Citation
Energy relationships and the productivity of Apalachicola Bay

Material Information

Title:
Energy relationships and the productivity of Apalachicola Bay
Series Title:
Technical paper - Florida Sea Grant [College]
Creator:
Livingston, Robert J
Iverson, Richard L. ( joint author )
White, David C. ( joint author )
Florida Sea Grant Program
Place of Publication:
Tallahassee Fla
Publisher:
Department of Biological Science, Department of Oceanography, Florida State University
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
iv, 437, [27] p. : ill., maps ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Estuarine ecology -- Florida -- Apalachicola Bay ( lcsh )
Estuaries -- Florida -- Apalachicola Bay ( lcsh )
Estuarine biology -- Florida -- Apalachicola Bay ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
General Note:
"Under the auspices of the Florida Sea Grant College Program, with support from the NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U. S. Dept. of Commerce, grant number 04-6-158-44055."
Funding:
This collection includes items related to Florida’s environments, ecosystems, and species. It includes the subcollections of Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit project documents, the Florida Sea Grant technical series, the Florida Geological Survey series, the Howard T. Odum Center for Wetland technical reports, and other entities devoted to the study and preservation of Florida's natural resources.
Statement of Responsibility:
Robert J. Livingston, Richard L. Iverson, David C. White.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier:
029917013 ( ALEPH )
03812730 ( OCLC )
ACF6421 ( NOTIS )

Full Text
io/
F^3 -


ENERGY RELATIONSHIPS AND THE
PRODUCTIVITY OF APALACHICOLA BAY



Robert J. Livingston1
Richard L. Iverson2
David C. White 1


Florida Sea Grant
Technical Paper


912




















ENERGY RELATIONSHIPS AND THE
PRODUCTIVITY OF APALACHICOLA BAY




Robert J. Livingston1
Richard L. Iverson2
David C. White 1









1 Department of Biological Science
Department of Oceanography
Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida


Final Report of Project R/EM-4



The information contained in this paper was developed under the
auspices of the Florida Sea Grant College Program, with support from the
NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U. S. Department of Commerce, grant number 04-
6-158-44055. This document is a Technical Paper of the State University
System of Florida Sea Grant College Program, 2001 McCarty Hall, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. Technical Papers are duplicated in
limited quantities for specialized audiences requiring rapid access to
information, which may be unedited.


June, 1976







CONTENTS


i. Summary of Results

v. Theses and Dissertations


I. Introduction


. . . . i.

. . . . V.

. . . . 1


Robert J. Livingston


II. Special Program for Ecological Science (SPECS):


Summary of Capabilities .5


Robert J. Livingston
Glenn C. Woodsum


III. Biomass


Transformations


. . . . . . 12


Robert J. Livingston
F. Graham Lewis, III
Gerard G. Kobylinski
Peter F. Sheridan
Bradford G. McLane
Bruce Purcell
Glenn C. Woodsum


IV. Physico-chemical Relationships: Sedimentology and Habitat Structure 19


Robert J. Livingston
Peter F. Sheridan
Gerard G. Kobylinski
F. Graham Lewis, III
Bradford G. McLane


V. Phytoplankton Productivity and Nutrient Analysis


. . . 67


Richard L. Iverson
Vernon B. Myers


VI. Detritus:


Micro- and Macro-particulates


. . . . 156


Robert J. Livingston
Peter F. Sheridan
F. Graham Lewis, III
Gerard G. Kobylinski


VII. Microbial Contribution to the Energy Budget of Apalachicola Bay .... .203


David C. White
R. J. Bobbie
J. S. Herron
J. D. King
Susan J. Morrison










VIII. Litter-Associated Organisms . .. .. . . .. 229

Robert J. Livingston
Peter F. Sheridan
Robert L. Howell
Kathryn G. Winter


IX. Benthic Infauna . . . . . . . 256

Bradford G. McLane
Peter F. Sheridan
Robert J. Livingston


X. Grassbed (Vallisneria Americana) Assemblages . . .. 265

Bruce Purcell
Robert J. Livingston


XI. Associations of Epibenthic Fishes and Invertebrates . ... .270

Robert J. Livingston
Peter F. Sheridan
Gerard G. Kobylinski
F. Graham Lewis, III


XII. Trophic Resource Partitioning Among Juvenile Fishes . .. 412


Peter F. Sheridan
Robert J. Livingston


XIII. Compartmental Model of the Apalachicola Bay System ..... .. In

Richard L. Iverson
Robert J. Livingston
David C. White


XIV. Application of Data to Planning and Management . . .434

Robert J. Livingston









i. Summary of Results
This report represents an integration of the results of 5 years of
study concerning short- and long-term changes in habitat structure, energy
relationships, and biotic functions of the Apalachicola Estuary.
Sediment analysis in the bay showed that seasonal variations, proximity to
the river, spatial relationships with benthic macrophytes, and upland drain-
age patterns all influenced the qualitative characteristics of the surface sediments.
There was a reduction in grain size and an increase in organic content from
the outer portions of Apalachicola Bay to the upper reaches of East Bay. While
seasonal variation of water temperature appeared relativelysstable from year
to year, there was a long-term trend toward reduced salinity which could not
be entirely explained in terms of river flow and local rainfall patterns.
Seasonal salinity levels were determined by fluctuations of the Apalachicola
River, proximity to land runoff, and local rainfall. Winter-spring flooding
of the river was associated with reductions in salinity and light transmission,
and increases in color, turbidity, and nutrients. Long-term changes in various
water quality parameters were noted, and were particularly evident in East
Bay. Spatial variability and long-term trends in major physico-chemical variables
were thus determined by river flow, local rainfall (land runoff), basin configura-
tion, and various meteorological phenomena.
Apalachicola River discharge was the primary factor controlling nutrient
concentration in the Apalachicola Estuary. Nitrates peaked during winter
periods of high river flow; phosphates increased during these periods although
maxima resulted from episodic wind-mixing of the sediments. Phytoplankton
productivity was maximal during spring months. During summer periods, phosphate
was the primary nutrient limiting phytoplankton productivity in East Bay and
Apalachicola Bay,with nitrates becomtig limiting in Apalachicola Bay with less
freqency than phosphate. Overall, temperature was a major limiting factor for
phytoplankton productivity. Phytoplankton productivity in this estuary was
higher than that in other areas along the coast, and was considered to be a
major source of organic carbon for various organisms in this area.
A survey of macrodetritus in the Bay showed that there are spatial and
temporal patterns of occurrence. During winter-spring periods of increased
river flow and upland flooding, leaf matter and wood debris predominate at stations
influenced by the river. Such matter comes from flood-plain thee associations
including various species of oak, maple, water Tupelo, river birch, sweetgum,
and cottenwood. Fall peaks of macrodetr-itus are dominated by benthic macro-
phytes such as Gracilaria foliifera, Halodule wrightii, and Ulva lactuca. The
annual bimodal distribution of macroparticulates was evident oiny during years when
river flow exceeded certain flow rates, with bay-wide (conservative)
estimates approximating 150 tons (dry weight) per month during such periods.
Microdetritus (45 p-2mm) found at the mouth of the Apalachicola River had a
similar relationship with river flow; the organic fractions (ash-free dry
weight) approximated 900 tons/month duringperiods of peak river fTow. Although
functions such as residence time flushing rates, utilization patterns, etc
remain unknown, the general relationship of detritus movement and availability
in the bay appears to be closely associated with the seasonally pulsed patterns
of river flow and flooding. Micro- and macroparticulate matter reached peak
levels only at times when riverflooding exceeded 60,000 cubic feet per second.
There was thus an association of the presence of particulate matter in the bay
with a pulsed river system and periodic flooding of upland flood,plain areas.









Preliminary estimates of the total contribution of allochthonous particulate
matter to the energy budget of the bay indicate that such detritus is compar-
able to the phytpolankton productivity as a source of energy.
Methods to assess the mass, activity, and population structure of the
estuarine detrital microflora have and are being developed. These methods
could provide data with which to initiate correlations between the activities
of these heretofore unstudied microbes and the rest of the estuarine food web.
The methods were designed to preserve the community associations and inter-
actions with as little selectFve pressure as possible. Measures of mass such
as the muramic acid level, the total phospholipid formed from H332P04, and ATP level,
correlate with the expected respiratory activity. Measures of growth
by pulse chase experiments show correlations between rates of phospholipid
synthesis, muramic acid turnover, glycolipid turnover,and saturation of the
cardiolipid precusor pool. Initial comparisons show when microbial mass and
activity increase, so do the species diversity and numbers of the detrital
benthic fauna. Comparison of types of detritus, or between pine needles and
teflon mimics of pine needles, show coordination of microbial activities
and the benthic food webs By analysis of the components of the newlyformed
lipids, it has been possible to document successional sequences on detrial
surfaces that coordinate with scanning electron micrographs. With these and
subsequently.developed methods,we hope to determine the role of microfloral
communities in the trophodynamics of the estuarine food web with speciallemphasis
on controlling external functions such as pollution.
Litter-associated organisms were surveyed in a series of field experiments.
This fauna was dominated by isopods, amphipods,and decapods. Preliminary experi-
ments indicated that macrodetritus such as leaf matter may serve as a substrate
for shelter and/or microbialiaccumulation. Numbers of individuals and species
and species richness generally increased with increases in salinity at all
stations. The allochthonous leaf matter was associated with a distinctive biota
which subsequently serves as a source of food for various dominant juvenile
fishes in the area.
The benthic infauna in the Apalachicola Bay System was surveyed for seasonal
distribution and spatial relationships of biomass, species composition, and
community struetivee. This was dominated by euryhaline and eurythermal crustaceans
(Tanaidaceans, amphipods) and polychaete worms which tend to reach peak abundance
during late winter and spring months. Many such species, as selective and non-
si&ective deposit feeders, feed on fine detrital matter and, in turn, are fed upon
by predacious polychaetes, crustaceans, and benthic fishes. There were consider-
able differeneesein biomass distribution in the bay with a range from 0.065 to
56.378 g (Ash-free dry weight)/ m2. The highest such values were found off St.
George Island and portions of East Bay in areas associated with grassbeds. Grass-
bed (Vallisneria americana) productivity was estimated from 322 to 353 g/m2/yr
with standing crops between 500-600 g/mm peaking during summer and fall months.
Die-offs of such grasses occurred during fall periods of reduced water temperature,
and were associated with fall peaks of secondary productivity in the bay. Certain
East Bay grassbeds were dominated by the gastropod, Neritina reclivata. Other
organisms such as crustaceans and fishes were also represented. Peak animal
biomass occurred during spring (March-May) and late fall (November-December) periods,
and such changes seemed to be timed in a general way with spring peaks of epi-
benthic organisms and fall increases in macrophyte-derived detritus.
Long-term (5 year) trends of epibenthic fishes and invertebrates were noted.
After the first year, there were regular seasonal patterns of fish abundance,
species representation, and community structure. There was a regular succession





iii.


of dominant fishes each year (late winter-spring: Micropogon undulatus, Leiostomus
xanthurus; summer-fall: Cynoscion arenarius; late fall: Anchoa mitchilli). Three
of 4 dominant fish associations were strongly affected by time pulses of river
flow. Generally, fish numbers and biomass peaked in spring and fall. During
the five-year study period, total numbers of fishes reached a low point during
the third year of sampling (3/74-2/75). Invertebrate numbers and biomass usually
peaked during spring and fall months. In this case, reduced numbers occurred
during the third and fourth years of sampling (3/74-2/76).
Resource (food) partitioning of the dominant juvenile fishes of the
Apalachicola Estuary was studied. Anchoa mitchilli fed primarily on copepods
(Acartia sp.) during spring and summer. During fall and winter periods,
anchovies switched from copepods to epibenthic and benthic organsims such as
mysids and insect larvae. Polychaetes formed the basis of the diet of Micropogon
undulatus which peaked during winter periods. This species fed primarily on
infauna, detritus, shrimp, and juvenile fishes. Leiostomus xanthurus fed on a
variety of items including harpacticoid copepods, polychaetes, insect larvae, and
bivalves. Cynoscion arenarius fed primarily on fishes (including Anchoa mitchilli)
and mysids. A size class analysis indicated trends in intraspecific trophic
relationships within a temporal and spatial context. There was efficient parti-
tioning of food resources in the Apalachicola Estuary with each of the dominant
species participating in a different trophic spectrum. The various biotic com-
ponents were linked to a seasonal succession of energy inputs whith were related
to river flow, detritus influxes, phytoplankton blooms, and benthic macrophyte
die-offs. The seasonal river flow pattern,as a major determinant of the physic6-
chemical environment of the bay, contributed to the seasonal succession of
trophic phenomena. These data tend to clarify various aspects of the distinct
temporal succession of biota in the Apalachicola Estuary as a function of energy
input and physico-chemical limiting functions.
The scientific data generated from this project have been used for various
planning and management decisions. This has involved associated projects with
Franklin County officials, state and federal agencies, and private concerns
such as pulp mill interests and local developers. Personnel of this project have
continued to work with the Florida agencies toward identification of environmentally
sensitive portions of the system. This has resulted in the $8 million purchase
of wetlands along the Lower-Apalachicola Valley. More than 28,000 acres have
been purchased to date, and Sea Grant information has also been used in purchases
of thousands of acres of St. George Island and Little St. George Island.
Sea Grant personnel were also involved in the generatitonof a published
compendium of data on the entire Apalachicola Valley to serve as a basis for
further management decisions in this area. In addition, contributions were made
to local planning functions including D.R.I. ev&auations, water hyacinth control
programs, public educational programs, etc. Variouseducational applications of
the data base through newspaper articles and public meetings allowed a translation
of key scientific concepts for publicconsumption. In addition, direct inter-
actions have been made with various federal agencies (Environmental Protection
Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Army Corps of Engineers).
This has resulted in the current evaluation by the Office of Coastal Zone Management
for designation of the Apalachicola Estuary as an Estuarine Sanctuary. Eventually,
through local, state, and federal interactions, a comprehensive plan for the
Apalachicola Valley may be developed which can serve as a model for future wet-
lands planning in other drainage systems. A six county planning group has been
established which, with advice from various state agencies, will attempt to
develop a set of guidelines for local planning (Zoning ordinances, etc.).




IV.






Overall, this Sea Grant project could serve as a catalyst for a basin-wide
planning program which would permit orderly development of the Apalachicola
Valley while protecting the important natural resources of this area.









V. THESES AND DISSERTATIONS


1. Bechtold, R.E. 1976. A kinetic analysis of leaf litter-associated
microbial activity in Apalachicola Bay. Master's Thesis, Florida
State University. (White)

2. Bobbie, R.J. 1976. Esterase activities and oxygen uptake of the
endogenous microflora associated with three types of litter in
a North Florida estuary. Master's Thesis, Florida State Univer-
sity. (White)

3. Duncan, James. 1977. Short-term impact of upland clear-cutting
activities on assemblages of epibenthic fishes and invertebrates
in East Bay. Master's Thesis, Florida State University.
(Livingston)

4. aughlin, Roger A. 1976. Avoidance of blue crabs (Callinectes
sapidus) to storm water runoff. Master's Thesis, Florida
State University. (Livingston)

5. McLane, Bradford G. 1977. Effects of clear-cutting on the benthic
infauna of the Apalachicola Estuary. Master's Thesis, Florida
State University. (Livingston)

6. Myers, Vernon B. 1977. Aspects of nutrient limitation of phyto-
plankton productivity in the Apalachicola Bay System. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Florida State University. (Iverson)

7. Purcell, Bruce. 1977. Effects of stornwater runoff on grassbed
assemblages in East Bay. Master's Thesis, Florida State Univer-
sity. (Livingston)

8. Sheridan, Peter F. 1977. Trophic relationships in the dominant
juvenile fishes in the Apalachicola Bay System. Ph.D. Disserta-
tion, Florida State University. (Livingston)









INTRODUCTION


There is an established base of published information on the Apalachicola

Bay System which will provide the background for this report. Most of the

published data in the Apalachicola Drainage System (taken prior to this project)

has been reviewed by Livingston et al. (1974). Methods of sampling, together

with basic fluctuations of epibenthic fishes and invertebrates in the Apalachi-

cola estuary have been outlined by Livingston (1976). The temporal progression of

dominant epibenthic populations has been described by Livingston et al. (1976).

The biological associations of this system have been analyzed with respect to

biomonitoring procedures (Livingston, 1976) and specific responses of individual

populations to key physico-chemical functions (Livingston et al, 1976). A com-

plete list of species taken by various sampling procedures (including benthic

infauna, detritus associated organisms, epibenthic fishes and invertebrates, etc.)

has been published (Livingston et al., 1977). This includes analyses of major

physico-chemical relationships, fluxes of detritus, and a comparison of the

natural history of dominant populations of organisms in the Apalachicola estuary

with that in other coastal systems of the Gulf of Mexico (Livingston et al., 1977).

Livingston et al. (in press) have described long-term changes in pesticide

levels and fish associationsin the Apalachicola estuary. Myers and Iverson

(1977) have described aspects of nutrient limitation of phytoplankton produc-

tivity in the Apalachicola estuary. Oesterling (1976, 1977) has indicated general

patterns of blue crab migration and the spawning potential for this species

in the Apalachicola Bay region. Supporting data concerning other biological

associations in the entire Apalachicola Valley are also available (Livingston

and Joyce, 1977). Overall, there is a rapidly growing base of published infor-

mation concerning the physico-chemical and biological relationships in the









Apalachicola Drainage System.

The published data have been supplemented by various unpublished studies

and reports concerning a broad range of subjects relevent to the Apalachicola

region. This includes the following documents:

"Survey: Chattahoochee-Flint-Apalachicola River System" (Florida
State Board of Health, 1962)

"A management program for the oyster resource in Apalachicola
Bay, Florida" (C.E. Rockwood et al., 1973)

"Strategy for change: an interim plan for the northwest Florida
region" (RMBR Planning/Design group, 1973: for the Northwest
Florida Development Council)

"Draft Environmental Statement. Lake Seminole and Jim Woodruff
Lock and Dam, Alabama, Florida and Georgia. Operation and Main-
tenance." (U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile, Alabama, 1975)

"Apalachicola River Basin Water Quality Management Plan" (Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, 1975)

"Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of various
pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application to
the management of the Apalachicola Bay System. (R. J. Livingston
and N. P. Thompson: Final report for Florida Sea Grant, 1975)

"Progress Report for Florida Sea Grant: Energy Relationships and
the Productivity of Apalachicola Bay." (R. J. Livingston, R. L.
Iverson, and D. C. White: Florida State University, 1976)

TThe Apalachicola River and Bay System, A Florida Resource" (Florida
Department of Administration; Division of State Planning, 1976)

"Final Environmental Statement. Apalachicola-Chattahoochee, and Flint
Rivers, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia (Operation and Maintenance)"
(U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile, Alabama, 1976)

"Proposal to Study the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River System
and Apalachicola Bay" (Northwest Florida Water Management District,
1976)

"A study on the effects of maintenance dredging on selected ecological
parameters in the Gulf intracoastal waterway, Apalachicola Bay, Florida"
(U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile, Alabama)

According to the National Estuary Study (Vol. 3, Fish and Wildlife Service,

U.S. Department of the Interior, 1970), the total area of the Apalachicola Bay

System is 535,600,000 m2 (131,840 acres) of which 7% is occupied by submerged










vegetation (38,106,000 m2 or 9,380 acres) and about 14% is emergent (marsh)

vegetation (85,000,000 m2 or 21,300 acres). Oyster beds account for about

24,374,840 m2 or 4.6% of the total bay (Rockwood et al., 1973). Mean depth

approximates 2.7 m while the total volume is about 1,446,120,000 m3. This

project was designed to study various aspects of the energy system in the

Apalachicola Estuary. The following objectives were part of the program.

1. Determination of the river derived input of organic plant
nutrients, and particulate and dissolved organic carbon into the
bay system.

2. Analysis of phytoplankton assemblages and phytoplankton
productivity of the Apalachicola Bay System.

3. Determination of the role of phytoplankton productivity
in the overall energy budget of the bay, including nutrient
limitation studies of key driving functions.

4. Analyses of the significance, source, and role of alloch-
thonous and autochtonous forms of detritus in the Bay including a
preliminary evaluation of the role of microorganisms in
detrital breakdown and energy transfer.

5. Continuation of the application of scientific data for the
development of a management program for the Apalachicola Drainage
System.

As an outgrowth of the original program, a long-term impact analysis is

being carried out to determine the potential influence of clearcutting

practices in the Tate's Hell Swamp on the Apalachicola Bay System. Prelimi-

nary observations will be made concerning these data preparatory to the com-

pletion of the first stage of this project in December, 1977. In some instances,

data analysis will be carried out within the context of the full 5-year data

base which dates back to March, 1972.


This report represents a preliminary analysis of the data base. This will

be followed by a more sophisticated review of the data base for publication in a

series of scientific papers.










LITERATURE CITED


Livingston, R. J. 1976. Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of
organisms in a north Florida estuary: sampling strategy,
structure, and species diversity. Est. Coast. Mar. Sci.


estuarine
community
4: 373-400.


. 1976. Time as a factor in environmental sampling programs: diurnal
and seasonal fluctuations of estuarine and coastal populations and
communities. Invited paper. Symposium on the Biological Monitoring of
Water Ecosystems (ed. J. Cairns, Jr.) ASTM STP 607: 212-234.


Livingston,
1974.
Biota,


R. J., R. L. Iverson, R. H. Estabrook,
Major features of the Apalachicola Bay
and Resource Management. Florida Sci.


V. E. Keys, J. Taylor, Jr.
System: Physiography,
37(4): 245-271.


Livingston, R. J., G. Kobylinski, F. G. Lewis, III, and P. Sheridan. 1976.
Analysis of long-term fluctuations of estuarine fish and invertebrate
populations in Apalachicola Bay. Fish. Bull. 72(2): 311-321.

Livingston, R. J. et al. (in press). The Biota of the Apalachicola Bay
System: Functional Relationships. In, Proceedings of the Conference
on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Florida Marine Research Publica-
tions, in press (eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.)


Livingston, R. J. (in
Drainage System.
and E. A. Joyce,


press). Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola
Fla. Mar. Res. Publ., in press (eds. R. J. Livingston
Jr.)


Myers, V. B. and R. L. Iverson. (in press). Aspects of Nutrient Limitation
of Phytoplankton Productivity in the Apalachicola Bay System. In,
Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Fla.
Mar. Res. Publ., in press (eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.)

Oesterling, M. J. 1976. Reproduction, Growth, and Migration of Blue Crabs
along Florida's Gulf Coast. Florida Sea Grant Publ. 19 pp.

Oesterling, M. J. and G. L. Evink. (in press). Relationship Between Florida's
Blue Crab Population and Apalachicola Bay. In, Proceedings of the Confer-
ence on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ., in press
(eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.).









II. Special Program for Ecological Science (SPECS): Summary of Capabilities






I. Data Storage

A. Physical-chemical data (by area, station, date, time of day, and
depth)
Dissolved oxygen, color, turbidity, Secchi disk depth,
temperature, salinity, pH, river flow, rainfall, bottom type
B. Fish and invertebrate data (by area, station, date, and time of
day)
Sgenus and species, number of individuals, mean size (with
standard deviation), biomass (ash free dry wet.), sex
(invertebrates only)
C. Plant data (by area, station, date, and time of day)
Senus and species, total wet and dry weight, stems and roots
wet and dry weight), tops (wet and dry weight)

II. Data Processing

A. Retrieval
for any area, station or group of stations, date or range of
dates
B. Sorting
Sby area, date, station, time of day, or any combination of these
Biological data sorted by species
C. Calculation of biological indices (Based on numbers of individuals
or biomass per species for any area, station or group of stations,
date or range of dates, or time of day)
Species Richness (Number of species, Margalef Index)
Species diversity (Simpson Index, Brillouin Index, Shannon Index,
McIntosh/indices, Hurlbert's E (Sn))
Species equitability (Brillouin J, Shannon J')
D. Graphics (for any area, station or group of stations, range of dates,
or time of day) : plotted as a function of time.
Small physical chemical variables
fish and invertebrates
1) number of individuals (single species or collective total)
2) average size
3) dry weight biomass (single species or collective total)
4) number of species
plants
1) dry weight biomass(single species or collective total)
2) number of species
any of the biological indices (see "C" above)
E. Statistics (for virtually any set(s) of numbers that can be generated
by any other routine in the system)
linear regression, Student's t-tests, nonparametric correlations,
discriminant analysis, factor analysis, scattergrams, analysis
of variance (one, two, and three-way), multivariate ANOVA,
canonical correlation, etc.
This portion of the report has been carried out with support from the
U.S Environmental Protection Agency (number R-803339).










F. Cluster analysis
Cluster by species, station, or time
total flexibility in how species, stations, and dates are grouped
prior to analysis
Selection of similarity index from amongOrloci's standard
distance, product moment correlation, Fager, Jaccard, Sorenson's,
Webb, Kendall, Cyekanowski, Canberrametric C-lambda, rho, and
tau
Selection of clustering strategy from among unweighted pair group
(grp avg), weighted pair centroidd) grouping, nearest neighbor
grouping, furthest neighbor grouping, median grouping, and
flexible grouping (with beta)

G. Dendrogram
Sfor any output from cluster analysis
Three scales available

H. Faunal summary (for any area, station or group of stations, range
of dates, and times of day)
number of individuals or dry weight biomass by species, month,
and year

I. C-lambda (for any area, station or group of stations, date or
range of dates, and times of day)

J. Mapping
Sphysical-chemical data, fish or invertebrate species population
totals mapped for all stations in study areas (by month)

K. Data base update
modification of any field in a data base record or records
Sdeletion of data records










Special Program for Ecological Science (SPECS): System Overview


I. Introduction

Long-term field studies in which diverse habitats are regularly
sampled for a variety of organisms and physical-chemical factors are
associated with the-accumulation of large amounts of data. Organization
and presentation of such data in a useful form has been aided
significantly by modern high-speed computers.

At Florida State,we have designed and developed a computer soft-
ware system specifically for use with long-term biological data. Primary
design criteria have been storage of a large data base, retrieval of virtually
any subset of the data, and rapid access to a diverse group of biological,
statistical, and graphical data reduction and analysis capabilities.

The SPECS system has been written mostly in the FORTRAN programming
language. A few subroutines are written in the Control Data Corporation
(CDC) COMPASS assembly language. SPECS operates on a CDC 6500 or
CYBER 73 computer under the KRONOS operating system.

II. Organization of the System

A. Data Storage.

Field data on physical-chemical parameters and fish, invertebrate,
and plant populations are assembled and punched on standard 80-column
cards. As the formats for each type of data are slightly different, a
set of four card-deck programs have been developed to add raw data to
a data base tape.

Two data base tapes are maintained, each with four files (one each
for the four types of data). When a card-deck program is executed the
old data base tape is read, the appropriate file is updated with raw
data information, and all information is copied to the new data base
tape (see figurel. For a subsequent addition of data, the data base
tapes reverse roles. During addition of fish and invertebrate data, mean
standard lengths, standard deviation of lengths, and dry weight biomass
are calculated and added to the data base. For a repetitive samples
data base figures represent sums of the overall samples.

Card-deck programs also copy raw data information to a raw data
tape. This tape is thus a backup for all card information and is not
in data base format.

B. Data Processing.

User Programs

All user programs, procedure files (predefined sets of oft-used
operating system commands), program libraries, and active data files
reside on computer center disk packs (for rapid access). Most of the
SPECS system is stored as a single file on one of these disks.










B. Data Processing. (continued)

This file contains one large program which has been structured
in an overlay format. There is one main overlay and nine secondary
overlays. Secondary overlays perform the majority of system
functions, such as loading data, sorting, calculating biological
indices, preparing for graphics and statistics, etc. The main
overlay simply fields a SPECS system command and calls for the
loading of a secondary overlay. Thus only two overlays are require
in computer core storage at any one time the main overlay and one
of the secondary overlays.

Library Programs

The F.S.U. Computer Center program library contains many routines
accessed by the SPECS system. Among these are the Statistical Package
for Social Science (SPSS), the FSU plotting package, a mapping package
(SYMAP), and a SORT/MERGE routine. The function of some SPECS
secondary overlays is therefore to prepare data base information for
input to these higher level routines.

III. Operation of the System

With the exception of programs in the data storage card decks, all
programs in the system are designed to be operated from a remote teletype
or CRT terminal. System operation is interactive in that there is two-
way communication between the user and the program. The user guides the
program through each step of analysis by entering commands or other
information in response to questions displayed by the program.

A. Terminal session.

A terminal session with the SPECS system begins with a user call
of the INIT (initiate) procedure file. This procedure first asks the
user for the location of the data to be used in this run(possibly a data
base tape or an active data file). It then gets the SPECS program and
initiates its execution.

The main overlay of SPECS writes a "COMMAND?" message to the
terminal screen. In response the user enters a SPECS system command.
The LOAD (retrieve) and SORT commands are used to create an active
data file from a data base tape. If the user began this run with an
active data file (created in a previous run), the LOAD and SORT
commands are not needed. Once an active data file is available for
use the user selects from among a group of commands that initiate
execution of secondary overlays which perform analyses of active data.
A summary of these commands and the operations performed is presented
in Table 1.

Following execution of a secondary overlay, the main overlay
is calledand the "COMMAND?" message is again printed at the terminal.
At this point the user may wish to load more data (create an additional
active data file), request another type of analysis on the same data
file, or terminate SPECS system operation. When system operation is











ended file disposition is under user control. Printer output files
created during SPECS operation may be listed on a line printer.
Active data files or other intermediate files may be saved if they
will be used again in the near future. This is especially valuable
if an important file has taken a long time to generate (that time
need not be invested again, for the file may be kept indefinitely).

This allows a person with limited computer background to use
an interactive computer system with immediate access to a broad-
based data file containing diverse forms of information. Using the
various options, this facilitates a rapid, relatively inexpensive
yet comprehensive analysis with great flexibility regarding access to
data and forms of analysis. All operations are carried out at the
terminal, and new options can be added easily in addition to routine
periodic updates of the data base. This gives the biologist the use
of a sophisticated computerized software system as a research tool.

IV. SUMMARY

The SPECS system consists of a collection of programs written
expressly for the storage, retrieval, and analysis of long-term
ecological data. It provides a wide range of analytic approaches
and data reduction capabilities. Some programs perform direct
calculations or data manipulations while others serve as interface
programs which prepare data for higher level (and widely available)
program packages.

The system is operated from a remote computer terminal or
teletype, from which the user supervises program execution in a
step-by-step manner. Operation is interactive in that the program
prompts the user for informational input required before each step is
executed. Output consists of terminal display, printed listing,
and electrostatic plots. Theorizing(the fun part) is left to the
user.




Table 1 Summary of SPECS commands and functions of corresponding secondary overlays


Command Overlay function

LOAD Forms active data file by retrieving data by data base file, area,
station (or group of stations, and date (or range of dates)

SORT Sorts active data file by area, date, station, and time of day (and
species, if biological data)

CALC Computes ten separate diversity,evenness, and richness indices for
every combination of area, station, date, and time of day present in
active data file. Output written to file suitable for printing.

GRAPH Prepares for time-based plots of virtually any subset of data base
information. Requested data is extracted from active data file.
A procedure file is called which executes a graphics interface program
(prepares data for FSU Plotting package), then executes the plotting
package. Output may be displayed on terminal screen or plotted on a
Gould electrostatic plotter.

SPSS Extracts requested data from active data file, prepares on SPSS control
card file, and executes SPSS (via a procedure file). Output placed on a D
file suitable for printing.

CLUST Performs cluster analysis on data in active date file. User selects from
10 similarity indices and 6 clustering strategies. Clusters are based
on species, stations, and time. Any one or all may be collapsed to any
desired degree, allowing great flexibility in grouping of data prior to
analysis. Output is on two files, one for printing and one for input to
dendrogram program.

DENDO Calls procedure file which executes dendrogram drawing program.

SUMRY Prepares time-based summaries of fish or invertebrate data in active data file.
For each species,monthly and yearly catch (and per cent of total catch) are
presented for number of individuals or dry weight biomass. Output on file
suitable for printing.

CLAMB Computes the C-lambda faunal affinity index for combinations of stations
and dates found in the active data file. Output on file suitable for printing.

UPDAT Provides for user editing of a data base file. User enters commands
to modify or delete data base records when error conditions require
correction.

























Program


v

New
Data Base
Tape


Figure 1 SPECS Data Storage Procedure










III. Biomass transformations


Because of the volume and diversity of field collections in this and

other Bay systems (i.e., Apalachee Bay, the Econfina and Fenholloway

drainage systems) presently under study by our group, the method of analysis

for biomass determinations was standardized for each species. This allowed

the computerized conversion of number/length data into dry weight

or ash-free dry weight figures after a determination of a regression

formula based on empirical information. Whenever possible, various

individuals for a given species (representing a normal range of size variation)

were counted, measured, and weighed for such analysis. Species which did not

have any real variation in size were simply counted and weighed for a com-

putation of mean weight per individual. Those species which were too rare

for such analysis were assigned figures from the more common species. Species

pairing was achieved subjectively based on configurational and/or taxonomic

similarity.

In this way, a regression equation or a conversion factor (based on

weight per individual) was computed for each species taken in the survey. A

biomass file was then constructed by species based on length/frequency data.

This file was used for all operations having to do with biomass figures.

Methods and Materials

All specimens used in the weight conversion study were taken fresh

(on ice) to the laboratory for analysis. Standard lengths, together with wet

and dry weights, were measured for all fish specimens. Various invertebrate

species were measured for total length, (tip of the telson to tip of the

rostrum, shrimp; carapace width, crabs)wet, dry and ash-free dry weight.

For those invertebrates normally counted in our data base (worms, mollusks,










amphipods, isopods, etc.), only mean ash-free dry weights were determined

per species.

Dry weights were obtained by oven-drying samples for 48 hours at

1050C. Ash-free dry weights were obtained by ignition of the specimens in

a muffle furnace for 1 hour at 5500C. Preliminary samples indicated less

than 1% error was introduced by reducing the ignition time from the rec-

ommended 3 hours (Cummins and Waycheck, 1971) to 1 hour.

Linear regression equations utilizing a log-log (natural logs) trans-

formation were calculated for each species where data were available (Table 1).

These were calculated according to the following general equation;

In (weight*) = In (length**) a-b
where a&b = regression coefficients
weight = dry weight (fishes)
= ash free dry weight (invertebrates)
** length = standard length (fishes)
= total or carapace width (invertebrates)

For those invertebrate species where no length or width measurements were

taken a representative grouping according to size was dried and/or ashed; a

single mean weight per individual was given for that species. For those

species collected so rarely that no length-weight relationship could be

established, regression equations or average weights of similar species

(similar body shape, size, etc.) were substituted. These equations are also

included in Table 1 along with the type species.

Literature cited:

Cummins, K.W. and J.C. Waycheck. (1971). Caloric equivalents for investigations

in ecological energetic. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. No. 18, 158 pp.










Table 1. Biomass regression and conversion figures for organisms taken in

Apalachicola Bay and Apalachee Bay from 1972 to 1976



A. Fishes, regression analysis by species (In dry wt. = a- In standard length -b)


# of individuals


ALU
ANC
ANC
ANG
ARI
AST
BAG
BAI
BRE
CAL
CEN
CHA
CHA
CHI
CHL
CYN
CYN
DAS
DIP
DOR
DOR
ETR
EUC
EUC
GOB
GOB
HAE
HAR
HIP
ICT
ICT
LAC
LAC
LAG
LEI
LEP
MEN
MEN
MIC


regression equation


SCH
LYO
MIT
ROS
FEL
GRA
MAR
CHR
PAT
ARC
MEL
FAB
SAB
SCH
CHR
ARE
NEB
SAB
HOL
CEP
PET
CRO
ARG
GUL
BOS
ROB
PLU
PEN
SPE
CAT
PUN
MAX
QUA
RHO
XAN
OSS
AME
BER
CRI


11
4
209
6
30
6
8
284
10
13
115
4
8
51
12
29
47
12
63
4
6
17
35
17
14
13
31

5
8
4
4
15
573
77
8
18
2
14


3.40541
4.05558
2.92631
3.21520
3.24073
2.31036
3.49714
2.90410
5.33190
3.08486
2.95025
3.36763
2.27591
2.69654
2.46994
2.85506
3.05722
3.17554
3.43800
3.69685
3.46547
2.99338
3.40790
2.64359
2.81134
2.99185
2.82564
3.46547
2.82587
3.02830
3.91137
4.25871
2.34179
3.24457
3.15892
3.28379
2.93110
1.33401
3.42472


Species


(DOR PET)


14.97588
17.13343
12.60137
15.84540
13.56112
9.11249
14.94788
11.76128
20.55185
12.23879
11.85323
12.66714
10.00217
9.69103
10.40515
12.09550
12.79894
12.61179
13.50773
15.64947
14.19044
12.30726
13.88700
10.80122
11.66922
12.17209
11.39730
14.19044
11.96161
12.31003
16.83136
17.00627
8.20714
12.94101
12.81603
15.53650
12.15889
5.79181
17.69587








regression equation


MIC
MIC
MON
MON
MUG
NIC
OGC
OPS
ORT
PAR
PAR
PAR
PEP
POG
POR
PRI
PRI
SPH
SPH
STR
SYM
SYN
SYN
SYN
TRI
URO
CYP
FUN
FUN
LEP
LUC
MIC
NOT
POE


GUL
UND
CIL
HIS
CEP
UST
RAD
BET
CHR
ALB
FAS
LET
BUR
CRO
POR
SCI
TRI
GUA
NEP
MAR
PLA
FLO
FOE
SCO
MAC
FLO
VAR
GRA
SIM
MAC
PAR
SAL
PET
LAT


22
174
115
86
7
10
2
27
99
26
14
33
5
2
3
4
20
7
24
4
14
58
21
10
30
33
6
6
3
10
5
4
7
3


=3.15783
=3.30722
=2.68766
=2.76823
=3.04576
=3.28415
=3.91484
=2.51062
=3.08003
=3.13787
=3.68192
=3.06070
=2.63529
=2.46761
=3.27791
=3.26012
=3.07717
=2.76380
=2.82279
=3.42754
=3.19256
=3.39967
=3.33944
=4.20130
=3.35751
=3.35273
=3.49504
=3.11153
=3.53472
=3.19176
=3.51483
=3.87904
=2.66732
=2.19844


(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)

(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(x)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)


13.17557
13.59050
11.00337
11.04164
12.49192
13.28714
16.05968
10.34034
12.54686
13.23092
15.60141
12.73843
10.45042
9.21713
14.04788
13.36732
12.21250
12.47892
10.95111
16.83563
13.76772
17.79450
14.67424
21.00771
13.05926
14.52737
13.50708
12.77763
14.48805
12.50672
13.99182
15.92254
11.73939
9.12226


B. Fishes (rare), assigned regression equations
Species comparable species


ADI
GAM
NOT
FUN
LEP

SYN
DIP
GYN
HYP
MEN
HAE
LUT
ANC
PAR


LOU
FOR
NIG
HEN
SAX
AUR
GRI
HEP
MAR


SYN
CEN
ANG
CHA
MEN
HAE
ORT
ANC
PAR


PAR
PAR
PET
GRA
MAC

FLO
MEL
ROS
SAB
AME
PLU
CHR
MIT
FAS


regression equation


=3.51483
=3.51483
=2.66732
=3.11153
=3.19176

=3.39967
=2.95025
=3.21520
=2.27591
=2.93110
=2.82564
=3.08003
=2.92631
=3.68192


13.99182
13.99182
11.73939
12.77763
12.50672

17.79450
11.85323
15.84540
10.00217
12.15889
11.39730
12.54686
12.60137
15.60141


Species


# of individuals








regression equation


SEL
POL
SCI
ANC
HYP
CAR
HAE
HIP
HIP
SPH
SPH
SER
MEN
EUC
OPH
SCO
MYC
MUL
CLU
OPH
BAT
GOB
LAB
ECH
RAJ
STE
HEM
TRA
GOB
SAR
HAL
SER
ELO
SCA
ARC
APO
AST
MIC
PEP
STE
GOB
MUG
MYR
ALO
OLI
RHI
MON
ANC
SYN
POM
CAR
SPH


VOM
OCT
OCE
QUA
GEM
HIP
SPE
ERE
ZOS
BAR
BOR
SUB
SPE
SPE
BEA
BRA
MIC
AUR
SPE
GOM
SOP
STR
SIC
NAU
TEX
CAP
BRA
CAR
BOL
ANC
BIV
PUM
SAU
SPE
PRO
TOW
STE
THA
PAR
LAN
HAS
SPE
PUN
ALA
SAU
BON
CHR
SPE
SPE
SAL
BAR
TIB


CHL
BAI
MIC
PAR
CHA
CHL
HAE
HIP
HIS
SPH
SPH
CEN
MEN
EUC
URO
CEN
CEN
MIC
BRE
ANG
GOB
GOB
MEN
ARI
DAS
DIP
STR
CHL
MIC
ANC
NIC
CEN
SPH
NIC
LAG
BAI
BAI
MIC
PEP
BAI
(MIC
MUG
ANG
DOR
CHL
DAS
BAI
ANC
SYN
LAG
CHL
BAG


CHR
CHR
UND
ALB
SAB
CHR
PLU
SPE
SPE
GUA
GUA
MEL
AME
ARG
FLO
MEL
MEL
UND
PAT
ROS
BOS
BOS
BER
FEL
SAB
HOL
MAR
CHR
GUL
MIT
UST
MEL
GUA
UST
RHO
CHR
CHR
GUL
BUR
CHR
GUL
CEP
ROS
CEP
CHR
SAB
CHR
MIT
FLO
RHO
CHR
MAR


2.46994
2.90410
3.30722
3.13787
2.27591
2.46994
2.82564
2.82587
2.82587
2.76380
2.76380
2.95025
2.93110
3.40790
3.35273
2.95025
2.95025
3.30722
5.33190
3.21520
2.81134
2.81134
1.33401
3.24073
3.17554
3.4380
3.42754
2.46994
3.15783
2.92631
3.28415
2.95025
2.76380
3.28415
3.24457
2.90410
2.90410
3.15783
2.63529
2.90410
2.83401
3.04576
3.21510
3.69685
2.46994
3.17554
2.90410
2.92631
3.39967
3.24457
2.46994
3.49714


(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)-
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X) -
(X)
(X) -
(X)
(X) -
(X)
(X) -
(X)-
(X) -
(X) -
(X) -
(X)
(X)
(X) -
(X) -


10.40515
11.76128
13.59050
13.23090
10.00217
10.40515
11.39730
11.96161
11.96161
12.47892
12.47892
11.85323
12.15889
13.8870
14.52737
11.85323
11.85323
13.59050
20.55185
15.84540
11.66922
11.66922
5.79181
13.56112
12.61179
13.50773
16.83563
10.40515
13.17557
12.60137
13.28714
11.85323
12.47892
13.28714
12.94101
11.76128
11.76128
13.17557
10.45042
11.76128
11.90954
12.49192
15.84540
15.64947
10.40515
12.61179
11.76128
12.60137
17.79450
12.94101
10.40515
14.94788


+ GOB HAS)


Species


comparable species









comparable species


3.04576 (X)
3.07717 (X)
3.06070 (X)
3.17554 (X)
2.85506 (X)
3.36763 (X)


C. Invertebrates, regression analysis by species.


# of individuals


regression equation


2.75501
2.67979
2.51633
2.64410
2.51735
3.29106
3.18888
2.75088
1.70501
3.77633
2.05252
3.23535


11.52437
10.51993
8.99184
9.04336
11.73789
14.03450
14.31392
12.56506
9.43702
18.02926
7.31573
14.16662


D. Invertebrates, calculated conversion coefficients per individual based
on narrow range of length frequency data.


mean ash free dry wt.


0.0036 (gu)
.0032
.0022
.0431
.0067
.1468
.6788
3.2713
.6914
.2050
.0360


E. Invertebrates, assigned regression equations or weight/individual.


comparable species


PEN
CAL
CAL
PEN


regression equation or mean
ash free


3.18888
2.67979
2.67979
2.75088


14.31392
10.51993
10.51993
12.56506


MUG
PRI
PAR
GYM
CYN
LOB


CUG
RUB
SPE
MIC
SPE
SUR


MUG CEP
PRI TRI
FAR LET
DAS SAB
CYN ARE
CHA FAB


12.49192
12.21250
12.73843
12.61179
12.09550
12.66714


Species


ALP
CAL
LIB
NEO
PAL
PAL
PEN
PEN
PER
TOZ
MET
PAL


HET '
SAP
DUB
TEX
FLO
INT
DUO
SET
AME
CAR
CAL
PUG


Species


PER
THO
HIP
PET
PAG
PAG
LOL
LYT
ECH
ECH
OPH


LON
DOB
ZOS
ARM
BON
LON
BRE
VAR
SPE
PAR
BRE


Species


AZT
GIB
SIM
CON


regression equation


Species








small RAN CUN
AEQ IRR
CRE PLA

small RAN CUN


large chaetes


* Those figures in parentheses represent


comparable species


weights of juveniles of a given species



regression equation or mean
ash free dry wt.


2.51735 (X)
2.75501 (X)
2.75501 (X)
2.64410 (X)
2.51633 (X)
2.64410 (X)
.1468
3.18888 (X)
3.29106 (X)
3.18888 (X)
3.18888 (X)
3.18888 (X)
3.18888 (X)
2.51633 (X)
.0306
.0306
2.51633 (X)
.0282
.0282
2.51633 (X)
3.1888 (X)
.0111
.0111
2.0742
.0360
.0360
.6914
.6914
.6914
.0360
1.3576


11.73789
11.52437
11.52437
9.04336
8.99184
9.04336

14.31392
14.03450
14.31392
14.31392
14.31392
14.31392
8.99184


8.99184


- 8.99184
- 14.31392


LAE
STR
CRE
PSE
TRA
BUR
APL
BRA
DIO
PLA
PAR
CLE


.5066
2.1975
(.0002)
(.0031)
.5066
2.0000
2.0000
.0100
.0100
.0100
(.0030)
(.0030)


Species


LEA
SYN
SYN
UCA
LIB
SES
PAG
PRO
AMB
SIC
SIC
SIC
SIC
POD
EPI
PEL
PIT
MEG
POR
MAC
SQU
URO
CAL
LUI
HEM
OPH
LUI
LUI
LUI
OPH
OCT


TEN
TON
LON
SPE
EMA
CIN
ANN
SPE
SYM
DOR
BRE
TYP
LAE
RLL
DIL
MUT
ANI
SOR
SIG
CAM
EMP
PER
JAM
CLA
ELO
ANG
SAG
SPE
ALT
ELE
VUL


PAL
ALP
ALP
NEO
LIB
NEO
PAG
PEN
PAL
PEN
PEN
PEN
PEN
LIB
LIB
LIB
LIB
PET
PET
LIB
PEN
CAL
CAL
3 (ECH
OPH
OPH
ECH
ECH
ECH
OPH
2 (LOL


FLO
HET
HET
TEX
DUB
TEX
LON
DUO
INT
DUO
DUO
DUO
DUO
DUB
DUB
DUB
DUB
ARM
ARM
DUB
DUO
JAM
JAM
SPE)
BRE
BRE
SPE
SPE
SPE
BRE
BRE)










IV. Physico-chemical Relationships: Sedimentology

and Habitat Structure


Livingston et al. (1975) showed that the aquatic environment in the

Apalachicola Estuary is affected to a considerable degree by seasonally-

directed fluctuations of the Apalachicola River. Variables such as local

rainfall, tides, wind-induced currents, temperature, salinity, dissolved

oxygen, turbidity, color, and pH, are important determinants of the

population and community structure of this bay system; together, these

parameters define the array of habitats in the area.

The sediments determine to a considerable degree the forms of benthic

organisms which occur in a given area. This is particularly true of the

benthic infauna, where feeding types are often correlated with sediment

forms. This includes direct sedimentary control of trophic distribution

(Sanders, 1958), coincidental correlation between water movement factors

and trophic distribution (Sanders, 1958; McNulty et al., 1962), and trophic

group amensalism mediated by the sediments (Rhoads and Young, 1970).

Support for these observations is available (Bloom et al., 1972). Thus,

sediment analysis was conducted concurrently with the analysis of the

infauna of the Apalachicola Estuary.

Materials and Methods:

Sediment Analysis

Sediment samples were taken with a corer (d., 7.62 cm) monthly from

March, 1975 through February, 1976. This was carried out at fixed stations

around the bay (Fig. 1). These analyses were conducted on the top 5-10 cm

of each core.










Two methods were used (the second method represents a standard

geological analysis which eliminates biological functions). At monthly

intervals, a sample of 50-150 g was wet-sieved through a series of

U.S. Standard sieves. Each fraction was dried at 1000C for 24 hours and

weighed. Sieve-class weights were then used to construct cumulative

percent particle size curves (Inman, 1952) on arithmetic probability

paper. A second analysis involved a supplementary subset of the above

samples (Ingram, 1971). A 30-50 g sample was dried at 1000C for 24 hours

and then treated with 10% HC1 for 12 hours to remove carbonates. After

redrying the sample, organic matter was removed by treatment with 30% H202

for 12 hours. The sample was then dried, and dry-sieved through a

series of sieves on a mechanical shaker for 30 minutes. Sieve class

weights were analyzed by the method of moments (Folk, 1966) using a

computer program developed by J. P. May (Dept. of Geology, Florida State

University). Sediment organic matter was analyzed monthly by drying a

subsample at 1000C for 24 hours and ashing at 5000C for 4 hours (Cummings

and Waycheck, 1971).

Physico-chemical Functions:

Surface and bottom water samples were taken monthly at fixed stations

in the Apalachicola Estuary (Fig. 1) with a 1 a Kemmerer bottle. Dissolved

oxygen and temperature were measured with a Y.S.I. dissolved oxygen meter

and a stick thermometer. Salinity was taken with a temperature-compensated

refractometer calibrated periodically with standard sea water. River flow

data taken at Blountstown, Florida were provided by the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (Mobile, Alabama) while local rainfall data were provided by the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Environmental Data Service,











Apalachicola, Florida) and the East Bay Forestry tower. Turbidity was

determined using a Hach Model 2100-A turbidimeter and was expressed as

Jackson Turbidity Units (J.T.U.). Water color was measured using an

A.P.H.A. platinum-cobalt standard test. Light penetration was estimated

with a standard Secchi disk. Data concerning chlorophyll A, orthophosphate

(inorganic, soluble, reactive), nitrite, nitrate, and silicate were

provided through a Florida Sea Grant Program directed by Dr. Richard L.

Iverson (Department of Oceanography, Florida State University); these

parameters were measured according to standard procedures (Livingston

et al., 1974).

A. Sediments:

Results of sediment analyses are presented in Table 1.

Station 1

This is a mid-bay station approximately 2 m in depth. The bottom is

somewhat loose, barren of vegetation, with occasional large wood and shell

fragments. There are scattered coarse, sandy deposits in an otherwise fine

sand area. The monthly average grain size is 2.60 4 units and contains

6.52% organic matter. There was considerable variation between samples

both for grain size and organic content, with no obvious trends. The

concurrent decrease in grain size and increase in organic content noted in

February, 1976, coincided with maintenance dredging activities nearby.

Station IX

This station is situated in a shallow (1 m) protected grass bed, com-

posed mainly of Halodule wrightii. The bottom is very firm sand with

scattered oyster bars in the area. The average monthly grain size is

2.02 d units and the organic content averages 2.06%. There was a little










between-sample variation in grain size but the sediment organic content

increased from July to January, coinciding with the die-off and deposition

of Halodule blades.

Station 3

This station is located in a shallow (1 m) channel leading from the

Apalachicola River into East Bay. Winter and spring deposits of wood and

leaf debris, washed in by peak river discharges, are found in this area.

The bottom is firm, fine sand with beds of Ruppia maritima and Vallisneria

americana in the vicinity. The average grain size is 2.83 units and

organic content averages 3.52%. There was some variability between samples

for grain size and organic content, probably resulting from the river-

deposited debris.

Station 6

This station is located in the middle of a shallow (1 m), protected
embayment close to the Apalachicola River with seasonally dense beds of

Ruppia nearby. The bottom is a loose, fine sand-silt. Woody debris was

almost always noted in the samples. The monthly average grain size is

3.64) units and organic content averages 5.60%. Samples were variable

with respect to grain size and organic content, with no trends observed.

Station 4

This station is moderately deep (2 m) and influenced to some extent by

river discharge. The bottom is barren, loose silty-sand, and contains

large wood fragments. The monthly average grain size is 3.93+ units and

organic content averages 7.98%. Grain sizes were somewhat variable in

the spring (perhaps due to river effects) and appeared stable for the rest

of the year. Organic content was highest in summer and fall, coinciding to











some extent with the die-off of upper bay grass beds.

Station 4A

This station is in a shallow (4 m) Vallisneria bed in upper East

Bay. The bottom is fairly loose, silty-sand. The monthly average

grain size is 3.98 units and organic content averages 8.61%. A fall

peak in organic content probably results from the die-off of Vallisneria

blades.

Station 5A

This station is located off a sandy beach in upper East Bay. The

bottom is firm, fairly coarse sand, and the nearby shore is fringed with

Vallisneria. The average grain size is 1.82 4 units and organic content

averages 2.58%. Between-sample variation in grain size is low, but

organic content increases from summer through winter, to some extent due

to the Vallisneria die-off.

Station 5B

This station is located in an upper East Bay tributary. The bottom is

loose silt with Vallisneria fringing the shoreline. The average grain size

is 4.22' units and organic content averages 11.23%. Grain sizes exhibited

low variability as did organic content, which was relatively high all year.

In summary, grain size decreases and organic content increases moving

from the outer Apalchicola Bay into the upper reaches of East Bay. The

observed late summer-fall die-off of benthic macrophytes coincides generally

with an increase in sediment organic content. The relationships between

the above observations and the reactions of the infaunal and epibenthic

organisms to both general sedimentary characteristics and the fall

increase in organic content will be examined in other sections of this report.










B. Physico-chemical parameters:

Water temperatures at a representative station are shown in Figs. 2

and 3. Although temperature peaks tended to remain stable from year to

year, there was a general decrease in temperature with time which was

particularly pronounced during the fifth year of the study. The winter of

1976-77 was extremely cold, and this should be taken into consideration in

any long-term evaluation of the biota of the bay. There was a general

reduction in salinity (Figs. 4-7) with time. Seasonal variation, based

to a considerable degree on river flow (Fig. 30), was a major determinant

of the salinity regimes in the system. There were also decreases in salinity

during summer and fall months which appeared to reflect surface runoff

from local rainfall patterns. Such changes were more pronounced in East

Bay than Apalachicola Bay. The general salinity pattern was thus relatively

stable from year to year. Low salinities occurred during winter and

spring months (associated with river flow) followed by increasing salinity

during the summer. There was then a rapid decline in the late summer or

fall, (coincident with increased local precipitation) and this was followed

by a fall or winter salinity peak just prior to the ensuing decrease in

salinity with renewed increases in river flow. The general annual patterns

of salinity (Figs. 4-7), with relatively low levels during the past 3

years, may not be entirely consistent with the mean annual river flow and

rainfall data (Table 2). This is especially true during the last year of

sampling. This will be the subject of further study involving mass flow

models.

Color values for representative stations in the Apalachicola Estuary

are shown in Figs. 8-11. The influence of the major river flooding during











the winter of 1973 (Fig. 30) is apparent throughout the bay. A secondary

peak appears during the spring of 1975. On the whole, there was a general

decrease in color at Station 1; this was especially significant at

greater depths. The reverse was true in East Bay, especially at the surface.

Spikes of high water color were particular pronounced during the latter

part of 1974. Peaks generally occurred during spring and late summer, thus

reflecting rainfall patterns (Fig. 30) during this period. East Bay was

thus more highly colored than Apalachicola Bay, and showed a trend which

appeared to be linked to patterns of local rainfall and runoff in the

Tate's Hell Swamp area. This was not the case with respect to turbidity

which tended to decrease during the study period in the bay as a whole.

Turbidity seemed to be closely correlated with river flow. Turbidity peaks

usually occurred during winter and spring months. One notable exception

to this occurred during the summer of 1974 in benthic areas of East Bay.

These trends in color and turbidity were generally reflected in the Secchi

disk data (Figs. 16, 17) where significant decreases occurred in East Bay

with time relative to the Apalachicola Bay area.

Dissolved oxygen data are shown in Figs. 18-21. There was considerable

seasonal variation at both stations with peak levels generally occurring

during winter and spring months indicating the usual relationship with

water temperature and salinity. In East Bay, there was a significant in-

crease in dissolved oxygen during the 5 year period of study which was not

as apparent in Apalachicola Bay. Relatively low levels of dissolved oxygen

were apparent in East Bay during the late summer of 1974. Levels

of pH in the Apalachicola Estuary are shown in Figs. 22-25. There was a

significant decrease in pH in Apalachicola Bay during the fall and early










winter of 1976. This remains unexplained at this time. The East Bay

data will be more thoroughly reviewed in another report in-

volving potential impact of clearcutting on the Bay.

Orthophosphate and nitrate levels in the Apalachicola Estuary are

shown in Figs. 26-29. These data will be analyzed in detail by Iverson

and Myers (Section V of this report).

Analysis and Discussion:

A statistical treatment was carried out with the first four years of

physico-chemical data. The seasonal changes in various physico-chemical

variables in the Apalachicola Bay System have already been described

(Livingston, 1974, 1976; Livingston et al., 1974a: Livingston et al., 1976)

and will not be reviewed in detail here. Overall, this is a shallow barrier

island estuary dominated physically by the widely fluctuating Apalachicola

River (Fig. 30). During the 4-year period of study, the river flow usually

peaked during the period from January to April. At these times, the range

of extreme diurnal flows usually was maximal. The range and mean flow

usually reached low levels during late summer and fall periods. This

pattern was almost completely out of phase with local rainfall which

ordinarily peaked during the summer and early fall. There was considerable

annual variation of river flow with relatively low levels during the

first and third years of sampling. During the winter and spring of 1973,

there was especially pronounced river flow and flooding throughout the

Apalachicola Valley.

Water temperature followed seasonal patterns with no substantial

variation from year to year. At any given time, there was usually little

vertical or horizontal variation in water temperature throughout the bay










system (Livingston et al., 1977). River flow generally dominated the

seasonal.characteristics of parameters such as salinity, color, turbidity,

and nutrient levels with increased flow associated with increases in the latter 3

functions. Generally, this is a highly turbid bay with considerable

oyster bar development and little benthic macrophyte productivity ex-

cept in shallow (fringing) areas. Tides in the Apalachicola Estuary are

semi-diurnal (mixed, unsymmetrical) with a small small range (up to 1 m).

Winds in the area follow no clear directional trend although during fall

and winter there is a northerly flow which becomes southerly during the

rest of the year. In June, 1972, Hurricane Agnes came ashore near the

Apalachicola region with winds gusting to 55 knots and tides around 2 m

above the norm.

