United States        Region 4          EPA 904/9-82-102
           Environmental Protection    345 Courtland Street, NE    SEPTEMBER 1982
           Agency          Atlanta, GA 30365
<>EPA     Marine Sampling and
           Measurement Program Off
           Northern Pinellas County
           Florida

           A Technical Report

           Volume II

-------
This report was totally funded by the Environmental
Protection Agency.  It has been reviewed for technical
accuracy.  However, any conclusive statements about the
suitability of a wastewater outfall into the Gulf of
Mexico are those of the contractor and not necessarily those
of the Agency.

-------
      CHAPTER SEVEN
TOTAL AND FECAL COLIFORM
        BACTERIA

           BY

      GARY S. CQMP
      DONNA W. FAMIGLIETTI
      SUZANNE HOFMANN and
      JOSEPH ENRICO
             307

-------
                            INTRODUCTION

       The purpose of this section of the Marine Sampling Program was
 to determine the background densities of fecal and total coliform
 bacteria along selected transects offshore of Pinellas County.  The
 baseline data presented herein will facilitate the evaluation of the potential
 effects of a proposed wastewater discharge.

       The presence of coliform bacteria in water generally"indicates
 that recent fecal contamination has occurred.  The sanitary quality
 of potable water as well as water used for recreational (e.g., swimming)
 or commercial purposes (e.g., shellfishing) is based on the density of
                                               !_,'
                                               5-
 coliform bacteria in the water at the time of sampling.

       The coliforms include, among others, Salmonella, Shigella,
 Escherichia coli and Aerobacter aerogenes.  Most are constantly present
 in the intestines of warm-blooded animals and some, such as Aerobacter,
 are also commonly found in the soil.  The coliforms are far more pre-
valent in the intestines than pathogens such as viruses, parasites,
 and pathogenic bacteria (including certain strains of the coliforms).
Hence, the pathogens enter the water, via fecal contamination, more
 sporadically than the coliforms and once in the water, their survival
 time is generally less than that of the enteric bacteria.  Coliform
bacteria are ubiquitous in the intestines of warm-blooded animals,
whereas the species and number of pathogens present may be host specific.
The presence of coliform bacteria in water indicates recent fecal
contamination and alludes to possible contamination by pathogens.
                                   308

-------
                               METHODS

       Water samples for coliform analyses were collected during two
periods, May 27-June 1, 1980 and October 27-November 3, 1980  (Table 7.1) along
Transects 1, 3, and 5 at Stations A through E, G, and I (Figure 1.2; Chapter
1). Samples were collected at the one-third and two-third depth locations in
water less than thirty feet deep and at the one-quarter, one-half, and three-
quarter depth locations in water greater than thirty feet deep.

Phase I (May 27 - June 1, 1980)
       All samples were collected with diver-operated sterile syringes
through which approximately 40 ml of water were drawn.  Upon return to
the surface, all syringes were kept on ice until inoculation.

       Fecal -and total coliform densities were determined by using a
                            *
Millipore Coli-Count Sampler.  The sampler consists of a membrane
filter bonded to an absorbent pad that is attached to a plastic tab.
The pad contains dehydrated medium (lactose bile salts  with an aniline-
blue indicator) that is hydrated when the tab  is immersed in a plastic
container holding 18 ml of the sample liquid -  Bacteria contained in
the 1.0 ml subsample are trapped on the filter and the rehydrated medium
serves as a nutrient source for the cells.  The sampler is removed
from the case containing the liquid to be tested.  After the liquid in
the case has been poured out, the tab containing the filter pad,
medium and bacteria is placed back in the case.   One set of
tabs and cases was incubated at 44.5 C  (4^ 0.2 C) for 18-24 hours for
fecal coliform determination and another  set was incubated
at 35 C for 18-24 hours for total coliform determination.  After the
incubation period, all colonies which exhibited the characteristic
blue or blue-green color were counted and the number recorded in a
field log book.

       A capped, sterile syringe was carried by a diver to the two-third
or three-quarter depth location at one station along each transect.   It
                                   309

-------
                               Phase I                  Phase II



  TRANSECT 1                   5/30/80                  11/3/80


  TRANSECT 3                   6/1/80                   10/30/80


  TRANSECT 5                   5/27/80                  10/27/80
              Table  7.1  Sampling dates for Phases I and II
*The use of the MLllipore Col i- Count  Sampler is not an EPA-approved
 procedure.   Membrane Filter method was used in Phase II.
                                     310

-------
was transported to the surface and  iced  along with  the regular
samples.  Upon return to the base station,  the syringe was uncapped
and filled with sterile, buffered water.  The contents of the syringe
were emptied into a Coli-Count case and  the sampler was  inoculated  as
described above.  This sample served as  a negative  control for  the
other samples.

       A positive control was run by diluting a pure culture of IS.  coli
in sterile buffered water and inoculating the sampler as described
above.  This sample served as a positive control to verify that the
medium and techniques chosen for use in  this study  were conducive to
the culture of coliform bacteria  (particularly ]2. coli).

       Duplicate samples (2) were run for each control and for  each
fecal and total coliform sample.
       The number of bacteria found within each sample are reported as
number per 100 ml based on the following equation:
        (number of colonies counted X 100)      ,.   , . ,.
       	:	    = # coliforms/100 ml
                  sample volume                                       ...
where:  sample volume = 1 ml

       Where no coliform colonies were found, the results are reported  as
<100 coliforms/100 ml.  When total coverage of the filter occurred, as  in
the case of the positive controls, the results are reported as TNTC
(too numerous to count).

Phase II (October 27 -November 3, 1980)
       Samples were collected along Transect 5 on October 27, 1980 using
the technique employed in Phase I sample collection.  Four syringes were
filled at each depth (8 when replicate samples were collected).

       Samples collected along Transects 1 and 3 were collected  in
sterile, 50 ml, plastic conical tubes, since the tubes enabled the  sample
                                   311

-------
  to be collected  and stored more efficiently than those collected with
  syringes.  Four tubes were taken by a diver (8 if replicate samples
  were collected) to the desired depth at each station,  uncapped,  and
  filled with water.  Upon return to the surface, all tubes were kept
  on ice until inoculation the following morning.

        The Membrane Filter Technique (APHA, 1976)  was  utilized for the
                                                     (R)
  culture of total and fecal coliform bacteria.   Nalge    Nutrient Pad Kits
  were used in all analyses.  The accuracy of the Membrane Filter Technique
  is significantly greater than that of the Coli-Count Method when the con-
  centration of bacteria in the sample is low.  Equation(1) indicates
  that a count of <100 coliform bacteria/100 ml of sample occurs if no
  colonies develop on a Coli-Count nutrient pad.  Whereas, if no colonies
  develop from any of the aliquots plated via the Membrane Filter Technique,
  the  count can be interpreted as 0 coliform bacteria/100 ml of sample
  (Equation (2)).  The counts obtained from the Membrane Filter Technique
 are not absolute,  but confidence limits to further define the results
 can easily be determined.

        Aliquots of 30,  20 and 10 ml from each 160 ml sample collected
 along Transect 5 were filtered through a 0.45 pm filter.  After filtra-
 tion, each  filter  was placed on a Nutrient pad (in a petri dish) and
 incubated.  This procedure was repeated twice for each sample, e.g., one
 series of 3 aliquots  (30, 20, 10 ml) was plated on Endo medium for total
 coliform enumeration  while the other series was plated on mFC medium for
 fecal coliform  enumeration.   Total coliforms were incubated at 35 C +0.5 C
 for  24  hours, while fecal coliforms were placed in airtight plastic bags
 and  submerged in a constant temperature water bath for 24 hours at
 44.5C  +0.2 C.  Analyses were similar for samples collected at stations
 along Transects 1 and 3,  except that aliquot volumes of 50, 30,  and 20
ml were taken from the 200 ml sample.

       After sufficient incubation,  each plate was  examined under a
fluorescent light and low magnification.   All  colonies that produced a
                                    312

-------
characteristic metallic sheen on Endo medium were counted as total coli-
forms.  All blue colonies that appeared on mFC medium were counted as
fecal coliforms.  The number of colonies counted was converted to the
number of coliforms per 100 ml by the following equation:
                            (sum of the colonies counted from each
  „ . „      ,  .    „„„  ,     aliquot producing at least 1 colony)  x 100
coliform colonies/100 ml =  	H _ ^f	:—	, ,.  ...^	,  *	
                             sum of the volumes (ml)  filtered from
                             each aliquot producing at least 1
                             colony                                    (2)
       The analytical scheme used for coliform determination is pre-
sented in Figure 7.1

       Control samples were analyzed to test the efficiency of the
methodology.  The controls are described below.

       1)  To test the sterility of the sampling devices, sterile,
buffered water was poured into 4 sampling tubes.  Aliquots from each
tube  (50, 30 and 20 mis) were filtered, plated on Endo and mFC media
and incubated as described previously.

       2)  To test the accuracy of the Nutrient Pad Kits, a small
amount of a pure culture of E_. coli (obtained from the Hillsborough
County Health Department) was placed in buffered water and dispensed
into 4 sampling tubes.  Each tube was shaken.  Aliquots from each tube
(50, 30, and 20 mis) were filtered, plated on Endo and mFC media and
incubated as described previously.

       3)  To test the effects, if any, of icing the samples, a sample
of the pure culture of E_. coli was placed in sterile seawater and dis-
pensed into 8 sample tubes.  Aliquots from 4 of the tubes were immediately
filtered, plated on Endo and mFC media and incubated as described pre-
viously.  The other 4 tubes were placed on ice for 19 hours before
aliquots from each were filtered and plated on Endo and mFC media.
                                   313

-------
              Figure 7.1.  Flow diagram of routine coliform analyses.
    Filter
    50 ml.
u>
H
Plate on
  ENDO
  media
                     2 Tubes
                 Total Coliform
                  Filter
                  30 ml.
Plate on
  ENDO
  media
                    Incubate at
                       35°C
                    for 24 hrs.
                       Count
                     Colonies
                  Filter
                  20 ml.
                                                      1 Sample
                                                (4 Tubes,  50 ml  each)
Plate on
  ENDO
  media
                                                                                    2 Tubes
                                                                                Fecal Coliform
                                      Filter
                                      50 ml.
Plate on
  rtFC
 media
            Filter
            30 ml.
Plate on
  mFC
 media
                                                                                   Incubate at
                                                                                      44.5°C
                                                                                   for 24 hrs.
                                                                                      Count
                                                                                     Colonies
                Filter
                20 ml.
Plate on
  mFC
 media

-------
                               RESULTS

       The results of Phase I of the study are embodied in Appendix 7.1.

       Total coverage or  coverage by colonies too numerous to count
occurred on all positive control samples.  Conversely, no coliform
colonies developed on any of the negative controls.

       The majority of samples (97.6% of the total coliform samples
and 100% of the fecal coliform samples) exhibited no growth of coliforms.
According to equation (1) this can be interpreted as a coliform density
of <100 per 100 ml.  Coliform bacteria were present at Station IB at a
depth of 12 feet and at Station II at a depth of 40 feet on May 30, 1980.
The total coliform counts at each of these sites were 200 coliforms per
100 ml of water.  The reason for their appearance at these stations is
unknown.  No coliform bacteria (based on the sensitivity of the Coli-
Count sampler) were found at any other station during this sampling
trip.

       The results of Phase II of the sampling program are embodied in
Appendix 7.2.

       Fecal coliform bacteria were detected only at one station (3B at
3 and 6 feet).  Total coliform bacteria were more ubiquitous at the
nearshore stations (A-D) but the counts never exceeded 16/100 ml at any
one station or depth.  The highest counts occurred at the nearshore
stations along Transect 5.  Samples collected at 5A revealed counts of
10 and 16 coliforms/100 ml at 2 and 4 feet depths, respectively.
Coliforms were also detected at 5B where samples collected at a depth of
2 feet accounted for 7 and 8 coliforms/100 ml, and those collected at a
depth of 4 feet accounted for 14 and 7 coliforms/100 ml.  Coliform bacteria
were also present at Stations 5C and 5D, but no coliforms were detected by
our methods at Stations 5E, 5G, and 51.
                                   315

-------
        Total coliform counts along Transect 3 ranged from a high
 of 7/100 ml at Station A (1 foot)  to a low of no detectable coliforms
 at Stations 3C through 3E,  3G  and 31.

        Total coliforms along Transect 1 were most numerous at a depth
 of 12 feet at Station 1C (12/100 ml) and at a depth of 5 feet at
 Station ID  (10/100 ml).  Coliform bacteria were also detected at a
 depth of 20 feet at Station 1G (6/100 ml).

 Controls
        No total or fecal coliform bacteria were detected when sterile
 buffered water was poured into 4 sampling tubes and subsequently
 plated.  This indicated that the sampling tubes (and the buffered
 water) were sterile.

        Fecal coliform colonies too numerous to count appeared on mFC
 medium  (after sufficient incubation) when the medium was inoculated with
 a pure culture of IS. coli.  Similarly, total coliform colonies  (TNTC) were
 evident (metallic sheen) on Endo medium (after sufficient incubation)
 when the medium was inoculated with a pure culture of IS. coli.  These
 results indicate that the use of Nalge ®  Nutrient Pad Kits was a
 sufficient method to detect total and fecal coliform bacteria.

        Icing the samples for up to 24 hours prior to filtering and
 inoculation did not appear  to affect the bacteria.  Identical samples
 were  prepared using a pure  culture of IS. coli.  Half of the samples
 were  processed immediately  (i.e.,  filtered, plated and incubated) while
 the other half were placed  on ice for 19 hours before processing.  The
 number of total  and fecal coliform colonies that developed on all
plates  (iced and not iced)  was too numerous to count, which indicates
that  icing had little or no affect on the viability of the cells.*
*Not an accurate test procedure.   Countable aliquats would be necessary
 to draw this conclusion.
                                     316

-------
                             DISCUSSION

        The contamination of water by coliform  (and other) bacteria
can occur in several ways.  The major input of microorganisms occurs
as a result of the discharge of treated sewage effluents, and from
urban and rural stormwater runoff.  These and other discharges can
contain a host of pathogenic and non-pathogenic organisms (Geldreich,
1972).  However, once these microorganisms enter an aquatic environment,
their ability to survive is greatly curtailed.

        Estuarine and marine environments are particularly non-conducive
to the proliferation of enteric organisms, and such environments have
been shown to have a definite bactericidal effect  (Pramer et al., 1963).
While the exact reason(s) for this effect has not been determined, it
appears that the shortened life span of coliformsin water may be
attributed to osmoregulatory problems within the cell, lack of sufficient
nutrients and increased predation and competition within a hostile environ-
ment.  The survival of coliform bacteria in seawater ranges from a few
hours to about three days, depending on, among other things, whether or
not the cell is encased in organic matter.  Their survival time also
appears to be site specific, since the factors which govern their survival
may be highly variable from site to site  (Jones, 1963).

        The bacteria detected at several of the stations during this pro-
gram may have originated in urban runoff or from bathers frequenting the
nearshore stations.  However, the primary source was most likely the
water which enters the Gulf from the Intracoastal Waterway through the
various passes during ebb tide.  This water may be contaminated by
direct sewage discharge or by urban stormwater runoff.  Due to the low
survivorship expected in seawater, the bacteria from the above mentioned
sources would be confined to the nearshore stations.  The results of this
study confirmed this expectation in all but one instance when coliforms were
detected at a depth of 20 feet at Station 1G on 11/3/80.  These bacteria may
have originated in the discharge of a passing vessel.
                                     317

-------
       The water quality standards in Florida for water used for
body contact recreation are:  a monthly average of 1000 total coliforms/
100 ml, not to exceed 2400/100 ml on any day and a monthly average of
200 fecal colifonus/100 ml, not to exceed 800/100 ml any one day  (EPA,
1979).

       *The water quality standards for shellfish harvesting areas are
more stringent and call for the median total coliform count not to exceed
70/100 ml, and the fecal coliforms are not to exceed 14/100 ml with no more
than 10% of the samples to exceed 43/100 ml.
                                                                   /
       The baseline data obtained during this study indicated that the
bacterial densities at all stations sampled were far below the acceptable
standards at the time of sampling.

* FDA  does not recognize the membrane filter method for shellfish
   standards; the MPN method is used.
                                   318

-------
                       SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

        1)  Total and fecal coliform bacteria densities were deter-
mined along three 10 mile transects  perpendicular to the Gulf coast
of Pinellas County, Florida.

        2)  Total and fecal coliform counts were far below the
acceptable water quality standards for water within the State of Florida
at all stations and depths during both phases of the program.

        3)  Highest total coliform counts were, in general, located
at nearshore  stations probably as a result of point source and non-
point source  discharges to coastal waters.
                                    319

-------
                          LITERATURE CITED
American Public Health Association.   1976.  Standard methods for the
        examination of water and wastewater, 14th ed.
        American Public Health Association, Inc. New York.

EPA.  1979.  Bacteria.  Water Quality Standards.  Criteria Digest.
        A Compilation of State/Federal Criteria.  EPA, Washington,
        D.C.  34 pp.

Geldreich, E.E.  1972.  Water-Borne  Pathogens.   Chapter 9, pp. 207-241.
        In;  Water Pollution Microbiology, R. Mitchell, ed.  Wiley-
        Interscience, New York.

Jones, G.E.  1963.  Suppression of Bacterial Growth by Sea Water.
        Chapter 53, pp. 572-579.  In;  Symposium on Marine Microbiology,
        C.H. Oppenheimer, ed.  C.C.  Thomas, Springfield.

Pramer, D., A.F. Carlucci and P.V. Scarpino.  1963.  The bactericidal
        action of seawater.  Chapter 52, pp. 567-571.  In;  Symposium
        on Marine Microbiology, C.H. Oppenheimer, ed.  C.C. Thomas,
        Springfield.
                                   320

-------
Appendix 7.1.
  Date
5/30/80
 Total and fecal coliform counts for samples collected along
 Transects 1, 3, and 5, during Phase I of the study.
                                                            No.
Coliform                  Depth                 No.      Coliforms/
  Test       Station       (ft)   Replicate   Colonies     100 ml
Pos. Cont.
Pos. Cont.
Neg. Cont.
Neg. Cont.
Total          1A
                              IB
                              1C
                              ID
                              IE
                              1G
                              II
 5/30/80
Pos. Cont.
Pos. Cont.
Neg. Cont.
Neg. Cont.
Fecal
                              1A
                              IB
_.
—
—
—
5

10

6

12

6

12

7

14

7

15

8

17

25

13

27

40

—
—
—
— .-
5

10

6

12

1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2 -*"•'•- ^~
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
- 2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
TNTC*
TNTC*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
_0
™"*"o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
TNTC*
TNTC*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
__
—
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
200
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
200
—
—
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
 *Too  numerous to count.
                                         321

-------
 Appendix 7.1.  Continued. Total and fecal coliform counts for  samples  collected
                along Transects 1, 3, and 5, during Phase I of  the  study.
   Date
  5/30/80
Coliform
  Test

Fecal
Station
  1C
                              ID
                              IE
                              1G
                              II
 6/01/80
Pos.  Cont.
Neg.  Cont.
Total
                              3A
                              3B
                              3C
                              3D
                              3E

Depth
(ft)
6

12

7

14

7

15

8

17

25

13

27

40

—
—
4

8

6

12

. 4

8

6

12

6

12



Replicate
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

No.
Colonies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TNTC*
0
0
0
0
0
0
TD
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
•s.
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Coliforms/
100 ml
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
__
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100

-------
Appendix 7.1.  Continued. Total and fecal coliform counts for samples collected
               along Transects 1, 3, and 5, during Phase I of the study.
              Coliform
                Test

              Total
             Station
               3G
                              31
 6/01/80
Pos. Cont.
Neg. Cont.
Fecal
                              3A
                              3B
                              3C
                              3D
                              3E
                              3G
                              31

Depth
(ft)
7

15

23

6

16

24

—
—
4

8

6

12

4

8

6

12

6

12

7

15

23

8

16

24



Replicate
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

No.
Colonies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TNTC*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Conforms/
100 ml
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
—
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100

-------
Appendix 7.1.   Continued.  Total and fecal coliform counts for samples collected
               along Transects 1,  3, and 5, during Phase I of the study.
  Date
5/27/80

Coliform
Test
Pos . Cont .
Neg . Cont .
Total



















Pos. Cont.
Neg. Cont.
Fecal

























o count.


Station
— .—
—
5A



5B


5C



5D


5E

5G

51

—
—
5A


5B



5C



5D



5E


5G


51






Depth
(ft)
__
—
' 3

5

3
5

3

6

4
8

6
12
9
18
.9
18
—
—
3
5

3

5

3

6

4

8

6
12

9

18
9

18

27
324


Replicate
__
—
I
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2

No.
Colonies
TNTC*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TNTC*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No.
Coliforms/
100 ml
m _I1II
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
__
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100

-------
Appendix 7.2.  Total and fecal coliform counts for samples collected along
               Transects 1, 2, and 3, during Phase II of the study.
 Date
Coliform
  Test
11/03/80    Total
             Fecal
 10/30/80    Total
Station

  1A

  IB
                1C

                ID



                IE

                1G

                II



                1A

                IB



                1C

                ID



                IE

                1G

                II



                3A
Depth (ft)

      6
     12
      6
      6
     12
     12
      6
     12
      5
      5
     10
     10
      6
     12
     10
     20
     12
     24
     36

      6
     12
      6
      6
     12
     12
      6
     12
      5
      5
     10
     10
      6
     12
     10
     20
     12
     24
     36

      1
      3
Replicate

    1
    1
    1
    2
    1
    2
    1
    1
    1
    2
    1
    2
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1

    1
    1
    1
    2
    1
    2
    1
    1
    1
    2
    1
    2
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1
    1

    1
    1
       No.
Coliforms/lOQ ml

        2
        5
        5
        0
        2
        0
        0
       12
       10*
        0*
        2
        0
        0
        0
        0
        6
        0
        0
        0

        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0

        7
        **
 *Based on an 80 ml sample.  The 20 ml aliquots were not properly plated.
 **50 ml and 30 ml aliquots produced colonies too numerous to count (TNTC).
   Coliform bacteria were not discernable.  No coliforms were present in
   the 20 ml aliquot.
                                          325

-------
 Appendix  7.2.
    Continued.   Total and fecal coliform counts for samples collected
    along Transects 1,  2, and 3,  during Phase II of the study.
  Date
 10/30/80
Coliform
  Test

 Total
             Fecal
10/27/80    Total
Station

  3B



  3C

  3D

  3E



  3G

  31



  3A

  3B



  3C

  3D

  3E



  3G

  31



  5A

  5B



  5C

 5D
Depth (ft)

     3
     3
     6
     6
     5
    10
     4

     6
    12
    12
    10
    20
     8
    16
    24

     1
     3
     3
     3
     6
     6
     5
    10
     4
     8
     6
     6
    12
    12
    10
    20
     8
    16
    24

     2
     4
     2
     2
     4
     4
     2
     4
     4
     4
     8
     8
Replicate

     1
     2
     1
     2
     1
     1
     1

     2
     1
     2
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1

     1
     1
     1
     2
     1
     2
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1
     2
     1
     2
     1
     1
     1
     1
     1

     1
     1
     1
     2
     1
     2
     1
     1
     1
     2
     1
     2
       No.
Coliforms/100 ml

        6
        6
        3*
        2
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        U
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0

        0
        0
        0
        2
        2
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0
        0

       10
       16
        7
        8
       14
        7
        3
        0
        7
        3
        4
        3
Based on 50 ml of sample.
                The remaining SO ml were not properly plated.
                             326

-------
Appendix 7.2.  Continued.  Total and  fecal coliform counts for samples collected
               along Transects  1, 2,  and 3, during Phase II of the study.

           Colif orm                                                         No.
 Date        Test        Station      Depth  (ft)    Replicate        Coliforms/100 ml

10/27/80    Total          5E              6              1                  0
                                          12              1                  0
                           5G              9              1                  0
                                          18              1                  0
                           51              8              1                  0
                                          16              1                  0
                                          24              1                  0

            Fecal          5A              2              1                  0
                                           41                  0
                           5B              2              1                  0
                                           22                  0
                                           41                  0
                                           42                  0
                           5C              2              1                  0
                                           41                  0
                           5D              2              1                  0
                                           2              2                  0
                                           41                  0
                                           42                  0
                           5E              6              1                  0
                                           12              1                  0
                           5G              9              1                  0
                                           18              1                  0
                           51              8              1                  0
                                           16              1                  0
                                           24              1                  0
                                          327

-------
     CHAPTER EIGHT
                    *x




     PHYTOPLANKTON






          BY .   ' ;






  KENNETH S. CARACCIA




         and






J. 0. ROGER JOHANSSON

-------
                             INTRODUCTION

       The phytoplankton community of the study area during the
"Marine Sampling  and  Measurement Program, Northern Pinellas County
(Florida)" was  characterized by determinations of abundance,
taxonomic composition,  and biomass (chlorophyll 'a').   The plankton
community was examined  on two separate occasions:
May  28-30, 1980 (Sampling Period 1) and October 29 - November 4,  1980
 (Sampling Period  2).  Locations of the sampling points (Figure 1.2)
and  a  general description of the study area are provided in Chapter 1.

       Previous information on the total phytoplankton population
(nannoplankton)  in the study area is limited.  Annual variations  of
phytoplankton productivity and standing crop of the Anclote Estuary
have been described by Johansson  (1975); one sampling station was
located within  the present study area, close to Station 5A  (Figure 1.2)
Other  phytoplankton studies of the West Central Coast of Florida were
conducted by Davis (1950), Odum, Lackey, Hynes, and Marshall (1955),
Marshall  (1956),  Saunders and Glenn  (1969), Steidinger and Williams
 (1970), and  Turner (1972).
                                    329

-------
                               METHODS

Chlorophyll  'a'
       Water samples for chlorophyll 'a' analyses initially were
to be collected at each station (see Chapter 1 for stations locations
and designations) at the 90, 50, and 10 percent incident light levels
located by an in situ marine photometer.  However, it was observed
during the first period (May 1980) that the 90 percent incident light
level at most stations was just above the bottom due to high water
clarity.  Further, the photometer malfunctioned during the later
stages of Sampling Period 1.  To provide a reasonable description of
the water column, chlorophyll "a1 values were therefore collected
at just below the surface, mid-depth, and just above the bottom.
 (See Appendix Table 8.1 for exceptions.)  Replicate samples were taken
at random stations and depths (see Appendix Table 8.2) during Sampling
Period 2 for quality assurance purposes.

       EPA approved methods were utilized for the analyses of the
samples.  Chlorophyll 'a1, corrected for phaeophytin  "a1, was determined
using the aqueous-acetone extraction procedure  (Standard Methods, 1975).

       Data reduction of the chlorophyll 'a' analyses consisted of  tabu-
lating the information in a sequential form.  Integrated chlorophyll  'a1
            2
values (mg/m ) of the total water column were calculated using a simple
linear regression of chlorophyll  'a1 concentration  (mg/m ) versus depth
(meters).

Phytoplankton
       Phytoplankton samples were collected with a 5 gallon water sampler
(bucket-like device)  from about 0.5 ft. below the water surface at  each
station .  The water in the sampler was  then well  stirred  and two one-gallon
samples were removed.  These samples were preserved  in  the field with
modified Lugol's iodine.

                                   330

-------
       In the Laboratory, a minimum of two sub-samples were analyzed
from each sample.  The sub-sample was pipetted into a Palmer-Maloney
chamber  (Palmer and Maloney, 1954) where cells were allowed to settle
before examination under a Unitron inverted phase contrast microscope.
Large phytoplankton were enumerated and identified at 200 X magnifica-
tion.  Small diatoms, and phytoflagellates  (which are naked flagellated
cells 3-8 y long) were enumerated and counted at 400 X magnification
 (Campbell, 1973 and Butcher, 1959).  One or more diameters of the counting
chamber were scanned until approximately 150 to 200 cells were counted.
Filamentous blue-green algae  (cyanophytes), however, were counted as
trichomes and not cells.  Identifications were carried to the species
 level for large cells and the  lowest practical level for small diatoms
 and phytoflagellates.
        The total concentration of cells  in the sub-sample was calculated
 by
        r  -  N
        C  -  v
        where:   C = total cell numbers  (cells/ml)
                 N = number of cells counted
                 V = volume examined  (ml)

        The total concentration of cells  at each station was estimated
 from the average of the sub-sample concentrations.

        Data reduction consisted of tabulating species lists for each
 station and the estimating the following community characteristics:
        o  Density  (# cells/ml)
        o  Species Richness  (# species/station)
        o  Species Diversity, H1   (Shannon and Weaver, 1963)*
        o  Equitability, J1   (Pielou, 1966)*
        o  Faunal Similarity between stations, C X   (Morisita, 1959).*
*  Indices described  (in detail) in Chapter  10.
                                   331

-------
                              RESULTS
 Chlorophyll  'a'
       During  the First Sampling Period  (May 28-30,  1980)  chlorophyll
 'a'  concentrations ranged from 0.6 mg/m  at the 1 foot depth  of Station
 5E to 20.1 mg/m3 at  the 10 foot depth of Station 3A  (Appendix Table 8.1).  Values
 were higher  at Transects 1 and 3 than at Transect 5.  Concentrations at
 Transects 1  and 3 generally decreased with increasing distance from shore.
 This trend was not observed at Transect  5."

       Chlorophyll 'a1 concentrations for the second sampling period
                                                                    3
 (October 29  and 31,  1980 and November 4, 1980) ranged from 0.4 mg/m  at
 the 38 foot  depth of Station 31 to 128.3 mg/m  at the 13 foot depth of
 Station  5C  (Appendix Table 8.2).  The high value  (128.3 mg/m  )  found at
 Station  3C may have  resulted from the presence of a  large,  unidentified,
 filamentous  algal mat which covered the bottom from  Station 3C to the
 shoreline.   No bottom chlorophyll 'a1 values are available for Stations
 3A and 3B, due to a  maximum depth of less than 5 feet.
 Comparatively, chlorophyll  'a' values at the surface  and at
 the 3 foot depth for Stations 3A-3C are high, ranging from 25.1 mg/m  to
 20.4 mg/m   (Appendix Table 8.2).  As observed in the first sampling period,
 chlorophyll  "a1 values were again higher at Transects 1 and 3 than at
 Transect 5.  Similarly, concentrations at Transects  1 and  3 generally
 decreased with increasing distance from  shore.  This trend was not evident
 at Transect  5.

       Integrated water column chlorophyll 'a' concentrations for the May
 1980  sampling  period ranged from 2.35 mg/m  at Station 5B to 28.4 mg/m2
 at Station 1G  (Appendix Table 8.1).  Average integrated concentrations
decreased from Transect 1 to Transect 5.  Obvious trends within transects
were not evident.
                                   332

-------
       The range of the integrated water  column chlorophyll  "a1
concentrations for the second  sampling period   (October-November 1980)
                 2                           2
was      3.9 mg/m  at Station  5B to  566 mg/m at  Station  3C  (Appendix
Table 8.2).  The high value observed at Station 3C was probably due to
the presence of the algal mat  previously described.  Obvious trends
within transects were not evident.   Average  integrated concentrations
were greater at Transects 1 and 3 than at Transect 5, with no discernable
trends within  transects.
Phytoplankton
       Phytoplankton densities  for  the May  1980  sampling period ranged
from 1,134 cells/ml at  Station  II to  17,024 cells/ml at Station 3B
 (Appendix Tables 8.4-8.6).  A general trend of decreasing cell numbers
with increasing distance  from shore was evident.  Average total phyto-
plankton numbers of Transects 1 and 3 were  similar and approximately
twice as large as  the Transect  5 average.

       Densities for the  October -  November 1980 sampling period ranged
from 415 cells/ml  at Station  5D to  16,245 cells/ml at Station 3C  (Appendix
Tables 8.7-8.9).   A general trend,  based upon average station densities,
of decreasing cell numbers with increasing  distance from shore was evident,
 exceptions being Stations 3B  and 3C where blooms of the centric diatom
Skeletonema  costatum were recorded,  and Station 5D where an unusually low
number of phytoflagellates were found.  Average  total phytoplankton numbers
were greater on Transects 1 and 3 than on Transect 5, with maximum cell
counts occurring on Transect  3  (Appendix Tables  8.13-8.15).

       The spatial distribution of  diatoms  in the May 1980 sampling showed
a pattern of decreasing relative   and absolute  densities with increasing
distance from shore.  Diatoms represented the second most abundant phyto-
plankton group at  most  stations, with small unidentified phytoflagellates
being     dominant .  Diatom  concentrations ranged from 7.6  to 55.5
percent of total phytoplankton.(Appendix Tables  8.4 - 8.6.)
                                   333

-------
The taxonomic list (Appendix Tables  8.10-8.12)
indicates that Transects 1 and 3 had similar phytoplankton populations,
which were different from the populations at Transect 5.  Chaetoceros
spp., Leptocylindrus minimus, and Rhizosolenia spp. were the dominant
diatom species of Transect 1 and 3, while Thalassionema nitzschioides,
small Navicula spp., and Thalassiosira spp. were abundant at Transect 5.

       The pattern of decreasing relative and absolute density of
diatoms seen in May  (1980) is also evident in the October - November
sampling period.  Diatom concentrations ranged from 31.1 to 86.4 percent
of the total phytoplankton population  (Appendix Tables 8.7-8.9).  A
greater number of diatom species were found in the October - November
sampling period, while total abundance at Transects 1 and 5 was low.  The
diatom populations of Transects 1 and 3 were similar, but to a lesser
degree than the May  sampling period   (Appendix Tables  8.13
and  8.14 and Appendix Figures 8.1 and 8.2).  Transect 5 generally differed
in both species composition and diatom abundance.  Asterionella japonica,
Leptocylindrus danicus, Leptocylindrus minimus, Nitzschia pungens,
Rhizosolenia fragilissima, and Skeletonema costatum were the dominant
species of Transects 1 and 3, while Chaetoceros spp., small Navicula spp.,
and  Rhizosolenia fragilissima comprised the dominants of Transect 5.

       Small unidentified phytoflagellates were the dominant group of
phytoplankton found  at most stations during the May 1980 sampling period.
Phytoflagellate concentrations (cells/ml) ranged from 30.1 to 77.1
percent of total phytoplankton numbers per station  (Appendix Tables 8.4-
8.6).  Transect 3 had the highest total phytoflagellate concentration with
5,459 cells/ml and Transect 5 the lowest with 2,342 cells/ml.  No other
trends were evident.

       The October - November 1980 sampling period showed concentrations
of unidentified phytoflagellates to be lower than in May.  Phytoflagellate
densities ranked second to diatom densities at all stations.  Transect 3
                                  334

-------
again had the maximum total phytoflagellate  concentration with  856
cells/ml, followed by Transect 5 with  207  cells/ml,  and Transect  1
with 196 cells/ml.  Decreasing density with  increasing distance from
shore was evident at Transect 3 but not observed at  either Transect 1 or
                                       \
Transect 5.

       During the May 1980 sampling period dinoflagellates were generally
found in low numbers, and were comprised mainly of small Gymnodinium
spp.  A bloom of Ptychodiscus brevis  (formerly Gymnodinium breve) was
present at the outer three stations of Transects 3 and 5.  The  maximum
concentration of this organism was 667 cells/ml at Station 31  (Appendix
Tables 8.10-8.12).

       Low numbers of dinoflagellates  were again found in the October -
November 1980 period.   Small Peridinium spp.  generally dominated most
stations of Transects 1 and 3.  Prorocentrum redfieldi was the
dominant dinoflagellate at most stations of  Transect 5  (Appendix Tables
8.13-8.15).  Moderate concentrations of Ptychodiscus brevis were found
at Stations II, 3G, and 31.  Station 31 had  the maximum concentration of
230 cells/ml.

       Other types of flagellated algae, excluding the group of unidentified
phytoflagellates, were  of minor numerical  importance at all  stations
in the May 1980 sampling period.  Six  taxa,  comprising 4 classes, were
found  (Appendix Tables  8.10-8.12).  Transect 5 had generally higher
numbers of these small  phytoflagellates.   During the second sampling period
 (October - November 1980), 7 taxa of flagellated algae, comprising 4 classes,
were found  (Appendix Tables 8.13-8.15).  Inshore stations  (A-D) generally
had higher densities than offshore stations  (F-I).   No trends between
transects were evident.

       Cyanophytes  (blue-green algae)  were found in  low densities in the
May 1980 samples.  Anabaena sp., Anacystis montana  (?) and Oscillatoria
erythraea were found.   Densities of cyanophytes in the
                                   335

-------
October - November samples were also low,  and the same species
were found as in May.  Cyanophytes were present at a
greater number of stations on Transects 1 and 3 in the October -
November sampling period.  No other trends were evident.

       Species richness, diversity (H1), and equitability values  (J1)
are presented in Appendix Table 8.17.  Except for the unusually low
species richness and correspondingly low diversity found at Stations
II and 1G, no general trends were evident in the May 1980 sampling
period.  Species diversity and equitability were generally high at all
stations.

       Greater species richness and diversity were evident in the October -
November sampling period.  The number of species per station in the
second sampling period ranged from 26  (IE) to 63  (3C) , as compared to
10  (II) to 28 (3B) in the May 1980 period.  Higher species diversity
was also evident for all three transects.  Equitability values for
Transects 1 and 3 were similar for both sampling periods.  Transect 5
showed a higher equitability in the October - November period.  No
other trends were evident.

       The faunal similarity matrix for the May 1980 sampling period
(Appendix Figure 8.1)  indicated that the  phytoplankton communities of
Transect 5 were different from the communities of Transects 1 and 3.   In
particular, Station 5E was strikingly different from all other stations.
Faunal similarities for the October - November period  (Appendix Figure 8.2)
contrasted those of the May 1980 period.  Transect 1 inshore stations
(A-D)  and Transect 3 inshore stations  (A-D) showed a high degree  of  simi-
larity but this trend was not evident in offshore  (F-I)  stations.  Transect
5 did  not follow this trend, but exhibited  a uniform moderate to high
similarity from Station 5A through 51.  The faunal similarity trends observed
in the  second sampling period  are consistent with the patterns previously
described for species  diversity and equitability.
                                    336

-------
                            DISCUSSION

       The phytoplankton data presented in this report represent a
total of 6 sampling days, between May 28 - November 4, 1980.  Samples
were collected in  early summer (warm,  dry season)  and fall (warm,  wet
season), in an attempt to assess seasonal fluctuations of the phyto-
plankton.  Several interesting trends are discernable.
       The trend of decreasing phytoplankton densities with increasing
distance from shore has been described previously for the West Central
Coast of Florida by Saunders and Glenn  (1969).  Similar patterns have
been shown for chlorophyll  'a'  (see Appendix Table 8.3) in coastal
waters of the eastern Gulf  of Mexico by Marshall  (1956).  The chlorophyll
'a1 data of the present study, in general, support these patterns.  The
chlorophyll 'a' data for Transect 5  (Stations 5G and 51 in particular)
however, has not supported  this pattern on either sampling period.  It
was postulated that the elevated values at Stations 5G and 51 in May
1980 were due to chlorophyll 'a* contributions from a Ptychodiscus brevis
bloom.  No such bloom was recorded in the October - November sampling
and yet chlorophyll 'a1 values remained consistently high.  A detailed
consideration of water chemistry data and specific current patterns might
provide insight into this anomaly.

       Also noted in the chlorophyll  'a' data for both the May and
October - November sampling periods was that the greatest chlorophyll 'a1
concentrations generally did not occur within the first meter of surface water.
This suggests that surface  light intensity may be too intense for
many phytoplankters.  Vertical distribution patterns of diatom populations
have not been clearly shown; however,  heavier diatom concentrations
have been reported to occur in bottom samples offshore and in surface
samples inshore (Saunders and Glenn, 1969).  This problem has been
addressed by Marshall (1956) with the recommendation that surface light
intensities not be regarded as a serious deterrent to the use of
chlorophyll 'al values as an index of biomass where the plankton is free
to mix vertically-
                                  337

-------
       High chlorophyll 'a* values at depth, such as those found
at 3A  (5/29/80) and 3C (10/31/80), are probably associated with the
mixing of benthic forms into the plankton of shallow waters.  The
elevated values of Transect 3 (Stations A-C) may be due in part to the
mixing of filamentous algae throughout the water column.  This conclu-
sion is supported by Phillips (1960) who has previously described
several large masses of filamentous green and red algae from Tampa Bay
north  to the Tarpon Springs area in the fall season.

       The taxonomic composition of the phytoplankton community
described in this study parallels the findings of other studies of
the coastal and nearshore waters of the West Central Coast of Florida
 (Davis, 1950;  Saunders and Glenn, 1969; Johansson, 1975).  Davis  (1950)
reported that  diatoms were most often the dominant type of phytoplankton
in nearshore waters.  In the present study, diatoms were the most abundant
group  in the October - November 1980 sampling and ranked second to phyto-
flagellates in May 1980.  Dinoflagellates were only dominant  (never
abundant) where Ptychodiscus brevis was found in large numbers.  This
seeming conflict with previous studies of this area probably results
from the use of different sampling techniques, preservation methods,
and counting procedures.  Earlier studies did most often not  usually account for
the nannoplankton fraction of the phytoplankton population.  Therefore,
the value of older studies lies in  their  reports of  absolute cell counts
 (cells/ml of each group) and not relative percentages.  Cell densities  in  the
present study  are comparative, however, with densities of other coastal areas
when the total phytoplankton was analyzed  (Pratt, 1959; Watling,  Bottom,
Pembroke, and Maurer, 1979).

       The phytoplankton populations of Transects 1 and 3 are  similar
and often contrasted to the population of Transect 5.  Inshore stations
(A-D)  on Transects 1 and 3 are apparently affected to a great degree by
their proximity to tidal inlets.  Tidal exchanges between the bays  and
the open Gulf of Mexico (see Chapter 5) are primarily responsible for
the currents at the bases of these transects.
                                   338

-------
        Plankton populations influenced by these estuaries are
 generally distinguished from those of open coastal waters by stronger
 gradients in spatial distribution and more pronounced seasonal and
 annual fluctuations.  This is evident in the October - November sampling
 period on Transects 1 and 3 as distinct inshore (A-D) and offshore
 populations exist.   Total densities may also be explained by estuarine
 influence in terms of seasons.  The May 1980 sampling period reflected
 the dry season where less freshwater and nutrients passed through
 inlets on tidal exchanges.  May in general exhibited higher species
 densities per station.  The October - November period was contrastingly
 wet with greater exchange of discharge volumes and correspondingly lower
 total densities.  Monospecific blooms, such as Skeletonema costatum and
 Rhizosolenia spp., often mask seasonal trends with respect to total
 densities.

        Transect 5 appears to be different from Transects 1 and 3.  In
 both May and October - November, densities at all stations were lower than
 corresponding stations on the other transects.  These differences may be
 attributed to the unique location of the transect, just outside a tidal
 pass at the south end of Anclote Key.  The area is influenced by a 57
 million gallon per day freshwater discharge from^the Anclote River (McNulty,
 Lindall, and Sykes, 1972).  This influence is strongly reflected in
 salinities, which, on the average, were 4-5 o/oo lower than the inshore
• stations of Transects 3 and 5  "Actual influence of salinity upon this
 area probably varies seasonally due to the range of discharge volumes
 (McNulty et al., 1972).  The forementioned factors in combination with
 other physical characteristics of the site are probably responsible for
 the differences in phytoplankton densities and species composition of
 Transect 5 and the other two study transects.

        The question of terrestrial runoff and its effect on the nearshore
 phytoplankton communities is one that is not easily  addressed, due to
 insufficient data on community structure and seasonal variation  in the
 study area.  The present study was limited to two distinct seasonal
 samplings.
                                   339

-------
       The impact of nutrient enrichment by municipal wastes
has been documented for certain phytoplankton  populations.
The response of Ptychodiscus brevis to enrichment with  selected  inorganic
nutrients, municipal waste materials, and various detergent compounds
has been determined.  The effluent from a secondary sewage outfall,  such
as that proposed for Station 3F, has been shown to cause up to three-
fold  increases in total cell numbers of P_. brevis  (Doig and Martin,  1974).
Doig  and Martin   (1974) suggest that the  impact of  seasonal
pulses in nutrient enrichments  (upwelling, land runoff) should be consi-
dered a more significant factor in P_. brevis outbreaks, whereas  an
essentially continuous process  (treated sewage outflow) could be con-
sidered a significant factor in sustaining an ongoing P_. brevis  bloom.
Considering the proposed discharge area and weak to moderate currents,  pre-
vailing south and west water movement  and observed P_.  brevis concentrations
from  100-667 cells/ml,  nutrient enrichment by municipal waste materials
could produce an ongoing bloom of P_. brevis in the vicinity of 5 Pinellas
County artificial reefs.  Three of these reefs lie directly within the
study area,  the remaining two being due south and southwest of  Pinellas
County Reef #1 - Rube Allyn  (see Photographic Documentation of North
Pinellas County Artificial Reefs Figure 1).  The   reefs include:  Dunedin
Reef; Clearwater Reef; and Rube Allyn, all within the study area; Pinellas
Number 2 Reef, to the southwest, and Indian Shores Reef to the south.
During August 1974 a severe Red Tide outbreak  (P_. brevis bloom)  and associated
defaunation was reported in the Pinellas County Artificial Reef  area.  Re-
covery took 9 to 10 months for the fish population and  two years for fouling
organisms (barnacles, corals, sponges (Pinellas County, 1979).

       The impact of nutrient enrichment by discharge of treated domestic
wastewater overall phytoplankton population is however  unknown.
                                   340

-------
                      SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

       1.  Twenty one stations along 3 transects were sampled for
phytoplankton in May and October - November 1980.  Abundance (density),taxonomic
composition, and biomass  (chlorophyll  'a') were assessed.  A total of
94 taxa were identified from the collections.

