Fao/Government Cooperative Programme Scientific Basis

Home , Argyropelecus sladeni, Barbantus curvifrons, Heterophotus ophistoma, Moringua edwardsi

FI:GCP/RLA/140/JPN

TECHNICAL DOCUMENT No. 4

FAO/GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVE PROGRAMME

SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT IN THE LESSER ANTILLES INCLUDING INTERACTIONS WITH MARINE MAMMALS AND OTHER TOP PREDATORS

CRUISE REPORT FOR THE LAPE ECOSYSTEM SURVEY ON RV CELTIC EXPLORER (CE0607)

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Barbados, 2006

FI:GCP/RLA/140/JPN

TECHNICAL DOCUMENT No. 4

FAO/GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVE PROGRAMME

SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT IN THE LESSER ANTILLES INCLUDING INTERACTIONS WITH MARINE MAMMALS AND OTHER TOP PREDATORS

CRUISE REPORT FOR THE LAPE ECOSYSTEM SURVEY ON RV CELTIC EXPLORER (CE0607)

Lesser Antilles Pelagic Ecosystem Project

(GCP/RLA/140/JPN)

Bridgetown, Barbados

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Barbados, 2006 This technical report is one of a series of reports prepared during the course of the project identified on the title page. The conclusions and recommendations given in the report are those considered appropriate at the time of its preparation. They may be modified in the light of further knowledge gained at subsequent stages of the project.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries

All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders. Applications for such permission should be addressed to the Chief, Electronic Publishing Policy and Support Branch, Information Division, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy or by e-mail to [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Scientific Basis For Ecosystem-Based Management In The Lesser Antilles Including Interactions With Marine Mammals And Other Top Predators: Cruise Report For The LAPE Ecosystem Survey On RV Celtic Explorer (CE0607), based on the work of Paul Fanning, FAO, Barbados, 2006. viii + 55 pp. FI:GCP/RLA/140/JPN. Technical Document No. 4 The LAPE project has completed an ecosystem survey using the research vessel R/V Celtic Explorer, operated from Galway, Ireland by the Marine Institute. The survey collected information on the abundance, biomass and distribution information for pelagic forage species, as well as sampling for trophic relationships and physical and biological environmental sampling. This includes samples from numerous species rarely or never observed when sampling from fisheries catches. Acoustic biomass estimates have not been completed however the greatest biomass of forage species detected, both acoustically and by trawling, is predominantly mesopelagic fish, squids and crustaceans. The catches of epipelagic species were mostly juveniles of oceanic pelagic, coastal pelagic and reef species. This survey did not target, and did not catch, the commercially important pelagic species of the region. Flyingfish (Exocetidae) and dolphin (Coryphaena hippurus) are known to occur only within a few meters of the surface, above both the acoustic transducers and the minimum fishing depth of the trawls. In addition, these and the adults of the other large pelagic species (Istiophoridae, Scombridae, Xiphiidae) are too fast and agile to be easily caught using pelagic trawls. The ecosystem survey also provided in-situ measures of biological oceanographic parameters to calibrate satellite estimates of primary productivity as well as information on key physical parameters of the water masses in the region. Preliminary inspection of the cruise results are all largely consistent with expected conditions in oligotrophic tropical oceanic waters (Longhurst, 1999). The primary production is limited to deep chlorophyll layers with essentially no chlorophyll or fluorescence measurable in near-surface waters. A cetacean sighting survey was conducted during daylight along the same transects. Although previous surveys have shown that the region does not have high concentrations of cetaceans the cetacean results are still surprisingly low. Since data are too few for a statistical analysis, a careful review of the cetacean survey is required to understand these extremely low results.

iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The LAPE project and the FAO acknowledge the very significant financial contribution made by the Marine Institute towards providing their excellent research vessel, the R/V Celtic Explorer, to conduct this survey. The ship's officers and crews on both legs of the survey provided expertise and professionalism of the highest order. Their contributions made the work safe, efficient and effective while providing a friendly and comfortable environment for all. It was a pleasure working with them.

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES...... VII LIST OF FIGURES...... VIII INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Objectives ...... 1 Participants...... 3 Cruise Dates ...... 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS ...... 3 Survey Design and Cruise Track ...... 3 Survey Design ...... 3 Survey Effort Allocation...... 4 Acoustics...... 7 Acoustic Data Acquisition:...... 7 Acoustic Data Scrutinising:...... 8 Acoustic Calibration...... 11 Trawling and Biological Sampling ...... 12 Catch Sorting and Recording...... 14 Oceanographic Sampling...... 16 Rosette Sampler ...... 16 Phytoplankton Sampling...... 16 Underway Information...... 17 Processing...... 17 Primary Production...... 17 Sighting Survey ...... 19 RESULTS ...... 20 Acoustics...... 20 Data analysis ...... 22 Abundance and biomass estimates ...... 24 Trawling and Biological Sampling ...... 25 Oceanographic Sampling...... 33 Water Column Structure ...... 33 Phytoplankton...... 36 Primary Production...... 47 Sighting Survey ...... 47 OUTSTANDING ANALYSES...... 49

v Acoustics and Trawling...... 49 Acoustic Biomass Estimation ...... 49 Species Atlas ...... 49 Biological Sampling...... 49 Stomach Content Analysis...... 49 Stable Isotope Analysis ...... 49 Environmental Sampling...... 49 Results for Primary Production ...... 49 Nutrients ...... 50 CONCLUSIONS ...... 50 REFERENCES ...... 50

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 SURVEY ROSTER AND PROGRAMME EXPERTS APPENDIX 2 ACOUSTIC CALIBRATION RESULTS APPENDIX 3 NET MANUAL - TRAWL CONFIGURATION APPENDIX 4 ACOUSTIC TRANSECT RESULTS APPENDIX 5 LIST OF TAXA IDENTIFIED FROM TRAWL SAMPLES APPENDIX 6 BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES FROM TRAWL-CAUGHT TAXA APPENDIX 7 OCEANOGRAPHIC STATIONS AND SAMPLES APPENDIX 8 TRAWL SAMPLE DATA FORMS APPENDIX 9 SIGHTING SURVEY DATA FORMS

vi LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Summary information on programme components ...... 2 Table 2 Ships itinerary for the LAPE ecosystem survey...... 3 Table 3 Estimation of time budget for ecosystem survey activities ...... 4 Table 4 Allocation of track lines and designed sampling intensity...... 5 Table 5 Final allocation of track lines to strata ...... 5 Table 6 Summary of acoustic classifications used in 2006 LAPE ecosystem survey ...... 10 Table 7 Summary of acoustic transects, date, start/end time, start/end position and length in nautical miles (n.mi.) and kilometres (km) by strata for the 2006 LAPE Ecosystem Survey. (All times are GMT) ...... 22 Table 8 Acoustic backscattering groups associated with individual trawl samples...... 24 Table 9 Trawl sets completed during 2006 LAPE ecosystem survey. See map (Figure 1) for strata...... 27 Table 10 Phytoplankton species identified in net hauls (ca. 150 m depth) sampled during the 1st leg of the LAPE cruise (26th April-9th May 2006). 36 Table 11 Key to light micrographs in Plates 1 to 8 of species identified in net hauls (ca. 150 m depth to surface) sampled during the 1st leg of the LAPE cruise (11th April-9th May 2006)...... 38 Table 12 Individual sightings, sighting numbers are indicated on Figure 14..... 48

vii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Survey design showing study area, strata, transects and oceanographic stations...... 6 Figure 2 Recovery of the multi-sampler showing the trawl net. The three cod- ends are not visible, below the after edge of the deck...... 13 Figure 3 Schematic of multi-sampler deployment showing opening and closing of the first cod-end...... 13 Figure 4 Calibration of the FL500 fluorometer against extracted chlorophyll from water bottle samples at corresponding depths...... 18 Figure 5 The acoustic transects (heavy red line) on the overall cruise track (thin grey line) for the 2006 LAPE Ecosystem Survey. Note that transect 1 was repeated at the end of the survey...... 21 Figure 6 Sample echogram (38 KHz on right, 18 KHz on left) on EchoView showing upward vertical migration of scattering layer at dusk and the trace of the CTD/Rosette sampler cast...... 23 Figure 7 Locations of fishing sets completed during the LAPE ecosystem survey...... 26 Figure 8 Distribution by depth (m) and hour of the day (local time). Daylight sets are grey-filled and night sets are black-filled...... 28 Figure 9 Sample page from at-sea species ID guide developed during the LAPE ecosystem survey 2006...... 29 Figure 10 Catches of fish families by sample depth. Daytime samples are marked in yellow and night samples in blue. The largest catches are shown with hollow circles to minimize obscuring other data points...... 31 Figure 11 Catches of non-fish families and groups by sample depth. Daytime samples are marked in yellow and night samples in blue...... 32 Figure 12 Oceanographic stations completed during the LAPE ecosystem survey. CTD, water and net samples were taken on all stations...... 34 Figure 13 Synopsis of major oceanographic features from the LAPE ecosystem survey. Western features in upper panel, eastern features in the lower panel. DCM indicates the deep chlorophyll maximum layer...... 35 Figure 14 Primary sighting transects (black line) on the LAPE ecosystem survey cruise track (fine line). Daylight intervals are marked with grey highlight...... 48

viii

INTRODUCTION

The relative importance and ecological role of different species in a given ecosystem is largely related to their abundance. Therefore, obtaining biomass estimates of key ecosystem components in the LAPE area is an important contribution to achieving the overall objectives of the LAPE project. Two fishery-independent surveys were proposed as part of the LAPE project to provide biomass estimates of priority species. These were combined and expanded into the ecosystem survey reported herein. This report includes operation details concerning the survey and preliminary results available shortly after the survey was completed. The purpose of this report is to ensure a record of the overall design and performance of the various activities during the survey. The data collected during this survey have been further analysed and are reported in other LAPE project technical documents In addition to abundance, biomass and distribution information for selected species, the ecosystem survey included sampling for trophic relationships and physical and biological environmental sampling. This information will improve the various input parameters for the ecosystem modelling efforts within the LAPE project. The ecosystem survey provided in-situ measures of biological oceanographic parameters to calibrate satellite estimates of primary productivity as well as information on key physical parameters of the water masses in the region, which can be used to understand patterns of productivity and fish distribution. Finally, the ecosystem survey provided an opportunity to obtain biological samples from species rarely or never observed when sampling from fisheries catches. The survey was conducted on board the Research Vessel Celtic Explorer, operated from Galway, Ireland by the Marine Institute. The Marine Institute is the Irish National agency charged with conducting marine research on behalf of the Government of Ireland. The Celtic Explorer has been in service since 2003 and provides state-of-the-art facilities and equipment for fisheries and marine biology research.

OBJECTIVES

• To obtain quantitative acoustic estimates of the biomass of the main pelagic/mesopelagic forage species found in the area covered by the LAPE project • To collect diet and stable isotope samples from a wide range of fish and invertebrate species • To obtain reference samples of otoliths for diet studies prey identification

1 • To provide ground-truthing data for satellite data through direct measurements of plankton concentrations, chlorophyll concentration and light extinction in surface waters • To study surface and vertical characteristics of water masses in the area • To carry out quantitative visual abundance surveys of cetaceans and schools of flyingfish and observations on other groups such as sea birds and sea turtles This required a large, multi-disciplinary team operating four largely- independent programmes simultaneously; acoustic biomass estimation, biomass sampling, environmental sampling, and the sighting survey (Table 1). These were intended to provide biomass estimates of various species; information on distribution and trophic relationships of priority species; information on key physical parameters of the water masses in the region; and biological oceanography information to estimate primary production and to understand patterns of primary productivity.

Table 1 Summary information on programme components Programme Acoustic biomass Biomass Oceanographic Sighting estimation sampling sampling Survey Ecosystem fish, squid, fish, squid, abiotic cetaceans, component crustaceans crustaceans environment and birds, turtles, primary flyingfish production Target biomass estimates species and size physical abundance Information of epi- and meso- composition of environment and pelagic zones acoustic biomass (temperature, distribution of including fish, targets salinity, nutrients) cetaceans and molluscs and samples for diet biological flyingfish crustaceans and stable oceanography isotope analysis (chlorophyll, light extinction) Activity Multifrequency Pelagic trawling Physical and Visual acoustic survey (stations) biological sighting using digital oceanographic survey of integration sampling (stations cetaceans and (transects) and transects) flyingfish schools (transects) Design Stratified zig-zag pelagic trawl vertical profile Stratified zig- transects (same as deployed on sampling at zag transects the sighting acoustic target approximately (same as the survey transects) masses regular grid of pre- acoustic selected sample transects) stations overlaid on survey transects, including vertical plankton samples Staff 4 5 3 4 complement

2 PARTICIPANTS

The scientific staff of the survey was made up of a team of programme experts and regional staff members. The regional staff came from the countries participating in the LAPE Project (Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, St Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines) and Trinidad and Tobago. Programme experts were drawn from Barbados, Canada, Dominica, Ireland, Martinique, Norway and St. Lucia. All countries whose waters were included in the survey, with the exception of Montserrat, had a national participant on at least one leg of the survey. All scientific staff were required to have a Sea-farer's Medical Certificate and a Personal Survival Training Certificate to meet the health and safety requirements of the vessel operator. Training and medical examinations were arranged by the LAPE project for all participants requiring them. The survey roster and information on the programme experts is included in Appendix 1.

CRUISE DATES

The R/V Celtic Explorer was selected after a comprehensive review of available and affordable research vessels. Once selected, the survey schedule was strongly constrained by the other commitments in the ship's annual programme. A total of 56 days of vessel time (Table 2) were required to complete 28 programme days (mobilization, demobilization and survey days), as a result of the required trans-Atlantic passages.

Table 2 Ships itinerary for the LAPE ecosystem survey. 11 April 2006 mobilization day 13 April departed Galway 13 transit days 26 April arrived Antigua - 06:30 departed Antigua - 12:00 13 survey days 09 May arrive Barbados - 11:00 disembark staff 10 May new staff report depart Barbados 10:30 13 survey days 22 May arrive Antigua - 10:00 depart Antigua - 17:00 05 June arrive Galway 14 transit days 06 June demobilization day

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SURVEY DESIGN AND CRUISE TRACK

Survey Design

The survey design was based on a number of considerations to balance the time requirements of the four survey activities (acoustic transects, sighting transects, fishing stations and oceanographic sampling stations). The acoustic transects

3 and the sighting transects were the same lines however the acoustics operated 24-hours while the sighting transects were limited to daylight hours. All transect surveying was suspended from time to time to conduct station sampling, either trawling or oceanographic. The extent of the survey area was the LAPE study area, and the spatial strata within it were adopted from the design used in 2004 for the LAPE Project Large-scale cetacean sighting survey (Figure 1).

Survey Effort Allocation

The estimated time budget for programme station activities (Table 3) left about 13-17 hours per day for survey transect steaming. It was assumed that time losses would largely out-weigh time gains i.e. activities would take a longer- than-planned time. Thus, the calculations for total survey effort assumed 13 hours of transect effort per day at 10.5 kts.

Table 3 Estimation of time budget for ecosystem survey activities Station type Elements Time per station Time per day Fishing deploy/recovery 30 min 1.0 to 1.7 x 3 to 4 depth stratum 1 to 3 @20 min 3.0 to 6.8 hrs depth change 10 min Sighting approaches 30 min up to 2 per day 1.0 hr Plankton vertical profiles 20 min up to 3 per day 0 to 1.0 hr CTD*-standard deploy/recover 10 min 2 per day 500 m casts w/ down/up at 1.0 m s-1 17 min 1.0 hr fluorometer CTD*-deep deploy/recover 10 min 1 per day 1500 m casts down/up at 1.0 m s-1 51 min 1.0 hr no fluorometer CTD*-full depth deploy/recover 10 min 9 for survey down/up at 1.0 m s-1 60 min on per day basis 0.5 hrs Estimated total station time per day: 6.5-11.3 hrs * Conductivity-Temperature-Depth probe

The survey was nominally 26 days (2 legs of 13 days), but time was required for acoustic calibration and off-effort steaming, leaving approximately 24.5 days of survey time. The resulting survey track line distance (nautical miles and kilometres) was: total transect effort (km/n.mi =1.852) in n.mi. in km. 13 hours/day 13 10.5 per hour 19.5 136.5 per day 252.8 24.5 days 24.5 3344 n.mi. total 6194 km

4 For planning purposes the design allocation of total effort was 3350 n.mi. (~6200 km.), which was allocated proportional to strata area with variable sampling intensity (Table 4). Stratum OE (62% of total area) had a target relative sampling intensity of 0.25.

Table 4 Allocation of track lines and designed sampling intensity target track effort by area and sampling n.mi. intensity prop prop. sample STRATUM area km2 area to area intensity n.mi. km 1 CWN 1886866 0.028 94.2 1.0 176.2 326.3 2 CMN 2460489 0.037 122.8 1.0 229.8 425.6 3 CWS 2690307 0.040 134.3 1.0 251.2 465.3 4 CWM 2512089 0.037 125.4 1.0 234.6 434.5 5 OW 4070651 0.061 203.2 1.0 380.2 704.0 6 CMS 3688361 0.055 184.2 1.0 344.4 637.9 7 CMM 2721421 0.041 135.9 1.0 254.1 470.7 8 OE 41633324 0.620 2078.7 0.25 972.1 1800.2 9 CE 5433288 0.081 271.3 1.0 507.4 939.7 67096796 3350.0 3350.0 6204.2

A randomly generated stratified zig-zag transect design was prepared using the Distance 5.0 software (citation). After plotting on charts the lines were manually revised, for example to avoid known hazards to navigation. The sampling distances were adjusted to a total of 3150 n. mi. after further consideration of expected port calls and off-effort connection transits needed to complete the survey. The resulting allocation of effort (Table 5) closely matches the designed sampling intensity, albeit with a slight under-sampling of stratum CWS. Figure 1 shows the final design and selected oceanographic sampling stations.

Table 5 Final allocation of track lines to strata Total On-effort Design sampling STRATUM n.mi. n.mi. intensity 1 CWN 176.6 174.7 1.05 2 CMN 198.4 196.3 0.91 3 CWS 196.6 193.7 0.82 4 CWM 232.7 229.3 1.03 5 OW 330.0 325.5 0.91 6 CMS 285.1 281.0 0.96 7 CMM 251.8 247.2 1.02 8 OE 1019.9 1016.4 0.27 9 CE 501.7 493.8 1.02 Nautical miles 3193 3158 Kilometres 5913 5848

Figure 1 Survey design showing study area, strata, transects and oceanographic stations.

6 ACOUSTICS

Acoustic surveying of fish, micronekton and plankton biomass was conducted using the Simrad ER60 multi-frequency scientific echo-sounder. Acoustic biomass i.e. integrated acoustic backscattering, was characterized by species and size composition of samples obtained by pelagic trawling (see next section). The trawl sampling locations and depths were usually selected to obtain samples from specific acoustic target biomasses.

Acoustic Data Acquisition:

The acoustic array onboard the Celtic Explorer consists of 4 split beam transducers with operating frequencies of 18, 38, 120 and 200 KHz. The transducers are mounted within the vessels drop keel and lowered to the working depth of 3m below the vessels hull or 8.8m below the sea surface. While on the survey track vessel propulsion was provided by twin DC electric motors, with generating power supplied from a single diesel engine, thus providing “silent” running. In this mode the measured underwater radiated noise levels of the vessel are well below those described by the ICES standard recommended for the limitation of fish avoidance responses (Mitson, 1995). However, during fishing operations two diesel engines were employed to provide sufficient power to tow the net. Acoustic data from the ER60 were observed and recorded onto hard-drives from the processing unit in two formats. The “RAW files” were logged via a continuous Ethernet connection as “EK5” files to a laptop computer and to the ER60 hard drive as a backup in the event of data loss. All acoustic data files from the previous day were downloaded to the vessel’s server nightly and as a further precaution backed up on DVD for transporting from the vessel. Sonar Data’s Echoview® Echolog (Version 3.2) live viewer was used to display the echogram during data collection to allow the scientists to scroll back through echograms noting the locations and depths of fish shoals and scattering layers. A member of the scientific staff monitored the equipment continually throughout the survey. A paper log was kept to record transect start and stop positions and all off track events, noting time, GPS position and vessel mile. The log was used to monitor the time spent off track during fishing operations and hydrographic stations plus any general observations. Few technical problems were encountered throughout the survey. However, during the pre-survey calibration, off Antigua, a large decrease (2 dB) in the sensitivity of the 38 kHz transducer was identified (Calibration Report, Appendix 2). The problem was isolated to the cabling in the drop keel and corrected at the end of transect 2. Consequently, although 38 KHz transducer results for transects 1 and 2 are included in the summary tables, they will be excluded from the final biomass analysis. Transect 1 was repeated at the end of the survey but no valid data at 38 KHz were obtained for Transect 2.

7 Acoustic Data Scrutinising:

The acoustic data were scrutinised daily using Sonar Data’s Echoview® (V 3.2) and/or Bergen Echo Integrator (BEI) post processing software. The edited (scrutinised) files were backed up on the vessel’s server and DVD daily for the previous days work. Although both software packages were available, and used in the editing process, the final output of summary values was from the BEI. Partitioning of data into the defined categories was largely subjective and a function of the view of the onboard scientist(s) experienced in scrutinising echograms. Echogram limits were set at an upper limit of 9m, to take into account the vessels drop keel depth (8.8m subsurface) and also the effects of bubble attenuation at the surface. The bottom detection limit was set at 750m, although in practice few discernable targets were observed below 500m. After inspection, the echograms were partitioned into the 9 broad categories (summarized in Table 6) and the Nautical Area Scattering Coefficient (NASC or 2 -2 SA in m n.mi. ) values from each vessel log interval of 5 n.mi. estimated. , Unless stated otherwise, classifications of echogram intensity were based on the observations relative to the 38 kHz output, the primary frequency employed during most acoustic surveys. Note that the 38 kHz transducer was not recording properly during transect 1 and 2 and was excluded from the final analysis. Transect 1 was repeated at the end of the survey as transect 41, however transect 2 was not. Acoustic categories were identified on the basis of trace recognition as follows:

Category 1: Plankton (PLANK). This classification is applied as a generic term covering phytoplankton, zooplankton, and other non-fish biota within the micronekton. Pre and post larval fishes are also included as a contributor to this category. For echo integration purposes categorisation criteria included; form dense scattering layers in surface waters (0-100m); form light scattering layers at depth (200- 500m); show diurnal vertical migration patterns; non-avoidance responses and correlation with the thermocline and halocline layers in shallow waters. The strong halocline observed at 180m offshore was regarded as the lower limit for surface plankton layers in this case. Deep plankton layers of low density were recorded down to a maximum depth of 500m in the open ocean. Echogram intensity on lower frequencies appeared highly variable from low density (blue) mixed scattering layers at depth to very high intensity (red) layers in surface waters both at night and during day light hours. High density plankton layers were most frequently observed in surface waters (0-80m) and at night appearing as mixed layers (see Category 3). High density plankton layers were also associated with shelf edge or frontal areas.

