, Univ. Delaware, 181 p. MAURER, D., W. LEATHEM. P. KINNER, and J. TINSMAN. 1979. Seasonal fluctuations in coastal benthic invertebrate assemblages. Estuarine Coastal Mar. Sci. 8:181-193. MAURER, D., L. WATLING, W. LEATHEM, and P. KINNER 1979. Seasonal changes in feeding types of estuarine benthic invertebrates J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 36:125-155. Trans. Estuarine from Delaware Bay. McCALL, P.L. 1977. Community patterns and adaptive strategies of the infaunal benthos of Long Island Sound. J. Mar. Res. 35:221-266. McDERMOTT, J. J. 1976. Predation of the razor clam Ensis directus by the nemertean worm Cer- ebratulus lacteus. Chesapeake Sci. 17:299-301. McGRATH, R. 1974. Benthic macrofaunal census of Raritan Bay-preliminary results. /n Proc. Symp. Hudson River Ecol. (3rd) Mar. 1973, Pap. 24. Hudson River Environ. Soc., Inc. McINTOSH. W. 1900. A monograph of the British annelids. Il. Polychaeta. Amphinomidae to Sigalionidae, p. 215-442. Ray Soc., Lond. McLUSKY, D. S., and C. N. K. PHILLIPS. 1975. Some effects of copper on the polychaete Phyllodoce maculata. Es- tuarine Coastal Mar. Sci. 3:103-108. MEEK, A., and B. STARROW. 1924. On the pelagic phase of Arenicola marina and Eteone arctica, Ann. Mag. Nat. His., Ser. 9, 14:435-455. MENZEL, R. 1964. Checklist of the marine fauna and flora of the St. George’s Sound area. Oceanogr. Inst. Fla. State Univ., Tallahassee, 134 p. MERRILL. A. S.. J. L. CHAMBERLIN, and J. W. ROPES. 1969. Ocean quahog fishery. Jn F. E. Firth (editor), The encyclopedia of marine resources, p. 125-129. Van Nostrand Reinhold Publ. Co., N.Y. MICHAEL, A. 1973. Numerical analysis of marine survey data, a study applied to the amphi- pods of Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts. Ph.D. Thesis, Dalhousie Univ. , Hal- ifax, N.S., 155 p. MICHAELIS, H. 1971. Beobachtungen uber die Maander von Scolecolepis squamata. [In Ger] Nat. Mus. 101:501-506. MINER, R. W. 1950. Field book of seashore life. MORTENSEN, T. e 1948. A monograph of the Echinoidea. Vol. 4. Part 2. Clypeastroidea, 471 p- C.A. Reidzel, Copenhagen. MUUS, B. J. 1967. The fauna of Danish estuanes and lagoons. Distribution and ecology of dominating species in the shallow reaches of the mesohaline zone. Medd. Dan. Fisk. Havunders. 5(new ser.), 316 p. MYERS, A.C. 1977. Sediment processing ina marine subtidal sandy bottom community: II. Biological consequences. J. Mar. Res. 35:633-647. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION. 1976. Evaluation of proposed sewage sludge dumpsite areas in the New York Bight. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. ERL MESA-11, 212 p. NEEDLER, A. B. 1941. Larval stages of Crago septemspinosus Say. Trans. R. Can. Inst. 23: 193-199. OCKELMANN. K. W.. and O. VAHL. 1970. On the biology of the polychaete Glycera alba, especially its burrowing and feeding. Ophelia 8:275-294. Van Rees Press, N.Y., 888 p. ORTH, R. J. 1971. Observations on the planktonic larvae of Polydora ligni Webster (Poly- chaeta:Spionidae) in the York River, Virginia. Chesapeake Sci. 12:121- 124. ORTIZ, M. 1978. Invertebrados marinos benthosicos de Cuba. I. Crustacea Amphipoda, Gammaridea. Invest. Mar. Univ. Catol. Valparaiso 8(38):5-10. PAINE, R. T. 1961. Observations on Phoronis architecta in Florida waters. Sci. Gulf Caribb. 11:457-462. PARKER. G. H. 1927. Locomotion and righting movements in echinoderms, especially in Echinarachnius. Am. J. Psychol. 39:167-180. PARKER, G. H., and M. A. VAN ALSTYNE. 1932. Locomotor organs of Echinarachnius parma. Hole) 62:195-200. PARKER. PS. 1967. Clam survey Ocean City, Maryland, to Cape Charles, Virginia. Com- mer. Fish. Rev. 29(5):56-64. PARKER, P. S., and L. A. FAHLEN. 1968. Clam survey off Virginia (Cape Charles to False Cape). Commer. Fish. Rev. 30(1):25-34. PARKER, P S.. and E. D. McRAE, Jr. 1970. The ocean quahog. Arctica islandica, resource of the northwestern Bull. Mar. Biol. Bull. (Woods Atlantic. Fish. Ind. Res. 6:185-195. PEARCE. J.B. 1971. Indicators of solid waste pollution. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2:11. 1972. The effects of solid waste disposal on benthic communities in the New York Bight. In M. Ruivo (editor), Marine pollution and sea life, p. 404- 411. FAO Fish. News (Books) Ltd., Surrey, Engl. 55 1974a. Environmental impact of the construction phase of offshore floating or barge mounted nuclear power plants to be sited between Sandy Hook and Atlantic city, N.J. Jn J. Peres (editor), Modifications thermiques et equilibres biologiques, p. 395-408. North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam. 1974b. Invertebrates of the Hudson River Estuary. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 250:137-143. 1975. Benthic assemblages in the deeper continental shelf waters of the Mid- dle Atlantic Bight. Jn L. Cronin and R. Smith (co-chairmen), Proc. Confer ence and Workshop on the Marine Environment. Implications of offshore oil and gas development in the Baltimore Canyon region of the Mid-Atlantic coast, Dec. 2-4, 1974, p. 297-318. Estuarine Research Federation, Wacha- preaque, Virginia. PEARCE, J., J. CARACCIOLO, A. FRAME. L. ROGERS, M. HALSEY, and J. THOMAS. 1976. Distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York Bight, August 1968 - December 1971. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-7, 114 p. PEARCE, J. B., J. V. CARACCIOLO, M. B. HALSEY, and L. H. ROGERS. 1976. Temporal and spatial distributions of benthic macroinvertebrates in the New York Bight. Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. 2:394-403. 1977a. Distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York- New Jersey outer continental shelf. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-30, 80 p. 1977b. Distribution and abundance of benthic macrofauna in the sewage sludge disposal area, N.Y. Bight apex, February 1975. U.S. Dep. Commer.. NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-36, 38 p. PEARCE, J., C. MacKENZIE, J. CARACCIOLO, and L. ROGERS. 1978. Reconnaissance survey of the distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York Bight apex, 5-14 June 1973. U.S. Dep. Com- mer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-41, 203 p. PEARCE, J., L. ROGERS, J. CARACCIOLO, and M. HALSEY. 1977. Distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York Bight apex, five seasonal cruises, August 1973-September 1974. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-32, 803 p. PEARCE, J., J. THOMAS, J. CARACCIOLO, M. HALSEY, and L. ROGERS. 1976a. Distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York Bight apex, 2-6 August 1973. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-8, 135 p. 1976b. Distribution and abundance of benthic organisms in the New York Bight apex, 26 August-6 September 1974. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Data Rep. ERL MESA-9, 88 p. PEARSE, A. S., H. J. HUMM, and G. W. WHARTON. 1942. Ecology of sand beaches at Beaufort, N.C. Ecol. Monogr. 12:135- 190. PECHENIK, J. A. 1978. Winter reproduction in the gastropod Nassarius trivittatus. 21:297-298. PETTIBONE, M. H. 1954. Marine polychaete worms from Point Barrow, Alaska, with additional records from the North Atlantic and North Pacific. Proc. U.S. Natl. Mus. 103(3324):203-356. 1957. Endoparasitic polychaetous annelids of the family Arabellidae with descriptions of new species. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 113:170-187. Veliger 1963. Marine polychaete worms of the New England region. |. Families Aphroditidae through Trochochaetidae. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 227, 356 p. PHELAN, TF: 1977. Comments on the water vascular system, food grooves, and ancestry of the clypeasteroid echinoids. Bull. Mar. Sci. 24:400-422. PIELOUSESG: 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley-Intersci., N.Y., 286 p. PORTMANN, J. 1970. A discussion of the results of acute toxicity tests with marine organisms using a standard method. FAO Technical Conference on Marine Pollution, Rome. Pap. FIR:MP/70/E-31, 13 p. PRATT, H. S. 1935. A manual of the common invertebrate animals (exclusive of insects). Reviseded. P. Blakiston’s Son & Co., Phila., 854 p. PRATT, S. D. 1973. Benthic fauna. /n S.B. Saila (program coordinator), Coastal and off- shore environmental inventory, Cape Hatteras to Nantucket Shoals, p. 5-1 to 5-70. Mar. Exp. Stn., Grad. School Oceanogr., Univ. Rhode Island, Kings- ton, R.I., Mar. Publ. Ser, 2. PRICE Ke'Si Jr. 1962. Biology of the sand shrimp, Crangon septemspinosa, in the shore zone of the Delaware Bay region. Chesapeake Sci. 3:244-255. RASMUSSEN, E. 1956. Faunistic and biological notes on marine invertebrates. III. The repro- duction and larval development of some polychaetes from the Isefjord, with some faunistic notes. Biol. Medd. Dan. Vid. Selsk. 23(1):1-84. 1973. Systematics and ecology of the Isefjord marine fauna (Den- mark). Ophelia 11, 495 p. REDFORD, D. 1978. Benthic community structure near a sewage outfall on Long Island, New York. M.S. Thesis, Adelphi Univ., Garden City, N.Y., 86 p. REID, R. N., A. B. FRAME, and A. F DRAXLER. 1979. Environmental baselines in Long Island Sound, 1972-73. Commer., NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS SSRF-738, 31 p. REILLY, P. 1975. The biology and ecology of juvenile and adult rock crabs, Cancer irroratus Say, in southern New England waters. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Rhode Island, Kingston, 146 p. REILLY, P. N., and S. B. SAILA. 1978. Biology and ecology of the rock crab, Cancer irroratus Say, 1817, in U.S. Dep. southern New England waters (Decapoda, Brachyura). Crustaceana 34:121-140. REISH, D. J. 1965. The effect of oil refinery wastes on benthic marine animals in Los Angeles Harbor, California. /n Symposium sur les pollutions marines par les micoroorganismes et les produits petroliers, p. 355-361. C.1.E.S.M.M. (Comm. Int. Explor. Sci. Mer Mediter.), Monaco. 1970. The effects of varying concentrations of nutrients, chlorinity, and dis- solved oxygen on polychaetous annelids. Water Res. 4:721-735. 1971. Seasonal settlement of polychaetous annelids on test panels in Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbors 1950-1951. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 28:1459-1467. REISH, D. J., F PILTZ, J. M. MARTIN, and J. Q. WORD. 1974, Induction of abnormal polychaete larvae by heavy metals. Mar. Pol- lut. Bull. 5:125-126. REMANE, A. 1933. Verteilung und organisation der bentonischen mikrofauna der Kieler Bucht. Wiss. Meeresunters Abt. Kiel, N.F. 21:161-221. RETIERE, C. 1967. Place du Spionidee Nerine cirratulus (Delle Chiaje) dans les sables medio-littoraux de la plage de Lancieux (Cotes-du-Nord). Interaction ali- mentaires des differentes especies du groupementannelidien. Bull. Soc. Sci Bretagne 42:39-47. RICHARDS, S. W., and G. A. RILEY. 1967. The benthic epifauna of Long Island Sound Oceanogr. Collect. Yale Univ. 19(2):89-135 Bull. Bingham ROPES, J. W. 1968. Reproductive cycle of the surf clam, Spisula solidissima, in offshore New Jersey. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 135:349-365. ROPES, J. W., J. L. CHAMBERLIN, and A. S. MERRILL. 1969. Surf clam fishery. /n F. E. Firth (editor), The encyclopedia of marine resources, p. 119-125. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., N-Y. ROSSI, S. S., J. W. ANDERSON, and G. S. WARD 1976. Toxicity of water-soluble fractions of four test oils for the polychaetous annelids, Neanthes arenaceodentata and Capitella capitata. Environ. Pol- lut. 10:9-18. RUDDELL, C. 1977. Histopathological studies. /n B. Laird (report coordinator), Middle Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf Environmental Studies, Vol. I[B - Chemical and Biological Benchmark Studies, Chap. 10, p. 1-47. Va. Inst. Mar. Sci., Gloucester Point, Va. SAGE, L. E., and S. S. HERMAN. 1972. Zooplankton of the Sandy Hook Bay area, N.J. 13:29-39. SAILA, S. B., and S. D. PRATT. 1973. Mid-Atlantic Bight fisheries. /n S.B. Saila (program coordinator), Coastal and offshore environmental inventory, Cape Hatteras to Nantucket Shoals, p. 6-1 to 6-125. Mar. Exp. Stn., Grad. School Oceanogr., Univ. Rhode Island, Kingston, R.1., Mar. Publ. Ser. 2. SALENSKY, W. 1907. Morphogenetische studien an Wurmern. II. Ueber den Bau der Archianneliden nebst Bemerkungen den Bau einiger Organe des Saccocirrus papillocercus Bobr. Ill. Ueber die metamorphose des Polygordius. Mem. Acad, Sci. St. Petersburg 19(11): 1-348. SALEUDDIN, A. S. M. 1964. Observations on the habit and functional anatomy of Cyprina islandica (L.). Proc. Malacol. Soc. Lond. 36:149-162. Chesapeake Sci. 56 SAMEOTO, D. D. 1969. Some aspects of the ecology and life cycle of three species of subtidal sand-burrowing amphipods (Crustacea:Haustoriidae). J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 26:1321-1345. SANDERS, H. L. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952-1954. X. The biology of marine bottom communities. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Collect. Yale Univ. 15:345-414. 1958. Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. I. Animal-sediment relation- ships. Limnol. Oceanogr. 3:245-258. 1960. Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. II. The structure of the soft-bottom community. Limnol. Oceanogr. 5:138-153. 1968. Marine benthic diversity: A comparative study. Am. Nat. Mus. 102:243-283. SANDERS, H. L., E. M. GOUDSMIT, E. L. MILLS, and G. E. HAMPSON. 1962. A study of the intertidal fauna of Barnstable Harbor, Massachusetts. Limnol. Oceanogr. 7:63-79. SANDERS, H., F GRASSLE, and G. HAMPSON. 1972. The West Falmouth oil spill. I. Biology. Woods Hole Oceanogr. Inst. Tech. Rep. 72-80. SANDIFER, P. A. 1975, The role of pelagic larvae in recruitment to populations of adult deca- pod crustaceans in the York River Estuary and adjacent lower Chesapeake Bay, Virginia. Estuarine Coastal Mar. Sci. 3:269-279. SASTRY, A. N., and J. R McCARTHY. 1973. Diversity in metabolic adaptation of pelagic larval stages of two sym- patric species of brachyuran crabs. Neth. J. Sea Res. 7:434-446. SAUNDERS, R. L., and J. B. SPRAGUE. 1967. Effects of copper-zinc mining pollution on a spawning migration of Atlantic salmon. Water Res. 1:419-432. SCARRATT, D. I., and R. LOWE. 1972. Biology of rock crab (Cancer irroratus) in the Northumberland Strait. J. Fish. Res. Board Can, 29:161-166. SCHECHTER, V. 1956. The effect of water upon gametes, upon maturation, and upon fertiliza- tion and cleavage. Exp. Cell Res. 10:619-630. SCHELTEMA, R. S. 1964. Feeding habits and growth in the mud-snail, Nassarius obsoletus. Chesapeake Sci. 5:161-166. 1972. Reproduction and dispersal of bottom dwelling deep-sea invertebrates: a speculative summary. /n R.W. Brauer (editor), Barobiology and experimen- tal biology of the deep sea, p. 58-66. N. Carolina Sea Grant Prog., Chapel Hill. SCHELTEMA, R. S., and A. H. SCHELTEMA. 1965. trivittatus. SCHRAM, T. A. 1968. Studies on the meroplankton in the inner Oslofjord. 1. Composition of the plankton at Nakkholmen during a whole year. Ophelia 5:221-243. 1970. Studies on the meroplankton in the inner Oslofjord. II. Regional differ- ences and seasonal changes in the specific distribution of larvae. Nytt Mag. Zool. (Oslo) 18:1-21. SCHROEDER, P. C., and C. O. HERMANS. 1975. Annelida: Polychaeta. Jn A. C. Giese and J. S. Pearse (editors), Repro- duction of marine invertebrates, Vol. III, Annelids and Echiurans, p. 1-213. Acad. Press. N.Y. SCHULTZ. G.A. 1969. How to know the marine isopod crustaceans. Dubuque, Iowa, 359 p. SCHULTZ. S. 1969. Benthos und sediment in der Mecklenburger Bucht. 24/25:15-55. SEGAR, D. A., and G. A. BERBERIAN. 1976. Oxygen depletion in the New York Bight apex: Causes and conse- quences. SHANNON, C. E., and W. WEAVER. Pelagic larvae of New England intertidal gastropods. III. Nassarius Hydrobiologia 25:321-329. Wm. C. Brown Publ., Beitr. Meeresk. 1962. The mathematical theory of communication. Univ. I11. Press, Urbana, 117 p. SHEPARD, F. P. 1963. Submarine geology. 2d ed. Harperand Row, N.Y., 557 p. SHOEMAKER, C. R. 1945. The amphipod genus Unicola on the east coast of America. Midl. Nat. 34:446-465. 1949. Three new species and one new variety of amphipods from the Bay of Fundy. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 39:389-398. Am. SIMON. J. L- 1967. Reproduction and larval development of Spio serosa (Spionidae; Poly- chaeta). Bull. Mar. Sci. 17:398-431. 1968. Occurrence of pelagic larvae in Spio setosa Verrill, 1873 (Poly- chaeta:Spionidae). Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 134:503-515. SIMON, J.. and K. BRANDER. 1967. Reproductive biology and larval systematics of Cape Cod polychaetous annelids. In M. Carriker (Director, Systematics-Ecology Progam), Systematics-Ecology Program Fifth Annual Report. p. 41-44. Mar. Biol. Lab., Woods Hole. Mass. SIMPSON, M. 1962. Reproduction of the polychaete Glycera dibranchiata at Solomons, Maryland. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 123:396-411. SMITH, F 1950. The benthos of Block Island Sound. 1. The invertebrates, their quanti- ties and their relation to the fishes. Ph.D. Thesis, Yale Univ., New Haven, Conn., 213 p. SMITH, R. I. (editor). 1964. Keys to marine invertebrates of the Woods Hole region. Lab.. Woods Hole, Mass.. Contrib. 11, 208 p. SOKOLOVA. M. N- and A. P KUZNETSOV. 1960. On the feeding character and on the role played by trophic factor in the distribution of the hedgehog Echinarachnius parma Lam. [In Russ., Engl. summ.] Zool. Zh. 39:1253-1256. SPRAGUE. J. B. 1964. Avoidance of copper-zinc solutions by young salmon in the labora- tory. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 36:990-1004. STANCYK, S. E., F J. S. MATURO. Jr, and R. W. HEARD, Jr. 1976. Phoronids from the east coast of the United States. 26:576-584. STANLEY. D. J.. and N. P JAMES 1971. Distribution of Echinarachnius parma (Lamarck) and sssociated fauna on Sable Island Bank, southeast Canada. Smithson. Contrib. Earth Sci. 6, 24 p. STEIMLE, F. 1976. A summary of the fish kill — anoxia phenomenon off New Jersey and its impact on resource species. Jn J. Sharp (editor), NSF/IDOE Workshop on Anoxia on the Mid-Atlantic Shelf During Summer 1976, p. 5-11. Univ. Del.. Lewes. STEIMLE, F W., Jr, and D. J. RADOSH. 1979. Chapter 12. Effects on the benthic invertebrate community. Jn R. L. Swanson and C. J. Sindermann (editors), Oxygen depletion and associated benthic mortalities in New York Bight, 1976, p. 281-293. NOAA Prof. Pap. 11. STEIMLE, F. W., and C. J. SINDERMANN. 1978. Review of oxygen depletion and associated mass mortalities of shell- fish in the Middle Atlantic Bight in 1976. Mar. Fish. Rev. 40(12):17-26. STEIMLE, F. W.. Jr., and R. B. STONE. 1973. Abundance and distribution of inshore benthic fauna off southwestern Long Island. N.Y. U.S. Dep. Commer.. NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS SSRF- 673. 50 p. STEPHENS. G. C. 1975. Uptake of naturally occurring primary amines by marine annelids. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 149:397-407. STEPHENS. G. C.. and R. A. SCHINSKE. 1961. Uptake of amino acids by marine invertebrates. 6:175-181. STICKNEY. R. R.. G. L. TAYLOR, and D. B. WHITE. 1975. Food habits of five species of young southeastern United States estua- rine Sciaenidae. Chesapeake Sci. 16:104-114. SULLIVAN, C. M. 1948. Bivalve larvae of Malpeque Bay, PE.1. 77, 58 p. SWAN, E. 1966. Growth, anatomy and regeneration. /n R. Boulootean (editor), Physiol- ogy of the echinodermata, p. 397-434. J. Wiley and Sons, Inc., N.Y. TAYLOR, A.C. 1976. Burrowing behaviour and anaerobiosis in the bivalve Arctica islandica (L.). J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 56:95-109. TAYLOR, A. C., and A. R. BRAND. 1975a. Effects of hypoxia and body size on the oxygen consumption of the bivalve Arctica islandica (L.). J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 19:187-196. 1975b. A comparative study of the respiratory reponses of the bivalves Arc- tica islandica (L.) and Mytilus edulis L. to declining oxygen tension. R. Soc. Lond. B, Biol. Sci. 190:443-456. Mar. Biol. Bull. Mar. Sci. Limnol. Oceanogr. Fish. Res. Board Can. Bull. Proc. 57 TENORE, K. R., and R. B-. HANSON. 1980. Availability of detritus of different types and ages to a polychaete macroconsumer, Capitella capitata. Limnol. Oceanogr. 25:553-558. THOEMKE, K. W. 1977. Amphipod life cycles in a west Florida estuary. [Abstr.] 17:967. THOMAS, J. P, W. C. PHOEL, F. W. STEIMLE, J. E. O'REILLY, and C. A. EVANS. 1976. Seabed oxygen consumption—New York Bight apex. nol. Oceanogr. Spec. Symp. 2:354-369. THORSON, G. 1946. Reproduction and larval development of Danish marine bottom inverte- brates. Medd. Komm. Havunders. Copenhagen 4(1):1-523. 1957. Bottom communities (sublittoral or shallow shelf). Jn J.W. Hedgpeth (editor), Treatise on marine ecology and paleoecology, Vol. 1, Ecology, p- 461-534. Geol. Soc. Am. Mem. 67. TIFFON. Y. 1975. Hydrolases dans l|’ectoderme de Cerianthus lloydi Gosse, Cerianthus membranaceus Spallanzani et Merridium senile (L.): mise en évidence d'une digestion extracellulaire et extracorporelle. [In Fr, Engl. abstr] J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 18:243-254. TIMKO, P. L. 1976. Dendraster excentricus. TURNER, H. 1949. Practical problems of the propagation of the soft shell clam, Mya are- naria. Proc. Natl. Shellfish. Assoc. 39:76-77. 1953. Growth of molluscs in tanks. Rep. Invest. Shellfish., Mass. Dep. Nat. Resour., Div. Mar. Fish. 6:35-38. TURNER, H. J., Jr. Am. Zool. Am. Soc. Lim- Sand dollars as suspension feeders: A new description of feeding in Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole) 151:247-259. 1955. How clam drills capture razor clams. Nautilus 69:20-22. TYLER, A. V. 1973. Caloric values of some North Atlantic invertebrates. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 19:258-261. VAHL, O. 1976. On the digestion of Glycera alba (Polychaeta). VARGO, S. L., and A. N. SASTRY. 1977. Acute temperature and low dissolved oxygen tolerances of the brachy- uran crab (Cancer irroratus) larvae. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 40:165-171. VERNBERG., W.B., P. J. DOCOURSEY, and W. J. PADGETT. 1973. Synergistic effects of environmental variables on larvae of Uca pugila- tor. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 22:307-312. VERRILL, A. E. 1873. Report upon the invertebrate animals of Vineyard Sound and the adja- cent waters, with an account of the physical characters of the region. Rep. U.S. Fish. Comm. for 1871-72:295-778. WALFORD, L. A., and R. 1. WICKLUND. 1968. Monthly sea temperature structure from the Florida Keys to Cape Cod. Am. Geogr. Soc. Ser. Atlas Mar. Environ. Folio 15, 2 p.. 16 pl., app. WALKER, A. J. M. 1972. Goniadella gracilis, a polychaete new to British seas. (Berl.) 14:85-87. WARREN, L. M. 1976. A population study of the polychaete Capitella capitata at Plym- outh. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 38:209-216. WARREN, L. W. 1977. The ecology of Capitella capitata in British waters. Assoc. U.K. 57:151-159. WASS, M. L. 1965. Checklist of the marine invertebrates of Virginia. Spec. Sci. Rep. 24 (revised), 55 p. 1972. Achecklist of the biota of lower Chesapeake Bay. Spec. Sci. Rep. 65, 290 p. WATLING, L., and D. MAURER. 1972. Marine shallow water amphipods of the Delaware Bay area, U.S.A. Crustaceana Suppl. 3:251-266. Ophelia 15:49-56. Mar. Biol. J. Mar. Biol. Va. Inst. Mar. Sci., Va. Inst. Mar. Sci., WEBER, R. E. 1971. Oxygenational properties of vascular and coelomic haemoglobins from Nephtys hombergii (Polychaeta) and their functional significance. Neth. J. Sea Res. 5:240-251. WEBSTER, H. E., and J. E. BENEDICT. 1887. The Annelida Chaetopoda, from Eastport, Maine. Rep. U.S. Fish. Comm. for 1885, part 13:707-755. WHITELBY, GiiGe Jr 1948. The distribution of larger planktonic Crustacea on Georges Bank. Ecol. Monogr. 18:233-264. WIGLEY, R. L. 1956. Food habits of Georges Bank haddock. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv.,.Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. 165, 26 p. 1968. Benthic invertebrates on the New England fishing banks. Nat. 5:8-13. WIGLEY, R. L., and B. R. BURNS. 1971. Distribution and biology of mysids (Crustacea, Mysidacea) from the Atlantic coast of the United States in the NMFS Woods Hole collection. Fish. Bull., U.S. 69:717-746. WIGLEY, R. L., and R. B. THEROUX. 1965. Seasonal food habits of Highlands Ground haddock. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 94:243-251. ; 1981. Atlantic continental shelf and slope of the United States— Macrobenthic invertebrate fauna of the Middle Atlantic Bight region— Faunal composition and quantitative distribution. U.S. Geol. Surv., Prof. Pap. 529-N, 198 p. WILCOX, J. R., and H. P. JEFFRIES. 1973. Growth of the sand shrimp, Crangon septemspinosa, in Rhode Island Chesapeake Sci. 14:201-205. 1974. Feeding habits of the sand shrimp Crangon septemspinosa. Bull. (Woods Hole) 146:424-434. WILLIAMS, A. B. 1965. Marine decapod crustaceans of the Carolinas. Fish. Bull. 65, 298 p WILLIAMS, A. B., and H. J. PORTER. 1971. A ten-year study of meroplankton in North Carolina estuaries: occur- rence of postmetamorphal bivalves. Chesapeake Sci. 12:26-32. WILLIAMS, S., and D. DUANE. 1974. Geomorphology and sediments of the inner New York Bight continental shelf. U.S. Coastal Eng. Res. Cent. Tech. Memo 45, 81 p Underwater Biol. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv.. 38 WINGET, R. R., D. MAURER, and H. SEYMOUR. 1974. Occurrence, size compositon and sex ratio of the rock crab, Cancer irroratus Say and the spider crab, Libinia emarginata Leach in Delaware Bay. J. Natl. Hist. 8:199-205. WINTER, J. E. 1969. On the influence of food concentration and other factors on filtration rate and food utilization in the mussels Arctica islandica and Modiolus modiolus. [In Ger., Engl. abstr.] Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 4(2):87-135. WOBBER, D. R. 1970. A report on the feeding of Dendronotus iris on the anthozoan Cerian- thus sp. from Monterey Bay, California. Veliger 12:383-387. WOLFF, W. 1973. The estuary as a habitat. An analysis of data on the soft-bottom macro- fauna of the estuarine area of the Rivers Rhine, Meuse, and Scheldt. Zool. Verh. 126: 1-242. YABLONSKAYA, E. 1976. Studies of trophic relations in bottom communities in the southern seas of the USSR. Jn O. Bauer and N. Smirnov (editors), Resources of the bio- sphere (results of Soviet studies under the International Biological Program). Vol. 2, p. 117-144. Nauka, Leningrad, USSR. YANCEY, R. M., and W. R. WELCH. 1968. The Atlantic coast surf clam - with a partial bibliography. Wildl. Serv., Circ. 288, 14 p. ZENKEVITCH, L. U.S. Fish 1963. Biology of the seas of the U.S.S.R. Wiley-Intersci., N.Y., 955 p. ZOTTOLI, R. A., and M. R. CARRIKER. 1974. External release of protease by stationary burrow-dwelling poly- chaetes. J. Mar. Res. 32:331-342. NOAA TECHNICAL REPORTS NMFS Circular and Special Scientific Report—Fisheries Guidelines for Contributors CONTENTS OF MANUSCRIPT First page. Give the title (as concise as possible) of the paper and the author’s name, and footnote the author’s affiliation, mailing address, and ZIP code. Contents. Contains the text headings and abbreviated figure legends and table headings. Dots should follow each entry and page numbers should be omitted. Abstract. Not to exceed one double-spaced page. Foot- notes and literature citations do not belong in the abstract. Text. See also Form of the Manuscript below. Follow the U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual, 1973 edi- tion. Fish names, follow the American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 12, A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada, fourth edition, 1980. Use short, brief, informative headings in place of ‘‘Materials and Methods.”’ Text footnotes. Type on a separate sheet from the text. For unpublished or some processed material, give author, year, title of manuscript, number of pages, and where it is filed— agency and its location. Personal communications. Cite name in text and footnote. Cite in footnote: John J. Jones, Fishery Biologist, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA 92037, pers. com- mun. 21 May 1977. Figures. Should be self-explanatory, not requiring refer- ence to the text. All figures should be cited consecutively in the text and their placement, where first mentioned, indi- cated in the left-hand margin of the manuscript page. Photo- graphs and line drawings should be of ‘‘professional’’ quality —clear and balanced, and can be reduced to 42 picas for page width or to 20 picas for a single-column width, but no more than 57 picas high. Photographs and line drawings should be printed on glossy paper—sharply focused, good contrast. Label each figure. DO NOT SEND original figures to the Scientific Editor; NMFS Scientific Publications Office will request these if they are needed. Tables. Each table should start on a separate page and should be self-explanatory, not requiring reference to the text. Headings should be short but amply descriptive. Use only horizontal rules. Number table footnotes consecutively across the page from left to right in Arabic numerals; and to avoid confusion with powers, place them to the /eft of the numerals. If the original tables are typed in our format and are clean and legible, these tables will be reproduced as they are. In the text all tables should be cited consecutively and their placement, where first mentioned, indicated in the left- hand margin of the manuscript page. Acknowledgments. Place at the end of text. Give credit only to those who gave exceptional contributions and not to those whose contributions are part of their normal duties. Literature cited. In text as: Smith and Jones (1977) or (Smith and Jones 1977); if more than one author, list accord- ing to years (e.g., Smith 1936; Jones et al. 1975; Doe 1977). All papers referred to in the text should be listed alphabeti- cally by the senior author’s surname under the heading “Titerature Cited’’; only the author’s surname and initials are required in the author line. The author is responsible for the accuracy of the literature citations. Abbreviations of names of periodicals and serials should conform to Biologi- cal Abstracts List of Serials with Title Abbreviations. For- mat, see recent SSRF or Circular. Abbreviations and symbols. Common ones, such as mm, m, g, ml, mg, °C (for Celsius), %, %o, etc., should be used. Abbreviate units of measures only when used with numerals; periods are rarely used in these abbreviations. But periods are used in et al., vs., e.g., i.e., Wash. (WA is used only with ZIP code), etc. Abbreviations are acceptable in tables and figures where there is lack of space. Measurements. Should be given in metric units. Other equivalent units may be given in parentheses. FORM OF THE MANUSCRIPT Original of the manuscript should be typed double-spaced on white bond paper. Triple space above headings. Send good duplicated copies of manuscript rather than carbon copies. The sequence of the material should be: FIRST PAGE CONTENTS ABSTRACT TEXT LITERATURE CITED TEXT FOOTNOTES APPENDIX TABLES (provide headings, including ‘‘Table’’ and Arabic numeral, e.g., Table 1.--, Table 2.--, etc.) LIST OF FIGURE LEGENDS (entire legend, including “‘Figure’’ and Arabic numeral, e.g., Figure 1.--, Figure 2.--, etc.) FIGURES ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Send ribbon copy and two duplicated copies of the manu- script to: Dr. Carl J. Sindermann, Scientific Editor Northeast Fisheries Center Sandy Hook Laboratory National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Highlands, NJ 07732 Copies. Fifty copies will be supplied to the senior author and 100 to his organization free of charge. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS OFFICE 7600 SAND POINT WAY N.E. BIN C15700 SEATTLE, WA 98115 OFFICIAL BUSINESS NOAA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was established as part of the Department of Commerce on October 3, 1970. The mission responsibilities of NOAA are to assess the socioeconomic impact of natural and technological changes in the environment and to monitor and predict the state of the solid Earth, the oceans and their living resources, the atmosphere, and the space environment of the Earth. The major components of NOAA regularly produce various types of scientific and technical informa- tion in the following kinds of publications: PROFESSIONAL PAPERS — Important definitive research results, major techniques, and special inves- tigations. CONTRACT AND GRANT REPORTS — Reports prepared by contractors or grantees under NOAA sponsorship. ATLAS — Presentation of analyzed data generally in the form of maps showing distribution of rainfall, chemical and physical conditions of oceans and at- mosphere, distribution of fishes and marine mam- mals, ionospheric conditions, etc. TECHNICAL SERVICE PUBLICATIONS — Re- ports containing data, observations, instructions, etc. A partial listing includes data serials; prediction and outlook periodicals; technical manuals, training pa- pers, planning reports, and information serials; and miscellaneous technical publications. TECHNICAL REPORTS — Journal quality with extensive details, mathematical developments, or data listings. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS — Reports of preliminary, partial, or negative research or technol- ogy results, interim instructions, and the like. Information on availability of NOAA ‘publications can be obtained from: PUBLICATIONS SERVICES BRANCH (E/AI 13) NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SATELLITE, DATA, AND INFORMATION SERVICE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 11400 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 767 vee avDISF yc. ¥ WT OF c¢ 3 7 oe ah « States or NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF-767 A Commercial Sampling Program for Sandworms, Nereis virens Sars, and Bloodworms, Giycera dibranchiata Ehlers, Harvested Along the Maine Coast Edwin P. Creaser, Jr., David A. Clifford, Michael J. Hogan, and David B. Sampson April 1983 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA TECHNICAL REPORTS National Marine Fisheries Service, Special Scientific Report—Fisheries The major responsibilities of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) are to monitor and assess the abundance and geographic distribution of fishery resources, to understand and predict fluctuations in the quantity and distribution of these resources, and to establish levels for optimum use of the resources. NMFS is also charged with the development and implementation of policies for managing national fishing grounds, development and enforcement of domestic fisheries regulations, surveillance of foreign fishing off United States coastal waters, and the development and enforcement of international fishery agreements and policies. NMFS also assists the fishing industry through marketing service and economic analysis programs, and mortgage insurance and vessel construc- tion subsidies. It collects, analyzes, and publishes statistics on various phases of the industry. The Special Scientific Report—Fisheries series was established in 1949. The series carries reports on scientific investigations that document long-term continuing programs of NMFS, or intensive scientific reports on studies of restricted scope. The reports may deal with applied fishery problems. The series is also used as a medium for the publication of bibliographies of a specialized scientific nature. NOAA Technical Report NMFS Circulars are available free in limited numbers to governmental agencies, both Federal and State. They are also available in exchange for other scientific and technical publications in the marine sciences. Individual copies may be obtained from Publications Services Branch (E/AI 13), National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 11400 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. Recent Circulars are: 726. The Gulf of Maine temperature structure between Bar Harbor, Maine, and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, June 1975-November 1976. By Robert J. Pawlowski. December 1978, iii+10 p., 14 figs., 1 table. 727, Expendable bathythermograph observations from the NMFS/MARAD Ship of Opportunity Program for 1975. By Steven K. Cook, Barclay P. Collins, and Christine S. Carty. January 1979, iv +93 p., 2 figs., 13 tables, 54 app. figs. 728. Vertical sections of semimonthly mean temperature on the San Francisco- Honolulu route: From expendable bathythermograph observations, June 1966-December 1974. By J. F. T. Saur, L. E. Eber, D. R. McLain, and C. E. Dor- man. January 1979, iii +35 p., 4 figs., 1 table. 729. References for the identification of marine invertebrates on the southern Atlantic coast of the United States. By Richard E. Dowds. April 1979, iv +37 p. 730. Surface circulation in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico as deduced from drift bottles. By Robert F. Temple and John A. Martin. May 1979, iii+13 p., 8 figs., 4 tables. 731. Annotated bibliography and subject index on the shortnose sturgeon, Acipen- ser brevirostrum. By James G. Hoff. April 1979, iii+16 p. 732. Assessment of the Northwest Atlantic mackerel, Scomber scombrus, stock. By Emory D. Anderson. April 1979, iv+13 p., 9 figs., 15 tables. 733. Possible management procedures for increasing production of sockeye salmon smolts in the Naknek River system, Bnstol Bay, Alaska. By Robert J. Ellis and William J. McNeil. April 1979. iii+9 p., 4 figs.. 11 tables. 734. Escape of king crab, Paralithodes camtschatica, from derelict pots. By Wil- liam L. High and Donald D. Worlund. May 1979, iii+11 p., 5 figs., 6 tables. 735. History of the fishery and summary statistics of the sockeye salmon, Onco- rhynchus nerka, runs to the Chignik Lakes, Alaska, 1888-1966. By Michael L. Dahlberg. August 1979, iv+16 p., 15 figs., 11 tables. 736. A historical and descriptive account of Pacific coast anadromous salmonid rearing facilities and a summary of their releases by region, 1960-76. By Roy J. Whale and Robert Z. Smith. September 1979, iv+40 p., 15 figs., 25 tables. 737. Movements of pelagic dolphins (Stenella spp.) in the eastern tropical Pacific as indicated by results of tagging, with summary of tagging operations, 1969-76. By W. F. Perrin, W. E. Evans, and D. B. Holts. September 1979, iii +14 p., 9 figs.. 8 tables. 738. Environmental baselines in Long Island Sound. 1972-73. By R. N. Reid, A. B. Frame, and A. F Draxler. December 1979, iv +31 p., 40 figs. 6 tables. 739. Bottom-water temperature trends in the Middle Atlantic Bight during spring and autumn, 1964-76. By Clarence W. Davis. December 1979, iii+13 p., 10 figs. , 9 tables. 740. Food of fifteen northwest Atlantic gadiform fishes. By Richard W. Langton and Ray E. Bowman. Febmiary 1980, iv +23 p., 3 figs., 11 tables. 741. Distribution of gammaridean Amphipoda (Crustacea) in the Middle Atlantic Bight region. By John J. Dickinson, Roland L. Wigley, Richard D. Brodeur, and Susan Brown-Leger. October 1980, vi+46 p., 26 figs., 52 tables. 742. Water structure at Ocean Weather Station V, northwestern Pacific Ocean, 1966-71. By D. M. Husby and G, R. Seckel. October 1980, 18 figs., 4 tables. 743. Average density index for walleye pollock, Theragra chalcogramma, in the Bering Sea. By Loh-Lee Low and Ikuo Ikeda. November 1980, iii+11 p., 3 figs., 9 tables. 744. Tunas, oceanography and meteorology of the Pacific, an annotated bibliogra- phy, 1950-78, by Paul N. Sund. March 1981, iii+123 p. 745. Dorsal mantle length-total weight relationships of squids Loligo pealei and Ilex illecebrosus from the Auantic coast of the United States, by Anne M. T. Lange and Karen L. Johnson. March 1981, iii+17 p., 5 figs., 6 tables. 746. Distribution of gammaridean Amphipoda (Crustacea) on Georges Bank, by John J. Dickinson and Roland L. Wigley. June 1981, iii+25 p., 16 figs., 1 table. 747. Movement, growth, and mortality of American lobsters, Homarus ameri- canus, tagged along the coast of Maine, by Jay S. Krouse. September 1981, iii+12 p., 10 figs., 8 tables. 