DOCSLIB.ORG

Design and Parameterization of the Chesapeake Bay Atlantis Model: a Spatially Explicit End-To-End Ecosystem Model

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Design and Parameterization of the Chesapeake Bay Atlantis Model: a Spatially Explicit End-To-End Ecosystem Model Design and Parameterization of the Chesapeake Bay Atlantis Model: A Spatially Explicit End-to-End Ecosystem Model Thomas F. Ihde, Isaac C. Kaplan, Elizabeth A. Fulton, Iris A. Gray, Mejs Hasan, David Bruce, Ward Slacum, and Howard M. Townsend U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-166 September 2016 Design and Parameterization of the Chesapeake Bay Atlantis Model: A Spatially Explicit End-to-End Ecosystem Model Thomas F. Ihde1, Isaac C. Kaplan2, Elizabeth A. Fulton3, Iris A. Gray2, Mejs Hasan4, David Bruce4, Ward Slacum5, and Howard M. Townsend4 1NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office, 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 207A, Annapolis, MD 21403; [email protected] 2Conservation Biology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, 2725 Montlake Blvd E, Seattle, WA 98112 3Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Marine and Atmospheric Research, GPO Box 1538, Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia 4NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office/Cooperative Oxford Laboratory, 904 South Morris Street, Oxford, MD 21654 5Oyster Recovery Partnership, 1805A Virginia Street, Annapolis, MD 21401 NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-166 September 2016 U.S. Department of Commerce Penny S. Pritzker, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Kathryn D. Sullivan, Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Recommended citation: Ihde, T. F., I. C. Kaplan, E. A. Fulton, I. A. Gray, M. Hasan, D. Bruce, W. Slacum, and H. M. Townsend. 2016. Design and parameterization of the Chesapeake Bay Atlantis Model: A spatially explicit end-to-end ecosystem model. U.S. Dept. of Commer., NOAA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-166, 145 p. Copies of this report may be obtained from: NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 207A Annapolis, MD 21403 Or online at: http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/tm/ ii Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... xi Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................ xiv Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Model Extent and Design................................................................................................................ 3 Projection Years .............................................................................................................................. 6 Physical Model................................................................................................................................ 7 Water Flux, Temperature, and Salinity ....................................................................................... 7 Nutrient and Sediment Inputs ..................................................................................................... 9 Biological Model .......................................................................................................................... 14 Nutrients .................................................................................................................................... 14 Primary Production ................................................................................................................... 15 Invertebrates .............................................................................................................................. 17 Vertebrates ................................................................................................................................ 19 Predation ................................................................................................................................... 20 Spawning and Recruitment ....................................................................................................... 21 Habitat Associations ................................................................................................................. 22 Model Calibration ......................................................................................................................... 24 Model Performance ....................................................................................................................... 24 Initial Calibration: No Fishing .................................................................................................. 24 Model Application ........................................................................................................................ 26 TMDL Scenario ........................................................................................................................ 26 TMDL with expected temperature increase .............................................................................. 26 Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 27 Current and Future Work .......................................................................................................... 28 Figures 8a–10e and Tables ............................................................................................................ 29 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................................. 88 Appendix A: Map Information ................................................................................................... 104 Chesapeake Bay Atlantis Model ............................................................................................. 104 iii Construction Log for Dynamic Boxes (24 AUG 2010) .......................................................... 104 Bathymetry Metadata .............................................................................................................. 114 Sediment Distribution Metadata ............................................................................................. 