Statistical analysis of the physico-chemical data taken over the 4-year

study period included simple linear regression and correlation for distrib-

ution with time. Significant changes in the regressions (original and loge

units) were found for salinity, rainfall, and turbidity. The re-

sults of a 2-way (month x year) analysis of variance of these data are shown

in Table 3. Since in a 2-way analysis with one observation per cell, the

mean square is of necessity used as an error term, the occurrence of

annually high significance levels probably indicates that considerable in-

teraction exists. There was significant (p <.05) annual variation of river

flow although no trend was apparent during the study period. There were

reductions in salinity and turbidity in the Apalachicola system

with time. The results of a factor analysis (Table 4) indicate that high

riverflow is usually associated with increased color and turbidity and re-

duced Secchi readings, and low levels of salinity, temperature, and









chlorophyll A. This is consistent with the known seasonal pattern of

these factors, and indicates the important influence of the Apalachicola

River on the physical environment of the Apalachicola Estuary. While the

river dominates the seasonal fluctuations of parameters such as salinity,

long-term changes in the overall salinity of the bay appear to be related

also to other functions such as local rainfall and runoff. This would

indicate that causation reflects multiple interactions thus allowing

apparently contradictory results in the short- versus long-term trends

(e.g., turbidity and salinity relationships).












Literature Cited

Bloom, S.A., J.L. Simon, and V.D. Hunter. 1972. Animal-sediment

relations and community analysis of a Florida estuary. Mar. Biol. 13,

43-56.

Cummins, K.W. and J.C.Waycheck. 1971. Caloric equivalents for investigations

in ecological energetic. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. No. 18. 158 p.

Folk, R.L. 1966. A review of grain-size parameters. Sedimentology 6, 73-93.

Folk, R.L. and W.C. Ward. 1957. Biagos River bar: a study in the signif-

icance of grain size parameters. J. Sedim. Petrol. 27, 3-26.

Ingram, R.L. 1971. Sieve analysis in R.E. Caever (ed.), Procedures in

Sedimentary Petrology. Wiley Interscience, New York. pp. 49-67.

Inman, D.L. 1952. Measures for describing the size distribution of

sediments. J. Sedim. Petrol. 22: 125-145.

Livingston R.J.: Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of

various pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application

to the management of the Apalachicola Bay System (North Florida, U.S.A.

Final Report, State University Systems of Florida. Sea Grant SUSFSG-04-

3-158-43) (unpublished, 1974).

- Impact of kraft pulp-mill effluents on estuarine and coastal fishes in

Apalachee Bay, Florida, U.S.A. Mar. Biol. 32, 19-48 (1975).

- Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of estuarine organisms in a North

Florida estuary. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 4, 323-400 (1976a)

- Dynamics of organochlorine pesticides in estuarine systems: Effects on

estuarine biota. Proc. Third International Est. Conf. (1976b)

- R.L. Iverson, R.H. Estabrook, V.E. Keys and J. Taylor, Jr.: Major









features of the Apalachicola Bay system: physiology, biota, and re-

source management. Florida Sci. 37(4), 245-271 (1974a).

G.J. Kobylinski, F.G. Lewis, III and P.F. Sheridan: Long-term fluctu-

ations of epibenthic fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola

Bay, Florida. Fish Bull. 74, 311-321 (1976).

P.F. Sheridan, B.G. McLane, F.G. Lewis, III and G.G. Kobylinski: The

biota of the Apalachicola Bay System: functional relationships. In:

Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Eds.

R.J. Livingston and E.A. Joyce, Jr. (in press, 1977).

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. Caribb. 12: 322-332.

Rhoads, D.C. and D.K. Young. 1970. The influence of deposit-feeding

organisms on sediment stability and community trophic structure. J. Mar.

Res. 28: 150-177.

Sanders, H.L. 1958. Benthic studies in Buzzard's Bay. I. Animal-sediment

relationships. Limnol. Oceanogr. 3: 245-258.











Monthly sediment analyses of various stations in Apalachicola

Bay. Median grain size determined by Method 1 (Inman, 1952;

Folk and Ward, 1975) and Method 2 (Folk, 1966; Ingram, 1971).

Organic content determined according to Cummins and Waycheck (1971).


STATION

1


DATE

3/75

4/75

5/75

6/75

7/75

8/75

9/75

10/75

11/75

12/75

1/76

2/76


3/75

4/75

5/75

6/75

7/75

8/75

9/75

10/75

11/75


MEDIAN GRAIN

METHOD 1

1.90

2.20

2.55

2.50

3.10

3.35

2.40

2.20

2.20

2.25

2.35

4.20


2.00

1.85

1.95

2.00

2.00

1.95

2.05

2.15

2.10


Table 1.


SIZE ( )

METHOD 2










2.08






2.00


4.20











2.36


% ORGANIC

4.66

4.05

5.14

6.26

6.70

7.18

5.84

4.29

8.79

6.13

6.41

12.88


1.78

1.76

1.68

1.64

2.00

2.42

2.16

2.26

2.47









Table 1 (continued)


STATION







3























6


DATE

12/75

1/76

2/76


3/75

4/75

5/75

6/75

7/75

8.75

9.75

10/75

11/75

12/75

1/76

2/76


3/75

4/75

5/75

6/75

7/75

8/75

9/75

10/75

11/75

12/75


METHOD 1

2.10

2.05

2.05


2.45

3.10

2.70

2.70

2.55

3.45

3.10

2.65

2.85

3.10

2.65

2.70


3.00

3.65

3.30

3.95

4.10

3.80

3.55

3.95

3.75

3.50


METHOD 2

2.37



2.04











2.87






2.98



2.43











2.97






3.05


% ORGANIC

2.56

2.36

1.68


4.17

3.93

3.67

2.82

2.92

2.38

6.47

4.25

2.96

4.30

2.11

2.30


5.73

6.61

4.18

6.33

7.98

6.48

4.80

6.63

3.62

5.11











Table 1 (continued)


STATION


DATE

1/75

2/76


3/75

4/75

5/75

6/75

7/75

8/75

9/75

10/75

11/75

12/75

1/76

2/76


3/75

4/75

5/75

6/75

7/75

8/75

9/75

10/75

11/75

12/75


METHOD 1

3.55

3.60


METHOD 2



2.81





























1.89



2.18


3.45

3.85

3.45

4.15

4.05

3.95

4.00

4.05

4.00

4.00

4.20

4.00


4.15

4.00

3.90

4.00

3.85

3.45

4.10

4.05

4.05

4.05


% ORGANIC

3.87

5.80


6.21

5.86

5.41

9.48

9.10

8.23

9.00

9.75

11.23

8.36

7.06

6.02


6.10

6.25

6.52

7.75

8.30

9.39

11.09

9.10

12.05

10.55










Table 1 (continued)


STATION DATE METHOD 1 METHOD 2 % ORGANIC

1/76 4.05 7.97

2/76 4.10 8.30


5A 3/75 1.70 1.11

4/75 1.75 1.03

5/75 1.60 1.40

6/75 1.85 0.97

7/75 1.75 2.38

8/75 1.95 1.79 2.83

9/75 1.80 1.41

10/75 1.85 1.70

11/75 1.90 4.64

12/75 2.10 1.93 8.45

1/76 1.80 2.78

2/76 1.80 1.72 2.33


5B 5/75 4.20 11.45

6/75 4.45 10.61

7/75 4.25 12.32

8/75 4.20 12.51

9/75 4.15 11.95

10/75 4.20 12.20

11/75 4.20 12.21

12/75 4.20 9.39

1/76 4.20 9.19

2/76 4.20 10.52













Table 2: Annual monthly means:
Apalachicola River Flow (Blountstown, Florida: U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Mobile District) and Local Rainfall
(Combined data from NOAA-climatological Station
in Apalachicola and the East Bay Fire Tower).


Apalachicola
River Flow (Cubic)
Feet Per Second)


Time 'Period

3/72 2/73

3/73 2/74

3/74 2/75

3/75 2/76

3/76 2/77


25,185

32,955

21,550

30,708

26,174


Local
Rainfall
(inches)

4.98


5.20

6.23

5.80

4.66




TABLE :


Results of 2-way analysis of variance (bymonth, by year) for physicochemical and biological parameters of the
Apalachicola Bay System taken over a 48 month period (March, 1972-February, 1976). Included are various
indices used in the overall statistical analysis.


Paramet
Physicoi


Number
of cases


chemical


River Flow (C.F.S.) 48
Secchi (m) 48
Color (P+-Co units) 48
Turbidity (J.T.U.) 48
Temperature (oC) 48
Salinity (0100) 48
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 48
Nitrate (ug/L) 42
Phosphate (ug/L) 42
DDT (Rangia: PPB) 29
PCB (Rania: PPB) 29
Chlorophyll A (mg/m3) 44
Rainfall 48
Wind 48
Tides 48
DDP** 48
ml mll*** 48


Mean


27,586
0.82
42.4
20.2
20.2
16.1
8.2


145
85
5.3
5.0


Standard
Deviation


15,366
0.37
74.5
33.4
6.3
8.3
2.3


173
85
2.1
4.0


Deviations from the mean by year Significance (P)
1972-73 193-74 1974-75 1975-76 Month Year


-2401
0.08
22.8
16.2
1.6
2.7
-0.4


160
79
1.9
01.3


5369
-0.19
-11.7
9.9
-2.6
0.8
0.1


-125
-61
0.7
-1.1
<- f


-6088
0.10
-16.7
-13.7
0.9
1.3
-0.1


-83
-41
-0.9
0.5


3122
0.01
5.1
-12.7
-0.2
-5.5
0.2




-1.1
2.0


0.001
0.172
0.203
0.999
0.016
0.003
0.058


0.303
0.402
0.331
0.398


0.025
0.194
0.999
0.180
0.240
0.114
0.999


0.001
0.001
0.002
0.999


Invertebrates

Number of individuals (N)* 45 647 763 -73 -170 25 224 0.999 0.999
-N-N1 (dominant species)* 45 209 125 -14 -39 -108 162 0.999 0.021
Margalef richness 45 1.78 0.56 0.02 -0.13 -0.01 0.16 0.999 0.999
Relative dominance (%) 45 56.4 16.6 -2.4 1.9 7.2 -4.9 0.358 0.999
Shannon diversity 45 1.34 0.36 -0.05 -0.14 0.04 0.16 0.999 0.257
Number of species (5) 45 11.7 3.8 .2 .0 0.8 1.6 0.999 0.255
Fishes
re;imhu r nf indHi~irrAl1c IN) A- 1i 70 1910 9n9 A l7 17n 4 917 n QQQ


N-N1 (dominant species)*
Margalef richness
Relative dominance (%)
Shannon diversity
Number of species (5)
Anchoa group*
Micropogon group*
Cynoscion group*
Gobiosoma group*
Chlororscombrus group*


663
3.52
54.9
1.48
26.4
2.57
2.14
1.58
1.12
0.59


221
0.71
16.6
0.33
5-9
0.70
0.80
0.94
0.57
0.86


-160
-0.22
10.6
-0.23
-1.5
0.20
-0.15
0.11
-0.28
0.19


17
-0.09
-1.0
-0.03
-0.9
-0.22
0.37
-0.21
-0.24
-0.07


20
-0.06
-5.4
0.11
-0.3
-0.02
-0.23
0.11
-0.11
0.07


162
0.37
-4.2
0.08
2.8
0.04
0.01
-0.01
0.42
-0.18


0.108
0.114
0.099
0.051
0.237
0.003
0.001
0.001
0.064
0.001


0.009
0.146
0.041
0.030
0.236
0.050
0.050
0.095
0.011
0.204


- --


er


I--,
-c,


---


-









Table 4: Factor analysis of a set of physicochemical variables taken
from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Color, turbidity, Secchi
readings, salinity, temperature, and chlorophyll A
were noted at Station 1 in the Apalachicola Estuary Tidal Data
included the stages of the tide on the day of collection while
the wind variable was represented by 2 vector components.


Variable


Factor 1
(49.0% of the


River flow

Local rainfall

Tide (incoming or
outcoming

Tide (high or low)

Wind direction (E-W)

Wind direction (N-S)

Secchi

Color

Turbidity

Temperature

Salinity

Chlorophyll A


variance)


-0.82

-0.04


0.26

0.09

-0.02

0.10

0.57

-0.80

-0.73

0.38

0.68

0.47


Factor 2
(22.3% of the
variance

-0.08

-0.30


0.61

0.39

0.09

-0.20

-0.07

0.33

0.54

0.15

0.21

0.51


Factor 3
(17.9% of
the variance

-0.07

S -0.09


-0.68

0.61

0.36

0.22

-0.17

0.01

0.08

-0.02

0.23

0.09


Factor 4
(10.8% of
the variance

-0.08

0.20


.0.06

-0.37

0.37

0.31

0.24

0.07

0.23

-0.18

-0.02

*' 0.31












Fig. 1: The Apalachicola Bay System showing assigned (permanent) stations
for all research operations.







\a




% M C.


%














0 0o
S.Vg. 0






CV) ,W) ""












, c . ".4














Fig. 2:' Surface'-water temperature (oC) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.



A:=LACr SC-'TEF. ': 1. 77/03/11. PAGE 3
FI-x \3NAMe4 (CCr'AION ATF = 77/! 1/11.)
SCiiTE .'r-' OF (JLN) TTi (ACROSS) DAYS
11.2::3 '93:.'5?': ,.73.1:?' 652.5753C 332.2251S11.0475i 090925C012370.375Q0015i49.82501729.275C
S----*--------+-----------*--- ----+-------- -----*------+---------------
7z I 32.3C
I I I I
I I I
I\ I* I I
*4.57 I I \ 29.57
II I
I I
I I l I
2

SI I \ 6
"+ I I \


I I I
-.1 I i -- I1
S-- ------/-------------- -----


1-" I j




--- --- -- --- --- ----------J-. --. .--------- -------- -- -- -- -- -- -
-I I I














+ (7.73
.: I I







S + I + 5.06
I I I

I I I I I
i I I











3/72 5!72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 974 12174 3/75 6/75 9/75 1275 3/76 6/76 976 12/76 377 15.
S TIMN MONTHS: March 1972 to February 1977







C TIX ()- -.Z.. R S5UAFE- .37532 SIGNIFICANCE v .31854
ST3 -kz< CF cFT 6.'.,9;s INT-R{LEPT (A) 2,.41Z48 STO E OR.OP. OF A 1.67141
S-FCAN A .'iIf SLOPE (b) -.335 STO ERROR OF B .30157
s i ;I II U C
I I I
I I I
I I





A ~ s EGRA S I TIMI IN MONTHS: March. 1972 to February. 1977







tL37i' vaLS 5 EXCLUDE VALUES- C MISSING VALUES 47
--em onT.Tcm reT r e 4 fC.Y rnA."M.T Or rf..DSITC














Fig. 3: -Bottom water temperature oC at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to
March, 1977.



AFALAC4 CATiTERGRAM)S 1 77/03/11. PAGE 5
FILE Nt-NME (CPEA'ICO CATE = 77/13/11.)
Si3TCERG-- "F (C6*N) -'1i (ACROSS) QAYS
l14.l225C 293.675CL 477.12~5r 552.57500 832.025C001l.475COii9t.92500137. 375001549.825001729.275CO
.-**----- ---- -- -- *---4----- -*--- +------+----- ***- 4-*4*
31.S X I 31.50

I I I I
SI I I
SI I I
2A.35 I I 2.5






I I / I I







/ \ I \ I l I t I
I I

I I I I
I















: INI I 2 t F
4T.35 + I I 23.55
--------- --------- ------*-----------------------*---------*------*------** *** --------
I I I I I
I I I
C-' \2 I I + 23.90
I I I
I I I
i I I
I I I













.)- P UAED C11 SIGNIFICANCE R .
I I I


II I I
I I I
I I
: () 2 222 F A -295
I I I
I I I


SII I
i I I I

I I I



I I + T.GL
t----r-*-, r--* --4 *----+----+----+----*-+-, r+,--** 4---+--***+***-+ ,--* -- .
/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 C/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77

PLIC 5 177 GZA Si 'I!" IN ?'ONTHS: March, 1972 to February. 1977


:-iR L. tI (R)- -.;7I P SQUAFED .(6110 SIGNIFICANCE P .*3170
I T -6.ZTI1? I'TERCEPT (A) 2L.23222 STO ERPOR OF A 1.66139
.. 1 SL; (?) -.11297 STO E'ROR OF 8 .Cb56

J --. f ^L V.L b fISSI VA tUS t7


........ .- rr:7-E :r I COEFFICIENT CANNOT GE CO"PUTEC.















Fig. 4: Surface salinity /oo at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to
March, 1977.




sALAC" SC fT-CrE'S i 77/03/11. PAGE 13
uIL *v0- (C'iEION AE = 77/3/11.
SC-TTERGRI. OF (]COSN) S:T1 (ACROSS) DAYS
li_..???Z ? 293i.67i. 47'.1:57. 652.575C0 832.C2530i011.4750C1190.925001370.375001549.825001729.2750C


.- -. ---..---.----+----+--- ---...... ..--. ..... ... -- ...
4 I I
I I
-i I I I


1H I I I
HI I I

SI I I I
I I I

+
i.---- -^--L...........--.4. ............ ....----4--...-... .......................-......-...
I I I I
SI I

I I I
I / f III I I
I I I I
III I
S 1 1 II
4 I I
I n J I I


I II I I
I Il I I
I II

I I I I




+ I I 4.

3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77

TIME IN MONTHS: March. 1972 to February. 1977


AFALCH SCATTERGRAPS 1

S' TISTICS..
COCRTLATI3N (R)-
-T3 E uF-EST -
SISNIFICACE A -
SIGNIFICANt: 9 -
FLOT'E1 VSL'rS -


33.70


30.33


26.96


23.59


20.22


16.85


13.48


10.11


6.74


3.37


77/03/11. PAGE 14


-.39378
7.25S;.Z


.Cn*C'I


R SQUARE
INTERCEPT (A) -
SLOPE (B)


.15506


-.3590


SIGNIFICANCE R -
STO ERROR OF A -
STO ERROR OF 8 -


.00085
1.86468
.00179


EXCLUDED VALUES- 0 MISSING VALUES -


33.7'


*3.33


15.35


1C.11


3.3?


4',


*E














Fig. 5: Bottom salinity /oo at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to
March, 1977.



APi-LACf 3CA-TTERR.YS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 21
FILE vrNA (C:-ATION CA'E = 77/f7/1l.)
SCAT'E.G.- CF toGCN) SA21 (ACROSS) DAYS
1L0-.?5', 2"3.75r? '~73.125P3 652. 75O 832.0OZSO 11.475OC1130.9Z5001370.375001549.825C01729.27500
.*---------------- ------------ +---------+---------*-----------* -- ---**+.

SI i
SI I
I I I
3.3 I I
II I I


T
I I I I
..i t A
If I I I



---* -------------..------ -------- ---- -- -------4- ------------ ----- -----
iI
I I
I I








I I 4
II
I I
I I



I I I













*----4------- ------+----*------ ------------ -------- ----------+-------,---- ---------+.
2 /7 /72 1272 3/73 6/73 9/73 2/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 975 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/7


ST^ : STS 1..1

S2:"T :T:?I (-)-
ST -P C' EST -

SIT ICL:'.CE ? -


TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977


. -.?Z 1

. Cu'1


o SQUARE -
INTERCEPT () -
LOCCE () *


EXtLU3DE VALUES-


.04929
19.116'6
-. '"47


SIGNIFICANCE R -
STO ERcOR OF A -
ST3 E';PO CF -


MISSIN, VALUES -


. "......IS I';T, :r I COE'FICIENT ZA'-'1OT SE ZC0PUTE2.


33.70


33.33


23.59


23.22


13.48


1CI.11


3.37


*C91122
2.09143
.;1201













Fig. 6: Surface salinity 0/oo at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977.




-, L''" :' -.T' L 77/.3/1L. FP GE 31
S* AT = 77/'3/11,)
T. ; c i.-- (ACoOSS) DAYS
I -- ;03.75- ,73.12 .- 52.575, 8 32. Z15Sl311.i 750' 11i 925 137. S375 1549. 82531729.275
----------- -------------- 4----------H2+----












,*----*----*-- ------------ --*--- -----+-------* -- -*----* -------*- ---*-----------------**--*---*-- T







8.6..
S- I I


S- I I
.. ; I 4* i


S- I I V S
i I I I
S i I I
I f N! II











-- ,..-..,4 .-..-.-.-,,.................4 --.---.-.-----. ------
3/7 I6 | 3 I 13.'3/
SS I


S7 I I i I



"+ .i 67 .














C-, *'T I3; (C>- -.I9"- R SQUARED .03574 SIGNIFICANCE R ..'5651

ST o. .ST 5. 376 3 IMITIRCCPT (A) 6-.6213 STO ERROR OF A .133972
S. ::.;4. .' : tSLOP? (PF) -.'J)196 STO EOOR OF P .G1
L',;i.ij C 'N ? .- 55
.7'- t.l% 7 F)CLUUJU VALULS- 1H MISSIS VALUES -

.. .,r., IS; P 'I"T) I!F A COEFFICIENT CANNOT CO'VPUTEO.













Fig. 7; Bottom salinity /o at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977.



APALACH SCATTE'GRAMS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 39
FILt NOJNME (CFrATION CITE = 77/f~/11.)
,CA.TEPGRA" OF (OOUN) SAC5 ACROSSS) DAYS
110.225' j 293.675rO 473.1:(0 652.57500 832.025O01011.475'i1190.9250137 .375001549.82Z5001729.27500
*---.----*---+----t------------- ----------+--------- ------------------- *---- ----*----- .

I I I


I
SI I .I
SI I I

|I I I
25. I I I i 252




II I I


I i I I
-- ---- ---I ---




-- -- -- ---- t --i - - -




1 I /i
P1C 1 .+0
I I

1!'I I

.6 I .





.- .... ----.---...--. +-- .---.-.----- .---+ --- ......
3/ 72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
APAL:C4 SCAT -GR.,S I TIE IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February. 1977

STAT:STI:S..
CO .LT-':; (R- -.,.9' SIUiARD .;4''6 SIGNIFICANCE R .C5238
-"J E- Cr EST 7.7? I7cF-ET (A) 9.48783 3TO ERROR OF A 1..479
SI3IrLCNCa 4 .*-: SLOPE (9) -.r:279 STO EPROR OF B .CC172
S1;';:F rC" -57

SFLT-F VLUE; 65 ,%;L'!=C VAL'ES- M ISSI;-3 VALUES 39
"..... !z P:'-.T': IF Z COEFFICIENT CAN''OT 0E :CoPUTEO.















Fig. 8: 'Surface water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.


.. rr,.L itu ir o ,CurrAviti-t IM UI Dc uPMfVIcU*

'C-ZCL- SC)TTEIR.-! 77/03/11. PAGE 9
FILE :O-'" (C-r.TIJ, -ATr 77/ATE/:.)
3CAT'l -E CF (Co-N) C, (ACROSS) DAYS
11i..C'"- 2*3T75.: 7'.-12E'jb 652.575: 832. 250"3111.75001.0 .925,O013737S750015.825031729.2750
652 ---------- 2!!--------------.-
I 450.00
SI I I
I II
I iI I
.i I



S315.00



-------------------- -* --------------------------------------- ---------------------.-------.------....
i I I




I I I

2 7 C .- 7*. O0
I














90.00
425..C 41 I 225.0

'I I I 35.0c




.TIME N I I 2 t F 00
I I I I









R SQUARED I CANCE R
S I (A) 5.2763ST ERROR OF A 7.334.0
SI I I













S T S I I IIC
PL IT3 vALu7S TM EXCLUDED VAI ES
S-o )t I

















Ct-ZLT:ON (B)- -.S.545 R SOUaEO .372 SIGNIFICANCE R I12C04
ST? I. LF EST 66.!.17 INTERCEPT (A) 5.2763 STO ERROR OF I 17.3S3'. w
S:;N:F::..SC- .1 ,'' I7" St-PS 5 ) 90- .

















4-iT'l> VSLUF^ Cr, FYrl-rnFn HEr<:* n r ,.,*,i c


-~---~-I ~-1-~


*~ ~ >~A19 *MkYLJ















Fig. 9: Bottom water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.


AoALAG4 SCATTERGRAPS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 17
FILE N(JAME (CREATION LATE = 77/r3/11.)
SCATTERGRC3 OF (OOWN) .CO (ACROSS) DAYS
i:,'.22533 293.675CG 473,125L 652.57530 832.025C01011.475201190.925001370.375001549.8250B1729.27500
.+... ...--+--+--+ ----.----+---*---- ----*** *******.-.----..-..- ---.- .-***** -- ------
3'. : + I 368.60
I I I I
I I I I

I I I I

s.2r + I I I + 2z8.00
i l I i
I I I
I I I
I I I
? I.3 I I 252.00
I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I
I I I I
I I I I
1t.' C + I I I + 216.00
I I
I I I I
SI I I
I I I
14-.3: I I 190.10
I I I I
I I
I k
I I I




4 .3 4 I I + 146.00
I I I I
E I I I
I----.--- - - ----- ----- - --*-** ** *- --* *** *** *-**** I
I I I I I
( I -I 4 1 8.-00


I I I



1. FOi
7 1 I I 1 I + 7 2.O
-! I I I
: I I
7c I + 36.00
I I I


S----.*----*-^---+----+-*--------- -----+--+ ---------+----+- **-***--*-*****+---.
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
s-eLAC., S'-T-E.S RG. S TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977

ST AIST :IC S..
CStELS-'IiN (0)- -.2;-7t A SQUARED .05797 SIGNIFICANCE R .C3693
S-; -:- ;- ?? 5. 33S'; INTER9CPT (A) 6r.Cl596 STO EFPOR CF A 14.78659


:.':TF.:NC-, 1 .-"' 30 LO-E (F) -.02513 STD EROR OF B .,1379
?: r F 3 ..C" C
.LTTI 'IuL3 55 EC."-:'t.- VALUES- S 'ISSING 'VALUES 49

.--...- S':'TE IF A CCCOFFIC:ENT CAN'4OT sE CO"PurE3.















Fig. 10: Surface water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.


APL.C. SC'CTTErGTAlS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 27
FILz N:;NA' (CEA.TION' LATE = 77/"1 /11.)
SLATTErS:-" OF (3CN) COT5 (ACROSS) OAYS


iL..25') 93. 75-: 7 u .i25^; 652.755 8352. 2501011.475001190.9250 137.3750C1549.825 1729.2753
*----------------+---------------------+---------+----+---- ------------+----------------+--.------
'6'.I I 26.OC .
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
+ 5 .20
I I I 1I
I I I




SI I .4










2
---- --------------------------------------*------- ---- ------------ -i
I I I




\ i I I .6
I I I I


SII I






APALI I to Feb ,
II I















IS PRINTED I A COEICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED
I I
I I I I
1 \ 5* i1 I I + i *
I I I I
1.5. 2 f I *
II I -

i3 2I 6 /.2 2
SI IN MOI M c I
T I
i \I I I
S I I
:G:IC +;I I 53.61
I I
II I I

SI P I A F I B
I f I I
I I I I




ST ES CFE 2ILI!I'~ET()-5.77 T RO FA-1.39
s:NIC~.~ A LP P ..278IDERRO 0!'
I I r r I/ a













Fig. 11! Bottom water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972
to March 1977.


APALACH SCATTEF.GAW.S 1 77/0T311. PAGE 35
FILE NONAME (CREATION DATE = 77/r3/11.)
SCATTESGRI: CF (C3w;) COF" (ACROSS) OAYS
l11.2.25'1 293.67530 473.1Z5C 6B52.575S0 832.3251f1011.O 7501 9O.925.7550137.1375'549.82500729.2750D
.*---**-- --+ ---* -------- --------------+----*-----. ---+-------- **--**7---+************
22 I 220.CO
I* I

19.0 191.01
I I
I I I I
I I I I
1 I I I
SI I I
7. I Y I 176.03





II I
I I I
I I I I I


2.j2+ I+ 132.00
SI I I
I I

I I
I I
II



.: *, I \I+ 81.00
.I i OI
1;. ie I I


\I I I





II:
I I I
I I



I
J I i I
4* 1 I 22.IC



.- *.-*--"--- --* -*- --"---- ---* +-- --- ------ -- -- -- -- -------*<. ----** -* -------------- ----*
3/7 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
Z- ~C~ 3:T 'S TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977


'CIc:LA'I:'3 (R)- .7 R SQUARED .CJC4'.4 SIGNIFICANCE R .44C57
ST. -- CF ST 5' .* INTERCEPT (A) 72.2'389 STO ERPOR OF A 15.84756
:;N;F: A L 0' rLO ( E .0C2P1 STO ER
I'T; 53 E:ELU'.E" V4LUES- C 1ISSIN3 VALUES 52


....... IS pFDI;- IF A COZFFICIENT CANNOT EE COPUJTiO.














Fig. 12,: Surface turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.



,...,,* 1 riliveCu lr *a overrjACttt ^aIt'IUtI oC urfU itcy

APLLL.CH SCiTTFRGRPS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 11
FILE N!' (C ETI3o LT7 = 77/13/11.)
SC;'; ' CF (JC-=) TUTi ACROSSS) DAYS
-.Z:_? 2*3.575^: 473.Z?'L 552.575C S32."Z25:i011 .475I1JG.925O1370.375301549.O25031729.2750C
----+--------------L--------------+--------------+---------+---------+----+----------------*-----.
? :*; I I 2S.C8
.*---- ------ ------------ ------- --------

SI I I


II 1
1 I I I
+I I I
I *I
I

I I I


I I I I








--T"--- -- V-A S --V--------------ALUES---MIS1 -G ALUES--5 I
I I I
I I j3.50

; I I i






r |. \ I I 2.50B
I I I

SI I I I
I I I "
I I

I I I
















.*-. -- ..*)--- .-.-- .- --.- --- -- *-**--UAR----- ,-0-****--G- N ---*-9--- ---- **----*- **- >
3/72 6 9 *2/7 I 1 9 2/7.06

I I I
II
SI I I


I II
SI I


















ST3; i- CF E;T ?i,. 06TE;CEPT {) 3C.832 STO ERROR OF A 7.57959
I I I

27I.5 I 2I.50





.-----+-------.----.-***--.---+---+
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77

cAL.ACrr -S'SCA EiA*" I TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977


=ELA'ION <>)- -.X6q 9 OUAREO *0Q036 SIGNIFICANCE R .2q96C
S3T EJ CF EZT ?4.03L.65 IrTERCEPT (4) 3C.4'4832 STD ERROR OF A 7.57959
Si.'IFICANC- A .*";9 SLOPE (E) -.i1723 STD ERROR OF 0 ,00717
s:TFTS :c;- :" 4 ..VA8:
PLOTTEJ VAiLULS 60 EXCLUC'C VALUES- r MISSING VALUES 45













Fig. 13: Bottom turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.



APtLACH SCATTTRGRAMS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 19
FILE NONAM (CPE-TION JAIE = 77/ 3/11.)
SLATTEuG; CF (ZCWN) TU31 (ACROSS) OAYS
11L.22c 3 293.275?u 477.1250 652.57500 832.025CC1011.475S01190.925001370.375001549.825001729.275O
ut -,---,------,------- *-------- -
... .20.00

+ i
2 I I *

I I I
I I 26.00


192.i I I+ 192.00
I I I I
I II I

6. I I 16.00
I-------------- ---------------------------------------------------- ----------- -------------------i
I I I
r--------------------- """""" ~'-----

+P I TI + 7-4 0
i I I I I S .
I I I I



SI I I 9
I* i





-t
-- ------ --- --- -. -------- ----------. ---.--- --------------------------------- ----------------



SI I C





I-------------- --- ------------------- -----------------------------------------
3.72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
LC .C-T.: .- .T T:11 :N MC'ITHS: Mdrch, 1972 to February, 1977

5TZST13S.,
CCiCELTHCN (C)- -.33Z57 o SCUAED .1i367 SIGNIFICANT 'CE R ,"C654
STJ C; EST F.ST IfTECEPT (A) 42.5647!. 5T EROPR OF A 1.,23514
'- .:.. LCE () -.;32429 STO E'ROP Or B ."C91.



FT V.). V.LL'S 53 ESCLU-'E3 VALUES- t -IS3IN; VALUES 5S

........ FPz':FEC Fr A COrFFICIENT CANNU E6F :OUPUTEO.













Fig. 14: Surface turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.

c"LAC" -CATTCrA'-S 1 77/03/11. PAGE 29
FILE (C-'.AITI:N 4;7T = 77/;7?/i.)
SC ,irTE G; OF (JO ) TUT; (ACROSS) DAYS
i1.. 2-cv 293.t75'0 &. 125'C 652.57530 82. 3 25; 0111.'I750C119g0.925?Z 370.37501549.S25C31729.275CC
S------.---+--------------------------.---------...- .---.......
92.r + I


'I i
I I 4.
I I I
I I I I
I I 4
I I I
I I I

.1i I
-- -.............-..... --- -- ..... -.. .. .. . . .-- ----------------------- ---------,
I I I I



I I
i I






+I il I I







3/7- ----- ------------------ ------------ ------
3 6 I
.i. ,!-





3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 5/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77


APALACH SCATTERGRAS S 1

STATISTICS..
CO-RELATION (Z)-
ST? ERR OF EST -
SIgNIFICaNCE A -
SFL:TFICTE VAL -
FLPTTE3 VALLEYS -


TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977


-.t5571

4-i** "Ci
.52959


R SCUAREO
INTERCEoT (A) -
SLOPE (e)

EXCLUUEC VALUES-


.0344.9
25.11766
-.03698

0


SIGNIFICANCE R -
STO ERROR OF A -
SO0 ERROR OF B -

MISSING VALUES -


........ IS POINTED IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT GE COMPUTED.


55.2C


73.6C


55.2S


18.40


. 0


.06929
5.20082
.00465

40













Fig. 15: Bottom turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977.




APiALC SCATTEcGRA-S 1 77/03/11. PAGE 37
:LE '. ."i (CtE&TION "ATE z 77/C3/li.)
SCAT .I'E;,' 3' (OwCN,; -US' (ACROSS) OAYS
ll'..2C3 293.675 n73.1255... 652.57500 832.25301 ''..750CC0. 92500137C. 350Ci549.82S5001729.275
.+----*---------------------------------- ---------+---- --- -
16.3" + I I 160.00
SI I I
i I I I
I I I I
I I I I I
I! I I I
SI I 1
1 II I
I I I
g4. 4 I I +* 1.0C

I I I
I I I
S.I I I







":.,r + 32 ct
I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I


I I I


S- I i I I
4I I
I I


I E P 1 C8
1** r i S 64
...... ..- --- ..... ......... ....................................... ...........



i 32.C


-"U 16.02



*- !2/I 0*
2'" -'72 9,/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/75 12/76 3/77
4'-L.": -^*" =-','S S TI" 1; .0THS: March, 1972 to February, 1977


C.-!O -M ': (*- -.--;^l R S"AfRED .E2513 SIGNIFICANCE R .12163
--- -';- ^- re ,i-.]5/i I -ForieT (-) 35.2-7:5 -Ti ERS.gR OF A 9.67 059
513 =IcL-,:'-: .. J S-CoE (5) -,Cl. 5 STS EF.RO0 CF B .30852


. r A . e r- 7- r'! TC i ?-F rcTrT-'m- r4,rfTT Pc rn p P!Tc,.














Fig. 16: Secchi disk readings (m) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.



AP.LACn SCATTE -.A 77/33/11. PAGE 23
FIL N!'. (CE'r ION "ATF = 77/"'3/1.)
SCA~;T^G Or (JC) SEr: (ACROSS) DAYS
l:'.2- Z3.2:3675: 477.1 650c 652.575C3 832.25001B11.750G 1130.925001370.37501549.825SO1729.275;
.* "---- ----;- --------*----- -,--------- --- ----------------------------- --.......

S I +
I I
i I I
.64 I 41.64

T I
II
SI I &

I I I I\








2 .52 I
'I I I



















.------- --------------------- ---.--- -+- -----..----,_...-... ..- -.------------------........-
3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
ATALACq SCATTERGRAMS I TIoE IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977

STATISTICS..
COiRELATION ()- .1 2 R SO'JUAL ~0C SIGNIFICANCE R .2

S T.. OF S .6 5 INtERCEPT (A) .7898S STD ERROR OF A ,C9136
I:3,:I;=-FI C i .5BC1 SLOPE (E) *GOGC7 STO ERROR OF 0 .00^~9
313N:FICN .CE 3 .8 V U
L**TJ VALUES 62 EXCLUDED VALUES- ISSING VALUES I3
er. -.!6L IdCET()-.98 T ROCVA-C13
-i 1 .ISOEC) -*QG7 SOERRO
I-'IJ AUS-ECUA)VLE-9ISIGVAJS- 4














Fig. 17: Secchi disk readings (m) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977.


AWALACH SCATTE GRAMS 1
FILE v0NA'F (CPEATION LATE = 77/07/11*)


SCAITTE


1



i


77/03#11. PAGE 41


GRAn CF (OO3N) SiL8 (ACROSS) OAYS
114.225' 293.67F! 473.125"0 652.575"C 832.025C010011.47O500U119.92500137.37015.825CO0729.Z75o0
-*--------,----* ----*----+----*------------------------------ ----- ----------- --- -- --





.1 I I
I I I I


I I I
II















^ .-- .--- --- -.11...-......---------..-------. -...-----
*3 2

+



I I I i


























---------- ---- ---------- -* *- **-- ---------- -+------------------------------
2/72 3/73 5/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 675 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
I I

I I I i

I t I i I
I .. I I













3/72 5/72 97 12i72 373 573 973 12/73 374 674 974 12/74 3/75 675 975 12/7 376 6/76 76 12/76 3/7








.4- ----*------~--- *4---- -~------
3'72 6/,2 9/72 12/72 3/73 5/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 5/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77


-~ -


TIM IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February. 1977


3:.:r;:4NZ 2 -


k SUARt3
I..TE.RCEPT (A)
SLOPE (5)


EXCL~CE' VALUES-


.7774i.


SIlNIFICANCE R -
STO ERROR OF A -
ST5 EPFRO OF e -


MISSING VAL'US -


1.60



1.46



1.32







1.04


" .2Q


.:7212


1 .1 1















Fig. 18:' Surface' dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.




"-ALIC1 5C'TT3RACr. 1 77/03/11. PAGE 7

S.'-TTE=-;;IL _e (LCH'!) 37-L (ACROSS) DAYS
:1.'6: *. ; 2 .'.c -^ .. -'.. ;..,Fi 52.575"3 932.00 ,''11Ci .6750' 0 19g.924;2 i373.375031549.825C01729.27500
**----- C-*--*.-----*- ----*-***-- ---- ------- *-- ----------- --*----* ** .* --* .
2*-- I T 12.03
T I I
I I
i I
I I
1 .' I I + 11.39
II I I|
SI I I



I I I I


I I
-b- I 9.56
I I
I I I
SI I I
67 9/72 1.97 /47
IIj I I




















SCATTErGA. TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977
I I I 8
I V I
q '. I I I I i 8.934
II







-*----------------- ----------- ------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------*-----------.-------------------I.
C SI-I T E I
I I
7.12 + I + 7.1Z
I I


I I




-*---***--- *----+----+----+*--- +-- I---+**--+**--*----e***-+---** **-**-+


* ALACH SCATTrRA"E i TIM IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February 1977

ST;IST'I"S..
C;;lELA'I3; (;)- .2549 P SQUA:RO .05085 SIGNIFICANCE R .56823
-TJ <* OF S T 1.79". INT~ERCErT (A) 8.S531i STO ERROk OF A .52971
tI';:FIC"Ct E A ..CC- SLOPE (B) .'0069 STD ERROR OF B .COC45
S:L-I;F:C3 VA 3 X C V -
^NC-rC. vCLv S 45 EXCLUPEC VALUES- 0 MISSION; VALUES 6C













Fig. 19: Bottom dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.

J r c. u ir A 1,UCrr il.tNi LANNUt bt LUMPUltU.

AFAL.AcH SCATTFRGRAtS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 15
F:IL *N3'.;- (COET:ON DOTE = 77/!3/11.)
SCITTEIG~AM OF (CO-N) D081 (ACROSS) DAYS
:11.22E5 293.675'0 473.125rT 652.5753 832. 25C01C11.4753ull9C.925001370.375001549. 825C1729.275C0
*------------***-*.----.-*--- ---*--- ---+------------*------- ---- -- -- -....- **---.
12. I I 12.60
I I I
I I I
I I I I
S+
SI I I
II I I
I I I



I I 0
S10.0


I / \ I I I Ii
II II





---------------------------------------- L------------------------- ---------- ------- -------I
SI I /
I----- ---------- --- ----- ---- ------
I / 9. \i



; /i \ .1
1 I I





I I
I *.60
II I
SI I
I

I I












------------------------- -- + +--- ------------- ----------+--------
3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
-=:.C ?--- .. S T;IE IN MOTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977





:1 EL'" I (: (Z)- .'b2 2 R SQUARED .CI39. SIGNIFICANC9 R .'4184
: -: -T .?;-. I0TEtCPT (A) 7.71122 STD ERROR OF A .71404
::-.: -' 1 S' (-i ) .- 25 STC ERROR OF I .^J 61


*T- .;. : 5 C I-J VLUES- c `:SSIri VALUIS 6:


" S ......... : IF A COLFFICIINT CAN...O" PF COMPU:EO.













Fig. 20: Surface dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972
to March, 1977.


******" P':,;NT- If A LCOFF:CIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTER.

1 .iC;- jCTTE; ; A 1 77/13/11. PAGE 25


'L,"i ,O>;aE (C EGTION :ATE : 77/'1 /11.)
C-T'E;- '-" j (iON) 3CT5 ACROSSS) DAYS
lt.22-, 2 .;'*.e5" t73.:*12 l 52..57511 832. 255;"1011. 475C011i9O.92560l373.375031549.8250a1729.275QC
.**---*---+----+-------+-------*--------- -------------------**-------------****-------*
.'.5- 4 I 4 12.50

I I \
I I


I

I I I
*.5z + I 11.02
SI I

I I I I


-I I I \
I I
~. + + I I + 10,028
I I I*

I I I I
SI I + 5.
I I I I
I.5 I I II *
I I I






-------------------- -------------- ---------- ---- ------ --- ---- -----
.I I
I I I




1 i.
I I I








3/72 /72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77
\} I \ \







LG S TIME IN MONTHS: March 1972 to February, 1977


STaTISTI-S..
OF T (- SQUARED 16256 SIGNIFICANCE R GG
T R ET .INRCPT (A) 7-55 STO ERROR OF A .479







S iT3N FI 4 .^a6<1 SLOPE (0) .431131 STO ERROR OF e O0 340
S 5 EXCLUDE VALUES- MSSIG VALUES 9
SP-I----E--- --- ----- IF A COEFFICIENT ANNOT BE COMPUTE.
A-'ALICH ;CA TEc~i(S 1 TIME IN MONTHS: March. 1972 to February, 1977













Fig. 21: Bottomdissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977.


=LCH 5iArT-F '^'S 1 77/P3/11.
7: 's.\ -.~ (: -l;TION "3'E 77/ 4/,11.)
S: !-. -'E .;'" (Z N) --i5 (ACROSS) OAYS
2113.b?''.: ; :3.575': E*2. r 52 6 5r\2. -73 C 832 .1 25 i01 -' 75. 11 *?.9 31t 3 7, a.37-1>L9.
.* ---- -----+- ----+---- ---- --*-----*------- ------*--+ ---
S.- I I
I I
I I
I I A
I I
I I

I i
A t II


/
/
/

/


PAC-E 33


12 .L


1;.'4


I \ i [i :

\II
11 i ,(

i I I
I .
. I I i


.---*"-- -- --.--^* .----. .----.--.-- ---**-**~*- 4----+4 --..--- ----------+*--. -- ---- .
2/72 5172 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77


r. SCU'J:EO
IxTE.CEFT (A) -
9,r]i (r) <


A-- -1


STj Ec-O0 O A -


:.' v^J.


-'~ ; 37F:_' -c:'~-': _


C, -


A
+


7.5C



6.52


5.54


3.5A



z.eC













Fig. 22: Surface pH at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977.


-> .* .Lt*Jrr L t_'M I' Zi kC Ur' t ,'.U.

.. .17'" ".-' : 77/s.i/li. r.',E 31

.' : (CSPOSS) OATS
.. --'.7:. -. : ^.7 -.: 5- 3. 7SI 62. J1 5 1?!^.475"; -I393 5 6. ^7r.. ;
..---.-----..------.----.----.. -- .- .


II



-- -- -------^----,- A ^ ------- -- ----.4 4- --- ------ --- ** *- + *----- -A---- --"------ -- I -- -

I I
/' i
*




.i----------.--------.----------- i --------.-----------. -
LI I I I
I J I
Si I

I





I I
I I
S. i I




i I


I I
4 ii 1* i
-...-- .-- -4 -,- ----..-..-- ---- -- 4- ----- ...---- --- ----"- ---_. .....- t-- .. t.
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77

".L4C'- C.:,TTEPS .HS 2


- r '"" -U


* c717


INTERCEPT (A) -
SLOPE (2)


EXCLUDEC VALUES-


.02983
6.82876
.0U042


SIGNIFICANCE R -
STO EPPOR OF A -
STO ERROR OF 8 -


MISSING VALUE -


.*.**.. IS .. I'TJ) IF A VOEFFICISNT CANt;GT SE ^OUFUTE0.


a.53


6.64


.21533
.7515&



86













Fig. 23: Bottom'pH at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977.






2'."'.r 3; T'TT ..RL'S 2 77/03/ii. PAGE 33
S k.1' .*'*".-TIJ O" t -' 77/:, /11.,
.: ) :" (AC'OSs) DAYS
^.5.' :.3. '.' u 557. 71? 7 726. T 5rs 894.17-01iO62. 32501230.4750139.625 1566.77500173
*-------------------------*-------+----- ----------*-----------------------

I I










I+ 7. 7~ 1
i /





iVr
I I







----------------- ------ ----- --- --------- *--- ------ ---*------ - -- -- -
----------------- -------------- ------------------------------------------(---------i----------__7
II I 1


7'*"i I .79


II
I I I5

I I.

I I



I ,
-.*--.;-- .**.-...........---- - -+*---*-- ..--**- .--+.---
S-- O ,7 -
-', 11' .: } '.,rI 5 ; R rF ;














Fig. 24: Surface pH at Station 5 (East Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977






S: 77/3/11. AGE

'Ci'i C'J /-! (4CkOSSI DAYS
.;. .. .. T'-.-I .: ="'.7 : '6.-'5,;P g94..750'313 j2.j325C12,.475 l). 8.6 ..25 .156 b.775 .173.925z
^*-------t- --------.--------*------------,----+..-- -- -





-+---------+------ ------------------- ----*--- 7---------------------- ----+--- ---*--------- ---------- 4-
I I I

I
I I Ii


S5I I





II 7.92
I II



- - -- - - -- - - 1
1 I II
I I
I + 7.166


I I A I Z

7I I I
I A \

I I I
II
I----------------------*-----------***-- --- **** ---- -- --***- --- *
1 46



*1 I + 6 .62
I I
III


I I
S .3S ) r I TI 6.6










*T.2,39', Ih r ry p rF : ( 4) 7 ,t g s. ST O E kPO R OF A J 77 5

G;.,,Z ..; R' SLOPE (C) -.1ci15 STO ERROR OF 8 ,0 ,9
CLUDE VALUES- SS G VALUES 0







1 I"TD I A IO-FFICIENT CANNOT EE CO PUT\D.
II I


.------------------ -,--------------*.--
/723/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77




I (A) *-..1'"" -0:335 SI.YIFIC 1MCF. f- .3,?7?

; '- a-..CCiI =Sl-CP (c) -.^C'$5 STO ERROR OF A .Jcc9




*""*-** ; II r'T'r L IF rt ;0!;tFFICI~kIr C4NN'( I E I NCPUTFO-
A~.,~~,~~~.,i~r -nu;xii tiim ;Riil~












Fig. 25r Bottom pH at Station 5 (East Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977-





APALACH SCATTEGRA,'S 2 77/93/11. PAGE 9
F'TE NJNAME CREATIONN DATE s 77/03/11.1
SeATTEPRGRMA OF (COWN) QH-5 (ACROSS) DAYS
221.5750i 389.725' 557.75(0 726.025,0 $94.175Gil012.3250C1233.475CD1398.625C31566.7750 1734. 925.0
.------------- --* ---- -----*-------- --------------------
ii I
I I 1 I







L----------------..-----.1-----.----------------- ---------- ------- -.------.-----

7,76 + I i + 7.76
I I I I






I n
7., I I \ 34



II I I
I I I I7.5




I----------------------------------------------------------- -----.------------ ---- ---- --
I I I I
7.13 I I + 7. S
I I I I
i I i I

I I
I I
.3 + I A + 6.92


,7 I 6.71
I I i



5 + I 1 6.50
----*^----*----+-------------+----------- ---+ -*--*--******---+---+-*--**------
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 000
AP.LAC iC~TT"GRANS 2

.T.T.ST: o...
--' "-' L 5:. ;?.i iSLEC -. .CC 275 SIGNIFICANCE R .3S546
; :- : .I ..47 i T (A) 7.lfri) eTO r sMR or a .i A T-
S'^ : : ';:ui'TE (3) .CLIZ .r. ...;o r';

L-t.' ? v. u-S ; .CLULCE VALUES- S ?ISSI'; VALUES P1

.""..." '* 2:',.1~') IF CoErFC: r CAvN'YT E C'PUTr-

_~_ ~~ ____~_~ ._ ~__-______ __,-...- _ui.^-----..- n ^;l~.W<1-I-i. a: el*~Pfi-l -**"(*-*.'-* **r-





Fig. 26: Surface orthophosphate levels (pg/a) at Station 2A (Apalachicola Bay) from June, 1972
to September, 1976.
S---- ---- ---- ------------ -- ----- ---
SI I
I I I
1 1 I I
T I
I I I
I I r
T I I I
T i I
r l T
SI I T
4 ? + I I *
I I I T
ST I T
I I II
I I I
'1.3 + I I + 4
I I I
--------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------
I T I I
I I i
I I +

I I
I I 1I I
TI IT
1 T
+ I1 + 1


SI I
I- ----- - --T l [ --- -- -
S *.( I 1 4





SI I
I I I I



I I I I
I T T I





I I I T
I I I

S"I I I
1I I I

I T I / T
I I IT


S.10


+ v i
.+ -- ----- ---- -- -- ----. --- --1- /.- + .-- -- ---- -- --+---+-. ---+-- ----- -----
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76


77/0'/23.


SCATTI..,' IvFPSCN PiYSGFEM


PA;E 10


STATISTICS..
Lr-, r rLA 'r CI (Q)
STU Lt,- -F LST -
.I ':; FICANLE A -
'ClGhlFTiNCE B -
fLCO'fED ALUC -


.28143
1o.?4320
.20392-
.03731


R SQUAPEDO
INTEPCEFT (A) -
,LOFE (B)


XGCLUI'ED VALUES-


.07923
3.97436
.00829


SIGNIFICANCE R -
Sin ERROR OF A -
STO ERROR OF 0 -


PrSSInr, VALUES -


S*'*"*** IS PRINTFO If A Cnr.FFICIrNT CANNOT IE COMPUTED.


~ -r-p----- -sICIrr-- I-- U I~WUl~Ur~I~I~CC-- 14--
- -'L.-- ... & ..-i


f'). "







47.82



41.93



6. 14



Id .30



24.46



19.6?





12.78



6.94



1.10


.03731
4.74990
.0045?


5







Fig. 27: Surface orthophosphate levels (pg/l) at Station 5 (East Bay) from November, 1972 to
September, 1976.
--------------------**-------- --------------.----------- .-. .-.
/ 7 '.
.I I I

I I
SI jI
7 4 . I 4 .97
I I T I
I I I I
I I I I


1 T I I
I I I



I I 1
.2 I I *
I I I I
I I I I
I I
















.7 --------------------- ----------- ----------- -------- ----- -- ---- -----
II Ir
I T i
l I T
I I















S?55 OF S 162472 INTCPT A) 8.392 n OP OF A 8.3I73
T S
I I I -L' 5
I I I I


i I I -
I-----------------------------------------------------------------------I
+ T 9







-I - -- - i
I ...... I I. ....

CI T I
C 0 IT,
I I I
T T
I t I
S4------------
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/7/5 3/76 6/76 91/7






,.1101 P U~J-P lU- .02894 .I1,6;IFICJ'1C[ 2 ,163 2
C t, OF [ST iE,62.72 4?ITE0CEPT (A) 8.33982 ': EHPOP OF A 8,tJ73
'IFiCd.F A .IF 230 SL[FE (B) .1073': CCTR(n rD'P F U .0??F





*.';- .-" - -U .f'O)'2







Fig. 23: Surface nitrate values (pg/t) at Station 2A (Apalachicola Bay) from May, 1972 to
September, 1976.
.4----,----+----t--_------- ---------------------------- ------- ---------------------------------
I.O' I ?5 00
I I
I I I
t I
I I
I T I
I I I
I T I T
+UN* O I I 41 0
] I
I I I I
T I
17".20 + 1 179.20
I I I

I I I







-. -......- ..... ......... .. - "T
ST T
+3.60 1 153.60
II
1 T I
I II
I I I
T I I
SI
IT I
I I





I T I
II .


.t---*---+--J--l- -------- ------ -- -*-------*.------' ^ -




3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 1
S EON PhYHEM 7/03/3 PAGE 8
II I T
i I I I









STATIT7TTCS..
F T








CP0.rATI-0. (RL- -.0 x07 L SCUfRFD 00103 S2N5FI CE .60
S R S 27656 INT T ) 8 661 ST OF ?8
1 1 I











T ',lFIC.k:.i..,r- t ,. t 1 lO
i I I I
0+ I I 0
**--+- ----+ ----+~---**--~-----i----- +*--+---- 1 *****---**---+)--~- --~----+----- ~L-,-r-****-----r,-* r
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 o'ou
StATrIu IdE9"fN I'btGHEM 77/03/23. PAGE 8

STATI'TICS.,
COPrFLATIO0I (R)- -.01207 R SQUARFO .00103 SIUNIFICANCE P .41910
STl r~R uF EST 82.67656 INTLRcrPT (a) 87.76E41 ST') FRIROR OF A 28.31 S87
'lINIFILA\'F A .00174 SLOFL (R) -.00556 STD ERROR OF B .0270'4

PL(TTL" OUiV 41 EXCLUnEO JALUr'- 0 NISSTN( VALUES 3


. P






Fig. 29: Surface nitrate values (pg/l) at Station 5 (East Bay) from October, 1972 to September, 197G.
.f--. ------------------- ----t ----- ----t'--- t----t------- ------t.--------------------.-----------
t II I
I aI |
1* I I
i I I
?q7.40 I A72. 0
I I I
I I I
I I Ij
222 .4 a 1 2?2.40
1 I I
I r



173.20 1 1 1 .4 173.20



I I I
I I T


I I I I
SI

173.20 T I 173.
I 4 T +
T IP


# T T
I T
I I I
I I I I

T' I T
T
TT I




T I
I +



SI T s..
. .... + .. o .... ..---....---...---....---------------------------------------....---...---....---...---....---







! ; LAc I.'T (C)- -. 15014 R SCUARL .02254 ~ISNIF16AMCL P .
TC Or, L-S, 7d.o6238 INTEkCFPT (A) 136.90121 STO EFPROP OF A 39.1,1377
[CtiFIrA'Cr A .000,8 SLOFF (o) -.0?97F. Roop lF B .0341tt
J~ :F ICAi-r .r9..b

LrI'LLJ vLUES 33 7ACLUPLID VALUES- U MISSIt; VALUMi 11

,. 14 F RTi Or) IF A flFtF 'ICIFFIT CANNOT PL COtIUIED.
., ....... .1 ................. .. .































V. Phytoplankton Productivity and Nutrient Analysis
















PHYTOPLANKTON ECOLOGY OF APALACHICOLA BAY, FLORIDA








Richard L. Iverson

Vernon B. Myers









Department of Oceanography

Florida State University











INTRODUCTION

Apalachicola Bay is a shallow, bar-built estuary approximately 12

miles long and 7 miles wide with a mean depth of 2.7 meters (M.L.W.). The

bay is protected to the south by a line of barrier islands adjacent to

the Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 1) and receives an average daily freshwater

input of 22,000 cfs from the Apalachicola River (U.S. Geological Survey,

1971). Apalachicola Bay supports the major Florida oyster fishery

(Colberg, et al., 1968.; Menzel and Cake, 1969). Dawson (1955) investigated

the hydrography of the bay while Gorsline (1963) described hydrographic

and submarine geological features of the bay. Less than 7 percent of

the bay bottom supports macrophyte growth (National Estuarine Study, 1970)

suggesting that phytoplankton are the primary autotrophs in Apalachicola Bay.

The investigation reported here was designed to determine patterns of

phytoplankton standing crop and productivity as well as factors controlling

phytoplankton productivity in Apalachicola Bay.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Stations were set at various locations in Apalachicola Bay (Fig. 2)

and sampling was started July, 1972. Water temperature and salinity

were measured with a Beckman RS5-3 in situ CSTD. Solar radiation data

was obtained from a pyrheliometer located at the FSU Marine Laboratory.

Apalachicola River discharge, measured at a gauging station near

Chattahoochee, Florida, was obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey.

Samples for chemical and biological analysis were taken at the surface

and bottom of the water column. Turbidity was measured with a Hach

Model 2100A turbidimeter. Total carbon dioxide for use in computing

phytoplankton productivity data was measured with an Oceanography










International carbon analyzer using the method of Menzel and Vaccaro (1964).

Nutrient samples were filtered through pre-washed Whatman GF/A glass fiber

filters and poured into nalgene bottles. After addition of 1 ml of a 2

percent (w/v) solution of mercuric chloride, the samples were placed on

ice where they were kept until analyzed. Molybdate-reactive phosphorus

was measured using the Murphy and Riley method (Strickland and Parsons,

1972). Nitrate was analyzed with a modification of the Morris and Riley

method (Strickland and Parsons, 1972) Nitrite was measured with the

Bendschneider-Robinson method (Strickland and Parsons, 1972). Reactive

silicate was measured according to the Mullin-Riley method with modifications

as given in Strickland and Parsons (1972).

Five hundred milliliters of water were passed through a Whatman

GF/A glass fiber filter for chlorophyll analysis with the spectrophotometric

method given in Strickland and Parsons (1972). Phytoplankton productivity

was measured with the carbon-14 method (Steeman-Nielsen, 1952). Samples

were incubated in situ for about three hours after which the contents of

the 180 ml incubation bottles were filtered through Whatman GF/C scintillation

grade glass fiber filters. Radiocarbon activity on the filters was measured

by liquid scintillation spectrometry using Aquasol as the scintillation

cocktail. One hundred milliliter aliquotes of bay water were filtered

through Millipore 0.45 micron filters for analysis of phytoplankton

species composition by the method of McNabb (1960). Nutrient enrichment

experiments were conducted with water from East Bay and from Apalachicola

Bay using modifications of the methods of Ryther and Guillard (1959) and

Menzel and Ryther (1961). (See appendices I and II for details of the

methods).











RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The circulation of surface waters of Apalachicola Bay is controlled

by wind (Fig. 2). Bottom circulation was uncoupled from wind except

following periods when wind speeds were high enough to mix the water

column.

River discharge is the primary factor which controls nutrient

concentrations in Apalachicola Bay (Table 1). Surface nitrate concentrations

in both East Bay and Apalachicola Bay were highest during winter periods

of maximum river discharge (Fig. 3, 4). An increase in surface phosphate

concentration was also observed during winter periods of maximum river

discharge (Fig. 5,6). Maxima in phosphate concentrations, observed during

1976 were the result of wind-mixing of sediments into the water column

during periods of strong winds over the bay (Myers, manuscript in preparation).

Phosphate maxima of this magnitude are not observed in the data record

prior to 1976 since boats available for use were not capable of operation

during periods of high winds. There do not appear to have been significant

changes in yearly cycles of surface nitrate or phosphate concentrations at

these two stations over the sampling period.