748. Annotated bibliography of the conch genus Strombus (Gastropoda, Strombi- dae) in the western Atlantic Ocean, by George H. Darcy. September 1981, iii+16 p. 749. Food of eight northwest Atlantic pleuronectiform fishes, by Richard W. Langton and Ray E. Bowman. September 1981, iii+16 p., 1 fig., 8 tables. 750. World literature to fish hybrids with an analysis by family, species, and hybrid: Supplement |, by Frank J. Schwartz. November 1981, iii +507 p. 751. The barge Ocean 250 gasoline spill, by Carolyn A. Griswold (editor). November 1981, iv +30 p., 28 figs., 17 tables. 752. Movements of tagged summer flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, off southern New England, by F. E. Lux and F. E. Nichy. December 1981, iii+16 p., 13 figs., 3 tables. 753. Factors influencing ocean catches of salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., off Wash- ington and Vancouver Island, by R. A. Low, Jr. and S. B. Mathews. January 1982, iv+12 p., 6 figs., 7 tables. —— aa tn gue ge 4 SION Oem OC, p AT MOSPy, Ay) oP En, <4 ane A on y & o> G Firmen oF “ON NOLIN NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF-767 A Commercial Sampling Program for Sandworms, Nereis virens Sars, and Bloodworms, Glycera dibranchiata Ehlers, Harvested Along the Maine Coast Edwin P. Creaser, Jr., David A. Clifford, Michael J. Hogan, and David B. Sampson April 1983 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration John V. Byrne, Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service William G. Gordon, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) does not approve, rec- ommend or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned in this publication. No reference shall be made to NMFS, or to this publication furnished by NMFS, in any advertising or sales pro- motion which would indicate or imply that NMFS approves, recommends or endorses any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned herein, or which has as its purpose an intent to cause directly or indirectly the advertised product to be used or purchased because of this NMFS publication. OmMAANNAMN HWN i=) CONTENTS ios Roose REE PRBUO URES DR DANS ava asMnoS OF RRR D A BOCOnAy Gomis CASO BU ood POO wees De cow oo e 1 DIGiTONCE SeowhvichbaGhoscobeenesoobondstide Fob dcann dMinGs oNomn Gam Go RAeA on OndE hoon DsO.AnuUDgddORododOo cde , Etabitati(Sanid WOrss)) Ps SAU, ARS Reics ows cay Bak ged cee olen ce abSe fe Sis SUSIE ER Ee eR RS or ee Pe egy esta et dD) Se ae 2, Le eAbylectc((n) forovel 7019 111) ine creer aie Serer coe ce iat coe ar omen mnnotin or core ouva noe qodld donaanoan soo dice cco a d.cc 3 Histonyzolthe marine worm’ fishery sys eerie: Soir shay toes hekeeei eens cy Nee ctereeceeie st CI tear Peeper th poi ee nara ee ees eves 3 VOTE GIGS 2 ale ites ereto a cies Gros ase Gio 8 GLO LORTEE RIO CNET 6 ce Siena ONAInnRel ora atacand Ain Mien nO dinate AEOOAIA bi pierp niko A ba.e occ 4 IMERIRS (OTM Be cedar ene soe e ROU ON ONT MAS An aot e MEOH Eine aS ky reann ocr Sed doN Rema e a Hoa sn hos ACOs 5 Rackan Syand | shippin Ssmedum ye reyare peace ieee ee Rica iciister- eet erectile betes decyl eerie erred: 5 RTESEM(sMANINe WONT MALKetS pie cy ecchesey oy2.0 mm) (%) 0.32 0.65 0.31 0.36 0.02 0.06 0.10 0.22 Sand (2.0-0.063 mm) (%) 9°52 11.24 10.72 8.73 9.66 6.54 7.23 6.62 Silt (0.063-0.004 mm) (%) 49.18 54.95 56.30 58.53 ahh 63.60 61.46 59.25 Clay (<0.004 mm)(%) 40.99 33.16 32.67 32239, 14.55 29.79 31.21 33.92 Heavy metals Subsample depth in core (cm) 0.4 12-16 0-4 12-16 Copper (ppm dry weight) 24.5 18.4 17.3 16.9 Zinc (ppm dry weight) 212 169.3 151 138.5 Manganese (ppm dry weight) 347 323.2 266 277.8 Chromium (ppm dry weight) 57.8 43.9 36.7 39.3 Cobalt (ppm dry weight) 18.4 15.4 10.9 14.0 Nickel (ppm dry weight) 37.0 30.7 SH: 30.7 Iron (%) 3.6 3e2 2.9 2.8 Organic carbon (%) 2.27 2.19 2.27 2.1 HABITAT (BLOODWORMS) During a study of the bloodworm population at Wiscasset, Maine The bloodworm is a relatively common inhabitant of intertidal flats bordering brackish waters and tidal estuaries (Pettibone 1963). Bloodworm diggers generally share the opinion that bloodworms are found in greatest abundance around freshwater streams that empty into coves (Ganaros footnote 4). Under many circum- stances, areas affected by considerable quantities of freshwater run- off may be occupied by bloodworms and not by sandworms and clams (Dow and Wallace;'* Pettibone 1963). Although blood- worms are commonly found in soft organically rich muds (Klawe and Dickie 1957), the mud is usually more compact than that found in commercial sandworm digging areas (Ganaros footnote 4). Klawe and Dickie (1957) believed that a relationship exists between soil type and abundance; a continuous increase in abun- dance exists in the following series of sediment types: sand, hard clay, dark sand, sand and mud, and soft mud. Sanders et al. (1962), on the other hand, reported that in Barnstable Harbor, Mass., the largest numbers of bloodworms were found at sandy stations. Andrews (1892) has recorded bloodworms as inhabiting shoals in the Beaufort, N.C., area. In the same area, Adams and Angelovic (1970) described the bloodworm as one of the dominant species of infauna in estuarine eelgrass beds. At certain times of the year, (Creaser 1973), the surface water salinity varied between 10.4 and 30.2%) and the surface river temperature varied between — 1.2° and 20.3°C. The bottom river salinity varied between 15.1 and 30.5%, and bottom temperature varied between —0.6° and 19.0°C. The interstitial mud temperature for this same area varied between 0.8° and 16.7°C. The results of more recent salinity and temperature studies from this same area (Creaser et al. footnote 12) have already been reported under sandworm habitat. Bloodworm sediments within DMR’s closed marine worm con- servation area at Wiscasset were also analyzed by Pedrick (footnote 8). The results of size and heavy metals analysis of bloodworm sed- iments are presented in Table 1. The physical properties of the sedi- ment taken approximately halfway between the bloodworm and sandworm producing portions of the flat are recorded in Table 2. A more detailed analysis of marine worm sediment size from Wiscas- set and other areas along the Maine coast is available from DMR files. Table 2.—Physical properties of the sediment taken approximately halfway between the bloodworm and sandworm producing portion of the closed conser- vation area at Wiscasset, Maine. Subsample depth in core (cm)! bloodworms containing immature gametes can be found swimming Property 0-6.5 6.5-18 18-24 free in some bays, harbors, and river channels (Graham and Creaser Wet unit weight (g/cm3) 1.42 1.48 1.53 1978; Dean 1978b). They have also been dredged in water up to Specific gravity of solids 2.62 2.60 2.62 approximately 400 m deep on bottoms of sand, mud, mud mixed Water content (% dry weight) 110.10 90.04 78.00 with gravel, rocks, and particularly in mud rich in detritus (Petti- NOTION | a ees SW ct bone 1963) Saturated void ratio 2.883 2.337 2.045 j Porosity (%) 74.2 70.0 67.2 Bloodworms are dug commercially from the mud at depths up to 25 cm (Pettibone 1963). Commerical bloodworm concentrations are usually not as dense as commercial sandworm concentrations (Ganaros footnote 4). Worm holes are not characteristic of a bloodworm flat (Ganaros footnote 4). However, evidence for the passage of oxygenated water through the burrows is revealed by the presence of a layer of lighter colored oxidized sediments around each burrow (Mangum;"* Pedrick 1978). "Dow, R. L., and D. E. Wallace. 1955. Marine worm management and conserva- tion. Maine Dep. Sea Shore Fish., Fish. Circ. 16, 9 p. '4C_ P. Mangum, Associate Professor, College of William and Mary, Williams- burg, VA 23185, pers. commun. May 1972. 'Subsampling depths determined by X-ray diffraction techniques. HISTORY OF THE MARINE WORM FISHERY It is generally agreed that a small marine baitworm fishery was in operation on Long Island, N.Y., during 1921-22. However, small scale worm transactions between a few individuals may have occurred on Long Island considerably before these dates (Wan- ser'®). By the mid-1920’s the Long Island fishery had become well 'SA. Wanser, marine worm dealer, Milbridge, ME 04658, pers. commun. July 1979. established as the result of a demand for baitworms by party boats fishing for weakfish in Peconic Bay. Initially, clams and mussels had been used for bait in this fishery but when fishermen discoy- ered that marine worms worked as well as or better than these baits, a preference for marine worms developed (Schmal'*). Although initially sandworms were the most sought after species, it was not long before both sandworms and bloodworms were being dug in areas such as Stony Brook, St. James, Jamaica Bay, Brooklyn, and Staten Island. Throughout Long Island, the worms were dug from sand flats and beaches. Sandworms were short but fat and of excel- lent quality. Bloodworms were of similar quality to those now obtained in Maine. Exploratory digging was soon extended as far as Fairfield, Conn., and Massachusetts (Sandrof 1946). A fishery that dealt mainly with sandworms was established in the area north of Boston: Winthrop, Revere, Lynn, Swampscot, Marblehead, Salem, Gloucester, and Newburyport by 1929 during the depres- sion (Greely '’). By 1932, some digging had occurred south of Bos- ton to Chatham on the Cape (Greely footnote 17). Marine worms were probably also being dug commercially in New Hampshire by this time. Yet, despite the exploration for and discovery of commercial marine worm populations prior to 1932, sufficient quantities were still not available to supply the market. This lack of availability has been attributed to: 1) an initial lack of abundance and the complaints of landowners who objected to worm digging in their sandy beaches (Sandrof 1946), 2) overdigging and depletion of the known stocks (Schmal footnote 16; Greely footnote 17), 3) increased demand for marine baitworms in the sportfish fisheries (MacPhail 1954; Dow's), 4) a decline due to increased pollution from heated effluent discharge and toxic heavy metal pollutants (Dow footnote 18), and 5) a demise in the fishery resulting from higher than optimal seawater temperatures (Dow footnote 18). Although some worming probably began in the Portland, Maine, area in the early 1920's, the fisheries’ slow initial growth in Maine was partly due to a certain skepticism toward the digging of marine worms (Glidden footnote 6). In 1933, an abundant supply of worms was found in the area around Wiscasset (Sandrop 1946) and Boothbay Harbor (Schaml footnote 16; Greely footnote 17). Most of the digging in these areas was directed toward sandworms but some bloodworms were also obtained. By 1937, the industry had become well enough established for the Maine Legislature to insti- gate “control” legislation (Glidden footnote 6). The municipalities affected by this legislation were mainly located in Cumberland, Sagadahoc, and Lincoln Counties (Dow'’). Nearly 40 laws were passed between 1937 and 1955 which prohibited nonresidents from digging worms within the political boundaries of numerous munici- palities. All these laws were repealed in 1955 after it was estab- lished that many of these exclusions were motivated by coastal property owners who desired to prevent trespass rather than con- serve marine worm stocks (Dow footnote 19). The fishery in Maine had been extended from Cumberland, Sagadahoc, and Lin- coln Counties into Hancock and Washington Counties by the early 1940's (Flye*°). By 1949, bait dealer inquiries from the United States had stimulated the Canadian Atlantic Biological Stations to '8D. Schmal, marine worm digger, North Edgecomb, ME 04545, pers. commun. July 1979. 70. Greeley, marine worm dealer, Sullivan, ME 04682, pers. commun. July 1979. 'SDow, R. L. 1977. The Maine marine baitworm fishery. Dep. Mar. Resour. state- ment, Augusta, 7 p. '8R. L. Dow, Coordinator, New England Regional Fisheries Management Coun- cil, Maine Dep. Mar. Resour., Augusta, ME 04330, pers. commun. July 1979. 20[. Flye, marine worm dealer, Newcastle, ME 04553, pers. commun. July 1979. initiate a program of exploration for baitworms along the Maritime coast. Stocks of sandworms were found in Charlotte County, New Brunswick, and in 1950 a bait business was established there. This initial endeavor was not successful due to the relatively small size of the worms and the lack of a suitable packing weed (MacPhail 1954). The search for worms was continued in the Maritimes dur ing 1950-51 in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island. Although some worms were found in practically all the areas examined, commercial quantities of bloodworms were found only in Nova Scotia in certain regions within Annapolis, Digby, Yarmouth, and Shelburne Counties (Flye footnote 20; Klawe and Dickie 1957; MacPhail 1954). Although the size of the worms dug within these areas was smaller than their Maine counterparts, excellent transportation facilities were available and by 1952, three shippers were operating in Yarmouth County, Nova Scotia. In 1953, sandworms were again shipped from Charlotte County, New Brunswick, but the absence of a suitable packing weed prevented large scale development of the industry (MacPhail 1954). Maine marine worm landings recorded in U.S. Department of Commerce (1946-80) in pounds and converted back into numbers, as well as landed value, are presented in Table 3. Table 3.—The numbers and value of bloodworms and sandworms landed by licensed marine worm diggers in the State of Maine between 1946 and 1980. Bloodworms Sandworms Licensed marine Value Value Year worm diggers Numbers (dollars) Numbers (dollars) 1946 _ 2,608,000 57,125 2,335,000 47,188 1947 = 7,200,000 144,530 2,046,000 37,086 1948 449 25,018,000 305,044 3,116,000 57,307 1949 498 17,700,000 297,021 1,356,000 18,910 1950 389 13,718,000 242,081 2,276,000 37,158 1951 324 9,511,000 157,966 5,868,000 88,412 1952 435 9,256,000 178,312 6,288,000 91,109 1953 522 11,198,000 217,966 9,744,000 148,499 1954 625 10,555,000 200,518 11,364,000 167,196 1955 551 8,921,000 167,004 7,176,000 110,283 1956 530 7,493,000 150,748 11,312,000 177,672 1957 640 10,485,000 246,436 11,636,000 214,344 1958 628 13,604,000 309,678 10,764,000 193,853 1959 784 18,837,000 371,832 21,548,000 334,285 1960 643 24,207,000 482,100 24,516,000 365,850 1961 729 26,176,000 515,979 25,720,000 387,066 1962 7715 25,674,000 516,362 27,108,000 421,267 1963 921 32,198,000 696,887 32,532,000 $06,578 1964 1,041 33,390,000 745,315 30,894,000 450,544 1965 1,015 33,918,000 759,582 29,545,000 447,341 1966 930 31,511,000 731,335 31,848,000 509,018 1967 1,025 32,956,000 834,826 28,257,000 492,384 1968 1,165 36,632,000 1,048,581 27,833,000 533,358 1969 1,168 34,449,000 999,787 26,914,000 523,836 1970 1,194 37,242,000 1,215,772 29,877,000 621,474 1971 1,396 35,603,000 1,381,676 30,115,000 674,296 1972 1,383 31,013,000 1,325,895 27,886,000 625,848 1973 1,451 35,381,000 1,744,832 28,135,000 1,060,402 1974 1,455 31,377,000 1,569,823 32,881,000 949,956 1975 1,267 35,634,000 1,779,266 29,935,000 862,854 1976 1,199 23,454,000 1,255,852 27,915,000 812,318 1977 1,197 17,474,000 1,313,987 29,506,000 1,000,432 1978 1,155 16,202,000 1,164,688 29,937,000 1,075,409 1979 1,105 19,387,000 1,434,258 29,776,000 1,109,292 1980 985 20,338,000 1,404,222 29,002,000 1,094,535 WORM DIGGING One of the most attractive features associated with digging marine worms is the low initial cost of involvement in the fishery. Based upon 1980 prices, a new digger is prepared to enter the fish- ery for an outlay of approximately $70-90 (license $10, blood- worm hoe $22 or sandworm hoe $45, boots $30, buckets $4, and perhaps a pair of gloves $4). The new digger can quickly recover his initial outlay with a little experience and two or three tides of digging effort. An experienced digger may desire a 14-16 ft alumi- num boat and a 10-25 hp motor. A good bloodworm digger will start digging high on the mud flat and follow the receding tide out with a trench measuring approxi- mately 1 m in width. When the tide changes, the digger reverses direction and digs ahead of the incoming tide. A bloodworm flat is considered good if the digger can dig one commercial-sized worm for each four or five turns of the hoe. Although a good bloodworm digger may dig as long as 5 h on a low drain tide, 2 to 4 h is the general rule. The sandworm digger generally waits until the tide is near the low water mark before he begins digging. He spends the entire tide digging parallel to the shore in the region of the low water mark. A sandworm flat is considered good if the digger can dig one commercial-sized worm for each turn of the hoe. Often the digger may be rewarded with three-four worms per hoe turn. Although a good sandworm digger may dig as long as 3-3/2 h on a low drain tide, 1'4 to 2'4 his the general rule. MARINE WORM HOES A commonly used form of the bloodworm hoe (Fig. 1A) is con- structed from two small spading forks welded together on a V- shaped brace. The hoe handle is constructed from a portion of the handle of one of the original spading forks. The handle is pounded down onto a short tine that has been welded to the middle of the brace at a relatively sharp angle to the tines. Various important bloodworm hoe measurements from the areas east and west of Penobscot Bay during 1977 are presented in Table 4. A commonly used form of the sandworm hoe (Fig. 1B) is con- structed from parts of three large spading forks. One tine from each of two large 4-tined spading forks is removed. The remaining por- tions are then welded together to form a 6-tined hoe. Each tine is then lengthened by welding on four additional tines from the third spading fork plus the two tines that were removed from the first two spading forks. The hoe handle, obtained from a portion of one of the onginal spading fork handles, is attached to the tines in much the same manner described previously for the bloodworm hoe. Var- ious important sandworm hoe measurements from the areas east and west of Penobscot Bay during 1977 are presented in Table 4. Previous descriptions of Maine marine worm hoes have been presented by Ganaros (footnote 4) and Dow and Creaser (1970). Figure 1.—Marine worm hoes commonly used by commercial diggers: (A) bloodworm hoe, (B) sandworm hoe. According to the hoe description supplied by Ganaros (footnote 4), the hoe was constructed from a modified garden fork, the handle of which was cut off 9-10 in (22.9-25.4 cm) from the tines. Two addi- tional tines were welded on either side of the fork and all six tines were bent at an angle of approximately 45° with the handle. Each tine was flattened and gently curved inward. The lengths of the tines were approximately 111 in (29.2 cm) and the overall width obtained was 1012 in (26.7 cm). Although Ganaros (footnote 4) did not state which worm species this hoe was designed for, the tine lengths are midway between those reported for bloodworm and sandworm hoes (Table 4), thus suggesting that it might have been used for both. The bloodworm and sandworm hoes described by Dow and Creaser (1970) are very similar in dimension to those summarized in Table 4. Bloodworm hoes used by diggers in the Maritime Provinces were also constructed from garden forks (Klawe and Dickie 1957). The four tines on these hoes were tapered from 0.5 to 0.75 in (1.3-1.9 cm) in width, were 9 to 10.5 in long (22.9-26.7 cm), and were curved slightly inward. No other measurements were recorded. PACKING AND SHIPPING MEDIUM Seaweed gatherers collect packing weed for specific use by marine worm dealers. Dealers prefer to pack both species of worms in the young fine textured shoots of Ascophyllum nodosum f. scor- piodes and Ascophyllum machaii, both of which are found growing quite abundantly at the base of Spartina in salt and brackish water Table 4.—A summary of bloodworm (B) and sandworm (S) hoe measurements recorded east and west of Penobscot Bay during 1977. Tine measurements (+1 SE) Hoe measurements (+ | SE) Handle Handle- Distance Species No. hoes Flat or length tine angle handle and area measured Number Length(cm) round(%) Width (cm) Width (cm) (cm) (°) tine (cm) B (east) 50 5.74 22.16 100 F 1.75 25.56 15.96 51.82 14.29 +0.15 +0.48 +0.08 +0.31 +0.41 +1.07 +0.19 B (west) 55 7.11 21.39 100 F 1.01 BIE) 20.91 42.07 18.01 +0.10 +0.52 +0.01 +0.35 +0.16 +0.68 +0.27 S (east) 48 6 38.84 87.5F 1.15 27.99 29.89 45.46 24.89 +0 +0.57 12.5R +0.04 +0.33 +0.55 +0.80 +0.41 S (west) 50 5.62 34.74 76.0F 1.00 25.21 23.17 46.54 23.35 +0.07 +0.73 24.0R +0.05 +0.35 +0.16 +0.77 +0.25 marshes (Vadis;?! Topinka”). Two precautionary measures are fol- lowed in the packing process for sandworms; pack life may be extended by the use of seaweed that is rather dry (compared with the wetter weed used in packing bloodworms) and the use of excep- tionally fine seaweed is avoided because the sandworms cannot burrow down through it and consequently clump together on top. Many dealers prefer to use light-colored packing weed when it is available. The reason for this may be simply that the product looks better packed in light weed (Curtis*’). Some dealers believe that dark weed is a better packing medium for bloodworms and light week is better for sandworms (Hammond*). In the past, sea let- tuce, Ulva, has also been successfully used as a packing medium in those areas (such as Prince Edward Island) where conventional packing weeds are absent (MacPhail 1954). The seaweed is placed in shallow newspaper-lined cardboard car- tons with lids. In the recent past, shallow tomato boxes were used for this purpose. Canned milk cartons have also been used success- fully for shipping bloodworms (Ganaros footnote 4). Each carton contains 250 bloodworms or 125 sandworms. The worms are shipped to their destination by refrigerated truck, bus, or air freight. In the past, they were also shipped by railway express and parcel post (Sandrof 1946). PRESENT MARINE WORM MARKETS Marine worm dealers presently categorize their U.S. marine worm markets into four general areas of delivery: New York, Bos- ton, the southern market, and California (Peaslee;*? Wanser;’° Wright;?’ Crowley ;** Fairservice*’). The approximate extent of the season and the worm species associated with each of these markets is described as follows. The onset of the “New York market,” including Connecticut, generally occurs some time between the end of February and the middle of March. This market is concluded between the middle and end of November. Both bloodworms and sandworms are marketed in New York but sandworms prevail in the “Connecticut market.” The “Boston market” is comprised of two divisions: a Boston proper market, including the area just east of Boston, and a market on the Cape Cod peninsula. The onset of the former occurs between the end of February and the end of March and it is concluded between the end of October and the end of November. The onset of the market on the Cape occurs in May, demand is high during June, July, and August, and the market is concluded by the first of Sep- tember. Both divisions of the Boston market deal primarily with sandworms. IR. L. Vadis, Professor, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04473, pers. commun. July 1979. 22J. Topinka, Principal investigator, Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, West Boothbay Harbor, ME 04575, pers. commun. July 1979. 23C. Curtis, marine worm digger, Wiscasset, ME 04578, pers. commun. July 1979. 24. H. Hammond, marine worm dealer, Wiscasset, ME 04578, pers. commun. 1979. °5F, E. Peaslee, marine worm dealer, Wiscasset, ME 04578, pers. commun. August 1979. 25R. Wanser, marine worm dealer, Wiscasset, ME 04578, pers. commun. August 1979. 27W. A. Wright, marine worm dealer, Addison, ME 04604, pers. commun. August 1979. 28K. A. Crowley, marine worm dealer, Addison, ME 04604, pers. commun. August 1979. 29S. H. Fairservice, Sr, marine worm dealer, Wiscasset, ME 04578, pers. com- mun. August 1979. The “southern market” includes New Jersey; Delaware; Mary- land; Washington, D.C.; Virginia; and North and South Carolina. The onset of this market occurs between the first of April and the end of May. It is concluded between the first of September and the end of October. Both bloodworms and sandworms are marketed in the northern New Jersey market. Bloodworms prevail in southern New Jersey and the remainder of the southern market. Several previous references to marine worm markets are avail- able in the literature. Ganaros (footnote 4) reported that blood- worms and sandworms were marketed in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut. MacPhail (1954) and Pettibone (1963) reported on the use of marine worms in a sport fishery that was concentrated about Long Island and extended from Connecti- cut to Maryland. Dow (1969) stated that both species of marine annelids were marketed from Long Island Sound to Chesapeake Bay. The “California market” is a relatively new market. Although marine worms are shipped to this market throughout the year, the greatest quantities are shipped during two specific periods. The first period begins in February and lasts through May or June. Few worms are shipped during the summer because of mortalities asso- ciated with overheating during delayed air transport. Market demand increases again during September, October, and Novem- ber. Both bloodworms and sandworms are desired by the northern California market, whereas a preference for bloodworms prevails in the southern California market. The most recent market to develop is the French market. The demand for worms increases around the end of May, remains good during the summer, and slows down during November. A small but continuous demand exists throughout the winter. Although both species are desired by the French market, 90% of the shipments consist of bloodworms (Flye footnote 20). According to many of the dealers interviewed during the course of this research, the weather plays an important role in determining the extent of a given market's season; good weather will result in a market's beginning earlier and ending later than normal. MATERIAL AND METHODS Marine Worm Sampling Program We developed a multistage sampling plan with monthly stratifi- cation that would yield information on: 1) Size and length fre- quency of the catch, 2) probability sampling expansions for total catch in numbers, total number of digger hours dug, total value of catch, total number of digger tides dug, total catch in pounds, and 3) ratio estimates (catch/effort data) for catch in numbers/hour, catch in numbers/tide, catch in pounds/hour, and catch in pounds/ tide. Selection of Commercial Sampling Period A survey of the marine worm industry conducted in 1972 showed that the initial increased demand for marine worms occurred during March, peak demand occurred during June, July, and August, and by the end of November the demand had substantially subsided. This trend is also evident from the monthly bloodworm and sand- worm landings obtained from U.S. Department of Commerce (1946-80), converted from pounds into numbers of worms, and presented in Figure 2. On the basis of the information above, we initially sampled commercial marine worm landings between 1 Apnil and 31 October. However, the sampling period was shortened to 1 Apnil-30 September after the first year’s sampling (1973) when 7 7 } \ / Q | \ © BLOODWORMS, a \ 6 H 4 SANOWORMS = NAY g 3 2e5 ae \ Q 4 PSs" rose, 3 \ z | \ \ = = P \ = 4 \ Pa i] \ 4 \ 2 /| \ | : 5 j fe) | = if O 33 \e 6 3 \ 3 | \\ 2 iil Ns 2 a\ S ° | NY A S2 ima 3 2 \ = | Fe | A 2 ¢ / % 4 2 \ 4 | \\ R | ey NS | \ SS sa & 4 FMAM 3) Jas OND J FMAM J I ITAGS Re OMNES D, 1965 1966 a =~ / = é 3 5 / \\ 2 3 LN z Z \ = =4 Leff OS : 2 Hee Hi = 53 ise e 2 [| z 2 By 3 Gi / | \ \ 7 21 / | Ni IY \\ a= \ 3 j EXIM Aw ee ed As ON O Sop w ee a rr Z z ° z z a Al Poe Sy ae | a | \ \ 2 = = | / oD \ 8 $ } / \ > rex / \ = ° {4 \ S o | j AN z S24 / N \ = = i 4 \ = 5 Aa = z Figure 2.—Bloodworm and sandworm landings in numbers reported monthly for the period 1965-76. it became evident that few dealers were purchasing large quantities of worms in October and the majority of our sampling trips during that month yielded no information at all. Primary Sampling Unit All daylight low tide periods occurring between one-half hour before sunrise and sunset during the months of April through Sep- tember were listed and designated as the primary sampling unit. The time of sunrise and sunset at lat. 44°16’N, long. 68°38’W (a point near Blue Hill, Maine, that is halfway between the extreme dealer sampling locations of Wiscasset and Jonesport) was obtained from the Nautical Almanac Office of the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C. Low tide periods were recorded for Portland, Maine (U.S. Department of Commerce 1973-76). Six randomly selected daylight low tide periods were chosen for sam- pling during any one month. Secondary Sampling Units All marine worm dealers who purchase their worms continually from 5 or more diggers during any given month were listed and de- A 6 o a ru v4 z © A” és Os eg = =| /\¥ z z TA\] 4 74 iY z 2 car re 3 | / 23 33 {/ ro) 6 fd \ 22 2 | 2 5 z / ms z 1 7 f-) A \ pee ‘ J FMAM J Ja AS a OM Nis: 1972 8 7 7 real ° Zz Ss 4 ‘| 5 oO 4 = a = 3 4 = >a 4 a4 3 Se oe 2; ° Yo fe} 23 [~e 23 3s 6 5 = 2 2 2] sr42| = 2 1 Ui 4 1 \ —.S J FMAM J J AS ON D 2 LR poo NUMBERS OF WORMS (MILLIONS) S NUMBERS OF WORMS (MILLIONS) w & i a Ce ° ee signated as the secondary sampling units. A restriction of at least 5 diggers/dealer was necessary in order to eliminate a number of worm dealers (6 during 1976) in the western portion of the state who operated bait and tackle shops or who supplied marine worms to party boats and purchased their worms occasionally from 1 to 3 diggers. Marginal dealers, who might be buying continually from 4 diggers one month and 5 diggers the following month, were con- tacted monthly during the sampling period to determine whether or not they should be included as secondary sampling units. A dealer code number consisting of a county and number was assigned to each qualified dealer (Fig. 3). Digger Interview Marine worm diggers were interviewed as they delivered their catches to the dealer. It was often necessary to fractionally inter view and sample the diggers (sample every 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th digger) instead of sampling every digger that approached the dealer buying location because of the large numbers of diggers involved, and their grouped arrivals during one or two predominant periods after low water (an early arrival period for sandworm diggers and a later arrival period for bloodworm diggers). wi L-4,5,6,8,25 WISCASSET ESI BOOT HBAY E2726 EDGECOMB LESS, NEWCASTLE K-29 WARREN H-28,30 BLUE HILL H-10 ELLSWORTH H- 27,31 FRANKLIN -14 SULLIVAN nus 2 HANCOCK =i5 S. GOULDSBORO W-16,17,18 MILBRIDGE W-19,20,21,22,25 ADDISON W- 23 JONESPORT W-24 BEALS ISLAND Figure 3.—Marine worm sampling locations along the Maine coast 1973-76. Sampling the Catch We attempted to collect worm samples from a maximum of 15 diggers at each dealer sampling location. Each sample contained 25 bloodworms or sandworms. Samples of marine worms were obtained directly from the digger’s bucket or hod prior to his enter- ing the worm cellar and therefore contained worms of commercial value as well as culls. Bloodworm diggers virtually always transported their worms to the buying locations in plastic or stainless steel buckets. The con- tents of each bucket sample were stirred with a small paddle and while the water and worms were in motion, a fine meshed tropical fish net was used to obtain a sample from the bucket. Sandworm diggers transported their worms to the buying locations in round 5 gal plastic pails or in rectangular wooden hods. Usually, these con- tainers held great quantities of worms in as little water as possible. It was not possible to stir the contents of these containers with a paddle without breaking the sandworms. Therefore the contents were mixed by reaching into the bottom of the container with both hands and gently drawing the bottom worms upward. After doing this three or four times in one area of the container, the sample was withdrawn with cupped hands. Samples of bloodworms and sand- worms obtained in the above manner were deposited into a narrow wooden tray from which a random cluster of 25 bloodworms or sandworms was counted out. The remaining worms were returned to the digger. Processing the Samples The 25-worm samples of bloodworms or sandworms were immediately placed into containers of high salinity water (31-33%) after being collected at the sampling location. When sampling was completed, the worms were transported to the labo- ratory and placed into trays with porous fiber glass screen bottoms floating in tanks of high-salinity flowing seawater. They remained in these trays until completely acclimated—a period of at least 24 h. Bloodworms were anesthetized in 0.2% propylene phenoxytol. The breakage of sandworms was reduced to an absolute minimum by first briefly placing the sandworms in 0.1% propylene phenoxy- tol to oe them down and then the 0.1% mixture was replaced with 0.2%. When completely anesthetized, the worms were mea- sured in a V-shaped measuring trough while submerged in anes- thetic. Their weight, sex, and condition (broken, punctured, regenerated) were also recorded. Sex was determined during April and May for bloodworms and during August and September for sandworms. Sex was distin- guished from a sample of the coelomic fluid withdrawn with a cap- illary pipette and examined under a microscope. Unanesthetized length measurements in the natural state were derived from a photograph taken while the worms were immersed in a seawater bath containing a 15 cm mle. Compilation of Interview and Cluster Sampling Information The information compiled by digger from the interviews and cluster samples is presented in Table 5. The information recorded in Table 5A was then summarized for each dealer daylight low-tide period sampled and recorded in the form shown in Table 6. Statistics All formulas used to calculate: 1) Individual, monthly, and 6-mo means, variances, and standard errors, 2) monthly and 6-mo proba- Table 5.—Forms used in the collection of (A) interview and sample information and (B) the total landings of acceptable and cull worms. Deal Date Pric 1) 2) 3) 4) 6) 5) 7) 8) 9) 12) Weat Tide (A) Commercial Catch - Sandworms - Blo0o0dworTts er (Code No.) sL=5 Limit No Yes No. 750 Sampling fraction 1:1 (1:2) 1:3 1:4 9/10/74 No. low tides on sample day 1 Sampler D.C. M.H. E.P.C. e/worm .04 Skers ber SiO Tae SLOGER= Digger No. 3 4 Digger arrival time 1247 1247 Digger age, # years digging experience 27 Is catch 1 or 2 tides dig? i il What time stop dig? 114] 114] Low tide at 1141 What time start dig? 1100 1100 OR How long on flats 1.30 hrs. 0.68 hrs. 0.68 hrs digging? —lhe—té610iT. O-he—4t min. _O hy.—44+-Tmtn. Worms from 1 area or more? al al ak River or area worms Back River dug from? Boothbay Waldoboro Waldoboro Last tide dug - morning or afternoon, day or night? Worm sample 2 low tides prev. (day) Wt. Sex (day) 2 low tides prev. 2 low tides prev. (day) al 4.42 2 27.4 Uerets) 32a) 3) (247 4.20 30.8 R = regenerated 4 24.2 4.58 NS 28.7 3.97 B = broken 5 38.4 11.40 iy 14.83 22.8 3.00 P = punctured 6 34.0 8.40 NS 6.15 25.4 SSS} NS = nonspawner 7) 27/59 Syaals} NS as} 28/53 6.00 M = male 8 377 12.46 NS 7.40 B 4.50 F = female 9 8.00 M 5.45 B 6.87 NS FI = female (immature) 10 4.52 NS 4.30 28.7 6.40 M 11 653 E; 8.23 SHhs12 7.88 12 4.56 NS 13 B 4.30 NS 3582 14 23.4 Soy NS 28.1 15 290i 622: NS B 16 R 4.09 NS B 17 R 5.40 NS — 19) [mL 2.63 NS 28.5 19 B 203 ENS 3573 20 R SVT ss 21 23.0 B22 23 B Volume 24 30=7 Som i= |e athe 25 R 3.24 Total no. worms 13 25 i dug (include | estimates of 364.8 134.07 487.8 159.05 494.9 143.04 #'s of culls, if any) 775+8 = 783 775+5 - 780 775+3 = 778 | her: Wind velocity 1 Wind direction E Air Temp. 21°C Barometric Press. = Cloud cover 7/8 clouds - rain clouds - no rain cs E Low tide (ft.) - tide table +1.00 Low tide (ft.) - actual +.75 Table 5.—Continued. Dealer Year 1974 Bloods (B) or Sands (S) M. R. No. (if any) No. Worms Dug Total Dug 6100 Total From Diggers Sampled 3100 bility expansion and ratio estimates, 3) time efficiency values, 4) optimum and proportional allocation, and 5) length-weight rela- tionships, are presented in Appendix A. Verification of Sampling Procedures and Responses to Interview Questions The methodology employed in several of the marine worm sam- pling and processing procedures was closely scrutinized. Since we anesthetize and measure the worm’s length immediately prior to weighing them, studies were performed to determine what effect the anesthetic might have on the worm’s weight. In these studies, worm weights were compared before and after anesthetization with 0.2% propylene phenoxytol. Another problem associated with length measurements on soft- bodied Annelids involved a determination whether the measurements were reproducible. This was investigated by repetitious measure- Total Culls Culls from diggers sampled 10 Culls Other Total, Including Culls Note - add 125 B to blood- worm form (L-5, 9/10/74) Total Time by 4.66 hrs 26 ments, reviving of individuals of both species between measure- ments, and a comparison of the results. Other experiments were performed to compare length differences resulting from relaxing and measuring the same assorted blood- worms in two different anesthetics. One group of bloodworms was first acclimated to high salinity water, anesthetized in 0.2% propyl- ene phenoxytol, and then measured. These worms were then revived in high salinity water and the following day they were anes- thetized and measured in 7.5% MgCl,. The entire experiment was then reversed using another group of assorted worms and the results of both experiments were compared. Experiments were performed to determine if the manner in which a 25-worm sample was obtained from the digger produced a mean length and weight estimate that was truly representative of the mean length and weight of all the worms present in the bucket (bloodworms) or hod (sandworms). All worms used in these exper- iments were obtained from two commercial diggers. A bucket con- Table 6.