       2.  Phytoplankton density and chlorophyll  'a' concentrations
generally decreased in an offshore direction.  Total phytoplankton
density and chlorophyll 'a' concentrations were comparable to other
findings along the Gulf coast of Florida.

       3.  Phytoplankton densities and chlorophyll  'a' concentrations
were similar for Transects 1 and 3.  Values for Transect 5 were lower.

       4.  The phytoplankton community of the  inshore stations  (A-D) was
a typical estuarine-coastal assemblage of moderate diversity.  The
offshore  (F-I) phytoplankton community was characterized by more oceanic
species and moderate diversity.

       5.  Dominance was seasonal in the study area with diatoms and
small unidentified phytoflagellates ranking either first or second at
most stations.  Dinoflagellates were never dominant.

       6.  Ptychodiscus brevis was found in high  concentrations  (>100 cells/
ml) at the outer stations of all 3 transects.

       7.  Possible effects of a sewage outfall could include sustained
blooms of Ptychodiscus brevis and other phytoplankton species.  The
toxic and non-toxic consequences of phytoplankton blooms include:  fish
kills; anaerobic conditions; and a possible restructuring of the primary
trophic level.
                                   341

-------
                          LITERATURE CITED
Butcher, R.W.  1959.  An introductory account of the smaller algae of
       British coastal waters.  In:  Introduction and Chlorophyceae .
       Fish. Invest., Lond. ,  Ser. 4, 74 p.

Campbell, P.H.  1973.  Studies on brackish water phytoplankton .  Ph.D.
       Thesis.  University of North Carolina.  407 p.

Davis, C.C.  1950.  Observations of plankton taken in marine waters of
       Florida in 1947 and 1948.  Quarterly J. Florida Acad. Sci.,
       12:67-103.

Doig, M.T. and D.F. Martin.  1974.  The response of Gymnodinium breve
       to municipal waste materials.  Marine Biology, 24:223-228.

El Sayed, S.Z.  1972.  Primary productivity and standing crop of phytoplankton,
       p. 8-13.  In;  Chemistry, primary productivity, and benthic algae
       of the Gulf of Mexico.  Folio 22.  American Geographic Soc., 29 p.

Gibson, R.A. and T.L. Hopkins.  1972.  p. 60-70.  In;  Anclote Environmental
       Project 1972.  Cont. No. 41, Dept. Mar. Sci., Univ. South Florida,
       220 p.

Gibson, R.A., J.O.R. Johansson, M.E. Gorman and T.L. Hopkins.  1974b.
       Phytoplankton ecology in the vicinity of the Florida Power
       Corporation Generating Plant at Crystal River, November 1973 -
       April, 1974, p. 429-447.  In:  Crystal River Power Plant Environ-
       mental Considerations.  Final Report to the Federal Interagency
       Research Advisory Committee, Vol. IV.  Florida Power Corporation,
       St. Petersburg.

Hulbert, E.M. and N. Corwin.   1972.  A note on the phytoplankton distribu-
       tion in the offshore waters of the eastern and central Gulf of Mexico.
       Caribbean J. Sci., 12:29-38.

Johansson, J.O.R.  1975.  Phytoplantkon productivity and standing crop in
       the Anclote Estuary, Florida.  M.S. Thesis, Univ. South Florida.
       75 p.

Marshall, N.  1956.  Chlorophyll 'a1 in the phytoplankton in coastal waters
       of the eastern Gulf of Mexico.  Journal of Marine Research,
       15:14-32.

McNulty, J.K., W.N. Lindall,  Jr. and J.E. Sykes.  1972.  Cooperative Gulf
       of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study, Florida:  Phase  1, Area
       Description.  NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS CIRC-368, 126 p.

Morisita, M.  1959.  Measuring of interspecific association and  similarity
       between communities.  Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyushu Univ. Ser.  E.  (Biol.),
       3:65-80.
                                   342

-------
Odum, H.T., J.B. Lackey, J. Hynes and N. Marshall.   1955.  Some red
       tide characteristics during  1952-1954.  Bull. Mar. Sci., 5:247-257.

Palmer, C.M. and T.E. Maloney.   1954.  A new counting slide for nanno-
       plankton.  Am. Soc. Limnol.  Oceanogr. Special Publ. 21, 6 p.

Phillips, R.G.  1960.  Ecology  and  distribution of marine algae found in
       Tampa Bay, Boca Ciega Bay, and at Tarpon Springs, Florida.  Quarterly
       J. Florida Acad.  Sci., 23:222-260.

Pielou, E.G.  1966.  The measurement of diversity in different types of
       biological collections.   J.  Thero.  Biol., 13:131-144.


Pinellas County Artificial Reefs.   1979.   A brochure published
      by the Pinellas Board of  County Commissioners, Pinellas
      County, Florida, April 1979.

Pratt, D.M.  1959.  The phytoplankton of Narragansett Bay.   Limnol.
       Oceanogr., 4 (4):425-440.

Saunders, R.P. and D.A. Glenn.  1969.  Memoirs of the Hourglass Cruises.
       Diatoms. Volume I, Part  III.  Mar. Res. Lab Fla.  Dept.  Nat.  Res.
       Contribution No.  127.  119 p.

Shannon, C.E. and W. Weaver.  1963.  The mathematical theory of communica-
       tion.  Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana.  117 p.

Standard Methods.  1975.  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
       and Wastewater.   14th Edition, 1975.  American Public Health
       Association,  p.

Steidinger, K.A. and J. Williams.  1970.  Dinoflagellates.   Memoirs of
       the Hourglass Cruises, Vol. II.  Fla. Dept. Nat.  Res. Mar. Res.
       Lab. 1-251.

Turner, J.T.  1972.  The phytoplankton of the Tampa Bay System, Florida.
       M.A. Thesis, Univ. South Florida.   181 p.

Watling, L., D. Bottom, A. Pembroke and D. Maurer.  1979.  Seasonal varia-
       tions in Delaware Bay phytoplankton community structure.  Marine
       Biology, 52:207-215.
                                   343

-------
 Appendix Table 8.1.  Chlorophyll  'a' concentrations at depth and of the total water column, Northern Pinellas County
                      Area, Florida, May 1980.


                   Depth  Sta.  Depth  Sta. Depth  Sta.  Depth  Sta.  Depth  Sta.  Depth  Sta.  Depth  Sta.    X
Transect Date
1 5/28/80
mg m

Integrated
mg m~2
3 5/29/80


Integrated
mg m~
u>
£ 5 5/30/80

Integrated
mg m""2
ft
3
7
13

3
6
10

1
3
6

A
6.2
5.6
7.6
25.0
6.5
6.0
20.1
27.6
1.9
1.3
1.8
2.9
ft,
3
9
15

3
9
16

1
3
6

B
5.2
6.3
6.0
26.6
6.1
4.8
5.8
26.7
1.4
1.3
1.2
2.4
ft
3
9
16

3
7
11

1
4
7

C
4.8
5.9
4.3
24.9
3.2
3.3
3.8
12.3
1.4
1.2
1.3
2.8
ft.
3
10
18

3
9
15

3
6
10

D
4.2
5.9
4.2
26.9
3.9
3.4
3.7
16.6
1.4
1.3
1.2
4.0
ft.
5
11
20

3
9
16

1
7
9
15

E
3.5
2.6
2.6
17.9
2.1
1.4
1.1
7.9
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.9
3.6
ft.
10
26

3
15
29

1
4
9

G
ND
3.5
3.8
28.4
3.0
1.3
1.4
16.3
1.6
1.5
1.2
3.9
ft.
10
54

3
16
30

4
10
15
35

I
ND
1.3
2.2
28.0
2.7
0.8
1.8
14.8
2.4
1.8
1.6
1.3
18.0
mg m


25.4



17.5


5.4
ND = Data not available.

-------
Appendix Table 8.2.  Chlorophyll  'a' concentrations at depth and of the total water column, Northern Pinellas County
                     Area, Florida, October-November 1980.

Transect Date
1 10/29/80
mg/m

Integrated
mg/m2
3 10/31/80a
mg/m

Integrated
mg/m
5 11/04/80
w . 3
** mg/m

Integrated
7s
mg/m''
Depth Sta. Depth Sta. Depth
ft. A ft. B ;:ft.
3 9.4 3 7.1 3 ;
8 8.2 9 7.1 8.5
15 9.3 18 5.9 17.5

41.6 31.8
3b 25.1/24.9 3b 24.1 3
	 	 	 	 6.5
	 	 	 	 13

NC NC
3b 2.0/2.9 3C 2.8 3C


5.5 2.8 6


NC 4.7
Sta.
C
5.9
6.3
5.2

26.9
20.4
20.0
128.3

566.0
2.8


2.0


3.9
Depth
ft.
3
8
16


3
5.5
11


3
5
10.5



Sta.
D
5.0
6.8
5.4

27.3
9.6
7.4
7.9

24.9
1.8
1.5
2.0


6.6
Depth
ft.
3
8
16


3 3
9
19


3 1
9
18



Sta.
E
2.9
4.1
2.3

11.4
.7/3.6d
4.4
3.8

22.2
.7/1.8d
1.3
1.1


5.4
Depth
ft.
3
15
30.5


3
15
30


3
14
28



Sta.
G
1.1
3.3
1.2

13.9
2.0/1.4d
1.3/1.7d
1.7/1.8d

15.3
2.0
1.7
7.8


66.1
Depth
ft.
3
23
47


3
19
38


3
18
37



Sta.
I
2.5
1.9
3.1

42.2
2 . 0/2 .
2.0
0.4

17.3
2.2
1.0
0.9


8.4
X -2
mg m




27.9
5d



129.1





15.2
a = Transect 3, Station I collected on November 4, 1980.
b = Surface sample
only, maximum depth 1.5 meters.
c = Surface and bottom sample only, maximum depth <2
d = Two replicate
NC = Not computed,

meters .


samples taken, mean used to calculate integrated
insufficient data.





-


chlorophyll values





(mg/m


















-------
     Appendix Table  8.3.  Ranges  of  chlorophyll  'a1 concentrations in various estuarine,  coastal,  and offshore
                          waters  of  the Gulf of Mexico.
           Area
     Offshore waters;
       Gulf of Mexico
                              Chlorophyll 'a'    Season
                               (ing/nT3)
                               0.01- 12.'35    All seasons
                                   Source
               El-Sayed, 1972
     Coastal waters;
       Gulf of Mexico adjacent
       Anclote Key
                               1.88- 17.33    All  seasons    Gibson, Johansson, Gorman, and Hopkins, 1974
u>
Estuaries;
  Hillsborough Bay
  Old Tampa Bay
  Mid Tampa Bay
  Lower Tampa Bay
  Anclote Anchorage
  Anclote River
                                   2.69- 56.47
                                   2.23- 28.23
                                   0.14-163.60
                                   0.52-  6.05
                                   1.70- 10.91
                                   3.75- 21.33
All seasons
All seasons
All seasons
All seasons
All seasons
All seasons
Turner and Hopkins, 1974
Turner and Hopkins, 1974
Turner and Hopkins, 1974
Turner and Hopkins, 1974
Gibson, Johansson, Gorman, and Hopkins, 1974
Gibson, Johansson, Gorman, and Hopkins, 1974

-------
Appendix Table 8.4. Average concentration  (cells/ml) and percent composition (%)
                    of phytoplankton groups on Transect 1, May 28,  1980,
                    Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                             TRANSECT  1

                                B       C       D       E
Diatoms  (cells/ml)    6,841   5,741   6,403   6,411    3,328      593      166   4,212
 (%)                  (55.5)  (45.0)  (45.7)   (53.3)   (46.4)   (22.9)   (14.6)   (47.5)

Dinoflagellates         231     154     277     123       62      144       83     153
 (%)                  ( 1.9)  ( 1.2)  ( 2.0)   ( 1.0)   ( 0.9)   (  5.6)   (  7.3)   ( 1.7)

Chrysophyceae            31      62     154     123    	    	     	         3
 (%)                  ( 0.3)  ( 0.5)  ( 1.1)   ( 1.0)                           ( 0.6)

Cryptophyceae         1,170     585     769   	         31      46       11     373
 (%)                  ( 9.5)  ( 4.6)  ( 5.5)           ( 0.4)   (  1.8)   (  1.0)   ( 4.2)

 Euglenophyceae       	     	     	        31    	    	     	         4
 (%)                                           ( 0.3)                           (<0.1)

 Haptophyceae            93   	     	       137    	    	     	        33
 (%)                  ( 0.8)                   ( 1.1)                           ( 0.4)

 Unid.  flagellates    3,971   6,186   6,216   5,073    3,693   1,801      874   3,973
 (%)                  (32.2)  (48.5)  (44.4)   (44.2)   (51.5)   (69.7)   (77.1)   (44.8)

 Cyanophytes          	        31     155     164       62   	     	        59
 (%)                          ( 0.2)  ( 1.1)   ( 1.4)   ( 0.9)                   ( 0.7)


 Total  Concentration,
 cells/ml            12,377  12,759  14,005   12,031    7,176   2/584    1,134   8,861
                                        347

-------
Appendix Table 8.5. Average concentration (cells/ml) and percent composition (%)
                    of phytoplankton groups on Transect 3, May 29,  1980,  Northern
                    Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                             TRANSECT 3
                       A	B	C	D	E	G	I	5L_

Diatoms  (cells/ml)   5,391    5,455    3,674   3,101     849     413      302   2,741
 (%)                  (34.6)   (32.0)   (30.3)   (33.7)  (23.0)   (16.1)   (10.6)   (30.4)

Dinoflagellates        492     328      205     154     119     369      813     354
 (%)                  ( 3.2)   (  1.9)   ( 1.7)   ( 1.7)  ( 3.2)   (14.4)   (28.6)   ( 3.9)

Chrysophyceae          123     164    	        31      37      50       31      62
 (%)                  ( 0.8)   (  1.0)           ( 0.3)  ( 1.0)   ( 1.9)   (  1.1)   ( 0.7)

Cryptophyceae          154     287      451     226     139      49       11     188
 (%)                  ( 1.0)   (  1.7)   ( 3.7)   ( 2.5)  ( 3.8)   ( 1.9)   (  0.4)   ( 2.1)

Euglenophyceae       	      	        123   	     	     	     	        18
 (%)                                  ( 1.0)                                    ( 0.2)

Haptophyceae         	      	        410     390     128      99       41     153
 (%)                                  ( 3.4)   ( 4.2)  ( 3.5)   ( 3.9)   (  1.4)   ( 1.7)

Unid. flagellates    9,355   10,749    7,463   5,210   2,405   1,589   1,644   5,459
 (%)                  (60.1)   (63.1)   (59.9)   (56.6)  (65.0)   (61.9)   (57.8)   (60.6)

Cyanophytes             62      41       93      21   	     	     	        31
 (%)                  ( 0.4)   (  0.2)   ( 0.8)   ( 0.2)                           ( 0.3)


Total Concentration,
cells/ml            15,574   17,024   12,126   9,205   3,698   2,569   2,842   9,005
                                       348

-------
Appendix Table 8.6. Average concentration  (cells/ml) and percent composition  (%)
                    of phytoplankton groups on Transect 5, May 30, 1980, Northern
                    Pinellas County Area, Florida
Diatoms (cells/ml)
Dinoflagellates
Chrysophyceae
Cryptophyceae
Euglenophyceae
Haptophyceae
Unid. .flagellates
Cyanophytes
A
2,589
(35.1)
62
( 0.8)
124
( 1.7)
502
( 6.8)
	
339
( 4.6)
3,762
(51.0)
	
B
2,747
(32.2)
41
( 0.5)
123
( 1.4)
656
( 7.7)
	
985
(11.5)
3,979
(46.6)
	
C
1,724
(30.5)
118
( 2.1)
87
( 1.5)
308
( 5.4)
	
548
( 9.7)
2,764
(48.8)
111
( 2.0)
TRANSECT
D
1,020
(27.2)
62
( 1.7)
	
170
( 4.5)
	
200
( 5.3)
2,124
(56.7)
170
( 4.5)
5
E
1,805
(55.8)
259
( 8.0)
21
( 0.6)
31
( 1.0)
	
113
( 3.5)
975
(30.1)
31
( 1.0)
G
336
(17.6)
382
(20.0)
32
( 1.7)
21
( 1.1)
	
52
( 2.7)
1,088
(56.9)
	
I
229
( 7.6)
793
(26.4)
42
( 1.4)
72
( 2.4)
11
( 0.4)
144
( 4.8)
1,702
(56.7)
11
( 0.4)
X
1,493
(31.2)
245
( 5.1)
61
( 1.3)
251
( 5.3)
2
340
2,342
(49.0)
48
( 1.0)
 Total Concentration,
 cells/ml             7,378   8,531   5,660   3,746   3,235   1,911   3,004   4,782
                                       349

-------
Appendix Table 8.7.
Average concentration (cells/ml) and percent composition  (%)
of phytoplankton groups on Transect 1, October 29, 1980,
Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                            TRANSECT 1
Diatoms (cells/ml)
Dinof lagellates
Chlorophyceae
Chrysophyceae
Cryptophyceae
Euglenophyceae
Unid. flagellates
Cyanophytes
A
4,205
(86.4)
280
( 5.8)
65
( 1.4)
40
( 0.8)
20
( 0.4)
5
( 0.1)
225
( 4.7)
25
( 0.5)
B
2,090
(83.1)
65
( 2.6)
40
( 1.6)
10
( 0.4)
10
( 0.4)
10
( 0.4)
275
(10.9)
15
( 0.6)

C
1,590
(79.7)
( 5
( 2
( o
( 0
( 0
(10
( 1
100
.0)
40
.0)
5
.3)
15
.8)
15
.8)
205
.3)
25
.3)
D
1,870
(82.7)
145
( 6.4)
	
20
( 0.9)
5
( 0.2)
	
200
( 8.9)
20
( 0.9)
E
495
(75.0)
65
( 9.8)
15
( 2.3)
	
	
S
( 0.8)
75
(11.4)
5
( 0.8)
G I
775 330
(74.5) (38.8)
90 275
( 8.7) (32.3)
	 	
	 	
10 15
( 1.0) ( 1.8)
	 	
165 225
(15.9) (26.5)
5
( 0.6)
X
1,622
(80.1)
146
( 7.2)
23
( 1.1)
11
( 0.5)
11
( 0.5)
5
( 0.2)
196
( 9.7)
14
( 0.7)
Total Concentration,
cells/ml             4,865
         2,515   1,995   2,260
660   1,040
850   2,026
                                       350

-------
Appendix Table 8.8. Average concentration  (cells/ml) and percent composition  (%)
                    of phytoplankton groups on Transect 3,  Stations A-G,
                    October 31,  1980 and Transect  3, Station  I, November 4, 1980,
                    Northern Pinelias County Area, Florida.

                                            TRANSECT 3

                       ABCDEGIjF
Diatoms (cells/ml)
Dinoflagellates
(%)
Chlorophyceae
(%)
Chrysophyceae
(%)
Cryptophyceae
(%)
Euglenophyceae
(%)
Unid. flagellates
(%)
Cyanophytes
(%)
9,625
(80.0)
660
( 5.5)
120
( 1.0)
110
( 0.9)
40
( 0.3)
10
( 0.1)
1,310
(10.9)
160
( 1.3)
11,465
(84.1)
480
( 3

( 0

.5)
70
.5)
30
( 0.2)

( 0

( 0
1,
(10

( 0
50
.4)
50
.4)
390
.2)
100
.7)
13,900
(85.6)
3,745
(72.8)
580
( 3
.6)
(
100
( 0

( 0

( o

( 0
1,
( 9

( 0
.6)
40
.3)
65
.4)
30
.2)
490
.2)
40
.3)
(

(

(

(

300
5.8)
55
1.1)
5
0.1)
135
2.6)
50
1.0)
815
(15.9)

(
35
0.7)
760
(40.5)
230
(12.3)
60
( 3.2)
40
( 2.1)
85
( 4.5)
	

670
(35.7)
30
( 1.6)
410
(48.2)
225
(26.4)
20
( 2.4)
5
( 0.6)
	

5
( 0.6)
180
(21.2)
5
( 0.6)
250
(33.1)
325
(43.0)
15
( 1.9)
10
( 1.3)
	

	

140
(18.5)
15
( 2.0)
5,685
(78.7)
400
( 5.5)
63
( 0.9)
34
( 0.5)
54
( 0.7)
21
( 0.3)
856
(11.9)
55
( 0.8)
 Total Concentration,
 cells/ml            12,035  13,635  16,245
5,140   1,875
850
755   7,219
                                        351

-------
Appendix Table 8.9.
Average concentration (cells/ml) and percent composition  (%)
of phytoplankton groups on Transect 5, November 4, 1980,
Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                B
                        TRANSECT 5

                   C       D       E
Diatoms (cells/ml)
(%)
Dinoflagellates
(%)
Chlorophyceae
(%)
Chrysophyceae
(%)
Cryptophyceae
(%)
Euglenophyceae
(%)
Unid. flagellates
(%)
Cy anophy t e s
(%)
995
(57.5)
260
(15.0)
30
( 1.7)
5
( 0.3)
15
( 0.9)
	

425
(24.5)
	

645
(59.7)
125
(11.6)
25
( 2.3)
5
( 0.5)
	

	

280
(25.9)
	

740
(63.0)
215
(18.3)
10
( 0.9)
5
( 0.4)
	

	

200
(17.0)
5
( 0.4)
230
(55.4)
65
(15.7)
10
( 2.4)
15
( 3.6)
	

15
( 3.6)
55
(13.3)
25
( 6.0)
375
(45.5)
130
(15.8)
40
( 4.8)
	

5
( 0.6)
25
( 3.0)
225
(27.3)
25
( 3.0)
410
(55.8)
175
(23.8)
10
( 1.4)
5
( 0.7)
	

___

135
(18.4)
___

720
(74.2)
90
( 9.3)
10
( 1.0)
	

10
( 1.0)
10
( 1.0)
130
(13.4)
— __

588
(59.4)
151
(15.3)
19
( 1.9)
5
( Q.5)
4
( 0.4)
7
( 0.-7)
207
(20.9)
8
( 0.8)
Total Concentration
cells/ml             1,730   1,080   1,175     415     825     735     970     990
                                       352

-------
Appendix Table 8.10.
                        Average density (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 1, May 28, 1980, Northern
                        Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                              1A
 DIATOMS
    Amphiprora sp.
    Amphora levis  (?)
    Amphora marina
    Asterionella japonica
    Bacteriastrum delicatulum
    Ceratulina bergonii
    Chaetoceros affinis
    Chaetoceros didymus
    Chaetoceros diversus
    Chaetoceros meulleri  (?)
    Chaetoceros pelagicus
    Chaetoceros subtilis
    Chaetoceros wighami  (?)
    Chaetoceros sp.  A
w   Chaetoceros spp.
uj   Coccojieis sp.
    Grammatophora marina
    Gyrosigma sp.
    Leptocylindrus  danicus
    Leptocylindrus  minimus
    Licmophora abbreviata  (?)
    Navicula  membranacea
    Navicula  sp. B
    Navicula  spp.
    Nitzschia closterium
    Nitzschia longissima
    Nitzschia pungens
    Nitzschia sigma
    Nitzschia spathulata
    Nitschia  spp.
                                                16
                                                          IB
1C
STATIONS

  ID
IE
1G
                                                                                                  21
                                                                                                          II
47
416
554
0
185
82
62
0
308
554
0
93
123
0
0
62
431
0
123
246
0
0
232
355
0
328
232
355
0
62
277
0
31
31
62
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47
785
0
0
154
47
123
0
62
1,631
0
0
92
0
0
0
0
1,169
0
31
0
31
0
0
0
602
123
0
0
137
0
0
0
677
62
0
93
62
0
0
0
221
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
93
0
0
21
0
0
0

-------
00
1A
2,585
552
400
693
0
0
93
IB
1,539
677
277
246
0
0
139
1C
3,016
985
154
62
31
0
62
STATIONS
ID
1,285
780
137
396
82
0
1,299
IE
585
462
0
431
0
0
462
1G
21
0
216
0
0
31
72
11
41
0
11
0
0
0
0
    Appendix Table 8.10. Continued.   Average  density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton  species on Transect 1, May 28,
                         1980, Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
   Rhizosolenia  fragilissima
   Rhizosolenia  setigera
   Rhizosolenia  stolterfothii
   Skeletonema costatum
   Thalassionema nitzschioides
   Thalassiosira aestivalis
   Thalassiosira spp.
   Tropidoneis lepidoptera

DINOFLAGELLATES
   Amphidinium sp.
   Goniaulax diacantha
   Goniaulax spinifera
   Gymnodinium verruculosam  (?)
   Gymnodinium sp. A
   Gymnodinium spp.
   Gyrodinium spp.
   Peridinium sp.
   Prorocentrum  redfieldi
   Ptychodiscus  brevis  (G. breve)
   Unidentified  dinoflagellates

CHRYSOPHYCEAE
   Apendinella sp.
   Calycomonas ovalis
   Calycomonas wulffii

CRYPTOPHYCEAE
   Cryptomonas sp.

EUGLENOPHYCEAE
   Eutreptia sp.

HAPTOPHYCEAE
   Isochrysis sp.
                                                  231
                                                             31
123
277
123
62
                                                    0
                                                   31
                                                1,170
 62
  0
585
154
  0
769
                                                                       31
  0
123
 0
 0
           31
144
  0
  0
          46
82
 0
 0
           11
                                                   93
                    137

-------
  Appendix Table 8.10.  Continued.   Average density (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 1, May  28,
                        1980,  Northern Pinellas  County Area, Florida.
CO
ui
ui
UNIDENTIFIED PHYTOFLAGELLATES
   Flagellate Type A
   Flagellate Type B
   Flagellate Type C
   Flagellate Type D
   Other Flagellates

CYANOPHYTES
   Anabaena sp.
   Anacystis montana  (?)
   Osoillatoria erythraea

SUMMARY DATA

   # Species
   Average Concentration,  cells/ml
1A
185
862
31
0
2,893
0
0
0
IB
1,354
1,108
93
0
3,631
31
0
0
1C
862
985
123
0
4,246
31
93
31
STATIONS
ID
55
1,067
396
1,176
2,379
96
68
0
IE
0
1,108
185
123
2,277
62
0
0
1G
0
539
87
0
1,175
0
0
0
11
21
257
62
0
534
0
0
0
    25
12,337
    21
12,759
    24
14,005
    25
12,031
   21
7,176
   12
2,584
   10
1,134

-------
    Appendix Table 8.11.
                      Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species on  Transect 3, May 29,  1980,  Northern
                      Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
CO
ui
DIATOMS
   Amphiprora sp.
   Amphora levis (?)
   Amphora marina
   Asterionella japonica
   Bacteriastrum delicatulum
   Ceratulina bergonii
   Chaetoceros affinis
   Chaetoceros didymus
   Chaetoceros diversus
   Chaetoceros meulleri (?)
   Chaetoceros pelagicus
   Chaetoceros subtilis
   Chaetoceros wighami (?)
   Chaetoceros sp.  A
   Chaetoceros spp.
   Cocconeis sp.
   Grammatophora  marina
   Gyrosigma sp.
   Leptocylindrus danicus
   Leptocylindrus minimus
   Licmophora abbreviata (?)
   Navicula  membranacea
   Navicula  sp. B
   Navicula  spp.
   Nitzschia closterium
   Nitzschia longissima
   Nitzschia pungens
   Nitzschia sigma
   Nitzschia spathulata
   Nitzschia spp.
   Rhizosolenia fragilissima
   Rhizosolenia setigera
   Rhizosolenia stolterfothii
3A
246
0
123
0
93
0
369
0
216
0
339
400
0
615
0
0
431
62
34
62
0
0
768
246
185
3B
164
41
0
0
82
82
451
123
123
0
369
862
0
574
41
0
369
205
0
0
41
0
1,108
287
0
3C
0
0
0
0
0
0
349
103
164
123
226
82
0
267
0
0
185
123
0
0
0
0
1,005
390
0
STATIONS
3D
0
0
0
62
0
0
72
123
134
0
462
144
0
749
103
0
113
31
0
0
0
0
513
123
154
3E
0
0
0
0
0
0
103
0
0
67
46
0
0
292
36
0
0
36
0
0
0
0
72
52
93
3G
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49
0
13
25
136
37
0
0
0
0
0
91
31
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
11
31
0
0
0
» 21
72
0
0
11
0
0
93

-------
Appendix Table 8.0.1. Continued.  Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species  on Transect  3,  May 29,  1980,
                     Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.

   Skeletonema costatum
   Thalassionema nitzschioides
   Thalassiosira aestivalis
   Thalassiosira spp.
   Tropidoneis lepidoptera

DINOFLAGELLATES
   Amphidiniunt sp.
   Goniaulax diacantha
   Goniaulax spinifera
   Gymnodinium verruculosam  (?)
   Gymnodinium sp. A
   Gymnodinium spp.
   Gyrodinium spp.
   Peridinium sp.
   Prorocentrum redfieldi
   Ptychodiscus brevis  (G. breve)
   Unidentified dinoflagellates
3A
93
770
339
0
492
0
0
3B
82
287
164
0
328
0
0
3C
62
82
513
0
205
0
0
STATIONS
3D
0
205
113
0
123
31
0
3E
0
31
21
16
87
0
0
3G
0
0
49
0
98
0
0
31
0
0
52
11
124
0
11
 16
271
                                                                                                           667
CHRYSOPHYCEAE
   Apendinella sp.
   Calycomonas ovalis
   Calycomonas wulffii

CRYPTOPHYCEAE
   Cryptomonas sp.

EUGLENOPHYCEAE
   Eutreptia sp.

HAPTOPHYCEAE
   Isochrysis sp.
123
154
287
                    451
                                                                   123
                    410
                                                                              31
                                                                             226
 16
139
 37
 49
                                                                                                            31
                                                                                                            11
                                                                             390
128
 99
                                                                                                            41

-------
   Appendix Table 8.11. Continued.  Average density (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species  on  Transect 3,
                        Northern Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
                                                                                                   May 29,  1980,
OJ
ui
oo
   UNIDENTIFIED PHYTOFLAGELLATES
      Flagellate Type A
      Flagellate Type B
      Flagellate Type C
      Flagellate Type D
      Other Flagellates

   CYANOPHYTES
      Anabaena sp.
      Anacystis montana (?)
      Oscillatoria  erythraea
SUMMARY DATA

   # Species
   Average Concentration, cells/ml
3A
0
1,846
924
2,000
4,585
0
62
26
15,574
3B
123
1,518
1,354
3,323
4,431
41
0
28
17,024
3C
144
1,067
451
1,211
4,390
0
0
23
12,126
STATIONS
3D
123
1,077
205
400
3,405
31
62
27
9,205
3E
0
590
87
0
1,728
0
21
22
3,698
3G
37
591
13
0
948
0
0
18
2,569
31
11
595
21
0
1,017
0
0
19
2,842

-------
Appendix Table 8.12.
                      Average density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 5, May 30,
                      Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                                                                                 1980, Northern
u>
in
DIATOMS
   Amphiprora sp.
   Amphora levis  (?)
   Amphora marina
   Asterionella japonica
   Bacteriastrum delicatulum
   Ceratulina bergonii
   Chaetoceros affinis
   Chaetoceros didymus
   Chaetoceros diversus
   Chaetoceros meulleri  (?)
   Chaetoceros pelagicus
   Chaetoceros subtilis
   Chaetoceros wighami  (?)
   Chaetoceros sp. A
   Chaetoceros spp.
   Cocconeis sp,
   Grammatophora marina
   Gyrosigma sp.
   Leptocylindrus danicus
   Leptocylindrus minimus
   Licmophora abbreviata  (?)
   Navicula membranacea
   Navicula sp. B
   Navicula spp.
   Nitzschia closterium
   Nitzschia longissima
   Nitzschia pungens
   Nitzschia sigma
   Nitaschia spathulata
   Nitzschia spp.
   Rhizosolenia fragilissima
   Rhizosolenia setigera
   Rhizosolenia stolterfothii
                                              5A
                                                        5B
5C
STATIONS

  5D
                                                                                      5E
                                                                                        11
                                                                                                5G
                                                                                                  21
                                        51
0
0
0
31
0
0
0
41
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
31
0
0
0
47
0
0
72
82
0
667
0
0
42
0
31
83
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
62
123
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
31
0
0
0
0
0
72
11
0
21
0
0
0
0
31
185
554
93
0
31
0
93
0
41
656
82
0
0
0
0
0
0
769
0
0
0
0
80
31
0
355
108
0
16
0
0
0
11
0
31
11
52
0
11
21
0
11
11
11
21
0
0
0
0
0
72
0
42
21
0
0
                                                                                                  11
                                          52

-------
CO
   Appendix Table 8.12. Continued.  Average density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 5,  May 30,  1980,
                        Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
    Thalassionema nitzschioides
    Thalassiosira aestivalis
    Thalassiosira spp.
    Tropidoneis lepidoptera

DINOFLAGELLATES
    Amphidinium sp.
    Goniaulax  diacantha
    Goniaulax  spinifera
    Gymnodinium verruculosam (?)
    Gymnodinium sp. A
    Gymnodinium spp.
    Gyrodinium spp.
    Peridinium sp.
    Prorocentrum redfieldi
    Ptychodiscus brevis  (G.  breve)
    Unidentified dinoflagellates

CHRYSOPHYCEAE
    Apendinella  sp.
    Calycomonas  ovalis
    Calycomonas  wulffii

CRYPTOPHYCEAE
    Cryptomonas  sp.

EUGLENOPHYCEAE
   Eutreptia  sp.

HAPTOPHYCEAE
   Isochrysis sp.
5A
1,078
0
339
0
0
0
0
0
62
0
0
0
0
0
124
0
5B
1,066
0
738
41
0
0
0
0
41
0
0
0
0
41
82
0
5C
511
0
203
80
31
0
25
0
62
0
0
0
0
25
62
0
STATIONS
5D
200
0
62
154
0
0
46
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5E
11
11
621
0
0
0
11
52
62
0
0
134
0
0
21
0
5G
0
11
72
0
0
0
0
144
0
0
11
216
11
21
11
0
51
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
175
11
52
11
533
0
21
21
11
                                                  502
656
308
170
 31
21
 72
                                                 339
985
548
200
113
52
144

-------
u>
en
  Appendix Table 8.12.  Continued.   Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species on Transect 5, May 30,  1980,
                       Northern Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
 UNIDENTIFIED PHYTOFLAGELLATES
    Flagellate Type A
    Flagellate Type B
    Flagellate Type C
    Flagellate Type D
    Other  Flagellates

 CYANOPHYTES
    Anabaena sp.
    Anacystis montana (?)
    Oscillatoria  erythraea
SUMMARY DATA

   # Species
   Average Concentration, cells/ml
5A
31
1,146
0
0
2,585
0
0
0
17
7,378
5B
123
1,682
41
0
2,133
0
0
0
17
8,531
5C
0
979
31
0
1,754
80
31
0
19
5,660
STATIONS
5D
47
877
31
0
1,169
123
31
16
21
3,746
5E
72
349
0
0
554
0
31
0
26
3,235
5G
41
400
0
11
636
0
0
0
25
1,922
51
31
820
0
0
851
0
0
11
21
3,004

-------
Appendix Table 8.13.
Average density (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 1, October 29,  1980, Northern
Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
DIATOMS
   Amphiprora sp.
   Amphora levis (?)
   Amphora marina
   Amphora spp.
   Asterionella japonica
   Bacteriastrum delicatulum
   Bacteriastrum spp.
   Biddulphia alternans
   Biddulphia aurita
   Ceratulina bergonii
   Chaetoceros affinis
   Chaetoceros atlanticus
   Chaetoceros compressus
   Chaetoceros curvisetus
   Chaetoceros decipiens
   Chaetoceros didymus
   Chaetoceros diversus
   Chaetoceros lorenzianus
   Chaetoceros meulleri (?)
   Chaetoceros peruvianus
   Chaetoceros wighami (?)
   Chaetoceros sp.  A
   Chaetoceros spp.
   Corethron  criophylum
   Coscinodiscus  spp.
   Cyclotella (?) sp.
   Cymatosira belgica
   Grammatophora  marina
   Guinardia  flaccida
   Gyrosigma  spp.
   Hemiaulus  membranaceous
   Leptocylindrus danicus
   Leptocylindrus minimus
1A
0
0
0
315
5
0
0
5
0
0
15
0
50
25
0
0
25
10
0
0
0
0
170
120
IB
5
0
0
75
5
0
0
0
5
0
40
30
0
25
0
0
60
10
0
0
0
0
85
20
1C
0
0
5
65
15
5
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
10
0
0
0
5
10
145
10
STATIONS
ID
0
0
0
115
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
80
185
0
10
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
125
160
IE
5
0
0
40
0
20
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
5
0
0
0
120
40
1G
5
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
5
15
0
0
15
40
11
10
25
0
10
0
0
20
0
0
15
0
0
0
20
0
5
20
0
5
0
0
0
20
5

-------
U)
cr>
u>
  DINOFLAGELLATES
     Amphidinium sp.
     Amphisolenia (?)
     Ceratium furca
     Ceratium sp. A
                  sp.

1A
0
5
0

IB
0
0
5

1C
0
0
0
STATIONS
ID
0
0
0

IE
0
0
0

1G
5
15
0

11
0
0
0
  Appendix Table 8.13.  Continued.   Average density (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 1, October  29,  1980,
                       Northern Pinellas County Area,  Florida,
Licmophora abbreviata
Lithodesmium undulatum
Navicula membranacea
Navicula salinarum  (?)
Navicula wawrikae
Navicula sp. A
Navicula sp. B
Navicula spp.
Nitzschia closterium
Nitzschia constricta  (?)
Nitzschia longissima
Nitzschia pungens
Nitzschia sigma
Nitzschia spathulata
Nitzschia spp.
Pleurosigma salinarum (?)
Pleurosigma strigosum
Pleurosigma spp.
Rhizosolenia alata
Rhizosolenia fragilissima
Rhizosolenia setigera
Rhizosolenia stolterfothii
Skeletonema costatum
Thalassionema nitzschioides
Thalassiosira aestivalis
Thalassiosira spp.
Thalassiothrix  sp.
Tropidoneis lepidoptera
Unidentified centric  diatoms
Unidentified naviculoid diatoms
Unidentified pennate  diatoms
65
60
0
0
335
5
20
5
0
5
0
230
0
0
2,230
335
165
0
5
0
0
10
50
0
10
170
0
10
0
5
0
0
50
5
0
970
190
250
0
5
0
0
30
20
0
0
140
5
10
0
10
0
0
80
0
0
520
405
70
5
0
0
5
20
30
5
0
180
0
15
0
0
0
5
160
20
0
530
195
20
0
0
0
5
5
10
0
5
120
0
0
0
0
0
5
10
0
0
90
0
0
0
0
0
5
30
10
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
15
560
10
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
5
5
15
0
0
25
0
0
0
0
0
5
110
0
5
0
0
0
5
0
5
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
 0
10
 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0

-------
   Appendix  Table  8.13.  Continued.  Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species on Transect 1, October 29,  1980,
                         Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
U)
    Goniaulax polygranaaa (?)
    Goniaulax spp.
    Gymnodinium spp.
    Gyrodinium spp.
    Peridinium spp.
    Polykrikos schwartzii
    Prorocentrum micans
    Prorocentrum redfieldi
    Prorocentrum spp.
    Ptychodiscus brevis (G. breve)
    Unidentified dinoflagellates

CHLOROPHYCEAE
    Chlamydomonas spp.

CHRYSOPHYCEAE
    Calycomonas  ovalis
    Unidentified Chrysophyte sp.

CRYPTOPHYCEAE
    Chroomonas sp.
    Cryptomonas  sp.

EUGLENOPHYCEAE
    Euglena spp.
    Eutieptia  sp.

UNIDENTIFIED  PHYTOFLAGELLATES
   Flagellate Type A
   Flagellate Type B
   Flagellate Type C
   Flagellate Type D
   Other Flagellates
1A
30
0
20
25
110
0
65
25
0
0
IB
10
0
0
10
30
0
10
0
0
5
1C
20
0
15
0
50
0
5
0
0
0
STATIONS
ID
20
0
15
15
55
10
25
0
0
5
IE
0
0
0
0
30
0
30
5
0
0
1G
0
0
20
5
50
0
0
10
0
0
11
10
5
5
0
80
0
45
10
115
0
                                                   65
                                                   40
                                                   15
                                                    5
                                                    0
                                                    5
40
10
10
 0
 0
10
40
         15
10
 5
 0
15
          20
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
5
5
0
0
 0
15
 0
 0
10
15
10
0
190
35
40
20
0
180
20
10
20
5
150
80
20
0
0
100
20
15
5
0
35
100
25
10
0
20
100
20
0
0
105

-------
   Appendix Table 8.13. Continued.  Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species  on  Transect 1,  October 29,  1980,
                        Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
  CYANOPHYTES
     Rnabaena sp.
     Anacystis montana (?)
     Oscillatoria  erythraea
   SUMMARY DATA

      #  Species
      Average Concentration,  cells/ml
1A
0
0
25
40
4,865
IB
10
0
5
39
2,515
1C
10
5
10
41
1,995
STATIONS
ID
20
0
0
33
2,260
IE
0
0
5
26
660
1G
0
0
0
31
1,040
11
0
0
5
32
850
u>
o\
in

-------
  Appendix Table 8.14.
                      Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species on Transect 3, Stations A-G, October 31,
                      1980, and Transect 3, Station I,  November 4, 1980, Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
u)
DIATOMS
   Amphiprora sp.
   Amphora levis  (?)
   Amphora marina
   Amphora spp.
   Asterionella japonica
   Bacteriastrum delicatulum
   Bacteriastrum spp.
   Biddulphia. alternans
   Biddulphia aurita
   Ceratulina bergonii
   Chaetoceros affinis
   Chaetoceros atlanticus
   Chaetoceros compressus
   Chaetoceros curvisetus
   Chaetoceros decipiens
   Chaetoceros didymus
   Chaetoceros diversus
   Chaetoceros lorenzianus
   Chaetoceros meulleri (?)
   Chaetoceros peruvianus
   Chaetoceros wighami (?)
   Chaetoceros sp. A
   Chaetoceros spp.
   Corethron criophylum
   Coscinodiscus spp.
   Cyclotella (?) sp.
   Cymatosira belgica
   Granuoatophora marina
   Guinardia flaccida
   Gyxosigma spp.
   Hemiaulus membranaceous
   Leptocylindrus danicus
   Leptocylindrus minimus
   Licmophora abbreviata
   Lithodesmium undulaturn
                                               3A
                                                        3B
3C
STATIONS

  3D
3E
                                                                     10
3G
                                                                                                          31
30
60
580
30
70
0
530
0
140
0
0
80
0
40
0
0
110
190
20
10
0
10
0
0
40
10
460
320
0
20
30
630
50
100
0
470
35
170
0
0
0
30
20
0
70
130
210
0
10
0
130
40
170
40
0
510
250
0
10
70
810
50
0
30
750
70
660
570
0
70
130
100
20
0
0
180
30
10
40
0
30
0
30
0
780
530
0
10
15
70
0
5
0
320
0
305
0
100
0
0
0
25
0
0
80
30
20
0
0
0
0
0
5
385
75
0
0
15
60
0
0
0
75
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
20
10
0
10
10
0
5
0
0
10
20
65
0
20
20
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
5
0
15
5
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
5
0
40
10
0

-------
  Appendix Table 8.14.  Continued.   Average  density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 3, Stations A-G,
                       October 31,  1980,  and  Transect 3, Station I, November 4, 1980, Northern Pinellas County
                       Area,  Florida.
U)
cry
Navicula loembranacea
Navicula salinarum  (?)
Navicula wawrikae
Navicula sp. A
Navicula sp. B
Navicula spp.
Nitzschia closterium
Nitzschia constricta  (?)
Nitzschia longissima
Nitzschia pungens
Nitzschia sigma
Nitzschia spathulata
Nitzschia spp.
Pleurosigma salinarum (?)
Pleurosigma strigosum
Pleurosigma spp.
Rhizosolenia alata
Khizosolenia fragilissima
Rhizosolenia setigera
Rhizosolenia stolterfothii
Skeletonema costatum
Thalassionema nitzschioid.es
Thalassiosira aestivalis
Thalassiosira spp.
Thalassiothrix sp.
Tropidoneis lepidoptera
Unidentified centric  diatoms
Unidentified naviculoid diatoms
Unidentified pennate  diatoms
  DINOFLAGELLATES
     Amphidinium sp.
     Amphisolenia (?)
                                                3A
                                                     3B
3C
STATIONS

  3D
                                                                                       3E
                                                                     10
                                                                                             3G
                                                                                                            31
0
0
0
140
280
0
0
0
210
230
0
10
10
250
370
0
0
10
120
60
0
0
0
65
70
5
0
0
50
10
0
0
0
15
10






1,


4,







610
0
5
20
0
20
10
040*
20
70
280
180
120
5
5
60
10
20
570
0
30
30
0
20
10
920
40
30
5,670
120
420
0
0
45
0
5
770
10
10
140
0
20
70
570
40
60
6,140
100
210
30
30
60
10
0
290
0
10
20
5
10
0
415
20
90
1,170
0
20
0
0
40
15
5
85
0
10
5
0
0
0
120
25
0
115
0
0
10
20
5
30
10
15
0
0
5
0
0
0
30
10
20
40
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
50
0
0
5
0
0
0
55
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
                  sp.

