DOCSLIB.ORG

MARINE VERTEBRATES and LOW FREQUENCY SOUND TECHNICAL REPORT for LFA EIS 28 February, 1999 Prepared by Donald A. Croll, Bernie R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MARINE VERTEBRATES and LOW FREQUENCY SOUND TECHNICAL REPORT for LFA EIS 28 February, 1999 Prepared by Donald A. Croll, Bernie R Marine Vertebrates and Low Frequency Sound: Technical Report for LFA EIS Item Type monograph Authors Croll, Donald A.; Tershy, Bernie R.; Acevedo, Alejandro; Levin, Phil Publisher University of California Santa Cruz, Institute of Marine Sciences, Marine Mammal and Seabird Ecology Group Download date 03/10/2021 23:52:41 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/35442 MARINE VERTEBRATES AND LOW FREQUENCY SOUND TECHNICAL REPORT FOR LFA EIS 28 February, 1999 Prepared by Donald A. Croll, Bernie R. Tershy, Alejandro Acevedo, and Phil Levin Marine Mammal and Seabird Ecology Group Institute of Marine Sciences University of California Santa Cruz Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS: MARINE VERTEBRATES AND LOW FREQUENCY SOUND............................................................ 1 TECHNICAL REPORT FOR LFA EIS..................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................I INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................I SEA TURTLES............................................................................................................................................ II SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................. II SEABIRDS ..................................................................................................................................................III SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................. III MUSTELIDAE (OTTERS)........................................................................................................................IV SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................IV PINNIPEDS.................................................................................................................................................. V SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................. V CETACEANS............................................................................................................................................ VII SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................VII SIRENIDAE (MANATEES AND DUGONGS) .......................................................................................XI SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................XI MARINE FISHES (By Phil Levin)...........................................................................................................XI SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................XI Taxonomic Coverage........................................................................................................................... XI Hearing Capabilities and Sound Production in Fish .........................................................................XII Known and potential impacts of low frequency sound in marine fishes: ...........................................XII Reducing and mitigating impacts of SURTASS LFA on marine fishes...............................................XII General Research Recommendations................................................................................................XIII CHAPTER 1: MARINE FISHES (BY Phil Levin) .................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION - EFFECTS OF LOW FREQUENCY SOUND ON FISHES................................... 1 TAXONOMIC COVERAGE OF THIS REPORT................................................................................................... 1 THE ACOUSTICO-LATERALIS SYSTEM IN FISHES ......................................................................................... 1 The inner ear......................................................................................................................................... 1 Getting sound to the ear........................................................................................................................ 2 The lateral line ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Interactions between the ear and lateral line........................................................................................ 3 HEARING CAPABILITIES AND SOUND PRODUCTION IN FISH ........................................................................ 3 Overview ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Hearing range and sound production in marine fishes: a summary .................................................... 3 Known and potential impacts of low frequency sound in marine fishes: a summary........................... 3 Reducing and mitigating impacts of SURTASS LFA on marine fishes: a summary............................. 4 General Research Recommendations.................................................................................................... 4 ORDER HETERDONTIDAE...................................................................................................................... 5 U.S. Fish and Wildlife or IUCN Status .............................................................................................................5 Distribution........................................................................................................................................................5 Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Natural History Notes........................................................................................................................................5 Hearing Range and Sound Production...............................................................................................................5 Known and potential impacts of low frequency sound......................................................................................5 Reducing and mitigating impacts of SURTASS LFA .......................................................................................6 ORDER LAMNIFORMES .......................................................................................................................... 