—The summary sheet for catch statistics data collected during each dealer daylight low tide period sampled. CATCH STATISTICS bloodworms sandworms Dealer L-4 Day 4 Month June Year 1976 1. Value/worm SuO055 2. Number of diggers sampled 18 3. Accepted catch in numbers from diggers sampled ASS 4. Catch in grams from diggers sampled 27216.52 lbs. (x.002205) 60.01 (numbers from diggers sampled (3) x mean wt./worm) 5. Number of worms taken in DMR samples 450 6. Number of mature males in DMR samples _ = 7. Number of mature females in DMR samples = 8. Number of digger tides dug from diggers sampled 18 9. Number of digger hours dug from diggers sampled 63.42 10. Mean length of worms in DMR samples 16.77 (from unbiased estimates of weighted means) il. Mean weight of worms in DMR samples UoWS (from unbiased estimates of weighted means) 12. Catch in numbers/digger tide dug 862.89 (catch in numbers from diggers sampled (3) (number of digger tides dug (8) 13. Catch in grams/digger tide dug 1512.03 (catch in gms. from diggers sampled (4) (number of digger tides dug) (8) 14. Catch in lbs./digger tide dug BSS (convert grams (13) to lbs. by multi. gms. x .002205) 15. Catch in numbers/digger hour dug 244.91 (catch in numbers from diggers sampled (3) (number of digger hours dug from diggers sampled (9) 16. Catch in grams/digger hour dug 429.15 (catch in grams from diggers sampled (4) (number of digger hours dug (9) 17. Catch in lbs./digger hour dug ~95 (convert grams (16) to lbs. by multi. gms. x .002205) 18. Value/digger tide dug $47.46 (derive from (12) by multi. numbers x value/worm) 19. Value/digger hour dug Sues 47 (derive from (15) by multi. numbers x value/worm) 20. Value/gram $0.03139 (catch in numbers from diggers sampled (3) x value/worm) (catch in grams from diggers sampled (4) 21. Value/1b. $14.24 (convert value/gm. to value/lb. by multi. (20) x 453.59) 22. Total number of diggers that dug 37 men 36 women 23. Total number of digger tides dug for all diggers 37 24. Total accepted catch in numbers for all diggers entering cellar 26,107 (+ others) 25. Total estimated number of digger hours dug for all of accepted catch 130.36 (estimate by interpolatation using {Qe _x) (2) (22) 26. Total catch in grams 45749.91 (+ others) (total accepted catch in numbers (24) x mean weight (11) Die “Total catch ian ibs< 100.88 (+ others) (total catch in grams (26) x .002205) 28. Total value of catch $1435.89 (+ others) (total accepted catch in numbers (24) x value/worm) 22. Total number of culls in catch for all diggers entering cellar 622(% of total catcn) 2.333 30. Total number of daylight low tides/month 42 31. Low tide magnitude - actual 624 calculated S02) 32. Weather 1 K from E, air temp. ZOMISC Wellearvand sunny with scattered clouds taining 581 bloodworms and a hod containing 1,041 sandworms were sampled as previously reported. The worms obtained in the sampling process were anesthetized, measured, weighed, and then returned to the original bucket or hod. After the worms had revived, the procedure was repeated a total of 10 times. The results obtained from these length and weight measurements on blood- worm and sandworm samples were then compared with the mean length of all measurable (461) and weighable (581) bloodworms in the bucket, and all measurable (779) and weighable (1,041) sand- worms in the hod. . The digger responses to several questions asked during the sam- pling interview were routinely checked for accuracy. The total worm count dug and reported to the sampler by the digger was checked against the number reported on the dealer’s record sheet (the number of worms the digger was actually paid for). The dig- ger’s response to questions dealing with the time digging began and ended on a given tide was compared with the actual digging time observed and recorded by the sampler for that digger from a con- cealed position along the shore. Yield-Effort Curves License and landings data used in bloodworm and sandworm yield-effort curves were obtained from DMR license records and U.S. Department of Commerce (1946-80) (for the appropriate years). Landings data reported in pounds in U.S. Department of Commerce (1946-80) were converted back into numbers using the appropriate conversion factors. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Digger Interview The proper use of a sampling fraction, in both the digger inter view and the commercial sampling, requires that the diggers are approaching the cellar in random fashion. This requirement is prob- ably met when one considers that some diggers dig for long periods and other dig for short periods, regardless of the distance between the digging site and the dealer buying locations. The use of a ran- domly selected choice of diggers has one advantage in that if the diggers were approaching the cellar in some sort of order, the order would in no way affect the selection of a random sample. For rea- sons of simplicity, the use of a sampling fraction was also the only logical choice; the act of interviewing different fractions of blood- worm and sandworm diggers as they were both entering and leav- ing the worm cellar simultaneously, was already complicated enough. Sampling the Catch We attempted to limit ourselves to collecting marine worm sam- ples from a maximum of 15 diggers (at 25 worms/digger) per dealer buying location because of the time involved in processing 375 worms for length, weight, and sex. Occasionally, when the larger dealers were sampled, we were unable to determine how many bloodworm or sandworm diggers would be arriving at the cellar with worms during the sampling period and we had to estimate, on the basis of past experience, what sampling fraction to use for both species without exceeding a total of 15 samples. In some cases we were successful and approximately 15 samples were obtained. At other times, our estimates were erroneous and either more or fewer than 15 samples were obtained. We chose to sample the diggers just prior to entering the dealer buying locations for several reasons. First, we did not desire to interfere with the dealer’s handling practices and procedures. Sec- ond, the inclusion of cull worms in the sampling procedure is desir able because the vast majority of the culls were never returned to the flats alive; they were either discarded in the “discard” bucket, along the road side, or they were dumped on the flats or in the water where they were rapidly consumed by sea gulls and fish. Our commercial sampling therefore reveals what is lost from the natural population through commercial digging and it includes both com- mercially acceptable worms and a small percentage of cull worms that will be discarded and wasted. Our commercial sampling results indicate that bloodworm culls comprise 3.0-4.6% and sandworm culls comprise 2.6-5.1% of the worm catch brought into the cellar. The net result is that the mean lengths recorded from our samplings of the catch are actually slightly smaller (they contain length mea- surements for cull worms that would be discarded and wasted dur ing the normal handling procedure in the cellar) than the mean size of worms shipped out of state. Processing the Samples Acclimation of all worm samples to high salinity water prior to anesthetization and measurement was necessary because the length and weight of marine worms vary with salinity. Preliminary inves- tigations revealed that some marine worms had either been dug from varying salinity conditions or had been exposed to additional dilution by the diggers for varying periods of time prior to our obtaining them (Table 7). This practice of “watering down” the worms is prevalent among bloodworm diggers and rare among sandworm diggers. Although salinities as low as 10% 9 have rarely been recorded from bloodworm bucket water, it is highly unlikely that the worms themselves are dug very often from mud of this salinity because salinity tolerance experiments conducted previ- ously (Creaser®) showed that bloodworms are stressed after expo- sure to 10%, for 24 h. Experiments designed to measure the time required for bloodworms to acclimate to a standard lab line salinity of 31-33%» from a lower salinity were initiated at a salinity of approximately 16%, because we did not wish to stress the blood- worms. Although sandworm diggers rarely “water down” their worms, an initial starting salinity of 16%, was also used in similar sandworm experiments. The results of these acclimation experi- ments on bloodworms and sandworms are presented in Figure 4. The results in Figure 4 show that bloodworms required as much as 10 h and sandworms required as much as 16-18 h to completely acclimate to high salinity after being dug and transported under the conditions reported. In view of the facts that: 1) The experiments in 3Creaser, E. P., Jr. 1971. Biological, environmental and technological research on marine worms. Project 3-16-R Completion Report covering the period 1966-1971. Dep. Sea Shore Fish., State House Annex, Capitol Shopping Center, Augusta, ME 04333, 224 p. Table 7.—The salinity content of water obtained from the hods and buckets of marine worm diggers and used in transporting bloodworms and sandworms from the flats to the dealer. Dealer Date Number of Bloods (B) Mean 1 standard code (1972) samples or sands (S) salinity (%po) error (%po) L4 4/24 19 Band S 16.09 +1.02 L-5 4/24 7 Band S 21.33 +2.26 L-6 5/07 13 Ss 26.61 +0.87 L-6 5/07 5 B 20.06 +3577, W-18 5/02 14 Band S 20.29 +0.81 Figure 4 were conducted in the fall at temperatures of 4°-5°C when the acclimation time would be slower, 2) no changes in weight were noted after 18-20 h during repetitious weighings of a few randomly selected bloodworms and sandworms collected peri- odically during commercial sampling, and 3) commercial samples collected on one day were never processed until at least 24 h later, it is highly probable that all length and weight measurements were made on commercial samples only after all worms had been fully acclimated to standard high salinity conditions. The length measurement of a marine worm in its natural state is a difficult if not impossible undertaking; the soft-bodied Annelid can coil, undulate, expand, and contract. To avoid these problems, we anesthetized the worms before measuring them. The relationships of natural lengths to anesthetized lengths for bloodworms and sand- worms collected from the Sheepscot River are shown in Figure 5. These results demonstrate that the difference between anesthetized length and natural length is greater for bloodworms than for sand- worms; a bloodworm of 20 cm anesthetized length is equivalent to approximately 13 cm natural length, whereas a sandworm of 20 cm anesthetized length is equivalent to approximately 17 cm natural length. Bloodworm samples collected during April and May were sexed because in the region of Wiscasset, Maine, spawning occurs in June (Creaser 1973). Sandworm samples were sexed during August and September after spawning in April and May (Creaser and Clifford footnote 11). Verification of Sampling Procedures and Interview Responses Studies preformed to determine what effect the anesthetic might have on the worm’s weight indicated that it had little effect. Studies performed to determine if length measurements upon bloodworms and sandworms are true and reproducible indicated that bloodworm lengths, over the range of sizes tested (15.7-36.6 cm), are reproducible within + 0.2 to + 1.0 cm (at 95% confidence limits or 1.96 SE) and sandworm lengths, over the range of sizes tested (12.1-64.3 cm), are reproducible within +0.4 to +2.4 cm (at 95% confidence limits or 1.96 SE). Studies in which lengths were obtained on individual worms after being relaxed in two different anesthetics (0.2% propylene phenoxytol and 7.5% MgCl.) demonstrate that when bloodworms were first relaxed and measured in 0.2% propylene phenoxytol and then relaxed and measured in 7.5% MgCl,, the lengths recorded in the MgCl, were usually smaller (23 out of 24 cases). The reduction in size varied between 0.8 and 23.4%. When bloodworms were first relaxed and measured in 7.5% MgCl, and then relaxed and measured in 0.2% propylene phenoxytol, the lengths recorded in the propylene phenoxytol were usually greater (16 out of 21 cases). Increased lengths varied between 1.0 and 12.0% and decreases var- ied between 1.5 and 13.0%. These results suggest that caution should be used when comparing the findings in this manuscript (where 0.2% propylene phenoxytol was used as as anesthetic) with the results in other publications (where other anesthetics were ~ used). More detailed information on the results of the studies above, which were performed to verify various sampling procedures, is reported in Creaser et al.! *!Creaser, E. P., D. A. Clifford, M. J. Hogan, and D. B. Sampson. 1980. An anal- ysis of the commercial baitworm fishery for sandworms Nereis virens Sars and bloodworms Glycera dibranchiata Ehlers in Maine. Maine Dep. Mar. Res. Lab. Res. Ref. Doc. 80/18, 180 p. The results of studies to determine if the 25 worm samples were truly representative of the entire contents of the bloodworm buckets and sandworm hods are presented in Table 8. It is evident from these results that on 10 out of 10 tries the range of bloodworm mean lengths and weights (+ 1.96 SE) overlapped the actual mean length and weight of the entire “bucket” population. On 9 out of 10 tries the range of sandworm mean lengths (+ 1.96 SE), and 8 out of 10 tries the range of sandworm mean weights (+ 1.96 SE), overlapped the actual mean length and weight of the entire “hod” population. There were few problems inherent in our method of selecting 25 bloodworms for measurement and most of the time the same holds true for sandworms. Few errors were observed when comparing the total landings we recorded during the digger interview with the total the dealer recorded and paid the digger for. In only a few instances during a 4- yr period were intentional errors made by diggers. Occasionally, a digger failed to report to the dealer that we had collected 25 of his worms and his recorded landings with the dealer were therefore 25 worms short. The results of our efforts to check the accuracy of the diggers’ estimates of their digging time are shown in Table 9. This study was necessary because certain industry factions shared the opinion that diggers were reporting false information regarding their estimates of beginning and ending time. The results in Table 9 demonstrate that there is less than a 2% discrepancy between the time estimates of groups of diggers and their actual digging time recorded by observation from concealed positions. However, when time esti- mates for individual diggers are obtained through digger interviews on the flat, these estimates are probably more accurate than the esti- mates they would have made had they been interviewed at the worm cellar some distance away. Because of manpower limitations we were not able to follow individual diggers back to their respec- tive cellars to obtain estimates of their digging time. We can only state that had we been able to do this the discrepancy might have been greater than 2%, but probably still within very acceptable lim- its. These data were analyzed to determine if the ratio of two varia- bles (actual vs. reported time) was significantly different from a 1:1 ratio at 95 % confidence limits (2 SE,). The results indicate that the relationship between actual and reported time is not significantly different from a 1:1 ratio (1.01764+0.02819 or 0.98945—1.04583). In other words, the mean estimate of digging time, as reported to the sampling crew, is quite accurate. As far as individual groups of diggers are concerned, some estimate a little high, some estimate a little low, and some estimate precisely. Verifi- cation of the accuracy of both reported landings and digging time estimates enables us to conclude that the estimates of catch/hour, one of the simplest indices of marine worm abundance, are proba- bly quite accurate. Commercial Sampling for Length, Weight, Sex, and Condition Table 10 shows that the 6-mo mean lengths (+1 SE) for blood- worms were 18.72+0.60 cm (1973), 19.84+0.38 cm (1974), 20.74 +0.59 cm (1975), and 20.83 + 0.54 cm (1976). These means are not significantly different from one another at 95% confidence limits (+ 1.96 SE). On the basis of this commercial sampling infor mation, no significant differences occurred in the size of blood- worms harvested between 1973 and 1976. It is also apparent from Table 10 that during April and May poten- tial spawners comprise between 7.33-13.58% and 0.50-1.63%, respectively, of the commercial catch. Apparently, the diggers WEIGHT ,GM 4 Oe 822210 12 (oo) yh OPE IK AECIVED TAP O18) 20M 22ian24 TIME, HR Figure 4.—The time required for assorted sizes of bloodworms and sandworms to acclimate to 32% 9. (A) Bloodworms dug from an interstitial salin- ity of 19.52% , transported to the laboratory in 16.09%, and acclimated to 32% 9. (B) Sandworms dug from an interstitial salinity of 22.00%, trans- ported to the laboratory in 16.49%), and acclimated to 32%p . avoid harvesting the fragile bloodworms that are approaching spawning condition in May. Diggers harvest slightly more female bloodworms than males. Potential bloodworm spawners are not evenly distributed along the coast; they were never collected east of the Taunton River (Sullivan, Maine) during 4 yr of commercial sampling. There are four possible sources of bloodworms recruited into the commercial fishery in eastern Maine. Trochophores (or juveniles) produced from the excellent spawning stocks in Nova Scotia (Klawe and Dickie 1957), may be carried on counterclock- wise currents across the Bay of Fundy to eastern Maine. Evidence for these currents in the spring and summer is presented by Graham (1970) and also by Bumpus and Lauzier (1965). It is also possible that close inshore currents move clockwise and transport tro- chophores (or juveniles) from the abundant spawning stocks in the Taunton River and Sullivan Harbor to eastern Maine. Recruitment may occur from unknown subtidal or intertidal spawning commu- nities in eastern Maine. However, since the worm digger is a hunter, it is unlikely that any large intertidal digging areas contain- ing spawners could exist without the diggers’ knowledge of them. An unlikely possibility is that the survival rate of the bloodworm trochophores produced by the rare spawners reportedly found by diggers in eastern Maine is exceptional and accounts for the excel- lent sporadic worm sets reported for numerous areas. The 6-mo means reported in Table 10 show that approximately 5-7% of the catch consists of bloodworms with regenerated tails. Broken bloodworms comprised approximately 12-13% of the catch. Table 11 shows that the 6-mo mean lengths (+1 SE) for sand- worms were 26.11+0.98 cm (1973), 26.22+0.68 cm (1974), 26.77 + 0.53 cm (1975), and 25.69 + 0.42 cm (1976). These means are also not significantly different from one another at 95% confi- dence limits (+ 1.96 SE). Sandworms spawn during March, April, and May and sandworm diggers also avoid picking up spawning worms. We waited until WORM A ~A & WORM sie ae WORM ee WORM 7 WEIGHT, GM 6 = 85=10 12 TIME, HR August and September before attempting to sex sandworms obtained from the commercial catch. During these months potential spawners comprised between 15.6 and 38.3% of the commercial catch. Diggers usually harvested more female sandworms than males. Potential sandworm spawners were found all along the coast of Maine. The 6-mo mean shows that approximately 8% of the catch con- sists of sandworms with regenerated tails. Broken worms com- prised approximately 19-23% of the catch. Variations in the mean size of bloodworms and sandworms har- vested between dealers listed in Tables 10 and 11 can be explained by: 1) Dealer preference, 2) tidal amplitude, and 3) the length char acteristics of the local worm populations being harvested on the days commercial samples were obtained. Some previous information exists regarding the commercially acceptable size of bloodworms and sandworms harvested in west- 15 Do dWail SZ Osea A 20 sXe) ern Maine. During March 1966, four dealers were asked to cull two bloodworm lots and two sandworm lots into commercial and non- commercial size groups. The results are shown in Figure 6. Although the commercial length results presented in Figure 6 cannot be directly compared with the 6-mo mean lengths recorded for bloodworms and sandworms in Tables 10 and 11 (7.5% MgCl, was used to anesthetize the former, 0.2 % propylene phenoxytol the latter), the results suggest that, had the 1966 bloodworm and sand- worm samples been anesthetized in 0.2% propylene phenoxytol, their mean sizes would probably have been slightly larger than the 6-mo mean lengths reported for bloodworms and sandworms dur ing the 1973-76 sampling program. These data suggest that there may have been a slight decrease in the acceptable size of commercial bloodworms and sandworms harvested between 1966 and 1973. ANESTHETI or DSF RY oa oO ScQo OR 25 46) 28 (A) ° () of Sep of 8 fo} fo} (0) fo} ro) xh © Y= 1.07893 + 1.40403(X) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 NATURAL LENGTH, CM SS (On Ol) TOs Ovn Os BG: NO) (Oy (On R00) ANESTHETIZED LENGTH,CM NH wo Ww on @® © nN a 20 7 (o) (B) V4 °0%8 is 209% {o} 00 #O @ 9 9 ° SYS fo} ay Ge Le fo} Y= 2.82210 +1.05315(X) 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 NATURAL LENGTH,CM Figure 5.—The relationship of natural length to anesthetized length: (A) blood- worms, (B) sandworms. Table 8.—Verification of the relationship of the mean length and weight (+1, +1.96 SE) of a 25-worm sample to the mean length and weight of the total. Bloodworms length (cm) (V=461) length (cm) (N=779) Sandworms AAnAnnAnnn an NNNNNNNNNN nn wn i] Mean +1.96 SE Mean +1.96 SE X(cm) + 1 SE + 1.96 SE (95% confidence) N X(cm) +1SE +1.96SE (95% confidence) 20.42 + 1.05 2.05 18.38-22.47 17 22.18 + 0.57 1.12 21.05-23.30 20.89 + 0.76 1.48 19.41-22.38 17. 22.91 + 0.49 0.96 21.94-23.87 19.44 + 0.73 1.43 18.01-20.86 22 22.88 + 0.82 1.61 21.27-24.49 19.93 + 0.75 1.47 18.46-21.39 20 23.14 + 1.10 2.15 20.99-25.28 20.78 + 0.97 1.91 18.88-22.69 22 22.79 + 0.71 1.39 21.40-24.18 19.78 + 0.76 1.50 18.28-21.28 22 25.13 + 0.62 1.21 23.92-26.34 18.35 + 0.90 1.77 16.58-20.13 18 23.27 + 0.87 1.71 21.56-24.99 19.22 + 0.76 1.50 17.72-20.71 18 23.21 + 0.65 1.27 21.94-24.48 20.39 + 0.69 1.36 19.03-21.75 18 22.84 + 0.62 1.21 21.63-24.05 20.55 + 0.81 1.59 18.96-22.13 21 «21.98 + 0.60 1.18 20.80-23.16 19.94 7719 =22.49 weight (g) (V=581) weight (g) (N= 1,041) 2.33 + 0.28 0.54 1.78-2.87 25 3.58 + 0.17 0.33 3.25-3.91 2.19 + 0.19 0.37 1.81-2.56 25 3.90 + 0.24 0.48 3.43-4.38 1.91 + 0.22 0.42 1.48-2.33 25 3.98 + 0.30 0.60 3.38-4.58 1.96 + 0.19 0.38 1.58-2.34 25 4.15 + 0.49 0.96 3.19-5.10 2.31 + 0.27 0.54 1.77-2.85 25 4.09 + 0.35 0.69 3.40-4.78 1.95 + 0.17 0.33 1.63-2.28 25 4.55 + 0.28 0.55 4.00-5.10 1.79 + 0.20 0.39 1.40-2.18 25 3.94 + 0.30 0.59 3.35-4.53 1.77 + 0.17 0.33 1.40-2.10 2. 4.56 + 0.32 0.62 3.93-5.18 2.07 + 0.21 0.41 1.67-2.47 25 3.66 + 0.22 0.42 3.24-4.08 2.29 + 0.22 0.43 1.86-2.71 2. 3.76 + 0.25 0.48 3.28-4.25 2.07 1,041 3.43 16 Table 9.—A comparison of the diggers’ time estimates with the actual time recorded. Diggers Actual No. diggers estimate recorded Error Date Area checked SorB (h) (h) (%) 4/03/74 Cod Cove-Wiscasset 19 B 48.22 48.30 -0.17 4/12/74 Hilton Cove-Wiscasset 15 B 46.33 45.08 207) 4/14/74 Yacht Club-Wiscasset 6 B 18.45 18.42 +0.16 5/13/74 Back R.-Boothbay 6 S 8.33 8.33 0 8/17/77 Rays Pt.-Harrington 6 S 6.58 7.65 -13.99 8/18/77 Hog Bay-Franklin 8 B 18.50 16.50 +12.12 8/23/77 Skilling R.-Hancock 12 B 30.25 29.25 +3.42 10/12/77 Jones Cove-W. Gouldsboro 6 S 9.12 9.03 +1.00 78 185.78 182.56 +1.77 The literature contains many references to the commercially acceptable size of bloodworms and sandworms. However, few of these measurements are comparable because the worms were mea- sured by various means. Sandrof (1946) reported the average length of bloodworms at 6-8 in (15.2-20.3 cm) natural length. Ganaros (footnote 4) stated that the minimum size for bloodworms was 18-20 cm. Dow (footnote 18) reported that Ganaros’ measure- ments were recorded from worms placed next to a ruler. Tax- larchis* reported that the minimum size for bloodworms was 16 cm. He first anesthetized his worms in 7.5% MgCl, and then mea- sured them next to a ruler MacPhail (1954) and Pettibone (1963) reported that the minimum marketable size was 6 in (15.2 cm). Klawe and Dickie (1957) reported that bloodworm diggers in Nova Scotia ordinarily harvest worms that are more than 20 cm (7.9 in) measured in 7.5% MgCl. Sandrof (1946) reported that the normal size range for sand- worms was 10-18 in (25.4-45.7 cm) natural length. Ganaros (foot- note 4) reported the minimum commercial size of sandworms at between 21 and 22 cm. Following discussions with various Boothbay, Maine, worm dealers, Taxiarchis*? concluded that the minimum commercial size for sandworms was 8 in (20.3 cm) natu- ral length. MacPhail (1954) reported that the minimum marketable size for sandworms was 6-7 in (15.2-17.8 cm) and Pettibone (1963) stated that a sandworm length of 20 cm was required to be of commercial importance. Length and Weight Frequency Samples Monthly sexed length frequency data recorded for the commercial bloodworm and sandworm catches sampled between 1973 and 1976 are shown in Figures 7 and 8, respectively. In Figure 7, the complete lack of maturing spawners during April 1975 may be attributed to the small sample size (V=44) and the fact that the random samples were only collected in the eastern por- tion of the state where bloodworm spawners were lacking from commercial samples. The commercial sandworm samples for 1974, 1975, and 1976 (Fig. 8) show that during August and September individual female sandworms contained eggs of either one of two size ranges. This happens because spawning occurs annually in sandworm popula- tions but the period of egg development in the coelom is longer than 12 mo. Therefore, worms containing larger eggs will spawn the fol- lowing March—May, whereas those containing small eggs will *?Jaxiarchis, L. N. 1954. Field notes on marine worms. Dep. Sea Shore Fish., Augusta, 36 p. Taxiarchis, L_N. 1953. Survey of the littoral zone of York County, Maine with respect to commercial productivity. Dep. Sea Shore Fish. Gen. Bull. 2, 13 p. spawn a year after that. Two general egg sizes have been recorded in the Wiscasset sandworm population between October-Novem- ber and April-May (Creaser and Clifford footnote 11). Data pre- sented by Brafield and Chapman (1967) suggest that two egg sizes may be present between September and April in the Thames estuary (Southend, England) and Snow (1972) reported the same phenome- non between September and June for sandworms collected at Brandy Cove, St. Andrews, New Brunswick. Bloodworm and sandworm sexed length frequency data for 6 mo (April-September) combined sampling data are presented in Fig- ures 9 and 10, respectively. Weight frequency data from combined monthly samplings of the commercial bloodworm and sandworm catches collected during the period Apnl—September (1974-76) are presented in Figures 11 and 12, respectively. Probability Sampling Expansions and Ratios Estimates Probability sampling expansions of catch and effort and ratios of two variables estimates (catch/unit effort) are presented by month and 6-mo sampling periods for bloodworms and sandworms in Tables 12 and 13, respectively. The importance of these probability sampling expansions is con- siderable. Although estimates of total catch in numbers are already recorded in Maine Landings, estimates of some of the other param- eters are either nonexistent (total number of digger tides dug, total number of digger hours dug) or they are reported in U.S. Depart- ment of Commerce (1946-80) in gross error (total catch in pounds). It is evident from the results presented in Tables 12 and 13 that the standard errors about the mean monthly probability sampling expansions are greater than those reported for the 6-mo expansions. Standard errors reported for the 6 mo combined data are 19.7-26.2% of the mean for bloodworm expansions and 19.2-31.9% of the mean for sandworm expansions. Although greater accuracy (smaller standard errors) of the expansions could be obtained by randomly selecting more than six daylight low tides per month, this could not be accomplished because of time and manpower limitations. Based upon the results of the four 6-mo ratio estimates for blood- worm and sandworm catch in numbers/digger hour, it cannot be conclusively stated that bloodworm and sandworm abundance changed significantly between 1973 and 1976. The only indication of a decline in abundance of bloodworms occurred during 1976 when the catch in numbers/digger hour was significantly different (at + 1.96 SE or 95% confidence levels) from the same recorded during 1974 and 1975. However, there was no significant differ ence between the 1973 and 1976 bloodworm data for catch in numbers/digger hour at 95 % confidence levels. Table 10.—A summary of bloodworm mean length (cm) and weight (g) data, and the percentages of males, females, regenerated, broken, and punctured individuals by dealer code, including monthly and combined 6-mo means (+1 SE) for the period April-September 1973-76. 1973 1974 1975 1976 1973 1974 1975 1976 Lae t April May No. Mean: Percent: No Mean: Percent Samples _—_ Length Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Samples Length — Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured 9 21.76 2.99 00 .00 5.96 13.25 -55 W-22 2 19.58 2.30 .0O0 00 8.00 6.41 -0O0 W-23 1 24.24 3.80 00 00 4,00 -00 4,00 H-10 11 20.52 2.70 5.70 8.61 6.42 915 2.58 H-12 7 18,66 1.89 .00 -00 3.84 17,87 3.84 L-6 8 24.06 4.00 6.18 17,31 4.38 8.23 6.47 L-8 14 18.58 2.26 37 2.55 1.89 10.11 4.81 L-5 S > . S = = = {L=4) = = = ss = = = = W-20 - : c c 2 e : : W-24 : = = = ° > = = 37 i 31 Monthly Mean 20.59 2.81 5,02 8,56 6.15 7,89 3.37 Monthly Mean 20,81 2.73 -09 64 3.92 10.31 3.30 Standard Error 1.25 +.41 *1.76 *+3,53 S575 S257. +1.38 Standard Error *+1.36 +,42 + .09 +.64 ==183 +3.79 2.94 Dealer No. Mean Percent: Dealer No Mean: Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured H-12 1 IE HYATE 2.45 4.49 5.26 3.59 6.52 1.95 L-8 14 18.58 2.01 -00 1.63 3,96 11.96 5.54 L-8 16 17.91 2,06 5.35 4,74 7.70 9.44 3.14 H-27 = = = = = : 2 2 H-14 10 1718 1.72 1.46 7.60 5.84 8.38 4.53 H-15 = > = = 2 2 = = H-11 3 16.43 1.50 3.49 1.16 1.10 13.12 2.33 W-20 - > - - - - 2 = W-23 = - - - - - - - H-14 - : - - W-24 = - - - - W-24 = = = = 5 = 40 14 Monthly Mean 17,82 1.93 3.70 69 7.02 937 2.98 Monthly Mean 18.58 2,01 .00 1.63 3.96 11.96 5.54 Standard Error as rin mer)! + 84 1.33. 1.56 +1.39 +157 Standard Error - - - - - - - Dealer No. Mean Percent Dealer No. Mean: Percent Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate, Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured W-19 2 19315 en .00 .00 5.01 5.01 2.99 L-6 5 20.97 2.72 .00 83 7,00 10.98 913 W-18 - - - - - - - H-14 6 19,51 2.57 -00 -68. 4.77 22.83 5.05 W-24 - W-19 3 19,42 2.75 -00 .00 738 26.97 8.00 L-8 L-2 - = - - - - - - L-1 - W-18 - - - - - - - - H-14 W-31 - : - - - a 2 14 Monthly Mean 19.15 2.25 00 .00 5.01 5.01 2.99 Monthly Mean 19,97 2.68 .00 50 6.3 20.26 7.40 Standard Error : : : : : : - Standard Error ISO e105 : 126) iB Bee) == if Dealer No Mean Percent: Dealer No Mean: Percent Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured W-23 3 18,21 2.62 150 .00 1.78 1332 4.85 W-19 9 21,98 2,94 -00 00 9:52 9.20 3.33 H-12 18 19,00 2.33 4.26 8.82 7.87 16.60 531 L-2 = = = < = = = = W-17 - - - - - - - H-11 - - - L-2 H-30 = = = L-25 c L-5 = 9 9 H-11 - - - W-21 - - - - - 21 9 onthly Mean 18.60 2.48 92 4.41 14,99 5,08 Monthly Mean 21.98 2.94 00 .00 9,52 9.20 3.33 Standard Error + .40 #15 $1.34 4.41 a] 1.61 25) Standard Error = 5 = 5 = z = No. Samples Mean: Length Weight Percent: Male June Female Regenerate. Broken 12.00 18.01 9.01 Monthly Mean Standard Error Punctured Dealer Code Dealer No Mean Percent: Dealer Code Samples — Length Wereht Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code L5 6 1980 2.43 : - 4.80 11.80 4.81 H-12 H-14 13 1840 2.34 = = 5393 12.95 2.14 L-8 W-22 1 23,44 4,83 - .00 16.00 4.00 L-9 L-8 14 19,85 2.28 - - $.28 9,98 5.19 H-28 W-19 W 17.92 2.24 - - 8.98 11.69 439 -2. W-23 - = c - = a 4 45 Monthly Mean 19.88 282 = - 5.00 12.48 4.23 Standard Error +.97 +50 1.45 +1.00 +.56 Dealer No Mean Percent: Dealer Code Samples Length Werght Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code L-8 16,31 1.82 - = 4.45 7.10 4.00 H-12 5 22.27 W-17 19,74 W-19 Monthly Mean Standard Error Dealer Code Monthly Mean Standard Error Samples Length 16.77 20.38 18.57 =1.81 Werght 1.75 3.15 245 ~.70 Percent Male Female Regenerate Broken 17.69 11.24 Punctured Code Monthly Mean Standard Error Monthly Mean Standard Error Monthly Mean Standard Error 9 Monthly Mean Standard Error No. Samples No. Samples 1.46 Length Weight 18.16 Mean July Percent Male Female Regenerate. Broken 11,61 8.92 6.41 14,70 Punctured A Percent Length Weight Male Female Regenerate Broken Punctured 20.97 2.60 5.32 14.92 2,46 21,77 3.06 21,37 +140 2.93 =.23 3.55 15,66 No. Samples Samples Mean: Length Weight 19,56 2,88 26,28 6.90 19,81 3,03 21.03 3.81 1.77. +1.04 Length Weight 21.80 Sarre 3,48 Percent: Male Female Percent: Male Female Regenerate Regenerate. Broken Punctured Broken Punctured 18,37 12,00 13,27 12,20 5,56 1.69 12,00 10A1 9.56 Table 10.—Continued. August September Dealer No. Mean: : Percent Dealer No Mean: Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured i-26 6 15.24 1.36 - - 1.33 15.83 -00 H-12 3 14,66 1.14 - - 7,99 17.60 1.10 o Ww-19 4 1446 1,12 - - 1,06 13.93 1.67 H-11 4 17.17 92.14 - - 4.11 14,16 2.72 n H-10 14 16,01 1.41 - 5,40 18.37 78 W-18 8 1743 2,57 - & 3,96 8,73 1,19 oa W-24 1 25.35 4.13 = 20 20,00 8,00 H-14 4 20,41 2.37 - - 6,66 12,27 2) ie K-29 z 13,68 1,05 3,30 17.29 1,05 W-23 - - - - - - - L-? - - - - - W-16 - 9 = = = — 32 19 Monthly Mean 16.939 1,81 2.22 17,08 230 Monthly Mean 1742 2.06 = 5.68 13,19 1,50 Standard Ener ©2.12 ©.58 - +96 SE 1,04 =F 1,45 Standard Error £118 +,32 2h +185 +All Dealer No. Mean Percent Dealer No. Mean Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured K-29 3 18.59 1.94 S = 8,65 16,78 853 U5) 10 20,64 2.73 < - 1.44 10.23 6.25 ws] w-21 12 1223 281 - - 5.40 11,80 3.28 W-17 6 2333 4.45 - - 5.55 18.89 4.32 Nine2 1 16.23 1.35 - = 36.00 4,00 4.00 L-25 7 21.66 3,00 : = 13.50 10.86 729 a] 6 5 24.48 4.00 - - 7.33 7.34 3.73 H-11 5 23.34 3.19 : = 13.13 11,32 3.29 —| 27 - - - - - - - = W-21 6 19,42 3,20 - = 10.26 8.70 3.90 t1 = = = = = = = - Ww-20 - - - - - - - - 21 34 Monthly Mean 19.63 2.52 = = 14.34 9,98 4.91 Monthly Mean 21.68 3.31 = - 877 12,00 5,01 Standard Error $1.74 53a = = Saree 2a 25 Standard Error = 60) - E232 1.78 +76 Deaier No Mean Percent: Dealer No. Mean: Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured H-14 6 22,38 3.29 - = 5,74 12,06 4.21 W-17 8 26.19 5.10 = - 4.46 11.25 6.50 wn L-4 10 22.10 3.00 - = 5.89 13,22 17,11 H-11 11 20.01 2.47 - 8.03 17.03 4,70 RN] H-15 8 21.95 4,00 - - 9.43 18.06 3.03 L-1 - - - - - - = = Oo} 1 - - - - - - - - L-2 - - - - - - - - — | Lg - - - - - - - - H-14 - - - - - W-21 = = > - = - - 24 3 Monthly Mean Monthly Mean 23.10 3.78 = =e 6.25 14.14 Standard Error Standard Error +3,09 1,31 - - 178 + 2.89 Y Dealer No. Mean: Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken H-14 8 22.10 3.72 o e 4.38 7.98 3.64 W-21 6 20.83 2.88 - = 8.74 el W-21 3 22.60 3.47 - - 12.74 9.42 5,42 H-11 S} 18.68 2.56 - - 464 n == ui 24.23 4.12 = = 6.18 11.86 452 L-4 11 19.19 2.11 = < 5,08 o}| v9 3 = z E - S W-17 3 27.25 692 = : 6.10 —_ H-28 + = = = - - - - H-14 6 20,37 > - 2 = = E é H-12 - - = 2 - - 11 z 25 ] Monthly Mean 31.36 12.19 - - 6537; 22.37 2.66 Monthly Mean 27,39 7.94 6.31 19,41 Standard Error +472 44,93 - - *+1.84 £110 +31 Standard Error 71,39 +,89 221.72 1. 2.26 Dealer No. Mean: Percent: Dealer No Mean Percent Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured L-8 5 20,82 4.61 3 - 6.51 28,41 83 L-8 6 27.29 6.35 : 9,05 18,37 1.26 J) oH-11 2 24.42 539 3 e 3.15 20.00 7.15 H-27 - : - - e - 2 = | w-24 9 29,28 7.71 E - 8.63 20.90 ga4 H-15 - - z : - OQ} w-23 2 2 - - - - - 3 Ww-20 : : : - Al) TRE - - - H-11 a S H-14 - - - - - W-24 7 = 16 6 Monthly Mean 24.84 0) 6.10 23,10 5,80 Monthly Mean 27,29 635 = 9.05 18.37 Standard Error 12,45 ast} - VES) aesOs 27, Standard Error - = - - 2 Dealer No Mean: Percent Dealer No Mean Percent Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate’ Broken — Punctured Code Samples Length _ Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured W-19 6 33.22 9,37 4.28 30,90 8,95 L-2 4 25.60 Bz) S 7,96 20,48 09 w 1-1 Ss 3143 10.32 6.75 17.67 460 L-6 10 24,56 5,70 2 1,47 29,59 61 ~~ W-18 - - - 2 - - - W-25 2 24.18 6,03 - 5,70 47.53 oa W-24 = ~ W-19 6 25.61 5.81 7 3.09 29,19 Lm L-8 2 W-18 = = = a = 5 H-14 - H-14 - a 3 3 ah WI 22 Monthly Mean 32,32 9,85 5.52 24,28 6.77 Monthly Mean 24,99 5.83 4,55 31.70 Standard Error _ +.90 Air, 1.24 SEY he ear AIG) Standard Error +36 =.07 E 71,43 + 5.68 F Dealer No Mean Percent Dealer No Mean: Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken L-2 6 24,58 642 8.22 17.29 239 L-2 5 25.18 7,50 s 2.26 25.13 wo] wiz 2 : 3 c 2 = = W-19 12 28.63 6.61 - = 1,80 25.52 nN | w-23 é = H-30 4 29.62 97.71 - - 2.37 16,32 OO] H-12 - - LS 7 26.39 5.79 - - 3,28 20,60 = L-25 sy S = 3 H-11 - - = = = - - H-11 D - - W-21 - - : - : - - L SHES 6 28 Monthly Mean 24,58 6.12 822 17,29 239 Monthly Mean 27,45 6.90 - 2.43 21,89 Standard Error = : = - = = Standard Error 1,01 2.44 $31 eae? June July Dealer No Mean Percent Dealer No Mean Percent Code Samples Length — Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured 7 25.29 653 26,22 00 W-17 3 20.77 4,34 - - 7,79 o 5 29.68 9.55 18.17 ,00 W-24 1 23,90 551 z 8,00 8,00 .00 n 6 26.44 7.18 13,60 1,62 H-28 3 25,60 6.72 11,04 28.03 00 a s 28,59 8.53 27.86 2,69 W-18 2 22.91 5.23 = 12.17 32,00 00 req) = : > = W=1'9) 4 23.73 5.56 = - 7.26 29.56 1.18 L-4 - - = : = - 23 T 13 Monthly Mean 27.50 725, 1,08 Monthly Mean 23.38 SAT 9.25 25.25 Standard Error 1.00 — 68 22.66 Standard Error £79 + 38 =.98 +437 E398 3 Dealer No Mean Percent Dealer No Mean Percent Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken 6 27,88 7.1 4 2.69 L-8 8 21,87 2.95 5.07 14,87 Ei t+ 7 26.08 6,04 1.83 W-24 9 26.62 620 835 18.28 2.10 n 16 26.01 6.03 2.61 L-9 = z 2 = 3 3 Z a 7 < 5 - H-28 é = Le H-12 - - - - H-11 2 J = | 24 T 17 Monthly Mean 640 23.75 238 Monthly Mean 24.25 5,07 6,71 1 Standard Error I.37; LW, ef Standard Error £2.38 21.13 £1.64 a Dealer No Percent Dealer No Mean Percent: Samples Weight Male Female Regenerate’ Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured + L-8 5 §21 8.26 986 4.82 W-17 3 22.94 463 = e 20,42 21,41 226 w W-21 7 5.52 12.52 18.72 621 W-20 = 25.80 $35 = = 9.72 17.48 00 nN W-24 - - W-23 12 24.19 4.66 = co 435 1783 282 a H-15 - H-12 - - - - = = = a - L-9 : W-19 - - - = = L-4 H-30 < = 12 i 20 Monthly Mean 536 1 14.29 5 Monthly Mean Standard Error 2.15 => +443 we Standard Error No Percent Dealer No Percent: Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate W-23 7 25,68 631 4052 oO wW-18 2 26.44 5.12 1447 n H-28 > = = = a} v4 ‘= t-1 H-30 = 9 Monthly Mean 6 5.97 13,31 Monthly Mean 25,60 5.67 - 9,26 17.99 Standard Error 8.85 =£11.38 Standard Error =AB Saco : 24.02 S140 Table 11.—Continued. — a J j | August September T Dealer No Mean: Percent: | Dealer No Mean Percent afl Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured L-1 3 31.93 11,41 1,07 10,93 5.07 20,44 5,07 W-23 i 19,08 3A3 921 12.25 3.44 34.95 79 oe) W-19 13 22.69 5.12 1,05 18,59 11.71 23,64 583 W-18 2 22,93 5.26 14,97 17AQ 13,94 26.06 149 nN W-24 7 22.84 5.17 4.50 10,74 15.95 21,42 81 H-12 é 3 is 5 - z - - @/| 26 - - - - - : - - W-16 - - - - H-10 - - - - - - H-11 - - K-29 : - - - H-14 - - 23 T 9 Monthly Mean 25,82 723 2.21 13,42 10.9 21.85 3,90 Monthly Mean 21.00 4.34 1209 14,87 8.69 3050 114 Standard Error 3,05 +209 +115 22,59 =3.1 £96 11.56 Standard Error 41.93 +.92 42.88 =2,62 2525 2445 +35 | Dealer No. Percent: Dealer No Mean Percent Code Samples Male Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured W-21 5 25,55 5,22 162 TANA2 30 Ashe 17,47 2,13 L-5 4 29,14 5,94 13,99 13.00(3,01) 11,99 24,01 00 vT L-2 10 26.17 5,13 8.43 22,16(7,47 422 16,84 1,06 W-17 4 23.21 3,95: 7.51 464(1,03) 7,60 7.03 1.41 n L-6 3 29,68 6.19 13.66 28,64( ,00) 1098 11,51 2.46 W-21 S 25.79 4.84 6A7 3.08(3.78) 11,68 17.70 «00 QO} 1 10 31.26 9.17 668 25-88€.00) 6.18 12,42 1.57 W-20 - - : = : : = 2 aaa 27, - - - - - - - : L-25 - - - K-29 - - H-11 2 : 1 ite 28 13 Monthly Mean 28,16 6.43 7 £6 20 ,96(2,46) 8.27 14,56 1.81 Monthly Mean 26,05 4,91 933 6.90(2.61) 10,42 16,25 47 Standard Error £1.38 +.95 ®248 £4,79(1,.76) 21,83 Se h5 2: 22734 Standard Error £1.72 +.58 £2.35 3,08(-t 82) +1.41 #495 = = = == Dealer No. Mean. Percent Dealer No Mean Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured E=1 ©) 25,43 52535 9111/02 19,08(3 82) 2.24 20.84 1.73 L-1 &) 31.27 8,77 19,30 16.95(8 75) 7.49 14,53 249 w Lg s) 2758 6.21 2543 20,54(5.26) 8E75 WASSS) 295 W-17 2 25.26 4.97 5.69 1663(13.06) 400 1653 231 n H-28 4 24.73 4.77 14.61 24 20(5.87) 980 18,52 35 L-2 a 5 = 2 - - - - oa H-14 2 - - - - - - H-14 - : ¢ : —| 4 - 3 = 2 ° é W-21 - - 5 : H-15 - = = H-11 = 18 1 Email Monthly Mean 25,91 550m 202. 2127(4.98) 693 16,98 1.68 Monthly Mean 28,26 6,87 12,49 16,79(10,90) 575 1558 240 Standard Error 4.86 $042 4.33 *1,52(+.61) 2,37 2.78 SS Standard Error -©3,01 *+1.90 *6.80 ~*#.16(4 2.16) 41.75 aio} is fo}e) Dealer No Mean: Percent: Dealer No. Mean Percent: Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured Code Samples Length Weight Male Female Regenerate. Broken Punctured LS 8 25,23 5,53 789 1844(3.68) 6.69 12.20 1.78 W-21 6 26,16 6.42 10.36 18,76(5,28) 8.72 14.90 66 o H-30 6 28.88 7.58 1348 21024(4,06) 4023 11.79 1.23 L-4 7 21,81 3.26 16.18 20.18(3,92) 783 1625 3.69 n H-14 = = = = = - P = L-6 7 23.26 4.14 17.49 15A8(2.56) 602 20.10 97 o L-9 - © 8 5 = = HV = : = ; > 2 = —| w-21 - - - - - - W-17 - S = 2 H-28 - 5 2 H-14 = - - é r 14 20 Monthly Mean 27,06 656 10.68 19,84(3,87) 546 11.99 151 Monthly Mean 23,74 4.61 14,68 18.14(3,92) 752 17,08 Standard Error #1083 +103 +280 ~+140(—,19) “1.23 = -20 = 227 = Standard Error 71.28 2.94 2.19 $1,394,785 1.79 Bale56 Length Length 26,22 Mean: Length Mean Standard Error 26,77 Mean: Length Mean oe Standard Error + A2 Percent: Weight = Male Female Regenerate. Weight Male 5,86 Percent: Weight Male Weight = Male 5.93 Female Regenerate. Female Regenerate. Female Regenerate. 