DOCSLIB.ORG

Nearshore Fish Community Structure in the Southwest Bay

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nearshore Fish Community Structure in the Southwest Bay NEARSHORE FISH COMMUNITY STRUCTURE IN THE SOUTHWEST BAY OF FUNDY AND NORTHWEST ATLANTIC: COMPARING ASSEMBLAGES ACROSS MULTIPLE SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL SCALES by Collin Arens B.Sc. (Hon), University of New Brunswick, 2003 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master’s of Science In the Graduate Academic Unit of Biology Supervisors: David Methven, Ph.D., Dept of Biology, CRI, UNB Saint John Kelly Munkittrick, Ph.D., Dept of Biology, CRI, UNB Saint John Examining Board: Matthew Litvak, Ph.D., Dept. of Biology, UNB Saint John Keith Dewar, Ph.D., Faculty of Business, UNB Saint John This thesis has been accepted by the Dean of Graduate Studies THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK April, 2007 © Collin Arens, 2007 ABSTRACT The purpose of this investigation was to assess seasonal, tidal/diel and regional variation in the nearshore fish assemblage of the southwest Bay of Fundy, as well as identify overlying patterns in taxonomic and functional guild structure throughout coastal shallows of the northwest Atlantic. Within the southwest Bay of Fundy species richness and abundance varied seasonally and were correlated with water temperature exhibiting distinct cold and warm water assemblages throughout the year. Over a 24 hour period greater species richness and abundance were observed among samples collected at low tide, with larger fishes captured at night. Regionally, assemblage structure was largely influenced by habitat type with geographic proximity among sites having little direct influence on the structure observed. Throughout the northwest Atlantic taxonomic structure reflected existing biogeographic provinces with the Labrador, Acadian and Virginian provinces represented, while functional guild structure exhibited latitudinal gradients with respect to ecological type and egg dispersal. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people who helped me in many different ways throughout the course of this project and I owe each of them a debt of gratitude. In particular I would like to thank my mother, Kathy Read for her support and encouragement over the years. I would like to thank my supervisors, Dr. Dave Methven and Dr. Kelly Munkittrick for their unending patience, guidance and feedback throughout this study, as well as my supervisory committee Dr. Simon Courtenay and Dr. Allen Curry for their suggestions and comments. I would also like to thank Kevin Shaughnessey, Mark Pokorski, Jason Casselman, Frederic Vandeperre and Joesph Pratt for their assistance throughout the field sampling; especially during the early mornings and cold winter months when I’m sure there were other places they would have preferred to be. Finally, thank you to my friends and fellow graduate students; Chris Blanar, Sandy Brasfield, Jason Casselman, Karen Gormley, Lindsay Jennings, Roshini Kassie, Mark Pokorski, Kevin Shaughnessey, and my partner Leslie Carroll, who were always willing to lend an ear or put on a pair of waders when I was in need. Without the assistance of all of these people this project would not have been possible. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ v LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... viii LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................ xi CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION ............................................................... 12 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 13 1.2 Literature Cited ............................................................................................ 16 CHAPTER 2: SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIATION IN THE NEARSHORE FISH ASSEMBLAGE OF THE SOUTHWEST BAY OF FUNDY .............................. 19 2.1 Abstract ........................................................................................................ 20 2.2 Introduction .................................................................................................. 21 2.3 Materials and Methods ................................................................................. 24 2.3.1 Study Area .......................................................................................... 24 2.3.2 Seasonal Sampling (Study 1) .............................................................. 24 2.3.3 Additional Sampling (Studies 2 & 3) ................................................. 26 2.3.4 Data Analyses ..................................................................................... 27 2.3.5 Functional Guild Classification .......................................................... 29 2.4 Results .......................................................................................................... 37 2.4.1 Seasonal Variation .............................................................................. 37 2.4.2 Functional Guilds ................................................................................ 