Year-to-year changes of vertical temperature distribution in the California Current region: 1954 to 1986

Studies by Enfield and Allen (1980), McLain et al (1985), and others have shown that anomalously warm years in the northern coastal California Current correspond to El Niño conditions in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. Ocean model studies suggest a mechanical link between the northern coastal California Current and the equatorial ocean through long waves that propagate cyclonically along the ocean boundary (McCreary 1976; Clarke 1983; Shriver et al 1991). However, distinct observational evidence of such an oceanic connection is not extensive. Much of the supposed El Niño variation in temperature and sea level data from the coastal California Current region can be associated with the effects of anomalously intense north Pacific atmospheric cyclogenesis, which is frequently augmented during El Niño years (Wallace and Gutzler 1981; Simpson 1983; Emery and Hamilton 1984). This study uses time series of ocean temperature data to distinguish between locally forced effects, initiated by north Pacific atmospheric changes, and remotely forced effects, initiated by equatorial Pacific atmospheric changes related to El Niño events.

Work plan for analytical support of an integrated ecosystem assessment of the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem, FY11 ‐ FY13

NOAA/NCCOS is conducting the following work for the NOAA California Current Integrated Ecosystem Assessment, in support of the NOAA/NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center.

Juvenile salmonid distribution, growth, condition, origin, and environmental and species associations in the Northern California Current

Information is summarized on juvenile salmonid distribution, size, condition, growth, stock origin, and species and environmental associations from June and August 2000 GLOBEC cruises with particular emphasis on differences related to the regions north and south of Cape Blanco off Southern Oregon. Juvenile salmon were more abundant during the August cruise as compared to the June cruise and were mainly distributed northward from Cape Blanco. There were distinct differences in distribution patterns between salmon species: chinook salmon were found close inshore in cooler water all along the coast and coho salmon were rarely found south of Cape Blanco. Distance offshore and temperature were the dominant explanatory variables related to coho and chinook salmon distribution. The nekton assemblages differed significantly between cruises. The June cruise was dominated by juvenile rockfishes, rex sole, and sablefish, which were almost completely absent in August. The forage fish community during June comprised Pacific herring and whitebait smelt north of Cape Blanco and surf smelt south of Cape Blanco. The fish community in August was dominated by Pacific sardines and highly migratory pelagic species. Estimated growth rates of juvenile coho salmon were higher in the GLOBEC study area than in areas farther north. An unusually high percentage of coho salmon in the study area were precocious males. Significant differences in growth and condition of juvenile coho salmon indicated different oceanographic environments north and south of Cape Blanco. The condition index was higher in juvenile coho salmon to the north but no significant differences were found for yearling chinook salmon. Genetic mixed stock analysis indicated that during June, most of the Chinook salmon in our sample originated from rivers along the central coast of Oregon. In August, chinook salmon sampled south of Cape Blanco were largely from southern Oregon and northern California; whereas most chinook salmon north of Cape Blanco were from the Central Valley in California.

Current velocity and catch efficiency in sampling settlement-stage larvae of coral-reef fishes

Light traps and channel nets are fixed-position devices that involve active and passive sampling, respectively, in the collection of settlement-stage larvae of coral-reef fishes. We compared the abundance, taxonomic composition, and size of such larvae caught by each device deployed simultaneously near two sites that differed substantially in current velocity. Light traps were more selective taxonomically, and the two sampling devices differed significantly in the abundance but not size of taxa caught. Most importantly, light traps and channel nets differed greatly in their catch efficiency between sites: light traps were ineffective in collecting larvae at the relatively high-current site, and channel nets were less efficient in collecting larvae at the low-current site. Use of only one of these sampling methods would clearly result in biased and inaccurate estimates of the spatial variation in larval abundance among locations that differ in current velocity. When selecting a larval sampling device, one must consider not only how well a particular taxon may be represented, but also the environmental conditions under which the device will be deployed.