8,07 2:23 Broken Broken Broken Broken 18,82 2.44 Punctured Punctured Punctured Punctured 3,12 235 21 (A) BLOODWORMS Non-Commercial Commercial X =19.60cm SE=rr20) SES .37 Nez 83) 3 % OCCURRENCE 0 5) 10 15 20 25 30 LENGTH BLOODWORMS j Commercial X =12.09em X =2195 cm SE= 19 SE= .33 y N= 164 N= 166 Y10 & [4 [-4 =} U 1S) fe) x 5 0) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 LENGTH Monthly and combined 6-mo values for catch in numbers/digger tide and catch in numbers/digger hour recorded in Tables 12 and 13 are mean values derived from samples collected during all low tide amplitudes. It is generally known by marine worm diggers and dealers that the number of worms dug/tide fluctuates with varia- tions in low tide amplitudes. During the early 1950's, marine biolo- gists in Maine observed that a + 1.0 ft low tide reduced the take of marine worms an average of 30% compared with a 0.0 low tide (Dow 1969). The catch in numbers/digger hour for 6 mo combined blood- worm data (Table 12) varied between 193 + 6 and 233 + 6. Ganaros (footnote 4) reported that the catch/hour of commercial-sized bloodworms varied between 150 and 200. It is quite possible, how- ever, that these lower catch/effort figures reported by Ganaros (footnote 4) resulted from the fact that larger bloodworms were demanded by the commercial market during 1951. Estimates of commercial bloodworm catch/hour have also been reported from the Marsh River (118-293 bloodworms/h) and Montsweag Bay (B) SANDWORMS 1 5 a Non-Commercial Commercial X =1761cm \ X = 2818 cm SE= 41 SE= 66 N= 98 N= 66 510 ro rr] [o4 [4 = U U (e) R (acon <> 40 45 fe) 5 LENGTH SANDWORMS 15 [Non-Commercial NM Commercial X =1396 cm X = 2638 cm SE=ten09, SE=i- Gy, N= 77 N= 60 010 Zz Ga a a =) U U e) & 5 0 5 10 als) 25 30 40 45 (enicTu Figure 6.—Assorted bloodworms and sandworms culled into commercial and non-commercial sizes by four dealers in western Maine. (A) Bloodworms (March 1966), (B) sandworms (August 1966) (10-450 bloodworms/h) in the vicinity of Wiscasset, Maine, by Dean and Ewart.* The catch in numbers/digger tide for 6 mo com- bined bloodworm data (Table 12) varied between 536+36 and 662 +26. Sandrof (1946) reported that bloodworm diggers dug approximately 350 commercial-sized bloodworms/tide. This reduction in catch/effort is also probably the result of larger worms being commercially harvested at that time. Sandrof (1946) reported that the average natural length of commercial-sized bloodworms was 6-8 in (15.2-20.3 cm), which is equivalent to approximately 22-29 cm relaxed length (Fig. SA). It is also possible that this reduction in catch/effort may have resulted from frequent “limits” imposed upon bloodworm diggers. 34Dean, D., and J. Ewart. 1978. Final report, environmental surveillance and studies at the Maine Yankee nuclear generating station 1969-1977. Section 10 Ben- thos (commercially important invertebrates). Maine Yankee Atomic Power Com- pany, 830 p. % OCCURRENCE ISOS Ce Sd Ce Os N=793 APRIL 1973 % OCCURRENCE fs- MALE @- FEMALE mE NON -SPAWNER SV 2" REH FRE ean = 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 LENGTH ,CM N=646 97 MAY 1973 8 7 B= remate 6 [a] = NON-SPAWNER 5 4 3 2 1 5) 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 LENGTH .CM 10; N=533 9 JUNE 1973 8 oO 7 TL ma © 4 o 5 U O 4 RK 3 7. ] 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH ,CM Figure 7.—Sexed length frequency data obtained from monthly samplings of the commercial bloodworm catch: (A) 1973, (B) 1974, (C) 1975, (D) 1976. 23 % OCCURRENCE 12 N=699 % OCCURRENCE 5) 10 % OCCURRENCE JULY 1973 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH,CM AUGUST 1973 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH ,CM SEPTEMBER 1973 20 25 30 35 LENGTH ,CM % OCCURRENCE Ny WwW Pp DT OM YN ® © % OCCURRENCE Or y-854 APRIL 1974 MALE BB remace fea] NON-SPAWNER 5 (OMMNISMENEZOMNSC5) =EsOn 525 98 40° 45 LENGTH, CM l2r N=291 MAY 1974 LIF fe) 9 ES) MALE 7 gf & FEMALE Oo 2 7h NON-SPAWNER a ep =) oO S) bir fo) tyr Sr 2t [+ A an oy | SEEK MeO SHO O5 Gu SO Mma) =i40 LENGTH, CM 12 i N=891 JUNE 1974 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 eG OMS COma cy )S0)n 135 40mn 45 LENGTH, CM 12 lI yeao2 JULY 1974 Ke) 9 o Ss ra c 7 3 6 O O56 x 4 3 QZ | 50 WIONSNISNan20™ l 25iun sOlmES MEERA LENGTH, CM II Or N=430 AUGUST 1974 eS) 8 WwW Siar, re reac rs) a (o) ee 4 3 2 l 5 10 “15 20° 25" SONS mRACMEaS LENGTH, CM '0r =N=683 SEPT. 1974 9 8 WwW Oo 7 a GB ec m2 oO Oo 4 x 3 2 I 5 IO) 15) 20251 1SOmSS ZONES LENGTH, CM Figure 7.—Continued. . % OCCURRENCE N=44 APRIL 1975 % OCCURRENCE fo) aC [NDS NE OE LO) fein OO leg CO, a ay 5 10 15 2025 30 LENGTH, CM 13 12 N=265 MAY 1975 i MALE 10 BB oremace (]_ Non-sPAWNER yo oO bp OT MDM NN @ oO 5 10 15 2OR 25 300 35 LENGTH, CM JUNE 1975 % OCCURRENCE 5 10 15 20 (is). {0) LENGTH, CM 25 % OCCURRENCE % OCCURRENCE yn oO Bh Oa DN @ O JULY 1975 jo ) ie 2 es so eS) LENGTH, CM AUGUST 1975 Bp enne et pe ee Nee ees 5 iO «615 20a sO s5 tao 45 LENGTH,CM al 8 N=378 SEPT. 1975 | WwW Oo 2 6 ra a i 3 8 4 S il 2 IF 5 10 «15 20 2 30 35 40 Figure 7.—Continued. LENGTH, CM nl =“ = {e) % OCCURRENCE IS. Ch ES Gr Ch S116) ©) % OCCURRENCE = = © APRIL 1976 N=551 JULY 1976 9 FS] MALE 8 BH remace ie u O76) LD non-srawner zZ 3 3 Q 4 se 3 2 a 5 109) 1b 220) 25S Oars be ©) LENGTH ,CM LENGTH , CM 12 1 13 A T 1976 ie UGUS 12 9 N=181 MAY 1976 1 8 10 7 9 wi 36 8 w or = 5 U 7 a ra Oo 4 05 as fo) 2 x 4 1 3 ; 5) 102 15) 20525) | 130m SbRINAOMEEZ LENGTH CM ; SuRENORNISIMEZOMNZS On arao) LENGTH , CM gt gl N=736 SEPTEMBER 1976 10 boty N=581 JUNE 1976 ws 9 Z 6 a 8 x5 © 7 Ole 6 S 3 5 2 4 1 3 5) ) 10!) S15 Nn2O R25 COMMCS EEO 2 LENGTH ,CM — 5 10 15 209 925 SO S5 40 LENGTH , CM Figure 7.—Continued. 9 N=205 APRIL 1973 8 JULY 1973 7 w 6 g = o9 = Z Q a 4 2 5 z OS 6 Re 2 ] = 10 a) 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 65 65 LENGTH ,CM 5} 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 LENGTH ,CM On Niele MAY 1973 9f N=393 : 973 7 r Fi = wate AUGUST 1 6 7 GB = Femace uw = NON-SPAW NER u 5 z w 6 w UV me Gas 2 ~ [- 4 3 an x ? 5 ] ia RK 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 LENGTH ,CM ave 3 5 10 5 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 LENGTH ,CM JUNE 1973 10f¢ N=135 SEPTEMBER 1973 9 Oo faq= MALE & E- FEMALE = [J= NON -sPAWNER o w fo) Zz x a a =) UO 1o) 5) On Mien AON Pn) OO SO oO LENGTH ,CM a Figure 8.—Sexed length frequency data obtained from monthly samplings of LENGTH ,CM the commercial sandworm catch: (A) 1973, (B) 1974, (C) 1975, (D) 1976. % OCCURRENCE uo % OCCURRENCE N=274 APRIL |974 LENGTH, CM lr N=108 MAY 1974 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 | IL 5 10 5 20 2 30 35 40 45 LENGTH, CM 9 [ N=445 JUNE 1974 =4[ 7 WwW = 6r rd aw oF =) 8 4} (eo) ae 5f al ao ONNISINEEZO NMI CS MENSON NSSmNn40NmN45 LENGTH, CM Figure 8.—Continued. % OCCURRENCE nN Ww Sf OA DD N @ % OCCURRENCE % OCCURRENCE JULY 1974 o uo 0 (5 20 2 30 35 40 45 + 50 LENGTH, CM N= 541 AUGUST 1974 MALE FEMALE (MATURE) @ FEMALE (IMMATURE ) NON-SPAWNER Baniiiinalges at Oo 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 LENGTH, CM SEPT. 1974 ie MALE WB remace (mature) Al N =240 EA FEMALE (IMMATURE) (J Non-srawner LENGTH, CM % OCCURRENCE 8. N=195 APRIL 1975 ut 6 5; 4r 3} 2 i” —+ 5 10 6 20 2 30 35 40 LENGTH, CM 10r N=368 MAY 1975 9 8 w 7t ox WwW 6F joa fog = Bp oO oO S 4 32 Be 2r ino SMO MISHEN Ones 30neESS 40 LENGTH, CM lo JUNE 1975 9 8 rye Zz WwW G6 a S) 6) S ° 4 oe 2 15 20 25 LENGTH, CM Figure 8.—Continued. 30 35 29 % OCCURRENCE Mow f OO WN ® © O % OCCURRENCE % OCCURRENCE NOR Cl SEO O) ee OO en: = + N=448 JULY 1975 [OM SINE COMIN EN SONNES 5 IMEEZO LENGTH, CM N= 362 AUGUST 1975 MALE FEMALE (MATURE) FEMALE (IMMATURE) ON @ & NON-SPAWNER B i] 10 bs) 209 e25 30 So) 8 740) 45 LENGTH,CM N=214 SEPT. 1975 2] mate BB oremace (mature) EA FEMALE (IMMATURE) NON- SPAWNER LENGTH, CM OCCURRENCE % % N=112 APRIL 1976 10+ Qt Bt 7+ O 6t ZL, aw 5+ [-4 an O 4 U Ors 3 2t it Seen OSM 2O Ne 25 SOS mN4O LENGTH , CM 8f N=529 MAY 1976 7r 6F 5+ 4t 3r 2t ‘ Pod | cae tt i — rh! re Le Sis OMaN15¢0 S20 mr 25ISOn sh 40m 645 LENGTH, CM 1p N=121 JUNE 1976 10} Gh | ] 7r | | w 7 6 w & 5 0 at fo) 3 2 a — — oe it di rt 5 10 15 20 25 30 Some AO MEAS LENGTH , CM Figure 8.—Continued. % OCCURRENCE NOs Con eer OO) sl Comm CO, 10} N=581 JULY 1976 3} Sr 7 w 6F UV 7L 5k = =) ‘| o © 3 2 io | di PL eee 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 LENGTH ,CM re N=294 AUGUST 1976 MALE GB remace (mature) Sat FEMALE (IMMATURE) oO NON -SPAWNER LENGTH ,CM N=381 SEPTEMBER 1976 cos 87 f4 MALE 77 i | FEMALE ( MATURE) 3 6 FEMALE ( IMMATURE) Es 5h O NON SPAWNER g 4} se 3f 2h 1F (eeesirle ms: I 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 LENGTH,CM The catch in numbers/digger tide for 6 mo combined sandworm data (Table 13) varied between 1,028+60 and 1,184+38. Tax- iarchis (footnote 33) judged the quality of sandworm digging on the basis of the catch/tide: 500-700 sandworms/tide (fair), 700-1 ,000 sandworms/tide (good), and 1,000 and over/tide (excellent). Catch Statistics Eighteen of the most important parameters included on the sum- mary sheet for catch statistics data collected during each dealer day- light low tide period sampled (Table 6) were summarized by month and for the 6-mo sampling period. These data are presented in Tables 14 and 15 for bloodworms and sandworms, respectively. The values presented in these tables were derived directly from the sampling and interview data. Catch/effort values (catch in numbers/digger tide, catch in numbers/digger hour, catch in pounds/digger tide, catch in pounds/digger hour) derived in this manner, are similar to values derived through ratios estimates (Tables 12, 13). A comparison of catch/effort results obtained by both methods are presented in Table 16. It is evident from Table 14 that the 6-mo mean (total) value/tide and value/hour information collected for bloodworms during the commercial sampling pro- gram (1973-76) varied between $27.97-$31.59 and $10.11-$11.00, respectively. Similar information collected for sandworms (Table 15) varied between $27.97-$40.30 and $14.34-$19.15, respectively. Information relevant to the price per worm paid to bloodworm and sandworm diggers is presented in Figure 13A and B. Figure 13A was derived from U.S. Department of Commerce (1946-80) information and Figure 13B was obtained directly from a Wiscasset dealer. It is apparent from Figure 13 (A and B) that the price/worm for both bloodworms and sandworms remained relatively constant between at least 1945 and 1965. After 1965, the price/worm increased rapidly for both species. The price of sandworms, how- ever, has not increased as rapidly as the price of bloodworms. Fig- ure 13B indicates that the Wiscasset dealer sometimes paid two to four different prices for bloodworms and two different prices for sandworms. These price differentials during a given year were the result of both quality differences and overall price increases. The price per worm recorded by month from the commercial sampling results for bloodworms and sandworms is shown in Table 17. Beginning in June 1976, a notable price increase for bloodworms occurred. Length-Wet Weight Relationships Length-wet weight relationships for whole bloodworms and sandworms obtained during samplings of the commercial catch are presented in Figures 14 and 15, respectively. As mentioned previously, few sexually discernible bloodworms were obtained in our coastwide samplings of the commercial blood- worm catch between 1974 and 1976. The length-weight relation- ships for those few male and female sandworms obtained coastwide between 1974 and 1976 are presented in Figure 15A. A comparison of the slopes of the length-weight curves for males and females of each species (Table 18) shows that, at 95% confidence limits (+ 1.96 SE) overlap occurs in the upper and lower ranges of the b values. No significant differences therefore exist in the length- weight relationships for male and female bloodworms and sand- worms. 31 Length-weight relationships for bloodworms and sandworms from 1) all areas and all sexes combined, and 2) eastern Maine (Jonesport, Beals, Addison, Milbridge, and Harrington) and the Sheepscot River (excluding Montsweag Bay), are displayed in Fig- ure 14 (B and C) and Figure 15 (B and C), respectively. A compari- son of the slopes of the length-weight curves for bloodworms and sandworms from eastern Maine and the Sheepscot River (Table 18) shows that, at 95% confidence limits (+ 1.96 SE), no overlap occurs in the upper and lower range of b values for these data. Sig- nificant differences therefore exist in the length-weight relation- ships for both bloodworms and sandworms in eastern Maine and the Sheepscot River. One possible explanation for the existence of these significant differences in length-weight relationships for bloodworms from eastern Maine and the Sheepscot River may be related to the fact that mature bloodworms are rare in eastern Maine. Bloodworms in this area may substitute an increase in weight for the production of gametes. No explanation can presently be given for the significant differences in length-weight relationships for sandworms in both areas. The authors were unable to locate any other bloodworm length- weight relationships in the literature to compare with data presented here. A scatter diagram for sandworm length-weight relationships is presented in Snow and Marsden (1974), but a comparison ts diffi- cult because their results are not fully analyzed. Numbers of Bloodworms and Sandworms Per Pound Given the mean length data (+ SE) and length-wet weight rela- tionships obtained from the commercial sampling program, we were able to calculate the numbers of bloodworms and sandworms per pound (+ 1.96 SE) for each 6-mo sampling period as well as the maximum and minimum values for individual months within that sampling period. These data are presented in Table 19. Although the mean number of bloodworms per pound decreased during the 4- yr sampling period, the decrease was not significant at 95 % confi- dence levels (+ 1.96 SE). No significant changes were recorded in the numbers of sandworms per pound during the 4-yr sampling period either. Past estimates of the numbers of bloodworms and sandworms per pound are presented in Table 20. Although some of these data (106 bloodworms/Ib and 63 sandworms/Ib) are biased in that they were obtained from a specific geographical area, the Sheepscot River (Walton*), they suggest that a progressive decrease occurred in size of both bloodworms and sandworms harvested prior to 1970. The 1950-52 figure of 44 bloodworms/Ib (Cates and Mc- Kown**) may be questioned to some degree because a recent inter view with one bloodworm dealer revealed that he supplied these port samplers with the largest bloodworms in his possession when asked for a representative bloodworm sample used in deriving this figure. Estimates of Marine Worm Age One of the most difficult problems encountered in our studies of the commercial baitworm fishery was the analysis of commercial 45C. J. Walton, Marine resources scientist, Maine Dep. Sea Shore Fish.. West Boothbay Harbor, ME 04575, pers. commun. 1966, 1968 soL.. B. Cates, Port sampler, Maine Dep. Sea Shore Fish., Augusta, ME 04330. pers. commun. and D. A. McKown, Port sampler, National Marine Fisheries Serv- ice, NOAA, Rockland, ME 04841. pers. commun 9+ N=3710 WA oO [_] NON- SPAWNER 7, MB remate ES] MALE LO U £5 = > 4 O } 3 RO ] 5 OL 15. )...201 25 COuo SO eS LENGTH CM IO? ONE S55 Lge 9 (imal NON-SPAWNER 3 a FEMALE 7 MALE wu 6 U 7h ao = 5 4 © o3 R 2 5 10° 15 20S DSS ONN NSS UA CIEE LENGTH, CM Figure 9.—Sexed length frequency data from combined monthly samplings of the commercial bloodworm catch col- lected between April and September of each year (1973-76). % OCCURRENCE [SSI Se ESS Sq] Kop) 9) ISD °F N= 2120 ME remace 8 [_] NON-SPAWNER Ly G4 oO 7 6 (ae (ey AS) O O 4 (S) SES 2 5 ie) IS 20 25 30 ED 40 LENGTH, CM 1976 = FEMALE MALE eal NON-SPAW NER 5 10 15 207% 25 SOc. tO) 45 LENGTH ,CM 1973 L_] NON - SPAWNER BB emace MALE k% OCCURRENCE Noe bh _— LL a LL KLEE (my CMEC IPaCG GO Ga LENGTH ,CM 1974 | N= 1913 MALE ih MB remace (mature) LJ © 6] FEMALE (IMMATURE) LW = "| ia] NON-SPAWNER Ba Oo Oo 4 3S ar LENGTH, CM Figure 10.—Sexed length frequency data from combined monthly samplings of the commercial sandworm catch collected between April and September of each year (1973-76). 34 OCCURRENCE %o % OCCURRENCE NC) ISR te Te) eo) MALE FEMALE (MATURE ) FEMALE (IMMATURE) UNS @ NON-SPAWNER pee ao 25 so, a> 26 SOMSS LENGTH, CM MALE FEMALE (MATURE) FEMALE ( IMMATURE ) ON @ NON-SPAWNER (Ol (a ems Somes Dian NiAER GG LENGTH CM 35 N=3432 18 1974 —_ % OCCURRENCE Nf © © O 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 WEIGHT IN GRAMS 16 N= 2002 14 1975 12 uw O Z 10 a =) 3} 0 © 6 & 4 2 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 WEIGHT IN GRAMS N=2703 14 1976 Sale. a 10 3 O08 oO e6 4 2 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10-0 1250 WEIGHT IN GRAMS Figure 11.—Weight frequency data from combined monthly samplings of the commercial bloodworm catch collected during the period April-September of each year (1974-76). 36 N= 1869 9 8 7 9) > 6 = ao > U) oO 4 e) x 3 2 1 area L 1 [7] 1 1 fos — 0.0 2-0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 160 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 260 WW 33.5 WEIGHT IN GRAAAS OCCURRENCE % i oan 1 rt we =o _" <0 2-0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18,0 20.0 220 24) 26.0 280 WEIGHT IN GRAMS SF N-=1966 1976 8 7 oO 6 z «5 [2-4 =) O 4 fo) 3 as D 1k vee i P el ee |b — 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10,0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20,0 22.0 24.0 26.0 WEIGHT IN GRAMS Figure 12.—Weight frequency data from combined monthly samplings of the commercial sandworm catch collected during the period April-September of each year (1974-76). 37 Table 12.—Probability sampling expansions of bloodworm catch and effort (+1 SE) and ratios estimates for catch/unit effort (+1 SE) by month and for the 6-mo sampling period (1973-76). 1973 Bloodworms Ratios of 2 Variables Probability Sampling Expansions Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in Tides Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger Pounds Numbers Dollars Du er Tide Hours Tide Hours April o 3,034,896 145,073 6,900 16,617 418 173 = = +1, 335,169 + 64,674 2e25958 Ea iTiek) 2923 eS) May = 5,888,974 293,411 13,832 39,385 388 139 = = +2,609,582 £130,875 + 5,870 +17,295 + 55 + 21 June oS 5,800,704 288,597 10,374 26,638 524 196 =) = +3,883,544 £194,539 + 6,756 +17,028 + 48 a i) July = 6,766,569 338, 328 13,537 31,710 516 215 = = +3,079,667 +153,983 + 5,219 +12,540 + 82 + 38 Aug. 2 7,515,040 3753/52 9,440 23,320 666 251 = = +3,827,157 +191, 358 + 4,141 +11, 384 +128 + 32 Sept. 2 4,431,768 221,588 5,808 12,309 737 299 = c +2,039,640 +101, 982 cupyae + 5,574 Totals R 33,437,951 1,662,750 5 = = +7, 208,753 +360, 396 1974 April May June July Aug. Sept. Totals Probability Sampling Expansions 1974 Bloodworms Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in Catch in Catch in Catch in Number/Dig- Pounds Numbers Dollars 26, 303 5,778, 108 288,905 11,214 28,869 539 +12, 841 +2,693,900 +134,695 + 5,656 +14,701 +ho 27,388 6,165,533 308,277 8,127 26,951 841 +25,251 +5,684, 341 +284,217 + 7,492 +24, 848 a= 37,253 7,338,112 368,969 11,473 32,439 571 £19,527 +3,903,567 +194, 748 + 5,378 +17,320 +40 48,139 8,056,594 402,830 13,468 37,550 605 +28,485 +4,667,030 +233, 352 + 8,158 £22,942 +28 27,323 4, 362,800 218,140 9,360 27,385 509 +14,675 +2,250,516 +112,526 + 5,062 +16,326 +48 40,171 5,744,270 309, 865 8,698 24,714 718 +10,725 +1,745,874 +104 ,836 + 2,814 +9553 72. +98 206,577 37,445,417 1,896,986 62,339 177,909 630 $48,224 +9,203,300 +463 ,632 £14,735 +44, 880 +20 38 Total Catch in Numbers/ Digger Hours C Ratios of 2 Variables Total atch in Pounds/ Digger Tide 3-53 -20 Total Catch in Pounds/ Digger Hours -23 -06 Table 12.—Continued. 1975 Bloodworms Probability Sampling Expansions Ratios of 2 Variables Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in Tides Hours Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger 1975 Pounds Numbers Dollars Du Du er Tide Hours Tide Hours April 926 290, 162 9,313 323 775 573 239 2.85 1.19 emo50) + 26652711 + 8,546 + 296 eS I +\- +- as + May 24,771 4,219,618 210,981 5,023 35 7/7/53 846 259 4.95 Was +11,031 +1,857,563 + 92,878 +2,197 + 6,755 oe59) sil) + 124 +.07 June 23,377 3,692,213 184,611 7,406 21,687 508 179 3.07 1.08 2115577 =1,671,937 + 83,597 +3,034 + 9,702 +100 +26 297.0) +.14 July 24,879 3,824,562 188,430 6,027 17,728 607 215 4.13 1.46 +17,089 +2,704,017 +135,840 +4, 318 £12,475 + 50 +13 + .50 =r | 5} Aug. 37,491 = 5,141,273 257,064 8,736 25,538 689 229 Pict} 1.73 +20,104 +2,880,779 +144,039 +5,004 £14,475 + 58 +10 + .66 +.16 Sept. 16,171 2,338,710 116, 883 3,031 8,190 77\ 290 5.93 2.23 + 9,461 41,561,634 + 78,075 +1,978 + 5,488 + 51 fal +1.73 +.79 Totals 127,615 19,506,537 967,281 30,545 89,691 662 233 4.30 1.51 +32,282 +4,936,204 +246 ,948 +7, 865 £23,142 + 26 £106 el ero? 1976 Bloodworms Probability Sampling Expansions Ratios of 2 Variables Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in i Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger Pounds Numbers Dollars i Tide Hours April 15,151 2,937,600 146,880 4,774 14,422 631 215 3.26 Ved £13,252 +2,586,339 £129,317 +3,887 +12,702 +103 +1 +.49 +.02 May 6,127 954,270 47,714 1,573 5,217 548 181 3.56 1.17 + 5,420 + 832,799 + 41,640 +1,392 + 4,615 24 ae ens +- June 21,217 4,685,850 257,429 6,880 23,052 759 234 3.68 1.13 £13,218 +3,313,372 +182, 326 +h,710 +16,547 +125 +14 +.41 +.24 July 31,656 4,831,974 267,706 9,828 27,030 455 167 3.02 1.11 £12,647 +1,992,739 +108,930 +3,686 +10,837 +51 +18 +.28 Eeilit Aug. 12,010 1,466,724 83,035 3,648 9,875 458 169 3.84 1.41 + 6,171 + 748,547 + 41,951 £1,697 + 4,838 + 88 +15 +.64 +.09 Sept. 23,775 3,809,360 215,477 6,347 19,634 554 189 3.74 1.27 + 3,847 +1,045,432 + 60,033 +1,721 +755295 + 4] +Th +.76 +.26 Totals 109,936 18,685,778 1,018,241 33,049 99,230 567 193 3.50 1.20 £24,343 +4,897,488 +262,544 +7,659 +25,007 +35 £06 +.21 +.07 39 Table 13.—Probability sampling expansions of sandworm catch and effort (+1 SE) and ratios estimates for catch/unit effort (+1 SE) by month and for the 6-mo sampling period (1973-76). 1973 Sandworms Probability Sampling Expansions Ratios of 2 Variables Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger 1973 Pounds Numbers Dollars i Hours Tide Hours April 2 3,536,940 72,111 2,760 5,749 1,137 542 = = +3,032, 880 + 60,486 +2,231 +4,602 +173 + 97 May = 10,140,130 280,531 8,372 17,184 1,165 Si. = 2 +4,240,642 +116,073 +3,430 +7,216 +198 +120 June 2 9,597,224 276,118 10,010 21,742 875 412 = - +3,810,652 +111,477 +3,071 +7,162 +245 + 85 July = 4,516,131 124,195 3,241 5,545 1,482 863 = = +1,266,239 + 34,822 +1,210 +2,056 +273 Eii}2 Aug. 2 4,590,400 126,600 4,960 9,517 930 506 = = +2,574,932 = /0%3/22. +2,518 #5125 +215 +131 Sept. 2 2,565,420 78,271 2,244 6,267 1,102 4ok = > +1,971,590 + 54,344 +1,638 +5,003 + 67 + 48 Totals 2 34,946,245 957,825 31,587 66,004 1,120 559 > e +7, 336,435 +196, 789 +6,055 +13,418 + 88 aaa is} 1974 Sandworms Probability Sampling Expansions Ratios of 2 Variables Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in Tides Hours Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger 1974 Pounds Numbers Dollars Du Du er Tide Hours Tide Hours April 36,001 2,678,760 76,915 2,772 5,661 942 459 13.93 6.79 +20,352 +1,441,976 +41, 638 +1,411 +3,013 +139 +31 +4.14 +1.55 May 30,212 2,158,167 64,745 1,840 3,910 1,401 659 19.61 9.23 +27,853 +1,989,731 +59,692 +1,696 +3,605 ae, +- + = a June 74,357 5,410,463 156,294 4,872 8,891 1,076 611 14.91 8.47 +36,140 +2,704,834 +80,433 +2,186 +4,026 +262 +96 43.75 +1.03 July 55,577 5,146,778 148,976 6,188 12,778 803 391 9.00 4.38 $32,657 +3,068, 389 +89,771 +3,623 +7,527 + 39 +16 £1.56 #1.15 Aug. 80,531 5,583,067 162,855 6,413 12,821 929 433 14.04 6.55 +30,471 +1,877,012 +54,101 +2, 328 +h 413 + 85 +59 +3.48 +1.78 Sept. 30,749 2,795,450 86,217 2,695 4,480 1,020 592 10.91 6.33 +15,601 +1,416,962 +41,646 21,217 +2,091 +167 +85 +1.82 +1.37 ——— a a ee Totals 307,426 23,772,684 696,003 24,781 48,542 1,028 523 13.75 6.96 +68,807 +5,319,814 +156, 482 +5,448 +10,899 + 60 +24 +1.16 2) Table 13.—Continued. 1975 Sandworms Probability Sampling Expansions Ratios of 2 Variables Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in Tides Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger Pounds Numbers Dollars Du er Tide Hours April 22,126 1,036,292 29,346 1,830 2,441 587 421 12.73 9.14 £13,695 + 653,061 #5185193 +1,190 + 1,506 + 39 + 29 +1.45 +19) May 153,137 12,051,848 346,453 9,471 19,222 1,279 692 16.25 8.79 +83,385 +6,578,737 +189,807 +4, 702 +10,568 +335 7 +h.16 + .90 June 50,171 4,198,075 118,728 2,898 5,445 1,506 761 17.88 9.03 +32,697 +2,704,852 Eee 05) +1,932 + 3,384 32 +119 2 ely? +1.66 July 64,853 6,227,183 171,249 5,597 11,332 1,053 545 11.06 5.73 246,772 +4,554,999 +125,262 +3,955 + 8,690 + 89 + 50 + .64 66 Aug. 26,593 2,251,568 65,935 2,457 4,903 916 459 18 5.60 #11,237 + 940,503 + 27,781 +1,134 + 2,144 a= (|535 + 45 +99 236) Sept. 18,194 1,007,903 29,851 1,150 2,404 877 419 15.83 Vas! 414,700 + 756,806 + 22,714 + 834 + 1,847 ex Syl) + 16 PEO? Es (sy Totals 335,075 26,772,867 761,562 23,402 45,746 1,051 558 14.16 7.65 =103,633 +8,557,325 +242 ,882 +6,699 +14,455 + 67 + 28 +5593 ES 7. 1976 Sandworms Probability Sampling Expansions Ratios of 2 Variables Total Total Total Total Total No. of No. of Total Worm Total Catch Catch in Catch in Total Total Value of Digger- Digger- Catch in in Numbers/ Pounds/ Pounds/ Catch in Catch in Catch in Tides Number/Dig- Digger Digger Digger 1976 Pounds Numbers Dollars Du er Tide Hours Tide Hours April 8,315 615,672 18,470 734 1,102 838 559 11.32 7.55 + 7,716 + 571,319 + 17,140 + 681 +1,022 ie as aS + - May 61,223 4,167,900 116,970 3,600 7,161 1,126 533 16.60 7.85 431,447 +2,168,487 + 59,382 41,674 42,714 Eit53 +109 £2.39 1 o5¥2 June 65,004 4,441,554 135,375 R229 5,654 1,469 822 20.72 11.59 £54,839 +3,634,273 +110,857 +2,699 +4,651 as 7/5) eZ! + .99 Selo 7/ July 192,101 15,169,140 474, 884 10,458 23,247 1,384 614 17.13 7-61 £77,777 = +£5,933,135 +180,290 +3,949 +8,611 995) + 68 +1.03 Say) Aug. 20,577 1,423,860 46,276 1,596 3,819 881 368 276 5.33 £12,158 + 826,382 + 26,863 + 940 20253) +136 + 59 +3.96 +1.69 Sept. 61,970 6,318, 333 194,715 4,533 9,834 1,356 626 13.56 6.26 £25,811 +2,613,942 + 80,676 +1,869 +4,127 + 4) + 40 +2.87 +1.67 Totals 409,189 32,136,459 986,690 24,151 50,817 1,184 592 15.40 Tots} +104,494 - +7,807,329 £236,314 5525) +11,239 + 38 02.2. as “OG Rel Spy 4] Table 14.—A monthly and 6 mo combined summary of bloodworm catch statistics data collected between 1973 and 1976. CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) APRIL 1 TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (9ms) 5624478 2 TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) 20773 3 TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($) 1038.65 4 TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES ; 62 5 TOTAL No FEMALES IN SAMPLES 89 6 TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES 50 7 TOTAL No. DIGGER HOURS 124.81 8 MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES 271 9 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE 415 10 CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER TIDE 1124.90 11. CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE 2.48 12. CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR 166 13. CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER HOUR 450.64 14 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR 99 15 VALUE/DIGGER TIDE ($) 20.77 16 VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) 8,32 17 VALUE/gm ($) -01847 18 VALUE/LB ($) 8,38 CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) APRIL 1 TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (gms) 92664,20 2 TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) 44165 3 TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($ 220825 4 TOTAL No MALES IN SAMPLES 39 5 TOTAL No FEMALES IN SAMPLES 5s 6 TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES 89 7 TOTAL No DIGGER HOURS 229)2 8 MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES 2)0 9 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE 496 10 CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER TIDE 104117 11 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE 230 12 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR 193 13. CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER HOUR 40444 14 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR 89 15 VALUE/DIGGER TIDE (S$) 24.81 16 VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) 964 17 VALUE/9m ($) 202383 18 VALUE/LB ($) 10,81 MAY 71862,53 32005 1612.15 0) O 76 219,13 2.25 421 945,56 2.08 146 MAY 8098692 40200 2.01000 ) 8 152806 3.37 229 46076 102 37,92 1144 .02482 11.26 1973 JUNE 56002.77 31426 1571.30 57 146,36 1.78 551 982.50 217 215 382.64 84 27,57 10,74 -02806 12,73 1974 JUNE 106138,27 42025 2326.03 73 1453,95 3.21 204 514.24 113 31.86 11,27 .02192 994 BLOODWORMS JULY AUGUST 60927.36 5938368 35489 46193 1774.45 2309.65 71 59 166,31 157.89 1,72 1.29 500 783 858,13 1006.50 1,89 2.22 213 293 366,35 376.1 -81 .83 24,99 39,15 10.67 14.63 02912 .03889 13,21 1764 BLOODWORMS JULY AUG 117,692,78 70191.48 42345 24670 2117.25 123350 74 54 206,32 157,99 278 285 572 457 159044 1299.84 3,51 2.87 205 156 570,44 444,28 1.26 98 2861 22.84 10.26 7.81 .01793 .01757 8.16 7.97 SEPT 67803,83 33574 1678.70 44 93.25 2.02 763 1541,00 3.40 SEPT. 14572560 46.017 248451 71 201,75 317 648 205247 453 228 722,31 159 34.99 12,31 01705 7.73 TOTAL 372224.95 199460 9984.90 62 89 357 907.75 1,87 559 1042.65 2.30 220 410,05 30 27.97 1190 02682 12,17 TOTAL 613399,25 239422 1237954 39 61 414 1177.35 256 578 1481.64 3.27 i 203 521,00 Table 14.—Continued. CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) 1975 BLOODWORMS APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT. TOTAL 1 TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (9ms) 3,900,65 7773965 6481170 75920)1 12530941 70181,84 41786336 2 TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) 1730 28815 22583 25215 37.665 22,370 138378 3 TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($) 86,50 144075 1129.15 1,260,775 1883.25 1118,50 6 918,90 4 TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES fe) {0} E = = ie) 5 TOTAL No. FEMALES IN SAMPLES (0) 3 = 3 6 TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES 3 35 46 42 64 29 219 7 TOTAL No. DIGGER HOURS 7,20 109,92 134,70 123,54 187,09 78,37 640,82 8 MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES 2,25 270 2.87 3.01 3.33 3,14 3,02 9 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE 577 823 491 600 589 771 632 10 CATCH IN Qms/DIGGER TIDE 1,300,22 2,.221,13 1408.95 1807.62 1957.96 2,420.06 190805 11 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE 2.87 4,90 3,11 3.99 432 534 4.21 12 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR 240 262 168 204 201 285 216 13. CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER HOUR 541,76 707,24 481,16 614,54 669,78 89552 652,08 14 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR 119 1,56 1,06 1.36 1.48 197 144 15 VALUE/DIGGER TIDE ($) 28,83 4116 2455 30,02 2943 38,57 31,59 16 VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) 12,01 13.11 8,38 10,21 10,07 1427 10,80 17. VALUE/3m ($) 02218 201853 201742 201661 201503 201594 01656 18 VALUE/LB ($) 10,06 841 7.90 7.53 6.82 7.23 751 CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) 1976 BLOODWORMS APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT TOTAL 1 TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (9ms) 56133.81 3355978 6853590 111930,92 4777931 93999,79 41194001 2 TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) 24000 11400 JC HCISI// 37727 12,546 33,310 152320 3 TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($) 1.200,00 570,00 1833.54 2088,98 70918 188458 828628 4 TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES 17 10) 4 S 5 17 5 TOTAL No. FEMALES IN SAMPLES 27 (0) 5 = ae 27 6 TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES 39 18 49 78 32 56 272 7 TOTAL No DIGGER HOURS 117,83 63,01 164.19 214,52 8662 173,23 819,40 8 MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES 2,34 2,94 206 2,97 381 282 2,70 39 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE 615 633 680 484 392 595 560 10 CATCH is gms/DIGGER TIDE 143933 1864.43 139869 1435,01 149312 167857 1514.49 11 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE 3,17 4q1 3,08 3,16 329 370 3,34 12 CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR 204 181 203 176 145 192 186 13. CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER HOUR 476,40 53261 417.42 52177 551,60 54263 50273 14 CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR 1,05 117 we 115 1.22 120 111 15 VALUE/DIGGER TIDE ($3) 30,77 31.67 37,42 2678 2216 33.65 30.46 16 VALUE/DIGGER HOUR (S$ 1018 9.05 11.17 9,74 8.19 10,88 1011 17 VALUE/9m ($) 02138 -01698 -02675 .01866 201484 -02005 .02012 18 VALUE/LB ($) 9.70 7.70 1213 847 673 9.09 912 43 Table 15.—A monthly and 6 mo combined summary of sandworm catch statistics data collected between 1973 and 1976. CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (gms) TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($) TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No. FEMALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES TOTAL No. DIGGER HOURS 17 18 MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN Qgms/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN 9gms/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR VALUE/DIGGER TIDE ($) VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) VALUE /9m ($) VALUE/LB ($) CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (9ms) TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($ TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No FEMALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES TOTAL No DIGGER HOURS MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN Qms/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR VALUE/DIGGER TIDE ($) VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) VALUE /9m ($) VALUE/LB ($) 1973 SANDWORMS APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT TOTAL 199029,92 470638.60 41314572 130278)1 153122,73 7139375 1437608,83 25630 55715 52732 23686 28690 19435 205888 522.54 1541.37 1517.13 651,37 791,25 592,96 561662 = = nN 24 35 = 84 31 5 20 46 55 17 31 7 186 41.66 94.42 119.46 29,08 59,48 4748 39158 777 8.45 783 5,50 5,34 3.67 6,98 1282 1211 959 1393 925 1143 1107 9951.50 10231,27 7511,74 766342 4939.44 4199.63 7729,08 21.94 22.56 16.56 16,90 10,89 9,26 17,04 615 590 44 815 482 409 526 4777.48 4984.52 3458.44 4479.99 2574.36 1503,66 3671.30 10.53 10.99 7.63 9.88 5,68 332 8,10 26.13 33.51 27.58 38.32 25,52 34.88 30.20 12.54 16.32 12.70 22.40 13.30 12,49 14,34 00263 ,00328 -00367 -00500 200517 00831 200391 1,19 149 1.67 2.27 2.34 3.77 1.77 1974 SANDWORMS APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT TOTAL 12093909 8935640 21456120 13673433 21070194 11383862 88613158 19385 14.075 34425 27,834 32,210 22,820 150,749 5549 422,25 99445 805,20 93955 703,81 441945 - 49 21 70 = = 155 (221) 22(91) 177(311) 22 12 31 34 37 22 158 44.93 2550 56,57 70,21 73,97 36,57 307,75 6.24 6,35 623 4,91 654 4,99 588 881 1173 1110 819 871 1,037 954 5497223 3504.17 6921,33 4.021,60 569465 5174.48 560843 1212 7,73 1526 8,87 1256 11,41 12,37 431 552 609 396 435 624 490 2,691,772 350417 3,792,84 1947.51 2.84848 311290 2,879.39 5.94 7,73 8.36 429 6,28 686 635 2519 35.19 32,08 23,68 25,39 31,99 27,37 12.33 16,56 17,58 1147 12,70 19.25 14.36 .00458 200473 00463 -00589 200446 200618 0499 2.08 214 230 2,67 22 2.80 2.26 Table 15.—Continued. CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (9ms) TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($) TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No. FEMALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No. DIGGER TIDES TOTAL No. DIGGER HOURS MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR VALUE/DIGGER TIDE (3) VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) VALUE/9m ($) VALUE/LB ($) CATCH STATISTICS (SUMMARY) TOTAL CATCH IN GRAMS (9ms) TOTAL ACCEPTED CATCH IN NUMBERS (nos) TOTAL VALUE OF CATCH ($3) TOTAL No. MALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No FEMALES IN SAMPLES TOTAL No DIGGER TIDES TOTAL No. DIGGER HOURS MEAN WEIGHT OF WORMS IN SAMPLES CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN 9ms/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER TIDE CATCH IN Nos/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN Gms/DIGGER HOUR CATCH IN LBs/DIGGER HOUR VALUE/DIGGER TIDE (3%) VALUE/DIGGER HOUR ($) VALUE/9m ($) VALUE/LB ($) 1975 SANDWORMS APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT TOTAL 9319889 48396667 14130333 20496515 90843,24 78,963,80 1093241,08 9625 83,985 26,075 43.395 16.495 9.645 189220 272,56 2,414.31 737.44 1193,37 483,04 285,66 5 386,38 - 66 43 109 : - 97 (171) 46(7I) 143 (241) 7 66 18 39 18 11 169 22,66 133,95 33,82 78,97 35.92 23,00 328,32 968 5,76 5A2 472 5,51 819 5,78 566 1.272 1449 1113 916 877 1120 5 482,29 7.332,83 7.85018 5,255.52 5,046.85 717853 6468.88 12,09 16,17 17,31 11.59 1113 15,83 14,26 425 627 771 550 459 419 576 4112,93 361304 4178,10 2595.48 2,529,04 3.43321 3329.80 9,07 7,97 9,21 572 558 757 7.34 16,03 36.58 40,97 30,60 2684 25,97 31.87 12,03 18,02 21,80 15.11 13,45 1242 16,41 ,00292 200499 .00522 -00582 ,00532 -00362 -00493 1.33 2,26 2,37 2.64 2.41 1.64 223 1976 SANDWORMS APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPT. TOTAL 30806,69 30850792 20997538 69143547 8103230 24797691 1569,734,67 5,030 46,310 31,635 120390 12,340 55,750 271,455 150,90 1,299.67 964.21 3.768,92 40098 1,718.07 8302.75 - - 34 74 108 - - : 69 (141) 91(201I) 160(341) 6 40 23 33 14 40 206 9.00 79,57 40,27 184.50 33,50 86.77 433.61 6,12 6,66 6.64 5.74 657 4.45 578 838 1158 1375 1.450 881 1394 1,318 513445 7.71270 9.12936 8,330.55 5 788,02 6199,42 7,620,07 11,32 17,01 2013 18,37 12.76 13.67 16,80 559 582 786 653 368 643 626 3,422.97 3.87719 521419 3747.62 2,418.87 2857.86 3.62015 7.55 8.55 11.50 8.26 5.33 6,30 7.98 2515 32.49 41.92 45.41 28,64 4295 4030 16,77 16,33 2394 2043 11,97 19,80 19,15 .00490 .00421 .00459 00545 200495 .00693 .00529 222 1.91 2:08 247 2,24 3.14 240 45 Table 16.—A comparison of catch/effort data obtained directly from the sampling and interview data and from ratio estimates. 1973 1974 1975 1976 Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio Sampling estimate Sampling estimate Sampling estimate Sampling estimate and interview (+1 SE) and interview (+1 SE) and interview (+1 SE) and interview (+1 SE) Bloodworms Catch in no./ 559 536+36 578 630+20 632 662 +26 560 567 +35 digger tide Catch in no./ 220 210+12 203 21945 216 233+6 186 193+ 6 digger hour Catch in Ib./ 2.30 3.27 3.53 +0.20 4.21 4.30+0.31 3.34 3.50+0.21 digger tide Catch in Ib./ 0.90 Ue1S 1.23+0.06 1.44 LSI 0512 1.11 1.20+0.07 digger hour Sandworms Catch in no./ 1,107 1,120+88 954 1,028+60 1,120 1.051467 1,318 1,184+38 digger tide Catch in no./ 526 $59+43 490 523 +24 576 558 +28 626 592 +22 digger hour Catch in Ib./ 17.04 12.37 13.75+1.16 14.26 14.16+0.93 16.80 15.40+0.92 digger tide Catch in Ib./ 8.10 6:35) 6.96 + 0.52 7.34 7.65 +0.37 7.98 7.73 40.52 digger hour 08 (A) Table 17.—The price/worm recorded by month during the commercial sam- 25 pling program for bloodworms and sandworms (1973-76). 