Quantitative composition and distribution of the macrobenthic invertebrate fauna of the Continental Shelf ecosystems of the Northeastern United States

From the mid-1950's to the mid-1960's a series of quantitative surveys of the macrobenthic invertebrate fauna were conducted in the offshore New England region (Maine to Long Island, New York). The surveys were designed to 1) obtain measures of macrobenthic standing crop expressed in terms of density and biomass; 2) determine the taxonomic composition of the fauna (ca. 567 species); 3) map the general features of macrobenthic distribution; and 4) evaluate the fauna's relationships to water depth, bottom type, temperature range, and sediment organic carbon content. A total of 1,076 samples, ranging from 3 to 3,974 m in depth, were obtained and analyzed. The aggregate macrobenthic fauna consists of 44 major taxonomic groups (phyla, classes, orders). A striking fact is that only five of those groups (belonging to four phyla) account for over 80% of both total biomass and number of individuals of the macrobenthos. The five dominant groups are Bivalvia, Annelida, Amphipoda, Echninoidea, and Holothuroidea. Other salient features pertaining to the macrobenthos of the region are the following: substantial differences in quantity exist among different geographic subareas within the region, but with a general trend that both density and biomass increase from northeast to southwest; both density and biomass decrease with increasing depth; the composition of the bottom sediments significantly influences both the kind and quantity of macrobenthic invertebrates, the largest quantities of both measures of abundance occurring in the coarser grained sediments and diminishing with decreasing particle size; areas with marked seasonal changes in water temperature support an abundant and diverse fauna, whereas a uniform temperature regime is associated with a sparse, less diverse fauna; and no detectable trends are evident in the quantitative composition of the macrobenthos in relation to sediment organic carbon content. (PDF file contains 246 pages.)

Annotated bibliography II of the hard clam Mercenaria mercenaria

In this era of proliferating scientific information it is difficult to keep up with the literature, even in one's own field. Review articles are helpful in summarizing the status of knowledge. In oyster biology, several such published reviews have been of great help to working scientists. The outstanding contributions that come to' mind are those by Baughman (1948), Korringa (1952), Joyce (1972), Breisch and Kennedy (1980), and Kennedy and Breisch (198 I). If done well, such compilations serve as checkpoints, eliminating or vastly reducing the need to consult the literature in detail. On Long Island, New York, where the hard clam Mercenaria mercenaria is the major commercial resource, we have felt the need for some time for a compendium of knowledge on this important mollusk. Several years ago my secretary, students, and I began to gather materials for an annotated bibliography. We have already published a collection of 2233 titles (McHugh et al. 1982), nearly all accompanied by abstracts, and in this publication we have added another 460. The experience has been rewarding. We have been surprised at the extent of the literature, much of it only remotely related to the shellfish industry itself, but nevertheless throwing light on the biology, physiology, and many other aspects of the scientific knowledge of hard clams. The following bibliography is divided into three parts. Part I comprises the bulk of the bibliography, while Parts 2 and 3 contain additional titles that we decided to include during editing, submission, and approval of the manuscript for publication. All three parts are indexed together, however. We also reexamined those titles in the previous bibliography (McHugh et al. 1982) which did not include abstracts. These are included in Parts 2 and 3 of this bibliography. Most of these contained no specific reference to Mercenaria mercenaria. A few searches were terminated for various reasons. (PDF file contains 66 pages.)