Surface phytoplankton productivity patterns exhibit maxima ,in the

spring and minima in the fall and winter (Fig. 7,8). Results of nutrient

enrichment experiments suggest that nutrients are not limiting for

phytoplankton productivity during the winter but are limiting during the

summer (Estabrook, 1973). An extensive investigation of summer nutrient

limitation revealed that phosphate was the primary nutrient limiting

phytoplankton productivity both in East Bay and in Apalachicola Bay with

nitrate limiting productivity with frequency less than phosphate in










Apalachicola Bay (Appendices I and II). Water temperature is a major factor

which limits phytoplankton productivity in this estuarine system (Fig. 9).

Chlorophyll a can be used to estimate phytoplankton biomass (Lorenzen,

1968). A comparison of surface chlorophyll a values reveals a general

-decrease in maximum values for Apalachicola Bay (Fig..10)compared to East

Bay (Fig. 11). Further data analysis will be required to determine the

cause of this apparent decrease.

REFERENCES

Colberg, M.R., T.S. Dietrich, and D.M. Windham. 1968. The social and

economic values of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Final Report to

Fed. Water Pollution Contorl Admin. Contract No. 14-12-117. 58 p.

Dawson, C.E. 1955. A contribution to the hydrography of Apalachicola

Bay, Florida. Inst. Mar. Sci. 4:13-35.

Estabrook, R.H. 1973. Phytoplankton ecology and hydrography of Apalachicola

Bay, Florida. M.S. Thesis, Florida State University. 166 p.

Gorsline, D.S. 1963. Oceanography of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. In

T. Clements (ed.). Essays in Marine Geology in Honor of K.O. Emery.

p. 69-96.

Lorenzen, C. 1968, Carbon/chlorophyll relationships in an upwelling area.

Limnol. Oceanogr. 13:202-204.

McNabb, C.D. 1960. Enumeration of freshwater phytoplankton concentrated

on the membrane filter. Limnol. Oceanogr. 5:57-61.

Menzel, D.W. and J.H. Ryther. 1961. Nutrients limiting the production of

phytoplankton in the Sargasso Sea with special reference to iron.

Deep Sea Res. 7:276-281.

Menzel, D.W. and R.F. Vaccaro. 1964. The measurement of dissolved organic











and particulate carbon in seawater. Limnol. Oceanogr. 9:138-142.

Menzel, R.W. and E.W. Cake, Jr. 1969. Identification and analysis of

the biological value of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Final report

to the Fed. Water Poll. Contr. Admin. Contract No. 14-12-191. 164 p.

Ryther, J.H. and R.R.L. Guillard. 1959. Enrichment experiments as a means

of studying nutrients limiting to phytoplankton production. Deep Sea

Res. 6:65-69.

Steeman-Nielsen, E. 1952. The use of radioactive carbon (C-14) for

measuring organic production in the sea. J. du Conseil. 18:117-140.

Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons. 1972. A practical handbook of

seawater analysis. Bull. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada No. 167 (2nd ed.).











TABLE I

CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF LINEAR REGRESSIONS OF NITRATE,
ORTHOPHOSPiATE, SILICATE, AND AMMONIA ON SALINITY




Date NO3 P04 SiO3 N"3


Oct 14, 1972



Dec 2, 1972



Jan 6, 1973



Feb 17, 1973



Mar 19, 1973



Apr 22, 1973



May 19, 1973



Jun 11, 1973



Jul 12, 1973



Aug 22, 1973



Sep 10, 1973


T -.70

B +.12

T -.88

B -.75

T -.55

B -.84

T +.002

B +.58

T -.95

B -.97

T -.76

B -.62

T -.88

B -.96

T -.60

B -.94

T -.82

B -.80

T -.90

B -.91

T -.99

B -.98


-.73

-.14

-.20

-.55

-.89

-.82

-.95

-.11

-.78

-.,60

-.77

-.62

-.54

-.65

-.01

-.61

-.10

+.42

+.04

-.84

-.29


-.98

-.85

-.99

-.87

-.33

-.002

-.98

-.998

-.93

-.80

-.998

-.99

-.995

-.93

-.97

-.93

-.95

-.94

-.995


-.02

-.15

-.85

-.45

--.67

-.93

-.48

-.81

-.55

+.06

-.82

+.03

-.50

-.91

-.83


-.99 -.98



































































Figure 1. Map of Apalachicola Bay


_____ ___
















































Figure 2. Surface salinity isopleths. East Bay and Apalachicola Bay sample locations are indicated
as terisks.








....~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ -'- -.. ... ... -" - 4- ... -. .- 4 -
-----------+--------
II
!: i
TT T
2-2 .1 + 27? 4
I r
I T

-97. + 1 97? "n
I I

7:- 20 I 4 73.2
I [A I I
.- ---------- ....--.-.----...--. -..

7+ r
T T
IV160 1 1 1 410f

i T I




S : I ]
I "r T L ....
T T




2,Ib I+
T i
, I T I I









I I I+ .0


.... .. .... + -. -- "-. ." . + *--+-------------


3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/"4 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 (00
Figure 3. Surface nitrate -nitrogen in East Bay.
Figure 3. Surface nitrate-nitrogen- in East Bay. 1 ,








f .-'--- --------- ---- ------ +----+ --- ----+---- ---- ---- ----- ---+------ -+---- ----+ --------+----+t .
!; ;. I ;, 1
:T :' M

?3i .4 r
T I

T I
SI I
IT I I
Zsa.SG ,,* ?"''.o


t79.20 +7q.20


-- -------- -_----+---- ------ ----- --- ----------------+----- ------ -- ---- --- --- --- ------
i I
S' Ti


1 0 15 .6
T T


C ( 4I i

$ I1 / HI
I I
I


,, i r
*I I I
_.- ___----- _-. -_ --.- ----_---^- ---.-,- -- ---!-_ -_ -_ --.-i- -_ _. ^---. --r -_ ii-p _- .._
6G : i i i\ r




/ I I I

j I 1 I
I 1
I I I I
I5^ i V'/i j \ j /-'^



; --------.---.---.-^-.--- ---".*+----- ------- .----+A-.--'-++- /---. 4.,---- ----..-f.-.4...-.4 -+---4.w--*-
.'/?2 C/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 5/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/7.

Figure 4. Surface nitrate-nitrogen in East Bay.









7e 70


7".97


7. 3a


T
T

T i
r
r 1
I
i T


I i
T r
T I
---------------------------------'^-'-'-"------------------------

T


I

I
39.55 I

3 2
31. 72 -.

r
*'--'-.-.- _._ ?-'----


I
I
I


T
+
I
I
I

I


16 I
I -l I

T




.7-*I
I T I

SI

*-_- -_~--,J.--_ A----L----~-^--- +--* ~--__A-----Jr------*------ L~-r-------.- --_-L--.-l~ L-----^JII--- *-- --*--__*__-
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 .3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76


Figure 5. Surface po'sphate-P in East Bay.


,Z.r. 4








47. *



3jg.55



31.72



27."? 8 -


8.23


7 .17









,-.------.------- ---+----------------+--------+----*----- ---+-----+-------*-------+------+---+.
59.57 I + 59.50
I I I

S-I I
I I I
I I I
53.66 I I

I I I
=I I



6.1 I + 3I.14
I II
4:7 I I+ 41.
i T




'I I .+ . 14
------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------

I I










T /7 I ]
1 I
I I


T T i




.I I + I






Vt6 / +It .5 lIco
19 6 Z -- -. .- -- -.- ---- .- - - -- -
TI I o








Figure 6. Surface hosphate-P n Apaahoa Bay.
12 7I + 12.78






I i
3.10 + I I +i
.- -. --a i -- ---*--- + -- -- ----+----+----+----+-------es--- ----+-- --------+----t----+----+----+---- .
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 -3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 -/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76

Figure 6. Surface Phosphate-P in Apalachicola Bay.








..----....+-.-.. -+--+-- --*-------- ------ -+----+- .+----.----* ----+----- -.---. ----+----.
P?."f I I. 4 72.00
I I I T
IT i I
I I I T
I I I I
i.90 a T + 64.90
I T I I
I I I I
S7. 0 I I 57.80
I I I I
I I I T
T T I
I\ I
. 7u .I I. 50070
TT
7I I I
T -/--- ----- -- -- -i \- *i -- -
SI I I
tI T 1 43.60








T-------........................\L-.-..----..-.. ............J.... ................... ......_O
0 22.30
r,. + + I I + 36 .50



T IL T
I I I I








11i 1 1 Ai
I TI I

I I I
294i 0 I + 22.30
I I a









1.00 + I
i I I i
37I I 9 6 / 3 6 9
S6.2e I I + 16520
II I



+~io I 8.10
r I I I
I T I
1. 00 1 1.0

3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6175 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76


Figure 7. Surface primary productivity in East Bay.









...---- -----+--- +----- ----.------------+---- -----.----- -- ----------------- ---.
q9.00 + I I + 99.00
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
i I I T
89.20 + I I 89.20
I I T I
I I I T
I I I I
I I I I
/9.40 + I 7940
I I I I
I T I I
I I I I
I I I I
69.60 + I I + 69.60
I I I I
]------- ----------------- ----------------- ---------------------- -- T
I I I I
$I I I I
59.80 + I I + 59.80
I T I I
I I I I



I T T I
S50.0 + I 0.00
I I I i*
T T
I I I II
40.20 + I I 40.20
1 I I I IN



I I I
I I I
SI I I
T I T I
I I I
20.t0 ++ 20.60





I T I
I I \I / I I
1n. I 8 \ I \. / \ B f t 10.80



1.00 + I I + .00
---*,, --- --- .*-- +,-* --*- --- ---+- ---+ -- ----------+.-------+---*------ -+--- --- -- ----- --- ----+ .
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 QO

Figure 8. Surface primary productivity in Apalachicola Bay.





83.


/ /
0/

0 /

/








/ -.


0 5 10
WATER


15 20
TEMP (0C.)


Figure 9. Productivity as a function of temperature.


-- --Oc-Feb
- --Feb-Sep


70-


60O


/.


501


I,,


L





U)

E


40-


30-


o


l-.'I
*~, *
rssO
O


201-


10-


25


30


-- -


T ... .. m


I









l~'ic i t-i~ ~~ c)--- ~--- ^- ~--~--- ---+,--+-,-1-,--.
1'.10 I.
T I
I I
1
II
11.95 + I I
I I T

TT
I I
I I
T T
T I

I
a.50 I

T I
SI
I5 I
S7,3I


iI
SI
6. h'20 +I

--- --- --- ----.-- --
i i
I
L) I
SI


3.90 +
T
I
i
2.75 +
T
I
T
7
t.63- +


13.10


11.95


10.80


9.65


.850


7.35


6.20

00


T I

S26

I I
- 7 2-L--- /*1--2* / 3-/ 6-3 /3 / **4 /- -2--/ --3-/-- + --+-- ---+ -7--5-- -2-- /- ----+--7--6-
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76


.75


.60


Figure 10. Surface chlrophyll a for Apalachicola Bay.









.#----+---- ----+-------------------- ----+--------* ----- ---- --- -- -
tr.E 4 I T
I I I I
T T I I
I I I I
y T T
SI I
T r r
I I
V I I i
4 Ir t I I
I I

T I I
I I 1
TT T T
T.L1 1 1 4
r-".........----- .-- -. --- .--r-- -f--- -.-----
.4a I I I
I I I I



5.55 + I I
T r r



I I I I

I I I \
4.62 I I I
I I I I
I I I i
I I I
I I
I I I
I TI I


1.7 + I I
I I I
I I I
I T I


I T I
I TI I


TI IT
r I I r
T IT
.80 + I

I... r
r.


------- +- ....... +-......- -- .-- .-- -+- --..- ---- .
3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76

Figure 11. Surface chloropty -r-Tf E-t-Bsay...


'I


10.20



9.77



s i4



7.41


6.48



5.55



4.62


3.69


1 *81


.90





86.




APPENDIX 1




,.


-87.


ASPECTS OF NUTRIENT LIMITATION OF PHYTOPLANKTON

PRODUCTIVITY IN THE APALACHICOLA BAY SYSTEM



by

Vernon B. Myers

Richard L. Iverson

Dept. of Oceanography
Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida











INTRODUCTION

The quantification of the extent of nutrient limitation in a marine

ecosystem is critical for the prediction of the response of the system to

various nutrient related stresses. To make sound environmental policy,

the critical nutrients and the relationships between these nutrients and

plant productivity must be known.

In estuarine systems, patterns of nutrient limited phytoplankton

production are complex and variable. It has been suggested that while

nutrients can limit phytoplankton growth in stratified estuaries, shallow,

well-mixed estuaries usually have nutrients, and especially phosporus, present

in excess of phytoplankton demands (Pomeroy, et al, 1972). However, spatial

and temporal variability in nitrogen and phosphorus limitation have been

identified in both types of estuaries (Putnam, 1967; Flemer, 1970; Carpenter,

1971; Ryther & Dunstan, 1971; Thayer, 1971; Kraswick & Caperon, 1973).

Nitrogen occurs in estuarine systems in various dissolved, and particulate

forms. Nitrite, nitrate, molecular nitrogen, ammonium, urea, dissolved

organic nitrogen, particulate organic nitrogen, and amino acids are nitrogen

forms that can be used directly or indirectly by plankton in marine ecosystems

(Dugdale & Goering, 1967; Riley & Chester, 1971; Carpenter, 1971; Thayer,

1971). The distribution of the different nitrogen forms in marine environments

is controlled by complex interactions between biological, physical, and

chemical processes.

Phosphorus occurs in estuarine systems, in a variety of collodial,

dissolved, and particulate forms (Taft, et al, 1975). The distribution of the
A
forms of phosporus in marine systems is controlled by physical, chemical, and

biological processes. The residence time of phosphate in coastal systems is









fairly short, between 5 and 100 hours (Pomeroy, 1960). Phosphorus concen-

trations in estuarine systems may be controlled by reversible sorption

reactions between sediments and the overlying water (Rochford, 1951; Carritt

& Goodgal, 1954; Jitts, 1959). Biological activity within the sediments can

also move significant amounts of phosphorus between the sediments and the

water column (Pomeroy et al, 1965; Hale, 1975), and has been shown to

control the seasonal cycle of phosphorus concentrations in several shallow

turbid estuaries (Pomeroy, et al, 1972). Phosphorus fluxes within estuaries

can also be dominated by reactions occurring within the water column.

Phosphorus uptake within the water column is usually due to phytoplankton

and/or bacteria (Correll, et al, 1975; Taft, et al; 1975). Regeneration of

phosphorus within the water column can take place by autolysis, zooplankton

consumption and remineralization, or bacterial degradation (Pomeroy, et al,

1963; Martin, 1968; Hargrave & Geen, 1968; Peters & Rigler, 1973;

Barsdate, et al, 1974).

Previous phytoplankton productivity studies in Apalachicola Bay

indicated that nitrogen and phosphorus were potential limiting nutrients,

while silicate and trace metal additions never stimulated phytoplankton

productivity (Estabrook, 1973). This paper presents preliminary results of:

nutrient enrichment experiments and phosphate uptake experiments designed to

quantify the extent of nutrient limited phytoplankton production and to

determine the importance of phosphorus in the Apalachicola Bay System.












MATERIALS & METHODS
Sampling trips to Apalachicola Bay and East Bay (Fig. 1, Livingston

et al.) were taken seasonally during 1975 and 1976 to determine the extent

of nutrient limitation in the Bay System. A detailed description of the

physiography and biota of the Apalachicola Bay System can be found

in Livingston et al (1974).

Water temperature and salinity were determined with a Beckman RS 5-3

Portable salinometer. Secchi disc measurements -were taken to estimate light

attenuation with depth. Turbidities were analyzed with a Hach model 2100

A Turbidometer. Suspended solids were determined gravimetically. Inorganic

suspended solids were also determined gravimetically after ashing the samples

at 5500C for 4 hrs.

500 ml water samples were collected at stations 1A in East Bay and

7 in Apalachicola Bay, for nutrient analysis (Fig. 1, Livingston et al).

Samples were immediately filtered through Whatman GF/A glass fiber filters

upon collection. One ml of 2% HgCl2 solution was added to eliminate microbial

processes and the samples were then placed on ice. All nutrients were

analyzed within 48 hrs. Soluble reactive phosphate was analyzed by the

method of Murphy and Riley as out lined in Strickland.& Parsons (1972).

Total dissolved phosphate was analyzed by the persulfate oxidation method

listed in Standard Methods (1971). Nitrite was determined by the method

of Bendschneider & Robinson given in Strickland & Parsons (1972). Nitrate

determinations were based on the method of Morris & Riley with modifications

given in Strickland & Parsons (1972).

Chlorophyll-a was determined by the method of Loftus & Carpenter









(1971) or the spectrophotometric method given in Strickland & Parsons (1972).

The total inorganic carbon ( C02) content of the water was either

determined with a Total Carbon Analyzer (Oceanography International, Inc.)

using an infrared detector or from a salinity vs CO2 standard curve

determined from 2 years of data collected in the Bay System. Dissolved

organic carbon was determined by the method of Menzel & Vaccaro (1964) using

the Total Carbon Analyzer. Phytoplankton taxonomy was determined by the

method of Holmes (1962). Cell carbon was estimated from cell volumes

according to the method of Strathmann (1967).

Two-factorial nutrient enrichment experiments with nitrogen and phosphorus

were conducted with phytoplankton in water samples from stations in East

Bay and Apalachicola Bay. General methods of nutrient enrichment experiments

can be found in Scheleske, et al (1974) and Gerhart & Likens (1975). Water

was collected in 20 1 polyethylene carboys and aliquots were placed in 500 ml

glass incubation bottles. Samples from each station were treated with either

0, 5, or 50 ug-atm/1 nitrate-nitrogen or 0.0,0.2,0.5, or 5.0 ug-atm/1 phosphate-

phosphorus. Nutrients were added as 1 ml volumes. Duplicates were prepared

for each concentration. A 4 hour acclimation period was begun about 10 hours

and was followed by an incubation with either 2 or 4 uCi 14C labeled

bicarbonate for approximately 4 hours. Incubation and acclimation were

performed in situ Two 100 ml aliquots from each bottle were filtered

through Whatman GF/C glass fiber filters. The filters were placed in 5 ml

of AquasolR and the activity was determined by liquid scintillation counting

(LSC). Primary productivity was calculated by the method of Strickland

and Parsons (1972).

Phosphorus uptake was measured in the Apalachicola Bay System to

determine phosphate dynamics and uptake rates of natural plankton communities.




Full Text

PAGE 1

121. APPENDIX 3



PAGE 1

ENERGY RELATIONSHIPS AND THE PRODUCTIVITY OF APALACHICOLA BAY Robert J. Livingston1 Richard L. Iverson2 David C. White 1 1 DEpartment of Biological Science Department of Oceanography Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida Final Report of Project R/EM-4 The information contained in this paper was developed under the auspices of the Florida Sea Grant College Program, with support from the NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U. S. Department of Commerce, grant number 046-158-44055. This document is a Technical Paper of the State University System of Florida Sea Grant College Program, 2001 McCarty Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. Technical Papers are duplicated in limited quantities for specialized audiences requiring rapid access to information, which may be unedited. June, 1976



PAGE 1

305. Table 3 :Concentrations ofL DD'-R and Arochlor 1254 (pg/g) in sediments taken from Lake SOeminole and the Apalachicola Bay System from March, 1972 to Octob-r, 1973 Lake Scm'.inole Apalachicola Bay System Arochlor Arochlor Station Date DDT-R 1254 Station Date DDT-R 1254 1 4/72 0.000 0.000 1 3/73 0.000 0.000 5/72 0.006 0.005 7/72 0.000 0.000 2 3/72 0.000 0.000 10/72 0.007 0.000 4/72 0.000 0.000 7/73 0.002 0.009 6/72 0.000 0.000 8/73 0.000 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.000 10/73 0.005 0.016 3 3/72 0.000 0.040 2 4/72 0.005 0.039 4/72 0.000 0.000 5/72 0.000 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.000 6/72 0.000 0.000 11/72 0.000 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.009 8/72 0.000 0.000 4 6/72 0.000 0.000 4/73 0.002 0.002 7/72 0.000 0.000 11/72 0.000 0.000 3 4/72 0.010 0.000 1/73 0.000 0.000 5/72 0.016 0.000 6/72 0.000 0.000 5 11/72 0.000 0.000 12/72 0.000 0.000 4 4/72 0.024 0.000 5/72 0.007 0.000 6 6/72 0.000 0.000 10/72 0.000 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.000. 4/73 0.028 0.003 11/72. 0.000 0.000 7/73 0.000 0.008 8/73 0.000 0.000 7. 3/72 0.000 0.000 6/72 0.000 0.000 5 4/72 0.003 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.000 5/72 0.000 0.000 --11/72 0.000 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.009 8/72 0.000 0.000 10/72 0.000 0.019 4/73 0.002 0.001 7/73 0.014 0.008 6 4/72 0.000 0.000 5/72 0.052 0.000 6/72 0.000 0.000 7/72 0.000 0.000 7 5/72 0.000 0.000



PAGE 1

Table 4: Biomass (g, dry weight) of fishes and invertebrates taken in Vallisneria beds in East Bay at night from November, 1975 to October, 1976: A. Total Biomass/15 m3 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. 4A(Bottom) 197.99 103.79 4.75 5.88 171.11 109.96 143.63 100.58 67.27 84.28 102.95 112.23 4A(Surface) ---0.010 0.43 0.71 1.23 12,18 120.97 96.07 46.46 1.98 4.40 1.79 4B(Bottom) 373.56 133.79 3.57 7.14 141.46 201,51 195.16 83.97 35.68 124.43 95.40 47.43 4B(Surface) --.003 0.14 1.23 0.89 7.26 25.61 75.28 44.05 30.09 5.37 0.60 B. Biomass/m2 Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. 4A(Bottom) 2.20 1.15 .0528 .0653 1.90 1.22 1.60 1.22 .747 .936 1.14 1.25 4B(Bottom) 4.15 1.49 .0397 .0793 1.57 2.44 2.17 0.933 0.396 1.38 1.06 0.527



PAGE 1

13. amphipods, isopods, etc.), only mean ash-free dry weights were determined per species. Dry weights were obtained by oven-drying samples for 48 hours at 1050C. Ash-free dry weights were obtained by ignition of the specimens in a muffle furnace for 1 hour at 5500C. Preliminary samples indicated less than 1% error was introduced by reducing the ignition time from the recommended 3 hours (Cummins and Waycheck, 1971) to 1 hour. Linear regression equations utilizing a log-log (natural logs) transformation were calculated for each species where data were available (Table 1). These were calculated according to the following general equation; In (weight*) = In (length**) a-b where a&b = regression coefficients * weight = dry weight (fishes) = ash free dry weight (invertebrates) ** length = standard length (fishes) = total or carapace width (invertebrates) For those invertebrate species where no length or width measurements were taken a representative grouping according to size was dried and/or ashed; a single mean weight per individual was given for that species. For those species collected so rarely that no length-weight relationship could be established, regression equations or average weights of similar species (similar body shape, size, etc.) were substituted. These equations are also included in Table 1 along with the type species. Literature cited: Cummins, K.W. and J.C. Waycheck. (1971). Caloric equivalents for investigations in ecological energetics. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. No. 18, 158 pp.



PAGE 1

201. Detritus, Ash Free Detritus, Ash Total Ratio of Dry Weight (7 m) Free Dry Dry Organic A: total (Kg/month) Date Station Weight (g/l) Weight (g/1) detritus B: total (tons/month) 7T 0.0001495 0.8401 A. 814, 794 3/77 7B 0.0003156 2.5212 B. 896 7M 0.0002326 1.6806 1.42 8 0.0002952 1.1966



PAGE 1

143. REFERENC ES And-:;r:son, J.W. and C.C. Stephens, 1969. Uptake of organic material by aquatic invertebrates. VI. Role of epiflora in apparent uptake of glycine by marine crustaceans. Mar. Biol., Vol. 4, pp. 243-249. .(1.'o , G.C. and R .P. 7ZIutscl!, 1970. Releas3e of dissolved organic matter by marine phytoplankton in coastal and offshore areas of the northeast Pacific Ocean. Limnol. Oceanogr., Vol. 15, pp. 402-407. Bramford, I.R. and R. Gingles, 1974. Absorption of sugars in the gill of the Japanese oyster, Crassostrea gigas. Comp. Biochem. Physiol., Vol. 49A, pp. 637-646. Btmford, D.R. and R. McCrea, 1975. Active absorption of neutral and basic amino acids by the gill of the common cockle, Cerasroderma edule. Comp. Biochem. Physiol., Vol 50A, pp. 811-817. Bermnan, T. and O. Holm-Hansen, 1974. Release of photo-assimilated carbon as dissolved organic matter by marine phytoplankton. Mar. Eiol., Vol. 28, pp. 305-310. Bi.igh, E.G. and W.J. Dyer, 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Can. J. Biochem. Physiol., Vol. 37, pp. 911-917. Ccstell, J.D. ancl D.J. Trider, 1974. Preliminary feeding trials us:ng atrtificial diets to study the nutritional requirements of oysters Cra-:ssostrea virginica). J. Fish. Res. Board Can., Vol. 31, pp. 95-99. Collie, A., 1959. Some observations on the respiration of the American oyster Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin). Inst. Mar. Sci., Vol. 6, pp. 29-108. Collier, A., S.M. Ray, A.W. Magnitzky and J. Bell, 1953. Effects of dissolved organic substances on oysters. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Fish. Bull., Vol. 54, pp. 167-185. Efford, I.E. and K. Tsumura, 1973. Uptake of dissolved glucose and glycine by Pisidium, a freshwater bivalve. Can. J. Zool., Vol. 51, pp. 825-832. Fogg, G.E., 1963. The role of algae in organic production in aquatic environments. Fr. Phycol. Bull., Vol. 2, p. 195. Gillespie, L., R.M. Ingle and W.K. Havens, Jr., 1964. Glucose nutrition and longevity in oysters. Quart. Journ. Fl. Acad. Sci., Vol. 27, pp. 279-288. 15



PAGE 1

Figure 27, continued B SFtT7qS TCP TEN FISi PnIOM$ASS khOLE BAY 77/03/z3. PAGE 13 FILVE WCN3M'CsEATION 'TE 1 77/03/23.) SCi,,fT *iA-' CF (COHWt) 4 APEN (ACPOSS) DAYS 10r.47500 284.42500 464.37500 644.32500 824.27500014.2250011O4.175001364.125001544.075001724.02509 ,+t-_-^_ -+ .----_-----«---------_--.4--------+-----*------*.-----«----------155.33 * I I 4 155.38 I I .I I I I I I I I T SI I I + I 13984 1 1 I I I T I I I I I I I I I 1V..30 + T I f 124.30 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I 13.77 + I 1 108.77 I I I I I-------------------------------------------------------?3.t3 + I I 4 93.?3 I I I I T T I T I I I I I I I I " 9 I I 4 77.69 C I I I I I I I I I I I I T-------------------------------------------I I I T 66.51 + I I * 46.61 r I I I I I I I T I I I I I I ] .S * I I I 31.08 I I I I II I I I I T .+ I * 15.54 T I I I I I I I I I I .....4. ...f . -~------~---------2--C-rL---C-----------------3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 3 SrOT5 7!T? TE:, FIS' 20ICASS I3HOLE 9Ay 77/03/23. PAGE 14 STATTI;eS.. -TI, ('-.120ol R SQUARED -.01455 SIGNIFTCANCE 0 -.17932 -'.: F **ST * ?.01C22 INTERCfPT (A) -6.81057 ST[ EPPOR OF A -5.15184 SC -.C9A SLOF (P,) --.045'5 'TC E-'PJ OF a -.'f'92 3::' ! I-'C a -.17332 *S -f .... .. * t " ; » » "5 ': " :Tt ' -^ r < rv-F r c ,T KATrl, n r s .4 4_' .'!'S .



PAGE 1

290. Giam, C. S., A. R. Hanks, R. L. Richardson, W. M. Sackett and M. K. Wong: DDT, DDE, and polychlorinated biphenyls in biota from the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea-1971. Pest. Mon. Jour. 6(3), 139-143 (1972). Haedrich R. L. and S. 0. Haedrich: A seasonal survey of the fishes in the Mystic River, a polluted estuary in downtown Boston, Massachusetts. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 2, 59-73 (1974). Harrington, R. W. and W. L. Bidlingmayer: Effects of dieldrin on fishes and invertebrates of a salt marsh. Jour. Wildl. Mgmt. 22, 76-72 (1958). Henderson, C., A. Inglis, and W. L. Johnson: Organochlorine insecticide residues in fish-Fall 1969 National Pesticide Monitoring Program .Pest. Mon. Jour. 5(1), 1-11 (1971). Johnson, D. W.: Pesticides and fishes-a review of selected literature. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 97, 398-424 (1968). Johnston, D. W.: Decline of DDT residues in migratory songbirds. Science. 186, (4166) (1974). Livingston R. J.: Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of various pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application to the management of the Apalachicola Bay System (North Florida, U. S. A. Final Report, State University Systems of Florida. Sea Grant SUSFSG-04-3158-43) (unpublished, 1974). Impact of kraft pulp-mill effluents on estuarine and coastal fishes in Apalachee Bay, Florida, U. S. A. Mar. Biol. 32, 19-48 (1975). Diurnal and seasonal fluctuarions of estuarine organisms in a North Florida estuary. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 4, 323-400 (1976a) Dynamics of organochlorine pesticides in estuarine systems: Effects on estuarine biota. Proc. Third International Est. Conf. (in press, 1976b). R. L. Iverson, R. H. Estabrook, V. E. Keys and J. Taylor, Jr.: Major features of the Apalachicola Bay system: physiology, biota, and resource management. Florida Sci. 37(4), 245-271 (1974a). G. J. Kobylinski, F. G. Lewis, III and P. F. Sheridan: Long-term fluctuations of epibenthic fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Fish Bull. 74, 311-321 (1976). , P. F. Sheridan, B. G. McLane, F. G. Lewis, III and G. G. Kobylinski: The biota of the Apalachicola Bay System: functional relationships. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr. (in press, 1977). McErlean, A. J., S. G. O'Conner, J. A. Mihursky and C. I. Gibson: Abundance, diversity, and seasonal patterns of estuarine fish populations. Est. Coastal Mar. Res. 1, 19-36 (1973).



PAGE 1

Dr. Robert J. Livingston Page Two December 28, 1976 three years in which the Lower Apalachicola purchase has been developed. We look forward to your further advice on the matter of its future management. Sincerely, James W. Pearce, Chief Bureau of Plans, Programs, and Services Division of Recreation and Parks JWP/am Enclosure 'B 3fv-·



PAGE 1

Fig. 24: Surface pH at Station 5 (East Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977 S -77/31/11. " A:GE ;' --(4COSSI DAYS ? -;.;" ": .'-.-' .: " ^'.;75 : '?6.-'5;P g94..·750'13f2.325Cl12":!.475 l .8.62255;..156:. 775001731.9295 -.------------+--------*----*-----------*----------------------------* -------------------. I I t* .7; II I i I I 1I. , I I I .17.92 .I j I.L I I I II I----------------------*---------------** **-*------------* * ------+1** i I+ 5.62 A F I L A ,,(A) 7.4q544 ST EPOR OF A -?3775(. ) I O E O TEXCLUDE VALUESP MISSING VALUES -Be " " 1 T'S iP A F CANNOT PE COm'PUT-D I I I 7.1 I I I I I I I I .1 I I.i ......... ....,--.......-.. --..J. ..... ....---.\ ... | .... ...I.. .... I I I *-. -. : F (A) -7.t9Q9. STL EkPOR CF A -6.376. IA -.. LP ) -.15 STO EOR F -. .R I I 6.13 .. .«----------»---+---»---,r -I-----, ..I-------,)----»----1...»...-_..-.-»-.-t-'" : * ..; -1 E.CLUDEP VALUESC 'ISSING VALUES -BO *"***'**" s I-r'T' IF 0A tFFICIEINT CANNOT EE CO PUTrD.



PAGE 1

14. Table 1. Biomass regression and conversion figures for organisms taken in Apalachicola Bay and Apalachee Bay from 1972 to 1976 A. Fishes, regression analysis by species (In dry wt. = aIn standard length -b) Species # of individuals regression equation ALU SCH 11 = 3.40541 (X) -14.97588 ANC LYO 4 = 4.05558 (X) -17.13343 ANC MIT 209 = 2.92631 (X) -12.60137 ANG ROS 6 = 3.21520 (X) -15.84540 ARI FEL 30 = 3.24073 (X) -13.56112 AST GRA 6 = 2.31036 (X) -9.11249 BAG MAR 8 = 3.49714 (X) -14.94788 BAI CHR 284 = 2.90410 (X) -11.76128 BRE PAT 10 = 5.33190 (X) -20.55185 CAL ARC 13 = 3.08486 (X) -12.23879 CEN MEL 115 = 2.95025 (X) -11.85323 CHA FAB 4 = 3.36763 (X) -12.66714 CHA SAB 8 = 2.27591 (X) -10.00217 CHI SCH 51 = 2.69654 (X) -9.69103 CHL CHR 12 = 2.46994 (X) -10.40515 CYN ARE 29 = 2.85506 (X) -12.09550 CYN NEB 47 = 3.05722 (X) -12.79894 DAS SAB 12 = 3.17554 (X) -12.61179 DIP HOL 63 = 3.43800 (X) -13.50773 DOR CEP 4 = 3.69685 (X) -15.64947 DOR PET 6 = 3.46547 (X) -14.19044 ETR CRO 17 = 2.99338 (X) -12.30726 EUC ARG 35 = 3.40790 (X) -13.88700 EUC GUL 17 = 2.64359 (X) -10.80122 GOB BOS 14 = 2.81134 (X) -11.66922 GOB ROB 13 = 2.99185 (X) -12.17209 HAE PLU 31 = 2.82564 (X) -11.39730 HAR PEN (DOR PET) = 3.46547 (X) -14.19044 HIP SPE 5 = 2.82587 (X) -11.96161 ICT CAT 8 = 3.02830 (X) -12.31003 ICT PUN 4 = 3.91137 (X) -16.83136 LAC MAX 4 = 4.25871 (X) -17.00627 LAC QUA 15 = 2.34179 (X) -8.20714 LAG RHO 573 = 3.24457 (X) -12.94101 LEI XAN 77 = 3.15892 (X) -12.81603 LEP OSS 8 = 3.28379 (X) -15.53650 MEN AME 18 = 2.93110 (X) -12.15889 MEN BER 2 = 1.33401 (X) -5.79181 MIC CRI 14 = 3.42472 (X) -17.69587



PAGE 1

Fig. 20: Surface dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. ****** P:';NTO If A COFF:CIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTEO. ':.CC.TTE; AS-3 1 77/13/11. PAGE 25 'L,"i O4,4aE (CPEITITON :ATE 77/'/1.) C-T'E:~ ;'(O~ ) 3CT5 (ACPOSS) DAYS l.22-', 2;'?.E'5": 47.*12£52..57511 832. 255;"1011. 475C011i9O.92560l373.375031549.8250il179.275QC **---*--*-+----+-------+------------------------------**-------------****-------* .51-' I I 4 12,50 Il.'t 1 I 11.76 I I I I I I I I I I I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*------I I I I I I I II *.I I I + 9.S06 ; I I I I I I I I I S .52a I SLOP 0) .1 OF e I \ I I SI I I :+ I I A C.8 O. SI I I **" """" -------------ti'----^-" --^ -\---->-\ I i i I i I i i \ I I I 5.I I I I I I Ii .I 5. 'I "* * .132 .-+--***-a-_*.--».--**-.--+----+.----+.-.<----+****---+----»----»*_-.-***-*-»-+*****--*****-»---***--*--*** 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 "ALACn ;CA'TEiGRAMS 1 TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977 STaTISTICS.. CORFEi.TION (.).-"i14 R SQUARED -.16256 SIGNIFICANCE R -.*C1CT ST] ERR 0EST -l.GZ138 IN"£TERCEPT (A) -7.11551 STO ERROR OF A -.1.7944 S IFI.*'.C _ --.^"<1 SLOPE (9) -.'.131 STO ERROR OF B .340 S'.GNI IC N CE 3 -.;7i"3 ^LO':.; V''JES -5EXCLUDEt VALUESC MISSING VALUES -49 ***** :S PI."TEO IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUT1O. S4--,,~,-,-,,----~-----------



PAGE 1

Figure 6 : continued = '. 7/ 2 * -.. i T(CP TE E 1OLE -,,Y &i-G: S 7 7 Ofj7. 3 L3 S A-u'-A OF ~(uUN) LOA8RE (4LROSS) GAYS ij4. 75. :. .25jL60L.375,0 644.325 C d 4.275;iC L 4. 225 0 11 .17 3c 4. 1 c 1544. 0 7 1724. 3 25 .*--------------------------------------+-------------------------«--------+---+79 .2 1 I 79.42 II I I I I I 1 B r I I .5 I + 55.59 I I I I Si I------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ 47.65 SI I I 4 53.5+ I I I iI I I "I I I I I 31.77 "+ : + 3 o77 " I I I I---------------------------------------------------------------------------_---------------S. I I 1 I 1 SI I I I I I I I i 1 1 I £ 4 39.71 I .i I 7.94 1 + 7l94 I I I I I r i 1 1 I S * I I I ......... -.-------.---..--..._-. ...--.-.......--.-,.....-....... ., I + I I + a. i i * \ I \ \ 1 \ \ I I / * I \ \ /1 -f \ IC *^ I 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 72/76 3/77 INVERT SCATTER> TOP TEN 4dOLE SAY BIOMASS ' 77f13/7. PAGiE 14 STATISTICS.. CORELATION (R)-.16372 R SaUARE -.02680 SIG'IFICANCE R..t0567 ST3 cRR OF LST -17.86865 INTERCEPT (A) -16.83664 STO EiRO OF A -4.59542 SIGNIFICANGE A -.30026 SLOPE (B) --.0551 STD.litR OF 3 -.,s436 SI;NIFICANCE a -.105t7 =LO3TE) vALUES -60 EXCLUDEC VALUESs hISSINI V4LUES S''T .0 PU .



PAGE 1

Figu 1 Idij we i ;ht) b daorarum ion the ApaJ4cicpla .Estuary tStataoný , 2,-# j--T z"~rrUT!r :il ' *"1 B * Utirly, 1y .'. .*^.. .. -, .u S--T -L Z. Y N 7/lu.3/Z7. PAF-: 11 -O;£OiE (CEA.T' 7 AT7E = 77/-/1.7,) -c,'.; ..GF (30r:) F-NUO0 (AGROSS) DAYS 1;4.475,0 c.45. O.375 64.25',j C 64325v-: 8a4.275JSC.il4.ZZ5aujillt4.17EL136o'+.i 501544.075(j1724.a256 **********************---+---~+--+--+ * ---+ ----+ ----+ --r+ ----* --* * + 633.6u + I + 633.60 1 A I I. I3 I I I I 563.C + I I 63 I I I I II 1 + i I --I I I I I I * I I 8 1 .I + ------------------------------------I I I I I I III I 1I SI I I I I I 352,OG + I I. * 35L·Ow I I II I .I I I 3/. + /+ 3 1.46 r I IINV.SCA-rr------P---TN WHOL .. ........ ..i a i S IA I I 21 I C N ( -i .. tI I S N IF A E T ^/ 3/72 3/ 9/72 12/72 /73 91 ' J2/73 3/74 6/74 9/741/ 3/7$· 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 !1276 3 7 IN SCRt^ SCATERS TOP TEN HOLE *SAY *;' .-:· 77113/27. PAGE 12 l. .: STATISTICS.4 " CORRiLATION -(tR)*u 1926 .·; S1-UARED 0 .Oi S S IFICANGE R 1 -: ST3 iRR OF Eir -9J.21J9 INTERCEPT (A) -£8.45125 STiD RID? OF A -24.8 354 SIZIFTICfANCE A -.12u37 SLOPE B) .-&TD TR49 OF .-;. SIGNISFICANCE -.4.94 -2?LTTEJ VAL'JES -60 EXCLUDEO VALUES0 bISSINS VALU.S -0 »»***** 15 RI1 0 IF A COtFF '£T r



PAGE 1

202 a. z 700:o z 500i1 I i Ilc 300 ..... ' 0.10,I / \ l 0 -S20060 WOOD DEBRIS I .1501 I BENTHIC PLANTS I LEAF DEBRIS l 100 o S 50' l I .i ; ,,I >0 S40 i a" ') I 1 Kt.J^ 3U 1 1 I j 12 3 6 9 12 3 6 9 12 3 TIME IN MONTHS (12/74-3/77)



PAGE 1

214. Electronic counters will accumulate the data. Water may be pumped into each radial chamber and drained through an outlet in the central chamber. By varying the composition of the water or food source, food preferences and water avoidance behaviors may be distinguished. The chamber is also suitable for the study of small shrimp and crabs. Presently the chamber has been constructed and the electronic monitoring system has been designed and partially constructed. Preliminary experiments show that use of 200 or more amphipods with the same bait samples in the radial chambers results in a random distribution. We propose to try to detect the effects of changes in detrital microflora on the amphipods by showing differences in the protein to neutral lipid ratios in the amphipods (preliminary studies show that starving amphipods for 24 hours decreases the lipids selectively). III. RESULTS: A. Effects of natural substrates on the activity and succession of the detrital microflora. Rates of 14CO2 formation from 14C-glucose and 1C-glutamate from oak leaves and pine needles incubated in Apalachicola Bay showed an initial colonization period in which there was a rapid increase in activity with the pine needles showing a higher activity than oak leaves (Vax 165 and 110 ng substrate/ 1 hour gram litter) which paralleled the ATP content. The muramic acid levels paralleled the turnover time (the time necessary for the removal of the substrate from the environment). The turnover time was highest initially, reflecting the .higher activity of the initial colonizers of the detrital surface which was largely bacterial. Initial turnover times were 41 hrs for pine and 102 hr for oak with glucose and 31 hr for pine and 36 hr for oak with glutamate as substrates (22).



PAGE 1

-2 10 .. 3 004 OC5 006 01A 018 OiC 05A Table 10, continued S SPECIES SAMPLE OATES 740315 740415 740515 740615 740715 740815 740915 741015 741115 741215 750115 750215 TOTALS ANCHOA MITCHILLI 776 246 48 213 426 252 238 948 1036 163 505 677 5525 20.83 11.83 28.92 53.12 49.36 12.j7 16.27 68.90 77.54 40.71 29.17 28.81 30.74 MICR3POGON UNDULATUS 2531 702 4 4 6 26 6 9 49 76 544 848 4805 67.93 33.75 2.41 1.00 .70 1.05 .41 .65 3.67 19.3% 31.43 36.09 26.74 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 0 54 62 104 114 974 814 222 44 3 2 2 2395 0.00 2.60 37.35 25.94 13.21 46.67 55.64 16.13 3.29 .*6 .12 .09 13.33 LEIOSTOMUS XANTHURUS 234 265 0 0 1 3 2 2 0 21 429. 581 1538 6.28 12.74 0.00 0.00 .12 .14 .14 .15 0.00 5.34 24.78 24.72 8.56 BREVOORTIA PATRONUS 4 717 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 121 844 .11 34*47 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.00 0.C 9D.00 0.00 0.05 .12 5.15 4.70 ARIUS FELIS 1 2 7 2 115 236 66 14 3 0 0 0 ,46 .03 .10 4.22 .50 13.33 11.31 4.51 1.02 .22 0.0o 0.00 0.00 2.48 STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS C 0 0 0 0 158 86 3 3 0 0 0 250 0.CG 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.30 7.57 5.88 .22 .22 0.0O 0.00 0.00 1.39 BAIRDIELLA CHPYSUPA 9 0 1 0 56 11 18 19 22 26 37' 47 246 .24 0.00 .60 0.00 6.49 .53 1.23 1.38 1.65 6.62 2.14 2.00 1.37 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CHRYSURUS C 0 0 8 75 86 6 54 0 0 0 4 233 O.CO 0.00 0.00 2.00 8.69 4.12 .41 3.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 1.30 MENIOIA BERYLLINA 27 4 0 6 0 0 0 4 25 9 95 9 173 .72 .19 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.00 0.00 .29 1.87 2.29 5.49 .38 .96 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS 0 0 0 0 16 66 57 8 6 3 1 0 157 O.C0 0.00 0.00 GO.0 1.85 3.16 3.90 .58 .45 .76 .06 0.00 .87 MICROGOBIUS GULOSUS 30 27 0 0 0 23 9 0 8 6 7 16 126 .81 1.30 C.CO 0.00 0.00 1.10 .62 0.0o .60 1.53 .40 *68 *70 MENTICIRRHUS AMERICANUS 3 0 22 13 16 42 3 10 14 .0 0 123 .08 .0CO 13.25 3.24 1.85 2.01 .21 .73 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .68 o" SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI 13 3 0 1 8 27 3 7 17 16 6 3 104 .35 .14 0.00 .25 .93 1.29 *21 .51 1.27 4.07 .35 .13 .58 TRINECTES MACULATUS 36 18 0 0 2 3 8 4 10 1 5 7 94 .97 .87 P.O0 0.00 .23 .14 .55 .29 .75 .25 .29 .30 .52 SYNGNATHUS FLORIOAE 0 0 0 0 2 70 21 0 0 0 0 0 93 0.00 0.00. 0.00 8.00 .23 3.35 1.44 G.00 0.00 0.OB 0.00 0.00 .52 ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 5 5 0 4 1 22 12 18 17 2 3 3 84 .13 .24 0.00 1.00 .12 1.35 .82 .73 1.27 .51 .17 .13 .47 LUCANIA PARVA 3 4 0 0 0 C 1 3 51 10 12 01 .08 .19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00O .07 0.00 12.98 .58 .51 .45 SYhPHURUS PLAGIUSA 4 4 0 1 3 17 9 7 17 6 7 4 79 .11 .19 0.00 .25 .35 .91 .62 .51 1.27 1.53 .40 .17 *44 IICROGOBIUS THALASSINUS 2 4 1 1 0 6 39 3 4 0 0 2 62 .05 .19 .60 .25 0.00 .29 2.67 .22 .30 0.00 0.00 .09 .34 *ARALICHTHYS LETHOSTIGMA 16 8 o O 2 3 12 9 0 a 1 53 .43 *38 0.00 0.00 .2 .14 .82 .65 1 0.00 0.00 .04 *29 4NCHOA HEPSETUS 0 0 6 35 3 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 50 0.00 0.00 3.61 8.73 .35 0.00 0.00 .44 5.00 0.08 8.00 0.00 268 ;YNOSCION NEOULOSUS 1 1 0 0 1 24 15 4 1 1 0 48 .03 .05 0.00 0.06 .12 1.15 1.03 .29 .07 .25 0.00 0.00 .27 )OROSOnA PETENENSE 1 2 a 2 5 2 0 0 0 5 22 1 4 .03 .*i 0.00 .50 .58 .10 D.00 I.00 0.00 1.27 1.27 .04 .2 EUCINOSTOMUS GULA 2 0 0 0 C 0 0 10 15 1 0 0 36 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .73 1.12 .25 .46 0.00 .20 SRIONOTUS SCITULUS 0 0 0 8 16 4 6 a 2 0 o.0c 0.00 C.0Ct Q. 0.00 .]8 1.09 .29 .45 0.00 .12 0.00 .1



PAGE 1

A Figure 25, continued SCATTERS TCP TEN FISH GIOMAS" iHOLE 9AY 77/03/23. PAGE 9 FILE N NA iE (uFE.TIO;N CATE = 77/03/23.) SCATTERGOAM OF (COWN) CYNARE (ACROSS) DAYS 104.475~,0 294.42500 444..J7'00 644.32500 824.275000104.225001184.175001364.125001544.075001724.02500 .+----+----+-------------+ »--------+---~+----*------+------+-----------+----+-------*-----*---+. 229.31 * T I 1 229.31 I I I I I 8 +i 1 4 ] I I I I T I J I I I I c21.J + I I 206.38 I I I I I I I I I I I -I . -.1I I 2 I T I I 137.59 + I 1 137.59 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I rI I I SI+S+ I I 1 I I I II ,-----------------------------------------------*---------------* ----,^ 68.79 I I T * 68.79 T T I t I I I I I I SII 45.3f + I 1 145.8 I I I II I 1 I iI -.----+-----------+4------3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SCATTE TOP TE' FISH arIoASE WhOLE BAY 77/0/23. PAGE 10 STATr'r!CS.. CC:FLATION (0l 5099 R SQUARED .00260 SIGNIFICAtrE R -.34942 ST2 tRD ". FST -56.5t..8 INTERCFPT (A) -9.59732 STO ERROR OF A -14 .5901 SIGNIFICANGE A -.017'24 SLOFE (R) -.00538 STn ERROR OF B -.01i85 FLC A C F F US U E -TIVTE9 J-\ J f / U V ..,---.----.-.-» ..-,*---.-,----*---+----, --; --r-^»,IF' ?,'*'," --»'--C-"U/--~-»-.--f*r---4-»* . *5 ' ., ;,; *.-:r-. -, ;i CCC^Frl ~'lT 3:^* .*T ':***":"" J



PAGE 1

127. UPTAKE OF GLYCOLIC ACID BY A MARINE BIVALVE BY Dante A. DiDomenico Richard L. Iverson Department of Oceanography Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 In Press: J. Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology



PAGE 1

*1. Old Data Base Tape Raw Data Raw Data Cards Tape Card Deck Program New Data Base Tape Figure 1 -SPECS Data Storage Procedure



PAGE 1

185. 77n 1 7 10 le T'lLS V .0 .'1 0 .J) :1 0Ao o.0 P4. 0.TflF 0.11 .01 1t 0.10 7.% L A W.l1 0.1,0 7-.4 0. 10 v .If( .01 0.([(% ().in nli .·ul f) I .01 .01 J~rcI~ .4 .L 5*AO *1I ..11 .0!O A 111 4 .10 4.4!0.00 O.U), 1.12 '* .1'0 0.20 .l0I *3, 0.00 .01 n..lq O.U9 .6 .1A .07 ,.nI 0.'1 ) U.o .1 1.I .9 .Y.0 .44 OS1 .1).u) I '1 .01 0 7 1 U ! 1 0.'UL .01 O.In 0 0. O I0I Ir t. , I A n n 0rt II*',) Q.1'O . -1 nr n.~ O nU9 n II f). i .0 .01 0 A."n ) .7I0 -.0 T-411 A ; 1 10 3 0 0 U fl -, 1) o n ..a rur.DU..", JPi) 1:10



PAGE 1

172. TABLE C , concluded Sphenopholis nitida (Bieler) Scribn. Taxus floridana Nutt. endangered Thaspium trifoliatum (L.) Gray Torreya taxifolia Am. endangered Verbesina chapmanii Coleman threatened Viola hastata Michx. Vuika hirsutula Braierd



PAGE 1

INV=RT SJ:4MAR 3ý4A!S W,4O.E BAY 4TH Yz Table 9, continued .TALL~jNS Cir 3LZ 36 J j3 C04 ý. ( ulA i.3 1 iS jA TIHE4 OF DAY 0 SPECIES SMýFL. 3A1LS 75-E3115.Z15 7L.515.. 73 .55.9; ?.32 lu.?? 7 ?t56 1.i5 7L."0 [..9,3 7512iJ 7. 76.ih5 10 k CALLI1NETEE i SAPIJU 754.13o 1.17 -.,51. 9c,157 19. .7 .6 7T.52 .66 L i7i .3.36 S J. 2Z 27'.o37 ,I.91z b 7 .73 5! .4 76.76 1 ts ..54 21. 3 a 7L5 ..T 9r.0 di. .2 66949 CANAECTS T I F7lk 17.57 7. 2 2.4 -.96 4.. .3 0 8 I I?.j 1 81 7. 7. 1L. 6 . L. 19 ý.7 5 C.. 5 .;,b.t , ý c 3. 13 ;77 9. -) (),* i-9 Id rL PENEEUS JJDRARUA 2.5" 10.14 19.329 15.3d ts a3 .17 7 J.31 .9 J1 Jdo37 97e L. 37. tic 2.7 .6 *5+ : 6 7L 1.L 4.1 4 .i 0 1.51 is76 PERAEUS AZTECU.N T1CT 66.95 -,.32 It'.77 *78 *vc .i 493 .2 a.J Jod L%1.8 *,I~j L I ý 1ý6 55 I.S1 .1.5 sia ;.. * .4 !. d ILL 6 a afo zsb LOLLINU Lj. Z. Z. w .. 16 .5 #.15 .7 .22 L12 .: 4 9si c.ul. 8 .55 a.. .b .j j ..-, .11 .L F.23 1.31 * 6 1e 13 *6 11. 0 7. OJ .79 ?o71 !). 7 1,LI i47 2.47 PALAZ%1ONr-T=PU;iO 7oL3 24o 3d 19* -9 .74 i.68 ez 1 7 is i 3. is ei .74 ;049 74. 6a .91 3.bu 5.u 5; ~ .4 i...6 1.6 O.i3 Lo 5Z iaJ 4 L7 Iii 5d 1I21i 1* 63 CALLIUECTU S LICARI 1S57 .4 1 2.3 15 Z.96 4 5 Li*88 I 3 il04a 1.4 J*J .5 e.o 6E*5* CI AI IsT ..3 .15 s.C .5 .9 ?5 .15 .. 3 S3 9i ia 4.J 6 58 NERITIMA i-CLIAATA .86 5033 230. 1.64 606a 917 61,6 li .8 .83 ..S3 Ifau o23 372.5 .ul *78 5*69 09Z I .2L .; 8 q z ) .J *I-) 1 4i ý I a a o7 045 TR.1 TPLu EiS COLSTRICTUS .00H ;604 *uON ou 7s77 3.4. 6 4 ..+3 3 .il o3. Joli boad LbuL L.13 .i j .. i k. 3. o d.JL 1 0 i.U ).iua ;3*d 4.19 .547 POLLUNUS ;13UP..I ý.aj as ..51 aaC d7 ..D .Zu 997 025 0 0 11 ia J 51* 34 i5vL .23 Lwjg 6 1 j b 65 1 j1; 1 J4 22 *Id 0 u 4 6060 is·il 13 RHITHROOPA 4UPS .ARRISI 1.5 *54 1994 1.Ou .16 IL i.1 42i Z 3 9) L16 I o .82 3.6 Su1 61 2 .55 404U oDJ.Jh5 *as *iIJ III s7 *23 .d6. *12 XIPSSHOTEU KRGYINEI O.ou U.OC 0.00. 0.ju .179 zo2G i I 3L J .1j 17L 1 Zoe; 4 9411 aJ g.551? ALPEU LEIc4AL J.wv .0 I 8 ..i U Uj )i i 8 1iu 1..uU..uJ .2626 Is15 Beu .LL C% SQUILLA E4PU4A L a ý 29.1 0 a Z 6:v 03 Joo 5 #1 o0 ý od .0a a *2 P0AN tJS POLLICEARS U.O 10,J .15 i. .44 a.1I. 6J .i h ·tiUIuJ 3.05j5w 36535 sub 019 1T .4 I jti 915 w 0 i to I 6u i Ij U3 J Jed is 96 jG 0 b 008 CLaISAARPJS VITTAiTJ o?3 015 I~i. 915 059 15 015 oi3 Ili 4.43 2 .i J.bi Z.63 qW9 .62 4. 60) *v 8 *26 0 ; 7 uj I3 u? j a J j 0 to to j RANGI4 CUIE-TA 86 LoBi oob; wlhu out Q.j io si 085 ofil i2.404 258 allSYCON CONTRAPILUM ipou u a ; G I iu 61 $ 6 L a I IU owu -a 1 361 3 I j 402 4 9 st ko U G Ou it w u I j 0 o i; L 1 0 9 u a I., i ·Jb 4 6u .06 TRACHYPENAEUS SIMI.IS W.6ý 089 *43 wo(O to.4u 4*i lut )Ojj Isaj ;*bi 427 1959 LoL .13 ·Ile a a &W Uu i·jo I m .0 a 3 0 3 31 0(u 57 4 POLLINICES 0UPI~CA1U. 6oze oi-I 051 ý.o 31 9,0 ; 6 J.j 'a. e) 5&I·kt L0? L.G ,i .14 Ea. old E a v II a. J. i J: 63 3 0 083 j I it J PALAER014EFE~ VUL6AUfS .3240C .25921 9 10 4 .-G.J-joC J*GwJjL Uw,#ýJj U jjOL I I i I i J i 3 Z4 0 J a 4 si3;U0 i 6480 06804 J4 0.i4 ý*Lý G.,sU Lout. jo1 u 300 Is)) .44 406j 3043 OL4 .42 XIPHOPENEUS KR3YER1 G&CUOU4*006CO 0#6oJJe 094Ca4L *17393 uo'jrb 4ojjQ~w j*C11Jj 935377 Jsu3&ýA 6004#16; ja)rriJ .55771 ··L 6 0 13 1 old 3 0 1 J d .1 1 a a oi I ALPHEUS HETEROCHAELIS O.UcU4 L *25b28 6o66Z4L ·94Lji -h ioJ; j wj U We u. ub 3.41341 0 0joid 1.44403 O Z3626 .4jiog 5!?E56 PROCAMBARUi PENAENSALANU4 O.QW46b 0.0juji e28,435 O.u3~k# uL too bu-j~G u 6*Vu)iG JJi JJi.13 J.4j)10i 4.1054j 460iju .2535 SIýYONIA BREVIROSTRIS 0.0ýiu.' G.0.1;. C·d&;4 4*64'.ui G uo~:ujý .*..34 U 49)#.4w jsli3Jl isj.Yr isiI'al 8ouiablo Oeiifau 9076:4 PEOPANOPE TEXANA .31 J;. 67 ....j .I 1 5 J 9 ~i~Jr 13 a~; J do 9 4 j;oGJU .,j 7 tiEIIPKOLJ = I.04ZiA; GC3 J g ,.3 L j·.i C.I .,, O.C ..6 1 J.A#Lý Ije de" 4d aebahlod ofj~s e



PAGE 1

.... ..r. l, T,'r0 1:. T Tle ll, c ,, -i ued UAT lS 7b.3 1-77022 a 1e II, Co i ii ed STATIWHS Ont 002 0 3 On4 t n 006 01A 01 01C 05A TTiES jF 9AY n SPECIFS -"PL:. CATE 7J3315 7h0415 7b0515 75n615 700715 7LUb15 760915 761011 761119 761213 770125 770220 TOTALS MTCDOCPr, O 'J'?bL;ATL ,.4 9 Uc5.39 990.52 514.81 7.F 61 51X.05 5; i.17 57.98 F6b.22 5.07 79.49 174.74 3976.29 2?.3 " 7. 4 3o.17 36.r 5.lu 'b.20 13. 4 ~3.30 2.39 1.07 14.73 13.70 19.81 LEIOSTOMUS XM:T"UJPUS 326.22 E42.59 580.JO 234.58 2.67 96.85 5.30 199.75 1172.66 73.75 9.33 109.33 3455.03 17.09 26.85 22.29 17.00 .19 4. 10 .45 11.68 36.95 15.55 1.73 8.57 17.22 DASYATIS r;.PINA r506b4 437.99 135.15 1.00 137.'? 0.n0 312.50 426.64 274.05 196.45 368.43 312.46 3151.56 3.A7 Id.O0 5.19 0.00 9.52 0.10 26.49 24.94 8.64 41.42 68.26 24.49 15.70 PAQALL;HT"YS LETHO-TIGMA 7.47 32.13 100.32 ?.7.10 153.88 45.80 190.48 202.21 535.19 64.98 6.31 340.65 1916.80 .3 1.34 3.87 16.82 11.02 2.32 16.15 11.82 16.97 13.66 1.17 26.70 9.55 ANCHOA MITCHILLT 66.31 5n.69 37.82 53.84 9:.17 698.84 48.6. 80.05 158.82 41.34 28.30 76.67 1436.53 3.45 2.12 1.45 3.90 6.6n 35.35 4.13 4.68 5.31 8.72 5.24 6.01 7.16 ARIUS FELIS 0.00 36.94 49.39 14.54 191.97 .9.63 170.56 93.49 145.01 4.17 0.00 0.00 775.70 9.00 1.54 1.90 1.05 13.31 ..52 14.46 5.46 4.57 .88 0.00 0.00 3.87 AFPHGSARGUS RCOBATCGFP -ALUS n.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 664.29 1.57 0.00 0.00 17.32 13.36 0.00 0.00 696.54 0.00 U.o0 0.00 0.00 4b.06 .08 0.00 0.00 .55 2.8? 0.00 0.00 3.47 RAIROIELLA CHPYSUDA 26.41 3.94 10.59 6.02 21.11 12.?0 15.41 37.67 464.53 23.25 2.99 15.64 639.86 1.J7 .16 .41 .44 1.46 .62 1.31 2.20 14.64 4.90 .55 1.23 3.19 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 2.67 14.74 23.09 153.85 45.06 124.30 70.85 96.29 15.38 2.13 0.00 1.29 549.65 .1* .62 .39 11.15 3.12 6.29 6.01 5.63 .48 .45 0.00 .10 2.74 BAGRE MARINUS 0.00 0.00 402.47 78.37 0.00 9.72 12.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 502.73 0.On 0.00 15.47 5.F8 0.00 .49 1.n3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.51 TRINErTES MALULATUS 77.98 63.79 54.94 13.38 23.79 39.89 56.26 118.72 0.00 1.40 0.00 0.00 450.15 4.06 2.67 2.11 .97 1.65 2.02 4.77 6.94 0.00 .30 0.00 0.00 2.24 BREVOOFTIA PATROMUS 311.65 14.25 44.18 11.94 0.00 0.00 31.21 .69 0.00 0.00 4.01 26.22 444.15 16.23 .60 1.70 .87 0.00 0.00 2.65 .04 0.00 0.00 .74 2.05 2.21 ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 11.39 28.67 30.71 2.69 .78 8.84 28.34 117.95 39.98 2.49 3.21 4.87 279.92 r .59 1.20 1i.1 .19 .05 .45 2.40 6.89 1.25 .52 .59 .38 1.39 SYMP"UtUS PLAGIUSA 6.22 22.82 55.18 3.38 9.35 7.55 34.58 113.73 15.20 1.02 1.95 0.00 270.98 .32 .95 2.12 .24 .65 .38 2.93 6.65 .48 .2? .36 0.00 1.35 RhINOPTERA PONASUS 0.00 0.00 0.0u 0.00 0.00 244.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 244.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 q.00 0.00 12.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.22 LAGOOON RHOMBOIPE.S 2.3 10.10 19.41 24.96 2.02 28.79 28.08 54.66 9.31 2.91 10.73 2.88 195.91 .12 .42 .75 1.81 .14 1.46 2. 3 3.19 .28 .61 1.99 .23 .96 ICTALU'US CATUS 26.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0. 0.00 0.00 0. 000 3.73 0.00 142.98 173.11 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .79 0.00 11.21 .86 LEPISOSTEUS OSSEUS 0.00 24.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 130.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 154.82 0.00 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .77 CYNOSCION NE3ULOSUS 10.06 9.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 .86 0.00 16.44 86.31 0.00 7.12 5.09 135.30 .52 .39 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 U.00 .96 2.72 0.00 1.32 .40 .67 UROPtYCIS FLORIDANUS 6.47 35.41 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 5.87 48.43 96.28 .34 1.48 O.00 0.0 000 ...0 0.00 0.0 0.00o .02 1.09 3.80 .48 SYNODUS FOETEtS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 12.16 0.00 62.98 6.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 88.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .49 .62 0.00 3.68 .20 0.00 0.00 0.00 .44 TCTALURUS PJNCTAIUS 0.00 22.65 4.73 '5.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52.80 0.00 .95 .18 1.84 0 0.00 00.000 0.0 00 .00 0.00 000 0.00 .26 PRIOIOTUS TRI3ULUS 2.52 .31 22.55 0.n0 0. 0 1.09 3.75 14.64 2.3? 1.91 0.00 .63 49.72 .1* .01 .57 0.00 0.00. .06 .32 .86 .07 .40 0.00 .05 .25 STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS O.Qu 0.00 0.00 0.00 .94 40./7 .24 .11 0.00 0.00 100 0.00 42.06 .000 0. 00 0.00 0.nd .07 2.06 .02 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .21 MICFROGOBIUS .ULCSUS 74.b0 6.49 2.24 1.37 .63 .21 .11 .27 .17 0.00 .02 0.00 36.11 1.28 .27 .09 .10 ,14 .01 .01 .02 .01 0.00 .00 0.00 .18 PFPRILUS PURIT 2. 22.. 10. ...35.



