Contributions to the Geology and Paleontology of the Canal Zone, Panama, and geologically related areas in central America and the West Indies. Part 11: The biologic character and geologic correlations of the sedimentary formations of Panama in their relation to the geologic history of Central America and the West Indies

The paper presents: 1) biologic summaries for each of the formations for which paleontologic data are available, with brief discussions of the geologic age; 2) geologic correlations of the formations and the distribution of their age-equivalents in Central America, the West Indies, and the southeastern United States; 3) an outline of the paleogeography of middle America. The biologic summaries are based on the paleontologic memoirs in this vol. by Messars. Howe, Berry, Chuchman, Jackson, Canu and Bassler and Pilsbry, Miss Rathbun and myself.

Observations on the life history and identity of intraspecific groups of the anchoveta, Cetengraulis mysticetus, in Montijo Bay and Chiriquí Province, Panama

ENGLISH: Howard and Landa (1958) and Barrett and Howard (1961) have studied the life history of the anchoveta in most of the areas where this species occurs in important quantities. The Gulf of Panama was the only area of Panama included in these studies, as this was the only one from which sufficient samples were available. Berdegue (1958) compared certain meristic and morphometric characters of anchovetas from Montijo Bay and nine other areas of the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. He found statistically significant differences, and concluded that the fish of the different areas belonged to separate "populations." Fish from Chiriquí province were not included in his study. Since the, completion of the above-mentioned studies, a number of collections of anchovetas from Montijo Bay and Chiriquí province have been obtained. In the present report use is made of this material to determine the salient facts regarding the life history of the anchoveta from these areas and to supplement the available knowledge of the identity of the intraspecific groups. Acknowledgment is extended to Dr. Milner B. Schaefer, formerly Director of Investigations, Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (now Director, Institute of Marble Resources, University of California), Mr. Clifford L. Peterson, Assistant Director of Investigations, and Mr. Edward F. Klima (now with the U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries) for advice and assistance rendered to the project. The shrimp-boat samples were collected by Captains Robert Barrett, Stephen Barrett, and Chester McLean. SPANISH: Howard y Landa (1958) y Barrett y Howard (1961) han estudiado la historia natural de la anchoveta en la mayoría de las áreas en donde esta especie aparece en cantidades importantes. El Golfo de Panamá es la única area de Panamá incluida en estos estudios, ya que es la única de la cual hubo suficientes muestras disponibles. Berdegué (1958) camparó ciertos caracteres merístieos y morfométricos de la anehoveta del Golfo de Montijo y otras nueve áreas del Océano Pacífico Oriental Tropical. Encontró diferencias estadísticamente significativas e hizo la conclusión de que los peces de las diferentes áreas pertenecían a "poblaciones" separadas. Los peces de la Provincia de Chiriquí no fueron incluidos en su estudio. Desde la terminación de los estudios antes meneionados se obtuvieron varias recolecciones de anchovetas del Golfo de Montijo y de la Provincia de Chiriquí. En el presente informe se usó este material para determinar los hechos sobresalientes referentes a la historia natural de la anchoveta de estas áreas y suplir el conocimiento disponible de la identidadde los grupos intraespecíficos. Se hace extensivo un reconocimiento al Dr. Milner B. Schaefer, antiguo director de investigaciones de la Comisión Interamericana del Atún Tropical (ahora director del Institute of Marine Resources, University of California), al Sr. Clifford L. Peterson, asistente del director de investigaciones, y al Sr. Edward F. Klima (ahora can el U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries) por su consejo y ayuda prestados en este proyecto. Las muestras de los barcos camaroneros fueron reeolectadas por los capitanes Robert Barrett, Stephen Barrett y Chester McLean

Fish pass design - criteria for the design and approval of fish passes and other structures to facilitate the passage of migratory fish in rivers

Many of British rivers hold stocks of salmon (Salmo salar L.) and sea trout (Salmo trutta L.) and during most of the year some of the adult fish migrate upstream to the head waters where, with the advent of winter, they will eventually spawn. For a variety of reasons, including the generation of power for milling, improving navigation and measuring water flow, man has put obstacles in the way of migratory fish which have added to those already provided by nature in the shape of rapids and waterfalls. While both salmon and sea trout, particularly the former, are capable of spectacular leaps the movement of fish over man-made and natural obstacles can be helped, or even made possible, by the judicious use of fish passes. These are designed to give the fish an easier route over or round an obstacle by allowing it to overcome the water head difference in a series of stages ('pool and traverse' fish pass) or by reducing the water velocity in a sloping channel (Denil fish pass). Salmon and sea trout make their spawning runs at different flow conditions, salmon preferring much higher water flows than sea trout. Hence the design of fish passes requires an understanding of the swimming ability of fish (speed and endurance) and the effect of water temperature on this ability. Also the unique features of each site must be appreciated to enable the pass to be positioned so that its entrance is readily located. As well as salmon and sea trout, rivers often have stocks of coarse fish and eels. Coarse fish migrations are generally local in character and although some obstructions such as weirs may allow downstream passages only, they do not cause a significant problem. Eels, like salmon and sea trout, travel both up and down river during the course of their life histories. However, the climbing power of elvers is legendary and it is not normally necessary to offer them help, while adult silver eels migrate at times of high water flow when downstream movement is comparatively easy: for these reasons neither coarse fish nor eels are considered further. The provision of fish passes is, in many instances, mandatory under the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975. This report is intended for those involved in the planning, siting, construction and operation of fish passes and is written to clarify the hydraulic problems for the biologist and the biological problems for the engineer. It is also intended to explain the criteria by which the design of an individual pass is assessed for Ministerial Approval.