-------
    Appendix Table 8.14. Continued.  Average density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton  species on Transect 3,  Stations  A-G,
                         October 31, 1980,  and Transect 3, Station I, November 4,  1980, Northern Pinellas County
                         Area, Florida.
03
    Ceratium furca
    Ceratium sp.  A
    Goniaulax polygramma (?)
    Goniaulax spp.
    Gymnodinium spp.
    Gyrodinium spp.
    Peridinium spp.
    Polykrikos schwartzii
    Prorocentrum  mi cans
    Prorocentrum  redfield!
    Prorocentrum  spp.
    Ptychodiscus  brevis   (G. breve)
    Unidentified  Binoflagellates

CHLOROPHYCEAE
    Chlamydomonas spp.

CHRYSOPHYCEAE
    Calycomonas ovalis
    Unidentified  Chrysophyte sp.

CRYPTOPHYCEAE
    Chroomonas sp.
    Cryptomonas sp.

EUGLENOPHYCEAE
    Euglena spp.
    Eutreptia  sp.

UNIDENTIFIED  PHYTOFLAGELLATES
   Flagellate Type A
    Flagellate Type B
3A
90
60
100
0
160
0
10
40
190
0
10
3B
30
0
100
0
160
0
10
70
90
0
20
3C
60
0
170
10
120
0
30
80
70
0
40
STATIONS
3D
15
0
105
0
80
5
0
50
45
0
0
3E
30
0
60
0
50
0
10
55
15
0
10
3G
20
0
20
0
5
0
5
5
25
145
0
31
20
0
20
0
10
0
10
20
10
230
5
                                                   120
                                                  110
                                                    0
                                                   40
                                                    0
                                                   10
                                                   90
                                                  140
 70
 30
 10
 40
 50
  0
 40
150
100
 40
 15
 50
 30
  0
 70
100
 55
 15
120
 50
  0
 40
110
60
           40
30
55
 0
 0
75
30
20
 0
10
 0
 5
15
 5
15
                    10
 0
 5
 0
 0
35
 0

-------
   Appendix Table 8.14. Continued.  Average density (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 3, stations A-G,
                        October 31, 1980, and Transect 3, Station I, November 4, 1980, Northern Pinellas County
                        Area, Florida.
w
0\
<£>
      Flagellate Type C
      Flagellate Type D
      Other Flagellates

   CYANOPHYTES
      Anabaena sp.
      Anacystis montana (?)
      Oscillatoria erythraea
   SUMMARY DATA

      # Species
      Average Concentration, cells/ml
3A
90
150
840
160
0
0
54
12,035
3B
130
250
820
0
0
100
53
13,635
3C
170
200
950
10
30
0
63
16,245
STATIONS
3D
140
55
470
35
0
0
47
5,140
3E
5
15
545
30
0
0
37
1,875
3G
5
10
145
5
0
0
41
850
31
0
5
100
5
0
10
30
755

-------
  Appendix Table 8.15.
                      Average density (cells/ml)  of phytoplankton species on Transect  5, November 4, 1980,
                      Northern Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
-j
o
DIATOMS
   Amphiprora sp.
   Amphora levis (?)
   Amphora marina
   Amphora spp.
   Asterionella japonica
   Bacteriastrum delicatulum
   Bacteriastrum spp.
   Biddulphia alternans
   Biddulphia aurita
   Ceratulina bergonii
   Chaetoceros affinis
   Chaetoceros atlanticus
   Chaetoceros compressus
   Chaetoceros curvisetus
   Chaetoceros decipiens
   Chaetoceros didymus
   Chaetoceros diversus
   Chaetoceros lorenzianus
   Chaetoceros meulleri (?)
   Chaetoceros peruvianus
   Chaetoceros wighami (?)
   Chaetoceros sp.  A
   Chaetoceros spp.
   Corethron criophylum
   Coscinodiscus spp.
   Cyclotella (?) sp.
   Cymatosira belgica
   Grammatophora marina
   Guinardia flaccida
   Gyrosigma spp.
   Hemiaulus membranaceous
   Leptocylindrus danicus
   Leptocylindrus minimus
   Licmophora abbreviata
                                                5A
                                                   0
                                                  10
                                                   0
                                                       5B
0
0
0
       5C
      STATIONS

        5D
        5E
15
 5
 0
10
10
 5
55
 0
 0
        5G
35
 0
 0
        51
15
35
5
10
5
0
0
15
0
120
25
0
0
0
5
60
0
0
5
0
0
15
40
0
25
5
0
0
25
30
0
0
0
35
0
95
0
0
0
10
15
0
0
5
0
0
0
25
0
45
0
25
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
30
0
65
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
50
90
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
70
0
0
0
55
80
25
80
0
0
0
0
65
 0
 0
0
5
10
30
85
5
0
5
0
20
35
0
15
0
0
0
90
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
5
10
0
0
25
0
0
5
0
15
60
0

-------
 Appendix  Table  8.15. Continued.  Average density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 5, November 4, 1980,
                      Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.

                                                                           STATIONS
    Lithodesmium undulatum
    Navicula membranacea
    Navicula salinarum  (?)
    Navicula wawrikae
    Navicula sp. A
    Navicula sp. B
    Navicula spp.
    Nitzschia  closterium
    Nitzschia  constricta  (?)
    Nitzschia  longissima
    Nitzschia  pungens
    Nitzschia  sigma
    Nitzschia  spathulata
    Nitzschia  spp.
w   Pleurosigma salinarum (?)
J^   Pleurosigma strigosum
    Pleurosigma spp.
    Rhizosolenia alata
    Rhizosolenia fragilissima  ,
    Rhizosolenia setigera
    Rhizosolenia stolterfothii
    Skeletonema costatum
     Thalassionema nitzschioides
     Thalassiosira aestivalis
     Thalassiosira spp.
     Thalassiothrix sp.
     Tropidoneis lepidoptera
     Unidentified centric diatoms
     Unidentified naviculoid diatoms
     Unidentified pennate diatoms

  DINOFLAGELLATES
    Amphidinium sp.
    Amphisolenia (?)  sp.
5A
0
5
0
30
0
215
30
5
55
15
0
0
195
5
0
0
10
0
20
35
5B
0
0
0
35
5
75
20
15
35
10
0
0
140
25
5
20
25
0
10
10
5C
0
0
0
25
15
95
25
10
75
20
10
0
120
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
5D
0
0
0
10
0
15
5
0
15
5
0
5
15
5
0
0
15
0
0
0
5E
0
0
0
0
0
15
10
0
15
0
5
10
115
5
0
0
30
0
5
5
5G
15
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
75
10
0
10
30
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
0
0
5
0
0
0
5
0
95
0
0
60
5
65
0
15
0
10
5
0

-------
   Appendix Table 8.15. Continued.  Average density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton  species on Transect 5,  November  4,  1980,
                        Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
w
    Ceratium furca
    Ceratium sp.  A
    Goniaulax polygramma (?)
    Goniaulax spp.
    Gymnodinium spp.
    Gyrodinium spp.
    Peridinium spp.
    Polykrikos schwartzii
    Prorocentrum  micans
    Prorocentrum  redfieldi
    Prorocentrum  spp.
    Ptychodiscus  brevis  (G. breve)
    Unidentified  Dinoflagellates

CHLOROPHYCEAE
    Chlamydomonas spp.

CHRYSOPHYCEAE
    Calycomonas ovalis
    Unidentified  Chrysophyte sp.

CRYPTOPHYCEAE
    Chroomonas sp.
    Cryptomonas sp.

EUGLENOPHYCEAE
   Euglene spp.
   Eutreptia  sp.

UNIDENTIFIED  PHYTOFLAGELLATES
   Flagellate Type A
   Flagellate Type B
5A
15
30
10
0
10
170
20
0
5
30
5
0
0
15
0
0
65
30
5B
10
20
25
0
5
50
15
0
0
25
5
0
0
0
0
0
30
20
5C
5
20
5
5
30
125
25
0
0
10
5
0
0
0
0
0
35
20
STATIONS
5D
0
10
5
0
5
25
15
5
0
10
10
5
0
0
10
5
10
5
5E
0
5
25
0
10
30
30
30
0
40
0
0
0
5
25
0
30
10
5G
20
25
25
0
5
15
10
75
0
10
5
0
0
0
0
0
30
5
51
20
20
20
0
0
15
10
5
0
10
0
0
10
0
10
0
20
10

-------
   Appendix  Table  8.15.  Continued.   Average  density  (cells/ml) of phytoplankton species on Transect 5, November 4,  1980,
                         Northern  Pinellas  County Area, Florida.
      Flagellate Type C
      Flagellate Type D
      Other Flagellates

   CYANOPHYTES
      Anabaena sp.
      Anacystis montana  (?)
      Oscillatoria erythraea
   SUMMARY DATA

      # Species
      Average Concentration,  cells/ml
5A
5
25
300
0
0
0
41
1,730
5B
30
5
195
0
0
0
37
1,080
5C
0
5
140
0
5
0
35
1,175
STATIONS
5D
0
10
30
5
10
10
36
415
5E
0
0
185
0
10
15
29
825
5G
0
0
100
0
0
0
28
735
51
0
0
100
0
0
0
30
970
-J
U)

-------
       Appendix Table 8.16.
                     Phytoplankton abundance  in various estuarine, coastal, and offshore waters of the
                     Gulf  of Mexico.
            Area
       Offshore waters;
       Central Gulf of Mexico
       Central Eastern Gulf of Mexico
                                               Abundance,
                                                 cells/ml
     Time of Year/
         Date
      Reference
                                                   0.1       September
                                                   1-2       November-December
                           Fucase,  1967
                           Hulbert  and Corwin,  1972
GJ
*-J
ife
       Coastal waters:
       West of Anclote Key  (0.25 miles)
       North of Egmont Key
       Mouth of Tampa Bay
       Offshore Tampa Bay  (10 miles)
       Gulf of Mexico adjacent to Anclote Key
       Gulf of Mexico adjacent to Anclote Key

       Clearwater to Naples  (12 miles offshore)
       Estuaries;
       Anclote Anchorage
       Anclote River
       Tampa Bay System, Florida
         Hillsborough Bay
         Old Tampa Bay
         Mid Tampa Bay
         Lower Tampa Bay
                                                   56C
                                                  400C
                                                  404£
                                                   30a
                                                  178
                                                 1910
                                                  393L
                                                 1420
                                                 1490

                                                 1200
                                                 1200
                                                 800
                                                 800
May 1973
Spring and Summer 1971
May 1966
May 1966
All seasons 1973
All seasons 1974

December 1954
All seasons
All seasons

All seasons
All seasons
All seasons
All seasons
Johansson, 1975
Turner, 1972
Saunders and Glenn, 1969
Saunders and Glenn, 1969
Gibson and Hopkins, 1974
Gibson, Johansson,
Gorman and Hopkins, 1974
Odum, Lackey, Hynes,
and Marshall, 1955
Gibson et al., 1974
Gibson et al., 1974

Turner, 1972
Turner, 1972
Turner, 1972
Turner, 1972
       a
       b
       c
       d
= Only diatoms counted.
= Only net plankton counted.
= Only Skeletoneraa costs turn  present.
= Only Ptychodiscus brevis   counted.

-------
Appendix Table 8.17. Community characteristics at phytoplankton sampling stations,
                     Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                            May 1980
October 1980
Station
1A
IB
1C
ID
IE
1G
11
3A
3B
3C
3D
3E
3G
31
5A
5B
5C
5D
5E
5G
51
No.
Species
25
21
24
25
21
12
10
26
28
23
27
~22
18
19
17
17
19
21
26
25
21
Density Diversity
(cells/ml) (H1)
12,377
12,759
14,005
12,031
7,176
2,584
1,134
15,574
17,024
12,126
9,205
3,698
2,569
2,842
7,378
8,351
5,660
3,746
3,235
1,922
3,004
2.46
2.34
2.23
2.85
2.29
1.71
1.60
2.53
2.50
2.40
2.43
1.98
2.03
1.83
2.09
2.13
2.14
2.21
2.37
2.24
2.03
Equitability
(J1)
0.76
0.77
0.70
0.88
0.75
0.69
0.70
0.78
0.75
0.77
0.74
0.64
0.70
0.62
0.74
0.75
0.73
0.73
0.73
0.70
0.67
No.
Species
40
39
31
33
26
31
32
54
53
63
47
37
41
30
41
37
35
36
29
28
30
Density Diversity Equitability
(cells/ml) (H1) (J1)
4,865
2,515
1,995
2,260
660
1,040
850
12,035
13,635
16,245
5,140
1,875
850
755
1,730
1,080
1,175
415
825
735
970
2.27
2.47
2.61
2.75
2.65
2.05
2.86
2.74
2.61
2.74
2.98
2.91
3.08
2.65
2.96
3.10
3.03
3.36
2.81
2.91
2.99
0.62
0.67
0.70
0.79
0.81
0.60
0.82
0.69
0.66
0.66
0.77
0.81
0.83
0.78
*
0.80
0.86
0.85
0.94
0.84
0.87
0.88
                                             a? s

-------
      Appendix Figure 8.1.  Faunal similarity matrix for phytoplankton stations collected  in Northern  Pinellas County
                             Area,  May 1980 (based on CX values).
u>
                HIGH • SIMILARITY (CX>_0.7)

        MODERATE SIMILARITY (CXX).5<0.7)
     LOW SIMILARITY  (CX >_0.3  <0.5)

VERY LOW SIMILARITY  (CX<0.3)

-------
     Appendix Figure 8.2.   Faunal similarity matrix for phytoplankton stations collected in Northern  Pinellas County
                            Area,  October-November 1980 (based on- CA values).
Ui
                                   D.07 0.15 0.93 0.9!
                HIGH SIMILARITY

       MODERATE SIMILARITY (CX >0.5>O.T)
     LOW SIMILARITY  (CA X).3>0.5)

VERY LOW SIMILARITY  (CA >0.3)

-------
  CHAPTER NINE

   ZOOPLANKTON

       BY

T. DUANE PHILLIPS
      and
E. NELL BRADY

-------
                             INTRODUCTION

       Zooplankton samples were collected from the Gulf of Mexico
in the north Pinellas County (Florida) area as part of a larger marine
sampling and measurement program.  Samples were analyzed to characterize
the zooplankton communities of the area in support of an Environmental
Impact Statement for a proposed offshore sewage outfall.

       Quantitative studies of the zooplankton of the Eastern Gulf of
Mexico are  lacking.    Early investigations were primarily preliminary
taxonomic surveys.  King  (1950) provided a comprehensive species list
and detailed zooplankton distribution off the west coast of Florida.
Davis  (1950) also provided an extensive species list for the Gulf
coast plankton including the phytoplankton and described distribution,
but again presented no quantitative data.  The distribution of calanoid
and cyclopoid copepods along the Florida Gulf coast was described by
Gric.e  (1960) but he provided neither quantitative information nor data
on other members of the zooplankton community-

       Specific objectives of Hie present study were to:
       1.  Identify and quantify the zooplankton at seven stations
           along each of three transects  (see Figure 1.2; Chapter 1).
       2.  Compare zooplankton populations along each transect.
       3.  Compare zooplankton populations between transects.
       4.  Predict possible effects of a sewage outfall upon the
           zooplankton populations of the area.
                         4
       Since samples were collected only in May and October  1980,
seasonal trends were difficult to discern.   However, the data gathered
during this study provide a general idea of the species composition and
relative abundance of the zooplankton indigenous to the area.
                                   379

-------
                        MATERIALS AND METHODS

        Zooplankton samples were collected between May 28 - 30 and
again between October 29 - November 4, 1980 at Stations A, B, C, D,
E, G, and I on Transects 1, 3, and 5  (see Figure 1.2, Chapter 1).
Two replicates were taken at each station with a 0.5 meter  (mouth
diameter) 80 pm mesh net.  A flowmeter was mounted in the net mouth
so that the volume of water sampled could be determined.  At each
station, the net was allowed to sink approximately five meters  (or to
the bottom at shallow stations) and then towed obliquely to the sur-
face.  Upon retrieval, the net contents were washed into a 0.25 liter
cod-end container.  The samples were preserved with buffered 10% formalin.
Each sample was labelled both internally and externally-

        In the laboratory, a 1 or 2 ml aliquot (depending on the
apparent abundance of zooplankton in the sample) was withdrawn from
each replicate sample and placed in a gridded petri dish.  All animals
contained in the aliquot were enumerated, and identified to the lowest
practical taxonomic level under a Unitron dissecting microscope.  If
fewer than 200 animals were found in the initial aliquot, additional
aliquots were withdrawn and sorted until at least 200 organisms were
found.

        The number of organisms per m  at each station was calculated
from the mean number of organisms of each species from the two replicates.

        Data reduction consisted of preparing species lists for each
station and the estimation of the following community characteristics:
        •   Density (# organisms/m )
        •   Species richness (# species/station)
        •   Species diversity  (H1)
        •   Equitability (J1)
        •   Faunal similarity between stations  (C A)
These numerical indices are defined and explained In Chapter  10.
                                    380

-------
                               RESULTS
        Composite species  lists detailing  zooplankton densities
by station for each  sampling period  are presented  in Appendices
9.1-9.6.  A total of 75  taxa were  identified during the  study.
 Species Composition
       Percentage composition  of  the dominant  taxa  at  each  station are
 presented in Table 9.1  (May, 1980)  and  Table 9.2  (October,  1980).

       Dominant Species
        (i)  Transect  1.
       Copepod nauplii were the dominant taxa  at  Stations A through D
 during both May and October.   Oithona brevicornis was  the most abundant
 adult copepod at offshore  stations  in May but  was replaced  by Oithona nana
 in October.  Paracalanus crassirostris  was one of the  four  most abundant
 species during both sampling periods.   Bivalve veligers replaced larvacea
 as one of the most abundant taxa  during October and they were the domi-
 nant taxa at Station  E.

        (ii)  Transect 3.
       Bivalve veligers, which dominated nearshore  stations in May,
 were present in greatly reduced numbers during October.  Larvacea
 (probably Oikopleura  sp.)  replaced  bivalve veligers as one  of the
 four most abundant taxa during October.   Copepod  nauplii dominated Inear-
 shore stations in October.  £. brevicornis and P_. crassirostris were
 the dominant adult copepods during  both sampling  periods.

        (iii)  Transect 5.
       Copepod nauplii, 0. brevicornis  and P_.  crassirostris were three
 of the four most abundant  taxa during both May and  October. A large
 number of bivalve veligers were collected during  October.   Bivalve
 veligers replaced the cladoceran, Penilia avirostris as one of the  four
most abundant taxa in October.
                                    381

-------
Table 9.1.   Percentage Composition of the Four Most Abundant Species or Groups  along
            Transects,  Northern Pinellas' County Area, Florida.  May, 1980.
TRANSECT 1

SPECIES OR GROUP

Copepod naupli i
Unid. Larvacea
Paracalanus crassirostris
Oithona brevicornis


TRANSECT 3

SPECIES OR GROUP

Bivalve veligers
Copepod nauplii
Oithona brevicornis
Paracalanus crassirostris


TRANSECT 5

SPECIES OR GROUP

Oithona brevicornis
Copepod nauplii
Paracalanus crassirostris
Penilia avirostris
                                          STATIONS
A
17
14
12
10
A
36
20
11
6
A
33
18
13
10
B
29
8
10
13
B
51
18
6
4
B
42
28
4
5
C
27
13
9
17
C
67
11
4
3
C
36
14
10
16
D
23
8
6
22
D
15
19
11
7
D
14
10
8
40
.E
10
8
10
27
E
16
17
8
14
E
21
12
18
32
G
32
7
7
15
G
9
29
19
12
G
16
11
22
22
I
21
23
6
12
I
2
21
20
16
I
8
12
26
8
                                        382

-------
Table 9.2.  Percentage Composition  of the Pour Most Abundant Species or Group
            along Transects, Northern Pinellas County Area,  Florida. October, 1980.
TRANSECT 1

SPECIES OR GROUP

Copepod nauplii
Paracalanus crassirostris
Bivalve veligers
0. nana

TRANSECT 3

SPECIES OR GROUP

Copepod nauplii
0. brevicornis
Larvacea
P_. crassirostris

TRANSECT 5

SPECIES OR GROUP

Copepod nauplii
Bivalve veligers
0. brevicornis
P. crassirostris
STATIONS
A
51
9
8
6
A
42
7
6
5
A
47
11
8
8
B
47
8
10
6
B
46
7
3
4
B
30
9
8
10
C
28
11
12
7
C
58
7
7
6
C
45
12
4
5
D
31
9
17
8
D
25
6
16
10
D
29
19
2
12
E
19
8
40
4
E
16
22
10
10
E
22
9
7
28
G
20
11
9
24
G
10
6
10
16
G
26
14
4
15
I
17
9
18
19
I
31
2
8
26
I
35
13
2
14
                                          383

-------
       Other Species
       During both May and October, more of the abundant species
occurred at higher densities nearshore than offshore.  The distinct
nearshore to offshore dispersion of several species which was
noted during May was also evident from samples collected in October:'
foraminifera; the tintinnid Favella'sp.; bryozoan cyphonautes
larvae and hemichordate tornaria larvae (which were found primarily
at inshore stations, during both May and October); unidentified'isopods,
and the copepod Euterpina acutifrons were dispersed nearshore during
October.

       Several species of copepods, the siphonophores and salps were
taken primarily at offshore stations dxiring both sampling periods.
Three species of calanoid copepods, Centropages bradyi, C^. furcatus
and Labidocera aestiva were only found offshore.  Several species of
cyclopoid copepods including Corycaeus catus, C_. latus, C_. lautus and
C_. speciosus also occurred only at the offshore stations.

Community Characteristics
       Table 9.3 presents various community parameters for both the May
and October sampling periods.  Morisita's Index of faunal similarity is
graphically shown in Figure 9.1 (May, 1930) and Figure 9.2  (.October,
1980) .

       Zooplankton densities were generally lower in October  than in
May except at offshore stations on Transect 1  (D, G, I) and Transect 3
(D, E, G, I).  Densities generally decreased with increasing  distance
from shore during October, although this trend was not so apparent  as
during May.  Densities usually were highest along Transect  3  and  lowest
along Transect 5 during both May and October.  Species richness was
usually lower in October than in May.  "he increase  in species number
with distance from shore on all transects during May was not  apparent
in October (especially on Transect 1).  No trends in either diversity
or  equitability were observed.
                                   384

-------
Table 9.3 .   Community Characteristics at Zooplankton Sampling Stations, Northern
            Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
                          May 1980
October 1980
Station
1A
IB
1C
ID
IE
1G
11
3A
3B
3C
3D
3E
3G
31
5A
5B
5C
5D
5E
5G
51
No. No.
Species Density Diversity Equitability Species* Density Diversity Equitabilit
26 386,060 2.42 0.74 26 94,321 1.95 0.60
25
24
30
29
29
30
23
25
29
26
24
33
30
21
26
27
24
21
23
28
362,881
431,845
171,237
212,487
47,910
51,672
363,025
732,637
613,363
254,545
124,137
55,394
64,494
107,872
285,525
315,572
250,475
184,318
128,391
68,239
2.39
2.27
2.38
2.08
2.46
2.50
2.12
1.75
1.42
2.47
2.30
2.42
2.49
2.10
1.83
2.13
2.09
1.91
2.14
2.11
0.74
0.72
0.70
0.62
0.73
0.73
0.68
0.54
0.42
0.76
0.72
0.69
0.73
0.69
0.56
0.65
0.66
0.63
0.68
0.70
24
26
23
25
21
20
21
24
23
27
24
• 25
28
19
23
22
26
23
22
22
98,462
150,138
204,331
207,701
81,562
89,077
215,491
139,686
194,965
264,037
149,964
83,069
70,836
88,649
81,310
142,851
45,856
94,239
80,900
. 64,680
2.01
2.41
2.21
2.04
2.26
2.24
2.15
1.98
1.66
2.45
2.41
2.51
2.13
1.93
2.41
2.06
2.22
2.28
2.32
2.13
0.63
0.74
0.70
0.63
0.74
0.75
0.71
0.62
0.53
0.74
0.76
0.78
0.64
0.66
0.77
0.67
0.68
0.73
0.75
0.69
                                            385

-------
LO
OD
       Figure 9.1. Trellis diagram depicting
       faunal similarity between stations,
       May, 1980 (based on CA  values).
        HIGH SIMILARITY (C/^0,7)
MODERATE SIMILARITY (GteO,5>0,7) ___
     LOW SIMILARITY (O0,3*0,5) jgS
    VERY LOW SIMILARITY (CM),3) L_J
I

-------
       Figure 9.2.  Trellis diagram depicting
       faunal similarity between stations,
       October, 1980 (based on C\ values).
          HIGH SIMILARITY (CA >d.7)
          MODERATE SIMILARITY (CA >0.5 <0.7)
          LOW SIMILARITY (C* >0.3  <0.5)
          VERY LOW SIMILARITY1 (C ^ <3)
u>
       3G
       I^M^H*
       31
       •^M««

       5A
           1A
                           Y///////.
                                y//.
                        0.97D.83
       51  0.910.910.93 0. 973.73 0.753.75 0.873.85 . 0.86|0.
                                        y////////    '//,
                                        ////////s/////.
                                         0.920.88
0.810.78
                                                 0.53 0.76
        0.83 0.92
0.750.78
       Faunal  similarity values  are based on Morisita's (1959)  formula.

-------
       Faunal similarity analyses showed high similarity between stations
along Transect 5 and relatively high similarity between stations along
Transect 1 during October.  Considerable variation in similarity between
stations along Transect 3 occurred in October.  Offshore stations on
Transect 1 (E, G, I) and Stations E and G on Transect 3 exhibited the
lowest similarity when compared with all other stations^
                                   388

-------
                             DISCUSSION

       Marine zooplankton can be classified generally into estuarine,
coastal or oceanic assemblages.  Although there may be some overlap
in species composition, each of these assemblages is unique.  Estuarine
and coastal areas receive large amounts of nutrients from freshwater
runoff and this, combined with their shallow depths, causes the areas to
be physically and chemically less stable than oceanic waters (Davis,
1955; Perkins, 1974).  Production in general, and particularly that of
the plankton, is therefore higher nearshore than in the more stable,
less enriched oceanic province (Davis, 1955).  Temporally, zooplankton
production is extremely variable in estuarine and nearshore coastal areas
because of seasonal variations in nutrient loading and the presence or
absence of meroplanktonic organisms* {Davis, 1955; Reeve and Cosper,
1973; Perkins, 1974; Hopkins, 1977).

       A standard half-meter mouth diameter, conical plankton net was
used for sample collection during the present study.  The net was con-
structed of Nitex nylon with a mesh size of 80 ym.  This mesh size is
commonly used for quantifying the larger microzooplankton and smaller
mesozooplankton of coastal waters, and is identical to the mesh size
employed in earlier studies of the Florida west coast zooplankton by King
(1950) and Hopkins (1977).  The net filtered a volume of water equal to
several hundred liters on each tow which is sufficient to quantify the
zooplankton population of the study area.  Ichthyoplankton is not adequately
sampled by such gear due to small mesh size and short tows.  A mesh size
of 333 ym or larger is recommended for quantifying fish eggs and larvae
(Ahlstrom, Sherman, Smith, 1973).

       Sampling during the present study was conducted only during May
and October and is therefore .inadequate to detect short-term fluctuations

*Meroplankton density is governed by the spawning activity of local
 species which is usually a seasonal occurrence.
                                     389

-------
in species composition or relative abundance? however, the data are
sufficient to indicate that the zooplankton in the study area constitute
a typically coastal assemblage,  Zooplankton species compositions along
the study transects were comparable to an earlier study conducted offshore
of Sarasota, Florida  (King, 1950).  When compared to the zooplankton
densities reported for Biscayne Bay (Reeve and Cosper, 1973) and Tampa Bay
 (Hopkins, 1977), the densities in the study area are usually higher,
 indicating that it is probably an area of high annual production.  Un-
 fortunately, quantitative zooplankton studies of similar coastal environ-
ments in south Florida do not exist for ^comparison.

        The major constituents of the zooplankton at the nearshore
 stations of the study transects are characteristic of southern coastal
 and  estuarine environment and contain many cosmopolitan shallow water
 species including annelid larvae, molluscan veligers and the copepods
 Acartia tonsa, Paracalanus crassirostris and Oithona brevicornis.
 Collections from both May and October indicate that mer/oplankton makes
 up a large portion of the fauna.  Seasonal variation in the abundance of
 meroplankton and plankton in general undoubtedly occurs -since each species
 involved has its optimal spawning period, and levels -of ^spawning activity
 differ  among species.  The present study, however, cannot detail the
 magnitude of variation on a temporal basis because of the low frequency
 of sampling.

        Inshore stations are apparently affected to a great degree by
 their proximity to tidal inlets.  The bases of Transects 3 and 5 are
located just outside such inlets and currents at these stations  are
primarily due to tidal exchange between the bays and the open Gulf  (see
Chapter 5) .  The flora and fauna of passes are primarily derived from
the estuary :.(Darnell, 1979).  Most of the species mentioned above,
particularly A.  tonsa, are most abundant in estuaries although they fre-
quently occur in large numbers in nearshore areas.  Transport from  the
estuary into the sea apparently occurs in A. tonsa and other estuarine
zooplankton species (Darnell and Soniat, 1979).  The presence of a  large
                                    3^90

-------
number of Anchoa mitchilli  (bay anchovy) eggs at Station 3A in May
provides strong evidence that at least part of the fauna at inshore
stations is derived from the bays, since this species spawns almost
exclusively in estuaries.  Presumably, eggs and larvae of other fish
species which are estuarine residents occur at nearshore transect
stations (as evidenced by the presence of A. hepsetus and Sciaenid eggs);
however, fish, eggs and larvae were not adequately sampled by the gear
employed during the present study and therefore were not collected in
larger numbers.

        The six and ten mile stations  (G and I) on each transect,
although generally similar to the inshore stations, begin to exhibit
differences which suggest a more oceanic fauna.  The numbers of individuals
of typically coastal species are greatly reduced or, in many cases, species
which were present in large numbers nearshore are absent altogether.  Low
numbers of exclusively oceanic forms, such as the salps and siphonophores,
appeared in samples from these offshore stations.  A number of species
occurred only at Stations A through E while other species occurred only
at Stations G and I.  The relatively uniformity of zooplankton densities
at offshore stations is also indicative of a more stable environment and
more typical of an oceanic fauna.

        Transect 5 appears to be different from Transects 1 and 3.  In
May, nearshore stations  (A through D) exhibited generally lower densities
than the inshore stations on the other transects while the densities at
offshore stations (G and I) were greater than those on Transects 3 and 5.
During October, densities at all stations on Transect 5 were lower than  the
corresponding stations on the other transects although densities at Stations
G and I were comparable to those of 1G, II and 3G, 31.  These differences
may be attributable to several factors including the unique location of
the transect itself.  The transect is located just outside a tidal pass
at the south end of Anclote Key.  This area is just west of the Anclote
River with a 14 year average discharge of 57 million gallons per day
(McNulty, Lindall and Sykes, 1972).
                                    391

-------
The influence of this discharge on the inshore stations of Transect 5
can be seen in the salinities which,  on the average, were 4-5 o/oo lower
than those of the inshore stations of Transects 3 and 5.  (See Chapter 5.)
The influence of freshwater upon this area probably varies seasonally
because of a large range of discharge volumes as illustrated during the
period reported by McNulty et al. (1972).   Anclote Power Plant, which
circulates 4400 CFS may also have some influence on the zooplankton
densities at inshore stations.  Stations A, B, and C on Transect 5 are
also located shoreward of a sandbar with a depth at low tide of less
than 0.5 m.  This barrier probably prevents effective mixing with waters
from the open Gulf.  These factors alone or in combination with other
physical characteristics of the site are probably responsible for the
difference in zooplankton densities between Transect 5 and the other
two study transects.

       The zooplankton community of the study area can be categorized
as a typical coastal assemblage which gradually shifts to a mixture of
coastal and oceanic fauna with increased distance from shore.  Nearshore
stations contain populations which are a mixture of estuarine and littoral
marine forms.

       The effects of sewage outfalls on marine zooplankton communities
have received little attention and are therefore not well known.  Oxygen
deficiencies and the addition of excessive amounts of nutrients are the
primary effects caused by sewage discharges.  Both can lead to a decline
in the zooplankton population of receiving waters  (Perkins, 1974).  Deter-
gents, oils, grease, and suspended solids are also associated with sewage
outfalls.  Lares blooms of planktonic algae may occur in areas where nutrients
are added to the marine environment.   Such blooms, while oxygenating surface
layers, may cause anaerobic conditions in the lower water column  (Perkins,
1974).   Anaerobic conditions caused by algal blooms or BOD  loading in  the
area would cause an adverse effect upon the zooplankton populations but  the
                                    392

-------
magnitude of this effect is unknown.  The effect would depend, in part,
upon the size of the area influenced by the outfall.  A reduction in
the zooplankton populations, which are a primary food source for many
species, may in turn cause deleterious effects on the populations of
these species.

       A sewage outfall in the vicinity of Stations 3D-3E may also
have some effect on the shellfish of the area.  May, 1980 zooplankton
collections have shown that molluscan veligers are seasonally abundant
at inshore stations on Transect 3.  Anaerobic conditions caused by an
outfall in combination with large amounts of suspended solids could
lead to suffocation of planktonic larvae or could affect recently settled
larvae.  Again, it is unknown to what extent this would affect the over-
all shellfish population of the area or recruitment to the population of
other areas.

       The fisheries of the area may also suffer adverse effects from
sewage discharge.  Sewage is known to impair hatching in cod eggs (Braarud,
1955, in;  Perkins, 1974).  That large numbers of anchovy eggs occur at
inshore stations is evidenced by collections from May, 1980 at Transect
3.  Impaired hatching of eggs or suffocation of newly-hatched larvae may
result in a population reduction of the species which spawn in the area
or nearby.  The effects on the overall fish population of the area  are,
however, unknown.
                                    393

-------
                       SUMMARY MO CONCLUSIONS

        1.  Twenty one stations along three transects were  sampled
for zooplankton in May and October 1980.  A total of 75 different
taxa were identified from the collections.

        2.  Copepod nauplii, Paracalanus crassirostris, Oithona
brevicornis and Oithona nana were the predominant species of  the  '
study  area during both May and October 1980.

        3.  Meroplankton, Including annelid larvae, molluscan veligers
and ichthyoplankton were seasonally abundant, particularly  at near-
shore  stations on Transect 3.

        4.  The zooplankton community of the area was found to be a
typically coastal assemblage of moderate diversity.  Offshore stations,
although generally similar to those nearshore, contained a  fauna
that was characteristically oceanic.

        5.  The study area is highly productive with seasonally
abundant meroplanktonic organisms.  It is a diverse and dynamic system
which  is affected by freshwater addition and tidal exchange.  Although
zooplankton densities are high compared with other areas of South Florida,
they do not necessarily indicate that the area is eutrophic even  though a
large  amount of nutrients are probably carried to the nearshore areas through
                                                                           f."\
the passes. None of the organisms collected are known to be "pollution indi-
cator  species".
        6.  Possible effects of a sewage outfall could  include  a
localized reduction in the zooplankton community due to anaerobic
conditions or BOD loading.  This, in turn, might lead to a  reduction
of other species which utilize the zooplankton as a food source.   Fish
and shellfish populations may suffer adverse effects due to larval
suffocation and impaired hatching of eggs resulting from anaerobic condi-
tions  or high levels of suspended solids.
                                    394

-------
                          LITERATURE CITED
Ahlstrom, E.H., K. Sherman and P.E. Smith.  1973.  Seagoing operations
       in ichthyoplankton surveys.  In:  Fish egg and larval surveys.
       G. Hempel, ed.  FAO Fish Tech. Pap. 122:82 p.

Darnell, R.M.  1979.  The pass as a physically-dominated, open
       ecological system.  In;  Ecological Processes in Coastal and
       Marine Systems.  R.J. Livingston, ed. Plenum Press, New York, N.Y.

Darnell, R.M. and T.M. Soniat.  1979.  The estuary/continental shelf as
       an interactive system.  In:  Ecological Processes in Coastal and
       Marine Systems.  R.J. Livingston, ed. Plenum Press, New York, N.Y.

Davis, C.C.  1950.  Observations of plankton taken in the marine waters
       of Florida in 1947 and 1948.  Quart. J. Fla. Acad. Sci.,
       12(2):67-103.

Davis, C.C.  1955.  The marine and Fresh-water Plankton.  Mich. St. Univ-
       Press.

Grice, G.D.  1960.  Calanoid and Cyclopoid Copepods Collected from the
       Florida Gulf Coast and Florida Keys in 1954 and 1955.  Bull. Mar.
       Sci. Gulf & Carib., 10(2):217-226.

Hopkins, T.L.  1977.  Zooplankton Distribution in Surface Waters of Tampa
       Bay, Florida.  Bull. Mar. Sci., 27(3):467-478.

King, J.E.  1950.  A Preliminary Report on the Plankton of the West
       Coast of Florida.  Quart. J. Fla. Acad. Sci^, 12(2):109-137.

McNulty, J.K., W.N. Lindall, Jr., and J.E. Sykes.  1972.  Cooperative
       Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory and Study, Florida:  Phase 1,
       Area Description.  NOAA Tech. Rep. NMFS CIRC-368, 126 p.

Perkins, E.J.  1974.  The Biology of Estuarine and Coastal Waters.
       Academic Press, New York, N.Y.

Reeve, M.R. and E. Cosper.  1973.  The plankton and other seston in Card
       Sound, south Florida, in 1971.  Univ. Miami, Tech. Rep. 24 p.
                                    395

-------
U)
IO
 Appendix 9.1.  Average Density (#/m3) of
               County Area,  Florida.

 SPECIES

 PROTOZOA
    Class Rhizopodea
       Order  Foraminiferida
         Unid.  Foraminifera
    Class Actinopodea
         Unid.  Radiolaria
 CNIDARIA
         Unid.  Medusae
         Unid.  Siphonophores
 PLATYHELMINTHES
    Class Tubellaria
      Order  Polycladida
         Stylochus sp.
NEMERTINEA
         Unid.  Pilidium
ANNELIDA
         Unid.  Larvae
ARTHROPODA
   Class Crustacea
    Subclass Branchiopoda
       Suborder Cladocera
         Evadne sp.
        Penilia avirostris
    Subclass Copepoda
        Unid. Nauplii
        Unid. Copepodites
      Order Calanoida
        Acartia tonsa
        Centropages furcatus
        Labidocera aestiva
        Labidocera sp.
        Paracalanus crassirostris
        Psuedodiaptomus coronatus
        Temora turbinata*
        Unid. Calanoid
                                            Zooplankton  Species at Stations on Transect 1, May 1980,  Northern Pinellas
ABC
360 — 492
—
8,120 4,942 3,560

321
720
4,440 19,726 7,091
3,720 641
49,440 9,988 28,295
67,080 103,293 116,200
1,220 1,365 5,498
38,80Q 30,592 24,723
—
— —
1,720 321
44,680 37,282 40,667
1,000 5,862 3,619
4,580 3,453 12,215
500 — 521
STATIONS
D
734
—
996
"
—
—
1,743
629
17,922
40,138
957
8,438
—
223
407
10,506
3,342
3,289
—
E

673
2,817
273
—
—
2,290
400
65,645
20,696
— —
5,217
273
~-
—
20,152
673
1,473
—
G

—
3,558
357
—
—
972

2,482
15,173
1,068
145
924
327
—
3,443
48
530
308
I

—
322
342
—
—
1,446

2,731
10,644
1,829
1,124
482
61
61
3,194
843
2,169
—
   *Identification uncertain.

-------
 Appendix 9.1. Continued.   Average Density (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species at Stations on Transect 1, May 1980, Northern
              Pinellas County Area,  Florida.

 SPECIES                                                                 STATIONS
                                              A	B	C	D	E_
       Order  Harpacticoida
         Euterpina  acutifrons                11,260     8,829    23,564    11,805    13,412       453     1,185
         Unid.  Harpacticoid                   —        —        —        —          273     —           61
      Order Cyclopoida
         Corycaeus  lautus                     —        —          492     1,520       800       894     1,968
         Corycaeus  venustus*                  —        —        —          669       400       634
         Corycaeus  sp.                          360
         Oithona  brevicornis                 39,560    46,049    73,817    37,953    56,575     7,390     6,066
         Oithona  plumifera                    --        1,685       521       446     1,200       490
         Oithona  sp.                            500     1,324     1,564       223
         Saphirella sp.                       —        —        —        —        —          327
         Unid.  Cyclopoid                      —          724       521     —        —        —           61
      Order Monstrilloida
         Unid.  Monstrilloid                   —        —        —        —        —          164
    Subclass Cirripedia
         Balanus  sp. nauplii                  2,000     6,265     2,056     1,625     2,800       846       261
         Balanus  sp. cypris                     500     2,006     1,505       407     —           48
    Subclass Malacostraca
      Order Isopoda
         Unid.  Isopod                         —        --        --          223       273     --          121
      Order Decapoda
       Suborder  Natantia
         Lucifer  faxoni                       —          321     1,564     —          673       145       281
         Unid.  Caridea                        —        —        --        —          273     --          141
       Suborder  Reptantia
         Unid.  Brachyura                      —        —          521       446       273       164        61
         Upogebia affinis                     —        —        —        —        —          145        61
         Unid.  Paguridae                        360     —        --          223       273       742       121
MOLLUSCA
         Gastropod  velger                     1,580     2,967     3,010     2,922       817     —          281
         Bivalve  velger                      31,480    29,662    22,954     8,960     5,140       434     1,927
HEMICHORDATA
         Unid.  Tornaria larvae               13,660    14,402     --          223
CHORDATA
  Subphylum Urochordata
         Unid.  Larvacea                      55,540    29,217    56,875    13,638     7,378     3,102    11,869

*Identification uncertain.

-------
U)
t£>
00
    Appendix ai. Continued.  Average Density (#/m3) of  Zooplankton Species at Stations on Transect  1,  May 1980, Northern
                  Pinellas County Area,  Florida.


    SECIES                                                                  STATIONS

                                                   A         B         C         D         E        G	I
       Class Thaliacea

            Doliolum sp.*                         --        —        —        —        —        ™           14
       Subphylum Cephalochordata
             Branchiostoma sp.                     2,880     1,644     —          407       945      2,597      1,908
       Subphylum Vertebrata
       Class Teleostei
             Unid.  Sciaenidae egg                 —        —        —        —          **^
             Unid.  Fish prolarvae                 —        —        —          223



    #  SPECIES                                       26        25        24        30        29         29         30


    TOTAL  #/m3  ORGANISMS                       386,060    362,881   431,845   171,237   212,487     47,910     51,762
    *Identification uncertain.

-------
Appendix 9.2.  Average Density  (f/m3) of Zoqplankton Species at Stations on Transect 3, May 1980, Northern Pinellas
              County Area, Florida.

SPECIES                                                                  STATIONS

PROTOZOA
Class Rhizopoda
Order Foraminiferida
Unid. Foraminifera
Class Actinopodea
Unid. Radiolaria
Class Ciliatea
Order Tintinnida
Favella sp.
CNIDARIA
Muggiaea sp.*
Unid. Medusae
Unid. Siphonophores
CTENOPHORA
Mnemiopsis sp.
NEMERTINEA
Unid. Pilidium
BRYOZOA
Unid. Cyphonaute larvae
ANNELIDA
Unid. larvae
ARTHROPODA
Class Crustacea
Subclass Branchiopoda
Suborder Cladocera
Evadne sp.
Penilia avirostris
Subclass Copepoda
Unid. Nauplii
Unid. Copepodites
Order Calanoida
Acartia tonsa
Acrocalanus monochus*
Centropages furcatus
A B C D E G I



3,425 988 430 296 — 84

148 426 176


854 600

176
1,126 854 600 860 527 640
73 84

99! __ — 176

1,200 — -- 142 176

2,572

3,926 10,262 929 1,850 379 282 343




1,707
11,764 3,438 11,032 24,479 12,827 1,425 4,554

70,874 133,757 64,913 49,139 21,454 15,375 13,796
3,003 1,732 2,304 2,280 527 146 1,185

17,963 29,379 10,819 6,970 379 1,633 870
696
713 1,990
*Identification uncertain.

-------
Appendix 9.2. Continued.   Average  Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species  at Stations on Transect 3, May 1980, Northern
              Pinellas County Area,  Florida.
SPECIES
Eucalanus pileatus*
Labidocera aestiva
Labidocera sp.
Paracalanus crassirostris
Psuedodiaptomus coronatus
Temora turbinata*
Unid. Gala no id
Order Harpacticoida
Euterpina acutifrons
Unid. Harpacticoid
Order Cyclopoida
Cofycaeus lautus
Corycaeus venustus*
Corycaeus sp.
Oithona brevicornis
pithona nana
** Oithona plumifera
o Oithona sp.
Unid. Cyclopoid
Subclass Cirripedia
Balanus sp. nauplii
Balanus sp. cypris
A
23,349
3,430
1,351
19,478
676
39,163
1,351
676
1,103
i, 205
B
854
28,331
1,732
1,719
15,510
45,625
1,733
854
2,599
1,707
c
600
15,251
3,174
330
14,419
659
600
25,296
600
600
600
3,329
D
2,280
18,035
2,280
5,717
_^
9,871
561
^_^
430
27,487
u«
1,421
2,113
562
E
232
17,825
1,729
611
2,633
232
527
18,416
*-«
— «™^
13,580
G
73
142
6,818
1,145
142
1,929
791
360
10,280
142
851
73
I
9,989
1,203
501
1,389
1,666
500
12,959
176
1,105
167
    Subclass Malacostraca
     Superorder Eucarida
      Order Decapoda
       Suborder Natantia
        Lucifer faxoni                       —          867       929     --        —           145
        Unid. CarTdeT"                       -        "        -          430     -           284       528
       Suborder Reptantia
        Unid. Brachyura                      —        *~        —                  ~~           142
        Upogebia affinis                     —        ~          987     —         232
        Unid. Paguridae                        552     --          658     1,421      758        142       352
MOLLUSCA
        Gastropod veliger                    7,907    13,726     4,761     4,261      739        506       703
        Bivalve veliger                    129,240   371,481   408,515    38,566    19,268     5,107     1,379

* Identification uncertain.