History of whaling in and near North Carolina

This study aims to reconstruct the history of shore whaling in the southeastern United States, emphasizing statistics on the catch of right whales, Eubalaena glacialis, the preferred targets. The earliest record of whaling in North Carolina is of a proposed voyage from New York in 1667. Early settlers on the Outer Banks utilized whale strandings by trying out the blubber of carcasses that came ashore, and some whale oil was exported from the 1660s onward. New England whalemen whaled along the North Carolina coast during the 1720s, and possibly earlier. As some of the whalemen from the northern colonies moved to Nortb Carolina, a shore-based whale fishery developed. This activity apparently continued without interruption until the War of Independence in 1776, and continued or was reestablished after the war. The methods and techniques of the North Carolina shore whalers changed slowly: as late as the 1890s they used a drogue at the end of the harpoon line and refrained from staying fast to the harpooned whale, they seldom employed harpoon guns, and then only during the waning years of the fishery. The whaling season extended from late December to May, most successfully between February and May. Whalers believed they were intercepting whales migrating north along the coast. Although some whaling occurred as far north as Cape Hatteras, it centered on the outer coasts of Core, Shackleford, and Bogue banks, particularly near Cape Lookout. The capture of whales other than right whales was a rare event. The number of boat crews probably remained fairly stable during much of the 19th century, with some increase in effort in the late 1870s and early 1880s when numbers of boat crews reached 12 to 18. Then by the late 1880s and 1890s only about 6 crews were active. North Carolina whaling had become desultory by the early 1900s, and ended completely in 1917. Judging by export and tax records, some ocean-going vessels made good catches off this coast in about 1715-30, including an estimated 13 whales in 1719, 15 in one year during the early 1720s, 5-6 in a three-year period of the mid to late 1720s, 8 by one ship's crew in 1727, 17 by one group of whalers in 1728-29, and 8-9 by two boats working from Ocracoke prior to 1730. It is impossible to know how representative these fragmentary records are for the period as a whole. The Carolina coast declined in importance as a cruising ground for pelagic whalers by the 1740s or 1750s. Thereafter, shore whaling probably accounted for most of the (poorly documented) catch. Lifetime catches by individual whalemen on Shackleford Banks suggest that the average annual catch was at least one to two whales during 1830·80, perhaps about four during the late 1870s and early 1880s, and declining to about one by the late 1880s. Data are insufficient to estimate the hunting loss rate in the Outer Banks whale fishery. North Carolina is the only state south of New Jersey known to have had a long and well established shore whaling industry. Some whaling took place in Chesapeake Bay and along the coast of Virginia during the late 17th and early 18th centuries, but it is poorly documented. Most of the rigbt whales taken off South Carolina, Georgia, and northern Florida during the 19th century were killed by pelagic whalers. Florida is the only southeastern state with evidence of an aboriginal (pre-contact) whale fishery. Right whale calves may have been among the aboriginal whalers' principal targets. (PDF file contains 34 pages.)

Climate change adaptation through coastal and use management: The context of environmental justice

Despite an increasing literary focus on climate change adaptation, the facilitation of this adaptation is occurring on a limited basis (Adger et al. 2007) .This limited basis is not necessarily due to inability; rather, a lack of comprehensive cost estimates of all options specifically hinders adaptation in vulnerable communities (Adger et al. 2007). Specifically the estimated cost of the climate change impact of sea-level rise is continually increasing due to both increasing rates and the resulting multiplicative impact of coastal erosion (Karl et al., 2009, Zhang et al., 2004) Based on the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, minority groups and small island nations have been identified within these vulnerable communities. Therefore the development of adaptation policies requires the engagement of these communities. State examples of sea-level rise adaptation through land use planning mechanisms such as land acquisition programs (New Jersey) and the establishment of rolling easements (Texas) are evidence that although obscured, adaptation opportunities are being acted upon (Easterling et al., 2004, Adger et al.2007). (PDF contains 4 pages)

Use of Artificial Eelgrass Mats by Saltmarsh-Nesting Common Terns (Sterna hirundo)

Terns and skimmers nesting on saltmarsh islands often suffer large nest losses due to tidal and storm flooding. Nests located near the center of an island and on wrack (mats of dead vegetation, mostly eelgrass Zostera) are less susceptible to flooding than those near the edge of an island and those on bare soil or in saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora). In the 1980’s Burger and Gochfeld constructed artificial eelgrass mats on saltmarsh islands in Ocean County, New Jersey. These mats were used as nesting substrate by common terns (Sterna hirundo) and black skimmers (Rynchops niger). Every year since 2002 I have transported eelgrass to one of their original sites to make artificial mats. This site, Pettit Island, typically supports between 125 and 200 pairs of common terns. There has often been very little natural wrack present on the island at the start of the breeding season, and in most years natural wrack has been most common along the edges of the island. The terns readily used the artificial mats for nesting substrate. Because I placed artificial mats in the center of the island, the terns have often avoided the large nest losses incurred by terns nesting in peripheral locations. However, during particularly severe flooding events even centrally located nests on mats are vulnerable. Construction of eelgrass mats represents an easy habitat manipulation that can improve the nesting success of marsh-nesting seabirds.