PAGE 1

16. Species comparable species regression equation SEL VOM CHL CHR = 2.46994 (X) -10.40515 POL OCT BAI CHR = 2.90410 (X) -11.76128 SCI OCE MIC UND = 3.30722 (X) -13.59050 ANC QUA PAR ALB = 3.13787 (X) -13.23090 HYP GEM CHA SAB = 2.27591 (X) -10.00217 CAR HIP CHL CHR = 2.46994 (X) -10.40515 HAE SPE HAE PLU = 2.82564 (X) -11.39730 HIP ERE HIP SPE = 2.82587 (X) -11.96161 HIP ZOS HIS SPE = 2.82587 (X) -11.96161 SPH BAR SPH GUA = 2.76380 (X) -12.47892 SPH BOR SPH GUA = 2.76380 (X) -12.47892 SER SUB CEN MEL = 2.95025 (X) -11.85323 MEN SPE MEN AME = 2.93110 (X) -12.15889 EUC SPE EUC ARG = 3.40790 (X) -13.8870 OPH BEA URO FLO = 3.35273 (X) -14.52737 SCO BRA CEN MEL = 2.95025 (X) -11.85323 MYC MIC CEN MEL = 2.95025 (X) -11.85323 MUL AUR MIC UND = 3.30722 (X) -13.59050 CLU SPE BRE PAT = 5.33190 (X) -20.55185 OPH GOM ANG ROS = 3.21520 (X) -15.84540 BAT SOP GOB BOS = 2.81134 (X) -11.66922 GOB STR GOB BOS = 2.81134 (X) -11.66922 LAB SIC MEN BER = 1.33401 (X) -5.79181 ECH NAU ARI FEL = 3.24073 (X) -13.56112 RAJ TEX DAS SAB = 3.17554 (X) -12.61179 STE CAP DIP HOL = 3.4380 (X)13.50773 HEM BRA STR MAR = 3.42754 (X) -16.83563 TRA CAR CHL CHR = 2.46994 (X) -10.40515 GOB BOL MIC GUL = 3.15783 (X) -13.17557 SAR ANC ANC MIT = 2.92631 (X) -12.60137 HAL BIV NIC UST = 3.28415 (X) -13.28714 SER PUM CEN MEL = 2.95025 (X) -11.85323 ELO SAU SPH GUA = 2.76380 (X) -12.47892 SCA SPE NIC UST = 3.28415 (X) -13.28714 ARC PRO LAG RHO = 3.24457 (X) -12.94101 APO TOW BAI CHR = 2.90410 (X) -11.76128 AST STE BAI CHR = 2.90410 (X) -11.76128 MIC THA MIC GUL = 3.15783 (X) -13.17557 PEP PAR PEP BUR = 2.63529 (X) -10.45042 STE LAN BAI CHR = 2.90410 (X) -11.76128 GOB HAS (MIC GUL + GOB HAS) = 2.83401 (X) -11.90954 MUG SPE MUG CEP = 3.04576 (X) -12.49192 MYR PUN ANG ROS =.3.21510 (X) -15.84540 ALO ALA DOR CEP = 3.69685 (X) -15.64947 OLI SAU CHL CHR = 2.46994 (X) -10.40515 RHI BON DAS SAB = 3.17554 (X) -12.61179 MON CHR BAI CHR = 2.90410 (X) -11.76128 ANC SPE ANC MIT = 2.92631 (X) -12.60137 SYN SPE SYN FLO = 3.39967 (X) -17.79450 POM SAL LAG RHO = 3.24457 (X) -12.94101 CAR BAR CHL CHR = 2.46994 (X) -10.40515 SPH TIB BAG MAR = 3.49714 (X) -14.94788



PAGE 1

Fig. 8: 'Surface water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. .. .) rr,.L itu ir o ,utrrtAvititMmiNUi Do CuPfVIcU* 'C-LCLSCC TTE.S)R.. 77/03/11. -PAGE 9 FILE O-'" (-LTi.3 -T 77/T /A.) 3CAT'7-. CF ('C-N) COT (ACROSS) DAYS 11'..C'" 23T75.: 7.12E'jb 652.5753: 8332.02531011.75001j..925 013737500154i.825031729.275 65 ----------------------.---I I I I "i I "4 " " 315.00 I I I I I I I I TI i I 360.00 -------------------* -----------------------------------------------------------.-------.----._--«.. SI I I I I T SI I I I I 5 I 25. I I I -?t. -------»3.G c * .......... "* ***. ... "'' .*.. ." " ..... . '. 3/ I AA SATRGRA TIE IN MONTHS: March. 1972 to February, 1977 90.0 S/ I I AL SCTRG S I TIME IN MTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977I STATI SIC I .. C-LTiON ()-..54I SQUARE -.r2372 SIGNIFICANCE R -.C0 ST? F ST -66. 7 INTERCEPT (A) -5!.27633 STO ERROR OF A -17.383I4 S:;N:F::.C-. A -.***"71 SLORPE F) --.01951 STO ERROR OF 0 -.PI43 fL-OTT.:vALU-S -.; EXCLMOED VALUESMISSING VALUES -45 4FL31>1 VSU' -5· EICLJOE VALUES0 riSSI:N6 VALUES -'.5



PAGE 1

293. Fig. 1: Chart showing the primary study areas in the Apalachicola Drainage System. This includes distribution of permanent stations in the impoundment above the Jig Woodruff Dam (Lake Seminole) and the Apalachicola Estuary (42 40' N; 850 00' W). * ° '. ..•' ... • W. •. .. ..-*tudy S ..N Area.: .. .". ".. " ...... .-. " . :-.* " ' " .* ' " ..... .. ...* :. ' * 4. ...":: ..: • •b •~ .* ..' " -* .. .. a* *,;. o; • .: .. e ...Area.. Bay lb *



PAGE 1

2771 were found for salinity (B = -0.26, p <0.02), rainfall (B = + 0.09, p <0.01), nitrate (B = -2.1 p <0.004), and turbidity (B = -0.63, p <0.04). The results of a 2-way (month x year) analysis of variance of these data are shown in Table 1. Since in a 2-way analysis with one observation per cell, the mean square is of necessity used as an error term, the occurrence of annually high significance levels probably indicates that considerable interaction exists. There was significant (p <.05) annual variation of river flow although no trend was apparent during the study period. There were reductions in salinity, turbidity, and nitrate in the Apalachicola system with time. The results of a factor analysis (Table 2) indicate that high river flow is usually associated with increased color and turbidity and reduced Secchi readings, and low levels of salinity, temperature, and chlorophyll A. This is consistent with the known seasonal pattern of these factors, and indicates the important influence of the Apalachicola River on the physical environment of the Apalachicola Estuary. While the river dominates the seasonal fluctuations of parameters such as salinity, long-term changes in the overall salinity of the bay appear to be related to other functions such as local rainfall and runoff. This would indicate that causation reflects multiple interactions thus allowing apparently contradictory results in the shortversus long-term trends (e.g., turbidity and salinity relationships). Pesticide Analysis Organochlorine residues in sediments taken from the Apalachicola Drainage Area are presented in Table 3. Generally low values were found for DDT-R and Arochlor 1254 while other pesticides were not detected. Due to these results, sediment analysis was discontinued after October, 1973. There were moderate levels of organochlorine compounds (DDT-R and PCB's) in organisms taken



PAGE 1

365 a. FIGURE 5 MAR. 3.0 * ................ A * -1.0*-* * 2010~.' 2.0 0* -, 100 H: 0 \ 0 3000NI300 S-;. 1 * * "--------o.6. 0 8 0/ * ® e'* 3000No 20001000D I ELI li i I il MAMJ JASONDJ F MAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ FM TIMEMONTHS(1972-76) %DOM. ----------INVERTEBRATES .------------AVE RAGE



PAGE 1

232. where N is the number of individuals in a sample and ni is the number of individuals in the ith species. Species richness was determined using the Margalef Index (Margalef, 1958) SS -1 loge N where S in the number of species and N is the number of individuals. The measurement of community similarity for interstation (temporal) comparisons was accomplished using the cX index of overlap (Morisita, 1959; Horn, 1966). This is a determination of the probability that two randomly drawn samples from populations X and Y will be the same species relative to the probability that two individuals of the same species will be drawn from populations X or Y alone. S S S 2~ 2 V V7 Ax = x A y = yi Ac = 2 xii i=l i=l i=1 X2 y2 (Ax + Xy) XY where s is the number of species; xi and yi are the numbers of the ith species in populations X and Y respectively; X and Y are the total numbers in the two communities, and x and y are measures of diversity (Simpson, 1949) as modified for sampling with replacement (Horn, 1966). Data were broken down according to dominance-diversity curves (seasonal, by station) to present the relative distribution of species numbers in a given collection. Station characteristics A detailed analysis of the characteristics and distribution of sediment in East Bay, St. Vincent Sound, and Apalachicola Bay has been made (Kofoed and Gorsline, 1963; Stickney et al., 1969; Livingston et al., this report). Oyster bars are a major source of calcareous matter. The



PAGE 1

142. ACKNOWLEDGE, ;E1T3 This research was supported by the Florida Sea Grant Progrc,.n under the National Oceanic and Atmos.ph:-ric Administration co.tr,-ct number 04-3-158-43. We wish to thank John Calder and David White for comments on the manuscript.



PAGE 1

0 .3 004 OP5 00 01A 018 01C 05A Table 10, continued SPECIES SAHPLE DATES 7303.5 731415 73P515 730615 730715 730815 730915 731015 731115 731215 740115 740215 TOTALSHICROPOGON UNDULATUS 1931 1557 1787 871 84 35 1 3 36 150 544 1128 8127 65.06 4C.45 74.09 44.53 15.67 6.34 .24 .15 3.02 12.61 34.65 67.30 40.21 ANCHOA 1ITCHILLI 444 136 79 75 181 43 27 1225 787 6:S 756 156 4775 14.96 3.53 3.28 3.83 33.77 7.79 6.59 64.51 66.02 72.71 48.15 9.31 23.63 HARENGULA PENSACOLAE 0 1879 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1879 0.OC 48.82 0.00 0.00 O.OC 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0D 0.00 0.00 9.30 LEIOSTOrUS XANTHURUS 433 160 342 371 1 0 1 17 67 6 6 69 1473 14.59 4.16 14.16 18.97 .19 0.30 .24 .90 5.62 .50 .38 '4.12 7.29 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 1 3 37 31 101 268 94 137 37 6 0 1 716 .03 .08 1.53 1.58 18.84 48.55 22.93 F721 3.10 .50 9.00 *06 3.54 POLYOACTYLUS OCTONEMUS 12 28 43 544 33 3 1 2 0 I 1 0 667 .40 .73 1.78 27.81 6.16 .54 .24 .11 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 3.30 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CHRYSURUS 0 0 0 0 11 3 108 192 0 0 0 .314 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.05 .54 26.34 10.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.55 TRINECTES MACULATUS 21 17 58 29 36 19 14 45 1 0 29 26 295 .71 .44 2.40 1.48 6.72 3.44 3.41 2.37 .08 0.00 1.95 1.55 1.46 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS 0 0 0 0 0 2 35 35 124 27 0 2 225 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.0C O.OC .36 8.54 1.84 10.40 2.27 0*.0 .12 1.11 BAIRDIELLA CHRYSURA 1 7 0 1 3 17 0 36 23 57 68 5 218 .03 .18 0.00 .05 .56 3.08 0.0O 1.90 1.93 4.79 4.33 .30 1.88 ARIUS FELIS 1 3 7 10 27 70 21 10 8 0 0 0 157 .03 .08 .29 .51 5.04 12.68 5.12 .53 .67 8.00 0.00 0.00 .76 MENTICIRRHUS AMERICANUS n 0 0 1 6 21 18 44 38 4 1 0 133 0.00 0.00 O.C0 .05 1.12 3.80 4.39 2.32 3.19 .34 .06 .O00 .66) -MICROGOBIUS GULOSUS 20 24 3 2 8 9 10 5 1 7 8 9 106 .67 .62 .12 .10 1.49 1.63 2.44 .26 .08 .59 .51 .54 .52 PARALICHTHYS LETHOSTIGNA 1 14 14 4 6 17 2 4 4 0 4 18 86 .03 .36 .58 .20 1.12 3.08 .49 .21 .34 9.00 .25 1.07 .44 LAGOOON RHOMBOIOES C 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 17 3 55 81 C.OC 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 .18 0.00 .16 .00 1.43 .19 3.28 .40 ANCHOA HEPSETUS 0 0 0 0 12 6 54 2 2 1 3 0 80 0.00 c0.0 0.00 0.00 2.24 1.09 13.17 .11 .17 *B. *19 0.O0 .40 LUCANIA PARVA 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 74 78 0.00 .03 .08 0.00 0.00 .18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 4.42 .39 SYMPHURUS PLAGIUSA 31 3 2 1 3 6 0 5 0 6 11 8 76 1.04 .08 .08 .05 .56 1.09 0.00 .26 0.00 .59 *70 .48 .38 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS 4 0 0 0 0 2 35 6 0 19 3 69 .13 0.00 0.00 0.0O b6.0 0.00 .49 1.84 .50 0.08 1.21 .18 *34 SOBIOSOA BOSCI 12 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 29 17 66 .46 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .18 O.O0 .00 .08 .42 1.85 1.81 .33 oTROPUS CROSSOTUS 0 £ 2 0 1 7 9 5 8 9 22 65 6.00 .03 *.0 0.00 .19 1*27 .24 *47 .42 .67 .57 1.31 *32 EUCINO3TOMUS GULA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 23 5 0 0 64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0 0.00 .00 1.90 1.93 .42 0.00 0.00 .32 4ICROGOBIUS THALASSINUS 31 1 1 0 0 0 O 2 0 0 26 2 63 1.C4 .03 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0o.00 *t11 00 9.00 1.66 .12 .31 iYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI 5 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 1 7 3 31 52 .17 0.00 0.03 0.00 .37 60.0 *73 o0.0o *0 .59 .19 1.85 .26 IENIDIA BERYLLINA 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 2 21 39 .24 .05 C.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .S00 .50 *.06 .13 1.25 *19 IREVO0OTIA PATRONUS G 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 36 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.90 3.00 0.00 000 0.09 0.00 .54 .1



PAGE 1

4. LITERATURE CITED Livingston, R. J. 1976. Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of estuarine organisms in a north Florida estuary: sampling strategy, community structure, and species diversity. Est. Coast. Mar. Sci. 4: 373-400. * 1976. Time as a factor in environmental sampling programs: diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of estuarine and coastal populations and communities. Invited paper. Symposium on the Biological Monitoring of Water Ecosystems (ed. J. Cairns, Jr.) ASTM STP 607: 212-234. Livingston, R. J., R. L. Iverson, R. H. Estabrook, V. E. Keys, J. Taylor, Jr. 1974. Major features of the Apalachicola Bay System: Physiography, Biota, and Resource Management. Florida Sci. 37(4): 245-271. Livingston, R. J., G. Kobylinski, F. G. Lewis, III, and P. Sheridan. 1976. Analysis of long-term fluctuations of estuarine fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay. Fish. Bull. 72(2): 311-321. Livingston, R. J. et al. (in press). The Biota of the Apalachicola Bay System: Functional Relationships. In, Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Florida Marine Research Publications, in press (eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.) Livingston, R. J. (in press). Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ., in press (eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.) Myers, V. B. and R. L. Iverson. (in press). Aspects of Nutrient Limitation of Phytoplankton Productivity in the Apalachicola Bay System. In, Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ., in press (eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.) Oesterling, M. J. 1976. Reproduction, Growth, and Migration of Blue Crabs along Florida's Gulf Coast. Florida Sea Grant Publ. 19 pp. Oesterling, M. J. and G. L. Evink. (in press). Relationship Between Florida's Blue Crab Population and Apalachicola Bay. In, Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ., in press (eds. R. J. Livingston and E. A. Joyce, Jr.).



PAGE 1

V. THESES AND DISSERTATIONS 1. Bechtold, R.E. 1976. A kinetic analysis of leaf litter-associated microbial activity in Apalachicola Bay. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. (White) 2. Bobbie, R.J. 1976. Esterase activities and oxygen uptake of the endogenous microflora associated with three types of litter in a North Florida estuary. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. (White) 3. Duncan, James. 1977. Short-term impact of upland clear-cutting activities on assemblages of epibenthic fishes and invertebrates in East Bay. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. (Livingston) 4. aughlin, Roger A. 1976. Avoidance of blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus) to storm water runoff. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. (Livingston) 5. McLane, Bradford G. 1977. Effects of clear-cutting on the benthic infauna of the Apalachicola Estuary. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. (Livingston) 6. Myers, Vernon B. 1977. Aspects of nutrient limitation of phytoplankton productivity in the Apalachicola Bay System. Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida State University. (Iverson) 7. Purcell, Bruce. 1977. Effects of stornwater runoff on grassbed assemblages in East Bay. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. (Livingston) 8. Sheridan, Peter F. 1977. Trophic relationships in the dominant juvenile fishes in the Apalachicola Bay System. Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida State University. (Livingston)



PAGE 1

122. LOSS OF RADIOCARBON IN DIRECT USE OF AQUASOL FOR LIQUID SCINTILLATION COUNTING OF SOLUTIONS CONTAINING "C-NaHCO, BY RICHARu IL. IvERsoN, IHElwY F. BrrrTAKER, AND V'ENO-; B. MYnis Reprinted from LImrNo.oLcY AxD OC.AN'Or:IAPHY Vol. 21. No. 5, September 1976 pp. 756-758 Made in the United States of America Copyright, © 1976 by The American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, Inc.



PAGE 1

304. Table 2: Factor analysis of a set of physicochemical variables taken from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Color, turbidity, Secchi readings, salinity, temperature, and chlorophyll A were noted at Station 1 in the Apalachicola Estuary,Tidal Data included the stages of the tide on the day of collection while the wind variable was represented by 2 vector components. Variable Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 (49.0% of the variance) (22.3% of the (17.9% of (10.8% of variance the variance the varianr River flow -0.82 -0.08 -0.07 -0.08 Local rainfall -0.04 -0.30 -0.09 0.20 Tide (incoming or outgoing 0.26 0.61 -0.68 0.05 Tide (high or low) 0.09 0.39 0.61 -0.37 Wind direction (E-W) -0.02 0.09 0.36 0.37 Wind direction (N-S) 0.10 -0.20 0.22 0.31 Secchi 0.57 -0.07 -0.17 0.24 Color -0.80 0.33 0.01 0.07 Turbidity -0.73 0.54 0.08 0.23 Temperature 0.38 0.15 0.02 -0.18 Salinity 0.68 0.21 0.23 -0.02 Chlorophyll A 0.47 0.51 0.09 0.31



PAGE 1

184. C', f,..,a'v A (',F 4 ('*f f t *iifdiT!IS IBTA S TTC' -l ?1 -I " ' I STarfih C0fl ri? 013 I '. )0 ,1j o l 0 ' 1 ' t l 1 i'l' t Tlt's t)r nAy n t f,: 'rF rIG if I T -I ·..rf I;' 1 ..i.I .rn niR I7. s 1 I.< ."r». /9il 4.H ? ?.3.17. It arnt iC 'S1.4> 2 H-I.* 1 >3-.,7 L~trirq 3l. U 30o.l'j 1*.41 4p*AR il. I' 10.0. 'i.lp If A' .l.? .31 .0I .01 ·»al 13.47 5,.J .164.61 .n7 .1! .71 .141 .,d .,?I AVLAC 0.07 4 .'1o 15 4*1 0PA.00 0.0 i~.S f0.00 0.0 1.11 EICaa 6.10 31. JO 171 .?P 1.07 .UI .70 SCtIPF q 0. 0.00 1l.94 0.00 0.10 .S. 0.)n 3.10 .S3 Toir i1 1.45 ' *fio f »,AIA .57 .Il .n1O AoBa 13.?>7 15i.92 S.4, rtH ALr 0..') 0.00 3)4.4 0.o00 .30 .0. ifrcYP I.?1 l.<> I..'>' .11 .u! .1 JPjTIn 3.11 0.0n ?'p .6* 0.iro 0 .i .11 LAtViN o.a 00.0 .0 .9t '»>.* 0.uO .04 .1 0 .0l 14.44 :. rn 0.00 1 ,1 1 0.,lo 0.1.0 .n"* SAPOrf 0.1i O.0to I1.1) 0.00 (.JO .06 *CFBl 1.11' *'.2. 11.1 .1' .1 w; CHA«Cn 0.n0) O.PU In.6, O).l)r) O.l,' .J



PAGE 1

1a C --o apalachicola " river tates hell swamp m,,t d " cattle ranch . 0 I b 03 B3 •I pa achicola Da o s I(D ereef i-s B3 --.. intra. waterway< 0 gulf of mexico kilometers -< 0 3 6 j~(D 0r



PAGE 1

„ SAhPL JATaS 73uJSl 73L415 73j5i5 7"o6.5 730715 1,dS5 73j-9i3 Tl r l,> 1Il a 74irXt5 1*.115 74 ltZ5 IOT"0 6 PERICLi ElcrS AIERICANUi J.CLJJ & C, C.u .Z. L.. C C j ..u. ý .4 a ,.' j .d 9 i. ors&4 .4 1 ;. ....uj j u |0j4)y .u.351 *DM **** 3**M --**M c U«u J ebu LJJi io <*j j d d eJu ORACrIODONTES zXUbTUS O.C.u6 4 A .O Lm 3.JUtLj u. >.0 u .u. L 3 j J u j .j.u. j..j.r O0 ..>


PAGE 1

146. Southward, A.J., and E.C. Southward, 1972. Observations on the role of dissolved organic compounds in the nutrition of benthic invertebrates. II. Uptake by other animals living in the same habitat as pogonophores, and by some lithorel Polychaeta. Sarsia, Vol. 48, pp. 61-68 Stephens, G.C., 1968. Dissolved organic matter as potential source of nutrition for marine Cor.ani: s-Am. Zoologist., Vol 8 pp. 95-106. Stephens, G.C. and R.A. Schinske, 1961. Uptake of amino acids by marine invertebrates. Limnol. Oceanogr., Vol 6, pp. 175-181. Stewart, M.G. and D.R. Bamford, 1975. Kinetics of alanine u-take by the gills of the soft shelled clam Mya arenaria. Corp. Biochem. Physiol., Vol. 52A, pp. 67-74. Tamura, T., B. Truscott and D.R. Idler, 1964. Sterol metabolism in the oyster. J. Fish. Res. 3d. Can., Vol. 21, pp. 1519-1522. Tenore, K.R., M.G. Browne and E.J. Chesney, Jr., 1974. Polyspecies aquaculture systems: The detrital trophic level. J. Mar. Res., Vol. 32, pp. 425-432. Tenore, K.R., J.C. Goldman and J.P. Clarner, 1973. The food chain dynamics of the oyster, clam, and mussel in an aquaculture food chain. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., Vol. 12, pp. 157-165. Testerman, J.K., 1972. Accumulation of free fatty acids from sea water by marine invertebrates. Biol. Bull., Vol. 142, pp. 160-177. Thomas, J.P., 1971. Release of dissolved organic matter from naturcil populations of marine phytoplanktcn. Mar. Biol., Vol. 11, pp. 311-323. Voogt, P.A., 1975a. Investigations of the capacity of synthesizing 3 B-sterols in Mollusca. XIII. Biosynthesis and compositions of sterols in some bivalves (Anisomyaria). Comp. Biochem. Physiol., Vol. 50B, pp. 499-504. Voogt, P.A., 1975b. Investigations of the capacity of synthesizing B-sterols in Mollusca. XIV. Bio-synthesis and compositions of sterols in some bivalves (Eulamellibranchia). Corr. Biochem. Physiol., Vol. 50B, pp. 505-510. Walton, M.J. and J.F. Pennock, 1972. Some studies on the biosynthesis of ubiquinone, isoprenoid alcohols, squalene and sterols by marine invertebrates. Biochem. J., Vol. 127, pp. 471-479. Wright, R.T. and N.M. Shah, 1975. The trophic role of glycolic acid in coastal seawater. I. Heterotrophic metabolism in sea:water and bacterial cultures. Mar. Biol., Vol. 33, pp. 175-183. 18



PAGE 1

Figure 26, continued B . SCATTERS TIP Tr4 FISH CIO)ASS VHOLE PAY 77/03/23. PAGE 11 FTLF :ONMAE (CREATTON DATE = 77/03/23.) SCATTEPGRAM OF (COWN) OPEPIT (ACROSS) CAYS 104.47500 214.442505 464.37500 644.32500 824.275001004.225001184.175001364.12500154.075001724.02500 »qo.27 + I I .I 990.27 I I I 1 1 I I I 1. I I 891.24 I T i 79:.22 4 I I * 792.22 I I I I I I -I 1 I I I I I I I I 9I I 693.19 I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------I 5I4.16 I 4 594.16 ST II I I I I I . I I I ! , 'O5*j3 495.13 o I I I 1 I I i I I I 396.11 + I I + 396.11 -1 I I I I I I 297.35 .I I t 297.08 I I I I 1r T T 1T SI I I T I T I I a I T. y\ T i I I 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 '6175 975 12t75 3/76 176 916 12176 3/77 0aa SCT'FPS T;= TEN FISH 9IOWASt WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. -PAGE 12 ?'nuTITICs. 'r°r=tATTC,-f ( i.12657 R SQUApED -.01602 SIGNIFICANCE o -.16761 99 I -S -13 761 INTECET ) -3.0916 E OF -33916 S: " --* :?:;„:.:? f -°.) 7t i I T 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 000 SCATI¶PS TP TEX FISH 9r#MAS' WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 12 % 0:AT~I~ (n.12657 P SQUAPED -.01602 SIGNIFICANCE * -.16761 "EY -7 ST -I.3'.27621 INTE"CEPT (A) --3.09816 'Tl ERROP OF A -34.39L16 '-*.'*E .:Lr.60 EXCLUCEC VALUES0 "ISSING VALUES -0 " '" 1 S °0INT,': IF & CCErFvCIS'l" 2 :-::" "7"T=.. .



PAGE 1

Table 1 -Summary of SPECS commands and functions of corresponding secondary overlays Command Overlay function LOAD Forms active data file by retrieving data by data base file, area, station (or group of stations, and date (or range of dates) SORT Sorts active data file by area, date, station, and time of day (and species, if biological data) CALC Computes ten separate diversity,evenness, and richness indices for every combination of area, station, date, and time of day present in active data file. Output written to file suitable for printing. GRAPH Prepares for time-based plots of virtually any subset of data base information. Requested data is extracted from active data file. A procedure file is called which executes a graphics interface program (prepares data for FSU Plotting package), then executes the plotting package. Output may be displayed on terminal screen or plotted on a Gould electrostatic plotter. SPSS Extracts requested data from active data file, prepares on SPSS control card file, and executes SPSS (via a procedure file). Output placed on a P file suitable for printing. CLUST Performs cluster analysis on data in active date file. User selects from 10 similarity indices and 6 clustering strategies. Clusters are based on species, stations, and time. Any one or all may be collapsed to any desired degree, allowing great flexibility in grouping of data prior to analysis. Output is on two files, one for printing and one for input to dendrogram program. DENDO Calls procedure file which executes dendrogram drawing program. SUMRY Prepares time-based summaries of fish or invertebrate data in active data file. For each species,monthly and yearly catch (and per cent of total catch) are presented for number of individuals or dry weight biomass. Output on file suitable for printing. CLAMB Computes the C-lambda faunal affinity index for combinations of stations and dates found in the active data file. Output on file suitable for printing. UPDAT Provides for user editing of a data base file. User enters commands to modify or delete data base records when error conditions require correction.



PAGE 1

25. the winter of 1973 (Fig. 30) is apparent throughout the bay. A secondary peak appears during the spring of 1975. On the whole, there was a general decrease in color at Station 1; this was especially significant at greater depths. The reverse was true in East Bay, especially at the surface. Spikes of high water color were particular pronounced during the latter part of 1974. Peaks generally occurred during spring and late summer, thus reflecting rainfall patterns (Fig. 30) during this period. East Bay was thus more highly colored than Apalachicola Bay, and showed a trend which appeared to be linked to patterns of local rainfall and runoff in the Tate's Hell Swamp area. This was not the case with respect to turbidity which tended to decrease during the study period in the bay as a whole. Turbidity seemed to be closely correlated with river flow. Turbidity peaks usually occurred during winter and spring months. One notable exception to this occurred during the summer of 1974 in benthic areas of East Bay. These trends in color and turbidity were generally reflected in the Secchi disk data (Figs. 16, 17) where significant decreases occurred in East Bay with time relative to the Apalachicola Bay area. Dissolved oxygen data are shown in Figs. 18-21. There was considerable seasonal variation at both stations with peak levels generally occurring during winter and spring months indicating the usual relationship with water temperature and salinity. In East Bay, there was a significant increase in dissolved oxygen during the 5 year period of study which was not as apparent in Apalachicola Bay. Relatively low levels of dissolved oxygen were apparent in East Bay during the late summer of 1974. Levels of pH in the Apalachicola Estuary are shown in Figs. 22-25. There was a significant decrease in pH in Apalachicola Bay during the fall and early



PAGE 1

Fig. 27: Surface orthophosphate levels (pg/k) at Station 5 (East Bay) from November, 1972 to September, 1976. * ----+----+----*---*---t *--**--T ----*-------------r---..-r---r----.,--,I/ .0 + .T 7 .A 4 + T b . I I I I + T T I I T I3. I I I I I I I i 1T I I t " j i .i i T"1r ! I I I I I I I Ij I I i I 2 3 1.7I 55 I I .552 r I I T I 7. ---------------------------------------------------------------------"----. S7 I T I SI -I T IC-* -..073 SI I i I I I T I I I T I I .I I [ TT I I I I C .O; F r --.. .34 3 -~""~~'-,---G---~---,------*C-3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 95 12/75 3/76 6/76 917 II: .' I =SOP Pc';.CI)'L77/03/12. PFGE 20 ,°t-LAITH i31.170ra R SQUPED .02894 SICd;IFIC4!ICE P -3 2 C t~ P OF [ST -iE,62.72 4?ITE0CEPT (A) -8.33982 'iO EHFOP OF t -8.6J273 ;TFiCd.F A -.IF 230 SLOIFE (B) -.5073': CTnrD OF U -.or o rir./.'L," -rA 'Lr. CL C ,' Ai 'j"rU -0 Mi'.-.T ./, t LitF S -10 -I L tL Z.' L.^L2I '7 ..-U!1J I L!1. Th2 ".^ ...^....__L_________



PAGE 1

o Rangia cuneata A ,00 Sciaenids B *----*dde, ------dde °----ddd , \ , \ ----ddd ,--ddt ,/ , " \ -----dd t -7 ! , 7 , , "' -,\ d " 7 \ ,/',, ,, \ \ 7 ,o .i ,, ,i \ i P ",-,' 50 / 5 0 0 soo C soo D 41 1 4 1 1 1 I Sciaenids Micropogon undulatus 375 ' 375 a. 250 -250 125 125 J .F .-I I I .I ..... . MlAMJ JA SN JFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJ JASON MAZMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJ *---. ddt -----pcb TIME--MONTHS (1972-74)



PAGE 1

17. Species comparable species regression equation MUG CUG MUG CEP = 3.04576 (X) -12.49192 PRI RUB PRI TRI = 3.07717 (X) -12.21250 PAR SPE FAR LET = 3.06070 (X) -12.73843 GYM MIC DAS SAB = 3.17554 (X) -12.61179 CYN SPE CYN ARE = 2.85506 (X) -12.09550 LOB SUR CHA FAB = 3.36763 (X) -12.66714 C. Invertebrates, regression analysis by species. Species # of individuals regression equation ALP HET ' 22 = 2.75501 (X) -11.52437 CAL SAP 49 = 2.67979 (X) -10.51993 LIB DUB 15 = 2.51633 (X) -8.99184 NEO TEX 49 = 2.64410 (X) -9.04336 PAL FLO 14 = 2.51735 (X) -11.73789 PAL INT 8 = 3.29106 (X) -14.03450 PEN DUO 50 = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 PEN SET 62 = 2.75088 (X) -12.56506 PER AME 9 = 1.70501 (X) -9.43702 TOZ CAR 10 = 3.77633 (X) -18.02926 MET CAL = 2.05252 (X) -7.31573 PAL PUG = 3.23535 (X) -14.16662 D. Invertebrates, calculated conversion coefficients per individual based on narrow range of length frequency data. Species mean ash free dry wt. PER LON 0.0036 (gu) THO DOB .0032 HIP ZOS .0022 PET ARM .0431 PAG BON .0067 PAG LON .1468 LOL BRE .6788 LYT VAR 3.2713 ECH SPE .6914 ECH PAR .2050 OPH BRE .0360 E. Invertebrates, assigned regression equations or weight/individual. Species comparable species regression equation or mean ash free PEN AZT PEN DUO = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 POR GIB CAL SAP = 2.67979 (X) -10.51993 CAL SIM CAL SAP = 2.67979 (X) -10.51993 TRA CON PEN SET = 2.75088 (X) -12.56506



PAGE 1

'EN'T -;Ailt3 iT OP TEN ,DLE dAY BIOMASS T77t3/Z7. P4E 159 FILE NUONAMrE (CREATION OATE= 77/13/27.) SCATrEiKRtAI OF (OOHN) RrlIHAR (ACKOSS) DAY3 t11.47530 284.42530 464.375G0 644.3250j 824.2753o10o04.25001184.1S500136'.t 154Ul4. 761724.. 25,3 . .+------------+------+-----+------------------+**+--------+--------*****---------------** 1.94 + I 1 1.94 I .I I II I I --i ------I I I I I 1.75 I I 1.7S I I I I I I I I i I -I I 1.!7 -I I I 1. , 6 I I I I .55 + 1.55 I I I I I I I .17 9 I I .17 1.36 * I IxT I .3.36 I I JEI I i----------------------LU-----..------I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1Z I I I I I I i I I I S1 I t 97 S+ I I I .78 I I .53 * + | .5P I I I I I .5TA;7 TCP T4 HOLE bAY BIOaS ? 3/7. P. .3 -+ -..U .39 .19 * 4 .19 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 I:NtTT SCATTES S iCP TEn iHOLE bAY BIO1SS ??'J3/27. PA,. 20 CURRELIT.IO (R).2255'. R SQUARED -.0t087 SIGNIFiCANZE R -.G4158 '3 T ..3345 i -T. CS T (A) -.7i37 .TO i9<31 DF A -.V8759 SIGOS.IC4ZCE A -.206J5 SLOPE (b) -.C0Au5 STO iRROR OF B * .-L:JB



PAGE 1

Fig. 3: -Bottom water temperature oC at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. AFALA.C i.ATTERGRAMS i 77/03/11. PAGE 5 FILE Nt-.m. (CPEAIICN CATE = 77/13/11.) SiTTERGR-"F (C6*N) 'OI (ACROSS) QAYS t14.Z225C 293.675CL 477.12~5r 552.57500 832.025C0l011.475COii9t.92500137.37501549. 825001729.275CO .-**--------*------*--*-----------------* 4 31%.St I + 31.50 5I I I SI \I I I I I I 2.35 * I I 1 8.5 I I I I I I II I 26. * I I . I I I I I I I I I ---------------------------------I-----------------<----I-------------------------------2 .5 + I I + I I I I I S-:---: *-IC-.. -* I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I *. I I I I I -.I I I I ----------*--------------------*----*--------------*----------------+* * : .SFI + ±2.95 I I I I C::."'-'-^ ,;':;' -.-:."1: SL" PE (?) --.12297 STO E-7ROR OF e -.Cbl56 f, -S -t. 1S7 I .rI I I I I I I I I I I I I + T.GL '' ----'---'* "---+ ----+-------^--U V -LJ"---ISS:' VA-,----S -7 72 56/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 /C74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 PLIC 5 LiTE GRAS i 'I!" IN ?'ONTHS: March, 1972 to February. 1977 SL ZN I)-..;719 P SQUAFED -.(6110 SIGNIFICANCE 5 -.*3C70 _E6.V'1i? I'TERCEPT (A) -2L.23222 STO ERPOR OF A -1.66139 -.. SL'E (9) --.22297 STD EGROR CF e * .-0156 Lr-t I? JrS'.IsS:':2 vvt2J -^7 ****** -:rA COEFFIC~:IE CANPVT 1± CO"PUTEZ.



PAGE 1

68. PIYTOPLANKTON ECOLOGY OF APALACHICOLA BAY, FLORIDA Richard L. Iverson Vernon B. Myers Department of Oceanography Florida State University



PAGE 1

6. F. Cluster analysis Scluster by species, station, or time .total flexibility in how species, stations, and dates are grouped prior to analysis Sselection of similarity index from amongOrloci's standard distance, product moment correlation, Fager, Jaccard, Sorenson's, Webb, Kendall, Cyekanowski, Canberrametric , C-lambda, rho, and tau Sselection of clustering strategy from among unweighted pair group (grp avg), weighted pair (centroid) grouping, nearest neighbor grouping, furthest neighbor grouping, median grouping, and flexible grouping (with beta) G. Dendrogram Sfor any output from cluster analysis Sthree scales available H. Faunal summary (for any area, station or group of stations, range of dates, and times of day) .number of individuals or dry weight biomass by species, month, and year I. C-lambda (for any area, station or group of stations, date or range of dates, and times of day) J. Mapping Sphysical-chemical data, fish or invertebrate species population totals mapped for all stations in study areas (by month) K. Data base update .modification of any field in a data base record or records Sdeletion of data records



PAGE 1

191. Table 4 (contined) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 1/76 7 T # 10 18 -35 .0028 .0034 42.9 60 .0067 .0077 40.3 120 .0357 .0212 20.7 170 .0735 .0214 10.2 325 .5740 .1121 5.3 Total .1658 7 B # 10 .0007 .0014 71.4 18 .0015 .0026 60.0 35 .0043 .0066 53.4 60 .0128 .0106 49.2 120 .0697 .0415 20.8 170 .1107 .0243 7.6 325 .8603 .1310 5.2 8 M Total .2180 # 10 .0018 .0018 50.0 18 .0033 .0028 42.4 35 .0049 .0044 44.9 60 .0163 .0050 15.3 120 .0265 .0030 9.4 170 .0118 .0046 19.5 325 .1073 .0420 19.5 Total .0636 2/76 7 T # 10 18 -35 .0010 .0026 90.0 60 .0042 .0077 64.3 120 .0228 .0220 33.8 170 .0518 .0223 15.1 325 .2437 .0744 10.7 Total .1290 7 B # 10 -18 .0016 .0040 87.5 35 .0035 .0089 60.0 60 .0101 .0186 64.4 120 .0461 .0323 24.5 170 .1183 .0323 9.6 325 .4532 .1135 8.7 Total .2096 8 M # 10 18 35 .0006 .0010 83.3 60 .0041 .0038 46.3 120 .0152 .0108 35.5 170 .0213 .0158 28.9 325 .3542 .1092 15.4 Total .1406



PAGE 1

Table 7: Stomach contents (% of total dry weight) of Cynoscion arenarius Food Item Size (mm) 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 Avg. 10-89 Detritus <.1 <.1 Polychaetes <.1 <.1 Calanoid copepods 18.7 14.7 6.1 2.9 0.8 0.2 2.9 Parasitic copepods 0.1 <.1 0.3 <.1 Isopods <.1 <.1 0.2 <.1 Amphipods 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.2 0.5 0.3 1.1 Mysids 72.9 65.3 46.0 33.1 14.2 10.7 7.8 25.7 Shrimp -zoeal 0.2 0.8 1.7 0.3 0.2 0.6 -postlarval 8.4 0.9 3.2 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.8 -juv./adult 3.4 3.1 7.9 2.7 4.0 Crabs -zoeal 0.9 3.6 4.2 1.4 0.6 2.0 -megalopal 0.1 <.1 0.2 <.1 0.6 0.1 -jub./adult <.1 0.3 0.2 <.1 0.2 Decapod larvae <.1 <.1 Insects -larval <.1 0.3 0.2 <.1 0.1 -adult 0.1 <.1 <.1 Fish -larval 0.2 <.1 <.1 <.3 -juvenile 16.2 34.2 52.0 73.3 84.9 91.0 100.0 62.1



PAGE 1

A B (n Callinectes sapidus Callinectes sapidus (hepatopancreas) (muscle) > 375 -o ( \ 2\ 1 25 ra / -? fl * 250 250 0o i / \ , /\ 125 \ 125\ ,fk (-h IO0 C D \/ ° I I I -I I Rangia cuneata Penaeus duorarum 7 2250 O In < 01500 51 ° \ i °-r +--*-* 250 750 SCD TIE-MNHA (1 S 7 2-4 MAMJJASONDJFMAMJJ ASONDJ FMA/JJASON MAMJjASONDJFMAMJJ A SONDJFMAMJ ' *--.* ddt 3----.pcb TIME--MONTHS (1972-74) a



PAGE 1

IV. Overall, this Sea Grant project could serve as a catalyst for a basin-wide planning program which would permit orderly development of the Apalachicola Valley while protecting the important natural resources of this area.



PAGE 1

266 . an artifact of the sampling procedures. Consequently, biomass maxima for estimates of productivity were taken fron the June data. Losses due to grazing were considered negligible and there was no observable leaf loss prior to August. There was some loss of female flowering parts prior to the summer maxima which could have made the productivity estimates somewhat conservative. This was probably counterbalanced by the presence of unremoved epiphytes, although few calcified epiphytes were observed throughout the period of sampling. The grassbeds at Station 4A showed higher biomass than those at Station 4B although the seasonal patterns were generally similar with low biomass occurring during winter and early spring months (December -April) and high biomass during the summer and early fall (June -October). Transition periods occurred in November and May with the first new growth noted in March. Leaves reached the surface by April, and leaf death was first sighted in August. Productivity figures (Table 2) were comparable in both study areas. The top 10 species in terms of biomass are given in Table 3. As shown, the gastopod Neritina reclivata was a strong dominant in the area of study. Monthly biomass figures for the study areas are shown in Table 4. The figures at Stations 4A and 4B are comparable with generally higher figures at depth except during the period from May to July when peak values in surface collections were taken. Peak biomass figures were evident in both areas during spring (March-May) and late fall (November-December) periods. This roughly coincided with periods of transition in grassbed areas (i.e., growth and death) and probably reflected changes in habitat associated with shelter-seeking and feeding functions of the individual species. These data have been analyzed in a report concerning the effects of clearcutting on the Bay system.



PAGE 1

244. Table i: Total numbers of leaf-litter a!:sociated organisms taken at 3 stations in Apalachicola Bay during the spring, summer, and fall of 1974. SPRING (April-Nay) S1J!*IER (August-September) FALL (October-November) Totals: 4 baskets with 2 controls (no leaves) -samples weekly, 4-6 weeks fiA I~rr~d~o~erkurive, #A) Intoo~a 892 152 CO~o~~pJm Iouisnnum 601 45 7 b.ss 2'35 Pakloamotiete puvjio 263 73 Topbrroinyi bo'..,ani 339 2 GO~ Us wn5tus 7 Caophium louiszotwn 242 5 Gmndi&relo bconnio.oide% 246 2 Mnno reynoidsi 1,2(I Gammamrussp. (2) 21M 10 Neitimi reclvoato 186 30 Gituroiis sp. Gwmrmaus mucronaum 130 Molito 3p, 71 Poiydoma webstre -'iC Grnd;kkellio bri,;erol;des 107 Gomrnoru, mucronotus 29 1 Maliia so. Q;" 25 RhiWhroponopet, Isarrisi; 93 Caflinectei sopiduS 22 2 Coropnium louisio~um 5ollinectes sopict1 .4 i Munnt reynoldi 20 3 Crsudiondeo avalii i:0 Melila sp. 37 Penau setiferus 18 2 Neanthes succin.*a Caopus sp. 15 Gam mrnussp. (2) 16 Coilinecres sopidus 4 Munna reyna$dsh 7 Poensonetes ptgio Is Nerit;n recl;,vto.1 Csidimndea oval;s a Rhithropenpeus halrr$i; 7 P1I3aemonetes vuigar is Lepaochefia, top 3 COaMPU sp. 7 I Grandi&dlo bonnjera~aes Gtonopsis sp. 7 Edotea montosa 13 FEs Edotea montosc 5 Ceroou sp. 2 -9rrbielk chrysuro 21 8 Cassidindkea ovalis 4 Rhithropanopeus. harr,s;i I . afevoortia Pationus Sphoeromo erebmns I Melito Fresnelii Syngnothus scovelli I CyiodusO si laMs Fishes rAmpelisco obdita GobEaeotr bosci 42 9 Nemerteons 2 Bairdiello chrysurn 17 2 Sphoerorna quadridentrntum Syngnathus florida. 2 Pena"us duorcrum Parometopelfi cypris i Pnra ites specioso AI1idopsis bigelowi :3 Fishes --biollaof bolCi 52 S WIl loves wnoufr meaves -IM iw * Invirtebrates Invertebrates Inverebrates to SP 2,W060 2 Munno reynoldsi 3,137 23 ds!umucronatus Muoni reynoldsi 1,400 L26 Grondikerella bonnieroides 1,725 26 Gitonosis sp. 1,346 51 Gamrrmorus sp. (2) 788 39 Miltaisp. ;,471 15 Corop; uum liouonufn "i2 ii cemPs sp. 382 11 Gitonapsis so. 1,460 A Ericthosius bras iiersis 22'q -. Graov~kierello bonnie-oides 125 81 Corophýium Iuis.cnum 5= 10 Muno reynoldsi 3 '8 faloesonetei pgio 306 91 Cosidinide* ovalis 380 Ccssidinidec ovolis 2: I Rhis&oponopeus narrisii 295 14 Gorinmrus mucrorstus 290 18 Melito sp. -71 2 Cocph;un iouhn*.3nw 292 90 Poldemronetes pU0o 130 8ittium voriun 5 Cmassdnidea ovoi4s 99 11 PoIlamonetes vulgari; 90 49 Neentses succinco 2 Xanthld juvenles 70 Gammarnus sp. (2) 84 2 Pbloeimonetes vulgor% 23 Nerttin redivoao 56 6 Callfinectes supidus 40 6 Callinectes sopicus Polemronerid juveniles 33 6 Edotea monrosa 24 Campus 50. so Gamnusoms mucronatus 23 Ncritina reclivoro is 3 Neritimn reclivoto ;4 Uotwo ,rn-os' to I ?ere sertiferus a Leptocselia rcpax 6 Gllinectes sapidus 10 CAmpUS Sp. 7 Polydoro websteri 2 Sphaecrom terebrons 2 Rhithropnope-us horrisi! 4 Edotea montoswI Sphaerorna rerebians 2 Rhithropanopeus horrisf I Fishes Xonthid juvenilcs 2 6 Amphicteis gurireri I 'idkosoma bosci 45 10 Penreus aztecus I Nemerteons Ictolwrus carus 4 ArgulusIsp. I Poloemloseres pugio Logodonr rhoaborde otlvygobkss soporotor I Fishes Fishes bairdiello chrvsuro 56 Gobiosorno bosci 3 Gobiosorno bosci 29 4 Lutjorus griseus Gobiosorno robustum 4 Ortlopristis chrysoprem



PAGE 1

107. An understanding of nutrient limitation of marine phytoplankton growth is important in elucidating mechanisms of phytoplankton competition and succession (1) and in making decisions concerning the use of the aquatic environment for waste disposal (2). Nitrogen has been identified as the primary limiting nutrient for phytoplankton in marine waters at various locations in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, offshore Notheastern Gulf of Mexico, and in California and New England coastal waters (3). We report results of nutrient enrichment experiments conducted in coastal and estuarine waters which suggest that phosphorus is frequently more important than nitrogen in limiting phytoplankton productivity in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Experiments to determine nutrient limitation of phytoplankton productivity were conducted monthly during the summers of 1975 and 1976 in several shallow North Florida coastal systems (Fig. 1) by inorganic carbon-14 uptake and phosphorus-32 bioassays. The carbon uptake bioassays were two-factorial designs in which different concentrations of phosphate and nitrate were added to water samples along with 14C labeled bicarbonate.(4). The phosphate uptake experiments were one-way designs in which different concentrations of phosphate were added to water samples along with 32P labeled phosphate (5). Environmental factors including temperature, salinity, turbidity, and YCO2 were measured (6). Nutrient samples were collected, stored, and analyzed according to prescribed methods (7).



PAGE 1

256. IX. Benthic infauna An investigation was made concerning the benthic infauna in the Apalachicola Estuary. Benthic macroinvertebrates are considered good indicators of water quality due in part to their limited motility. Portions of East Bay and Apalachicola Bay were sampled to determine seasonal changes and spatial relationships of biomass, species composition, and community structure. Methods and Materials Permanent stations were chosen in established areas of study (Fig. 1; 1, Ix, 3, 4, 4A, 5A, 5B, 6). A hand operated corer (d. 7.7 cm) was used and 10 subsamples were taken monthly to depths of 15 cm at each station (1, lx, 3, 6; from March, 1975 to February, 1976: 4, 4A, 5A, 5B; from February, 1975 to the present). All samples were washed through a 0.5mm screen and fixed in 10% formalin. Rose bengal was added at a concentration of 200mg/l (Mason and Yevich, 1967). Animals were rough sorted and placed in 40% isopropyl alcohol, identified to species, and counted. Biomass (ash-free dry weight) was determined by oven drying each sample at 1000C for 12 hours. After weighing the sample, it was heated at 5000C for four hours. Standard determinations for each species were made using 100-200 individuals for computations of mean dry weight/individual. This was then used for all conversions to biomass. Station descriptions, methods, results of physico-chemical sampling, and other supportive data appear elsewhere in this report.



PAGE 1

175. Table E.. Plant Species Common & Scientific Terminology Alder Alnus serrulata (Ait.) Willd. Ash Fraxinus spp. Birch, River Betula nigra L. Blackgum Nyssa biflora Walt. Bulrush Scirpus spp. Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto Lodd. Cat-tail Typha domingensis Pers. Cord-grass Spartina spp. Cottonwood Populus deltoides Marsh. Cut-grass Zizaniopsis miliacea (Michx.) Doell & Aschers. Cypress, BaldTaxodium distichum (L.) Rich Cypress, Pond1,ascendens Brongn. Dogwood Cornus florida L. Galiberry .Ilex glabra (L.) Gray Hickory, Mockernut Caryomentosa Nutt. Water C. aquatica (Mirchx. f.) Nutt. Holly, American Ilex opaca Ait. Ironwood Carpinus caroliniana Walt. Magnolia, Southern Magnolia grandiflora L. Maple, Red Acer rubrum L. &64thk~e 7 7arA. ba'batum rMichx. Needlerush Juncus roeroerianus Scheele Oak, Chapman's Quercus chapmanii Sarg. Diamond-leaf Q. laurifolia Michx. Dwarf-live Q. geminata Sriill Nyrtle Q. myrtifolia Willd.



PAGE 1

28. chlorophyll A. This is consistent with the known seasonal pattern of these factors, and indicates the important influence of the Apalachicola River on the physical environment of the Apalachicola Estuary. While the river dominates the seasonal fluctuations of parameters such as salinity, long-term changes in the overall salinity of the bay appear to be related also to other functions such as local rainfall and runoff. This would indicate that causation reflects multiple interactions thus allowing apparently contradictory results in the shortversus long-term trends (e.g., turbidity and salinity relationships).



PAGE 1

364. Fig. 4: A. Residues of DDT and its major metabolites found in clams of the Apalachicola Estuary and expressed as percentages of.the total (DDT-R) on a monthly basis from March, 1972 to November, 1974. B. Residues of DDT and its major metabolites found in Sciaenid Fishes of the Apalachicola Estuary and expressed as percentages of the total (DDT-R) on a monthly basis from March, 1972 to July, 1974. C. Residues of DDT-R and Arochlor 1254 found in Sciaenid Fishes taken in the Apalachicola Estuary March, 1972 to June, 1974. D. Residues of DDT-R and Arochlor 1254 found in Micropogon undulatus taken in the Apalachicola Estuary from March, 1972 to June, 1974.