07 MAINE LANDINGS STATEWIDE AVERAGE © BLOODWORMS 1973 1974 1975 1976 06 x SANDWORMS < Bloods Sands Bloods Sands Bloods Sands Bloods Sands om April $0.050 $0.024 $0.050 $0.028 $0.050 $0.029 $0.050 $0.030 zB May -050 .028 050 -030 050 029 050 029 = June .050 .029 O51 028 .050 029 055 030 ru] ; July 050 028 .050 -029 050 028 .060 032 = August -050 .028 -050 029 050 029 057 032 : Sept. -050 028 052 .032 050 029 056 -031 0079401945. 19501955 1960 1965 +1970 1975 1980 10 ° (B) 09 WISCASSET DEALER 08 © BLOODWORMS 07 x SANDWORMS PRICE PER WORM 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 Figure 13.—The price/worm paid to bloodworm and sandworm diggers. (A) Price/worm information derived from Maine Landings estimates of landed value and pounds landed (converted to numbers landed). (B) Price/worm information recorded by a Wiscasset marine worm dealer. 46 sampling data for age. The method of Cassie (1950) was applied in deriving estimates of the number of assumed year-class modes from the length-frequency data presented in Figures 9 and 10, respec- tively. The results of these analyses have been presented elsewhere (Creaser*’). However, yearclass modes are not obvious in these lumped length-frequency data, probably because worm growth varies between flats, worm growth occurs throughout the 6-mo commercial sampling period, and there is considerable overlap in length at age. The reliability of the age estimates presented in Creaser (footnote 37) are therefore questionable until the data can be verified against other aging techniques. Estimates of natural and fishing mortality, growth, and yield in weight per recruit are not included in this manuscript because of the problems inherent in the age analysis of the length-frequency data from which these esti- mates are derived. Yield-Effort Curves Fisheries can be managed through size restrictions, a reduction in fishing (digging) mortality, or a combination of both methods. Suf- ficient data presently exist to explore two means of limiting digging mortality: limited entry and quotas. 7Creaser, E. P., Jr. 1978. Marine worm research. Completion report. Maine Dep. Mar. Resour.. Augusta, 226 p. 18 (A N=63 / W=00227/E sees N=875 WEIGHT, GM / 16 FEMALE (-) 18 W=.00189 | 24291° EASTERN MAINE () i 14 16 4 / / 12 14 4 = / 2 10 E12 ap 5 x Q wi 8 on 210 Po x», rh W=.00368 | 220082 MALE W=.00249 127838! SHEEPSCOT RIVER«x) O 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 LENGTH ,CM O 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 LENGTH CM 20 (B) 18 — (o>) N=3364 W=00231 | 232236 rs WEIGHT , GM = je) Figure 14.—Bloodworm length-wet weight relationships: (A) The length- weight relationship for male and female bloodworms obtained during sam- plings of the commercial catch, 1974-76 (all data points plotted). (B) The length-weight relationship for bloodworms from all areas and all sexes com- bined, collected during the commercial sampling program of 1974 (1 out of 30 data points plotted). (C) Length-weight relationships for bloodworms collected during the 1974 samplings of the commercial catch from eastern Maine (Jones- port, Beals, Addison, Milbridge, and Harrington combined) and the Sheepscot River (excluding Montsweag Bay), (1 out of 10 data points plotted). O 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 LENGTH , CM 47 WEIGHT, GM = —_ ao © (A) N=205 W-00399 L 22437? MALES (x) JS N-358 ete W=00422 L2-2!593 Ye FEMALES (-) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 LENGTH, CM N= 1870 (B) w=.00368 L**°9°° 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 LENGTH, CM 48 (C) N=915 W=.00215 L *“0'% EASTERN MAINE() N-546 W=00461t 71880° SHEEPSCOT RIVER'™) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 LENGTH ,CM Figure 15.—Sandworm length-wet weight relationships: (A) The length-weight relationship for male and female sandworms obtained during samplings of the commercial catch, 1974-76 (males: 1 out of 2 data points plotted, females: 1 out of 4 data points plotted). (B) The length-weight relationship for sandworms from all areas and all sexes combined, collected during the commercial sam- pling program of 1974 (1 out of 15 data points plotted). (C) Length-weight rela- tionships for sandworms collected during the 1974 samplings of the commercial catch from eastern Maine (Jonesport, Beals, Addison, Milbridge, and Harrington combined) and the Sheepscot River (excluding Montsweag Bay), (1 out of 5 data points plotted). Table 18.—The upper and lower confidence limits about the slope (b) of bloodworm and sandworm length-weight regressions. Slope 1 SE of b 1.96 SE of b 95% confidence limits 95% confidence limits (b) (68 % confidence limits) (95 % confidence limiis) about b-upper range about b-lower range Bloodworms Males (all areas) 2.20052 +0.09987 +0.19974 2.40314 1.99789 Females (all areas) 2.34133 +0.07225 +0.14450 2.53256 2.15010 All areas all sexes 2.32236 +0.01573 +0.03146 2.35319 2.29153 combined Eastern Maine 2.42910 +0.03297 +0.06594 2.49373 2.36447 Sheepscot River 2.28381 +0.02636 +0.05272 2.33549 2.23214 Sandworms Males (all areas) 2.24379 +0.04789 +0.09578 2.33766 2.14993 Females (all areas) 2.21353 +0.04627 +0.09254 2.30422 2.12283 All areas all sexes 2.23996 +0.02022 +0.04044 2.27960 2.20033 combined Eastern Maine 2.40194 +0.02786 +0.05572 2.45656 2.34733 Sheepscot River 2.18866 +0.03385 +0.06770 2.25500 2.12231 Table 19.—The numbers of bloodworms and sandworms per pound. Bloodworms Sandworms Length Weight! Length Weight! (cm) (g) Worms/Ib (cm) (g) = Worms/Ib 1973 6-mo X 18.72 2.07 219 26.11 5.49 83 X+1.96SE 19.90 2.40 189 28.03 6.42 71 X-1.96 SE 17.54 1.78 255 24.19 4.63 98 Max.month.X 20.81 2.66 171 31.36 8.30 55 Min. month. X 16.99 1.66 213 21.00 3.37 135 1974 6-mo X 19.84 2.37 191 26.22 5.53 82 X+1.96 SE 20.58 2.60 174 27.55 6.22 13, X-1.96 SE 19.10 2.18 208 24.89 4.94 92 Max. month. X 21.68 2.93 155 28.16 6.52 70 Min. month. X 17.82 1.85 245 24.25 4.67 97 1975 6-mo X 20.74 2.63 172 26.77 5.82 78 X+1.96SE 21.90 2.99 152 27.81 6.32 72 X-1.96 SE 19.58 2.31 196 25.73 5.30 86 Max. month. X 23.10 3739) 134 32.32 8.84 51 Min. month. X 19.15 2.20 206 24.31 4.67 97 1976 6-mo X 20.83 2.66 171 25.69 5.30 86 X+1.96 SE 21.89 2.99 152 26.51 5.68 80 X-1.96 SE 19:77 2.37 191 24.87 4.94 92 Max. month. X 22.98 3935 135 27.45 6.17 74 Min. month. X 18.57 2.05 221 23.74 4.42 103 ‘Weight values derived from length-weight conversions (all areas, all sexes combined). Table 20.—The numbers of bloodworms and sandworms per pound reported prior to 1970. Bloodworms Sandworms Date (no./lb) (no./Ib) Source 1950-52 44 40 Cates and McKown (text footnote 36) 1964 100 50 Dow (1964) 1964 115 57 Cates and McKown (text footnote 36) 1966 106 63 Walton (text footnote 35) 1968 142 ao Walton (text footnote 35) 1969 150 80 Dow (1969) 49 Approximate values for a restriction on limited entry can be obtained from yield-effort curves (Pinhorn and Halliday 1975). Yield-effort relationships for bloodworms and sandworms are pre- sented in Figure 16 (A and B). These results suggest that the maxi- mum sustainable yield (MSY) in numbers of bloodworms and sandworms harvested was obtained with an effort of approximately 1,300 licensed marine worm diggers. Prior to 1973, no attempt was made to record whether diggers to whom marine worm digging licenses were issued were engaged mainly in bloodworm or sandworm digging, or digging for both species. This information was extracted from licenses issued dur ing the period 1973-78 and the results are presented in Table 21. The assumption has been made in Table 21 that the proportions cal- culated from completed application forms also apply to that 10.9-20.0% of the applicants who did not file completed applica- tions. On the basis of the information presented in Table 21 and assuming that the percentage of licensed diggers who dug only bloodworms or sandworms prior to 1973 was the same as it was between 1973 and 1978, the MSY was obtained with approxi- mately 815 bloodworm diggers (62.66% of 1,300), 386 sandworm diggers (29.72% of 1,300), and 99 diggers (7.62% of 1,300) who dug both species. A yield-effort relationship consisting of com- bined bloodworm and sandworm landings plotted against the total number of licensed marine worm diggers is presented in Figure 16C. These results suggest that the MSY for both species combined could be obtained at a limited entry figure of approximately 1,300 licensed marine worm diggers. Where sufficient data exist on the total cost of digging, and the value of the catch over a period of time, a limited entry figure for Table 21.—The percentage of licensed marine worm diggers digging bloodworms, sandworms, and both species (1973-78). Percent of licensed diggers digging Year Bloodworms Sandworms Both species 1973 64.77 28.42 6.81 1974 61.39 29.45 9.16 1975 61.36 30.23 8.41 1976 64.80 28.08 7.12 1977 63.88 29.99 6.13 1978 59.78 32.16 8.06 '62.65 +0.86 '129.72+0.60 17.62+0.46 'Mean +1 SE. IN MILLIONS OF WORMS CATCH IN MILLIONS OF WORMS CATCH 40 : (a) ° = ay a 4 gel Y= 77997353.627 + 43955 64894 x -0000048900 x e681) 0. neo p =.88747 id is p=.78760 3° ce} 1972 1978 CATCH IN MILLIONS OF WORMS nN Oo 300 400 500 600 700 800 300 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 NUMBERS OF LICENSED DIGGERS (B) 73 Y = -27133642.52 + 89325.35742 X -33,65237215 x? % 100 200 P= 92617 p?= 85780 wo 1975 sort O18 1972 1968 951 Ko} 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 NUMBERS OF LICENCED DIGGERS (C) a Y = -24287545.98 + 95184.44915 x -.000011018 x* p=.93854 p= .88085 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 300 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 NUMBERS OF LICENSED DIGGERS Figure 16.—Yield-effort curves: (A) bloodworms, (B) sandworms, (C) combined. 50 optimal sustainable yield (OSY) can be approximated by the method of Gulland (1968). In the present case where a portion of this information is lacking, the cost of digging, the OSY can only be very roughly approximated (by inspection of Fig. 16A, B, C) at somewhere between 900-1,100 licensed marine worm diggers. Based upon the proportions presented in Table 21, this would be equivalent to approximately 564-689 bloodworm diggers, 267-327 sandworm diggers, and 69-84 diggers who dig both spe- cies. Assuming that OSY is very roughly approximated at 900-1,100 licensed marine worm diggers, very rough quotas of 28-33 million bloodworms and 26-30 million sandworms can be estimated from the data presented in Figure 16 (A and B). Miscellaneous Information Obtained from Sampling Interview Digging Frequency.—One interview question dealt with the fre- quency of bloodworm and sandworm digging expressed as the number of low tide periods occurring since the last low tide dug. The mean and standard error of the responses of all diggers inter- viewed during each month of each year (1973-76) are presented in Table 22. Table 22.—The frequency of bloodworm and sandworm digging expressed as the mean (+1 SE) number of low tide periods occur- ring since the last low tide period dug. Bloodworm diggers Sandworm diggers No. diggers o No. diggers z interviewed Xx +1SE interviewed X +1 SE 1973 A 37 6.5 +0.8 11 (ys) ae724{) M 31 SHS aE) 24 373) 7) SEO J 26 323/7 p08 23 25, 14:0:6 J 36 2a +0.2 13 2 Set 05 A 32 40 +1.6 23 222 ie 08S Ss 20 10.1 ee, 9 3.2 +1.3 average SES) average 4. 1974 A 34 Sh) S07/ 14 DEAS) t.022. M 14 4.4 +1.8 6 50h eles J 44 11.2 +4.4 — 24 3.1 +0.6 J 20 322) 0!5 11 4.0 +0.5 A 21 3: Ome 0:3 28 2.8 +0.4 S 33 ON 02, 13 229 et 0!9) average 4.5 average 3.4 1975 A 2 8.0 +8.0 11 S58 te lie5) M 14 2.1 +0.2 22 Dey ae) J 29 4.1 +1.1 12 23a) 053) J 19 2) Oey 012 24 See ceiley/| A 24 328) el0) 18 CHOP eee) S 19 aha) “ezihe) 10 ae" E07) average 3.9 average 3.8 1976 A 19 Demet 22) 6 sy azila} M 9 Svar SHUG) 28 40 +0.4 J 30 13.1 +4.1 9 1.8 +0.2 J 39 kite © aes ly 32 2) Sev) A 18 Heh ester) 14 2.0 +0.0 S 36 16.9 +7.4 20 235 0:3) average 7.6 average 2.6 Overall Overall average 5.3 average 3.4 51 Digging Experience.—The number of years of digging experi- ence was recorded for those bloodworm and sandworm diggers who were interviewed during sampling. These data are expressed as a percent of the total number of diggers categorized in each incre- ment of digging experience by year in Table 23. It is evident from these data that digging for worms is frequently a short-lived work experience; usually, the largest percentage of bloodworm and sand- worm diggers interviewed had participated in marine worm dig- ging activity for 4 yr or less. Table 23.—The percent of the total number of bloodworm and sandworm diggers categorized in each increment of digging experience, 1973-76. Number of years digging experience i973 1974 1975 1976 Bloodworm diggers 1-4 50.51 37.58 37.73 35:25 5-8 15.82 16.76 2359 23.02 9-12 15:31 13.87 13.21 9.35 13-16 6.12 17.34 12.26 11.51 17-20 6.63 6.36 7.54 13.67 21-24 2.04 1.73 1.89 1.44 25-28 2ES5, 5.20 1.89 2.88 29 1.02 1.16 1.89 2.88 Sandworm diggers 1-4 34.23 22.12 23.71 27.52 5-8 16.22 11.54 17.53 13.76 9-12 24.33 13.46 17.53 22.02 13-16 9.01 20.19 11.34 6.43 17-20 Lineal 14.42 12°31, 16.51 21-24 _ 2.88 8.24 3.67 25-28 1.80 10.58 2.06 2.75 29+ 2.70 4.81 7.22 7.34 Age of Marine Worm Diggers.—Age-frequency distributions for bloodworm and sandworm diggers interviewed are expressed as a percent of the total number of bloodworm and sandworm dig- gers interviewed in each age category in Table 24. It is evident from these data that the numbers of diggers in age categories beyond age 40 decline rapidly. The results also show that there are few diggers under age 9 and over age 60. The mean age +1 SE for all blood- worm and sandworm diggers interviewed during each sampling year is shown in Table 25. Table 24.—The percent of the total number of blood- worm and sandworm diggers interviewed in each age category (1973-76). Digger age 1973 1974 1975 1976 Bloodworm diggers <9 1.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10-19 31.87 20.23 24.30 16.77 20-29 26.37 39.88 34.58 34.16 30-39 24.73 23.81 22.43 29.19 40-49 10.44 10.12 14.02 8.70 50-59 3.30 2.98 3.74 7.45 =60 2.20 2.98 0.93 3.73 Sandworm diggers <9 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10-19 21.15 12.38 17.53 21.11 20-29 34.62 35.24 31.96 31.11 30-39 25.00 24.76 22.68 25.56 40-49 9.62 19.05 16.49 17.78 50-59 7.69 8.57 11.34 3.33 =60 1.92 0.00 0.00 1.11 Table 25.—The mean age +1 SE of bloodworm and sandworm diggers interviewed during each sampling year (1973-76). Bloodworm diggers Sandworm diggers Year N Xage +1SE N Xage +1SE 1973 182 27.7 +0.9 104 29.8 «+12 1974 168 «29.6 = +0.9 105 31.9 +11 1975. 107: (29.1 #11 wT May le 1976 161 31.2 +1.0 90 30.9 +1.2 Percentage of Day and Nighttime Digging.—The results of one interview question regarding the percentage of bloodworm and sandworm diggers who responded that the last tide dug occurred during daylight (one-half hour before sunrise to one-half hour after sunset) or at night are presented in Table 26. These results indicate that most digging occurs during daylight. A greater percentage of sandworm than bloodworm diggers dig worms at night. Night dig- ging is accomplished with the aid of a miner’s light attached to the head. Table 26.—The percent of bloodworm and sand- worm diggers reporting that the last tide dug occurred during daylight or at night (1973-76). Bloodworms Sandworms Year Daylight Night Daylight Night 1973 94 6 86 14 1974 97 3 92 8 1975 98 2 89 ll 1976 97 3 80 20 Percentage of Male and Female Worm Diggers.—The per centage of male and female bloodworm and sandworm diggers recorded during sampling interviews is shown in Table 27. Few women are involved in this occupation. Table 27.—The percent of male and female bloodworm and sandworm diggers recorded during sampling interviews (1973-76). Bloodworm diggers Sandworm diggers Year Males Females Males Females 1973 98.4 1.6 99.5 0.5 1974 98.3 7) 100.0 0.0 1975 99.1 0.9 98.8 1.2 1976 95.3 4.7 100.0 0.0 Decline of Bloodworm Landings After 1975 The bloodworm industry, unlike the sandworm industry, experi- enced a considerable decrease in production between 1975 and 1979 (Table 28). Many factors probably contributed to this decline. Table 28.—The percent gain or reduction in bloodworm and sandworm production between 1975 and 1979. No. of % gain or No. of % gain or Year bloodworms reduction sandworms reduction 1975 35,634,000 29,935,000 1976 23,454,000 —34.18 27,915,000 —6.75 1977 17,474,000 25.50 29,506,000 +5.70 1978 16,202,000 11-28 29,937,000 +1.46 1979 19,364,000 +19.52 29,776,000 +0.54 n ns) The failure of the Sheepscot River as a major bloodworm pro- ducer is probably responsible for a significant portion of the decline in production from western Maine. The exact nature of this contin- uing failure is unknown but it may be that oil (Page*’) or toxic chemicals are contributing factors. Dow (footnote 18) attributes the decline in production to the fol- lowing causes: 1) Naturally occurring fluctuations in abundance and availability are associated with such environmental factors as seawater temperature. The mean annual sea temperature increased from an optimum of 8.4°C (1972) and 8.8°C (1973) to an above optimum of 9.2°C (1974). 2) A decline was apparent in the num- bers of licensed marine worm diggers. Licenses dropped from 1,267 (1975) to 1,105 (1979). The possibility exists, however, that licenses declined as the result of decreased demand and production and not vice versa. 3) Toxic oil spills, heavy metals contamination, and possibly the presence of other pollutants may account for a por tion of the decline. 4) A 3-wk strike during 1976 may have reduced production by as many as 3 million worms. 5) Poor market condi- tions resulted in a decrease in digging effort. Following a series of telephone conversations with marine worm wholesalers and retail- ers, Walton*’ concluded that the poor market conditions resulted from 1) a reduction in the availability of some sport fish (striped bass, flounder) in the central states (New Jersey, Delaware, Mary- land) where bloodworms are used extensively, and 2) either switch- ing from both species of marine worms to alternate and less expensive baits (clam necks, night. crawlers) in the northeast (Rhode Island, New York, Massachusetts) or switching from bloodworms to less expensive sandworms. A decline in fishing activity resulting from the gas shortage and the poor quality (small size) of bloodworms may be other contribut- ing factors. In many commercial digging areas, diggers and shippers report that overharvesting is a primary cause of the decline in production. However, no research directed toward collecting the catch/effort data necessary to confirm or deny these claims has existed since 1976. Previous declines in marine worm landings have been attributed to cyclic changes in the environment (Dow;*® Dow and Wallace footnote 13), gradual changes in soil composition (Klawe and Dickie 1957), expansion of the commercial area dug (Dow and Wallace footnote 13), and changes in tidal exposure because of bridge and highway construction (Ganaros footnote 4). Suggestions for Improving Future Marine Worm Sampling Programs It is apparent, from the magnitude of the standard errors about the monthly probability expansion estimates (Table 12), that greater accuracy (smaller standard errors) could be obtained by sampling on more than six daylight low tide periods per month. Although we were not initially optimistic about increasing the accuracy of proba- bility estimates because of project restrictions on time, funding, and manpower, an attempt was made to estimate by optimum and proportional allocation the number of sampling daylight low tides 38Page D. S. 1977. A survey of hydrocarbons in bloodworms and accompanying sediments from the Wiscasset, Maine area. Bowdoin College - A report to the Maine Department of Marine Resources, Augusta, 38 p. #8C_ J. Walton, Marine resources scientist, Maine Dep. Mar. Resour., West Boothbay Harbor, ME 04575, pers. commun. July 1978. 40Dow, R. L. 1951. Marine worm report. Maine Dep. Sea Shore Fish., Augusta. 6p ae required to obtain a minimum desired accuracy of + 15% about the mean expansion estimate (total catch in numbers, total number of digging hours dug, etc.) at the 90 % confidence level. The results of these analyses on both bloodworms and sandworms are shown in Tables 29 and 30, respectively. In most cases (using both optimum and proportional allocation), the number of sampling daylight low tides required to obtain the desired accuracy exceeds the number of tides which could reasonably be sampled. Furthermore, to make use of optimal allocation, one must be able to reliably predict the relative variability which occurs in each stratum (month), but the 4 yr of data do not demonstrate consistent monthly variability from year to year. Because of these problems, we chose to sample six daylight low tide periods per month, and accept the large standard errors about the mean estimates for probability expansion esti- mates. We applied the combined methodology of Gulland (1966), Pope (1956), and Snedecor and Cochran (1967) to determine whether satisfactory estimates of mean length ina future commercial marine worm sampling program could be obtained with less sampling of worms/digger, diggers/dealer, and dealers/month. The results of this analysis indicate that variability of no more than +15% of the estimated mean at the 95% confidence level could be obtained for bloodworm lengths by sampling approximately 10 measurable worms/digger, 6 diggers/dealer, and 2 dealers/mo (if only 1 mo was sampled). Similar data could be collected for sandworms by sam- pling approximately 14 measurable worms/digger, 5 diggers/ dealer, and 1 dealer/mo (Creaser footnote 37). Obviously, the Table 29.—Calculations of the desired frequency of monthly samplings for bloodworms to obtain a minimum accuracy of +15% about the mean estimate for 1) total catch in numbers and 2) total number of dig- ger hours dug, at the 90% confidence level. 1973 1974 1975 1976 Total catch in numbers (bloodworms) Optimum allocation A 1(36) 2 8.72 (36) 15.15 (38) 2.75 (36) 24.20 M (42) 16.81 (40) 31.65 (41) 19.03 (25) 8.17 J (42) 25.01 (41) 21.69 (42) 17.09 (39) 30.81 J (44) 19.76 (42) 25.88 (41) 27.70 (42) 20.47 A (40) 24.75 (40) 12.53 (39) 29.64 (38) 7.76 S (33) 13.45 (35) 9.85 (33) 16.34 (34) 10.96 Proportional allocation A (36) 17.72 (36) 20.21 (38) 22.05 (36) 20.61 M (42) 20.67 (40) 22.45 (41) 23.79 (25)) (13517; J (42) 20.67 (41) 23.02 (42) 24.37 (G9) 222'33' J (44) 21.66 (42) 23.58 (41) 23.79 (42) 24.04 A (40) 19.69 (40) 22.45 (39) 22.63 (38) 21.75 S (33) 16.24 (35) 19.65 (33) 19.15 (34) 19.46 Total number of digger hours dug (bloodworms) Optimum allocation A (36) 11.21 (36) 17.87 (G8)p 1255 (36) 22.91 M (42) 24.71 (40). 29.90 (41) 14.59 (25), 418573 J (42) 24.33 (41) 20.80 (42) 20.91 (39) 29.67 J (44) 17.85 (42) 27.49 (41) 26.95 (42) 21.46 A (40) 16.33 (40) 19.65 (39) 31.40 (38) 9.67 S (33) 8.15 (35) 11.42 G3) 2S Ll (34) 10.70 Proportional allocation A (36) 16.86 (36) 20.71 (38) 22.34 (36) 19.98 M (42) 19.67 (40) 23.01 (41) 24.07 (25) 12.77 J (42) 19.67 (41) 23.59 (42) 24.65 (39) 21.65 J (44) 20.61 (42) 24.16 (41) 24.07 (42) 23.32 A (40) 18.73 (40) 23.01 (39) 22.89 (38) 21.10 S (33) 15.46 (35) 20.14 (33) 19.37 (34) 18.88 '( )=The total number of daylight low tides in the month. The calculated number of sampling tides required to obtain the desired accuracy. 53 desire to obtain a variability of no more than 5 or 10% of the esti- mated mean at the 95% confidence level would be obtained by increasing the sample size. Since we sampled approximately 20 measurable bloodworms/digger and approximately 7 bloodworm diggers/dealer from an average of 3 bloodworm dealers/mo, and approximately 18 measurable sandworms/digger, and approxi- mately 6 sandworm diggers/dealer from an average of nearly 3 sandworm dealers/mo between 1973 and 1976, we have sampled more than what was required to obtain the minimum desired degree of accuracy. The magnitude of the standard errors about the 6-mo mean lengths (Tables 10, 11) also demonstrates this point. Considering that 1) probability expansion estimates could be improved (smaller standard errors obtained) by sampling more fre- quently each month, and 2) satisfactory monthly estimates of marine worm length could be obtained with fewer length samples, it would probably the possible to sample more frequently each month and improve the probability estimates if fewer worms were being obtained for length processing. Although it is not possible to increase sampling to the point at which we could attain the accuracy expressed in Tables 29 and 30, it would probably be possible to increase the amount of sampling to 8 or 10 daylight low tides per month. Sampling could furthermore be stratified so that each of 4 or 5 bloodworm and 4 or 5 sandworm shippers could be randomly sampled each month. Both worm species would be sampled at those shippers selected who purchase both species of worms. Despite the decreased sampling required to estimate worm length, it might still be desirable to collect some length samples Table 30.—Calculation of the desired frequency of monthly samplings for sandworms to obtain a minimum accuracy of + 15% about the mean estimate for 1) total catch in numbers and 2) total number of digger hours dug, at the 90% confidence level. 1973 1974 1975 1976 Total catch in numbers (sandworms) Optimum allocation A 1(36) 218.57 (36) 13.30 (38) 4.04 (36) 2.90 M (42) 25.61 (40) 18.17 (41) 40.46 (25) 11.41 J (42) 23.01 (41) 24.64 (42) 16.60 (39) 18.32 J (44) 7.62 (42) 27.90 (41) 28.01 (42) 33.05 AP (40) Wols 6 (40) 17.14 (89); = St8il (38) 4.64 Ss (33) 12219 (35) 13.10 (G3)Pe 4075 (34) 14.86 Proportional allocation A (36) = 17.44 (36) 18.51 (38) 25.77 (36) 19.91 M (42) 20.35 (40) 20.57 (41) 27.81 (25) 13.83 J (42) 20.35 (41) 21.08 (42) 28.49 (39) 21.57 J (44) 21.32 (42) 21.60 (41) 27.81 (42) 23.23 A (40) 19.38 (40) 20.57 (39) 26.45 (38) 21.02 S (33) ie nS99; (35) 18.00 (33) 22.38 (34) 18.81 Total number of digger hours dug (sandworms) Optimum allocation A (36) 14.94 (36) 13.17 (38) — 5.62 (36) 3.41 Me (42) 23511 (40) 15.61 (41) 39.20 (25) 9.38 J (42) 22.93 (4A) R739) (42) 12.53 (39) 15 J (44) 6.56 (42) 32.45 (41) 32.23 (42) 31.51 A (40) 16.48 (40) 19.10 (B9) 7299) (38) 8.32 S (33) 16.40 (85) peor (33) 7.00 (34) 15.40 Proportional allocation A (36) 16.98 (36) 18.48 (38) 25.62 (36) 18.28 M_ (42) 19.81 (40) 20.54 (41) 27.65 (25) 12.69 J (42) 19.81 (41) 21.05 (42) 28.32 (39) 19.80 J (44) 20.75 (42) 21.56 (41) 27.65 (42) 21.33 A (40) = 18.86 (40) 20.54 (39) 26.30 (38) 19.30 Ss (33) ) 15:56 (35) 17:97 (33) 22.25 (34) 17.27 \( )=The total number of daylight low tides in the month. ?The calculated number of sampling tides required to obtain the desired accuracy. each month to enable us to determine whether worm size is affected by monthly or seasonal market demands. Monthly sampling would also allow us to accumulate more length, weight, sex, and condi- tion information from assorted growing areas. Problems inherent in the analysis of lumped commercial length frequency data for age (and the mortality estimates based upon that age structure) have been discussed previously under the section entitled “Estimates of Age.” Despite the fact that commercial- length frequency data collected from specific growing areas over short periods of time may be more easily analyzed for age structure than similar data collected from a large geographical area and lumped over a longer period of time, the authors do not recommend the former approach either. Our experience has been that when the former procedure is followed, considerable overlap in the older year classes occurs and the validity of aging results may still be questioned. It would seem more appropriate to develop a means of aging marine worms other than by analyzing length frequency dis- tributions. In this respect, aging by 1) the possible presence of annuli on bloodworm and sandworm mouth parts, and 2) mark and recapture techniques using tagged or dyed worms or worms with mutilated appendages, should be attempted. Age structure deter mined by these means in three or four commercial growing areas could then be used to determine the numbers of worms at each year class mode required for mortality estimates. Total and natural mor tality rates could be estimated from length-frequency data collected from open and closed growing areas situated side by side in each of the three or four study areas. Fishing (digging) mortality (F) could be determined for each study area by F= Z—M where Z= total mor tality and M = natural mortality. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the marine worm diggers and dealers who cooperated with us in the collection of commercial sampling infor mation. David A. Clifford and Michael J. Hogan of the Maine Depart- ment of Marine Resources (DMR), West Boothbay Harbor, trav- eled long distances, worked weedends and holidays, and were instrumental in the collection and summary of sampling and inter view data in the field and laboratory. I wish to thank James C. Thomas, principal investigator of the DMR lobster project, for his experience and assistance in sampling design, for his patience with my numerous inquiries, and for his encouragement throughout. David B. Sampson (DMR) deserves a great deal of credit for his meticulous evaluation and improvement of the statistical manipula- tions employed in this work. James A. Rollins, Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, West Boothbay Harbor, was responsible for photographic services and Phyllis A. Carnahan (DMR) typed this manuscript. This research was conducted by the Maine Department of Marine Resources in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, and financed under Public Law 88-309. LITERATURE CITED ADAMS, S. M., and J. W. ANGELOVIC. 1970. Assimilation of detritus and its associated bacteria by three species of estuarine animals. Chesapeake Sci. 11:249-254. ANDREWS, E. A. 1892. Report upon the Annelida Polychaeta of Beaufort, North Carolina. Proc. U.S. Natl. Mus. 14:277-302. 54 BRAFIELD, A. E., and G. CHAPMAN. 1967. Gametogenesis and breeding in a natural population of Nereis virens. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 47:619-627. BUMPUS, D. F,, and L. M. LAUZIER. 1965. Surface circulation on the continental shelf off eastern North America between Newfoundland and Florida. Ser. Atlas Mar. Environ. Am. Geogr. Soc. Folio 7,4 p., 8 pl., | table. CASSIE, R. M. 1950. The analysis of polymodal frequency distributions by the probability paper method. N.Z. Sci. Rev. 8:89-91. COCHRAN, W. G. 1963. Sampling techniques. CREASER, E. P., Jr. 1973. Reproduction of the bloodworm (Glycera dibranchiata) in the Sheep- scot estuary, Maine. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 30:161-166. CROWDER, W. 1923. Dwellers of the sea and shore. DEAN, D. 1978a. Migration of the sandworm Nereis virens during winter nights. Bio. (Berl.) 45:165-173. 1978b. The swimming of bloodworms (Glycera spp.) at night, with com- ments on other species. Mar. Biol. (Berl.) 48:99-104. DOW, R. L. 1964. Changes in abundance of the marine worm, Glycera dibranchiata, associated with seawater temperature fluctuations. Commer. Fish. Rev. 26(8):7-9. 1969. Maine marine worm fishery. /n F. E. Firth (editor), The encyclopedia of marine resources, p. 372-376. Von Nostrand Reinhold Co., N.Y. DOW, R. L., and E. P. CREASER, Jr. 1970. Marine bait worms - a valuable inshore resource. Fish. Comm., Leafl. 12, 4 p. GOSNER, K. L. 1971. Guide to identification of marine and estuarine invertebrates. Intersci., N.Y., 693 p. GRAHAM, J. J. 1970. Coastal currents of the western Gulf of Maine. Atl. Fish. Bull. 7:19-31. GRAHAM, J. J., and E. P.- CREASER, Jr. 1978. Tychoplanktonic bloodworm, Glycera dibranchiata, in Sullivan Har- bor, Maine. Fish. Bull., U.S. 76:480-483. GULLAND, J. A. 1966. Manual of sampling and statistical methods for fisheries biology. Part 1. Sampling methods. FAO, Rome, 52 p. John Wiley and Sons Inc., N.Y., 413 p. Macmillan Co., N.Y., 333 p. Mar. Atl. States Mar. Wiley Int. Comm. Northwest 1968. The concept of the maximum sustainable yield and fishery manage- ment. FAO Fish. Tech. Pap. 70, 13 p. HARTMAN, O. 1944. Polychaetous annelids. Allan Hancock Found. Atl. Exped. 3, 33 p. 1950. Goniadidae, Glyceridae and Nepthtyidae. Allan Hancock Found. Pac. Exped. 15:1-181. KLAWE, W. L., and L. M. DICKIE. 1957. Biology of the bloodworm, Glycera dibranchiata Ehlers, and its rela- tion to the bloodworm fishery of the Maritime Provinces. Fish. Res. Board Can. Bull. 115, 37 p. MacPHAIL, J. S 1954. Marine bait-worms—a new Maritime industry. Fish. Res. Board Can., Prog. Rep. Atl. Coast Stn. 58:11-17. MINER, R. W. 1950. Field book of seashore life. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, N-Y., 888 p. PEDRICK, R. A. 1978. The role of the marine bloodworm, Glycera dibranchiata, in the bio- geochemistry of heavy metals. Ph.D. Thesis, Johns Hopkins Univ., Balti- more, Md., 153 p. PETTIBONE, M. H. 1963. Marine polychaete worms of the New England region. 1. Families Aphroditidae through Trochochaetidae. Smithson. Inst. Bull. 227 (Part 1), 356 p. PINHORN, A. T., and R. G. HALLIDAY. 1975. Resources 1975 - Current status of Atlantic offshore groundfish stocks and fisheries. Environ. Can., Fish. Mar. Serv., Tech. Rep. 526, 49 p. POPE, J. A. 1956. An outline of sampling techniques. Rapp. P.-V. Reun. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer 140(1):11-20. SANDERS, H. L., E. M. GOUDSMIT, E. L. MILLS, and G. E. HAMPSON. 1962. A study of the intertidal fauna of Barnstable Harbor, Massachu- setts. Limnol. Oceanogr. 7:63-79. SANDROE S. 1946. The wormturns. Natl. Geogr. Mag. 89:775-786. SNEDECOR, G. W., and W. G. COCHRAN. 1967. Statistical methods. 6th ed. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, 593 p. SNOW, D. R. 1972. Someaspects of the life history of the Nereid worm Nereis virens (Sars) on an intertidal mudflat at Brandy Cove, St. Andrews, N.B. M.S. Thesis, McGill Univ., Montreal, Quebec, 161 p. SNOW, D. R., and J.R. MARSDEN. 1974. Life cycle, weight and possible age distribution in a population of Nereis virens (Sars) from New Brunswick. J. Nat. Hist. 8:513-527. STIMPSON, W. 1854. Synopsis of the marine invertebrata of Grand Manan: or the region about the mouth of the Bay of Fundy, New Brunswick. Smithson. Contrib. Knowl. 6, 66 p. 55 SVESHNIKOY, V. A. 1955. Reproduction and development of Nereis virens Sars. Nauk SSSR Zoologuya 103: 165-167. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. 1946-80. Maine landings. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., Curr. Fish. Stat. 1973-76. Tide tables of the east coast of North and South America. Dep. Commer., NOAA, Natl. Ocean Surv., Rockville, Md. VERRILL, A. E. 1871. Marine fauna of Eastport, Maine. Bull. Essex Inst. 3:1-6. 1874. On the results of recent dredging expeditions on the coast of New England. Am. J. Sci. 7:131-138. WEBSTER, H. E., and J. E. BENNEDICT. 1887. The annelida chaetopoda, from Eastport, Maine. Fish. Rep. for 1885, p. 707-755. Dokl. Akad. US. U.S. Comm. Fish APPENDIX A The following formulas were used to calculate the means, vari- ances, and standard errors for length and weight data and the per cent males, females, broken, regenerated, and punctured individuals collected during each dealer daylight low tide period sampled. Y,=UN;¥,/ IN, (1) J oF var (Y,) = (Yi —Y,)?/(m(m— 1) ) (2) J (3) Yaa Veulre k where Y,=mean for the ith dealer daylight low tide, Y,=mean for the jth digger sampled, N,=number worms landed by the jth digger sampled, m =number of diggers sampled, Y,=measurement for the Ath worm from the jth digger sampled, nj=number of worms measured from the jth digger sampled. Formulas used to calculate the monthly means, variances, and standard errors for the same parameters above include the following: (4) where Y,,=mean for the Ath month, Y,=mean for the ith dealer daylight low tide (Equation (1)), =number of dealer daylight low tides sampled. Formulas used to calculate the 6-mo means and standard errors for the same parameters above include the following: Wor = =N,Y,/=N, h h var (Y,,) = (N,2evar (Y,) ) / (ZN,) h h (6) (7) where Y,,=6-mo stratified mean, Y,=mean for the hth month (Equation (4)), N,=number of daylight low tides in the Ath month. Probability expansions have been calculated for the following marine worm sampling data: total catch in numbers, total number of digger hours dug, total value of the catch, total number of digger tides dug, and total catch in pounds. The formulas used in calculat- ing these expanded estimates, their variances, and standard errors ona monthly basis, conform to the methodology of Gulland (1966) and Snedecor and Cochran (1967) and are presented as follows: X,= N,-D,°X,, (8) var (X,)=N, (N,—n,)@D,2¢ var (X,) (9) 56 where 4 = expanded estimate for the hth month, X,,=mean for the hth month (Equation (4)), N,,= number of daylight low tides in the Ath month, D,,=number of qualified dealer locations open during the Ath month, n,=number of daylight low tides sampled in the Ath month. Formulas used to calculate probability expansions and their standard errors for the entire 6-mo sampling period include the following: X,==X, var (X,) =) Val (xy h (10) (11) where X,=6-mo stratified total, X,,=total for the Ath month (Equation (8)). Ratios of two variables (catch/effort data) have been calculated for the following marine worm sampling data: numbers dug/digger ude, numbers dug/digger hour, pounds dug/digger tide, and pounds dug/digger hour. The formulas used in calculating these ratios of two variables, their variances, and standard errors on a monthly basis, conform to the methodology of Cochran (1963) and are pre- sented as follows: R,=LY/UX, (12) var (R,) =n,°X(Y,—R,°X,)7/ ( (1, — 1)(2X,)?) i i (13) where R,,= ratio estimate for the Ath month, Y,=some measure of catch sold to the ith dealer daylight low tide sampled, X,=some measure of effort for diggers selling to the ith dealer daylight low tide sampled, n,, = number of dealer daylight low tides sampled. Formulas used to calculate the ratios of two variables and their standard errors for the entire 6-mo sampling period include the following: R, ==N,R,/EN, h h (14) var (R,,) = X(N,7*var (R,) )/(ZN,)? (15) h h where R,,= ratio estimate for the hth month (Equation (12)), N,,= number of daylight low tides in the Ath month. Estimates for the number of dealers that should be sampled each month, the number of diggers that should be sampled per dealer, and the number of worms that should be sampled from each digger, conform to the methodology of Snedecor and Cochran (1967). Information on the use of their methods may be found in Creaser (text footnote 29). The relationship of worm weight to worm length was calculated using a logarithmic transformation of the basic equation W=aL’. NOAA TECHNICAL REPORTS NMFS Circular and Special Scientific Report—Fisheries Guidelines for Contributors CONTENTS OF MANUSCRIPT First page. Give the title (as concise as possible) of the paper and the author’s name, and footnote the author’s affiliation, mailing address, and ZIP code. Contents. Contains the text headings and abbreviated figure legends and table headings. Dots should follow each entry and page numbers should be omitted. Abstract. Not to exceed one double-spaced page. Foot- notes and literature citations do not belong in the abstract. Text. See also Form of the Manuscript below. Follow the U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual, 1973 edi- tion. Fish names, follow the American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 12, A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada, fourth edition, 1980. Use short, brief, informative headings in place of ‘‘Materials and Methods.’’ Text footnotes. Type on a separate sheet from the text. For unpublished or some processed material, give author, year, title of manuscript, number of pages, and where it is filed— agency and its location. Personal communications. Cite name in text and footnote. Cite in footnote: John J. Jones, Fishery Biologist, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA 92037, pers. com- mun. 2] May 1977. Figures. Should be self-explanatory, not requiring refer- ence to the text. All figures should be cited consecutively in the text and their placement, where first mentioned, indi- cated in the left-hand margin of the manuscript page. Photo- graphs and line drawings should be of ‘‘professional’’ quality —clear and balanced, and can be reduced to 42 picas for page width or to 20 picas for a single-column width, but no more than 57 picas high. Photographs and line drawings should be printed on glossy paper—sharply focused, good contrast. Label each figure. DO NOT SEND original figures to the Scientific Editor; NMFS Scientific Publications Office will request these if they are needed. Tables. Each table should start on a separate page and should be self-explanatory, not requiring reference to the text. Headings should be short but amply descriptive. Use only horizontal rules. Number table footnotes consecutively across the page from left to right in Arabic numerals; and to avoid confusion with powers, place them to the /eft of the numerals. If the original tables are typed in our format and are clean and legible, these tables will be reproduced as they are. In the text all tables should be cited consecutively and their placement, where first mentioned, indicated in the left- hand margin of the manuscript page. Acknowledgments. Place at the end of text. Give credit only to those who gave exceptional contributions and not to those whose contributions are part of their normal duties. Literature cited. In text as: Smith and’ Jones (1977) or (Smith and Jones 1977); if more than one author, list accord- ing to years (e.g., Smith 1936; Jones et al. 1975; Doe 1977). All papers referred to in the text should be listed alphabeti- cally by the senior author’s surname under the heading “Literature Cited’’; only the author’s surname and initials are required in the author line. The author is responsible for the accuracy of the literature citations. Abbreviations of names of periodicals and serials should conform to Biologi- cal Abstracts List of Serials with Title Abbreviations. For- mat, see recent SSRF or Circular. Abbreviations and symbols. Common ones, such as mm, m, g, ml, mg, °C (for Celsius), %, %., etc., should be used. Abbreviate units of measures only when used with numerals; periods are rarely used in these abbreviations. But periods are used in et al., vs., e.g., i.e., Wash. (WA is used only with ZIP code), etc. Abbreviations are acceptable in tables and figures where there is lack of space. Measurements. Should be given in metric units. Other equivalent units may be given in parentheses. FORM OF THE MANUSCRIPT Original of the manuscript should be typed double-spaced on white bond paper. Triple space above headings. Send good duplicated copies of manuscript rather than carbon copies. The sequence of the material should be: FIRST PAGE CONTENTS ABSTRACT TEXT LITERATURE CITED TEXT FOOTNOTES APPENDIX TABLES (provide headings, including ‘‘Table’’ and Arabic numeral, e.g., Table 1.--, Table 2.--, etc.) LIST OF FIGURE LEGENDS (entire legend, including “Figure’’ and Arabic numeral, e.g., Figure 1.--, Figure 2.--, etc.) FIGURES ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Send ribbon copy and two duplicated copies of the manu- script to: Dr. Carl J. Sindermann, Scientific Editor Northeast Fisheries Center Sandy Hook Laboratory National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Highlands, NJ 07732 Copies. Fifty copies will be supplied to the senior author and 100 to his organization free of charge. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION POSTAGE AND FEES PAID NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS OFFICE COM—-210 7600 SAND POINT WAY N.E. BIN C15700 THIRD CLASS SEATTLE, WA 98115 BULK RATE OFFICIAL BUSINESS Sele LIBRARIES - Be SMITHSONIAN NS WASHINGT ON, NOAA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was established as part of the Department of Commerce on October 3, 1970. The mission responsibilities of NOAA are to assess the socioeconomic impact of natural and technological changes in the environment and to monitor and predict the state of the solid Earth, the oceans and their living resources, the atmosphere, and the space environment of the Earth The major components of NOAA regularly produce various types of scientific and technical informa- tion in the following kinds of ations PROFESSIONAL PAPERS — Important definitive TECHNICAL SERVICE PUBLICATIONS — Re- research results, major techniques, and special inves- ports containing data, observations, instructions, etc. ugations A partial list includes data serials; prediction and outlook periodicals: technical manuals, training pa- CONTRACT AND GRANT REPORTS — Reports pers, planning reports, and information serials; and prepared by contractors or grantees under NOAA miscellaneous technical publications. sponsorship TECHNICAL REPORTS — Journal quality with : extensive details, mathematical developments, or data ATLAS — Presentation of analyzed d = . S P in the form of maps showing distribution of rainfall, chemical and physical conditions of oceans and at- TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS — Reports of generally mosphere, distribution of fishes and marine mam- preliminary, partial, or negative research or technol- mals, ionospheric conditions, etc. ogy results, interim instructions, and the like. ey oe Nouns” Information on availability of NOAA publications can be obtained from: PUBLICATIONS SERVICES BRANCH (D812) INFORMATION MANAGEMENT DIVISION NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 11400 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 NT OF Cc avt ny, af ne * ep Kee In % % m * ” conn one ene hae nnnenanea inne pnb ROREBE Conc neRb Gear ben EaIGBOBEES Sond ang dnsnosda toa GoeanAbEn Salih ManenBpEdtenocdsenee 5 (GTI INIT GT AGT a ccpo scars Gk or I COsbr Bo gee ac OCU OBE ES aE UH BOOS DES DSS UD CHU EC HEHE aa Anca R Ha SL endoaech boos cna Heat nodoBeneseenn 5 INILG TUTOR TIC? ete eer aor CAE COLAC Beer eE EEE HEE ONCE EES REDE CN Re RESID CEU e SEE oRo Ao” iol Sas ac Sc Coc an no Aa ECB OBER one 5 INUCUIGNAKCONPENL EN iss Fae sence cise toe eels dae Ee 28 Hct es He O SEONG as 2 wie Sa Sece TTA MOTE ET Oe ees Sac denisawoeess 6 INT GULANGICAUG ALA trea R NaN Ie oa CE TSS OTE ACOSO oa REE RE ne SEE ER SRE Scheer cae 6 INUCUIGNG DED TULA «cassie cess Sate aeeR eres Tae ae eSB sicle Hats gs eEE AE TSE SESE HOTA He dss REE Oo eee an atenieaiesiacm cece 6 INUCUIANGICTIUISUIGALAS Pr crccrse ase STE OES SOUR eR eRe ee eae sees 6 INTEL TOES sy ceca sce cnet CBee a CRD DACRE CREPE aE LO ECO RC aa pe Teo REE REECE ee oc tecenE igen as so Gosqouodbacisndetasb seca cenaaeeeneces 7 (ESS) CALE ere cote Cot en pp On ER SBEEEY DO OE AC OR IEEE ORE Hace ICO SER oot po LSC CHE RIDER aude eS doptSobb Second Aris apereepeneEeeras 7 } COG TELE CCHIT Ui eeeacaccnpecdo ss nose Ecc bE cpEnbasd ot Doe oGeSar DENT aoH ao TOnTae Gen odncdabano SancaSSdnl adaceon sab beneepesEnHensBeCe 7 VOL AIH ITY GIS essere cae os eee sels ne SRA oS IES BCLS SSE ASS Ee See Te te Oe IRE cc cre onion 7 NOMIC CQULATIS crc crist tesa se ene socials tock po Sae sd ae ove SED Sd So HH SSSR SOROS SORE aOR E oie cassaiceoses 8 VOIIG=SAPOLI danse aren cron rasa ener ores sto eA ostoe oe eas tS GET eo SENS ial Te STA RR ESPN chotcs oh salam scl 8 OLGA hraGiaeformisi eens AoE Ne aaa EEE Se aU ENE ERR ets uneee oae 8 VALE FOR sy se Ae cea cc eG besa bere nS EE CC BtE GU BECO RD ERE RENEE LHe beece CEE ETE SRABE OCHRE EUs cca anak thoes sha amanda ei Rseeaeee 9 GenuspRortlandianer cers nse ee ee OT Eee EEE ae See REESE See RECA See 9 DA TAL TALTATS (ACTA IE eon teeter COREE EEE eG COT ETON E HERR Oo Ooty HO CRDREUR DED S008 RENO REE RAG BE OR OD OCORSUGEAR CE AO nc ceeRBRE BCE 9 VARGA LTATS TC Ee ei a ae poop ae ne aE Rec pe SAUCE en ORE IOC EEOC EE e ARE GRD DE HD Re Oe oC acter acon doenbecea eneree 9 ROntlANndidsiNCONSDIGU A) ascse rose eee tes oe ne EE Se oN Ee TEE TOT EST COCO oe EO EEE OE Se ene 9 IP ONL ANAIGHIN IAL tan wec emer ne tea Me a kee oe ee CEOS eT FRE CEES Soe SESE EERE Sees as Se eee 10 IR OFLLANGIGTIFISIP EN ete EEG Soe Ee Toe OTE Eo EOS aN eRe MERE Cae eee 10 IROPLIGN GLANCE NTI CULA nea nee een eR ESTEE Se CSS TERE eee ee OnE Ee Eee eee eee 10 ROFL ANCIANIU CIC Cierra eee ieee eee KORE CE Geena CORRE Eee DONTE eStats See et cTsC OS AE Eee EE Nee Bos ERE 10 ROTUANAIGHNINUS CULO tee eae esc EEE OE EERE seo OIA SARIS SE SESE ect onee eames ll Subclass Cryptodonta OrdergSclemy ordaierereraes tM eae cere eee oy Pee ME mae emirate nite cc aren at AMR AORN eS Se ll Family Solemyacidae Genus Solemya ISOLETNY AND OTCALISh Mere cane CRE A oe ear not oN cee ex ar tht lJ ae ee RL DNS REDON 2S cere aU ll SS OLCIIVY GAVE LUST easier mean Rye ED cE ee ects Cea lt ac soy EO Ro eC ec EEE RTE ee Sets sone 11 SubclasssEtenomorphiiayere ete se rok ede eee eek Oo re acer eth” et te RRNA M CORSET AU SON SMERIM ePI tart gue 11 Ord erpAT COMM ape ese crt onk ee nate ae eS mea Ee ie ucaahc ts Valu Sele see R Re Ene Oe cee ll ara nl yPAT CIC AC Ie seas ee ss onc acta anand ee ances esas eta see Saleen ale oe ac LC oe eae aaa acer ee 11 GENSAT AC Or Cig ees ee en er carseat areca ded zur ce beem eae beck ihe SRNR RETA OIE SR ee 12 VATUUIAT OVS err anes nie rar se Ne os STE AS eA eli TG MCG EIs SERRA CS EE eR NE ee 12 PATELLA (UREN CUTISY EVSCU om sy nce tee tan ae cele cs sara Stes cies arte te a SRE EEE oe a ee aan 12 ill (GL=1 0 VII: | 67 ane Re ed a SRR ER HEA te ocd dononaHoda saSAanonarsoobodadeAbleadsccosscacce 12 AMCOISDs) chs dae sneahosieecasbncastianroe sabe ee seuis ve vsineion abi sristaaleiis Sater clo eens eee aR ella tse eee eee nee eee eee eR ERE eee 12 GENUS! BAthy Gr. «sc eescess secayed Show ees see Ada So sate dite Salee Moree ERO REESE eee Eee eee 12 IBAathty ara! QNOMAIG 2 nec.55 3 cece se cstane ae sane cone sense nee nels teen sealees ee eee ee aoe eee EEE eee 12 Bathyarca pectunculoides: .2sc.00 cssans aces oeenansosirosatan buses beh taa sence pee eee ae Deen econ Cee C eee ROE eee 13 BAthy Ara SP iiiecte ics scsaesa ceed nccine dnidia cucinnadis oitanis aineises teste bit tamlente Sepiesee teeen aot eetes ee ee OSE CER GEER ERE Ree eee 13 GenuUSeNOetIG) ces acscessacsousteseoses ace sejses dtaudiine ociecinagaduiean ce aeneek aptete dates eeneeee ORR ERE ee eee RCE REECE EEE EREEe 13 INOCLIGYDONGETOS A: oc. isecevescuswes sae #ciig can atte at eoacintsise a ecee uemas eeeeSaS eee doe R ERC EL ERE EE gS ene R EERE EEE EEE EEE 13 Family; Timopsidae). .2.cs ceed ssccis canisinn coon od stated sjeieesignte views ai tele of SoHE nS ReleoR ROSE URE SEER EERE OEE OEE E EEE een 13 GeNUSWETMOPSIS. cies cctv dee scien konte cae cabs calneeedndes verses Secu sibed gnecuen sade be pues so SeRO REE OR EER EREEE CEE REC EEE EERE EERE 13 ETOP SIS (APPINIS, «oS cepa see cigs ined ee hieins so eeeienernegeine sane souls ene daeiise ee Son sheaacsee ore oct eee PERE ERR EER EE EER ERER EE 13 GUM OD SIS CTISEALG B52 5) Ohi cate ene den os vale sess on va neler oles eelbes ciold es dalietiers ole nese aee ER Oe oe eE CEE eee eee EEE Eee eee 14 ETM OPSISSMINUEG 2 2a 5. casts aasince Gosnsiewis sn Sejae a valde oly sais so ae oa wana Se mA OAS AA aes eeelal a TOSSA ee ee Cee 14 LIMOD SIS SUICAIA. sissedeuseacashssetiinsnhsigncoessenaciedensee dh Sebee teh sueseneeccan. hosee Cee er eee eee eee ee ee EEC ERE eRe 14 ETOP SISESP jos oho seis eee de se gine elye tciunnion ban aes aesone ea digs swlel edn des Sade gaae sees eae eR ERE eis ee aoe ERR ERE 14 Ramily (Gly cymerididae 035. .ccsccvaecccwsdesesee docs dssase ce scaseoamy acbnsueeenc base nace eee Ee ee eee 14 GENUS IG] y Cy Me nis sass. Sess ea cit oka woth eva in a oT HH aE Sce Sl A ok AS 14 GIy CYMETFIS AMETICANG seisiieccess bee senha an vee te odan debe sets ood eS T NOSSR OeEeREEEeEEREEEEEEE 14 GIy Cy MeriS\ PCCtiNata ~ Lee. eea ceases ac ea we Sek eae ASS HA Sala ROE ERE SESE ORE EEE EEE REE 15 GIy CY MEFISYSD 22 osc o Sakes khan cha Sense Ga Sk Sa Saag Eee Uae STEN ane ES OE eee 15 Orders Mytloida ei. y occ escacusesascenscceuevoenessuogrteces sivosea cog des sectcbediudis cane gbiges¢taed odelameter c REAR CREE Ee eR eRe Eee eee REE Ere 15 PamilysMytilidae oi scieccinncsnsaaieeswiqeine oesjsendaiecomaasuls ota sieatis.e yalstite sense masta sue dee eae site cace Re eee Eee eee EEE eeEre 15 GENUS! BrachidOntes: <2... cccccedsecnseetadesescuenssnscegessnsaueced dane seneaealseinndoelene tue ce (Gee e ee ee RTE ee OEE ERE eee 15 BraGhidOntes. CXUStUS: 2..sciccceceen caine saun denne ias aduioiie dae sais aad vous Ouse Ne Mee Stas eee NSERC SEER eC EERE EEE 15 GENUS Crenella 0.2 .ccceeccssssvecic sea sceeednndecwancoase uses conus tvesameshves tena uuyauteblonstdyse eee EMER a Re Re EERE eee Eee Eee 15 Grenella CeCuUSSALA. 02 éce.si cn cccevsncsesa sense set s ocean danse Suns ome nese ade See Ree 15 Grenella: glanQuUla ..o...c2secedssanneaaneanoeenns suteeey shennstageoins asses hepabenseer ne se toe ee eee hee ECE REE EREE EELS 16 Grenella SP iiescedcccecagcaas vecneaseceosedven-ne gslen ernie ngs adhaaecanooalaeseanetageesee eee ane dele ER Se eC ReR ERC Eee EEE EERE ERE REES 16 GENUS! DGCIYdIUM: ¢ovcccccsneseccsvawcnsae tenn dacssen ens deewssees snes svlsjediensuceineee ate ceguee die Seeheceee Ose EE ERE EEE CER Eee ER eee 17 DGGrydium VUNCUIN, oi cacceseees cones saaiedes yan vs oes nates snestaescaienes aolels sarsoles eRe Se SaaS ae Ree ee eee eee eee eee 17 GeNUS; GeUkeNsia. «2 cs.005 cosnce vce sovceianssieesws ves sons ssaheeeseuncdesased cee eens Oke aSeee eee ae eee ee Eee 17 Geukensia CeMissa) x ccocccccesciweecscadesacascaenssaacdeensiacisedeealeacejan casein a5 ooeeee SATS ee ASS CRETE EEE EE EE EE REECE 17 GONUSIMOdIOIUS <.0s 0c scccs.ccctec cease asesadceeecessuas cougensesieneessanenasensndieiecateeaeeek eadeceh aoe ee eeeEe MEET ee EERE ECE 17 MOIiOIUS MOGIOLUS. 2. cued seis cea cides cesouslandignss oveme putas wassge se oc sinngegeeloen Wee neene ase oe eRe EE SAREE CREO eee 17 GENUSIMUSCULUS:. cocccks ssc ccudsrcdechacuecosn cs ab gaaeseuee abe a suecahiuwasa Meee TODS To ea eee SRE a eee ee eEETEe 18 MUSCULUS COFTUBALUS. . c.ic.sc.scesiocecdye doa cennscnsneaslees cea esiens sa nensuegsaece eee te aes SER ee EERE ERTL EEE EEE 18 Mus Cilus dis COTS: 2.5 os vous savin cecaessass caWoansooseus si oe een Soot un eases Pee as Nee Oe ae ae eee eee 18 MUSGULUS NIGER. ciccssiss ses cuvsaacden tind sous yeoneeens oaseadsiauo dale yeseaste wot cee oeene nese een RES AR ER RE COREE EEE 18 MUSCULUSISP.. ses soscacesivinkssnsee se swede sade os vont socacatne so vaseeniee ne teseee sels ean dee TSAR ee ECR EERE eee 19 Genus: Mytilus) co... 0.02 scoxce cece sas dca secs sien ccn deen Senda tise Megs tia ociegaeunda 5d se CO Eee 19 Mytilus edulis <<. cacccasecuces sacs wsieasactoaase oe cos enone ates nas enodonesace tose see ocean eases sae e a Eee EEE 19 OrdermRterioid ayes sas. sshhed fs he hed ecocecaaaseee cae costena sbemen ee Ces Sed ea eee ee OE SS ee 20 RamilysPectinidac: norte sc <2eiscsccsssegs nc se chs woasaos he tone Sad leone ee Genser Ce 20 GenusjAequipecten: (ir -s.3.8 BR Aansantgh Meco dedcncd atatee ene eae ne SL ee a 20 Alequipecten: phry ium. i201) 55c.csah shes as cs odauncyeeea sve oe Sere One 20 GenusrArcopecte ns .o5.ssiscaedondseie dase tat dal acuoe sae de teed a eee ee 20 IAP BOPECLEN CIDDUS <2. vetoes ots c See ck eens een ok onan ceeded 20 ANT ODE CLENMUTTAGIANS® «cccsscsecce see qsnsaetseccee son cceres eee e ee oe Sere TOTO CE eee TEER 20 GenusChlamys so. 22 Bosch bees Roiass on eke obs suena ee 21 GhlamiysiislandiGa? 2 .325.3.24 sone Sass dcvisc soca (ese eR ee 21 Genusi@yClopecten c.2:2<5.c0c0%.cs004 0ses ees seeenen onginn oes onmonnn see nc eeROo ee eee ee Asaeon 21 Gyclopecten:nNanus 22.0.0. cen, isedaosbanade: 24 Ramulya@streidae yee ies semen ucts trteeeet cere tise veerci ine sid tate tenia tie selec at atciactisiis ek Oe ict ee Nee area Meets May gna ee ee 24 (GENUSEOS IRS A ce Rea ae oe DACRE SATO SS Ou eae nO EES GRIain aS Mon Noe ua edles Oe OAS EMO E: 2 POT BE En eee 24 (ORICA ip ce cB ROR Ee RnE RESO Sc US ce RRROREcer RR nCRRE ones aie Cre penn mecmrramne ceca cnt dccatnchoctndcorbnascHnacces bro ntearememscsecae 24 GENUSEGrASSOSIBCO Se ree rachis sree OO ee ee ae ee ES Eee RON eee 24 CRASSOSIFCCBVINGINICG ere ce ee EES RS RE TART EER Sao ee ae Se 24 SubclasspHetenod Ontalecrscccesecaccc eee eee ees ORT IS eae ee SO SO ET TORR ee RESET ee ens eer nee 25 Oya NES TCE, Res ean enemas eC aR EAE RE HBA RSER Batenels Seerneh anon E SE MOR TER ICEL SEM Sen SHB OR ARN Ty A Oran cai Dae, A ue Sate A aahe 5 AMV ASU CII AC as aernactan wisi setetace salsa bercieatieeline Stee ae Sguatestea steateeae temas ae settee hens oceee eae Ebel Meme core ece eon 25 (GENUSPIEU GING MO ge Sessa Ae oe Te SS OAD A SO So aa eS Ee 25 ENGINOMANDIAREAN Ge seer sae Re OT Too SE TCT ee ae 25 TEUCINOMGSPUOS A. a Perse es soos tosis Se Td I ER en eee eee 25 TGTIGH TO (00) ©) ot escectem tice ncde ee acc peeth Gren nas CeRsea Ces bc asa Aer Er Saas sna ter nasseae bt acrchine aboacteaaecoBesaacoccdceeaccnnaacas I>) (STING! BY 12/7 tienen mre ee rer te leer onen tiger Ein Crna eRe ENT GN En en Huw a sarc anennNE tl mareon ne pdashniaasomdsoudodccaceLoaEendLcrounels 26 IATA ADT CORE! cabdcoconaeodepharcaoavoApepanaarhuobbasars sated suecuousasduasuoncsabadcasasHaaAsesdoneacnqnadeunsbanobagase 26 GenusePanvilUcinay resco d nee ee el ST ee ee PETE ET OE RRR HE Mine 26 RarvyiluGinaxpland ac rsccos saan cis neocon RSLs SL ESI TSE aT Ea EE 26 ami ya Phy asiridaes sascha hose cee ses cee eae ee a Ne ae REG RTE SRI brat aU RS SEN RS CS 26 (GEIB, ba) AN | fesaanseessadese conde bedeedssedeusensarsetoduahseedpradéc Jeciasnccdoaddéncdedee dep adsac bude lqaancudusadcbseaceractos 26 PAXINOD SIA AON DIGUIAIA re ce teee nent e See eee REE ee eee ee CEN ina 26 GenusHlihy aSinate srs tent ee eee ee ee EAC ERE ELC OR REA EE |e MRO DRE SOMA Ra LAS arn oa 26 YASIR QUOT EVIS. Mace ss cathe t a acaccine See ee Nee eee SE TERA eee eas ck eM 26 WAYS 1A ChOULIMENSIS Sone ee ese eee TE Ne ica eel MN rec se LE 26 ity ASI AyClliptiGa ress ecwes scan Sete eee ee ee ESCO ee a Ee ee cane 27 PIAS OVC QUALIS Fees cee ce tes rene eee eae eee Te Rr Seb 27 TNS OSURCR APL F110 S Bae OE CEB BO LCE ES EE BEG GF GRE re ar Banta ode mee Onin did aoa NU AGHUdabaaa LOG Sad Bead ase abUSDOAS Dan RSERERCSmEoE 27 EY ASU GUTICXUOS Marae nace ccaetn cece ae ease OO CT e EG eT eee E ee Roa 27 DAY ASIrAuplEXUOSA NOTA COUT Ne eer eee: SE ee ee OPE ESE a EP cen Sn eUE RE RE SANUR U a 28 ity ASINAipY SMACG eee BESS RSS OSC atS TAC re CHE DEC EC ene EST Repent Sep eea BEE ccuScconsccodted cocone a eaBeeaon 28 WHY ASU AES UDOVALGNe srske ec Seco eee eS TLS Te OTT RET ee 28 TN SUR OBU DILL IALG oncbcapnere tae aceccene bd sconoo sec cecO Tse D Rococo dad ccesaeaSeR aCe berdobedca ccecuasseesonpocdaotenessoseetoeas 29 EUTEY ASU ORS Ds aie. oscars ere seo Tee oS sel SA re go ET Ooo EE ISTE Sf ESE Seu eee 29 LST hy Osits 1 Wit here sees are eaStac bbe poncoenes PeCu GB SA DBS RESe ate bones nn tok oa SADE MBER CHE ad or bbbhone cco db dbbondocboandeneaneraes 29 GenussDiplodOnt arava corcecoe ee setsc ose e HOLS EES NES REESE EO ER LCS E SES o eA ER ae ee 29 DI DIOGONEGES Pay screens ee ISS ee ee 29 amilys Chamidacyert.r.cocccosccck cree os ease sec eos ala a ale lc eee Ee eT eee dee OS Se SSRI os ns EON 30 GenusrArcinel] aes ccs Geo eee STS ee re Aa TENA Mi is Sie ea 30 BAT. CINE A COMNULG) bye 35 s)5 seice ate essen) eles Sa ope te eed ASG oe NSO eo Tee SR eS eee 30 Ramil ys Car did ae x. oc) 2 ase ase cassar eee cise oaee nv oiasteoia duels Saabs neseeen jose sess sas seceee oN eae oS RReSeOa Se seas ecnes 30 Gems Ch carrn aa pont tess atce ioe an eins ave ee lo ig eae is oucdnets sae ch eel Se RATS ot = Sos ae ICE one aR Wace cd eee 30 (CU TAT [TIES Sy eG eee ea SCa ee osteo dco nero e aeecod es spac mbeiter oer es aam anc asnid a Copa ae MEL cates sesscosacsobocacbarmacRae cae: 30 BamilygWasaeid acne tanec ceo eo ciara cies ckite acer otis ose eS SR eo ete SSE ae a oe Sues cree 30 GeEnUSPATi ger ye ier aa sor mi ee eel aa Se Se SEY MG SESE TS Ee RE ee eae ccaieeisens 30 VALI C CNANELEV ALAS fms ote ees SNS eos ee ES To NST ITS aS Sac as oos se 30 amily gl¥e ptomidae ic evs secs cer i ete iaceeeee OEEe Oa olin Sea ere isle id SSE OTS IE ISIS ST a a SSS ATs scr eee 30 (CYTES Y COT TCIGTTC Te Btteotoncood poston oon tenn coc ESC ebE neo ibane deccoUE COTO REE Hers en seat eter paccor each Ssudccotorice oqcuespabeamannos 30 IWVICLHTTETIG! Cho)” Songaaanaeabaesodedaccasonesprooccosr capone tecronacectnet nanan cocnacensrrenccnanndessrecbrococuscodancosanoososeos 30 GenuseMiy sell autos sss seco see ee ee eel a aoe es do eTS AE Oa A AS ous SSS A ee Ee eee 30 LA KGIGES 9 Beprntecctobeccdcee senna octoc Uece CEN CORE TEE Ee CREE eee pacrecnc sa sone eoncer aodacrrasenc cnancanabecnoossagasecdatsasecs 30 LEE C aL K eM BIT fy 111 (¢ Fees coud S RCS R OREO ROOT ER OCC ZOHO STR ET BE ROCHE BPR RET CR OSI S ENON CE TES ee Enna sant. csc acctotcanucesocdodoqacdancccsas 30 (CATES TITITIOT C7 coeciener eee nooat Roca TE DISSE eb cH ae DAE Eancan ean ence ee Rpdr osoecmpedtiycaccocdecnonannascGdascosdsudeeeacboan 30 TUTTO TILES Up! Gace CCRC ECU ECOSOC CC CED EEC CODE COOR EOD BEET ODC ORE DEE EET SE oa nO Lac eeE EER Aa rican aghed6ascaqSocnguBUSEeocEaeas 30 Family Carditidac: 2.cc.circsscstccs desacicnedadasoctenacenaaeitue es anssein siesta cauaanisnn ans atest secs See te Rae e eRe aEa eee eee eee eee 31 Genus Cyclocardia’ wscisiv.cesssasassieavscnis sees ses os vais see sise sinaledeaiva aw seostesanlsee aoee eae HUE RER RECEP ERE EE EEC ERE EEE 31 Gyclocardi. borealis) 23). sesisess axes ee 28s vane cage tana asish Saas silos Seid dale GEER ERES AHO OSEE ROR ORE REECE ERE 31 Gyclocardia novanglide) icccvas seuess tie sean ciresees signs secon e+ tuinn vine Coa ema aU ae Sen e LOE EERE RE CEE EE CERRO 31 Gyclocardia spe ish eee cai vecsens ac useve oi dtbaas seas snow his aise bale eetlen yoaeebien selec ere Ree UE REE een Oo aE EAE EERE EEE 31 (Gray af (712017, ORE Raa acne ane risacarccceretedac eras aancre aioneetn vodcuenecsosoneudans dada cboadadannoudandondancosqcces 32 PIEUrOMMOTISVEFIACNLQLG® 255 5ciac sisceiese sists sa a at's a nia'stsaloarerwrselanialar Os doeara oala be oe SS oR OR OR OEE ee eee 32 Genus PLerOmenisy oo sss cov ivan ieeueiw esis od onea sa ogc esas baja wesh viele ciacisie orleish eee Ase GD Oe eee ee eee eee ee 32 PLELOMEFIS"PETDIANG: oiscasiSesweeee acs edn cdeaenechelen lage ddleels ated ne obas seek sileh sein cetteige ues eee ERE COREE EEE EOE REE 32 Ramily*Aistartid aey oo cscsews cx ciiee gosenwtieaes soa etiat vicina cereeitelon else ertaielareeete estates Ma aOR CRETE SSSR CEE REECE eee 32 (ES NG (717 ieee eee cee eC eeerEe enn neceeraneccner aanacascanaoacncceronpbdrcaunsrarecaeuasboosebooaboococace0ece 32 ASLATLEND OE ALIS 0.52 coisas dass ha slae aa acl dide a Seaigle Sade elas Seale ne eee a a ES GUAT IONE CECI EOE ERE 32 MA SHANLE: CASLANCG sae aad ieeivisis dec siacialsasiaits 0 8 diaala s awcele ater dieies aula o sins alate erate ta orolale ellelseje clare eee REECE ROE ERE CR EEE EEE EEE EES 32 ASfartexcrenata SUDEQUILALETA <.sne.ecscmeshacuns nus seeteeis ooaslentiei en metse nate asco mesa see Oo ee ce AERC ee EEE 33 AStOr le CLlipti CG sso Sieisics Galstaatis Salsa ciostlaa'e ve have blo atea Weeiaton ear SE AUE ea SOC EAEEEC ERE RET ECE EERE EE 33 TACT CALLOUS) LEC RRR SEER REE EEE REE E EEE EAR RE Ee Ce nere cee rre cecdenberaeracencaas cradcosancria cadre daoasonciasabgoaconéoc000G00" 34 AISTANLE NANG! s.0d.o.cbesce acs Risa cacs hades Sas close cides alatefeeisley pialsislolne tle Wslelataale tebe ias oh colelels lesa seen ee eee CRE REE Eee eee 34 AStArté: QUACMONS +t) si d85 esausoreae es 8as awe enn sedis noes dane bbenerea aes AONE SAE HU TER eee aE ORE oe eRe eee eRe 34 7 NGA A114 CLR RP RA RRR APSR EERE rrar ne Erc arate tice ia nae nennseciaanr aan onosoBeaidannasucs sea ob ddosoosnoobecooce 34 AISLQT LES UNCAG oc 25 ss cvecas cde soos eeu ek atede wea hows ea des daC nial a aloo SE oe ne BEET eee 34 ASLQVLE” SP oss oa Suck Sed sna Sa cewcaaedan ca dioasewelece bose s ote wrela oataiet eile olels situbvetlatelsatepe ge RT le eas Sater cee ROR EEE ERE Se See Re REE Eee 35 Family Grassatellidac 205. 2.2.0 scc.0 hese ssi ucaae sie iets as olsen osteaa sSuteaivaatinn a ees eis eee ER AR ECO EREE SEE Coe 35 Genus: Crassinella® i2see sca seis 5508 oe Sea SSSA ORI PROS A Tae SU ORS CLEC EEE eEee 35 Grassinellalunulata’ i552. sacshscdie soe nd tech ese Poke Gs Be aT Nae SE RESO 35 Grassinellasspy: cissccsecces gecko 8 anes ce Oa ea ee Seine dats seelod ceteseaeals Seats oe Senne ee CREE eee 35 Genus Eucrassatella (0. . ae Alan ieaet Ss See MR DR ARR a aR RRR EN co clot Andon ier EES 4] IRAN G1 GAG TSH ALATL2? oo wea esciacidoae dang onde, sqdeaesnsoaden sodden s00ua008 a5 ogannen aeesHabob bdo aocconddandadsaadarasaesadsae: 41 TRALEE YATES. Nocictbbc ose dodcnddpacnadadedddendaaddrnedchacdatouaeeopaacenddaacdeandcddrsaodcdten cagaasroouuanbadeecnocbsotbmaccet 4] TICALT YOR CLOV ATO LLL ALL es toca RO ROC RO So eee pre ac SEH HRSA C HAST ace C Epa OSE raRGnb aE aEnGrdsconcoboanascé cncoodoasonasnae 42 TURAL VPA net) 1a) seeea etane eae Saa a aATnn a sn caodaneddeacddcndeadiecEaanacmanbonstendantnca sshaar cuacacasceadooEesasnade 42 TUAUIT AEG IS sctecodeace sondccsnodncadtamaasosaasaaddags adadae ns suess deeds cond Acde onde abbassorosdbocosdeecbenotobcadabasogdoddaapenc 42 TRANS IVIDY IDIOT EVETGEYS 2) ccagaadoceccadenoannenoadacaagsascdsect cans cadedasacccraaconesacas una qse6sanecnctadseebuponoqoonacedtsasduaccadoe 43 Gem SoD a ri cascaice hace ee cn cote eRe raphe ree or PRT Pyar pierces circ aera) TOR TE ER NS UT ER oie cae er ee 43 IDOYGBE DE, ‘sdecscdocucdasaocccdanaursosond sade sacaenosaceqanded sac duacracdd dosssdgdadoucntdnacobodanccuacibcopdadubanoscéGossouNoae 43 TBM Ni? Son elite EVO G4 Sstdcedeoddoosouudaesauanoeddenadidesca seedy saasudacesdas6 van uoddeacosbseuctodd acboqqoudsqndqquaceuocoabadecsedcn 43 (GTA. 2) 7 easter are are: Serer Gn eu er tata ean ates aman naa eater dananbanabradakuctacHacnudeceaoseccoca 43 JD TGPSOS: aad Seecdeeaascudtugdansdaadadcsadoqsodsadsaodoa Asean acadansasdodsddascasanctcudcsbacoud dau cocuddooupcgseqsasdaddaeeaadan 43 (GSTS (GHIA! Seccedaacectode tocsenodon/ectibardonaeaddenseass ue sass seseadedconecddédoodded vane 0 cBooeadcDbcuoqnoppdaacdecnapeodsods 43 (CIAL FICT WANE OLE (OS) se tcc dacod ocendoddods base re sbaseeondsbnadocosadoanéde oussudceebon angus dqabadadaddacdoonuobodasodeod 43 GTA Te rere et IR ta it ter acne an AG ACE DARA A pasddonaesnnccis GOR NantAn HBHaE OnE 43 aA TAR TTI aeren aie aoe ae tn tora Alias Shara Sciacca ricridaat aa sano Aan aca aap udagahcuanesbonauaodadopsaqadassodonon 43 Vazite OTT (ahr (Gre tn er ne eRe ny Seeacr ant ian arena] pub aRe Abc onan aachedce Ab des daa aene BOSHEBBOOE 43 SECs AT ETRE tassseercademeceseaece sdasracrancaanacuacdscaciase secene sakaaceacoacaendsananbeséausconedesudyoouusqecéon. 44 SaiaAIE Sob” sdeaceneeasdonseodundsaeqassabdcarecddansesenceannecaagadadacasseddescedoccocecannadbopasappoduovebuscnocadaconGsooncaed 44 TPT hie Grol even in Go eYo esata cgeties saat sic gedaraaauok nadenaasdésensaassbdndendesdeedddaoqsobdassadse desobcddopossseogecnougodoqaesoedt 44 (CYST IR ea as deer ice capaayci din ad ari sab aa aad a Sad OnE aaa ada Saneabd stad dodce na ob iapuce ao ssouausd pysenaenaguedaaadcn 44 TEVA EG Ta LATS aa anetaas sans gona accuandas dada seddeadas aedosaaboanceassaccndsdaAcsnadeneabsandasoscanssacchoqecbdscEqapsdoondce 44 TFET ZAISTSTC ENS) mi opeodcosodsoncdcensososoddacndaadodaatodardaadaapanase saaansseasoncnacceosaabeeccodakoobsauagddodendddocuesaduescdae 44 (CYSTALN GY. ats (67s eas ae re a nara stir Ae Ae a nd nade ac ears cacnn daar qaotiaaabdsobsneaniaccoanceneer aeeaseAn 44 NGL OTT] 71101 (GT eer nea eee Sn aan a ea ep een Shite Sta ah od cohen ngRARoGcaenanee 44 Jeaveari hy \Wclatein td Gra wads a aes cee Scee. san dnoe co dabao ad oc deca teense aces Gd aa ueeidaneen an eube DHESEaeetiia SeBea ioe nde beva San sonaraneEHEnon 45 (GYEVTINS Grad LEA Ta eee res ea ata Rite sR A a me Ty L/S EY ee Ne ee ee 45 Gallistayeu Cy Mat ais ars reece nrc THOR RT OR eR ECL IS OR SER CCR EINE SEER OPEC TEE ECE 45 GENUSKONIOM CH Sore doh prence ciacrocieetetie cle et API cece GioM TE EO EE EOE CREE REECE CS ce CEU RE ee Ce ER aes 45 GChionevintapurp une mers oo: See OTT Ore LT ETT aL E OT LOS OS TE ee on EERE a aaee 45 (CUO) ICN IGT TIT OG Te meses ae co BER sannein das aca GHC SarAE SHAG SCIEaH SorOG SHAR O Ono TOSUAGRA UC Nae Rac aaa SOONG Hobie ae orec 45 GQRION EES Prag ease ros so ce he ae oe ELLET Se Ne e See TTR SEES Sree aa et eaters Ea Se re SRR 45 (GSTS "(GEA TAIGE Sagoscaneeae JoHebto Bon daobt ac Cae bssobol dd amea nat ae cus -eratHOSEBETaoGpa Sado RHO ad dama to cheep scmben ica dosecancceeeuaeae 46 (ANAT EM Racca nner ROBE ped Hae a EE Lou cota Moe Nee Aone aE doo NA Guin nie a DURE BEBHEN 0 o ons eber ania esendudsadudasuocSOBHEneede 46 (GTS) Ge irelea Shere cat natn ic fee nen ie Muntase tier ee Haise aan Scere eae nis Lea tae P(e se aD a RE 46 TETOGY MARIUGIUOS Gin Preeti h ce ce Ces cha eer naar EC cere cals ea SE AERTS Ai oT COC EERE Ge Oe EE ER OTE EDA 46 (GENUS HMENCENGAIIG ros cetrssceeieasaec irae ch close CRG Gas es TOSSES ee TREE Cie CCE EIA Ru aers See neo eee 46 WHARGAGTA ON GAR COMICLUG) Nee see addba vonsacec aca sacs nbn Gomucnocdsbocdduven senda das ond od dado dduandsode abcess Scoseagacnsbenkeune 46 GeniseRerigly pice rrce eens Piscine een eee TL Soe a eae CNC SRLS ATS ORR Reels pe 47 Rerig ly ptaulisteniscirns ee rnc: jet nee cists Meee CO SEO A A STS ARETE oo rh eae Manu te SAV ORRNC cess CATS 47 GEMS PEE Toa ei xr nti temps sess eee sehen orn SCE MRC a eis x EC ACS SEEN TENA OE SLB eI IR ont. Ee eh 47 I OLE PROL IAGO GRY cee oe ab ace eect GoD Ea OGrInCoe aearao Sued SOS e Tad oa Lo ORO oe recnUeadascast das bachbba ancoscneeaaeceseeas 47 IEP EL CAST) Map estes: Se pay tee oe trae ar ER aN AE Aer Pe ser ae ERE SANs DSR EIT tC TEL = MRP cy OP REURRRESES Biot fe con SEN, 47 BamilyePetric olidae kere’ sake Meme eems eee Nae NT a ae PNG erect Eien eer ean at end ai ar ek Cnr 47 GenUstRetiicol ages erate eee ye enh aie te oi a aaa te CRT idee tate eo e Tee eee 47 2 CiriGCOLAYP OLA AION IMIS ee RT OCC EOE eee onan eee 47 OrdergMy oid apts eth tin. Oe mE ees tee MENSA SA it Op N etlND 1/00r URL Ie carer nor RE Ne ed eter ea ee et Se 48 JRCTCIIK ZIM KAT ETS cin icin Sekotton quan abaareacticlcacren tat aie foes Meta a MORNE MIR RIS (a A LGR Ss cre aay godess Aes BU ee 48 (GENUS RM iy ages sete NTE Se RIA IRE 1h END A MLO SaAS LES SE Denna Ae NE Ut pee, Sepa pertet ds Bi ale 48 WY SENT AGH (IOI Ae doadha ree Pritts sepa dco as BR ASG SD te BBOC BURACAGCe IOS e ST ORAS EMCEE BES: canines see esac ERB G Rea eee eee ear 48 amily EOrbDuUlidae petircy-retey erate hee Nr see IEEE ee errs SETAC. f taeeiclatn sie SRR Nee ne ee ele ac sc ne eee 48 (GLE Cai 71 tal ec ptee sence spe Ep BORE CE DUE Go REECE ODE Ton On TEE HON OC OE Cre ce RoE Ba Un EH er Duin anes ogc Upcut antinchnakianaauegmuacateereacs 48 (CUI ATA CR COT VI RLICH CMe ob oer eubbeoe dubcoc Contec soc c CET anCET CUR OST ORE REED oe ben Gaa an cecb race se raccoon iscrE sr anbndase arenaabecsaesac 48 Corbiulaikr CbSiands vsristes5 senses ease ee OE EIS 8 SO TG TTT ie ac SEAT oi ae eee 49 (CUTTING 0) Seat crenee Ce COCURCER EE RUBE COC ESC TCC TEE TCE OCTET EE enna nee re RE ONRE San Nac iaetodoaariduoach enue auedecsacoue 49 Bamilvctiiatellida enya samme assent aya tee ester aia /celle ssi asin sate aslsiaeteiad sa scieulate's See Meme ee ee eee ee eee 49 (GATE (GAATTOLERTTENs Hecceeae cee c Ere: SEEDER HEISE OE TRON CORE ERODE Cnc MER RRR Se UE ct ae BE aa HER anemencac anita ucobnacbc idsoondosedne 49 (OSG aTe LATE CHIC tempter Ehee be cer cL aCe RbOC Ohne Bere oEoe eR cena c re ner Ron cae UR On neRE oc etic ncn cecerea saccssascoosomuosbeds 49 Vii ia tella arctica: co.cc secede sklee eee his OR RL SU OFA ETE Eee Ee 49 ELI atella SUriGta isos spires d ree ieee ae tI Cn OO ELE OS ETE ERE EERE Eee EEE 50 (Ges NU atc (16) 7) etac inc ee aaa Ena en Cone ana ae Bearer aeariancc cenaresaconeccasucdacactndaccoscepacdoadecooandbo0d00000000 50 POQNOMYG AP CHEG : cosas siejisieeigens eunceaee ed os sot e 4 ope Hie Jeg thee neles petnes SURG ONC REE PERRE CREE UE CREO C Eee Eee EEE 50 Family Pholadidae® s.da-ciyorccceie cescemwelesion tame nsene acer cee atl ee eee nee CEC REA EE Dee G REE EERE EEC OEE ee EEE eee 50 GENUS? Barne ai eee ase caacdneaedhacan cine eediees saya Las eauis seutn ed's SMR aa HERESIES GS SEE CEE REE EE ROE ECE OER eee CREE 50 BGI Ne GtrunCQta ooh ccs cxcdactee sep soled weaiaceesing sae se poaes ined ROSES COON OE ORS Ee Oe ee eee EEEe 50 937571 0 eae Reena eae eee cre ee ee a eerie aacraaaec coradcreaccaacansddtidanoadcracadooscaacs 5c0scc0acs00000c 51 Genus Woylophaga ss: .c.0.2 ecg se saees acess sn desea see Sane dae See eRe EE Os espe REEDS SOURCE RRC 51 AVylOPhaGa AUANUCA ve sescsnsugaess ning see ceed soos sea eee sheer aan EH Eee LaRE REPRE ee ee REECE eee 51 Subclass#Amomalodesmatal. - c.g. cscdecsieg coasts ewan edn dviets Nacnestoe ea eaten Hee ten ee HEE IEA NE RU nl te CAS Aa 51 OrdersPholadomy oda: s. cc cccccescawsss sense ese ce scneesa See ce se sles eee see ese TERE Meee eee RINE ane oe ee 51 amily Pand oridae® iii ..cahccescs. ccne cde sana valltiensceoeiecaetiesweue cee snceeue dee seeeate ence Seema cee ee ee Ce oA eRe REECE ECE ee eee ERE 51 GENUS HPANAONA® eicc. cicscime nes ousie sen aegins hash bS6 Rabb gh eRe ES osis Cae BOE Tee 51 PGNGOKAIDUSHIGHG \a.ra0ci8s sisiciarcesrina swaye menteindle Sinn onc pcieelelaitn de eel soroets pela shee HOS Ree EE SEER ER CECE EC EEEEERE a Sl PPANAGOlA GOULCIAHA® ais os sie cine vsieysi esi einiigeeistinsle natin Scop ins oaereaieg oee ele eee are re eee ee Se EEC EE Eee EEE 51 PANG OG ANPLALG: srcacieadceseianesinege ote deli ciecwied evielseleailsleeueienlsamneeenioa Ses eeneee nee ece ect tee ERE ERE EEE ee See eee 51 PANG ONGINOTNALA va deewaerwe in sctse sein ithe vine a0 area ee laorea ool nel Osta area ee me eee ete TISS OES RE CE EREE OEE EEE EERE 52 PONGONGtriliN€ Al «30.0 x uisemciseaaaelesaivasasinciie ss «SN aee ole sala apaOC ee ea ates eee EE CATE SEE 52 IPANGOPGISD: ‘icc soda are audiences oie odinois eitelien Seis ondiscies esate Ueiuea isin gto sly ae otesle ee See EES aes CRRA EOR EER ERE EE EERE 52 Family Téyonsitdae: :s.2.cc2s0s saneewenes vecep eset beatviecen stronch necinnee sunt tiasien remccne nee ec aeENeeR Ce eee 52 GENUSPEVOMSIG: oissiiiswosistesies ossinewiorsn sic ewicin Slo eeiioasiolsln’S ab pe isis ole le MERU orale te Be Has R ROE REE SEE REC EE REE EEE EEE 52 VEY ONSIG/QTENOSG: se0vecnoue sais dunce ove dae sadasles soeebucaaeaneses desiessheenGeniiet as tishiet Gok ARCOM ACE ERE EEE ERE EEE EEE EEE 52 EVONSIQARYGLING. Soho. ciniseicesiasinen gay vans ielyiaddeaderde aaitls lore bealsleda losis saeco ee oe EE ee 53 FEY ONSTAESP WS) Wisin 5's Sowecisen sow dts s.onn sinals Sb aigcalvd tise oadisadeceWer sate ce bol oR AUECERG SPS ECAC EENG EE ERE eee 53 Family: Periplomatidae) o. «..... 04s. s00sce%ans sioteaateevesserd cae Toance oaaaunndawecee ee OeeeG ne ot Enlai ee EE SEE Eee eee 53 CTS SDK 604,014) 10) 7 (10 eee Re ee ra LE a IEE ry i Maier abonndsdsovocodcoousgaooqecocue 53 PeriplOMaVapfin’ secs vice cas scncaelssa dete se oeates velses sustole Soueaes slows Sede Ge Oee LESTE NOSE ORDER EE EE ECE REE EEC EERE 53 Periploma fragile sess. ccs occvesa shin baule wadaenssaess dceedennaasatece te coe Sate Meee ROee ERG CER ERE ECE CREE EE Eee EEEe 53 PeriplOMA@tleanurn: 6. ise ce ceeasatcdwesisneamaadena san cadbecdadd esas nelaaltes aie ake Ofo5 oie See Aer eR REESE eee 54 Periploma PaPYFAtiumM |... cscesseesieea ce cgusten vs vasses onoeaiieysiesaneSolosess Teese Mane AR EEN Lee 54 PeriplOMassp? \cssccsswems asda oecsasasteenicisaclesaee vedaabea seesue nesses se0es sansa thee ae aeEee Soe ee SEE RE EEE EERE EEE EEE 54 amily sUhracuidae: ssi, «cacao coc ses ceceadaeceovese nations sene cvmesitinds «eee asa cose Se ue eC OS ean ES EES eee ee 55 GENUS HAPACIG rose Fs siscns tenda dive ec cane sno vas wand noes Cabsea pean Paks Sula s ts nah SSS eee IS EE NSS aE eee 55 TRV ACIAICONTGGL 52 oes asin scasch aa cadiees oa sad se eae oa esien sted NaaGg Geis WEa Sa Toa PORE AR EEE Ee 55 DRRACIGIMY ODSIS\ a. cbcon8q090000020 56 Bamily Cuspidariidae.. c.c.c.....cccsecsneseees cans seascnessaeiecesnsesedeie suiseltewarosiseciseosest hes Seeee re EER eC Ee REEEEE EEE 56 GENUS IGGrdiOMYa. co. casecmcws sas awsaeaoeseesoece seusacecstnedeas sbi soseisess oreo SPE abe seer Seae ME eECeE eee eE CEE ee eE EE eee eeEEeee 56 GArdiOMy Gs PerrOStIAta . c5.ccccecsenewavan cine es ecan sae tes deeeinssciieron genes -eiecsjasetiser eee se0 a See Ree Eee CER EERE EEE ERE 56 GENUS CUSPIAGTIA ..505.56c6seceesescesseavensssceacess cues cbies bites cneeleesbadeinuive she eolenie tehE ee eAeEGRBC EERO REE EEC EEE EEEEEEEE 56 Guspidaria QlacialiS, ...:....cc<.0ceacesse aves so scbesecareecsrsuces seen dst oscsoeesaseseeenaeeecee eee ech ERE EE EERE REE EERE EERE 56 GuUSPidGTiGODESG % sascccbesessies orienta donsndeavdessavesleeteiidesea todos sions elsceeeeebides ese CEE: DERE EEE: CEE EE RCCE ERE EE EEE 57 GUSDIAAHIG\ PONV 2 ceed. can sedate oon caceasen soeews «2 cesaeeloene sees oe eieee reste peep pe ee see EEE Re CC EE EEE EEE CECE EE ERE Eeerees 37) Guispidaria Pellucida® ..:5..0.2.2s.000.saeeeus sn sess ocsesanseieped seme es ene sek Gee eae See seo ee EES ER CEE ECE ECE EEE 57 GusPidQria!rOStr Ata) «scsi. :ced esd conn sigs ecte cone ee Saeesae Jdscles Sasectomnn Semeur sss sels se seco heer SEC EERE ECE EEE EEE EEE 57 (GHKY 7 (TANS oan aancnepe ECR eBaEEe parE EEEeeEREr ee eon cbonceso cobs aaoacouonaced lonesasdancnqnngoncbocssonanscbooasoxnceaInsInD 2273 57 GenUSYPIECLOU ON) ees iiisdeccccsecesss dase seaswasscadswesciieesneeee seuss sem sone vs see e ee oeE a SUE ERC ERC ECE CEE EEE EEE EEE eeee 58 PIECTOG OM SPs csacsees.s0sesc0es Soe ocessnisdes case sis tned onbetacee devUats sceisslencloee eens bed oe ee ReeE eae eee EE EEE CEE ee eee 58 BamilyeVertiCOrdidae ...i...0csc0seem nen ccac+ececcwasdensieessuemmeewes tee (selena dooms eee ceed sklsel ss teacee wee eects cee eee ee 58 Genus LV ONS G w.c.005.0 csceseuss seven eevasaseadhenesieenn ose sea aoeaGe da sasiasaesscesseseceeik sehen eee eer eee epee Eee 58 Eyonsiella: abyssicola. ..... Bathymetnic occurrence of Cerastoderma pinnulatum |... .cis 5% se cecnat esses shes son a sacses cane sateen eee eee ee eee EES . Occurrence of Cerastoderma pinnulatum in bottom sediments = Bathymetricoccumence of ClinocardiumyCiligtum: ..c.. .i.5. sicacse cos se0e oso cesees ROR CuSPIdarid) DAIWA)... :s5scssse een eos See ROO oe Cuspidaria pellucida’ ssa nce cceses sate ee ee 57 Cuspidarid FOStQLd oo cosecene acceso nee ee eee 57 Cuspidaria sp Cuspidariidae Gyclocardia‘ borealis: \\.ss0s. ses.cs oe ee 31 Cyclocardia novangliae 208.5 ...c...0: see sece eee OTR 31 Cyclocardia Sp... s.c05:sesiscsas dese sennelcene sceeee eee eee EEE RECEEEE Gyclopecteninanus) assnpeceeceee ee ee Cyclopecten pustulosus Cyrtodaria: Stliqua .c..52o5canssn0sen000e ene tee Dacrydittm Vitreurm) csshsn.289 Se scsos sso eee Solenidae: 602.5252 cshrcma secs ae aes eee eee oR eee Solidissima, Spisula: (acess. eee Speciosa, Eucrassatellay iac1e penne eee Spisula POlynyMaiic.sceccacs eee sc eee eee Spisula solidisstma) iy. .sccstateaeaeeresee eee ee SPONAYLUS SP see A soso ieccaas cade eke eee CE Squamula, ANOMIQ eccccescctsecce seece ee eee eee Strata, FLIAtella® o.oo ecue .ccccis ccc vio skccasbe See sone een Dhyasira croulinensis) sic. 40c025. cose. ee Thyasiraelliptica 3.003. .cu.cacccsesesionnaaseeee eee eee Thy Gsir@ €Quallis 5.5.20. .5s see 550 sacs Sooo eee MO Thyasira ferruginea: .)isco.scs.scce 25 jade eee Phy sir flOXUuOS® 5.00 sosene cece dens deseste eet ee Thyasira flexuosa-Qouldii. 01.2. s...0.0scoeoeee sone DRY ASIA) PY QMAEA> v2 soe. 2s sess sscencet eee ee TRY GSA SUDOVQLA . fo..8 osc scc 505 ennn dace concent Ee TRYASir@triSinUuata ~.....5.cocs.cosees0s20ss0 eee Thya@sira’sp scevsss23ssce0s6.4 50554 hs Hee transversa, Anadara® 5.0. cc<52< 2550 s5s8 ease soe tridendata, Pleuromenis: .... 225. — 4,000 M = iS) is) Ss v CHARLESTON (@ JACKSONVILLE @ Figure 1.—Chart of U.S. east coast showing sampling locations for bivalve collection. Figure 2.