6 U.S. Fish and Wildlife or IUCN Status .............................................................................................................6 Distribution........................................................................................................................................................6 Natural History Notes........................................................................................................................................7 Hearing Range and Sound Production...............................................................................................................9 Known and potential impacts of low frequency sound....................................................................................10 Reducing and mitigating impacts of SURTASS LFA .....................................................................................10 ORDER RAJIFORMES - SKATES AND RAYS .................................................................................... 10 U.S. Fish and Wildlife or IUCN Status ...........................................................................................................10 Distribution......................................................................................................................................................10 Natural History Notes......................................................................................................................................10 Hearing Range and Sound Production.............................................................................................................11 Known and potential impacts of low frequency sound....................................................................................11 Reducing and mitigating impacts of U.S. Navy Low Frequency Active Acoustic System..............................11 ORDER ELOPIFORMES.......................................................................................................................... 11 U.S. Fish and Wildlife or IUCN Status ...........................................................................................................11 Distribution......................................................................................................................................................11 Natural History Notes......................................................................................................................................12 Hearing Range and Sound Production.............................................................................................................12
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geometric Morphometric Comparison of Abu Mullet, Planiliza Abu (Heckel, 1843) Populations in Bushehr Basin, Iran
    Tanzania Journal of Science 47(1): 1-9, 2021 ISSN 0856-1761, e-ISSN 2507-7961 © College of Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Dar es Salaam, 2021 Geometric Morphometric Comparison of Abu Mullet, Planiliza abu (Heckel, 1843) Populations in Bushehr Basin, Iran Fatemeh Shabaninejad1, Yazdan Keivany1* and Dara Bagheri2 1Department of Natural Resources (Fisheries Division), Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, 84156-83111, Iran 2Department of Fisheries, Faculty of Marine Science and Technology, Persian Gulf University, P. O. Box 75615-415 Bushehr, Iran Co-authors’ e-mails: [email protected] (Shabaninejad); [email protected]; [email protected] (Bagheri) *Corresponding author, e-mail addresses: [email protected]; [email protected] Received 24 Oct 2020, Revised 21 Dec 2020, Accepted 28 Dec 2020, Published Feb 2021 Abstract Many fish behavior and habitats could be defined based on the fish morphology, thus, using the fish body shape, in addition to its genetic characteristics, could be used to infer the type of fish habitat and its characteristics. This study aimed to compare the body shapes of five populations of abu mullet, Planiliza abu (Heckel, 1843), in Bushehr basin using geometric morphometric method. Some 162 specimens from Hendijan, Genaveh, Helleh, Kaki and Mond rivers were used. Three morphometric characters, total length (TL), fork length (FL) and standard length (SL) were measured. Samples were photographed from the left side, then 18 landmarks were digitized using ImageJ software. Data obtained from Procrustes were analyzed by multivariate analysis using PCA and CVA. The results of PCA analysis showed significant differences between Kaki and other populations (P < 0.0001).
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Stratigraphy of Neogene Strata in the Cocinetas Basin, La Guajira, Colombia
    Swiss J Palaeontol (2015) 134:5–43 DOI 10.1007/s13358-015-0071-4 Revised stratigraphy of Neogene strata in the Cocinetas Basin, La Guajira, Colombia F. Moreno • A. J. W. Hendy • L. Quiroz • N. Hoyos • D. S. Jones • V. Zapata • S. Zapata • G. A. Ballen • E. Cadena • A. L. Ca´rdenas • J. D. Carrillo-Bricen˜o • J. D. Carrillo • D. Delgado-Sierra • J. Escobar • J. I. Martı´nez • C. Martı´nez • C. Montes • J. Moreno • N. Pe´rez • R. Sa´nchez • C. Sua´rez • M. C. Vallejo-Pareja • C. Jaramillo Received: 25 September 2014 / Accepted: 2 February 2015 / Published online: 4 April 2015 Ó Akademie der Naturwissenschaften Schweiz (SCNAT) 2015 Abstract The Cocinetas Basin of Colombia provides a made exhaustive paleontological collections, and per- valuable window into the geological and paleontological formed 87Sr/86Sr geochronology to document the transition history of northern South America during the Neogene. from the fully marine environment of the Jimol Formation Two major findings provide new insights into the Neogene (ca. 17.9–16.7 Ma) to the fluvio-deltaic environment of the history of this Cocinetas Basin: (1) a formal re-description Castilletes (ca. 16.7–14.2 Ma) and Ware (ca. 3.5–2.8 Ma) of the Jimol and Castilletes formations, including a revised formations. We also describe evidence for short-term pe- contact; and (2) the description of a new lithostratigraphic riodic changes in depositional environments in the Jimol unit, the Ware Formation (Late Pliocene). We conducted and Castilletes formations. The marine invertebrate fauna extensive fieldwork to develop a basin-scale stratigraphy, of the Jimol and Castilletes formations are among the richest yet recorded from Colombia during the Neogene.
