Translation Series No.1561

rfflmjyrS

FISHERIES RESEARCH BOARD OF CANADA Translation Series No. 1561

• Solar adtivity•and periodià fluctuations in'the ' • 'abundance of salmon • (from "Biological,foundations of the fishing - industry. and regulations of-Marine: fisheries") ,

By.I.B Birman . leglee - OCkUdà FISHEItiES AND eflA0TeQUE etce3 OCÉANS

Original title: Periodicheskie kolebaniya chislennosti lososevykh i solnechnaya aktivnost,'("Biologicheskie osnovy rybnogo khozyaiStva i règchlirovanie morSkogo rybolovstva")

From: Trudy VseSbyuznogo Nàuchno-,Issiedovatel'skogo Instituta Morskogô Rybnogo Khozyàistva i Okeanografii - (VNIRO). . (Proceedings of the All-Union Research Institute of Marine - Fisheries and. Oceanography). Publ. by: Pïshchevaya PromyshlennoSt, Moscow; 67.(1):. 171-189, 1969.. t, • Translated by.the'Translation Blireau( JO) • Foreign Languages Divisicin • Department of the Secretary' of State of Canada

Fisheries ReSearch Board - of Canada. Halifax Laboratory, , Halifax, N.S. .Biological . Station,. St. Andrews, N.S. .FreshWater Institute, 'Winnipeg, Manitoba ' . 1970 . • .31 pages typescript • • • DEPARTMENtOF THE SECRETARY OF STATE SECRÉTARIAT D'. ÉTAT• TRANSLATION BUREAU BUREAU DES TRADUCTIONS FOREIGN LANGUAGES DIVISION DES LANGUES

CANADA • '- ÉTRANGÈRES

TRANSLATED FROM — TRADUCTION DE INTO — EN

Russian English

AUTHOR — AUTEUR

•Birman, LB.

TITLE IN ENGLISH -• TITRE ANGLAIS Solar Activity and Periodic Fluctuations in the Abundance of Salmon Title in foreign language (transliterate foreign charactera) DeriodiCheskie kolebaniya chislennosti lososevykh i solnechnaya aktivnostt.

RÇURENCE IN FOREIGN VANGUAGE (NAME OF BOOK OR PUBLICATION) IN'FULL. TRANSLITERATE FOREIGN CHARACTERS. REFERENCE 'EN LANGUE ETRANGàRE (NOM DU LIVRE OU. PUBLICATION), AU COMPLET.TRANSCRIRE EN CARACTàRES . PHONETIQUES. "Bioliogicheskie osnoVy-rybhogo. khozyaistva i.regulirovanie morskogo

rybolovstva% .

REFERENCE IN ENGLISH — RiFàRENCE EN ANGLAIS' uBiological Foundations of. the Fishing'IndustrY and Regulation of Marine FiSheries".. ••' •

PUBLISH ER EDIT EUR PAGE NUMBERS IN ORIGINAL DATE OF PUBLICATION. NUMàROS DES PAGES DANS• n . DATE DE PUBLICATION L'ORIGINAL "Pishchevaya promyshlennostI •

.YEAR ' ISSUE NO.' - 1 71-189 - , VOLUME ANNEE ' NUMiRO PLACE OF PUBLICATION NUMBER OF TYPED PAGES LIEU DE PUBLICATION ,NOMBRE DE PAGES . ' DACTYLOGRAPHIàES Moscow, USSR 1969 67 31

TRANSLATION BUREAU NO: ' REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Fisheries & Forestry 1216 MINISTàRE-C LIE NT , NOTRE DOSSIER N°

BRANCH OR DIVISION Fisheries Research Board -.TRANSLATOR (INITIALS) J .0. DIRECTION OU DIVISION TRADUCTEUR (INITIALES) Dr. M.S. Mounib, Laboratory PERSON rEQUESTING Halifax, N.S. DATE •OMPLETED OCT - 2. 1970 DEMANDE PAR . ACHEVE LE

• . , ' • , . YOUR NUMBER ' . UNEDITED DRAFT «- .1 4- " • . : ' TRANSLATION VOTRE DOSSIER N° . • '7694-8 . • On:y for information • • . TRADUCTION NON REVISÉE DATE OF REQUEST 15 .5 . 70 DATE DE LA.DEMANDE Informal ion seuloment

10 Se. 200.10.-0 ( EV. Veil

, : 4

• Fea • 1541

DEPARTMENT OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE • SECRÉTARIAT D'ÉTAT TRANSLATION BUREAU BUREAU DES TRADUCTIONS FOREIGN LANGUAGES DIVISION • DIVISION DES LANGUES ÉTRANGÈRES

CANADA

• CLIENT'S NO. DEPARTMENT DIVISION/BRANCH CITY N° DU CLIENT MINISTERE DIVISION/DIRECTION VILLE 769- 18-14 Fisheries & Forestry Fisheries Research Board Halifax, N.S.

BUREAU NO. LANGUAGE TRANSLATOR (INITIALS) DATE No DU BUREAU LANGUE TRADUCTEUR (INITIALES) 1216 Russian J.0. OCT -. 2 1970

• SOLAR ACTIV-ITY AND PERIODIC FLUCTUATIONS IN. THE ABUNDANCE OF 'SALMON (Periodicheskie kolebaniYa chislennesti losesevykh I solhechnaia aktiVnost 1 ): • • • rom Biological.FoundatiOne.of the Fishing IndUstry and Regulation of Marine Fisheries. (from 'Biologicheskie osnovy.rybnogo khezyaistva regulirovanie morskogorYbolovstVa).., Works of the.A11-Union Institute of Scientific Research en Sea- •• Fisheries and Oceanography.(VNIRO). (Trudy VsesoYuznogo.nauchno- • issledovatel , Skogo instituta morskogo.rybnogo khozyaistva i okeanografii[VNIRO]) . . • Published-by '!PishelleVaya promyshlennost , (! 1 Food - Industre). Moscow, 199, Vo1.LXVII, , No. 1.: • UNEDITED DRAFT TRANSLATION • Only for information UDk 597 . - 152.6:597..553.2+639.211. TRADUCTION NON REVISÉE Birman, I.B. , • Inforffiation eculernent. • * Following the studies.made by A.N. Derzhavin. (1922), for • p.171 a long time no attention wàs*paid to the influence'of solar acti.: vity ôg fish boDulations.. Derzhavin has clearly.demonStrated the

relationship between the abundance of the Kurin Ëturgeon (Acinén- • ser.stellatus stellatus natiocurensis Berg_a, and certain other • fish of the Cespian-baSin with the Changes in'solar activity. However,tvirtliallyi no further stUdies have been Madet apparently becaUsef:the:contr -oversiai problem of relations between'the eun-an the earth in general. • rromtne point of view of theprôbleMs of long-term planning an regulation of the Fish Industry, the study of the influence - of solar:rhythms on:fish : .populations inuip.iabtécily,deserves the lacs .L SerioUs attention. Until now, the long-term prognosis of these -.- populations, in the sphere . of.ap'plieu ichthyological studies; . has been the weakest point . ,

*Numberà in the right. margin indicate the corresponding pages in the

2 •

' At present the sun - earth relationship is being widely, • studied, as is. thé influence of solar rhythms on biological processes. In conneCtion With this, the question of the influence • - of Solar activity on-fish_population . .dynamics becomes of very ' , great interest. In his preVique works, the author (Birman, 1954,• 1 96 4) . has shàwn that solar activity has à great influence on the stocks of hliMpbacked salmon of the Far- East. The aim of . the • • presènt article is.to . shOw the existence of a relationship . between •y-clical veriationS of solar,activity and thé pOpulation dynamics of other species of salmon.. We will once more .mention' the humpbacked salMon and correlate . actual data pertaining to . . thia'problem. ' . • Semgale -( .Salmo Salar 4,2 • L.S. Berg (1935, 1936) and the fjanàdian scientists Calder- • - Wood (1930) and HuntsMan (1931) (quoted . froM L.5. Berg), noted • a periodicity in the'•atchée - Of the Atlantic salmon genus Selmo. • • • ..As Berg:points out (1935), a-periodicity of 8 - 11 years . can be:Observed, in the catches of semga in the northern :uuesian

besin . of the Barents And the White Seaà. Approximately the same • periodicity' (9.6 yearsaccording to Huntsman) has aleo been obserVed in Canada. It has.also been nOted that the periods* of minimal and maximal Catches•coincide on both sides.ofAtlantic. Berg„'llowèver, did, not venture:to connect this:periodicity with the 11 -...year solar cycles for the following reasons..-, - • If the years of-Minimal and maximal catches are*matched p-. 172 with the extremum periods of the 11 Year solardycles, the folio-. • - wing pictureis obtainedt Pad years.for . Semga•. . in northern- Russia

Werè'1912 ., 1922, 1932, 191i.2 and1951; They came • .to 5 years-after • • *periods. of maximum solar . activity and the bad years of 1882, 1894.. - and. 1928 came 4. to 5 years after periods of minimumeolar The good years of 1974 and 1898 were notéd 4 years after maximum eolar aCtivity and the good year of 1883 was years after. the 'minimal. Thus, it fevery :difficult to establish whether the ' Trannatorts •Semga: Ae.there ie no English equivalent•for. the Seimo. salar- L. note. 1 . specieS of salmon, the Éussian name nselean will pe used through- - out the article.. 3