41 2.4.3 Regional Variation .............................................................................. 42 2.4.4 Tidal and Diel Variation ..................................................................... 44 2.5 Discussion .................................................................................................... 46 2.5.1 Seasonal Variation .............................................................................. 46 2.5.2 Functional Guilds ................................................................................ 49 2.5.3 Regional Variation .............................................................................. 52 2.5.4 Tidal and Diel Variation ..................................................................... 53 2.6 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 56 2.7 Acknowledgements ...................................................................................... 57 2.8 Literature Cited ............................................................................................ 85 iii CHAPTER 3: LATITUDINAL VARIATION IN TAXANOMIC AND FUNCTIONAL GUILD STRUCTURE OF NEARHSORE FISH ASSEMBLAGES OF THE NORTHWEST ATLANTIC ........................................................................................... 91 3.1 Abstract ........................................................................................................ 92 3.2 Introduction .................................................................................................. 93 3.3 Materials and Methods ................................................................................. 95 3.3.1 Sources of Data ................................................................................... 95 3.3.2 Data Analyses ..................................................................................... 96 3.3.3 Functional Guild Classification .......................................................... 97 3.4 Results ........................................................................................................ 100 3.4.1 Taxonomic Analyses ........................................................................ 101 3.4.2 Functional Guild Analyses ............................................................... 101 3.5 Discussion .................................................................................................. 104 3.6 Acknowledgements .................................................................................... 110 3.7 Literature Cited .......................................................................................... 133 CHAPTER 4: GENERAL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................ 136 4.1 Summary .................................................................................................... 137 4.1.1 Southwest Bay of Fundy Nearshore Fish Assemblage ..................... 137 4.1.2 Northwest Atlantic ............................................................................ 139 4.2 Conclusions ................................................................................................ 140 4.2.1 Functional Guilds .............................................................................. 140 4.2.2 Implications for Management of Nearshore Areas ........................... 142 4.2.3 Future Research ................................................................................ 142 4.3 Literature Cited .......................................................................................... 144 VITA iv LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Name, number, location and dominant substrate type at the 16 sites sampled in this study. Study indicates sites sampled during seasonal (1), regional (2) and tidal/diel (3) studies. See Methods for details. ..................................... 58 Table 2.2: Functional guild classification used in this study during the 13 months of sampling at sites 1-3 and 12-14. Abbreviations as follows: Ecological Type - Marine Migrant (MM), Marine Straggler (MS), Estuarine Resident (ER), Estuarine
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance Fourth Edition – APRIL 2011
    SGR 129 Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance Fourth Edition – APRIL 2011 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY AND APPLIED NUTRITION OFFICE OF FOOD SAFETY Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance Fourth Edition – April 2011 Additional copies may be purchased from: Florida Sea Grant IFAS - Extension Bookstore University of Florida P.O. Box 110011 Gainesville, FL 32611-0011 (800) 226-1764 Or www.ifasbooks.com Or you may download a copy from: http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances You may submit electronic or written comments regarding this guidance at any time. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations. gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number listed in the notice of availability that publishes in the Federal Register. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (240) 402-2300 April 2011 Table of Contents: Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance • Guidance for the Industry: Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance ................................ 1 • CHAPTER 1: General Information .......................................................................................................19 • CHAPTER 2: Conducting a Hazard Analysis and Developing a HACCP Plan