    [Show full text]
  • Moringua Edwardsi (Moringuidae: Anguilliformes): Cranial Specialization for Head-First Burrowing?
    JOURNAL OF MORPHOLOGY 266:356–368 (2005) Moringua edwardsi (Moringuidae: Anguilliformes): Cranial Specialization for Head-First Burrowing? N. De Schepper,* D. Adriaens, and B. De Kegel Ghent University, Evolutionary Morphology of Vertebrates, 9000 Ghent, Belgium ABSTRACT The order Anguilliformes forms a natural Moringuidae burrow head-first (Castle, 1968; Smith group of eel-like species. Moringua edwardsi (Moringui- and Castle, 1972; Smith, 1989a). It is striking that dae) is of special interest because of its peculiar fossorial only immature specimens of M. edwardsi spend all lifestyle: this species burrows head-first. Externally pro- their time burrowed in the sand (Gordon, 1954; Gos- nounced morphological specializations for a fossorial life- line, 1956). Adults seem to limit their burrowing style include: reduced eyes, lack of color, low or absent behavior, as they leave their burrows during the paired vertical fins, elongated, cylindrical body, reduced head pores of the lateral line system, etc. Many fossorial night (Smith, 1989a). Smith (1989a) mentions rapid amphibians, reptiles, and even mammals have evolved movements of the body, just beneath the surface, for similar external specializations related to burrowing. The subterranean hunting and feeding. The modification present study focuses on osteological and myological fea- of the snout into a solid conical structure, combined tures of M. edwardsi in order to evaluate the structural with a protruding lower jaw, facilitate burrowing, modifications that may have evolved as adaptations to where power is provided by the cylindrical body burrowing. Convergent evolutionary structures and pos- (Castle, 1968; Smith, 1989a). As immature speci- sible relations with head-first burrowing, miniaturization, mens spend most of their time buried in the sand, feeding habits, etc., were investigated.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Department of Natural Resources
    FOREWORD Abundant fish and wildlife, unbroken coastal vistas, miles of scenic rivers, swamps and mountains open to exploration, and well-tended forests and fields…these resources enhance the quality of life that makes South Carolina a place people want to call home. We know our state’s natural resources are a primary reason that individuals and businesses choose to locate here. They are drawn to the high quality natural resources that South Carolinians love and appreciate. The quality of our state’s natural resources is no accident. It is the result of hard work and sound stewardship on the part of many citizens and agencies. The 20th century brought many changes to South Carolina; some of these changes had devastating results to the land. However, people rose to the challenge of restoring our resources. Over the past several decades, deer, wood duck and wild turkey populations have been restored, striped bass populations have recovered, the bald eagle has returned and more than half a million acres of wildlife habitat has been conserved. We in South Carolina are particularly proud of our accomplishments as we prepare to celebrate, in 2006, the 100th anniversary of game and fish law enforcement and management by the state of South Carolina. Since its inception, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) has undergone several reorganizations and name changes; however, more has changed in this state than the department’s name. According to the US Census Bureau, the South Carolina’s population has almost doubled since 1950 and the majority of our citizens now live in urban areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Identification of Marine Eels Through DNA Barcoding From
    Genomics Data 11 (2017) 81–84 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Genomics Data journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gdata Genetic identification of marine eels through DNA barcoding from Parangipettai coastal waters Samuel Peninal, Janakiraman Subramanian, Alaganatham Elavarasi, Murugaiyan Kalaiselvam ⁎ Centre of Advanced Study in Marine Biology, Faculty of Marine Sciences, Annamalai University, Tamil Nadu, India article info abstract Article history: Anguilliformes, also known as “true eels”, are an ecologically diverse group of predominantly marine origin Received 24 September 2016 whose members were easily recognized by their extremely elongated bodies with reduced cross-sectional Received in revised form 4 December 2016 areas and universal lack of pelvic fins. The Marine Eels were