Minimum or the maXimumdegree of. solar activity is s the most favorable for semga.Iield. The 8-to 11-year recurrencè . of gocid and bed catches'of semga is a well established -fact. These catches follow the extremum periods of solar Cycles or immediately after the years preceding them. The difference in the number of years corresponds approxi- 'mately to the age of trie first mass maturation of semga (in-most rivers usually 4 + . to 5 + years). On . thiS basis one is forced to aknowledge the existence of.the influence of solar activity on - semga Population.dynamics. it'is,not yet oléar why. the Opposite - • , extrema of solar activity influence the catches of_semga in the same way;howeVer;the'f011owing explanation is possible: : • In the opinion •(1935 a, b, v), E.B. Kuchina.. (1935).and 'others, a low water level injrivers and-frequent .drying up of .estuarieS during . drought Years are extremely • unfavorable factors fOr the reproduction Of semga.:,as.it himiers •• 'the passageof seMga tO the sPawning grounds.:Thus, Kuchina for • 'instance notes that . "the entry of semga intà the ',aka River (tri- . butàry of the Kuloy RiVer, diàcharging into . Mezen Bay on the White Sea,: I.B.) is made difficult through loweringof the water. -level in the estliary during the summer". The saine author•points - . out that in the.Soyana. Riyer - :(also a tributary of.the Kuloy semga spawns nearly . a1ong the whole length . of the river from ' the situated - 27 ..28- km 'from the estizary, right . up . •to the. source..Kuchina Centinues that "the locations of.the . spawning grounds change depending"on thewater.level in the dutumn. . M.P. ViroIainen,(1946), who stlidied the spawning grounds

- of.seMga on the'Kemi River, notes the following: "the size .of . spaw-.- geeatly . : ning grounds also: changes/with the variations of the water leveln the river: - Inyears in which the . water level. Was low, ,as in l97, - most of the sPawninggrounciS:Were Situated.above'the water ],e-Vel, • and in many. places SeMga , werenot• spaWning .because . of the instiffi-. oient depth or too . weak a current. If the water level . drops H •-• or if the speed._ of . the— current decreasee i . the.stones become covered

With water mQssFor1tinaii , making:such pleces.unsuitable for eemga spawning.griminds The-author ::points out, that during the

• 4

years when the water level is low:, the spawnini: !.rounds are littered . by timber-rafting. . A.L. Smirnov, who studied sewza Of the rinea iver (19,55,b) . • writes: "Along the long-stretcheS of these tributaries (Pinega 'River, thelarge as well as the small- onès, there are . many rapids, shoals, springs, brooks with fine pebbly and coarse- . grained sandy deposits suitable for the spawning of semga. it is here, as a.rule, - that spawhing takeS - Uace,.with the exception of the drought years when the large-fish aredetaineà in mass - in. the main river-be4 where they are forced (Emphasis Dy I.b.).to epawn".. And . further:, nComparatively smallarrivals b:f the-diaaromouS fish into the .Pliukhcha.River (tributary -, of Pinaga>.i%iVer, arecaueed by . the estuary becoming shallow. I is hinderéu for a number- of years the timely:arrival of sema- into the left tributary of/diukhcha - Poltoma but, after the estuary•waS •,eished - out by the-s -bring waters in 1929, the arrivals of fiàh started anew". it should be noted thatfor a lare .fish sUch as semga, -p.173 the water level-above the rapids and shoals is, withoUt doubt, the Main condition for its•spreacing in the basin of a given • • river,' especially if one takes ihto Consideratio n. that the Water • level, even - duririg the melting of eshoW, does not exceed 0.2 7 0-.3m; •A.G. Smirnov -(193.5 à) writesi---for-instance, - the'followingi • - - "Transiational•moVement - of Semga ihtd the river- depend s . muCh on • • thelphysico+hydraulic.Conditions, namely: - • -à) into the rivers with the•abundaht water supply and • a deep estuary,therindividuals coMing•to the shore enter during . one fall season: • • • • • • • b) intO the.rivers With a scant water supply, thé estuaries' • of which often dry•out,'which.have . a. rapid:ice. movement in fall - and freeze deeply during the winter (it is necessary to acCount • thata - part of - seMga stayih the holes over Winter-- • - the-fall arrivai of seMga forcibly stops, oh accouht of which à rapid arriVal Of fiSh alter the spring doe movemént.isobserved ("podledka", "zaledkan). • •. • V) larger - individuals.(older age groups) énter the river . - -more often-when the water level:is high,. during the fall and in the early Spring". - - . ' • ... .

TO promoté....,thereproduCtiOn Of seffiga in 'the rivers of the :Kola Peninsula„. , pgirnOi::»935i suggesta !'to deepen the ways. Of . , the . arrival* of fish: into the estuary Of rivers and their tributaries, :Whith become.s .éhallowi :during dy-Yeare. • • . . • ' V,V. Azbelev :'(1960 ) discovered the influence Of - the Water •level, in_ the river on the SUrViVal Of . the roe and the fry of semga: the higher- the Water leVel_› çluring . the :,first Summer . of their life, the more Cf them live to. t4e. adult, age and return for spawning. - In the the water level dliring the . development . Of they::,roce in the firaft, summer of life of thé young was . the loweSt the return' of edultr#4; Was the lowest. . . • . .Finaily, 11...(‘Y:.récéntly,. O.A._Azernikova (1964; a,b) has 'observed:. gc clear:poeitive-relationShip 'between the ater - level and the relative :131:ge'-of semga generations in the basin of Pechora River and the Northern :Dvina. - VitelS br 1948) shoWed, that the intensity Of cyclonié activity increases with the increase Of solar activity and as a ruiSi. is the highest during the maximum periods of scilar cycles, but the améunt of precipitation (it is !established for Leningrad and •the. ,baain .of Onega Lake, Vito ls , 1951) , does' not always increase..:The , same authOr writes: "In cases where the 2. inten-

sity, of cYClOnes inCreaseS, following the pattern: of solar. .activity , but .which doea not reich: a::very high degree, the amount of precipitations alao increaseS . Thé intensity of cyclones reaches maximum during the périOd of .maximum solar activity and then deereases . with its diminution. In theSe cases the curve of precipitations of 411,. 11 Or the '100 year cycles of solar activity appears Synehro- :niZed .With the curVe of solar activity. - • . Some easel:, are observed, loweVèr, when the. intensity of cyclones grovra- aboe. the limits ; .af ter: which the lineal character of the relationship betWeén the precipitations and the intensity of the 'cyclones Ceases, In: these cases, the preeipitation'curvé . , . , .;.4he. beginning: Of the :cyCle . (on its :.ascending branc#) - follows . . , • : at the beginning the pattern of . solar aCtivity, but before reaching • _ - - • - . : e. 13.SitiOd . 9f solar maelnunl- Starts, to descend. Then it bas .its: -'AtinimuM-during the :period e. Maximum solar activity.

then.it decreaseS'again, formsa-,secondmaximum On the . descen- . ding branch- Of the-Soiar':CYCie:and - decreases'aeain.:A characte', :ristiC - twO•l.peak CurVe: forms... , .This kind, of curve , can have:different appearance: both2MaiiMa:COuld-be ObSerVed:near the maximum of solar activity. and;he2diVided thrOugh: a slightly pronounced mini- rnum.>Or , on the- cOntrarythese two peaks could bè present at . - :the , beginning oratthe'end of a solat.cycle.-Then the precipi+. tation cùrve 4. -antiparal1e1 to the:solar-activity curve (Vitels, 1951). . Al1 *this Aal-ouropinion :explains well., why it:iç impossible . to-COnnect the minimal and the maximal- CatcheS of sema during the 19:year:cycIe with., .,a'We11.defined condition of ço1ar activity; the same conditions of solar activity_could be favorable ,or unfavorable fOr:.semga reproduction, dependint:ôn:the intençity: of thecyc1oaic activitY . Stimulated by the'so1ar actiyity, and :that:i.e .:what -We ohServe in realitY. On,the . basiS,of the:available data (Table 1 and 2), the relationshipbetWeeensood.seMga.catches=and the condition of solar actiVityl.Ooksf'apprOXimate1Y es - follOwel, 14 Russia as in Canada' 'the:beSt yeare,forSéme are during . the extremum years or more ...oftentwo., sometimes three years after it (71%_ofcases.in Russia and 78%_inCanada ) .The bad catches ocçur_in Russia during the .- :Yeite''Of'extreMum. , (55..5% of cases) or .1 year previously to them, and ln Canada arendthe periods of the extremum with the diffe- tênce:of.. 1 -* 2:years ln bothdireCtiOns.:The good and .ba&years :alternetel: HthatliG. if:ln .a:given:period . of theextremubt .Of solar eictivity- Or arOund'it there Wai3 a bad year, 2- orH3 years following it good'year.,. but the next bad.year is:possible-only after- _*:fel-ornearIy. :411„;t0year cycle; i.e.., the alternations oCcue

- 4. years ---- ead.Year-. . ' gOod year bad year good year - tO years . This pattern 'considerib1y facilitates the : possibility of the influence of - prOgn90t4ato.n.Th, 40. 4 ei"e1).e.. 17i0d4, when the one .activity on pemgà catches has a 'ortWOthaelieraità.. - ,,of, . solar definite Character. ,Thne, 'betWeen 1907 - and 1948 the .worst catches . • -,•• , of semga . in the norttternRUeSia Were observed -during the peridds- of maximal solar: actiVite/Or in the years preceding it, and the go9d_years Were:2 .,yearSfellowing théMaximum.: - .The best- .and '.the .WorSt catches in Russia end in . Canada, noted by Berg (1936) not 'always correspond in tiMe. Comparing - with Canada, the f maximal catches in Russia are -2 . years Later. Therefore after a good year for semga in Canada the same can be

-expected in Russia 2 yeare later, if it has not been in the same year. The minimal catches in Russia might occur somtrtimes a few years later (from 1 to 4), but on the average more than two years. The opposite, i.e. belated minimal and maximal catches in Canada -0Ccur elso, but significantly more seldom. It also happens, that the high and low peaks of the catches, with the interval of 2 to years in Russia, and in Canada are the consequence of the dia- metrical opposite conditions of solar activity. For instance, ' minimal catches in Canada in 1919 were probably the consequence of' a bad year for salmoru young in 1913 - 1914, i.e. during the periOd of a minimal solar activity or near . it, and the corresponding to it minimal catches in Russia in 1922 areobviouslY connected with thé bad year 1917, it,e, the period of the maximal solar actiWity. ' These cases apparently 'seldom happen. This as well as some ,leseer discrepancieS in time show that the saine conditions for semga reproduction can be formed in Russia and on the opposite side of the Atlantic during the different conditions of solar acti- Irity or, which comes to the same, the conditions of solar activity could influence the salmon populations, in Russia and in Canada in a different manner, without disturbing the general synchroni- p.176 sation of phases of the numerical fluctuations. The causes of this should probably - be 'looked for in the specific hydrological conditions of each region.