—Distribution of predominant bottom sediments. 68 sto i) Anadara ovalis e Abra sp. Neo s Aequipecten phrygium a Aligena elevata Figure 3.—Geographic distribution of Abra sp., Aequipecten phrygium, and Figure 4.—Geographic distribution of Anadara ovalis and Anadara transyersa. Aligena elevata. 69 = fe) is) S T 1,000 M @ = Anomia simplex Figure 5.—Geographic distribution of Anomia simplex. 70 * Anomia squamula Figure 6.—Geographic distribution of Anomia squamula. = is) is) is) S = is 8 Ss Tv Arca sp. Arcidae Arcinella cornuta Figure 7.—Geographic distribution of Arca sp., Arcidae, and Arcinella cornuta. Figure 8.—Geographic distribution of Arctica islandica. 71 ¢ = ie) is} Ss} Tr = is} is} i} = \a 3 So [s) is) 3 aS v Tv ro) S Argopecten gibbus Figure 9.—Geographic distribution of Argopecten gibbus and Argopecten irra- Figure 10.—Geographic distribution of Astarte borealis. dians. Se (4 1000 M CHARLESTON =@) Figure 11.—Geographic distribution of Astarte castanea. Figure 12.—Geographic distribution of Astarte crenata subequilatera. 73 4,000 M ° Astarte quadrans (oe Astarte smithii Figure 13.—Geographic distribution of Astarte elliptica, Astarte montagui, and Figure 14.—Geographic distribution of Astarte quadrans and Astarte smithii. Astarte nana. 74 Oo) oy? fy 0 4,000 M = S is) Ss Tv ee CHARLESTO! = S So vr = Ss 8 i = S s) eS) vv ey s Figure 15.—Geographic distribution of Astarte undata. Figure 16.—Geographic distribution of Astarte sp. 75 1,000 M & 700 Ay i = 9° 8 Si ‘ i fo} S is) RS Figure 17.—Geographic distribution of Axinopsida orbiculata and Barnea trun- cata. ~ 4,000 M 76 Figure 18.—Geographic distribution of Barnea sp. and Bathyarca anomala. 1,000 M \ = S So vr | ° S is} % = ° is} is} 4,000 M Vv 0° ye c Bathyarca pectunculoides Figure 19.—Geographic distribution of Bathyarca pectunculoides. di 1,000 M 4,000 M oO 0 1,000 M 2% 4,000 M 4,000 M , OM 0" 0 xe %S, qe %, e Bathyarca sp. : ¢ S, %, , Figure 20.—Geographic distribution of Bathyarca sp. = ° 8 St v 4,000 M PD, 2 - a Brachidontes exustus ° Bivalvia. \— a Callista eucymata Figure 21.—Geographic distribution of Bivalvia, Brachidontes exustus, and Cal- Figure 22.—Geographic distribution of Cardiomya perrostrata. lista eucymata. 78 1000 M = = 9 8 is} 8 is} 8 S} Tt << *“ Chione intapurpurea Figure 23.—Geographic distribution of Cerastoderma pinnulatum. Figure 24.—Geographic distribution of Chama sp. and Chione intapurpurea. 79 3 S 8 S T Chione sp. ee oes t Chlamys islandica Figure 25.—Geographic distribution of Chione latilirata. Figure 26.—Geographic distribution of Chione sp. and Chlamys islandica. 80 1,000 M = i's) S S Corbula krebsiana Aa Corbula sp. Figure 27.Geographic distribution of Clinocardium ciliatum and Corbula con- Figure 28.—Geographic distribution of Corbula krebsiana and Corbula sp. tracta. 81 = = is} is 8 8 a ‘S os > one \ 4,000 M ne 9 ° Crassinella Junulata a * Corbulidae Crassinella sp. Figure 29.—Geographic distribution of Corbulidae. Figure 30.—Geographic distribution of Crassinella lunlata and Crassinella sp. 82 4,000 M = iS) is} S Tv Ab *Crenella glandula Figure 31.—Geographic distribution of Crassostrea virginica and Crenella decus- Figure 32.—Geographic distribution of Crenella glandula. sata. 83 a ee M al _ 1,000 M Oo Crenella sp. A ue glacialis Ss %, g, Figure 33.—Geographic distribution of Crenella sp. and Cumingea tellinoides. Figure 34.—Geographic distribution of Cuspidaria glacialis. 84 1,000 M = io) 8 S SF Ss J 2 Cuspidaria obesa . Cuspidaria pellucida Figure 35.—Geographic distribution of Cuspidaria obesa and Cuspidaria parva. Figure 36.—Geographic distribution of Cuspidaria pellucida and Cuspidaria ros- trata. 85 ©.% % 2 © eo = ° is) i 4,000 M Cuspidaria sp. A 5 L/L} Cyclocardia borealis YS % Cuspidariidae Figure 37.—Geographic distribution of Cuspidaria sp. and Cuspidariidae. Figure 38.—Geographic distribution of Cyclocardia borealis. 86 = is) is) So + of at oS e we e : aes Cyclocardia novangliae Cyclocardia sp. am %, %, &, Figure 39.—Geographic distribution of Cyclocardia novangliae and Cyclocardia Figure 40.—Geographic distribution of Cyclopecten nanus, Cyclopecten pustulo- sp. sus, and Cyrtodaria siliqua. 87 4,000 M = is) S$ S z 1,000 M 4,000 M oo = is) is) S vv ¢ No e Dacrydium vitreum : é eR Diplodonta sp. a Delectopecten vitreus oh Donax sp. Figure 41.—Geographic distribution of Dacrydium vitreum and Delectopecten Figure 42.—Geographic distribution of Diplodonta sp. and Donax sp vitreus. 88 {000 M = is) 8 S SF 1,000 M 1,000 M ae : 4,000 M oe , ° Ervilia concentrica ~ he Figure 43.—Geographic distribution of Ensis directus. Figure 44.—Geographic distribution of Ervilia concentrica and Eucrassatella speciosa. 89 ATLANTIC :1@) = fo) Ss So Figure 45.—Geographic distribution of Gemma gemma. Figure 46.—Geographic distribution of Geukensia demissa and Glycymeris amer- icana. 90 wy, = asl is} So Ss) oy @ we e % % &, Figure 47.—Geographic distribution of Glycymeris pectinata. 91 = iS) Ss So Figure 48.—Geographic distribution of Glycymeris sp. and Hiatella arctica. or ATLANTIC 330; *Hiatella striata Hiatellidae Figure 49.—Geographic distribution of Hiatella striata and Hiatellidae. 4,000 M aft Figure 50.—Geographic distribution of Laevicardium mortoni. = is) is) S a ° Limopsidae4 Limatula subauriculata : ae Limopsis affinis A - Limatula sp. Limopsis cristata Figure 51.—Geographic distribution of Limatula subauriculata and Limatula sp. Figure 52.—Geographic distribution of Limopsidae, Limopsis affinis, and Limop- sis cristata. 93 100 KM NM as 6 pO gS = re) i=) is} SI vt ae ap $ 8 . Tt Ne al ae 1,000 M 4,000 M %, 25 p me) es oe a Limopsis minuta Limopsis sulcata Limopsis sp. at %, %, g, Figure 53.—Geographic distribution of Limopsis minuta, Limopsis sulcata, and Limopsis sp. * Liocyma fluctuosa xX < “ Lucinoma blakeana Figure 54.—Geographic distribution of Liocyma fluctuosa and Lucinoma blakeana. = is) 8 S Tv 4,000 M a ——_ EE Lyonsia arenosa *Lucinoma filosa : Lyonsia sp. Lucinoma sp. Figure 55.—Geographic distribution of Lucinoma filosa and Lucinoma sp. Figure 56.—Geographic distribution of Lucinidae, Lyonsia arenosa, and Lyonsia sp- 95 = io} is) Ss ss Tap 4,000 Mites cal ae 4,000 M %, 2 ° at _—__— 1,000 M Ch 0 Lyonsia hyalina Lyonsiella abyssicola ~ * Macoma balthica cy > Lyonsiella sp. Figure 57.—Geographic distribution of Lyonsia hyalina, Lyonsiella abyssicola, Figure 58.—Geographic distribution of Macoma balthica. and Lyonsiella sp. 96 = is) is) oS + 4,000 M = ae Es \ o ° Macoma calcarea Figure 59.—Geographic distribution of Macoma calcarea and Macoma tenta. Figure 60.—Geographic distribution of Macoma sp. and Malletia obtusa. 97 Po vo « “ Mesodesma arctatum a Figure 61.—Geographic distribution of Mercenaria mercenaria and Mesodesma Figure 62.—Geographic distribution of Modiolus modiolus. arctatum. 98 ATLANTIC :{@) “Mulinia lateralis : te re = ee ° Musculus corrugatus Figure 63.—Geographic distribution of Montacuta sp., Mulinia lateralis, and Figure 64.—Geographic distribution of Musculus corrugatus. Mulinia sp. 99 “PORTLAND:, = ie) is} So ¥ at ° ZA) 4,000 M 5 Xo, Figure 65.—Geographic distribution of Musculus discors. Figure 66.—Geographic distribution of Musculus niger. 100 = Q 8 So 4,000 M Mya arenaria ic Sa Musculus sp. “ Myrtea pristiphora Figure 67.—Geographic distribution of Musculus sp. Figure 68.—Geographic distribution of Mya arenaria and Myrtea pristiphora. 101 > ° po ay ° 42 > cy ae -~ 2. ah & = iS = 5 a & Vie a oy las cost %, P if @ Mytilus edulis y A BOMKY oe if 4 Ro Gi : Bee Nemocardium peramabile oO Mysella sp. Mytilidae are %, , B Figure 69.—Geographic distribution of Mysella sp. and Mytilidae. Figure 70.—Geographic distribution of Mytilus edulis, Nemocardium peramabile, and Noetia ponderosa. 4,000 M wy, 4,000 M 1,000 M Qe “Oz 4,000 M o® e ae Nucula delphinodonta Figure 71.—Geographic distribution of Nucula delphinodonta. = cs) is) Ss AF Figure 72.—Geographic distribution of Nucula proxima. SQ, Po Po So e s Nucula tenuis oh Figure 73.—Geographic distribution of Nucula tenuis. Figure 74.—Geographic distribution of Nucula sp. 104 Nuculana acuta Figure 75.—Geographic distribution of Nuculana acuta, Nuculana carpenteri, Figure 76.—Geographic distribution of Nuculana pernula. and Nuculana caudata. 105 es 4,000 M 1,000 M § & ~———— 100 M 1,000 M CHARLESTO! 4,000 M e a ; . j Nuculana tenuisulcata Figure 77.—Geographic distribution of Nuculana tenuisulcata. Figure 78.—Geographic distribution of Nuculana sp. 106 1,000 M = 3S 8 S <7 CHARLESTON: as Se ° Pandora bushiana Nuculanidae \ Nuculoida Ostrea sp. Figure 79.—Geographic distribution of Nuculanidae, Nuculoida, and Ostrea sp. Figure 80.—Geographic distribution of Pandora bushiana and Pandora goul- diana. 107 “4,000 M 1,000 M Figure 81.—Geographic distribution of Pandora inflata. 108 = is} 8 ‘3 v 0° | 10) Figure 82.—Geographic distribution of Pandora inornata and Pandora trilineata. i = S is) S v 1,000 M e@ Papyridea semisulcata 4 Parvilucina blanda S Pectinidae Figure 83.—Geographic distribution of Pandora sp. and Panomya arctica. Figure 84.—Geographic distribution of Papyridea semisulcata, Parvilucina blan- da, and Pectinidae. 109 ae n Po 1,000 M i seek eee Sl Fe )* 4,000 M dy, I, aS oh ie) J Co ws a) 4,000 M ® e Sct oa ° Periglypta listeri |\, rd (a f ~ | : Periploma affine we %, } F 2S € #3 \ 7 5 = iS . ee Periploma fragile | oe Periploma leanum %. %, 2 Figure 85.—Geographic distribution of Periglypta listeri, Periploma affine, and Figure 86.—Geographic distribution of Periploma leanum. Periploma fragile. 110 = Ss S So + Figure 87.—Geographic distribution of Periploma papyratium. Figure 88.—Geographic distribution of Periploma sp. and Petricola pholadi- formis. 111 4,000 M~_ Ne —— \ ) ) 1S \ Pitar sp. ae ~ \ Placopecten magellanicus Plectodon sp. Figure 89.—Geographic distribution of Pitar morrhuanus. Figure 90.—Geographic distribution of Pitar sp., Placopecten magellanicus, and Plectodon sp. a Se 7 ‘4 Portlandia frigida 4S i? e Pleuromeris tridentata « Piicatula gibbosa = Poromya sp. Figure 91.—Geographic distribution of Pleuromeris tridentata, Plicatula gibbosa, Figure 92.—Geographic distribution of Portlandia fraterna, Portlandia frigida, and Poromya sp. and Portlandia inconspicua. 113 = is) 8 So ST; S22 1,000 M woe ie SOR Res See , 4,000 M oS, I, Oh o° 4,000 M " Portlandia iris %, eo Ti, aaa Has S\N \ < iy) = SS — Zio e mA ——_ . . Aa = . 2 Portlandia inflata Portlandia lenticula v %. %, oo Figure 93.—Geographic distribution of Portlandia inflata. Figure 94.—Geographic distribution of Portlandia iris and Portlandia lenticula. 114 = fe) is) st Tv Portlandia lucida (FN eA a ee Portlandia minuscula Propeamussium thalassinum Figure 95.—Geographic distribution of Portlandia lucida, Portlandia minuscula, Figure 96.—Geographic distribution of Pteromeris perplana and Rangia cuneata. and Propeamussium thalassinum. 115 = 8 is) S SS 4 Neos 4,000 M e Semele nuculoides a Semele purpurascens SX “Semele bella a Semele sp. Figure 97.—Geographic distribution of Saturnia subovata and Semele bellastriata. Figure 98.—Geographic distribution of Semele nv * and Semele « 116 = is) is) S Tv 4,000 M —— 1,000 M CHARLESTON Figure 99.—Geographic distribution of Siliqua costata and Solemya borealis. Figure 100.—Geographic distribution of Solemya velum and Spisula polynyma. 117 4,000 M | S\ @ —_ 100m ea ee AY) _= 4,000 Ne eee aa Solenidae Spondylus sp. Figure 101.—Geographic distribution of Spisula solidissima. Figure 102.—Geographic distribution of Solenidae, Spondylus sp., and Strigilla mirabilis. 118 = is) 8 So a Tagelus plebeius Figure 103.—Geographic distribution of Tagelus plebeius, Tellina aequistriata, Figure 104.—Geographic distribution of Tellina consobrina. and Tellina agilis. 119 RE 3 e $ 4,000 M s\ - 60 0 Se IN Tellina sp. Tellinidae é : : Tellina versicolor Thracia conradi Figure 105.—Geographic distribution of Tellina versicolor. Figure 106.—Geographic distribution of Tellina conradi. sp., Tellinidae, and Thracia 120 = 3 is} is} vv s\ 0° 4,000 M ye Thyasira brevis A ey Thyasira croulinensis Thracia myopsis Thracia septentrionalis 7 Thyasira elliptica Thraciidae Figure 107.—Geographic distribution of Thracia myopsis, Thracia septentriona- Figure 108.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira brevis, Thyasira croulinensis, lis, and Thraciidae. and Thyasira elliptica. 121 = S is) SY Tv = fay is) o v 1,000 M a i Thyasira equalis Figure 109.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira equalis. Figure 110.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira ferruginea. 4,000 M ATLANTIC Figure 111.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira flexuosa. Figure 112.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira flexuosa-gouldii. 123 | , = * Thyasira pygmaea EN e NS Thyasira trisinuata Figure 113.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira pygmaea and Thyasira sub- Figure 114.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira trisinuata. ovata. 124 = SY 8 Ss ¥ ° Thyasira sp. * Turtonia sp. ° Veneridae Figure 115.—Geographic distribution of Thyasira sp. and Turtonia sp. Figure 116.—Geographic distribution of Veneridae. 125 = ry is} 38 vv ° 8 So vv = 3 is} Ss) = io) S So e = ° S 8 a f= eS 4,000 M hy 0 mw an ao * Yoldia myalis A ae Xylophaga atlantica Figure 117.—Geographic distribution of Verticordia ornata, Xylophaga atlantica. Figure 118.—Geographic distribution of Yoldia myalis and Yoldia regularis. and Yoldia limatula. 126 4,000 M Figure 119.—Geographic distribution of Yoldia sapotilla. 127 ne = 9 Ss is} 8 J Figure 120.—Geographic distribution of Yoldia thraciaeformis. | { = | 9 et CHARLESTO! * Yoldia sp. Figure 121.—Geographic distribution of Yoldia sp. 128 Table 1.--The distribution of samples containing bivalve mollusks Tablets papal iymelmickoccunuence OF IBivalvia abascd lonetO>/ Goksamples in the NEFC Specimen Reference Collection by collecting vessel. and Le 2oees Dec mens. Samples D ; Vessel Nunber BaReEE epth Range Samples Specimens A, EB. Verrtil 6 0.1 m % 2 Albatross IIT 984 9.4 a = a Albatross Iv 2,735 26.2 0-24 VSTi 17.4 Asterias 571 BED) 24-49 15.8 T5ES) Blueback 25 0.2 50-99 33.6 40.5 Delaware I & II 1,998 19.1 100-199 22.1 16.3 Fish Hawk 1 <0.1 200-499 10.4 7.0 Gaiborn 4 <0.1 500-999 iley) 1.6 eae 3,920 36.6 1000-1999 1.6 1.0 Harengus z 1 <0.1 2000-3999 0.8 0.4 rene t ave 3 <0.1 Unknown 0.3 0.3 Shirley and Roland 3 <0.1 Silver Mink 13 0.2 Total 100.0 100.0 Whaling City 1 <0.1 Samples with no designated vessel 295 Bad Table 2.--The distribution of samples containing bivalve mollusks in the NEFC Specimen Reference Collection by type of sampling gear. Samples Sampling Gear No. Zz Bottom Grabs Campbell 3,716 = LS7/ Dietz-LaFond 3 <0.1 Petersen 5 <0.1 Smith-McIntyre 2,099 20.1 Van Veen 90 0.9 WHOI Miniature Van Veen 2 <0.1 Dredges Digby drag 323 Soul Digby scoop 29 0.3 Hydraulic Clam Dredge 37 0.3 MBL Naturalist Dredge 6 0.1 Quahog Dredge 19 0.2 Scallop Dredge 296 2.8 Rock Dredge 19 0.2 WHOI Chain Bag Dredge 19 0.2 WHOI Pipe Dredge 4 <0.1 i-Meter Naturalist Dredge 2,351 22.6 Table 4.--Occurrence of Bivalvia in bottom sediments, based on 10,465 samples and 108,934 specimens. Trawls Beam Trawl 1 <0.1 Bottom Type Samples Specimens Dutch Herring Traw] 1 <0.1 Isaacs-Kidd Trawl 2 <0.1 % o Otter Trawl] 2 <0.1 = 4 6-Foot Seine 33 0.3 Gravel 525 6.7 - Sand-gravel 0.4 0.3 Miscellaneous Till 6.0 9.9 Bottom Skimmer 196 1.0 shell sic we : Sand-shell 6.0 3.2 Dip Net 71 0.7 2 Sand 32.0 24.8 Diver (Scuba) 4 <0.1 Silt d 12 Fish Stomachs 97 0.9 Ue) SEM! 8 13.8 2 Silt 8.0 7.8 Ring Net 181 1.7 i-Meter Sled 83 0.8 Clave 6.5 5.3 Other 92 0.9 Unclassified 21.4 27.3 Samples with no gear designation 40 0.4 Total 100.0 100.0 129 Table 5.--Total and percent number of specimens and samples of each bivalve taxon in the NMFS collection. Specimens z Abra sp. Aequipecten phrygiun Aligena elevata Anadara ovalis Anadara transversa Anomia simplex Anomia squamula Arca Sp. Arcidae unident. Arcinella cornuta Arctica islandica Argopecten gibbus Argopecten trradians Astarte borealis Astarte castanea Astarte crenata subequilatera Astarte elliptica Astarte montagut Astarte nana Astarte quadrans Astarte smithti Astarte widata Astarte Sp. Axinopsida orbiculata Barnea truncata Barnea Sp- Bathyarca anomala Bathyarca pectunculotdes Bathyarea sp. Bivalvia unident. Brachidontes exustus Callista eucymata Cardiidae unident. Cardiomya perrostrata Cerastoderma pinnulatwn Chama sp. Chione intapurpurea Chione Latilirata Chione sp. Chlamys islandica Clinocardiun ciliatwn Corbula contracta Corbula krebstana Corbula sp. Corbulidae unident. Crassinella Lunulata Crassinella sp. Crassostrea virginica Crenella decussata Crenella glandula Crenella sp. Cumingea tellinotdes Cuspidaria glacialis Cuspidaria obesa Cuspidaria parva Cuspidaria pellucida Cuspidaria rostrata Cuspidaria sp. Cuspidariidae unident. Cylcocardia borealis Cyclocardia novangliae Cyclocardia sp. Cyclopecten nanus Cyclopecten pustulosus Cyrtodaria stliqua Dacrydiun vitreun Delectopecten vitreus Diplodonta sp. Donax Sp. Ensis directus Ervilia concentrica Eucrassatella speciosa Gemma gemma Geukensis demissa Glycymeris amertcana Glycymeris pectinata Glycymeris Sp. Hiatella arctica Hiatella striata Hiatellidae unident. Laevicardiun mortont Limatula subaurtculata Limatula sp. Limopsidae unident. Limopsis affinis Limopsis cristata Limopsis minuta Limopsis sulcata Limopsis sp. Liocyma fluctuosa Luctnana blakeana Luctnoma filosa Luctnoma sp. SCONDOKHADWDOOCON ANOBIEYVBHONEN eesess Fosny on PODOSCOFHOOCOWSSOONNSSSSO |, | OADOHANANNYBOCONSFOONRN NwWHOOBHOROWONDOOOWN e0c0C0O ROOD OCDDOKrOD000 esneseszess zeune ROURGCSFPHG BE or SCOOSCBODDOCOCOOCSCONGD000 CO000 SCHWODWOUNDDONOHNMNODO DOAINONOE ERNIE DOPE OONWhOUN COCO COrFK C0000 ecosroerrereSsans RYELRERD ONc2DDD0D0D000COOOOYF 0.12 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 9.99 3.88 0.02 0.01 <0.01 1.91 0.01 0.02 0.02 8.12 A BEELARRB A A SCOSWSCDDONOOKOGGOGDG0000 A A OnceosG00G0000 Sepesesse ce Cursor eeeeseues LSRBSSERSSSELRESRECEESSGFP SNe A A Table 5.--Cont'd. Specimens a Lucinidae unident. Lyonsta arenosa Lyonsia hyalina Lyonsta Sp. Lyonsiella abysstcola Lyonsiella sp- Macoma balthica Macoma calcarea Macoma tenta Macoma Sp. Malletia obtusa Mercenaria mercenaria Mesodesma arctatun Modiolus modiolus Montacuta Sp. Mulinia lateralis Mulinia sp- Musculus corrugatus Musculus discors Musculus niger Musculus Sp. Mya arenaria Myrtea pristiphora Mysella sp. Mytilidae unident. Mytilus edulis Nemocardiun peranabile Noetia ponderosa Nucula delphinodonta Nucula proxima Nucula tenuis Nucula sp. Nuculane acuta Nuculana carpenteri Nuculana caudata Nuculana pernula Nuculana tenutsulcata Nuculana sp. Nuculanidae unident. Nuculoida Ostrea Sp- Pandora bushiana Pandora gouldiana Pandora inflata Pandora inornata Pandora trilineata Pandora SP. Panomya arctica Papyridea semisulcata Parvilucina blanda Pectinidae unident. Periglypta lister Periploma affine Periploma fragile Periploma Leanun Periploma papyratiun Periploma sp. Petricola pholadtformis Pitar morrhuaus Pitar sp. Placopecten magellanicus Plectodon sp. Pleuromeris tridentata Plicatula gtbbosa Poromya sp. Portlandia fraterna Portlandia frigida Portlandia inconspicua Portlandia inflata Portlandia iris Portlandia lenticula Portlandia lucida Portlandia minuscula Propeamussiun thalassinwn Pteromeris perplana Rangia cureata Saturnia subovata bellastriata nuculoides purpurascens sp. costata borealis Solemya velun Spisula polynyma Spisula solidissima Solenidae unident. Spondylus Sp- Strigilla mirabilis Tagelus plebetus aequistriata agilis consobrina versicolor Tellina Sp. Tellinidae unident. CUONDOWHNNROOCONES P| DOPNWee apron WNHOHUNOCORK WODOWOODFENY AORWDSOHP ERNE BENOYVEFOFANS PROC ORPNRNHKOOKP OOOO OKH OOOO OFrFODDDOOOOSCOrOO CORED CONSCCDDD CDODD0009000000 PN BEAK UEYV ER WWD n HOONSENOSOSOOOUONNDOCOUNNOSHY SOPSSRERYeSoL BRO PBBRASDEYVNBIUEEHDANNY ANBDDGOANGENS _ ecoeDDDDODOCOOOOrDOO en wn a nN RPAMSSSSSSHMNOBQWOBUENS REGOE BOA SCODOKF ODOC OKrFSDD0000000 AYVHISE EP OFEONRNFEe 166 0.15 81 0.07 544 0.50 6 0.01 1 <0.01 1 <0.01 783 0.72 542 0.50 708 0.65 12 0.01 145 0.14 21 0.02 52 0.05 1,132 1.04 1 <0.01 897 0.82 2 <0.01 88 0.08 457 0.42 406 0.37 75 0.07 290 0.27 8 0.01 2 <0.01 201 0.19 5,272 4.84 2 <0.01 5 0.01 2,092 1.92 12,091 11.10 2,031 1.86 961 0.88 352 0.32 45 0.04 2 <0.01 320 0.29 469 0.43 448 0.41 834 0.77 2 <0.01 1 <0.01 15 0.01 144 0.13 34 0.03 159 0.15 ll 0.01 ll 0.01 64 0.06 3 <0.01 6 0.01 23 0.02 6 0.01 21 0.02 101 0.09 60 0.06. 2,976 2.73 4 <0.01. 27 0.03 723 0.66 130 ~0-12 1,225 1e135 meee): OF 168 0.15 6 0.01 6 0.01 5 0.01 5 0.01 3 <0.01 197 0.18 334 0.31 4 <0.01 161 0.15 2 <0.01 28 0.03 28 0.03 9 0.01 70 0.06 38 0.04 146 0.13 6 0.01 3 <0.01 104 0.10 1 <0.01 67 0.06 14 0.01 764 0.70 39 0.04 2 <0.01 12 0.01 4 <0.01 1 <0.01 1,131 1.04 20 0.02 297 0.27 151 0.14 67 0.06 Table 5.--Cont'd. Samples Specimens No. % No. Thracia conradi 6 0.06 10 0.01 Thracta myopsis 3 0.03 6 0.01 Thracia septentrionalis 13 0.12 46 0.04 Thraciidae unident. 19 0.18 36 0.03 Thyasira brevis 1 0.01 3 <0.01 Thyasira croulinensis 3 0.03 4 <0.01 Thyasira elliptica 4 0.04 12 0.01 Thyasira equalis 44 0.42 309 0.28 Thyasira ferruginea 92 0.88 1,381 1.27 Thyasira flexuosa 104 1.00 1,044 0.96 Thyasira flexuosa-gouldi 37 0.35 415 0.38 Thyastra pygmaea 8 0.08 64 0.06 Thyasira subovata 7 0.07 18 0.02 Thyasira trisinuata 133 1.27 1,079 0.99 Thyasira sp. 142 1.36 734 0.67 Turtonia sp. 1 0.01 1 <0.01 Veneridae unident. 54 0.52 117 0.11 Verticordia ornata z 0.07 8 0.01 Xylophaaga atlaitica 3 0.03 76 0.07 Yoldia limatula 37 0.35 375 0.34 Yoldia myalis 21 0.20 47 0.04 Yoldia regularis ll 0.11 42 0.04 Yoldia sapotilla 279 2.67 2,128 595 Yoldia thraciaeformia 46 0.44 158 0.15 Yoldia sp. 88 0.84 303 0.28 Total 10,465 108,934 131 Table 6. --Bathymetric occurrence of Unidentified Bivalvia, Table 10. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nucula proxima, based on 36 samples and 76 specimens. based on 221 samples and 12,073 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 19.4 15.8 0-24 30.8 46.9 25-49 5.6 2.6 25-49 26.7 6.9 50-99 41.6 5523, 50-99 36.6 45.4 100-199 16.7 14.5 100-199 5.0 0.8 200-499 16.7 11.8 200-499 0.9 <0.1 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 == == 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- — 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 7,--Occurrence of Unidentified Bivalvia in bottom ol ima in b diments, Sed mentemibasedtontzolisannlestandicomspecinens! Table 11 Occurrence of Nucula proxima in bottom sediments based on 214 samples and 12,059 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 3.4 oe, Sand-gravel 13.8 8.3 Se rps ee so Till 3.4 26.7 Sane On fel Shell 3.4 y/ Shell 1.4 0.2 Sand-shell 3.4 1.7 5 . z and-shell 9.9 0.4 Sand 44.8 45:0 Sand 48.1 40.4 Sillty!sand 10.3 6.7 Silty sand 17.3 32.9 Silt 6.9 3.3 Silt 4.2 3.7 Clay 10.3 4.9 Clay 15.4 22.1 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 8. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nucula delphinodonta, Table 12. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nucula tenuis, based on 145 samples and 2,092 specimens. based on 215 samples and 2,031 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 YS 1.8 0-24 0.5 <0.1 25-49 13.8 10.6 25-49 8.4 4.0 50-99 40.7 78.2 50-99 23.7 54.6 100-199 17.9 4.3 100-199 41.4 23.8 200-499 13.8 1.6 200-499 7.9 2.7 500-999 4.8 1.3 500-999 7.9 4.5 1000-1999 3.5 2.2 1000-1999 9.3 10.0 2000-3999 > aS 2000-3999 0.9 0.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 9. --Occurrence of Nucula delphinodonta in bottom Table 13. --Occurrence of Nucula tenuis in bottom sediments, sediments, based on 143 samples and 2,086 specimens. based on 200 samples and 1,956 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type 5 Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 2.8 0.7 Gravel 3.0 0.5 Sand-gravel 4.2 0.4 Sand-gravel 5.5 4.2 Till 4.2 0.8 Till 3.0 0.8 Shell 2.1 0.5 Shell 1.0 0.9 Sand-shell 0.7 0.2 Sand-shel1 0.5 0.1 Sand 23.8 15.6 Sand 17.5 7.8 Silty sand 29.3 72.2 Silty sand 35.5 36.2 Silt 13.3 3.3 Silt 16.0 20.4 Clay 19.6 6.3 Clay 18.0 29.1 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 132 Table 14. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nucula sp., Table 18, --Bathymetric occurrence of Saturnia subovata, based on 108 samples and 961 specimens. based on 22 samples and 70 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 2.8 14.5 0-24 — a5 25-49 10.2 258} 25-49 er — 50-99 7.4 2.1 50-99 = =o 100-199 12% 19.8 100-199 = 2 200-499 15.7 2.7 200-499 hs 3 500-999 12.0 11.1 500-999 4.5 4.3 1000-1999 27.8 37.6 1000-1999 45.5 57.1 2000-3999 12.0 929 2000-3999 50.0 38.6 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 15. --Occurrence of Nucula sp. in bottom sediments, Table 19. --Occurrence of Saturnia subovata in bottom based on 104 samples and 761 specimens. sediments, based on 22 samples and 70 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 1.0 0.3 Gravel => a Sand-gravel 1.9 18.5 Sand-gravel -- -- Till 1.0 1.6 Till -- -- Shell -- ae Shell = = Sand-shel] 5.8 2.4 Sand-shel1 -- am Sand Wfe3 4.5 Sand -- -- Silty sand 29.8 29.8 Silty sand 22.7 22.8 Silt 31.7 37.2 Silt 63.7 58.6 Clay 11.5 5.7 Clay 13.6 18.6 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 16. --Bathymetric occurrence of Malletia obtusa, Table 20. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nuculanidae, based on 38 samples and 145 specimens. based on 98 samples and 834 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- =m 0-24 -- = 25-49 = = 25-49 Soul 0.5 50-99 == ca 50-99 4.1 1.0 100-199 == = 100-199 10.2 17.6 200-499 == =e 200-499 56.1 73.0 500-999 = oS 500-999 24.5 Via 1000-1999 52.6 66.2 1000-1999 mo == 2000-3999 47.4 33.8 2000-3999 2.0 0.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 17. --Occurrence of Malletia obtusa in bottom sediments, Table 21. --Occurrence of Nuculanidae in bottom sediments, based on 38 samples and 145 specimens. based on 98 samples and 834 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Gravel Shai 1.4 Sand-gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- 2S Till -- =o Till ao = Shell -- -- Shell 2.0 1.8 Sand-shel1 =- on Sand-shel] 10.2 4.1 Sand -- -- Sand G7/ 37.9 Silty sand 21.1 17.2 Silty sand 28.6 3585) Silt 52.6 62.1 Silt 20.4 18.9 Clay 26.3 20.7 Clay 2.0 0.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 133 Table 22. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nuculana acuta, based on 59 samples and 352 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 25-49 -- -- 50-99 Is} 5e} Tell 100-199 Say 89.5 200-499 5.0 3.4 500-999 == 22 1000-1999 -- ce 2000-3999 =o . <2 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 23, --Occurrence of Nuculana acuta in bottom sediments, based on 59 samples and 352 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel ms ee Sand-gravel -- -- Till = = Shell == == Sand-shell -- = Sand 33.59 38.3 Silty sand 42.4 48.6 Silt Bait 1.7 Clay 18.6 11.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 24, --Bathymetric occurrence of Nuculana carpenteri, based on 17 samples and 45 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 25. --Occurrence of Nuculana carpenteri in bottom sediments, based on 17 samples and 45 specimens. Bottom type Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shell Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Samples Percentage of Specimens 134 Table 26. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nuculana pernula, based on 119 samples and 320 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 r - a 25-49 2.5 Boil 50-99 33.6 50.6 100-199 41.2 31.9 200-499 21.9 13.8 500-999 0.8 0.6 1000-1999 a au 2000-3999 -- = Total 100.0 100.0 based on 113 samples and 306 specimens. Table 27. --Occurrence of Nuculana pernula in bottom sediments, Bottom type Samples Gravel 15.9 Sand-gravel 0.9 Till 23.9 Shell 1.8 Sand-shell 2.6 Sand 8.0 Silty sand 14.1 Silt 8.0 Clay 24.8 Total 100.0 Percentage of Specimens a= oN Nf moe SD SwWHEENOOD SD MONAVRIOADWY based on 129 samples and 469 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Table 28, --Bathymetric occurrence of Nuculana tenuisulcata, Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 25-49 3.9 2.6 50-99 23.2 26.6 100-199 44.2 40.3 200-499 28.7 30.5 500-999 == =o 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- = Total 100.0 100.0 Table 29. --Occurrence of Nuculana tenuisulcata in bottom sediments, based on 120 samples and 414 specimens. Bottom type Samples Gravel 8.3 Sand-gravel 6.7 Till 20.9 Shell -- Sand-shell 0.8 Sand 5.8 Silty sand 28.3 Silt 8.3 Clay 20.9 Total 100.0 Percentage of Specimens nN w fees So NON WID Oo DOOnmre! wow = So Table 30. --Bathymetric occurrence of Nuculana sp., based on 84 samples and 448 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 2.4 0.7 25-49 11.9 3.8 50-99 21.4 60.9 100-199 41.7 27.9 200-499 22.6 6.7 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 31. --Occurrence of Nuculana sp. in bottom sediments, based on 82 samples and 446 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shell Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Samples Specimens 2.4 225) 2.4 1.1 aoa 27.6 24.4 42.8 39.1 21.5 1.2 0.2 13.4 4.3 100.0 100.0 Table 32. --Bathymetric occurrence of Yoldia limatula, based on 37 samples and 375 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total mo anwoo ileal Table 33. --Occurrence of Yoldia limatula in bottom sediments, based on 30 samples and 342 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand 70.1 40.1 Silty sand 23.3 21.6 Silt 323) 38.0 Clay Boe) 0.3 Total 100.0 100.0 135 Table 34. --Bathymetric based on 21 Depth range (m) occurrence of Yoldia myalis, samples and 47 specimens. Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 35. --Occurrence of Yoldia myalis in bottom sediments, based on 18 samples and 44 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel Eis) 25.0 Sand-gravel 27.7 31.8 Till 5.6 (si Shell 11.1 27.3 Sand-shel1 11.1 4.5 Sand -- -- Silty sand 5.6 eh Silt 5.6 6.8 Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 36. --Bathymetric based on 11 occurrence of Yoldia regularis, samples and 42 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 25-49 Sail 2.4 50-99 81.8 76.2 100-199 9:1 21.4 200-499 -- - 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 37. --Occurrence of Yoldia reqularis in bottom sediments, based on 11 samples and 42 specimens. Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shel] -- -- Sand -- -- Silty sand 54.5 21.4 Silt 36.4 57.2 Clay Oeil 21.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Percentage of Table 38. --Bathymetric occurrence of Yoldia sapotilla, based on 278 samples and 1,980 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 0.7 0.1 25-49 OI, 8.2 50-99 54.7 66.4 100-199 21.2 17.0 200-499 13.7 8.3 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- . -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 39. --Occurrence of Yoldia sapotilla in bottom sediments, based on 270 samples and 1,970 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 0.4 <0.1 Till Sez Qa Shell 0.4 <0.1 Sand-shel1 0.7 0.2 Sand 27.8 25.2 Silty sand 33.3 37.9 Silt 5.9 6.6 Clay 26.3 27.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 40. --Bathymetric occurrence of Yoldia thraciaeformis, based on 46 samples and 158 specimens. Depth range (m) 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Percentage of Samples Specimens 4.3 a3 65.3 73.4 26.1 23.4 4.3 129 100.0 100.0 Table 41. --Occurrence of Yoldia thraciaeformia in bottom sediments, based on 41 samples and 144 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel 2.4 2.1 Sand-gravel -- -- Till 24.4 14.6 Shell == = Sand-shell -- -- Sand = = Silty sand 12.2 7.6 Silt 12.2 34.0 Clay 48.8 41.7 Total 100.0 100.0 136 Table 42. --Bathymetric occurrence of Yoldia sp., based on 88 samples and 303 specimens. Depth range (m) 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Percentage of Samples Specimens 1.1 0.7 4.5 1.7 14.8 20.1 43.3 51.4 35.2 24.8 tail ios} 100.0 100.0 Table 43. --Occurrence of Yoldia sp. in bottom sediments, based on 83 samples and 272 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel We2 0.4 Sand-gravel 2.4 4.8 Till 97. 5.9 Shell -- -- Sand-shel1 -- -- Sand 9X7. 6.9 Silty sand 31.3 31.2 Silt 12.0 10.7 Clay 3357, 40.1 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 44, --Bathymetric occurrence of Portlandia fraterna, based on three samples and five specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 45. --Occurrence of Portlandia fraterna in bottom sediments, based on three samples and five specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shel1 Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Table 50. --Bathymetric occurrence of Portlandia iris, Table 46. --Bathymetric occurrence of Portlandia frigida, based on 47 samples and 334 specimens. based on three samples and five specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 0-24 Zl 0.3 25-49 -- -- 25-49 -- -- 50-99 33.3 20.0 50-99 14.9 12.6 100-199 -- => 100-199 27.7 26.0 200-499 66.7 80.0 200-499 55a, 61.1 500-999 -- == 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- =e 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- = 2000-3999 -- == Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 47. --Occurrence of Portlandia frigida in bottom sediments, based on three samples and five specimens. Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- == Gravel 4.3 2.4 Sand-gravel -- ot Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Till 152 4.5 Shell -- = Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- os Sand-shell -- -- Sand -- = Sand 6.5 7.0 Silty sand 33.3 60.0 Silty sand 28.3 35.3 Silt -- on Silt 15123 13.3 Clay 66.7 40.0 Clay 30.4 37.5 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Percentage of Table 4g, --Bathymetric occurrence of Portlandia inflata, based on 24 Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 == -- 0-24 == -- 25-49 -- =- 25-49 eS on 50-99 20.8 6.1 50-99 75.0 75.0 100-199 4.2 iat 100-199 ne an 200-499 75.0 92.4 200-499 25.0 25.0 500-999 = ae 500-999 == == 1000-1999 =e Sa 1000-1999 =e == 2000-3999 =e == 2000-3999 se oa Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 samples and 197 specimens. Percentage of Table 51. --Occurrence of Portlandia iris in bottom sediments, based on 46 samples and 331 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Table 52. --Bathymetric occurrence of Portlandia lenticula See based on four samples and four specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Table 49. --Occurrence of Portlandia inflata in bottom sediments, Table 53, --Occurrence of Portlandia lenticula in bottom sediments, based on 24 samples and 197 specimens. based on four samples and four specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel == as Gravel = oe Sand-gravel 16.6 65.0 Sand-gravel a = Till 4.2 0.5 Till ae e2 Shell —— == Shell = == Sand-shell <— = Sand-shell == = Sand =o oa Sand -- == Silty sand 4.2 1.5 Silty sand 75.0 75.0 Silt 25.0 13.2 Silt 25.0 25.0 Clay 50.0 19.8 Clay = Ss Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Specimens 137 Bottom type Percentage of Table 54. --Bathymetric occurrence of Portlandia lucida, based on 27 samples and 161 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 357 0.6 25-49 -- aa 50-99 18.5 11.2 100-199 44.5 47.8 200-499 SES) 40.4 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 55. --Occurrence of Portlandia lucida in bottom sediments, based on 25 samples and 132 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Gravel 4.0 Sand-gravel 4.0 Till 16.0 Shell -- Sand-shel] 4.0 Sand 4.0 Silty sand 24.0 Silt 4.0 Clay 40.0 Total 100.0 beat. IN| AnAof: OM Specimens MW Table 56,.--Bathymetric occurrence of Solemya velum. based on 33 samples and 65 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 42.4 64.6 25-49 15.1 Ui) 50-99 27.3 20.0 100-199 6.1 3.1 200-499 6.1 3.1 500-999 -- ms 1000-1999 3.0 15 2000-3999 -- mae Total 100.0 100.0 Table 57. --Occurrence of Solemya velum in bottom sediments, based on 21 samples and 37 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Gravel — Sand-gravel = Till <5 Shell - Sand-shell Sand 5 Silty sand 1 Silt Clay Total 100. Specimens 138 Table 58.--Bathymetric occurrence of Arcidae, based on 7 samples and 15 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 42.8 53.3 25-49 =o =o 50-99 14.3 13.3 100-199 14.3 6.7 200-499 14.3 6.7 500-999 -- aS 1000-1999 -- = 2000-3999 14.3 20.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 59.--Occurrence of Arcidae in bottom sediments, ba on 7 samples and 15 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type sed Samples Specimens Gravel 14.3 6.7 Sand-gravel 14.3 6.7 Till 14.3 6.7 Shell ome ar Sand-shell -- oc Sand 28.5 46.6 Silty sand 14.3 20.0 Silt == = Clay 14.3 13.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 60. --Bathymetric occurrence of Arca sp., based on 11 samples and 19 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 27.3 26.3 25-49 36.3 36.8 50-99 9.1 5.3 100-199 -- a 200-499 Cet 10.5 500-999 18.2 21.1 1000-1999 -- ce 2000-3999 oo a Total 100.0 100.0 Table 61.--Occurrence of Arca sp. in bottom sediments, based on 11 samples and 19 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell 27.3 21.0 Sand 45.4 47.4 Silty sand 18.2 26.3 Silt 9.1 B53! Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 62.--Bathymetric occurrence of Bathyarca anomala, based on 9 samples and 129 specimens. Depth range (m) UU Percentage of 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Samples Specimens 22.3 38.8 44.4 58.1 Boece Soul 100.0 100.0 Table 63.--Occurrence of Bathyarca anomala in bottom sediments, based on 8 samples and 57 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- on Sand-gravel 12.5 3.5 Till 37.5 89.6 Shell = os Sand-shell -- oe Sand 12.5 7, Silty sand 1255 iS / Silt -- = Clay 25.0 3.5 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 64.--Bathymetric occurrence of Bathyarca pectunculoides, based on 157 samples and 1,297 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Samples Specimens Gail 6.7 61.1 72.9 33.8 20.4 100.0 100.0 Table 65.--Occurrence of Bathyarca pectunculoides in bottom sediments, based on 140 samples and 1,095 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel 15.7 43.8 Sand-gravel 5.0 1.2 Till 20.0 31.9 Shell == = Sand-shel] -- -- Sand ies) Za Silty sand Soe) 13.8 Silt Bol Qeill Clay 10.0 329, Total 100.0 100.0 139 Table 66.--Bathymetric occurrence of Bathyarca sp., based on 9 samples and 14 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Samples Specimens 66.7 78.6 33%3 21.4 100.0 100.0 Table 67. --Occurrence based on 9 of Bathyarca sp. in bottom sediments, samples and 14 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel rhitsat 7.1 Till able 7.1 Shell 11.1 14.3 Sand-shell -- -- Sand 11.1 Tol Silty sand 22.3 14.3 Silt -- -- Clay S333, 50.1 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 68. --Bathymetric occurrence of Limopsidae, based on 16 samples and 1,052 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Samples Specimens 6.2 0.2 6.2 0.1 50.0 2.9 25.0 96.5 12.6 0.3 100.0 100.0 Table 69. --Occurrence of Limopsidae in bottom sediments, based on 16 samples and 1,052 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel 6.2 0.2 Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- == Sand-shell 18.8 0.5 Sand 50.0 98.8 Silty sand 12.5 0.3 Silt 12.5 0.2 Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 70, --Bathymetric occurrence of Limopsis affinis, based on 4 samples and 10 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 -- 25-49 -- 50-99 == 100-199 -- 200-499 -- 500-999 -- 1000-1999 2000-3999 - Total Table 71. --Occurrence of Limopsis affinis in bottom sed based on 4 samples and 10 specimens. iments, Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- =s Sand-gravel == ne Till = ae Shell —— = Sand-shell -- = Sand -- aS Silty sand 25.0 40.0 Silt 50.0 20.0 Clay 25.0 40.