Larval abundance of summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) as a measure of recruitment and stock status

Summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) is one of the most economically and ecologically important estuarine-dependent species in the northeastern United States. The status of the population is currently a topic of controversy. Our goal was to assess the potential of using larval abundance at ingress as another fishery independent measure of spawning stock biomass or recruitment. Weekly long-term ichthyoplankton time series were analyzed from Little Egg Inlet, New Jersey (1989–2006) and Beaufort Inlet, North Carolina (1986–2004). Mean size-at-ingress and stage were similar between sites, whereas timing of ingress and abundance at ingress were not similar. Ingress primarily occurred during the fall at Little Egg Inlet and the winter at Beaufort Inlet. These findings agree with those from earlier studies in which at least two stocks (one north and one south of Cape Hatteras) were identified with different spawning periods. Larval abundance at Little Egg Inlet has increased since the late 1990s and most individuals now enter the estuary earlier during the season of ingress. Abundance at Little Egg Inlet was correlated with an increase in spawning stock biomass, presumably because spawning by larger, more abundant fish during the late 1990s and early 2000s provided increased larval supply, at least in some years. Larval abundance at ingress at Beaufort Inlet was not correlated with spawning stock biomass or with larval abundance at ingress at Little Egg Inlet, further supporting the hypothesis of at least two stocks. Larval abundance at Little Egg Inlet could be used as a fishery-independent index of spawning stock size north of Cape Hatteras in future stock assessments. Larval occurrence at Beaufort Inlet may provide information on the abundance of the stock south of Cape Hatteras, but additional stock assessment work is required.

Distribution and life history of two diminutive flatfishes, Citharichthys gymnorhinus and C. cornutus (Pleuronectiformes: Paralichthyidae), in the western North Atlantic

Citharichthys cornutus and C. gymnorhinus, diminutive flatfishes inhabiting continental shelves in the western Atlantic Ocean, are infrequently reported and poorly known. We identified 594 C. cornutus in 56 different field collections (68–287 m; most between 101–200 m) off the eastern United States, Bahamas, and eastern Caribbean Sea. Historical records and recently captured specimens document the northern geographic range of adults on the shelf off New Jersey (40°N, 70°W). Citharichthys cornutus measured 17.2–81.3 mm standard length (SL); males (20.0–79.1 mm SL) and females (28.0–81.3 mm SL) attain similar sizes (sex could not be determined for fish <20 mm SL). Males reach nearly 100% maturity at ≥60 mm SL. The smallest mature females are 41.5 mm SL, and by 55.1 mm SL virtually all are mature. Juveniles are found with adults on the outer shelf. Only 214 C. gymnorhinus were located in 42 different field collections (35–201 m, with 90% between 61 and 120 m) off the east coast of the United States, Bahamas, and eastern Caribbean Sea. Adults are found as far north as the shelf off Cape Hatteras, NC (35°N, 75°W). This diminutive species (to 52.4 mm SL) is among the smallest flatfishes but males (n=131; 20.3–52.4 mm SL) attain a slightly larger maximum size than that of females (n=58; 26.2–48.0 mm SL). Males begin to mature between 29 and 35 mm SL and reach 100% maturity by 35–40 mm SL. Some females are mature at 29 mm SL, and all females >35.1 mm SL are mature. Overlooked specimens in museum collections and literature enabled us to correct long-standing inaccuracies in northern distributional limits that appear in contemporary literature and electronic data bases for these species. Associated locality-data for these specimens allow for proper evaluation of distributional information for these species in relation to hypotheses regarding shifts in species ranges due to climate change effects.

Prevalence, intensity, and effect of a nematode (Philometra saltatrix) in the ovaries of bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix)

Examination of 203 adult bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) from Long Island, New York, in 2002 and 2003 and 66 from the Outer Banks, North Carolina, in 2003 revealed the presence of dracunculoid nematodes (Philometra saltatrix) in the ovaries of female fish. Percent prevalence reached 88% in July and then decreased after the peak of the spawning season. Bluefish contained up to 100 parasites per fish. Infection was associated with a range of disorders, including hemorrhage, inf lammation, edema, prenecrotic and necrotic changes, and follicular atresia, that may prevent proper development of oocytes and probably affect bluefish fecundity. Historical occurrences, life cycle, and geographical distribution of this nematode remain largely unknown, but may play important roles in recruitment processes of bluefish.