PAGE 1

279. study. This is consistent with the marked decline of organochlorine residues after the first year of monitoring. The long-term trends of organochlorine residues in the Apalachicola Estuary thus reflect reduced upland usage and flushing patterns which may have been related to the major river flooding during the winter and spring of 1973. Biological Parameters Analysis of the composite collections is shown in Figs. 5 and 6. There was a general increase in the invertebrate Shannon index with time. There were also increased numbers of invertebrates (N) during the final 18 months of sampling and slight increases with time in the number of species and the Margalef index. After the first 6 months, there was a gradual decrease in the relative dominance with time. Although these trends appear to be real, there was no statistically significant variation from year to year (Table 1); this was possibly due to the aforementioned use of the year-month interaction as an error term. The fishes (Fig. 6) showed a similar though more pronounced pattern of changes during the study. During the first year of sampling, all indices were relatively low while relative dominance was high. After a further decrease which coincided with the increased river flooding during the winter and spring of 1973, there was an increase in the number of species, Margalef Index, and Shannon diversity. The relative dominance was inversely related to the diversity index. The six-month mean values for all indices tended to stabilize by the winter of 1974. Further analysis of these data (Table 1) indicated that increased N-N1 and Shannon diversity and decreased relative dominance with time were statistically significant on an annual basis. Except for Shannon diversity, monthly variations were not significantly



PAGE 1

274. than 10 grams, the extract was then divided into the two equal portions; one to analyze for various organochlorine compounds, the second to check for Mirex. The extract was poured into a 250 ml beaker and evaporated to dryness under a hood. After evaporation, the beakers were weighed and 50 mls of hexane saturated with acetonitrile were added to the sample residue. This was transferred to a 250 ml separatory funnel and 50 mls of acetonitrile saturated with hexane was added. After shaking, the acetonitrile layer was drained, and the hexane layer was washed 3 times with 50 ml acetonitrile. The hexane portion was discarded and the combined acetonitrile. washings were evaporated to dryness under a hood. The residue beaker was reweighed; the difference was recorded as lipid weight. Sediment samples were placed on Florisil directly after extraction eliminating the acetonitrile partitioning. Further residue cleanup was accomplsihed by quantitatively transferring the sample with 30 ml of hexane to a column (22 x 180 mm) of 7% water deactivated Florisil and eluting the columns with 200 ml of hexane: benzene (3:1) solution. The eluate was then concentrated to 0.5 ml and analyzed by electron capture gas chromatography. A Varian 2400 gas chromatograph with 6' x 1/4" glass column of 1.5%) V-17 + 101 was used for confirmation. Operations parameters for the gas chromatograph were: injections port temperature 2100C; column temperature 1980C; detector temperature 2500C; and a N2 carrier gas flow rate of 60 ml/min. While the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls interferred with the quantification of pesticides, a further separation was made on a silica gel column. The sample was placed on a column (10 x 70 mm) of Grace-Davidson grade 950 silica gel (60-200 mesh) and eluted with 70 mls of pentane and 50 mls of benzene. These eluates were collected separately, concentrated and injected as above, with the eluates



PAGE 1

N1M.'ET SCATTER, TOP TEN nHOLE 6AY BIOhASS 77/03/27. P4GE t1 FILE. NON AME m r AT:O DATF = 77/3/27 7.) SCAIJTER M OF , .i ' .. (A CROSS) OAYS .2'..' .i 6 3 '-*. 7 -I.". *' ^ ld4. 17534 ' L 21, 5 [1 3.,4. .3 50 17Z i , 5 j -: --·;·--Y>l;·----~-·+ ··-))-·-~------.--------------------+-+ ·*----I i i I 77.33 1 7 33 I I 61.6 I + I 136 69.6 * .1 I 49 I *I i I I& * I *1 * I .* 6;.3 5t.1, I I i + +2»« I I I I x-------.-----------,-----------.„ -«„-....,-------.----------«----------------------46.4L + I + 46*40 I-I I I I -----------I ----I ----+ + i I 1.67 .I 67 :G 3 +L 4 -,' S O ( I 1 -41 I I 1 . I i I 1 IWVE-ý! SAIIýS1 TOP TE: mHOLE 2AY 510MA 5 77fD3/27. PAGE 12 r \ I / I 7316.732PT (At 15.4356 OF A -4.3175I \,., 3 FiS + -.\.85 ICIIiT -:.I .. -6 1 EXC9 R -1-LUES1 MISSINa VALUES -. T« T;'


PAGE 1

244 a. IX wiri leaoes w;thou' ieaves with leaves without leaves rm m eaves wmrnur Invertebrates Inverrebrates Invertebmtes Gcn:mmarvs mucronotus 9,?2 82 Melita sp. 6,017 27 Melita sp. 1,662 32 Melita sp. 2,504 24 Ericthonius brasiliensis 2,569 149 Gammnrus mucronatus 7"4 16 Ericthonius brasil;ensis 1,961 79 G;tnopsis sp. 424 1 Cymodua sp. 605 40 Coropl;um louis;vnu m 6' 82 Cassidinidea ovalis 314 7 Ericthonius brmsiiensis 417 26 Cass;d;n;deo ovolis 308 5 Cyonadus sp. 219 17 Couidinidea ovatis 255 IA Xonrh;d jveniles 224 3 Nementans 101 12 Neonthes succinea 198 35 Leptochel;o ramx 148 Xanthid juven;les 93 Gitanopsis sp. 152 Polaenonetls i,,\;rs 125 Gammar-j mucronatus 92 19 Podorke sp. !5 Gitcrbopo. sp. !04 2 Paloemonetes vulgaris 82 7 Polaemonetes vulgaos 114 !5 Ntnnrt-.i. 41 Edlcc montosa 2? 3 Nemerteas 59 EJ-eao 3-on'io. 33 4 .. .. 17 Crepidul oo 1o $3 Erichinel-' (f:r;'.n;i '7 PaloemonerJ juveniles 16 I Leptochel;o rupo« 38 Amoeli;,c ol;lid.i 37 5 Laptochel;i mp,:, 14 4 Bittium vurium 27 5 Neonthes sUl.;nea 35 4 Taphroysis bowvrn; 13 3 Coroph;um louisionum 19 Cymaduo sp. 15 3 Neopondr treana 12 i Hoploscoloplos frogilis 18 2 Neoponope texosa 10 Corophium louis;anum 5 I Erichsonello filiform;s 13 Spho-,.o |uJ:i.de..,tum 3 Erichsonell fil:;ormis 3 Fobriciao p. 3 Call;nctes s s 5 Penneus duororum 3 Anachis avam 7 2 Hoplomcol:.pos fg;l; 3 2 PbIlneonetes pg;o 2 I Neoponope texom 7 Penere, d,,olo,u I Cl;boanorius vitrotus I 2 Edotea montma 6 .Alp , h .;; I Noritim reclivata I I Ner;tiln rocl;vaa 5 hi,,.,t ,. ,i I Nudibranch species I Polydora wetler; 5 C o sp. I Toplromysis bowmoni 5 5 T3ph.llpr; i? f.."l s Fishes Clymenello 1p. 4 Leprtouli, ri,, m' 105 botioomn oscl 7 Pamnaltes sp"c,.o 2 Fundulus g0rvJis 3 Penonev duo(our' F;,k., Opsonus bh-i 2 Collinectes snp~lu 2 p'" I...... w Lutonut gisciu I Hem;i.eno nmins I Lo,,, l.,,,,nt I .. , I Penous arlecus I SIS I *S llot|>In hirlr icti



PAGE 1

280. different. In general, most of the indices representing the first year of sampling (1972-73) were divergent from subsequent results. Such differences coincided in time with the precipitous decrease in organochlorine residues and relatively high levels of dissolved nutrients and chlorophyll A. Species Composition Changes in the species compositon of fishes taken at night at Stations 1 and 4 in the Apalachicola Estuary are shown in Fig. 7. During the first year of sampling, Anchoa mitchilli was a major dominant, and accounted for a considerable proportion of the total numbers of fish taken. By the second year of sampling, this dominance was largely reduced to the months of October and November. A succession of dominant species became apparent, Anchoa in the late fall, Micropogon in the winter and spring, and Cynoscion in the summer. With the exception of June, July, and August, the number of species taken per month was generally higher during the second year of sampling. These data explain the distribution of relative dominance and diversity. During the first year, there was a general trend toward increased dominance (and consequently, reduced diversity) when compared to the second year. There was an increase in numbers of individuals in species other than the dominant during the second year of sampling. The nocturnal distribution of trawl-susceptible fishes in the Apalachicola Estuary thus follows a clear pattern of time-dependent changes in relative abundance and temporal species succession which are consistent with previous analysis at the community level. These results are further explained by long-term population variations of the numerically dominant fish species (Fig. 8). During 9 of the first 12 months of sampling (1972-73), Anchoa mitchilli was the dominant species,



PAGE 1

APALACHICOLA FLORIDA 32320 ROBERT L. HOWELL December 22, 1976 Clerk Circuit Court Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission P. O. Box 128 DeFuniak Springs, Florida 32433 Attention: Jerry T. Krummrich Regional Aquatic Botanist Dear Mr. Krummrich: I presented your letter of 13 December 1976 to the Board of County Commissioners pertaining to the spraying of hyacinths in the creeks along Jackson River. I also presented your copy of a letter to Dr. Robert J. Livingston dated 20 December 1976 pertaining to the same subject. It is the desire of the Board of County Commissioners that you spray and control the hyacinths in the area as stated in your letter of 13 December but would you work out the schedule with Dr. Livingston. Any schedule he works out will be satisfactory to the Board of County Commissioners. Sincerely, Robert L. Howell Clerk Circuit Court .Franklin County, Florida RLH:mmj cc: Dr. Robert J. Livingston 1I p '* * * » ' -,L



PAGE 1

147. ZlAitch, 1. and S. Ochoa, 1973. Oxidation and reduction of glycolic and glyoxylic acid in plants. I. Glycolic acid oxidase. J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 201, pp. 707-718. 19



PAGE 1

SNVE.T SCATTERS TOP EN hHOLE BAY 610MASS 77/33/27. PA5E 9 FILE NONAME (CREATION DATE = 77/L3/27.) SCA;TTERGRAn OF tOOhN) NEkREC (ACROSa) DAYS 154.425aU 28'.4Z500 4&64*37500 644*.35C0 824.275u i,4».P25Si31 Ia.7Sbi 364.Li50154» .S750n 7t2,530 I I I 2 .60 " : * 23.6, .. . I I 1 I I II I I 1.52 + I + 16.2 I ------------------« ----«------*------------------*--------------.--------------------------I I I I -----------e----------------------------------------------**-******-----I I I t I I I I |: '1 2.36 + 1 + 2,16 I I I I I I 7... + .1 1 4 .. 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 ^auk INVE'tT 4CATTERS TO? TEN "sHCLE BAY BIOMASS 77/a3127. PAGEl I. I I7776 R SCARE SIG NCE R II I I jTO £^ OF :ST -3.<3,b41 INfc:RLEPtI (A) -.0932 STO -EklOk 3F 6 -.d355 I .58SLOPE (I ) -.F -I 9 I 1 I i I I SiGNiFI:C£I 0 -.I.67 I I I I I I I I I I I PLC TT.."-'--, -6: :),gLaDE9 VALU:S*IS l -l-U--a 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77* INVE-T .CATStRS TOP TEN WHGLE BAY BIONASS 77/03/27. PAGE ID .:7776 R SYJARED -.0316b SItAIFICANCE R -.871G .TD £1z OF EST -3.e3D4i INTERLEPT (A) -.*2932 STO iRi 3F A -.dj359 51:NIF.NCE 4 -0.8582 SLOPE (B) -.CD1'9 STO ERROR OF 6 * .JLC79 SIGN1F:lotCE 0 -.,8710 PL-TIc .-a) ;'LJZEV VALUL~S?1IS1N; VALU.5 a "....s ..s f .oCf'" o ** --":> 1



PAGE 1

INTRODUCTION There is an established base of published information on the Apalachicola Bay System which will provide the background for this report. Most of the published data in the Apalachicola Drainage System (taken prior to this project) has been reviewed by Livingston et al. (1974). Methods of sampling, together with basic fluctuations of epibenthic fishes and invertebrates in the Apalachicola estuary have been outlined by Livingston (1976). The temporal progression of dominant epibenthic populations has been described by Livingston et al. (1976). The biological associations of this system have been analyzed with respect to biomonitoring procedures (Livingston, 1976) and specific responses of individual populations to key physico-chemical functions (Livingston et al, 1976). A complete list of species taken by various sampling procedures (including benthic infauna, detritus associated organisms, epibenthic fishes and invertebrates, etc.) has been published (Livingston et al., 1977). This includes analyses of major physico-chemical relationships, fluxes of detritus, and a comparison of the natural history of dominant populations of organisms in the Apalachicola estuary with that in other coastal systems of the Gulf of Mexico (Livingston et al., 1977). Livingston et al. (in press) have described long-term changes in pesticide levels and fish associationsin the Apalachicola estuary. Myers and Iverson (1977) have described aspects of nutrient limitation of phytoplankton productivity in the Apalachicola estuary. Oesterling (1976, 1977) has indicated general patterns of blue crab migration and the spawning potential for this species in the Apalachicola Bay region. Supporting data concerning other biological associations in the entire Apalachicola Valley are also available (Livingston and Joyce, 1977). Overall, there is a rapidly growing base of published information concerning the physico-chemical and biological relationships in the



PAGE 1

133 UM 15.4 u g 8.82 uM S68.0 uM 30300 3.56 uM ,-... .,.! ...____------1..t-»---------i. 5 10 20 40 60 5 10 20 40 60 TIME(min)



PAGE 1

2. Apalachicola Drainage System. The published data have been supplemented by various unpublished studies and reports concerning a broad range of subjects relevent to the Apalachicola region. This includes the following documents: "Survey: Chattahoochee-Flint-Apalachicola River System" (Florida State Board of Health, 1962) "A management program for the oyster resource in Apalachicola Bay, Florida" (C.E. Rockwood et al., 1973) "Strategy for change: an interim plan for the northwest Florida region" (RMBR Planning/Design group, 1973: for the Northwest Florida Development Council) "Draft Environmental Statement. Lake Seminole and Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam, Alabama, Florida and Georgia. Operation and Maintenance." (U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile, Alabama, 1975) "Apalachicola River Basin Water Quality Management Plan" (Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 1975) "Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of various pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application to the management of the Apalachicola Bay System. (R. J. Livingston and N. P. Thompson: Final report for Florida Sea Grant, 1975) "Progress Report for Florida Sea Grant: Energy Relationships and the Productivity of Apalachicola Bay." (R. J. Livingston, R. L. Iverson, and D. C. White: Florida State University, 1976) TThe Apalachicola River and Bay System, A Florida Resource" (Florida Department of Administration; Division of State Planning, 1976) "Final Environmental Statement. Apalachicola-Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia (Operation and Maintenance)" (U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile, Alabama, 1976) "Proposal to Study the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River System and Apalachicola Bay" (Northwest Florida Water Management District, 1976) "A study on the effects of maintenance dredging on selected ecological parameters in the Gulf intracoastal waterway, Apalachicola Bay, Florida" (U.S. Army Engineer District, Mobile, Alabama) According to the National Estuary Study (Vol. 3, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1970), the total area of the Apalachicola Bay System is 535,600,000 m2(131,840 acres) of which 7% is occupied by submerged



PAGE 1

171. TABLE C. Plants known in Florida only to the Apalachicola River Region, Excluding Those Known only on Bluffs and Floodplains. Ampelopsis cordata Michx. Arnica acaulis (Walt.) BSP. Aster plumosus Small threatened Cuphea aspera Chapm. endangered Cyperus aristatus Rottb. Dicliptera brachiata (Pursh) Spreng. Eragrostis glomerata (Walt.) Dewey Eragrostis pectinacea (Michx.) Nees Euphorbia telepioides Chapm. threatenecd Gentiana saponaria L. Harperocallis flava McDaniel endangered Heliopsis minor (H!ook.) Mohr Heteranthera dubia (Jacq.) Macil. Iva annua L. Justicia americana (L.) Vahl Justicia crassifolia (Chapm.) Small Linum sulcatum Ridd var. harperi (Small) Rogers threatened Macbridea alba Chapm. endangered Oxypolis greenmanii Math. & Const. endangered Parnassia caroliniana Michx. Parnassia grandifolia DC. Phoebanthus tenuifolia (T. & G.) Blake Rhexia parviflora Chapiman. endangered Scutellaria floridana Chapman. threatened



PAGE 1

29. Literature Cited Bloom, S.A., J.L. Simon, and V.D. Hunter. 1972. Animal-sediment relations and community analysis of a Florida estuary. Mar. Biol. 13, 43-56. Cummins, K.W. and J.C.Waycheck. 1971. Caloric equivalents for investigations in ecological energetics. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. No. 18. 158 p. Folk, R.L. 1966. A review of grain-size parameters. Sedimentology 6, 73-93. Folk, R.L. and W.C. Ward. 1957. Biagos River bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters. J. Sedim. Petrol. 27, 3-26. Ingram, R.L. 1971. Sieve analysis in R.E. Caever (ed.), Procedures in Sedimentary Petrology. Wiley -Interscience, New York. pp. 49-67. Inman, D.L. 1952. Measures for describing the size distribution of sediments. J. Sedim. Petrol. 22: 125-145. Livingston R.J.: Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of various pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application to the management of the Apalachicola Bay System (North Florida, U.S.A. Final Report, State University Systems of Florida. Sea Grant SUSFSG-043-158-43) (unpublished, 1974). -Impact of kraft pulp-mill effluents on estuarine and coastal fishes in Apalachee Bay, Florida, U.S.A. Mar. Biol. 32, 19-48 (1975). -Diurnal and seasonal fluctuations of estuarine organisms in a North Florida estuary. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 4, 323-400 (1976a) -Dynamics of organochlorine pesticides in estuarine systems: Effects on estuarine biota. Proc. Third International Est. Conf. (1976b) -R.L. Iverson, R.H. Estabrook, V.E. Keys and J. Taylor, Jr.: Major



PAGE 1

239. isopods, amphipods, and decapods. Presumably, these crustaceans use this debris as a source of food and shelter. Various studies indicate that such species often depend on the microbial component of the detritus as food (Adams and Angelovic, 1970; Fenchel, 1970; Kaushik and Hynes, 1971; Odum and Heald, 1972). The details of the actual energy transfer mechanism are little known, however. The small invertebrates are in turn consumed by larger organisms. A summary of trawl-susceptible organisms found in the vicinity of the leafbasket stations is shown in Table 5. Many invertebrate species (Penaeus spp., Palaemonetes spp., etc.) are detritovores, feeding on small fragments of organic matter deposited on or within the substrate (Odum and Heald, 1972; Nixon and Oviatt, 1973). Others, such as Callinectes sapidus, are omnivores (Tagatz, 1968). Major predators of the leaf-associated biota would be the fishes, primarily Bairdiella chrysura, Lagodon rhomboides, Orthopristis chrysoptera, Eucinostomous argenteus, and Cynoscion arenarius (Odum and Heald, 1972; Carr and Adams, 1973). As shown previously, leaf litter and other allochthonous forms of detritus are either indirectly or directly available to various estuarine organisms both as a primary substrate and as a source of smaller (fragmented) portions of the organic detrital pool. These trophic relationships will be analyzed in more detail elsewhere in this report. In summary, various estuarine organisms were associated with mixed (deciduous) leaf litter that was dropped in baskets throughout the bay during 1974. Such species assemblages were dominated by amphipod, isopod, and decapod crustaceans. Qualitative and quantitative characteristics of leaf litter associations were highly correlated with salinity. Increased salinity was often accompanied by increased numbers of Gammarus



PAGE 1

Fig. 23: Bottom'pH at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977. 5'."'.r 3;T'TT ..RL'S 2 77/03/ii. PAGE 33 r -'L r u '*"-TI O -ft 77/ :'/1'1 .: -' " .' ) : (AC'OSs) DAYS _-1.5.: ! 3'3. -.'u 557.4 7?.5 726.'T5rs 894.17-01iO62.325 01230.4750139.625 1566.77500173 .----------------------------------------.-----»---------»-----+----------.---,---------------<--. ---------------------+-----0+I I 3 SI II I --I + 7.71 .'i i -r L I f ---------------------*----+ -*.T -*y + t ---+-----+-*-(-+---*i *--.-4---+_. _ 7 I I / 1 I I i I I 6 .7 I i I I 3172 S/72 9172 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/7; ) r. *. --'-'T:?1, ,, '_ .717"T,; ; SOUJAF'" -.03.73i S GdIFIC ANCE R -.'5:i-S '" ' "" .' -" -' : "L-T (,) -6 7..7 .._' ,'7 I .7 OF a -7 _' " -~ *e-I -



PAGE 1

145. Koli:nska, J., 1975. The intestine. In, Cell Membrane Trans.or-t: Princjples and Techniques, edited by A. Kotyk and K. Janace Plenum Press, New York, pp. 463-487. Laidler, K.J., 1965. Chemical Kinetics. McGraw-Hill, Inc., U.S.A. 566 p. Res., Vol. 3, pp. 134-146. Merrett, M.J. and J.M. Lord, 1973. Glycollate formation and metabolism by algae. New Phytol., Vol. 72, pp. 751-767. Nelson, E.B. and N.E. Tolbert, 1970. Glycolate dehydrogenase in green algae. Arch. Biochem. Biophys., Vol. 141, pp.. 102-110. Parsons, T.R. and M. Takahashi, 1973. Biological Oceanographic Process.s. Pergamon Press, Braunschweig, 186 pp. Pasteels, J.J., 1968. Pinocytose et arthrocytose par 1' epithelium branchial de Mytilus edulis.' Z. Zellforsch. mikrosk. Anat., Vol. 92, pp. 339-359. Peterson, J.I., 1969. A carbon dioxide collection accessory for the rapid combustion apparatus for preparation of biological samples for liquid scintillation analysis. Anal. Biochem., Vol.' 31, pp. 204 210. Pequignat, E., 1973. A kinetic and autoradiographic study of the direct assimilation of amino acids and glucose by organs of the mussel Mytilus edulis. Mar. Biol., Vol. 19, pp. 227-244. Robinson, G.G.C., L.L. Hendzel and D.C. Gillespie, 1973. A relationship between heterotrophic utilization of organic acids and bacterial populations in West Blue Lake, Manitoba. Limnol. Oceanogr., Vol. 18, pp. 264-269. Rose, I.A., 1958. The absolute configuration of dihydroxy-acetone phosphate tritiated by aldolase reaction. J. Am. Chem. Soc., Vol. 80, pp. 5835-5836. Sam.uel, S., N.M. Shah and G.E. Fogg, 1971. Liberation of extracellular products of photosynthesis by tropical phytoplankton. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 51, pp. 793-798. Sorokin, Y.I. and D.I. Wyshkwarzev, 1973. Feeding on dissolved organic matter by some marine animals. Aquaculture, Vol. 2, pp. 141-148. Southward, A.J. and E.C. Southward, 1970. Observations on the role of dissolved organic compounds in the nutrition of benthic invertebrates. Experiments on three species of Pogonophora. Sarsia., Vol. 45, pp. 69-95. 17



PAGE 1

177. Table E concluded Torreya Torrey^taxifolia Am. Tupelo, Ogeeche Nyssa ogeche Bartr. Water N. aquatica L. Willow, Black Salix nigra Marsh. Wiregrass Aristida stricta Michx. Yew, Florida Taxus floridana Nutt.



PAGE 1

180. er*rc* t t* oo r ''i Tf 1")l t 7.n 1 7.-' | 7I -' ) 7S :;l /I io n 7 nnl f)a I I7 0L n 1 1ool uI 11TSlln 751701 7h01 1l ArTf .? ., 4 .PJ .7'I ./ ' .10 .)*n fn.n0 0.fin 0.00 0.00 1.55 .17 .'7 f,. .,' l .11 ,.: 0.0`0 (1.0 0.00 n.no 0-. 0 .r* .nh P, PItr ., .0 ..(f .0l j .it 0.0n n.n0 0. hq 0.00 0.00 3.0? 0n.n .30 ,i .0 1 ."(' P .01r 0.00 (.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 .t n.nn00 I. ;T ..-J .0 o. fio, .:;r,) 0.o 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .21 fl. n .*' .1. .i0 0.011 .0 0 .n0o n.nn 0.00 0.00 o.00oo .? 0.nn I?'rTr]T p0.0 (0.!0 o0.00 .) '.:10 0o.o n00. n 0.00 0.00 .01 o.nf 0.00 'I. 1 .) .( 0 .oo0 .** ';. o 0o.n n.o00 .0n0 0.00 .00 .00o n.an Ftir(I.tr f. 0.i 0 0.0 u. 0n i. .00 3.12 0.0 0.n00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n. 1. i .0.0 .0 (" .o .n.nn o.nn o0.00 0n.00 0.o00 0. T0 or .0.3 0. 01 0.')i 0o.nn .0c0 .nn 0.n 0.00 ?.55 0.00 .2 0..nn 0.'" 0.8 (.0' (..0 no.')0 0.n0 0.0o 0.00 .12 0.00 .11 0n.n r LAT .! U. sU0 11.00 0."' ."0 0..0 0 .n0 0.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0o .-t* (.L" '1. u.0."" f,.10 0.00 0.n00 0.00 0.00 o.0n 0.0 0.n00 A.oodA 7.1', .07 .10, (.n .10 u.n0 0.n0 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 0.00 .31 .i .0o 0.0on .n o.no n0.0n o.nn 0.00 .ni 0.0o 0.no S ar.os ..lo ,') .71 '.30 (.o 0 o.n0 0o.n 0.00 0.00 .?2 0..n .014 .,* .07 .*4 i.30, 0.00 n.n0 o.on 0.00 0.no .14 0.nn t77 , .77 .1 .0' .10 .0.00 0.n0 .nn0 0.00 .75 .03 .03 0.00 .1 .1O .no .sI c.0n0 0o.0 0.)0 0.00 .04 .01 .0n 0.00 3I L p' .'> O.00 ..r o0.':r f..0 i 0.n0 n.no 0.00 0.00 o.00 0.0o 0.00 .1 t 0.00 .17 o.0on C(.0 0.n0 n.fl (n.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.n0 o1*1 l-1' 0."0 0.n0 (.' r. U.no n.n o.no 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.nn .1 I l .0 I 0.1')P U. P '..o10 U0.0 0.0 0o.0o 0o.0 0.00 0.on 0.00 c*,ic. r i,f, n"n "r o.0 *.A') 0.fn0 0.no 1.15 0.0n o.nn 0.00 .1* .4.0 C ,0 0.L00 0'.00 0.00 0.00 0.n0 .O0 0.00 0.00 0o.0 rpCr .0.c.a 4). ri 0.00 fi O.00 0.0 0 .00 0.00 0.o0 .47 0.00 .; O.00 0. n U.nr C.n .o n.no .0 (f.00 f 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0.o0 tFit( .tora09, r,.niii' ".n (i1,i ,.No. n 01 i ', '. '11 0i.0000f)0 0O.1)1n 0.01000 0.00000 0.100000 1.00000 0.00000nn , 1 11.'i11I 0.i .i 0 .'" .'n o0 .('.0 0.00n 0.00 0.00 0. 0n 0.00 TyT I;IS') .' ) "·.,'f ' l'l f,. 'I''I." '). .r .s3 ' q .-" .Il001 0n .0000 nnn ) 0o. l0lnnnn .0nnr.0 0.no;no n.no n 0 .00i)n0 .1.1.0 V.' I' i.r'".' .'. r 0.0n .0 n.n0 o.nn n.o0 0.n0 0.0n n.00 Ju7 ;r .) l ' .i, -.j , .."I '' 1 *I, ..1. o n 1t 40r 'n1 ,0.:.lnn (f1.000f 0 0.000.nn 0.0.no .00 0 o.n (n .nnnn o .1 ,.* ., U.'!o .."i .n .' n.00n 0.00 o. 0. 00 0.n. f.8 -." ..("' i''.r),) n.*i; ,n n.0i)' O.it n nO, 10 1.0inn 0.0n0 00.10000 o.0000 0.00o00 .*6000 0.00noo 6'i. .. (,,, 1. n '. .:.(,n 0.no n. nn 0.or 0.00 O.n0 .12 o.nn f ?.t r ..-u -'r !s.rr.'.,I " ..l,! ' n.r1. ,I .o .00. )n .0uI'0 0 n0.liq000 0..00i00 0.n000no 0.000n0 0 0 0.00000 0.00n no n;.. n0.lu '.-J) t.n1 t.1n o0.00 (.10 0.nn 0.00 0.00 0 .0 0.00 itrl~,a L .l'l-,'i .14000 .')1'0 1 .00,1n I.f0 iJ'1: U.ill0onn 0.ooinn .1o 000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000oo0n 0.00000n .,' ..' .r. .on ".30 0a.nn 0.n0 .0n 0.00 0.00 0.no o.n0 rLrtlo ..'"i .92?u41' .*)'i 10 f(,0.0lll a C,, .C00 .l0Oi(nO .00001uno) n0.(000 0.000o 0.00100 n.oo0 0 0.000oon .An .')1 .11 0.1n0 .00 O.n0n n.00 c.00 0.00 0.00 0.n0 0.00 lTri.or ,tr? .'%)i( ;'i *.(,' 00)(4l .0'i.00i 0.00 n.0 I.01o')n0 0.00000 .(n4110 0.00000 0.00)00 .01000 0.00000 S."'i n.0' '.n, .rin 'i.30 .n0 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 vCI ' .n'". I' .01: ..:> il .,1, li.s ;'i('' O.99 .30 0.00 00uo 0.o.ut0 0.101)0 0.n0000 0.00o 0 0.o.n0no 0.000nn q.' .I) s '(.0 O.0 .' .'Oi 0.0n0 .n o. 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00. o~,bniI .:i.. 0n, n.rn1r':C n.ll *' "'(' .o )10 .) ' .r ;; 0.ono00 0o .onnnn 0.oino 0 0.oo00 oo00 0.00n 00 o .non00 0 .00oo00 .jI 0.00 1).1' .D r) i .b(. o. n 0,00 O.nO0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 si tPF .fr'"10 .0-0i) .oi00ii 0.000oj'i '.o0' u.n00000 0.00onn o.o0000 0.00 0.00000 0.00 0. no 00n 0.00n00 0.'i .Od .no U.09 '.30 (0. on n.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0o o.on of IAPF n .."i ' (0 .n:]o nl n.ini. .0 1u')0 n0.c(0' 0 0.4(00000 0.floo0 0.0000A O.n00000 0.00)n00 0.00000 0 o.ooonn .' 0 .00 .non '.n ".0 0.00 n 0.0n .0.n 0.00 0 0.0n t p~W~.r" ,orn 0 .00.;) q .I'.0'qi n0. .o o.t' , 0. noC; .A.Onln10 U.unnnl0 0.'00o)o 0O.n0000 0.00000 0.00non 0.0000n .A 0.0." 0.00 11.nn ( .no 0.non 1.n 0n.nn i 0.00 0.00 0.n0 0.nO 14 P7 r u .Oos0 A*. j4(,1 .VL,)rr) .'401'' , 0 ,i."C: 3 0 U .00)l)nO 1 ). Ur0o04 0.n 00{0 0 0. i()0010) 0.4)o 00 0. 0()(40 0 0. o0000 ,l 0 0 10 .( O.n 0 .0) 0.I0 n ). no) 1.n00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 ,erFrtn


PAGE 1

FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER F~SH COMMISSION R. THOMAS, Chairman E P. "SONNY" BURNETT, Vice Chairman HOWARD CDOM DONALD G. RHODES MD.S. GEORGE G. MATTHEWS Jacksonvlle Tampa Mrianna Sattltte Beach Palm Beach DR. 0. E. FRYE, JR., Director P O B 128 H. E. WALLACE, Deputy Director P.. Box 1 R. M. BRANTLY, Deputy Director DeFuniak Springs, Florida 32433 December.20, 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Florida State University Department of Biological Science Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: I received your letter of December 17, 1976, concerning the hyacinth problem in Apalachicola Bay. We are of the opinion that our spring spraying of the creeks is not a loss of breeding habitat. I have tried to make clear that hyacinths are detrimental in these areas and we want to maintain them, both to insure quality habitat and quality recreatton-potential. I have come to regard the marsh area as too complex a system for us to infringe upon and believe if we concentrate our efforts on the area above the marsh we can accomplish the desired objectives. I believe I showed you enough information on the herbicide 2,4-D to adequately demonstrate that our use on hyacinths upstream would have no direct effect on invertebrates in the marsh. This is why I believe we could have a program in these upstream creeks in September and October. I would like your opinion on this point. The County Commission felt obligated to speak for the fishermen when they requested we not spray the creeks in the spring. I am asking they reconsider whether the fishermen wish us to cease our program. We cannot spray in February before the fishing season as they suggested.



PAGE 1

.O GObveraor a BRUCE A. SMATHERS State of Florida 1 RUCE A. atr lest.tary of Stite ROBBRT L. SHIEVIN n Attorney General GERALD A. LEWIS Comptroller DEPARTM\ENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES """;ASLER DOYLE CONNER Commissioner of Agriculture HARMON W. SHIELDS CROWN BUILDING / 202 BLOUNT STREET I TALLAHASSEE 32304 RALPH D. TURLINGTON Executive Director Commissioner ofEducation December 28, 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Associate Professor Department of Biological Sciences Conradi Building Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: As you know, the State of Florida recently authorized the acquisition of 12,869 additional acres within the Lower Apalachicola River endangered lands project. This brings the total acquired so far to more than 28,000 acres, or better than 90% of the proposed acquisition. The scientific knowledge generated through your on-going studies, and your generous sharing of that information with us, has enabled the State to define an optimum purchase boundary which will reap public dividends far in excess of the 8 million dollars we have so far invested in the L6wier Apalachicola land purchase. We would hope that your work will continue so that we might even further sharpen our focus on the most critical environmental needs of this estuarine complex. Now that our initial land purchase in the Lower Apalachicola is nearly completed, we are working towards finalizing a management plan for the area. Enclosed you will find a draft management concept outlining the essential elements of that management plan. In view of your long-standing interest and involvement with this state acquisition, we would invite your comments and criticisms on the draft. Once again, may I express our deepest appreciation for your invaluable assistance to the State of Florida over the more than ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES * LAW ENFORCEMENT .MARINE RESOURCES DIVISIONS / RECREATION AND PARKS * RESOURCE MANAGEMENT



PAGE 1

37. Table 4: Factor analysis of a set of physicochemical variables taken from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Color, turbidity, Secchi readings, salinity, temperature, and chlorophyll A were noted at Station 1 in the Apalachicola Estuary Tidal Data included the stages of the tide on the day of collection while the wind variable was represented by 2 vector components. Variable Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 (49.0% of the variance) (22.3% of the (17.9% of (10.8% of variance the variance the variance River flow -0.82 -0.08 -0.07 -0.08 Local rainfall -0.04 -0.30 ' -0.09 0.20 Tide (incoming or outcoming 0.26 0.61 -0.68 .0.06 Tide (high or low) 0.09 0.39 0.61 -0.37 Wind direct'on (E-W) -0.02 0.09 0.36 0.37 Wind direction (N-S) 0.10 -0.20 0.22 0.31 Secchi 0.57 -0.07 -0.17 0.24 Color -0.80 0.33 0.01 0.07 Turbidity -0.73 0.54 0.08 0.23 Temperature 0.38 0.15 -0.02 -0.18 Salinity 0.68 0.21 0.23 -0.02 Chlorophyll A 0.47 0.51 0.09 "' 0.31



PAGE 1

96. Hargrave, B.T. and G.H. Geen (1968) Phosphorus excretion by zooplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr., 13, 332-342. Holmes, R.W. (1962) The preparation of marine phytoplankton for microscopic examination and enumeration on molecular filters. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish, 433, 6 pp. Jitts, H.R. (1959) The adsorption of phosphate by estuarine bottom deposits. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res., 10, 7-21. Kraswick, G. and J. Caperon (1973) Primary productivity in a nutrient limited tropical estuary. Pac. Sci., 27, 189-196. Livingston, R.J., R.L. Iverson, R.H. Estabrook, V.E. KeyPs, and J. Taylor (1974) Major features of the Apalachicola Bay System: physiography, biota, and resource management. Florida Sci., 37, 245-271. Loftus, M.E. and J.H. Carpenter (1971) A fluorometric method for determining chlorophylls a,b, and c. J. Mar. Res., 29, 319-338. Martin, J.H. (1968) Phytoplankton-zooplankton relationships in Narragansett Bay. III Seasonal changes in zooplankton excretion rates in relation to phytoplankton abundance. Limnol. Oceanogr., 13, 63-71. Menzel, D.W. and R.F. Vaccaro (1964) The measurement of dissolved and particulate carbon in seawater. Limnol. Oceanogr., 9, 138-142. Perry, M.J. (1976) Phosphate utilization by an oceanic diatom in phosphorus-limited chemostat culture and in oligotrophic waters of the central North Pacific. Limnol. Oceanogr.,.21, 88-107. Peters, R.H. and F.H. Rigler (1973) Phosphorus release by Daphnia. Limnol. Oceanogr., 18, 821-839. Pomeroy, L.R. (1960) Residence time of dissolved phosphate in natural waters. Sci., 131, 1731-1732. Pomeroy, L.R., H.M. Matthews, and H.S. Min (1963) Excretion of phosphate and soluble organic phosphorus compounds by zooplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr., 8, 50-55. Pomeroy, L.R., E.E. Smith, and C.M. Grant (1965) The exchange of phosphate between estuarine water and sediment. Limnol. Oceanogr., 10, 167-172. Pomeroy, L.R., L.R. Shenton, R.D.H. Jones, and R.J. Reinhold (1972) Nutrient flux in estuaries In: Nutrients and Eutrophication; G.E. Likens, editor, American Society.of Limnol. Oceanogr. Inc. Putnam, H.D. (1967) Limiting factors for primary productivity inl a west coast Florida Estuary. Adv. Water Poll. Res. 3rd. Int. Conf. Munich Proc., 3, 121-152. Rhee, G.Y. (1973) A continuous culture study of phosphate uptake, growth rate, and polyphosphate in Scenedesmus spp. J. Phycol., 9, 495-506.



PAGE 1

ii~



PAGE 1

273. after. Complete data were not taken during 3 summer months of 1974. All collections were preserved in 10% formalin and identified to species. Analysis was carried out on composite samples including Stations 1, 5, and 6, and 2 (2-minute) tows taken at Stations 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3, 4, and 5A. Varying combinations of stations and time periods were used for calculations which generally were performed on composite data at monthly intervals. Pesticide Residue Analysis Animal samples from Lake Seminole (Fig. 1) were taken for pesticide determinations by the use of bag seines and hook-and-line fishing. Multiple samples were taken with otter trawls from the various stations in the Apalachicola Bay System. All samples were immediately wrapped in aluminum foil and frozen with dry ice in the field; such samples were kept frozen until analysis. Clam (Rangia cuneata), shrimp, and (small) fish samples were usually pooled composites of 3-6 individual organisms. Sediment samples were taken at various stations with a small coring device (7.2 cm d); the top 10 cm were placed in aluminum foil and frozen for analysis. Samples were prepared as described by Thompson et al. (1974). Animal samples were dissected, weighed, and ground in sodium sulfate. Samples of very small fish included the entire fish; larger fish samples consisted of the dorsal muscle. Clam samples included the entire body except the shell. Crab samples consisted of the muscle base of the last pair of walking legs and the hepatopancreas. Total sample size was usually less than or equal to 25 grams. Sediment samples were dried under a hood for two days and 50 gram portions were analyzed. The samples were extracted for six hours with 200 ml of petroleum ether in a Soxhlet apparatus. If the weight of the sample was greater



PAGE 1

* ' C F ZINO T!"h Co*'"i servjT'': Founndti7on 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.. Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone (202)797-4300 Cable CONSERVIT APALACHICOLA MEETING January 7, 1976 CF Conference Room Preliminary Agenda 9:30 AM State and Local Needs and Priorities -Overview and Slide Presentation on Ecosystem -Robert J. Livingston -Franklin County -Apalachicola River Basin -Regional Interest -State Perspective 12:00 Noon Lunch 1:30 PM The National Stake in the Apalachicola -Open questions on the research needs and management objectives for the Apalachicola system. Round table discussion with Federal representatives. 4:15 PM Cocktails John Clark Convenor I'CL' ICOi, n ,',ycldd Popor



PAGE 1

B Figure 25: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Cynoscion arenarius in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1 2, 3 4, 5 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. Sa:TTE°S FISH TOP TEN ? 77/03/23. PAGE 9 F:ILE NOME (CZEATCTI DATE = 77/03/23.) SwAT'ESGR 3 0;7 (JChN) CYNARE (ACROSS) DAYS 14.475.'0 284.425Ca 464.37500 644.325C0 824.2750010C4.225rii~~1.175001364!.1501i544.37500724.a2500 .-----* -------------+------+-------------------+-----------------7. "-I I + 974.00 i .i \ i I I I I I ?7&.50 I I + 876.63 i I \ I I 8I I 7 I I I I 779.23 + I I + 779.2Z I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 661.3I I 681.80 I I I I I-------------------------------------------------------*-----------.. -. ...-------------TAii 1 S 1 ST I I I I I I I I I S1 584.43 I I I I I I I I 487.JC i I I 487.03 I I I I I I I I I SI I , I 389.61 +V I I 4 389.6C I I I I I I I SI II L92.0 L 1 I 292.20 SI II I. I I I H I I I SI I I I I I I I 196.8 + I + i94.8C I I I I I I I 97.4.0 I + 97.40 I I I I I --\-----I I „ --* **--*--+---*-T--T --»----***-+ *--..------»+-----*,*----**--+---jt---t-3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 0a SCAtTE.S FISH TOP TEN N STATISTICS.. COqRELATION (.).7867 R SQUARED -.OC619 SIGNIFICANCE R -.27513 STUO 'R CF EST -236.5781C INTERCEPT (A) -122.06655 STO ERROR OF A -61.C4763 SI;NIF:C"NCE 4 -.12!12 SLOPE (0) -.C3482 STO ERROR OF 8 -.C5794 SIGNIF:CeNCE 3 -.2751C PLOTTEi VALUES -6C EXCLUDED VALUES0 MISSINS VALUES -0 _ __ _ ___ ******* PRI';TLO IF A COEFFICIENT CANW:OT BE COMPUTED.



PAGE 1

71. RESULTS AND BISCUSSION The circulation of surface waters of Apalachicola Bay is controlled by wind (Fig. 2). Bottom circulation was uncoupled from wind except following periods when wind speeds were high enough to mix the water column. River discharge is the primary factor which controls nutrient concentrations in Apalachicola Bay (Table 1). Surface nitrate concentrations in both East Bay and Apalachicola Bay were highest during winter periods of maximum river discharge (Fig. 3, 4). An increase in surface phosphate concentration was also observed during winter periods of maximum river discharge (Fig. 5,6). Maxima in phosphate contentrations, observed during 1976 were the result of wind-mixing of sediments into the water column during periods of strong winds over the bay (Myers, manuscript in preparation). Phosphate maxima of this magnitude are not observed in the data record prior to 1976 since boats available for use were not capable of operation during periods of high winds. There do not appear to have been significant changes in yearly cycles of surface nitrate or phosphate concentrations at these two stations over the sampling period. Surface phytoplankton productivity patterns exhibit maxima ,in the spring and minima in the fall and winter (Fig. 7,8). Results of nutrient enrichment experiments suggest that nutrients are not limiting for phytoplankton productivity during the winter but are limiting during the summer (Estabrook, 1973). An extensive investigation of summer nutrient limitation revealed that phosphate was the primary nutrient limiting phytoplankton productivity both in East Bay and in Apalachicola Bay with nitrate limiting productivity with frequency less than phosphate in



PAGE 1

138. Micellar or molecular diffusion appear to be the primary rmiec-anismrs for absorption of fatty acids and monoglycerides by intestin-l epithelium in a variety of organisms (Hubscher, 1970; Kolinska, 1975). Testerman (1972) found uptake of some fatty acids exhibited saturation kinetics with two species 0: polych:--ete. Souti-wr.d a Southward (1970, 1972) obtained the same results with both uogonophores and polychaetes. Pinocytosis is another route for entry of lipids and fatty acids into the cell. Pasteels (1968) demonstrýated pinocytosis of ferritin by gill cells of Mytilus edulis. However, the significance of pinocytosis in lipid transport into epitL-.lium cells is questionable (Hubscher, 1970) and available data favor other means of transport. The accumulation of labelled glycolic acid by the gill tissu2 is not likely to be caused by bacteria adhering to the gill surface since bacteria exhibit saturation kinetics with respect to uptake and oxidation of glycolic acid at low concentrations similar to those used here (i.obinson et al., 1973; :right and Shah, 1.975). The natural cleansing effect of gill cilia, use of filtered artificia. sea water and short incubation times further reduced bacterial ef.t cts. Plate counts of csiears of gill tissue on both Zobell and Nutrient agar media revealed low ( <50 colonies) population of bacteria. ; o!.pes of regression lines on the time course of 14CO2 evolution with antibiotic treated vs. untreated Mercenaria sp. gill tissue showed no significant differences (P<0.05) for M. mercenaria (Figure 3) or foo M. campechiensis (Figure 4). Accumulation of a radioactive label is not definitive evidence of net accumulation of a compound because of the possibility of e:xchange diffusion or label exchange. There is evidence that marin-10



PAGE 1

86. APPENDIX 1



PAGE 1

YNGMATHUS FLORIOAE 0.00000 0.o00000 0.00000 0.00000 .12000 0.000000 0.00000 .40000 .34000 000000 0.00000 0.00000 .86000 0.00 q0.0 0.00 0.00 .n01 0.0 0.00 .02 .31 0.00 0.00 n.00 .00 SPECIFS SAMPLE CATES 75031 750415 750515 730615 750715 7r0815 150915 751015 751115 751215 760115 760215 TOTALS OTROPIS PETERSONT 0.00000 0.00000 .560o 0.00n00 0.01000 0.0000 0 0.00000 0.00000 0.000 0.0000 000000 0.00000 000 .56000 0.00 u.0n .02 o.oo 0.00 0.00 o. o .0.o 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 ObIOSONA POtUSTUM O.UO000 0. 00ou 0.00000 0 .08000 .050Un o.00000 .o0000n 0.0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .29000 .42000 0.00 0.00 0.00 .ni .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 .07 .00 YNGNATHUS LOUISIANAE 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .37000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .37000 0.00 0.00 U.09 .04 0.00 0.00 0. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 ONACANTHUS HIS°TDUS 0.00000 0.00000 0.000(1 0.00000 .02000 0.00000 0.00000 .23000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ,25000 0.00 0.00 U. 000 ..0 00 01 0.00 o .0.00 .0. 0.00 00 .00 .00 UNOULUS GRANOIS 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .22000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .22000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 EPOMIS MACQOCHIRUS 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .09000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .08000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 ONACANT4US CILIATUS 0.00000 0.00000 .05000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000 0.00o00 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .05000 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. n 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 TOTALS 1191.3 1464.8 2b65. 8 964.4 '1034.3 597.3 1413.9 2308.4 3025.3 674.2 4243.7 442.9 20826.6 * ,-



PAGE 1

SPECIES ; L 1. .5 76a515 7uL615 76.715 T6.6ý5 7 o,9 9e5 T*Ljll 751119 76LE13 77wLZ5 77,Z2is 1014.5 PALAEKON--;TES ITEkl~u~jS U C J i C J 5 Q.' 0 ui;ý j. u. &o w. C ý UL 66 3 J i ·Q'i JOZi78 ·DSU'Jjjuu rlj EC~dnNAR~alNIJS PAR4A 6 U i u 6 6.0 6 6 j .1 J 5 J 10 J -G I J .1 4 4 4 61, Jr~·t·rj ~j~j~ 6Gilc, ·~rJ u·. ~ ~ Ya·L L·UuL a. .0~r rJV ·J HEMI 40 U E D jA Au L L w.j L ii k. 4 .U 72.%t W. 11 4.6 1 j .1 4. j i 16 6 0 A 1 .4 a 40 o i k. ..0 0 4.0 1 im 1. 0 u 72 .6, FALAEMON FLOýUuANU4 U*;Uuwý4 J 3 L 0 U v u 6o Uk .UJU u .U j 0 a 44 jr~ I~jr~, ·Uru. ·~3J PAýU:WU i 33NAIR:-NiIS uouCUwC O*Gjjav 0* j 0 0 J j*65oL u kju6L u s u v .L J i JJ J*3J4. J .U a j J .4 ·bý7j ioa340L .36574 PM;AMBJAIUS PE4Az.NSALAýUý' 4*ý605C 3 J .; o J J ;L u I,3] JoauJuL uo ; 7 J 4 o 3 4 uu 1 13 G JoU.4ýJ .d J 4. .n I34Z 4 3 1i kr A .4. 3'tZ NUOIBRANCH SP* 0 ool~a4 3 j ý4ý ja'z o 6. 1., ý j ua u 1, o w u 4o~LU 6w 4 j 1 4 v 4 J.4J~iJ ioU44ja 3 o 3 11 0 *iý4i ·0 a to 3 0 j o JL ' 0 a 4 1, * L ý 0 ý4 1.44 3 a i G a a 0 .0000 o J TOTALS 328o3 53605 831o2 26996 467.9 Wo. 8 4L8.4 ijoo 2!b* IL99 3305 3?09 425509



PAGE 1

103. TABLE -IV Phytoplankton SOecies Data* S9/76 1/75 3/76 6/75 7/7z 3;pi-iE r'or'a usD------------__ Ll ._* ---------Bacillaria paxillifer -++ Bacteri.-.strum sDp --. Ceratium furca .Chaetcce-os lorenzi-anum ++ -+ .. Chaetoceros snp 1 --.... -. Chaetoceaos spp 2 --. + +Cocconeis disculodes +++ _ -+Coscinodiscus radiatus ++-.. +_ -_ +Coscinodiscus spp.... .. Cyclotella sp, 1 ++ ++ __ __ ++ + Cyclotella spu 2 ++ +_ + ++ ++ ++ + ++ + Gyrosig" -.a sn _ ++s -+_ +++ +++ +_ Gyrosigma spp 2 ----+ --_ Melosira gran.ulata ---++ +4 + -Navicula s pp1 +++++_ +-_ _ .++ Navicula spp 2 --+ Nitzchia closteriun+-+_ +_ +_ +_ + Ni-tzchic pi-do:-:a -----_ Ri z. O -i --.. --= ..--~..... --.. Rizosol!nia snp + Striat e s ----Surirella smithii -----



PAGE 1

278. above and below the impoundment behind the Woodruff Dam (Table 4); these levels-were not dependent on station placement (above or below the dam) or the passage of time from 1972 to 1974. Mean organochlorine resides in various species taken in the Apalachicola Estuary from March 1972 to November, 1974 are shown in Table 5. Graphical representations of monthly maxima of organochlorine residues for selected species are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. The results of an analysis of variance of the station-specific distribution of organochlorine residues in the Bay showed no significant spatial relationship in the occurrence of such compounds in estuarine organisms. Therefore, station locations were not given in the final data presentation. The temporal patterns of DDT occurrence were correlated with PCB distributions,with generally increased residues during winter and early spring months. Such increases coincided with river flooding. During the sampling period, there was a marked reduction of organochlorine residues for all species, with relatively low levels found subsequent to the first year of analysis. This overall decrease appeared to be timed in a general way with the reduced use of the organochlorine compounds although river flow patterns appeared to be related to both seasonal and annual variations of the residues. The two-way Anova results (Table 1) confirm a significant decrease in DDT-R and PCB residues in R. cuneata after the first year of sampling. A comparison of changes of relative percentages of the DDT metabolites with time in Rangia cuneata and the sciaenid fishes is shown in Figs. 4A and 4B. During the study period, there was a general decline in the relative level of DDT and DDD while the DDE percentages increased. This indicates that relatively little new DDT entered the bay system during the period of



PAGE 1

155. '-..V. GLCo1Vr~ IC ~ ---'---.----.. c'IAKXl. A~~1Ii·~CW' C"" OHOH oCH oCOCI-~r CHf 2 C 7 CL7 C CAD /'2 C ca 2 )0'L fL COKI COO ~C: .OOHI 2~I AC\llCOA 'CO .rc ,4cy -·~· CA



PAGE 1

A B n =1 n=O n=lI n t=O AA 1.0A A A A A > 0.5 -0 °, O0 0 O -j 0 o o I 1 2 3 01 2 3 -0.5 " " LOGo C 10



PAGE 1

A B .T Callinectes sapidus Callinectes sapidus (hepatopancreas) (muscle) 375 375 l-o CD SI I\ II CI I /I\ I I\ tiiI I I A11 \ o1g 21 500 2500 D I i I I | "-p 75022 .io r"t o.. ---------3 0 0 0I 0I . S* d , t , -OOO " C soo 7, -o 15 0 0 0 -1 5 C 5 I0" -B II Rangia cuneata Penaeus duorarum Io I I1 250 760 \ 2' \ , , _ _ _o -_ rt , • • y -. 0 A -I MAJ J AS NDJ FMAMJASONDJ FMAJJ A SO N MMMJJ A S N D iJFMAM JJ A S a N D J FMAMJ J" T.E----dd t =( 2 •-----TIME--MONTHS (1972-74) C



PAGE 1

Table 11, continued SPECIES SAMPLF DAIES /031 5 750415 750015 750615 7r0715 750815 750915 751015 751115 751215 760115 760215 TOTALS JROPHYCIS FLORIDANUS (0.63 0.00 6.74 0.00 n.n .0 0.0 .0 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.53 6.25 35.15 ,1.7 .00o .?5 o.00 0.no0 0.00 .O O 0. 00 O.OP 0.00 .04 1.41 .17 DOROSOMA PETENENTE 3.54 4.07 .74 0.UO .0.00 0.00 3. 76 0.0O1 0.00 0.00 22.31 0.00 34,42 .30 .28 .03 0.00 u.OO 0.00 .27 0.00 0.00 O.P0 .53 0.00 .17 LUCANIA PARJA 6.26 4.18 20.03 .15 .63 1.65 0.00 .24 .79 .07 0.00 0.00 34.00 .53 .29 .75 .02 .03 .28 0.no .01 .03 .01 0.00 0.00 .16 EUCINOSTOMUS ýULA 2.47 0.00 1.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.72 0.00 2.04 16.94 0.00 0.00 33.59 .e1 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.08 .76 0.00 .07 2.51 0.00 0.00 .16 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CHRYSURUS .01 0.00 2.32 .94 id.17 0.00 3.65 2.70 .79 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.58 *00 0.00 .09 .10 .99 0.00 .26 .12 .03 0.0n 0.00 0.00 .14 OTPLECTRUM FORMOSUM 0.00 1.25 4.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.19 4.15 4.15 4.28 0.00 0.00 23.17 0.00 .09 .16 0.00 0.00 0.00 .37 .18 .14 .63 0.00 0.00 .11 ANCHOA HEPSETUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 Q .60 17.22 0.00 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 .37 .94 0.00 .10 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 MENIDIA BERYLLINA .85 10.78 3.28 .72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .72 1.74 3.12 0.00 21.21 .07 .74 .12 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 .26 .07 0.00 .10 PEPRILUS PARU 0.00 0.00 8.14 0.00 4.91 5.40 0.00 1.81 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.36 0.00 0.00 .31 0.0P .27 .90 0.00 .08 .03 0.00 0.00. 0.00 .10 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS 2.33 .11 2.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .32 7.24 2.49 .79 .21 16.14 .20 .01 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .01 .24 .37 .02 .05 .08 ANGUILLA ROSTRATA 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 9.0 0.00 12.10 3.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .86 .14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI .52 1.45 3.58 1.46 1.84 3.43 .24 .53 1.14 .05 .08 .63 14.95 w .04 .10 .13 .15 .10 .57 .02 .02 .04 .01 .00 .14 .07 vi GOBICSOMA BOSCI *96 .81 0.00 0.00 0.00 .39 .95 4.91 1.79 i.08 .30 3.42 14.61 .08 .06 U. 0 0.00 0.00 .07 .07 .21 .06 .16 .01 .77 .07 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS 0.00 0.UO 0.00 1.00 0.00 6.64 .95 4.28 2.40 .23 0.00 0.00 14.50 0.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 1.11 .U7 .19 .08 .03 0.00 0.00 .07 SPHOEROIDES NEPHFLUS 8.20 4.13 0.00 .09 .28 0.00 .98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.68 .69 .28 0.00 .01 .02 0.00 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 HICROPTERUS SALMOICES 0.00 0.00 .36 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0n 9.39 0.00 9.96 0.00 0.00 .01 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .22 0.00 .05 PORICrnTHYS FOROSISSIMUS 0. 0 U.00 7.29 .18 .68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.15 0.00 0.00 .?7 .02 .04 0.nu 0.0o 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 LUTJANUS GPISEUS ..00 O0.00 O.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.12 0.00 7.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0n.0 0.00 0o.n .15 0.00 .11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 PRIONOTUS SCITULUS 4.86 .54 O.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.46 .*i .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 CENTROPRISTIS HELANA 5.17 0.00 O.0q 0.00 0.. 00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.17 .43 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 GOBIONELLUS hASTATUS U.00 3.22 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.61 0.00 .22 .05 n.u0 0.0 0 0.00 0. uO 0.00 0.0q0 .00 0.00 0.00 .02 MUGIL SPECIES 0.00 3.61 .12 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 O.00 0.03 0.00 0.0 0.00 3.73 0.00 .25 .u0 n.00 0d.J U.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 .02 GORIONCLLUS BOLEOSOMA .38 0.00 .25 0.00 0.00 0.00 .28 .08 .16 .13 .57 1.82 3.67 .03 0.00 .01 0.10 0.00 0.00 .02 .00 .01 .02 .01 .41 .02 PEPRILUS nURTI 0.00 0.00 0.01 0. J ).00 0.00 0.0 .17 0.OJ 2.73 0.00 .14 3.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0. O n 0.00 U. 0 .01 0.30 .4n O.0u .03 .01 ANCYCLOPSETTA QUAC OCELLATA .19 ?.uJ U. O 0.0:1 1.00 0 0.0 0. o.J O. .1 0.0 0.0 .2.30 *C? .14 .0O n."" n .0 ".00 0. 3 0. o00 0.30 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 ýICROCOBIUS T ALASSINUS .42 1.03 n.0U 0.u0 .01 .04 .01 .04 I.U0 0.00 0.00 .03 1.58 *n4 .07 0.00 U.00 .10 .ut .00 .00 n.00U 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 CtAETOOIPTFRUS FAdFC 0. .O 0.0 .10 j u.n .21 .00 1 .q n. nn .1."" n .,4 0.00 .o0 C.. ," ..1 U0.00 .08 l.00 0.0 0 0.0 1.00 0.00 .0



PAGE 1

CONTENTS i. Summary of Results ......... ................ i. v. Theses and Dissertations ........ ................ I. Introduction .............. ..............1 Robert J. Livingston II. Special Program for Ecological Science (SPECS): Summary of Capabilities .5 Robert J. Livingston Glenn C. Woodsum III. Biomass Transformations ................... .....12 Robert J. Livingston F. Graham Lewis, III Gerard G. Kobylinski Peter F. Sheridan Bradford G. McLane Bruce Purcell Glenn C. Woodsum IV. Physico-chemical Relationships: Sedimentology and Habitat Structure ..19 Robert J. Livingston Peter F. Sheridan Gerard G. Kobylinski F. Graham Lewis, III Bradford G. McLane V. Phytoplankton Productivity and Nutrient Analysis ............ .67 Richard L. Iverson Vernon B. Myers VI. Detritus: Microand Macro-particulates ................ 156 Robert J. Livingston Peter F. Sheridan F. Graham Lewis, III Gerard G. Kobylinski VII. Microbial Contribution to the Energy Budget of Apalachicola Bay ..... 203 David C. White R. J. Bobbie J. S. Herron J. D. King Susan J. Morrison



PAGE 1

252. Figure 2: Apalachicola River flow, local rainfall, and physical parameters (temperature, salinity, color, turbidity) at primary sampling stations from January to December 1974. TEMPERATURE SALINITY 30 30... :.30 "3 O0-:.:.:.:.:. :: : .. S 3. ...... .. *.* * ... *..*.*.*.. * • .... _ a: .: *:*: COLOR ... TURBIDIT): : 300 ... :: *:: :.•.::: .. o•••: : :.:: : : , Q20 ----.* :..o. .. *** .:. -. ..i ....i i ... .. ! z , 120 ************' 1.:•:.:•:: ...*.. SA M P LI:N -IO D .... .. ...... .:.:.:o: •... *.. ... ... ...........''........... .......... .....• .: .. ... ... I I I I .i TI MEMONTHS (1974) -5A RIVERIVER FLOW .:::::: .SAMPLING PERIOD 3 IIIIIIIII IIII RA A LL z ! :'"'"



PAGE 1

160. 1 (7 samples) 1 a (2 samples) 1 b (2 samples) 1 c (2 samples) 1 x (2 samples) 1 e (2 samples) 2 (2 samples) 3 (2 samples) 4 (2 samples) 5a (2 samples) 5 (7 samples) This amounted to 64 minutes of trawling at representative stations in the .bay each month. Detritus was returned to the laboratory where it was sorted, identified to (plant) species, and dried at 1000C for 24 hours. Where no identification to species was possible, the material was sorted to type (i.e., benthic macrophyte debris, leaf debris, wood debris). These data were then entered into the interactive computer system which gave monthly totals (Table 2) for 22 minutes of sampling (a total of the dry weight figures per trawl tow for each of the 11 sampling areas). These were characterized as total detritus (Totdeb), total wood debris (Woodeb), total leaf debris (Leadeb), total benthic macrophyte debris (Benmac), and individual totals for each species of tree or benthic macrophyte. Microdetritus was taken at monthly intervals from August, 1975, to the present. Samples were collected at Station 7 (near the mouth of the Apalachicola River, surface and bottom, and at Station 8, about 1.5 km. from the mouth of the Little St. Marks River (middepth). Samples were generally taken as close to low tide as possible, although some collections at Station 8 were made shortly after low tide due to the shallowness of the



PAGE 1

248. lable 3 CA values for interstation comparisons during the three sampling periods. Seasonal (within station) comparisons are also shown. Data analyzed include leaf litter associated invertebrates in Apalachicola Bay. Spring Summer Fall Station 5A1 31 IX 5A2 3 IX2 5A 3 IX S23 3 3 5A -.21 .18 .49 .15 .03 .12 .23 .11 31 .i8 .32 .77 .63 .42 .19 .60 IX i. .13 '.15 .31 .52 .72 .60 5A2 -.35 .19 .18 .30 .20 -~~~ ----..---.---------3 -.33 .52 .42 .35 2 = N IX2 .44 .14 .80 5A 3 -.70 .55 3 --------------_ \ ____ IX 3 3 .48ix _ , _ _ _ ___ __________ ___3»



PAGE 1

sPECIES~ La e , cont nue 7 2 3 lt 72 :5i ý 1 7 1 1> 7 C 7 5 F L 3. c .1!,5 rlir 72,LI7 73 1L57.2510Fki. OGVR1DE LItICOLA PERIOLIthEEj AlIANU.) ...* 1 4.s: e**d Jc, .. r* ·.u j·~b BUSYCON 6OJT';.~I~ -XlPrQJPEN.Uz K;,wYERI I * .4 h ALPHEUS Arl1ALLATJS 1 6 I. a J*Jv Je.. 1. SINYONIA 3ORSA-1S -;a L a ~·cC L·.·J. c~r ..L ·60 w u 4#4 o L~j ·Y ANADARA diASILIA4. L I 4 j I U . 0 .U. 1%,a6 ..94 60 00 w DINO;AkOIUhROuU.TJt & L j J 1 2 . s L r-~·* ~ L #.6j~·~ .94 4 t 6ý PROCAM8ArJS PLNAitJ&ALANU.ý, i L 4 u 3 1 f) L T67. o.4. 1.. 4 w. 6 i,.. u L Ju j j 0 UA .L 94 .6 O TOTALS 119. L~ 779. 8 2000 7j4*0 18.30 Z4.L .L I* 17i gi ýSIAOV L2$tl iua. .32Z. $WJ..