Category 2: Plankton and pelagic mix (PL/PE). This classification was defined to include well-mixed layers of both plankton and pelagic fish species occurring in surface waters (0-50m). Selection criteria include; lack of distinct or recognisable schools or single targets in the

8 echogram; presence of pelagic fish species within layer from trawls catches. This layer was applied across all echograms both in the neritic and pelagic realms due to continued presence of fish in trawl catches both during the day and at night. Normal practices of threshold adjustment to remove unwanted plankton echotraces also had the effect of removing fish biomass from the echogram, thus necessitating this category.

Category 3: Plankton and mesopelagic mix (PL/ME). This category was chosen to take into account the nightly vertical migration of mesopelagic layers into surface waters (25-100m). Selection criteria; presence of near surface layer during hours of darkness and absence during daylight; well mixed with surface plankton; non-schooling behaviour. Echogram intensity on lower frequencies (18 & 38KHz) generally appearing as low density (blue) layers. The above categories (2 and 3) were composed of a mixed fish and plankton layer. The layers were well mixed and proved very difficult to isolate fish and plankton echotraces, thereby necessitating a mixed layer category. The characteristics of plankton layers encountered showed strong resistance to threshold levels commonly used to filter out plankton and reveal underlying fish biomass. Under normal circumstances a –65dB threshold is applied on 38 kHz to remove unwanted plankton. However, thresholds below this level may also remove fish traces from the echogram leading to a removal of fish biomass.

Category 4: Unidentified pelagic species (PMIX). This category was applied to pelagic school, and single fish targets forming species occurring in surface waters down to 200m. Selection criteria include; recognisable school formation during daylight hours and school dispersion at night; unrecognisable from Categories 8 & 9; no trawl samples available to confirm identification.

Category 5: Krill (KRILL). The krill classification was applied to single distinct schools appearing commonly encountered around a depth range of 150-250m during daylight hours. Categorisation criteria include; singular schools often of distinct shape and structure; occurrences at or around the 200m depth contour; school dispersion during hours of darkness Echogram intensity appeared on all frequencies (18, 38, 120 and 200KHz), but was most intense on 18KHz.

Category 6: Mesopleagic (MESO). This classification was formulated to include but is not exclusive to the Myctophidae. Categorisation criteria include; deep scattering layer between 400-600m during daylight and migration to surface waters (25-100m) at night; shallow scattering layer at or around 200m during daylight hours and migration to surface waters (25-100m) at night; visible migration pattern at

9 dawn and dusk. Echogram intensity dominated by low density (blue) diffuse layers.

Category 7: Mixed bottom species (OTDEM). This category was defined to include bottom or near bottom schools or layers of fish encountered in coastal waters (<500m) that were not identified by directed trawling due to gear constraints. Selection criteria; demersal orientation on or near to seabed or bathymetric feature; variable school structure and density during daylight hours; forming diffuse feeding layers above the seabed at night. In coastal areas, (<500m) this category was commonly applied as a layer extending from the seabed up to cover nightly migration of bottom species. Echogram intensity ranged from high (red) to low (blue), with schools and small marks of variable size and structure.

Category 8: Pelagic 1 (PEL1) The Pelagic 1 classification was formulated to include small schooling pelagics, characteristic of fishes with swim bladders such as members of the families Engraulidae and Clupeidae. Classification criteria include; school forming in surface waters; schools most frequently encountered within plankton or in close association with surface (0-100m) plankton layers. Echogram intensity of pelagic 1 schools ranged from low to high intensity (red) to medium intensity (yellow/green), mainly due to high acoustic reflectivity of the gas inclusion in the swimbladder.

Category 9: Pelagic 2 (PEL2) This category was defined to include small schooling pelagic fishes without swim bladders encountered in surface waters such as species of Scrombrids and Carangids amongst others. Classification criteria include; form small schools in surface waters; schools most frequently encountered within plankton or in close association with surface (0-150m) plankton layers. Echogram intensity of this category of schools was mostly confined to the low (blue) and medium (yellow/green) intensity echotraces.

Table 6 Summary of acoustic classifications used in 2006 LAPE ecosystem survey Category Abbrev Description Time Depth

1 Plankton PLANK Generic Plankton - Surface Day/Night Deep Layer 0-150m Phytoplankton, Zooplankton, non-fish ~400m

2 Plankton/ PL/PE Plankton and pelagic fish Day/Night ~0-150m Pelagic Contains schools

3 Plankton/ PL/ME Plankton with nightly vertical Night 25-100m Mesopelagic migration of mesopelagic 4 Unidentified PL/ME Schools near surface Day 0-200m Pelagics Dispersed at night

10 Category Abbrev Description Time Depth

5 Krill KRILL single schools Day 150-250 schools dispersed Night ~200m 6 Mesopelagic MESO Mainly Myctophidae (Deep) Day 400-600m Myctophidae mixed with Plankton Night ~200m (Shallow)

7 Mixed OTDEM Unidentified bottom targets Day/night 1-10m Bottom above Species bottom 8 Pelagic 1 PEL 1 medium to high Intensity returns Day/Night 0-150m likely due to swimbladder 9 Pelagic 2 PEL 2 low to medium Intensity returns likely Day/Night 0-150m swimbladder absent or not air filled

Acoustic Calibration

Calibration of the ER60 acoustic array is routinely carried out onboard the Celtic Explorer following the principles described by Foote et al. (1987). Regular calibrations are required to align the scale reading of each operating frequency within the system to that of a known standard target. Results of the previous and subsequent calibrations are compared to determine transducer gain and SA correction differences. A calibration factor is then applied to the output data to ensure accuracy of the scrutinised SA data for calculation of species abundance estimates. The ER60 was last calibrated in late March 2006 in the NE Atlantic. Acoustic frequencies were calibrated using the same settings employed for the survey. Ambient environmental conditions were measured at each calibration site using a CTD cast to determine sound velocity profile. Calibrations were carried out using standards of known target strength. For the 18 and 38 KHz frequencies copper target spheres of 63mm and 60mm were used. For the higher frequencies of 120 and 200 KHz a tungsten carbide sphere of 38.1mm was used. As this was the first time the vessel has worked in a warm water region two calibrations of each frequency were undertaken to ensure data accuracy. The first calibration was carried out on the 26th May in the open sea 6.2 n.mi. west of Antigua in 30m of water over a sand-flat. Weather conditions on site were considered good, with moderate easterly trade winds (11Kts) and a calm sea state (1m±0.5m). Only the 18, 120 and 200 KHz transducers were calibrated as a fault in the 38 KHz unit was discovered. A second full calibration of the acoustic array was attempted on 9th May in Oistins Bay, Barbados but was abandoned due to incoming vessel traffic in the vicinity. The calibration was completed on 10th May in Carlisle Bay, Barbados, at the start of the second leg of the survey. The 200 KHz transducer could not be calibrated at this time because of the strong current and interference caused by

11 abundant plankton. Weather conditions on site were considered good, with a moderate (18Kts) wind from the southeast and a wind swell of approximately 1m also from the southeast. Sea conditions on site were not ideal due to a strong (0.8Kts) current running from the east. A final calibration at the end of the survey was carried out on 21st May, west of Barbuda on the 38 KHz frequency only. This was necessary as the repairs carried out on the cabling system earlier in the survey had meant only one valid calibration was available for this frequency. The 200 KHz transducer again could not be calibrated due to current and interference from plankton in the water. Results of the ER60 calibrations carried out during the survey are detailed in the calibration report in Appendix 2.

TRAWLING AND BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING

Trawl tows were conducted several times per day using one of two pelagic (midwater) trawls. The trawls are used routinely by Marine Institute on the Celtic Explorer, the herring net and the multi-purpose net. In most cases the multi-purpose trawl was used, however the choice of trawl and trawl configuration was determined for each tow depending on the depth of water and target fishing depth. The herring net was used in shallow water (<100 m) or when the target depth was very shallow (~20 m). Otherwise the multi-purpose trawl with the multi-sampler was used. The standard configurations for each trawl are given in Appendix 3. The multi-purpose trawl was fitted with a multi-sampler which was borrowed from the Institute of Marine Research (IMR) in Bergen Norway (Engas et al, 1997). The multi-sampler is an acoustically-operated net opening and closing system. It is fitted at the end of the trawl in place of a standard cod-end (Figure 2) and has three cod-ends which can be sequentially opened and closed (Figure 3) by acoustic link from the wheelhouse. Each cod-end can be used to obtain a sample of catch from a discrete depth interval without contamination from other parts of the water column. Because three samples can be obtained from a single trawl tow use of the multi-sampler greatly reduced the number of trawl tows required. Each cod-end was opened at a selected depth and towed for 20 minutes. Later in the survey the tow length was increased to 30 minutes to increase sample content, given the low catch rates experienced.

Figure 2 Recovery of the multi-sampler showing the trawl net. The three cod-ends are not visible, below the after edge of the deck.

Figure 3 Schematic of multi-sampler deployment showing opening and closing of the first cod-end.

13 The multi-sampler codends were numbered corresponding to the release order to prevent sample confusion on deck after recovery. The trawl and sample details (time, location, depth, trawl configuration) were recorded in the wheelhouse during the tow on the trawl record form (Appendix 9). Trawl mensuration equipment was deployed on all sets. Door spread sensors and depth sensor (both Scanmar) and a headline sensor, either a Scanmar Trawl-eye or a BEL Reeson (cable linked) net sonde, were routinely deployed. Wing spread sensors (Scanmar) were used on most sets using the multi- purpose trawl although trawl damage later in the survey resulted in the loss of one sensor.

Catch Sorting and Recording

The cod ends were opened immediately the multi-sampler and nets were brought onboard. The contents of each cod end were carefully collected in separately labelled trays corresponding to the numbered net, to ensure that the samples from each depth fished were kept separate. In addition to the catch in the codends, there were various instances when substantial numbers of organisms were caught in the meshes of the trawl body (particularly squids and long-bodied fishes). These individuals were added to the catch from the codend to which they were most similar in species composition. The samples were then transferred to the onboard fish laboratory for sorting, identification (to species level where possible) and sampling for catch composition and biological specimens. In the fish lab, each sample was processed independently on separate data recording forms as outlined below.

Taxonomic identification Identification in many cases required the use of family, genus and species keys (For fish: Anonymous 1983, Collette and Nauen 1983, Fahay 1983, Smith and Heemstra 1988, Uyeno et al 1983, Nakamura and Parin 1993, Carpenter 2002. For cephalopods and other invertebrates: Boltovskoy 1999a 1999b, Carpenter 2002, Jereb et al. 2005, Roper et al 1984, Takeda and Okutani 1983 ) and the use of digital photographs and/or a dissecting microscope. Specimens were identified to the lowest taxon possible, in many cases (e.g. for fish and squid) this was the genus or family level. In some cases, particularly with other invertebrates (e.g. crustaceans and tunicates) the lowest taxon may have been suborder or even order. Samples from every identified taxon were carefully photographed to provide material for an electronic identification guide. This guide grew rapidly and was accessed frequently throughout the survey to assist in the efficient processing of samples.

Catch Composition Samples were usually sorted in their entirety but in a few instances of exceptionally numerous catches, a weighed sub-sample was selected from the homogeneously mixed catch. Sample and sub-sample weights were recorded to estimate total catch size subsequently.

14 For each sample (or sub-sample), the total weights of each taxon (i.e. lowest taxonomic grouping identified) were first recorded on the catch record sheet (all data recording forms are given in Appendix 9). For each taxon, the total number of individuals was determined by various means. For previously well- sampled taxa the total number was either counted directly or estimated from a count of a weighed sub-sample of the taxon, and the information added to the catch record form. Alternatively, the taxon was sampled for a length frequency; again either entirely or from a weighed sub-sample, and the information was recorded on the length frequency record form. Lengths were measured to the nearest mm using fork and/or total length for fishes; mantle length for squids and carapace length for crustaceans. Lengths were measured using a fibreglass measuring tape (cm precision) for very large specimens, a fish measuring board for most (mm precision), and calipers (.1 mm precision) for very small individuals e.g. planktonic larvae. Further subsamples of taxa (the first two from each length class) were weighed to the nearest g on a POLS brand motion-compensated balance and recorded on the length-weight record form.

Biological sampling Whole stomachs were collected from a subsample of most taxonomic groups, packaged in separately labelled ziplock bags and stored in the laboratory freezer immediately after collection. Sex and state of maturity was noted macroscopically for all dissected specimens. Otoliths were also collected for a subsample of common taxonomic groups, cleaned under a binocular microscope, photographed for gross morphology and stored dry in small separately labelled envelopes. At least 5 samples for subsequent analysis of stable isotope ratios were collected from most common taxonomic groups. Each sample included approximately 5 g of tissue. For sufficiently large specimens, 5 g of dorsal muscle and 5 g of liver tissue were sampled and packaged separately. For smaller individuals, a 5 g section of whole body was sampled, and for very small individuals the entire organism or several individuals were collected to make up 5 g. Stable isotope tissue samples were packaged in separately labelled ziplock bags and stored in the laboratory freezer at -22C immediately after collection. Data relevant to each biological sample (set and sample, length, weight, sex, maturity) were recorded on the detail record form. All the biological samples collected from an individual specimen were tagged with the same number using pre-printed adhesive labels.

Data Entry and Data Management The catch data were entered into a set of linked tables using MS Excel (Office 2003). The data structure was designed to maintain referential integrity of the table relations although no application was used to ensure this. The database was transferred to MS FoxPro (Visual FoxPro Version 7.0) where quality control tests, including referential integrity were applied. Data products (listings,

15 summaries and cross tabulations) were produced using SQL and FoxPro reporting tools. Maps and graphics were prepared using ACON (v10.4.14, © Fisheries and Oceans Canada, www.mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/acon) and MapMaker (MapMaker Pro v3.5, © Eric Dudley, www.mapmaker.com). The relatively small file size involved meant adequate daily backups were simply maintained on memory sticks and other computers.

OCEANOGRAPHIC SAMPLING

The oceanographic programme included environmental (physical-chemical) and biological sampling. The biological oceanography was specifically targetted on providing information to calibrate the estimation of primary production from satellite imagery. This was supplemented by vertical plankton net samples for microscopic examination to identify the taxonomic make-up of the phytoplankton.

Rosette Sampler

Oceanographic sampling was conducted at a total of 56 pre-selected stations designated as CTD500, CTD1500 and Ocean section stations (indicated on Figure 1). Oceanographic casts were to 500m, 1500m or full ocean depth respectively, although the full depth was limited to approximately 3900m by wire length. A rosette sampler (Seabird 32) with a Seabird 911 Conductivity, Temperature and Depth (CTD) probe was deployed at all sites. The rosette included up to 18 Oceantest Hydro-bios water sampling bottles (10 l capacity). In-situ fluorescence profile was measured, at CTD500 stations only due to the instruments depth limit, with a SeaTech FL500 fluorometer. Water bottle samples were triggered on the up-cast at a number of depths selected from the down-cast profile. Water samples were taken from the bottles for phytoplankton examination (immediate or preserved for later analysis), nutrient analysis (nitrate, nitrite, reactive phosphate and silicate) after the cruise, salinity calibrations, extracted chlorophyll a, high-precision liquid chromatography (HPLC) and spectrophotometric analysis and primary production rate experiments.

Phytoplankton Sampling

Phytoplankton samples were taken from the CTD bottles, preserved with buffered formalin and stored in the refrigerator. Coccolithophore samples from the CTD bottles were vacuum-filtered onto 0.8µm Isopore filters which were oven-dried at 40-60°C for several hours. After each CTD cast, vertical plankton net samples were obtained with a 0.5 m plankton net (25µm mesh) from approximately 200m to the surface. Nets were washed down and the samples concentrated. When time permitted, samples were examined live under a photomicroscope. Samples were also preserved

16 using buffered formalin or Lugol's solution. Preserved phytoplankton samples were stored refrigerated. All phytoplankton samples were returned to National University of Ireland in Galway.

Underway Information

The Celtic Explorer is equipped with a non-toxic water supply system (i.e. near- surface seawater which is uncontaminated by any shipboard materials). A flow- through Seabird SBE-21 Thermosalinograph was used to gather data on surface temperature and conductivity and a Turner Designs 10-AU fluorometer for fluorescence.

Processing

The CTD data were processed using Seabird Data Processing (Win 32). The data were taken through the following steps; Data Conversion, Wild Edit, Cell Thermal Mass, Filter, Loop Edit, Derive and Bin. Processed data are in 1m bins. Visual inspection was also carried out on each file for surface readings and any erroneous readings were removed. Data were then plotted using Seaplot and Matlab. Underway data were edited in Access and Excel for outlying points and plotted in Surfer.

Primary Production

This sampling programme included profiles of extracted Chlorophyll a, in vivo fluorescence and nutrients. High precision liquid chromatography and phytoplankton absorption spectra samples as well as photosynthesis-irradiance experiment samples were collected from selected depths. The primary production rate experiments were conducted using the carbon stable mass isotope 13C. Hyper-spectral surface reflectance was estimated using a hand-held fibre-optic probe connected to an Ocean Optics spectrometer at stations where conditions were suitable. Biological samples were collected from 10 depths in the upper 200 m of the water column. Sampling depths were determined station by station depending on the depth of the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM). A typical profile sampled 200, 140, 120, 100, 90, 80, 60, 40, 20 and 10 meters. Extracted chlorophyll was obtained from duplicate 100 ml samples from each depth which were filtered on to 25mm GF/F glass fibre filters at low vacuum pressure (250 mm Hg). Each filter was then placed into a 20 ml glass scintillation vial containing 10.0 ml of 90% Acetone. Chlorophyll was extracted for 18 to 24 hours in the dark at –22C. Samples were then removed from the freezer and allowed to warm to room temperature (in the dark) before measurement. Fluorescence before and after acidification with 10% hydrochloric acid was measured with a Turner Designs 10 AU fluorometer. The fluorometer had been calibrated prior to the cruise with pure chlorophyll a solutions of known concentration. The concentration in each sample was computed and then the average of the two samples at each depth was

17 calculated. The average extracted value was then plotted against nominal sampling depth at each station to give vertical profiles of extracted chlorophyll a. These results were used to calibrate the voltage output from the SeaTech FL500 fluorometer attached to the CTD package for all stations that were 500m deep or less (Figure 4).

1.2

y = 6.3232x - 0.2001 1 R2 = 0.801

0.8

0.6 Chlorophyll

0.4

0.2

0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 Volts

Figure 4 Calibration of the FL500 fluorometer against extracted chlorophyll from water bottle samples at corresponding depths. Seawater samples for High Precision Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) were collected from two depths at all stations. The shallow sample was from 20 meters and the second sample was from the Deep Chlorophyll Maximum (DCM). The DCM was estimated from the fluorescence profile. At stations where there was no fluorescence profile (i.e. CTD cast to depths greater than 500 meters) the depth of the DCM at the previous station was used. One litre of sample was filtered onto a 25 mm GF/F glass fibre filter at low vacuum pressure. The filter was then folded in half, wrapped in aluminium foil, identified and then placed in Liquid Nitrogen for preservation. The HPLC analyses will be conducted at a later date at the Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland, USA. Seawater samples for spectrophotometric analyses were collected from the same sample depths as for the HPLC samples. One litre of sample was filtered onto a 25 mm GF/F glass fibre filter on a 15.8 mm diameter filter holder at low vacuum pressure. The filter was then carefully inserted into a 2 ml cryovial

18 without creasing the filter. The vial was identified and stored in liquid nitrogen for later analysis at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography. Photosynthesis-Irradiance (PI) experiments were conducted once each day. The water sample was collected from 20 meters at a scheduled CTD station. The mass isotope tracer (7.5 ml of 0.2 mmol sodium bicarbonate 13C solution) was added to 7.5 l of seawater sample and well mixed. Water was then dispensed into 10 x 750 ml culture flasks. Caps were secured and flasks placed into a linear incubator. Four pieces of Lexan film were placed between each bottle to attenuate the light. The light source was a slide projector fitted with a 150 watt tungsten halogen lamp. Temperature in the incubator was controlled by a constant flow of surface water. Samples were incubated for 3 hours. Each sample was then filtered onto a precombusted (425°C for 2 hours) 25 mm GF/F glass-fibre filter and rinsed five times with filtered seawater. Filters were dried overnight then stored in labelled Petrie dishes for mass spectroscopic analysis at the Boston University Stable Isotopes Laboratory, Boston, USA. Light intensity at each flask position was measured with a QSL 100 Quantum Scalar Irradiance meter. Flasks were filled with surface water and put into the incubator with the Lexan film attenuation screens placed between each flask. The probe of the QSL 100 was then inserted into each flask and the light intensity recorded. Surface reflectance was measured at selected stations using a hand held fibre- optic probe attached to an Ocean Optics S2000-TR temperature regulated spectrometer. These measurements were done only when certain conditions were met. The time window was 0900 hours to 1500 hours and the sun had to be directly overhead (near local noon) or on the starboard side of the ship. The latter requirement was dictated by the layout of the ship (very limited clear access on the port side) and the availability of 110v power. The only source of 110v power was from two transformers in the water laboratory/chemistry laboratory. The first two measurements were made by aiming the fibre-optic probe at an angle of 45° to the sea surface and to the sky. The target area was 120° from the sun. The third measurement was taken at an angle of 45° to a Spectralon block exposed to direct sunlight. Water was collected from all sampling depths for nutrient analysis. Approximately 40 ml of sample water was collected in a 50 ml sterile plastic centrifuge tube and stored frozen at –22C for later analysis.

SIGHTING SURVEY

A sighting survey was conducted on the same transect lines used for the acoustic survey. This survey was limited to 06:00 to 18:00 (approximately daylight hours) only. A team of 4 observers operated from the crow's nest (3 persons at the primary station) and monkey island (1 independent observer station). Although similar in many respects to the procedures used in the 2004 large-scale sighting survey conducted by the LAPE project, there were a few key differences. The data recording was reduced substantially as much of the

19 pertinent information was recorded continuously by the vessels underway data logging system (Simrad MDM400). The pertinent timestamped data included position, heading and speed. Because the vessel was involved in numerous activities, the time actually on-effort was regularly interrupted by CTD and fishing stations. When these occurred the sighting survey was either suspended or switched to secondary sighting. Sighting data were recorded on the same data forms used in the 2005 small- scale surveys (Appendix 10) however the information recorded by the MDM system was not needed, only the accurate recording of the time of various observations. The data from the MDM were extracted using the DATEX application at 1 minute intervals into an Excel spreadsheet. The survey data were then appended to the appropriate rows, based on the time of the event. A separate record of the independent observer's results was maintained.

RESULTS

The ecosystem survey successfully completed all of the planned track lines and oceanographic stations in the allotted time. Results in this cruise report, from all components of the ecosystem survey, are incomplete and preliminary. In most cases additional sample analysis is required to complete the data acquisition and, in all cases, additional data analysis starting with stringent quality control is required.

ACOUSTICS

In addition to the two planned calibrations in the waters off Antigua, an additional calibration was undertaken off Barbados. This was needed because of the cabling fault in the 38KHz transducer identified during the first calibration and affecting the first two transects. The first transect was repeated at the end of the survey, i.e. with all transducers working, but no 38KHz data are available from the second transect. The primary acoustic transects were separated from off-effort steaming for the following data analysis (Figure 5).

