Ecological Relations Between the Herring and the Plankton off The North-East Coast of England

I. 430 plankton samples, which were taken by several herring drifters using the Continuous Plankton Recorder in the Shields fishing area during the summer seasons of 1931 to 1933, are analysed to show the main changes in the plankton during those seasons. 2. A comparison is made between the proportions of the different zooplankton organisms found in the plankton and the proportions of these recorded by Savage (1937) in the stomachs of herring obtained from drifters working in the same area and during the same time. The comparisons are made for 29 ten-day periods in the seasons 1931 to 1933, and in addition, for 6 ten-day periods relating to a single drifter which obtained both plankton and stomach samples at the same time in 1932. 3. The comparisons in 2 provide evidence that the herring feeds by selecting certain organisms by individual acts of capture and not by swimming open-mouthed to strain out the plankton indiscriminately: (a) Calanus and Temora in the stomachs either correspond fairly closely to the proportions in the plankton or they may be in very much higher proportions. The latter is always true regarding Anomalocera. (b) Acartia, Oithona, Cladocera and Lamellibranch larvae are always in larger proportions in the plankton than in the stomachs; this applies also to Centropages with two insignificant exceptions. (c) There is a close correspondence between the numbers of Limacina and Sagitta in the plankton and stomachs in the latter half of the 1931 season, but not during 1932 and 1933, when the numbers in the stomachs were insignificant ; during the former period there was a great scarcity of Calanus in the plankton.

Chaetopterid tubes from vent and seep sites: Implications for fossil record and evolutionary history of vent and seep annelids

Vestimentiferan tube worms living at deep-sea hydrothermal vents and cold seeps have been considered as a clade with a long and continuing evolutionary history in these ecosystems. Whereas the fossil record appears to support this view, molecular age estimates do not. The two main features that are used to identify vestimentiferan tubes in the fossil record are longitudinal ridges on the tube's surface and a tube wall constructed of multiple layers. It is shown here that chaetopterid tubes from modern vents and seeps—as well as a number of fossil tubes from shallow-water environments—also show these two features. This calls for a more cautious interpretation of tubular fossils from ancient vent and seep deposits. We suggest that: current estimates for a relatively young evolutionary age based on molecular clock methods may be more reliable than the inferences of ancient “vestimentiferans” based on putative fossils of these worms; not all of these putative fossils actually belong to this group; and that tubes from fossil seeps should be investigated for chitinous remains to substantiate claims of their potential siboglinid affinities.