    [Show full text]
  • Andrea RAZ-GUZMÁN1*, Leticia HUIDOBRO2, and Virginia PADILLA3
    ACTA ICHTHYOLOGICA ET PISCATORIA (2018) 48 (4): 341–362 DOI: 10.3750/AIEP/02451 AN UPDATED CHECKLIST AND CHARACTERISATION OF THE ICHTHYOFAUNA (ELASMOBRANCHII AND ACTINOPTERYGII) OF THE LAGUNA DE TAMIAHUA, VERACRUZ, MEXICO Andrea RAZ-GUZMÁN1*, Leticia HUIDOBRO2, and Virginia PADILLA3 1 Posgrado en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México 2 Instituto Nacional de Pesca y Acuacultura, SAGARPA, Ciudad de México 3 Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México Raz-Guzmán A., Huidobro L., Padilla V. 2018. An updated checklist and characterisation of the ichthyofauna (Elasmobranchii and Actinopterygii) of the Laguna de Tamiahua, Veracruz, Mexico. Acta Ichthyol. Piscat. 48 (4): 341–362. Background. Laguna de Tamiahua is ecologically and economically important as a nursery area that favours the recruitment of species that sustain traditional fisheries. It has been studied previously, though not throughout its whole area, and considering the variety of habitats that sustain these fisheries, as well as an increase in population growth that impacts the system. The objectives of this study were to present an updated list of fish species, data on special status, new records, commercial importance, dominance, density, ecotic position, and the spatial and temporal distribution of species in the lagoon, together with a comparison of Tamiahua with 14 other Gulf of Mexico lagoons. Materials and methods. Fish were collected in August and December 1996 with a Renfro beam net and an otter trawl from different habitats throughout the lagoon. The species were identified, classified in relation to special status, new records, commercial importance, density, dominance, ecotic position, and spatial distribution patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean Volume
    ISBN 0-9689167-4-x Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean (Davis Strait, Southern Greenland and Flemish Cap to Cape Hatteras) Volume One Acipenseriformes through Syngnathiformes Michael P. Fahay ii Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean iii Dedication This monograph is dedicated to those highly skilled larval fish illustrators whose talents and efforts have greatly facilitated the study of fish ontogeny. The works of many of those fine illustrators grace these pages. iv Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean v Preface The contents of this monograph are a revision and update of an earlier atlas describing the eggs and larvae of western Atlantic marine fishes occurring between the Scotian Shelf and Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (Fahay, 1983). The three-fold increase in the total num- ber of species covered in the current compilation is the result of both a larger study area and a recent increase in published ontogenetic studies of fishes by many authors and students of the morphology of early stages of marine fishes. It is a tribute to the efforts of those authors that the ontogeny of greater than 70% of species known from the western North Atlantic Ocean is now well described. Michael Fahay 241 Sabino Road West Bath, Maine 04530 U.S.A. vi Acknowledgements I greatly appreciate the help provided by a number of very knowledgeable friends and colleagues dur- ing the preparation of this monograph. Jon Hare undertook a painstakingly critical review of the entire monograph, corrected omissions, inconsistencies, and errors of fact, and made suggestions which markedly improved its organization and presentation.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Data on Northern·Kingfish
    BIOLOGICAL @-'. FISHERIES DATA ON NORTHERN·KINGFISH .. Menticirrhus s'axatilis (Bloch and Schneider) JULY 1982 Biological and Fisheries Data on the Northern Kingfish, Menticirrhus saxatilis Daniel E. Ralph U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Fisheries Center Sandy Hook Laboratory Highlands, New Jersey 07732 Technical Series Report No. 27 CONTENTS 1. IDENTITY 1.1 Nomenclature................................................. 1 1.1.1 Valid Name.. 1 1. 1.2 Synonymy... ........................................... 1 1. 2 Taxonomy... .................................................. 1 1.2.1 Affinities.................. 1 1.2.2 Taxonomic Status...................................... 5 1.2.3 Subspecies 5 1. 2.4 Common Names.......................................... 5 1.3 Morphology............ 5 1.3.1 Externa1 Morphology................................... 5 1.3.2 Cytomorphology.............. 6 1.3.3 Protein Specificity... 6 2. DISTRIBUTION 2.1 Total Area................................................... 6 2.2 Differential Distribution....... 6 2.3 Determinants of Distribution............... 8 2.4 Hybridization.,... 8 3. BIONOMICS AND LIFE HISTORY 3.1 Reproduction................................................. 8 3.1.1 Sexuality 8 3.1.2 Maturity.............................................. 8 3.1.3 Mating................................................ 9 3.1.4 Fertilization...... 9 3.1.5 Gonads 9 3.1.6 Spawning.............................................. 9 3.1.7