20 20°

19°

2 1 18° 1

40 17° 27 28 39 3 26 38 29 16° 25 30 37 31 36 15° 24

32 35 4 23 33 34 14° 14 13 22 12 21 15 11 13° 20 16

17 10 19 12° 5 18 9 8

11° 7 6

10°

64° 63° 62° 61° 60° 59° 58° 57° 56° 55° Figure 5 The acoustic transects (heavy red line) on the overall cruise track (thin grey line) for the 2006 LAPE Ecosystem Survey. Note that transect 1 was repeated at the end of the survey

21 Table 7 Summary of acoustic transects, date, start/end time, start/end position and length in nautical miles (n.mi.) and kilometres (km) by strata for the 2006 LAPE Ecosystem Survey. (All times are GMT) Transect Strata Date Time Start End Length Length Number Start End Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude (N.Mi.) (Km) 1 CMN 2006.04.27 19:46 7:06 N17:19.1 W062:14.2 N18:48.1 W061:55.3 90.8 168.2 2 OE 2006.04.28 8:52 23:40 N18:49.0 W061:55.4 N17:52.1 W058:07.5 223.7 414.3 3 OE 2006.04.30 9:21 14:28 N17:47.5 W057:53.8 N15:02.5 W060:18.3 215.5 399.1 4 OE 2006.05.01 16:09 0:37 N15:01.1 W060:17.4 N13:30.2 W056:02.4 263.3 487.7 5 OE 2006.05.03 4:28 14:10 N13:29.5 W056:02.2 N10:47.5 W059:46.2 272.4 504.5 6 CE 2006.05.04 21:03 5:30 N10:08.8 W060:23.2 N10:41.4 W060:58.0 47.3 87.5 7 CE 2006.05.05 2:41 10:43 N10:42.5 W060:57.9 N10:53.7 W060:01.6 56.4 104.5 8 CE 2006.05.05 10:55 0:32 N10:55.0 W060:00.5 N11:45.8 W060:47.8 68.8 127.4 9 CE 2006.05.06 1:38 9:58 N11:47.4 W060:47.8 N11:57.6 W059:37.5 69.5 128.8 10 CE 2006.05.06 10:04 23:22 N11:58.5 W059:37.2 N12:50.1 W060:24.9 46.7 86.5 11 CE 2006.05.07 0:26 9:12 N12:52.5 W060:24.4 N13:02.6 W059:17.7 65.8 121.8 12 CE 2006.05.07 10:44 20:47 N13:04.8 W059:13.9 N13:51.5 W060:03.1 66.9 123.8 13 CE 2006.05.07 20:47 0:17 N13:51.4 W060:03.0 N13:58.1 W059:28.9 33.8 62.5 14 CMS 2006.05.08 3:59 10:12 N13:54.8 W060:03.5 N13:46.1 W060:52.6 48.5 89.8 15 CMS 2006.05.08 10:19 19:44 N13:45.1 W060:52.5 N13:12.7 W060:33.7 37.2 68.9 16 CMS 2006.05.11 7:28 12:39 N12:56.7 W060:24.3 N12:44.1 W061:16.4 52.3 96.9 17 CMS 2006.05.11 13:16 3:11 N12:42.8 W061:16.1 N11:54.2 W060:46.7 56.5 104.6 18 CMS 2006.05.12 3:17 9:34 N11:53.7 W060:47.4 N11:39.5 W061:54.9 67.6 125.2 19 CWS 2006.05.12 10:37 6:10 N11:39.4 W061:57.7 N13:04.3 W061:18.3 93.2 172.6 20 CWS 2006.05.12 22:17 6:10 N12:45.8 W062:22.3 N13:04.2 W061:18.2 65.1 120.6 21 CWS 2006.05.13 6:16 10:39 N13:05.2 W061:18.0 N13:39.8 W061:35.2 38.4 71.2 22 OW 2006.05.13 23:39 11:00 N12:59.1 W062:17.6 N13:59.6 W062:55.4 70.8 131.1 23 OW 2006.05.14 11:07 0:21 N14:00.4 W062:54.8 N14:21.7 W062:02.1 55.4 102.5 24 OW 2006.05.15 0:27 9:07 N14:22.6 W062:02.3 N15:34.1 W062:48.4 84.2 156.0 25 OW 2006.05.15 9:13 12:01 N15:35.1 W062:48.6 N15:44.4 W062:23.5 25.9 48.0 26 OW 2006.05.15 12:07 5:21 N15:45.4 W062:23.8 N17:00.3 W063:22.3 93.6 173.3 27 CWM 2006.05.16 5:28 21:44 N17:00.4 W063:21.3 N17:04.2 W062:07.9 70.3 130.2 28 CWM 2006.05.16 22:03 4:25 N17:03.3 W062:05.9 N16:18.4 W062:41.8 56.6 104.7 29 CWM 2006.05.17 4:36 10:42 N16:16.7 W062:42.6 N16:10.9 W061:48.5 52.3 96.8 30 CWM 2006.05.17 10:49 20:36 N16:09.9 W061:48.9 N15:22.1 W062:16.7 54.8 101.4 31 CWM 2006.05.17 20:56 5:54 N15:19.9 W062:15.6 N15:00.6 W061:14.2 62.3 115.4 32 CWM 2006.05.18 6:12 12:50 N14:58.5 W061:14.0 N14:16.5 W061:59.4 60.8 112.6 33 CWM 2006.05.18 12:56 17:53 N14:15.7 W061:59.8 N13:59.2 W061:17.5 44.2 81.9 34 CMM 2006.05.18 23:45 1:17 N13:58.6 W060:35.2 N14:00.9 W060:51.7 16.2 30.0 35 CMM 2006.05.19 1:17 10:45 N14:00.9 W060:51.7 N14:55.2 W060:16.7 64.0 118.5 36 CMM 2006.05.19 10:45 15:44 N14:55.2 W060:16.7 N15:08.4 W061:13.8 56.7 105.0 37 CMM 2006.05.19 15:56 3:59 N15:09.3 W061:15.5 N16:16.4 W060:39.1 75.7 140.2 38 CMM 2006.05.20 4:04 8:42 N16:17.3 W060:39.0 N16:26.2 W061:13.0 33.8 62.6 39 CMM 2006.05.20 8:55 15:08 N16:27.1 W061:12.4 N17:05.3 W061:00.3 39.9 73.9 40 CMN 2006.05.20 15:14 1:18 N17:06.3 W061:00.4 N17:17.3 W062:13.8 71.0 131.4 1 CMN 2006.05.21 1:24 11:39 N17:17.5 W062:14.7 N18:40.7 W061:55.7 85.1 157.7

Data analysis

Echo integration was carried out using two independent post-processing packages, Echoview from SonarData (Figure 6) and the Bergen Echo Integrator (BEI) system. Because of the cable fault detected on the 38 KHz transducer during the first leg of the survey, quantitative data analysis for transects 1-2 at this frequency was not possible. As a result the 18 KHz frequency was used as the primary frequency for data analysis for the first two transects. From transect 3 onwards the 38 KHz transducer was fully functioning and so was used as the primary frequency in offshore waters. Secondary data analysis was carried out using the 18, 120 and 200 KHz frequencies where possible. However, it should be noted

22 that in offshore strata the use of the higher frequency data were of limited use due to the effects of acoustic absorption. The 120 KHz frequency data had an effective maximum depth range of 300m, while the 200 KHz penetrated to a maximum of 150m subsurface.

Figure 6 Sample echogram (38 KHz on right, 18 KHz on left) on EchoView showing upward vertical migration of scattering layer at dusk and the trace of the CTD/Rosette sampler cast. For the offshore strata, only the 18 and 38 kHz data were scrutinised for echo integration purposes. In coastal waters scrutinising was undertaken on the 18, 38 and 120 KHz frequencies. The 200 kHz data were not analysed due to the shallow penetration depth. The “RAW” ER data files were imported into the latest version of the BEI for echo post-processing. The echograms were divided into cells using an ESDU (elementary sampling distance unit) of 5n.mi. Cells define the sample intervals of an echogram, from which integration variables can be calculated through echo integration. Echo integration was performed on selected marks or scattering layers, belonging to one of the nine categories described above. Regions were drawn around the various marks and the SA calculated for the selected regions. Nautical area scattering strength values were obtained by drawing regions around schools and then defining the regions. The echograms were analysed using a threshold of -80 dB and, where possible, plankton was filtered out by setting the threshold at –65 dB. Upon completion of the scrutinising the results were output as the nautical area scattering strength (SA) per nautical mile and 5 nautical mile intervals (m2/n.mi2) along the transect for each frequency. The results of the analysis were summarized in two forms; summed over the entire water column by category and transect, or summed in 50m depth intervals from 0 to 500m by category and transect. The results of echo integration are presented in Appendix 4. The initial analysis output the SA by transect for each category throughout the 750m depth. The second series of tables provides the SA values for day and night by 50 m depth

23 intervals, transect and classification category. For this analysis day was defined as 07:00-17:00 and night from 19:00-05:00 local time (11:00-21:00 GMT and 23:00- 09:00 GMT respectively). Note that all data were logged using GMT. Also included in Appendix 4 is a set of transect cross-sections for each scattering group.

ABUNDANCE AND BIOMASS ESTIMATES

The conversion of acoustic energy into an estimate of biomass will require an analysis well beyond the scope of this initial cruise report. Each classification category will have to be associated with the depth-specific species composition from trawling. For on-track hauls the actual classification and species assemblages during the tow will be used for the analysis. However, where hauls were off-track the transect segment for 2 nautical mile leading up to the haul will be considered representative of the haul, unless the tow targeted specific and unique reflectors. Table 8 relates the individual trawl samples to the classified acoustic backscatter.

Table 8 Acoustic backscattering groups associated with individual trawl samples

24 Table 8 continued

TRAWLING AND BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING

A total of 44 fishing sets (Figure 7) by midwater trawling with either the herring net (single cod-end) or the multi-purpose trawl fitted with the multi-sampler (three cod-ends). resulted in a total of 96 samples (Table 9) Sampling was conducted both day and night and sample depth ranged from 18 to 592 m. Experience with the multi-sampler revealed that communications were unreliable when the trawl was below about 450 m so the deepest samples were taken by opening the sample net as the trawl was passing about 450m on the way down to the target depth. To minimize sample contamination, the sample net was closed while hauling up as soon as communication with the multi-sampler was re-established. During the latter part of the survey some trawl samples were selected to ensure that there were no large gaps in the distribution of depths sampled by day and night (Figure 8).

Figure 7 Locations of fishing sets completed during the LAPE ecosystem survey.

26 Table 9 Trawl sets completed during 2006 LAPE ecosystem survey. See map (Figure 1) for strata.

Trawl samples were not taken during dawn/dusk vertical migration periods (approximately 1 hour around 06:00 and 18:00 local time, 10:00 and 22:00 GMT). This was done simply by inspection of the migration pattern which was clearly visible on the echo-sounder (refer back to Figure 6).

Figure 8 Distribution by depth (m) and hour of the day (local time). Daylight sets are grey- filled and night sets are black-filled.

Although the cruise plan had indicated that fish sampling would be conducted in two shifts working a 6-on/6-off watch, this did not work out in practice. In particular, the taxonomic expertise was developed by different individuals for different taxonomic groups but was needed for all samples. Thus the entire fish lab team would work on each sample, and trawl sets were scheduled to accommodate having only a single team available. Since a single multi-sampler set, of three samples, could take 7-8 hours to process, this resulted in some extremely long days for this team.

28 Over 200 taxa were identified in the trawl catches (Appendix 5). Some of these are higher-order taxa, usually families, within which lower-order taxa were identified as well i.e. genera or species within the family. In some cases the identification of a particular taxon was refined during the survey as a result of improved expertise. Where possible, such as cases where only a single species occurs in the region, more specific identifications were applied to taxa recorded from earlier sets. A photographic atlas of the species observed was compiled in MS PowerPoint with notes and photographs to highlight identification cues (an example page is given in Figure 9). The atlas was used extensively, both in the lab and after sets were completed to review and improve the identifications.

Figure 9 Sample page from at-sea species ID guide developed during the LAPE ecosystem survey 2006.

To examine the taxonomic composition of the catches, the total weight caught in each sample was summed to the family level to account for the variable degree of taxonomic precision over the course of the survey. The catch by family (gm wet weight) from each sample (Figure 10 is for fishes, Figure 11 for all other families and groups identified) show several patterns of depth and time distribution. Important diel vertical migrators include mesopelagic fish families like Myctophidae and Chauliodontidae and invertebrates such as krill (Euphausiacea), shrimp (Oplophoridae) and squid (Enoploteuthidae). Strictly epipelagic fish groups i.e. remaining in the upper water column, include

29 Carangidae, Scombridae and juveniles of numerous families which, as adults, are associated with coral reefs (e.g. Sparidae, Monacanthidae, Priacanthidae). Invertebrates groups did not show a strictly epipelagic distribution as clearly, possibly as a result of fewer occurrences. It should be noted that the night catches of Ommastrephidae are much larger than the daytime catches and mask the numerous small daytime catches in Figure 8. There were a number of families showing a pattern of strongly mesopelagic distribution as well, such as several families of Stomiiformes fish and the squids Spirulidae and Sepiolidae. A summary of the sampling of the catch for length, weight and biological samples (otoliths, stomachs and stable isotope tissues) is included in Appendix 6. The total numbers of biological samples were less than anticipated, mostly as a result of the unexpectedly large amount of time required for species identification. Stomach sample collection in particular was further reduced since the small sizes of most of the individuals caught meant they were primarily planktivorous or micronekton feeders. A greater effort was focused on biological sample collection in the latter part of the survey, when the species identification procedures were more rapid. The individual trawl samples have been related by depth and location to the corresponding acoustic categories (Appendix 7). Four of the samples did not correspond to any classified acoustic results and all of the classified samples included a significant fraction of the total acoustic return in the plankton or plankton mix groups. There were no samples corresponding to the PMIX acoustic classification. The remaining step in the acoustic process, of estimating the relevant biomasses, will be completed subsequently.

Figure 10 Catches of fish families by sample depth. Daytime samples are marked in yellow and night samples in blue. The largest catches are shown with hollow circles to minimize obscuring other data points.

Figure 11 Catches of non-fish families and groups by sample depth. Daytime samples are marked in yellow and night samples in blue.

32 OCEANOGRAPHIC SAMPLING

A total of 55 oceanographic stations were sampled during the survey (Figure 12). The various samples collected from each depth at each station are listed in Appendix 8. In-situ fluorescence profiles were obtained from 36 of the stations (CTD500) due to the 500m operating limit for the fluorometer.

Temperature-Salinity-Fluorescence

The oceanographic data from the CTD and fluorometer casts have been assembled into four offshore sections and, nearer to the island chain, eight areas having similar characteristics. This physical oceanography (summarized in Figure 13) will be used with the biological oceanography (when it is completed) to describe the influences driving primary production in this area. The individual profiles and the compiled sections are reported in Appendix 8. Sections Stations Areas Stations 1 3 - 9 1 28 - 30 2 9 - 14 2 31 - 35 3 14 - 20 3 36, 37, 39, 51 4 20 - 25 4 38, 40 5 42, 43, 50 6 41 7 44 - 49 8 52 - 56

The surface salinity and temperature from the underway sampling instruments are included in Appendix 8 (Figures 9 and 10 therein respectively). The surface fluorescence was essentially zero throughout the survey and is not reported further.

Water Column Structure

The water mass names used in this section are defined in Appendix 8 and all of the stations and sections from the survey are plotted there as well. Caribbean Surface Water was seen in the upper 50m in the survey area, with the exception of Sections 3 and 4. This is a mixture of North Atlantic surface water, Amazon River water and local freshwater run off from South America. Typical salinity values for this water mass are <35.5 with potential temperatures of about 28C. Sections 3 and 4, in the southern offshore area, exhibit lower salinity water in the upper 20m which can be attributed to Amazon water, consistent with Moore et al, 1986. In the northern part of the survey area this feature is not present, and likely becomes entrained with the Caribbean Surface Water.

33 20°

19° 3 4 5 6 7 2 8 18° 9 4000 56 10 46 1 55 17° 47 11 45 800 1000 48 54 44 12 16° 53 49 13

43 14 15° 50 15 52 16 42 17 14° 51 34 18 41 19 40 35 33 1800 2800 20 4400 39 32 21 13° 38 31 36 22 23 12° 30 29 37 24

25 28 11° 27

26 10°

64° 63° 62° 61° 60° 59° 58° 57° 56° 55° Figure 12 Oceanographic stations completed during the LAPE ecosystem survey. CTD, water and net samples were taken on all stations. Fluorometer was included only when 500m or less. Filled circles indicate stations to 500m (or less), open circles are stations to 1500m unless a greater depth is specified adjacent to the point.

A high salinity tongue is evident at depths ranging from 80-180m and is consistent through the area. This peak in salinity can be attributed to Subtropical Under-Water formed in the Sargasso Sea, which has salinities greater than 37 (Klein et al, 1995). At 14.5N this water mass splits into two salinity maxima, one of North Atlantic and one of South Atlantic origin (Klein et al, 1995). This can be seen in Section 3. In the west of the section the water is of North Atlantic origin and in the east of South Atlantic origin (Klein et al. 1995).

34 21

19 3 4 DCM 120m 5 6 7 2 8 DCM 100m 18 9 56 10 46 1 55 17 47 45 11 48 54 Fresher upper 44 12 16 53 150m 49 13

43 14 50 15 15 Colder less saline at 52 16 42 17 depths 80-260m 51 34 18 14 41 40 35 33 19 20 39 32 21 Peak in Salinity at 13 38 31 36 22 100m to 36.9. then 23 30 12 29 drops to 34.7 at 37 24 500-900m 25 28 11 27 26 Deepening of 10 chlorophyll max -65 -64 -63 -62 -61 -60 -59 -58 -57 -56 -55 northwards DCM 80-100m

20 DCM 100-150m

19 3 4 5 6 7 2 8 18 9

56 10 46 1 55 17 47 45 11 48 54 44 12 16 53 49 13 Intrusion of Cold

43 14 Water at depth 50 15 15 52 16 150-500m. 42 17 51 34 18 DCM 50-100m 14 41 40 35 33 19 20 39 32 21 13 38 31 36 22 Salinity Lens 200-100m 23 30 with values of 36. 12 29 37 24 Disappears to the north. 25 28 11 27 26 Fresher upper 20m 10 -65 -64 -63 -62 -61 -60 -59 -58 -57 -56 -55 of water column. DCM 80-100m. DCM 40m Figure 13 Synopsis of major oceanographic features from the LAPE ecosystem survey. Western features in upper panel, eastern features in the lower panel. DCM indicates the deep chlorophyll maximum layer.

35 The temperature profiles in Section 2 between 300-500m and Section 3 between 150-500m show updoming isotherms between 59°W and 60°W with Sub- Antarctic Intermediate water being pushed upwards into the Subtropical Under-Water. This feature indicates a cyclonic eddy (Schmuker et al, 2002) and is important for entrainment of nutrients into the mixed layer and leads to an increase in productivity in the central part of the eddy (Kupfermann et al, 1987). In the deeper depth range of 600-1000m there is a decrease in salinity which can be attributed to Antarctic Intermediate Water (AAIW) (Station 38, 40) with temperature between 3.0 and 10.0C. North Atlantic Deep Water was present below 1000m.

Phytoplankton

Time between CTD stations did not permit at-sea analysis of the various phytoplankton species sampled from vertical net hauls at individual stations. Analysis completed since the-survey has identified a total of 87 species (Table 10) including dinoflagellates (65), diatoms (16), coccolithophores (5) and cyanobacteria (1).

Table 10 Phytoplankton species identified in net hauls (ca. 150 m depth) sampled during the 1st leg of the LAPE cruise (26th April-9th May 2006).

Dinoflagellates Ceratium arietinum Ceratocorys horrida Ornithoceros sp. Ceratium bipes Ceratocory reticulata Oxytoxum subulatum Ceratium candelabrum Cladopyxis brachiolata Oxytoxum scolopax C. candelabrum var. depressum Dinophysis brevisulcus Podolampas elegans Ceratium carriense Dinophysis caudata Podolampas palmipes Ceratium contortum Dinophysis cuneus Podolampas spinifera Ceratium declinatum Dinophysis doryphorum Prorocentrum compressum Ceratium deflexum Dinophysis favus Prorocentrum gracile Ceratium euarcuatum Dinophysis hastata Prorocentrum micans Ceratium furca Dinophysis miles Protoperidinium acutipes Ceratium fusus Dinophysis schuettii (large) Protoperidinium angustum Ceratium gibberum Dinophysis schuettii (small) Protoperidinium cerasus Ceratium horridum Diplopsalis lenticular Protoperidinium claudicans Ceratium limulus Dissodinium elegans Protoperidinium depressum Ceratium macroceros Gonyaulax polygramma Protoperidinium diabolus Ceratium pentagonum Gonyaulax polyedra Protoperidinium elegans Ceratium pulchellum Gyrodinium sp. Protoperidinium minutum Ceratium ranipes Heterodinium blackmanii Protoperidinium subpyriforme Ceratium symmetricum Heterodinium rigdenae Protoperidinium steinii Ceratium teres Ornithoceros formosus Protoperidinium tenuissimu Ceratium tripos Ornithoceros magnificus Scrippsiella sp. Ceratium tripos var. atlanticum Ornithoceros steinii

Diatoms Aserionella sp. Chaetoceros socialis Rhizosolenia alata Bacteriastrum delicatulum Chaetoceros wighami Rhizosolenia calcar Bacteriastrum elongatum Ditylum brightwelli Rhizosolenia delicatula Ceratulina bergonii Dactyliosolen meditterraneaus Rhizosolenia imbricata Chaetoceros affinis Eucampia cornuta Rhizosolenia robusta Chaetoceros affinis var. willei Eucampia zoodiacus Rhizosolenia setigera Chaetoceros cinctus Gyrosigma sp. Rhizosolenia shrubsole

36 Chaetoceros constrictus Hemiaulus hauckii Rhizosolenia stolterfothii Chaetoceros costatus Leptocylindricus danicus Rhizosolenia styliformis Chaetoceros decipiens Navicula sp. Striatella unipunctata Chaetoceros diversus Planktoniella sol Thalassionema nitzschoides Chaetoceros pelagicus Pseudonitzschia sp. Thalassiothrix mediterranea

Coccolithophores Coronosphaera sp. Forisphaera profunda Syracosphaera sp. Discophaera tubifera Scyphosphaera apsteinii

Cyanobacteria Oscillatoria sp.

In general, the phytoplankton community was diverse with large numbers of armoured dinoflagellates occurring alongside the chains of diatom one would expect to find in the oligotrophic seas east of the Caribbean. A number of micrographs of live specimens were taken during the course of the survey, samples of which are included here (Plates 1 to 8). High numbers of Ceratium spp. were observed (plates 1 and 2). Less common species included members of the genera Phalacroma, Dinophysis, Ceratocorys and Ornithoceros (plate 3). The latter two yielded a number of beautifully ornate and elaborate specimens, some of which contain up to a dozen blue-green symbionts located in the collar next to the epicone (e.g. plate 3, top left). Also less common were Protoperidinium species (plate 4 and 5) Chains of diatoms were ubiquitous in the net hauls (plate 6) although few Chaetoceros spp. with setae were observed. Few centric diatoms were present and numbers of Rhizosolenia (plate 7) were only observed on the southern transects. Coccolithophores (plate 8, top 4) seemed rare although they are more difficult to distinguish due to their small size (4-20 µm). Syracosphaera apsteinii was the most common with cells of Discophaera and Coronosphaera also observed. The smaller species (<10 µm) proved difficult to image even with a x100 oil- immersion lens, due to the ships vibration. Gamberdiscus toxicus is a well known toxic dinoflagellate in the area, which is responsible for outbreaks of ciguatera poisoning. It is benthic and epiphytic, and as such, occurs on coral reefs and shallow waters in the northern area of the Caribbean islands. The toxin is bioaccumualated in large predators such as Barracuda which feed on the smaller reef fish. No cells of G. toxicus were observed during the course of the survey. Analysis of net hauls from some stations revealed filamentous algae visible to the naked eye. This appears to be mats of cynobacteria, genus Oscillatoria but the species has yet to be identified (plate 8, bottom 4 images).