T'A BLE I. Good years for salmonliand solar activity (fertile generations)

Sign of the of the :Bitrenz" and the . Canada :.extremum. White _Sea. •

:Years of Maximal catches ...,-• • . 11874 1883 :1898 1914 .1924 , 1874 lam 1896 1106 1916 192411m hatChing Of - the :generations . (year Ofirreslion.ding . , 186911878,1893 1903 1909 1919 1940 1949 1869i 1880 ‚18911901 1911 1919 .19215 of 'the-Cate:I :less..5. • . 'Number -tif..years.. the. -next.• -.2 : ' -.-2- +g.

-. .eitremuis of thé.. ac tivity,

, The,..#1:e.,Sétist:-:.yetiri: of the '-extr.e - 1907 1917 1937,1 194.7 ;Solar 'ad tivit 34/anim. :186711878. 1901- 1878: 1901

: TABLE -II, Bad- years-for salmon* and- solar ectivity,-(unfertilesaneratioaa)"

Sign of the basin of the Brenz and the .Canada. - kextremui. . White Sea. . . _. , Yeat eofienimal . . . CatChes..., ..... ..,.:.: 18..52 1894 1903 1912 .1922.19n 1942 1951 wm 1890 I« 1910 1919 11;;FrjeThe hatching. of the . . . . corre8pOndinggenerations (year .1877 1889 1898 1907 1917 1927 1937 .1946 1876 1885 1896 1905. : 1923

of, the catch lesa 5 years).... b . .. Number of- years to the'neXt .- - . .+i , 41 ' +1 42 - 2' 42 ' ixtreinue- Of. the Solar .activity ,•, .-." • I The closest year of the extre- • saximmx1.7.- ,.•1 1907 1917 1928 1937 1947 I 1883 1 19 1 1878 1913 1 1923 I mum - of the Ëolar activity t ..... • • Nininmic !..1878- 1889 1901

Salmo salar L. 411. In the basin of the Barents and the White Sea the year 1928 wasI also bad. The HumnbaCkedalMOU (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha As it was -esgreadyehoiint (Birman, .1954), the fluctuations - p.176 in the solar actiWiti:. .havea- great influence ,upon .the reproduction Of the Amur hUMpbecked:sa1mo11. The yearà immediately pre- teding the maxima ofeplar fictiViti are, as a 'rule, favorable for the reproduction Of the :htimpbacked Salmon, but the . periods ' the . maximumitself,lee P.Ilarac.4irized by unfavorable . conditions. Adc. .a result of thiS;Starting. from : the twenties, the largest • - scheois of t#e. huMeackee salMofl came for spay/fling during 1928, 1939, • 1948 and 1958, but their descendants turned out tp be unpro- AUCtive the i. comtempoeary depreased state Of the . of ,theyimu4LhumPbaCked salmOn-. During the 17, 18 and 19-th reserves . cycles the, , _ Maximal po1er - attivity lyere 1937 1947 . and 1957 Bowe!' erithe, .Pitaks of the curves Of . these cycles were

- flatter and the decrease in the numbers of solar spots from those

.2yeare to the tplapetig:,ones was Very . insignificant (Eigenson; 1963). ObWiously, it Couldbe:noted, that:the effect:el-the influente of the maximum : solar actiVity on the conditions of reproduction • of Salmencould-be:delayed one year, i.e. manifest itself just '..-during the second y'ear. of the Maximum period. ièn ;pc. .

425, iser,:-../ese . co

EfeneratiOfladynemacm - Of . the western Kamchatka .humpbacked 1940H0pa*n. . • . • • 1 y.ars 2 - even: yearSgeneratoas; maximum : stair -.actiltity. • . • - • • . ,,• - • .- • , . . .• •'.e-he population 01 - the humpbacked-Salmon fluctuates not only in to....yeee e-clee,',.,ecinnec bed with their maturation dueing the• Second ,2yeerilint. -, also there . «102year cycle, le• - iS. •' it• ' was

■■. !Zzy

The existence ottiieee c-y~2fs aliows .one to , predict the further course in the.reprOd14-etiOn-:oftheir•reserves If the intensity of . • - .: • • ié poseible . to expect that the Amur hUtilpbacXedfsalitOW-pOiigation will increase during 1968 - 1969 and .

-.then:maybe . evWetàbiliZebecaUSethe' maximum of the 100 year ..Bolar:cycle.is :pa$Sed and":inthe-lUture the value of the following maxima ofTeolar.actiwity:Ohouldbe On the decrease. From Fig.1,. leSide,the above MentiOnedi.;.One.dan see, that the comparatively 1OvCleVel :Oethe)eatietalHValues . of,soler aCtivity (up to 1928).. HOorregPonded' to,a .:high leWelof the reServes of the Amur hUmpbacked sal,mon aml- the- 'fo110iiiii- inerease, in the maxima corresponds to the .deoreeme in ràser*O0Ileilthié precesà.should.be reVersed. a]jo .(Birman, 1964) that thednfluenceof: - . _ ottelar activiti:Onthe population dynamiCs ofthehumpbacked Salmon.

, d6es , ncitlimitie-to . theAmur basin,;• but is obserVedin the other regionsoftWIPar,EaStand-defines_ • . . in - a certain . ..degree the '.order'Ofalterriationeof the gobd .and bad years - for the generations of the inliaPPOice04m04.- The Matter is, that as a result'of the two-year cycle in the reprOduCtiOn:of' s. the hUMpbacked salmon we.have two separate lini)de.orgi,nel'atiOns':which,do not intermix, out of which one nnibere. However,. SoOner or later moment:'cOmee:WhenthefnUmbers:of the recessiVe line:Start • " . , licreaS4g.and'th‘s»numbers of the dominant one start"decreasing . .:• , : •:: and an a;',result.Ot.thiii cbuld occur a change in the dominating .generatiOngt,':. ortheshange of the phase between yearly numerical fluctuations. ,The,41#4iiMiCe.of the catches of the htImPbacked salmon

- shoW,ithatthese -.:OhàhgeS,begin . and end usUaIly during the Periods

, of>the.maiimài'linareetiVity Or around them, Which One can !ee t f tà" thil4itiuï-Siinir - . 'as" it was shOwn (Birman' 1954) the directreaSOnetWdisurbance, , in the conditions Of, the _'re pro 7

. diictiOn'or.tWh-limpbaéked'ealmon du:ring .the periods:of maximal : . • - -OlarCaotivitY,aree011Owsf.. the extremelyhigh rain fell a, onaccoun... ' AIMber of'file,. spaWn in:the-places : which

.1 1.

dry out after the witte; goes. down. Especially high waters occurred in 1928,- after which the decrease in the reserves began. It looks (Fig.2), as if during. ''the' period of a high solar activity the height of flood waters in the Amur increases, opposite to what we observe in the other salnion riverS. 2). Abnormally high summer . temperatures during the movement Of fish in the Amur estitary and in the river itself , , with the fol- IOWing. consequencesi a) The development of the gonads speeds up: the energy reseries saved:: in the Elea are used up faster and, as a result, tha apawning area diminishes ., because the fish are forced to shorten the aecent of the Aitur' and its tribtitaries. Some Spawning grounds 'are overpoPulated; while the other ones are empty. • As a result, the Mârteility of .the rbe 'increases; b) the môrtality of the adult fish before spawning also increases, but thé reasonEi for it are not very clear• we :assume, . that it Might be beCause of the disturbance in the oxygen exchange.

. .. . . ._ . :.,e,1k.: ,à „ ..Fluctuations : . of...... the „.: •:AMur .., . . humpbacked„ .salmOn ... population . ',. , .i l'..-. : • .•••and eiOlat, 'adtiVitY. •-' • , .-• ,' . • ,. • -• '.. . -. *., : • . ' . „. : .. . • . . „. • • . . ... . .. . . . ' • V*.'4•,,..elolf ea:- hiteee8..,''''ev:0;',..a.,.:. 'maximal levels of water in the Aunir :ne,e4,7:.:x4tpiti-Ér,vfigq ,3:' .-:, ,F,i:eit4h-ets of the huinpbaCked salmOn during ,. . e. even ,, •• • : . .., . •.....„ .„ • , . . ,years..., •,.'::.;::: ,.. 3)« excisaiV,S,le ;lhard :Winters with low air temperatUreai .. . .-.: :Scant , 'Eini",i1W fill .SUiiiëaia,-.,•S-•.;:ietault,* .deeper:- than UsUal: ,freeling in ::•..:the gatials$:'t4tia■fil::1,ia:e-.:4. ...eiçità; *.4içh ,dQ: zio:.t • have the - flow .de :. the CerfeffireWq- WegeeePPPWW4Y.

underground watère4The: Winter of 1938 : - accOrding to A.G. • • - - . - pnirnoir (3.9k7),SiedbareOterized by • theee conditions. The same thing • loCctireedil.à :,LeYanidôv (19640 reports that in Februàry 1959 ..:*4e4i4. ,-,.'4Ï7,et;e:, ,,;(4EInitt)st:. important of the Amur baSiii, used Or spawning by the humpbacked Salmon) the wa.ter level was the '1.iiwest siDce 1936, whichcaneed the freezing of the spawning 'groUnds„• and mass. :rieetrtictiCin. , •of the , rOe. and the 3..arvae of the humpbacked . salmon of the 1.958 spawning. „ . lindçfubtedly, •.'eoMe. of the ezitinierated phenomenal are also • • • • - Observed'during the, periedS of à maximum solar aC tivity in the . „ , Other region's 'c.e., ,.:tbe Fax a'ét NeVertheiess the changes in the humpbe.eked salleo,tiËopulation, côtiditiOned b y- solar actiVity., are moSt' Clearly. seen-':,pn,:':the s Amiir.” Actuàlly, 9 . the Alnur' basin is the only • . . . . , . region !here; dur.ing ;the :plà-st . 40 ye:Ors, a clear - 10-year periodicity