-------
    Appendix 9.2.  Continued.  Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species at  Stations on Transect 3,  May 1980, Northern
                  Pinellas County Area, Florida.

    SPECIES                                                                 STATIONS
                                                  A	B	C	D	E	G	I
    ECHINODERMATA
            Ophiopluteus larvae                  —        —        —          430     --          284        352
    HEMICHORDATA
            Unid. Tornaria larvae                —        —          600
    CHORDATA
      Subphylum Urochordata
            Unid. Larvacea                      12,122    46,699    16,064    24,539     8,098      2,838      5,591
       Class Thaliacea
            Doliolum sp.*                        —        —        —        —        —            73        935
      Subphylum Cephalochordata
            Branchiostoma sp.                    9,560    11,220    22,006    27,142     2,024      2,130      1,389
      Subphylum Vertebrata
       Class Teleosti
            Anchoa hepsetus egg                  1,103     —        —        —        —
            Anchoa mitchilli egg                 1,103
            Unid. Sciaenidae egg                 —        —        —        —        —          142      —

o
H   # SPECIES                                       23        25        29        26        24         33         30

    TOTAL #/m3 ORGANISMS                       363,025   732,637   613,363   254,545   124,137     55,394     64,494
    *Identification uncertain.

-------
   Appendix 9.3. Average Density (#/m )  of Zooplankton  Species at Stations on Transect 5, May 1980, Northern Pinellas
                  County Area, Florida.

                                                                            STATIONS
   PROTOZOA                                   '	~	—
       Class Rhizopodea
          Order Poraminiferida
            Unid.  Foraminifera                   —        4	          434     	        	        —        —:
       Class Actinopodea
            Unid.  Radiolaria                     —         594     	        ^        .._        1,126       *
   CNIDARIA
            Unid.  Medusae                        1,922     5,118     3,221    21,162       560     2,615     19,031
            Unid.  Siphonophores                  -^         594       838     —        —        —         906
   BRYOZOA
            Unid.  Cyphonautes larvae               213     —          354
   ANNELIDA
            Unid.  Larvae                         3,009     2,300     4,059     3,042     2,378     2,048       302
   ARTHROPODA
      Class Crustacea
       Subclass Branchiopoda
          Suborder  Cladocera
g           Penilia  avirostris                  10,672    12,946    49,904    99,487    58,552    27.962      5,436
       Subclass Copepoda
            Unid.  Nauplii                       19,696    80,743    44,342    23,868    22,377    14,116      7,852
            Unid.  Copepodites                    —        3,229     3,352     —        2,020       204       604
         Order Calanoida
            Apartia  tonsa                        2,791     8,865    13,596     5,918     4,965     —         *
            Acartia  spinata                       -1-        ~        ~        •—          455     •*-
            Centre-pages  furcatus                  —         594     —-        —•        —          257       302
            Paracalanus  cyassirpsltyis            14,111    12*904    31,288    20,264    33,613    28,794     17,516
            Psuedodiaptomus  coronatus             '--         854     —        —          187
            Temora turbinata*                      857      519     2,514     2,777     —        1,330       *
            Unid.  Calahoid                        —        —        —        —        '-^          461       302
         Order Harpacticoida
            Euterpina acutiffons                  7,464     9,492    11,566    10,243       746       7l8      2,416
         Order Cyclopoida
            Corycaeus lautUs                     —*•        —'          484       266       560       408       604
            Corycaeus venustus*                             '         ~~          587       187       816       *
            Oithona  brevicornis                 35,666   118,601   114,070    34,054    39,277    19,974      5,134

      *l<3.ei\tif ication uncertain

-------
Appendix  9.3.Continued.  Average Density (#/m3)  of Zooplankton Species  at  Stations on Transect 5,May  1980, Northern
             Pinellas County Area, Florida.

SPECIES                                                                 STATIONS

                                              A         B         C         D        E	G	I
        Oithona plumifera                      648     6,532     4,508      4,856      1,282      2,411      2,114
        Oithona simplex                      —        —        —          321      —         —         —
        Oithona sp.                          1,074     1,447     2,738
        Saphirella sp.                         213     —        —          266      —          718       *
    Subclass Cirripedia
        Balanus sp. nauplii                    213     1,188     --        4,646      —         6,054       302
        Balanus sp. cypris                   —          594     1,192        266       455      —          302
    Subclass Malacostraca
     Superorder Peracarida
      Order Isopoda
        Unid. Isopod                         —        -.-          708        907
     Superorder Eucarida
      Order Decapoda
       Suborder Natantia
        Unid. Caridea                        —        1,631     —        —        —         —          *
       Suborder Reptantia
        Unid. Brachyura                      —        —        1,322      —        —          204
        Upogebia affinis                       652     1,037     1,546        797       828       257
        Unid. Paguridae                        218       594       354      2,080       641       461       *
MOLLUSCA
        Gastropod veliger                    5,218     6,415     2,030        321       641       204       302
        Bivalve veliger                      1,735     2,375     7,860      4,104      3,334     16,739      3,624
ECHINODERMATA
        Ophiopleutus  larvae                  —          398
CHAETOGNATHA
        Sagitta hispida                        213       605     1,546        266       187      —          604
CHORDATA
  Subphylum Urochordata
        Unid. Larvacea                         861     4,762    10,988      9,656     11,073       514       302
   Class Thaliacea
        Doliolum  sp*                         —        —        —        —                             302


*Identification uncertain.

-------
   Appendix 9.3. Continued.  Average Density (#/ro3) of Zooplankton Species at Stations on Transect 5, May  1980, Northern
                Pinelias County Area, Florida.

   SPECIES                                                                 STATIONS

                                                 A         B         C         D         E	G  	I	
     Subphylum Cephalochordata
           Branchiostoma sp.                      426       594       354       321
     Subphylum Vertebrata
      Class Teleostei
           Unid. Sciaenidae egg                 —        —•          354     —


   # SPECIES                                       21        26        27         24        21        23        28

   TOTAL #/m3 ORGANISMS                       107,872   285,525   315,572    250,475    184,318   128,391    68,239
*»     Present in other replicates but not quantified.
o
£*
      Total, 2 replicates.

-------
     Appendix 9.4.  Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species on Transect 1, October 29, 1980, Northern Pinellas
                   County Area, Florida.

     SPECIES                                                                  STATIONS

                                                   A         B         C        D         E         G         I	
     PROTOZOA
        Class Rhizopodea
           Order Foraminiferida
             Unid. Foraminifera                     966     1,791       674     —         1,238        358
     CNIDARIA
             Unid. medusae                          248       135     1,096
             Unid. siphonophores                  —        —        —        —         —           281       338
     NEMERTINEA
             Unid. pilidium           •            —        —          225     —          383
     POLYZOA
        Class Gymnolaemata
             Unid. Cyphonautes larvae               248       135       450     1,024       214
     ANNELIDA
             Unid. larvae                         2,815     3,831     7,065    10,639      2,432      5,538      1,231
     ARTHROPODA
        Class Crustacea
o        Subclass Branchiopoda
01           Suborder Cladocera
             Penilia avirostris                   —        —        —        —         —           77
         Subclass Copepoda
             Unid. nauplii                       47,896    45,789    42,265    63,926     39,679     16,053     15,206
             Unid. copepodites                    1,225       770     3,090     2,167      5,540      2,476      1,605
           Order Calanoida
             Acartia tonsa                        3,057     6,006     3,989     1,772      1,497        204
             Centropages bradyi                   --        —        —        —         —         —          113
             Labidocera sp.                       —          250     —
             Paracalanus crassirostris            8,310     7,897    16,368    17,538     17,057      8,807      7,592
             Paracalanus spp.                       371     —        —         473       383        364
             Pseudodiaptomus coronatus              242     —          450      276      —         —          113
             Temora longicornis                   —          520       878      473      1,069        154       113
             Unid. Calanoid A                       236
           Order Harpacticoida
             Euterpina acutifrons                   242       383       450      748       214

-------
   Appendix 9.4.
   SPECIES
               Continued. Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton  Species on Tiransect 1,  October 29,  1980, Northern
               Pinellas County Area, Florida.
*>
o
a\
      Order Cyclopoida
        Corycaeus  latus
        Corycaeus  speciosus
        Corycaeus  spp.
        Oithona brevicornis
        Oithona nana
        Oithona plumifera
        Oithona simplex
        Oithona spp.
        Saphirella tropica
        Saphirella sp.
    Subclass Cirripedia
        Balanus sp. nauplii
        Balanus sp. cypris
    Subclass Malacostraca
     Superorder Peracarida
      Order Isopoda
        Unid. Isopods
     Superorder Eucarida
      Order Decapoda
       Suborder Natantia
        Lucifer faxoni
       Suborder Reptantia
        Pinnixa chaetopterana
MOLLUSCA
        Gastropod veligers
        Bivalve veligers
ECHINODERMATA
        Echinopluteus larvae
        Ophiopluteus larvae
PHORONIDEA
        Unid. actinotroch larvae
CHAETOGNATHA
        Sagitta hispida
HEMICHORDATA
        Unid. tornaria larvae
A
DwfaB
— —
— -
618
5,826
2,091
3,517
317
242
742
236
_.
124
--
—
3,546
7,140
_„
—
124
STATIONS
BCD

__ — — — —
135
135 218 2,442
6,222 9,964 16,348
2,946 6,418 5,637
3,776 12,802 4,888
592
— — —
2,851 2,191
250 1,566 2,915
436
135 892 592
218
250 871
2,101 12,646 14,696
10,303 18,307 35,313
__ __ — _
276
276
E

—
—
4,222
7,892
5,157
9,130
1,194
—
214
2,218
597
__
383
—
5,843
83,714
383
— -
__
G I
113
113
— —
3,875 8,446
19,787 17,088
3,858 5,304
843 3,826
128
__
113
204 128

__
204
—
4,465 4,951
7,228 16,195
204
— --
_». «—
                                                                     450
                                        77
                                                  118
135
1,024
383

-------
    Appendix 9.4.  Continued. Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species on Transect 1, October 29, 1980, Northern
                  Pinellas County Area, Florida-

    SPECIES                                                                  STATIONS
                                                  A         B         C         D         E         G         I
    CHORDATA
      Subphylum Urochordata
            Unid. larvacea                       3,770     1,716     6,159    20,296    16,665     6,505     6,249


    # SPECIES                                       26        24        26        23        25        21        20

    TOTAL #/m3 ORGANISMS                        94,321    98,462   150,138   204,331   207,701    81,562    89,077
O
-J

-------
   Appendix 9.5.  Average Density (#/m3)  of Zooplankton Species on Transect 3,  October  31 - November 4, 1980,
                  Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida

   SPECIES
   	—                                                                  STATIONS

   PROTOZOA                                  —^	§	S	S	E	G	
      Class Khizopodea
         Order Poraminiferida
           Unid. Foraminifera                  4,236     3,237     2,427    15,721     8,800     1,342       491
   CNIDARIA
           Unid. medusae                        —        	          239       992     	          290     	
           Unid. siphonophores                  —        —          239     	       	        	          405
   CTENOPHORA
           Unid. ctenophores                    —        	        	        	       	        	
   PLATYHELMINTHES
      Class Turbellaria
           Unid. larvae                           695       805       239     1,434
   NEMERTINEA
           Unid. pilidium                       —          200     —
   POLYZOA
      Class Gymnolaemata
^          Unid. cyphonautes  larvae             —          600       309       992     1,896
O  ANNELIDA
           Unid. larvae                         6,472     6,891     8,824    25,399     4,350     3,836     1,070
   ARTHROPODA
      Class Crustacea
       Subclass Branchiopoda
          Suborder Cladocera
           Evadne sp.                           —        —        —        —       —        —          145
       Subclass Copepoda
           Unid.  nauplii                       86,459    64,668   113,498    67,075    23,410     8,625    21,641
           Unid.  copepodites                      500       205     2,358     1,543     2,233     7,064     1,875
         Order  Calanoida
           Acartia  tonsa                       29,264    20,900    14,732    13,096     2,441       586       346
           Centropages furcatus                 --        —        —        —       —          152
           Labidocera aestiva                   —        —        —        —       --        —          145
           Labidocera spp.                       —        —        —        —       —        —          290
           Paracalanus crassirostris            9,820     5,673    10,931    25,798    14,308    13,599    18,409
           Paracalanus spp.                      —        —        —        —       —          152
           Pseudodiaptomus  coronatus            1,195       805       617       684     —        —          290
           Temora longicornis                   —        --        —        —       —        —          115
           Unid..  Calanoid A                       347     —        —        —         273       152       260
         Order  Harpacticoida
           Evrfcerpina acu-blfrons                 1,195       605       955     3,043       546       152

-------
A
—
——
—
__
__
—
15,861
11,514
3,000
1,000
•MB*
	
1,195
10,445
__
B
__
— —
—
__
—
—
9,550
4,273
609
200
200
205
205
4,250
__
C
309
—
—
_—
—
—
13,091
2,119
1,473
1,473
—
309
239
2,288
--
STATIONS
D
—
684
1,301
__
—
309
15,721
2,867
2,867
6,527
—
—
1,059
5,335
309
E
—
—
—
__
—
—
32,707
3,597
1,493
2,571
—
—
610
20,346
—
G
—
—
— —
__
441
—
5,040
14,994
2,818
1,632
—
—
152
3,698
—
I
—
—
— —
375
—
—
1,330
6,041
2,020
606
—
—
145
260
—
 Appendix 9.5.   Continued. Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species  on Transect 3, October 31 - November 4, 1980,
                Northern  Pinellas County Area, Florida.

 SPECIES

         Harpacticus sp.
         Parategastes sphaericus
         Phyllopodopsyllus sp.
      Order Cyclopoida
         Corycaeus latus
         Corycaeus specjosus
         Corycaeus spp.
         Oithona brevi cornis
         Oithona nana
         Oithona plumifera
         Oithona simplex
         Oithona spp.
         Orthocyclops modestus*
         Saphirella sp.
    Subclass Cirripedia
         Balanus sp. nauplii
         Balanus sp. cypris
    Subclass Malacostraca
     Superorder Peracarida
      Order Isopoda
         Uni d. Isopods
      Order Mysidacea
         Unid. Mysids
     Superorder Eucarida
      Order Decapoda
       Suborder Natantia
         Lucifer faxoni
         Unid. penaeid
MOLLUSCA
         Gastropod veligers
         Bivalve veligers
ECHINODERMATA
         Echinopluteus larvae
         Ophiopluteus larvae
PHORONIDEA
         Unid. actinotroch larvae
CHAETOGNATHA
         Sagitta hispida
*Identification uncertain.
1,042
  600
          1,809
             273
            145
9,042
7,931
4,041
6,691
3,382
5,978
14,197
12,721
                      478
                      617
1,000
  405
                                         610
3,389
9,621
                      338

                      273

                      338
3,704
5,948
                                                   296
                       145
                                                             115
  115

2,076
5,919

  115
  260

-------
Appendix 9.5.  Continued.  Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species on Transect 3, October 31 - November 4, 1980,
              Northern Pinellas County Area, Florida.

SPECIES                                                                  STATIONS
                                              A	B	C	D	E	G	I
HEMICHORDATA
        Unid. tornaria  larvae                —        —        —          309      273
CHORDATA
  Subphylum Urochordata
        Unid. larvacea                      13,278     3,868    14,436    41,628    15,268     7,961     5,862
  Subphylum Vertebrata
   Class Teleostei
        Unid. Soleidae  eggs                  —        —        —        —        —          145

# SPECIES                                       21        24        23        27        24         25        28

TOTAL tt/m3 ORGANISMS                        215,491   139,686   194,965   264,037   149,964     83,069    70,836

-------
 Appendix 9.6.  Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species on Transect 5,  November 4,  1980, Northern  Pinellas
               County  Area, Florida.

 SPECIES                                                                  STATIONS
                                              A	B	C_	D 	E	G	I
PROTOZOA
   Class Rhizopodea
      Order Foraminiferida
        Unid. Foraminifera                     389       997     1,372     —          206
   Class Ciliatea
      Order Tintinnida
        Favella sp.                            160       146     2,040
CNIDARIA
        Unid. medusae                        —        —        —          242       371       739       167
        Unid. siphonophores                  —        —        —        —        —           87       290
PLATYHELMINTHES
   Class Turbellaria
        Unid. larvae                         —        —        —           86
NEMERTINEA
        Unid. pilidium                       —        —        --        -—        —        —          167
POLYZOA
   Class Gymnolaemata
        Unid. Cyphonautes larvae               229       462       955       520     2,594     —          334
ANNELIDA
        Unid. larvae                         1,714     3,768     3,993       589     1,525     2,261     1,979
ARTHROPODA
   Class Aracnida
      Order Halacaridea
        Unid. Halacaridean                   —          146     —        —        —        —        —
   Class Crustacea
    Subclass Branchiopoda
       Suborder Cladocera
        Penilia avirostris                   --        ~~        ~~        —        —        ~~          247
    Subclass Copepoda
        Unid. nauplii                       41,544    24,379    63,577    13,257    20,777    21,242    22,638
        Unid. copepodites                    1,943     1,240     2,873     1,574     1,747     1,448       457
      Order Calanoida
        Acartia tonsa                        6,038     3,888    11,198       417     3,256     1,012
        Clausocalanus acuicornis             —          292

-------
   Appendix 9.6.  Continued. Average Density (#/m3)  of Zooplankton Species on Transect  5,
                  Pinellas County Area, Florida.
                                                                                      November  4, 1980, Northern
to
   SPECIES
        Centropages  furcatus
        Labidocera spp.
        Paracalanus  crassirostris
        Temora longicornis
        Unid.  Calanoid A
      Order  Harpacticoida
        Arenosetella sp.
        Euterpina  acutifrons
        Phyllopodopsyllus sp.
      Order  Cyclopoida
        Corycaeus  catus
        Corycaeus  latus
        Corycaeus  speciosus
        Oithona brevicornis
        Oithona nana
        Oithona plumifera
        Oithona simplex
        Saphirella sp.
    Subclass Cirripedia
        Balanus sp.  nauplii
        Balanus sp.  cypris
    Subclass Malacostraca
     Superorder Pericarida
      Order  Isopoda
        Unid.  Isopods
     Superorder Eucarida
      Order Decapoda
       Suborder Reptantia
        Pinnotheres  sp.
MOLLUSCA
        Gastropod  veligers
        Bivalve veligers
ECHINODERMATA
        Echinopluteus  larvae
        Ophiopluteus larvae
                                                                           STATIONS
A
—
—
7,084
—
—
—
—
707
__
—
— —
7,153
1,256
1,096
867
548
B
—
—
7,731
—
—
170
511
2,771
__
—
— •
6,538
4,693
948
2,771
632
C
—
191
6,737
—
—
__
191
573
__
—
—
5,469
5,104
1,181
3,160
1,563
D
173
86
5,625
—
70
—
—
—
173
209
—
1,035
5,778
467
1,590
173
E
—
—
26,646
—
—
—
—
—
186
988
—
6,917
6,857
412
3,070
—
G
—
—
12,219
250
—
—
—
— —
163
337
87
3,317
3,775
2,578
5,973
250
I
—
—
9,232
247
— —
—
—
— —
870
1,080
123
1,160
1,609
986
1,906
—
                                                  389
                    36
                 3,361
                                                  389
146
                                                                     191
191
70
186
                                                                                         186
                  163
3,406
10,172
_~
— —
5,518
7,486
—
__
9,757
17,327
—
191
2,060
8,791
86
225
1,916
8,156 .
206
186
6,223
11,260
87
—
4,094
8,515
412
__

-------
   Appendix 9.6.  Continued. Average Density  (#/m3) of Zooplankton Species on Transect 5, November 4, 1980, Northern
                 Pinellas County Area, Florida.

   SPECIES                                                                  STATIONS
A
•••w
B C D E G
146 — 86 597 1,012
I
167
   CHAETOGNATHA
           Sagitta hispida
   CHORDATA
     Subphylum Urochordata
           Unid. larvacea                       3,565     5,931     5,017     2,388     3,893     6,417     8,000

   # SPECIES                                       19        23        22        26        23        22        22

   TOTAL #/m3 ORGANISMS                        88,649    81,310   142,851    45,856    94,239    80,900    64,680
co

-------
      CHAPTER TEN







BENTHIC MACROINFAUNA AND



   SEDIMENT STUDIES







          BY







    JAMES K. CULTER



    SELVAKUMARAN MAHADEVAN



    ROBERT YARBROUGH



    MARK GALLO

-------
                           INTRODUCTION

       Benthic infauna and sediment samples were collected during the
Northern Pinellas Marine Sampling and Measurement Program  (May and
October, 1980) to describe the benthic communities in the study area.
Specific objectives of the benthic study were to:
        (1)  Characterize  the macroinvertebrate infauna of
            the study area in terms of species composition,
            abundance and diversity;
        (2)  Describe the sediment of the study area in
            terms of granulometry and volatile organic
            content, with particular reference to infaunal
            distribution;
        (3)  Provide baseline data for the preparation of an
            Environmental Impact Statement  (EIS) to address
            the environmental effects of a proposed sewage
            outfall (see Chapter 1 for details).

Study Rationale
       The benthic community is generally regarded as the most important
faunal  component in assessing environmental stress in aquatic and marine
environments  (e.g.- Menzies et al., 1952; Reish, 1959a; McNulty, 1971;
Parker, 1975; Watling and Maurer, 1976; Rosenberg, 1977; Hart and Fuller,
1979; Yokel,  1979; Sanders et al., 1980).  The relative lack of mobility
 (Dills and Rogers, 1972) and .the long life histories of benthic organisms
make them valuable indicators of past and present water quality  (Mackenthun,
1966; McKee,  1966; Cairns and Dickson, 1971).  The utility of the benthic
community as  a pollution indicator is considerably enhanced by the  collec-
tion of adequate baseline data prior to the influence of any pollutant.
This study provides such a preliminary baseline.  In order to address
seasonal variation, samples were collected for a spring  (May) and a fall
 (October) sampling period.
                                    415

-------
Background Literature

       Historical literature  concerning  the benthos  in  the  immediate

study area is non-existent.   However,  several  studies are available
from nearby areas such as  Anclote Anchorage, Tampa Bay,  and the  Gulf
of Mexico.  Because habitats  and species composition are to some
extent similar among the adjacent areas  for which historical informa-
tion exists, a summary of  past studies is presented  in  the  following

paragraphs.


       General reviews of  Gulf benthic communities are  presented in
Galstoff  (1954),  Collard and  D'Asaro (1973) and  Lyons and Collard
(1974).  In following Lyons and Collard's  (1974) classificiation,  the
study area can be considered  as a mixture of the "shallow shelf  zone"
and the "coastal barrier islands-shoreward zone".  Their descriptions

of the two faunal zones are:
       Coastal Barrier Islands: Moderate wave  energy beaches
       of quartz sand and  shell fragments are  the dominant
       shoreward feature of this zone  which extends  northward
       to Anclote Key.  Bottom composition is  also largely
       of these materials, with little hard substrate except
       dead shells of large mollusks.  Seagrasses are scarce
       to absent.  The quartz-shell sediments  actually  extend
       far to sea off Tampa Bay and the  Charlotte Harbor area.
       In the latter area, influence of  these  sediments is
       quite strong in the next seaward  zone,  and possibly
       even beyond.  Large temperate mollusks  and echinoderms
       are characteristic  faunal elements.  Species  diversity
       is generally lower  than in adjacent estuaries or off-
       shore areas.

       Shallow Shelf (10-30 m): This  is the  first major zone
       of tropical species intrusion into the  Eastern Gulf.
       Rock substrate allows  establishment of many  scleractinian,
       alcyonarian, molluscan, crustacean, and other inverte-
       brate species common in shallower waters in  the  Florida
       Keys.   Sand dwellers are represented by some  species
       from more  inshore waters but with many tropical species
       as well.   Sediments are still largely  of quartz  sands,
       with increasing percentages  of biogenically  derived
       carbonates seaward. Overlying green,  relatively turbid,
       coastal waters  are  usually well mixed,  but cooler bottom
       waters are often separated by a low thermocline, especially
       during warmer months.
                                 (page 161;  Lyons and Collard,  1974).
                                  416

-------
The Hourglass Cruises (South Tampa Bay to Fort Myers; surveys to
the 40 fathom line) by the Florida Department of Natural Resources
provided a series of monographs on various components of the benthic
community (Joyce and Williams, 1969; Dawes and Van Breedveld, 1969;
Lyons, 1970; Topp and Hoff, 1972; Camp, 1973; Cobb et al.,  1973;
Cooper, 1973; Gore and Scotto, 1979; Huff and Cobb,  1979; Serafy, 1979).
The Hourglass Cruise collections are still being processed, and various pub-
lications of other benthic taxa are currently in preparation or press. The
Bureau of Land Management has conducted several studies in  the Eastern
Gulf of Mexico, but they focused on offshore waters.  The -ophiuroids
of Florida described by Thomas  (1962) and his monograph on  the amphiurids
of the western Atlantic describe species found on the study area.

       Studies off Pinellas County have dealt with artificial reefs
 (Hanni and Mathews, 1977), offshore benthic algae  (Phillips and Springer,
1960), dredge-fill effects  (Godcharles, 1971; Saloman, 1974) and  sewage
effects  (Neithamer et al., 1971).  However, none of  the studies are
located within the present study area.

       Primarily due to the existence of a power plant, the Anclote
estuary has been intensively studied.  Studies of the benthic algae
 (Ballantine and Humm, 1975; Hamm, 1975; Hamm and Humm, 1976; Thorhaug
et al., 1978) seagrasses,  (Rogers, 1972; Moore, 1976; Thorhaug et al.,
1978) and the benthic fauna  (Humm et al., 1970; Zimmerman et al., 1971;
Baird et al., 1971; Baird et al., 1972; Baird et al., 1973; Mayer and
Maynard, 1974; Studt, 1976; Thorhaug et al., 1978; Mahadevan, 1979;
Mahadevan and Patton, 1979) have been conducted.  The northeastern boundaries
of the present study area can be expected to be faunally  similar  to  Anclote
Sound.

       Several benthic studies have been conducted  in Tampa Bay.  The
southeastern portions of the present study  area can be  expected  to  contain
a similar species composition to that of Tampa Bay.  Studies  in Old Tampa
                                    417

-------
Bay  include intertidal benthos  (Bloom et  al.,  1972);  sediment character-
istics  (Ross and Mayon, 1975); polychaete fauna  (Dauer,  1974; Dauer
and  Simon, 1975; Dauer and Simon, 1976a;  b); benthic  repopulation
 (Simon  and Dauer; 1972; 1977); organic enrichment effects (Dauer and
Conner,  1976); power plant effects  (Blake et al.,  1974);  waterfront
canal benthos  (Hall and Lindall, 1974; Lindall et al.,  1973;  1975), and
the  brachiopod, Glottidia pyramidata  (Culter,  1979).   Studies in Boca
Ciega Bay include investigations of dredging effects  (Button et al., 1956;
Taylor  and Saloman, 1968; Sykes, 1971), molluscs  (Sykes  and Hall, 1970),
and  general species checklists  (Sykes, 1966a;  b).   Studies in Hillsborough
Bay  include investigations of sewage effects  (Simon and Haung, 1975;
Simon,  1977; 1978); long-term cyclic disturbances (Santos, 1979; Santos
and  Simon, 1980); small scale disturbances (Proffitt  and Simon, 1980) and
dredging effects  (Taylor et  al., 1970; Wastewater Engineers,  1979).  Studies
in the  Big Bend area of Tampa Bay include investigations of power plant
effects (Virnstein, 1972; Conservation Consultants, 1975; Mahadevan, 1976;
Mahadevan and  Hunter, 1976;  Mahadevan et  al.,  1977; Mahadevan and Culter,
1978; Mahadevan et al., 1980); dredging and filling effects  (Mahadevan
et al.,  1976;  Mahadevan and  Murdoch, 1977); fouling organisms (Mahadevan
and  Culter, 1977) and the evaluation of sampling  techniques  (Culter and
Mahadevan, 1978; Reeves and  Mahadevan, 1978).  Studies in lower Tampa
Bay  include investigations of polychaetes at Lassing  Park (Santos, 1972;
Santos  and Simon, 1974); benthos near Beacon Key  (Mahadevan, 1976), benthos
near Port Manatee (Conservation Consultants, 1971a; b;  c; d;  1972a; b; c;
d),  and  sphaeromid isopods in Cockroach Bay (Estevez, 1978).  Other studies
in Tampa Bay include investigations of macroinvertebrates (Dragovich and
Kelly, 1967; Hall and Saloman, 1975; Taylor, 1964; Taylor and Saloman,
1966), molluscs (Hall, 1972), amphipods  (Thoemke, 1977,-  1979), phoronids
(Stancyk et al., 1976) polychaetes  (Taylor, 1971; 1973b; 1975; Perkins
and  Savage, 1975; Rice and Simon, 1980) ,  dredging and filling effects
(Taylor, 1970;  1972; 1973a;  1979; Simon and Dyer, 1972;  Simon and Doyle,
1974; Simon,  Doyle and Conner, 1976; Conner and  Simon, 1979), fertilizer
processing effects (Law Engineering Testing Company,  1975; Upchurch  et  al./
                                    418

-------
1976), benthic algae  (Kruer, 1977), evaluation of sampling techniques
(Jordan, 1978) and a review of existing literature  (Simon, 1974).

       The above literature provides a comprehensive background  of
existing benthic ecology information in the vicinity of the study
area.  It is obvious from the survey that site-specific information
is lacking; however, the information from adjacent  sites can be
helpful in corroborating the trends observed  in  the present study.
                                     419

-------
                       MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sampling Locations
       The general study area and its boundaries are shown  in
Figure 1.1  (Chapter 1).  Specific sampling locations  (Figure 1.2)  for
the benthic study were:
       Transect 1:     Stations 1A, IB, 1C, ID, IE, 1G, and II
       Transect 2:     Stations 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3E, 3G, and 31
       Transect 5:     Stations 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, 5E, 5G, and 51
A total of twenty-one  (21) stations were sampled during the periods
May 28 through May 30, 1980 and October 13 through October  17,  1980.

Sampling Devices
       Samples for faunal analysis were collected with stainless  steel
                                                            2
plug  corers  (dimensions:  12.5 cm x 12.5 cm x 23 cm,  .016 m surface
area) that are fitted with handles and a screen mesh  (0.5 mm) top to
avoid loss of organisms.  A diagrammatic sketch of the corer is shown
in Figure 10.1.  The corer is very similar to the one used  by Salesman
 (1976).

       Sediment samples were collected with 4 cm diameter cylindrical
PVC cores fitted with caps to avoid sediment loss during transport to
the boat.

       Both types of sampling devices were operated by SCUBA divers.

Replication
       Seven faunal core samples were collected at each  station during
the May sampling.  Eight faunal core samples were collected at each station
during the October sampling (one sample reserve).  Two  sediment core
samples were collected at each station with one sample  serving as a reserve.
                                     420

-------
Field Procedures
       Stations were located using Loran C navigation and marked with
buoys prior to the sampling program.  At each  station a SCUBA diver
descended from the anchored boat to the bottom and commenced sampling.
The faunal cores were pushed to a depth of approximately 20 cm into the
sediment and removed with a hand covering the  bottom.  The cores were
then inverted and placed in a labelled cloth bag and transported to
the boat.  The two sediment cores were inserted to a depth of 10 cm
and removed with a hand covering the bottom.   The core was then capped
on both ends and transported to the boat.

       Aboard, the faunal samples were emptied into the accompanying
cloth bags, internally labelled, tied and placed in a bucket containing
10% MgCl- solution  (for narcotization; Russell, 1963).  The sediment
samples were emptied into internally and externally labelled jars and
iced for transportation to the laboratory, where they were frozen until
analysis was performed.

       On shore, the faunal samples were washed through a 0.5 mm sieve
and fixed with a 10% formalin-seawater-rose bengal solution in a pre-
labelled jar.  The rose bengal stain was used  to facilitate rapid and
accurate sorting  (Mason and Yevich, 1967; Korinkova and Sigmund, 1968;
Hamilton, 1969; Williams and Williams, 1974).  The preserved samples were
then transported to the laboratory.

Laboratory Procedures
       Seven faunal samples and one sediment  sample from each station were
processed in the laboratory.

       Paunal samples were decanted into  light and heavy  fractions  and
preserved in 70% isopropyl alcohol.  The  light fraction  contained    the
majority of the fauna and was sorted under  a  Unitron  ZSB  Stereozoom
                                    421

-------
                       1.2-cm dia.
                       0. 5-nun
                        mesh screen
                       1.6-nun -thick
                        stainless steel
                 PLUG SAMPLER
                                                 0.5-mm
                                             mesh screen
10-cm
T
L.
Figure 10.1.  Sieve  and Plug Sampler used for Quantitative Benthic Studies.

-------
binocular microscope.  The heavy  fraction, containing primarily
molluscs and larger animals, was  sorted  with the unaided eye in a
white background enamel pan.  Taxonomic  identifications  were performed
under various powers of the binocular microscope or an AO compound
microscope.

       Laboratory analyses of the sediment samples are shown in the  form
of a flow-diagram in Figure 10.2.

Taxonomic Procedures
       Taxonomic identifications  of species were accomplished with the
use of descriptive literature  (Appendix  Table 10,4  provides  a list of
taxonomic references used in this study).   In addition,  taxonomic experts
were utilized to either identify  or confirm the identifications of several
species.  The following scientists assisted in  taxonomic identifications:
Dr. R. Tucker Abbott  (Mollusca) ,   Dr. E.D. Estevez (Isopoda) , Dr.  R.  Heard
 (Crustacea), Dr. W. Price (Cumacea), Ms. C. Hunter (Polychaeta and
Sipunculida), and  Dr.  L.  Kornicker  (Ostracoda).

Data Analysis Procedures  - Fauna                                  »
       Numerical indices  were chosen for their ability to provide meaning-
ful summaries of data.  One criterion used in the selection of indices
was their widespread use  in scientific  literature, which should facilitate
comparison of data from this study with  other quantitative information
available in literature.

                          Fauna!  Density
       Faunal density  estimates are reported as numbers  of individuals
per square meter.  Values were computed  by dividing the  total number of
individuals found at a station  (for 7 replicates) by the total area  sampled
 (0.112 m2).
                                     423

-------
Collect
Samples




Record
Field
Data
                               Freeze Samples
                               Until Processing
Obtain Organic
Matter Aliquots
\
r
Dry Organic
Matter Aliquot
in Tared Cru-
cible @ 100°C
for 24 hours.
-«


Salt Removal; Wash
with Distilled Water;
Allow Sample to Settle,-
Siphon off water


Wet Sieve Sample
through a Sieve
with Distilled
Water

T
Record Dry Wt.;
Burn sample @
500°C for 1 hr.;
^
r
Record Ash-Free
Dry Wt. ; Calcu-
late % Organic
Matter '


^

>
Allow Silt-Clay
to Settle: Siphon
off water
\

Dry Silt-Clay
Fraction in
Tared Jar for
72 hrs. @ 100°C
1
Record I
of Silt-
Fraction
r
Dry Wt.
-Clav
i



Dry Sand Fraction
@ 100°C for 24
hours .
i
i
Dry Sieve Sand
Fraction on
Mechanical
Sieve Shaker
(30 min.)
t
Weigh each
fraction



                                                        Determine  Grain
                                                        Size  Distribution
Figure 10.2.  Sediment Analysis Procedures.

                             424

-------
                         Species Diversity
       Menzies, George and Rowe  (1973) define diversity as a concept
in community ecology which refers to the heterogeneity  (or lack of it)
in a community or assemblage of organisms.  Thus, diversity is depen-
dent upon the number of species present  (Species richness, S) and the
distribution of individuals among species  (Equitability or Evenness).
Another definition of diversity is simply the number of species found
in a unit area  (Whittaker, 1972).  Indices to measure diversity, species
richness and equitability are so numerous that  confusion  is rampant
 (Reviews in Hairston, 1964; Sanders, 1968; Hurlbert, 1971; Whittaker,
1972; Fager, 1972; Peet, 1974; Pielou, 1975; Smith et al., 1979; etc.).
The proliferation of indices has prompted Hurlbert  (1971) and Peet  (1975)
to recommend discarding diversity as a measure  in ecological studies.
However, placed in the proper perspective, diversity indices have been
shown to be useful in "bio-environmental" studies  (Boesch, 1972;
Borowitzka, 1972; Swartz, 1972; Pearson, 1975;  Swartz, 1978).  In this
study we have restricted our data analysis to the two commonly used.
diversity indices:  the Shannon-Weaver index and the Gini's  (Simpson's)
index.

i.  The Shannon-Weaver Index of Diversity  (Shannon and Weaver, 1963).
       The index is based on  'information' techniques, where diversity
is equated to the amount of uncertainty  which exists regarding the
 species identity of an individual selected at random from a community.
The more species and the more evenly their representation, the greater
the uncertainty and hence, the greater the diversity.   The computational
formula for Shannon's index is:
             H' = C/N .(N Iog1() N - Zsn    Iog10  n±)
                                    i=l
where C = 2.3026  (for units of "nats"),  N =  total  number  of  individuals
and n. = number of individuals in the i  th species.  Lloyd  et  al.  (1968)
have presented the functions nlog10n for all integers  from  n = 1 to n =
1050 to simplify the use of Shannon's index.
                                     425

-------
 ii.  Gini's Index of Diversity  (Gini, 1912; Simpson, 1949).
       The index is a measure of the dominance in a sample.   Though it
 is usually insensitive to rare  species, it has been used  commonly as a
 diversity index.  The computational formula for dominance diversity is:
             DM =  £Si=1n  (n-l)/N(N-l)  (Simpson, 1949)
 and  complemental or actual diversity, d = 1 - DM  (Gini, 1912).

                         Species Richness
       Species richness is estimated as the Margalef's index  and  as the
 total  number of species  (S) collected per station.

 i.   Margalef*s Index  (Margalef, 1958).
       Margalef's index of species richness is computed as follows:
             D = S - 1 / log N
 where  S  is the number of species in the sample.

 ii..  Number of Species/Station.
       The total number of species found at each station  for  all
 replicates.

                           Equitability
       Equitability is computed by Pielou's  (Pielou, 1966) conventional
method.  The computational formula is:
             J1 (Pielou's index) = H1 / log S
                                           e

                         Faunal Similarity
       A number of coefficients for measuring faunal similarities are
available (Bray and Curtis, 1957; Sanders, 1960; Horn, 1966;  Whittaker,
1967; Lie and Kelly,  1970;  Grassle and Smith, 1976).   However,  most of
                                    426

-------
the available coefficients consider only the number  and rank of
common species and not the distribution of  individuals.   The Morisita's
index (Morisita, 1959) , which takes into consideration both the number
of species in common and the number of individuals shared, is utilized
in this study.  Many authors in the past have used this index with a
greater degree of success than other overlap coefficients (Ono, 1961;
Barnard, 1970; Mauchline, 1972; Bloom et al., 1972;  Gage  and Geekie,
1973; Menzies, 1973; Paul, 1973; Gage, 1975; Farrell, 1974, Marum, 1974;
Gage, 1975; Mahadevan, 1979).  The computational  formula  for the Morisita's
index is:
where        \   - Is
                                (H  -1)
             X2  * Z  i-1  n2i
 where N  and N  are the total  number of  individuals  in sample one and two,
 respectively,  n  . and n2- are the  number of individuals  in the  i th species
 of  sample one and two, respectively.   The value  of CA  is  about one when
 the two samples are identical  and zero when no common  species are present.
 The index is relatively free from sample size effects.

 Data Analysis Procedures - Sediment
       Analysis of the sediment samples  includes determination of percen-
 tage volatile matter and grain size distribution.  Statistics on the
 grain size distribution are performed using the  following formulae; where
 phi (0)  = -log x;  x = particle size in millimeters:
              (i)  Mean grain size  (Mz) - overall size  measure  (Folk, 1974).
             Mz = 016 + 050 +  084
                        3
                                     427

-------
Class
Gravel
Very coarse sand
Coarse sand
Medium sand
Fine sand
Very fine sand
Silt clay
a Values
<0.35 0
 0.35 $ - 0.50 0
 0.50 0 - 0.71 0
 0.71 0 - 1.00 0
 1.00 0 - 2.00 0
 2.00 0 - 4.00 0
                                    Size (mm)
                                    2.0
                                    1.0
                                    0.5
                                    0.25
                                    0.125
                                    0.0625
                                    0.0625
              (ii)  Inclusive graphic standard deviation (sorting coefficient)
                   (a) - measure of uniformity or sorting (Folk, 1974).
                  084 - 016
                      4
                      095 - 05
                         6.6
             Degree of Sorting
             Very well sorted
             Well sorted
             Moderately well sorted
             Moderately sorted
             Poorly sorted
             Very poorly sorted
              (iii)  Inclusive graphic skewness  (SK) - the degree of
                    asymmetry between the central part of the  grain  size
                    composition curve and the "tail" portions  of the
                    curve  (Folk, 1974).
             SK  =
SK Values
-1-1.00 - +0.30
+0.30 - +0.10
+0.10	0.10
-0.10 - -0.30
-0.30	1.00
016 + 084 - 2050
  2 (084 - 016)
05 + 095 - 2050
 2 (095 - 05)
             Degree of Skewness
             Strongly fine-skewed
             Fine-skewed
             Near Symmetrical
             Coarse skewed
             Strongly coarse-skewed
                                    428

-------
             (iv)   Graphic kurtosis (Kg) - ratio between the sorting in
                   the "tails" of the granulometric curve and the
                   sorting of the new central portion of the curve
                   (Folk, 1974).
             Kg  =
Kg Values
<0.67
0.67 - 0.90
0.90 - 1.11
1.11 - 1.50
1.50 - 3.00
>3.00
                 _  095 - 05
                   2.44 (075-025)
Degree of Kurtosis
Very platykurtic
Platykurtic
Mesokurtic
Leptokurtic
Very leptokurtic
Extremely leptokurtic
Data Management
       Computer data management of information collected in the present
study was conducted by a 8-bit H-8 Heath mini-computer  (64 K memory,
3 disk system).  All numerical indices listed above were computed and
species lists compiled by the computer system.  Software for the system
was prepared by Dr. William N. Tavolga  (Senior Staff Scientist, Mote
Marine Laboratory).

Quality Assurance
       Stringent quality assurance  (QA) procedures were employed to ensure
the validity and accuracy of collected data.  Procedures that were part
of a project-specific, written  QA manual were strictly followed.  Some
highlights of the QA program for the present study were:
       •     Documentation, in the form of  internal and external
             sample labels, checked and copied bench sheets,
             and verified computer printouts.
                                     429

-------
Data traceability was maintained from sample
collection to report presentation through
consistent sample labelling and data-tracking.

Sample custody and integrity was maintained by
custody records and by sample security.

Specific QA procedures to ensure accurate sorting,
identification and data analysis were implemented:
1)  Resorting at least 5% of the samples.
2)  Rechecking at least 5% of the identifications.
3)  Obtaining taxonomic confirmation from experts
    in the field and museums.
4)  Rechecking and verifying all computer entries.
5)  Spot checking at least 2% of the computer
    calculations.
                      430

-------
                             RESULTS^

Physical and Chemical Parameters
       Temperature, salinity, and dissolved  oxygen  content were measured
during the current studies of the Northern Pinellas Program.  Data
are presented in Chapter 5.  Spatially  all parameters varied very little
for both sampling periods.  Therefore,  these are  not considered as
controlling factors in the distribution of benthic  fauna within the
study area, provided the observations during May  and October are
characteristic of conditions during  the remainder of the year.

       Currents data for the study area are  presented in chapter 5.
Tidal currents may have a significant influence on  the  benthic fauna
of the nearshore stations of Transects  3 and 5, located near Hurricane
Pass  (Transect 3) and tidal exchange channels (Transect 5).  Station 3B
is located in an old pass channel.

Sediment Characteristics
       Sediment granulometric statistics and the  percentage of silt-clay
and volatile organic content are presented  in Table 10.1.  Mean grain
size ranged from 1.25 $  (medium sand) at Stations II (May) to 3.58 0
 (very fine sand) at Station 3C  (October). Variation in mean grain size
was not extreme, however, since a majority of the stations had sediments
with mean grain size between 2.0 0  (fine sand) to 3.0 0 (very fine sand).
Sediments of Transect 5 stations were all within  the range of fine sand
as were most of the stations of Transect 1,   the  exceptions being Stations
ID, IE, and II of the May sampling.  Stations 3A, 3B, and  3C were the only
sites with a mean grain size greater than 3  0 (very fine sand).

       In terms of sorting coefficient  (measure of grain homogeneity),
most stations contained moderately sorted sediments.  Some exceptions
were:  Stations IB, ID, IE, and II for  May;  3B, 3C, and 3D for May  and
                                     431

-------
Table 10.1. Comparison of Sediment Characteristics for Benthic Samplina Stations between May and October 1980.


Station
1A
IB
1C
ID
IE
1G
11

3A

3B
3C
3D
3E
3G
31
5A
5B
5C
5D
5E
5G
51
(Mean,

Mean
MZ
May Oct.
2.92 *
2.47 *
2.54 2.70
1.46 *
1.43 2.59
2.62 2.62
1.25 2.40

3.13 3.22

2.91 3.13
2.79 3.58
2.21 2.78
2.82 1.62
2.65 1.02
2.12 2.62
2.73 2.46
2.73 2.60
2.72 2.38
2.71 2.75
2.74 2.76
2.44 2.64
2.86 2.76
Median, and Sorting Coefficient expressed in phi ( units) ) .