collected from landing centres of Parangipettai coast- Accepted 7 December 2016 al waters and identified based on their morphometric and meristic characters. The newly recorded species were Available online 09 December 2016 used for the barcoding analysis. Information on molecular taxonomy of marine eels was very meagre and hence, Keywords: the present study was aimed to study the barcoding of marine eels which were present along the southeast coast fi Barcoding of India. The cube of lateral muscle was exercised for DNA isolation followed by its ampli cation. Cluster IX 2.06 COXI was used to align the nucleotide sequences (Thomson, 1997). The evolutionary history was inferred using the Marine eels Neighbor-Joining method (Saitou and Nei, 1987). The evolutionary distances were computed using the Maxi- Nucleotide analysis mum Composite Likelihood method (Tamura et al., 2004). The barcodes sequences were submitted in NCBI (Na- Anguillidae tional centre for Biotechnological Information).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7: Short Range Modalities
    Principles of Animal Communication, Second Edition Jack W. Bradbury and Sandra L. Vehrencamp Chapter 7: Short Range Modalities Literature Cited 1 Adams, C. M., M. G. Anderson, D. G. Motto, M. P. Price, W. A. Johnson, and M. J. Welsh. 1998. Ripped pocket and pickpocket, novel Drosophila DEG/ENaC subunits expressed in early development and in mechanosensory neurons. Journal of Cell Biology 140: 143–152. 2 Adrianov, A. V. and V. V. Malakhov. 1995. Comparative morphological analysis of the organization of cephalorhynch worms, the phylogeny, and the system of the phylum Cenpahlorhyncha. 3. Sense organs, digestive system, and body cavity. Zoologichesky Zhurnal 74: 19–30. 3 Albert, J. S. and W. G. R. Crampton. 2005. Diversity and phylogeny of neotropical electric fishes (Gymnotiformes). In Electroreception (T. H. Bullock, C. D. Hopkins, A. N. Popper, and R. R. Fay, eds.), pp. 360–409. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media. 4 Alves-Gomes, J. A. 2001. The evolution of electroreception and bioelectrogenesis in teleost fish: a phylogenetic perspective. Journal of Fish Biology 58: 1489–1511. 5 Ameye, L., R. Hermann, P. Dubois, and P. Flammang. 2000. Ultrastructure of the echinoderm cuticle after fast-freezing/freeze substitution and conventional chemical fixations. Microscopy Research and Technique 48: 385–393. 6 Andres, K. H., M. Vonduring, and E. Petrasch. 1988. The fine structure of ampullary and tuberous electroreceptors in the South American blind catfish Pseudocetopsis spec. Anatomy and Embryology 177: 523–535. 7 Arnegard, M. E. and C. D. Hopkins. 2003. Electric signal variation among seven blunt-snouted Brienomyrus species (Teleostei : Mormyridae) from a riverine species flock in Gabon, Central Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Digenean Trematodes of Fishes from Deep-Sea Areas Off the Pacific Coast of Northern Honshu, Japan
    Deep-sea Fauna and Pollutants off Pacifi c Coast of Northern Japan, edited by T. Fujita, National Museum of Nature and Science Monographs, No. 39, pp. 25-37, 2009 Digenean Trematodes of Fishes from Deep-sea Areas off the Pacifi c Coast of Northern Honshu, Japan Toshiaki Kuramochi Department of Zoology, National Museum of Nature and Science, 3̶23̶1 Hyakunincho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 169̶0073 Japan E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: Thirty-two species plus nine unidentifi ed forms of digenean trematodes from 10 families, Bucepha- lidae, Fellodistomidae, Lepocreadiidae, Acanthocolpidae, Opecoelidae, Zoogonidae, Hemiuridae, Accacoeli- dae, Derogenidae and Lecithasteridae were recognized from 31 species of fi shes collected in deep-sea areas off the Pacifi c coast of northern Honshu, Japan. They are listed and several taxonomic and zoogeographic re- marks are given. A new combination, Tellervotrema katadara is also proposed. Key words: fi sh parasites, Digenea, deep-sea fi shes, the Pacifi c coast, Japan Introduction “Study on Deep-Sea Fauna and Conservation of Deep-Sea Ecosystem” organized by the Na- tional Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo (NSMT) has been conducted since 1993. For dige- nean parasites of fi shes, Machida and Kamegai (1997) reported 22 species of fi sh digeneans, in- cluding two new species, from deep-sea fi shes caught in Suruga Bay, off the Pacifi c coast of central Japan, as the fi rst phase of the investigation, followed by Kuramochi (2001) which recorded 12 species from anguilliform and gadiform fi shes from deep-sea areas of Tosa Bay off the Pacifi c coast of western Japan as the second phase and by Kuramochi (2005) which recorded 14 species from fi shes caught in deep-sea area off the Ryukyu Islands, the East China Sea, southern Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • Venom Evolution Widespread in Fishes: a Phylogenetic Road Map for the Bioprospecting of Piscine Venoms