" • : - httinnbackedhujobbadked àalmon.salmon hashas beenbéen in the -poPulitiondynenits _ off observed. The reason for this, as we believe, . J.s , fotind, in the -peculiarities of the hydrologicàl o6nditione. Of the Anittr especially in the -exceptionally perni- • , . . CiOttà influence of the etiener floods on the reproduction tetfk the *Mint' hiuïipbacked. ea' 1M0ii. If,• for. instancé-11., /t141-res tperriiiici lU11e.4.massa of • • • • • .,:hnuipbaCked ea' linon:::Oomee -for spawning' after the flood peak , " '-(ths.:-.4i'startS,.:inthe- middle of July, and the 'high: water pe* more often fall8 -...,:in:theeeticind hàlf of June), on the Ainur the -.Sn, • : • the htutpbacked,', eà1anCiii, ends before the surnmer floOds , whiCh are .ere :'in'Anguritt„ . .'+;eépteriber,', . Srid the Speining• occurs net:tally'. during e:• 11.11e It is .t.ttl:that; during the period% of maxikaI solar activity, thé..riVers. also 'gets • higher, in :.lçameli-atkaf;:::'; but R. here: it IS'netj„.,. ,,,a0,: important .as , on. the • Amur , - because. the , peak ore the spawning of the hump- to the Oata Of the .HYdrome.;

• . • tsol"olQgical $ervioe of the Kamcha tka Di vision, in the basin of the ÉeI te4i ?> Y r ' highest stiinmer water •••• a -,. • - - • • .';.•

. .:Oheteeteied...:in '1947 and 1957, but the :peak' s of the . -"- flcieds' ere cbrreapoadingle'S'oitiluiy..:22. pact:June:25. It ,..roilows that these ificant-Influence .;• • • • r • ;h~ buapbacked aalaon. In teneral'::'»thé-high Water level- -of the I , 3 .

western Kamchatka rivers is more favorable for the reproduction of the humpbacked salmon than that of the Amur. Besides, in our opinion, the pernicious influence of the high summer floods and the hard winters with a scarcity of snow give an explanation as to why the Amur population of the humpbacked salmon is small. This does not correspond to the available area for spawning in the Amur basin. To conclude, it is necessary to note that on the American coast the influence of solar activity on the hUmpbacked salmon population dynamics'is hardly noticeable. In any case the 10 Year periodicity of catches.there is absent. However, in America the two-year cycle in the catches exists, but not everywhere. This ' • probably Can be àplained by the less labile climatic elements. As e. rule, the influenpe of solar activity on the humpbacked salmon populations is seeb more markedly where the fluctuations between the even and the odd years are more important; in other words, where the climatic conditions change every year, for which the basin of the Okhotsk Sea is especiallY noted. ' It is interesting to note that during the last 40 or 50 years the periods of maximal solar activity were equally unfavorable for the reproduction of Salmo salarI, and the humpbacked salmon. The immediate causeà of this were, undoubtedly, opposite: for the Salmo salar L. probably the low water level of rivers and for the humpbacke4 salmon was too high a level. This agrees with the proposed by G.K. Imheysky'(1964) division of the Eurasia into two climatic systems, where the fluctuations of the hydrometearological conditions occur in opposite phases: European-Asiatic, which-includes the ,principal and the most productive part of the spawning areas of thé Salmo saler L. and the eastern Siberian, with which, according to IzheVsky, the Bering Sea is included. '

,Chum Salmon (OncOrhynchus keta Walb.). As it waelleinted out (Birman, 1954), the influence' of solar activity in the Amur basin affects not only the humpbacked eelmon but chum salMon ale:). Probably, of all different populations of:the'chliM:Saleon.ef .the Far East; the Amur summer chum salmon4e-themosteUbject:to . this influence because, like the . .

Mur humpbacked salmon, thST come for spawning before the begin_ ning of summer flOods and spawn usually during the high water in p.179 places without the underground water supply and which have the ten- , dency to freeze more deeplY during the winter. Et is not excluded that these floods and the freezing through of the spawning grounds ' durinie the' periods of maximal solar activity of the four previous solar cycles (16, 17, 18 and 19-th) which have hindered the rest o- ration of the reserves of this salmon during the early twenties. ROwever, it should be noted that 1928, 1938 1948 and 1958 were also had Years for westarn Kamchatka chum $.4.mcn.

isileheae ali,aie102ew 106:W4p9STIO- MW if0Mniel .3. ..The alternatiOne• in-strength: of the Amur :fall chUm salmon Éeneratione ::(acCording to catches ml lower Amur). :

I UndoubtedlYthe-_ _ „ _ AMut. fall,, chum :salmon suffers less ' from 110 freezing_of .thei...Spawriing- grounds, as .it arrives after the flood .watier ree e4ee ...*ii4e1+*ho in the :places ',where . the • abundant Supply, , . _ of unçiereou,rg,u,.vleee411#708ent.. As •seS4 in .Fig.3 in the generation -

enall4Ca• Of the e'nii:.,.Ç4,14-.salmem besidea the two-year ,periodicity , the main -deuee . of which is appàtentlY: the same as for the hump-' • of •hydrometecrological ipaCked •Salm911. ,'- • .eluctilatibns the . • -.• •. - conditions, thereie'falso, a *10. year -,periodicity. From 1934 to 1950 (unfortunately we- do 'not .PoSSess: more :comPlete• data) the best generations•-Were /rom,.; the Seawning• .• :,of. the:Years• • •• • 1936 and -1.947 , . even •: the 'Spawning populations of those ,-years:..were nôt the largest.: a., ShOuld: Add this, - during:the next - period the . best ... • . . • . • • • .•• _, . . • , . •, ••:,• • • • 11W ','*-:;.aâae enty, 0.f 1958.: whit h haa - given during.:, the

•14at 1 14.3rolia. e.s.1.14.1i*W4èe4inis#meeni .,:.i.017 the fishinle industry -. • From Pl..e3'.iS:::Seen 'that. eriiuncuthe . period:of maximum Y Of - 'f. .4e::kioleneérineeneratio4s of -Ohunettlicin 15

- . Occurred:. befeethamaximUM:period:the generations'of the even yearà were predoilnaiiit ,andAifter cit -were those of the odd years. Thus,the fluctuationg.ifl,soiar activity : also influence the'repro-

2ductionlof the-fallthUMiSalÀ0a. . This influeneW'prebably Works through the fluctuations of the undergroundWater'.level, 'about which we unfortunately know very little as yet..The . observationa-of_ . other regions show, accor-

ding tO-Eigenson - , ( 96,)i.,that • , the.undergroundwater level is a' very aenaitiveindicatorsolar-activity.- ' • _ - Equally is:iMpertant;as the underground water level for the survival:of the:-roefare -. the temperatures at the beginning of winter,,whew.theWater,leVel.e . the spawning grounds reaches its Attinimal-Valuei.in'eth“anger of - freezing : of the grounds exists. ..*JoseSn:from pig.;44t#S.viriatiOna of the air temperatures through -::thelware:, in the pritoipil . regions of Spawning of the fall chum _ Salmonleew, , a .clear':relationship . . with the, fluctuations of solar :

*0 tivity. .ThiuminiMal,Selar_ - activity corresponds, as a ruie, to the -loweSt-tampOraturaValiles.:This eans that at à given underground 'Water I've andyether conditions equal - the least favorable for the Amur .fall -chUMSalMOn':roè_aurVival are the periCids of minimal solar 'iietiWitY,, -oppOsite:',tO What we have. peen for the humpbacked_ salmon. ,APpareutlY1 thia4MarfloOds do not have a fatal influence on the . p. 180: . .43:8:3.1nOn. These floode are rather useful, as i.ibetticiticgont4i Ml.tlifing:thea,.thaUadergroUnd' water . 1eVelrises abruptly.. Probably . :-thia,Could be theakplanatioeofeeme Cases when the Salmo salar L. and the'hUnipbaCketilaiMen spawning are affected in the opposite Way dUring:the , - The: sumerchum.salmon_ . in its ocology'and in the Sense of -the:influence'ef, :theeeler activity fluctuations on ite reproduc - tion ':,IS:situatee:beWeen the humpbacked salmon and the fall chum . _ . It.:ia.to0444cUthat.the:exPeeted'decline, _ . .in eolar activity:(after reaehitteits 1 .00 year Maximum). will Oase'the possibility Or:',IseMe'increaWin-popUlationa :Of the Amiir aummer chum,salmon,:if Wintensity',, Of'2t4:fishing - indUeirlimited and the Oceariographie ,nditiona will ba-:::faverable .171

se 4.■

"'year , 1 changee ntimbers of Wolf; 2 f. the air temperatures • in the middle:, ,Of.'Noyember, cOmpSring with the average of ute?iY: • :Sockeye Salmon (0, nerka Walb.). In Agsiai two relatively. _ . large Sockeye populations are known