Median
M
May Oct.
2.81 *
2.57 *
2.51 2.60
2.23 *
1.84 2.56
2.57 2.56
1.31 2.47

3.21 3.31

2.96 3.31
2.73 3.83
2.54 2.70
2.78 1.70
2.58 0.96
2.25 2.57
2.65 2.46
2.65 2.55
2.64 2.54
2.63 2.67
2.66 2.66
2.46 2.57
2.82 2.69
Sorting
Coefficient
May Oct.
0.94 *
1.37 *
0.82 0.82
1.91 *
1.61 0.61
0.66 0.71
1.36 0.82

0.81 0.74

1.33 1.40
1.03 1.13
1.51 1.15
0.92 1.76
0.75 1.33
0.99 0.82
0.76 0.45
0.62 0.67
0.81 1.60
0.69 0.66
0.69 0.72
0.79 1.01
0.74 0.78

Skewness
Sk 	
May Oct.
0.09 *
-0.31 *
-0.10 0.07
-0.46 *
-0.34 0.03
0.05 0.03
-0.14 -0.15

-0.10 -0.10

-0.08 -0.22
-0.16 -0.35
-0.43 -0.17
-0.13 -0.12
0.03 0.01
-0.19 -0.05
-0.01 -0.22
0.16 0.06
-0.03 -0.31
0.07 0.12
0.08 0.13
-0.21 -0.14
-0.02 0.00

Kurtosis
Kg
May Oct.
1.19 *
2.18 *
2.68 1.62
0.97 *
0.96 1.40
1.39 1.46
0.87 1.65

0.99 1.00

0.84 0.76
1.51 1.00
2.02 1.86
1.21 0.80
1.38 0.94
1.07 1.50
1.48 1.27
1.13 1.34
1.55 1.34
1.34 1.09
1.19 1.22
2.09 2.32
0.96 1.12

Percentage
Silt Clay
May Oct.
10.16 *
4.69 *
1.66 5.18
5.35 *
0.60 0.34
0.24 0.75
0.57 2.91

10.08 10.38

23.32 36.50
2.81 45.77
1.47 3.93
2.41 4.21
0.72 1.80
0.28 0.52
0.18 0.58
0.06 0.98
0.13 0.95
0.17 0.30
0.46 4.19
0.33 0.96
0.80 0.85
Percentage
Organic
Content
May Oct.
0.46 0.92
0.74 1.27
0.40 0.53
1.10 0.33
0.84 0.33
0.28 0.42
1.29 0.75

2.23 1.33

20.44 9.29
0.82 6.73
0.60 0.77
0.78 1.16
0.50 1.33
0.40 0.39
0.28 0.36
0.14 0.40
0.25 0.70
0.18 0.13
0.30 0.44
0.33 0.36
0.77 0.43

Sediment
May Oct.
Fine sand *
Fine sand *
Fine sand Fine sand
Medium
sand *
Medium
sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Medium
sand Fine sand
Very fine Very fine
sand sand
Very fine
Fine sand sand
Fine sand sand
Fine sand Fine sand
_ . -, Medium
Fine sand sand
Fine sand Coarse
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
Fine sand Fine sand
*Data   not   available.

-------
October, 3E and 3G for October; 5C and  5G  for  October.  All of  the  noted
exceptions had poorly sorted sediments.  In terms  of  skewness,  46%  of
the sediments (May and October) were near  symmetrical,  28% coarse skewed,
15% strongly coarse-skewed and 10% fine  skewed.  Most of  the  sediments
(both May and October) were leptokurtic  (39%)  or very leptokurtic  (36%).
Only 23% were mesokurtic and 3%  (one sample) platykurtic.

       The percentage of silt-clay was generally low  for  Transects  5,
1, and the offshore stations of Transect 3.  For corresponding  stations,
Transect 5 had the lowest percentages of silt-clay while  Transect 3 was
nearly always highest.  Organic content  follows trends  similar  to that
of percent silt-clay.  Stations 3B  (May  and October)  and  3C  (October)
were the only stations with a large percentage of  organic matter.

       In general, the surface sediments of the study area can  be
classified as a fine to very fine quartz sand  substratum  with very  low
silt-clay and organic content and mixed  with varying  g^iantities of
calcareous shell material.  General topographic features  of the study
area are presented in Chapter 2, which  also describes the presence  of
coarse sand and hard bottoms in the area.  The sediment analysis, however,
indicates the predominance of soft bottom  habitats in the study area.

Species Composition
       A total of 538 different taxa were  identified  from 31,107 organisms
collected in the study.  During May, 13,592 organisms representing  348
species were collected,while in October  17,515 organisms  representing
392 species were collected.  A species  list including major taxonomic
headings is presented in Appendix Table  10.1.  Appendix Tables  10.2 and
10.3 are composite species lists for the May and October  samplings,
respectively, including total animal counts for each  station.  Overall,
for May, Nematoda spp.  (17.3%), Acanthohaustorius  sp.,  an amphipod  (9.7%),
Branchiostoma caribaeum, a cephalochordate (4.4%), Copepoda  sp. A  (3.8%)
and Nemertina spp. (3.8%) were the most  abundant species  in the study
area.  For October, Nematoda spp.  (22.1%), Branchiostoma  caribaeum (14.4%),
                                    433

-------
 Ophelia sp.,  a polychaete (5.8%),  Oligochaeta spp. (3.6%), and
 Acanthohaustorius sp.  (3.1%)  were  the most abundant.   Spatial hetero-
 geneity in species composition is  evident by the large number of taxa
 collected.  The most abundant taxa (>_ 5%) at each station are presented
 in Table 10.2.  Table 10.3 lists a comparison of the faunal composition
 of the study area between May and  October for major taxonomic groupings.
 For both sampling periods polychaetes were most numerous followed by
 nematodes.  The molluscs (7.3%, May;  8.5%, October) and crustaceans
 (28.5%, May;  17-0%, October)  composed relatively consistent percentages
 of the total fauna although percentages varied among their sub-groupings.

        In general, oligomixity (dominance by a few species) was low.
 Nematodes and nemertines were ubiquitous, absent only at Station 5B
 during October.  Spatial heterogeneity in species composition was high and
 the incidence of opportunistic species low.

 Faunal Density
        Faunal density 0# organisms/m ) values for the 21 stations are
                                                                2
 presented in Table 10.4.  Density  ranged from 1,277 organisms/m  at
                                           o
 Station 5D (October)  to 24,321 organisms/m  at Stations II (May).
 Density differences between the three transects were evident.  At Transect 1,
 a  general increase in density occurred at the offshore stations in May
 while a decrease in offshore  densities was noted in October.  At Transect 3,
 no pronounced offshore-nearshore differences were evident for May, but
 a  large increase in densities of offshore stations was apparent in October.
 Stations of  Transect 5 exhibited higher densities nearshore for both
 sampling periods.   For the May sampling, Transect 3 had the lowest overall
 faunal density (x = 3,128), Transect 1 the highest (x = 8,180) and Tran-
 sect  5 (x = 5,486)  falling between 1 and 3.  During October, Transect 3
 had the  highest mean density  (x =  8,930) while Transects 1 and 5 were
 nearly equal  (Tl,  x =  6,500;  T5, x = 6,852).

 Species  Richness
       Species  richness values are presented in Table 10.4.  Very high
numbers of species  were encountered at-Transect 1, Stations IE and  II for

                                     434

-------
Table 10.2 .
The Most Abundant Taxa  (>5%) at each Station for the May
and/or October Benthic  Samples.
STATION
1A
IB
1C
ID
IE
1G
SPECIES
Nematoda spp.
Oxyurostylis smithi
Nemertina spp.
Haplocytherida setipunctata
Anodontia alba
Oxyurostylis smithi
Mysidacea sp. (juv.)
Nemertina spp.
Nematoda spp.
Crepidula plana
Notomastus hemipodus
Sarsiella sp.
Nemertina spp.
Nematoda spp.
Polydora socialis
Aricidea sp.
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Amphiuridae sp. (juv.)
Isolda pulchella
Lumbrinereis crassidentata
Aricidea fragilis
Pseudopolydora sp.
Nemertina spp.
Nematoda spp.
Lumbrinereis latreilli
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Caecum johnsoni
Ophelia sp.
Synelmis albini
Mellita quinquiesperforata
Nematoda spp.
Spiophanes bombyx
Nemertina spp.
Sarsiella sp.
Anadara transversa
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Nematoda spp.
Copepoda sp. A
Anodontia alba
Armandia agilis
Branchiostoma caribaeum

PERCENTAGE OF
May
7.0
6.4
5.5
3.5
10.3
7.2
5.4
0.6
0.0
3.1
2.7
3.5
9.6
7.1
6.4
5.0
5.3
6.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.2
8.0
5.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
21.4
8.0
6.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
29.8
35.8
0.3
0.0
0.3
TOTAL FAUNA
October
4.2
0.1
3.2
38.3
1.5
0.0
1.0
8.0
5.0
9.7
7.5
5.7
7.3
3.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.1
6.8
6.4
6.7
0.4
9.2
0.5
27.6
7.9
6.3
5.0
5.3
36.5
0.2
1.8
6.7
5.8
1.1
14.8
0.0
17.2
12.3
7.4
                                       435

-------
Table  10.2.
Continued. The Most Abundant Taxa (>5%) at each Station for
the May and/or October Benthic Samples.
STATION
II
3A
3B
3C
3D
3E
SPECIES
Nematoda spp.
Copepoda sp. A
Selenaria sp.
Pitar simpsoni
Anodontia alba
Nemertina sp.
Sigambra bassi
Oligochaeta spp.
Nematoda spp.
Ancistrcsyllis jonesi
Notomastus latericeus
Paraprionospio pinnata
Tellina sp.
Tellina versicolor
Pseudopolydora sp.
Capitella capitata
Leucon sp.
Metamysidopsis swifti
Nematoda spp.
Tellina versicolor
Amphiuridae sp. (juv.)
Nemertina sp.
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Rhepoxynius c.f. epistomus
Amphiuridae sp. (juv.)
Tellina versicolor
Paraprionospio pinnata
Listriella c.f. barnardi
Amphipoda sp. E
Hemichordata sp.
Onuphis eremita oculata
Corophium sp.
Nemertina spp.
Oligochaeta spp.
Brania wellfleetensis
Notomastus laterceus
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Nemertina spp.
Nematoda spp.
Apoprionospio pygmaea
Onuphis eremita oculata
Mellita sp. (iuv.)
Goniadides carolinae

PERCENTAGE
May
31.6
6.1
8.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
2.4
4.9
5.4
8.1
25.4
5.4
0.8
0.4
0.0
10.3
5.7
62.7
1.2
2.5
0.0
6.7
8.3
5.4
7.3
0.6
0.0
0.6
0.3
0.0
5.6
7.6
4.5
1.3
0.0
0.6
4.1
10.0
8.3
9.1
5.9
5.3
0.0
OF TOTAL FAUNA
October
20.0
0.0
0.0
11.3
6.7
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.6
6.0
0.0
4.2
19.8
6.0
16.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.5
7.3
5.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
7.2
17.2
11.1
6.1
5.4
13.6
4.9
0.2
6.4
6.0
8.9
5.1
6.2
0.9
50.4
0.0
0.1
0.0
7.9
                                      436

-------
Table  10.2.
Continued. The Most Abundant Taxa  (>5%) at each Station for
the May and/or October Benthic Samples.
STATION
3G
31
5A
5B
5C
5D
5E
SPECIES
Nematoda spp.
Nemertina spp.
Oligochaeta spp.
Armandia maculata
Nematoda spp.
Copepoda sp. A
Oligochaeta spp.
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Nematoda spp.
Spio pettiboneae
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Rhepoxynius c.f. epistomus
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Ophelia sp.
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Ophelia sp.
Rhepoxynius c.f. epistomus
Spio pettiboneae
Travisia hobsonae
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Rhepoxynius c.f. epistomus
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Ophelia sp.
Nematoda spp.
Spiophanes bombyx
Tiron tropikis
Rhepoxynius c.f. epistomus
Cyclaspis varians
Nemertina spp.
Onuphis eremita oculata
Scolelepis squama ta
Acanthohaustorius sp.
Nemertina spp.
Anodontia alba
Monoculodes nyei
Mysidacea sp. (juv.)
Nematoda spp.
Olivella dealbata
Ostracoda sp. A
Metamysidopsis swifti
4-^7
PERCENTAGE
May
19.4
5.4
1.9
1.2
53.4
13.4
0.9
0.2
6.2
7.4
32.0
9.8
19.0
O.D
64.7
11.2
0.1
2.7
8.0
6.1
32.8
6.6
20.1
0.0
5.4
5.8
5.4
31.2
5.4
0.1
0.5
0.0
3.4
7.1
7.1
5.1
19.0
3.4
1.0
0.0
0.0
OF TOTAL FAUNA
October
53.3
0.7
7.5
12.2
57.3
0.0
6.2
5.1
0.3
0.2
7.9
11.7
43.0
21.3
16.3
35.3
29.3
6.4
1.9
0.0
9.8
7.9
45.0
13.2
0.7
1.4
0.0
8.4
0.0
14.0
7.0
15.4
9.8
3.8
2.5
0.0
0.0
6.6
6.9
5.3
28.7

-------
Table  10.2.
Continued. The Most Abundant Taxa (>5%) at each Station for
the May and/or October Benthic Samples.
STATION
5G






51





SPECIES
Nemtaoda spp.
Mysidacea sp. (juv.)
Copepoda sp. A
Mellita sp. (juv.)
Armandia maculata
Axiothella mucosa
Branchiostoma caribaeum
Nematoda spp.
Nemertina spp.
Mysidacea sp. (juv.)
Ostracoda sp. A
Spio pettiboneae
Branchiostoma caribaeum

PERCENTAGE OF
May
32.0
18.8
5.4
5.4
0.4
0.0
1.0
19.8
11.1
13.2
6.3
0.3
0.0
TOTAL FAUNA
October
12.2
0.2
0.4
0.0
14.8
6.8
32.0
43.3
0.3
1.1
0.2
24.6
6.2
                                     438

-------
Table 10.3.  Comparison of the invertebrate faunal composition  (percent
             of total numbers) by major taxa between May and October 1980.
Taxon

ANNELIDA
Polychaeta
Oligochaeta
NEMATODA
NEMERTINA
CEPHALOCHORDATA
Branchiostoma caribaeum
MOLLUSCA
Bivalvia
Gastropoda
Scaphopoda
CRUSTACEA
Amphipoda
Ostracoda
Decapoda
Isopoda
Mysidacea
Cumacea
Tanaidacea
Cirripedia
ECHINODERMATA
CNIDARIA
PLATYHELMINTHES
Percent Composition (Rank Order)
May

24.7 ( 1)
1.9 (12)
17.3 ( 2)
3.8 ( 7)

4.4 ( 5)

6.1 ( 4)
1.1 (13)
0.1 (16)

16.4 ( 3)
2.7 ( 9)
2.0 (11)
0.6 (14)
4.1 ( 6)
2.6 (10)
0.1 (16)
0.02 (17)
3-0 ( 8)
0.6 (14)
0.3 (15)
October

29.0 ( 1)
3.6 ( 7)
22.1 ( 2)
2.0 (10)

14.4 ( 3)

5.8 ( 5)
2.5 ( 9)
0.2 (16)

7.7 ( 4)
4.5 ( 6)
1.6 (11)
0.9 (12)
0.8 (13)
0.7 (14)
0.4 (15)
0.4 (15)
2.6 ( 8)
0.1 (17)
0.2 (16)
                                   439

-------
 May and  also Station 3E for October.  Station 3B exhibited  species
 numbers  uncharacteristically low for the study area: 19  species  in  May
 and 28 in  October.  Factors accounting for this anomaly  are presented
 in the discussion.  The greatest absolute change in species numbers
 occurred at Station II, a decline of 116 species from May to October.
 The greatest increase in species numbers was for Station 3E, which
 increased  by 54 species from May to November.  Changes at other  stations
 were less  pronounced.  No nearshore-offshore trends in species richness
 were evident.  Overall, the pattern of mean number of species per transect
 was the  same for both May and October.  Transect 1 had the  greatest mean
 number of  species  (May, 93; October, 68), Transect 3 fewer  (May, 63;
 October, 63), and Transect 5 the lowest  (May, 51; October,  49).  The
 Margalef's index generally reflects the same trends exhibited by species
 numbers.

       Figures 10.3 and 10.4 illustrate the spatial patterns of  species rich-
 ness (I  of species) and faunal densities  (# organisms/m  ) at each transect for
 May and  October.  A notable similarity exists for both the  May and  October
 plots of Transect 5, in that increased faunal density is accompanied  by
 increased  species numbers at inshore and offshore stations  with  a corres-
 ponding  reduction in both parameters at Station 5D.

 Species Diversity and Equitability
       Species diversity (as Shannon's and Gini's indices)  values are pre-
 sented in  Table 10.4.  Shannon's H' values ranged from 1.53 at Station 3B
 (October)  to 3.90 at Station 3C (May).  Mean diversity values  (by transect)
 show  similar patterns as species richness, i.e., greatest diversity
 occurring  at Transect 1 and the lowest at Transect 5.  Notably,  H1  values
 at all but three stations (1G, 5B, 5D) were lower in October than May.
 Gini's index values generally followed the trends exhibited by  the
 Shannon's  index.

       Equitability values (Pielou's index, J') are presented  in Table
10.4.  Higher equitability values were usually accompanied by  higher
                                    440

-------
    28
    24'
  o 20.
H 16-
(0

i

i  8


1  4
         200r

         85
         u.
         O80-J-
         §40+
                 TRANSECT 1
                     1A
                             18        1C         10

                                     STATION
                                                              IE
          1G
                                                                                  11
  6

*•" »
 ?


 w

 5»
 _i
     i
          100r
         (0
         u.
         IU
         a
                 TRANSECT  #
                     3A
                              3B         3C         3D

                                     STATION
3E
3G
                                                                                  31
    12
   to
     6-
   < 4
           80
         O)
         Ul
         5

         IU
         &
         CO
       Ul
       to
          20-
     2"  Z
                 TRANSECT  5
                                                            *	
                     5A
                             SB         5C         5D

                                     STATION
5E
                                                                        5G
                                                                                51
figure  10.3.
            Faunal Density ($/m2, solid  line)  and Species  Richness (# species/

            station, dotted line) Plots  of Benthic Fauna by  Transect for May,

            1980.
                                     441

-------
       200i
                  TRANSECT 1
                                      1C        1D

                                   STATION
 28


 -24*  _

      
-------
       Table 10.4.  Comparison of Benthic Community Parameters between May and October 1980.
Station

1A
IB
1C
ID
IE
1G
11
3A
3B
3C
3D
3E
3G
31
5A
5B
5C
5D
5E
5G
51

Faunal Density
No./m
May Oct .
3036 7991
4607 5330
3866 8634
4875 15063
11518 4964
5036 2179
24321 1339
2313 3839
2152 4152
2795 2491
4714 4911
3000 27884
1982 12188
4938 7045
7348 13179
10420 12964
5982 9777
1804 1277
3652 3518
6313 4098
2884 3152
SPECIES RICHNESS
No. of
Species Margalef ' s
May Oct. May Oct.
59 89 9.93 12.95
84 72 13.29 11.11
81 90 13.16 12.95
88 79 13.78 10.50
114 54 15.68 8.39
71 49 10.99 8.73
156 40 19.42 7.78
59 58 10.43 9.40
19 28 3.27 4.40
86 42 14.79 7.28
83 75 13.04 11.73
63 117 10.64 14.42
74 64 13.15 8.73
60 59 9.27 8.69
38 45 5.51 6.03
46 44 6.37 5.91
48 56 7.22 7.86
39 39 7.14 7.66
67 54 10.97 8.87
69 60 10.30 9.63
52 42 8.78 6.99
SPECIES DIVERSITY
Shannon-Weaver
H1 Gini's
May Oct. May Oct.
3.65 3.04 0.97 0.84
3.77 3.55 0.97 0.96
3.69 3.57 0.96 0.96
3.84 2.94 0.97 0.89
3.57 2.67 0.93 0.84
2.42 3.06 0.78 0.92
3.26 3.12 0.88 0.93
3.23 3.11 0.92 0.92
1.54 1.53 0.59 0.55
3.90 3.01 0.97 0.92
3.83 3.67 0.97 0.96
3.53 2.21 0.96 0.72
3.68 2.08 0.95 0.69
2.13 2.09 0.69 0.66
2.31 1.94 0.84 0.75
1.59 1.85 0.57 0.76
2.40 2.14 0.83 0.76
2.88 3.07 0.88 0.93
3.43 3.06 0.94 0.90
2.77 2.67 0.85 0.85
3.07 2.08 0.92 0.75

Equitability
Pielou's J1
May Oct.
0.89 0.68
0.85 0.83
0.84 0.79
0.86 0.67
0.75 0.67
0.57 0.79
0.65 0.84
0.79 0.77
0.52 0.46
0.88 0.81
0.87 0.85
0.85 0.46
0.86 0.50
0.52 0.51
0.63 0.51
0.42 0.49
0.62 0.53
0.79 0.84
0.82 0.77
0.65 0.65
0.78 0.56
U)

-------
diversity values.  The trends shown by Jf were identical to those of
the diversity indices but were not as pronounced.

Faunal Similarity
       Faunal similarity values (Morisita's index) between stations are
presented as trellis diagrams in Figures 10.5 and 10.6.  Higher similar
station groupings are summarized by the following, where the double
arrow indicates high similarity:
       for May:
                •    1C «—» ID «—» 3E
                                   1G
       for October:
                     5G*-
-*5C,
                                      5B
                •  IE, 3B, 3E, 3G, 31 and  51 were  all  highly similar to
                   each other.

       The analysis for May indicates an offshore  faunal group which
appears slightly stronger if moderately similar  stations are considered.
Just as significant, however, are Stations  3A and 3B, which are very
dissimilar to all other stations.  For May, there  were 16 (7.6%) combi-
nations of high similarity, 35  (16.0%) combinations of moderate similarity,
35 (16.7%) cases of low similarity and 124 (59.0%) cases of very low
similarity.

       There are no clear nearshore-offshore groupings for October;
however, the nearshore Stations 5A,  5B, 5C of  Transect 5 were similar to
                                    444

-------
                     Figure 10.5.  Trellis Diagram Depicting Faunal Similarity Between Benthic

                                   Sampling Stations,  for May,  1980 (based on CX values).
Station No.
      !A    16     1C
                        ID
                 16
                 II
                 3A
                 3B
                  3C
            3D
            3E
                 31
                 5A
                 SB
                  5C
                  5E
                  56
                  51
 I A
 IB
 1C
 ID
 IE
 16
 II
 3A
 3B
 3C
 3D
 3E
 3G
 31
 5A
 SB
 5E
 3D
 5E
 56
 51
            IB
1C
ID
IE
16
TT
3B
3C
3D
3E
36
31
SB
SC
5D
                                                                                                              5E
5D    51
£>•
U1
  HI6H      CX   > 0.7
  HODERATE  CX>0.5<0.7
  LOU      CX>0.3<0.5
  MERY  LOU  CX   <0.3
                                                                   Faunal  sinilarity values are  based on
                                                                    Horisita's (19S9) fornula.

-------
                     Figure 10.6.  Trellis Diagram Depicting Faunal Similarity Between Benthic

                                   Sampling  Stations,  for October, 1980 (based on CX values).
Station No
      1A
                  1C
ID
IE
16
II
3A
3B
3C
3D
3E
36
31
5A
5B
5C
5E
51
                   HIGH
                   HODERATE
                   LOU
                   VERY LOU
      C A   > 0.7
      C X >0.5<0.7
      C X >0.3<0.5
      CX   < 0.3
                                      Faunal sinilarity values  are based on
                                      Horisita's (1959) fornula.

-------
stations 5G and ID.  Also, stations of Transect  3  (3B, 3E, 3G, 31) were
similar to Stations IE and 51.  Overall,  for October  ther were more
highly similar combinations  (23, or 11%)  than May,  fewer moderate and low
combinations (11, or 5.2%; and 27, or 12.9%) and more very low
similarity cases  (149, or 71.0%).

      As stated earlier, Nematoda comprised a large portion of the total
fauna collected for both sampling periods.  In general, nematodes are
considered a meiofaunal group  (animals which pass  through a 0.5 mm sieve),
although they may be many millimeters in  length.   However, because of
their very small diameter  (usually<. 1 mm), most  nematodes will pass "
through a 0.5 mm sieve given sufficient sieving  time.  In light of the
difficulty in quantifying nematodes, faunal similarity analysis was
also conducted after deleting them from the data sets.  The overall
result for both May and October was a reduction  in faunal similarity
between most stations  ( Figures 10.7 and  10.8).  The  stations group
out as follows:
      for May:
                *   1C-—» 3C
                        5C
                   5E
      for October:
                        51
                •   ID.
I/I
5A-	»5B
                •   3B-	»3C

      For May the 1C, 3C,  and  5E with 5G,  and  51  are new highly  similar
groupings.  Overall, excluding nematodes  for May  there are 8  (3.8%)
combinations of high similarity,  23  (11%)  combinations of moderate  similarity,
                                   447

-------
                     Figure  10.7.   Trellis Diagram Depicting Faunal Similarity Between Benthic
Station No.
       1A
ID
1C
ID
IE
Sampling Stations, excluding Nematodes,  for  May,1980

(based on CX values).
16    II     3A    3B    3C
      1A
                                                                                 SB
                                                                                SC
                                                                                SD
                                                                                5E
                                                                                56
51
00
       HIGH      CX    > 0.7
       MODERATE  C* >0.5 <0.7
       LOU       C * >0.3 <0.5
       VERY LOU  CX    <0.3
                                                                   Faunal sinilarity  values are based on
                                                                    Horisita's (1959)  formula.

-------
                     Figure 1O.8.
                       Trellis Diagram Depicting Faunal Similarity Between Benthic

                       Sampling Stations, excluding Nematodes, for October, 1980

                       (based on CA values)
Station No
                                                                                                                          51
      1A
IB
1C
ID
IE
16
II
3A
3B
3C
3D
3E
36
31
5A
SB
5C
5D
5E
50
51
        HI6H      CX    > 0.7
        MODERATE  CX  20.5<0.?
        LOU       CX  >0.3<0.5
        VERY  LOU  CX     <0.3
                                             •••»
                                                 Faunal  sinilarity values are based on
                                                  Horisita's  (1959) fornula.

-------
40 (19%)  combinations of low similarity and 139 (66%) combinations of
very low similarity.   Excluding nematodes for May, the nearshore, offshore
groupings for Transect 5 were much more clear cut.

       With the exclusion of nematodes, for October, the 3C, 3B, and
the 5B, ID high similarities were new groupings.  Overall, there were 10
(5%) highly similar combinations, 3 (1%) moderately similar combinations,
20 (10%)  low similarity combinations, and 177 (84%) very low similarity
combinations.  Excluding nematodes for October results in a large reduc-
tion of many similarity values.  Transect 3 between-station similarities
were only slightly changed.

       Results of a faunal similarity analysis between May and October
samplings for all stations are presented in Table 10.5.  Only one pair
of stations  (3B and 5E) exhibited high between-season similarity.  Nine
station pairs (3C and 5D; 5A and IE, 5A, 5B, 5C; 5C and IE, 5A, 5B, 5C)
exhibited moderate similarity.  Generally, there was a notable lack of
faunal similarity between seasons.

       Overall, the faunal similarity analysis indicates a hetero-
geneously distributed benthic fauna with definite seasonal changes.

Sediment-Fauna Inter-relationships
       Hardly any significant relationship existed between benthic fauna
and sediment parameters.  However, stations with a low mean phi  (ID, IE,
II, 3E (October), and 3G (October)) usually contained the greatest number
of species (although the linear correlations between the number of species
and mean grain size were not particularly high: May, r = -.78; October,
r = -.44). The correlations between faunal density and mean grain  size
(0 value) were most consistent but again not high: May, r = -.69;  October,
r = -.60.  Other sediment and faunal parameters generally exhibited  low
linear correlations.

       A few other sediment-fauna relationships are  worth noting:
       •  The polychaete Capitella capitata, considered an
          indicator of organically enriched sediments, occurred
          only in relative abundance at the silty Station 3B (May).

                                     450

-------
 Station No.
            IB
                  1C
                        IP
                              IE
                                    1G
                                                     38
      OCTOBER
      3C    3D    3E
                                                                             36
                                                                                   31
                                                                                         5A    SB
 1C
 1C
 1B
 IE
 16
 11
 3«
«3B
A3C
Y3D
 31
 36
 31
 5»
 SB
 5C
 SB
 5E
 56
 SI
       1A     IB    1C    ID    IE     16     II     3A     3B    3C    3D    3E    36    31    5A    SB     5C    SB    SE    56    51
                    HIGH      C    3 0.7
                    MODERATE  C  >0.5<0.7
                    LOU       C  >0.3
-------
          Metamysidopsis swifti (mysid), a probable
          opportunistic species was collected at the same
          station in high numbers.

       •  The amphipod Acanthohaustorius sp. and the bivalve
          Anodontia alba occurred in abundance (^5%) only at
          stations consisting predominantly of fine sand.

       •  The bivalve Tellina sp. was abundant (j>5%) only
          at stations consisting of very fine sand.

       Grain size was statistically different between Transects
 (Students t, a = 0.05) 1 and 3 for  May, as were faunal density and
 species richness.  Transects 1 and  5 and Transects 3 and 5 were not
 significantly different in mean grain size, faunal density, or species
 richness.  For the October sampling, there were no significant differ-
 ences between transects for mean grain size, faunal density or species
numbers.  When May is compared to October no significant differences
were observed between corresponding transects for the same three
parameters.
                                    452

-------
                           DISCUSSION

Adequacy  of  Sampling Design
       The accuracy of the baseline data collected in the present study
is dependent on  the adequacy of the sampling design.  Some of the key
factors in establishing sampling and analysis adequacy are:

       •  Reliability and accuracy of sampling device
          (consistent substrate penetration, no loss of
         sample during retrieval, etc.; characteristics
         for a  good sampling device are described by
         Menzies and Rowe, 1968; Holme and Mclntyre, 1971).
       •  Adequate sieve size to retain a majority of the
         macrofauna (Reish, 1959b).
       •  Good and consistent procedures to ensure  proper
         preservation of fauna.
       •  Adequate number of stations to address spatial
         variability of fauna.
       •  Sufficient replication to adequately describe
          (1) within-station faunal variation, and
          (2) a  majority of the species inhabiting the
         site.
       •  Sufficient temporal frequency of sampling to
         address seasonal variations in fauna.
       •  Sound  taxonomic procedures and use of expert
         confirmations to ensure accurate identification
         of organisms.
       •  Consistent data analysis procedures.

       In the present study the above criteria have been addressed as
follows to ensure the collection of an adequate, quantitative data base:

       •  A  diver-operated core was utilized to ensure consistent
         penetration and the collection of samples satisfying
                                   453

-------
          all the criteria defined by Menzies and Rowe, 1968.
          The core is generally considered a better device
          than conventional grabs (Word et al., 1976; Swartz,
          1978).  Additionally, the use of cloth bags to
          enclose the cores prevents any loss of sediment or
          animals upon retrieval.

       •  A 0.5 mm sieve was utilized to wash the samples.
          This sieve size is generally considered adequate
          for macrofaunal studies (Mahadevan and Patton, 1979).

       •  Fixing and preserving methods were consistent and
          followed acceptable proecdures in the literature.

       •  A total of 21 stations were sampled to ensure the
          documentation of spatial faunal variability.  The
          stations encompassed various depths and substrates.

       •  Seven replicates were analyzed from each station.
          Species saturation curves  (Gleason, 1922; Holme, 1953)
          for each station are presented in Figures 10.9 through
          10.14.  in general, seven replicates appear to be
          adequate for collecting a majority of the species at
          most stations (criterion: increase between replicates
          5 and 6 less than 10%; each curve is the average of
          two randomly chosen data permutations).  Exceptions
          were Stations 1A (10.5%, Figure 10.9), IB  (10.5%,
          Figure 10.9), II (15.0%, Figure 10.9), 3B  (10.5%,
          Figure 10.10), 3E (10.5%, Figure 10.10}, and 31  (10.7%,
          Figure 10J.O) for the May sampling.  For October, there
          were only two exceptions:  Station 3G  (16.1%, Figure
          10.13) and 51 (14.1%, Figure 10.14).

       Sampling appears sufficient for October and marginally adequate
for May.   Additional replicates would have strengthened the  data base.
                                    454

-------
•rl
0
(1)

en
   60
   30
        Station 1A
   90
81
o
•rl
0
0

w   45
         _i	i    i	i	i
          12    345

                Replicate
        Station 1C
                             6   7
   120 ,.
to
0
•H
O
0
Oi
w   60
 •
0
z
         Station IE
              23456

                Replicate


                         170
                      to
                      0)
                      •H
                      y
                      cu
                      a

                      W  85
                                           in
                                           o>
                                           •H
                                           O
                                           0)
                                           ft
                                              90
                                              45
                                           01
                                           
-------
   60
W
o>
•H

S  30
   90
 OJ

!4S
   65
 CQ
 0)
 •H
 O
 (U
 0, 33
        Station 3A
          1   •    •	1	L.
          12   34   5   67

               Replicate
        Station 3C
          12345
               Replicate
        Station 3E
6  7
          1234   5   6   7

               Replicate
                20
            •H
             O
             <"  1 n
             Ot  10
            cn
                                         to
                                         0)
             a
                                            90
                45
             to
             0)
             •H
             O
             0)
                                         cn  40
                                                 Station 3B
                                                  i	i  a
                       123   4   567

                            Replicate
                                                 Station 3D
                80 L
                       1   2    34   567
                             Replicate
                        60
                      (0
                      0)
                      •H
                      U
                      g.30
                      w
                              Station 31
                              12   3   45   67

                                    Replicate


   Figure 10.10. Species Area Curves  for Transect 3, May, 1980.
                Percentage increase  is between replicates 6 and  7.
                                       456

-------
   40
ra
01
•rf
0

I
«  20
   50
   70
 10
 
-------
10
0)
-H

0)
04
  904
   60
   30
      Station 1A
                       ,1   I
         1234567
   9 Of-  station  1C
to

-------
        Station 3A
•  60
.3

i
S1  30
   45
0)
•H
U
ID   on
n,   2U
W
 ffl
•H
 0
   120
    60
           12    34   567
                  Replicate

          Station 3C
 12345

       Replicate

Station 3E
                              6   7
           12   3   4   567

                 Replicate
                                                 CO
                                                 (U
                                                •H
                                                 o
                                                 0)
                                                 ft
                                       CQ
                                       0)
                                       •H
                                       O
                                       
-------
                                               45
60
30
60
30
60
30
       Station 5A

                5.4%  increase — ^

                 i   i   I   i
       12   34567
            Replicate

       Station 5C
       1234567
             Replicate

       Station 5E
                8.2% increase
  34567
Replicate
                         60
                         30
                              Station  51
                                               20
                                  45
                                               20
                                               60
                                                30
                                                    Station 5B
                                         12345
                                              Replicate
                                       Station  5D
                                                              I
                                                        I
j	I
                                             2345
                                                Replicate
                                        Station 5G
                                                       1
                                                   7.4% increase
                                              I   I   I    II   I
                                                       12345
                                                            Replicate
                                         14.1%  increase

                                   Jill    I 	I
     Figure 10.14.
                  1234567
                        Replicate

       Species Area Curves for Transect 5, October, 1980.
       Percentage increase is between replicates 6 and 7.
                                           460

-------
       The number of replicates analyzed per  station for this study
was considerable:  7 replicates, total surface  area 0.122 m2.  For
                           2
most benthic studies, 0.1 m  is considered  a  sufficient sample size
 (Holme and Mclntyre, 1971).  Most of  the previous studies in this geo-
graphic area (cited in the Introduction) sampled considerably less
surface area.  The large number of replicates required to obtain species
saturation exemplifies the diversity  of the study area.  There were no
apparent correlations between substrate type  and degree of saturation
of the species area curves.
       •   In order to address any variations due to seasonal
           influences, samples were collected for both May and
           October.  There was no significant difference
           (Student's t, a = 0.05) for faunal density or number
           of species at any Transect for May versus October
           comparisons.  A faunal similarity  analysis was con-
           ducted between May and October samplings for all
           stations  (Table 10.5).  Only one pair of stations
           (3Band5E) exhibited high  between-season similarity
           (May to October) ; nine station pairs (3C and 5D; 5A
           and IE, 5A, 5B, 5C; 5C  and  IE, 5A, 5B, 5C) showed
           a moderate similarity.  Generally, there was a notable
           lack of faunal similarity  between  seasons.  The
           inshore stations of Transect 5 showed the least
           amount of seasonal variation and can be considered
           the most "stable" of the stations.
       •   Taxonomic procedures followed standard literature
                     jf
           keys and expert confirmations.
       •   Sediment samples have been analyzed  by standard
           geological methods, tabulated and  summarized for
           each station.  Appendices  present  complete station
           by station faunal counts for all organisms collected.
           Analytical methods and numerical indices were
           chosen on the basis of their widespread use in
           scientific literature and  their  ability to provide
           meaningful data summaries.
                                    461

-------
 Substratum Characterization
       A general description of the substrata at  the  three transects as
 observed from bottom video coverage is presented  in Chapter 2 (Figure 2.10).
 At Transects  1 and 3, silty sand was observed in  nearshore stations and
 confirmed by  the grain size and silt-clay analyses  (Stations 1A-1D, 3A-3E).
 Similarly, patchy areas of coarse shell-sand bottom were observed in the
 offshore areas of Transect 1 and confirmed by the sediment analyses
 (Stations IE  and II).  Although the rest of the area  consisted of patchy
 hard bottom and coarse shell substrates  (video coverage),  sediment analyses
 confirmed only the presence of coarse to very fine  clean sand substrates
 (based on mean particle size, j3 value).

       The study area can be characterized as a typical coastal habitat
 with silty sand bands nearshore and clean fine sand/shell mixture offshore
 with patches  of hard and coarse shell bottoms.  This  description agrees
 with those of Collard and D'Asaro  (see Introduction), for the Eastern
 Gulf of Mexico.

 Faunal Characterization
       Some of the characteristics of the benthic macrofaunal communities
 in the study  area are:
       •  High species diversity
       •  Low incidence of single species dominance
          (or high equitability)
       •  High spatial and temporal heterogeneity in  species
          composition
       •  Moderate faunal density
Although seasonal changes in faunal density and species richness were minimal,
the extent of change in species composition is indicative of a benthic
fauna in the study area that is dependent on larval recruitment.  In com-
parison to Tampa Bay (including Hillsborough Bay),  the fauna is considerably
more diverse and spatially heterogeneous  (Table 10.6).  Communities at
Anclote Sound and Beacon Key (Tampa Bay) appear to  be more diverse but
are probably due to the seagrass beds in the area,  which generally tend
                                    462

-------
      *TabJ.e 1O.  6.
               Comparison of average faunal densities (number of organisms/m )  and species richness
               (average number of species/station)  for sub-tidal benthos of Tampa Bay and Anclote
               Anchorage,  Florida.
              Locality
                                          Species
                                         Richness
          Faunal
          Density
                       Source
     1975


     1976
u>
      1972

      1972



      1978
       Apollo Beach  (Hillsborough Bay)
        (a)  1972                             22
        (b)  1975                             54
        (c)  1976-77                          54
        (d)  1979-80                          30
       Beacon Key Area  (Tampa Bay)
        (a)  Sandy substrate                 110
        (b)  Channel                          50

        (a)  Sandy substrate                  88
        (b)  Channel                          41
     1974    Bullfrog Creek  (Hillsborough Bay)     21
       Gadsden  Point  Cut
        (a)   1974
        (b)   1975-76
                                (Hillsborough Bay)
      1975    Gardinier  (Hillsborough Bay)

             Hillsborough Bay
              (a)   1974
              (b)   1975-present
        Papys Bayou (Tampa Bay)

        Tampa Bay (near Channels)
        (a)   Undredged soft substrate
        (b)   Undredged firm substrate
        Anclote Anchorage
        (a)   Sandy substrate
        (b)   Grass beds
1980    Gulf of Mexico (offshore Pinellas
        County)
*Table modified from Upchurch et al. (1976).
60
51

10
17
29

25
17
29

85
94
          17150
          16605
          23160
           5489

           9740
           3018

          11061
           4879

           8865
          15755
          14989

          12017
23178
73400

 6112
 2378
 2837

 6916
17263
                 Virnstein, 1972
                 Mahadevan and Hunter, 1976
                 Mahadevan et al., 1977
                 Mahadevan et al., 1980

                 Mahadevan, 1976
                 Mahadevan, 1976
                 Mahadevan, manuscript
                 Mahadevan, manuscript

                 LETCO, 1975
                 Simon and Doyle, 1974
                 Simon, Doyle and Conner, 1976

                 Upchurch et al., 1976
                           Taylor, 1975 ++
                           Simon et al. (in progress)
                           Hall and Lindall, 1974°
                           Taylor,  1973
                           Taylor,  1973

                           Mahadevan and Patton,  1979
                           Mahadevan and Patton,  1979
                                                    ++Only Polychaetes.   Only control data.

-------
 to provide highly diverse benthic communities; Thorhaug et al., 1978.

       The high diversity in the study area is probably attributable
 to the presence of several microhabitats in the form of hard bottoms and
 coarse shell areas intermixed with sand and silty areas.

       Single or several polychaete species are often the dominant taxa
 of the nearby bays.   In contrast, although polychaetes are the most
 abundant taxonomic group (Table 10.3), individual polychaete species are
 not  as dominant  (Table 10.2).  Dominant species  often include amphipods,
 mysids, molluscs, and Branchiostoma caribaeum (cephalochordate) which are
 often indicative of "clean water" conditions.

 Substratum-Fauna Relationships
       Substratum type is generally considered as the most important
 factor influencing the distribution of benthic organisms  (Petersen, 1913;
 1915; 1918; Jones, 1956; Thorson, 1957; Sanders, 1958; McNulty et al.,
 1962; Buchanan, 1963; Nichols, 1970; Young and Rhoads, 1971; Johnson,
 1971; Bloom et al., 1972; Pearson, 1975; Probert, 1975; Conner and Simon,
 1979).

       Mean grain size appears to be correlated with faunal density  and
 species richness in the study area.  Capitella capitata is a polychaete
 often associated with organically enriched sediments  (Reish, 1972),  and
 is a common, often abundant component of local bays.  The only station
 at which £. capitata was abundant was 3B, which also contained the greatest
 amount of silt-clay and organic content.  This anomaly  can be  explained
 by the location of Station 3B near the mouth  of Hurricane Pass.   The station
 is located in the depression of an old pass channel which is  now acting as
 an organic sink for fine particles.  A bathymetry  trace (Figure 10.15) shows
 this feature.  The other inshore stations of  Transect  3 also have relatively
 large mean grain sizes  (0) .  The source for the fine particulate organic
matter is undoubtedly St. Josephs  Sound via  Hurricane Pass.   Transects 1
and 5 do not appear to be similarly influenced by  nearby bays.
                                    464

-------
   DEPTH (ft
 -0-  "•
 -10-
Figure 10.15.  Bathymetry Trace for Stations A, B, and C of Transect 3,
               from May, 1980.
                                    465

-------
       Extreme heterogeneity of substrata in the study area probably
 accounts  for the high diversity, large numbers of species and lack of
 continuous communities over large expanses.  This substrata hetero-
 geneity increases further offshore as the sand bottom becomes thinner
 and  rock  outcroppings and coarse sediments become more numerous
 (Chapter  2).  Observations made by divers indicated that in some areas a
 thin layer of sand or shelly material overlies limestone rock or fossil
 coral.  Additionally, the patches of soft substrate become smaller off-
 shore sometimes only meters or tens of meters wide.  This patchiness
 accounts  for the common finding of "typical" reef or rubble dwelling
 organisms in soft substrate samples  (i.e., polychaetes such as Syllis
 spongicola and several species of scale worms).

 Environmental Considerations
       The proposed sewage outfall would probably alter the benthic
 habitats  in the area in the following manner:
       1) Change substrata type to finer grain sizes.
       2) Organically enrich the substratum.
       3) Introduce various chemical pollutants in the substratum.
       4) Increase turbidity of the overlying water column.
       5) Reduce salinity in the area of outfall.
       6) Introduce bacterial and viral contaminants.
 Indirectly, benthic communities would also receive altered larval recruit-
 ment due  to physical and chemical changes in the water column.

       Because mean grain size appears related to the species richness  and
 faunal density in the study area, a change in substrate type would probably
 alter these parameters.  It is likely that species richness would decrease,
 faunal density increase, and opportunistic species dominate the  study area,
 following sewage release,  it is reasonable to expect that the area  under
 the  influence of the sewage would mimic the benthic community described at
 Station 3B in the present study, i.e., relatively lower species  richness,
lower diversity,  higher single species dominance and preponderance  of
opportunistic species.
                                    466

-------
       The magnitude of the effects would depend on various factors:
the volume of discharge, the amount of particulates present, and the
dispersal of the discharge.  Concerning dispersal of effluent, multiple
small discharges would possibly have a less severe "sub-lethal" effect
than would  one large discharge  (because of more efficient mixing with
the water column).
                                     467

-------
                     SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

       1.   A study of benthic macroinfauna and sediments was conducted
off northern Pinellas County during May and October 1980 to serve as a
preliminary baseline for an Environmental Impact Statement in relation
to >a proposed offshore sewage outfall.

