Diel vertical migration of the bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus), a species possessing orbital retia mirabilia

The bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus, Lowe 1841) is one of three sharks in the family Alopiidae, which occupy pelagic, neritic, and shallow coastal waters throughout the altropics and subtropics (Gruber and Compagno, 1981; Castro, 1983). All thresher sharks possess an elongated upper caudal lobe, and the bigeye thresher shark is distinguished from the other alopiid sharks by its large upward-looking eyes and grooves on the top of the head (Bigelow and Schroeder, 1948). Our present understanding of the bigeye thresher shark is primarily based upon data derived from specimens captured in fisheries, including knowledge of its morphological features (Fitch and Craig, 1964; Stillwell and Casey, 1976; Thorpe, 1997), geographic range as far as it overlaps with fisheries (Springer, 1943; Fitch and Craig, 1964; Stillwell and Casey, 1976; Gruber and Compagno, 1981; Thorpe, 1997), age, growth and maturity (Chen et al., 1997; Liu et al., 1998), and aspects of its reproductive biology (Gilmore, 1983; Moreno and Moron, 1992; Chen et al., 1997).

Horizontal and vertical movements of juvenile bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) in relation to oceanographic conditions of the western North Atlantic, determined with ultrasonic telemetry

We employed ultrasonic transmitters to follow (for up to 48 h) the horizontal and vertical movements of five juvenile (6.8–18.7 kg estimated body mass) bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) in the western North Atlantic (off the eastern shore of Virginia). Our objective was to document the fishes’ behavior and distribution in relation to oceanographic conditions and thus begin to address issues that currently limit population assessments based on aerial surveys. Estimation of the trends in adult and juvenile Atlantic bluefin tuna abundance by aerial surveys, and other fishery-independent measures, is considered a priority. Juvenile bluefin tuna spent the majority of their time over the continental shelf in relatively shallow water (generally less then 40 m deep). Fish used the entire water column in spite of relatively steep vertical thermal gradients (≈24°C at the surface and ≈12°C at 40 m depth), but spent the majority of their time (≈90%) above 15 m and in water warmer then 20°C. Mean swimming speeds ranged from 2.8 to 3.3 knots, and total distance covered from 152 to 289 km (82–156 nmi). Because fish generally remained within relatively con-fined areas, net displacement was only 7.7–52.7 km (4.1–28.4 nmi). Horizontal movements were not correlated with sea surface temperature. We propose that it is unlikely that juvenile bluefin tuna in this area can detect minor horizontal temperature gradients (generally less then 0.5°C/km) because of the steep vertical temperature gradients (up to ≈0.6°C/m) they experience during their regular vertical movements. In contrast, water clarity did appear to influence behavior because the fish remained in the intermediate water mass between the turbid and phytoplankton-rich plume exiting Chesapeake Bay (and similar coastal waters) and the clear oligotrophic water east of the continental shelf.

Population structure of king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) around peninsular Florida, as revealed by microsatellite DNA

A total of 1006 king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla) representing 20 discrete samples collected between 1996 and 1998 along the east (Atlantic) and west (Gulf) coasts of Florida and the Florida Keys were assayed for allelic variation at seven nuclear-encoded microsatellites. No significant deviations from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium expectations were found for six of the microsatellites, and genotypes at all microsatellites were independent. Allele distributions at each microsatellite were independent of sex and age of individuals. Homogeneity tests of spatial distributions of alleles at the microsatellites revealed two weakly divergent “genetic” subpopulations or stocks of king mackerel in Florida waters—one along the Atlantic coast and one along the Gulf coast. Homogeneity tests of allele distributions when samples were pooled along seasonal (temporal) boundaries, consistent with the temporal boundaries used currently for stock assessment and allocation of the king mackerel resource, were nonsignificant. The degree of genetic divergence between the two “genetic” stocks was small: on average, only 0.19% of the total genetic variance across all samples assayed occurred between the two regions. Cluster analysis, assignment tests, and spatial autocorrelation analysis did not generate patterns that were consistent with either geographic or spatial-temporal boundaries. King mackerel sampled from the Florida Keys could not be assigned unequivocally to either “genetic” stock. The genetic data were not consistent with current spatial-temporal boundaries employed in stock assessment and allocation of the king mackerel resource. The genetic differences between king mackerel in the Atlantic versus those in the Gulf most likely stem from reduced gene flow (migration) between the Atlantic and Gulf in relation to gene flow (migration) along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of peninsular Florida. This difference is consistent with findings for other marine fishes where data indicate that the southern Florida peninsula serves (or has served) as a biogeographic boundary.