PAGE 1

299 a. FIGURE 6 MA .*40 " * JOB ...'. ..... I /. n/---------M .t 00 0 0-0 A .* ... 3.0 I . 40-S 20) g -4\ *V 24 + 2.0 ..100 0.. .*/ -*0 0 I 1.2 -/ -' 60 , .........-.-.. ............* 0 ... ......... ... .. *A I ,0.8 / " ----40 3000N 2: 2000MAMJ J AS ONDJ F MAMJ JASONDJFMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJ AS ONDJ FM TIMEMONTHS(1972-76) nnAA ............-------FISHES A-------------AVERAGE



PAGE 1

-87. ASPECTS OF NUTRIENT LIMITATION OF PHYTOPLANKTON PRODUCTIVITY IN THE APALACHICOLA BAY SYSTEM by Vernon B. Myers Richard L. Iverson Dept. of Oceanography Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida



PAGE 1

89. fairly short, between 5 and 100 hours (Pomeroy, 1960). Phosphorus concentrations in estuarine systems may be controlled by reversible sorption reactions between sediments and the overlying water (Rochford, 1951; Carritt & Goodgal, 1954; Jitts, 1959). Biological activity within the sediments can also move significant amounts of phosphorus between the sediments and the water column (Pomeroy et al, 1965; Hale, 1975), and has been shown to control the seasonal cycle of phosphorus concentrations in several shallow turbid estuaries (Pomeroy, et al, 1972). Phosphorus fluxes within estuaries ( can also be dominated by reactions occurring within the water column. Phosphorus uptake within the water column is usually due to phytoplankton and/or bacteria (Correll, et al, 1975; Taft, et al; 1975). Regeneration of phosphorus within the water column can take place by autolysis, zooplankton consumption and remineralization, or bacterial degradation (Pomeroy, et al, 1963; Martin, 1968; Hargrave & Geen, 1968; Peters & Rigler, 1973; Barsdate, et al, 1974). Previous phytoplankton productivity studies in Apalachicola Bay indicated that nitrogen and phosphorus were potential limiting nutrients, while silicate and trace metal additions never stimulated phytoplankton productivity (Estabrook, 1973). This paper presents preliminary results of: nutrient enrichment experiments and phosphate uptake experiments designed to quantify the extent of nutrient limited phytoplankton production and to determine the importance of phosphorus in the Apalachicola Bay System.



PAGE 1

141. of ]itbe. nto the l.ipid fracL on (Tabl 1) .Incorporation occurred after uptake of the compound from solution for a short period (2 hours), a method which differs from the. more popular method of injcc-ting a compound of high specific activity directly into the anrimal and waiting a considerably longer period before extraction. This may explain the low specific activity of the lipids fraction. Uptake of glycolic acid and evidence of its inclusion into oxidative and biosynthetic pathways of Mercenaria sp. gill tissue have been demonstrated here. We do not suggest that glycolic acid is a primary carbon or energy source for the organism. However, uptake of reduced cacbon by higher organisms can be an important nutritional supplement (Stephens, 1968) which should be considered in quantitative studies on the transfer of energy through a marine ecos ystemn. 13



PAGE 1

7 e 7 0 7 r 1T 4 3. 3 4I I Ti T I I .: T I I I STI I I I I S+ .23 I I I7 I I I \ T I I 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 3 Figure 5. Surface po'sphate-P in East Bay. I I' I r i I --r---J-,~--L--~-,,~--.u--~--*,,. r-------L---~ L-~·-"I'" P~c----1 1 16.12I6 Figure 5.* Surface po'sphate-P in East Bay.



PAGE 1

119. Carbon Uptake Phosphate Uptake Station Date NO3 PO4 PO4 E-12 6/03/75 * , N E-12 7/18/75 -N E-12 7/12/76 -* * E-12 9/10/76 M. L. 6/13/76 * * M. L. 7/03/76 M. L. 8/30/76 -M. L. 9/22/76 Ock-1 6/17/76 Ock-1 7/28/76 -* Ock-1 8/30/76 Ock-2 6/17/76 * Ock-2 7/28/76 -* Ock-2 8/30/76 -Apal-IA 9/02/74 * * N Apal-lA 5/29/75 --N Apal-]A 7/11/75 -N Apal-lA 9/11/75 -* * Apal-lA 9/15/75 --



PAGE 1

Fig. 2:' Surface'-water temperature (°C) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. A:=LACr SC-'TEF.v,': 1 77/03/11. PAGE 3 FI-x N3AMe4 (CCrA'ION 7ATF = 77/! /11.) SCiiTE.'-r' OF (JuLN) TTi (ACROSS) DAYS 11.2:~ *:3 ;'3.' : l77.12?5' 652.5753C 3.32.t25111.47S i90.925C012.70.3750015i49.825017Z9.27SCC ----*-------------------**-----------------4---+-*----*----*-+---------------S* I 32.3C I I. I I I I I I I I * 4. 1 .I Z 29.57 II I II I I I V \,* I I I 1 .i 26 .1.3 :T .-..... ---------.-/ -. .-......^ ' I I |I :I I I .I : \I I I I IV i+ .0 I 1 I T I IVSI I i-----*---*---+ ----t -* ----* -* -« -* ---» -* ---» -* -*» -» 3/72 5!72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 121/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 121/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 6 TIMN MONTHS: March 1972 to February 1977 CC^'rLTI (q)-.4.i R S5UAFE -.37532 SIGNIFICANCE 0 -.31854 ST3 -kz< CF cFT -6..Z..9;.l INT-R{LEPT (A) -24.41Z48 STO EOR.OP. OF A -1.67141 S::-MF:CANr A -.'trlr SLOPE (b) --.00335 STO ERROR OF B -.30157 v i 1 I I I I siI I CLA TII 5 -EXCLUDEU VALUSC MISSING VALUES -47 -----------------,---cm -4 ----rr---------AM-T O DT



PAGE 1

18. LAE MOR small RAN CUN .5066 STR ALA AEQ IRR 2.1975 CRE FOR CRE PLA (.0002) PSE FLO (.0031) TRA EGM small RAN CUN .5066 BUR LEA 2.0000 APL FLO 2.0000 BRA AME large chaetes .0100 DIO CUP .0100 PLA DUM .0100 PAR CAU (.0030) CLE PLA (.0030) * Those figures in parentheses represent weights of juveniles of a given species Species comparable species regression equation or mean ash free dry wt. LEA TEN PAL FLO = 2.51735 (X) -11.73789 SYN TON ALP HET = 2.75501 (X) -11.52437 SYN LON ALP HET = 2.75501 (X) -11.52437 UCA SPE NEO TEX = 2.64410 (X) -9.04336 LIB EMA LIB DUB = 2.51633 (X) -8.99184 SES CIN NEO TEX = 2.64410 (X) -9.04336 PAG ANN PAG LON = .1468 PRO SPE PEN DUO = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 AMB SYM PAL INT = 3.29106 (X) -14.03450 SIC DOR PEN DUO = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 SIC BRE PEN DUO = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 SIC TYP PEN DUO = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 SIC LAE PEN DUO = 3.18888 (X) -14.31392 POD RLL LIB DUB = 2.51633 (X) -8.99184 EPI DIL LIB DUB = .0306 PEL MUT LIB DUB = .0306 PIT ANI LIB DUB = 2.51633 (X) -8.99184 MEG SOR PET ARM = .0282 POR SIG PET ARM = .0282 MAC CAM LIB DUB = 2.51633 (X) -8.99184 SQU EMP PEN DUO = 3.1888 (X) -14.31392 URO PER CAL JAM = .0111 CAL JAM CAL JAM = .0111 LUI CLA 3 (ECH SPE) = 2.0742 HEM ELO OPH BRE = .0360 OPH ANG OPH BRE = .0360 LUI SAG ECH SPE = .6914 LUI SPE ECH SPE = .6914 LUI ALT ECH SPE = .6914 OPH ELE OPH BRE = .0360 OCT VUL 2 (LOL BRE) = 1.3576



PAGE 1

>-ggC ,REUBIN O'D. ASKEW Governor ---J-_L"-1 *BRUCE A. SMATHERS State of Florida Secretary of State ROBERT L. SHEVIN cS Attorney General GERALD A. LEWIS Comptroller DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DOYLE CONNER Commissioner of Agriculture HARMON W. SHIELDS CROWN BUILDING / 202 BLOUNT STREET / TALLAHASSEE 32304 RALPH D. TURLINGTON Executive Director Commissioner of Education November 15, 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Department of Biological Science Florida State University Room 213, Conradi Building Tallahassee, Florida 32601 Dear Skip: The staff of the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning hopes to prepare an application for designation of the Apalachicola River/Bay system as a Louisianian Biogeographic National Estuarine Sanctuary as provided for in Section 312 of the Coastal Zone Management Act, PL 92-583, October 27, 1972. It is most important that all interested parties concerned with the preservation of this estuarine system be involved in this project. The reserarch that you and your colleagues have undertaken in the Apalachicola Bay system provides an important part of the framework for this proposal. We feel that your input into this project is most important and any information concerning the Apalachicola River/Bay area will be greatly appreciated. On behalf of Florida's coastal zone management, thank you for your assistance in this matter. Best regards. Sincerely, oe Johnson Chief, Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning BJ/jg cc: Harry McGinnis DIVIS S ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES * LAW ENFORCEMENT * MARINE RESOURCES DIVISIONS -



PAGE 1

Figure 22, continued SCATTERS TOP TEN FISH BIOMASS WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 3 FILE No-'ANE 'CEATIION OATE = 77/03/23.1 SCATTFRG~tM ,jF (CCiN) ANCMIT (ACROSS) CAYS 194.47500 2,4.4250 4.3750 6 3250 824.275001004.225001184.175001364.125001544.075001724.02500 .4----+----,r--+------------+----+----------------------+----+----+----+-------------4224.68 I I 42 24.68 SI I I I I I I I I I I I 3302.21 I T + 3en7.29 I I I I I I I SI I B I I I I I I I 73 79.1 + I 1 4 379.90 I I I I I I. 257.51 + I I 2957.51 I I I I -----------.----------------------------------------I I I I II I 255.1Z I 2535.12 SI I I I I T 2112.0 I I I I I I I i +16"f.3I I t61.34 I * I I I I I I I T I I r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I IA7.95 + I I 4 1267.95 I TI I 1 I T r I I i 145.56 + I + 845.56 STT I I I I r I T I T T I 23.17 I I 7< 423.17 I I I T T 'I IT I + ._ ., _ctC* ,_ t-+ctr w )--.-Z'^^ ^ i .1*78 S-----r --00 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 00 CATTr' 3 T-= TEN FIS "-IOMAS kOLE 3AY 77/03/23. PAcE 4 STASTSTICS.. Cc--LATION (3;-.19181 R SQUARED -.03679 SISNIFTCAMr R -.07103 ST EP. r r-ST -5!2.72168 ITFPCEPT (A) -381.60(38 STf EP'R OF A -14c..1390 N.'.T , i -.Cr5,C6 SLO"F (R) --.2?4°8 STO EpoDs oF 9 -.1i772 L: F L U.. -.071' -!~~~~~ ~ '" * .,. ': L:'^i"' ,ALU ES:i ": s";-^ "611);' -0



PAGE 1

165. of the bay system. Although this analysis is still in a preliminary state, the data to date tend to corroborate the importance of the river (in terms of absolute flow rates and temporal patterning) to the Apalachicola Estuary. It would appear that the temporal sequence of upland flooding of this river system could provide a key link to the productivity of the bay system.



PAGE 1

DIPLECTRUM FORMOSUN Table 10, r.O .. C.o 0.03 .00 0.0 .o .0, 00 00 00 SPCIEScontinued SAMPLE DATES 760315 760415 760515 760615 760715 760815 760915 761011 761119 761213 770125 770220 TOTALS ELOPS SAURUS 0 0 0 1 0 a 0 00 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 3. 0.00 00GO 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 HARENGULA PENSACOLAE 0 1 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 12 0.05 .02 oo00 0.00 0..c C.00 .00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .OC LUTJANUS GRISEUS 0 0 0o. .o.0 .8 .0 C.0C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 .07 0.00 0.00 0.010 0.0 RHIIOPTERA BONASUS 0 0 0^ 0 £ 0 0 a 0 a T0.0 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 .02 1.00 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08 OG TOTALS 13123.0 5903.0 3391.0 1755.C 893.0 4771.0 579.0 1514.8 3143.0 780.0 2331.0 6294.0 44397.0 wP



PAGE 1

Table 6: Identified food items in stomachs of Leiostomus xanthurus ( 81 sets of samples) Polychaetes (52/81 occ.) # of occurrences Amphipods (30/81 occ.) # of occurrences Amphicteis gunneri 13 Gammarus sp. 1 7 Glycinde solitaria 13 Melita sp. 3 Capitellid sp. 6 Grandidierella bonnieroides 3 Paraprionospid pinnata 5 Haustoriid sp. 2 Neanthes succinea 2 Cerapus sp. 2 Laeonereis culveri 1 Corophium louisianum 1 Loandalia americana 2 Sigambra bassi 1 Isopods (8/81 occ.) Edotea montosa 3 Munna reynoldsi 3 Cyathura polita 1 Mysids (25/81 occ.) Mysidopsis bigelowi 4 Taphromysis bowmani 3 Mysicopsis bahia 1



PAGE 1

282. results of this analysis (using the top 45 species taken during the survey) are shown in Fig. 9. As might be expected, the key clusters were centered around particular dominant species. Based on relative abundance, five such groups were chosen for further analysis. Associations were determined somewhat arbitrarily on the closeness of fit. By using clusters of species instead of individual populations in our statistical analysis, the annual variability of population abundance tended to be smoothed from one year to the next. Of these groups, none showed a statistically significant change in a linear regression with time. However, there were significant variations based on annual fluctuations as shown in Table 1. The Anchoa group was particularly abundant during the first year of sampling and was largely absent during the second year whereas the Micropogon group prevailed to a considerable degree during the second year of sampling. There was a steady increase in the predominance of the Gobiosoma group;this was especially pronounced during the fourth year of sampling. In general, the relative dominance of the major clusters of fishes in the Apalachicola Estuary appeared to be consistent with a change in conditions subsequent to the second year of study. The results of stepwise regressions run with various combinations of variables (listed in Table 1) are given in Table 6. Due to the fact that nutrients, chlorophyll A, and organochlorine residues were not sampled for the entire 48-month study period, three difference sets of regression data are presented. The DDP (dummy) variable was set up to provide a contrast between the first year of relatively high levels of organochlorine residues (+1) and the subsequent two years of low residue (0). Dummy variables for months of the year were provided to determine temporal relationships. Overall,



PAGE 1

198. Table 4 : (continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 3/77 7 T # 10 .0011 .0012 45 18 .0035 .0050 57 35 .0038 .0067 71 60 .0099 .0125 51 120 .1091 .0247 09 170 .2563 .0152 02 325 .4564 .0842 07 Total .1495 7 B # 10 .0056 .0130 93 18 .0073 .0157 86 35 .0150 .0260 69 60 .0304 .0342 45 120 .4512 .0567 05 170 1.0553 .0355 01 325 .9564 .1345 06 Total .3156 8 M # 10 .0033 .0075 91 18 .0017 .0035 82 35 .0038 .0070 74 60 .0120 .0180 60 120 .0541 .0397 29 170 .1593 .0440 11 325 .9624 .1755 07 Total .2952



PAGE 1

203. VII. THE MICROBIAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE ENERGY BUDGET OF APALACHICOLA BAY MICROBIOLOGICAL STUDIES I. RATIONALE: The vital role of macroand microdetritus in a river-dominated estuary as shown in this study of the Apalachicola estuary, indicated that study of the primary detritus utilizers -the microflora -was essential. It is these microorganisms which have the enzymatic armentarium to mineralize refractory materials and form sufficient cell-mass to support a large proportion of the estuarine food web. At the initiation of this study there was little quantitative work done in assessing the composition or population dynamics of the estuarine detrital microflora. Clearly from studies of the water column in fresh and salt water, the sediments and the soil, classical methods of isolation and plating on selective media are of little use in studies of a dynamic population (see the literature reviewed in publications 1 -4), and so initial phases of this work concentrated on the development or modification of existing methods with which to study the detrital microflora. These methods involve measures of microbial mass and activity. From studies of activity it has been possible to develop methods with which to study population dynamics and the impact of stresses on the microbial community. II. METHODS: A. Mass 1. Muramic acid. The murano peptide is a component uniquely found in all known bacteria and blue-green algal cell walls with the exception of the



PAGE 1

Fig. 13: Bottom turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. APtLACH SCATTTRGRAMS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 19 FILE NONAM (CPE-TION JAIE = 77/73/11.) SLATTE¾uG; " CF (


PAGE 1

S15 74r515 740615 74L71 740815 40915 741015 741115 741215 750115 750215 TO L 8ObI0SOPA BOSCI 8 2 a0 0 0 3 9 6 I 11 4 3. 21 blSO O.PC G.O0 0.00 0.C. .21 3.00 *45 o.00 .64 .17 .19 SYNO1US FOETENS 0 1 13 10 1 1 0 4 3 0 a1 34 SY S FETENS C.0 .5 7.83 2.09 .12 .95 3.0 .929 .22 C.o0 .06 0.00 .19 GOBIONELLUS BOLEOSOPA 11 0 1 G 2 1l i i a 3 0 30 G30 C.00 O.0 .s25 0.00 .10 .75 .07 .07 .0CO .17 0.00 .17 UROPHYCIS FLORIOANUS 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 20 6 29 .05 .05 0.00 .OC 0.00 0.0 .O Bi 00 3 1.16 *26 *16 OASYATIS SABINA 1 2 0 0 ...v .80 .1 .03 .10 0.00 0.0 23 .05 .OO 6 o.15 960 o 10 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS 4 0 1 1 0 O 2 2 5 1 2 0 18 PRIONOTUS TRBULUS .11 0.00 .60 .25 0.00 Co0 .1* .15 .37 .25 .12 0300 .10 SYNGNATHUS LOUISIAN-C 0 1 0 a 4 2 3 3 2 1 0 0 16 SYNGNATHU LOUI0.00 5 0.00 00 .46 .10 .21 o22 o15 .25 0.00 0o00 .09 LAGOOON RHOMBOIDES 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 2 2 10 GOBO A ROBSM .0 0. 0 .. 0OG 0C.0 0JO 0.00 .07 .03 0.00 .1Z 009 .906 GOBIOSONA ROBUSTUM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 ICALUUS CATUS.0 0. 0 0.00 .38 0.00 0.00 A.0 0.03 0.06 0.00 .95 ICTALURUS CATUS 0 0 .0 .0 0 .0 0 .06 0.0 2 5AGR RINUS .0.0 0.00 .00 000 .000 00 0.00 0.00 o06 000 .02 $PHOEROIDES NEPHELUS 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 00HAETOIPTEUS FABER 0.00 .60 0.00 .OL .05 0.00 .00 .0 0.00 06 0.00 .02 BAGR0 MARINUS 00 0 0 0 40 .a a 0 0 4 GO RIC US P S Io o.00 0.00o , 0.00 .1 9 0.00 .0.00 0.00 3.09 0.00 0.00 .02 PEPRLUS PARU CC 0 0 C.00 0025 0.12 01900 0o0 eo00 D0D 0Bc 9*00 0000 O0 CHAETOOIPTERUS FABER C 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 B 3 COSGUS POATOEPHLUS 0. .0.00 0.00 12 0.00 0 00 0.0 0.00 0 0.00 .02 PORICHTHYS POROSISSINUS 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 a 0 0 3.0 STROSCOPUS Y 0.00 .0 0.00 o 12 0 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.o0 .092 PEPRILUS PARU 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 00 0 3 ARANX IPPOS 0 0 C 05 .12 00.07 .0 0.01 0800 0.00 .02 ARCHOSARGUS PROBATOCEPHALUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 a 0 8 1 0 2 IPLECTRUM FORMOSU0.0 0.00 0.00 0.C00 0.00 .0 000 .07 .0 0.0 0.000 06 0.00 .ol ;ARANX HIPPOS 0 0 0 1 0 1 00 0 0 0 2 CEPISOSTEUS OSSEU 0.0 0 0.00 0.00 0.O0 .05 c0.0 .07 0.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 01 oIPLECTRUM FORMOSUM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0.0T 0.00 Coco 0.o0 Co0 o05 0D09 .07 D000 0.9O0 0.00 0.00 .01 LEPISOSTEUS OSSEUS 00 0 0 10.0 0. 0.0 0O 00 20 NCYCLOPSEA QUAOCEATA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 .05 G0.0 0*00 9.00 0.01 D0 0.00o .01 HILOYCTERUS SCHOEPF0.00 .0 0.0 0. 0 0 900 0.00 0.0 o 00 07 *.2 0.00 0.08 .31 IOLYOACTYLUS OCTONEMUS 0 2 0 0 .0 0 a. a0 0 0 2 0NCYCLOPSETTA QUAOROCELLATA G a 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 Y.00 0.0c 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 .co0 0.00o 02. 06.0 0.00 .1 HILONYCTEUS RUS SCHOEPFI 0 0 0 0 c0 0 a0 0 0 0 1 0.0o 0.00 0.00 0.c 00 c00 0.00 g.03 0.00 8o00 .01 3IPLOOUS HOLBROOKI C 0 0 0 0 a 0 0.00 0.0 000 Deco .90 0.00 9.00 ) 0.08 3.08 0 0 .0.ges 000 3e0 4YPSOBLENNIUS HENTZI 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 a I C*.00o 0.00 G.00 0 0.00 0.00 0. 00o 0.00 0.0c .25 0.00 0.D0 .ee LUTJANUS GRtSEUS G 0 0 a a 0 0 a 0 I 1 a L C.0 c 0.00 ro.O 0D00 0.00 0.00 De0o D.00 Co8.o0 0. .06 0.00 .01



PAGE 1

261. Biomass figures are shown in Table 2. Large transients (i.e., Callinectes, Penaeus, Rhithropanopeus) were excluded from this analysis since they were sampled elsewhere and were not considered a part of the infaunal assemblage. Biomass was highest at stations IX, 5A, and 3. In all portions of the Bay, biomass of the infauna peaked during winter and spring months. A more detailed analysis of these data will be developed in the analysis of the impact of clearcutting practices in Tate's Hell Swamp on the estuarine system.



PAGE 1

189. Table 4 : (continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 9/75 7 T # 10 --18 .0007 .0044 35 -.0016 60 -.0008 120 .0017 .0020 29.4 170 .0007 .0028 325 .0037 .0056 37.8 Total.0043 7 B # 10 .0032 18 -.0016 35 -.0020 60 .0025 .0056 56.0 120 .0081 .0096 29.6 170 .0043 .0032 18.6 325 .0146 .0188 32.2 Total.0440 8 M # 10 18 35 -.0020 60 .0003 .0012 120 .0015 .0004 6.7 170 .0038 .0028 18.4 325 .0056 .0084 37.5 Total.0148 10/75 7 T # 10 .0006 18 .0001 -35 .0025 .0060 60.0 60 .0072 .0148 51.4 120 .0204 .0292 35.8 170 .0267 .0236 22.1 325 .2626 .1064 10.1 Total.1800 7 B # 10 .0056 .0176 78.6 18 .0047 .0148 78.7 35 .0181 .0612 84.5 60 .0286 .0664 66.8 120 .0457 .0668 36.5 170 .0950 .0664 17.5 325 .5053 .1620 8.0 Total.1652 8 M # 10 18 --35 .0029 .0054 65.5 60 .0059 .0063 37.3 120 .0137 .0174 44.5 170 .0204 .0252 43.1 325 .1211 .0809 23.4 Total.1352



PAGE 1

Table 8: Identified food items in stomachs of Cynoscion arenarius (122 sets of samples) Isopods # of # of Fish # of (4/122 occurrences) occurrences Shrimp occurrences T797122 occurrences) occurrences Cyathura polita 1 Zoeal (14/122 occ.) Anchoa mitchilli 25 Edotea montosa 1 Cynoscion arenarius 5 Erichsonella filiformis 1 Callianassa sp. 5 Micropogon undulatus 1 Parasitic isopod 1 Palaemonetes sp. 1 Microgobius sp. 1 Amphipods Postlarval (42/122 occ.) (19/122 occ.) Gammarus sp. 1 27 Palaemonetes sp. 1 Grandidierella bonnieroides 9 Corophium louisianum 7 Juv./adult Cerapus sp. 6 (16/122 occ.) Gammarus sp. 2 2 Ampelisca vadorum 1 Penaeus spp. 7 Haustoriid sp. 1 Callianassa sp. 3 Aetes americanus 3 Palaemonetes sp. 2 Ogyrides limicola 1 Mysids Crabs (118/122 occ.) Zoeal (13/122 occ.) Mysidopsis bahia 39 Mysidopsis bigelowi 16 Rhithropanopeus harrisii Mysidopsis almyra 16 5 Taphromysis bowmani 7 Juv./adult (5/122) Callinectes sapidus 5



PAGE 1

Figure 31.: continued A SCATTERS TOP TEN FTSH BIOHASS WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 21 FTLE NONAPE (CFIATION rATE = 77/03/23.) SCATTERIUAM OF (ECON) ARIFEL (ACROSS) DAYS 104.47500 284.42500 464.375t0 644.32500 8.275014.2.22500 184.175001364.125001544.S75001724.02500 .f---^-------------*----, ----+------------*---«*----l----------*-----»---4---, 1211.76 1210.76 I I + 1210.76 I I I I I I I I 1089.68 + I r I .109.68 I I I 8 II 961.6 + I 6.6 I I I I iI 8.61 +l* t 4 q f 968.61 I I I I I I I 1 I I I T----------------------------------------------------I I I I I ! 1 726.46 + I 4 726.46 I I I I I I I I I I 484.30 1 I 1 4.30 T I I .II TI I I + 363.23 I I I I 1 I I T SI I . 121.0 + I+ 121. T Sr "~i-t -----" --T -" -w" -t ^, . I T I I T I I I I I I III I I II 0 I I + 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 '0 SC!TTEE ITOP TEN FISP SI"MAS! nHCLE SAV 77/03/23. PAGE 22 STAT :T; :qS.. CC s.ELTIO' (f)-.7881I R SCUARFO --.08305 SIGNIFICANCE R -.01278 ST-: E;z U. -ST -21..o8325 INTERCEPT (A) -373.33455 STD EPPOP OF A -72.50612 S:~~.FICA\CF A -.'?cnt 'LOFE e --.15772 1Trn ERROR OF B -.06 81 L'T. T'T -;: E -EX F ALUESS G VALUS ;'L-PTIEt .;iLUS -6g EX-LUJFU J.AL'UESM YISSING VALU-S .-^. -.3



PAGE 1

Figure 19: continued ,"',-... ~I. -.T ; :T .T7CT;N 4 -1LE A;Y N 770f3/27. PAi 1.9 C TGLF (u.ANh r,T JGATTi R> TOP TEN I.GOLE 6AY N 77/f3/27. PAGE Zu STATISTICS.. CO RELATION (R).32582 R SQUARED -.i±1bb SIGNIFICANCE R -.·i554 STD ERi OF EST -6.6996L INTERCEPT (A) -.?i652 STD ERROR OF A -1.57397 tlGNUFIC4NCE A -.jc760 SLOJPE (3) -..392 STU ERRDR OF d -rL0149 SIGNIFICANCE 3 --.0554 PLjTit. VALU;. -60 LXCLUCED VALUcSU MISSINFj VALUS -



PAGE 1

208. 2. Sulfate reduction. Sulfate reduction is only known to proceed by anaerobic microbial activities of the Desulfovibrio-like organisms. We have developed an assay using the recovery of H 35S, generated by reduction of 2 35SO4=, from sediments or water (after acid treatment) or from the air above a sample to measure rates of reduction; hence we are able to estimate anaerobic activity. Sulfate reduction rates in bottom muds have been shown to be related exponentially to sulfate concentrations between 40 and 200 ppm sulfate. 3. Heterotrophic potential. Heterotrophic activity, assayed by the collection and measurement of 14C02 released by microbial utilization of various 14C-labeled substrates has been measured. The correlation between heterotrophic activity in Apalachicola Bay microfloral detrital activity and other measures of activity have been reported (22). 4. Rate of lipid synthesis. Our studies have shown (24) that the rates of phospholipid synthesis and synthesis of total lipids measured as incorporation of 14C and 2P into lipids parallel the adenosine triphosphate levels, alkaline phosphatase, a-D-mannosidase, or rate of oxygen utilization. Methods can be applied to estuarine sediments or detritivore communities. The parameters necessary to control quadrat size, sample variance and assay reproducibility have been determined. 5. Non-invasive semi-continuous monitoring of microbial activity. The detrital microflora on oak leaves incubated in Apalachicola Bay for 4 -6 weeks is a diverse and active collection of organisms (2). The leaves lose only about 20% of their dry weight in 16 weeks, so remain fairly stable. If cut into discs 6.5 mm in diameter and loosely packed in glass columns and estuarine water is pumped through the columns, various activity measures can-be monitored. Differences in oxygen concentration, sulfide concentration and pH have been monitored in the influent and effluent stream pumped through a column loosely



PAGE 1

120. Apal-1A 6/!.0/76 Apal-lA 6/24/76 -* Apal-lA 7/05/76 * Apal-lA 8/15/76 Apal-lA 8/26/76 Apal-7 9/02/74 -N Apal-7 5/29/75 --N Apal-7 7/11/75 * * N Apal-7 9/11/75 Apal-7 9/15/75 Apal-7 6/10/76 Apal-7 6/24/76 -Apal-7 7/05/76 Apal-7 8/15/76 Apal-7 8/26/76 --



PAGE 1

1717 Massachusetts AvN nue, N.W., Washington. D.C. 20036 Telephone (202)797-4300 Cable CONSERVIT December 20, 1976 Mr. Robert Knecht, Administrator Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Dear Bob: On behalf of the Conservation Foundation, I am inviting you to a one-day forum on the national stake in the resources of the Apalachicola River Basin, in the panhandle area of North Florida. We will be meeting January 7, beginning at 9:30 a.m. at the Foundation. Lunch and a short cocktail period at the end of the day will break up the working agenda. I hope you can join a small group of local, state and Federal officials interested in research and management priorities for this valuable ecosystem. Both state and federal governments have important land holdings in this area. The ecosystem is intact and contributes to the livelihood of local oysterm'n and grwing agricultural operations. Industrialization and recreational development have yet to exert strong pressure in the area, though St. George's Island, a barrier island at the mouth of the estuary has been the subject of disputes ove. second home development. The recent decision by the Florida Governor and Cabinet opposing the cross-Florida barge canal project sugge;ts a reexamination of the longer term agenda for the Apalachicola The state is also making efforts to implement coastal management objectives with a new state task force. The ecosystem's complex relationships between fresh and salt waters afford an opportunity to address both values. T2a Apalachicola will be an early priority for significant management decisions. The opportunity for setting a coordinated research and management agenda exists now. This meeting between state, federal and local interests can take place befiore confrontation has made dialogue and some measure of consensus



PAGE 1

266. method developed by Westlake (1965). Vallisneria, as a perennial, dies off in the late fall of each year. Minimal biomass was determined by averaging the dry weight figures taken during the dormant period (i.e. the winter months) and subtracting this from (summer) biomass figures at each station. The confidence limits were broad due to extreme seasonal and spatial variability; maximal biomass for station 4a was calculated from June rather than September (which is when biomass peaks were actually observed). Physico-chemical data were taken according to methods described earlier in this report. Sampling for grassbed organisms was carried out in identical fashion at stations 4a and 4b during the day and the succeeding night (about one hour after sunset). Six one-minute trawl tows (at speeds of about 1.5 kncts) were made using a 32cm dredge net (D-net) (nylon bag: 1mm mesh) for benthic sampling and a 30cm plankton net (1mm mesh) for the surface biota. Sampling was carried out in such a way that the same volume of water ( 15m3/6 samples) was sampled by each net. All organisms were preserved in 10% formalin in the field and later washed and transferred to 40% isopropyl alcohol in the laboratory. Samples were sorted, identified to species, measured, and counted. Data were entered in files of the interactive computer system (described by Livingston and Woodsum in this report), and biomass transformations were made according to previously described procedures. Results and discussion Measurements of biomass in the East Bay grassbeds are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 2. Differences in the spatial distribution of such macrophytes were responsible for some month to month variability as a result of the sampling methods used. It was estimated that some Vallisneria leaves had died by September and the generally high levels of biomass at this time were considered



PAGE 1

131. MATERIALS AND METHODS Exper'iment al organisms The experimental organisms were specimens of the northern quahog, Mercenaria (Venus) mercenaria (Linne) and the southern quahog, Mercenaria campechiensis (Gmelin) or their hybrids obtained from R.W. Menzel. Specimens of Mercenaria sp. (80 to 100 mm) were obtained several days prior to an experiment. Collections were planned over the period September to February so that seawater temperatures and salinities coincided as closely as possible to experimental conditions (T = 20°C, 300C, S = 28.30/oo). Seawater temperatures at the time of collection varied less than 30C from experimental temperatures. Salinity remained between 28 and 29 parts per thousand. The bivalves were thoroughly scrubbed with a stiff brush and were rinsed with seawater before being placed in glass holding tanks containing aerated seawater. Salinity was adjusted, if necessary, by addition of distilled water. Water was changed daily and animals were allowed at least 48 hours to acclimate to experimental conditions. Experiments were conducted in a Tenney Relialab Model B910U Environmental Room which controlled temperature to within 0.150C. Tissue preparation Animals were taken from the holding tanks and opened by fracturing one valve on the dorsal side immediately before an experiment. The anterior and posterior adductor muscles were severed with a clean stainless steel scalpel. Remaining portions of the valve were removed and the mantle was peeled back to expose the gills. The gill tissue was visually inspected and discarded if damage had occurred durring opening. 3



PAGE 1

T.AiIS T i t0 .N' ' rC , 7 7/3/27 PAGE 5i .L.., NO.t.Y; (REATC;7IOi. DAfE 77/t13/27.7 ;.i',TE-Gi OF t3SGo?) PALPUG (ACROSS) OAY3 ij in4. 75'.) 2 34. .--'.37510 644.3255GU 3.rZ. 3730 1 f0i. 2Z0 i 4l s, e75 u ! 5'. 525J65 l?4.e 37501 7i 4. S25y I I I I 8 7 ---------------------------------------------------I9275 138I.U LL I I I I I 7 7 I I I I .I I II . I I II I ? I I I I 1 i i ..1 1i I 5, I I + I I I IX ,----~---------------'---------------------------_---------„--"------------I I I I I f II ;TATI STI CS• I I I I SO I P i SI I I C T I5. I + *1 i3 i \ I I I I I I i i .c I I 5AI I I I '3 ? -* 3/726/729/7212/72 +.-4-E-*----3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 CNViT ,GAr7E£S TOP TEN HHOLE SAY N 77/u3/27. PA.E 6 .TATISTIZS.. CORRELATV3N (R)-..3353 R SQUARED -.0iS12 SIGNIFICANCE R -.S9961 3J ERk OF EST -BS ,63737 INTERCc.PT tA, -155.3399. STU -RROR OF A -74.99731 ,IGNIFIG:NCE A -.c23.42 SLOP. (5» --.C8ia9 STD ERRO0 OF B -.u7lia SI2NIFIGANCE 3 -.39?6i PLOjTTc 2 v-ES -60. EXCLUUEO VALUES3 hIbSIN, VALUiS -y „*,. IS FI.;TED IF A Cu0FFICIENr CANNOT SB ;OMPUTIU.



PAGE 1

435. part of the state's Environmentally Endangered Lands Plan. A total of more than 28,000 acres at a cost exceeding 8 million dollars has now been purchased. This purchase was defined and qualified by scientific data generated by the Apalachicola Sea Grant project. Further involvement of this project in the proposed management of such lands is anticipated. In addition, baseline data generated by this Sea Grant Project have been used in decisions by state officials to buy portions of St. George Island and Little St. George Island, an investment exceeding $10 million. Thus; sensitive portions of the Apalachicola Drainage System have been identified and appropriate steps toward preservation of such areas have been taken. 3. Baseline data from the Sea Grant project have also been used to generate interest in the development of a basin-wide management plan through the coordinated action of a number of state and federal agencies, county commissions, and private interests in the Apalachicola Valley. The principal investigator, together with the Florida Department of Natural Resources, has generated a published compendium of knowledge (Livingston and Joyce,'1977) concerning scientific, economic, legal, and managerial considerations in the Apalachicola Drainage System. This includes papers written by 28 experts in various fields and is now serving as a multi-disciplinary base of information to be used in future planning and management decisions. This has provided the impetus for various related activities, and is viewed as an important step in promoting an objective translation of scientific data for use in planned development. 4. The principal investigator has served as an advisor to the Franklin County Board of Commissioners with regard to zoning regulations, local planning programs for St. George Island, water hyacinth control in



PAGE 1

94. were between 0.57 and 0.93 ug-atm P04-P/1 under phosphate limited conditions. However, when phosphate was not limiting maximum uptake rates were obtained at lower phosphate concentrations. Similar observations have been cited in the literature (Perry, 1976). The differences in the spatial responses of phytoplankton of the Apalachicola Bay-East Bay system to nutrient additions cannot be satisfactorially explained by species composition differences (see Table IV). Phytoplankton species differences do occur between the two stations; however, the majority of the species are common to both areas. Spatial differences in nitrate enrichment responses may be due to the presence of other assimilitive forms of nitrogen, such as ammonium, nitrite, or urea. Differences in phosphate limitation between the two stations can not be explained by concentration differences alone and may be due to suspended sediment and water column interactions. Temporal differences in the response of phytoplankton to nutrient additions suggests that temperature limits phytoplankton productivity during colder months (Estabrook, 1973) and that nutrients limit productivity during the warmer seasons. The nutrient enrichment and phosphorus uptake experiments presented in this paper suggest that phosphorus is the most critical limiting nutrient in this estuarine system and that a reduction in phosphate level during summer months could reduce phytoplankton productivity.



PAGE 1

30-I, kl.. I ao 2 oo ...-*, LU. 20* <-1 * 0 Cl 'e l F-C/)T 1 27 .,o I iv/ * 0 r . O1e.00 * 0120aU .> 401 3 4 56 7 8 91011121 2 3 4 5 6 78 91011121 2 3 4 56 7 8 91011121 2 34 5 67 8 91011121 2 TIME-MONTHS (3/72-2/76)



PAGE 1

285. undulatus, almost twice as many fishes were taken during the fifth year of sampling (3/76 -2/77) than any of the previous years. As noted previously dominants (numbers) in this bay include Anchoa mitchilli, Micropogon undulatus, and Cynoscion arenarius. These data are currently under review to determine the relationships of the individual population distributions with the various other parameters (physico-chemical, biological) which are available in this report. Discussion Various episodic sources of stress, natural and anthropogenic, occurred during the study. In June, 1972, Hurricane Agnes came ashore near the Apalachicola region with winds gusting to 55 knots and tides around 2 m above the norm. Routine dampling of the bay immediately after the storm revealed little overt change in the physico-chemical and biological functions of the Apalachicola Estuary although several fish species were taken which were not found in the bay before the hurricane. While such storms can cause mass mortalities of coastal organisms (Brongeersma-Sanders, 1957; Robins, 1957; Tabb and Jones, 1962), none was observed here. Also, the extreme flooding of the Apalachicola River in 1973 had an immediate effect on the bay fauna. This was particularly pronounced with respect to epibenthic invertebrate distributions. Such natural phenomena can influence long-term biotic trends in such areas. In addition, periodic maintenance dredging and spoil disposal in the vicinity of Stations 1 and 2 and clearcutting and draining activities in the Tate's Hell Swamp (above Stations 5 and 5A) could have been responsible for habitat changes which caused local trends in the biotic indices. The relative significance of clearcutting will be presented as a separate report. Although the residue analysis in this study is consistent with known trends of organochlorine contamination in other areas with respect to seasonal



PAGE 1

Fig. 17: Secchi di'sk readings (m) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. APALACM SCATTEýGRtAS 1 77/03'1i. PAGE 41 FILE 340NA'F (CPEAION LATE = 77/C7/11.) SCATTEPG-A, CF (OHN) S83F5 (ACCOSS) CAYS 114.225' 293.671%! 473.125"~ 652.575^C 832.02C51011.4750O119C.92500137.37550001729.Z756o 1.6 *--------------------+-------------------.-------1..6" + I 1.6 I I I I I I SI I SI 1.32 I1.32 I II .I 1.32 + 1,+ I I I I II I I lI I I *.I 4 I1 4 ATTSI I'i ,I I \I+ I*U. 1.' 04 I. I I I I S: I + ( i ..76 --------------»---.--.-------.-«-.. .----»---------------»-.---.-----------.» ------~~~~~~ --------------------4 ---4-------4----4-----------------3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 5/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 T2rL Ti IN M2NTHS: March. 1972 to February. 1977 -C1 3'U 3 -17 SINIFICANCE R -. S-SCPT (A) -.7774. STO E9ROR OF A -.,72-2 $SI;rICANCE A -.cvt:C SLCPE (5) --.122 ST5 EPF.OP OF e -.CC:: i EXCLJ C VALUESI MISSNG VALS 41 --. ......... STZEI FE T -,Tg .E CP A .7 ,S OE RR O Z22 S -.-,,. '. C Ca -.,r SLS E (=) .,L ' T5 EFO F 2 .C '.3 S:+I iC=. t -' o"t2C C.?TZ "U -:E CUSSVLS 2.,II US -



PAGE 1

*-----e -. I --.. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY MOBILE DISTRICT, COfiFS OF ENGINEERS P. 0. B0X 2288 MOBILE. ALABAMA 38628 REKPLY TO ATTENTION OFs SAMPD-N 24 May 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: I have recently received a copy of comments attributed to you in a 26 April 1976 edition of the Herald Tribune regarding development on the Apalachicola River. I note from your statements that you do not totally oppose use of the Apalachicola River for navigation purposes, but support a multiple use plan which would permit such use in conjunction with preserving fundamental environmental values. In this respect your views are not basically different from the objectives of the Corps of Engineers' planning efforts. As.you are aware, the Corps of Engineers has been directed by Congress 'to investigate alternatives that will better maintain the authorized 9-foot navigation channel on the Apalachicola River. While our study directive is to investigate improvements for navigation, the Corps of Engineers' planning criteria use a framework established in the Water Resources Council's-"Principles and Standards for Planning Water, and Related Land Resources," which requires the systematic preparation and evaluation of alternative solutions that will maximize contributions to the two national planning objectives of "Environmental Quality" (EQ) and "National Economic Development" (NED). The process also requires that the impacts of proposed actions be evaluated and measured to the fullest extent possible. Within this planning concept we are not only unconstrained, but charged to develop multiple use plans for water resource developments that achieve the best overall balance in contributions to both EQ and NED. Our study on the Apalachicola River has been inactive for the past year due to lack of funds; however, it is scheduled to be actively resumed in the forthcoming fiscal year. In an endeavor to achieve a better understanding of the planning objectives, we are proposing a series of I



PAGE 1

226. 17. Goldenbaum, P. E., P. D. Keyser and D. C. White. 1975. Role of vitamin K in the organization and function of Staphylococcus aureus membranes. J. Bacteriol. 121: 442-449. 18. Knowles, C. J., and L. Smith. 1970. Measurements of ATP levels of intact Azotobacter vinelandii under different growth conditions. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 197: 152-160. 19. Karl, D. M., and P. A. LaRock. 1975. Adenosine triphosphate measurements in soil and marine sediments. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 32: 599-607. 20. Atkinson, D. E. 1968. The energy charge of the adenylate pool as a regulatory parameter. Interaction with feedback modifiers. Biochemistry 7: 4030-4034. 21. Murrell, W. G. 1969. Chemical composition of spores and spore structures. In: The Bacterial Spore, G. W. Gould and A. Hurst (eds), Academic Press, New York, pp. 215-273. 22. Bechtold, R. E. 1976. A kinetic analysis of leaf litter-associated microbial activity in Apalachicola Bay. -Master's Thesis, Florida State University. 23. Bobbie, R. J. 1976. Esterase activities and oxygen uptake of the endogenous microflora associated with three types of litter in a North Florida estuary. Master's Thesis, Florida State University. 24. Lillich, T. T., and D. C. White. 1971. Phospholipid metabolism in the absence of net phospholipid synthesis in a glycerol requiring mutant of Bacillus subtilis. J. Bacteriol. 107: 790-797. 25. Parsons, J. R., and J. D. H. Strickland. 1962. On the production of particulate organic carbon by heterotrophic processes in sea water. Deep Sea Res. 8: 211-222. 26. Abel, K., H. de Schmertzing and J. I. Peterson. 1963. Classification of microorganisms by analysis of chemical composition. I. Feasibility of utilizing gas chromatography. J. Bacteriol. 85: 1037-1044. 27. Shaw, N. 1974. Lipid composition as a guide to the classification of bacteria. Adv. Appl. Microbiol. 17': 63-108. 28. Kates, M. 1964. Bacterial lipids. In: Advances in Lipid Research, Vol. 2, R. Paoletti and D. Kritchevsky (eds), Academic Press, New York, pp. 17-90. 29. Dawes, E. A., and P. J. Senior. 1973. The role and regulation of energy reserve polymers in microorganisms. Adv. Microbial Physiol. 10: 135-266. 30. Dawes, E. A. 1976. Endogenous metabolism and the survival of starved prokaryotes. Symp. Soc. Gen. Microbiol.29: 19-54. 31. Livingston, R. J., G. J. Kobylinski, F. G. Lewis III and P. F. Sheridan. 1976. Long-term fluctuations of epibenthic fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Fishery Bull. 74: 311-321.



PAGE 1

234. marshes (Juncus roemerianus, Spartina spp.) fringe the island in this area. During periods of extensive discharge and/or tidal fluctuations, occasional deposits of leaf litter are found. Although this portion of the report will concentrate on the preliminary determination of the litter associations, subsequent experiments have been carried out. Determinations using methods described above were made using 3 sets of baskets at Station 3. Each set of 4 baskets was filled with oak leaves, pine needles, or artificial (teflon) substrate; 12 baskets were set at Station 3 and collected at monthly intervals from July, 1975 to November, 1975. A third series of experiments was carried out at Stations 5A, 3, and IX from January, 1976 to January, 1977. Four baskets of oak leaves were placed at each station at monthly intervals and the previous month's baskets were sampled. This was carried out to determine seasonal variation of litter associations. Although all samples have been taken, the data are still being analyzed and will not be presented here. Results and Discussion Physico-chemical parameters A one year profile of various physical conditions in the three primary study sites is presented in Fig. 2. Water temperature varied little from one station to the next; peaks occurred during late summer months. Biological sampling took place during periods of increasing, peak, and decreasing water temperature levels. Peak river flows occurred during late winter and spring months. Increased turbidity paralleted river flow at Stations 3 and 5A. However, farther out in the bay, Station lX was characterized by constant low turbidity levels (being less affected by such flow). Local rainfall, out of phase with river flow, peaked during late



PAGE 1

158. significance of detritus of various sizes in estuarine systems remains obscure, the potential importance of such material as a direct and indirect source of food for complex food webs cannot be underestimated. The Apalachicola Bay System (Fig. 1) is a shallow, barrier island estuary in north Florida that is physically dominated by the Apalachicola River (Livingston, 1974; Livingston, 1975; Livingston et al., 1975). This river system is composed of a series of interlocking marsh, swamp, and riverine habitats that empty directly into Apalachicola Bay. The current structure, salinity, nutrient, and detritus regimes of the bay system have been directly associated with river function (Livingston, 1974; Livingston et al., 1974). According to a recent (1970) survey of the Apalachicola River basin by the Florida Division of Forestry (George Reinert, personal communication), there are approximately 253,000 acres of wetland forest (including stream margins, deep swamps, and bay heads). Clewell (1977) has described the terrestrial plant associations in the Apalachicola Valley. The dominant species in the flood plain are as follows: Sand bars Black willow (Salix nigra) Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) River banks River birch (Betula nigra) Ogechee-tupelo (Nyssa ogeche) Alder (Alnus serrulata) Natural levees Southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora)



PAGE 1

35. Table 2: Annual monthly means: Apalachicola River Flow (Blountstown, Florida: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District) and Local Rainfall (Combined data from NOAA-climatological Station in Apalachicola and the East Bay Fire Tower). Apalachicola Local River Flow (Cubic) Rainfall Time 'Period Feet Per Second) (inches) 3/72 -2/73 25,185 4.98 3/73 -2/74 32,955 5.20 3/74 -2/75 21,550 6.23 3/75 -2/76 30,708 5.80 3/76 -2/77 26,174 4.66



PAGE 1

FiLE 4,3-nC (-L0x;.N -J;rE = 77/1 A/27.) 3C i S.Ai CF (,OnN) NRcC (ACROS) DAYS 1*.+ 4. .4 .t + + e4..; 75..-. 6-. .; 5. 3 .2. 75. 31 C0 4.225u+l.4.l 75: 136+. L 5 5 4. 75 l7 '.) 5 **--**-*----*---+----+"--------+----+-------+----+---*---'---***-~--* 7. I | I 7 7 i I I 1 I I 753.JO + I I A 753.3u 4 I I I jI , I I I i I I 1. I ;n+.5; 4 I + 669.6i 6 I I I I i I I I 1 ' I I I 5 -5.90 I I 1 585.9u I i I I ;-------------------------------„--------------**.«---.-----»*....*-*.***-.--i Z I I I 4S. I I I+ 5 . I I 1 1 1 I 1 1j I I I I I I I +l.'i + I I +* 418.5C SI I I I I I I I I I I I I 1I 434.8i + I I 33$..0. I I I I I I I 1 1---------------------------------------------------------------I I I I 1. ( c51.1 I I + 2l.li I I I I I I 1 1 I I ,I .1 I i I i I I &7.'4, -+ I T I 11+ 1.7.4 j I I I I \ I I I I I I I I IA AO E M 3/72 6172 9/72 12/72 3173 6/73 9/73 12/73 3174 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 675 9/75 12/75 3/7 6/76 9/ 1/7 3/77 3/72 5/72 9/72 ;2/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73"3/74 6/74 9/7 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 5 1,./?5 3173 6/75 9/75 12t/? 3/77 ' ';' INVE;ri SftiERS TOP TEN "'ODLE' R AY N " " -*. .-.77/3327, -.PAGE -'.: STATISTICS.. CO.RtLATION (R)' .177.5 R SQUARED ... ..;3 SIG.IfIGAfNCE : : : ' 67d$l7 " STD; E. OF tET -il4.55526 4 NTERCGPT (A) -1.05766 STO ER?93 OF A -' 2.0.S.,3j *SiGNFICAtCA -.48579 SLOPE (8) --... : f3859 STO ERROR OF 8 ..*2886 , '. .-.087-1 f z i.U .A.L.3S -86 EXCLUDEO VALUES0 lISSIN; VALUES -'" *,,„*,„ IS PRINTfD IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT ~E OnMPUTED.



PAGE 1

423. Table 2. Identified food items in stomachs of Anchoa mitchilli (276 sets of samples) AMPHIPODS (20/276 occurrences) # of # of occurrences Shrimp (12/276) occurrences Gammarus sp. 1 3 Ogyrides limicola 5 Grandidierella bonnieroides 3 Lucifer faxoni 4 Cerapus sp. 2 Corophium louisianum 1 MYSIDS (52/276) occurrences Fish (4/276) Mysidopis bahia 18 Anchoa mitchilli 1 Mysidopsis bigelowi 3 Cynoscion Arenarius 1 Mysidopsis almyra 3 Syngnathus sp. 1 Taphromysis bowmani 2



PAGE 1

Fig. 7; Bottom salinity /oo at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. APALACH SCATTE'GRAMS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 39 FILt NOJNME (CFrATION CITE = 77/f~/11.) ,CA.TEPGRA" OF (OOUN) SAC5 (ACPOSS) DAYS 110.225' j 293.675rO 473.1£:(0 652.57500 832.025001011.475'i1190.925D0137.375001549.82Z5001729.27500 °*---. --------+---t----.--.---------+-------------------------------*-------*---. SI I I I I I I I I I I, ! I 25. L I I 25.2 I I I I | I I I I I I I 2i SI II iI I I P 4 \A i 1+ I 5.6 ^ 5.6. / I '.6 .I + J. I 8 -...----.--.--.-------. -------.--........... --.....-............---.--..-----.-.-.---...... 37-2 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 APAL:4C SCAT -GR.,S 1 TIE IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February. 1977 STAT:STI:S.. " " CO iLATH -(': R) ( --R,.9.. .SIUARED -.;4''6 SIGNIFICANCE R -.C5238 C-J RCr EST -7. 7??c I7cF-WECT (A) -9.45783 STO ERROR OF A -1.i479 SI3IrLCNCa 4 -.*-: SLOPE (9) --.i:279 STO EPROR OF B -.0C173 FLT-F: V*LUEJ -65 -,%L'!=C VAL'ESMr ISSI;-3 VALUES -39 "..... -!z P:'-.T:' IF Z COEFFICIENT CAN''OT 2E :Co PUTED.



PAGE 1

Fig. 4: Surface salinity 0/00 at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. SALAC" SC TT;cSe; S 1 77/03/11. PAGE 13 uIL *v0(CiESION A.E = 77/:3/11. SCiTTESRGRA OF (COON) S:T1 (ACROSS) DAYS It.??;? 295.67i. 47'.1l5-a 652.5750 832.C253i011i.4750CCi90.925001370.375001549. 25001729.2750C .-----------------,---+---+-------*------------------------------33.7 I I 3.70 i f 3 3.7 I I i I I SII II I I I II I I I I I. I I S....--.----.---.--...-----------------------T.IM I , arhi 1 to Fbur.17 i 1 i I\ i -I I I / -I \ TR I I E I I I I / I I I 16.35 I I 1i M 6.5 I I I I I i I I I + I I+ I " , -t --t + I I • 13.4t I I II SIN MONS: ar. 19to Febai .977 I I I I .AL TTERS S 770311. PAG+ * ; II I i II I S TI I;< .. ! I I II I I I 1· I I 4.+16.85 : TIME INIMONTHS: March. 1972 to February 1977 CCRRSLATIN (R).-.39378 R SQUARED -.15506 SIGNIFICANCE R -.00085 -r3 ERR 3F-EST -7.25;2£ INTERCEPT () -' 15.0a43 STO ERROR OF A -1.86468 <* SISGIFICAiCE A -.C-IC SLOPE (83) ---.30590 STO ERROR OF B.0C179 -.. SIGNIFITCAL 9 -.-1:S9 U U 0 M V FLOT'E1 VAL'JrS -51 ExCLUOEG VaLUES0 MISSING VALUES -.4 rrrrrrr r r~\·+I



PAGE 1

111. 1. D. W. Menzel, E. M. Hulburt, and J. H. Ryther, Deep Sea Res. 10, 209 (1963); D. Titman, Sci. 192, 463 (1976); D. W. Schindler, ibid. 195, 260 (1977). 2. A. L. Hammond, ibid. 172, 361 (1971); N. A. Jaworski, D. W. Lear, Jr., and 0. Villa, Jr., Limnol. Oceanogr. Special Sym. Vol. 1, 274 (1972). 3. R. W. Eppley, Water Pollution Control Res. Series No. 16010 EAC 12171 (Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1971); J. H. Ryther and W. R. Dunstan, Science 171,1198 (1971); J. C. Goldman, K. R. Tenore, and H. I. Stanley, ibid. 180, 955 (1973); J. G. Jennings, M.S. Thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, 83 p (1973); S. Vince and I Valiela, Mar. Biol. 19, 69 (1973). 4. Surface water (z -0.5 m) was collected and placed in 500 ml glass incubation bottles. Nutrient concentrations of 0.0, 5.0, or 50.0 pg-atm N03-N 1-1 and 0.00, 0.25, 0.50, 2.00, or 5.00 pg-atm PO-P 1-1 were obtained by adding appropriate ammounts of NaNO3 or Na2PO4 to each bottle. Phytoplankton were acclimated in situ to the added nutrients for 4 hours and then incubated in situ with 4 p Ci of 14C labeled bicarbonate. Two 100 ml aliquots from each bottle were filtered through Whatman GF/C ,glass fiber filters. The filters were place in 5 ml of Aquasol and the activity was determined by liquid scintillation counting. Carbon fixation was calculated by the method in J. D. H. Strickland and T. R. Parsons, A Practical Handbook of;:Seawater Analysis, Fish. Res. Bd. Canada (1972).