Table 11 Key to light micrographs in Plates 1 to 8 of species identified in net hauls (ca. 150 m depth to surface) sampled during the 1st leg of the LAPE cruise (11th April-9th May 2006). Left hand side Right hand side Plate 1 Ceratium arietinum Ceratium horridum Dinoflagellates Ceratium fusus Ceratium macroceros Ceratium pentagonum Ceratium limulus Ceratium deflexum Ceratium tripos var. atlanticum Plate 2 Ceratium pulchellum Ceratium carriense Dinoflagellates Ceratium sp. (declinatum?) Ceratium gibberum Ceratium fusus Ceratium carriense hypotheca Ceratium candelabrum Ceratium ranipes Plate 3 Ornithoceros magnificus Dinophysis schuettii Dinoflagellates Ornithoceros steinii Ceratocorys horrida Dinophysis caudata Dinophysis brevisulcus Dinophysis schuettii Ornithoceros sp. (recently divided) Plate 4 Heterodinium blackmanii Podolampas elegans Dinoflagellates Protoperidinium depressum Protoperidinium sp. Heterodinium rigdenae Podolampas spinifera Oxytoxum subulatum Protoperidinium minutum Plate 5 Podolampas spinifera Prorocentrum sp. Dinoflagellates Protoperidinium steinii Protoperidinium claudicans Prorocentrum gracile Protoperidinium elegans Protoperidinium sp. Gyrodinium sp. Plate 6 Chaetoceros decipiens Chaetoceros affinis Chain Diatoms Chaetoceros decipiens Chaetoceros cinctus Leptocylindricus danicus Oscillatoria sp. Hemiaulus hauckii Eucampia zoodiacus Plate 7 Planktoniella sol Dissodinium elegans Diatoms Rhizosolenia styliformis Rhizosolenia shrubsolei Ditylum brightwelli Gyrosigma sp. Thalassionema nitzschoides Filamentous sp. Plate 8 Discophaera tubifera Syracosphaera apsteinii Coccolithophores Syracosphaera apsteinii Coronosphaera sp. and filamentous Oscillatoria sp. Oscillatoria sp. algae Oscillatoria sp. Oscillatoria sp.

Primary Production

Extracted chlorophyll profiles were obtained from 51 stations. The majority (48) were to 200 meters. A deep chlorophyll maximum (DCM) was evident in most of these profiles and ranged in depth from 50 to 140 m. The deepest DCM layers were in the north and north-east of the sampled area with depths ranging from 100 to 120 meters. In the south and south-west the DCM was generally between 50 and 80 meters with some as deep as 100 meters. The maximum chlorophyll concentration found in the DCM layer was 0.97 µg l-1 at 50 m at station CE0607- 15. In the three shallow stations, all less than 100 meters deep, the chlorophyll concentration gradually increased with depth to the bottom. A total of 100 samples were collected for HPLC analysis and frozen in liquid nitrogen. These samples will be extracted and measured at the Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland, USA at a later date. A total of 100 samples were collected for spectrophotometric analysis and frozen in liquid nitrogen. These samples will be analysed at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography at a later date. A total of 22 photosynthesis-irradiance experiments were completed during the survey. The dried filters will be analysed by mass spectroscopy at the Boston University Stable Isotope Laboratory, Boston, USA at a later date. A total of 16 surface reflectance measurements were made. Several difficulties were encountered when making these measurements. There were very few locations on the vessel where these measurements could be made. The problem was further compounded by restricted access to 110 volt power and the cooling unit for the spectrometer was, at times, overwhelmed by the midday heat. Nutrient samples were collected from all depths between 10 and 200m at 51 stations. The samples were frozen and will be analysed at a later date at the National University of Ireland at Galway. The primary production data collected at sea with the data from the laboratory analyses to follow will be used to estimate primary production over the LAPE area from analysis of satellite imagery. The imagery will be obtained and processed at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography (Dr. Trevor Platt and colleagues)

SIGHTING SURVEY

The sighting survey results were disappointing overall. There were very few sightings, 10 in total (Table 12). Sighting effort was limited as the sighting survey could only operate in the daylight hours (Figure 14) while the ship continued along the transects on a 24-hour basis. Also, the sighting survey was interrupted by other programme activities on a fairly regular basis as it was

47 Table 12 Individual sightings, sighting numbers are indicated on Figure 14. SN TimeStamp Latitude Longitude Species Num. Min. Max. 1 27/04/2006 17:25 17.5995 -62.1735 unidentified dolphins 30 15 40 2 27/04/2006 17:42 17.6450 -62.1630 Humpback 2 2 2 3 06/05/2006 17:21 12.7778 -60.3488 Humpback 5 4 5 4 07/05/2006 16:21 13.8013 -59.9908 Baleen whale (not 2 2 2 Humpback) 5 07/05/2006 16:46 13.8531 -60.0462 Humpback 1 1 2 6 07/05/2006 17:01 13.8826 -60.0436 Humpback 4 4 4 7 17/05/2006 11:35 16.0526 -61.8799 dolphins or porpoises 3 4 8 17/05/2006 12:30 15.9168 -61.9582 dolphins or porpoises 3 3 9 18/05/2006 13:15 14.2363 -61.9618 dolphins or porpoises 3 5 10 20/05/2006 12:55 17.0430 -61.0164 Spinner Dolphins 3 3

20°

19°

18° 2 1

10 17°

7 16° 8

15°

14° 9 6 5 4

13° 3

12°

11°

10°

64° 63° 62° 61° 60° 59° 58° 57° 56° 55° Figure 14 Primary sighting transects (black line) on the LAPE ecosystem survey cruise track (fine line). Daylight intervals are marked with grey highlight. suspended completely when the ship stopped for CTD stations or left the transect to investigate acoustic targets. Sighting continued or switched to secondary mode when fishing tows were conducted along the transect but the speed was reduced to 3.5-4.0 kts instead of 10.5. This would have a biasing

48 effect on the sightability but, given the small number of sightings, this is not considered further. Sighting conditions were generally good throughout the survey with winds at Beaufort Force 2 or 3 and, very rarely, Force 4 for a few hours at a time.

OUTSTANDING ANALYSES

The analyses listed below were planned at the time this cruise report was prepared. Many of these have been completed and the results incorporated in other project technical documents.

ACOUSTICS AND TRAWLING

Acoustic Biomass Estimation

Application of target strength assumptions to the integrated acoustic backscattering, based on observed species and size compositions is required to complete the biomass estimation. Examination of the echograms and the observations made during the survey indicate that the vast majority of the acoustic biomass is above 750 m and in fact most is above 500 m.

Species Atlas

The species atlas information collected during the survey (photographs, otoliths and measurements) will be compiled in a separate report and an electronic (web-based) version is planned.

BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING

Stomach Content Analysis

The stomach samples collected will be processed and the contents identified. These results will be incorporated with the stomach sampling information being collected by the LAPE project in a separate diet studies report.

Stable Isotope Analysis

The tissue samples for stable isotope analysis will be processed and analysed by the Stable Isotopes in Nature Laboratory at University of New Brunswick, Fredricton, New Brunswick, Canada. The SI results will be incorporated in the diet studies report.

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING

Results for Primary Production

Upon completion of the laboratory analyses (HPLC, spectrophotometric and stable isotopes) the resulting optical properties of the phytoplankton will be

49 used in analysis of satellite imagery of the LAPE area which will be conducted at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Nutrients

A selection of nutrient samples will be analysed for nitrate, nitrite, reactive phosphate and silicate at the National University of Ireland - Galway. Salinity calibration samples will be processed there as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary inspection of the cruise results are all largely consistent with expected conditions in oligotrophic tropical oceanic waters (Longhurst, 1999). The primary production is limited to deep chlorophyll layers with essentially no chlorophyll or fluorescence measurable in near-surface waters. The greatest biomass of forage species detected, both acoustically and by trawling, is predominantly mesopelagic fish, squids and crustaceans. The catches of epipelagic species were mostly juveniles of oceanic pelagic, coastal pelagic and reef species. Although biomass estimates have not been completed, it seems apparent that reasonable assumptions regarding acoustic target strengths will yield relatively low biomass densities overall. This survey did not target, and did not catch, the commercially important pelagic species of the region. Flyingfish (Exocetidae) and dolphin (Coryphaena hippurus) are known to occur only within a few meters of the surface, above both the acoustic transducers and the minimum fishing depth of the trawls. In addition, these and the adults of the other large pelagic species (Istiophoridae, Scombridae, Xiphiidae) are too fast and agile to be easily caught using pelagic trawls. Although previous surveys have shown that the region does not have high concentrations of cetaceans the cetacean results are still surprisingly low. Since data are too few for a statistical analysis, a careful review of the cetacean survey is required to understand these extremely low results.

REFERENCES

Anonymous 1983. Ontogeny and systematics of fishes. Based on an international symposium dedicated to the memory of Elbert Halvo Ahlstrom. August 15-18, 1983. Spec. Pub. No. 1, American Society for Ichthyologists and Herpetologists. Borstad, G.A. 1982. The influence of the meandering Guiana Current and Amazon River Discharge on surface salinity near Barbados. Journal of Marine Research. 40. 421-434

50 Boltovskoy, D. (ed) 1999a. South Atlantic zooplankton. Vol. 1, Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp: 1-868. Boltovskoy, D. (ed) 1999b. South Atlantic zooplankton. Vol. 2. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp: 869-1707. Carpenter, K.E. (ed.) 2002. The living marine resources of the Western Central Atlantic. Volumes 1, 2 and 3. FAO Species Identification Guide for Fishery Purposes and American Society of Ichthyology and Herpetology Special Publication No. 5. FAO, Rome. 2127pp. Collette, B.B. and C.E. Nauen. 1983. FAO Species Catalogue, Volume 2: Scombrids of the world: An annotated and illustrated catalogue of the tunas, mackerels, bonitos and related species known to date. FAO, Rome, 137pp. Fahay, M.P. 1983. Guide to early stages of marine fishes occurring in Western North Atlantic Ocean, Cape Hatteras to the southern Scotian Shelf. J NW Atl. Fish. Sci. 4:3-423. Fine, R.A. and R.L. Molinari 1988. A continuous deep western boundary current between Abaco (26.5°N) and Barbados (13°N). Deep Sea Research. Vol. 35. No. 9. 1441-1450 Froelich, P.N., D.K. Atwood and G.S. Giese 1978. Influence of Amazon River discharge on surface salinity and dissolved silicate concentrations in the Caribbean sea. Deep Sea Research. 25. 735-744 Jereb, P. and C.F.E. Roper (eds) 2005. Cephalopods of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of cephalopod species known to date. Volume 1. Chambered nautiluses and sepioids (Nautilidae, Sepiidae, Sepiolidae, Sepiadariidae, Idiosepiidae and Spirulidae). FAO Species Catalogue for Fishery Purposes. No. 4, Vol. 1. Rome, FAO. 262pp. 9 colour plates. Joyce, T.M., A. Hernandez-Guerra, and W.M. Smethie 2001. Zonal circulation in the NW Atlantic and Caribbean from a meridional World Ocean Circulation Experiment hydrographic section at 66°W. Journal of Geophysical Research. Vol 106. C10. 22095-22113 Klein, B., R.L. Molinari, T.J. Muler and G. Siedler 1995. A transatlantic section at 14.5°N: Meridional volume and heat fluxes. Journal of Marine Research. 53. 929-957. Kupfermann, S.L., G. Becker, W. Simmons, U. Schauer, M. Marietta and H. Nies 1987. An intense cold core eddy in the North-East Atlantic. Nature. 319. 474-477 Moore, W.S., J.L. Sarmiento and R.M. Key 1986. Tracing the Amazon Component of Surface Atlantic Water using 228Ra, Salinity and Silica. Journal of Geophysical Research. 91. C2. 2574-2580

51 Nakamura, I. and N.V. Parin 1993. FAO Species Catalogue, Volume 15: Snake mackerels and cutlassfishes of the world (families Gempylidae and Trichiuridae). An annotated and illustrated catalogue of the snake mackerels, snoeks, escolars, gemfishes, sackfishes, domine, oilfish, cutlassfishes, scabbardfishes, hairtails, and frostfishes known to date. FAO, Rome, 136pp. Rhein, M., L. Stramma and U. Send 1995. The Atlantic Deep Western Boundary Current: Water masses and transports near the equator. Journal of Geophysical Research. Vol 100. C2. 2241-2457 Roper, C.F.E., M.J. Sweeney & C.E. Nauen 1984. FAO Species Catalogue. Vol. 3. Cephalopods of the world: An annotated and illustrated catalogue of species of interest to fisheries. FAO Fish. Synop. (125)Vol. 3:277p. Schmuker, B. and R. Schiebel 2002. Planktic foraminifers and hydrography of the eastern and northern Caribbean Sea. Marine Micropaleontology. Vol. 46. 387-403 Smith, M.M. and P.C. Heemstra 1988. Smith’s sea fish. Macmillan South Africa Publishers Ltd. Johannesburg, South Africa. Takeda, M and T. Okutani 1983. Crustaceans and molluscs trawled off Suriname and French Guiana. Japan Marine Fishery Research Center, Tokyo, Japan. 353pp. Uyeno, T., K. Matsuura and E. Fujii (eds) 1983. Fishes trawled off Suriname and French Guiana. Japan Marine Fishery Research Center, Tokyo, Japan. 519pp.

52 APPENDIX 1 SURVEY ROSTER AND PROGRAMME EXPERTS

Leg 1 (26Apr-09May) Leg 2 (10May-22May) Survey Leader Paul Fanning Paul Fanning FAO/LAPE Project Acoustics Ciaran O'Donnell Gary Melvin MI, Ireland DFO, Canada Acoustics Martin Dahl Martin Dahl IMR, Norway Acoustics Lucine Edwards Derrick Theophile FD, St. Vincent FD, Dominica Acoustics Hilroy Simon Ross Gardner FD, Antigua DoF, St. Lucia Biological sampling Lionel Reynal Hazel Oxenford Ifremer, Martinique UWI, Barbados Biological sampling Laetitia Nelson Laetitia Nelson Ifremer, Martinique Biological sampling Kenny Manning Chris Parker DoF, St. Kitts FD, Barbados Biological sampling Sophia Punnett Marcel Edwin FD, St. Vincent DoF, St. Lucia Ocean/Biological Jullan Defoe Collin Asgarali FD, Dominica MFAU, Trinidad Oceanography Pauhla McGrane Sheena Fennell NUIG, Ireland MI, Ireland Oceanography Brian Irwin Brian Irwin Consultant, Canada Sighting survey Jeannine Rambally Norman Norris DoF, St. Lucia FD, Dominica Sighting survey Paul Phillip George Looby FD, Grenada FD, Antigua Sighting survey Audra Barrett Ralph Wilkins FD, Nevis DoF, St. Kitts Sighting survey Daniel Medar Hophni Sergeant DoF, St. Lucia FD, Barbados

A1-1

Figure 1- 1 Participants in first leg standing from left, Daniel Medar, Hilroy Simon, Paul Phillip, Sophia Punnett, Lucine Edwards, Jeannine Rambally, Kenny Manning, Lionel Reynal, Audra Barrett, in front, Laetitia Nelson, Jullan Defoe. Absent Martin Dahl, Paul Fanning, Brian Irwin, Ciaran O'Donnell.

Figure 1- 2 Participants in second leg from left George Looby, Colin Asgarali, Sheena Fennell, Derrick Theophile, Paul Fanning, Brian Irwin, Ross Gardner, Hazel Oxenford, Gary Melvin, Martin Dahl, Chris Parker, Hophni Sargeant, Laetitia Nelson, Marcel Edwards, Ralph Wilkins, Norman Norris.

A1-2 Programme Experts for the LAPE Ecosystem Survey The survey leader (Chief Scientist) was responsible for all aspects of the programme, cruise planning, operations, logistics, reporting and data management. The Chief Scientist wass also responsible for liaison between the survey programme areas and the ship's crew and operations. Mr. Paul Fanning LAPE Project Manager FAO Subregional Office for the Caribbean Bridgetown, BARBADOS In both his roles, as Project Manager and survey Chief Scientist, Mr. Fanning was involved in the design, planning and logistics in support of each programme activity on the survey, including integration of potentially competing programme requirements. The ecosystem survey also required the assistance of a wide range of experts to complete the very ambitious and comprehensive sampling programme. Experts were responsible for ensuring the data and results from their relevant programme components were complete and accurate. In addition, regional survey participants in specific programme areas received training as required and conducted the various sampling processes.

1 ACOUSTIC FISH SURVEY

Forage fish distribution and abundance was being estimated by a state of the art acoustic survey. The primary equipment required, the Simrad ER 60 multifrequency sounder, is part of the equipment provided on the Celtic Explorer. The system included the computer consoles and the EchoView acoustic processing software to allow at-sea scrutinizing and post-processing of the acoustic results. Additional equipment provided by IMR included a Linux computer and the Bergen Echo Integrator software. This system was largely complementary to the EchoView software. The acoustic survey was staffed by two external acoustics experts and two regional staff on each leg.

1.1 LEAD ACOUSTIC SCIENTIST

Dr. Gary Melvin Research Scientist Department of Fisheries and Oceans St. Andrew's Biological Station St. Andrew's, New Brunswick, CANADA Dr. Melvin has worked for many years in Canada and recently in New Zealand, on the art and science of fisheries acoustics to provide biomass and stock assessment information on epi-, meso- and bathy-pelagic species.

A1-3 In addition to routine logging, scrutinizing and post-processing, the lead acoustic scientist will complete biomass estimates for the various species identified in the biological samples. Selection of trawl locations was based on the acoustic information, with consideration of the requirements for oceanographic samples. Raw, scrutinized and post-processed data were prepared and archived throughout the survey. At the surveys’ end, individual frequency analyses and the analysis of the multi-frequency data required several additional weeks of post-survey analysis. When complete, results will include biomass estimates, distribution maps and 3- D distributions of acoustic biomass. Species and size characterizations, dependent on target strength analysis, will be completed if data permits.

1.2 FISHERIES ACOUSTICIAN

Mr. Ciaran O'Donnell Pelagic/Acoustics Scientific Technical Officer Fisheries Science Service Marine Institute Galway, IRELAND Mr. O'Donnell is a fisheries acoustician with the Marine Institute and is a regular participant in acoustic surveys on the Celtic Explorer. The fisheries acoustician conducted routine logging, scrutinizing and post- processing of acoustic results from all four frequencies available. Selection of trawl locations was based on the acoustic information, with consideration of the requirements for oceanographic samples. Raw, scrutinized and post-processed data were prepared and archived throughout the survey.

1.3 ACOUSTIC ENGINEER

Mr. Martin Dahl Acoustics Engineer Electronic Instrument Division Institute of Marine Research Bergen, NORWAY Mr. Dahl is an acoustic and electronic engineer with the Institute of Marine Research in Bergen Norway. He has an extensive background in electronics and acoustics and has been involved in the development, operation and maintenance of most of the instruments to be used on the survey. The acoustic engineer conducted the same logging, scrutinizing and post- processing of acoustic data as the Fisheries Acoustician. In addition, in consultation with the ships technician, he provided engineering and technical maintenance of the scientific echo-sounder and the CTD/Rosette sampler as required. He also installed and supported the use of the IMR multi-sampler cod- end system which was used on the multi-purpose trawl.

A1-4 2 BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING

At points selected from the acoustic traces, net sampling with pelagic trawls was conducted to obtain biological specimens of the acoustic targets. Two types of pelagic trawls were available on the Celtic Explorer, a herring trawl (8 m vertical opening) and a multi-purpose trawl (30 m vertical opening). Selection of which trawl was used depended on the depth of the acoustic density being sampled. The multi-sampler from IMR allowed up to three discrete samples to be taken from different parts of the scattering layers in a single tow and without contamination between them. The sampling team sorted, identified, and sampled fish and invertebrate species captured in the research trawls and completed the data recording and computer entry into a standardized database In addition to the species and size data required for the acoustic biomass estimation, the net catches were sampled for diet and stable isotope analysis, reference collection material and to provide specimens for national or regional bodies. Taxonomic expertise and experience in the detailed processes was required and grew with experience during the survey. The biological sampling required five staff in total including two with extensive taxonomic and sampling experience on each leg.

2.1 TAXONOMY

M. Lionel Reynal Chef du laboratoire Ressources Halieutiques and Mlle. Laetitia Nelson VCAT en halieutique a l'IFREMER Martinique Station IFREMER Antilles Pointe-Fort, Le Robert MARTINIQUE M. Reynal has recently been leading work at Ifremer in Martinique to study the species, diets and behaviour of large pelagic fish in the vicinity of FADs. Mlle. Nelson has worked on these studies and has developed considerable expertise in taxonomic identification and sampling of the forage species found in the diet of various large pelagic predators. M. Reynal and Mlle. Nelson will provide training, reference material and assistance in processing, sorting and identifying the micro-nekton forage species during the survey.

2.2 REFERENCE AND DIET SAMPLES

Dr. Hazel Oxenford CERMES

A1-5 University of the West Indies Cave Hill, BARBADOS Dr. Oxenford has conducted and supervised fisheries research work at the University of the West Indies (CERMES) on fisheries and fish in the LAPE area including taxonomic, diet and ecological studies. The LAPE project is also collaborating with CERMES to establish the Fisheries Reference collection at UWI Cave Hill. The ecosystem survey provided the best opportunity the project will have to obtain samples of the forage species supporting the large pelagic fish and cetacean top predators. The reference collection is being established as a means of providing identified specimens of otoliths for comparison with those found in diet samples. It will also include morphometric data to allow reconstruction of prey biomass from otolith size information. Photographic records of otoliths and whole specimens, stomach samples and otoliths were collected for inclusion in the reference collection and diet studies of the LAPE project.

3 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING

Physical oceanographic measures (salinity, temperature, depth) were collected both continuously and at sampling stations and analysed to provide a synopsis of the ocean environment in the LAPE area. These data were processed and archived throughout the survey and after the survey they were post-processed and archived in standard oceanographic formats. Data collection was be largely automated and the analysis was prepared by the oceanographic expert during the second leg of the survey.