114 Appendix B: Biological Processes Modeled in Atlantis ............................................................. 115 Appendix C: Vertebrate Life History ......................................................................................... 117 Fish .......................................................................................................................................... 117 Mammals ................................................................................................................................ 118 Reptiles ................................................................................................................................... 119 Birds ........................................................................................................................................ 120 References—Life History ........................................................................................................... 123 Appendix D: Diets ...................................................................................................................... 133 Fish .......................................................................................................................................... 133 Mammals ................................................................................................................................ 137 Reptiles ................................................................................................................................... 137 Birds ........................................................................................................................................ 138 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................................ 139 References—Diets ...................................................................................................................... 141 iv List of Figures 1a. Spatial structure of CAM. The model consists of 97 irregular polygons determined by salinity, depth, bottom type (mainstem only), and management boundaries. ..................... 4 1b. Detailed river structure of CAM ............................................................................................... 5 2. Vertical structure of CAM ......................................................................................................... 6 3. Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Model (fine-scale cells) superimposed on Atlantis model polygons (yellow) (a), and Atlantis model polygons superimposed on Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Model (b). .................................................................................................... 8 4. Chesapeake Bay 2003 segmentation scheme (78 segments) ................................................... 10 5. Nitrogen inputs for years 1991–2000, as specified by Chesapeake Bay Phase 5.3 Community Watershed model. For the Atlantis simulations presented here, values
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download PDF Version
    MarLIN Marine Information Network Information on the species and habitats around the coasts and sea of the British Isles Fireworks anemone (Pachycerianthus multiplicatus) MarLIN – Marine Life Information Network Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Review Catherine Wilding & Emily Wilson 2008-04-24 A report from: The Marine Life Information Network, Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Please note. This MarESA report is a dated version of the online review. Please refer to the website for the most up-to-date version [https://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/detail/1272]. All terms and the MarESA methodology are outlined on the website (https://www.marlin.ac.uk) This review can be cited as: Wilding, C. & Wilson, E. 2008. Pachycerianthus multiplicatus Fireworks anemone. In Tyler-Walters H. and Hiscock K. (eds) Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Reviews, [on- line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. DOI https://dx.doi.org/10.17031/marlinsp.1272.2 The information (TEXT ONLY) provided by the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License. Note that images and other media featured on this page are each governed by their own terms and conditions and they may or may not be available for reuse. Permissions beyond the scope of this license are available here. Based on a work at www.marlin.ac.uk (page left blank) Date: 2008-04-24 Fireworks anemone (Pachycerianthus multiplicatus) - Marine Life Information Network See online review for distribution map Individual with out-stretched tentacles.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Bulletin of the Fish and Wildlife Service V.55
    CHAPTER VIII SPONGES, COELENTERATES, AND CTENOPHORES Blank page retained for pagination THE PORIFERA OF THE GULF OF MEXICO 1 By J. Q. TIERNEY. Marine Laboratory, University of Miami Sponges are one of the dominant sessile inverte­ groups. The. floor of the Gulf between the bars brate groups in the Gulf of Mexico: they extend is sparsely populated. The majority of the ani­ from the intertidal zone down to the deepest mals and plants are concentrated on the rocky Parts of the basin, and almost all of the firm or ledges and outcroppings. rocky sections of the bottom provide attachment The most abundant sponges on these reefs are for them. of several genera representing most of the orders Members of the class Hyalospongea. (Hexacti­ of the class Demospongea. Several species of nellidea) are, almost without exception, limited to Ircinia are quite common as are Verongia, Sphecio­ the deeper waters of the Gulf beyond the 100­ spongia, and several Axinellid and Ancorinid fathom curve. These sponges possess siliceous sponges; Cliona is very abundant, boring into spicules in which (typically) six rays radiate from molluscan shells, coral, and the rock itself. The II. central point; frequently, the spicules are fused sponge population is rich both in variety and in ~gether forming a basket-like skeleton. Spongin number of individuals; for this reason no attempt 18 never present in this group. is made to discuss it in taxonomic detail in this In contrast to the Hyalospongea, representa­ r~sum~. ti\Tes of the clasa Calcispongea are seldom, if Some of the sponges of the Gulf are of world­ ~\Ter, found in deep water.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthopleura and the Phylogeny of Actinioidea (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniaria)