: to existi:1:lone, in':the Kuril Lake of South-western Kamchatkft and the Other, in thiiiKeM.Cheka River. We do not have the necessary 4ita, about the catches and the numeriCiù values on the generations Of the sockeye frol# the Second location. As to the Sockeye from the KUril Lake the data of 'Observations of the fluctuations in -numbers These fluctuations show five- pe the generationeYexist sinCe. 1935. .yeai. and two-year ii.serioci#1.ty • The first one is conditioned by the , • ..•

maturation of - the pinCipal mass of fish on the sixth year of life, .,.end; the : ifecOndOne,i'.apparently, by the two-year. -period of the climatic vai iations , There is no .10 year periodicity of the population numbére .in the SoCkeye2 of the Kuril Lake Hoivever, , thié does not 'Mean that solar .agt..Yity - has no. influence on the, variations of the ...:SockeYe population, From the:-: data of :F Krogius and ESM. KrOkhin (1948) about Lie :population of the sO4eye- : yoUng in the take . Dal nee of south, ::-westers Kainchatka, one cah:See; ‘ for. instance, tha:t from the sOckeye generations, :hat0i.7;iid s betiison 1935 and 194:0; the ,.leaSt in sPits Of the great numbers of the Parental population, were the generatiOns „ .frôni,. the Spàvining of 19.37: and 1938, i.e. uring the period of , , sôlar actiiiity. Probably, this ia not ,aCcidenta1,. 'sis .:#:;:tiit4.-,p'ti44.7 work ,trOgitie and Krokhin note/ • hat "ereturn of the sock.yefrom the ..19k7 seam:ling into the :Lake Krogitis pointe out that the low- nee , v.Oraa , ,

ere.,1:71-cM1.,

nuaibèr of the deseendaattS::Oe.:.this• generation was due to the . high ■■ through or the rnOrtalitY of the :Ï-(i••• :.,,ipil.,,„.. .-0*w• . 14.gyitilte i'ree.zing. • . . spaw 195i1). It is true in the first eaào,according , that the over, . • . . . . , . . • . , and the • poPulation• of• the • , , . by the spaWnere .digging .0Verof .:the nestà..-IillecUeit#.the'PreVioilsly deposited' roe were obaérVed,-.,HOWever,::itedifilcUlt. , y tt. • , :guarantee. . -that at the same tiaethere were nO?..0.4Sr.•:nravorabie ,i,cOnditio4s for the survival •Ieft• • on .•:the.';:grCi'unds .,‘ Therefore one :can Suppose that, Uring the period. ofrnaxiaua itolar activity on Lake Dal 'nee the Oilditions .::are:crsated ,,:e4iMh-: ars '. unfave,rab.le for the reproduction ',BOCkeYe last.. Work Krogius Points out that ths..generationS .:•sr:::soskeysT.Ori 19k3 and 194i+ Spawning, i.e. during 'low. n numbérs. Thigt similar . the IiiniaUle,:SOl'azaStivity. „, • :,..' eere' alto influence tiek'the' -c;i".ppbeite, extrema ,‘ or Solar aç tiVity has been die- the Selma ealarL. In this eUesed before '..When,..'ii.e,:were talking abOUt..,.•. . . • we deal probably with :.ple • saae: phenoinenon. ;HOWever,' the im- • case itSdiater-:. -caUSs here , according to ,Krogius, Was a .different one: .• was not the «freetin'e.'Ot he epaWning 'grounds, but the • lOw niSaber :-surViyal"..or .$0:eng::.., diiringii, their . period. of fOrag.ng • in the lake. . • . • . . .„.....„. „ , . . . . . • . . Or factors .influencine the sockeye hael.also .;•to• be- taken- inte conside- ,. •.• • • • •:.• • . , . • , . it .apee.about it .. With :Certainty. . . . . . . . .• . „. „ .••:.kieutch• . , .•••..,..... ••-. -. • • • . • • .. 5•::Shpwe'graphical, values of the .aoho:-..catches in. the . :»!Fig„.- . .,• . . . • •. , . . . region of the ol'ehaia River on the western . Kaachatka. As the coho .„ wetur• on their.'-third , .y.ear. of .. the curve showing the catch. values is displao.d to the • left: that nukber of Yearà (3) to show' • apini-o.ï0.1tuit..el.y..the.:-.poii1434.t4.os • dynamics. One can ,'.'ese.e:-.,that coho catches aleo show a periodicity of

. • . exi, .à.Ct. 11 .),., TheH „ mileanum catches. (*Ore _ •••- • • wa:si ii.Omewhat higher) , 1919, l9O, 1937, 191+6, 195k and 1963,:i ,4CCOrditigly, the .aost•2'pre;- ' 1907 (or .poSiàibly' 1906) k3, l91 and 1969 spawning. First generation> telY.:::dÏiiiiiig,::the:PeriOd Of -itaximuni solar 18

Kt X I.

400 300.

irmèisands

/56..100

r, 15.0 j / 100 • j 1/4 • I \ I / \ 50 1/4 / ' • • .1 `... / • -1910 1970 • WO 1949 1930 1960 veors Fig•5. Population dynamics of the western Kamchatka .coho, the Aral bream and the western Kamchatka humpbacked salmon and solar activity.

i:- curve' • of Wolf .numbers; 2 - relative size of Aral bream • generations (the year of the catch less 5 years),(G.K. Iiheveik,y, 1963); 3-. relative size of the weStern Kamchatka coho from the Bolishaia River' (the year of the catch less 3 years) in per cènt of th.e average of many years; 4 - relative size •of thè western Kamchatka humpbacked salmon generations (the year of the catch less 2 yéarà) in per cent of the average of many years.

activity, the Second and the third on.eà were hatched during the year preceding the maximum; the fourth one was during the minimum of solar activity and the rest were hatched during the years close to the Periods of minimum. Thése prolifiC generations gave in turn

- the descendants whiCh were not prolific. The principal mass of fiah hatched in 1934 and 191+3 Spawned during the years of' maximum solar ' actiVity. As a matter of fact , out o' the years of maximum p.182 activity ônly one year 1907 was good, if we assume that most sôlar fish Caught in 1910 were hatched in 1907 and not in 1906. AU other years Of maximum' Solar activity were bad or nearly bad. It is true, Some years were bad which were close to the years of minimum solar activity, but in'''soMe. cases this is explained by the small number of spawners. The catches at the shore do not show a correct value of.generations becansè a significant part, and it côuld be the lar-I was caught by the Japanese 19

COmmercial Fleet •n•-the open sea.: Since the Japanese Fish Industry reached its present siZe in thé north-western part of the Pacific, i.e. *since 1955;it is diffiCult tôjudge -about the size of the . „ •spaWnerst populatià.of saiMon With the help of the shore catches only. Iu . most castià the Periods of minimum Solar activity and the

, yearis close to .them'are• favorable for the reprodtictio n . of coho.. The largest generationé of coho were hatched during those years.. • ' We must note that the years of thé extremum of solar aC- . (Or. close di.ffer greatly in the condition of spawL7 ning • of coho from the , other years. • • • . As .to - the . '.difference.: Of the •effects when, for instance, S'ome of the periodS of maximum solar activity are favorable for , • , . the reproduction ,and the others are unfavorable, we have seen, it - when we 'dealt with Silmo,'ssiIar L. We eXplained,, aCCOrding tO Vitela, that the intensity of the cyclonic activity can be different: . one of solar aCtivity could correspond to the period of dryness, 'Maximum and the other maximum: COulçi *correspond .to the maximum' of PreCipi- tatione, .COSequently : affecting the water • levels of rivers. It is important to note • that the maxima of 1937, 191+7,. 1957 . Were significantlY ihigher than the previotis ones and, . naturally, 2 their effects .should' have been stronger. In this case', as is seen in Fig.5, to the high maxima correspond .the least : fertile generations; The :higheet maximum was in 1957 whi.ch ,coincides , as is knew.' n.,• litith the ineXimuitt of the 100 year cycle. >. This certainly con- tribUtei to à signifiCant çlecrease Of the Coho reserves a s well , as other species:of Salmon ., .which we have observed at the end oe, the -fifties. • • At seen frail: Fig. .5., the curve of the ,coho generations • fellOwe quite well the étu.v.e of Wolf ts , nUmbers, even though dUring this period the:character b; their relationship changes somewhat, , six solar cycles correspond seven cohO popu-, To- the''' iast• lation each ,Of which, like the 'solar cycles, ,consists of t*.o branches: the ascending and the descending ones. The aiaCen... ding., branch of the•:.firet *cycle not known, but in all .the folIo- , „ , . „ . wing , cycles ' the .inereaSe ..Of population started on thé descending e. 'Ïïey'l-e!.te solar:cycle, i.e.. during the decrease of •• . • . • • ..•.•• • • • • .

. , , • . • ;• • • • . . . . . 20

• during solar spots. The 'decrease of population numbers reached its lowest point/ the year of the maximum of the next solar cycle or somewhat later. In studying the two last ,abundance cycles one should .take Into an- sideration that in 1955 the Japanese shArply increased salmon fishing in the open sea and since then the coastal catches do not show the :irue values of the n stocke. One should assume tha't the genera- ' tiOns of 1952, 1953 and sulD se qua n •b. , ones were larger than as shown in the coastal catches. The sixth cycle of the abundan.ce was evidently esrupted 'greatly by the growth of the Japanese Fishing Industry. The final year of this cycle should be, we believe, p.183 1957, a ye ar 'o.t“ .,maximum solar activity, because only during • the next (1958) year the next significant increase in .abu.ndanO-e- started to show. . • • At present We observe again the decrease in the coho 'abündance, which, possibly, is speeded' up by fishing and will end e;PParentiy in 1967. Then the increase in stocks ca.n be exp- ec-•\. : ted again; . To be ansured once more of the reality of the described relationship, we show in the sa.me Fig.5 the data on the Aral

- bream, taken from the book by Izhevsky (Izhevsky, 196,3). The 10-year cycles in the catches of the Aral bream were observed by G.V. (Nikol sky , 1940) . As seen in Fig. 5, the * fluctuations of the cohO and the bream abundances have ,nearly the Same: phase. The increase in the stocks of bream, as well , as Coho, 'starts on the descending branch of the previous solar cycle and reaChes maximum during the period of minimuni or nearly minimum solar açtivity. It is especially worth noting that the length of the fluctuation period changes for both fish simultaneously. This shows that the:relationship between the fish population dynamics and solar: actiVity is very real and not only apparent. , eastérn. • Kaniehatea (nanighatka River) this relation- . : Or con° SZOCKS . ship betWeen .also the other fish) . and solar activity•.1s barely.,noticeable. In America., where-the coho population -is larger than in : Rusaia, year to• year and Over a period of yearn :e.itiçttis:tiôss of thç:'T.reser.Veri are lesà, marked and do not show any 21

'clearpericidicity..OUt of,this, one:should not draw the conclusions . that fluctuations in Solar'activity do. not have - any influenceon the reproduction of the AMerican