PAGE 1

99. TABLE TI Nutrient enrich--nt resnornve: Wh to.yn.theJ i c.hSeC -4S e enha-n, in resnonse to nutrient additions . 1A 7/11/75 7 7/13/75 103 3 ' 0.0 .5.0 50.0 0.0 5.0 50.0 0.0 29.8 30.1 .-32.3 0.0 28.7 30.2 32.3 PO4 0.5 40.9 41.8 42.2 P0O 0.5 30.4 31.6 33.4 2.0 41.0 39.9 41.1 2.0 33.0 32.6 34.1 1A 9/25/75 7 9/26/75 ' 03 1 -0N 3 0.0 5.0 0. 5.0 0.0 45.8 47.0 0.0 29.8 3~i6 POL 0.5 57.4 56.4 POl 0.5 30.3 36.5 ( 2.0 680.8 59.5 2.0 30.8 38.2 1A 1/13/75 7 1/13/76 NO 3 0.0 5.0 -0.0 5,0 c.~---·L--·------r~--0.n --0.0 35.6 38.3 O.n 256.9 27.1 POL 0.5 34.4 32.4 PO. 0.5 28.6 27.2 2.0 35.7 32.1 2.0 23.5 27.0 1 i



PAGE 1

... .... no0 0.00000 0.00000 0.on000 .62000 0.00000 *62000 continued .. ... ... .. * .no 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 0.00 .00 SPECTFS SAMPLF DATES 760415 7,0415 760515 7;.0615 760715 760815 760915 761011 761119 761213 770125 770220 TOTALS. ChAStOOS SArU#EPAL 0 .o000 0.00000 0..0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00900 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .33000 0.00000 0.00000 .33000 J.On J.o0 U.00 0.00 0.00 u0o.o 0. o0 0 00 0.00 .07 0.00 .00 .00 ELOPS SAUUtS O.JOOdn 0.00000U o.n0uPO .?79l00 0.On00 0.00000 0.00000 0.0o0000 .00 POO 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .28000 n.,0 0o.00 0.00 .02 o.n0 0. 00 .no0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 MICROPTERUS SALMOInES 0.00O00 0.00000 .05000 0.30000 3.0Q00(0 0.00000 0. 00000 0 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .05001 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 n.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0*00 .00 CHAETODIPTERUS FABER 0.00OO 0.00000 00 .00000 000000 0 0.00000 .01000 0.00000 0.00000 .0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .01000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 TOTALS 1920.8 2393.0 2602.2 1379.8 1442.2 1977.2 1179.8 1710.9 3173.1 474.3 539.7 1275.9 20068.9 (3"



PAGE 1

15. Species # of individuals regression equation MIC GUL 22 =3.15783 (X) -13.17557 MIC UND 174 =3.30722 (X) -13.59050 MON CIL 115 =2.68766 (X) -11.00337 MON HIS 86 =2.76823 (X) -11.04164 MUG CEP 7 =3.04576 (X) -12.49192 NIC UST 10 =3.28415 (X) -13.28714 OGC RAD 2 =3.91484 (X) -16.05968 OPS BET 27 =2.51062 (X) -10.34034 ORT CHR 99 =3.08003 (X) -12.54686 PAR ALB 26 =3.13787 (X) -13.23092 PAR FAS 14 =3.68192 (X) -15.60141 PAR LET 33 =3.06070 (X) -12.73843 PEP BUR 5 =2.63529 (X) -10.45042 POG CRO 2 =2.46761 (X) -9.21713 POR POR 3 =3.27791 (X) -14.04788 PRI SCI 4 =3.26012 (X) -13.36732 PRI TRI 20 =3.07717 (X) -12.21250 SPH GUA 7 =2.76380 (X) -12.47892 SPH NEP 24 =2.82279 (X) -10.95111 STR MAR 4 =3.42754 (X) -16.83563 SYM PLA 14 =3.19256 (X) -13.76772 SYN FLO 58 =3.39967 (X) -17.79450 SYN FOE 21 =3.33944 (X) -14.67424 SYN SCO 10 =4.20130 (X) -21.00771 TRI MAC 30 =3.35751 (X) -13.05926 URO FLO 33 =3.35273 (X) -14.52737 CYP VAR 6 =3.49504 (X) -13.50708 FUN GRA 6 =3.11153 (X) -12.77763 FUN SIM 3 =3.53472 (X) -14.48805 LEP MAC 10 =3.19176 (X) -12.50672 LUC PAR 5 =3.51483 (X) -13.99182 MIC SAL 4 =3.87904 (X) -15.92254 NOT PET 7 =2.66732 (X) -11.73939 POE LAT 3 =2.19844 (X) -9.12226 B. Fishes (rare), assigned regression equations Species comparable species regression equation ADI XEZ LUC PAR =3.51483 (X) -13.99182 GAM AFF LUC PAR =3.51483 (X) -13.99182 NOT VEN NOT PET =2.66732 (X) -11.73939 FUN CON FUN GRA =3.11153 (X) -12.77763 LEP MIC LEP MAC =3.19176 (X) -12.50672 SYN LOU SYN FLO =3.39967 (X) -17.79450 DIP FOR CEN MEL =2.95025 (X) -11.85323 GYN NIG ANG ROS =3.21520 (X) -15.84540 HYP HEN CHA SAB =2.27591 (X) -10.00217 MEN SAX MEN AME =2.93110 (X) -12.15889 HAE AUR HAE PLU =2.82564 (X) -11.39730 LUT GRI ORT CHR =3.08003 (X) -12.54686 ANC HEP ANC MIT =2.92631 (X) -12.60137 PAR MAR PAR FAS =3.68192 (X) -15.60141



PAGE 1

272. Materials and Methods Field Procedures Surface and bottom water samples were taken monthly at fixed stations in the Apalachicola Estuary (Fig. 1) with a 1 liter Kemmerer bottle. Dissolved oxygen and temperature were measured with a Y.S.I. dissolved oxygen meter. Salinity was taken with a temperature-compensated refractometer calibrated periodically with standard sea water. River flow data taken at Blountstown, Florida were provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Mobile, Alabama) while local rainfall data were taken by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Environmental Data Service, Apalachicola, Florida). Turbidity (Jackson Turbidity units) was determined using a Hach Model 2100-A turbidimeter, and water color was measured by a platinum-cobalt standard test. Light penetration was estimated with a standard Secchi disk. Data concerning chlorophyll A, orthophosphate (inorganic, soluble, reactive), nitrite, nitrate, and silicate were provided by Dr. Richard Iverson (Department of Oceanography, Florida State University); these parameters were measured according to standard procedures (Livingston et al., 1974). Biological sampling was carried out in the bay at fixed stations (Fig. 1) with 5-m (16 foot) otter trawls (1.9 cm mesh wing and body; 0.6 cm mesh liner) towed at speeds of 2.0-2.5 knots. The determination of station placement and sampling procedures has been described by Livingston (1974, 1975, 1976). Station placement was determined by visual (diving) examination. Much of the study area consisted of shallow mud flat habitats with Station 6 characterized by seasonally heavy concentrations of benthic macrophytes dominated by Ruppia maritina. Day and night samples were taken at monthly intervals from March, 1972 to May, 1974. Only day samples were taken there-



PAGE 1

267. Table 1: Biomass (g/m2) of macrophytes taken in East Bay. Values include root stocks and uncalcified epiphytes. DATE 4A 4B 11/02/75 455.7 334.4 12/14/75 200.6 213.0 1/17/76 287.2 167.8 2/18/76 206.8 263.2 3/20/76 269.2 196.6 4/20/76 220.8 138.6 5/20/76 316.9 268.1 6/18/76 563.0 354.9 7/17/76 358.4 568.4 8/14/76 538.8 365.6 9/11/76 585.1 489.8 10/10/76 486.9 438.7 Total 4,489.4 3,799.1 Mean/month 374.1 316.6



PAGE 1

, -." 2 1 .. -., , .---..., -.1 .. 1 .. -...1 .I I I ruary, 97 ----+----+------+---4*-------------------*---*. -* 75.4.. I I I i I I I SI i n I 1 I 1 i1 I I I I I i 1 ... .... 1 .r I I i i i ÷ i 7I iJ3.70 + 2 -, • 4i i I I I II , I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*----------I I I I I i i I I I i . I I I I I I C i i I -I I I 1 1ORPuATION (R),06450 R SQUARED -416 SIG1.FIJANuE R -.51220 J-1. P L..I I x I I 1 S R F .591 NTEREPT A) 26179 S F A -i 9 94 8 S IA ISLOPE (5) 1G 44 1 U ERROP OF E -u i79 '*D IS ,NED IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT b MPUTE. 3 6 9 12 3 67 9 2 1i.7 -I <. -7A. I 3 PL;i..VALI.ES -63 EXCLUOEO VALUES& t-;IS3i; VALUS -5 +,» *,«, jI PP.INTE3 IF A COEFTISIcNT CANNOT BE ZOMPUTEO.



PAGE 1

168. 1963. Leaching and decompositon of water soluble substances from different ypes of leaf and needle litter. Stud. Forest. Suecia 3: 1-31. Odum, E.P. and A.A. de la Cruz. 1963. Detritus as a major component of ecosystems. A.I.B.S. Bull. 13: 39-40. Odum, W.E. and E.J. Heald. 1972. Trophic analyses of an estuarine mangrove community. Bull. Mar. Sci. 22(3): 671-738. 1975. The detritusbased food web of an estuarine mangrove community. In, Estuarine Research, Vol. 1, pp. 265-286. Pennak, R.W. 1953. Freshwater invertebrates of the United States. Ronald Press Co. N.Y. Perkins, E.J. 1974. Decomposition of litter in the marine environment. In: Dickinson, C.H., and J.F. Pugh (eds.), Biology of plant litter decomposition. Academic Press, New York. Tagatz, M.E. 1968. Biology of the blue crab, Callinectes sapidus Rathbun, in the St. John's River, Florida. Fishery Bull. 67: 17-33. Wildish, D.J. and N.J. Poole. 1970. Cellulase activity in Orchestia gammarella (Pallas), Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 33: 713-716. Willoughby, L.G. 1974. Decomposition of litter in fresh water. In Dickinson, C.H., and G.J.F. Pugh (eds.), Biology of plant litter decomposition. Academic Press, New York. 2: 659-681. and J.F. Archer. 1973. The fungal spora of a freshwater stream and its colonization pattern of wood. Freshwater Biol. 3(3): 219-239.



PAGE 1

.-4 AnchoalrO -' .-Leiostomus .................... Brevoortia -------------micropogon I. Cynoscion -......... Harengula .................. Chloroscombrus --, Cynoscion ::::::::::::::::::::: (' C* rt .-h 11 (It D -*r-t S( --< "< '72-73 73-74 '74-75 '75-76o o 0 0 --I L r-h r ) S=60 N=22,458 S=68 N=20,199 S=66 N=17,957 S=65 N=19,473 m Z n ( 11 n-. W. O-0 N-n=7,881 N-n= 15,439 N-n= 12,432 N-n =13,295 < < 1001 103. * -* o N-(nl+n2)=5,159 IN-(nl+n2)=7,312 N-(n+n2)=7,610 N-(n + n2)= 8,401 0 / 0 = (80-n -0 4 .X : D C 80: CD fo t < [ "r+ rt -o S0Dc .. O.C D k -> I-20.. -... ri -0 m 0 , .o --0. -< -P* CL C -o TM•M .H .S3 2. 0 D O ': " n" f-u CD •. • .• .. .. ,. .-.--, CD IME--MONTHS (3/72-2/76)



PAGE 1

436. the lower Apalachicola Drainage, and the development of efficient decision-making processes at the local level. Through a series of lec-::' tures and briefings, this project has contributed scientific input to the Florida Division of State Planning with respect to the development and coordination of a resource management and planning program for the entire Apalachicola Drainage System. Close contacts have been maintained with various local groups and elected county officials. High school and university students have been taken out on our boats and trained as marine biologists in a continuing effort to operate on a grass roots level. The principal investigator has periodically written a column in the local newspaper, translating scientific facts about the bay into everyday language. Cohsequently, decisions have been made at the local level which have ppened the way for the development of constructive planning programs throughout the area. 5. There has been close coordination of this Sea Grant project with researchers of the Fish and Wildlife Service in their ongoing and proposed studies of the Apalachicola wetlands. Data from the Sea Grant project has been used to initiate preliminary efforts of the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to develop remote sensing as a management tool in this area. Information has also been used by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in their activities in the Apalachicola Drainage System. Data from the Apalachicola Sea Grant project provided the impetus for the possible designation of the Apalachicola Bay System as a Nat-onal Estuarine Sanctuary in the Gulf of Mexico under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. This represents, if successful, the direct application of Sea Grant research data to the implementation of coastal zone management on a national scale. Pursuant to this activity,



PAGE 1

22. between-sample variation in grain size but the sediment organic content increased from July to January, coinciding with the die-off and deposition of Halodule blades. Station 3 This station is located in a shallow (1 m) channel leading from the Apalachicola River into East Bay. Winter and spring deposits of wood and leaf debris, washed in by peak river discharges, are found in this area. The bottom is firm, fine sand with beds of Ruppia maritima and Vallisneria americana in the vicinity. The average grain size is 2.83) units and organic content averages 3.52%. There was some variability between samples for grain size and organic content, probably resulting from the riverdeposited debris. Station 6 This station is located in the middle of a shallow (1 m), protected embayment close to the Apalachicola River with seasonally dense beds of Ruppia nearby. The bottom is a loose, fine sand-silt. Woody debris was almost always noted in the samples. The monthly average grain size is 3.64 units and organic content averages 5.60%. Samples were variable with respect to grain size and organic content, with no trends observed. Station 4 This station is moderately deep (2 m) and influenced to some extent by river discharge. The bottom is barren, loose silty-sand, and contains large wood fragments. The monthly average grain size is 3.93+ units and organic content averages 7.98%. Grain sizes were somewhat variable in the spring (perhaps due to river effects) and appeared stable for the rest of the year. Organic content was highest in summer and fall, coinciding to



PAGE 1

Table 8, continued SPECIES J\ AAPL T JAT 74SPECIES15 74 7t35i5 74.615 74'715 r70d.5 74,915 7vL&415 Tilis 11it3L 753115 754215 TOiALj NUDIBRANCH SP. C U 0 3 3.6 .1 HENIPHOLUS ELONGATA .0 a 2 1 i uecl * 3 Joý je.u b w *Ju j064 J06J jou j ad *4 O$D 056 OVALIPES SUADULPENSIS C ... O96C L.:w ý.A0 6.0,0 Uto 3.u .s j 4*U .6 ii **u ?AGURUS O NGICAIPUS .L C 0 i .0 j 1. o6 ±0.0 0.0 0.0t 07 0 0 ;±a. 3*.CL j .i9u I .aJ 0. I .56 3 z2 TOTA.S 140g.. 69.3 71.0 ?8.u 22>1.u 16b.C G 3A7.4 5j5.1 6983. 2>3. j 3 1.C 1730. 53763.



PAGE 1

INV4; T SU1MA BIVASS 4H3. BAY 5TN %YAK Table 9, continued STATIONS ..1 ~Z i,3 u,4 3.5 0.6 1JA 013 C1C :54 TIME4 OF DAY 0 SPECIES SAFPLE 3AITE 70.31 7i.Lw'l: 76.5.5 7b.615 76,715 16bo5 76j-ta fl1t. 51119 7612L3 77I125 77a22z OT.i 5. CALLINE;TES 3AP;3US 27i.b8 427.70 5i5..5 Z:o.d3 91.41 LEZo..7 !L..o 73.il L 4fi8 3.6b 31.24 33.:4 246.23 (:.Z5 79.7j 62..) 8 .13 6Z.Od 4.'.1b lo.d i2#. s.-37 77.f3 731.1 Bs.22 55.13 PENA-uS JETIFL-J4 11.77 w.Io j.52 ý.19 149.91 457.74 3j«.7! :L.>. J.·s 3sja jo.v tou 1268.23 3.59 ..*2 I*t* 3c..5 Ii.*» 7-. dj 7L.3+ 3 c 205!2 o tbj .iu e9. d PtNAEUS AZIECUa O0.C 2.59 i8o.95 13.22 j.11 lw,.L 3.£d Lo3r .oJ Jo. udJw j.od 227.52 .4oi .o 22.49 7.13 .66 L..4 .79 .37 .39 j..0 j.ru 5.3i CALLINECT£E In1L15 12.61 34.*4 32.54.42 .99 .*7 .8J i.2 }1.84 2.63 .22 .u 1 U5,74 3.85 6.4 3.91 1.04 041 ..4 .2, L.4 +*.79 2.S4 o57 'J.&u 2.4B PENAEUz JUJJRAJ1 9.-39.99 J4.79 1.45 6.72 .37 .37. .2i .32 1.. 3.66 l.ui LUi4JJ 2.81 7.45 ;.19 .54 1.;* .16 *u9 .52 .14 .0 39.79 Jo u 2.37 LOLLIIUNCULA BREVIS 2.34 4..7 5o.27 ij.18 1Z2 4.0S 4.75 .53 L,33 2?.7 3.0. L. 36 96.39 .62 .76 6.2 2 3.78 2.61 .77 1.14 .L3 .6b 2.25 .a 3. 59 02. RANGIA CUdEATA .86 .86 L.u. 1.72 .0J7. .j 3.61 ,255 i.uJ 3o.44 j. .Jo 1i85 .26 .16 ..u, .64 t.ju j.ju .,,6 ,7r .oJj .od3 ;.J j·.Ou ,42 PALAJMONETES PU;iO 1l.9. l.Lu 1.22 .52 .j7 *.7 .i2 .2 La.5J .*1 *.5 .I2 16.72 3.32 .19 .15 .19 *.i .j9 *ul a. .67 .13 I Z7 **b o.$ NEtITINA REGLIVATA .25 .42 1.64 3.dl .82 .54 .82 1.S3 .39 2.17 .17 1.13 14.66 08 ..d .2J 1.t41 .17 j9 .20 .52 .17 2.3* *43 2.3 .34 GRASSOSTIREA VI3INICA C.* A;.J ·.u U 3. UL .4 ,ob #.20 *.34 2.2J *.) .*36 J 3.b 13.16 0.O *.ajJ 1.U0 3.iju b.t.L 1.4, .53 1L.c .97 3.53 ..j j.ail .31 SQUILLA EtPUSA C.i. 9.51 q. n. *bb .j. .9u ).i i.3JJ .eJj .99 4dj 12.14 .O.. 1.79 U. u Jul ...4 J# .21 J.1J 1..3 J1. 2.5 .Wl0 5.29 XIPHOPENiUS KROYERL 0. 0. G.Cj .JC j.ju .d4 93.2 i..u .55 3].U; .) .Oa 3.O1 1.ia2 O 0.3j %"} j.. J*Ju .16 1.53 j.u .1 J.t j 1iJi i J.Jj J.ei .6 POLLINICES DUPLICATUM utu3 3j.3 .aCO .CG bL.u 11 ib l, i .03 30.1 2.33 .51 6.5* 6.LO .0 .COLg 4.U06 b.JU U. j6 ioU. as aJ.J 2o53 9513 L.34 15i PASURUS POLLICARIS *15 ..aJ G.uJ J.Ou C.fJ E.ju .44 ?2.2 .23 .53 a.di iw.t 3.67 *C04 .Cu 3.J U .u .eUjU iJ.Ju .11 *53 .1.3 .43 .whu U.iu *9 RHITHROPA'OPEUS HARRISII .27 .52 .03 .30 .47 *L5 .11 3.jJ .41 .85 .15 027 3.44 *;a8 *L *u oi .1*O *.2 .V3 ).J3 .1. ..39 .71 .*8 oUSYCON CONTRARIUN C.dL .O00 0.0o 3.ij b.Ce i.r. *e..U 2.21) ..a1 j.j j.aa J.r 2.2 0.e u.ij Gi.uj jauW U.J 3W.ju J.CA .ac *.iJ1 J.da i.IJ .h.80i .si5 LUIDIA CLATHRATA L.OL .a 0.JO u 4.J4U 2.97 oJ.uu i.3j 0j 3.0 J taJ }3.0 2. 7 0.00 vua.d b.o u.0 bi .LL .34 i3.1 ieU) a.j .j .i j .d J .5 TRAC4YPENALUS SIMIlIS .13 .66 u.WO .Gu u.0 W.jiU j%.uO .75 ;.ju v.JJ 0i 3 J.0u 1.54 .04 .12 0 .O 6.w 0u 4 uW. j.du .21 J.0J .. J k.1. .eI a *i34 HETAPORHAPHIS CALCARATA U.3a 3i.C0. G.CG .u l.qji .O*I j ..6* 3.. i.0. *L O. 949 1.9 1.41 0.bd 0 .d E.Ud .Lu C0J 0D.) i.Lu J.JJ j.j .25 3.00. 2.89 .d3 PORTUNUS GIBBESII O.00DaO. .acS. 0 J.J.Uug u.C-au, 0.JC; 3 C.E)J.c C3..4.u .41W)2 U.43u.3 .53371 0.uOI0C0 J.jjJai .95196 b.*0C L.O O *Gu *0.uU ... C.Jb .i u .1 1 0L *d .45 .ai 1.6 .*442 CLIBANARIJS VITTATJS .1468 O.OiJjJ .14684 u.GoCCG .293bu 4.oCjJju 4.uaGe. ,.1458j 3j.lald J.aiJJ do.OIJj 0.O.J340 734.. .*4 nu .12 ..C *.b W..** A .i .34 .oJ .uja Ja.JJ 0jd el2 PALAiONETES VULGAUSS 0.OOO .3324j 1.0uG. O.C.Jdu .2265b. ..Jb6. .u372Vu .152j 0.,i3id .5'48 8.0J300j 0.OUjI .58321 0.00 *ji .JDO J*.a 9,5 a. Jj *92 j4 .liJ *r voi ia Ju *4ail NEOPANOPE TEXANA O.QuuQL C.GuCOjJ 0.6LLO0 4.DOJi J.GLU.u 6.0..j u.u. 3.JL 3lj) u.6Gu j .456953 d..UJ *.i574U .52339 .ulL L o 4j o.ai j 4 Wa .iJJ iuj 1.3.) 1 ,4 *3I i. u4 ld Al TRACMVPENAEUS CONSTRICTUS 0.OLJOC .u;ij j4.*utDu .ou.joU ..48b 4.*JJj.u J.udju 3*..3je .27617J 2.j.J 0.UOU0.4 i.u430 .32643 LPUk e.C j I .b' .t. *,J * .J e U J J *0 1 J .1 uob 0 *li .l PAGURUS LONGICARPU> o..u40 3.j60C, J.G4u6l J.4L4.l 3.364jo n.ujsu .W ..u .2333 ..Ajbwj I. .Jj 3.Ojiui aJ1ikj *293.j ^. LC ...0 ..L ...L u' i '. L .*· d to 4J. 4Ja s do a« d a d ALP .US riETcROCrAELIS LejuOw. ý .00C' 4 a3. 4u u.bji .4. L jsjJ J..'wJ4 u-4 > ..4duj <). ue. Jo ii Ju 41316 a u. 34 NJ *29 rIc^ « ^ .« j ,d 4j j j.i 74 ^.d



PAGE 1

284. while fall periods were characterized by penaeid shrimp (largely Penaeus setiferus) and Callinectes sapidus. In terms of biomass, blue crabs and white shrimp were by far the most significant species in the bay. There was a longterm downward trend in the invertebrate biomass figures due to the relatively high biomass figures during the first two years of sampling. The third year of sampling (3/74 -2/75) was a low point in total biomass of invertebrates in the Bay. This was followed by increases in the 2 succeeding years. This was due to relative declines in most of the species normally caught in the area. Monthly variations of numbers (A) and biomass (B) of the top 9 species of epibenthic invertebrates are given in Figs. 12 -19. The reductions during 1974 and 1975 are reflected in the figures of penaeid shirmp and blue crabs (Figs. 12 and 13). Varied patterns are evident, however which indicate reduced numbers during the river flooding of 1973 (Figs. 14, 15, 17, 15). The total numbers and biomass (dry weight) of fishes taken at stations in the Apalachicola Estuary are shown in Figs. 20 and 21 and tables 10 and 11. Although the general trends were similar regarding numbers of individuals and biomass, there were some differences which in some instances related to species such as Dasyatis sabina and Lepisosteus osseus which tended to dominate biomass figures while being relatively insignificant in terms of numbers of individuals. Numbers tended to peak in spring and fall although this pattern showed some variation (as with biomass) where there would be a continuous series of peaks in spring, fall, and winter. This reflected patterns of individual populations which have been described above and are shown in Figs.22-31. Total number of fishes reached a low point in the third year of sampling (3/74 -2/75) and, due to large numbers of Brevoortia patronus, Leiostomus xanthurus, Anchoa mitchilli, and Micropogon



PAGE 1

4ENTICIRRHUS SAXATILIS Table 10 G 8 .o .0 .8 .ca 0.08 0.O8 c.o a.o 8.08 .01 continued SPECIES SAHPLE DATES 740315 740415 74G515 740615 740715 740815 740915 741015 741115 741215 750115 750215 TOTALS 4ONACANTHUS HISPIOUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1. 0.00 0.00 0. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 *07 0.00 0.00 0*00 *01 0TROPIS PTERSONI 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 .05 0.00 ".CO L.00 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.08 .00 0.00 .01 )LIGOPLITES SAURUS 0 o O 0 0 0 05 0 O O 1 C0.0 O.o0 0.03 o 0.0 0o.00 C.J0 0.000 ..0.01 0.00 01 3PHICHTHUS GOMESI 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0C .05 0.00 0.0000 C. 0.0 0.00 0.0 0 0 0*0 00.0 0.00 .01 IPSANUS BETA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 O.Pc C.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0s0 .07 0.00 0.00 8.0s 0.0 .01 *EPRILUS BURTI C 0 a C 0 0 0 3 1 a 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0o *00 0.60 0.00 0.00 .01 *OPATO"US SALTATRIX C 0 0 0 C 0 0 i 0 0 1 0.0, 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00C 0.00 o.00 .07 0.008 .8 0.08 0.00 .01 SCIAENOPS OCELLATA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.030 .00 0.00 0.00 .OO 0.D0 0.00o 3.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .01 ;PHYRAENA BOREALIS 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 c.0a .e05 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 .01 ARDINELLA ANCHOVIA 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.00 0*00 0.08 0.00 0.00 .05 o.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.80 0.00 .01 ;ARANX BARTHOLOMAEI 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.D 0.00 0.00 0.0c 0.00 0.00C 0.00 0010 00. 0 .o00s 0.01 .0 01 SYMNURA NICRURA C 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 O.CO 0.00 0.CO 0.0O 0.00 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 061 TOTALS 3726.0 2080.0 166.0 401.0 863.0 2087.0 1463.0 1376.0 1336.0 393*8 1731.0 2350*0 .17972.0 PO0



PAGE 1

INVr~r SUMMA-ZY 31O4AS.ý WH32.E BAY ZNdJ Y-Am Table 9, continued DATr'_ 73.3.1-7,02,'ý STATZONS ji 6j2 CA3 iQL' 3,5 L.6b DIA :18 LIX, 4 TINES OF jAY 0 SPECIES A MPL~ LIAT 73 t,315 7 3. 45 73.51513i 5 7 5.I~ 7i~75 73Z6.5 ?jý 415 f3~3 1j. 3LI 73ie13 74u115 74jZ15 TOTk'~i CALLINECTEý SAPIDUS 23.3..,. 367.:2 E1.9.69 .'i0.99 317,51. S73.a9 4ii.66 3,ý.37 -.5.55 6t.d.8 oa.-67 4~.h3359534 92.e8 96.*J 94..37 93.87 79.68 85.13 865,6i ý3.I #3.73 63.5? i$.. 6!2 74.i5 3.53 *J.9 a .3. .Ui E..j8 I.1.7 0ul ý 11..7 a.. .. 7.73 1.66 PENAEUS JJORARJ11 .1. .Z96 j .L .85 27.26 1.63 i L ,33 1 '. .* 1.65 13 a 'j 14.395? .34 .~ .3o j A .21 B. ;L .8 -.3j 701 i * 3 a*56 2.8.3 i PALAEMONETES PJ3IO 8.1,5 r.35 .72 I.s6 .b .12 ' :6 J..~J .L .76 33.6o. 47.a;. 3.23 i62 .27 .-j2 .1l.0 .ýL 6.i i. 12 .12 3.79 .j PENAEUS AZIECUS ý * 9.15 D.79 1.27 w a 3 k.~ G 01 L.15 2.86da 4.L #.13s 21.65 CALLINECTES SIMILIS 0 8.57 U.ý ..UQ C .G 1 1.32 J.Lý j..2 a I.. ?I~ 105U 2i.55 8.ao5 2.25 J.UU D.j.2 U.2.2 .u .3I hLJ i.jj A 03 611 1o4 NERITINA RECLIVArA 1.35 3.423 .L8 .31 j 3 3 *i ik )oil 4.0.1 4.ý2 *1 .99 60 31 .54 o , k.V .2.?, .ý± a aj 6 1 .Lu I .J I.2 1.j .2 ila. .1 R11IThROPANOPEUS HARRISII .65 L .. U .I 1~. 0 4. 0 ..6 10 17 o. 3 .#7 .12 z.94 LUIOIA CLArHRArA 14 ..; j.U a. L.2 2.J .2.i7 a q.. 4.46 .3.4 Zo k1 POLLINICES DUPLICArUS alu.c C.O.; ;*Cu D.h ~ f.JL2 a.o42 L.1 o.i fqUj 1.21 2*.P3 jJCU 0. U .*6 .a9 D3 144 I.~ 0 0~. 4d I #.W6 *. I~2 *.. *iL .28 a.3* NEU.PANOPE TEXANA 0 W, .p a'.4. 0 0 i L iJ.U4L 4 j .. 2.8 J... 1 J1 i jdJ o.a 6 .. .395 ALC.U t$TRCHEI UZe~ 3.Lo t 4 U06. ..1 0 U... J 5u.. u. J~~ L .141 ioi Jdj. 0.6.0h .jju .38724j NEPANOPEU PALCKAROTI 6 C.CU ~.OtD(J. j. -*1+. j.0~.. 4.uuL 0.JJ j .)IC U .&~L ;.i .44d 0.h~. ..i .0 ..Joao 1237 tIj a 0 U. a. .t*17 41**19 L.~ 9,jU " U j L ~ f.1 4 .j .j~a. 30....J XPALAEMNETES VRL5AUI 0.CL'u4a D.CLU4b 3uJ oj a st 4,( J o aa.L2 u .a1) L u .E.7'5 a. vaJ u.J2J.. jqj,#.wj *06481. 0*0iii .3845 0%11 ...5. u. 0 ..... L 90 U. ..13 ..ý v.. a.. j.J 0 4 Ij* j. 1



PAGE 1

32. Table 1 (continued) STATION DATE METHOD 1 METHOD 2 % ORGANICS 12/75 2.10 2.37 2.56 1/76 2.05 2.36 2/76 2.05 2.04 1.68 3 3/75 2.45 4.17 4/75 3.10 3.93 5/75 2.70 3.67 6/75 2.70 2.82 7/75 2.55 2.92 8.75 3.45 2.87 2.38 9.75 3.10 6.47 10/75 2.65 4.25 11/75 2.85 2.96 12/75 3.10 2.98 4.30 1/76 2.65 2.11 2/76 2.70 2.43 2.30 6 3/75 3.00 5.73 4/75 3.65 6.61 5/75 3.30 4.18 6/75 3.95 6.33 7/75 4.10 7.98 8/75 3.80 2.97 6.48 9/75 3.55 4.80 10/75 3.95 6.63 11/75 3.75 3.62 12/75 3.50 3.05 5.11 2



PAGE 1

a e , cont nue SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 730315 730415 730515 730615 730715 730815 730915 731015 731115 731215 740115 740215 TOTALS o.cOE De0 0o 0.00 C. .00 0.00 0.00 .79 .1 .17 .57 .0 914 IOROSOHA PETENENSE a 0 95 5 2 2 | .OBIONELLUS BOLEOSOHA 2 8 0 ag 0 a 0 2 0 3 7 5 26 .27 0.00 .04 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 Sit 0.00 .25 *45 .30 .13 ,YNOSCION NEBULOSUS 0 0 0 0 4 6 4 8 2 0 25 0.00 .o 00.00 0 0.00 000 .98 *32 .34 .67 .13 0.00 .12 IRTHOPRISTIS CHRYSOPTERA 0 0 0 41 0 0 -3 0 17 -1 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .19 0.00 0.00 0.00 .25 0.00 1.08 .06 .11 jVNODUS FOETENS a0 a 0 1 1 3 a 0 18 S0.0 0.00 G.00 0.00 .19 *16 .73 .38 .08 .08 0.00 0.00 .09 PEPRILUS 5URTI 0 0 4 0 12 1 0 a a 0 0 0 17 0.00 0.00 .17 0.00 2.24 .18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .98 JASYATIS SABINA 1 1 0 2 3 0 0 2 2 2 1 2 16 .03 03 08.00 .10 .56 0.00 0.04 .11 .17 .17 .06 .12 .06 PORICHTHYS POROSISSIMUS 0 1 1 0 0 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 15 0.0o .03 .04 0.00 0.00 2.17 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.0 IONACANTHUS HISPIOUS a0 0 0 0 0 1 2 7 2 0 0 0 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 .18 .49 .37 .17 0.00 0.00 0.00 *.6 JROPHYCIS FLORIANUS 0 8 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 0.00 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .12 .05 IYNGNATHUS LOUISIANAE 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 2 6 0 6 0.00 0.00 C.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 .24 .26 .17 0.00 0.00 8.00 .04 :HAETOIPTERUS FABER0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 e.00 .0i .54 .73 1.00 8.00 O.D0 0.00 0.00 .83 LtEPISOSTEUS OSSEUS 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 4 1 6 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .25 .06 .03 >RIONOTUS SCITULUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 6 0.00 C0.00 0.00 0.00 C.24 0.00 .25 0.00 .06 .06 .03 CCTALURUS CATUS 0 0 a0 1 0 0 0 .1 1 5 5 0.00 000 0.00 .10 .19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .06 .82 SPHOEROIOES NEPHELUS 0 0 0 0 0 .0a 0 1 1 2 5 0.00 0.0 000 0. 0 000 0.0 00 0.88 .06 .12 *02 3AGRE MARINUS 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .15 .19 0.0 00 .0.0 0.00 0.0C 0.00 0.08 .02 4UGIL CUREHA 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Co0. 0.00 0.00 .15 C.00 0.00 5.00 0 .01 0.00 O.:O 0.00 0.00 .01 STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 a 1 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .01 INCYCLOPSETTA QUADROCELLATA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .12 .01 :ENTROPRISTIS MELANA 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 0.00 0.00 .00 0O.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01i ;OBIONELLUS HASTATUS 0 0 0 a0 0 0 2 0 2 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 .0 .0 000 .13 0.00 .01 ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS i 0 1 0 0 a 0 0 0 6 0 2 .03 ..00 04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.c 000 0.00 .01 4ICROPTERUS SALMOIDES 0 0 0 2 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.C O.Co00 .00 .1*i e.OO .00 .o00 3.00 0.00 8.00 c0.0 0.00 .01 )PHICHTHUS GONESI C0 0 0 0 C C 0 0 0 2 G 2 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 0.00 .01 'OGONIAS CROMIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 C.CO 0.00 0.0C G.CL 0.00 0.00 .0oC 0.00 .08 0.00 .06 8.00 .i1 »EPRILUS PARU 1 0 2 ...4 0 .1



PAGE 1

174. TABLE D, concluded Nolina atopocarpa Bartlett endangered Pieris phillyreifolia (Hook.) DC. threatened Pinckneya bracteata (Bartr.) Raf. threatened Pinguicula ionantha Godfrey endangered Pinguicula planifolia Chapm. threatened Polygonella macrophylla Small threatened Rhapidophyllum hystrix (Pursh) Wendl. & Drude threatened Rhexia salicifolia Kral & Bostick threatened Rhododendron austrinum (Small) Rehder threatened Sarracenia psittacina Michx. threatened Senacio aureus L. rare Smilax smallii Morong. threatened Uvularia floridana Chapm. rare Uvularia perfoliata L. rare Warea sessilifolia Nash endangered Xyris isoetifolia Kral threatened Xyris longisepala Kral rare Xyris scabrifolia Harper threatened Zephyranthes treatiae S. Wats. threatened



PAGE 1

N s U 4C-0 N0 (s S-30 " -. -4500 0 0 -< S -oo o -: \ \ A / / r* U A m > -€" : * * \ ... ".i ·I 11 '3 0. 0 SV v : : .*. W 1500" / \ 0 \ / \I m. E 3. V) (o 2 \ --) ( ... I -0 m -. -o n I ( " ... I F"2 > H \V/ il 4o m\ i 4J -0( E c E :c r "-' -r .-) C, e-' .9 SA M J J A S A M J J A S = TI ME-MONTHS (1974) LL 5A -----3 * *. * 1*---v-m TIME-MONTHS (1974



PAGE 1

Table , con nue PECIES SAMPLF CAT S 720315 720415 720515 770615 7?0715 720815 720915 721015 721115 721215 730115 730215 TOTALS ;TALURUS CATUS n.nO 0.UO 0.00 .0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 22.66 0.00 22.66 0.00 0.00 0. aO 0.00 0.00 0.O O. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.96 0.00 .08 )ThOPPISTIS CuPs 0)1 -:'A 0.un 0l.on 1.08 14.11 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.30 3.72 0.00 0.00 21.21 J.t0l .0o ..7 .76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .19 J.O0 0.00 .07 ENT=CP-nIST:S PELA.. 0i.0U .00 0.00 0.0U 1.00 U.0U 0.J0 6.53 8.55 .00 0.00 3.50 18.58 n..I 1.00 u.on 0.00 :3.00 n.o 0.00 .17 .11 0.00 0.00 .07 .06 MAETODIPTERUS FAP .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.53 .49 1.77 14.34 0.00 0.on 0.00 0.00 18.13 0.00 1.00 0.no 0.00 .U4 .03 .09 .38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 UCINOSTOMUS AoGFr'TE'U3 3.00 0.0o d.00 0.00 0.00 2.31 0.00 0.00 7.23 0.00 4.97 0.00 14.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .on .14 0.00 0.00 .09 0.00 2.18 0.O0 .05 IPHICrtTHUS GOMESI O.Ud 13.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13,17 0.00 3.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n.00 0.00 .04 .UCANIA PARVA .2d 11.85 .11 .03 .13 0.OU 0. J 0.00 0.00 .10 .03 0.00 12.53 .06 2.94 .01 .un .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 .04 'EPRILUS PARU 0.00 U.00 0.30 0.00 2.38 .04 3.85 3.03 2.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.33 u.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .00 .20 .08 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 )OROSOMA PETENENSF 0.00 1.79 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.89 2.16 0.00 ' 0.90 10.84 0.00 .44 0.00 0.00 J.00 0.00 00 0.00 .09 .11 0.00 0.00 .04 kLOSA ALAOAMAE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.65 .0 ..00 0.000. .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 0.00 o0.O 0.00 .03 ;OaBISUMA 8OSCI .08 1.59 .35 .44 .09 .18 .27 .81 3.42 .17 0.00 .93 8.33 .02 .39 .02 .02 .00 .01 .01 .02 .14 .01 0.00 .02 .03 HICRO-CBIUS 3ULOSUS .13 1.25 2.57 1.09 .22 .37 O.00 .64 1.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.99 .03 .31 .18 .06 .01 .02 0.00 .02 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 PRIONOTUS SCITULUS 0.00 .19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 .84 1.71 1.15 2.40 .55 6.92 0.OU .05 0.00 0.0U 0.00 0.00 .00 .02 .02 .06 1.05 .01 .02 PORICOTHYS POROSISSIMUS 2.59 0.00 0.0Oi .67 J.00 0.00 0.00 2.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 "5.35 .59 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0 000 0.00 .02 . OIPLECTRUM FORMOSUM O.O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.02 0.00n .00 0.00 5.02 0.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 UROPýVCIS FLORIDANUS 1.a8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 2.44 4.46 .43 0.00 0.00 0. .0 0.00 00. 0 0.00 a 0.00 0.00 .06 .05 .01 SC(AENOPS OCELLATA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.40 0.00 4.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.93 0.00 .01 SVNGNATHUS FLOPI'A E 0.00 0.uO .Oo .42 0.00 .12 1.83 1.61 .03 0. 00 000 0.00 4.07 0.00 0.00 .00 .02 0.00 .01 .09 .04 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI q0.00 1.98 .24 1.05 .15 .26 .09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .21 3.98 0.00 .49 .02 .06 .00 .02 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .01 GOBIONELLUS ASTATU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00.00 .0 .00 1. o.00 n .25 3.14 0.00 0o00 0.00 3*39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .04 0. 0. 0.00 0.00 .01 SYNGKATHUS LOUISIANAE 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 0.00 .35 0.00 0.00 1.07 0.000 0.0 0.00 1.5w 0.00 q.00 u.00 .01 J.00 .02 U. O 0.00 .01 0. 0o0.00 0.00 .01 MONACANTHUS HISPTOUS 0.00 i.45 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.45 0.00 .36 0.00 O.UO 0. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0n 0.00 0.00 .00 PPIONOTIIS RUBIO 0.00 .OO0 1.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.19 0.00 0.00 .38 0.00 0.00 n.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 BPEVOORTIA PATRONUS 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.12 0.00 .28 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.0 00 000 00 0.00 0.00 .00 MICRCrOBIUS T ALASSTNI)Sg3= .09 0.0.00 .00 O.un 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 .83 1.05 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.01 0.00 .06 .02 .00 ALUTE=US SC:IJoCF; O.00OOU 0.00000 0.00000 .47000 0.010O0 n.n0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .47000 ,. .nn 0.n0 .T 0.00 0u. 0.00 0.00 o 0 ..o 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 LUTJAN'JS ,kISFUS 1.t00un .30'1u0 f.OOOu 01.10000 0. 1 000a n.n00o 0.000J0 .44001 0.00050 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .44000 .1 .0.0 0.D0 0.00 0.00 .000 0. 10 .01 n".J 0.10 J.00 0.00 .00



PAGE 1

224. Figure 1. Scanning electron micrographs of the colonization of Quercus virginiana leaves during incubation for various lengths of time in estuarine water. (A) Dorsal surface, Week 0, 230X, 1OKv (B) Dorsal surface, Week 2, 200X, 30Kv (C) Dorsal surface, Week 4, 140X, 5Kv (D) Dorsal surface, Week 6, 210X, 10Kv (E) Ventral Surface, Week 0, 210X, 10Kv (F) Ventral surface, Week 1, 160X, 30Kv (G) Ventral surface, Week 5, 230X, 10Kv (H) Ventral surface, Week 6, 290X, 10Kv Figure 2. Scanning electron micrographs. Organisms observed on surface of Quercus virginiana leaves colonized in estuarine water. (A) Dorsal surface, Week 1, 5530X, 30Kv (B) Dorsal surface, Week 1, 2600X, 30Kv (C) Dorsal surface, Week 2, 5320X, 30Kv (D) Dorsal surface, Week 3, 8420X, 30Kv (E) Ventral surface, Week 5, 5400X, 10Kv (F) Ventral surface, Week 1, 6090X, 30Kv (G) Ventral surface, Week 3, 1690X, 30Kv (H) Ventral surface, Week 4, 1440X, 5Kv



PAGE 1

178. Table 2. Summary of total (combined) macrodetritus taken from stations in the Apalachicola Estuary (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A 1A, 1B, 1C, 1E, 1X) from January, 1972 through March, 1977. The figures represent the total of all mean values (combined data at each station) so that each monthly figure represents 11 2-minute trawl-tows (558 M2/station) or 6,138 M2 of Bay bottom.



PAGE 1

73. and particulate carbon in seawater. Limnol. Oceanogr. 9:138-142. Menzel, R.W. and E.W. Cake, Jr. 1969. Identification and analysis of the biological value of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Final report to the Fed. Water Poll. Contr. Admin. Contract No. 14-12-191. 164 p. Ryther, J.H. and R.R.L. Guillard. 1959. Enrichment experiments as a means of studying nutrients limiting to phytoplankton production. Deep Sea Res. 6:65-69. Steeman-Nielsen, E. 1952. The use of radioactive carbon (C-14) for measuring organic production in the sea. J. du Conseil. 18:117-140. Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons. 1972. A practical handbook of seawater analysis. Bull. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada No. 167 (2nd ed.).



PAGE 1

31. Table 1. Monthly sediment analyses of various stations in Apalachicola Bay. Median grain size determined by Method 1 (Inman, 1952; Folk and Ward, 1975) and Method 2 (Folk, 1966; Ingram, 1971). Organic content determined according to Cummins and Waycheck (1971). MEDIAN GRAIN SIZE ( ) STATION DATE METHOD 1 METHOD 2 % ORGANICS 1 3/75 1.90 4.66 4/75 2.20 4.05 5/75 2.55 5.14 6/75 2.50 6.26 7/75 3.10 6.70 8/75 3.35 2.08 7.18 9/75 2.40 5.84 10/75 2.20 4.29 11/75 2.20 8.79 12/75 2.25 2.00 6.13 1/76 2.35 6.41 2/76 4.20 4.20 12.88 IX 3/75 2.00 1.78 4/75 1.85 1.76 5/75 1.95 1.68 6/75 2.00 1.64 7/75 2,00 2.00 8/75 1.95 2.36 2.42 9/75 2.05 2.16 10/75 2.15 2.26 11/75 2.10 2.47



PAGE 1

William McCartney Executive Director Northwest Florida Water Management District 325 John Knox Road Tallahassee, Florida 32303 JD Dr. Ralph J. McCracken Associate Administrator L -bAgricultural Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Washington, D.C. 20250 Peter Ramatowski. Assistant Director ? kbct "-2. Planning and Assessmet Water Resources Council 2120 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 Robert Shevin, Esquire 6-C. Ke• ucU Attorney General P .s The Capi+-ol ..40 Tallahassee, Florida 32304 ' Harmon Shields Department of Natural Resources SOL ~ b -\1S Crown Building 202 Blount Street Tallahassee, Florida 32304 .\1Eastern Tin Chief, Bureau of Land and Water Management Division of State Planning Department of Administration Ct 0 k 660 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32304 4, Cecil Varnes 40 ·C ° Chairman, County Commission Franklin County t1 Apalachicola, Florida 32320 Kenneth Woodburn Environmental Advisor Office of the Governor O0 .-16-\ The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32304



PAGE 1

263. Table 1 continued Mysidacea Taphromysis bowmani Mysidopsis bigelowi Bowmaniella dissimilis Mysidopsis almyra Mysidopsis bahia Mysidopsis sp. 4 & sp. 5 Taphromysis louisianae Cumacea sp. 1 sp. 2 sp. 3 Tanaidacea Leptochelia rapax Tanaid #2 Isopoda Sphaeroma quadridentatum Edotea montosa Sphaeroma terebrans Xenanthura brevitelson Cyathura polita Munna reynoldsi Erichsonella filiformis Cassidinidea ovalis Amphipoda Gammarus mucronatus Grandidierella bonnieroides Gammarus n.sp. 1 Ampelisca vadorum (G. "macromucronatus") Ampelisca verrilli Gammarus n. sp. 2 Carinobatea sp. Melita appendiculata Cymadusa compta Melita nitida Gitanopsis n. sp. Melita n. sp. 1 (M. "elongata") Paracaprella tenuis Melita n. sp. 2 (M. "intermedia") Microsprotopus n. sp. Melita n. sp. 3 (M. "longisetosa") Parametopella cypris Cerapus n. sp. Orchestia uhleri Corophium louisianum Batea catharinensis Turbellaria sp. 1 (?) Rhynchocoela sp. 1 (?) Aschelminthes Nematode #1 Phoronida Phoronis architecta Insecta (underlined if genus known) Anisopteran #1 Anisopteran #2 Caenis sp. Callibaetis sp. Ceratopogonid #1 Chironomid #2 Corixid #1 Dicrontendipes sp. Dipteran #1 (non-aquatic) Nymphula sp. 7nmrn+nva-n A1



PAGE 1

I-7 , 5 Trawl-susceptible fishes and invere5rates taken at sampling stations Station in Apalachicola Bay during 1974. IX 3 5A Bairdiella chrysura 523 Anchoa mitchilli 168 Cynoscion arenarius 204 Lagodon rhomboides 372 Cynoscion arenarius 106 Anchoa mitchilli 142 Orthopristis chrysoptera 205 Eucinostomus argenteus 37 Opisthonema oglinum 18 Eucinosfom,^s argenteus 169 Cynoscion nebulosus II Eucinostomus argenteus 10 Cynoscion nebulosus 71 Syngnathus scovelli 8 Bairdiella chrysura 5 Eucinostomus gu la 43 Micropogon undulatus 3 Cynoscion nebulosus 4 Lucania parva 26 Microgobius thalassinus 2 Trinectes maculatus 4 Microgobius gulosus 20 Syngnathus louisianae I Prionotus scitulus 3 Syngnathus scovelli 17 Syngnathus floridae I Lagodon rhomboides 2 Monacanthus hispidus 13 Prionustus scitulus I Arius felis 2 Sphoeroides nephelus 8 Menticirrhus americanus 1 Syngnathus louisianae 2 Chilomycterus schoepfi 8 Gobiosoma robustum I Sphoeroides nephelus Anchoa mitchilli 7 Bathygobius soporator I Micropogon undulatus Cynoscion arenarius 6 Arius felis I Microgobius thalassinus Lutjanus griseus 6 Microgobius gulosus Synodus foetens 6 Gobiosoma bosci I D=syafis sabina 4 Gobionellus boleosoma I Syngna hus louisianae 3 Hypsoblennius hentzi 2 Paralichthys lethostigma 2 Prianotus tribulus 2 Sciaenops ocellata I Leiostomus xanthurys Gobionellus boleosoma E~ropus crossotus Centropristis melana :Anchca hepsetus I Mednicirrhu's americanus Pceaenione es vulgaris 306 Penaeus setiferus 320 Penaeus sefiferus 285 Tozeuma carolinense 57 Callinectes sapidus 35 Penaeus duorarum 21 Periclimenes longicaudatL47 Penaeus aztecus 21 Callinectes sapidus 15 Cc linoctes sapidus 44 Penaeus duorarum 10 Penaeus aztecus 5 ;':;/-ieus aztecus 30 Palaemonetes vulgaris 6 Neritina reclivata 4 P!::naeus duorarum 20 Palaemonetes pugio 3 .Palaemonetespugio 2 P-nfceus se ie rus 5 Rhithropanopeus harrissi I .Acetes americanus 1 H:ppolI;te plauracantha 5 Lolliguncula brevis I c. :. amricanus 2 i. -":O ;nop t tcxana I C. bn rI.us vitftotus I etI-i .*·



PAGE 1

209. filled with detritus. The oxygen concentration of the influent and effluent streams may then be monitored to assess short-term respiratory response as a function of the experimental variables in order to determine a dose response relationship. The advantage of this method lies in the ability to do repeated experiments with a nearly constant undisturbed microbial population. The methodology has been well worked out in our laboratory, and preliminary data are very encouraging(Table I). Exploitation of information contained by other chemical parameters of the flow stream will be attempted. The thick epibiotic matrix commonly found associated with detritus suggests the possibility than significant amounts of anaerobic activity may exist, in spite of the high oxygen levels present. With this in mind, sulfate-reducing ability of the system could be determined by following the sulfide concentrations in the flow streams. A preliminary experiment, adapting a spectrophotometric sulfide assay (25) for continuous monitoring via an Autoanalyzer type reaction system, showed promise. The sulfide concentration appeared to fluctuate in a non-random manner: Fourier analysis of the data indicated a 90-hour cycling time of the sulfide levels. Unfortunately stability of the analytical instrumentation is presently inadequate to unequivocably confirm the data. Another possibility of measuring sulfide lies in the use of a specific ion electrode. Again, the problem of detector stability needs to be solved. Another parameter to be measured is pH, since a number of microbial processes create changes in hydrogen ion concentration. In a sample experiment, a detrital column equipped with a pH electrode showed small changes in response which, when analyzed by Fourier transformation, indicated a cycle time of greater than 70 hours. Again the drift of the electrode introduces a large measure of uncertainty to the results.



PAGE 1

12. III. Biomass transformations Because of the volume and diversity of field collections in this and other Bay systems (i.e., Apalachee Bay, the Econfina and Fenholloway drainage systems) presently under study by our group, the method of analysis for biomass determinations was standardized for each species. This allowed the computerized conversion of number/length data into dry weight or ash-free dry weight figures after a determination of a regression formula based on empirical information. Whenever possible, various individuals for a given species (representing a normal range of size variation) were counted, measured, and weighed for such analysis. Species which did not have any real variation in size were simply counted and weighed for a computation of mean weight per individual. Those species which were too rare for such analysis were assigned figures from the more common species. Species pairing was achieved subjectively based on configurational and/or taxonomic similarity. In this way, a regression equation or a conversion factor (based on weight per individual) was computed for each species taken in the survey. A biomass file was then constructed by species based on length/frequency data. This file was used for all operations having to do with biomass figures. Methods and Materials All specimens used in the weight conversion study were taken fresh (on ice) to the laboratory for analysis. Standard lengths, together with wet and dry weights, were measured for all fish specimens. Various invertebrate species were measured for total length, (tip of the telson to tip of the rostrum, shrimp; carapace width, crabs)wet, dry and ash-free dry weight. For those invertebrates normally counted in our data base (worms, mollusks,



PAGE 1

15 720515 720615 720715 726815 723915 721015 721115 721215 730115 730215 TOTALS PEPPILUS PARU 0 a 0 r 6 1 12 3 1 0 C.0o .0.00 00 .CO .21 .1.30 .05 .0 .0 O.Co 0.0 .10 PARALICHTHYS LETHOSTIGPA C U 2 2 7 3 3 1 C 0 0 0 18 c.C00 0.L .11 .13 .25 .44 .32 .02 0.0J 0.0 0.00 3.00 .08 PRIONOTUS SCITULUS C 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 4 3 2 2 17 i.0C .10 C.OC u.0O 0.OC 0.00 ,11 .07 .08 .·6 .56 .13 *08 CHAETODIPTERUS FABER 0 0 0 0 6 3 1 5 0 0 0 0 15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .21 .44 .11 .09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 PORICHTHYS POROSISSIMUS 1 0 0 12 C 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 15 .22 0.00 0.00 .76 0.00 C.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 SYNGNATHUS FLORIOAE r 0 1 3 C 3 2 3 1 0 0 0 13 0.00 C.C0 .06 .19 O.c0 .14 .22 .05 .02 0.00 O.0U 0.00 .06 HICROGOBIUS THALASSINJS 1 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 12 .22 0.00 C0.0 O.OC 0.00 0.30 C0OO 0.00 8.00 0.00 .28 .65 .05 LEPISOSTEUS OSSEUS 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 8 11 0.PC O.00 0. 0 00.00 0 .00 0.O .02 2 02 .14 0.00 .52 .05 SYNGNATHUS LOUISIANAE 0 0 1 0 7 0 3 2 0 0 0 10 O.CC 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 1.C3 G.00 0.00 *04 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 UROPHYCIS FLORIDANUS 1 0 0Q 0 0 0 3 0 1 8 10 .22 0.00 9.00 0Q.30 C.O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .28 .52 .04 ARCHOSARGUS PROBATOCEPHALUS 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 7 .44 0.00 0.00 .06 0.0 0C.0 0.00 0.00 .06 8.00 0.00 .06 .03 GOBIONELLUS HASTATUS G 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 0 0 7 0.00 0.OO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 HONACANTHUS CILIATUS 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 .25 .04 0.00 0·.0 0.03 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 COPOSOMA PETENENSE C 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 4 0.00 .10 0.00 0.o00 000 0.00 000 0.00 .04 .14 0.00 o.00 .02 HARENGULA PENSACOLAE C 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0O 4 40 0.00r 0.00D 0.00 0.0 0.00 D.0 0.00 9.00 0.00 0.00 O.O .26 .02 CENTROPRISTIS MELANA 6 0 0 0 C 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 0 000O .02 *02 0.08 0.00 .06 .01 GO0IOSOMA ROBUSTUM 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 c00S '.0c 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .43 0.00 0.00 .01 HICRnPTZRUS SALMOIDtS 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.00 O.C0 .17 0.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 SCIAENOPS OCELLATA 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 O a 3 0 3 0.00 0.60 0.00 .00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .85 0.00 .01 STRONGYLURA MARINA C 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.00 .10 .11 o.00 0*00 0.0 000 o0o 00 0.03 0.00 0.00 o01 ALOSA ALABAMAE C 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.00 G.OO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.JO 0.00 .00 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 CHILOMYCTERUS SCHOEPFI 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.00 0.00 000 06 ..0 0 0.00 .02 O.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 ICTALURUS CATUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 .00O 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0*06 .56 0.90 *01 ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 C.O0 0.00 0.00 B.00 0.00 .O 0..0 1.0 00 .00.08 56 0.00 .01 MONAGANTHUS HISPIOUS C 2 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 G.O0 .20 0.0 OC 00 0.00 0. OO .00.0 .0 00 0000 0.8* 0.O0 *01 SELENE VOMER 0 -1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 C.OC 0 CO c0.00 .0L .04 G.20 .11 O.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 ALUTERU. SCHOEPFI 3 2 0 .0 0 0 0 a0 0 0 1 CO.L O.CJ C.CC .06 0.0 C0.0 5.00 C0 3.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 .0G



PAGE 1

Figure 21: Total biomass (dry weight) of fishes taken monthly in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A, 6) From March, 1972 to March, 1977. SCATTERGRAMS N,BTOMASSNS 00.1,0290030Ot4,005.S6.01A.1IB BOIC 8I " 77/03/22. PAGE 5 FILf NONAIE (CRFATION LATE = 7?/03/22.) SCATTER.RAH OF (DOHW BIO .(ACROSS) OAYS 1047.57500 284.42500 464.37500 644.32500 824. 275001 O4.225001184.175001364.125001544.075 001724.02500 .**-----****------+-------***----+---** ----------*****--*--.*--***-----~-**---*--*-*, 7775.91 + I I » 777S.91 I I I I I I 7012.39 I 7012.39 I II I I T I I 6248.88 I I .6248.80 I I I I j----.-------.-.------------------..F-------..-I ---.^.j 4:721.S4 i + I i 721.«4 I I i I 3958.33 395S.33 I I I I I .5',55..36 + I t I 5485.3 I I -I I I * I I I I 721.94 .I I + 4721.86 t q l i II .I 2f3t.. T I ..B.?6 * I < | ] \ I I -1 t II fe.» I I SI I. I '" 6/;3194.872 1212 3/73 73 9/73 12/73 374 6/7 9/74. /74 3/7S5 675 97 /76 I9/76 126 3/77 194.8 IC*T S HBXOttSSNS 011 00 <0 , 0)I I006,614,01 0 STATISTICS..' COR2ELAT1 I (.)-.22694 2 SQUARED -.OS8 SIGNIFICAC R -2 .401 STP fER Or EST -t472.35163 INTERCEPT (A) -S26S.9605 51TO EROP OF A -37.13t93 SIGNIFICACE A -.aB06 SLOPE (U -;63991 STO ERROR OF I -*305S S16N7IFICACE B.46 -. 1 PLOTTED VALUES -69 EXCLUDED VALUESO MISSING VALUES -a0 *'•" IS PRINTED IF A COEFFICIIET CANNOT BE COMPUTFO "****** IS PNINTEO IF A COEFFICIENT CANINOT BE C0MPtiTFD.