3.1 OCEANOGRAPHER

Ms Sheena Fennell Oceanographic Scientific Technical Officer Oceanographic Service Marine Institute Galway, IRELAND Ms. Fennell is an Oceanographer at the Marine Institute with expertise in data processing and analysis of data from a variety of oceanographic data collections systems. She participated in the second leg of the survey and produced maps, profiles and other oceanographic summaries included in the survey report. In addition to the physical/chemical data, the survey collected a suite of biological oceanographic data which includes continuous and discrete fluorescence samples, chlorophyll and phytoplankton biomass samples and various optical properties of the water. The biological oceanographic properties measured are focused on primary production, particularly the data required to calibrate satellite-based estimates. This required both profiles and water samples from discrete depths followed by laboratory processing (filtration, preservation, analysis) at-sea. Additional laboratory analysis of samples after the survey will be needed to complete the entire process. Net sampling of phytoplankton was

A1-6 conducted to obtain specimens for species identification and species composition measures. During the survey, the collection and processing of these samples was conducted or supervised by an expert with assistance from regional staff. Post- survey processing will be conducted at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Canada (HPLC and AS samples) and National University of Ireland - Galway (salinity calibration and nutrient samples).

3.2 BIOLOGICAL OCEANOGRAPHER - FIELD

Mr. Brian Irwin Consultant Maitland, Nova Scotia, CANADA Mr. Irwin has over 40 years experience in biological oceanography in arctic, temperate and tropical waters. He obtained samples from continuous-flow or rosette bottles, filtered, and preserved water and plankton samples. He also conducted fluorometry measures of discrete samples, spectrography analysis of incident light and photosynthesis-irradiance experiments on a daily basis.

3.3 BIOLOGICAL OCEANOGRAPHER - ANALYSIS

Ms. Marie-Helene Forget Dalhousie University/Bedford Institute of Oceanography Halifax, CANADA Ms. Forget is a post-graduate student (PhD candidate) working on primary production and satellite estimation methods with Dr. Trevor Platt of the BIO. She will complete the laboratory analyses required and work closely with Dr. Platt to estimate the primary production in the LAPE area, by season on a fine spatial scale. Post-survey processing of biological samples from the oceanographic sampling will be completed at the laboratories at BIO in Canada and NUI - Galway. In addition, analysis of the field data to provide estimates of productivity and biological parameters will be done and a report prepared. The field data will be used to refine seasonal and spatially explicit estimates of primary production from the LAPE area derived from ocean colour satellite imagery.

3.4 PHYTOPLANKTON BIOLOGIST

Ms. Pauhla McGrane The Martin Ryan Institute National University of Ireland Galway, IRELAND Vertical net samples for phytoplankton were examined and taxonomic identification was completed either at-sea or subsequently. Photomicrographs

A1-7 with light and electron microscopes were compiled in an atlas of species in the Lesser Antilles. In addition to providing the loan of a fluorometer for use on the CTD Rosette sampler, the lab at NUI - Galway will provide important calibration analyses of salinity samples, and nutrient concentrations (nitrite, nitrate, reactive phosphate and silicate) from frozen samples.

4 CETACEAN SIGHTING SURVEY

A sighting survey collected data on cetaceans and flyingfish. This survey was limited to daylight hours and was conducted from two observers' stations on the upper decks of the ship which provided for an independent observer, as required to estimate unbiased abundances. Equipment for the sighting survey (binoculars, cameras, GPS units) was provided by the participating countries. The sighting survey team were all experienced in both small-scale and large- scale cetacean surveys conducted in the region.

4.1 SIGHTING SURVEY LEADERS

Ms. Jeannine Rambally (First Leg) Mr. Norman Norris (Second Leg) Fisheries Officer Fisheries Officer Department of Fisheries Fisheries Division Castries, ST LUCIA Roseau, DOMINICA Both survey team leaders have participated in and led cetacean sighting surveys since 2000. In addition to the managing the sighting team activities on deck, including an independent observer operating in isolation from the remaining team members, the team leaders supervised data entry and quality control after sighting shifts and took the lead in preparation of reports, datasets and other sighting survey products.

A1-8

Programme Acoustic biomass Biological sampling Environmental sampling Sighting Survey estimation Ecosystem fish, squid, crustaceans fish, squid, crustaceans abiotic environment and cetaceans, birds, turtles, component primary production flyingfish estimation Target biomass estimates of epi- species and size physical environment abundance and Information and meso-pelagic zones composition of acoustic (temperature, salinity, O2, distribution of cetaceans including fish, molluscs biomass targets currents, nutrients) and flyingfish and crustaceans (optionally include sea samples for diet and stable biological oceanography turtles and sea birds) isotope analysis (chlorophyll, light extinction) Activity Multifrequency acoustic Pelagic trawling and towed Physical and biological Visual sighting survey survey using digital plankton sampling oceanographic sampling of cetaceans and integration (stations) (stations and in transit) flyingfish schools (in transit) (in transit) Design Stratified zig-zag transects pelagic trawl deployed on vertical profile sampling at Stratified zig-zag (same as the sighting acoustic target masses approximately regular grid of transects (same as the survey transects) plankton sampling in pre-selected sample stations acoustic transects) association with pelagic overlaid on survey transects tows and environmental sampling stations Equipment EK60/ER60 sounder with Trawls and doors for CTD and rosette system and sighting work areas (MI) EchoView software herring trawl and multi- continuous flow with sun shelters purpose trawl fluorometer/CTD Equipment Bergen Echo-Integrator Multi-sampler cod-end (IMR) software on Linux system for trawls computer

A1-9 Programme Acoustic biomass Biological sampling Environmental sampling Sighting Survey estimation Equipment PAR meter, filtration (DFO/BIO) apparatus, sample Dewars and liquid nitrogen shippers Equipment fluorometer, phytoplankton (NUI) nets, photomicroscope Equipment microscope, cameras, binoculars, cameras, (countries) sorting and lab supplies GPS, angle board Experts Martin Dahl (IMR) Lionel Reynal (Ifremer) Brian Irwin (at sea) Jeannine Rambally Gary Melvin (DFO) Laetitia Nelson (Ifremer) Marie-Helene Forget (post- (SLU) Ciaran O'Donnell (MI) Hazel Oxenford (UWI) survey) Norman Norris (DOM) Sheena Fennell (MI) Pauhla McGrane (NUI) Report Leader Gary Melvin Paul Fanning Sheena Fennel (phys.) Jeannine Rambally Marie-Helene Forget (biol.) Norman Norris Staff (per leg) 4 5 3 4 BIO - Bedford Institute of Oceanography DFO - Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada Ifremer - Institut français de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer, France (Martinique) IMR -Institute of Marine Research, Norway MI - Marine Institute, Ireland NUI - National University of Ireland UWI - University of the West Indies, Cave Hill, Barbados

A1-10 APPENDIX 2 ACOUSTIC CALIBRATION RESULTS

Acoustic frequencies were calibrated using the same settings employed for the survey (Table 1). Ambient environmental conditions were measured at each calibration site using a CTD cast to determine sound velocity profile (Table 2). Standard target reference spheres of known target strength (TS) were used to calibrate each frequency. For the 18 and 38 KHz frequencies copper target spheres of 63mm and 60mm respectively were used. For the higher frequencies of 120 and 200 KHz a tungsten carbide sphere of 38.1mm was used.

CALIBRATION 1

Calibration results for the 18, 120 and 200 KHz frequencies were within expected boundaries and no irregularities were identified for the current conditions (Table 3). However, the 38 KHz transducer showed significant irregularities on both the first and second run with unacceptably high dB differences (-40 to –42dB) from the standard target sphere (-33.6dB). A possible cause of the fault was identified as an open channel on one of the transducer elements that affected 2 of the 4 quarters of the acoustic beam. Investigation determined that the fault was within the cable linking the transducer to the general purpose transceiver (GPT). The cable was replaced on the 30th April after which the 38 KHz transducer was fully functioning. An old calibration file was loaded until a subsequent calibration was completed. As a result of the cable fault the data collected from the 38KHz frequency could not be used for quantitative analysis during the period from the 27th – 30th April.

CALIBRATION 2

Calibration of 18, 38 and 120 KHz took place on the 10th May in Barbados. A strong long shore current (0.8Kts) hampered the progress of the calibration. 200 KHz was not calibrated due to strong current and plankton.

CALIBRATION 3

The final survey calibration was carried out 21 May off the west coast of Barbuda. Only 38 KHz was calibrated. 200 KHz was again not calibrated due to strong current and plankton.

A2-1 Table 1 ER60 settings employed during the LAPE acoustic survey, 2006.

Frequency (KHz) 18 38* 120 200 Absorption coefficient (dB/Km) Pulse length (m/s) 1024 1024 1024 1024 Bandwidth (KHz) 1.57 2.43 3.03 3.09 Transmitting power (W) 2000 2000 300 120 Angle sensitivity (dB) 13.9 21.9 21.0 23.0 2-way beam angle (°) -17 -20.6 -20.8 -20.7 Gain 22.19 25.95 24.66 25.96 SA correction -0.74 -0.68 -0.37 -0.23 3D Beam Width Alongship: 10.2 6.99 7.27 6.45 Athwartship: 10.53 7.03 7.17 6.57 Max range (m) 1000 1000 1000 1000

Table 2 Environmental conditions during the ER60 calibrations.

Parameter Calibration 1 Calibration 2 Calibration 3 Water temperature (°C) 27.7 Salinity (ppt) 36.1 Sound Velocity (m/s-1) 1545.7 1545.4 ~1545

Table 3 Calibration summary for the Simrad ER60 Echo sounder 18 KHz. Location Ireland Antigua Barbados Date 26.04.2006 10.05.2006 Reference Target: (db) -34.30 -34.30 (TS 64 mm Copper sphere) Min. Distance (m) 13.00 27.00 Max. Distance (m) 18.00 32.00 Transceiver: GPT 18 kHz Pulse length (m/s) 1024 1024 1024 Bandwidth (KHz) 1.57 1.57 1.57 Transmitting power (W) 2000 2000 2000 Transducer: ES18-11 Angle sensitivity 13.90 13.90 13.90 2-way beam angle (dB) -17.00 -17.0 -17.0 Gain (dB) 22.19 22.03 22.56 SA correction (dB) -0.74 -0.86 -0.81 Athw. Beam Angle (°) 10.53 11.47 10.81 Athw. Offset Angle (°) -0.21 -0.09 -0.10 Along. Beam Angle (°) 10.20 11.09 10.81 Along. Offset Angle (°) 0.00 -0.05 -0.03

A2-2 Table 4 Calibration summary for the Simrad ER60 Echo sounder 38 KHz.

Location Ireland Barbados Barbuda Date 10.05.2006 21.05.2006 Reference Target: (db) -33.6 -33.6 (TS 60 mm Copper sphere) Min. Distance (m) 27.00 9.50 Max. Distance (m) 35.00 16.5 Transceiver: GPT 38 kHz Pulse length (m/s) 1024 1024 1024 Bandwidth (KHz) 2.43 2.43 2.43 Transmitting power (W) 2000 2000 2000 Transducer: ES38B Angle sensitivity 21.90 21.90 21.90 2-way beam angle (dB) -20.6 -20.6 -20.6 Gain (dB) 25.53 25.55 25.64 SA correction (dB) -0.70 -0.59 -0.64 Athw. Beam Angle (°) 6.97 6.99 6.94 Athw. Offset Angle (°) -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 Along. Beam Angle (°) 6.98 6.85 7.01 Along. Offset Angle (°) -0.06 0.00 0.00

Table 5 Calibration summary for the Simrad ER60 Echo sounder 120 KHz LAPE acoustic survey, 2006

Location Ireland Antigua Barbados Date 27.04.2006 10.05.2006 Reference Target: (db) -39.80 -39.80 (TS sphere WC 38.1mm) Min. Distance (m) 13.00 27.00 Max. Distance (m) 18.00 35.00 Transceiver: GPT 120 kHz Pulse length (m/s) 1024 1024 1024 Bandwidth (KHz) 3.03 3.03 3.03 Transmitting power (W) 300 300 300 Transducer: ES120-7 Angle sensitivity 21.0 21.0 21.0 2-way beam angle (dB) -20.8 -20.8 -20.8 Gain (dB) 24.66 25.99 26.36 SA correction (dB) -0.37 -0.34 -0.39 Athw. Beam Angle (°) 7.17 7.27 7.21 Athw. Offset Angle (°) 0.06 -0.02 -0.05 Along. Beam Angle (°) 7.27 7.16 7.45 Along. Offset Angle (°) 0.15 0.07 0.13

A2-3 Table 6 Calibration summary for the Simrad ER60 Echo sounder 200 KHz LAPE acoustic survey, 2006

Location Ireland Antigua Date 27.04. Reference Target: (db) -38.80 (TS sphere WC 38.1mm) Min. Distance (m) 13.00 Max. Distance (m) 18.00 Transceiver: GPT 200 kHz Pulse length (m/s) 1024 1024 Bandwidth (KHz) 3.09 3.09 Transmitting power (W) 120 120 Transducer: ES200-7 Angle sensitivity 23.0 23.0 2-way beam angle (dB) -20.7 -20.7 Gain (dB) 25.96 25.70 SA correction (dB) -0.23 -0.34 Athw. Beam Angle (°) 6.57 6.49 Athw. Offset Angle (°) 0.16 0.03 Along. Beam Angle (°) 6.45 6.59 Along. Offset Angle (°) -0.08 -0.02

A2-4

Table 7 ER60 settings used during the LAPE acoustic survey, 2006. Frequency (KHz) 18 18 38* 38 120 120 200 Date (from – to) 27.4-10.5 10.5 -21.5 30.4-10.5 10.5-21.5 27.4-10.5 10.5-21.5 27.4-21.5 Pulse lengh (m/s) 1024 1024 1024 1024 1024 1024 1024 Bandwidth (KHz) 1.57 1.57 2.43 2.43 3.03 3.03 3.09 Transmitting power (W) 2000 2000 2000 2000 300 300 120 Angle sensitivity 13.90 13.90 21.90 21.90 21.0 21.0 23.0 2-way beam angle (dB) -17.0 -17.0 -20.6 -20.6 -20.8 -20.8 -20.7 Gain (dB) 22.03 22.56 25.53 25.55 25.99 26.36 25.70 SA correction (dB) -0.86 -0.81 -0.70 -0.59 -0.34 -0.39 -0.34 Athw. Beam Angle (°) 11.47 10.81 6.97 6.99 7.27 7.21 6.49 Athw. Offset Angle (°) -0.09 -0.10 -0.05 -0.05 -0.02 -0.05 0.03 Along. Beam Angle (°) 11.09 10.81 6.98 6.85 7.16 7.45 6.59 Along. Offset Angle (°) -0.05 -0.03 -0.06 0.00 0.07 0.13 -0.02

A2-5 Appendix 3. Celtic Explorer Net Manual

CELTIC EXPLORER NET DESIGN & RIGGING FOR SINGLE PELAGIC MID-WATER TRAWLS

FSS PELAGICS

Ciaran O’Donnell FSS Pelagics January 2004

A3-1 VESSEL SPECIFICATION

The MRV Celtic Explorer is a 65m multipurpose research vessel. The vessel was delivered to Galway docks in December 2002 from Damen Shipyards, Holland. The Celtic Explorer is ideally configured to undertake acoustic surveys of pelagic fish occurring in Irish territorial waters and beyond. The 2004 vessel programme incorporates over 130 days to acoustic fisheries research. The vessel is exceptionally quiet being driven by diesel electric motors and complies well within ICES 209 noise requirements. The transducers are positioned under the hull in a drop keel that can be raised or lowered to avoid the adverse effects of sea state and surface aeration. Summarised below are some of the most important features of the vessel to fisheries research. Vessel Dimensions: LOA: 65.5m Beam: 15m Draught: 5.8m (max) Draught with Drop Keel lowered: 8.8m Propulsion system: 2 x Indar DC electric motors (1500 Kw, 0-180 rpm each) Propeller FPP in extreme low noise configuration. Max cruising speed 18 Kts Max cruising speed in silent mode: 11 Kts Survey equipment: Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) with 75 kHz transducer Thermosalinograph, CDT & rosette sampler Motion reference unit Scientific Echo Sounder EK60 (Fisheries)– operating frequencies 18, 38, 120 & 200 kHz Scanning Sonar Simrad SP70 (Shoal detection) Multibeam Echosounder EM1002 (Seabed/habitat Mapping) - operating frequencies 93, 98 kHz Hydrographic Echo Sounder EA600 Deck Equipment: Split trawl winches: 2x 30 ton, capacity of 5000m of 26mm warp Net drum winches: 2 x upper net drums (auxiliary) 35 ton, 5m³ capacity 1 x lower net drum (main) 35 ton, 10m³ capacity Net sounding winch: 5.6 ton, capacity of 4700m of 12mm wire

A3-2 GEAR REQUIREMENTS

As part of the Acoustic Survey Program, Fisheries Science Services (FSS) routinely carries out 3 pelagic surveys, accounting for approximately 63 days on the Celtic Explorer per annum. This includes two herring surveys carried out in coastal waters and a blue whiting spawning stock survey which is carried out in deep sea waters. In addition, routine industry-led herring acoustic surveys are carried out onboard commercial vessels. A full complement of single midwater trawls have been designed and tested to suit surveying of current pelagic species both on large research and smaller commercial vessel.

Bridles

Trawl Doors

Clump Weights

Figure 1 Single pelagic midwater trawl. (Source: Marlab, UK. 2004).

Herring Trawls

2 x Single small midwater trawls suitable to fishing in shallow coastal waters. These trawls are specifically rigged to be towed by a large vessel such as the Celtic Explorer, with a large power output (Figure 2)

Multipurpose net

1 x Single midwater net designed specifically for the Celtic Explorer and suitable for either coastal or offshore conditions (Figure 3).

Blue whiting trawls

2 x Single midwater net designed specifically for the Celtic Explorer and suitable for offshore conditions in deepwater (Figure 4).

A3-3 Note: All the above nets are fully rigged and ready to fish and come complete with spare bridle, backstrop configurations. Codend liners can be fitted to suit target species (depending on prior notification).

NET MONITORING SYSTEM

Net monitoring is carried out using both a cable linked “BEL Reeson” netsonde (50 kHz) and a Scanmar TrawlEye acoustic linked sensor (50 & 200 KHz,). Nets are routinely fitted with a Scanmar depth sensor. Spread between the trawl doors is monitored using Scanmar distance sensors, all sensors being configured and viewed through a Scanmar Scanbas system on the bridge.

A3-4 1. HERRING MIDWATER TRAWL

22 x 12 fm

Herring Midwater Trawl Fishing Circle 330m

Mesh Twine (mm) (No.) Belly: 1600 210/624 Mesh Twine (mm) (No.) 1600 210/624 Wings: 1600 210/624 800 210/312

400 210/180

200 210/78

100 210/66

50 210/48 50 2mm braid

Brailer: 17 fm long made up of 4 x 260 meshes 20mm of No. 210/60 twine with top and middle splitter. Codend 20mm No. 210/72 double complete with lifting rings. Bottom section of the brailer is fitted with a 60mm No. 3.5mm braided coverbag. Note: All mesh sizes given in half meshes.

A3-5 2. MULTIPURPOSE MIDWATER TRAWL

30 x 27 fm Multipurpose Midwater Trawl Fishing Circle 422m

Mesh Twine (mm) (No.)

2400.0 9mm

1600 288

800 160

400 80

200 40

100 32

50 32

60 3mm

Brailer: 21 fm with 20mm mesh fully rigged for lifting with half cover bag. Blowout panel included in brailer. Note: All mesh sizes given in half meshes.

A3-6 3. BLUE WHITING GEAR 44 x 39 fm Blue Whiting Midwater Trawl Fishing Circle 768m

Mesh Twine (mm) (No.)

12800.0 10mm

6400.0 9mm

3200 288

1600 240

800 160

400 80

200 40

100 32 50 32 60 3mm

Brailer: 21 fm with 20mm mesh fully rigged for lifting with half cover bag. Blowout panel included in brailer. Note: All mesh sizes given in half meshes.

A3-7

Bridle length 80fm

Poly-Ice doors 6m² 4 x 250 Kg Wt 750 Kg clumps

Figure 1 Typical trawl door, bridle, pennant and backstrop rig as used onboard the Celtic Explorer.

Table 1 Trawl door specifications. Door Type Size (m2) Weight in air

Thyboron* V -Door 3.5 700

Polyice Poly foil 6 750

* has 10 x 12Kg additional weight plates to be added as required

Table 2 Net specifications. Net Doors Bridle length (m) No. Clumps^ Net opening (m) Door spread (m) Liner (mm)

Herring Thyboron 36/70 4 8 75/90 10

Herring* Thyboron 36/70 4 8 75/90 10

Multipurpose Polyice 110 08/10 30 130 20

Blue Whiting Polyice 145 10 45 180 20

* herring commercial trawl, ^ total number of 250 Kg weight clumps required for both sides of net.

A3-8 FISHING PROCEDURE USED IN COASTAL WATERS

During herring acoustic surveys marks of fish are often found in relatively shallow water areas (<50m) close to the shore. In order to target the fish successfully a quick response and deployment of gear is necessary. To speed up the process of shooting the idea of stacking the brailer portion of the net (17 fm) by the stern of the vessel was adopted (photo below).

Codend

Top of Brailer 17 fm

Once a mark of fish was spotted the Master of the vessel would leave approximately 1.5nmi between the mark and shooting the net. This practice was adopted for each tow during the survey. To make the shooting and hauling of the gear as easy as possible both the port and starboard selvedges of the net were marked so they were easy to see and spread on the net drum. This practice worked well and will be adopted for each of the nets used onboard.

Starboard Selvidge

Port Selvidge

In many instances fishing hauls are carried out over rough or uneven ground. To minimise damage to the net a float system was added to give the codend increased buoyancy and reduce the chances of contact with the bottom.

A3-9

12” Float

4” Float tied to the above inside

A3-10 APPENDIX 4 ACOUSTIC TRANSECT RESULTS

The results of the integrated acoustic backscatter, SA, from the 41 transects completed during the LAPE ecosystem survey are presented in the following tables and figures.

Tables Table A4- 1 provides the basic information about the individual transects and tables...... A4-2 Table A4- 2 through A4.10 report the integrated backscattering at 18 KHz (left side) and 38 KHz (right side) from each transect for 50m depth intervals...... A4-3

Figures Each figure includes a panel (page) for each of the 41 transects and the four long transects (2-5) are split into a northern and southern segment resulting in a total of 45 panels. The SA scale is constant over all transects within an acoustic category. The pink background colour represents 0 SA while the white areas indicate bottom less than 500m deep. Hourly intervals are marked on the top margin and transect mile on the bottom. The approximate locations of trawl samples are indicated with white rectangles. Figure A4- 1 presents the acoustic data at 18 KHz as vertical profiles of SA in 10 m intervals to 500 m for each mile of transect line...... A4-13 Figure A4- 2 presents the acoustic data at 38 KHz as vertical profiles of SA in 10 m intervals to 500 m for each mile of transect line...... A4-57

NOTE: The printed report contains only the first of the 90 acoustic transect profiles. The electronic form of this appendix contains the full survey acoustic results.

A4-1 Table A4.1. Acoustic transects completed on LAPE ecosystem survey.