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Department of Natural Resources
    FOREWORD Abundant fish and wildlife, unbroken coastal vistas, miles of scenic rivers, swamps and mountains open to exploration, and well-tended forests and fields…these resources enhance the quality of life that makes South Carolina a place people want to call home. We know our state’s natural resources are a primary reason that individuals and businesses choose to locate here. They are drawn to the high quality natural resources that South Carolinians love and appreciate. The quality of our state’s natural resources is no accident. It is the result of hard work and sound stewardship on the part of many citizens and agencies. The 20th century brought many changes to South Carolina; some of these changes had devastating results to the land. However, people rose to the challenge of restoring our resources. Over the past several decades, deer, wood duck and wild turkey populations have been restored, striped bass populations have recovered, the bald eagle has returned and more than half a million acres of wildlife habitat has been conserved. We in South Carolina are particularly proud of our accomplishments as we prepare to celebrate, in 2006, the 100th anniversary of game and fish law enforcement and management by the state of South Carolina. Since its inception, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) has undergone several reorganizations and name changes; however, more has changed in this state than the department’s name. According to the US Census Bureau, the South Carolina’s population has almost doubled since 1950 and the majority of our citizens now live in urban areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Sensory and Energetic Ecology of Sciaenid Fishes and Their Competitors in Chesapeake Bay, VA
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2009 Comparative sensory and energetic ecology of sciaenid fishes and their competitors in Chesapeake Bay, VA Andrij Z. Horodysky College of William and Mary - Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Horodysky, Andrij Z., "Comparative sensory and energetic ecology of sciaenid fishes and their competitors in Chesapeake Bay, VA" (2009). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539616699. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.25773/v5-wdtk-qy37 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMPARATIVE SENSORY AND ENERGETIC ECOLOGY OF SCIAENID FISHES AND THEIR COMPETITORS IN CHESAPEAKE BAY, VA A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the School of Marine Science The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Andrij Zenon Horodysky 2009 APPROVAL SHEET This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Approved August 2009. q-:af.;;; Committee Chairman, co-Advisor Mark R. Patterson, Ph.D. '~-- Duke University Durham, NC ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to the memory of my grandfather, John Zenon Horodysky, Ph. D., J.D. (1915-2002), who always made time to take me fishing and dreamed about seeing his grandson pursue a graduate education.
    [Show full text]
  • Hotspots, Extinction Risk and Conservation Priorities of Greater Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Marine Bony Shorefishes
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations Biological Sciences Summer 2016 Hotspots, Extinction Risk and Conservation Priorities of Greater Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Marine Bony Shorefishes Christi Linardich Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Biology Commons, Environmental Health and Protection Commons, and the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation Linardich, Christi. "Hotspots, Extinction Risk and Conservation Priorities of Greater Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Marine Bony Shorefishes" (2016). Master of Science (MS), Thesis, Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/hydh-jp82 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds/13 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HOTSPOTS, EXTINCTION RISK AND CONSERVATION PRIORITIES OF GREATER CARIBBEAN AND GULF OF MEXICO MARINE BONY SHOREFISHES by Christi Linardich B.A. December 2006, Florida Gulf Coast University A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE BIOLOGY OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2016 Approved by: Kent E. Carpenter (Advisor) Beth Polidoro (Member) Holly Gaff (Member) ABSTRACT HOTSPOTS, EXTINCTION RISK AND CONSERVATION PRIORITIES OF GREATER CARIBBEAN AND GULF OF MEXICO MARINE BONY SHOREFISHES Christi Linardich Old Dominion University, 2016 Advisor: Dr. Kent E. Carpenter Understanding the status of species is important for allocation of resources to redress biodiversity loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Brains: Evolution and Environmental Relationships
    Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 8, 373±408 (1998) Fish brains: evolution and environmental relationships K. KOTRSCHAL1,Ã, M.J. VAN STAADEN2,3 and R. HUBER2,3 1Institute of Zoology, Department of Ethology, The University of Vienna and Konrad Lorenz Forschungsstelle, A±4645 GruÈnau 11, Austria 2Institute of Zoology, Department of Physiology, The University of Graz, UniversitaÈtsplatz 2, A±8010 Graz, Austria 3Department of Biological Sciences, Bowling Green State University, Life Science Bldg, Bowling Green, OH 43403, USA Contents Abstract page 373 Fish brains re¯ect an enormous evolutionary radiation 374 Based on morphology: how conclusions on sensory orientation are reached 376 Structure of ®sh brains 378 Large-scale evolutionary patterns of ®sh brains 384 Functional diversi®cation 386 Cyprinidae Gadidae Flat®shes Cichlidae and other modern perciforms How environments shape brains: turbidity, benthos and the pelagic realms 393 Variation of brain and senses with depth 395 Ontogenetic variation: a means of adaptation? 398 Intraspeci®c variation between `adult' age classes Intraspeci®c variation within age classes Conclusions: where to go from here? 400 Acknowledgements 401 References 402 Abstract Fish brains and sensory organs may vary greatly between species. With an estimated total of 25 000 species, ®sh represent the largest radiation of vertebrates. From the agnathans to the teleosts, they span an enormous taxonomic range and occupy virtually all aquatic habitats. This diversity offers ample opportunity to relate ecology with brains and sensory systems. In a broadly comparative approach emphasizing teleosts, we surveyed `classical' and more recent contributions on ®sh brains in search of evolutionary and ecological conditions of central nervous system diversi®cation.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a Sarah Tanedo/USFWS Common Tern with Chicks
    Appendix A Sarah Tanedo/USFWS Common tern with chicks Animal Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge Table of Contents Table A.1. Fish Species Known or Suspected at Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). ..........A-1 Table A.2. Reptile Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR ............................A-8 Table A.3. Amphibian Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR .........................A-8 Table A.4. Bird Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR ..............................A-9 Table A.5. Mammal Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR.......................... A-27 Table A.6. Butterfly and Moth Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR. .................. A-30 Table A.7. Dragonfly and Damselfly Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR. ............. A-31 Table A.8. Tiger Beetle Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR ....................... A-32 Table A.9. Crustacean Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR. ....................... A-33 Table A.10. Bivalve Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy NWR. ......................... A-34 Table A.11. Miscellaneous Marine Invertebrate Species at Monomoy NWR. .................... A-35 Table A.12. Miscellaneous Terrestrial Invertebrates Known to be Present on Monomoy NWR. ........ A-37 Table A.13. Marine Worms Known or Suspected at Monomoy NWR. .......................... A-37 Literature Cited ................................................................ A-40 Animal Species Known or Suspected on Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge Table A.1. Fish Species Known or Suspected at Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). 5 15 4 1 1 2 3 6 6 Common Name Scientific Name Fall (%) (%) Rank Rank NOAA Spring Status Status Listing Federal Fisheries MA Legal Species MA Rarity AFS Status Occurrence Occurrence NALCC Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Woodland Et Al 2012.Pdf
    This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 99 (2012) 61e73 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecss Comparing the nursery role of inner continental shelf and estuarine habitats for temperate marine fishes Ryan J. Woodland a,*, David H. Secor a, Mary C. Fabrizio b, Michael J. Wilberg a a Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, PO Box 38, Solomons, MD 20688, USA b Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary, PO Box 1346, Gloucester Point, VA 23062, USA article info abstract Article history: The marine-estuarine transition represents an important biogeographic boundary, yet juvenile marine Received 7 January 2011 finfish have been observed in both temperate inner continental shelf (ICS) and estuarine habitats during Accepted 13 December 2011 the summer nursery period. In a direct comparison of ICS and estuary nurseries, spatial and temporal Available online 26 December 2011 patterns in species composition, biodiversity, size structure, and relative abundance of age-0 fishes were tested using contemporaneous data from multiyear (2004e2006) trawl surveys of the Maryland ICS near Keywords: Assateague Island, MD, and lower Chesapeake Bay, VA (estuary).