    Org Divers Evol (2017) 17:545–564 DOI 10.1007/s13127-017-0326-6 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Anthopleura and the phylogeny of Actinioidea (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniaria) M. Daly1 & L. M. Crowley2 & P. Larson1 & E. Rodríguez2 & E. Heestand Saucier1,3 & D. G. Fautin4 Received: 29 November 2016 /Accepted: 2 March 2017 /Published online: 27 April 2017 # Gesellschaft für Biologische Systematik 2017 Abstract Members of the sea anemone genus Anthopleura by the discovery that acrorhagi and verrucae are are familiar constituents of rocky intertidal communities. pleisiomorphic for the subset of Actinioidea studied. Despite its familiarity and the number of studies that use its members to understand ecological or biological phe- Keywords Anthopleura . Actinioidea . Cnidaria . Verrucae . nomena, the diversity and phylogeny of this group are poor- Acrorhagi . Pseudoacrorhagi . Atomized coding ly understood. Many of the taxonomic and phylogenetic problems stem from problems with the documentation and interpretation of acrorhagi and verrucae, the two features Anthopleura Duchassaing de Fonbressin and Michelotti, 1860 that are used to recognize members of Anthopleura.These (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniaria: Actiniidae) is one of the most anatomical features have a broad distribution within the familiar and well-known genera of sea anemones. Its members superfamily Actinioidea, and their occurrence and exclu- are found in both temperate and tropical rocky intertidal hab- sivity are not clear. We use DNA sequences from the nu- itats and are abundant and species-rich when present (e.g., cleus and mitochondrion and cladistic analysis of verrucae Stephenson 1935; Stephenson and Stephenson 1972; and acrorhagi to test the monophyly of Anthopleura and to England 1992; Pearse and Francis 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Brains of Primitive Chordates 439
    Brains of Primitive Chordates 439 Brains of Primitive Chordates J C Glover, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway although providing a more direct link to the evolu- B Fritzsch, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA tionary clock, is nevertheless hampered by differing ã 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. rates of evolution, both among species and among genes, and a still largely deficient fossil record. Until recently, it was widely accepted, both on morpholog- ical and molecular grounds, that cephalochordates Introduction and craniates were sister taxons, with urochordates Craniates (which include the sister taxa vertebrata being more distant craniate relatives and with hemi- and hyperotreti, or hagfishes) represent the most chordates being more closely related to echinoderms complex organisms in the chordate phylum, particu- (Figure 1(a)). The molecular data only weakly sup- larly with respect to the organization and function of ported a coherent chordate taxon, however, indicat- the central nervous system. How brain complexity ing that apparent morphological similarities among has arisen during evolution is one of the most chordates are imposed on deep divisions among the fascinating questions facing modern science, and it extant deuterostome taxa. Recent analysis of a sub- speaks directly to the more philosophical question stantially larger number of genes has reversed the of what makes us human. Considerable interest has positions of cephalochordates and urochordates, pro- therefore been directed toward understanding the moting the latter to the most closely related craniate genetic and developmental underpinnings of nervous relatives (Figure 1(b)). system organization in our more ‘primitive’ chordate relatives, in the search for the origins of the vertebrate Comparative Appearance of Brains, brain in a common chordate ancestor.
    [Show full text]
  • (= Amphioxus) Branchiostoma Floridae
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 130: 71-84,1996 Published January 11 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Larval settlement, post-settlement growth and secondary production of the Florida lancelet (= amphioxus) Branchiostoma floridae M. D. Stokes* Marine Biology Research Division, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California 92093-0202, USA ABSTRACT A population of Branch~ostomaflondae in Tampa Bay, Flonda, USA was sieved from the substratum frequently (often daily) from June 1992 through September 1994 Body lengths were mea- sured for 54264 luvenlle and adult lancelets The breedlng season lasted each year from early May through early September and newly metamorphosed lancelets settled as luveniles from late May through mid October, dunng this period of the year dlstinct settlements occurred approxmately every 1 to 3 wk Post-settlement growth was followed as changes in modal length on size-frequency histo- grams Changes in cohort growth over this peliod were compared to several different simple and seasonally oscillating growth models The von Bertalanffy functlon in smple and oscillating forms provided the best estmates of lancelet growth The lancelets grew in summer (almost 0 5 mm d-' in recently settled luveniles), but growth slowed and almost ceased durlng wlnter B flondae can llve at least 2 yr and can reach a maxlmum length of 58 mm The maximal secondary productlon was 61 53 g m-' yrrl (ash-free dry welght) and the productlon to biomass ratio was 11 64 Population den- sities at the study site ranged from about 100 to 1200 lancelets m ' KEY WORDS: Lancelet . Amphioxus . Branchiostorna flondae . Growth . Production . Breeding season .