Transect Miles Start End Length Transect Stratum Start End Lat Long Lat Long N. Mi. Km. 1 CMN 5 102 17.318 -62.237 18.785 -61.922 90.8 168.2 2 OE 104 361 18.817 -61.924 17.867 -58.123 223.7 414.3 3 OE 375 589 17.792 -57.897 15.041 -60.303 215.5 399.1 4 OE 590 845 15.018 -60.290 13.549 -56.168 263.3 487.6 5 OE 853 1154 13.491 -56.037 10.471 -60.163 272.4 504.5 6 CE 1187 1235 10.146 -60.387 10.677 -60.959 47.3 87.6 7 CE 1236 1301 10.708 -60.965 10.893 -60.025 56.4 104.5 8 CE 1302 1392 10.917 -60.008 11.762 -60.795 68.8 127.4 9 CE 1393 1462 11.789 -60.797 11.956 -59.637 69.5 128.7 10 CE 1463 1563 11.975 -59.620 12.836 -60.402 46.7 86.5 11 CE 1565 1635 12.875 -60.406 13.029 -59.379 65.8 121.9 12 CE 1645 1739 13.081 -59.232 13.909 -59.877 66.9 123.9 13 CE 1726 1762 13.856 -60.050 13.969 -59.482 33.8 62.6 14 CMS 1795 1844 13.914 -60.059 13.769 -60.877 48.5 89.8 15 CMS 1844 1910 13.752 -60.875 12.961 -60.415 37.2 68.9 16 CMS 2040 2093 12.946 -60.404 12.735 -61.273 52.3 96.9 17 CMS 2094 2189 12.713 -61.268 11.932 -60.786 56.5 104.6 18 CMS 2191 2259 11.895 -60.790 11.658 -61.915 67.6 125.2 19 CWS 2261 2348 11.657 -61.962 12.736 -62.367 93.2 172.6 20 CWS 2349 2414 12.763 -62.371 13.060 -61.316 65.1 120.6 21 CWS 2415 2475 13.086 -61.300 13.975 -61.755 38.4 71.1 22 OW 2542 2615 12.985 -62.293 13.993 -62.923 70.8 131.1 23 OW 2615 2703 14.007 -62.913 14.361 -62.035 55.4 102.6 24 OW 2703 2787 14.377 -62.038 15.569 -62.806 84.2 155.9 25 OW 2787 2814 15.585 -62.809 15.741 -62.391 25.9 48.0 26 OW 2814 2927 15.757 -62.396 17.004 -63.372 93.6 173.3 27 CWM 2927 3036 17.006 -63.354 17.071 -62.132 70.3 130.2 28 CWM 3038 3095 17.055 -62.098 16.307 -62.697 56.6 104.8 29 CWM 3096 3149 16.279 -62.710 16.181 -61.808 52.3 96.9 30 CWM 3149 3205 16.165 -61.815 15.369 -62.279 54.8 101.5 31 CWM 3207 3269 15.332 -62.260 15.015 -61.254 62.3 115.4 32 CWM 3272 3332 14.975 -61.233 14.287 -61.977 60.8 112.6 33 CWM 3333 3377 14.262 -61.996 13.992 -61.308 44.2 81.9 34 CMM 3424 3440 13.976 -60.586 14.012 -60.844 16.2 30.0 35 CMM 3441 3504 14.028 -60.871 14.889 -60.283 64.0 118.5 36 CMM 3505 3562 14.920 -60.278 15.140 -61.230 56.7 105.0 37 CMM 3563 3639 15.155 -61.259 16.258 -60.659 75.7 140.2 38 CMM 3641 3674 16.299 -60.661 16.432 -61.200 33.8 62.6 39 CMM 3676 3716 16.451 -61.206 17.073 -61.010 39.9 73.9 40 CMN 3717 3790 17.105 -61.007 17.287 -62.212 71.0 131.5 1a CMN 3791 3874 17.292 -62.245 18.662 -61.932 85.1 157.6

A4-2 Table A4.2 Mean acoustic density for 'PLANKTON' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 1,906.01 513.67 497.23 220.25 52.93 34.16 53.40 69.09 140.48 121.32 76.32 2 617.56 83.79 30.82 44.93 18.68 27.48 50.33 71.62 73.92 48.42 32.12 3 1,103.46 282.16 59.56 17.40 13.81 25.82 41.25 50.45 30.30 23.00 15.51 665.69 325.65 115.12 34.50 29.67 27.94 8.99 4.80 3.44 4.43 10.27 4 925.19 463.68 61.16 44.47 31.77 42.61 52.60 60.31 30.82 13.49 8.58 1,752.56 536.21 850.46 191.73 35.83 23.30 8.45 9.13 4.90 7.85 20.02 5 1,182.12 691.67 26.26 20.23 20.65 40.71 92.03 67.69 35.43 26.50 18.23 941.33 628.10 102.29 33.71 22.79 15.41 10.90 8.92 7.10 11.64 21.45 6 546.44 404.28 131.01 00000000746.63 492.93 238.46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 633.24 391.66 81.25 3.42 24.94 20.61 33.24 26.13 17.50 0.79 0.86 1,041.36 650.34 321.08 15.07 8.73 12.12 6.25 2.47 0.91 0.32 1.42 8 441.06 257.95 51.79 9.58 6.51 14.80 8.25 12.88 16.29 6.33 4.80 922.90 491.56 276.10 69.43 31.52 12.39 5.85 7.05 4.67 1.46 3.51 9 1,064.86 494.91 5.79 0.15 13.23 43.12 48.58 71.46 63.35 34.81 24.36 1,698.33 1,527.72 24.24 0.19 5.24 17.41 6.44 7.37 10.15 11.92 18.80 10 667.28 146.26 28.29 32.42 43.90 82.14 63.34 62.91 17.87 0.82 0 1,940.46 792.31 822.59 140.96 41.41 32.09 11.51 12.00 1.90 0.11 0 11 2,545.91 932.35 255.11 366.04 153.22 176.34 194.27 115.17 94.65 65.05 52.48 1,676.70 1,166.97 155.41 135.56 30.65 34.15 41.00 11.83 11.03 12.52 17.48 12 545.00 212.68 8.53 9.40 25.02 63.38 48.37 25.56 0.11 0 0.09 1,717.29 943.86 463.78 66.76 47.00 36.74 12.56 9.48 2.00 0.15 0.07 13 1,134.04 678.13 9.75 16.25 21.43 25.27 58.40 99.45 47.96 33.66 17.99 800.30 484.97 122.70 21.75 7.99 12.41 11.42 9.04 5.72 6.63 8.17 14 1,080.81 513.43 28.02 18.04 21.10 39.88 50.71 106.89 71.57 47.70 19.52 1,260.02 736.13 340.42 17.17 6.67 14.58 9.74 13.46 8.88 8.59 29.25 15 698.16 185.99 140.78 36.52 22.82 30.23 32.38 61.82 49.22 7.76 3.24 1,074.66 475.63 397.31 75.01 17.24 19.18 6.93 10.89 10.50 1.11 0.69 16 995.58 466.24 187.92 37.28 17.80 24.21 22.89 50.57 36.00 24.46 16.83 2,719.06 2,126.28 404.38 37.22 7.25 7.04 5.12 8.08 9.00 11.62 15.77 17 966.00 450.24 254.09 81.59 6.93 5.74 11.57 23.99 27.31 9.26 5.32 940.22 560.93 256.95 21.82 10.98 5.87 3.30 5.11 5.10 10.34 7.55 18 1,683.91 876.86 585.60 28.60 0.30 0.44 0.05 13.19 29.14 22.51 17.51 1,234.53 720.58 348.49 7.94 0.19 0.06 0.00 4.94 19.41 38.28 28.37 19 775.26 285.31 189.81 72.51 57.25 40.81 30.32 8.14 0 0 0 1,616.23 413.23 874.98 140.69 48.79 25.68 8.81 4.03 0 0 0 20 1,217.70 731.65 16.04 8.42 3.89 9.21 76.73 102.41 66.73 51.20 47.33 863.52 635.27 12.82 4.17 1.79 3.72 14.81 18.07 12.86 20.99 62.74 21 864.77 380.01 86.78 20.45 14.71 14.10 46.11 64.11 48.77 32.58 42.75 605.28 246.33 156.57 25.74 12.78 8.07 17.39 16.55 11.39 19.57 33.44 22 1,219.44 606.81 108.66 44.38 13.44 9.55 82.42 119.16 84.19 51.78 34.11 852.64 504.10 123.01 27.49 8.21 8.31 29.52 22.46 16.25 14.66 23.60 23 732.01 307.23 134.09 64.79 38.42 41.05 39.09 12.46 8.63 8.91 10.21 899.58 266.35 439.93 71.67 29.18 18.58 7.51 2.62 2.20 8.65 16.98 24 953.37 529.05 1.71 0 0 32.19 96.03 70.28 61.73 37.81 26.72 669.05 465.21 3.69 0 0 8.90 18.30 11.55 9.02 14.22 38.71 25 1,068.72 401.12 341.68 91.43 40.12 24.08 15.22 0 0 0.11 0.38 1,278.49 371.65 573.16 133.32 34.00 32.03 8.88 0 0 0.09 0.72 26 1,013.44 433.94 182.28 36.57 22.55 18.49 17.81 42.70 52.62 46.17 34.37 1,019.93 527.38 217.28 70.29 23.83 14.47 10.70 9.89 6.85 8.89 22.10 27 1,132.33 374.86 229.14 117.05 46.24 38.34 67.77 59.41 50.64 55.38 37.26 863.12 220.94 269.00 147.48 50.44 25.50 15.57 25.11 16.12 14.07 22.45 28 867.41 454.03 26.04 8.24 2.01 5.12 31.91 54.59 85.84 83.74 46.83 840.00 498.20 75.52 17.82 6.77 4.24 8.06 13.15 12.57 12.90 34.81 29 1,060.28 502.99 72.62 20.36 7.05 10.50 53.85 89.96 96.00 70.57 41.88 702.04 391.67 60.22 24.09 8.07 5.42 25.11 20.50 15.05 15.83 36.91 30 574.68 172.59 153.42 113.63 36.23 34.35 30.05 17.85 5.52 0 0 1,321.71 193.73 614.31 361.61 77.76 27.51 11.49 8.32 3.80 0 0 31 933.56 473.79 124.20 32.67 15.97 6.36 8.54 36.70 58.18 51.77 35.32 1,116.97 635.39 96.63 94.98 18.16 6.69 4.50 5.53 9.57 14.32 45.95 32 1,225.91 539.71 238.18 87.96 26.65 20.82 12.32 55.14 85.39 35.32 22.90 1,827.38 591.72 967.15 86.19 21.68 11.01 4.64 11.60 13.14 10.64 15.78 33 533.21 91.42 111.60 103.13 26.50 37.39 33.26 28.06 0 0 0 1,407.90 205.15 874.57 184.56 28.22 24.73 5.08 4.18 0 0 0 34 1,079.46 664.78 287.89 18.23 0 0 0.14 7.22 13.47 10.66 6.42 1,314.61 1,023.17 135.14 0 0 0 0 2.53 5.60 8.79 20.04 35 750.21 353.16 10.61 10.49 26.10 23.90 48.36 68.38 49.33 45.29 34.93 576.64 338.39 27.43 3.86 8.70 8.73 10.96 11.39 8.57 12.75 36.45 36 466.82 88.62 105.64 30.57 31.18 23.36 34.67 40.29 21.27 3.69 2.04 1,439.80 300.45 894.14 61.92 45.28 32.90 13.90 8.22 4.11 0.67 0.55 37 758.60 268.37 135.44 14.25 11.37 23.74 61.97 67.42 50.70 36.59 17.84 773.16 378.49 137.29 48.84 27.84 15.32 10.61 7.88 6.83 10.12 27.35 38 790.66 530.97 54.93 0.38 5.63 5.37 37.71 37.61 28.24 28.70 20.29 751.10 575.95 82.60 0.26 1.65 1.78 7.05 6.44 3.81 5.68 9.78 39 492.54 167.90 121.69 46.55 22.46 27.57 18.69 31.04 0.74 2.00 3.68 1,060.27 340.91 463.60 84.04 38.88 27.72 3.71 2.05 0.63 2.32 9.76 40 1,131.00 907.97 66.61 21.97 8.66 6.90 15.18 31.44 20.33 4.33 1.36 1,300.87 456.81 385.24 367.02 20.71 22.95 5.75 5.83 5.08 1.20 0.57 1a 825.55 413.42 50.50 39.85 21.78 23.07 54.77 65.13 40.79 36.23 32.45 1,048.87 670.72 77.63 41.59 18.67 33.16 15.26 12.77 9.24 7.37 14.16

A4-3 Table A4.3 Mean acoustic density for 'KRILL' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 100000000000 2 0.17 000000.00 0.09 0.08 0 0 3 9.66 0 0 0.06 0.72 5.64 2.02 1.17 0.00 0 0 2.99 0 0 0.09 0.70 1.55 0.52 0.11 0.00 0 0 4 18.98 0 0.44 17.68 0.72 0.06 0.00 00004.91 0 0.34 4.14 0.37 0.05 0.00 0000 5 1.45 0 0 0.27 1.04 0.00 0.11 0.02 0 0 0 0.51 0 0 0.19 0.27 0.00 0.04 0.00 0 0 0 60000000000000000000000 70000000000000000000000 8 1.16 0 0.30 0.82 0.03 0.00 000000.91 0 0.50 0.34 0.05 000000 90000000000000000000000 100000000000000000000000 110000000000000000000000 120000000000000000000000 130000000000000000000000 140000000000000000000000 15 8.89 00000.36 6.31 2.09 0 0 0 0.86 00000.11 0.46 0.28 0 0 0 160000000000000000000000 170000000000000000000000 180000000000000000000000 19 2.00 00000.07 1.78 0.13 0 0 0 4.24 0 0 0.10 0.60 1.07 1.28 0.60 0.52 0.02 0 200000000000000000000000 210000000000000000000000 220000000000000000000000 230000000000000000000000 240000000000000000000000 250000000000000000000000 260000000000000000000000 270000000000000000000000 280000000000000000000000 290000000000000000000000 30000000000000.33 00000.29 0.03 0000 310000000000000000000000 320000000000000000000000 33 2.94 000000.11 2.71 0.06 0 0 0.54 000000.01 0.49 0.02 0 0 340000000000000000000000 35 8.45 0 0 0.00 8.16 0.16 000000.70 0 0 0.00 0.64 0.05 00000 36 13.37 0 0 3.38 0.93 7.84 0.63 0.34 0.02 0 0 3.00 0 0 0.46 0.49 1.69 0.21 0.08 0.01 0 0 37 30.25 0 0 15.75 11.30 2.69 0.11 00004.59 0 0 1.80 2.19 0.51 0.02 0000 380000000000000000000000 390000000000000000000000 400000000000000000000000 1a0000000000000000000000

A4-4 Table A4.4 Mean acoustic density for 'MESOPELAGICS' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 17.48 3.18 2.56 8.03 3.13 0.39 00000 200000000000 30000000000000000000000 40000000000000000000000 50000000000000000000000 60000000000000000000000 70000000000000000000000 80000000000000000000000 90000000000000000000000 100000000000000000000000 110000000000000000000000 120000000000000000000000 130000000000000000000000 14 18.15 0.31 0.80 0.28 0.21 0.03 7.99 5.75 2.25 0.17 0 4.57 0.11 0.39 0.71 0.16 0.05 1.13 1.08 0.78 0.06 0 15 19.11 0.40 0.60 0.66 1.88 5.00 1.64 2.97 3.39 1.44 0.48 10.18 0.16 0.32 0.65 0.64 2.01 1.05 1.30 1.58 1.73 0.42 16 2.87 0.40 0.18 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.24 1.75 0.23 0.02 1.03 0.35 0.12 0 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.30 0.08 0.03 170000000000000000000000 180000000000000000000000 190000000000000000000000 200000000000000000000000 210000000000000000000000 220000000000000000000000 230000000000000000000000 240000000000000000000000 250000000000000000000000 260000000000000000000000 27 9.46 0000000.59 1.62 3.80 2.51 5.61 0000000.26 1.37 2.05 1.29 280000000000000000000000 290000000000000000000000 300000000000000000000000 310000000000000000000000 320000000000000000000000 330000000000000000000000 340000000000000000000000 350000000000000000000000 360000000000000000000000 370000000000000000000000 380000000000000000000000 390000000000000000000000 400000000000000000000000 1a0000000000000000000000

A4-5 Table A4.5 Mean acoustic density for 'OTHER DEMERSALS' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 3.27 0.86 0.09 0.01 0 0.00 0.14 0.26 1.13 0.60 0.04 200000000000 30000000000000000000000 40000000000000000000000 50000000000000000000000 6 12.42 10.26 1.90 0000000010.93 6.32 4.39 00000000 7 16.01 6.50 8.07 0.43 0.53 0.20 0000016.60 7.65 8.27 0.23 0.13 0.02 00000 80000000000000000000000 90000000000000000000000 100000000000000000000000 11 4.56 0 0 0 0.04 1.00 2.51 0 0 0.18 0.19 3.90 0 0 0 0.06 1.22 1.84 0 0 0.09 0.18 120000000000000000000000 130000000000000000000000 14 5.40 0.21 0.53 0 0.00 0.00 2.01 2.13 0.34 0.07 0 2.22 0.25 0.82 0 0.01 0.04 0.38 0.43 0.18 0.07 0 15 0.51 0.27 0.23 0 0.01 0000000.62 0.36 0.22 0 0.03 000000 16 4.14 1.64 0.18 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.24 1.75 0.23 0.02 2.03 1.33 0.12 0 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.30 0.08 0.03 17 14.43 9.84 2.91 0.76 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.37 0.15 0.02 0.02 10.28 6.66 2.71 0.53 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.01 180000000000000000000000 19 8.39 8.22 0.00 0 0.00 0.04 000007.42 7.27 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.04 00000 200000000000000000000000 210000000000000000000000 220000000000000000000000 230000000000000000000000 240000000000000000000000 250000000000000000000000 260000000000000000000000 27 0.57 0000000.04 0.10 0.23 0.15 0.81 0000000.02 0.08 0.12 0.16 28 0.09 00000000000.27 0000000000 290000000000000000000000 300000000000000000000000 310000000000000000000000 320000000000000000000000 330000000000000000000000 340000000000000000000000 350000000000000000000000 36 0.82 0 0.81 0000000000000000000 370000000000000000000000 380000000000000000000000 390000000000000000000000 40 22.72 20.62 1.76 0000000014.83 13.17 1.44 00000000 1a0000000000000000000000

A4-6 Table A4.6 Mean acoustic density for 'PELAGICS 1' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 100000000000 200000000000 30000000000000000000000 40000000000000000000000 50000000000000000000000 60000000000000000000000 7 3.94 3.87 0000000004.43 4.35 000000000 80000000000000000000000 90000000000000000000000 100000000000000000000000 110000000000000000000000 120000000000000000000000 130000000000000000000000 140000000000000000000000 150000000000000000000000 16 1.85 1.81 0000000003.51 3.44 000000000 17 0.06 0.06 0000000000.08 0.08 000000000 180000000000000000000000 190000000000000000000000 200000000000000000000000 210000000000000000000000 220000000000000000000000 230000000000000000000000 240000000000000000000000 250000000000000000000000 260000000000000000000000 270000000000000000000000 280000000000000000000000 290000000000000000000000 300000000000000000000000 310000000000000000000000 320000000000000000000000 330000000000000000000000 340000000000000000000000 350000000000000000000000 360000000000000000000000 370000000000000000000000 380000000000000000000000 390000000000000000000000 400000000000000000000000 1a0000000000000000000000

A4-7 Table A4.7 Mean acoustic density for 'PELAGICS 2' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 100000000000 200000000000 30000000000000000000000 40000000000000000000000 5 4.74 0.80 1.45 2.32 0.16 0.00 000003.85 1.17 1.41 0.85 0.41 000000 6 1.34 1.31 0000000000.72 0.70 000000000 70000000000000000000000 8 1.21 0.96 0.23 0.00 00000000.82 0.62 0.15 0.04 0000000 90000000000000000000000 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110000000000000000000000 12 5.91 3.58 2.09 0.18 00000002.38 1.53 0.75 0.07 0000000 130000000000000000000000 140000000000000000000000 150000000000000000000000 160000000000000000000000 17 0.55 0.05 0.50 000000000.66 0.06 0.58 00000000 180000000000000000000000 190000000000000000000000 200000000000000000000000 210000000000000000000000 220000000000000000000000 230000000000000000000000 240000000000000000000000 250000000000000000000000 26 2.80 0 0 0.37 2.41 0000001.86 0 0 0.65 1.19 000000 27 8.76 0 0.00 8.55 0.09 0000000.65 0 0 0.59 0.06 000000 280000000000000000000000 290000000000000000000000 300000000000000000000000 310000000000000000000000 320000000000000000000000 330000000000000000000000 340000000000000000000000 350000000000000000000000 360000000000000000000000 370000000000000000000000 380000000000000000000000 390000000000000000000000 400000000000000000000000 1a0000000000000000000000