    [Show full text]
  • January 2015 1 ROBIN M. OVERSTREET Professor Emeritus
    1 January 2015 ROBIN M. OVERSTREET Professor Emeritus of Coastal Sciences Gulf Coast Research Laboratory The University of Southern Mississippi 703 East Beach Drive Ocean Springs, MS 39564 (228) 872-4243 (Office)/ (228) 282-4828 (cell)/ (228) 872-4204 (Fax) E-mail: [email protected] Home: 13821 Paraiso Road Ocean Springs, MS 39564 (228) 875-7912 (Home) 1 June 1939 Eugene, Oregon Married: Kim B. Overstreet (1964); children: Brian R. (1970) and Eric T. (1973) Education: BA, General Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 1963 MS, Marine Biology, University of Miami, Institute of Marine Sciences, Miami, FL, 1966 PhD, Marine Biology, University of Miami, Institute of Marine Sciences, Miami, FL, 1968 NIH Postdoctoral Fellow in Parasitology, Tulane Medical School, New Orleans, LA, 1968-1969 Professional Experience: Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, Parasitologist, 1969-1970; Head, Section of Parasitology, 1970-1992; Senior Research Scientist-Biologist, 1992-1998; Professor of Coastal Sciences at The University of Southern Mississippi, 1998-2014; Professor Emeritus of Coastal Sciences, USM, February 2014-Present. 2 January 2015 The University of Southern Mississippi, Adjunct Member of Graduate Faculty, Department of Biological Sciences, 1970-1999; Adjunct Member of Graduate Faculty, Center for Marine Science, 1992-1998; Professor of Coastal Sciences, 1998-2014 (GCRL became part of USM in 1998); Professor Emeritus of Coastal Sciences, 2014- Present. University of Mississippi, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Biology, 1 July 1971-31 December 1990; Adjunct Professor, 1 January 1991-2014? Louisiana State University, School of Veterinary Medicine, Affiliate Member of Graduate Faculty, 26 February, 1981-14 January 1987; Adjunct Professor of Aquatic Animal Disease, Associate Member, Department of Veterinary Microbiology and Parasitology, 15 January 1987-20 November 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Vol. 56, No. 3
    BULLETIN of the Florida Museum of Natural History TELEOSTEAN OTOLITHS REVEAL DIVERSE PLIO- PLEISTOCENE FISH ASSEMBLAGES IN COASTAL GEORGIA (GLYNN COUNTY) Gary L. Stringer and Dennis Bell Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 83–108 August 9, 2018 ISSN 2373-9991 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE The FLORIDA MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY is Florida’s state museum of natural history, dedicated to understanding, preserving, and interpreting biological diversity and cultural heritage. The BULLETIN OF THE FLORIDA MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY is an on-line, open-ac- cess, peer-reviewed journal that publishes results of original research in zoology, botany, paleontology, archaeology, and museum science. New issues of the Bulletin are published at irregular intervals, and volumes are not necessarily completed in any one year. Volumes contain between 150 and 300 pages, sometimes more. The number of papers contained in each volume varies, depending upon the number of pages in each paper, but four numbers is the current standard. Multi-author issues of related papers have been published together, and inquiries about putting together such issues are welcomed. Address all inqui- ries to the Editor of the Bulletin. The electronic edition of this article conforms to the requirements of the amended International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, and hence the new names contained herein are available under that Code. This published work and the nomenclatural acts it contains have been registered in ZooBank, the online registration system for the ICZN (http://zoobank.org/). The ZooBank Publication number for this issue is EB7556D6-823A-470D-813F-8AC26650EC89. Richard C. Hulbert Jr., Editor Bulletin Committee Richard C.
    [Show full text]