' The influence of solar activity on the conditions of • life

• . of salmon at sea. • . . It is undereitood that solar aCtivity influènces not only the conditions'ofiSalmon reproduction but also their life at sea. • I14'MakaimOv:(1961 . ) showecLthat - the GUlfstream's behaViour . .is influenced hY Solar-actiVity. The inCraase in the latter heightens the activity - ofthè Gulfatream. ThiS :was confirMed in thé later works Of Maksimov:and hiSco-workera (Maksimov and,SmirnOV',"1965; , SmirnoV,1965).- • : • • G.K..Izhevsky .:.(1961,- 1964) and $:,S..- FedorOv (196) èstab- lished thài r thé AtlanticScandinavian hèrring populations correlate positivelY yith :the, amount of heat brought by the Gulfstream iày 'Comparing. these two propositions Wecan COnclude that . during the periOda or'ma4imum. Solar. activity .the herring population •

IshoUld 'increase. • . - . Izhevsky-!alsci: shows that with the increase'.of the. GuIfstrearn . aCtiVity . thepopulationof the Barents : Sea:cod increaSes not becaude of-higher.fedunditY,.but . because of:better survival Of the yOung, which, like herring,, depend on the increaSe in the'amount of zooplanktor4 . • ' • Therefore:we-have right to.assUme that-the:years • of the incraased:GulfstreaM aC:tivity:and , espeçially. those : which fall

- during:the makimiim 2Solar activity, are marked by'the favorable, . conditions for theSalmo salar L. migrating to the sea also This is•dartainlyimpOrtant for the sUrvival of thOSe, generatiOns which yiere'hatChed2 to.".yeari before the iàcrease of the.intensity 'ofythe.:GillfStrealbeCauSe•the mass of àaluici- salai' L. Young stay aboutthis '..langth,:ditime . in:fresh . water. '.By.:analogY.-:One.Can aSsume - that the fluctuations in the actiVitY'of the:nacificàulfstreaM" Kuroshio:also have.such an influence onthinditiOns:of foragIng and surViVal of the young_ an4-Wh.iWnneolibtedW:arenlau connected.,withthe 22

. L. FuOuoka(1959). noted the 11 year,period among the other, periOds of:fluctiiations - of . the Kuroshib.. F. Takashi -(i96.4) found 5 year.periodicity in changes of .the northern border location .of the Kuroshio whiCh Suggests . a connection with the 5 year-eyclesbf solar activity. , Borne especially strong perturbances of the Kuroshio, ' as .for instance one of the strongest in 1937, correspond in time .with the periods of the:extreme of.solar:activity. • - • -• _HFinally,the periods of the warming and cooling of the Sea in the regionef the'Kuroshiô established.by'A.M. Betalin . (quoted frOm.i.G..,:Kaganovski,. - 1949).apprOkimately . correspond- in :tiMe to the 1. 1:year cycles of Solar activity which we already .' 7pointed out.(BirMan,1957):. '-, • . - • . The actionrof.these fluctuations on the different species of s Salmon.ie ,hot the same; as.was noted . by Birman,.(1957 i '1959).' . The strengthening of:theKureshio.actenegatiVely:on the hu*pbacked , salmon poPUlation;:at the same time has a Positive action in the eaMe . Waters On the chum . salmon. Because of this in some'regions . (as'fbrinstance in the.region-.of the Bollshaia River on the Kamchatka):the-fluctuations . over a 'oeriod of years. of the- chum and the humpbacked salmon.populations are in a reversed:' ratio.. Nearlythe -leame thing>is observed in the comparison of the humpbaCked -salmenand:thecOho populations. - From fig.5-one can . see that thé decrease of the BOUshaia:RiVer:coho population • ' -COrrespondethe:inèreaSe-of . the hiiMpbacked salmon and vice versa.' The conclusion is'rather , evident that the strengthening of the Kuroshio - being : faVorable.for• - the reproduction of ail -three. species. i in the region : of the Bellshaia River (as. they reprOduce in &fairly -similar conditionS ), -has a negatiVé influence on the sùrvivai_of .:one'ef:the . speciee When they :are intheeea.: Xe:theUghtearlierthat the - opposite :4uctuationsOf, the humPbaCked: and;the:ChuM Salmon populations could be'explained by - _ - the difference_in the'lotation Of. -theirwintering grounds. (The . to theSOUth duringthe -winterthan liUmpbacked Salmeh:Staysmore ,thé»ohUM.salmOn)geweVer,. , - the.eXistenCe- • . of -this differencebetween, thehUniPhacked:realinonand:the'ÇQ4O . proves:that_there must:beanother:. 23

reason since the.teMperatures of their wintering grounds are nearly the saMe. - Thus e we belieVe as before that - ihé strengthening of .—the KurOshio hasan Unfavorable-effect'on the humpbacked salmon. The humpbacked. salmon'fry feed very little in the river and pass . ' to active . feedingafter their migration to the.sea. They migrate earlier than the Otherspecies, the:Water at that time is still cold and 'contains 'little zooplanktOn: :This increases the Mortality of,the fry and,.tindoubtedly, their.mortality is,higher than in .

- any'of. the other species:which migrate - lâter,:after a period of ' . more or less•prolOnged'fbraging in fresh'. Waters and because of - their being of 'Elarger Siie. In:Some.CoaStalregionS• the strengthening'of the •urbéhio activates cold urrents, which cauSes. the ..cOolingtheYsea.,Because.ofthis, during. the • *strengthening of the Kuroshio, -the'éonditicins'of.feedingof the'humpbacked salmon fry•get worse. There is nodoubt, that Solar.activity. through the of the sea which, in KurélShio activity, influences temperatures turn, influence the-:food•reserVeS.for . salMon and their . survival. • •Fureher studies of the biolOgy - of saIMon 'during their life . .at sea and the conditions of the coastal.waters of the rar . East P.185 •will eolve these.problems.: • : : : • • . To•doncIude -, me must.note_that the observed simultaneous :decrease in reserves of the-Coho.and the western Kamchatka.huMpr - backedsalmon-during the fifties proveb once more that the Causes of this decreaSe were not cliMatic conditions oraY, but also the • 'excessive fishing . in the open sea. Especially unfavorable for . humpbacked Salmon. waS•the . period of.the- thereproduCtion'of the '. maxima of the 100 - year and the 11. year Solar cycles . (1957 - 1958) when'the western Xamchatka humpbacked - salmon-population decreaSed to their present low level, as never hapened before. Oriecan not - count on the restoration ofthe_western Kamchatka humpbacked aainion:i.eserves : dtiring the perited of the increase of the western'. - Kaichatka-cohow»To Predict about the population Of one of the specie:ea. Of Salmon, one has to keep•in kind the.tendencies:of the population dynamicS . of the other specie's': , •

2 1+

Differences of the . Influ . ence o7f S,o l'ar. Activi ty. - . ..Izhevsky,'G,K; (1961; 1964).noted in detail ten-year'cycles

. ekisting . in the population dynamics of soMé fish.which he deseribed in'his works. about tWOceandlogiéal.Bases for Planning the-Fi--• shing Industry, His wOrks laid dOwn the foundation:for the'further improvement Of.Methods for the long terM forecast of the commèr- cial.supply of . fiSh. However,'IzhevSky'connects . these 10 year, cycles exclusiveiY with the periodicity. of tides* in the ocean . ..which are reflected , in his opinion;' on 'the climate ana the hydro-, Iegical conditions of the watersgJecause'of the GulfStream fluctuations.lie excludes the influenceof'solar activity'On.the popn- . • lati.on.dynamics as if hewere refilsing.to acceptthe findinue of Contemporary heliogeophysics, which definitely proved the connections between soleractivitY . ànd the most important processes of › the atmospheric . circulation; intensity of.the-Gillfstream,- water •H

- levels of the iakes-and rivers- and .many.otner:factors whieh were . summarized by :M.S." Éigenson . .(1963). • . Izhevsky bélièyes that.."the periodie changes in solar ac- . tivity should havé the same influence on the processes in the hydro- apere and the atmesphere,of all regions:of the earth, .orsin-any_ case in the:regions situated one near the other''. However,• as .we I see it, this centradicts his on conception of the Organization of the-atmospheric and the hydroSpheric processes. • - Izhevsky divided the northernihemisIdlere into 5-systems: the Atlantic, the ,GreenlandAmerican -; the Euro.,)eanAsiatic, the • Eastern Siberian-and the Pacifie, eiaCh-of them having their,specific organizatiOn of the natural processes. In the neighbouring systems; as arule;-the ,same processes are in opposite . phases. If this is trUe, then the.othér preeesses Which . are influenced by solar - -activity must also have opposite phases, as we believe that.the :

, effect of solar activitY on the hydrometeOrological conditions of a: given. region should depend tà . a high degree on the local . specificity of these:conditions. Ai the same time, in the systems .

- situated far apart, the same.*processes created by Solar activity ..cOuld be in thesame phase. An,example of this is simultaneous . 25

minimal and maximal . catches of the - Balme saler L. in northern • Europe and America. .The most iMportant Salme salar.4 rivers of • .. northern Russiaare:Pechora, iqorthern Dvina and Mezen Whichbelong, p.186 accordirig to Izhevsky, to the Eurepean-Asiatic system, and the - north AmeriCan rivers belong*to the Greenland - American system. In both systems the prodesses, as - izhevSky believes, develop in the same.phase. One can . suppose that this denotes asimilarin- fltienceof solar:activitY bA thepopulation dynamic's:of both- Balm° saiàr L.'populations.12his does not.exclude the possibility that in the rivers.oT -the Atlantic system,'wherethe processes develop in an oppoSite phase. , the influence of solar -activity on the Salmo salar L. ponulation is soMewhat'different. ' • -We believe that if ône follows the conception of-lzhevsky, it is difficUlt to imagine , that'solar a.dtivity influences the fish populations everyWherethe same way. On.the contrary; while ..lentioningthe resultsof L.A. Vitels (1951) studies on the difference of the influence of solar acti-

vity on the - hydrological conditions for different regions and •

different - periods; . M.S. .Eiuenson.(1963)..points dut that "a suM- • mation - of:these Studies leads to a practical Concliision that the •character -of thé hydrologicel.conditiens under the influence of, SOlar'activity .(and . ,therefore of the hydrobielogical I.B.) could. différent in.different re4.ons and at different times". and Should:be -Further Eigénson writes: "In connection .with this:there apears . a serious scientific and practical problem of defining the regions -, . hy taking.into consideration tho differences in the helioeophy- sical,: climatic : and hydrelogical uata. This means that the terri- tory, which ià interesting from a,ocientific and - economical point- of: view, should be divided into such physico-..E.;eographical areas (provinces) that. during a defined period of time there is the • same type of solar.-hydrometeorologiCal connections". • - One should—note that these . uphysico-geographical areaSu could bè'in some,Cases separate reziens of the same System of Izhevsky. It is sufficient to :point Out that, accordin to lzhavsky, the. Fennescandia and the Gulfstream systems beleng to:the same 'Atlantic.system but . , as A.V. Shnitnikov found that the water level- • • A

of some Fennoscandian lakes. Increases during the minimum of :solar . atthe same. time as the intensity of the . Gulfstream; according to Makeimbv,..decreases. The poulation dynamics of the species of fish inhabiting these Waters are understandably a result of not only outer influences but also. of tbapériodic fluctuations connected with the.solar rhythms. • • It is cléarthat the influence of solar activity on fish poPulation dynamics depends on the.ecological specificity of their species and.. in the same - waters could influence«different fish species in a different way. :Fcir.instance, thè heavy.rain floods durini.; the

maxima of solar activity on 'the Amur are harmful for the reprouuc-. • of the Amur'' humpbacked salMon and tbe Amur summer chum salmon tion •