    [Show full text]
  • Tampa Bay Benthic Monitoring Program: Status of Middle Tampa Bay: 1993-1998
    Tampa Bay Benthic Monitoring Program: Status of Middle Tampa Bay: 1993-1998 Stephen A. Grabe Environmental Supervisor David J. Karlen Environmental Scientist II Christina M. Holden Environmental Scientist I Barbara Goetting Environmental Specialist I Thomas Dix Environmental Scientist II MARCH 2003 1 Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County Richard Garrity, Ph.D. Executive Director Gerold Morrison, Ph.D. Director, Environmental Resources Management Division 2 INTRODUCTION The Environmental Protection Commission of Hillsborough County (EPCHC) has been collecting samples in Middle Tampa Bay 1993 as part of the bay-wide benthic monitoring program developed to (Tampa Bay National Estuary Program 1996). The original objectives of this program were to discern the ―health‖—or ―status‖-- of the bay’s sediments by developing a Benthic Index for Tampa Bay as well as evaluating sediment quality by means of Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines (SQAGs). The Tampa Bay Estuary Program provided partial support for this monitoring. This report summarizes data collected during 1993-1998 from the Middle Tampa Bay segment of Tampa Bay. 3 METHODS Field Collection and Laboratory Procedures: A total of 127 stations (20 to 24 per year) were sampled during late summer/early fall ―Index Period‖ 1993-1998 (Appendix A). Sample locations were randomly selected from computer- generated coordinates. Benthic samples were collected using a Young grab sampler following the field protocols outlined in Courtney et al. (1993). Laboratory procedures followed the protocols set forth in Courtney et al. (1995). Data Analysis: Species richness, Shannon-Wiener diversity, and Evenness were calculated using PISCES Conservation Ltd.’s (2001) ―Species Diversity and Richness II‖ software.
    [Show full text]
  • 1471-2148-9-187.Pdf
    BMC Evolutionary Biology BioMed Central Research article Open Access An updated 18S rRNA phylogeny of tunicates based on mixture and secondary structure models Georgia Tsagkogeorga1,2, Xavier Turon3, Russell R Hopcroft4, Marie- Ka Tilak1,2, Tamar Feldstein5, Noa Shenkar5,6, Yossi Loya5, Dorothée Huchon5, Emmanuel JP Douzery1,2 and Frédéric Delsuc*1,2 Address: 1Université Montpellier 2, Institut des Sciences de l'Evolution (UMR 5554), CC064, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 05, France, 2CNRS, Institut des Sciences de l'Evolution (UMR 5554), CC064, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 05, France, 3Centre d'Estudis Avançats de Blanes (CEAB, CSIC), Accés Cala S. Francesc 14, 17300 Blanes (Girona), Spain, 4Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA, 5Department of Zoology, George S. Wise Faculty of Life Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 69978, Israel and 6Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle WA 98195, USA Email: Georgia Tsagkogeorga - [email protected]; Xavier Turon - [email protected]; Russell R Hopcroft - [email protected]; Marie-Ka Tilak - [email protected]; Tamar Feldstein - [email protected]; Noa Shenkar - [email protected]; Yossi Loya - [email protected]; Dorothée Huchon - [email protected]; Emmanuel JP Douzery - [email protected]; Frédéric Delsuc* - [email protected] * Corresponding author Published: 5 August 2009 Received: 16 October 2008 Accepted: 5 August 2009 BMC Evolutionary Biology 2009, 9:187 doi:10.1186/1471-2148-9-187 This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/9/187 © 2009 Tsagkogeorga et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Ontogeny of Jurassic Bakevelliids and Their Bearing on Bivalve Evolution
    Early ontogeny of Jurassic bakevelliids and their bearing on bivalve evolution NIKOLAUS MALCHUS Malchus, N. 2004. Early ontogeny of Jurassic bakevelliids and their bearing on bivalve evolution. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 49 (1): 85–110. Larval and earliest postlarval shells of Jurassic Bakevelliidae are described for the first time and some complementary data are given concerning larval shells of oysters and pinnids. Two new larval shell characters, a posterodorsal outlet and shell septum are described. The outlet is homologous to the posterodorsal notch of oysters and posterodorsal ridge of arcoids. It probably reflects the presence of the soft anatomical character post−anal tuft, which, among Pteriomorphia, was only known from oysters. A shell septum was so far only known from Cassianellidae, Lithiotidae, and the bakevelliid Kobayashites. A review of early ontogenetic shell characters strongly suggests a basal dichotomy within the Pterio− morphia separating taxa with opisthogyrate larval shells, such as most (or all?) Praecardioida, Pinnoida, Pterioida (Bakevelliidae, Cassianellidae, all living Pterioidea), and Ostreoida from all other groups. The Pinnidae appear to be closely related to the Pterioida, and the Bakevelliidae belong to the stem line of the Cassianellidae, Lithiotidae, Pterioidea, and Ostreoidea. The latter two superfamilies comprise a well constrained clade. These interpretations are con− sistent with recent phylogenetic hypotheses based on palaeontological and genetic (18S and 28S mtDNA) data. A more detailed phylogeny is hampered by the fact that many larval shell characters are rather ancient plesiomorphies. Key words: Bivalvia, Pteriomorphia, Bakevelliidae, larval shell, ontogeny, phylogeny. Nikolaus Malchus [[email protected]], Departamento de Geologia/Unitat Paleontologia, Universitat Autòno− ma Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Spain.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Anchoa Analis (Miller, 1945)
    FAMILY Engraulidae Gill, 1861 - anchovies [=Engraulinae, Stolephoriformes, Coilianini, Anchoviinae, Setipinninae, Cetengraulidi] GENUS Amazonsprattus Roberts, 1984 - pygmy anchovies Species Amazonsprattus scintilla Roberts, 1984 - Rio Negro pygmy anchovy GENUS Anchoa Jordan & Evermann, 1927 - anchovies [=Anchovietta] Species Anchoa analis (Miller, 1945) - longfin Pacific anchovy Species Anchoa argentivittata (Regan, 1904) - silverstripe anchovy, Regan's anchovy [=arenicola] Species Anchoa belizensis (Thomerson & Greenfield, 1975) - Belize anchovy Species Anchoa cayorum (Fowler, 1906) - Key anchovy Species Anchoa chamensis Hildebrand, 1943 - Chame Point anchovy Species Anchoa choerostoma (Goode, 1874) - Bermuda anchovy Species Anchoa colonensis Hildebrand, 1943 - narrow-striped anchovy Species Anchoa compressa (Girard, 1858) - deepbody anchovy Species Anchoa cubana (Poey, 1868) - Cuban anchovy [=astilbe] Species Anchoa curta (Jordan & Gilbert, 1882) - short anchovy Species Anchoa delicatissima (Girard, 1854) - slough anchovy Species Anchoa eigenmannia (Meek & Hildebrand, 1923) - Eigenmann's anchovy Species Anchoa exigua (Jordan & Gilbert, 1882) - slender anchovy [=tropica] Species Anchoa filifera (Fowler, 1915) - longfinger anchovy [=howelli, longipinna] Species Anchoa helleri (Hubbs, 1921) - Heller's anchovy Species Anchoa hepsetus (Linnaeus, 1758) - broad-striped anchovy [=brownii, epsetus, ginsburgi, perthecatus] Species Anchoa ischana (Jordan & Gilbert, 1882) - slender anchovy Species Anchoa januaria (Steindachner, 1879) - Rio anchovy
    [Show full text]
  • Revision of the Genus Ceriantheomorphe (Cnidaria, Anthozoa, Ceriantharia) with Description of a New Species from the Gulf of Mexico and Northwestern Atlantic
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 874: 127–148Revision (2019) of the genus Ceriantheomorphe (Cnidaria, Anthozoa, Ceriantharia)... 127 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.847.35835 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Revision of the genus Ceriantheomorphe (Cnidaria, Anthozoa, Ceriantharia) with description of a new species from the Gulf of Mexico and northwestern Atlantic Celine S.S. Lopes1,2, Hellen Ceriello1,2, André C. Morandini3,4, Sérgio N. Stampar1,2 1 Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Laboratório de Evolução e Diversidade Aquática – LEDA/FCL, Avenida Dom Antônio, 2100 – Parque Universitário, Assis, São Paulo, Brazil 2 Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Zoologia, Rua Prof. Dr. Antônio Celso Wagner Zanin, 250 – Distrito de Rubião Junior, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil 3 Uni- versidade de São Paulo (USP), Instituto de Biociências – Departamento de Zoologia, Rua do Matão, Travessa 14, 101, Cidade Universitária, São Paulo, Brazil 4 Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Centro de Biologia Marinha (CEBIMar), Rodovia Manoel Hypólito do Rego, Km 131.50, Praia do Cabelo Gordo, São Sebastião, São Paulo, Brazil Corresponding author: Celine S.S. Lopes ([email protected]) Academic editor: James Reimer | Received 30 April 2019 | Accepted 29 July 2019 | Published 9 September 2019 http://zoobank.org/5723F36A-EA44-48E3-A8F5-C8A3FF86F88C Citation: Lopes CSS, Ceriello H, Morandini AC, Stampar SN (2019) Revision of the genus Ceriantheomorphe (Cnidaria, Anthozoa, Ceriantharia) with description of a new species from the Gulf of Mexico and northwestern Atlantic. ZooKeys 874: 127–148. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.874.35835 Abstract The present study presents a revision of the genusCeriantheomorphe Carlgren, 1931, including redescrip- tions of the two presently recognized species, Ceriantheomorphe ambonensis (Kwietniewski, 1898) and Ceriantheomorphe brasiliensis (Mello-Leitão, 1919), comb.