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 72, --Bathymetric occurrence of Limopsis cristata, based on three samples and four specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 S353) 25.0 25-49 -- -- 50-99 -- -- 100-199 -- -- 200-499 33.3 25.0 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 3305 50.0 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 73. --Qccurrence of Limopsis cristata in bottom sediments, based on three samples and four specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Gravel -- Sand-gravel -- Till -- Shell -- Sand-shell -- Sand = Silty sand Silt Clay - Total Specimens 140 Table 74, --Bathymetric occurrence of Limopsis minuta, based on 13 samples and 30 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples 0-24 Yet 25-49 -- 50-99 -- 100-199 =- 200-499 Tou 500-999 23.1 1000-1999 61.5 2000-3999 -- Total 100.0 Table 75, --Occurrence of Limopsis minuta in bottom-sedi based on 13 samples and 30 specimens. Specimens 3.3 ments , Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 7.7 3.3 Till -- -- Shel] -- -- Sand-shel] -- -- Sand toil 20.0 Silty sand 30.8 23.3 Silt 30.8 16.7 Clay 23.0 36.7 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 76, --Bathymetric occurrence of Limopsis sulcata, based on 6 samples and 21 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples 0-24 -- 25-49 -- 50-99 16.7 100-199 -- 200-499 a= 500-999 -- 1000-1999 83.3 2000-3999 -- Total Table 77. --Occurrence of Limopsis sulcata in bottom sed based on 6 samples and 21 specimens. Specimens iments, Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand -- == Silty sand 33.3 14.3 Silt 33.3 33.3 Clay 33.3 52.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 78. --Bathymetric occurrence of Limopsis sp., based on two samples and two specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 25-49 -- -- 50-99 ee ES 100-199 -- -- 200-499 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 50.0 2000-3999 -- Total Table 79. --Occurrence of Limopsis sp. in bottom sediments, based on two samples and two specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- =- Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell =- -- Sand -- -- Silty sand 50.0 50.0 Silt 50.0 50.0 Clay -- -- Total Table 80. --Bathymetric occurrence of Glycymeris pectinata, based on 20 samples and 40 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 30.0 30.0 25-49 55.0 37.5 50-99 = os 100-199 15.0 32.5 200-499 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 == a 2000-3999 --_ -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 81. --Occurrence of Glycymeris pectinata in bottom sediments, based on 20 samples and 40 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 5.0 10.0 Till -- -- Shel] -- -- Sand-shell 40.0 55.0 Sand 50.0 30.0 Silty sand 5.0 5.0 Silt -- -- Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 141 Table 82, --Bathymetric occurrence of Glycymeris sp., based on 23 Depth range (m) samples and 48 specimens. Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 21.7 29.2 25-49 Sep 41.6 50-99 -- -- 100-199 4.4 al 200-499 30.4 22.9 500-999 4.4 4.2 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 83. --Occurrence of Glycymeris sp. in bottom sediments, based on 23 samples and 48 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- == Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell 4.4 2.1 Sand-shell 21.7 14.6 Sand 139) 83.3 Silty sand -- -- Silt -- -- Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 84, --Bathymetric occurrence of Mytilidae, based on 33 samples and 201 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 9.1 2.0 25-49 6.1 21.4 50-99 21.2 17.9 100-199 36.4 49.2 200-499 24.2 55 500-999 3.0 2.0 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 85. --Occurrence of Mytilidae in bottom sediments, based on 26 samples and 171 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel Us 19.9 Sand-gravel 11.6 41.5 Till 7.7 2.4 Shell -- -- Sand-shel1 3.8 14.0 Sand 19.2 259 Silty sand 7.7 7.6 Silt 15.4 6.4 Clay 26.9 Ges} Total 100.0 100.0 Table 86.--Bathymetric occurrence of Crenella decussata, Table 90.--Bathymetric occurrence of Crenella sp., based on 83 samples and 443 specimens. based on 35 samples and 69 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 3.6 0.9 0-24 14.3 7.3 25-49 12.0 18.1 25-49 14.3 13.0 50-99 61.5 67.9 50-99 28.6 18.8 100-199 20.5 12.6 100-199 37.0 56.5 200-499 2.4 0.5 200-499 -- co 500-999 -- -- 500-999 = es 1000-1999 as — 1000-1999 2.9 2.9 2000-3999 = = 2000-3999 2.9 1.5 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 87.--Occurrence of Crenella decussata in bottom Table 91.--Occurrence of Crenella sp. in bottom sediments, sediments, based on 81 samples and 439 specimens. based on 32 samples and 63 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel Sad 4.1 Gravel PAG) 95 Sand-gravel 7.4 359. Sand-gravel 9.4 28.6 Till ley 0.5 Till == as Shell 2.5 0.6 Shell 3.1 11.1 Sand-shell m5 = Sand-shel] 6.2 3.2 Sand 34.6 25.1 Sand 34.4 27.0 Silty sand 29.6 56.0 Silty sand 21.9 Teil Silt Sy) 0.9 Silt Salt 3.2 Clay 17.3 8.9 Clay 9.4 6.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 88. --Bathymetric occurrence of Crenella glandula, Table 92.--Bathymetric occurrence of Dacrydium vitreum, based on 229 samples and 1,835 specimens. based on 94 samples and 519 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 a5 6.4 0-24 -- -- 25-49 8.7 45.8 25-49 1.1 0.4 50-99 54.6 30.7 50-99 a => 100-199 29.7 16.2 100-199 52.1 71.3 200-499 35) 0.9 200-499 38.3 26.2 500-999 a = 500-999 2.1 0.4 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 B58) 1.5 2000-3999 = ze 2000-3999 ial 0.2 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 89.--Occurrence of Crenella glandula in bottom Table 93.--Occurrence of Dacrydium vitreum in bottom sediments, based on 205 samples and 1,696 specimens. sediments, based on 92 samples and 511 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 7.8 6.7 Gravel 4.3 2.9 Sand-gravel 7.8 5.8 Sand-gravel 2.2 0.4 Till 15.6 33.4 Till = mS Shell a5 0.3 Shell =) => Sand-shell 2:3 0.6 Sand-shel] == = Sand 33.7 21.3 Sand 12.0 Zid) Silty sand 17.1 27.0 Silty sand 18.5 14.3 Silt 2.0 1.2 Silt 8.7 Shs! Clay 12.2 3.7 Clay 54.3 73.6 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 142 Table 98. --Bathymetric occurrence of Musculus corrugatus, Table 94. --Bathymetric occurrence of Geukensia demissa, based on 11 samples and 88 specimens. based on 10 samples and 36 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 100.0 100.0 0-24 =e -- 25-49 os om 25-49 See; 2.3 50-99 = os 50-99 72.7 75.0 100-199 oe em 100-199 9.1 22.7 200-499 -- = 200-499 -- =e 500-999 -- os 500-999 a a 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 = =e 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 oo a Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 95. --Occurrence of Geukensia demissa in bottom sediments, based on 4 samples and 18 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of based on 127 samples and 1,132 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Table 99. --Occurrence of Musculus corrugatus in bottom sediments, based on 10 samples and 87 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Gravel -- oe Sand-gravel -- == Sand-gravel 40.0 60.9 Till = = Till 30.0 33.3 Shell -- -- Shell 10.0 325 Sand-shel1 -- -- Sand-shel] -- = Sand 25.0 bo) Sand 20.0 2.3 Silty sand 75.0 94.4 Silty sand -- so Silt -- -- Silt -- —— Clay = -- Clay oo = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 96. --Bathymetric occurrence of Modiolus modiolus, Table 100.--Bathymetric occurrence of Musculus discors, based on 80 samples and 457 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples- Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 2.4 0.3 0-24 -- -- 25-49 22.8 58.3 25-49 Was) 53.8 50-99 55.1 26.8 50-99 58.8 40.3 100-199 17.3 9e7 100-199 23H) 5.9 200-499 2.4 4.9 200-499 -- -- 500-999 -- — 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 <= oe 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- = 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 97. --Occurrence of Modiolus modiolus in bottom sediments, based on 98 samples and 953 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Table 101.--Occurrence of Musculus discors in bottom sediments, based on 5/7 samples and 417 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 17.4 4.7 Gravel 21.1 au Sand-gravel 23.5 23.5 Sand-gravel 42.1 82.0 Till 6.1 3.6 Till 15.8 4.3 Shel] Cail 0.8 Shell Vey, 3.8 Sand-shell 6.1 54.4 Sand-shel] 325) 0.8 Sand 33.7 9.9 Sand 8.8 2.4 Silty sand 6.1 2.9 Silty sand 1.7 0.2 Silt 1.0 0.1 Silt -- -- Clay 1.0 0.1 Clay Bos} 1.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 143 Table 102.--Bathymetric occurrence of Musculus niger, based on 115 samples and 406 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Table 106.--Bathymetric occurrence of Mytilus edulis, based on 106 samples and 5,269 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 2.6 1.0 0-24 34.0 14.5 25-49 20.0 24.4 25-49 21.7 72.5 50-99 54.8 58.1 50-99 33.0 12.4 100-199 21.7 16.3 100-199 8.5 0.5 200-499 0.9 0.2 200-499 2.8 0.1 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- = 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- — 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- == Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 103.--Occurrence of Musculus niger in bottom based on 105 samples and 372 specimens. sediments, Bottom type Percentage of based on 62 samples and 1,083 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Table 107.--Occurrence of Mytilus edulis in bottom sediments, Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 9.5 7.0 Gravel 6.5 2.7 Sand-gravel 15.2 19.9 Sand-gravel 16.2 43.8 Till 6.7 24.5 Till 3.2 1.1 Shell 1.0 0.5 Shel] 1.6 0.3 Sand-shel1 i) 0.5 Sand-shell -- = Sand 40.0 25.2 Sand 43.5 12.9 Silty sand 10.5 Cer) Silty sand 22.6 37.8 Silt Bere 4.6 Silt 1.6 0.1 Clay O35 8.1 Clay 4.8 1.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 104.--Bathymetric occurrence of Musculus sp., Table 108. --Bathymetric occurrence of Pectinidae, based on 13 samples and 75 specimens. based on 14 samples and 23 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 0-24 Teal 4.4 25-49 7.7 10.7 25-49 35577, 30.4 50-99 53.8 22.7 50-99 14.3 8.7 100-199 15.4 57.3 100-199 28.6 21.7 200-499 23.1 9.3 200-499 14.3 34.8 500-999 -- = 500-999 =e <2 1000-1999 -- = 1000-1999 mS = 2000-3999 -- = 2000-3999 == o= Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 105.--Occurrence of Musculus sp. in bottom sediments, based on 10 samples and 71 specimens. Table 109.--Occurrence of Pectinidae in bottom sediments, based on 12 samples and 21 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 20.0 60.6 Gravel 8.3 4.8 Sand-gravel 30.0 26.8 Sand-gravel << zs Till 10.0 4.2 Till -- == Shell == == Shell 8.3 9.5 Sand-shell -- -- Sand-shell 25.0 14.3 Sand 10.0 1.4 Sand 33.4 28.6 Silty sand 10.0 1.4 Silty sand 16.7 9.5 Silt -- -- Silt 8.3 33.3 Clay 20.0 5.6 Clay —— == Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 144 Table1l0.--Bathymetric occurrence of Chlamys islandica, based on 76 samples and 361 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 oo = 25-49 ehoe) 0.9 50-99 38.2 74.8 100-199 52.6 22.4 200-499 Bes) 1.9 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table11l.--Occurrence of Chlamys islandica in bottom sediments, based on 48 samples and 276 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel 52.0 59.8 Sand-gravel 18.7 31.9 Till 10.4 2.5 Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand 10.4 4.0 Silty sand 2.1 0.7 Silt el 0.4 Clay 4.2 0.7 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 112--Bathymetric occurrence of Cyclopecten nanus, based on 3 samples and 21 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 = a 25-49 = = 50-99 66.7 52.4 100-199 33.3 47.6 200-499 a se 500-999 =a = 1000-1999 - = 2000-3999 = = Total 100.0 100.0 Table113.--Occurrence of Cyclopecten nanus in bottom sediments, based on 3 samples and 21 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand 100.0 100.0 Silty sand -- - Silt -- -- Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 145 Table114.--Bathymetric occurrence of Cyclopecten pustulosus, based on 30 samples and 58 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 25-49 -- == 50-99 -- -- 100-199 63.3 53.5 200-499 30.0 43.1 500-999 6.7 3.4 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table115.--Occurrence of Cyclopecten pustulosus in bottom sediments, based on 25 samples and 44 specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel 8.0 22.8 Sand-gravel 24.0 15.9 Till 20.0 31.8 Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand 24.0 13.6 Silty sand 20.0 13.6 Silt -- -- Clay 4.0 2.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 116.--Bathymetric occurrence of Delectopecten vitreus, based on 3 samples and 12 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 = = 25-49 =: ss 50-99 = =: 100-199 =o = 200-499 66.7 66.7 500-999 33.3 33.3 1000-1999 ze a 2000-3999 ae ra Total 100.0 100.0 Table 117.--Occurrence of Delectopecten vitreus in bottom sediments, based on one sample and four specimens. Percentage of Bottom type Samples Specimens Gravel = = Sand-gravel oS == Till 100.0 100.0 Shell -- = Sand-shell 2 = Sand = == Silty sand -- = Silt -- == Clay -- == Total 100.0 100.0 Tablell8. --Bathymetric occurrence of Placopecten magellanicus, based on 164 samples and 1,225 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 25-49 6.7 335) 50-99 59.8 61.5 100-199 30.5 33.8 200-499 3.0 Te2 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 119.--Occurrence of Placopecten magellanicus in bottom sediments, based on 98 samples and 622 specimens. Bottom type Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shel] Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Percentage of Samples rH w Hm OOr 1 oN oER hee Pw NOrOROS Specimens a wn w NOWONOI1OCL POONan = So i=) o Table 120,--Bathymetric occurrence of Propeamussium thalassinum, based on 6 samples and 28 specimens. Depth range (m) 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Percentage of Samples Specimens 16.7 7.1 66.6 50.0 16.7 42.9 100.0 100.0 Table 121. --Occurrence of Propeamussium thalassinum in bottom sediments, based on 4 samples and 26 specimens. Bottom type Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shell Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Percentage of Samples Specimens 25.0 7.8 25.0 46.1 50.0 46.1 100.0 100.0 146 Table 122.--Bathymetric occurrence of Plicatula gibbosa, based on four samples and six specimens. Depth range (m) Samples 0-24 25.0 25-49 50.0 50-99 25.0 100-199 = 200-499 -- 500-999 -- 1000-1999 -- 2000-3999 -- Total 100.0 Percentage of Specimens 33.3 3353 Skis) Table 123.--Occurrence of Plicatula gibbosa in bottom sediments, based on four samples and six specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shell Sand Silty: sand Silt Clay Total Table 124,-Bathymetric occurrence of Anomia simplex, based on 301 samples and 10,880 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 125--Occurrence of Anomia simplex in bottom sediments, based on 225 samples and 8,978 specimens. Bottom type Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shell Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Percentage of Samples 14.3 20.0 12.5 1-3 Specimens we ar w Ree ONOWR~ S CK OWW4 ENN ~ i=) o . Table 130.--Bathymetric occurrence of Limatula sp., Table 126 --Bathymetric occurrence of Anomia squamula, based on u % based on 14 samples and 22 specimens. 279 samples and 4,231 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 1.8 0.2 0-24 14.3 27.3 25-49 5.4 11.9 25-49 21.5 13.6 50-99 39.7 41.7 50-99 14.3 9.1 100-199 S5eu 27.1 100-199 nl 9.1 200-499 17.6 19,1 200-499 35.7 36.4 500-999 0.4 <0.1 500-999 Honk 4.5 1000-1999 -- —— 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 127--Occurrence of Anomia squamula in bottom sediments, based on 217 samples and 3 3 ,083 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 17.6 22.4 Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 22.1 29.9 Sand-gravel 7.2 4.5 Till 18.4 13 21 Till -- -- Shell 1.8 2. Shell -- -- Sand-shell 0.9 0.4 Sand-shel1 21.4 31.9 Sand 24.5 18.5 Sand 21.4 18.2 Silty sand 8.3 4.3 Silty sand 7.1 4.5 Silt C.9 5e5 Silt 42.9 40.9 Clay 5.5 4.7 Clay oe = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 128. --Bathymetric occurrence of Limatula subauriculata, based on 14 samples and 328 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Table 131.--Occurrence of Limatula sp. in bottom sediments, based on 14 samples and 22 specimens. Bottom type Percentage o f Table 132.--Bathymetric occurrence of Lucinidae , based on 44 samples and 166 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 cs = 0-24 81.8 93.4 25-49 2s a 25-49 13.7 5.4 50-99 on =o 50-99 4.5 Te 100-199 21.4 1.8 100-199 = a 200-499 21.4 92.7 200-499 = _— 500-999 14.3 0.9 500-999 at ee 1000-1999 42.9 4.6 1000-1999 -_ Be 2000-3999 -- =- 2000-3999 _ we Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 129. --Occurrence of Limatula subauriculata in bottom sediments, based on 14 samples and 328 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Table 133. --Occurrence of Lucinidae in bottom sediments, based on 44 samples and 166 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel == =e Gravel aia aa Sand-gravel 7.1 0.3 Sand-gravel -- => Till =e = Till = SS Shell =- =o Shell 2.3 1.2 Sand-shel] ae = Sand-shel] 22.7 11.4 Sand 28.6 93.9 Sand 72.7 86.8 Silty sand 28.6 3.4 Silty sand 2.3 0.6 Silt 35.7 2.4 Silt -- -- Clay =o ao Clay = = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 147 Table 134.--Bathymetric occurrence of Lucinoma blakeana, Table 138.--Bathymetric occurrence of Lucinoma sp., based on 6 samples and 34 specimens. based on four samples and four specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- = 0-24 25.0 25.0 25-49 == =e 25-49 -- -- 50-99 50.0 38.3 50-99 —— a 100-199 SE}58} 58.8 100-199 on as 200-499 16.7 2.9 200-499 25.0 25.0 500-999 -- =o 500-999 25.0 25.0 1000-1999 SS =< 1000-1999 25.0 25.0 2000-3999 == > oe 2000-3999 os = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 135--Occurrence of Lucinoma blakeana in bottom sediments, Table 139.--Occurrence of Lucinoma sp. in bottom sediments, based on 6 samples and 34 specimens. based on four samples and four specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel = == Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- o> Sand-gravel -- -- Till =o oS Till -- == Shell oe a Shell -- -- Sand-shel1 = oS Sand-shell -- -- Sand 50.0 38.2 Sand -= a5 Silty sand 50.0 61.8 Silty sand 75.0 75.0 Silt -- -- Silt 25.0 25.0 Clay = ss Clay a= =e Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 136.--Bathymetric occurrence of Lucinoma filosa, Table 140,.--Bathymetric occurrence of Parvilucina blanda, based on 241 samples and 2,266 specimens. based on five samples and six specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 0.4 <0.1 0-24 20.0 16.7 25-49 2.5) 0.4 25-49 80.0 83.3 50-99 44.8 31.7 50-99 -- -- 100-199 38.2 51.4 100-199 -- -- 200-499 12.0 16.3 200-499 -- == 500-999 1.7 0.2 500-999 -- == 1000-1999 0.4 0.1 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 137.--Occurrence of Lucinoma filosa in bottom sediments, Table 141.--Occurrence of Parvilucina blanda in bottom based on 241 samples and 2,266 specimens. sediments, based on five samples and six specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Gravel -- == Sand-gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- — Till -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell 1.7 0.4 Sand-shell 20.0 16.7 Sand 42.3 39.4 Sand 60.0 66.6 Silty sand 37.3 48.1 Silty sand 20.0 16.7 Silt 5.0 1.4 Silt -- -- Clay 13.7 10.7 Clay == == Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 148 Table 142.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira croulinensis, Table 146.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira equalis, based on three samples and four specimens. based on 44 samples and 309 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 = =e 0-24 > a 25-49 S3'%5 25.0 25-49 4.5 2.9 50-99 3353 25.0 50-99 13.6 18.8 100-199 -- -- 100-199 34.1 27.9 200-499 SSeS 50.0 200-499 34.1 25.2 500-999 -- -- 500-999 11.4 24.9 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 =- -- 2000-3999 2.3 0.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 143.--Occurrence of Thyasira croulinensis in bottom Table 147. --Occurrence of Thyasira equalis in bottom sediments, based on three samples and four specimens. sediments, based on 44 samples and 309 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Gravel -- oo Sand-gravel -- -- Sand-gravel -- -- Till 3383 25.0 Till -- -- Shell -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand-shell -- -- Sand -- -- Sand 11.4 12.3 Silty sand 33.3 50.0 Silty sand 31.8 35.9 Silt 33.3 25.0 Silt 6.8 3.6 Clay == -- Clay 50.0 48.2 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 144,--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira elliptica, Table 148.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira ferruginea, based on 4 samples and 12 specimens. based on 92 samples and 1,381 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 zs 2 0-24 = be 25-49 -- == 25-49 1.1 0.1 50-99 75.0 91.7 50-99 1.1 0.1 100-199 25.0 8.3 100-199 -- = 200-499 oe =a 200-499 7.6 6.4 500-999 as = 500-999 28.3 54.0 1000-1999 -- == 1000-1999 36.9 19.8 2000-3999 = Pe 2000-3999 25.0 19.6 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 145--Occurrence of Thyasira elliptica in bottom Table 149.--Occurrence of Thyasira ferruginea in bottom sediments, based on 4 samples and 12 specimens. sediments, based on 92 samples and 1,381 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- ers Gravel a = Sand-gravel -- = Sand-gravel -- == Till -- aa Till <= = Shell == _ Shell == — Sand-shell -- == Sand-shell -- eh Sand 25.0 33.3 Sand 8.7 6.4 Silty sand -- as Silty sand 26.1 45.2 Silt = S Silt 50.0 43.0 Clay 75.0 66.7 Clay 15.2 5.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 149 Table 150.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira flexuosa, based on 104 samples and 1,044 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 151.--Occurrence of Thyasira flexuosa in bottom sediments, based on 104 samples and 1,044 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel 3.8 0.4 Sand-gravel 1.0 1.0 Till x) ies Shell 1.0 0.6 Sand-shel] 1.0 0.1 Sand 27.8 12.1 Silty sand 20.2 38.3 Silt 10.6 14.7 Clay WERTs S125) Total 100.0 100.0 Table 152.--Bathymetric occurrence of _Thyasira flexuosa forma gouldii, based on 37 samples and 415 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 153.--Occurrence of Thyasira flexuosa forma_gouldii in bottom sediments, based on 37 samples and 415 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 2.7 0.5 Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shel1 -- -- Sand 32.5 10.6 Silty sand 37.8 45.3 Silt 5.4 9.6 Clay 21.6 34.0 Total 100.0 100.0 150 Table 154.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira pygmaea, based on 8 samples and 64 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Specimens Table 155,.--Occurrence of Thyasira pygmaea in bottom sediments, based on 8 samples and 64 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- = Sand-gravel -- — Till == as Shell = pea Sand-shel1 -- oo Sand J 12.5 Boil ilty san 3725 QO. Silt -- a8 Clay 50.0 56.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 156.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira subovata, based on 7 samples and 18 specimens. Percentage of Depth range (m) Samples Specimens 0-24 = -- 25-49 = = 50-99 57.1 44.4 100-199 -- -- 200-499 28.6 50.0 500-999 14.3 5.6 1000-1999 -- = 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 157.--Occurrence of Thyasira subovata in bottom sediments, based on 7 samples and 18 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel <= == Sand-gravel -- -- Till -- -- Shell -- -- Sand-shel] -- -- Sand 28.6 27.8 Silty sand 14.3 11.1 Silt 42.8 55.5 Clay 14.3 5.6 Total 100.0 100.0 | Table 158.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira trisinuata Table 162.--Bathymetric occurrence of Diplodonta sp., based on 133 samples and 1,079 specimens. based on 58 samples and 90 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 0.7 0.4 0-24 43.1 37.8 25-49 4.6 6.3 25-49 39.07; 34.4 50-99 60.9 61.6 50-99 13.8 21.1 100-199 21.8 16.9 100-199 oy =, 200-499 7.6 11.6 200-499 iTa7/ 1.1 500-999 3.0 29) 500-999 = as 1000-1999 0.7 0.2 1000-1999 7) 5.6 2000-3999 0.7 0.1 2000-3999 -- =e, Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 159.--Occurrence of Thyasira trisinuata in bottom Table 163. --Occurrence of Diplodonta sp. in bottom , sediments, based on 133 samples and 1,079 specimens. sediments, based on 58 samples and 90 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 0.8 0.1 Gravel => -- Sand-gravel 0.8 2.2 Sand-gravel a -- Till qg5 1.6 Till -- -- Shell = a Shell — =o Sand-shell 5) 1.1 Sand-shell 19.0 17.8 Sand abcd) 25.9 Sand 74.1 f3e3) Silty sand 39.8 52.5 Silty sand 5.2 363) Silt 5.3 4.9 Silt 1.7 5.6 Clay 15.0 11.7 Clay -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 160.--Bathymetric occurrence of Thyasira sp., Table 164.--Bathymetric occurrence of Arcinella cornuta, based on 141 samples and 731 specimens. based on three samples and three specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 0.7 0.3 0-24 333 SESS) 25-49 4.3 4.1 25-49 66.7 66.7 50-99 12.8 17.5 50-99 -- -- 100-199 31.2 30.6 100-199 -- -- 200-499 34.7 22.7 200-499 -- os 500-999 10.6 23.2 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 4.3 1.2 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 1.4, 0.4 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 161.--Occurrence of Thyasira sp. in bottom sediments, Table 165.--Occurrence of Arcinella cornuta in bottom sediments, based on 134 samples and 701 specimens. based on three samples and three specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 0.7 0.1 Gravel == =o Sand-gravel Siy/ ley Sand-gravel -- -- Till 4.5 3.4 Till == == Shell -- -- Shell = = Sand-shell 0.7 0.1 Sand-shell 3353) 33.3 Sand 10.5 11.3 Sand 66.7 66.7 Silty sand 29.9 31.0 Silty sand -- -- Silt 15.7 19.4 Silt -- == Clay 34.3 33.0 Clay ae = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 151 Table 166--Bathymetric occurrence of Cyclocardia borealis Table 170--Bathymetric occurrence of Cyclocardia sp., raat 2 specimens. based on 473 samples and 8,839 specimens. based on 16 samples and 2 Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 3.0 0.4 0-24 50.0 59.1 25-49 12.7 ablGs} 25-49 37.5 31.8 50-99 55.8 62.6 50-99 12.5 Gait 100-199 24.1 24.7 100-199 -- a 200-499 4.4 1.0 200-499 =< an 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- on 1000-1999 -- be -- 1000-1999 -- == 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- — Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table167.--Occurrence of Cyclocardia borealis in bottom sediments, Tablel71,.--Occurrence of Cyclocardia sp. in bottom sediments, based on 430 samples and 8,694 specimens. based on 16 samples and 22 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 7.4 3535) Gravel 6.2 4.5 Sand-gravel 10.2 4.3 Sand-gravel -- -- Till i223 38.4 Till -- os Shell 12 0.4 Shell 6.2 4.5 Sand-shel1 Sa7. 0.5 Sand-shel1 50.0 50.0 Sand 36.3 15.0 Sand 31.4 31.9 Silty sand 13,1 15.2 Silty sand 6.2 9.1 Silt 2.1 0.6 Silt 2s =o Clay L3hi: yl Clay ae ae Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 168--Bathymetric occurrence of Cyclocardia novangliae, Table 172.--Bathymetric occurrence of Pleuromeris tridentata, based on 26 samples and 89 specimens. based on 61 samples and 168 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 0-24 42.7 32.1 25-49 ELL 2a2 25-49 44.3 56.0 50-99 65.4 89.9 50-99 9.8 9.5 100-199 2350 6.6 100-199 1.6 1.2 200-499 3.8 1.1 200-499 1.6 1.2 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- oe 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- = 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- =5 g Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 169.--Occurrence of Cyclocardia novangliae in bottom sediments, Table 173.--Occurrence of Pleuromeris tridentata in bottom based on 25 samples and 88 specimens. sediments, based on 61 samples and 168 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 20.0 6.8 Gravel 1.6 2.4 Sand-gravel 44.0 43.2 Sand-gravel -- -- Till 12.0 27.3 Till -- -- Shell 8.0 18.2 Shell 6.6 7.1 Sand-shell 4.0 1.1 Sand-shell 41.0 Zaue Sand 8.0 2a Sand 47.5 65.5 Silty sand -- -- Silty sand 3.3 1.8 Silt -- -- Silt -- a Clay 4.0 1.1 Clay == == Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 152 Table 174.--Bathymetric occurrence of Pteromeris perplana, based on 14 samples and 28 specimens. Table 178.--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte castanea, based on 105 samples and 457 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 21.4 10.7 0-24 22.8 30.4 25-49 78.6 89.3 25-49 36.2 33.7 50-99 -- -- 50-99 36.2 34.6 100-199 -- -- 100-199 4.8 1.3 200-499 -- -- 200-499 -- == 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- = 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 175.--Occurrence of Pteromeris perplana in bottom sediments, based on 14 samples and 28 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- om Gravel 4.2 Opit Sand-gravel 7.2 3.6 Sand-gravel 13.8 24.2 Till -- == Till -- -- Shell 14.3 Tel Shell 3.2 1.6 Sand-shell 21.4 Shae Sand-shell 9.6 7.5 Sand 57.1 53/56 Sand 64.9 63.3 Silty sand -- -- Silty sand 3.2 1.0 Silt -- = Silt -- -- Clay -- aS Clay Del 0.3 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 176--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte borealis, b 18 samples and 22 specimens. ene ased on Depth range (m) Percentage of Table 179.--Occurrence of Astarte castanea in bottom sediments, based on 94 samples and 384 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Table 180--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte crenata subequilatera, based on 433 samples and 4,972 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 0-24 0.2 0.1 25-49 11.1 9.1 25-49 4.2 7.7 50-99 88.9 90.9 50-99 32.6 35.8 100-199 -- -- 100-199 41.1 44.7 200-499 == =e 200-499 21.2 11.5 500-999 -- -- 500-999 0.7 0.2 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 --— -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 177.--Occurrence of Astarte borealis in bottom sediments, based on 17 samples and 21 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Table 181>-Occurrence of Astarte crenata su bequilatera in bottom sediments, based on 391 samples and 4,649 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel ebick) 28.6 Gravel 14.3 14.6 Sand-gravel 35.3 42.9 Sand-gravel 11.3 2.1 Till =e = Till 21.7 49.3 Shell -~ = Shell 1.8 0.7 Sand-shell 5.9 4.7 Sand-shell 0.5 0.5 Sand 23.5 23.8 Sand 17.9 13.6 Silty sand == =F Silty sand 16.9 12.9 Silt == as Silt 2.8 1.2 Clay = oc Clay 12.8 §.1 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 153 Table 182.--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte elliptica, based Table 186--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte quadrans, based on 42 samples and 317 specimens. on 28 samples and 48 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 2.4 0.6 0-24 14.3 16.7 25-49 9.8 925) 25-49 32.2 22.9 50-99 75.6 83.2 50-99 46.4 56.2 100-199 12.2 6.7 100-199 7.1 4.2 200-499 =< ss 200-499 -- =5 500-999 = = 500-999 -- ac 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 <= = 2000-3999 == == 2000-3999 -- = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 183.--Occurrence of Astarte elliptica in bottom sediments, Table 187.--Occurrence of Astarte quadrans in bottom sediments, based on 31 samples and 284 specimens. based on 26 samples and 46 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 12.9 17.6 Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 22.6 3.9 Sand-gravel 19.3 13.0 Till 19.4 20.8 Till 3.8 2.2 Shell EBU 41.2 Shell = ea Sand-shel] Ser 083 Sand-shell 7.7 4.4 Sand 19.3 3.9 Sand 69.2 80.4 Silty sand ys 325 Silty sand = as Silt -- -- Silt == — Clay lad 8.8 Clay =< = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 184.--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte nana, based Table 188=--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte undata, based on 4 samples and 18 specimens. on 444 samples and 4,705 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 0-24 2.0 0.6 25-49 -- -- 25-49 11.8 10.1 50-99 -- -- 50-99 55.2 58.5 100-199 -- -- 100-199 27.7 30.0 200-499 50.0 aa53 200-499 2.7 0.6 500-999 50.0 66.7 500-999 0.6 0.2 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 =o 2S 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- == Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 185.--Occurrence of Astarte nana in bottom sediments, Table 189.--Occurrence of Astarte undata in bottom sediments, based on 4 samples and 18 specimens. based on 444 samples and 4,705 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Gravel 12.2 8.8 Sand-gravel -- oe Sand-gravel 10.7 2.4 Till -- = Till 13.8 37.2 Shell -- = Shell 2.7 6.4 Sand-shell -- —— Sand-shell Tez) 0.8 Sand 25.0 11.1 Sand 30.3 16.7 Silty sand 50.0 66.7 Silty sand 12.7 16.2 Silt 25.0 22.2 Silt aoe 1.4 Clay == == Clay 12.7 10.1 Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 154 Table 190--Bathymetric occurrence of Astarte sp., based Table 194--Bathymetric occurrence of Crassinella sp., on 94 samples and 533 specimens. based on three samples and nine specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 1.1 Tea 0-24 66.7 55.6 25-49 4.3 2.2 25-49 33.3 44.4 50-99 Shee 39.6 50-99 -- oo 100-199 28.7 2303 100-199 -- = 200-499 190 16.9 200-499 -- = 500-999 9.6 16.9 500-999 -- = 1000-1999 -- =o 1000-1999 == _ 2000-3999 == = 2000-3999 -- a Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 191.--Occurrence of Astarte sp. in bottom sediments, Table 195.--Occurrence of Crassinella sp. in bottom based on 88 samples and 515 specimens. sediments, based on three samples and nine specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 3.4 1.4 Gravel == aS Sand-gravel Oa 62 Sand-gravel = =i Till : 9.1 15.5 Till = Se Shell = == Shell = = Sand-shell =a Se Sand-shel1 33.3 22.2 Sand 42.1 57.1 Sand 66.7 77.8 Silty sand 17.0 13.2 Silty sand 3S == Silt 6.8 Sas Silt on — Clay 12.5 4.1 Clay se = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 192.--Bathymetric occurrence of Crassinella lunulata, Table 196--Bathymetric occurrence of Cerastoderma pinnulatum, based on 87 samples and 226 specimens. based on 466 samples and 3,317 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 49.4 53.5 0-24 4.5 40.2 25-49 40.3 38.9 25-49 18.7 12.9 50-99 5.7 05) 50-99 43.5 35.0 100-199 4.6 4.1 100-199 27.3 10.1 200-499 -- -- 200-499 5.8 is7/ 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 0.2 <0.1 2000-3999 =— ioe -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 193.--Occurrence of Crassinella Junulata in bottom Table 197.--Occurrence of Cerastoderma pinnulatum in bottom sediments, based on 87 samples and 226 specimens. sediments, based on 403 samples and 1,825 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel Zed Sell! Gravel 8.9 er Sand-gravel 2.3 1.3 Sand-gravel ale }7/ 8.4 Till oe a Till 5.9 2.5 Shell 4.6 Jel Shel] 1.6 4.5 Sand-shel1 36.8 31.9 Sand-shel1 5.7 7.5 Sand 46.0 46.9 Sand 43.7 58.3 Silty sand 8.0 13.7 Silty sand 9.9 6.4 Silt = oe Silt (2553 0.8 Clay ae a Clay 8.4 3.9 eK. ce ee 100.0) a 1000 ee Total 100.0 100.0 155 Table 198.--Bathymetric occurrence of Clinocardium ciliatum, based on four samples and six specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Table 199.--Occurrence of Clinocardium ciliatum in bottom sediments, based on four samples and six specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel aS) 25.0 Sand-gravel er on Till SESS) 50.0 Shell = = Sand-shel1 a =o Sand a aad Silty sand om mal Silt = on Clay 333) 25.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 200.--Bathymetric occurrence of Laevicardium mortoni, based on 47 samples and 104 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 49.0 56.7 25-49 46.8 39.4 50-99 4.2 Stat) 100-199 = a 200-499 -- oo 500-999 << os 1000-1999 -- = 2000-3999 -- a Total 100.0 100.0 Table 201.--Occurrence of Laevicardium mortoni in bottom sediments, based on 36 samples and 76 specimens. Bottom type Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shel] Sand Silty sand Silt Clay Total Percentage of Samples Specimens 5.6 3.9 33.3 27.6 55.5 59.3 5.6 9.2 100.0 100.0 156 Table 202.--Bathymetric occurrence of Mulinia lateralis See. based on 51 samples and 897 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 84.3 98.4 25-49 13.7 1.5 50-99 2.0 0.1 100-199 = oo 200-499 = — 500-999 =< os 1000-1999 == OS 2000-3999 == os Total 100.0 100.0 Table 203. --Occurrence of Mulinia lateralis in bottom sediments, based on 37 samples and 754 specimens. Bottom type Percentage of Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Sand-gravel 2.7 0.5 Till -- -- Shel] =o = Sand-shel] Beit 0.4 Sand 29.7 23.5 Silty sand 29.7 8.1 Silt 10.9 51.5 Clay 24.3 16.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 204. --Bathymetric occurrence of Spisula solidissima, based on 164 samples and 743 specimens. Depth range (m) Percentage of Samples Specimens 0-24 41.5 67.1 25-49 40.2 26.7 50-99 16.5 5.8 100-199 1.8 0.4 200-499 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Table 205.--Occurrence of Spisula solidissima in bottom sediments, based on 126 samples and 668 specimens. Bottom type Samples Percentage of Specimens Gravel Sand-gravel Till Shell Sand-shell Sand Silty sand Silt Clay -- ae Total 100.0 SOF ORI HY Table 206.--Bathymetric occurrence of Ervilia concentrica, Table 210.--Bathymetric occurrence of Solenidae, based on 112 samples and 592 specimens. based on 11 samples and 39 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 53.6 55.2 0-24 63.6 35.9 25-49 44.6 43.9 25-49 27.3 25.6 50-99 1.8 0.9 50-99 9.1 38.5 100-199 =- == 100-199 -- == 200-499 -- -- 200-499 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 or om 1000-1999 o 2S 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table207.--Occurrence of Ervilia concentrica in bottom sediments, Table 211.--Occurrence of Solenidae in bottom sediments, based on 112 samples and 592 specimens. based on 10 samples and 24 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel 0.9 1.4 Gravel 10.0 4.2 Sand-gravel 0.9 0.3 Sand-gravel =S == Till -- = Till -- om Shell 3.6 Sef2 Shell oO S Sand-shel1 27.7 30.4 Sand-shell 30.0 20.8 Sand 63.3 61.4 Sand 50.0 62.5 Silty sand 2.7 3.0 Silty sand 10.0 12.5 Silt 0.9 0.3 Silt ox = Clay -- -- Clay 2s aS Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 208. --Bathymetric occurrence of Mesodesma arctatum, Table 212.--Bathymetric occurrence of Ensis directus, based on 2 samples and 52 specimens. based on 206 samples and 2,150 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Depth range (m) Depth range (m) Samples Specimens Samples Specimens 0-24 -- -- 0-24 45.1 67.4 25-49 -- -- 25-49 319) 29.5 50-99 100.0 100.0 50-99 16.5 3.1 100-199 -- -- 100-199 0.5 <0.1 200-499 -- -- 200-499 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 500-999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 1000-1999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- -- 2000-3999 -- —— Total 100.0 — 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 Table 209. --Occurrence of Mesodesma arctatum in bottom Table 213.--Occurrence of Ensis directus in bottom sediments, sediments, based on 2 samples and 52 specimens. based on 194 samples and 2,113 specimens. Percentage of Percentage of Bottom type Bottom type Samples Specimens Samples Specimens Gravel -- -- Gravel 1.0 0.4 Sand-gravel -- -- Sand-gravel Sal 2.4 Till -- -- Till ce == Shell -- -- Shel] Sail 0.7 Sand-shell -- -- Sand-shel] 20.1 13.0 Sand -- -- Sand 69.6 60.1 Silty sand 50.0 3.8 Silty sand 2.6 23.2 Silt -- -- Silt 0.5 0.2 Clay 50.0 96.2 Clay = = Total 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 157 Table 214. --Bathymetric occurrence of Siliqua costata, based on 32 samples and 104 specimens. Depth range (m) 0-24 25-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500-999 1000-1999 2000-3999 Total Percentage of Samples Specimens 15.6 LHS) 31.3 41.4 46.9 39.4 Soil 6.7