.but do not harm. the reproduction of the fall chum saimen, which • spawns after the waters go down. Theàe floods probabl - • are useful for the reproduction of the phytophilous_fish of the AMur .,:as they enlarge the spawning grounds of the latter. At the same « time a dif-: solar activity.on . the- poulation dynamics of . ferent influence.pf • . the same.species of fish in different waters is possible. .or instance, we can:mot say:that the influence of solar , activity on the Amur and the western. Kamchatka humpbacked salmon population_ dynamids is similar'. .0n the Amur, becauSe.of the peculiarities • of its water.conditionS, it.can ba seen more Clearly. However, it shOuld be noted, it has not 'always been thi way: . The maxima of • • . the 14-th and the 15-th eleven year. cycles of solar activity did •not produce such changes in. the .Amur.humpbacked Salmon population p ..187 as the following cycles. In One word, if 'il. differences in the conditions of waters and fish ecolocy are taken into consideration,-it is clear'that the influence of solar« activity on.fish _ populations can be and is different in.its strength and effects and this is what .we observe in reality. • C onclusi ons. . . • 11 The 8 - .1.0 year neribdicity in the ,Salmo awar L catches in northern. Pussia and in Canada is the - result •Of the influence . • , of solar activity on ifs productiveness. , The high water levels • « - of the rivers harmful for thé alrno salarL: re-roduction cari be obseryed..during:the periods of maxiMum as well as Of . minimum soiar activity and depend on the intensity of cyclones. . 2 7

The best years.for.the.Salmo salar Li . catches in Russia and in Canada ocgur during the:years of . the extremum of solar activity, or 2,,sometimes 3 years.after,it. Bad years for the Jalimo salar L. in Russia occur during the years Of the extremum or the year previous to it, andin Canada aroUnd the periods of the extremum with a difference Of 1 to 2 years in both directions. • Between the years of 1907 and 1948.the'wori.A years for the L. in northern RUsSià were obserVed during the periods Salmo salar of maximum solar:actiyity or theyears. preceding them, and the'pest years were 2 years after the,maxim m solar activity. : 2) The influence of solar activity . on the Far Last hUmp- backed salmon Population'dynamics, is observed clearly on the Amur, where the increase. of population corresponds to each 11 Year cycle of Solar activity and . the.abrupt decrease of tile pOpulation cor-

responds to the periods of the,minimum solar activity.tartir ij . from 192 8the increase in the maxima of solar activity was accom- • panied On the Amur by the lowering of the humpbacked salmon repro l. duction. The . expected decrease in solar. activity after . the passing oe the 'maximum period.of:the 100 year cycle could help to bring •

up the reserliesof the Amur humpbacked salmon on condition that • the intensity . of fishing is moderate, • • The intrease.can be expected in 1968 or 1969 and every t en the decrease.of the general levels years thereafter.lidweVer, with of:solar activity:this 10 year periodicity probably will not ' te as clearly shown. • . . 3) The main cause of te catastrophically low catches and smaIl population Of the Amù• humPbacked salmon is its mas s. spaw- . ninjT. during the maximum of summer floods and. te: f011owing free- : zing of. dried out•spawning . ,mounds. Eaeh increase oe the 11 year . cycle of solar activity gerresponds . to the increase of the water level dùring . thè rain floodS en .the Amur. . In the regions'of the Far East where the humpbacked 'salmon spawning occurs after the flood waters- recede (for instance on the'

KamChatka), the influence of:solar activitY on the humpbacked sal - mon population is,not as pronounced, and the population is larger. 4) During the extremum periodsthere occurs à change of

of the conditions for the.humpbacked La1o11 reroduction which leads to , tne alternation of. the dominatinr.: ,enerations. 5) The infltience of polar activity is observed also on the chum salmon reproduction, especially on the Amur summer chum • salmon, whose s!?awning periods, as those of the:humpbacked salmon, fall during the periods of high water levels on the Amurand its tributaries. The expected decrease in solar activity lets us anti- ' cipate some increase in thé reproduction of the suriuier chuM salmon, provided thefishing is liMited.to the

The. influence. of soir - rhyth ms- on- the Amur chum salmon • P.Idô • reproduction (esbecially on the fall chum - sal.:ion):probably oceurs through the underground water levels and also the air tem,..)eratures during «Ile incubation period of the ree. - The j':all+winter air.tem- perature . fluctuations oVer a period of Years i.)1. the prihci iial renions of spawning of the falI chum salmon show a clear correla-

tion with the fluctuations of solar activity: • • • ' 6) The - weStern.KaMchatka coho Population also !shows a•periodicity of about 10 Years (7 to 11). The periods of minL-..ial solar activity are favorable for the coho reproduction end the periods' • • of maximal are . unfavorable. Then:is a si-,_ilarity in- the population - fluctuations of the western Kamchatka coho and the Aral bream. • . . Selar activity influences mot only.thé 'conditions for salmon reproduction, but also the conditions of %heir life in .the seauthrough'the fluctuations of the Uulftream. and the Kuroshio. 8)The influence of the Kuroshio oh tho -conditions of life - in the sea or the humpbacked salmon is_mot the same as- its influence on. • the coho and the chum salmon in seme relons this influence is the opPosite. The Simultaneeus decrease OIS the -xestern - Kamchatka hump,-

backed salmon • and tue western Kamehatka .coho pop .,lations durin:.1 the . • fifties is .a proof.that one of the.reasons'o2 the!decrease was the. excebsive fishing.of_the humpbacked salmon in the cpel.l.sea. . . . BeCause.of the . differences.ef'waters,. - cli2laticcoriditions and th: eCology•of'fish; - the.influence'of! Polar activityon fish; • • 1 • 'popu.latiOns coud be yery different in its strene.h and could be- . . • positive or negative, and'also• chance with tilue.. _ . e‘

. BIB.L.10GRAPHYY. . ' : Azbelev . V.V.Saterialy po bioloii se,tu,d-hol'soo ' poluostrova i ee vyzhivaemosti (Material's on the h;ioiow of the Kola Peninsula Salmo salar L. and on its Ability of Surviva:U. • : Trudy PINRO Uorka - of the Polar institute of .3çientific Lesearch on Fisheries and . Oceanography).:Nb.Xii, 1'60. :• . • Azernikovaj• O.A. Metod rascheta.chisiennosti' se- .i.reki Pechory. (A Method of Gonnting the Population o± Salo.saIar,L. . of the Pechora 1-dver).:. • "Rybnoe khoziàistvo"' (line FiShin Incsustry").. - No.2, 1964-à. . • : . ' . . • O. A.Dinàmika: semi severnoi Dviny • V zavisimdsti ot'uslcivii eè vosJroizvOdstva (NOrthern tvinahiver - Salmo salar L. Population.Dynamics dependig: on the i,.:onditions ' •• ItsSeproduction). "Rybnoe khoziaistvo" . , .ro. ,•, -.1964-P. . . Berg, L.S. Materialy po biologii semu,i (aterial.bn the . Biology :of Salmo salar L.). Izvestiia VIORKha (NowS of .i.i10.11*), . . Vol.20, 1 •55. . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Berg, L.S.- 0 -periodichnosti v razmnozhenii i raspredelenii ryb (A Periodicity:ifithe -Seproduction and the e'oraphical Area •• • Occuation of Fish). Izbrannye'trudy(Selectedrks), 'vol.IV,• Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the..i_LSh, 2961. T'irman, I.B. - Dinamikà . çislennostià.. sOvre,ilennue sostoianie zapasav'kety i rorbushi v oasseine future. (Po.juIation dynamics. . . . and Contemorary Conditions Of. the Iila:. d hu.;!::,aci;ed -_-.alnon Reserves . in the Afimr Estuary). Trudy Soesi:c:lani-ia po vo:.)rosam '. • - lososevozo knoziaistva DV ( orks af the .;onferen.ce on th. Q Probles • of almon.Fishing Industry of the Far Last). PubUshin i:ouse . of the 'Acadoy of SCiences of the U04., l'»j:i.. • _ '- . ' Birhian, 1:urosiu'i'chiblennost' al.t.).bi osegei . kety . - . Uncornynchus,keta :(Walb.) infrasp. autu ,,inalià ',(The iaJ.rosio and the Popujation of the 2all hum Salmon, Unçorhync:nus .eta-( Elib.) • infrasp. autumnalisI .).•"Vciprosy ikhtiolo4_i" r2rob1ems of lchthy- •- . . olosy"), 112. -8 -,.19.57. - . . . . .. . • . Birman, I.B. Eshche o'viiianii:hUroio nafdina:uiu chisIen- nosti losose'i (Mo.l'e about the Influence of the.Auroshio on the . Population_Lynemics.Of SalMon): ". c):)ro,,,,;y . ibtio'l,biiii- , No.1.5, 1959-. . Birman I:B.. 0 .vliianii k14latichikb-1'aktoÉgv. - Aa •,