    Journal of Heredity 2006:97(3):206–217 ª The American Genetic Association. 2006. All rights reserved. doi:10.1093/jhered/esj034 For permissions, please email: [email protected]. Advance Access publication June 1, 2006 Venom Evolution Widespread in Fishes: A Phylogenetic Road Map for the Bioprospecting of Piscine Venoms WILLIAM LEO SMITH AND WARD C. WHEELER From the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027 (Leo Smith); Division of Vertebrate Zoology (Ichthyology), American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024-5192 (Leo Smith); and Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024-5192 (Wheeler). Address correspondence to W. L. Smith at the address above, or e-mail: [email protected]. Abstract Knowledge of evolutionary relationships or phylogeny allows for effective predictions about the unstudied characteristics of species. These include the presence and biological activity of an organism’s venoms. To date, most venom bioprospecting has focused on snakes, resulting in six stroke and cancer treatment drugs that are nearing U.S. Food and Drug Administration review. Fishes, however, with thousands of venoms, represent an untapped resource of natural products. The first step in- volved in the efficient bioprospecting of these compounds is a phylogeny of venomous fishes. Here, we show the results of such an analysis and provide the first explicit suborder-level phylogeny for spiny-rayed fishes. The results, based on ;1.1 million aligned base pairs, suggest that, in contrast to previous estimates of 200 venomous fishes, .1,200 fishes in 12 clades should be presumed venomous.
    [Show full text]
  • Hotspots, Extinction Risk and Conservation Priorities of Greater Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Marine Bony Shorefishes
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations Biological Sciences Summer 2016 Hotspots, Extinction Risk and Conservation Priorities of Greater Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Marine Bony Shorefishes Christi Linardich Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Biology Commons, Environmental Health and Protection Commons, and the Marine Biology Commons Recommended Citation Linardich, Christi. "Hotspots, Extinction Risk and Conservation Priorities of Greater Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico Marine Bony Shorefishes" (2016). Master of Science (MS), Thesis, Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/hydh-jp82 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds/13 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HOTSPOTS, EXTINCTION RISK AND CONSERVATION PRIORITIES OF GREATER CARIBBEAN AND GULF OF MEXICO MARINE BONY SHOREFISHES by Christi Linardich B.A. December 2006, Florida Gulf Coast University A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE BIOLOGY OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2016 Approved by: Kent E. Carpenter (Advisor) Beth Polidoro (Member) Holly Gaff (Member) ABSTRACT HOTSPOTS, EXTINCTION RISK AND CONSERVATION PRIORITIES OF GREATER CARIBBEAN AND GULF OF MEXICO MARINE BONY SHOREFISHES Christi Linardich Old Dominion University, 2016 Advisor: Dr. Kent E. Carpenter Understanding the status of species is important for allocation of resources to redress biodiversity loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Testículos Y Del Sistema De Conductos Urogenitales, Encontrándose Una Mayor Diversidad En Los Teleostei
    El Doctorado en Ciencias Biológicas de la Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana pertenece al Padrón de Posgrados de Excelencia del CONACYT, y cuenta con el apoyo del mismo Consejo, con el convenio PFP-20-93. El jurado designado por la División de Ciencias Biológicas y de la Salud de las Unidades Iztapalapa y Xochimilco aprobó la tesis que presentó Abraham Kobelkowsky Díaz el día 28 de enero de 2005 Sinodales: Presidente Dr. José Luis Arredondo Figueroa _______________________ Secretaria Dra. María del Carmen Uribe Aranzábal _______________________ Vocal Dr. César Flores Coto _______________________ Vocal Dr. Edmundo Díaz Pardo _______________________ Vocal Dr. Armando Ferreira Nuño _______________________ COMITÉ TUTORIAL Director de tesis: Dr. José Luis Arredondo Figueroa Profesor Titular C, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa Asesores: Dra. María del Carmen Uribe Aranzabal Profesora, Faculta de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Dr. César Flores Coto Investigador, Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Sinodales: Dr. Armando Ferreira Nuño Profesor Titular C, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa Dr. Edmundo Díaz Pardo Investigador, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro Indice general Resumen I Abstract II Introducción 1 Objetivos 5 Materiales y métodos 12 Resultados 12 Relaciones topográficas del riñón 12 Diversidad morfológica de los riñones 15 Diversidad de las gónadas 22 Diversidad del sistema de conductos urogenitales 29 Caracteres sexuales secundarios 35 Discusión 42 Conclusiones 54 Literatura citada 56 Glosario 62 Publicaciones relacionadas con la tesis 66 RESUMEN Se analizó el sistema urogenital de 76 especies de peces, correpondiendo una a los Agnatha, seis a los Elasmobranchii y 69 a los Teleostei.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Fish Species (Pisces) of La Réunion, Including a Red List of Threatened and Declining Species
    Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Naturkunde A, Neue Serie 2: 1–168; Stuttgart, 30.IV.2009. 1 Annotated checklist of the fish species (Pisces) of La Réunion, including a Red List of threatened and declining species RONALD FR ICKE , THIE rr Y MULOCHAU , PA tr ICK DU R VILLE , PASCALE CHABANE T , Emm ANUEL TESSIE R & YVES LE T OU R NEU R Abstract An annotated checklist of the fish species of La Réunion (southwestern Indian Ocean) comprises a total of 984 species in 164 families (including 16 species which are not native). 65 species (plus 16 introduced) occur in fresh- water, with the Gobiidae as the largest freshwater fish family. 165 species (plus 16 introduced) live in transitional waters. In marine habitats, 965 species (plus two introduced) are found, with the Labridae, Serranidae and Gobiidae being the largest families; 56.7 % of these species live in shallow coral reefs, 33.7 % inside the fringing reef, 28.0 % in shallow rocky reefs, 16.8 % on sand bottoms, 14.0 % in deep reefs, 11.9 % on the reef flat, and 11.1 % in estuaries. 63 species are first records for Réunion. Zoogeographically, 65 % of the fish fauna have a widespread Indo-Pacific distribution, while only 2.6 % are Mascarene endemics, and 0.7 % Réunion endemics. The classification of the following species is changed in the present paper: Anguilla labiata (Peters, 1852) [pre- viously A. bengalensis labiata]; Microphis millepunctatus (Kaup, 1856) [previously M. brachyurus millepunctatus]; Epinephelus oceanicus (Lacepède, 1802) [previously E. fasciatus (non Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)]; Ostorhinchus fasciatus (White, 1790) [previously Apogon fasciatus]; Mulloidichthys auriflamma (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775) [previously Mulloidichthys vanicolensis (non Valenciennes in Cuvier & Valenciennes, 1831)]; Stegastes luteobrun- neus (Smith, 1960) [previously S.
    [Show full text]
  • Weekly Report, Leg 1 (01.04
    Weekly Report, Leg 1 (01.04. to 05.04.2015) Research Vessel Maria S. Merian left Pennos Wharf in St. George’s, Bermuda as scheduled on 01.04.2015 at 9:00 o´clock after four hours of fuel bunkering in the dockyards. With a strong breeze she steamed from Bermuda towards the first sampling station on our westernmost transect at 70°W, 30°N. The first trial run of all sampling gear was successful except for the CTD probe (Figure 1), which due to some defect showed strong deviations from the expected temperature and salinity data. After intensive efforts and various steps to repair the probe, the problem could be solved and all data were successfully recalibrated. The deployment of the multinet, the two Isaaks-Kidd midwater trawls (0.5 and 5 mm mesh size) (Figure 2), the 1 m2 MOCNESS (Figure 3) and Manta trawls worked fine, although is was decided to run the IKMTs from the stern instead of the starboard side. The cooperation with the ship´s crew is excellent. Station planning follows the programme suggested in the ship´s research proposal and is carried out in close communication with the captain and scientists. Each station of the first transect includes the deployment of a CTD and an IKMT. In addition, MOCNESS and multinet, respectively, as well as the 5-mm IKMT are used alternatively at two neighbouring stations. The Manta trawl may be deployed parallel to other trawled gear, captain permitting. The tedious sorting of the plankton samples of all gears is carried out directly after each catch.
    [Show full text]