       2.   Twenty one stations located on three east-west transects
 (16 km length) were sampled.

       3.   A total of 538 taxa were identified from 31,107 benthic
organisms  collected in the study.

       4.   Species composition and various community parameters, such as
 faunal density, species richness, diversity and equitability, were
described.  Dominant taxa in the study area for May were:  Nematoda spp.,
Acanthohaustorius sp. (.amphipod), Branchiostoma caribaeum  (cephalochordate),
Copepoda sp. A and Nemertina spp.  For October, the dominant taxa were:
Nematoda spp., Branchiostoma caribaeum, Ophelia sp.  (polychaete),
 Oligochaeta spp. and Acanthohaustorius sp.  In general, species diversity
 and richness were high, dominance low and the incidence of opportunistic
 species low.  Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in species composition
was high.

       5.   Faunal similarity analysis indicated that Transects 1, 3, and 5
were not similar to one another, indicating a high degree of species
variation.  Faunal similarity analysis also showed low similarity between
May and October samples, indicating a high degree of seasonal variation.

       6.   Substrata of the study area were predominantly medium to fine
sand with silt-clay and organic content generally low.  Stations 3A, 3B,
and 3C contained a noticeably higher percentage of silt-clay and organically
enriched sediments, possibly originating from St. Josephs  Sound.  Faunal
density and species richness appear to be inversely  related to  sediment
mean grain size (0) .

-------
      7.  Communities  of  the study area appear to be indicative
of "clean water"  conditions,  with the exception of the nearshore
stations of Transect  3.
                                      469

-------
                         LITERATURE CITED
 Baird, R.C., K.L. Carder, T.L. Hopkins, T.E. Pyle and H.J. Humm. 1971.
       Anclote Environmental Project Report 1971.  A report submitted
       to Florida Power Corporation by the Univ. South Fla. Marine
       Science Institute.  251 pages.

 Baird, R.C., K.L. Carder, T.L. Hopkins, T.E. Pyle and H.J. Humm.  1972.
       Anclote Environmental Project Report 1972.  A report submitted
       to Florida Power Corporation by Univ. South Fla., Dept. Marine
       Science.  220 pages.

 Baird, R.C., K.L. Carder, T.L. Hopkins, T.E. Pyle, H.J. Humm, N.J. Blake
       and L.J. Doyle.  1973.  Anclote Environmental Project Report 1973.
       A report submitted to Florida Power Corporation by Univ. South Fla.
       Dept. Marine Science.  136 pages.

 Ballantine, D. and H.J. Humm.  1975.  Benthic algae of the Anclote Estuary.
       I.  Epiphytes of seagrass leaves.  Fla. Scientist 38(3):150-162.

 Barnard, J.L. 1970.  Benthic ecology of Bahia de San Quentin, Baja
       California.  Smithson. Contr. Zool., 44: 60 p.

 Blake, N.J., L.J. Doyle and T.E. Pyle.  1974.  An ecological study in the
       vicinity of the P.L. Bartow Power Plant, Tampa Bay, Florida.
       Final Report. Univ. South Fla., Dept. Mar. Sci., 130 pages.

 Bloom, S.A., J.L. Simon and V.D. Hunter.  1972.  Animal - sediment relations
       and community analysis of a Florida estuary.  Marine Biology 13(1):
       43-56.

 Boesch, D.F.  1972.  Species diversity of marine macrobenthos  in the
       Virginia area.  Chesapeake Sci., 13(3):206-216.

 Borowitzka, M.A.  1972.  Intertidal algal species diversity and the effect
       of pollution.  Aust. Journ. Mar. Freshwater Res. 23(2):73-84.

 Bray, J.R. and J.T. Curtis.   1957.  An ordination of the upland forest
       communities of southern Wisconsin.  Ecol. Monogr. 27:325-349.

Buchanan, J.B.  1963.  The bottom fauna communities and their  sediment
       relationships off the coast of Northumberland.  Oikos,  14:154-175.

Cairns, J.  and K.L. Dickson.  1971.  A simple method for the biological
       assessment of the effects of waste discharge on  the  aquatic bottom-
       dwelling organisms.  Journ. Water Poll.  Contr. Fed.,  43(5):755-772.
                                    470

-------
Camp,  D.K.   1973.   Stomatopod Crustacea.  Memoirs of the Hourglass
       Cruises.  Vol. Ill, Pt. II, Fla. Dept. Nat. Resources, Mar.
       Res.  Lab.   100 pages.

Cobb,  S.P.,  C.R. Futch and D.K. Camp.  1973.  The rock shrimp, Sicyonia
       brevirostris (Decapoda, Penaeidae).  Mem. Hourglass Cruises.
       III(l):l-38.  Fla. DNR, Mar. Res. Lab., St. Petersburg, Fla.

Collard, S.B.  and  C.N. D'Asaro.  1973.  Benthic Invertebrates of the
       Eastern Gulf of Mexico.  28 pages.  In;  A summary of knowledge
       of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.  SUSIO, St. Petersburg, Florida.

Conner, W.G. and J.L. Simon.  1979.  The effects of oyster shell dredging
       on an estuarine benthic community.  Estuarine and Coastal Marine
       Science,   9:749-758.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  1971a.  A seasonal ecological survey in the
       eastern Tampa Bay in the vicinity of Port Manatee.  Rept. by
       Conservation Consultants, Inc. to Florida Power and Light Company.
       134 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  197Ib.  An ecological study of eastern
       Tampa Bay in the vicinity of Port Manatee.  Progress rept. by
       Conservation Consultants, Inc. to Florida Power and Light Co.
       59 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  197Ic.  An ecological study in the vicinity
       of Port Manatee, Tampa Bay.  Summer Quarter Rept. by Conservation
       Consultants, Inc. to Florida Power and Light Co. 1(1):136 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  197Id.  An ecological study in the vicinity
       of Port Manatee, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Fall Quarter Rept. by Conser-
       vation Consultants, Inc.  1(2): 133 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  1972a.  An ecological study in the vicinity
       of Port Manatee, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Winter Quarter Report to
       Florida Power and Light Co. by Conservation Consultants, Inc.  110 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  1972b.  An ecological study in the vicinity
       of Port Manatee, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Spring Quarter Report to Florida
       Power and Light Co. by Conservation Consultants, Inc.  87 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Inc.  1972c  An ecological study in the vicinity
       of Port Manatee, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Progress rept. No. 2 prepared
       by Conservation Consultants, Inc. for Florida Power and Light Co.
       48 pp.
                                    471

-------
Conservation Consultants, Inc.  1972d.  An ecological study in the
       vicinity of Port Manatee, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Summary report
       prepared by Conservation Consultants, Inc. for Florida Power
       and Light Co.  129 pp.

Conservation Consultants, Incorporated.  1975.  A summary and analysis
       of past ecological studies in the vicinity of the Big Bend Steam
       Electric Station, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Edited by R.D. Garrity.
       A report submitted to Tampa Electric Company.  423 pages.

Cooper, A.G.  1973.  Brachiopods.  Mem. Hourglass Cruises. Ill(III):
       1-17.  Fla. DNR, Mar. Res. Lab., St. Petersburg, Fla.

Culter, J.K. and S. Mahadevan.  1978.  Vertical stratification of
       benthic estuarine fauna.  Paper presented at Fla. Field Biol.
       Second Annu. Meet. Jan. 20-22, 1978.

Culter, J.K.  1979.  A population study of the inarticulate brachipod
       Glothidia pyramidita  (Stimpson).   Univ. South Fla., M.S. Thesis.

Dauer, D.M.  1974.  Repopulation of the polychaete fauna of an intertidal
       habitat following natural defaunation.  Univ. South Fla., Ph.D.
       Dissertation.

Dauer, D.M. and J.L. Simon.  1975.  Lateral or along-shore distribution
       of the polychaetous annelids of an intertidal, sandy habitat.
       Marine Biology, 31:363-370.

Dauer, D.M. and W.G. Conner.  1976.  Organic enrichment effects upon
       benthic polychaete populations.  Virginia Journ. Sci., 27(2):43.

Dauer, D.M. and J.L. Simon.  1976a.  Habitat expansion among polychaetous
       annelids repopulating a defaunated marine habitat.  Marine Biology,
       37:169-177.

Dauer, D.M. and J.L. Simon.  1976b.  Repopulation of the polychaete fauna
       of an intertidal habitat following natural defaunation:  Species
       equilibrium.  Oecologia (Berlin), 22:99-117.

Dawes, C.J. and J.F. Van Breedveld.  1969.  Benthic marine algae.  Mem.
       Hourglass Cruises, Marine Res. Lab., DNR, .1  (Part II) : 47.

DeJong, T.M.  1975.  A comparison of three diversity indices based on
       their components of richness and evenness.  Oikos 26(2) -,222-221.
                                   472

-------
Dills, G.G. and D.T. Rogers.  1972.  Aquatic-biotic  community  structure
       as an indicator of pollution.   Geol.  Survey of Alabama, Circ. 80,
       21 pages.

Dragovich, A. and J.A. Kelly, Jr.   1964.  Ecological observations of
       macroinvertebrates in Tampa  Bay, Florida,  1961-62.  Bull. Mar.
       Sci.  Gulf Caribb., 14(1):74-102.

Estevez, E.D.  1978.  Ecology of Sphaeroma terebrans Bate, a wood boring
       isopod.  Univ. South Florida, Ph.D. Dissertation.

Fager, E.W., 1972.  Diversity:  A sampling study.  The Amer. Naturalist,
       106: 293-310.

Farrell, Douglas.  1974.  Benthic ecology of Timbalier Bay, Louisiana
       and adjacent offshore areas  in  relation to oil production,  Ph.D.
       dissertation, Florida State  University, Tallahassee, Fla. 151 pp.

Folk, R.L.  1974.  Petrology of Sedimentary  Rocks.   Hemphill Publishing
       Company, Austin, Texas.  182 pages.

Gage, J. and A.D. Geekie.  1973.  Community  structure of the benthos
       in Scottish Sea-Lochs.  III.  Further studies on patchiness.  Mar.
       Biol. 20:89-100.

Gage, J. 1974.  Shallow-water zonation of sea-loch benthos and its
       relation to hydrographic and other physical features.  J.M.B.A.
       (U.K.), 54:223-249.

Gage, J.  1975.  A comparison of the deep-sea epibenthic sledge and
       anchor-box dredge samplers with the Van Veen  grab and hand coring
       by diver.  Deep-Sea Res. 22:693-702.

Galstoff, P.S. (ed.).  1954.  Gulf  of  Mexico, its origin, waters and
       marine life.  U.S. Fish and  Wildlife  Service, Fish. Bull. 89.

Gini, C. 1912.  Variabilita e mutabilita.  Studi Economico-Guirida  Fac.
       Giurisprudence Univ. Cagliari.  A. Ill, parte  II.

Gleason, H.A.  1922.  On the relation  between species and area.  Ecology,
       3:158-162.

Godcharles, M.F.  1971.  A study of the effects of a commercial hydraulic
       clam dredge on benthic communities in estuarine areas.  Fla.  St.
       Dept.  Nat. Resources, Mar. Res. Lab.,  Tech. Ser. No. 64; 51 pages.
                                   473

-------
Gore, R.H. and L.E. Scotto.  1979.  Crabs of the family Parthenopidae.
       Mem. Hourglass Cruises. Ill (VI): 1-98.  Fla. DNR Mar. Res. Lab.,
       St. Petersburg, Fla.

Grassle, J.F. and W. Smith.  1976.  A similarity measure sensitive to
       the contribution of rare species and its use in investigation of
       variation in marine benthic communities.  Oecologia  (Berl.) 25:
       13-22.

Hairston, R.  1964.  Studies on the organization of animal communities.
       J. Ecol.  (Supple.) 52:227-239.

Hall, J.R.  1972.  Molluscs and benthic environments in two Florida west
       coast bays.  Univ. South Fla., M.A. Thesis.

Hall, J.R. and W.N. Lindall, Jr.  1974.  Benthic macroinvertebrates and
       sediments from upland canals in Tampa Bay, Florida.  NOAA, NMFS,
       Data Rep. 94.  221 pages.

Hall, J.R. and C.H. Saloman.  1975.  Distribution and abundance of macro-
       invertebrate species of six phyla in Tampa Bay, Florida, 1963-64
       and 1979.  NOAA, NMFS, Data Rep. 100, 505 pages.

Hamilton, A.L.  1969.  A method of separating invertebrates from sediments
       using long wave ultraviolet light and fluorescent dyes.  J. Fish.
       Res. Bd. Com. 26:1667-1672.

Hamm, D.C.  1975.  Benthic algae of the Anclote River estuary, Tarpon
       Springs, Florida.  Univ. South Fla., M.S. Thesis.

Hamm, D. and H.J. Humm.  1976.  Benthic algae of the Anclote Estuary.  II.
       Bottom dwelling species.  Fla. Scientist 39(4):209-229.

Hanni, E. and H.H. Mathews.  1977.  Benefit-cost study of Pinellas County
       artificial reefs. Fla. Sea Grant Tech. pap. No. 1. 44 pages.

Hart, C.W. Jr. and S.L.H. Fuller  (eds.).  1979.  Pollution  ecology of
       estuarine invertebrates.  Academic Press.  406 pages.

Holme, N.A.  1953.  The biomass of the bottom fauna in the  English Channel
       off Plymouth.  J.M.B.A. (U.K.) 32:1-49.

Holme, N.A. and A.D. Mclntyre.  1971.  Methods for the study of marine
       benthos.   International Biological Programme, London.   334 pp.
                                   474

-------
Horn, H.S.  1966.  Measurement of overlap  in  comparative ecological
       studies.  Am. Nat., 100:419-424.

Huff, J.A. and S.P. Cobb.  1979.  Penaeoid and  sergestoid shrimps.
       Mem. Hourglass Cruises. V(IV): 1-102.   Fla. DNR Mar. Res. Lab.,
       St. Petersburg, Fla.

Humm, H.J., R.C. Baird, K.L. Carder,  T.L.  Hopkins and T.E. Pyle.  1970.
       Anclote Environmental Project  Annual Report 1970.  A report
       submitted to Florida Power Corporation by Univ. South Fla.
       Marine Science Institute.  172 pages.

Hurlbert, S.H.  1971.  The non-concept of  species diversity:  a critique
       and alternative parameters.  Ecology 52:577-585.

Button, R.F., B. Eldred, K.D. Woodburn and R.M. Ingle.  1956.  The ecology
       of Boca Ciega Bay with species reference to dredging and filling
       operations. Fla. St. Bd. Conserv- Mar. Lab. Tech. Ser. No. 17.
       Pt. 1, 87 p.

Johnson, R.G.  1970.  Variations in diversity within benthic marine
       communities.  American Naturalist 104:285-300.

Johnson, R.G.  1971.  Animal-sediment relations in shallow water benthic
       communities. Mar. Geol. 11:93-104.

Jones, N.S.  1956.  The fauna and bottom biomass of a muddy sand deposit
       off Port Erin, I.O.M. J. Anim. Ecol. 25:217-252.

Jordon, W.R.  1978.  Sampling a macrobenthic  infaunal sand community in
       a subtropical estuary.  Univ.  South Fla., M.S. Thesis.

Joyce, E.A. Jr. and J. Williams.  1969.  Rationale and pertinent data.
       Mem. Hourglass Cruises, Vol. I, Part. I. F.D.N.R. Mar. Res. Lab: 1-50.

Korinkova, J. and J. Sigmund.  1968.  The  coloring of bottom fauna samples
       before sorting.  Vestn. Cesk.  Spol. Zool. 32:300.

Kruer, C.R.  1977.  A study of the benthic algae of the natural reefs off
       Tampa Bay, Florida gulf coast.  Univ.  South Fla., M.S. Thesis.

Law Engineering Testing Company.  1975.  Waste water disposal plan, East
       Tampa Fertilizer Manufacturing Complex.  Unpublished report.
       290 pages.

Lie, U. and J.C. Kelly.  1970.  Benthic infauna communities off the coast
       of Washington and Puget Sound.  J-  Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 27:621-651.
                                    475

-------
Lindall, W.N.,  J.R. Hall and C.H. Saloman.  1973.  Fishes, macro-
       invertebrates and hydrological conditions of upland canals
       in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Fish. Bull., 71(1):155-163.

Lindall, W.N., Jr., W.A. Fable, Jr. and L.A. Collins.  1975.  Additional
       studies on the fishes, macroinvertebrates and hydrobiological
       conditions of upland canals in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Fish. Bull.,
       73(l):81-85.

LLoyd, M., J.H. Zar and J.R. Karr.  1968.  On the calculation of information
       theoretical measures of diversity.  The Amer. Mid. Natur. 79(2):
       257-272.

Lyons, W.G. 1970.  Seyllarid lobsters (Crustacea, Decapoda).  Mem. Hourglass
       Cruises, I(IV):l-74.  Fla. DNR, Mar. Res. Lab., St. Petersburg, Fla.

Lyons, W.G. and S.B. Collard.  1974. Benthic invertebrate communities of
       the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, pp. 157-165.  In;  Proceedings of
       marine environmental implications of offshore drilling, Eastern
       Gulf of Mexico: 1974.  R.E. Smith (ed.), SUSIO, St. Petersburg,
       Florida.

Mackenthun, K.M.  1966.  Biological evaluation of polluted streams.  Journ.
       Water Poll. Contr. Fed., 38(2):241-247.

Mahadevan, S.  1976.  Benthic studies (Chapter 6).  In;  R.D. Garrity  (ed.),
       Ecological Studies at Big Bend Steam Electric Station, Tampa Bay,
       Florida.  6(2):183-276.  Twenty-second Quarterly by Conservation
       Consultants, Inc., Palmetto, Florida.

Mahadevan, S. and C.L. Hunter.  1976.  Benthic studies  (Chapter 4, Part II).
       In;  R.D. Garrity (ed.). Ecological Studies at Big Bend Steam
       Electric Station, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Twenty-third Quarterly Report
       to Tampa Electric Company by Conservation Consultants, Inc.,
       Palmetto, Florida.

Mahadevan, S.  1976.  Benthic studies in the Beacon Key area.  Chapter IV
       (Section B).  In:  Tampa Electric Company 26th Quarterly report on
       the Big Bend Thermal and Ecological Surveys.  Prepared by Conservation
       Consultants, Inc.  R.D. Garrity, ed.  pp. 23-85.

Mahadevan, S.  1979.  A review and evaluation of the 316 Demonstration
       (Volume II, Benthos) by Florida Power Corporation on  the Anclote
       Generating Unit No.  1.  Environ. Prot. Agency, Region 4, Surveillance
       and Analysis Division.  Tech. Rep. Cont. No. 68-01-5016.
                                   476

-------
Mahadevan, S., J. Culter, S. Hoover, J. Murdoch, P.  Reeves  and R.  Schulze.
       1976.  A study on the effects of silt-spill and  subsequent  dredging
       on benthic infauna at Apollo Beach embayment.  A report by
       Conservation Consultants, Inc.  to  Tampa Electric Company.  58 pages.

Mahadevan, S. and J.K. Culter.  1977.  A biological  study of  the Big Bend
       breakwater structure.  A report submitted by  Conservation Consultants,
       Inc. to Tampa Electric Company-  28 pages.

Mahadevan, S. and J.D. Murdoch.  1977.  A study on the  recovery of benthic
       infauna at Apollo Beach embayment following a silt-spill and sub-
       sequent dredging.  A report submitted by Conservation  Consultants,
       Inc. to Tampa Electric Company.  37 pages.

Mahadevan, S., J.J.B. Murdoch, F.S. Reeves, J.K. Culter, R.A. Lotspeich
       and J.D. Murdoch.  1977.  A study on the effects of  thermal discharges
       on benthic infaunal community structure at Big Bend, Tampa  Bay,
       Florida.  Final Report, Volume  2, Chapter 4,  415 pages.  Submitted
       to Tampa Electric Company by Conservation Consultants, Inc.

Mahadevan, S. and J.K. Culter.  1978.  A continued study of benthic infauna
       at Big Bend, Tampa Bay, Florida.  A report submitted by Conservation
       Consultants, Inc. to Tampa Electric Company.

Mahadevan, S. and G.W. Patton.  1979.  A study of seive size  effects on
       benthic fauna collected from  Anclote Anchorage.  A report  submitted
       by Mote Marine Lab. to U.S. Envirnomental Protection Agency. Contr.
       No. 68-01-5016. 28 pages.

Mahadevan, S., J.K. Culter and R. Yarbrough.  1980.   A  study  of thermal
       effects on benthic communities  at Big Bend, Tampa Bay  (Florida).
       A report submitted by Mote Marine Laboratory  to  Stone  & Webster
       Engineering Corporation.  154 pages.

Margalef, R.  1958.  Information theory in ecology.   Gen. Sys. 3:36-71.

Marum, J.P.  1975.  Spatial and temporal variation of zooplankton  in
       relation to offshore oil drilling and estuarine  faunal exchange.
       246 pp. Ph.D. dissertation, Florida State University,  Tallahassee,
       Florida.

Mason, W.T.  and P.O. Yevich.  1967.   The use of phloxine B and rose
       bengal stains to facilitate sorting benthic samples.   Trans. Amer.
       Microsc. Soc. 86:221-223.
                                    477

-------
Mauchline, J.  1972.  Assessing similarity between samples of plankton.
       J.M.B.A. (India), 14:26-41.

Mayer, G.F. and V. Maynard (eds.).  1974.  Anclote Environmental Project
       Report 1974.  A report submitted to Florida Power Corporation by
       Univ. South Fla. Dept. Marine Science.  526 pages.

McKee, J.E.  1966.  Parameters of marine pollution - an overall evaluation.
       In:  T.A. Olsen and F.J. Burgess  (eds.), Pollution and Marine
       Ecology, pp. 259-266. Interscience.

McNulty, J.K.  1961.  Ecological effects of sewage pollution in Biscayne
       Bay, Florida:  Sediments and the distribution of benthic and
       fouling organisms. Bull. Mar. Sci., 11(3):394-447.

McNulty, J.K., R.C. Work and H.B. Moore.  1962.  Some relationships
       between the infauna of the level bottom and the sediment in South
       Florida.  Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf Carrib., 12:322-332.

Menzies, R.J., W. Horvath and D.J. Reish.  1952.  San Diego Bay water
       pollution survey, 1951.  Report upon the extent, effects and limi-
       tations of waste disposal into San Diego Bay.  Publ. St. Calif.
       70-80.

Menzies, R.J. and G.T. Rowe.  1968.  The LUBS, a large undisturbed bottom
       sampler.  Limnol. and Oceanog., 13(4):708-712.

Menzies, R.J., R.Y. George and G.T. Rowe.  1973.  Abyssal Environment
       and Ecology of the World Oceans.  John Wiley and Sons, New York.
       488 pp.

Moore, S.J.  1976-  Growth of Syringodium filiforme in thermally stressed
       and unstressed areas of the Anclote River estuary. Tarpon Springs,
       Florida.  Univ. South Fla.- M.S. Thesis.

Morisita, M.  1959.  Measuring of interspecific association and similarity
       between communities.  Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyushu Univ.  Ser. E.  (Biol.),
       3(1):65-80.

Neithamer, R.W., T.M. Dembroski, J.C. Ferguson and A.A. Murphy.   1971.
       The Sewage System of St. Petersburg, Florida, a multi-disciplinary
       assessment of its status and environmental effects.  Florida
       Presbyterian College  (Eckerd College), St. Pete.   104  pp.
                                   -478

-------
Nichols,  F.H.   1970.   Benthic polychaete assemblages and their
       relationship to the sediment in Port Madison, Washington. Mar.
       Biol.,  6(1):48-57.

Ono, Y.  1961.  An  ecological study of the brachyuran community on Tomoika
       Bay,  Amakuse,  Kyusha.   Recs. Oceanogr. Works in Japan. 5:199-210.

Parker, R.H.  1975.  The study of benthic communities.  A model and
       review.  Elvesier Oceanography Series, 9.  Elvesier Scientific
       Publishing Company.  279 pages.

Paul, A.Z.   1973.  Benthic ecology of the high-artic deep-sea. Ph.D.
       dissertation,  Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.
       298 pp.

Pearson,  T.H.   1975.   The benthic ecology of Loch Linnhe and Loch Eil,
       a sea-loch system on the West Coast of Scotland.  IV.  Changes in
       the benthic  fauna attributable to organic enrichment.  J. Exp.
       Mar.  Biol, Ecol. 20:1-41.

Peet, R.K.   1974.  The measurement of species diversity.  Annual Rev.
       of Ecol. and Systematics.  5:285-307.

Peet, R.K.   1975.  Relative diversity indices. Ecology, 56:496-498.

Perkins, T.H.  and T.  Savage.   1975.  A bibliography and check list of
       polychaetous annelids of Florida, the Gulf of Mexico and the
       Caribbean region.  Fla. Mar. Res. Lab. Publ., No. 14, 62 pages.

Petersen, C.G.J. 1913.  Evaluation of the sea II.  The animal communities
       of the  sea bottom and their importance for marine zoogeography.
       Rep.  Dan Biol. Stat.,  21:110.

Petersen, C.G.  1915.  On the animal communities of the sea bottom in
       the  Skagerrak, the Christianna Fjord and the Danish waters.
       Rep.  Danish  Biol. Stat. 23:3-28.

Petersen, C.G.  1918.  The sea bottom and its production of fish food.
       A survey of  the work done in connection with the valuation of the
       Danish waters from 1883-1917.  Rep. Danish Biol. Stat. 25: 62 pp.

Phillips, R.C. and  V.G. Springer.  1960.  Observations on the offshore
       benthic flora in the Gulf of Mexico off Pinellas County, Florida.
       Am. Midland  Nat., 64(2):362-381.
                                    479

-------
Pielou, E.G.  1966.  The measurement of diversity in different types of
       biological collections.  J. Theor. Biol. 13:131-144.

Pielou, E.G.  1975.  Ecological Diversity-  Wiley Interscience.  165 pp.

Probert, P.K.  1975.  The bottom fauna of China clay waste deposits in
       Mevagissey Bay.  J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., 55:19-44.

Proffitt, C.E. and J.L. Simon.  1980.  Small scale disturbance and infaunal
       community structure.  Fla. Scientist, 43 (Suppl.): 22.

Reeves, F.S. and S. Mahadevan.  1978.  A comparison of sampling efficiency
       between the petite ponar grab and the diver-operated hand core in
       Tampa Bay, Florida.  Pap. pres. Fla. Field Biol. Second Annu.
       Meet., Jan. 20-22, 1978.

Reish, D.J.  1959a.  An ecological study of pollution in Los Angeles
       Harbors, California.  Allan Hancock Occ. Pap., 2:1-119.

Reish, D.J.  1959b.  A discussion of the importance of the screen size in
       washing quantitative marine bottom samples.  Ecology, 40:307-309.

Reish, D.J.  1972.  The use of marine invertebrates as indicators of
       varying degrees of marine pollution. In;  M. Ruivo  (ed.), Marine
       Pollution and Sea Life-Fishing News  (Books) , London., pp. 203-207.

Rice, S.A. and J.L. Simon.  1980.  Intraspecific variation in the pollution
       indicator polychaete Polydora ligni  {Spionidae).  Ophelia 19(1):
       79-115.

Rogers, S.W.  1972.  Sediments of a seagrass bed in Anclode Anchorage,
       Tarpon Springs, Florida.  Univ. South Fla., M.S.. Thesis.

Rosenberg, R.  1977.  Effects of dredging operations on .estuarine benthic
       macrofauna.  Marine Pollution Bulletin, 8:102-104.

Ross, R.W. and T.V. Mayon.  1975.  Sedimentary structures and animal-
       sediment relationships in Old Tampa Bay., Florida.  Fla, Scientist,
       38 (Suppl. 1):13.

Russell, Henry D.  1963.  Notes on methods  for the narcotization, killing,
       fixation, and preservation of marine organisms.  Marine Biological
       Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass.  70 p.
                                    480

-------
Saloman, C.H.   1974.   Physical,  chemical and biological characteristics
       of  nearshore  zone of Sand Key,  Florida,  prior to beach restorations.
       Vols.  1  and 2.  NMFS, SEFC.,  Panama City  Lab.  Kept.

Saloman, C.H.   1976.   The benthic fauna and sediments of the nearshore
       zone off Panama City Beach,  Florida.  Report No. 76-10, U.S.  Army
       Corps  of Engineers,  Coastal  Engineering  Research Center, Fort
       Belvoir, Virginia.

Sanders, H.L.   1958.   Benthic studies  in Buzzard's Bay. 1.   Animal-
       sediment relationships.   Limnol. Oceanogr., 3(3):245-258.

Sanders, H.L.   1960.   Benthic studies  in Buzzard's Bay. 111.  The structure
       of  the soft bottom community.   Limnol. Oceanogr. 5:138-153.

Sanders, H.L.   1968.   Marine benthic diversity:  A comparative study.  The
       American Naturalist 102:243-282.

Sanders, H.L.,  J.F.  Grassle, G.R. Hampson, L.S. Morse, S.G. Price and
       C.C. Jones.   1980.  Anatomy of  an oil spill:   Long-term effects
       from the grounding of the barge Florida  off West Falmouth,
       Massachusetts.   Journ. Mar.  Res. 38(2):265-380.

Santos, S.L.   1972.  Distribution and  abundance of the polychaetous annelids
       in  Lassing Park, St. Petersburg, Florida. Univ. South Fla., M.S.
       Thesis.

Santos, S.L.   1979.  Cyclic disturbance, recolonization and stability in
       an  estuarine  soft-bottom infaunal macrobenthic community.  Univ.
       South  Fla., Ph.D. Dissertation.

Santos, S.L.  and J.L.  Simon.  1974. Distribtuion and abundance of the
       polychaetous  annelids in a south Florida estuary.  Bull. Mar. Sci.,
       24(3):669-689.

Santos, S.L.  and J.L.  Simon.  1980. Marine soft-bottom community
       establishment following annual  defaunation:  Larval or adult
       recruitment?  Mar. Ecol.  Prog.  Ser. 2:235-241.

Serafy, O.K.   1979.  Echinoids (Echinodermata:  Echinoidea).  Mem. Hourglass
       Cruises. V (III): 1-120.   Fla.  DNR Mar.  Res.  Lab.,  St. Petersburg,
       Fla.

Shannon, C.E.  and W. Weaver.  1963. The mathematical theory of communica-
       tion.   Univ.  Illinois Press, Urbana.  117 pp.

Simon,  J.L.   1974.   Tampa Bay estuarine system - a synopsis.  Fla. Scientist,
       37(4):217-244.
                                   481

-------
 Simon, J.L.  1977.  Annual variation in benthic invertebrate populations
       in stressed and unstressed habitats in Hillsborough Bay, Florida.
       Fla. Scientist  (Suppl. 1):16.

 Simon, J.L.  1978.  Summary:  Effects of sewage pollution abatement on
       environmental quality in Hillsborough Bay, Florida. Sea Grant
       Rep. R/EM-7.

 Simon, J.L. and D.M. Dauer.  1972.  A quantitative evaluation of red tide
       induced mass mortalities of benthic invertebrates in Tampa Bay, Fl.
       Environ. Lett., 3(4):229-234.

 Simon, J.L. and J.P- Dyer III.  1972.  An evaluation of siltation created
       by Bay Dredging and Construction Company during oyster shell
       dredging operations in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Final Research Report,
       Univ. South Fla., Dept. Biology.  60 pages.

 Simon, J.L. and L.J. Doyle.  1974.  Advanced inspection of proposed shell
       dredging in Site  5, Tampa Bay, Florida.  Report Number 2. St.
       Fla. Trustees Internal Improv- Trust Fund.

 Simon, J.L., L.N. Doyle  and W.G. Conner.  1976.  Environmental impact of
       oyster shell dredging in Tampa Bay, Fla. Rep. No. 4. Fla. St.
       D.E.R.

 Simon, J.L. and W.H. Huang.  1975.  Effects of sewage pollution abatement
       on environmental  quality in Hillsborough Bay, Florida.  Florida Sea
       Grant Interim Report.

 Simon, J.L. and D.M. Dauer.  1977.  Re-establishment of a benthic
       community following natural defaunation.  Belle W. Baruch Symp.
       Mar. Sci., Univ.  S. Carolina, 1977.  Ecology of Marine Benthos.
       pp. 139-154.

 Simpson, E.H.  1949.  Measurement of diversity.  Nature 163:688.

 Smith, W., J.F. Grassle  and D. Kravitz.  1979.  Measures of diversity with
       unbiased estimates.  Ecological Diversity in Theory and Practice,
       6:177-191.

Stancyk, S.E., F.J.S. Mature, Jr., and R.W. Heard, Jr.  1976.  Phoronids
       from the east coast of the United States.  Bull. Mar.  Sci.  26(4):
       576-584.

Studt, J.F.   1976.  Chronic in situ exposure of the bay scallop  to a
       thermal effluent  in a Florida Gulf estuary.  Univ.  South  Fla.,
       M.S.  Thesis.
                                   482

-------
Sykes,  J.E.   1966a.  Estuarine research program, Benthic Project In:
       Rep.  Bur. Commer. Fish. Biol. Sta., St. Petersburg Beach, PL.
       Fisc. hr. 1962-1964.  U.S. Dept. Inter., Fish and Wildl. Serv.,
       Bur.  Commer. Fish. Contrib. No. 23, Circ. 239, 26 pages.

Swartz, R.C.  1972.  Biological criteria of environmental change in
       Chesapeake Bay.  Chesapeake Sci. 13(S):17-41.

Swartz, R.C.  1978.  Techniques for sampling and analyzing the marine
       macrobenthos.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis
       Environmetnal Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon.  EPA-
       600/3-78-030.  26 pages.

Sykes,  J.E.   1966b.  Benthic Project.  Report of the Bur. Commer. Fish.
       Biol. Sta., St. Petersburg Beach, Fla., Fiscal year 1965.  U.S.
       Dept. Interior, Fish Wildl. Ser., Contrib. No. 25, Cir. 242,
       30 pages.

Sykes,  J.E.   1971.  Implications of dredging and filling in Boca Ciega
       Bay,  Florida.  Environ. Lett., 1(2):151-156.

Sykes,  J.E.  and J.R. Hall.  1970.  Comparative distribution of mollusks
       in dredged and undredged portions of an estuary, with a systematic
       list of species.  Fish. Bull., 68(2):299-306.

Taylor, J.L.  1964.  Benthic Project, p. 5-8. In;  Rep. Bur. Commer.
       Fish. Biol. Sta., U.S.D.I., FWS., Cir. 239.

Taylor, J.L.  1970.  Coastal development in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Marine
       Pollution Bulletin, 1(10):153-156.

Taylor, J.L.  1971.  Polychaetous annelids and benthic environments in
       Tampa Bay, Florida.  Univ. Fla., Ph.D. Dissertation.

Taylor, J.L.  1972.  Some effects of oyster shell dredging on benthic
       invertebrates in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Taylor Biological Company.
       16 pages.

Taylor, J.L.  1973a.  Studies of the effects of oyster shell dredging in
       Tampa Bay, Florida.  Taylor Biological Company.  7 pages.

Taylor, J.L.  1973b.  Biological studies and inventory.  Tampa Harbor
       Project.  Report prepared by Taylor Biological Company for the U.S.
       Army Corps of Engineers.   84 pages.
                                   483

-------
Taylor, J.L.  1975.  A biological evaluation of five proposed open
       water disposal areas, Tampa Harbor Project.  Report prepared by
       Taylor Biological Company for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Taylor, J.L.  1979.  Benthic data from Tampa Harbor Project.  Unpublished
       report.

Taylor, J.L. and C.H. Saloman.  1966.  Benthic Project, p. 4-13. In;
       Rep. Bur. Commer. Fish. Biol. Sta., St. Pet. Beach, Fla., U.S.D.I.,
       F.W.S., Cir. 242.

Taylor, J.L. and C.H. Saloman.  1968.  Some effects of hydraulic dredging
       and coastal development in Boca Ciega Bay, Florida.  Fish. Bull.,
       67(2):213-241.

Taylor, J.L., J.R. Hall and C.H. Saloman.  1970.  Mollusks and benthic
       environments in Hillsborough Bay, Florida.  Fish. Bull. 68(2):
       191-202.

Thoemke, K.W,  1977.  Amphipod life cycles in a west Florida estuary.
       American Zoologist, 17(4):967.

Thoemke, K.W.  1979.  The life histories and population dynamics of four
       subtidal amphipods from Tampa Bay, Florida.  Univ. South Fla.,
       Ph.D. Dissertation.

Thomas, L.  1962.  The shallow water amphiurid  brittle stars of Florida.
       Bull. Mar. Sci. 12(4):623-694.

Topp, R.W. and F.H. Hoff, Jr.  1972.  Flatfishes. Mem. Hourglass Cruises.
       IV  (II): 135.

Thorhaug, A., M.A. Roessler and P.A. McLaughlin.  1978.  Benthic Biology
       of Anclote Anchorage.  625 pages.  In;  Florida Power Corporation
       Post-Operational Ecological Monitoring Program 1976, Final Report,
       Anclote Unit No. 1.

Thorson, G.  1957.  Bottom communities.  Chapter  17.  In:  Treatise on
       Marine Ecology and Paleoecology.  J.W. Hedgepeth~(ed.).  Vol.  1,
       pp. 461-534.

Upchurch, S.B., E.D. Estevez  and R.A. Rea.  1976.  The distribution  and
       possible effects of removal of sedimentary contaminants offshore
       of Gardinier, Inc. in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Rept. submitted to Fla.
       D.E.R.  94 pages.
                                    484

-------
Virnstein, R.W.  1972.  Effects of heated effluent  on density and
       diversity of benthic infauna at  Big  Bend,  Tampa  Bay, Florida.
       Univ. South Fla., M.S. Thesis.

Waste Water Engineers.  1979.  Report of dredge and disposal area water
       quality monitoring - Tampa Harbor Deepening  Project.  U.S. Army
       Corps of Engineers.  DACW17-77-C-0059.

Watling, L. and D. Maurer  (eds.).  1976.  Ecological studies on benthic
       and planktonic assemblages in Lower  Delaware Bay.  CMS-RANN-3-76.
       College of Marine Studies, Univ. Delaware.   634  pages.

Whittaker, R.H.  1967.  Gradient analysis of vegetation.  Biol. Rev. 49:
       207-274.

Whittaker, R.H.  1972.  Evolution and measurement of species diversity.
       Taxon 21:213-251.

Williams, D.D. and N.E. Williams.  1974.  A counterstaining technique for
       use in sorting benthic samples.  Limnology and Oceanography 19(1):
       154-156.

Word, J.Q., T.J. Kauwling and A.J. Mearns.  1976.   A comparative field
       study of benthic sampling devices used  in  southern California
       benthic surveys.  Report to the  Environmental Protection Agency -
       79 pp.

Yokel, B.J.  1979.  Biology.  In;  The  Naples  Bay Study.  The Collier
       County Conservancy, Naples, Fla.

Zimmerman, R., J. Feigl, D. Ballantine  and  R.  Baird.  1971.  The benthic
       community along the proposed discharge  canal for the Anclote River
       power plant.  Tech. Rept. 6., Environmental  Status Report to Florida
       Power Corporation.
                                    485

-------
Appendix  Table  10.1.
List of  taxa  collected  during  the May  and  October
Samplings  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  off  Pinellas  County.
   PORIFERA
         2  Porifera SP

   CNIDftRIA

    HYDRDZDA
         5  VaOeoit SP

   ANWOZOA
         7  Anemic SP A
         8  Anetone & B
         9  Anetone SP C
         10 Aneaooe SP 0
         11 Aaetoae 5? J
         12 Anettni » N
         13 AlhenarisspA
         14 Athenaria SP B
         15 Athenaria SP C
         16 Athenatia a D
         17 Athenaria s?E
         18 Athenaria SP F
         19 Alhenaris SP 6
         20 Athenaria 9 H
         21 Athenaria spK
         22 Athenaria SP L
         23 AlheoariaspH

   PLATYHEUHNTHES
         25 EuPlsua s-scilis
         26 Euplana SP
         27 Stslochus SP
         28 Twbellaria sf A
         29 Turbellarian SP I)
         30 Turbellarist s? E.
         32 Hetertines
   HEHATODA
         34
   PRIftPllIBA
        3i  Priapttlida SP

   CUAETOCNATHA
        33  Cbaelofialha SP

   BRVZfld
        40  Brszna SP
        41  Seleoaria SP

   PHORONIDA
        43  Phoroais arcbilecta
   3RACHIOPDDA
        45  GlolUdis
    SIPUNCULA
         49  Asfidisifhoa SP
         50  Gulfiaiiidae »
         51  ParasridosiPhon SP
         52  Ptascoloin SP
         53  Sipuaculis SP
         54  Sipunculife «> (Juv)

    IHUUSC&

     POLYPUCQPHDRA
         57  ChaetoPleura mculsU

     GASTROPODA
         5?  Acieacioa canaliculaU
         40  Acleoeina SP
         61  Anscbis otess
         42  Anacbis wlchella
         43  Arene IricsrinaU
         44  Ate caribaes
         45  Caecu* csroUniBDUi
         44  Caecui cooperi
         £f  Casern Jotmsoni
         68  Caecui pukbelki
         69  Caeeui SP
         70  Crepidula fornicaU
         71  Crepiduia Plata
         72  Crepidula SP
         73  Cscloslrewscus SP
         74  CslichneUa bidenlsU
         75  EpUoniiw
         76  Efilaiiia SP
         77  Gastropods sp
         78  H»inoe3
         79  Haiiaoea succines
         80  Nitrella luoata
         81  Xitrella SP (Juv)
         82  Hannodieila oxia
         83  Hatics Pttsilla
         84  Haticidae SP (Juv)
         85  Nudibraach SP (Juv)
         86  Mostotis SP (Juv)
         87  Ddostotiiaae SP (Juv)
         88  Dlivella dealbata
         39  01iveils SP
         90  Pvandellidae SP
         91  Scaphella Jimonia
         92  TeinosioH SP (Juv)
         93  TeinosloM iMasiMS
         94  Turbonilla conradi
         95  TurbooUla iatecrupU
         96  Turbooiila SP
         97  TurtaoiUiaae SP (Juv)
         98  Twridaesp
         99  UrosalPittx SP
         100 Viirioella SP
    101 Gastropoda SP
    102 Caecui iibricaltm
    103 Epilooiu* novanalise

SCAPHQPOM
    105 Dntslim SP A
    106 KenUliui SP B
    107 DenUliui SP C
    108 DetUlin SP I
    109 ScaphoPodB SP

POECYPODA
    111 Abra aeaualis
    112 Abra SP (Juv)
    113 Anadara iransversa
    114 Anodmtia alba
    115 Analina aaatiia
    116 Anoria siwlex
    117 ffWPKiea SP
    118 Cardiidae SP
    119 Cardiidae SP (Juv)
    120 Cbione caocellaU
    121 Chione iDlapurpurea
    122 Cbime laUUraU
    123 Corbula coatracta
    124 Corbula suittisna
    125 Crassioella lunuiaU
    126 Crassinella SP
    127 Crassoslrea viMuica
    128 BiplodotU wnciaU
    129 Donax texasiaws
    130DOB8XSP
    131 Sosinia discus
    132 Geutensu SP
    133 Gwildis cerita
    134 Laevicardiui SP (Juv)
    135 Uosa atiaaUs
     136 bicina wltiliDeaia
    137 Kacrocallisia Hotlats
    138 Hamxaiiisia nitbosa
    139 HacroeallisU SP (Juv)
     140 Naciridae SP (Juv)
     141 Kodiolus swricanus
     142 Kulinea IsUraiis
     143 Nttsculus  Islerslis
     144 Nusculus SP (Juv)
     145 Ntsella planulsU
     146 Ibsella 9
     147 felilidae  SP (Juv)
     148 Nuculaaa  coaceairica
     149 Par-aMia subovaU
     150 Ptoladidae SP
   ECHIURIDA
        47  Ecbiurida SP
                                                                486

-------
Appendix  Table  10.1.    Continued.    List  of  taxa  collected  during  the  May  and
                                     October  Samplings  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  off  Pinellas County.
     151 PiUr
     152
     IB Pteroteris
     154 RaeU plicatella
     ISSSetele  SP
     156 Solera velai
     157 Soleiw occideaialis
     158 Soleo viridis
     IS? Srisula solidissiia sitilis
     160 Tellidnra crislaU
     161 Tellioa rrobias
     162 Tellina lenella
     163 Tellini versicolor
     164 Tellitt SP
      165 Tellioa s» (Juv)
     146 Thracia SP
      167 TractHcardiw wticalui
      168 Tracbscardiini SP
      16? Varicorbula opercuiala
      178 Veneridae » (Juv)
      171 Bivalvia ft ft
      172 Bivalvia SP B
      173Bivalvia SP (Juv)
   OLIEDCHftETA
      176 OlisoebaeU SFP