'dinamiku Chislennosti gorbushihe influence of ..:1i. atic 2actors• • on the Population._ Dynamics of the Htil •baCke -;a1::lon).. •• . . . . . •"VoprOsy ikhtio1o,2;ïin, 196. . . . . . . Virolainen ,„,. P• 'Nereti3iqhCh. - . , _e.- ,,„,- e:_ i '( a.1Io salar) na reke Kemi (The SalliôsalarlipawninT.,. Ground .0. 11 the Ke!fli .hiver)- . Trudy Karelo-FinskOgo otdelealia - VNIONKha ( - orks bi. the Karelo- • Finnish Division of the VI .:I6-.RKh*), vol.11 ., 1946. _ '--Vitels L.A.•.:Tsikiony severnykh Morei.i. poteplenie Arktiki. ((.;yclones of the Northern Seas and the Warmiw; Up of the ArCtic). • "Meteorologiia igidroldgiia", Informatsionnyi sbOrnik ("Metêorolopy . .and - Hydrology",Collection ofInforMation), No.5, 1 .-A-a. . . • • • . . . . . . . . . . * VNIORKh -,YVsesdiuZnyi nauChno-issledovateltskii iftstitut ozerhogo i rechnoo khoziaista. (411-Union Institute of Scientific .iesear0i.. ' On Lake and hier Êisherie . .- , . . . . . .. . . . . .

. Vitels, 4.A. Mnogoletnie izmeneniya bariko-tsirkulyatsionnogo rezhima i ikh vliyanie /12 kolebanie klimata (C nanes.in. the baro-circulat ion.regime e over a Period of• Years and their influence. . on Climate 'Ieluctuations). Trudy GGO /GIavnaya Éeb-fizicheskaya •- observatoriya imeni A.I...Voeikova (Werks Of the Central , leopilysical Observatory nameu'after A.I.; Voèikov). NO.8 (70), 1948. ' ' • Vitels, 1....A. X:vbprosu o svyazi ospdkey''s :olnechnei •, • activnosttiu (Connections between.precipitation'and Solar Ac- • • . . tivity).. "Byulletèh' Komissii.po isSleQovàniyu soIntsa , ! . (ulletin . . •

of the C.ommission on Sun Stu:die au ) , i..o.7(21).,1951. . • Derzbavin A".A.,. Kaspiisko-Kurisie Zapasj . se .,ryui (Stocks . of Sturgeon in the Paspian - Kurin Tb ;:ions). Ochend_ po biolb1- - • cheskim.oanovam rybnogo khbzjaiStva (Esays dà theeoleiCal.flaseS Of the Fishing Industry), Publishing HOuse of. the. Academy of Sciences . of.the•UL;SR, 1961.. ' • • . . Izhevsky; G.K.'Okeanolo2;icheskie osnevy formirovaniya . . • . promysloVoi;:roduktivnosti morei (Occeoloical - ases fôr the Dcve- . lopment of •.CoMmercial PrOductiiiity Of • thé Seas ) ....-PishcheOromizdat . ./GosudarstvennoeHnauchno-tekhnicheskoe izdatelstv iF3c:flevoi • • promyshlennosti/ .(State Scientific and Technical Publihin- Uoube . . • of the'roed Industry). F . 1961. . . : '• :• ' ' .. . . . . • Iznevsky; d.l.s: Sistemnaya osnova pr:)gnoziroNani)la okeano- p.189. ' .,logicheSkikh ualovii i vosproizVodstve oroyslevykh ryb (Systematic Bases •For Prediction. of' Oceanological cOnaitions and of the Heoro- • . . duction of COmmercial Fish) . , MoscOw. , 1964, , . . . • . • . . . Kaganevsky,:A.G. ilekotorye voProsy 'xiolo ii i di:.nattiki. . . chislennosti: gorbùshi (Some Problems - of . bilocy and tie Abundance. , Dynamics of the HumpbaCked a1 roc) lzvestlya TI.12,H0 (fil u' 'journal, ..vol...29, 1949.. -: . . . . Krogius,'F.V .L anàKrokhin; E..::i, Ob urozhainosti•molodi krasnoi (Ueproduction Ability of the Sockeye YOun) (Oncornynchus nerka'Walb.).:Izvestiia TIÉ;HO (TIM:0 Journal', vol.28, lu48,.-

, Krogius - F.V. and Krokhin, E...,...Puti yosstanbvieniya . i Uve- I. ,

.lichénibi-A stad kamchatakikh lososei (ays.of .œStbratien . and • Enlargement of the KamChatka—Salmon repulation), Truciy :oveslicnanf,ya . 'pà Voprosam losbsevogo khoZYaistva DV (*arks ef . the- C.onference on Salmon . Fishing Industry Preblems of the_ Var Saat) - Fublishing Houe ei'.. the Academy of . Sciences of the li, -H, 1 9As: . ... • . • . . Kuchina._; E.S. BiolOgiia.i ro.myÉel semgi reki L;oiany,(.bioloy. ' and . Fishing of the SalMo salar . 4- Of the .Soyalla Hiver)...lzvestiya • ' .:

,Ts Y:IGRKha, (TsWIORKh”•* Ilews). i v61.20, 103).- . ,* - ... . .Maksimo'v 1.V. Vekovoi tsikl.solnechnoi . deyatelinosti i f. . . . . seVerôatlanticheskoetcchenie .(aundred-year:cycle of Solar ActivitY . and the Worth-Atlantic Current). - i'Okeanolbiyan . ("OceanolOgy"), - . . vol.1, Noà, 1961. . • • . • • . .. . Maksimov - I.V.:and: Smirnov,...P. K izucnenett mnogoletnikh izmenenii deyatel'nosti 6i tri (Causes of GI.Inges . . . * Revisorls.note.:"Baro-Circulation .reginie" is à direct translation . er - the Russian Pal'.iko-tsirktIlyatsionnzi.reihim. • • ** TIM«) -. Tikhbokeanskii nauchno-isleuovalerskii institut ryonogo'• . klbziaistva i okéanografii/Vladivestok/ (Pacific Institute Of Scientific lesearch on '1.S.hing and-Oceanot;raphy, Vladivostok). • . . **.41' TeNICYL:Kh -,:Tséntralinyi nauchnb-issiedovateltskii - institut . . . • ozernogo i rechnego'rybnbgo khoziaistva .(Céntral institute 'of • . •. Sdientific 'Research on Lake and Hiver Fisheries).- . . . . . . ' ' • . •

1.1 di. h1/4i,' 31 • •

. in the Gulfstream:Activity over a Period of Yeare).. "Okeanologiia"H . ("Oceanology"), Vol.5, No.2, 1965. ' • NikoltskY. C.V. 0 periodicheskikh:kolebaniiakh.chislennosti promyslovykh,ryb Itralskogo moria,i faktorakh - ikh opredeliaiush-'. chikh (Periodic Fluctuations of the Fishing Industry ReServos of .• the Aral•Sea and Factors Influencing Them). Zoologicheskii zhurnal. (Zoological Journal)* vol.XXIII, No.1, 1944.. , 'Nikoleske*G.Vp. Chastnaie ikhtioloeiia Ichthyology). Publishing Bouse "Sevetikaianaukdç.- ("Soviet Science"),

1950. . . •• Semi«. A.G. Issledovenie bio1ogi i Dromysla semgi v rekakh vostothnoi- Chasti.Terskogo berega i na Murmane•v - 1932i ' 1933 godakh (Biologiéal Studies and btudies - of'the Salmo salar.L. ' Fishing Industry Of the Eastern Coast RiVers.of TerSk and MUrman

during . 19.52 and 1933).-Izvestiia VNIORKàa '(V.NIORKh* Sews), vol.20, • . 1935-a. . , _ • Smirnov. A.G. Semga reki Pinegi, ee zhizr0,:ipromyse,1 (Salmo•Salar.L. of Pinega RiveriItà Life and eishing).:Izvestiia • ••„., • - .VNIORKha (VNIORKh* News),. vol.20,• 1935.aD. - • • . - . SmirnoxiLA&U SoObrazhenlia op ihtensifikatsii•razmnozheriiia semgiy rekakh Kol'skdego p-ova (Ideas about theIntenaificaticin • of ReproductiWof the ajmo saJar 14a, in the Rivers of the Kola - . • peninsula).• Izvestiia.VN1ORKha (VNIORKh - • spripnov,N,PI Dolgoperiodnye ritmiCheskie yavleniia v • deiatelenosti Golfstrima (Periodic Rhythmical Phenomena' of Long • • • Duration:in the Activity of the Gulfstream), IzvçStiia VG0. • • /Vsesoluznoé.geograficheskoe obehchestvor(VG0'/A11-Union GeOgra.. phiCal Society/ NeWs) * No.5 9 1965. FedoroV, S.5; 0 kolebaniiakh chislennosti atlanticheskoi - seledL(PopUlation Fluctuations of the Atlantic aerring),"Rybnoe • khoziaistvo" ("Fishing industry"), No.7, 1962. •' • •Eifenkion- .M S Solntse, pogoda 1 klimat (The Sun, the.Weather and the Climate), Gidrometeoizdat./Gosudarevennoe nauchne-tekhni cheskoe gidrometeorologicheskoe izdateVetvo/(State Publishing •Rouse for scientific • Technical . hydrometeorology) -, '1963, - . • Fusuokà, I. On the periodicity - of the variations of the • • oceanic. conditions. J. Marine Meteor. • ot., v. 35, N 1,1959. • ' • • - .Takashi, Fe Preliminary report onthe oCeanographicanOmaly* • in the early . half of 1963 in the waters ad Lacent te Kanto district. Bull, of TOkai Regi9M..Fish. ReS,Labor.,N 38. Febr., 1964. •VRIORKh nauChno-issledovatel , skii institut ozernogo rechnoi4) rybnago khoziaistva (AllUnion institut Of Lcientific

Research on Lake and River Fisheries.- • • • • •