Quahogs in Eastern North America: Part I, Biology, Ecology, and Historical Uses

The northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenaria, ranges along the Atlantic Coast of North America from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, while the southern quahog, M. campechiensis, ranges mostly from Florida to southern Mexico. The northern quahog was fished by native North Americans during prehistoric periods. They used the meats as food and the shells as scrapers and as utensils. The European colonists copied the Indians treading method, and they also used short rakes for harvesting quahogs. The Indians of southern New England made wampum from quahog shells, used it for ornaments and sold it to the colonists, who, in turn, traded it to other Indians for furs. During the late 1600’s, 1700’s, and 1800’s, wampum was made in small factories for eventual trading with Indians farther west for furs. The quahoging industry has provided people in many coastal communities with a means of earning a livelihood and has provided consumers with a tasty, wholesome food whether eaten raw, steamed, cooked in chowders, or as stuffed quahogs. More than a dozen methods and types of gear have been used in the last two centuries for harvesting quahogs. They include treading and using various types of rakes and dredges, both of which have undergone continuous improvements in design. Modern dredges are equipped with hydraulic jets and one type has an escalator to bring the quahogs continuously to the boats. In the early 1900’s, most provinces and states established regulations to conserve and maximize yields of their quahog stocks. They include a minimum size, now almost universally a 38-mm shell width, and can include gear limitations and daily quotas. The United States produces far more quahogs than either Canada or Mexico. The leading producer in Canada is Prince Edward Island. In the United States, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island lead in quahog production in the north, while Virginia and North Carolina lead in the south. Connecticut and Florida were large producers in the 1990’s. The State of Campeche leads in Mexican production. In the northeastern United States, the bays with large openings, and thus large exchanges of bay waters with ocean waters, have much larger stocks of quahogs and fisheries than bays with small openings and water exchanges. Quahog stocks in certifi ed beds have been enhanced by transplanting stocks to them from stocks in uncertified waters and by planting seed grown in hatcheries, which grew in number from Massachusetts to Florida in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Use of ocean and estuarine habitats by young-of-year bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) in the New York Bight

Young-of-year (YOY) blue-fish (Pomatomus saltatrix) along the U.S. east coast are often assumed to use estuaries almost exclusively during the summer. Here we present data from 1995 to 1998 indicating that YOY (30–260 mm FL) also use ocean habitats along the coast of New Jersey. An analysis of historical and recent data on northern and southern ocean beaches (0.1–2 m) and the inner continental shelf (5–27 m) during extensive sampling in New Jersey waters from 1995 to 1998 indicated that multiple cohorts occurred (June–August) in every year. When comparable collections of YOY were made in the ocean and in an adjacent estuary, the abundance was 1–2 orders of magnitude greater on ocean beaches during the summer. The YOY were even more abundant in ocean habitats in the fall (September–October), presumably as a result of YOY leaving estuaries to join the coastal migration south. During 1999 and 2000, YOY bluefish were tagged with internal sequential coded wire microtags in order to refine our under-standing of habitat use and movement. Few (0.04%) of the fish tagged on ocean beaches were recaptured; however, 2.2% of the fish tagged in the estuary were recaptured from 2 to 27 days after tagging. Recaptured fish grew quickly (average 1.37 mm FL/d). On ocean beaches YOY fed on a variety of invertebrates and fishes but their diet changed with size. By approximately 80–100 mm FL, they were piscivorous and fed primarily on engraulids, a pattern similar to that reported in estuaries. Based on distribution, abundance, and feeding, both spring- and summer-spawned cohorts of YOY bluefish commonly use ocean habitats. Therefore, attempts to determine factors affecting recruitment success based solely on estuarine sampling may be inadequate and further examination, especially of the contribution of the summer-spawned cohort in ocean habitats, appears warranted.

Proposal for improving fishing opportunities off Pt. Loma by construction of an artificial reef

(Document pdf contains 42 pages)

Report of Pendleton artificial reef studies with recommendations for constructing a kelp reef

(Document pdf contains 64 pages)

A report of biological observations at Topanga artificial reef and Santa Monica Bay artificial reef

(Document pdf contains 25 pages)

Cruise Report 70-S-3: Rockfish

(PDF contains 3 pages)

Cruise Report 70-S-4: Crab

(PDF contains 4 pages)