A4-8 Table A4.8 Mean acoustic density for 'PLANKTON/MESOPELAGICS MIX' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 52.49 0 0 0 17.18 22.98 11.77 0000 2 662.54 0 156.59 64.91 16.19 16.11 15.20 6.39 11.59 54.85 126.60 3 829.84 0 113.74 117.74 40.47 35.97 51.70 65.26 52.96 95.97 120.58 405.64 0 81.56 69.63 27.31 20.99 9.24 8.17 6.88 19.34 42.41 4 1,052.38 0 303.42 107.22 72.78 81.13 50.20 36.14 60.06 93.89 92.00 794.68 60.06 360.03 107.54 25.66 16.96 9.92 8.46 16.86 31.81 71.15 5 866.34 0 229.84 122.42 53.69 29.81 16.16 18.04 41.85 95.45 96.04 700.64 124.21 228.26 140.40 31.93 8.12 4.94 5.64 13.27 33.83 56.29 60000000000000000000000 7 87.31 000000.91 9.13 23.14 18.85 14.46 33.99 000000.07 1.52 2.71 5.81 11.57 8 2,561.49 0 142.01 78.43 52.88 298.62 626.49 482.85 381.35 222.92 114.24 333.97 30.73 27.63 21.71 16.45 33.27 53.76 29.93 30.48 27.12 28.52 9 1,192.26 0 560.85 285.90 93.16 43.47 44.34 24.35 2.67 1.70 1.13 1,436.57 294.39 793.90 261.22 46.07 10.72 4.81 2.39 0.42 0.55 1.00 10 726.87 0000002.84 66.39 208.86 187.82 293.60 0 0.32 3.33 0.88 1.98 0 0 18.29 46.12 72.96 11 989.15 0 454.31 300.09 54.68 37.94 0 0 10.86 6.19 5.69 1,091.27 119.92 437.78 366.80 66.51 61.13 8.50 0.43 2.20 1.62 2.00 12 741.72 000000.18 21.66 95.54 206.07 158.76 341.11 000000.02 2.51 19.52 61.12 79.89 13 912.40 0 77.67 52.82 63.17 31.59 17.92 89.60 156.87 112.15 95.25 570.56 19.36 109.09 83.54 35.59 18.66 8.91 16.72 34.04 56.22 66.25 14 610.17 0 198.30 195.37 61.81 22.18 0.93 4.15 14.34 17.46 13.63 925.74 236.55 411.37 194.33 35.19 6.18 0.36 0.76 2.56 6.50 4.33 15 611.11 00000.05 0.62 1.53 41.49 129.61 216.96 233.70 00000.03 0.18 0.33 8.29 34.77 59.69 16 416.24 0 0.45 80.49 53.95 33.59 15.53 39.95 78.50 46.61 34.42 213.82 0 2.01 61.23 28.09 15.41 5.98 7.67 14.10 20.50 30.47 17 447.75 0 1.50 55.67 23.97 42.56 45.41 59.19 107.02 57.80 24.45 156.27 0 0 42.78 20.86 11.13 8.29 11.04 15.14 17.43 15.57 18 379.22 0 0 114.53 55.25 68.78 84.72 49.38 0.58 0.05 0 136.44 0 0 45.39 38.72 20.71 17.16 12.03 0.40 0.07 0 19 621.07 0 0.01 1.93 5.25 5.43 9.19 57.33 133.27 223.59 108.72 280.40 0.17 0.03 0.39 0.87 1.63 2.72 15.88 43.35 69.66 81.87 20 1,444.98 0 478.87 464.31 159.01 105.39 50.74 11.68 6.70 4.78 4.12 1,413.98 189.65 819.14 237.69 65.99 46.27 17.65 7.33 3.81 2.13 1.97 21 790.29 0 234.73 224.44 40.83 31.60 6.47 39.04 41.33 43.20 34.67 588.45 90.72 237.00 83.86 26.57 18.08 2.74 8.67 14.60 28.81 42.58 22 1,558.91 0 360.38 503.29 177.17 104.01 11.34 19.09 30.52 24.63 19.43 1,388.86 276.71 506.45 345.77 94.63 69.76 6.11 8.99 13.43 15.33 12.37 23 988.60 0 304.52 46.72 43.35 39.68 36.36 28.96 67.84 145.69 73.66 491.70 40.48 104.16 25.59 18.61 11.04 15.43 19.46 32.55 47.47 58.20 24 1,372.17 0 528.61 494.62 181.25 58.42 1.02 1.45 0.83 0.05 0 1,377.26 178.20 654.08 393.42 109.53 23.86 1.10 0.59 0.24 0.02 0 25 663.06 0 0.09 2.33 5.20 10.22 15.64 110.43 190.91 145.88 63.99 395.35 0 0.25 3.49 3.18 7.10 9.00 39.62 40.61 65.31 98.86 26 765.81 0 126.58 181.26 104.87 43.94 47.63 40.78 64.56 69.56 38.44 568.02 0 133.74 151.97 52.09 33.92 18.93 20.83 28.80 33.83 49.82 27 719.89 0 83.02 91.07 90.17 62.40 41.51 42.03 42.61 59.62 112.13 441.15 0.46 89.09 84.91 40.87 30.84 14.58 10.28 10.80 20.43 41.35 28 1,020.34 0 380.65 350.11 109.07 45.83 27.92 14.11 7.08 38.96 17.94 830.07 0 382.39 236.58 68.92 45.52 16.23 8.68 2.84 6.26 6.77 29 1,089.91 0 193.11 344.87 233.27 84.67 11.08 12.20 69.60 34.13 26.48 875.87 2.93 308.67 283.73 114.29 57.67 7.31 3.44 12.62 10.66 14.09 30 750.03 0000003.37 87.64 267.77 160.18 424.11 0000001.97 31.63 75.52 89.46 31 1,357.86 0 497.42 341.02 102.53 71.48 99.04 77.06 51.74 25.40 24.11 951.39 0 512.24 163.88 65.76 44.83 27.67 21.94 18.45 19.73 23.36 32 660.18 0 21.94 109.50 51.00 37.95 40.54 32.90 95.03 102.80 47.19 378.26 0.25 25.32 54.67 36.62 34.89 21.71 10.90 17.76 31.67 52.40 33 710.66 0000004.57 33.40 244.96 284.46 286.15 0000001.07 11.83 64.83 106.04 34 912.55 0 522.45 164.63 56.29 49.66 52.47 13.38 0 0 0 448.62 0 230.40 139.71 33.33 9.46 6.85 2.48 0 0 0 35 1,361.74 0 659.63 269.57 53.43 33.30 6.43 10.61 25.32 23.77 15.80 1,031.64 333.53 394.02 151.13 52.23 22.45 3.80 4.65 7.46 8.61 18.11 36 619.11 0 0.02 0.10 0.62 1.22 1.81 15.52 46.47 138.26 148.05 327.11 0.02 0.20 0.14 1.50 1.83 5.92 4.50 12.18 36.28 68.39 37 891.34 0 251.19 183.55 43.97 38.61 23.10 15.99 52.99 62.40 98.79 521.53 46.64 128.49 87.52 38.13 41.11 18.55 10.32 10.54 18.31 47.04 38 2,390.60 0 691.48 1,044.92 330.80 102.49 46.47 17.35 13.96 15.27 5.47 1,734.07 19.30 985.89 295.43 178.34 70.96 21.23 8.00 10.84 8.83 14.85 39 604.67 0 7.71 11.94 12.31 11.21 21.23 54.36 111.83 118.55 115.24 401.26 0 6.88 4.48 6.60 7.83 10.71 20.22 27.89 34.69 82.07 40 445.69 0 40.17 39.71 5.72 0 0.12 6.36 26.47 28.09 42.72 277.98 7.43 51.29 26.62 3.10 0.00 0 0.18 1.85 7.83 15.85 1a 685.62 0 294.98 211.92 36.22 1.88 2.07 2.48 17.35 33.18 30.50 686.95 16.58 334.22 179.64 33.76 1.82 1.53 1.12 2.98 7.38 10.68

A4-9 Table A4.9 Mean acoustic density for 'PLANKTON/PELAGICS MIX' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 100000000000 2 225.38 224.40 000000000 30000000000000000000000 40000000000000000000000 5 24.71 24.62 00000000095.84 95.51 000000000 60000000000000000000000 70000000000000000000000 80000000000000000000000 90000000000000000000000 100000000000000000000000 110000000000000000000000 120000000000000000000000 130000000000000000000000 14 69.32 67.93 000000000158.91 155.73 000000000 150000000000000000000000 160000000000000000000000 170000000000000000000000 180000000000000000000000 190000000000000000000000 200000000000000000000000 210000000000000000000000 220000000000000000000000 230000000000000000000000 240000000000000000000000 250000000000000000000000 260000000000000000000000 270000000000000000000000 280000000000000000000000 290000000000000000000000 300000000000000000000000 310000000000000000000000 320000000000000000000000 330000000000000000000000 340000000000000000000000 350000000000000000000000 360000000000000000000000 370000000000000000000000 380000000000000000000000 390000000000000000000000 400000000000000000000000 1a0000000000000000000000

A4-10 Table A4.10 Mean acoustic density for 'UNIDENTIFIED PELAGICS' category by transect and 50m depth interval

18 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) 38 KHZ SA (m2nmi-2) Depth Interval (m) Transect Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Total 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 7.98 0 0.94 0.10 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.05 0.03 0 0 2 5.86 0 0.46 0.31 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0 3 7.01 0 0.67 0.21 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 4.31 3.36 0.79 0.12 0.02 000000 4 14.25 0 4.18 0.97 00000008.65 7.70 0.71 0.11 0 0.06 0.04 0000 5 12.89 0 1.99 0.08 0.05 0.01 000006.68 5.95 0.62 0.07 0.02 0.00 00000 6 31.33 0 0.29 0000000020.35 19.89 0.05 00000000 7 22.97 0 0.90 000000008.32 7.78 0.39 00000000 8 8.46 0 1.04 000000004.77 4.54 0.18 00000000 9 12.02 0 0.55 000000008.17 6.60 1.45 00000000 10 6.69 0 0.70 0.19 00000008.70 7.10 1.31 0.18 0000000 11 6.62 0 0 0.29 0.04 0000008.38 8.04 0 0.17 0.02 000000 12 12.46 0 1.21 1.23 0.12 0000005.74 4.31 0.64 0.49 0.22 000000 13 5.06 0 0.62 1.10 0.39 0000002.63 2.07 0 0.45 0.03 000000 14 16.30 0 2.48 000000005.76 3.11 2.53 00000000 15 9.66 0 1.23 0.17 00000005.91 5.52 0.14 0.16 0000000 16 9.35 0 0.02 0.04 0.01 0000005.87 5.68 0.05 0.02 0.01 000000 17 15.58 0 0.09 1.57 0.01 0000009.57 7.55 0.09 1.77 0.01 000000 18 6.40 0 0.02 000000005.55 5.45 0.01 00000000 19 10.92 0 0.20 000000005.46 5.17 0.21 00000000 20 3.34 00000000002.36 2.33 000000000 21 5.45 00000000002.15 2.11 000000000 22 7.35 0 0.02 000000003.88 3.83 000000000 23 24.70 0 3.08 1.67 0 0.52 5.70 6.71 0 0 0 7.21 4.40 0.93 0.60 0 0.22 0.39 0.53 0 0 0 24 7.29 00000.14 0.43 0.30 0.21 0.09 0.00 4.23 3.55 0 0 0 0.07 0.16 0.13 0.15 0.11 0.00 25 38.31 0 17.35 000000004.21 3.22 0.84 00000000 26 41.01 0 13.56 17.40 00000006.12 3.08 1.42 1.56 0000000 27 7.80 0 0.44 0 0 0 0.05 0.53 0.44 0.34 0 4.83 4.05 0.44 0 0 0 0.01 0.09 0.12 0.08 0 28 34.23 0 0.17 00003.02 7.53 5.52 2.15 23.87 14.87 0.41 00000.15 0.22 0.38 1.30 29 10.38 0 0.06 000000006.30 6.05 0.12 00000000 30 9.10 0 0.51 000000003.31 3.23 0.02 00000000 31 16.89 0 3.80 0.09 00000009.58 8.27 1.16 00000000 32 4.44 0 0.62 000000003.83 2.35 1.42 00000000 33 5.00 0 0.81 000000002.86 2.65 0.15 00000000 34 12.06 0 0.81 2.60 3.46 2.45 0.58 0.07 0 0 0 0.42 0.35 0.05 00000000 35 7.40 00000000006.77 6.66 000000000 36 14.75 0 1.96 0.11 00000005.60 5.31 0.19 0.00 0000000 37 38.30 0 14.46 0.01 0000000.17 9.96 6.99 2.22 0.00 0000000 38 29.07 0 3.66 0.21 1.41 1.34 5.90 3.08 2.81 1.83 1.39 13.00 3.09 0.09 0.07 0.41 0.44 0.97 0.62 0.87 0.90 0.76 39 5.01 0 0.36 000000003.28 3.17 000000000 40 40.72 0 1.06 0.03 000000020.67 10.74 0.43 0.25 0000000 1a 8.89 0 1.37 0.37 0.24 0.08 0.10 0.15 0.19 0.46 0.17 6.74 4.57 0.38 0.27 0.19 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.40 0.12

A4-11 APPENDIX 5 LIST OF TAXA IDENTIFIED FROM TRAWL SAMPLES

The trawl samples were identified at-sea to the highest taxonomic resolution possible, which in many cases was not to the species level. This appendix lists all the taxa recorded in the survey catches classified from class down to the lowest taxon possible and the corresponding frequency of occurrence (out of 96 samples).

A5-1 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Actinopterygii

Database taxon Freq. Database taxon Freq.

Order: Unknown Order: Aulopiformes Family: Unknown Family: Synodontidae UNKNOWN 2 Synodontidae 1

Order: Anguilliformes Order: Beryciformes Family: Anguillidae Family: Berycidae Anguillidae 1 Berycidae 1 Family: Congridae Family: Diretmidae Bathymyrinae 1 Diretmichthys parini 3 Congridae 1 Diretmidae 3 Pseudophichthys splendens 1 Diretmoides pauciradiatus 3 Diretmoides sp. Family: Derichthyidae 1 Diretmus argenteus 1 Derichthyidae 1 Family: Holocentridae Family: Heterenchelyidae Holocentridae 4 Heterenchelyidae 1 Family: Trachichthyidae Family: Moringuidae Gephyroberyx darwinii 8 Moringua edwardsi 1 Moringuidae 1 Order: Elopiformes Family: Muraenidae Muraenidae 12 Family: Unknown Elopiformes 1 Family: Nemichthyidae Nemichthyidae 22 Order: Gadiformes Family: Ophichthidae Family: Bregmacerotidae Ophichthidae 1 Bregmaceros sp. 4 Family: Serrivomeridae Bregmacerotidae 1 Serrivomeridae 4 Family: Macrouridae Family: Synaphobranchidae Macrouridae 1 Synaphobranchidae 1 Family: Melanonidae Melanonus zugmayeri 1 Order: Aulopiformes Family: Evermannellidae Order: Gasterosteiformes Odontostomops sp. 10 Family: Fistulariidae Family: Notosudidae Fistularia petimba 4 Notosudidae 2 Fistulariidae 1 Scopelosaurus sp. 2 Family: Paralepididae Order: Lampridiformes Lestidiops sp. 9 Family: Lophotidae Paralepsis sp. 4 Lophotidae 2 Family: Scopelarchidae Family: Radiicephalidae Scopelarchidae 1 Radiicephalus elongatus 1 Scopelarchoides sp. 3 Scopelarchus sp. 2

A5-2 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Actinopterygii

Database taxon Freq. Database taxon Freq.

Order: Lophiiformes Order: Perciformes Family: Unknown Family: Carangidae Lophiiformes 1 Decapterus macarellus 1 Decapterus sp. Family: Melanocetidae 4 Decapterus tabl 20 Melanocetus sp. 1 Naucrates ductor 16 Selar crumenophthalmus 9 Order: Myctophiformes Selene sp. 31 Family: Unknown Family: Chaetodontidae Myctophiformes 3 Chaetodon ocellatus 4 Family: Myctophidae Chaetodontidae 1 Benthosema sp. 1 Family: Chiasmodontidae Diaphus sp. 1 Chiasmodontidae 10 Lampadena sp. 1 Myctophidae 47 Family: Epigonidae Myctophum sp. 7 Epigonus macrops 2 Symbolophorus sp. 1 Family: Gempylidae Family: Neoscopelidae Gempylus serpens 1 Neoscopelus sp. 3 Lepidocybium flavobrunneum 2 Notolychnus sp. 1 Nealotus tripes 3 Nesiarchus nasutus 10 Promethichthys prometheus 3 Order: Osmeriformes Family: Argentinidae Family: Lutjanidae Argentinidae 4 Lutjanus sp. 3 Lutjanus vivanus 28 Family: Opisthoproctidae Ocyurus chrysurus 1 Opisthoproctidae 2 Family: Mugilidae Family: Platytroctidae Mugilidae 3 Barbantus curvifrons 1 Platytroctidae 2 Family: Nomeidae Cubiceps gracilaris 10 Cubiceps sp. 13 Order: Perciformes Nomeidae 4 Family: Acanthuridae Nomeus gronovii 23 Acanthurus bahianus 17 Psenes arafurensis 2 Acanthurus sp. 20 Psenes pellucidus 1 Family: Acropomatidae Family: Polynemidae Acropomatidae 13 Polydactylus sp. 6 Family: Ariommatidae Family: Priacanthidae Ariomma regulus 1 Cookeolus japonicus 1 Ariommatidae 1 Heteropriacanthus cruentatus 20 Family: Bramidae Priacanthus arenatus 17 Brama sp. 30 Family: Scombridae Eumegistus sp. 4 Acanthocybium solandri 2 Family: Carangidae Auxis thazard thazard 8 Alectis ciliaris 1 Euthynnus alletteratus 1 Carangidae 2 Scombrolabrax heterolepis 7 Caranx crysos 11 Thunnus atlanticus 4 Caranx sp. 1

A5-3 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Actinopterygii

Database taxon Freq. Database taxon Freq.

Order: Perciformes Order: Stephanoberyciformes Family: Scombrolabracidae Family: Melamphaidae Scombridae 2 Melamphaes polylepis 1 Family: Sparidae Sparidae 23 Order: Stomiiformes Stenotomus caprinus 7 Family: Astronesthidae Family: Sphyraenidae Astronesthes sp. 9 Sphyraena barracuda 1 Astronesthidae 1 Sphyraena sp. 1 Borostomias sp. 3 Heterophotus ophistoma 2 Family: Trichiuridae Neonesthes sp. 4 Benthodesmus nasutus 1 Benthodesmus simonyi 3 Family: Chauliodontidae Benthodesmus sp. 2 Chauliodontidae 1 Benthodesmus tenuis 1 Chauliodus sloani 4 Trichiuridae 1 Chauliodus sp. 12 Trichiurus lepturus 1 Family: Gonostomatidae Family: Xiphiidae Bathylagidae 3 Xiphias gladius 1 Bonapartia sp. 1 Diplophos sp. 1 Gonostomatidae 20 Order: Pleuronectiformes Manducus maderensis 1 Family: Achiridae Family: Idiacanthidae Achiridae 2 Idiacanthus fasciola 3 Family: Bothidae Family: Malacosteidae Bothidae 4 Aristostomias sp. 2 Malacosteidae 1 Order: Polymixiiformes Photostomias sp. 1 Family: Polymixiidae Family: Melanostomiidae Polymixia nobilis 2 Bathophilus sp. 2 Polymixia sp. 3 Eustomias sp. 4 Polymixiidae 4 Leptostomias sp. 1 Melanostomias sp. 4 Order: Scorpaeniformes Photonectes sp. 1 Family: Unknown Family: Phosichthyidae Scorpaeniformes 3 Phosichthyidae 1 Family: Dactylopteridae Pollichthys mauli 1 Dactylopteridae 3 Pollichthys sp. 1 Dactylopterus volitans 8 Vinciguerria sp. 1 Family: Peristediidae Family: Sternoptychidae Peristedion imberbe 2 Argyripnus sp. 2 Peristedion sp. 2 Argyropelecus aculeatus 19 Argyropelecus affinis Family: Scorpaenidae 3 Argyropelecus hemigymnus 6 Scorpaenidae 3 Argyropelecus sladeni 4 Argyropelecus sp. 6 Maurolicus sp. 1 Polyipnus sp. 1 Sternoptyx sp. 13

A5-4 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Actinopterygii

Family: Stomiidae Stomias sp. 1 Stomiidae 1

Order: Tetraodontiformes Family: Monacanthidae Aluterus monoceros 4 Aluterus scriptus 1 Cantherines macrocerus 1 Cantherines pullus 15 Monacanthidae 1 Monocanthus ciliatus 4 Monocanthus tuckeri 1 Stephanolepis setifer 3 Stephanolepis sp. 1 Family: Ostraciidae Acanthostracion polygonius 1 Acanthostracion sp. 3 Ostraciidae 1 Rhinesomus sp. 2 Family: Tetraodontidae Lagocephalus lagocephalus 7 Sphoeroides pachygaster 1 Sphoeroides sp. 15

Order: Zeiformes Family: Caproidae Antigonia capros 7 Family: Grammacolepidae Xenolepidichthys dalgleishi 1

A5-5 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Cephalopoda

Database taxon Freq. Database taxon Freq.

Order: Decapodiformes Order: Decapodiformes Family: Unknown Family: Thysanoteuthidae Decapodiformes 2 Thysanoteuthis rhombus 2 Family: Bathyteuthidae Bathyteuthis abyssicola 2 Family: Chiroteuthidae Chiroteuthis sp. 1 Family: Chtenopterygidae Chtenopterygidae 1 Family: Cranchiidae Cranchiidae 8 Family: Enoploteuthidae Abralia sp. 9 Abraliopsis gilchristi 1 Enoploteuthis sp. 18 Pterygioteuthis giardi 4 Family: Histioteuthidae Histioteuthis dofleini 3 Histioteuthis sp. 1 Family: Loliginidae Loliginidae 2 Loligo plei 2 Family: Lycoteuthidae Lycoteuthis sp. 9 Lycoteuthis springeri 1 Selenoteuthis scintillans 14 Family: Octopoteuthidae Octopoteuthis sp. 1 Family: Ommastrephidae Hyaloteuthis pelagica 13 Ommastrephes bartramii 18 Ommastrephes sp. 2 Ommastrephidae 3 Ornithoteuthis antillarum 29 Family: Onycoteuthidae Onycoteuthidae 1 Family: Ornychoteuthidae Onycoteuthis sp. 12 Family: Sepiolidae Semirossia sp. 1 Sepiola sp. 3 Sepiolidae 4 Family: Spirulidae Spirula spirula 4

A5-6 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Chondrichthys

Database taxon Freq.

Order: Rajiformes Family: Dasyatidae Dasyatis say 1

A5-7 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Crustacea

Database taxon Freq. Database taxon Freq.

Order: Amphipoda Order: Palinura Family: Unknown Family: Unknown Amphipoda 2 Palinura 6 Orchomenella sp. 1 Family: Palinuridae Family: Hyperiidae Palinuridae 1 Hyperiidae 3 Family: Phronimidae Order: Peneidea Phronimidae 4 Family: Penaeidae Family: Phrosinidae Parapenaeus longirostris 4 Phrosina semilunata 1 Penaeidae 5 Family: Platyscelidae Platyscelidae 1 Order: Stenopodidea Platyscelus armatus 5 Family: Stenopodidae Stenopodidae 2

Order: Brachyura Family: Unknown Order: Stomatopoda Brachyura 10 Family: Unknown Stomatopoda 7

Order: Caridea Family: Oplophoridae Nosostomus caprinus 1 Notostomus gibbosus 3 Oplophoridae 31

Order: Decapoda Family: Caridea Caridea 3 Family: Sergestidae Sergestes edwardsii 1 Sergestidae 10

Order: Euphausiacea Family: Unknown Euphausiacea 30

Order: Mysidacea Family: Lophogastridae Gnathophausia ingens 5

A5-8 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Gastropoda

Database taxon Freq.

Order: Heteropoda Family: Atlantidae Atlantidae 10

Order: Pteropoda Family: Cavoliniidae Cavolinia gibbosa forma 1 Cavolinia gibbosa forma flava 1 Cavolinia tridentata forma 5 Cavolinia uncinata uncinata 1

A5-9 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Hydromedusa

Database taxon Freq.

Order: Unknown Family: Unknown Cunina sp. 1

Order: Capitata Family: Corymorphidae Euphysora sp. 2

Order: Hydromedusae Family: Unknown Hydromedusae 6

Order: Semaeostomae Family: Ulmaridae Aurelia aurita 1 Ulmaridae 1

A5-10 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 taxon frequency of capture CLASS: Thaliacdea

Database taxon Freq.

Order: Salpida Family: Tunicates Tunicates 6

A5-11 APPENDIX 6 BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES FROM TRAWL-CAUGHT TAXA

Biological sampling from the trawl-caught taxa included measurements of total and/or fork length, total and/or gutted weight. Otoliths were collected for inclusion in a regional reference collection. They were not intending for ageing purposes as the sample sizes would be too low to establish useful age-length relationships. Stomach samples were collected from larger specimens and frozen for diet analysis. Tissue samples were collected and frozen for stable isotope analysis. The SI samples were to weigh approximately 5 g. For smaller species this required entire specimens or even pooling several individuals of very small species. For larger species a cross-section through the body was collected and for even larger specimens, a 5 g piece of muscle tissue from the dorsal muscles and a 5 g piece of liver tissue were collected separately.