    [Show full text]
  • Mid-Atlantic Forage Species ID Guide
    Mid-Atlantic Forage Species Identification Guide Forage Species Identification Guide Basic Morphology Dorsal fin Lateral line Caudal fin This guide provides descriptions and These species are subject to the codes for the forage species that vessels combined 1,700-pound trip limit: Opercle and dealers are required to report under Operculum • Anchovies the Mid-Atlantic Council’s Unmanaged Forage Omnibus Amendment. Find out • Argentines/Smelt Herring more about the amendment at: • Greeneyes Pectoral fin www.mafmc.org/forage. • Halfbeaks Pelvic fin Anal fin Caudal peduncle All federally permitted vessels fishing • Lanternfishes in the Mid-Atlantic Forage Species Dorsal Right (lateral) side Management Unit and dealers are • Round Herring required to report catch and landings of • Scaled Sardine the forage species listed to the right. All species listed in this guide are subject • Atlantic Thread Herring Anterior Posterior to the 1,700-pound trip limit unless • Spanish Sardine stated otherwise. • Pearlsides/Deepsea Hatchetfish • Sand Lances Left (lateral) side Ventral • Silversides • Cusk-eels Using the Guide • Atlantic Saury • Use the images and descriptions to identify species. • Unclassified Mollusks (Unmanaged Squids, Pteropods) • Report catch and sale of these species using the VTR code (red bubble) for • Other Crustaceans/Shellfish logbooks, or the common name (dark (Copepods, Krill, Amphipods) blue bubble) for dealer reports. 2 These species are subject to the combined 1,700-pound trip limit: • Anchovies • Argentines/Smelt Herring •
    [Show full text]
  • Gastropoda, Acteonidae) and Remarks on the Other Mediterranean Species of the Family Acteonidae D’Orbigny, 1835
    BASTERIA, 60: 183-193, 1996 Central Tyrrhenian sea Mollusca: XI. of Callostracon Description tyrrhenicum sp. nov. (Gastropoda, Acteonidae) and remarks on the other Mediterranean species of the family Acteonidae d’Orbigny, 1835 Carlo Smriglio Via di Valle Aurelia 134, 1-00167 Rome, Italy & Paolo Mariottini Dipartimento di Biologia, Terza Universita degli Studi di Roma, Via Ostiense 173, 1-00154 Rome, Italy A new acteonid species, collected in the Central Tyrrhenian Sea, is here described. It is placed in Callostracon and named C. Hamlin, 1884, tyrrhenicum. The description is based on shell morpho- logyonly. Remarks on the four bathyal and the three infralittoral species ofthe familyActeonidae known from the Mediterranean Sea, are also featured. Key-words: Gastropoda, Opisthobranchia, Acteonidae, Callostracon, taxonomy, bathyal fauna, Central Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy. INTRODUCTION In the framework of carried an investigation out over the past decade, we continue to characterize the bathyal faunal assemblages from the Central Tyrrhenian Sea, off the Latial coast (Italy) (Smriglio et al., 1987, 1990, 1992, 1993). In particular, we are interested in the molluscan fauna occurring in the deep-sea coral (biocoenose des and des coraux blancs, CB) muddy-bathyal (biocoenose vases bathyales, VB) commu- nities & of this In this we describe of (Peres Picard, 1964) area. paper a new species acteonid, Callostracon tyrrhenicum, from material dredged in a deep-sea coral bank off the coast. Latial Among the molluscan fauna associated with C. tyrrhenicum, we have iden- tified four which bathyal acteonids, we think worth reporting: Acteon monterosatoi Crenilabium Dautzenberg, 1889, exile (Jeffreys, 1870, ex Forbes ms.), Japonacteon pusillus and Liocarenus (McGillavray, 1843), globulinus (Forbes, 1844).
    [Show full text]