   PJUCHAETA
      178 Aslaoptews verrilli
      177 Avftaretidae SP < Jw>
      189 AtPhareUdae SP A
      181 Avharetidae SP G
      182 taphiaoiulae 9
      183 Ancislrossllis. harUaaae
      184 Aftcislfossllis Jantsi
      185 Aonides 9
      136 A>o?piaiospiD PUSHES
      137 Arabella iricolor
      138 frciiiamielida -#
      13? fe'icidea wrrutii
      1?0 Arkidea faiveli
      171 Aricidea fra&lis
      1?2 Aricidea »
      173 Aricidea uassi
      1?4 Artaadia 32ilis
      ITS fraaDdii aaculsU
      l?i Asachis caroUnse
      197 Asschis »
      1?8 AdolhelU wcosa
      1?? Asiothslla a-
      200 frandrioaaichis awricaoa
201 Braais clavaU
202 Braais s?
203 gratia wilt leeleasis
204 CspiUlia  cariUU
205 Caiilerieila alsls
206 Caulleriella SP
207 Cerstocerhale SP
208 Cerslooereis tirabilis
20? diaelopUrus varioradatus
210 Chaetozooe satiheadii
211 CJrasorelslu* SP
ZliCbooe SP
213 Cirrslulidae SP (Juv)
214 Cirralulus SP
215 Cirriforiia gp
216 Cirrophorus branchialus
217 Clneoella calida torouata
218 CtaodrUns SP
21? BassbraDcJws liuulatus
229 Biapalra cuprea
221 lispio uncini
222 Eleooe heicropoda
223 Clone laclea
224 Euclaeoe SP
225 Eulalis saaaiinea
226 Eunice vUUU
227 Eunice SP A
228 Eunice SP B
22? Eunicidae SP
230 ExoSone dispar
231 Extaooe SP
232, Fabricia SP
233 FlabelUaeri&e SP
234 Clscera atericaaa
235 Qlacera owcwhala
236 Glscinde solilaru
237 Sooiada laculata
238 Gotiadides carolinae
23? Gooiadidae SP
240 GsPtis brevifilPB
241 C»tis vitUU
242 Haploscoloplos  foUosus
243 Hvloscoloplos  rotostns
244 Hartoihoe SP
 245 Ifedroides SP
246 Isolds pulctella
 247 laincapilella alabrs
 248 Leanira SP
 24? Upidonotus SP
250 Loitia teduss
251 Louis viridis
252 Lutbrioereis brevirei
253 Luibriflereis crassid»lala
254 Uubrinems cf crazensis
255 Luttrinereis iicsliess
256 Uttrinereis lalreilli
257 Utbrinereis SP
258Lssidice SP
25? Hweiona pacifies
260 Hsseinoa peilibweae
261 Haftlana rioJa
262 Haftkoa SP A
263 teselona w B
264 feselona SP C
265 Haldaidae SP
266 Kalifrenia SP
267 tarphssa SP
268 Hedinastus califomiasis
26? HeialoMa bioodaiw
270 feliaiia laculaia
271 tetieulecis wberi
272 Miottspio cirriferi
273 Nviocteie SP
274 fariotwua SP
275 (Mil-s picU
276 XephlHS SP
277 Nereis vetacodaBU
278 Nereis swdiea
27? Nereis SP
280 Nerinides SP
281NoUriasp
282 Nototasltts aiericants
283 NoUessiits hetiwdss
284 Noiatashis ialericew
285 OdmlosaUis faiaems
286 Onwhis emila ooiaU
287 Owphis nebulnw
288 Onuchis pallidula
28? toufhis SP
270 Ophelia dnticuUU
291 Ophelia SP
2?2 Optaelina SP
273 Oueaia fasiforus
294 Oneniidae SP
275 Paradmeis lars
294 Paranailis  palaioides
277 Paramtis fiilsen*
298 Pacapiaoossllu
2?? ParaprioROSpie
300 Prclinaria awldii
                                                                  487

-------
Appendix  Table  10.1.
Continued.    List of taxa  collected during  the  May  and
October Samplings  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  off  Pinellas  County.
      301 Pherusa SP
      302 Phsllodoce areaae
      303 rtodladocidae SP (Juv)
      304 PiMossllis SP
      305 Pisioae reioU
      304Pislasp
      307 Podarte obscara
      308 PwcilochaetBS Jotasooi
      307 Polscirrus carolinensis
      310 Polscirrus SP
      3U Polsdora lisa.
      312 Polsdcra social!*
      313 Pohriora si>
      3U Polsdora yebstsri
      315 Polsnoidea SP B
      316 Polawidea SP C
      317 Polsnoidea a> B
      313 Prioaospio crisUU
      31? PMonnspia SP A
      320 Prionospio SP B
      321 Protodorvillea Kefersteiai
      322 ProUriorvillea SP A
      323 Protodamllea SP B
      324 PseudMurvt&oe aab&ia
      325 Pseudarolsdors SP
      324 Ssbellaridae SP
      327 Sabeilidae SP A
      323 Sabellidae SP B
      32? Schistoieriitsfcs languorous
      330 SchisioKriaAis peclinaU
      331 Scoleiepis SP
      332 3coUle?is smiawla
      333 Kolwtos rtibra
      33+ Seoloplos y IJaul
      335 Serpula veriicular 3fanaloaa
      336 Serpulidae SP A
      337 Ssrpulidse SP B
      333 Si&lion SP  A
      33? Si&Uut SP  B
      340 Sisaiimidas SP
      3il 3i25Bb,-3 bsssi
      342 Sifeabrs 5p
      ~43 Si&ebra IsiUcuiaU
      3ti Sphsersssllis SP
      34-5 3fio Fetliiwoeae
      3'-.5 S.°ioduet.QpUrus costaru» oculata
      3i7 S?ionidae SP (larvae)
      343 Sfiophsnes taatetx
      3W Sleniwaereis SP
      350 SLhsneisis bos
       351 Sthenelais SP
       352 Slf eptossliis ar enae
       353 SaUitfae SP H
       35+ Saiiiiiae SP 1
       355 Salliiiaesp J
       354 Saliidae SP K
       357 Sallidae SP L
       358 Ssllidae SP H
       35? Ssllis slUnuti
       340 Ssllis armtU
       jilSallis aracillis
       342 Ssdlis swnsicola
       344 Saneiiiis albini
       3&5Thar>K aanulosus
       344 ThsriK SP
       347 Theiepus seiosits
       348 TrsvUia hobsonae
       34? Travisia cf parva
       370 Travisia SP
       371 Trichobraichus alacialis
       372 ISoideotiriHi SP A
       373 UnideaUf led SP 0
  ARTHRQPOJA

   PYCHKffiflBA
       374
                     SP
   (XPtttLOCARIDA
       378 Liahlieila
   OSTRACOIW
       330 HaolflcaUwrida selimcUU
       381 Paraslerwe pollBi
       382 Sarsiella zostericnia
       384 Uaid. 9 A
       385 IMd. 9 B
       munid. SPC
       387 Unid. & B
       338 IMd. » E
       38? Unid. SP F
       390 Unid. SP G
       371 Unid. SP H
       392 tmidi SP I
       373 Unid. SP J
       374 IMd. SP K

   COPEPQDA
       374 IMd. SP A
       377 IMd. SP B
       378 IMd. SP C
       37? IMd, SP B
       400 IMd. SP E
    401 IMd. SP F
    402 IMd. SP C

CURIPEDtt
    404 Balms SP
    405 Trsretesidae SP

HALAC05IRACA

 CUIACEA
    408 Csclaspis
    407
    410 Csclaspis SP A
    411 leucoa atericatms
    412Leaconsp
    413
    414 OxsurosUUs SP
    415 IMd. SP £
    414 IMd. SP F

 TWAIDACEA
    418 twtachelU SP
    41? IMd. SP B
    420 Unid. SP C
    421 IMd. SP D

 ISOTODA
    423 Ae&tboe occttlai
     424 AnUuridae SP
     425 Apanthura
     424 Apanthura SP ( Juvl
     427 Edolea Motosa
     428EdoleasP
     42? Idolheidae SP
     430 Kunna SP
     431 Seroiis tarasi
     432 SphaeroH wadridnialw
     433 SUnelriu*
 AHPHIPODA
     435 Acsnlhobauslarius SP
     434 Arolisca c.f. abdila
     437 Avelisca verrilli
     438 Avelisca vsdora*
     43? Paracaprella SP
     440 Cerapus SP
     441 Corophiia c.f. lubercuiatia
     442 Corophimi SP (Juvl
     443 Cofortiiui SP
     444 Dexanne SP
     445 Podocerus SP
     444 Ericbihonius SP
     447 Haosloridae SP
     448 Letbos  cf wbsleri
     44?LabQ5.sp
     450 Leucothoe SP
                                                               488

-------
 Appendix  Table  10.1.
Continued.    List of  taxa  collected  during  the May  and
October Samplings  of  the  Gulf  of Mexico  off  Pinallas County.
   451 Uslrifiils cf bararfc
   452 Lssiaaflpsis c.f . alba
   453 taoadodes nf . laterlaris
   448 Ihid. SP G
   449 Ihid. SP H
   470 (toil!. » I
   471 Uaid. SP J
   472 Ibid. SP K
   473 Ibid, »H
   474 UBid. 9 H

insmm
   474 Boaanieiia fxloricensis
   477 SoMaiuell» SP
   478 feUwsi&Psis suifU
   47? haudofsis bi&loui
   480 IhsidDPSis fares
   481 feudopsis SP
   482 Ibid, SP ( Juv)
   483
   484

DECtfOM

 IMTAKTU
   488 filfheid SP (larvae)
   490 Carides SP
   491 HifPolsU S
   492 Lalreuies
   493 Lwlochels serrsUrbiU
   494 Tradnpenaeus SP
   495HatanUa SP (Juv)
   494 OSarifes liiicols
   497 Palanooidae SP tJuv)
   498 Paoseus SP
   499 PericliKDse ioa^icsudalas
   509 frocesss beriudensis
             501 Process
             502Processa SP
             543 Procsssidee SP !JBV)
             504 Sicmtig SP
             SOS Trachapsnaeus coailficlus

          msm
             507 CaUlaoassa cf laUspina
             508 Callianassa SP

          AHQHURft
             510 Dioseainse SP
             511 Eiieersius  M-seloaais
             512 Paaurns » (Juv)
             513 PsftrisUs twui
             514 Pasurus bonairensis
             515 PaSurus bullisi
             514 PaSirus loniLcarwis

          BRAE8YIKA
             518 Bcschaira  SP (Jwl
             519 Disso&cluhs lelliUe
             520 Eurwanopeiis tfepressus
             521 Eura>lax allida
             522£rapsldae  SP(JJV)
             523 Ha>3lu5 SP
             524HelerocrapU graiuiUU
             525 ParUwnopidw SP
             524 Pinnixa chacei
             527 Pioaixa chssloplersna
             528 Piimixj if. 5P «
             529 Pimiixa relii«ns
             530 Pinnixa pearsei
             531 Pinituta H. SP
             532Pinnate-lire SP (Juv)
             533 PotosDt aibbesi
             534 Porlunus c.f. Sibbesii
             535 PorUnns Sibbssii

         ECHWOKiHIATA

          HXOTHUfiOUEA
             538 Bendrochirolida s?
              53? LePlceaipaU SP
              540 Hololliiiroidsa SP A
              541 Hololharoidea SP S

          ECHIHOUEA
              543 EchiDOMTdia* f lavescaas
              544 Encupe aich8ii.fi
              545 ttellita wiBoaiesperfsrst
              546 HslliU w iJav)
              547 Echinoidsa SP
              548 Echiaoiie? SP wjv)

          ftSTEROIKA
              550 Astropectifi SP
     SSI Slelleroidea SP
     553 te>hlura smioie
     554 HariiphoUs elafeU
     555 KicrophDlis aira
     554 HicrophaUs arscilliw
     557 Kicropholis januarii
     553 Hicrap'nalis MU3»aU
     55? tticroptnlis SP ( Juv)
     540 Qphiaphraaus f iloaranets
     541 QphiopivaMKis fulchsr
     543 Qptaoptvasiui
     544 OPhioplraAus s?
     545 fUpltiurid SP
     544 Aiphiuridae SP iJav)
     547 Dphiuroidea SP iJuv)
     548 Qphiuroiiea SP
     570 Haichordala SP

CEPHftUKHQEIiAIfl
     572 Branctuostwa caribaeua
     574 HoliulicUe SP
     575 Ascidiacea SP 3
     574 Ascidiacea SP 3
     577 Aihenaria SP I
     578 Turbellaria SP B
     57? Turbellaria SP C
                                                                 489

-------
Appendix  Table  10.2.    Composite  Species  List  by  Station  for  the May,  1980 Benthic  Sampling.
       Taxa
                                                                               Stations
                                 1A    IB
                                             1C    ID    IE    1G    II
                                                                                   3C    3»
                                                                                                   3C    31
                                                                                                                                         5C    51
                                                                                                                                                     Total
   2   Porifws sr
   13  Alhenaria SP A
   14  Altaians SP B
   13  AUiaisria sp C
   16  Athena-13 SP C
   17  AUiaiaria SP E
   18  Alhenaria SP F
   19  Atearia SP G
   7   Annone SP A
   8   Anetone & B
   9   Aneione SP C
   577 Altaians sp I
   20  Athena-is SP H
   25  Euplana smilis
   24  Euplana SP
   27  Stslochussp
   28  Tnrbellsf ian SP  A
   578 Turtwllaria SP B
  579 Tiirbellaria SP C
   32  Newtiiua  SP
  34  NwrtodasP
   176 Olisoctata SPP
   178 telaophaus vwrilli
  292 Ophelina SP
   179 Aipharelidae SP  (juv)
  184 Ancistrossllis Jonesi
  186 AFOPrionospio ryjtaea
  187 Arabella tricolor
  173 Aricidea iiassi
  195 Arundia laculaU
  198 Axioliwlla nicosa
  202  Bfsnia SP
  204 Oilella »PilaU
  204 Caulleriella SP
  207 Ceralocephale sp
  209 Chaelopleru* variondalus
  210 Chaetozone gasheadii
  211 Chrssoprtalm sp
  212 Bme SP
  218 Clenodrilus SP
  220 Diopalra cuprea
  221 Dispio uncini
  222 Elaine heleroroda
  223 EUone laclea
  225 EuUlia sanjuinea
  227 Eunice SP A
  231 ExoSone SP
  232 Patricia SP
  234 Glwera aericana
  238 Goniadides carolinae
  236 Glwinde solitaria
  231 Goniadidae SP
  240 Gwtis brevipalpa
  242 Haploscoloplos foliosus
  244 Harulhae SP
  245 Hwt-utfK SP
  247 Lepidonotas SP
  555 LiMbrinereU ii
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
A
V
0
0
1
0
0
0
t
T
0
0
19 1
24 1
6
0
0
0
13
12 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


1
C
0 «
2 t
0 C
0 I
0 <
3 «
0 0
5 S
0 0
2 3
0 1
1 1
10 20
0 1
0 t
0 (
0 (
0 0
4 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
A i
V 1
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
i 9
T L
0 0
0 0
4 42
B 31
2
0
0
1
2
1
0
3
0
0
0
1
6
0
0
1
0
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
3
1
0
I 0
) 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
Oft
V
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3-1
l)
0 1
0 0
56 83
44 288
17 36
0 3
1
0
2
27
0
0
0 i
0 2
0 6
0 0
6 3
0 0
0 0
0 1
1 0
1 5
0 0
0 0
0 12
0 0
4 10
0 0
1 9
0 0
0 1
0 4
5 0
19 9
5 1
0 0
0 0
0 32
7 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
t 0
0 0
0 0
«\
\
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 4
0 0
0 2
17 71
174 925
3 144
1 0
0 0
0 29
1 21
3 0
0 0
1 1
4 78
0 12
0 7
0 0
0 1
0 10
o o
0 0
0 3
1 3
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 0
3 7
0 29
2 29
0 97
0 1
2 0
0 2
0 0
0 1
0 2
2 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
J4
1
»A
V
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
2 1
14 3
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
21 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0 25
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1A
V
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
3
0
3
0
0
3
1 0
0 0
» a
0 0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
6 2
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
21 2
1 1
4
0
2
0
1
5 1
1
0
0
0
0
0
3 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
1
9
1
0
0
4
0 0
0 0
7 0
0 0
0 0
0
1
0

0
0
0
4 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
4 34
9 28
7 5
0 0
1 1
0 0
3 0
9 31
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
9 5
1) 0
I 0
9 t
»A
V
» 0
9 0
II 0
F v
D 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
D
0
000
000
0 0 0
0 0 0
3 0 0
0 1 0
000
0 0 0

000
000
000
000
1 3 0
1 0 1
000
0 0 0
14 11 14
50 310 51
550
1 1
0 1
0 0
0 0
3 2
2 0
0 0
3 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 2 0
000
000
000
200
000
8 2 1
0 0
5 3
1 0
2 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
000
i 9 a
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 4
19 31
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 3
0 0
0 0
5 0
0 3
2 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
0 0
0 0
3 2
2 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2 29
11 14
0 10
0 1
0 i
0 0
0 0
3 15
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 3
0 4
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
5 0
2 12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
k
V
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
235
li
0
0









p
0
0
3
0
0
o
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
0
1
3
0
0
0
3
0 7
3 7
0 10
0 2
0 3
0 1
0 1
1 2
Oin
48
Ot
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 8
0 5
1 JO
Oil
16
0 1
0 2
37 515
66 2356
1 265
2 11
0 12
0 31
0 71
0 143
0 5
0 9
0 96
0 14
0 13
0 27
0 34
0 10
0 1
0 11
01
4
B 30
0 1
0 2
0 5
0 10
0 13
0 3
0 16
1 34
0 29
3 77
0 97
0 35
1 14
0 13
1 95
0 13
0 2
1 14
0 68

-------
0
Appendix  Table  1O.2.    Continued.
              Taxa

         256 Lrabrinems latreilli
         258 Lssidice sr
         242 Natelna SP A
         243 Hafelima SP I
         244 Hafelona a- C
         248 Medinastus caUforniensis
         249 Hefelnn biwulatut
         272 HimisPio cirrifwi
         275 NerhUs picta
         274 NephUs SP
         277 Nereis arBiocodnita
         278 Nereis aiccinea
         283 Notmaslus hetiKxtos
         284 Notnaslus laUriceus
         286 Oouphis ereiita oculata
         291 Ophelia SP
         192 Aricidea SP
         293 Ouenia fusifortis
         294 Dueniidae SP
         295 Paradoneis Isra
         297 Paraonis fulsens
         299 Paraprionospio pinnata
         300 PecUitaria Souldii
         302 PteUodoce arenae
         303PhsUodocidaespIJw)
         373  Eolychaeta sp.
         304 Pista SP
         311 Polsdors lisni
         312 Poladora socialis
         313 PohHtara SP
         314 Poiwkra aebsUri
         340 Sittliwidae SP
         315 Pohaioidea SP B
          314 Polsnoidea SP C
          318 Pricnospio crislala
          322 Prolodorvillea SP A
          324 Pseudoeur-iUioe aibisue
          324 Sabellaridae SP
          327 Satellites SP A
          328 Sabellidae SP B
          329 Schistuerinsos lonsicornus
          330 StinstOMTinaos pectinaU
          331 ScoleleFis if
          243 Haploscoloplos robustos
          333 Scoloplos rubra
          334 Scoloplos SP (Juvl
          334 Semlidae SP A
          337 Serpulidae SP I
          338 Siaaiion SP A
          342 SiSaibra SP
          343 Sisstbra tenUculala
          345 Spio pelUboneae
          357 fellidae SP I
          344 SpiochwtoPlerus coslarui  oculaU
          347 Spionidw SP (larvae)
          185 Amides SP
          348 Spiophanes  boitaK
          350 Slhenelais  boa
          298 ParapioirasslUs  lonsicirrala
          344 Sphaerossllis SP
                       Composite  Species  List  by Station  for  the  May,   1980  Benthic  Sampling.
                                               Stations
1A Ib
0 0
0 0
0 5
OA
V
8 A
V
2 I
«A
0
3 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 3
0 0
14 11
0 0
0 0
0 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 1
4 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
13 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0





0
0
0
0
0 13
0 0
0 0
t 0 0
0 0
0 0
4 11
17 15
0 0
0 0
1C ID
0 28
1 0
0 0

2 9
««
2
4 15
0 1
0 0
0 0
1 7
1 10
0 1
13 8
0 0
22 10
2 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
2 12
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 4
28 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
4
3
D
0
2
ft v
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
12 17
2 5
0 0
0 1
IE
0
0
0

9
29
1
0
0
13
4
0
14
1
0
0
0
21
0
0
4
9
2
1
0
1
0
0
4
0
0
0
49
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
1
1
0
108
3
8
4
1C 11
0 10
0 1
2 2

1 4
01
i
0 12
1 3
0 41
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 15
0 0
0 0
2 24
0 2
0 11
0 0
0 15
0 0
0 8
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 15
0 1
0 4
12 131
57





0 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 0
0 4
ft 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
11 7
3 1
1 1
0 1
3A
1
0
0

0
4
0
0
5
0
44
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
14
2
2
0
0








0
0
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
11
0
0
3B 3C 3!)
0 5 25
000
003
»A 0
v V
0 2 t
OA A
V V
0 13 0
000
0 1 21
0 7 15
0 4 3
11 30
1
0
1
0
0
0 0
10 0 0
0 0 1
0 3 2
000
000
000
0 0
0 1
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 2
0 0
5 0 0
000
0 0 0
0 4 B
3 2 4
0 1 4
000
3E 30
10 0
0 0
1 4
OA
V
01
J
5 0
1 1
0 1
0 0
0 1
8 1
0 0
20 1
0 0
0 0
0
0
1
0
1
1
3
1
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 3
0 3
D 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
14 2
3 5
0 1
0 0
31 5A
0
0
4


0
0
0 0
0 0
1 14
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
2 2
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
8 41
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
SB 5C
1 0
0 0
0 0
»ft
V
On
v
i i
0 0
1 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
3 13
0 0
0 1
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 D
0 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
14 54
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
11 10
0 0
0 0
0 0
5D 5E
0 0
1 0
0 3
A A
V V
On
V
4 4
OA
V
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 5
0 0
1 8
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
5 3
0 1
0 2
0 0
0 0
12 7
2 10
0 9
0 0
5G 51
0 0
0 0
2 9
A 7
V £
0 0
v v
0 3
A ft
v v
0 0
0 0
0 0
g o
0 0
0 3
0 2
4 1
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
7 4
9 0
4 11
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
4 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
4 0
i 0
2 1
0 0
0 0
0 C
0 0
5 4
2 0
4 1
0 0
Total
80
3
35
i
T
1
t
50
e
J
87
9
41
1
51
93
74
158
3
32
39
3
44
2
41
11
48
5
1
2
5
29
13
4
15
1
4
212
57
33
4
1
5
8
20
2
5
1
2
1
1
1
17
48
164
1
13
1
1
250
88
75
4

-------
Appendix  Table  10.2.     Continued.  Composite  Species  List  by  Station  for  the  May,   1980  Benthic  Sampling.
                                                                          Stations
     343 Ssllis SP
     353 Ssllidae sf H
     354 Ssllidae y I
     355 SHllidae SP J
     354 Ssllidae SP K
     340 Ssllis cornula
     341 Ssllis sracillis
     342 Skills spongicola
     347 Thelepgs selosus
     309 Polscirrus carolinensis
     250 Louis wdusa
     344 Tharw sf
     348 Travisia hobsonae
     370 Travisia SP
     371 Trichobranchus Slacialis
     580 Polscimis exUinus
     215 Cirriforiia SP
     344 Ssiellis albioi
     274 (bnoweiua SP
     319 PrionDSPio SP A
     320 Prionospio SP B
     228 Eunice SP B
     112 Abra SP (Juv)
     113 Ansdara Irsnsversa
     114 taodonlia slba
     118 Card)idse SP
     57  PiaetoplRira  apiculaU
     120 Chione cancellala
     121 Chione ifltapurpurea
     124 Corbula  snifliana
     125 Crassinella lumilala
     128 Diplodmla punctata
     130 Donax  SP
     132 Geukensia SP
     133 bwldia cerina
     134 Laevicardiim SP (juv)
     135 LinSa  aiiantus
     134 Lucius wltilineaU
     137 HscrocallisU SP (Juv)
     142 Hulinea laUralis
     143 Jtosciilus laleralis
     145 Hssella planuUU
     144 fosella SP
     147 fell Udae sf( Juv)
     148 Nuculana concenlrica
     153 Pteroieris perplana
     154 Raela  plicalella
     157 Solera occideiiUlis
    158 Solen  viridis
    144 Tellina SP
     142 Tellina tenella
     143 Tellina versicolor
     147 Trachscardiui wricsllii
     148 TraclRicardiui SP
     14? Varicorbula oterculaU
     170 Vener idae H> (Juv)
     171 Bivalvia w A
     172 Bivalvia SP 8
     122 Chione laLUirata
     164 TVacia SP
1A
0
0
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
3
7
a
4
1
4
4
0
0
4
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
4
4
4
1
1
1
4
10
4
1
4
1
0
4
0
0
IB
4
4
0
0
0
1
4
0
4
0
24
4
0
4
4
4
4
2
0
0
4
4
53
0
0
3
4
1
0
2
0
4
0
1
4
4
4
0
4








2
1
0
0
0
18
0
0
0
1
1(






















IS
0
D
0
0
0
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
0
4
4
0
0
4
2
8
4
4
4
4
0
4
0
19
0
4
0
0
: ID
4
0
4
0
4
14
4
4
0
0
I
0
0
0
4
4
4
1
4
4
1
4
17
4
4
0
4
0
4
1
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
1
4
4
5
0
0
2
3
0
4
4
15
0
1
0
0
IE
4
4
4
4
1
41
4.
3
1
4
1
0
4
1
0
4
4
0
0
0
2
0
21
4
1
0
4
0
34
4
0
4
0
0
11
1
4
1
4
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
1
0
10
1
4
0
23
4
4
0
0
1G
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
2









0
0
4
3
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
4
4
3
4
2
4
0
4
0
4
4
0
0
11
4
1
4
4
4
44
9
1
0
0
4
4
1
4
4
4
0
0
0
1
4
28
2
5
3
9
4
3
25
4
4
0
12
4
2
4
0
0
0
0
5
4
4
4
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
1
8
1
0
4
0
3A
0
0
0
4,






4
0
0
0
0
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
4
4
12
4
4
4
0
4
1
4
0
0
4
4
1
1
4
4
11
4
4
4
0
2
0
1
4
0
4
2
4
4
1
0
3B
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
4
0
0
9
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
3C
4
0
4
4
4
1
4
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
1
4
4
0
4
0
4
2
1
1
4
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
1
4
0
0
0
4
4
1
0
4
4
2
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
3D
0
0
1
4
4
2
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
0
4
4
0
2
2
3
4
0
0
0
4
4
1
4
1
4
4
3
0
4
2







1
4
0
0
0
0
0
8
4
0
0
0
3E
4
7
0
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
0
0
14
9
4
4
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
4
0
1
4
0
1
0
4
4
4
4
0
1
0
0
1
4
4-
0
0
3
4
4
4
0
3G
4
4
0
4
0
0
1
4
4
0
0
3
4
4
4
0
8
0
0
1
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
1
2
0
4
0
0
4
0
0
0
31
4
9
4
4
0
4
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
0
4
1
0
4
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
0
2
4
1
4
0
g
0
0
4
4
0
5A
4
4
0
0
0
4
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
8
0
0
4
0
4
0
0
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
2
4
44
4
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
5B
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
1
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
4
0
4
4
0
0
4
0
4
44
0
4
0
3
4
0
0
0
5C
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
0
4
0
1
14
41
0
4
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
4
0
14
0
22
0
4
9
1
0
4
4
0
5D
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
0
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
3
4
0
4
4
4
0
0
0
5E
4
3
4
1
4
4
4
0
4
0
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
29










4
2
4
4
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
5
4
4
o
4
4
4
4
0
5G
4
9
0
0
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
0
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
4
0
I
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
0
51
4
4
0
4
4
4
0
4
4
0
4
0
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
3
4
0
4
0
0
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
4
4
4
0
0
4
0
0
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
0
4
4
4
9
4
Iota
8
45
2
1
2
3
109
9
4
1
1
45
117
I*/
1
1
1
1
17
1
3
1
1
5
42
194
17
4
28
4
4
42
4
2
2
12
1
19
4
4
4
7
1
5
14
4
2
17
2
37
15
153
1
1
1
119
1
1
1
1

-------
        Appendix  Table  10.2.
                   Taxa
                                  Continued.   Composite  Species  List  by Station  for  the  May,  198O  Benthic  Sampling.
                                                                                      Stations
*=.
VO
U)
44 Actnciiu SP
t3 (Irene tricariiuU
65 Caecui carolinisoiii
48 Cstcui ralchelliM
69 Caectm SP
74 CrePiduU fornicaU
71 Crepidala plana
72 Crepidula SP
73 Csclostrmscus SP
74 Calichnella bidenUU
75 Epiloniui iiillislriaUit
76 Eriloniut SP
585 Harsinelhdae SP
84 Hilrella lunata
81 Hilrella SP (j»v>
82 Nannodiella 
-------
Appendix Table  10.2.    Continued.  Composite  Species  List  by  Station  for  the  May,  1980  Benthic Sampling.
            Taxa
        448  Amphipoda
        469  Amphipoda
        470  Amphipoda
        472  Amphipoda
        473   Amphipoda
        W   Amphipoda
        447 Hausloridae se
        423 Aeaathoe occulala
        425 Apanthiira Hgiifka
        426 Apanthurs SP (Juv)
        427 Edolea
        427 Idalheidae
        430 hunna SP
        431 Serolis
        432 Sfhsero
        433 Slenelrim unocule
        409 Csclaspis varians
        412 leucon SP
        413 Oxaurostslis 51 it hi
        414 Oxyurostylis SP
        408 Caclaspis pustulaU
        410 CsclasPis SP A
        415cumacea  sp
        478 helaissidopsis svif U
        47? Ibsidopsis biseloui
        481 Hssidopsis sp
        476 Bowaniella POT
        482 My sidacea
        418 LeHochelij SP
        419 Tanaidacea  sp.
        380 Haplocslherida sell
        381 ParasUrope pollex
        383 Safsiella SP
        384 Ostracoda
        385 Ostracoda
        384ostracoda
        387 Ostracoda
        3880stracoda
        389 Ostracoda
        3?2 Ostracoda
        391 Ostracoda
        378 LiShlieUa floridana
        394Copepoda  sp
        397Copepoda sp
        jjjCopepoda  sp
        jy^Copepoda  sp
        450 Copepoda  sp
        404 Balanus SP
       487 Alpheus sp
        488Alphei
.orbila
)
»
9
0
0
0
0
o
V
0
0
0
9
V
9
0
9
0
17
0
22
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
9
9
12
9
4
3
0
0
9
9
9









0
9
9
0
0
0
0
9
7
0
9
0
9
9
0
0
9
n
V
0
9
9
9
9
1
0
0
9
14
9
37
9
2
9
0
13
5
9
0
28
0
9
2
9
16
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
3
9
0
0
0
9
0
0
1
9
9
2
0
0
14
1
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
\
I
9
9
4
9
9
9
9
9
0
5
9
13
9
0
0
9
9
3
9
9
8
9
9
1
0
3







0
9
9
2
9
0
9
0
0
0
9
0
0
2
9
9
9
1
9
g
0
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
9
1
9
9
0
5
9
12
9
2
9
9
9
12
1
9
9
0
9
9
9
1
3
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
6
9







9
9
1
9
9
1
9
1
2
0
0
i
0
9
9
1
9
10
0
0
0
1
0
0
25
0
9
9
0
0
0
0
2
5
9
9
9
9
9
9
2
7
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
9
3
2
0
9
9
9
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
I :
3
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
0
0
5
0
3
1
0
0
0
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
3
0
1
3
6
0
9
9
0
0
0
299
9
9
0
0
9
0
9
0
1
1
9
0
0
0
2
9
9
1
9
9
0
1
1
8
17
5
9
9
9
0
0
2
2
0
4
9
2
1
1
2
9
0
0
0
12
2
9
0
1
51
4
29
0
0
0
9
9
179
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
2
1
0
0
0
3
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
9
0
0
9
9
0
4
0
3
0
0
0
9
2
9
0
0
0
0
9
3
1
B
9
1
0
9
0
9
0
9
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
0
0
0
9
0
4
14
1
0
0
0
0
153
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
9
0
0
9
0
9
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
9
9
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
9
0
9
9
0
0
2
9
1
9
1
0
9
9
9
4
2
4
0
1
0
1
9
0
8
9
9
9
9
9
1
1
9
0
0
9
9
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
1
9
0
9
4
9
9
0
9
9
0
9
9
9
15
9
9




9
9
9
9
9
9
9
1
9
6
9
3
9
9
19
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
1
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
0
0
9
3
9
9
0
9
0
9
9
9
9
1
9
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
9
1
9
1
9
0
0
1
0
2
9
12
9
3
9
9
2
9
0
9
0
0
0
1
2
7
6
0
1
0
9
9
0
9
8
9
5
9
9
9
0
9
4
0
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
6
0
9
9
9
0
9
0
0
1
9
0
9
9
0
9
7
9
6
0
1
9
0
0
1
12
0
9
9
0
9
9
4
2
5
9
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
9
0
0
9
1
I
0
9
0
9
0
9
0
0
2
9
9
9
9
9
• 9
2
9
9
9
1
9
0
9
9
9
0
25
9
9
9
9
8
17
5
0
0
9
0
9
9
78
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
19
0
9





2
9
2
0
2
9
0
9
0
9
1
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
0
9
9
9
9
0
7
9
0
0
0
9
0
9
1
9
5
9
4
9
1
9
0
9
9
3
9
0
9
0
1
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
1
1
9
9
9
0
3
9
9
0
0
9
0
9
1
0
7
0
1
9
3
0
9
1
9
2
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
1
0
9
9
0
9
9
9
4
9
0
9
0
0
9
0
0
9
9
9
0
9
9
0
0
0
0
9
9
0
0
0
9
9
11
0
8
9
2
0
9
0
9
9
9
4
0
0
0
9
7
9
2
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
0
9
1
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
2
9
9
9
9
9
5
9
15
9
9





9
78
9
9
9
1
12
9
9
9
1
1
9
9
1
9
0
13
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
1
0
9
9
9
9
9
' 9
9
9
9
3
1
0
9
9
1
9
9
9
9
1
9
2
9
2
9
9
9
9
138
9
9
1
3
31
23
4
4
9
0
0
9
0
49
9
9
0
9
9
0
0
1
9
1
9
0
9
9
9
9
i
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
9
9
0
9
9
3
9
4
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
44
9
1
4
1
15
21
0
9
4
9
1
0
9
9
0
0
9
9
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
2
15
2
1
1
1
1
11
41
24
3
1

2
1
2
129
16
174
1
29
1
B
182
23
27
2
339
12
4
27
9
123
137
27
34
5
1
1
1
1
522
3
24
2
1
3
1
9
20
4
3
1
4
3
1
27
6
16

-------
         Appendix   Table  1O.2.     Continuea.   Composite  Species   List  Joy  Station  for   the  May,
                                                                                                                                                                          198O  Berithic  Sampling -
                                                                                     Stations
VO
                                                                                                                                                          5C
                                                                                                                                                                5D    5E    5C   51
496 Oftrides lincola
512 Paaurus SP (Jail
514 Pasurus tanairensis
516 PaOirus lonSicarms
515 Paaurus bullisi
498 Paiaeus SF
494 Traclwpenaeus SP
527 Pirmixa chaeloptersna
528 Pinnixs N. SP A
530 Pinnixs pearsei
531 Pinnixa N> SP
532 PinnoUieridae SF (Juv)
534 PorUnos c.f, aibbesii
501 Processa heiPhilli
502 Processa SP
503 Pfocessidae SP iJav)
51? Dissodsclslus »eUiUe
545 HelliU minouie!
546HelliU SP (Juv)
547 Echinoidea SP
548 Ectuntndea SP (Juv)
543 Echinocsrdiij
551 Slelleroidea
555 Hicrofhohs atra
556 mcfOPholis aracillUa
557 Hicropholis Jaauarii
556 Hicropholis souataU
540 Ofhiop(ir83*u5
562 Ophiofhraaws
543 OphioPhrssDis
564 OphioptiraSius  SP
 561 OphiophraJMis  pulcher
 547  Amphiuridae  sp
 537 LeptossnpsU SP
 540 Hololhuroidea  SP A
 45  Glottidia pwai
 41  Selenaria SP
 38  OiaetoSnalha SP
 47  Echiurida &
 43  Phoronis architecla
 51  ParasPidDsiphm SP
 47  Aspidisiphon SP
 570 HnichordaU SP
 572 Braochioslota c
 584 Ascidiacea sf (Juv)
  273 tbriochele SP
  64  Alss caribaea
  102 Caecim iibricalui
  103 Eritoniui novanglUe
  86  Odosloiia SP  (Juv)
                                                                                                                                                                                           Total
1A
a 0
4
sis 0
pus 0
0
0
0
ersna ,
0
7
1
(Juv) 0
bbesii 1
h 0
0
Juv) 0
lliUe 0
sperforaU 0
I 0
0
njv) 0
avescens 0
0
i 1
:illin 0
isrii 0
aaU 0
iloSraoeus 0
»tUS 0
iirdetani 0
r 0
ulcher 0
> sp. (Sjuv.) 4
1
p A 1
itiala 0
0
0
0
ecla 0
SP 0
0
3
•aribaeui 1
Juv) 1
0
Lui 0
iSlUe 0
Juv) 0
TOTALS ! 344
TOTAL SPP, ! 59
IB 1C
0
4
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
7 0
0 0
1 12
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 15
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
5 0
0 0
17 27
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 0
1 6
0 0
0 0
1 0
8 7
0 0
OA
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
516 437
84 81
ID IE
0 0
21 36
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 9
0 1
9 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
2 0
16 3
0 0
2 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
5 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 57
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
551 1346
88 114
1G 11 3
0 0 (
2 32 :
0 1 <
0 11 I
0 1 (
0 0 4
2 0 (
0 0 1
0 0
0 0 1
o 6 ;
3 2 !
0 0 (
0 0 <
6 5 (
3 0 (
0 0 (
0 0 (
2 2 (
0 0 I
3 0 (
0 0 I
0 0 I
0 0
1 (
0 (
0 (
0 I
0
0
0
0
6 20
0
0
1 10
1 234
0 0
0 0
1 2
10 5
1 0
0 1
2 60
0 1
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
584 2931 261
71 156 5
A 3B
) 0
! 0
) 0
1
I u
0
I 0
0
0
0
0
> 0
) 0
I 0
) 0
I 0
) 0
> 0
) 0
) 0
1 0
) 0
I 0
0
1 0
1 0
I 0
I 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
) 0
} 0
) 0
1 0
9 0
) 244
> 19
j". 3D
0 0
3 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
ft 1
0 1
0 2
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
2 0
6 19
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
2 0
1 0
0 0
2 0
0 19
0 0
23 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 22
0 0
OA
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
313 537
86 83
IF,
0
1
0





0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
w
a
3G 31 3
2 1
4 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 4
0 0
0 0
5 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
6 2
0 0 0
000
0 1 0
0 0 0
000
000
040
000
0 0 0
000
1 1 156
000
OA A
0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0
000
ODD
258 581 823
74 60 38
A 30 ->*
0 0
1 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
12 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
131 136
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 9
0 0
0 0
1171 673
46 48
t -* "
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
1
0
205
39

0 0
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
17 40
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 16
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 7
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
411 735
67 69

0 3
0 124
0 1
0 12
0 1
0 1
0 2
0 3
0 1
0 15
0 11
0 44
0 5
0 2
! 23
0 3
0 1
0 3
14 155
0 1
0 3
0 1
0 2
0 2
0 1
0 1
0 5
0 1
0 1
0 k
0 25
0 2
9 m
0 1
0 5
1 15
0 235
0 4
0 3
4 28
0 15
0 1
o y
0 694
0 2
1
0
0
0
0
333 13592
52 348

-------
Appendix Table  10.3.  Composite Species  List by Station for the October,  1980 Benthic  Sampling.
          Taxa
                          1A   IB  1C   ID  IE  1C
   Stat lour,
SA  31   3C  3D   3£
                                                                   3G   31
                                                                                           56   SI
                                                                                                  Total
5 Hsdroid SP
10 Anenne SP D
11 Anewne SP J
12 Anenne SP H
13 Alhenaria SP A
14 Athenaria SP B
UALhpnaria SP f
nLimioi 10 br F
19 Athenaria SP G
20 Alhenaria SP H
21 Athenaria SP K
22 Athenaria SP L
23 Alhenaria SP H
25 Euplana sracilis
26 Euplana SP
27 Slslochus SP
29 TurbelUrian SP D
30 Turbellarian SP E
32 Neter tinea SP
34 Keutoda SP
36 Priapulida SP
38 Chaeloaialha SP
40 Brszoa SP
41 Selenaria SP
43 Phoronis architects
£., 45 Glottidia pwatidala
lO 47 Echiurida SP
^ 49 Aspidisiphon SP
SO Golfinaiidae SP
52 Phascoloin SP
53 Sipunculis SP
54 Sipunmlida spUuv)
57 Chaelopleura apiculata
59 Acleocina canaliculala
60 Acleocina SP
61 Anachis obesa
62 Anachis pnlchella
64 AUs caribaea
65 Caecui carolinianui
66 Caecut cooperi
67 Caecui johnsoni
68 Caecui rulchellu*
70 CrePidula fornicala
71 CrePidula plana
73 Csclostreiiscus SP
74 blichnella bidenlala
76 Epiloniui SP
77 Gastropoda spat
78 Haiinoea elesans
79 Haiinoea succinea
81 Hitrella SP (Juv)
82 Hannodiella oxia
83 Natica pusilla
85 Nudibranch SP (Juv)
86 MoslMia SP 
-------
                          ,0.3.
VO
T.-ixa
94 Turhtmilla cmradi
95 Tiirbonilla interrupia
96 riirbonilla SP
97 TurbonJllinse SP IJuv)
98 Turridae SP
99 Urosalpinx SP
101 Gastropoda SP
105 Denlaliin SP A
198 Bentaliut SP E
199 Scaphopoda SP
111 Ahra aeoualis
113 Anadara transversa
114 AnodmiUa alba
115 Austins snatins
116 Annia siwlex
117 Araopecten SP
119 Cardiidae SP (Juv)
12ft Chime cancellata
121 Chione inUpumirea
123 CorbuU contrscta
125 CrawineLls lunuUU
126 Crassinella SF
127 Craswstm vuiiiuca
123 DlpIodonU piinctaU
129 Eonax tesssiaras
131 Dosinia discus
132 Geulensia SP
133 Gonldia cerina
135 LiMa snanlus
137 HacroMllisla taculaU
133 Kacrocallisla niiijosa
140 Hactridae sp (Juv)
141 todiolus atericanus
143 nusculu* laleralis
144 HuscuUs SP ( Juv)
145 IteelU plawlala
148 Nuculana concentrica
149 Parana subovaU
15ft Pholadiiiae SP
151 Pilar SMPSOIU
154 Raela plicatella
155 Seiele SP
156 Solewa vslut
157 Soleisa occidental!?
158 Sol™ viridis
159 SPisula solidissiM siiilis
169 Tellidora cristata
161 Tellina probina
162 TelliM lenella
163 Teliina versicolor
164 Teliina SP
169 Varicorbula operculaU
17ft Veneridae SP (Juv)
173 Bivslvia SP (juv)
176 Olisodiaela SPP
178 Mlaortiaws verrilli
179 AiPharelidae SP (Juv)
189 AlPharetidae SP A
181 Awharelidae SF t
102 AtPhinotidae SP
1A
ft
9
9
9
ft
t
ft
4
9
1
3
3
5
ft
9
ft
9
1
ft
9
ft
ft
ft
1
9
11
ft
9
ft
ft
0
2
0
9
9
9
0
9
9
9
9
9
9
3
9
ft
0
ft
10
5
9
t
9
4
13
ft
ft
9
ft
0
IB 1C
ft ft
9 ft
ft ft
t ft
1 9
9 9
ft 9
9 1ft
ft 3
ft 9
9 t
9 10
1 1
9 5
0 ft
9 9
g «
9 ft
ft 1
9 9
ft ft
ft ft
9 ft
3 9
9 0
9 0
9 2
9 9
ft ft
3 9
ft ft
0 9
9 9
9 2
9 9
ft 6
9 0
9 9
9 1
9 ft
1 ft
9 17
ft 9
9 0
1 9
9 9
3 ft
1 5
ft 9
9 9
9 24
1 9
15 14
9 2
9 9
9 9
9 ft
9 ft
ID
ft
0
0
ft
0
ft
0
1
ft
ft
t
5
ft
ft
ft
ft
9
ft
ft
9
ft
9
9
0
t
9
ft
9
0
ft
ft
9
ft
0
0
9
ft
ft
t
ft
ft
ft
ft
9
ft
ft
51
6
9
9
3
9
1
9
9
9
ft
ft
IE 1C
ft ft
ft 9
1 1
ft 1
9 t
ft t
ft 1
1 0
ft 9
ft ft
ft ft
32 42
ft ft
« ft
ft ft
ft ft
0 ft
ft ft
9 9
ft ft
9 9
ft t
ft 1
ft ft
1 ft
ft ft
ft ft
9 ft
ft ft
9 9
9 9
3 ft
9 9
0 9
0 ft
9 1
ft 6
9 0
9 9
9 9
ft ft
9 9
ft ft
ft ft
1 ft
18 12
ft ft
ft 9
4 ft
ft
3
1
ft
9
ft
ft
Stati
11 3A
t
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
g g
ft ft
o g
g g
ft ft
10 5
ft ft
« ft
0 ft
9 t
« ft
« ft
« ft
ft i
ft ft
ft ft
0 1
0 ft
3 ft
0 ft
g o
ft ft
« ft
ft ft
ft 9
9 9
9 9
9 6
9 ft
0 ft
17 0
9 ft
9 ft
9 ft
ft 0
9 9
9 1
9 ft
1 ft
ft 26
ft 85
4 ft
2 1
ft ft
8 9
9 9
ft ft
9 6
It 0
9 9
ons
3B 3C
0 ft
ft ft
ft ft
t ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft 0
ft ft
g g
0 ft
» ft
ft ft
a «
ft ft
ft 9
9 «
g g
t ft
g g
ft 9
0 ft
g >
« g
ft ft
0 9
ft 9
0 2
ft 9
9 9
ft 9
ft 9
0 9
ft 0
9 ft
ft ft
ft 9
ft ft
ft 9
9 ft
9 9
ft ft
0 ft
ft ft
34 43
9 9
9 0
0 9
ft 9
ft 9
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
t 0
ft 9
3 't 3 "
9
ft
ft
g
1
g
2
t
0
g
g
5
g
< g
g 3
ft 200
» g
I 4
g g
g 2
g 4
1 12
g i
g i
2 ft
ft ft
t ft
ft 0
ft g
9 «
ft 0
i ft
ft 2
ft ft
ft ft
t ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft 9
10 3
t ft
14 6
0 ft
33 359
ft 0
ft ft
9 3
ft 1
ft ft
10 11 5 A
ft ft ft
g g
ft g
< ft
ft t
ft «
ft «
t »
2 ft
g g
g g
4 g
6 ft
2 ft
« «
3 g
7 ft
> 0
g g
g g
g ft ft
ft i
< ft
g g
g ft
> ft
ft t
9 ft
9 ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft «
ft ft
9 ft
g ft
g g
« «
ft t
ft »
ft 10
1 0
ft 4
ft »
102 4 ft
ft ft
ft ft
0 9
0 1 ft
,B
ft
g
g
«
ft
ft
«
g
g
13
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
ft
g
g
ft
g
g
g
ft
g
ft
g
g
g
g
g
g
9
i
ft
e
9
12
0
ft
4
ft
1
ft
ft
9
0
9
1C 5 1>
ft 0
ft ft
ft ft
1 ft
ft ft
ft t
ft ft
g g
g g
2 1
0 ft
9 ft
g g
g ft
ft ft
« ft
4 ft
ft ft
ft t
i ft
< «
ft i
ft g
ft i
ft «
0 ft
« i
« ft
ft »
ft 9
ft 0
ft ft
o g
ft t
« , «
0 ft
ft 9
g g
g g
9 ft
9
s
ft
i
9
5
ft
0
2
1
ft
ft 9
ft ft
0 0
I) 0
? 9 0
990
g g g
9 9 9
g g 9
t ft ft
1 ft ft
ft ft 0
9 ft ft
ft t ft
10 I 12
ft ft ft
ft 1 ft
ft 2
9 ft
ft ft
ft 9
9 9
ft 9
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
t 9
9 9
6 ft
ft ft
ft ft
0 0
ft 9
ft 1
9 9
9 9
9 ft
ft 9
ft 9
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft ft
ft ft ft
ft 9 ft
9 9 9
999
ft ft 2
2 ft 9
9 9 ft
9 ft 9
9 ft 1
ft 1 0
6 2 2
9 9 9
9 0 1
990
a 1 fi
too
                                                                                                                                                                                 Total
   2
   1
   1
   2
   27
   4
   1
   6
   i
  149
   2
   6
   2
   1
   t
   7
   5
  291
   4
   >
   6
   1
  18
   1
  1ft
  21
   2
   1
   1
   1
   3
   3
   ^
   £.
   6
   i
  11
  23
  2
  2
  i
  22
  1
  1
  2
  1
 69
2W
 86
  4
 74
  7
O2
  4
  1
  3
  t
  1

-------
  Appendix  Table  10.3.    Continued.   Composite  Species  List, by  Station  for  the  October,   1980  Benthic  Sampling.