A6-1 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Unknown Family: Unknown UNKNOWN 2 1 3 1 1 1 Order: Anguilliformes Family: Anguillidae Anguillidae 2 2 2 2 Family: Congridae Bathymyrinae 3 3 3 3 3 3 Congridae 2 2 2 2 Pseudophichthys splendens 1 1 1 1 Family: Derichthyidae Derichthyidae 1 1 1 1 Family: Heterenchelyidae Heterenchelyidae 1 Family: Moringuidae Moringua edwardsi 1 Moringuidae 3 3 3 3 Family: Muraenidae Muraenidae 40 20 20 20 Family: Nemichthyidae Nemichthyidae 87 64 64 64 10 10 Family: Ophichthidae Ophichthidae 1 1 1 1 Family: Serrivomeridae Serrivomeridae 20 12 12 12 5 5 Family: Synaphobranchidae Synaphobranchidae 1 1 1 1 Order: Aulopiformes Family: Evermannellidae Odontostomops sp. 21 11 7 11 7 11 7 7 Family: Notosudidae

A6-2 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Aulopiformes Notosudidae 2 2 2 2 1 1 Scopelosaurus sp. 4 4 2 4 2 4 1 1 Family: Paralepididae Lestidiops sp. 37 20 1 20 1 20 1 1 Paralepsis sp. 5 3 3 3 Family: Scopelarchidae Scopelarchidae 1 1 1 1 Scopelarchoides sp. 5 5 5 5 Scopelarchus sp. 2 2 2 2 1 1 Family: Synodontidae Synodontidae 3 Order: Beryciformes Family: Berycidae Berycidae 1 Family: Diretmidae Diretmichthys parini 3 2 2 2 Diretmidae 3 1 1 1 Diretmoides pauciradiatus 10 10 2 10 2 10 Diretmoides sp. 4 4 4 4 4 4 Diretmus argenteus 1 Family: Holocentridae Holocentridae 20 2 2 2 Family: Trachichthyidae Gephyroberyx darwinii 15 1 1 1 Order: Elopiformes Family: Unknown Elopiformes 3 Order: Gadiformes Family: Bregmacerotidae Bregmaceros sp. 28 6 6 6 1 1

A6-3 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Gadiformes Bregmacerotidae 12 3 3 3 2 2 Family: Macrouridae Macrouridae 1 1 1 1 Family: Melanonidae Melanonus zugmayeri 2 2 2 2 Order: Gasterosteiformes Family: Fistulariidae Fistularia petimba 5 3 2 3 2 3 Fistulariidae 1 Order: Lampridiformes Family: Lophotidae Lophotidae 5 1 1 1 Family: Radiicephalidae Radiicephalus elongatus 1 Order: Lophiiformes Family: Unknown Lophiiformes 1 1 1 1 Family: Melanocetidae Melanocetus sp. 1 1 1 1 Order: Myctophiformes Family: Unknown Myctophiformes 1,533 Family: Myctophidae Benthosema sp. 17 17 17 17 1 1 Diaphus sp. 11 11 11 11 Lampadena sp. 3 3 3 3 Myctophidae 11,065 241 9 246 9 241 14 4 10 Myctophum sp. 525 33 33 33 3 3 Symbolophorus sp. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Family: Neoscopelidae

A6-4 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Myctophiformes Neoscopelus sp. 40 1 1 1 1 1 Notolychnus sp. 2 2 2 2 Order: Osmeriformes Family: Argentinidae Argentinidae 9 8 8 8 1 Family: Opisthoproctidae Opisthoproctidae 2 1 1 1 Family: Platytroctidae Barbantus curvifrons 7 7 7 7 Platytroctidae 2 1 1 1 Order: Perciformes Family: Acanthuridae Acanthurus bahianus 433 32 32 32 1 1 Acanthurus sp. 459 27 27 27 2 2 Family: Acropomatidae Acropomatidae 212 59 40 59 40 59 8 3 5 Family: Ariommatidae Ariomma regulus 3 3 3 3 3 3 Ariommatidae 1 1 1 1 Family: Bramidae Brama sp. 314 130 46 131 5 45 131 16 2 7 10 Eumegistus sp. 17 8 8 8 5 5 Family: Carangidae Alectis ciliaris 1 Carangidae 6 5 5 5 Caranx crysos 5,258 65 118 118 65 118 3 3 Caranx sp. 1 1 1 1 Decapterus macarellus 44 Decapterus sp. 923 7 56 63 63 Decapterus tabl 963 91 66 147 1 10 147 9 2 8

A6-5 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Perciformes Naucrates ductor 130 21 13 21 1 13 21 1 1 Selar crumenophthalmus 151 64 64 64 64 64 1 1 Selene sp. 847 42 67 73 36 73 1 1 Family: Chaetodontidae Chaetodon ocellatus 8 3 4 7 7 1 1 Chaetodontidae 1 1 1 1 Family: Chiasmodontidae Chiasmodontidae 19 14 5 14 5 14 3 3 Family: Epigonidae Epigonus macrops 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 Family: Gempylidae Gempylus serpens 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lepidocybium flavobrunneum 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 Nealotus tripes 3 2 2 2 Nesiarchus nasutus 45 30 15 32 2 13 32 13 3 11 Promethichthys prometheus 7 5 5 5 4 4 Family: Lutjanidae Lutjanus sp. 19 12 12 12 1 1 Lutjanus vivanus 2,700 110 1 109 1 109 16 10 6 Ocyurus chrysurus 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Family: Mugilidae Mugilidae 8 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 Family: Nomeidae Cubiceps gracilaris 448 88 130 134 84 134 13 11 9 13 Cubiceps sp. 1,147 81 1 81 1 81 7 7 Nomeidae 21 8 8 8 1 1 Nomeus gronovii 3,054 145 29 155 3 19 155 11 1 4 7 Psenes arafurensis 4 4 1 4 1 4 1 1 1 Psenes pellucidus 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Family: Polynemidae

A6-6 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Perciformes Polydactylus sp. 383 103 51 103 51 103 3 3 Family: Priacanthidae Cookeolus japonicus 1 1 1 1 1 1 Heteropriacanthus cruentatus 576 69 69 2 69 5 2 2 2 Priacanthus arenatus 3,360 102 102 2 102 2 1 2 Family: Scombridae Acanthocybium solandri 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 Auxis thazard thazard 70 22 23 30 15 30 5 5 Euthynnus alletteratus 30 26 26 26 Scombridae 4 1 1 1 Thunnus atlanticus 27 5 12 12 5 12 5 2 5 Family: Scombrolabracidae Scombrolabrax heterolepis 29 18 18 18 18 18 8 8 Family: Sparidae Sparidae 95 15 15 15 Stenotomus caprinus 33 9 9 9 2 1 1 Family: Sphyraenidae Sphyraena barracuda 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sphyraena sp. 1 1 1 1 Family: Trichiuridae Benthodesmus nasutus 1 2 2 2 1 1 Benthodesmus simonyi 10 10 1 10 1 10 Benthodesmus sp. 3 3 1 3 1 3 Benthodesmus tenuis 1 1 1 1 Trichiuridae 9 2 2 2 Trichiurus lepturus 1 1 1 1 Family: Xiphiidae Xiphias gladius 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Order: Pleuronectiformes Family: Achiridae

A6-7 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Pleuronectiformes Achiridae 2 1 1 1 Family: Bothidae Bothidae 10 2 2 2 Order: Polymixiiformes Family: Polymixiidae Polymixia nobilis 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 Polymixia sp. 10 10 10 10 10 10 Polymixiidae 11 4 2 6 1 6 1 1 1 Order: Scorpaeniformes Family: Unknown Scorpaeniformes 5 1 1 1 Family: Dactylopteridae Dactylopteridae 16 3 3 3 Dactylopterus volitans 87 14 12 14 12 14 2 1 1 2 Family: Peristediidae Peristedion imberbe 3 3 3 3 Peristedion sp. 6 3 2 2 3 3 Family: Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae 7 6 6 6 Order: Stephanoberyciformes Family: Melamphaidae Melamphaes polylepis 1 1 1 1 Order: Stomiiformes Family: Astronesthidae Astronesthes sp. 22 17 4 17 4 17 1 1 Astronesthidae 2 2 2 2 Borostomias sp. 11 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 Heterophotus ophistoma 2 2 1 2 1 2 Neonesthes sp. 86 22 14 24 12 24 15 1 5 14 Family: Chauliodontidae

A6-8 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Stomiiformes Chauliodontidae 4 4 4 4 4 4 Chauliodus sloani 401 68 6 68 6 68 7 2 5 Chauliodus sp. 213 67 50 71 46 71 Family: Gonostomatidae Bathylagidae 8 7 7 7 3 3 Bonapartia sp. 2 2 2 2 1 1 Diplophos sp. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gonostomatidae 518 38 5 38 5 38 5 5 Manducus maderensis 1 1 1 1 1 1 Family: Idiacanthidae Idiacanthus fasciola 13 11 10 10 1 1 Family: Malacosteidae Aristostomias sp. 11 11 3 11 3 11 6 6 Malacosteidae 4 4 4 4 4 4 Photostomias sp. 1 1 1 1 Family: Melanostomiidae Bathophilus sp. 4 4 2 4 2 4 3 2 3 Eustomias sp. 10 7 7 7 1 1 Leptostomias sp. 3 3 3 3 2 2 Melanostomias sp. 23 3 3 3 Photonectes sp. 1 1 1 1 Family: Phosichthyidae Phosichthyidae 13 Pollichthys mauli 1 1 1 1 Pollichthys sp. 2 2 2 2 2 2 Vinciguerria sp. 1 1 1 1 Family: Sternoptychidae Argyripnus sp. 12 9 9 9 Argyropelecus aculeatus 87 58 16 58 1 16 58 13 1 1 12 Argyropelecus affinis 8 7 7 7 1 1

A6-9 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Stomiiformes Argyropelecus hemigymnus 16 3 3 3 Argyropelecus sladeni 10 8 8 8 Argyropelecus sp. 15 4 4 4 Maurolicus sp. 38 15 15 15 Polyipnus sp. 4 4 4 4 Sternoptyx sp. 39 15 15 15 2 2 Family: Stomiidae Stomias sp. 1 1 1 1 Stomiidae 1 1 1 1 Order: Tetraodontiformes Family: Monacanthidae Aluterus monoceros 81 48 48 48 Aluterus scriptus 1 1 1 1 Cantherines macrocerus 2 Cantherines pullus 45 22 22 22 3 1 2 Monacanthidae 1 Monocanthus ciliatus 21 1 1 1 Monocanthus tuckeri 3 Stephanolepis setifer 8 1 1 1 Stephanolepis sp. 5 Family: Ostraciidae Acanthostracion polygonius 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Acanthostracion sp. 3 Ostraciidae 1 Rhinesomus sp. 4 2 2 2 Family: Tetraodontidae Lagocephalus lagocephalus 10 4 4 4 Sphoeroides pachygaster 1 1 1 1 Sphoeroides sp. 48 14 15 29 29

A6-10 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Actinopterygii Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Zeiformes Family: Caproidae Antigonia capros 11 8 8 8 Family: Grammacolepidae Xenolepidichthys dalgleishi 14 1 1 1

A6-11 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Cephalopoda Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Decapodiformes Family: Unknown Decapodiformes 1 Family: Bathyteuthidae Bathyteuthis abyssicola 5 1 1 1 Family: Chiroteuthidae Chiroteuthis sp. 1 Family: Chtenopterygidae Chtenopterygidae 2 Family: Cranchiidae Cranchiidae 15 4 4 4 Family: Enoploteuthidae Abralia sp. 330 56 56 56 Abraliopsis gilchristi 1 1 1 1 Enoploteuthis sp. 281 101 101 101 2 2 Pterygioteuthis giardi 80 2 2 2 Family: Histioteuthidae Histioteuthis dofleini 3 3 3 3 2 2 Histioteuthis sp. 2 Family: Loliginidae Loliginidae 263 Loligo plei 387 74 74 74 12 12 Family: Lycoteuthidae Lycoteuthis sp. 132 23 23 23 12 12 Lycoteuthis springeri 1 1 1 1 Selenoteuthis scintillans 279 81 81 81 Family: Octopoteuthidae Octopoteuthis sp. 5 5 5 5 Family: Ommastrephidae Hyaloteuthis pelagica 190 55 55 55 2 2 Ommastrephes bartramii 960 234 234 234 5 5

A6-12 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Cephalopoda Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Decapodiformes Ommastrephes sp. 40 33 33 33 Ommastrephidae 76 30 30 30 Ornithoteuthis antillarum 1,370 207 207 207 7 7 Family: Onycoteuthidae Onycoteuthidae 47 Family: Ornychoteuthidae Onycoteuthis sp. 137 33 33 33 1 1 Family: Sepiolidae Semirossia sp. 1 1 1 1 Sepiola sp. 21 21 21 21 Sepiolidae 5 Family: Spirulidae Spirula spirula 9 3 3 3 1 1 Family: Thysanoteuthidae Thysanoteuthis rhombus 10 1 1 1

A6-13 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Chondrichthys Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Rajiformes Family: Dasyatidae Dasyatis say 1 1 1 1 1 1

A6-14 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Crustacea Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Amphipoda Family: Unknown Amphipoda 2 Orchomenella sp. 1 Family: Hyperiidae Hyperiidae 4 Family: Phronimidae Phronimidae 4 Family: Phrosinidae Phrosina semilunata 1 Family: Platyscelidae Platyscelidae 2 2 2 2 Platyscelus armatus 17 Order: Brachyura Family: Unknown Brachyura 477 Order: Caridea Family: Oplophoridae Nosostomus caprinus 1 1 1 1 Notostomus gibbosus 3 2 2 2 Oplophoridae 792 52 53 52 2 2 Order: Decapoda Family: Caridea Caridea 3 3 3 3 1 1 Family: Sergestidae Sergestes edwardsii 1 Sergestidae 77 25 25 25 2 2 Order: Euphausiacea Family: Unknown Euphausiacea 1,403 1 3 3

A6-15 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Crustacea Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Mysidacea Family: Lophogastridae Gnathophausia ingens 15 10 10 10 Order: Palinura Family: Unknown Palinura 29 Family: Palinuridae Palinuridae 1 1 1 1 Order: Peneidea Family: Penaeidae Parapenaeus longirostris 73 2 2 2 Penaeidae 120 10 10 10 1 1 Order: Stenopodidea Family: Stenopodidae Stenopodidae 2 Order: Stomatopoda Family: Unknown Stomatopoda 37

A6-16 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Gastropoda Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Heteropoda Family: Atlantidae Atlantidae 6 1 1 1 Order: Pteropoda Family: Cavoliniidae Cavolinia gibbosa forma australis 1 Cavolinia gibbosa forma flava 1 Cavolinia tridentata forma australis 4 Cavolinia uncinata uncinata forma uncina 2

A6-17 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Hydromedusa Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Unknown Family: Unknown Cunina sp. 2 Order: Capitata Family: Corymorphidae Euphysora sp. 2 1 1 1 Order: Hydromedusae Family: Unknown Hydromedusae 40 Order: Semaeostomae Family: Ulmaridae Aurelia aurita 1 Ulmaridae 2

A6-18 LAPE Ecosystem Survey 2006 sampling summary - numbers of samples of specified types

Class: Thaliacdea Total Numbers of samples for: Number Total Fork Total Gutted Total L/ Length/ Tagged Stable Database taxon Caught Length Length Weight Weight Fork L Weight Samples Otoliths Stomachs Isotopes Order: Salpida Family: Tunicates Tunicates 95

A6-19 APPENDIX 7 OCEANOGRAPHIC STATIONS AND SAMPLES

Oceanographic data were collected at 56 pre-selected stations. Samples were collected from fixed depths, and from the vicinity of the deep chlorophyll maximum (DCM) when fluorometer casts were done. This appendix lists the samples at each depth for each station.

A7-1 s s s s s s s s s s s s rients rients rients rients rients rients rients rients rients rients rients rients HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI Station (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore HPLC Nut No 1 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx 110 2 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx 110 3 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx 110 4 2 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx 110 5 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 6 0 10 20 30 4050607080 90 100 110 7 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 8 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 9 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 10 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 11 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 12 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 13 0 10 20 30 4050607080 90 100 110 14 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xxxxxx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 15 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 xxxxxx 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx xx 110 16 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xx 70 xxxxxx 80 xx 90 100 xxx 110 17 0 10 20 30 4050607080 90 100 110 18 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xxxxxx 110 19 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xxxxxx 110 20 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xxxxxx 110 21 0 10 20 30 4050607080 90 100 110 22 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xx 70 xxxxxx 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 23 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xx 70 80 xxxxxx 90 100 xx 110 24 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 xxxxxx 100 xx 110 25 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xx 70 xxxxxx 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 26 0 xx 10 x xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 xx 40 xxx 50 xx 60 xxxxxx 70 xx 80 xx xx 90 100 110 27 0 xx xx 10 x xx 20 xxxxxx 30 xxx 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 28 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xx xx 110 29 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 xxxxxx 60 xxx 70 80 xx xx 90 100 xx 110 30 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 xxxxxx 100 xx 110 31 0 xx 10 xx 20 x xxxx 30 40 xx xx 50 60 xxx 70 80 xx xx 90 xxxx 100 xx xx 110 32 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xx 90 xxxxxx 100 xxx 110 33 0 xx 10 xx 20 xxxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx xx 70 80 xxx 90 xxxxxx 100 xx 110 34 0 10 20 30 4050607080 90 100 110 35 0 10 20 30 4050607080 90 100 110 36 0 xxx10 x xx 20 x xxxxx 30 xxx 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 37 0 x 10 xx 20 xxxxx 30 40 xxx 50 x xxxx 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx 110 38 0 x 10 xx 20 xxxx 30 40 xxx 50 x xxxx 60 xx 70 80 xx 90 100 xxx 110 39 0 x 10 xx 20 xxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 x xxx 80 xx 90 100 x xx 110 40 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx x 30 40 xx 50 x xxx 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx 110 41 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx 30 40 xx 50 60 x xxx 70 80 xx 90 100 xxx 110 42 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx x 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 x xxx 80 xx 90 100 xxx 110 43 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 x xxx 80 xx 90 100 xx 110 44 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx x 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 xx 80 x xxx 90 100 xx 110 45 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 x xxx 80 xx 90 100 xx 110 46 0 x 10 xx 20 xxx x 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx 110 47 0 x 10 xx 20 xxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx 110 48 0 x 10 xx 20 xxx x 30 40 xxx 50 60 xxx 70 80 xx 90 100 x xxx 110 xx 49 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 80 xx 90 100 x xxx 110 xx 50 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 xx 80 x xxx 90 100 xx 110 51 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx x 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 80 xx 90 x xxx 100 xx 110 52 0 x 10 xx 20 x xxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 80 x xxx 90 xx 100 xxx 110 53 0 x 10 xxx 20 xxx x 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 80 x xxx 90 xx 100 xx 110 54 0 x 10 xxx 20 xxx 30 40 xx 50 60 xxx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx 110 55 0 x 10 xx 20 xxx x 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 100 xx 110 56 0 x 10 xx 20 xxx 30 40 xxx 50 60 xx 70 80 xxx 90 x xxx 100 xx 110 s s s s s rients rients rients rients rients HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut HPLC Nut Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore Chlorophyll Absorbtion experiment PI (m) Depth sampleWater Salinity (m) Depth sampleWater Salinity (m) Depth sampleWater Salinity (m) Depth DCM Station (m) Depth Phytoplankton Coccolithophore HPLC Nut Notes No 200m bottle misfired 1 120 xxxxxx 130 xx 140 xx 160 xx xx 200 Misfire 120 2 120 xx 130 xxxxxx 140 160 xx xx 200 x x 130 3 120 xxxxxx 130 140 xx 160 xx xx 200 1500 Misfire 120 No fluorometer but 120 taken as DCM 4 120 xxxxxx 130 140 Misfire 160 xx xx 200 Misfire 120 No obvious DCM 5 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 x x x 140 6 120 130 140 160 200 - No water samples taken except salinity from 1500 m 7 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 x x 140 Leakage of filters at 100 and 140 m. 8 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 x x 140 Salinity taken from 4000 m 9 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 xx 4000 x x 140 10 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 x x x 140 11 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 x x x 140 12 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 xxx 1500 x 140 13 120 130 140 160 200 - Deep ocean station to 4000 m 14 120 xx 130 140 xx xx 160 xx 200 xx 1500 xx 60 15 120 xx 130 140 xx xx 160 200 xx 50 16 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 70 17 120 130 140 160 200 Deep Ocean station 18 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 xx 200 x x 100 19 120 xx 130 140 xx xx 160 xx 200 x x 100 20 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 xx 200 xx 4000 x 4400 x 100 21 120 130 140 160 200 22 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 xx 200 xx 70 23 120 xx xx 130 140 xx 160 xx 200 xx 1500 Misfire 80 24 120 xxx 130 xx 140 xx 160 200 xx 90 25 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 70 26 120 130 140 160 200 60 27 120 130 140 160 200 - 28 120 xx 130 140 xxxxxx 160 xx 200 xx 1500 x 29 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 30 120 xx xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 31 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 32 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 33 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 34 120 130 140 160 200 35 120 130 140 160 200 36 120 130 140 160 200 37 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 38 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 1500 x 20 x DCMsuggested at 50m 39 120 xx 130 140 x xx 160 200 xx 40 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 2800 x 600 x 41 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 xx 200 xx 1800 x 600 x DCM suggested at 60m 42 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 43 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 44 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 45 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 1000 x 600 x 140 x DCM suggested at 70m 46 120 x xxx 130 140 xx 160 xxx 200 xx 47 120 x xxx 130 140 xx 160 xxx 200 xx 800 x 120 x DCM suggested at 120m , 200m sample may have had some leakage do not use 48 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 49 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 1500 x 600 x 110 x DCM suggested at 100m 50 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 51 120 xx 130 140 xxx 160 200 xx 52 120 xx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 53 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx 54 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 xx 200 xx No DCM 55 120 xx 130 140 x xxx 160 xxx 200 xx 56 120 xxx 130 140 xx 160 200 xx APPENDIX 8 TRAWL SAMPLE DATA FORMS

A - Trawl Record Form

A8-1 B - Catch Record Form

A8-2 C - Length Frequency Record Form

A8-3 D - Length-Weight Record Form

A8-4 E - Detail Sample Form

A8-5 APPENDIX 9 SIGHTING SURVEY DATA FORMS

Effort and Weather

Country Vessel Block Date Page

Position Effort Weather Navigation and Time Latitude Longitude Act Weather Wind Beaufort Sea Glare Sightings Course Speed Visibility Hour Min. Deg. Min. N/S Deg. Min. E/W ion Speed Direction scale state Sev. From To Waypoints Sighting #

......

A9-1 Sighting

Country

Vessel Block Line Date 0 Recorder Sighting No. Time Type Year Month Day Hour Min.

Unit Seen Seen Swimming Position of vessel Closest Unit Time Left R/L Angle Distance of Cue direction Course Latitude Longitude of Hour Min. distance at by Deg. Min. N/S Deg. Min. E/W distance distance

. ..N W .

Species School size No. of No. of Name Best Min. Max. Calves photos

Comments

Water temp.

Water depth

Biopsy sample no. Year Month Day Sighting No. Individual No.

A9-2

A9-3