                     Taxa                                                                Stations
                183 Ancistrogjllis harlianae
                184 AnmtrosKllis Jonesi
                186 Apoprionospio ptidiaea
                187 Arabella iricolor  •
                188 Archiannelida SP
                139 Aricidea cerrulii
                190 Aricidea fauveli
                191 Aricidea fraailis
                192 Aricidea SP
                193 Aricidea uassi
                194 Aria'ndia aSilis
                194 fteMndia Mills
                195 ftr'ijiidis laculala
                196 te'achis carolinae
                197 Asscbis SP
                198 AxiolheUa lucosa
                200 Bracichraasschis aiericana
                201 Brania clavala
                202 Brania SP
                203 Brania wUfleeUnsis
                204 CapileUa capilala
                205 fauileriella alala
                206 Caulleriella SP
                208 Ceralonereis lirabilis
                209 Chaetoplerus variopedalus
00
212 Qione SP
211 ChrysopeUlut s?
213 CirraUilidae SP 
>
)
)
)
)
!



























2
















t 5
3
0
0
3









































1

i
0
0
0
0
0
ft
0
1
A 5B 5C SO •>
) 1 0 0
(000
2005
000
0 0 0
0 0 ft
0 ft 0
1 ft 0
000
0 ft ft
ft ft ft
ft 1 t
000
ooo
0 1 0
ft 0 ft
ft ft ft
ft ft 0
ft ft ft
0 0 ft
ft ft ft
9 ft 2
000
0 ft ft
ft 0 0
0 3 1
000
0 ft 0
ft ft 0
ft 0 0
000
ft ft 0
On A
V V
0 0 1
000
OA A
V V
000
0 ft 0
0 ft i)
0 ft ft
000
000
000
ft ft 0
ft 0 0
000
0 0 ft
0 1 0
9 1 2
000
040
0 ft 0
000
ft 0 0
ft 3 0
0 0 ft
It V 1
002
1 0 1
E •>(
1)
9









61


3







1












1










1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
'• •>! Total
0 i4
) 0 61
> 0 117
0 4
> 0 119
> 10 14
i! 1 3
i 0 85
>A |O
V IT
) 0 2
) 0 3ft
9 ft 3ft
9 5 285
9 0 2
1 0 2
t 2 126
9 0 1
1 0 19
» 0 2
I 0 69
) 0 2
) 0 1
1 0 84
) ft 1
) ft 14
) t 1
) 0 10
) 0 U
0 1
0
0
0
0
ft
0
0
0 41
0 16
0 16
ft 3
ft 47
0 2
0 15
0 1
0 249
ft 33
0 14
0 20
0 21
0 18
0 169
0 1
0 1
ft 6
0 6
i n
9 3
0 M

-------
Appendix  Table  1O.3.     Continued.  Composite  Species  List  by  Station  for  the  October,  1980  Benthic  Sampling.
                Taxa
                                                                                      S I a L i o n H
vo
257 Uibrinereis SP
258 Lasidice SP
259 Hafelona pacifica
260 Haftluia peUibooeae
241 Ha&lona rioja
242 Haaelotii SP A
245 Haldanidae SP
244 HalMrenia SP
247 Na-phasa SP
248 ttedioiasUs californiensis
26? NeteloMa biocuUtui
270 hehnna taculala
271 Hexieulepis niter i
272 NinusPio cirriferi
273 Hwioctwle SP
275 Nephlss picU
277 Hereis arenoaxtonta
278 Hereis succinea
27? Hereis SP
280 Nerinides SF
2S1 Holhria w
282 Hotmaslus  aiericanus
283 HoloiasUis henpodus
284 Noloisslus lalericeus
285 Odontossllis  fulserens
284 OnupKis emits oculaU
287 Qnuphis nebulosa
288 OnuPhis pallidaU
28? OnuFhis SP
290 Ophelia cfenUciilaU
291 dPhelia SP
 292 Ophelina SP
 293 OHenia fusiforiis
 295 Parsdoneis Iwa
 274 PBrsnaitis polsnoides
 299 Parapionossllis lonSicirraU
 2?? Psrawionospio pjnnata
 300 Pectiitaria souldii
 301 Pherusa SP
 302 Phallodoce arenae
             305 Pisione rnota
             304 Pisla SP
             307 Podarte obscura
             308 Poecilochaetus jotasoni
             30? Pohcirms carolinensis
             310 Polscirrus SP
             312 Poladwa  socialis
             313 Poladora  SP
             317 Polwioidea SP D
             318 Prionosfio crislaU
             321 ProtodorviUea Kefersliini
             322 Protodorvillea SP A
             324 Pseudoeur-fthoe atoitoa
             325 Pseudoralwlora SP
             326 Sabellaridae SP
             327 Satellitee SP ft
             32? Scbistoieriiuos lansicorniis
             130 Schistowinlos peclinaU
             332 Scolelepis smiaiata
1A IB
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
7 12
0 0
0 1
0 0
21 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
34 45
0 0
0 0
6 14
0 0
0 0
0 C
0 1
0 1
0 1
o ;
0 (
0 (
0 (
0 1
0 I
0 (
1 I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16




1





1C ID
5 0
1A
u
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 29
19 0
0 0
44 a
0 0
0 0
0 0
35 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 1
0 0

2 0
20 4
0 0
0 0
11 2
1 0
0 0
0 1
0 1
3 106
0 0
4 0
0 5
0 0
0 0
ft 17
) 0 0
) 0 0
) 1 6
4 4
0 0
0 0
A A
V V
0 0
1 20
1 0 1
1 3 0
1 0 0
& 0 1
0 1 ?
9 0 0
0 D 0
0 1 0
2 65 1
0 2 0
0 0 0
D 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 0
IE 1G
1 0
OJV
V
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
7 2
0 0
0 0
2 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 4

0 0
1 4
0 0
0 0
15 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 A
.16 0
3 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
2 0
0 0
0 0
A A
V V
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 0
0 1
0 0
1 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
11
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0












































0
0
0
3A 3D
0 0
Oft
U
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

0 0
7 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
A A
V V
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
18 7
0 1
0 0
3 0
0 0
0 0
I 0
OA
u
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
71 0
0 0
o a
0 0
0 0
0 0
'it: .3D
0 0
OK
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 7
0 0
0 0
0 0
6 3
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 ft
0 27
0 28
0 0
0 27
0 0
0 0
0 0
A A
" 11
0 0
0 0
1 3
0 0
0 4
0 0
31 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
OA
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 o
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
« 3
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
5
5
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
4
25
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
?
0
2
0
15
2
0
3C






















0
0
0
0
0 I
0 1
0,
1
0 1
0
2 <
1 1
0 <
? 1(
0
0
0
0








'

1







0
31 5A SB
9 0 0
OA A
V U
> 0 0
1 0 0
) 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 1
I 1 6
9 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 0
9 0 0
2 1 0
9 0 0
1 0 3
1 0 0
) 0 0
1 0 0
> 0 0
1 10 15
) 0 0
) 0 0
1 0 0
I ft 0
) 0 0
I 0 0
) 315 426
) 2 1
1 0 0
I 0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
ft 0
2 1
0 0
0 0
0 D
ft 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 ft
0 0
0 ft
0 0
ft 1
ft ft
0 0
1 (1
sc
0
0
0
0
0
0
ft
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
ft
0
3?
.0
0
1
0
0
0
144
0
ft
ft
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
ft
0
0
0
0
ft
1
0
0
ft
0
ft
0
0
ft
(1
0
S
51) SK 5C 51
0 0 ft
OA A
V V
0 0 9
000
0 0 1
0 ft ft
0010
0000
0000
0651
0040
0400
2 3 ft I
0 0 0 ft
ft 0 0 ft
ft 0 0 ft
ft ft 0 ft
ft 0 0 0
0 ft 0 0
ft 0 t 0
ft 0 0 0
0000
3340
0 0 ft ft
0101
10 1 8 3
ft D 0 1
0000
0000
ft 0 4 0
ft 1 0 ft
0010
0 0
1 0
5 ft
0 0
0 0
0 ft
0 ft
ft 0
ft 0
0 0
0 3
0 0
5 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 ft
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 00
0 0 0
:•? i? u )
Total
4
o
3
1
2
1
34
1?
2
176
7
6
18
71
8
5
2
8
2
4
1
2
218
30
2
103
2
1
1
|
1015
8
20
31
5
26
82
1
2
16
10
1
4
3
1
33
1
6
2
24
19
12
3
15
161
5
3
IA

ft

-------
  Appendix  Table  10.3.    Continued.  Composite Species  List  by Station  for  the October,  1980  Benthic  Sampling,
U1
o
o
 333 Scoloplos rubra
 334 Scoloplos SP (Juv)
 335 Serpula verticui
 336 Sermlidae SP t,
 33? SUalion SP 8
 340 Sisalionidae SP
 341 SiSaibrs bassi
 343 SiSaibra lentaculata
 345 Spin peltiboneae
 346 SpiochaetopUriis
 348 Spiophanes boitiax
 349 SLeiunonerels sp
 350 Sitwnelais boa
 351 SUiHielais SP
 352 Streplossllis arenas
 353 Ssllidae SP H
 358 Ssllidae SP H
 359 Ssllis alteriurta
 340 Ssllis cornuU
 341 Ssllis S-acillis
 344 Ssneliis albini
 365 Tharux annulosus
 344 Tharyx SP
 347 Thelepus selosus
 348 Travisia hobsonae
 349 Travisia et parva
 371 Trichobranchus Si
 372 Polychaeta
 376 Pscnosonida
 380 Haploralher
 381 Paraslerope pollex
 382 Sarsiella zoslericols
 383 Sarsiella SP
 384 Ostracoda
 385 Ostracoda
 384 Ostracoda
 387 Ostracoda
 389 Ostracoda
 390 Ostracoda
 391 Ostracoda
 393 Ostracoda
394 Ostracoda
 396Gopepoda   sp
397Copepoda   i
 400Copepoda   <
401 Copepoda
402 Copepoda
 404 Balanus SP
405 Tra-eUsidse SP
408 Cachspis posldlaU
409 Oiclaspis varians
398 Copepoda
410 Csclaspis SP A
411 Leucon awricanus
 413 QxsurosUlis siithi
 415 Cumacea sp
 414 Cumacea sp
 418 Leptochelia SP
 419 Tanaid^cea
 420 T a n a i d a c e a
1A IB 1
0 0
iv) 0 0
lar jranulosa 0 0
0 0
On
0 0
lata 10 20 3
! 0 0
i coslarui oculaU 0 0
K 00
0 0
0 0
0(1
enae 0 0
0 0
On
Q « 1
6 21 1
0 0
It 0
7 0
25 21
Oft
e 00
a 0 0
lacialis 0
i sp. A 0
0
etlPUncUla 34 28
ex 1
icols 0
32 34
sp. A 0
sp. B 1
sp. D 0
sp. F «
sp. H 00
Up. J 00
sp. K 00
p. A 00
p. B 80
p, E 00
p. F 00
ip. G 01
0 0
0 0
aU 0 0
s 2 0
,p. C 00
0 0
i 0 0
thi 1 0
>• E 001
p. F 001
0 0
> sp. B 373
i sp. c 00
C ID IE 1C 11
1020
0000
0000
0000
OA A A
0000
3100
0200
2000
0010
0000
0000
0000
0000
4000
3 4i 0 0
0000
0 85 0 0
2000
1010
On n A i
00001
1 0 0 0 (
0 0 0 0 (
0 0 0 0 (
1010
J 0 0 6
D 0 0 0
9000
» 59 37 1
1010
) 16 o o ;
0001
0001
0441
0 0 0 t
0000
0000
0000
0000
000
1000
2800
0000
0000
0000
0100
10000
10000
11001
14114
00000
3A 3B }<: 3n 3E 3C 3
) 00000
1 10000
1 00000
1 00000
00 0 3 15
v 0 9 v 0
214183
0 0 0 0 15 1
001100
000 100
000000
1 12 9 000
0 0 0 ft 0 0
000070
000040
0 0 0 & 20 i
000000
0 0 0 0 2 10'
000000
1 0 1 4 i 3
I ft ft A A 1 A
1000140
1000000
1 D 0 0 0 1 0
1000000
000000
900000
000000
000100
300000
000000
000011
006012
000000
000001
000000
000000
i 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 34 1
000000

501000
1 10 3 * 0 0
6 0 0 D 1 0 1
oooooo
0 i 1 0 0 0
2 12 4 4 0 0
0 0 0 - t 1 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 «
0002100
0 0 0 0 0 15 I
I <










0
0
1 (
i 5B sc so •>
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
010
1000
3 15 21 0
000.
2 3 2
000
0 0
0*
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 3
0 0
0 0
000
0001
000
000
0 2 0 (
0 0 2 21
1 3 0 (
0 0 0 .(
000
000
000
000
OA A
000
A ft A
000
0 0 0
0 '0 0
On ft
0 0 0 fl
o i 3 g
3 i 0 14
0000
1 0 0
000
1 0 0
000
000
0 0 v
000
0 A II 0
E SG ST Tnfal
00 3
0 0 1
0 0 1
0 4
2
0 18
0 16
1 2 106
87 144
0 4
0 13
0 1
0 22
1
0 1
0 8
2
0 34
0 120
0 3
0 1 117
00 9
00 68
00 5
0 0 4
0 0 1
00 2
0 0 1
00 400
0 0 1
0 0 1
\ 0 1 173
1 1 33
60 45
0 1 8
0 0 2
0 1 5
00 12
00 4
A A I
2 i 3
4
46
3
7
13
56
15
0 4
0 7
0 26
00 3
0 0 1
00 i
JO 56
i) 0 15

-------
Tatoie  1O . 3 .
                                                                                Speeie,
Tax a
421 Tanaidacea sp. D
423 teffiUne occulala
424 AnUwridae SP (Juv)
JTC AunUuira *3rtiifii*a
Tta HrsnuHirs •HHITIC*
428 Edotea SP
435 AcanUnhagsUrius SP
436 toelisca c.f. abdita
437 toelisca verrilli
438 Aipelisca vadorui
439 ParacaprelU SP
444 teams SP
441 Corophiu c.f. toberoiUUil
443 Corophiui SP
444 Dexatine SP
446 ErichUtonius SP
443 Leibos cf uebsUri
451 Lislriella cf barnardi
453 Honoculodes nsei
454 Tiron IropiUs
457 ParaKtopella cypris
458 Plalsischnopidae N. 4en.
461 Rhepoxynius c.f. epislonis
442 Amphipoda sp.  ft
4444
ft 4
1 4
ft 14 4 4
2444
4 5 10 5
3 17
1 3
0 4 ft 4
0 4
6 A
ft
4 0
0 ft 1
0 0
0 4
ft 0
4 15
4 0
ft 0
1 4
0 0
1






4
2
4
ft
ft 0 ft 4
0 0 (
0 0 (
0 ft i
) 5
) ft
i 4
ft ft ft ft
ft ft A A
ft 9 ft ft
0 ft 0 2
ft ft ft ft
ft 1 (
) 4
0 0 ft A
t 2 1
ft 9
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 ft
0 0
0 1
ft 0
ft ft
0 0
0 0
ft ft
0 ft
ft ft
ft 0
9 ft
ft 1
) 1
A
V
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
4
D
1
17
79
5
J
1
A
3G 31 SA
4 t ft
2 2 ft
4 A
IT A
111 V
A 13
A 4
4 117
4 ft
ft 4
ft 4
ft 1
4 t
4 ft
4 4
4 4
4 ft
ft 4
ft 1ft
4 1
4 4
«A
ft
0 23
0 172
ft ft
4 4
4 ft
4 ft
ft ft
ft ft
4 9
ft 8
ft 4
4 4
ft 1
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft 4
t ft
ft 0
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
A A
V V
ft 9
ft t
ft 9
9 9
1 9
ft 8
9 ft
4 ft
4 ft
9 1
ft ft
10 3
1 ft
9 ft
ft ft
ft ft
SB 50
ft 9
9 4
4 4
8 14
13 4
4 4
236 147
4 ft
4 ft
4 0
2 2
4 4
4 4
4 4
0 4
4 0
ft ft
1 3
1 3
4 0
««
V
12 24
93 86
ft 0
4 4
ft 0
ft 4
0 0
4 4
4 0
2 0
4 2
4 0
4 ft
ft 9
4 0
ft 0
ft ft
1 0
0 0
ft ft
ft 4
ft ft
4 0
0 9
9 0
9 0
9 ft
9 0
9 0
0 0
9 1
0 ft
9 9
9 1
4 9
9 9
9 0
9 0
5D 5F. 5G -i?
9 9 ft ft
9949
9 ft ft
A A A
v 1
ft 1
' V
) ft
1 2 9
14
ft
ft
Q
2
A
ft
ft
9
9
ft
ft
2
4
3
12
ft
4
4 0
1 3
4 «
) ft
0
1
ft
ft
0
0
ft
9
9 D
9 1
ft 2
ft 9
ft ft
ft
0
3
ft
ft
1
ft
ft 9 9 9
222*
ft ft ft ft
1 3
9 ft
ft ft
9 ft
9 ft ft ft
4 113
9 ft
ft 1
ft 0
ft 9
ft 9
ft ft
9 9
9 ft
ft 0
ft ft
9 9
ft ft
9 9
ft 9
ft 9
9 9
ft 9
9 ft
9 0
9 9
ft ft
0 0
0 0
9 «
ft 0
9 9
ft 9
9 9
1 4
0 9
1 9
9 0
« 9
9 9
1 ft
9 ft
ft ft
D 0
ft ft
0 0
9 ft
4 0
ft ft
9 ft
9 9
0 ft
0 0
9 ft
9 0
Tata 1
1
4
9
65
4
541
35
31
1
7
2
1
3
10
2
24
78
9
10
75
383
3
1
13
25
2
2?
26
17
t,
5
1
119
6
2
1
18
2
7
2
3
2
1
3
1
3
15

4
I
2
18
195
6
3
i


-------
                Taxa
                                                                Stations
o
NJ

522 Grapsidae SP (Juv)
525 ParUienopidae SP
524 Pinnixa chacei
527 Pinnixa chaetoplerana
528 Pinnixa K, SP A
529 Pinnixa relinens
532 PinnoUwridae SF (Juv)
533 Poloosx Sibbesi
535 Portiinus iibbesii
538 Dendrochirolida SP
539 Leptossinpata SP
54ft Hololhuroidea SP A
541 HoloUwoidea SP B
543 Erhinocardiiu flsvescens
544 Encope (ichelipi
545 Hellila miinouiesperforaU
544felliU SP(JUV)
550 AstroPMtin SF
553 ta>hiiira Soniodes
554 Her»iPholis elonSats
555 NicroPholis alra
5S4 Xicropholis graciliiia
558 HicroPhoiis saustaU
559 XicroPholis SP (Juv)
541 QphioPhraAus pulcher
•?H fKiliTnfihnfftMir ufff*jfufc3fli
•HW UrlUhUrlH B3HU9 VW UCW1A

544 Awhiuridae SP (Juv)
568 Qphiuroiitea SP
570 HeiichorrfaU SP
572 Branchioslua cariteau
574 IfoUulidae SP
575 ftscidiacea SP t
574 Ascidiacea SP D
TOTALS !
TOTAL SPP. .!
1A IB
ft ft
ft ft
ft t
3 0
4 0
0 11
ft ft
2 ft
ft t
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft 4
ft ft
9 ft'
0 1
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
1 ft
ft ft
ft ft
10 ft
ft 0
5 12
14 ft
t 0
ft 9
2 3
4 1
ft 8
ft 1
895 597
89 72
1C ID
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft 1
3 3
ft 0
ft 0
t t
0 1
1 ft
ft ft
6 ft
ft ft
ft »
ft ft
1 0
ft «
i a
ft ft
ft 0
ft 0
»»
0
9 9
24 1
ft ft
ft 4
t ft
0 ft
2 445
9 ft
ft ft
947 1487
9» 79
IE
ft
0
ft
0
ft
9
2
0
9
0
ft
9
1
0
0
5
ft
ft
ft
ft
0
ft
ft
ft
0
0
ft
0
ft
7
ft
ft
554
54
1G 11
ft t
ft 0
ft 0
0 ft
D ft
ft
4
ft
ft
9
ft
ft
ft ft
1 9
ft 0
9 9
9 9
ft ft
ft t
9 9
ft ft
2 0
9 9
Ori
0
A ft
4 ft
ft ft
ft 4
0 ft
ft 9
18 3
ft 9
9 ft
244 159
49 4ft
3A
ft
9
2
ft
3
ft
ft
ft
1
t
ft
ft
ft
0
ft
0
ft
ft
ft
ft
1
1
ft
ft
2
ft
5
ft
7
4
ft
ft
439
58
38 3C 11) '»!'. 1C. 31 SA 5B SC
0 \,
2 ft t
0 0 ft 2 0
ft 2 ft 2
ft ft
ft 4
0 0
0 0
ft 0
0 0
ft a
0 0
0 ft
ft ft
ft ft
0 ft
ft ft
ft , 0 (
ft
11
2






a
ft
0
ft
) ft
ft 0 0 0
0000
9 0 ft 0
0 ft ft 0
0 1 ft ft
0 3 0 ft 0
ft ft ft 2 9
ft ft 2 0 ft
ft 0 1
ft 4
25 26 ft 4 7
0 ft ft ft 2
7 38 5 ft ft
ft ft ft
ft ft 0
ft ft 0
ft ft 0
1ft 4 ft
9 1 0
ft 0 3
900
ft ft ft
9 a a
ft ft 0
0 ft 0
ft 0 ft
ft ft 0
too
5ft 27 54
ft 0 0
too
ft ft ft
ft ft 0
ft 0 0
ft 0 0
ft t 1
OA A
V V
too
5 0 7
t ft ft
1 1 0
t ft ft
ft 9 9
ft ft 34 94 32 4» 434 513 493
001000000
0 0 ft 1 ft. 0 0 0 0
00 ft' 000000
445 279 559
28 42 75
3123 1345 789 1474 1452 1995
117 44 59 45 44 54
so
ft
0
0
ft
ft
0
ft
ft
ft
ft
0
9
0






ft
ft
ft
0
t
1
ft
9
0
ft
5
o
ft
ft
143
39
5 R S G
0 0
ft 0
0 0
0 0
2 ft
ft 1
t ft
0 ft
0 ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft
ft
ft
0
ft
ft
ft
ft
t
9
0 ft
t 0
OA
V
t
1
9
3
9
ft
147
5
ft ft
ft ft
394 459
54 ID
SI Tntal
0 3
0 2
0 4
0 8
0 42
ft 14
0 11
0 2
ft 1
0 1
ft 1
ft 2
ft 1
3 14
ft 1
6 227
0 1
ft 1
ft 4
ft 1
ft 5
ft 3
ft 4
Of A
"J
ft 2
1 47
ft 2ft
ft SI
ft 2
0 42
22 2523
ft i
» i
ft 1
0 1
353 17515
42 392

-------
  CHAPTER ELEVEN
 ARTIFICIAL REEFS
        BY
R. HARRY BLANGHET
JAMES K. CULTER
ROBERT H. YARBROUGH
SUZANNE HOFMANN AND
MARK GALLO

-------
                           INTRODUCTION

       During the past fifteen years, artificial reefs have been
methodically introduced in the marine waters of Pinellas County.
Nine of these reefs are offshore and one is in Tampa Bay? four of
the offshore reefs are within the present study area.  Three of these
reefs  (Clearwater Reef, Dunedin Reef, and Tarpon Springs Reef) are
in 7.7 to 9.2 m  (25-30 ft) of water, while one. Rube Allyn (Pinellas
No. 1) Reef, is in a depth of 15.4 m (50 ft).  Locations of the
reefs are shown on Figure 11.1.

       Artificial reefs are a firm substratum suitable for settle-
ment of marine epifauna and flora.  Both the epibiota and the shelter
provided by the reef material attract several fish species.  Some
pelagic species such as the Spanish and king mackerel, cobia, and jacks
are also attracted to prey by the high silhouette of the reef.  The
reefs thus provide recreational benefits such as sport fishing, sport
diving, and commercial fishing.  The artificial reefs off Pinellas
County do not appear to contribute to local commercial fisheries,
        ~j                        .                   i
though commercially valuable species inhibat them  (Hanni and Matthews,
1977; Pinellas County, 1979).

Description of the, Study Area
       A general description of the artificial reefs in this study
was provided in a pamphlet by Pinellas County  (1979).  A few addi-
tional notes on the reefs are listed below.

       The oldest reef in the area is Clearwater Artificial Reef.
                               i
The first materials were dropped here in 1962.  This consisted  of
custom-made concrete reef material.  Much of the material was scattered
when deposited, however, and little remains at the present site.  Most
intact material, consisting of concrete culvert, construction debris,
steel barges, and tires, was deposited  since 1973.
                                   504

-------
Figure 11.1.
Locations of Artificial Reefs:  TS, Tarpon Springs;
Dun, Dunedin; Clw, Clearwater; RA, Rube Allyn.
                                 505

-------
       Tarpon Springs Artificial Reef is in an area which also con-
tained several natural rock outcroppings.   The only reef materials
found in this survey were culvert pipes, though tires are probably
in the vicinity.

       The Dunedin Reef also consisted of culvert pipes.  Natural
reef areas are reported near both ends of the reef (Pinellas County,
1979) , but were not found by MML divers.

       Rube Allyn Artificial Reef contained steel barges, tires,
and culvert pipes.  This reef is in water nearly twice as deep
as the other three reefs.
                                   506

-------
                              METHODS

       Scuba divers surveyed the four reefs in May and October,
1980.  May dives covered only Rube Allyn Reef.  All four reefs
were covered in three days of diving in October, 1980.  All reefs
were photographed with a Nikonos II and qualitative collections
of epifauna and flora were taken by the divers in bags, and upon
return to the vessel, were preserved in plastic quart bottles in
5% formalin.  Analysis consisted of identification of the preserved
specimens to the lowest practical taxonomic level using standard
references for each group and examination of the photographic slides
taken on site with verification and notes by the divers.

       Dives were also made on natural reef areas near Tarpon
springs Artificial Reef and along the regular sampling transects.
Though no biological samples were taken during this portion of the
study, photographs of the areas were compared to the artificial
reef environment.
                                 507

-------
                              RESULTS

       Ten algae, 54 invertebrate and 11 vertebrate taxa were
recorded from photographs and preserved specimens from the four
artificial reef sites.  Occurrence of various taxa is presented in
Table 11.1.  Lack of any single species at any one site is not
considered significant as the low sampling effort probably accounts
for this.  Lack of specimens of a major group, however, may be
significant in describing differences between the reefs.  Some of
these groups were very abundant on some reefs  but not found on
others.  Such differences may parallel real differences in system
structure.

        Identifications of specimens were to the lowest practical
taxonomic level.  Many species could only be classified to higher
taxa (Phylum, Class, Order, etc.); this was particularly true of the
sponges  (Porifera), hydroids (Hydrozoa), and bryozoans  (Ectoprocta),
which were identified whenever possible.  Problematic specimens were
grouped by gross morphology; these groups could not realistically be
considered as single species due to the large degree of polymorphism
in the sponges, and the high similarity of structure of many species
in the other groups which have been reported from the Gulf of Mexico.

        Notable in the results is the lack of most algae at Rube
Allyn Reef.  Much of the culvert on the reef was only sparsely
fouled with growth, suggesting that the material examined was only
recently placed on the reef.  Even the top of the barge on this reef,
the point of highest relief, lacked the heavy growth of algae seen
at the other reef areas.  Instead, the surfaces were generally
covered with low encrusting forms, colonial hydroid colonies, and
gorgonians (whip corals).
                                    508

-------
Table  11.1.  Animals  found on artificial reefs  off  Pinellas County,
             TS = Tarpon Springs Artificial Reef; DE  =  Dunedin
             Artificial Reef; CW = Clearwater Artificial  Reef;
             RA = Rube Allyn Artificial Reef.   Number 1 represents
             animals  collected by divers; 2 indicates species
             identified from photographic slides.

„!.•,    i- ,.   ,~      i   ^                       TS     DE     CW     RA
Chlorophyta  (Green algae)
      Halimeda discoidea                              1     1
      Codium sp.                                11
      Caulerpa peltata                          1
      C_i sertularioides                         1
Rhodophyta (Red algae)
      Chondria dasyphylla                             112
      Sucheuma isiformes                        1             1,2
      Grinnellia americana                      1
      Halymenia sp.                             1
Phaeophyta (Brown algae)
      Padina vickersiae                               1
      Sargassum filipendula                     1      1,2     1,2
      Unid. algae                                     2
Pori fera (Sponges)
      Chondrilla sp.                            1
      Ircinia vamosa                                         1
      Microciona prolifera                                          1
      Verongia sp.                               1      1
      Unid. spp.                              1,2            2     1,2
Coelenerata
   Hydrozoa  (Hydroids)
      Eudendrium sp.                                         1
      Pennaridae                                                    1
      Bougainvilliidae                                              1
      Unid. spp.                                      222
   Octocorallia (Sea whips; gorgonians)
      Leptogorgia virgulata                           1/2           1,2
      Lophogorgia cf. puniacea                        2      1     1,2
      Unid. spp.                                2222
   Scleractinia (Stony corals)
      Siderastrea siderea                             1
      Cladocora arbuscula                             111
      Phyllangia americana                      1
      Manicina areolata                                      1
      Oculina robusta                           !      1
Ectoprocta (Bryozoans, moss animals)
      Bugula sp. (Brown moss animal)                  1
      Unid. spp. (Sea mat)                                   2      !
Annellida
   Polychaeta (Bristle worms)
      Nereis sp.
      Eunice websteri                                               ^
      Syllis spongicola                                             -1-
      Unid. Sabellidae  (Feather duster)         1111
                                  509

-------
Table 11.1.  Continued. Animals found on artificial reefs off Pinellas
             County, TS = Tarpon Springs Artificial Reef; DE = Dunedin
             Artificial Reef; CW = Clearwater Artificial Reef; RA =
             Rube Allyn Artificial Reef.  Number 1 represents animals
             collected by divers; 2 indicates species identified from
             photographic slides.
                                               TS     DE     CW     RA
Mollusca
   Gastropoda (Snails)
      Diastoma varium                                 1             1
      Ocenebra sp.                                           1
      Mitrella lunulata                               1             1
      Crepidula fornicata (Slipper-shell)                    1
      Thias haemostoma  (Oyster drill)          1
      Murex florifer                           1
      Triphora sp.                                                  1
      Aeolidiidae                                                   1
   Pelecypoda
      Ostrea sp.  (Oyster\                      1      1
      Petricola lapicida  (Boring clam)         1             1
      Chama congregata  (Jewel box)             1             12
      Lithophaga bisulcata  (Boring mussel)     1
      Area zebra  (Turkey wing)                 1             11
Crustacea
   Cirripedia (Barnacles)
      Balanus amphitrite                       1     1,2    1,2     2
   Amphipoda (Sea Fleas)
      Gammarus sp.                                                  1
      Cymadusa sp.                                    1
      Aoridae                                                       1
      Dexaminidae                                     1
      Caprellidae  (Skeleton  shrimp)                                 1
      Unid. spp.                                                    1
   Tanaidacea
      Unid. sp.                                                     1
   Decapoda
      Periclimenes longicaudatus                                    1
      Hippolyte zostericola  (Eel-grass  shrimp)                1
      Pagurus brevidoctylus  (Short-fingered
       hermit crab)                                                 1
      Pilummus sayi                                                 1
      Menippe mercenaria  (Stone crab)                         2
      Pseudomedaeus agassizi                                       1
      Mithrax forceps                                               1
      Pitho Iherminieri                                1
Echinodermata
   Asteroidea (Sea stars)
      Asterias forbesi                          2        ,      1
      Luidia alternata                          2              1
   Ophiuroidea (Brittle stars)
      Ophiothrix angulata                       1                     1
   Echinoidea (Urchins)
      Lytechinus variegatus  (Short-spined
       urchin)                                  1,2            1,2     2
      Arbacia punctulata  (Purple  sea urchin)                         2

                                  510

-------
Table 11.1.  continued. Animals found on artificial  reefs off
             County, TS = Tarpon Springs Artificial  Reef; DE - -----
             Artificial Reef; CW = Clearwater Artificial Reef; RA -
             Rube Allyn Artificial Reef.  Number  1 represents animals
             collected by divers; 2 indicates species  identified from
             rVh/^-hrti-rva-Klri r> ell f3f?S .
             photographic slides.
Urochordata
   Ascidiacea  (Tunicates, Sea squirts)
      Ecteinascidia turbinata                                        •••
      Didemnum sp.                              J-
      Unid. spp.                                              2
Chorda ta
   Chondrichthys
      Ginglymostoma cirratum (Nurse shark)                           2
   Teleostei
      Harengula jaguana (Scaled sardine)        2                     2
      Synodus foetens (Inshore lizard fish)                          2
      Echeneis naucrates (Shark sucker)                              2
      Chaetodipteras faber (Spadefish)                 2
      Myctoperca microlepis (Gag)               2
      Lut janus griseus (Grey snapper)           2       2
      Haemulon sp. (Grunts)                                          2
      Diplodus holbrooki (Spot- tail pinfish)    2
      Balistes capriscus (Gray triggerfish)     2
      Unid. fish                                       2             2
   Reptilia
      Caretta caretta (Loggerhead turtle)                            2
                                   511

-------
        No sponges were found on Dunedin Artificial Reef.  Several
taxa of sponges were noted on the other reefs; however, some taxa
that were observed on the natural reef were never seen on the
artificial substrates.  The absent taxa included several forms
common on natural bottom, including the loggerhead (Speciospongia
vesparia) and vase sponge (Ircinia campana).   The absence of
sponges at Dunedin Reef may be due to a combination of factors.
This reef and the Clearwater Artificial Reef were the most turbid
of the reefs on the days they were sampled.  The slow recruitment
rate of sponges, combined with the higher turbidity of the area
may explain the absence of sponges in the Dunedin Reef.  Clearwater
Reef contains older material than Dunedin, which may explain the
presence of sponges in this reef.

        Hydroids were not recorded from Tarpon Springs Artificial
Reef.  Unidentified hydroids were common on all other reefs,
including some large, obvious colonial forms.

        Gorgonians were also missing in collections from Tarpon
Springs.  At the other three reefs, two species were common in the
collections and photographs.  Specimens in many photographs were
unidentifiable, but were similar in form to the types collected.
A very different form, probably of the Plexauridae was also common
on natural reef but never seen on the artificial reefs.  Another
species was only represented by one specimen photographed on natural
substrate.  Its rarity precludes any comments on substrate preference.

        Echinoderms were absent at the Dunedin Artificial Reef.
The brittlestar Ophiothrix angulata was associated with  sponges at
other sampling sites, and the lack of sponge probably  explains its
absence at the Dunedin Reef.  Other species may have been missed
due to lack of intensive collection effort.
                                    512

-------
         Several other major groups were notably lackong on various
reefs.   Decapods were missing from Tarpon Springs Artificial Reef,
tunicates from Dunedin Reef and fishes from Clearwater Reef.  Lack
of these groups may also be attributed to a lack of intensive
collection effort.

        Relatively low numbers and variety of fishes were noted in
the present study.  Smith et al.  (1979)  provide a good description
of the fish fauna in the area.   The present study does add a few
species to the list, but none of these are especially closely
associated with the reef in terms of food or life habits.

        A loggerhead turtle,  Caretta caretta caretta, was observed
at Rube Allyn Reef in May.

        Overall,  the species recorded in the present study are
typical of those recorded elsewhere at hard bottom areas in the
Gulf of Mexico.   Fouling invertebrates were dominated by barnacles,
sponges, hydroids, soft corals,  and mollusks.  Algae were very
common on the shallower reefs;  the most conspicuous species was
Sargassum filipendulum.   A large variety of motile invertebrates
appear to utilize the area for shelter and food supply.  A variety
of fishes were recorded in the vicinity of the reefs.

        Three types of artificial substrates are present on the
reef sites studies.  The most common substrate was concrete pipe
and rubble.   Tires were present both as bundles and individually.
A metal barge at Rube Allyn Reef provided the greatest relief (about
6 m)  recorded in the area.  Tires were generally covered with silt
and a low hydroid growth with some specimens of gorgonians and
Sargassum.  The barge at Rube Allyn was covered with barnacles,
bivalve mollusks, hydroids, and encrusting sponge, with the overall
                                   513

-------
pattern again being one of low growth.  Concrete seemed the most
diverse substrate.  Sponges, barnacles, hydroids, algae and many
motile species such as urchins were common on this substrate.

        Natural rock areas were closest to the concrete substrate
in terms of fouling organisms present.  Qualitative observations
suggest a greater diversity of species occurring on the natural
substrate, but as no samples were taken, this cannot be completely
verified.  Certainly, a larger variety of gorgonians and sponges
exist on the natural substrate.  Conversely, barnacles are more
common on artificial substrates.
                                   514

-------
                             DISCUSSION

        Collections  and photographic  surveys  of four artificial
reefs off Pinellas County showed a community  not strikingly different
from other hard bottom areas of the shallow shelf (Collard and
D'Asaro, 1973).  Some variation was noticed between epifauna of
artificial reefs and nearby natural rock outcrops.   The differences
in the types of epifauna are probably due to  the relatively young
age of the artificial reefs.  Local study of  fish populations shows
that artificial reef fish communities approach  those of the natural
hard bottoms within a year  (H.M. Mathews, In;   Hanni and Mathews,
1977).  Invertebrate populations seem to take a longer  time to approach
natural hard bottom communities.  Settlement  of the first  invertebrate
larvae occurs very soon after the material is placed into  position.
True succession (as opposed to seasonal variation)  seems to occur
in five years in California (Turner et al., 1969);  the  time for
succession to occur on Florida reefs  is unknown,  but the present
study seems to indicate that it may be as long  as five  years.   The
speed with which a community becomes  established depends on substrate
type (Pearce and Chess, 1969).  These authors report tires  to be most
rapidly colonized while many species  take longer to become  established
on concrete.  In the present study, though, concrete supported  a
larger faunal biomass once it had aged.  Tires  appear to support low
growth, while the concrete substrates seem to be covered more with
large as well as small organisms.  Steel barges,  much the same  as
tires,  do not seem to support much faunal growth other  than hydroids~,
which are fairly fast growing spec ies. -The lack of: large! epifauna on
steel is probably due to corrosion slowly removing  the  colonized sub-
strate.  The reason for the relative  lack of epifauna on tires  is
unknown, but may be due to chemical inhibition  of settling of some
species by leaching of the rubber.  On at least  four  tires, some
growth of Sargassum weed and gorgonians was observed.   It is possible
that further colonization will occur  as the tires age.
                                   515

-------
        Artificial reefs differ from natural reefs in the area by
providing generally higher relief than the limestone substrate
of the natural rocks.  Relief on the natural reef areas is pro-
vided by isolated rocks and by large epifauna such as gorgonians
and sponge, especially the loggerhead and vase sponges.  Artificial
reefs provide more shelter than natural reefs, where overhangs on
some edges of the reefs provide the only overstory cover.  This
type of cover is provided in tires, culvert pipes, and inside wrecks.
This cover is apparently attractive to many reef fishes.  Landings
and biomass of food fishes are often reported two or more times
higher from artificial reefs than from natural reefs (Stroud, 1964;
Smith et al., 1979).  Since food for the fishes appears as abundant
or more abundant on natural reef areas, it seems that the utility
of artificial reefs as shelter is important in elevating faunal
biomass.

        Animals found in the present study are typical of unpolluted
hard bottom areas along the inner West Florida Shelf; they are very
similar to organisms of reef areas between the St. Marks and Ecofina
Rivers, north of the study site, which have experienced little impact
from man's activities (personal observation).  Some of the species
reported herein are sensitive to siltation, especially the sponges
and corals.  Increased turbidity in the area due to a sewage outfall
nearby would most likely displace these species.  Other species,
such as hydroids and barnacles are more tolerant to turbidity and
would be affected only under extreme and unusual conditions where
siltation would actually cover and suffocate the animals.
        The algal flora on the artificial reefs are, in general,
fairly tolerant of turbidity, but diminished light could  limit  or
curtail growth.  No estimate of tolerance limits can be made, as
ambient light levels have not been monitored on the reefs, and  limits
for most species are not well defined.
                                   516

-------
        A more sensitive area to perturbation than the artificial
reefs are the natural rock outcroppings of the area.  Their lower
relief and higher numbers of sensitive species, especially sponges,
would  increase their vulnerability to turbidity.  Smith et al. (1979)
describe an incident of low dissolved oxygen in the near bottom waters
which decimated populations on Clearwater Reef.  Video coverage of
Transect 3 shows extensive areas of hard bottom between Stations D and
G (Chapter 2).   These areas might be sensitive to turbidity from the proposed
sewage outfall.  High profile artificial reefs such as wrecks would be
relatively unaffected by bottom conditions, and attached biota might thus
be protected as would be the fishes inhabiting the area of the wreck.
                                   517

-------
                      SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

        1.  Four artificial reefs in the waters off northern Pinellas
County were surveyed by divers during this study.  Photographs
and qualitative samples of epifauna and flora were taken.

        2.  The fouling biota are similar to, but not identical to,
those of nearby natural reefs.  The artificial substrates seem to be
still undergoing succession toward communities inhabiting natural
reefs.

        3.  Three substrate types were recorded.  Concrete provides
support for attached communities exhibiting the most diversity. Steel
and tires support mostly very tolerant species, with tires seemingly
the least well colonized substrate.

        4.  Artificial reefs seem to be important in providing shelter
and congregation areas for some fish species.  More shelter is avail-
able at the artificial reefs than the natural reefs; this may explain
the reported high catches of fish off the artificial reefs.

        5.  Natural rock butcroppings have a lower profile than most
artificial reef substrates, which provide attachment area for a vast
variety of organisms.  These areas are of great ecological significance
to the study area.
                                   518

-------
                           LITERATURE CITED
Hanni, Eila A. and Heyward H. Mathews.  1977.  Benefit-cost study
         of Pinellas County artificial reefs.  Fla. Sea Grant
         Tech. Pap. No. 1, 44 p.

Pearce, J.B. and J.R. Chess.  1969.   Distribution and ecology of
         attached marine organisms.   Progress in Sport Fishing Research,
         Resource Publ. 77, pp. 20-21.

Smith, Gregory B., D.A. Hensley, and H.H. Mathews.  Comparative
         efficacy of artificial and natural Gulf of Mexico reefs
         as fish attracttants.  Fla. Dept. Nat. Res. Mar.  Res.
         Publ. 35, 7 p.

Stroud, R.H.  1964.  Reef recommendations.  Sport Fishing  Institute
         Bull.  164:4.

Turner, C.H., E.E. Ebert, and R.R. Given.  1969.   Man-made reef
         ecology-  Calif. Dept. Fish and Game Fish Bull. 146,  221 p.
                                   519

-------