PAGE 1

67. V. Phytoplankton Productivity and Nutrient Analysis



PAGE 1

Fiq. 23: Surface nitrate values (pg/t) at Station 2A (Apalachicola Bay) from May, 1972 to September, 1976. .-------------------------------------------------------------------------r 1 3 .4 U I T I T T T I I I I I 2U0.'i *» I ?31.40 I I I II I I I SI II I ---I--.I-.-.--.. -I I --j \-Is I I I T I 17'~.20 + 1 170|.20 I 373.6 4 6 9 1 13/4/ l 1 , I 1 I .II I I I 15 A.00 + 1 ?.0 T I I SI. ST I CO12.-ATIO4 M-.03207 R SCUlRFD .00103 SluNLFICANCE P -e41910 IS I O I I I SI-(-N-F-A''F A -.*00174 SLOFt<)-() -.00556 STI ERROR OF 6+ -.o07.o4 rT12.40 + .I -102.4) I I I I I I I I T Stdn 4I ,60 I I I I I I T 51.0 5 451 20 I I I I I I II I i + I TI I a I--+ 5----.6----0---**---+------+* ----------**---**---+----+-----0---* * ---r 3/72 6172 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 o'3 S4ArTFu I.JE9ON o'YtRHEM 77/03/23. PAGE 8 STATIITICS., COP~rFLATIOI (R)-.03207 R SQUARFO -.00103 SIfNIFICANCE P -.41910 STD rRR uF ST -82.67656 INTERCEPT (a) -87.76E41 STO FRROR OF A -28.31$.7 -Ir-NIFtILA\F A -.00174 "LOFIL (R) --.00556 STD ERROR OF B -.027,oo04 'f ,,IlFlI:.*C. w -.1910 i'L(Tl' L.i.LL -41 ExCLUnEn JALUr'.0 ISSTNG VALUES * i _ __ _ i .....-, .. r



PAGE 1

109. reactive phosphate concentration (r = +0.73) and was weakly corr with soluble reactive nitrate (r = +0.L1) or soluble.nitrate (r = This suggests that soluble reactive phosphate concentration was mor.'e importa-nt than dissolved nitrate or nitrite levels in explaining summer phytoplankton productivity in the coastal systems of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. A multiple regression model was constructed to determine which combinations of environmental or nutrient variables could explain the most variation of phytoplankton productivity in these coastal systems. A multiple linear regression model was designed with phytoplankton primary productivity as the dependent variable and temperature, salinity, turbidity, surface light intensity, soluble nitrate, soluble nitrite, and soluble reactive phosphate as possible independent variables. Soluble reactive phosphate and salinity were the only variables which met the model constraints (12) and together they explained 64% of the variation in phytoplankton productivity in these coastal systems. Results of both the carbon uptake and phosphate uptake nutrient enrichment bioassays also indicated that soluble reactive phosphate was more important than soluble nitrate in limiting phytoplankton productivity during the summer months in these coastal systems. (Table 2). Phosphate additions stimulated phytoplankton carbon fixation more frequently than nitrate additions .When phosphate additions stimulated carbon uptake, phytoplankton phosphate uptake was also stimulated (13). The nearshore Northeastern Gulf of Mexico environments investigated in this study receive runoff which does not contain high dissolved phosphate concentrations, in contrast to New England



PAGE 1

219. respiratory activity are illustrated in Table I. Adding glucose or aged tanninrich water increases immediate activity (elasticity) with little long-term effect (inertia) or effect on the recovery (resiliency). Increase of salinity decreases activity again without effect on inertia or resiliency. Antibiotic treatment however affects all three parameters. Similar changes in activity can be shown in the ATP to ADP ratio and the amount and synthesis of the microbial endogenous storage material poly-a-hydroxy butyric acid by decreasing the pH and by increasing the salinity. F. Studies on the amphipod behavior and feeding efficiency. Preliminary studies show that Gammaridean amphipods have a remarkable ability to select leaves with a high microbial population. They prefer the more heavily colonized ventral surface of the oak leaves to the plain dorsal surface. They trim the stellate hairs of the leaves but do not consume intact leaves. When hungry amphipods have been in contact with the detritus, the scanning electron microscopy looks like a lawn mower has run over the surface. This has been confirmed by showing a 10-fold higher incorporation of 14C in the amphipods allowed to graze on the leaves than in those exposed to water in con-tact with the labeled detrital microbial population (Table IV). Scanning electron microscopy of the amphipod fecal pellets shows the same catholic collection of microbial forms as found on the leaf surface, suggesting they "skim" a proportion of the flora. Comparison with different detrital microfloral populations should help to understand nutritional characteristics of these most important primary detritivores.



PAGE 1

Fig. 29: Surface nitrate values (pg/a) at Station 5 (East Bay) from October, 1972 to September, 1975. .f. --+-----------------------------------------------------------------I I I II I I II I I I I I I ?222 .4 242.40 I I I I rr 1q7.80 + 197.80 I I 173.20 + I .4 173.20 ---------------....--....--.-------..... I i I I I JI T 121.00 i 1 / 174.90 I I .O I / I i i I I I I I A I I 4 4 + I I I 7"* *0 T I 34 .q 4 I ---------------1 .i I T T F) II I*-------*----*-*-+ --+ ----+ ----+ ----+ ----+ ----s ----s --.I I I IC I T I I I I I T -------+----4F---------------------------------------3/72 8/72 9/72 i2/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/7E 1 .7. 0 01 9 21L j.4O h0 4 1.3-00f00 5j3.200n. 0 74. 10000 897.0 00001048.O 90OUR200. d3UUqIo 9ul .1 U1fOlOU4.b9OO1.5P nu0c I If :.3 TVFf"C , i-" i. EM' 77/03123. PA3E 19 ;C;LA TitL (Tt-. 15014 R ýCUARL -.02254 FISN·IF1i6AMCL P -.l6 TC Or O~ 1-S -7d.of6238 INTEkCFPT (A) -136.90121 STO EFROP OF A -39.1,1377 [Ct-iFrA:'n A -.000(,8 ¶LOFC (o) -.0?97., STI, iRDO)P rF B -.0341t LrI'LJ ,yLUES -33 CACLUPLI) VALUESU MISSItl; VALUi. -11 ,'"' ' 1 F~I -RTITFr) IF A 0)FtFFICIFFIT CANNOT PL CO'tIlUED.



PAGE 1

*NVERT SUMIARY N NHOL daAV 3R~ YbtA Table 8, continued UATcS 74u31-750228 STAIIONS 001 G.2 .L3 GC4 aJ5 ODb6 LA 18 GC u5A TIMES OF JAY 0 SPECIES SAPPLE )ATEý 740315 74.415 74'515 74u615 74r715 7*u815 743915 T7L313 7.1115 714Lc 75L1L5 752215 TOTALS PENAEU3 >ETIFERUS 17 -3 13 129 33.5 293 4143 97 1e 7 6 4549 lc.14 *.a 4*.<3 45.44 55.2. 9 5.7 7 73.1 73*.11 5ý.64 3.a5 2.33 5 .47 72.ca PALAEMON£TES PUGIO 6 21 0 C c 3u 9 J .L. 1L57 1.b 493 4.29 30.43 ,..j *.L. 9.*5 .. *.i7 5... 3.. 55.92 52.16 59.22 7.73 CALLINECTES bAPIDUS 1C1 33 6 4 14 58 23 L. bj 2r 9. 33 t 72.i4 476.3 11.27 14.29 6.33 ..59 5.79 2.5> 12.o5 .1/; 23.9. 1.4t 7.21 PENAiUS iJORAkLU 2 2 C 1 19 54 28 37 56 7r 5 230 1.43 2.9u u.ob 3.57 .oi 1.75 7.C5 .o61 11..4 bo.7c 1.66 .79 3.7. LOLLIGUNCULA BREVIS 56 6 1 14 d1 ** 12 2 1 196 u.I6 ua.J 81.69 2A..43 18.55 .38 4.+3 7.85 2.41 .7: J..jj .56 3.i7 PENAEUS AZTECU C a 0 2 77 116 16 1 121 b*uI LLnu .Jdj 7.14 L..O c.1u 4.>ja .93 3.21 1.13 .33 .56 1.3j PALAEMONETES VJLGARIS 3 0 0 5 3 43 37 18 3 112 2.14 .oG3 U L.j 3.-O u.UL .14 j.oO .,* 3.63 14.o2 5.98 1.68 1.76 ChLLINECTE. SIMILIS L 3 1 2 4 4 2 3 7 2 .4 1 33 0.C 4.35 1.41 7.14 1.81 1 *.1 .S5 .54 1.41 O.3 L.33 .56 .52 NERITINA RECLIVATA. L 3 U u U J j 7 11 3J 0*.3 4.35 s.Ca 0.0. 4*uJ l.0u j.bU 3.jJ 2.i3 3.55 2.33 i.15 a,7 RHITHROPANOPEUS HARRISII L .J • 1 u 1 1 2 9 U 14 .OO. O.Cu 3.uJ 0.u .**5 u.jd .25 .18 }a.J .73 2.99 ].0u .22 PAGURUS P3LLICARIS 1 1 u U 6 J 3 u 11 0.CC 1.45 1.41 OD*j C0*oG Olb J.uu J.jj .63 J.GCJ u.di. J. .17w ACETES AMEIICANU4 C .& d 6 8 2 4 O 1 0000 ..L. a* U 1.. Us. J3.Ju ) .L; .43 L*.< J .oj 4 0. J.oa ..16 PORIUNUS GIaBESII 3 u0 L 0 U Lu u 3 IJ 3 S 2.14 w aC * Ofou au 0u t U. 46 0 u .36 au U.a 6 ..ui 1.66 * .3L6al TRACGYPE~AEUS CONSTRICrUS L ; j u u u 5 J J 2 .3 a 6.u*L Gb ..3 uk3 u.u. 3.sO 1.2o u3 0 .us 0 a.j L.ou 1.68 .13 METAPORHAPHIS CALCARATA 4 3 U 1 3 .1 0 1 7 2.86 L .C La. Ja.6 L.U.t .j3 .JU a.3.2] J.u .04 1.v0l .56 OI. SQUILLA E£PUSA 1 0 2 43 1 1 1 5 0.3.i 1.45 au J4.3 uL.00 *.5 j*L J. aJ *s3 .4. 4.0j .56 s6 TRACHYPENAEUS SiMILIS 4 3 4 3 0 1 3 .1 u 5 2.86 J.uj L.* 0.iu .uu J. u *25 )o. J 'uja .j* js Jei. 39. u a* B NEOPANOPE IEXANA 4 C 0 U 3 3 a 0 a 0.ub 5.bu ..u. :.u' i3.dC ».*u J3.b .3 ).CJ .0i J.i3 ..u6 *6 PERSEPHONA HMEITERUANEA i j 2 u i u .L *J ac.0 L-4i 6* .,5 3.u0 jý* ..j j. j. Joad 033 HYSID SP. c 3 0 2 2 L*Ou .LJ. ..uJ -.Ju ublk Ju .b JduJ iouu k.. .66 ibs .*a EULYPANOPEUS DEPRESSUS d U 1 LOtUC LOZJ co-, js c iju j j aj *J i. a., 04 HEXAPANOPEUS ANGUSTIFRONS U u 3 , J 1 .0 .Z PALAEMON FLORIDANUS ..1 ** * > L* *C * ·*. 3 t-. a. I 4 3J j a ' .j2 PERICLIMENES LJN3I.AUDATUS 1 1 L.EC Oji V' .uL fedt ur *a e6 .J a«* ju e « 2 PODOGHELA RIISEI 1 i C.*TOZU , A. C .t it .3 j .a R a.E .u Je * d 2 TOZEUMA CAROLINENSE 0 ; i De09 &rtJ Json uedu bast yuiJ Je9 a .a



PAGE 1

Table 2 245. 1. Summary of organisms associated wi-u oak leaves at station 3 (East Bay) from 15 July, 1975 to 15 November, 1975 SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 750715 750815 751015 751115 TOTALS CALSAP 26.55 9.48 0.00 1.90 31.92 82.35 41.28 0.00 35.94 6e,27 NERREC 5.16 11.51 .11 1.33 18.10 16.01 50.09 26.54 25.12 29,73 RHIHAR 0.00 1.84 .31 1.84 3.99 0.00 8.01 72.19 34.89 6.55 PALPUG .47960 .04360 0.00000 .04360 .5bb80 1.49 .19 0.00 .83 .93 GAMMAC .03861 .06110 .00325 .03549 .1J345 .12 .27 .76 .67 .23 PALVUL 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .09720 .09720 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.84 .16 GAMNSP .00108 .00486 .00108 .0166 .0268 .00 .02 .25 .30 .04 MELINT .00132 .01684 .00012 .00380 .02208 .00 .07 .03 .07 .04 MUNREY .00129 .00804 0.00000 .00807 .01740 .00 .04 0.00 .15 .03 CASOVA .00330 .00363 0.00000 .00308 .01001 .01 .02 0.00 .06 .02 GRABON .00306 .00066 .00072 .00306 .00750 .01 .00 .17 .06 .01 DICSPE .00003 .00150 .00021 .00108 .00482 .00 .01 .05 .02 .00 CYAPOL 0,00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00234 .00234 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .00 CORSPE .00056 .00014 0.00000 0.00000 .00070 .00 .00 0.00 0.00 .00 CORLOU .0002 .00018 0.00000 .00010 .00030 .00 .00 0.00 .00 .00 TAPBOW 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00019 .00019 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .00 AMPGUN 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00014 .00014 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .00 TURSPE .00002 .00012 0.00000 0.00000 .00014 .00 .00 0.00 0.00 .00 GITSPE 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00007 .00007 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .00 CERSPE 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00006 .00006 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .00 TOTALS 32.2 23.0 .4 5.3 o0.9 AIYY076. 13.43.22. 77/02/23.



PAGE 1

Figure 23, continued SCATTERS T17P TEN FISH qIOMASS WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE S FTLE 'ONA.E (CRcATION DATE = 77/03/23.) SCATTE.GAHM OF (COWN) MICUND (ACROSS) DAYS i~4.47503 294.42500 464.37505 644.32500 824.275001004.225001184.175001364.125001544.075001724.0250o ,+--,--_---s--»----------*----+------* --*--*+--*---* * -»-----* 159..19 + T + 1594.19 I I I I T I i 134.77 + 1434.77 I I T I I I I I 1275.35 + I I 1275.35 I I I r I I I 111.93 I I 1115.93 I I I O -------------------------------------------------------I 7)7.9| 797.09 95b.51 * I I T 956.51 I I I 637.6 I I 637.+8 ..... ........... ..............-.. -------------------------------.. -----478.2 I I 78. I T I SI I SI I 6376 I 6357.84 T I T --+---------------------I I 4 47I.76 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 I S'IATTES T"' TEN FISP 1"ZSz? '"LE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 6 "-LT"%; '"-.t945C R QARED -.10970 SIGNIFICAwCE R -.22791 lTz' -iz OF rST -339.Sfa, .TNT£QýEPT (A) -300.48733 STD E3PfP OF A -7.6o2159 SI,'TSNT IL\ ! -.900'6 ?LOPE (5) --.C6269 STI ERROP OF P -.08316 ' "'-VALUESI .',ISSTG ViLUFS -



PAGE 1

.*,,. -Fig. 10: Totaitnumbers of epibenthic invertebrates taken monthlyrthe-palachicola Estuary (Stations I,..:.. .B. C, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A, 6) From March, 1972 to March, 1977. S~ ~ ~.. -MCO5S) DAYS ;1.. : 7 &4. Z5 0 -64 .375L' 6 Z.325 3, 324.275'; i, 4 Z.'* 5L i3 4. 175v I o4 .i25. 12 544, ý 7Tia 7< .ji 5uu ----------------+----------------4----+------.----_----------. 6i+ 36593.i. * I I I t --+ -25b3.7, ----------------------,-----.. ........ .........-----------------------------------, , I, _1 I I £. 2.L. i i i ------------------------------------------------------------------------------N CPT ( -99ST OF A -C. 141178 I 75+.2 w NwI -TiRS N,3O AS NS HOLE SAY 77IJ3/ 7. PA E 4 .* * . 3:-N: 1 -.. 77 SLOPE i) -.3735 Si OF 6 -.17113 -i-I ~'~E X 'I'; -.4 S1191 //A.



PAGE 1

197. .Table 4 (continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction .Per Sample .Per 1000 L ,Organics 1/77 7 T # 10 .0009 .0010 56 18 .0004 .0006 75 35 .0043 .0048 56 60 .0069 .0084 61 120 .0439 .0170 19 170 .1683 .0220 07 325 5115 .0678 07 Total .1216 7 B # 10 .0057 .0092 81 18 .0040 .0066 83 35 .0116 .0144 62 60 .0308 .0300 49 120 1777 .0366 10 170 3995 .0300 04 325 7367 .0700 05 Total .1968 8 M # 10 .0007 .0012 86 18 .0009 .0014 78 30 .0031 .0048 77 60 .0048 .0058 60 120 .0663 .0206 15 170 .1219 .0202 08 325 .5987 .0704 06 Total .1744 2/77 7 T # 10 .0010 .0016 80 18 .0003 -30 .0017 .0016 47 60 .0026 .0012 23 120 .0085 .0050 29 170 .0198 .0068 17 325 .2384 .0466 10 Total .0628 7 B # 10 .0009 .0010 56 18 .0007 .0010 71 30 .0016 .0020 63 60 .0049 .0068 69 120 .0307 .0198 32 170 .0754 .0148 10 325 .6471 .0956 07 Total .1410 8M # 10 --18 .0004 .0006 75 30 .0011 .0018 81 60 .0019 .0026 68 120 .0068 .0042 31 170 .0171 .0058 17 325 .1996 .0266 07 Total .0416



PAGE 1

iao e , cot llue FISH SUIHACY 9IO~ASS FIlE YEARF DATES 720301-770221 STAT'O"'I 001 032 U00 104 00 006 01A l fl n0C 05A TIMES 3F OAr D SPECIEF QAMPLE DAltS 720315 720415 720515 720615 720715 720815 720915 721015 721115 721219 730115 730215 DASYATIS SASINA 219.99 134.95 378.39 976.39 2212.58 0.00 399.54 1581.23 781.58 634.51 0.00 ?41.89 50.34 43.51 26.20 52.47 56.2? 0.00 2. t4 41.79 10.05 31.89 0.00 5.13 ANCHnA MITCHILLI 59.79 27.03 60.00 71.32 245.60 18.99 69.00 974.09 4224.68 72.61 21.06 17.92 13.69 6.71 4.15 3.83 6.24 1.18 3.56 25.74 54.33 3.65 10.13 .38 LEPISCSTEUS OSSEUS 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 .0.00 n 0.00 0.00 92.29 237.38 493.95 0.00 4262.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 3. 00 0.00 0.00 2.44 3.0 24.82 0.00 89.26 ARIUS FELIS 1.12 0.00 7.82 269.03 366.96 704.11 4P1.82 282.66 679.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 .26 0.00 .o4 15.53 3.32 43.69 24.89 7.47 8.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 MICROPOGON UNOLLATUS 47.54 186.30 476.06 158.15 582.95 .49 824.98 51.02 18.51 15.57 7.37 113.57 10.o8 46.26 32.97 8.50 14.81 .03 42.61 1.35 .24 .78 3.24 2.38 BAIROTELLA CHRYSURA 8.56 0.00 44.02 36./9 2.04 1.29 0.00 196.20 1101.50 176.85 10.80 17.61 1.96 ..00 3.05 1.98 .05 .08 0.00 5.18 14.17 8.89 4.75 .37 LEIOSTOMUS AANTHURUS 25.87 0.00 242.67 182.07 243.77 53.42 12.63 18.28 68.16 22.40 t 16.49 5.33 5.92 0.00 16.80 9.78 6.19 3.31 .65 .48 .38 1.13 7.25 .11 RHINOPTERA 90NASlIS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 610.54 0.000 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PARALTCHTHYS LETHOSTIGMA 0.00 0.00 35.63 14.29 162.68 192.42 76.23 64.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.47 .17 4.13 11,94 3.94 1.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 0.00 .64 147.61 15.21 64.76 9.18 11.04 46.03 229.31 16.26 ?.32 0.00 0.00 .16 10.22 .82 1.65 .57 .57 1.2? 2.95 .82 1.02 0.00 DOROSOMA CEPEDIANUM 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.UO ..00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 406.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.41 0.00 0.00 CYNOSCION NFBULOSUS 0.00 .13 U.00 2.52 0.00 .53 .04 108.17 75.36 79.96 44.23 0.00 0.UO .03 0.00 .14 0.00 .03 .00 2.86 .37 4.02 19.44 n.00 FTPOPUS CRUSSOTUS 2.42 .89 7.36 5.00 4.55 4.11 11. b4 70.44 74.17 7.60 11.20 3.96 .55 .22 .51 .27 .12 .26 .60 1.86 .95 .38 4.92 .08 TRINECTES MACULATUS 39.75 13.86 30.02 8.14 11.09 1.37 7.13 31.07 6.19 0.00 0.00 21.46 9.10 3.44 2.08 .44 .28 .09 .37 .82 .08 0.00 0.00 .45 MENTICIRRHUS APEPICANUS 0.00 0.Un 1.40 2.94 18.27 6.83 1.75 25.71 75.78 9.33 0.00 12.52 0.00 0.00 .10 .16 .46 .42 .09 .68 .97 .47 0.00 .26 LAGODON PHOMBOIDES 0.Od 2.91 1.48 2.83 11.76 0.00 0.00 51.28 25.09 5.98 16.96 2.43 0.00 .72 .10 .15 .30 0.00 0.00 1.36 .32 .30 7.45 .05 SYMPHURUS PLAGIUSA .13 1.63 2.26 4.08 .90 .55 2.88 54.21 13.44 5.53 3.35 7.44 .03 .40 .16 .2 .02 .03 .15 1.43 .17 .28 1.47 .16 SYNODUS FOETENS U.00 0.00 .87 1.55 1.31 .10 4.69 24.76 50.80 9.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .08 .03 .01 .24 .65 .65 .49 0.00 0.00 MENIDIA BERYLLINA 13.84 0.00 .69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.47 .69 0.00 22.94 36.60 3.17 0.00 .05 0.00 .0.00 0.00 000 .09 .11 0.00 10.08 .77 CHLOROSCOMdRUS CHRYSURUS .15 0.00 1.75 0.09 .34 3.42 17.56 46.07 4.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .12 0.00 .01 .21 .91 1,22 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHILOMYCTERUS SCPOEPFI 0.00 U.UO 0.00 59.13 0.00 0.UO 0.00 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PIONCTUS T.IBULUS U.00 9.00 0.1U .43 1.11 .19 2.73 18.99 30.31 1.10 .23 2.81 0.00 0.0UU 0.01 .02 .03 .01 .14 .50 .40 .0 .10 .06 APCHOSARG'S oRORATOCE HALUS 12.74 11.00 0.u0 .38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.24 0.00 0.00 15.25 2.?2 0.00 0.00 .0? 0.00 0.00 0.n0 0.00 .31 0.00 0.00 .32 EUCINGSTOMUS GULA 0.00 0.00 0.00 l0.0 0.00 O.OU 3.77 1.4R 1.34 24.87 O. n ?.19 U.O0 o0. .J00 0.30 0.0U 0.00 .19 .04 .02 1.25 0.00 .05 ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS 0.00 0.00 U.O0 0.00 .0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .no 0.00 23.71 0.00 0.o0 u.oo o.uO * 0.40 0.00 0.00 0. on 0.o 0.00 0.00o 10.42 0.00 9 .1 .



PAGE 1

128. ABSTRACT Glycolic acid was accumulated by in vitro preparations of gill tissue from the quahog clam, Mercenaria sp., by a process exhibiting diffusion kinetics. Carbon-14 from labelled glycolic acid was found in the lipid fraction of the gill tissue. Evolution of labelled carbon dioxide suggested the glycolic acid was metabolized in gill tissue.



PAGE 1

97. Riley, J.P. and R. Chester (1971) Introduction to marine chemistry. Academic Press, 465 pp. Rochford, D.J. (1951) Studies in Australian estuarine hydology. I. Introduction and comparative features. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res., 2, 1-116. Ryther, J.H. and W.M. Dunstan (1971) Nitrogen, phosphorus, and eutrophication in coastal marine environments. Sci., 171, 1008-1013. Schelske, C.L., E.D. Rothman, E.F. Stoermer, and M.A. Santiago (1974) Response of phosphorus limited Lake Michigan phytoplankton to factorial enrichments with nitrogen and phosphorus. Limnol. Oceanogr., 19, 409414. Strathmann, R.R. (1967) Estimating the organic carbon content of phytoplankton from cell volume or plasma volume. Limnol. Oceanogr., 12, 411-418. Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons (1972) A practical handbook of seawater analysis. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 310 pp. Taft, J.L., W.R. Taylor, and J.J. McCarthy (1975) Uptake and release of phosphorus by phytoplankton in the Chesapeake Bay Estuary, USA. Mar. Biol., 33, 21-32. Thayer, G.W. (1971) Phytoplankton production and the distribution of nutrients in a shallow unstratified estuarine system near Beauford, N.C. Ches. Sci., 12, 240-253.



PAGE 1

Fig. 6: Surface salinity 0/oo at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. -, L'L'" _'Z-:T'I;L.7 / 77/.3/1L. FP E 31 !.0' AT = 77/1'/11,) ; T..----' c i.-.(AC OSS) DAYS ." ;3.75 F 7.1Z5. 572.575;, 832. 125 3 11.75' .9119925C1370. 375 1549. 82531729.275.0 *-----------*--*-------------*-----***--------------------------------2 **+---* 2 .. t T I Z.I + 2.,*------------------------*-----------------------------------------------*-----------------T i I .. ; I I I -.4I I SI I I -----------------2 6 K fI I I II fl NI I ' I I f Ii\ T L -1FC --1 i 1LAN 6 COPUE I IS1. 1. \ ! ! i CI C i **" I 1 ., S 6 **.. .4 " .... -I" _._1" ..1 -.SI"NIFICANC R -.i56" S*----+----4----4.----4---4----4--3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 5/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 ' --.C9-9 R SQUARED -.03574 SIGNIFICANCE R -.'5651 STj ,;, .ST -5. 37F3 IMITC'PT (A) -6.,.6213 STO ERROR OF A -1.33972 S.::.;4. -.'C:I SLOPE (P) --.'.)196 510 EOo OF B -.CG1f • FLI'Tt" (t`l" -F>CLUUEC VALUtSMISSIMS VALUES -3t ...,,r, IS PI"T:) IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT RF CO-'PUTEO.



PAGE 1

-_-.s.·-,-iE, Table-1.1J jJQ l biomass (dry weight) of epibenthic invertebrates taken mpnt-hly i the Apalachicola -zILE ..,EN -CEATCO AT = : /u0r'7.~)Stations 1, 1A, IB, 1C, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A, 6) From March, 1972 to March, 1977. CArTfr;t.,-: OF' .-C0cN) BIJMHAS (ACROSS) DAYS fI '.475. j 284.425: .6J 64.375kui 6.4.325uu 824. 275 i0 i4. 225ullid 4. 175Uw13b4. I Z5 .<+144. U750 L17Z4. j i(Zu u .+----+--------------------+----*---------+-------+------------------------*--+21 6.5 + I + 2106.6 I I I I SI i I 1i93.3a + 4. 1 I t8 a9.32 i II i I £ 1 I i \ 1 .I I I I I 1592.; + I I + 169-.u4 I I i I I I I I I 4. I I A l+a+.76 + I I .+ 14&.76 I 1 I -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I i I 1'4 .; + + i77T.29 5 3 1 i1 --64b7 I + H07R.2O I i I II I I -~-54. I .I + 4 55.65 lI b IL +I 2I V'i II i.. :: ~f 1 N+ .3J.Sc ---------------------.--------------4. J---·---»----,*--------+ **«-+---<-.-----------------. 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 " 4.4, ,' 5 b.5: . :'*£z~i-.~ '.S »il . 77/,.3/ ,,. PrFt ; b i.)-.29 R UAR3 -.;b -.75 :.. .. *; iT -536.5696 iN;TG.CFT (A) -531.35.57 5TO -iiR OF A -93.31483 i.-0.. '; ., -.-..1 SLOr^ (i; --.16-b7 T3 iRROR OF b -.-9.4



PAGE 1

33. Table 1 (continued) STATION DATE METHOD 1 METHOD 2 % ORGANICS 1/75 3.55 3.87 2/76 3.60 2.81 5.80 4 3/75 3.45 6.21 4/75 3.85 5.86 5/75 3.45 5.41 6/75 4.15 9.48 7/75 4.05 9.10 8/75 3.95 8.23 9/75 4.00 9.00 10/75 4.05 9.75 11/75 4.00 11.23 12/75 4.00 8.36 1/76 4.20 7.06 2/76 4.00 6.02 4A 3/75 4.15 6.10 4/75 4.00 6.25 5/75 3.90 1.89 6.52 6/75 4.00 7.75 7/75 3.85 2.18 8.30 8/75 3.45 9.39 9/75 4.10 11.09 10/75 4.05 9.10 11/75 4.05 12.05 12/75 4.05 10.55



PAGE 1

Table 7 :Ratios of DDE:DDT found in Ranqia cuneInt at the head of the Apalachicola estuary from fiarch, 1972 to Ifovelbecr, 1974. Date DDE:DDT March, 1972 1.00 April -1.60 May 0.24 June 0.85 July 0.47 September 0.36 October 0.36 November 0.40 December 0.48 January, 1973 0.36 March 1.18 May 1.38 August 14.00 September .0.63 October 1.20 November 7.00 December 3.00 January, 1974 3.00 February 1.00 March 2.17 May 1.00 June 35.25 Novciiber 6.40



PAGE 1

Table 5. Stomach contents (% of total dry weight) of Leiostomus xanthurus, summed by size classes. Food Item Size (mm) 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100-109 Avg. 20-109 Sand grains 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 2.1 1.6 0.3 0.7 Sediment masses 0.1 <.1 <.1 Detritus 19.7 21.4 14.5 12.5 11.8 27.2 33.4 33.0 14.4 22.5 Plant remains <.1 <.1 Rhychocoels <.1 <.1 Nematodes 8.8 12.6 9.6 8.3 7.1 8.2 7.2 4.3 3.0 7.8 Polychaetes 37.2 12.4 12.3 12.4 15.6 23.2 22.6 17.4 18.1 Gastropods 0.3 0.4 <.1 Bivalve siphons 0.7 0.1 <.1 Bivalves 5.8 12.5 11.5 2.4 8.8 8.7 21.3 69.9 12.1 Cladocerans 0.2 <.1 <.1 <.1 Ostracodis <.1 <.1 Calanoid Copepods 5.2 5.6 1.1 3.6 5.1 3.8 7.0 3.8 Harpacticoid copepods 8.3 20.4 11.9 15.5 25.2 22.8 15.1 19.9 6.9 18.3 Cumaceans 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.4 1.4 0.4 Isopods 0.2 0.1 0.3 <.1 <.1 Amphipods 0.8 3.6 2.2 0.5 1.2 0.1 <.1 4.6 1.0 Mysids 3.2 1.4 5.4 1.3 3.0 2.1 2.2 0.8 2.6 Shrimp zoea <.1 <.1 Crabs -zoeal <.1 <.1 <.1 -megalopal <.1 <.1 Insects -larval 19.3 12.9 32.8 28.8 28.3 2.0 0.6 0.2 12.4 -adult 0.1 <.1 <.1 Invertebrate eggs <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Fish eggs <.1 <.1 <.1



PAGE 1

LTS ~5F CLU~r~ei AAI4QLYJSE O. FoR 5fecieS 5OF FISH FROf .4IL4C0HICCLA AY8 4 v ,2e cqASS. A lcatA7ow iu(Abjiirs IC40SI005 Xo7WUZu3 CYAOSCO QRlrU *,i--:·AIQZLWnJI15L _1i F.to. CLUSTMW6 SA4ftYz FLA&O .c 4·T=-l) cIasttswx Qxvm£,I 'Y Cv ; e Ak. 5Mr4TAg 4Ab b4lltl I/MWDeb A7Lrn-6 S * S'br!S Avotw-D) 'sTaVoJ Ai AL SZG17oA15 -'IycS /M'c ttGiom eO .77 I ' .; ..:. -! I----.. .r .I I ·i -i·:! --------------T _ .-I .-, " .;_ .I -1 .1 .I .I : I 1 .&_ I f Va.h 1 # o -p4S -G-.0 0 S l I (i L AI Ii F I IF : .. .stI I I r/wji::~: Li. i:* .1



PAGE 1

112. 5. Surface water was collected and placed in 500 ml glass incuba~ tion bottles after which Na2PO4 was added to obtairn concerntre, tions of 0.00, 0.25, 0.50, or 2.00 ig-atm P04-P 1-1. Half the samples were poisoned with 1 ml of 2% HgC12 solution. One ml of between 500,000 and 1,000,000 dpm/ml of carrier free 32P phosphoric acid was added to the bottles acnd the samples were incubated in situ. Fifteen ml subsamples welre periodically removed from all bottles and filtered through Whatman GF/A glass fiber filters. Ten mls of filtrate wece pipeted into LSC vials and the 32P activity was determined by Cherenkov radiation measuremnts with a liquid spectrometecr (E. J. C. Curtis and I. P. Toms, In: Liquid Scintillation Counting, Heyden & Sons, (1972); F. Fric and V. Palovickova, Int. J. App. Rad. Iso. 26, 305 (1975)). Plankton phosph ite uptake rates;were estimated from linear regression slopes of total phosphate uptake minus HgC12 poisoned uptake vs time for R2 greater than 0.80. 6. Water temperature and salinity were determined with a Beckman RS 5-3 portable salinometer. Turbidities were analyzed with a Hach model 2100 A Turbidometer. ZCO2 was measured with an Oceanographic International Corperation Total Carbon Analyzer model 0524. 7. Water samples were collected and immediately filtered through prewashed Whatman GF/A glass fiber filters and thea placed in 500 ml nalgene bottles. One ml of 2% HgCl2 solution was added to the sample after which it was placed on ice. All nutrients



PAGE 1

299. Fig. 6: Changes in Margalef Richness (Mar), number of species (S), Shannon diversity (H'), and the number of individuals of fishes taken monthly from the combined stations (35 trawl tows) in the Apalachicola Estuary from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Dashed lines represent 6-month mean values of these indices and relative dominance of the top species.



PAGE 1

< 09 ESI -7.9132F3 2.77 R29 CTD cR)DF A -2.ul90 SIj: .l.M. 2. -*C 9;3 SLOPE (') -*... 2.7 .T2 ii;3< OF 5 -.,,194 -cI'm V£LUEx -OEXCLU.E) V7LUESr'Il3iv; JALJ:S -



PAGE 1

181. c t. .t**4 I| t, ii i.i .I I it I.. I r I Ii -T. ". / -. ,I "l-| 7 ; < 'I " I. C TAfA fI'| KI c ' *t r. ' > i; t * l .* .* ':.) f -.. '1 I l* ) .l , t r" i;|, T ,*.f , rfr 4*i ') cr'Ct . ;*'Il .' ",r,'.i)l t .Iý,I 1/r I-' 7,On I hno001 T7'09'O 7M1001 71119 741tPI 7T7Ir 'r-:i /7-.,i fi ..<"e Ii.? I4A. .3 i» .1A. 3I.4A 65.0 2`1.49 223.01 495.40 2?2.60 50?.?p 37 ,qI .'*) I',1 *i. 1* <*., • 3.J. l 31.7. 16J6,3 33.94 W.4.3 1. 4 .f1.65 46.,?T ar', SRo.. ..; 7..'i Iz.4) 3,.3,.o0 .19 4.76f 0.71 10.50 03.74 243.05 14. H Im.e 17 3* '# **I& .94 .q99 7p.q9 1,33 .73 15.in 22.194 F**"'.r .4 .-,S I4.)j I... 11 1-3. 214.41 3.?.1 6.29 6.66A 210.04 47.9 57."50 44.44 SQ. .1.7 1.71 i. 9... 5 I ?/.1 31.%1 37P:64 27.93 31.97 $3. 4 10.50 4 *.1 Lert ': no. l o.7x 9. .e11 .n>7 ,01 .0I. 1.49 4.61 S*6.3 25 7.64 1 .lo .1 .Al , I .; .04 .n0 .S0 .10 .23 .32 M.12 19.4 r', l 2+.?+ **.',. 3.11 >o.fn C.30 1.1 1 10 76.04 326.J»2 41,11 26.?? 3 .1 11.1 .'51 b.iS '.a0 1.12 .10 .15 19.8 P2.63 7.51 2.44 lCu'lJW .P' '.* l.J l.' .') ri6.t4 5.92 15.S4 9.43 5.12 I.IAl 9.49 .1'l 1.37 .1' .4 2t-.LP '.17 J3.72 26.0O 1.s0 .35 2pol .?9 R. 1 <*' .1 .3? .46 4e.A' lI.43 .11 .14 33.03 111.36 t.52 1.40 .? ..' .14 .I J'.3? 1. S.7 .27 5.03 7.71 .2 ' .1 " 0 vr. 0.0t 0.0G 3. J.I? o.no 0..0 0.00 0.04 0.0.0 0.00 0. 00 '.'.0 0n.ni f). l J. V1 .0. 0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 JI vt'r 17.ji .78 .I1 0.013 C.00 0.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 +.07 1.19 .l;I ?.*44 .'1 11. U.,l O.n. 0..00 0.00 0.00 B.00 .01 .11 1' -F ..in o.u' 0. U.f'i 1 .*04 t.? o. 0.00 0.00 .41 0.00 0.00 0.00 .".1 O.'i1 0.0..) It.?' lI. 11 7.17 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00) 0.40 4Tro 1..1 .1", 1.) 0.a111 0. 1.) o.qo o.o0 .a I 3.14 33.46 14.q4 23.34 1.1' .,l .'7 il.i '(.n ln .n 0.00o .27 .40 2.32 ?.11 2.17 V'a ' 1l.1 .t l ..* .1 .79 .1? .77 1.46 2.;8 l. Rk 5.40 1.-< .1 .14 ..04 j .;'. .62 1.71 .22 -.I4 .35 .50 i' .I I./' r. ). .'. i...lo .05 0.00 0.00 .09 .31 7.77 .?0 .i .* nf.i)l .17 u.'jA .5 0o.0n 0.00 .01 .02 1.42 .4A -I"t l r ) ' ) , .) O.' .'.00 O.nn00 .O 0.00o 34.24 0.00 ,000 0.0n0 M".n0 o.00 11.o n 0.o c.00o 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.97 6.00 0.00 0.00 AMrtIlon F ,A 0.0 o .f O.nn 0.0 0.00 O.no 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 ".11 .'0 '. O..I (.')' C. 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.000 OO 0.00 0.0 0.00 "I1Lt ' .., 0.Lf .41 ". 0.10 0.00 0.90 0.00 3.24 6.73 1.W4 .11 0. 5. J2 0.30 0.0.0 R.0. O 0.00 0.00 .22 1.23 .14 .s sa -.77 .'b . O.',n (.00 O.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .64 .7, .ci .,' 0..') .n o.00 o 0 00..00 0 00 0.00 .00 .06 ')I^7 O.on G.J)) 0.00 0.n. I ".3I 00.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.B0 0. '.l 0.00 .or ..in .30 0 .00uoO 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0. .00 ArTr.'I l.Il 1.J. A.,n o.n "'.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .*' 0.09) 0.,)0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inlrY It.'. .I I O.'r,) .35 0.s 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 8.04 1307 .:. , '.0 0.0o .1 0.00 0.00 0.0 00 0.00 0.0O 161 .10 S1norr n. i. 1.0. ' ,.' 0.) 0U.'I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .IA 000 , in 'I. A .')i 0.10 I .I n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0o .03 0.00 t,*., l. 0 .0. . ..0 0..n n.0n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.f') .;i0 » (.; i '." ino f4 '1.'. 0.000 0.0.00 0.00 0n..0 0 n0 ozrr 0 .n 0. 0.0 U.nn Q.00 ..1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.l00 0.00 0.00 0.; 1 0. i .'i 0(.00 n '.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0..0 0.00 ..1 .I ?.I 01.01 c t.30 0.00 0.00 o.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.ft n.81 , ...0n n. in O.n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Aer n .li * .0. ..I.nn 0.100 0.00 0.00 .31 0.00 2.16 1.45 .1. .1 0.04 .06 0«.I O.0O 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 .39 .14 V,, 3. '( 1 ).' ) .').0 n .0.10 0.00 0.00 0. 0.00 0.00 O.a0 0.00 .." n.' O.ln O.rn O. 0.00 .0 00.0 0 0.0 000 0.00



PAGE 1

2. -of orJiS associated with pine needle-iL" stgtion 3 (East Bav) from 15 July, 1975 to 15 Nove ber, 1975 SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 750715 750815 751015 751115 TOTALS CALSAP 32.23 36.03 0.00 36.03 104.29 84.83 65.33 0.00 78.44 74.45 NERREC 3.33 14.75 .23 1.66 19.97 8.76, 26.74 22.49 3.62 14.25 RHIHAR .46 2.45 .46 6.90 10.28 1.21 4.45 45.87 15.03 7*34 PALPUG ' .42 1.26 .24 .63 3*55 3.73 2.29 23.90 1.38 2.54 PENSET .52 .52 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.37 .94 0.00 0.00 *74 PALINT 0.00000 0.00000 .06900 .39100 .46000. 0.00 0.00 6.88 .85 .33 PALVUL 0. 0 .00000 0.0000 .00000 .1940 .19440 0.00 0.00 0.00 .42 *14 GAMMAC .02808 .07423 .00442 .05044 .1i717 .07 .13 .44 .11 .11 GAMNSP 0.00000 .00054 .00054 .03240 .03348 0.00 .00 .05 .07 *02 CASOVA .00572 .01958 .00055 .00671 .03256 .02 .04 *05 .01 .02 MUNREY .00063 .01926 .00018 .00918 .02925 .00 .03 .02 .02 .02 MELINT .00032 .01080 .00024 .01320 .02456 .00 .02 .02 .03 .02 GRABON .00612 .00342 .00210 .00180 .01344 .02 .01 .21 .00 .01 DICSPE .00012 .00255 .00063 .00417 .00747 .00 .00 .06 .01 .01 PERLON 0.00000 .00360 0.00000 0.00000 .00360 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .00 CYAPOL 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00234 .0U034 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .00 CORLOU .00008 .00030 .00004 .00020 .00062 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 IURSPE 0.00000 .00038 0.00000 0.00000 .00038 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 .00 CORSPE .00014 .00014 0.00000 0.00000 .00028 .00 .00 0.00 0.00 .00 GITSPE U.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .00006 .00006 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .00 TOTALS 38.0 55.1 1.0 45.9 140.1 A1YY076. 13.43.21. 77/02/23.



PAGE 1

S' --Y N 77/ .3/7. FAB, 15 Sy 77/,.3/ = 77/,3/'7.) --.. -' .) PENAZ (4COOSa) DAYS l i... 47.. 234..25. ; 464.375;i 644.325. 824. .275 .. C .4.. 2-''L .. 1751 1356. 1 5 1544. .i.. u75l17 4.j5jw, ---+------+----+----------+----+----+----------+----+----+-------------+----. 1 .. I I A 82.u ,8I I + I I I i + i I 1 I i I i i 6 l I I 1 I4 I I 4I I I I I 9 1 1 + 5 +.o + + 54*6u4 i I I SI i I I 1---.!---_-----------«_--__---__ ----------------------------------.-------------------------_ I I I I 1TD lOF EST -3I47lQ INTLRCEPT (A) -.18.44254 STO ERýOR F A -10 Z9 I I I I I I * I I I Si-NiFIOANCE A -.i373C SLOPE (2)' -. STO -RIOR OF B -iU9957 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 iL--TT-VLU -EX-------UDE--VALUES------------..0 M-...31. ..V-.ALU-.S " SI II 4.6 PU I iI SI I i I I I I 36.-3 + I + 35.4u I I AI I i\ I I I lI I I 13.2, I 1 * 1.8.2 I I 6+ ... , . 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 ; INvifr :r;,T-TS iCF TitN iHHOiE AY .77?f3/i7. PAGE 16 . STATO..TICS.. CORELATI3N (R)-.5440 R SQUAREO -.6J296 SIGNIFICANCE R -.33987 -ru ;L JF ES7 -39.4711j INThRCEPT (A) -18.4223. STD ;RORi OF A -16.iA529 SI:f-FICA?4C A -..373C SLOPE ()' --.04Sti ST0 iRROR OF 8 -..009&7 SIGNIFICAGCE 5 -«33S7 FPLOTi3 VLUHt3 -6C EXCLUDEC VALUESC MISSI'0 VALUiS -*L** .. I 7 ICItNT C -.PU



PAGE 1

240. mucronatus, Melita sp., Erichthonius brasiliensis, and Gitanopsis sp. Salinity was directly correlated with the number of species(S), number of individuals (loge N), and Margalef richness (Ma). Such indices as Shannon-Weaver diversity (H'), S, and Ma peaked during the fall; associated with this was a reduction in relative dominance (DI) at this time. Experiments with leaf litter indicated that it was used for shelter and/or as a substrate for microbial deposition although this remained open for further analysis. Organisms associated with leaf litter are part of the food webs of various estuarine systems. Therefore, although the direct (quantitative) energy relationships of such matter remain speculative, allochthonous detritus in river-dominated estuaries such as the Apalachicola System should be considered in any estimate of the total trophic structure of such systems.



PAGE 1

Station Temp Salin .Turb. Light N03 NO2 PO4 Pri. Prod. Chl-a C %, FTU 1 h .. .g atm 1..mg C m-3 hr-1 c m-3 C• mg. m hrE-12 28.4 26.2 3.15 26.5 0.32 0.01 0.04 6.00 0.61 1.01 2,48 0.35 5.60 0.14 0.03 0.01 1.25 0.17 M. L. 27.8 29.7 3.15 37.8 0.55 0.02 0.19 9.20 0.52 1.78 3.53 0.49 3.73 0.10 0.02 0.04 0.58 0.21 Ock-1 28.2 4.20 4.97 37.9 1.83 0.05 0.37 30.8 2.14 0.90 1.06 0.78 7.22. 0.37 0.01 0.07 2.57 0.41 Ock-2 28.2 10.3 4.93 37.9 2.24 0.12 0.36 26.4 3.00 0.80 0.70 0.61 7.22^ 0.83 0.05 0.09 4.74 0.51 Apal-lA. 27.5 3.74 16.5 33.9 3.08 0.15 0.34 40.3 5.13 1.19 2.58 8.96 • 9.17 2.63 0.16 0.08 10.7 1.12 Apal-7 27.5 11.7 11.7 36.9 3.55 0.21 0.40 36.7 4.11 1.34 8.26 6.88 3.50 3.69 0.16 0.09 5.81 0.84



PAGE 1

192. Table 4 (continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 3/76 7 T # 10 18 35 -60 .0019 .0009 47.4 120 .0079 .0020 25.3 170 .0110 .0036 32.7 325 .0610 .0171 28.0 Total .0236 7 B # 10 -18 -35 .0010 .0007 70 60 .0038 .0025 65.8 120 .0238 .0123 51.7 170 .0317 .0125 39.4 325 .2434 .0586 24.1 Total .0866 8 M # 10 .0025 .0015 60.0 18 -35 .0018 .0011 61.1 60 .0069 .0031 44.9 120 .0188 .0090 47.9 170 .0280 .0100 35.7 325 .2989 .0606 20.3 Total .0853 4/76 7 T # 10 .0007 18 -35 .0024 .0018 75 60 .0014 .0008 57.1 120 .0041 .0014 34.1 170 .0050 .0019 38 325 .0244 .0045 18.4 Total .0104 7 B # 10 .0003 18 -35 .0045 .0026 80 60 .0073 .0047 64.4 120 .0104 .0060 59.6 170 .0079 .0032 40.5 325 .0220 .0094 42.7 Total .0259 8 M # 10 .0003 18 .0010 .0007 70 35 .0016 .0007 43.8 60 .0037 .0031 78.4 120 .0065 .0041 63 170 .0181 .0143 79 325 .1360 .0220 :23.5 Total .0449



PAGE 1

SUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY s7P / WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Dr. Robert J. Livingston Florida State University Department of Biological Science Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: The Office of Monitoring and Technical Support (Environmental Protection Agency CEPA) Headquarters),'the EPA Region IV, and the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas (EMSL-LV) wish to thank you for your highly valuable assistance in the collection of ground truth data during the recent remote sensing Csatellite and aircraft) effort with National Aeronautics and Space Administration over the Apalachicola Bay area. Such joint efforts, that combine the actual needs of the user community with the prospective agencies, produce the encouraging environmental goals that we so gravely need. The work that yoU helped us complete will hopefully serve as a milestone in any future efforts to monitor environmentalstress in our coastal zone around the Nation. Once the final report is completed, two copies will be sent to you. We are looking forward to receiving your helicopter photographs, as well as the vital water quality ground truth, background data reports and oyster bed maps. I hope to visit with you personally duringimy next visit to the area. Thank you again for your cooperation. Sincerely yours, John Koutsandreas, Senior Advisor Advance~Monitoring Program Monitoring Technology Division Office of Monitoring and Technical Support cc: John M. Hill (RD680) Dr. Harvey Melfi (EMSKLV)



PAGE 1

..--• a , -:. --.' T. T N -, .AY N (7/u3 27.PAGE 3 :: (;, :: (CTI , AT = 77/.-3/ 7.) C-i TT.GA j0) P;T (ACROSP ) DAYS -95.-. -I t * J .. . Si I .*' ;4 3 644.325.Z I Ii I i i I I I 27I.J. + I I I 2716.u I I I I .1 I I 6.5 + I I + 236.Su I 1 I . I----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I i I I I I I I I ± I I I i I I i i I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I A ' i 1------------------------------------------------------------***-**-*-****i I7 I I1 SI I 679. Ez | I I ( 679.1 5 4.NFC I I -Si.F * -I I SI I I I I I i I 1 1 I I I 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 !' 'i ....t .I I .. I I TATI IiI, Cv";.-sR-ri3:. ({).*:9310 R SQUAREO -,0S867 SIG41FICAN«CE -.239.3 STD, ir< OF E£T -575.55048 INTERE.Fr (A) -169.57848 STO -ROR OF 4, -L'e8.51751 SIGtIFICANCE A -.i29i1 SLOPE (B) * ..id137 TO ERO0 OF 8 -1i96 .S uiIF CNCE 3 -.23963 »iS 13 PINTi'.J IF A GCO FFICIENT 1ANNOT IE OiIPUTED rr~rn~ I S Pi!NTi.J IF A L;OLFFICIENI t~ANNOT BE ~O:1PUTiD



PAGE 1

did:T SC;TTER. TCP D LN WrOLE JAY BICMASS 77/j3127. Aa 7 :LE NO.M.t (C.E.TI-ON 5AiE = 771/L3/27.) ;,T;EAJ.A4 OF t.jON) 3ALSAP (ACRObs) DAYS 1i.475;J 284.,*50J 464.3753G 644.3253a 824.27502 OC4. 225311184.l750t36*.25 4,750172 Z 9. -----------------*-----------------------------*-------------------" ---9 973.72 + I I 4 973.72 I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 i 377.95 + I I + 877.96 i i i B i I i I I I I 782.24 I 1 + 782.20 S I I t I i I I I I I I I 686.. + I 1 + 686.44 I----..--.------------.----------------------------.-------.-.---------------------L SI I\ I II -I II I I I I 59:+.&8 I I * 5.68 I I I I SI i I i I I I 494.32 * I I I I H * i39.92 I i I I i \ I I i i I I I I 1 I 399.16 I I 39.716 .*I + I I 1--.-----.-l--------*-^----*----------*---"------******* -*--***********i SI I I1 I II I I I I I52 I I I .16.12 2 I2 I TI I I I I I vi _ __ II ZjT.68 i I I I I i I I I S.2 + 1 I I .+ , .16.12 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 -; 3;L3 70F T-N WhGLE BAY aIC"ASS77/jS/27. PAGE 8 CO-,iLAI±OQ (R)-.27992 R SQJAREO -.u7836 SIGtIFICANCE i -..1515 CT3 .-.F EES -89.,75"95 INTERCtPT (A) -3i7.5'456STO 1.3, OF A -4.,73862 L:1-1;IF1,.r--.-r. C ii SLOPE t(i --.1.27, ^TO :,i<,k OF 8 -.u4.526 * PiiiTjC. --VA.LUES , ...,*. ',, -i p;;,;:-_, iF .J.O.-_.-"F ICI NT C:,';t.L.T 0-; ;OpPUT: 0.



PAGE 1

15 75L5i.5 7506i5 75015 75v8l5 75491' ?5L3Li. ?511A3 7512L5 76i1L5 764215 tOTALz SICYONIA BREVIROSTRIS i g 2 IOZEUmA CAR.LII'kJ4Si L L 8 1 6 4 1, tý L a ·7 a * J 2J NUDI3RAN;H SP* L ·* U·~ 3·: 1·? ~·U~Y ·~ LGU ·i BUSYCON ý;3WRA41Jh L 0 G 1i I L .o 4 L A. ; 0 .t. 4 VU *4 RANGIA CU4EATA I L to 4 J.,..t 049 U*W4 v6ju L I..01i 1 0 j 4 .0 6 J 4 0 j 0 U it o*Qm 1 lid PROCAfHBAP.US PENAENjALANUS I ki w o24 Ctj L o Vu L0.t j·u. v .jJ to iu uis 0 GiOa u.G i wEhIPHOLUS ELONGATA L u L o * 3 J jgQij 0S9 L20u 5... 11. 43 Lru C 4.. a ·i 0 At A n.) 2toJ 115. 1 2.t 3..1 43*ev TOTALS 265ow L15 4 U 413e4 141ou 4310a 3E664 14!700 7 f 3 2i1ei I1561 42*4 93*0 4333ig



PAGE 1

413. 20-29mm, etc.). Stomachs of up to 25 individuals (50 individuals in 10-19 class) from each size class were dissected and their pooled contents stored in 40% isopropanol. Stomach contents were then analyzed concerning percent composition by a gravimetric procedure using a series of 76mm diameter sieves (2000, 850, 425, 250, 150, and 75 V mesh) as described by Carr and Adams (1972; 1973). Large food items were separated, identified by genus and species whbn possible, and dried individually. Smaller items were separated into fractions of similar particle size with the sieves. After determining the percent composition of each fraction by subsampling, (enumerating andidassifying 100-300 particles with a dissecting microscope), each fraction, as well as the larger items, was placed in preweighed aluminum tins and dried overnight at 90-100 oC in an oven. Samples were then weighed to the nearest 0.1 mg on a microbalance. Percent composition was determined by multiplying the numerical percentage of each food type in a sieve fraction by the dry weight of that fraction, then summing the values of each food type over all fractions. Data analysis was conducted using various combinations of similarity indices and clustering strategies. For continuous data such as biomass, three similarity coefficients and two clustering strategies were used. The similarity coefficients included: 1) complement of the Bray-Curtis measure, S['' -/ 2) complement of the Canberra metric, 3) Rho n? (' \



PAGE 1

24. B. Physico-chemical parameters: Water temperatures at a representative station are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. Although temperature peaks tended to remain stable from year to year, there was a general decrease in temperature with time which was particularly pronounced during the fifth year of the study. The winter of 1976-77 was extremely cold, and this should be taken into consideration in any long-term evaluation of the biota of the bay. There was a general reduction in salinity (Figs. 4-7) with time. Seasonal variation, based to a considerable degree on river flow (Fig. 30), was a major determinant of the salinity regimes in the system. There were also decreases in salinity during summer and fall months which appeared to reflect surface runoff from local rainfall patterns. Such changes were more pronounced in East Bay than Apalachicola Bay. The general salinity pattern was thus relatively stable from year to year. Low salinities occurred during winter and spring months (associated with river flow) followed by increasing salinity during the summer. There was then a rapid decline in the late summer or fall, (coincident with increased local precipitation) and this was followed by a fall or winter salinity peak just prior to the ensuing decrease in salinity with renewed increases in river flow. The general annual patterns of salinity (Figs. 4-7), with relatively low levels during the past 3 years, may not be entirely consistent with the mean annual river flow and rainfall data (Table 2). This is especially true during the last year of sampling. This will be the subject of further study involving mass flow models. Color values for representative stations in the Apalachicola Estuary are shown in Figs. 8-11. The influence of the major river flooding during



PAGE 1

361. Fig 1: Chart showing the primary study areas in the Apalachicola Drainage System. This includes distribution of permanent stations in the impoundment above the Jim Woodruff Dam (Lake Seminole) and the Apalachicola Estuary. i^* . I-. ...* 4 ..' : .3 MY Study O -N' Area Q J ..*b *, '. , ** . :.*. *.5~ *pahd *.;z' g ..* * .a .a 3 ;*,:



PAGE 1

Figure 5: Regressions of numbers of species (S) and number of individuals (logeN) of leaf litter invertebrates with salinity for data taken at 3 stations in Apalachicola Bay. .30 25 9.0 80C 20 0 8.0 °0 , o • 0 0 0" o * * 0 ) ° * oo o -15 _o * 7.00 0 U 0" _ .* ?s " ' ý *C\ c.3 * o" 3 .o 0. ° " 10 6.0 5 5.0° 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 5A SALINITY-PPT SALINITYPPT 03 -IX



PAGE 1

275. being analyzed separately, the pentane portion for chlorinated hydrocarbons. Silica gel separations were not attempted on samples where the maximum possible DDD concentrations was less than 0.005 ppm. After the sample was extracted and divided, the Mirex portion was evaporated to dryness and eluted with 50 ml of hexane on a column of activated Florisil (12 x 100 mm). The eluate was concentrated to 0.5 ml and injected on the gas chromatograph. Statistical Methods In all computations, numbers of individuals (N), dry weight biomass (B), and number of species (S) were used. Various indices were determined from the invertebrate and fish data. These included the Margalef Index (MA) (Margalef, 1958), the Simpson Index (SI) (Simpson, 1949), and the Shannon Index (H') (Shannon and Weaver, 1963; Pielou, 1966 a, b, 1967, 1969). Relative dominance (D ) was determined by dividing the number of individuals of the single most dominant species by the total number of individuals (McNaughton, 1968; Berger and Parker, 1970). The rationale for the use of these indices has been developed elsewhere (Livingston, 1975, 1976) and will not be detailed here. The measure of affinity (Matusita, 1955; van Belle and Ahmad, 1973) was used for the cluster analysis with a locally modified version of a program furnished by Dr. D.F. Boesch. All other statistical calculations were run with programs taken from the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (S.P.S.S., 1975) and Biomedical Computer Program (B.M.D., 1973). Results Physico-chemical Functions The physico-chemical data appear in full in another portion of this report. A brief summary of these parameters is presented here. Data indicate



PAGE 1

STATE OF FLORIDA Department of Abmimthtration • Division of State Planning Reubin O'D. Askew 660 Apalachee Parkway -IBM Building CovrNue TALLAHASSEE RZ Whittle, J: 32304 Lt. Gov. J. H. "Jim* Williams SME PLANN*I DM SCARACIOR OF AOMINISTmATIO (904) 488-4925 January 12, 1977 Dr. Robert J.' Livingston Department of Biological Sciences Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Skip: I want to confirm the briefing we discussed during our teleplhone conversation of January 11. I would like you to brief the Director, Assistant Director and Bureau Chiefs of the Division of State Planning on the status of your research in the Apalachicola River basin. We will meet on Friday, January 21, at 10:00 A.M. in our third floor conference room. I also want to tell you how much I enjoyed your presentation to the Conservation Foundation in Washington, D.C. last week. Your research and your hard earned contacts in the basin should prove invaluable to our Apalachicola River and Bay Resource Management and S Planning Program. Hopefully, you will continue to work with us to protect these valuable resources and to assist the people of the basin to meet their o6n socio-economic needs. Sincerely, Eastern W. Tin Chief, Bureau of Land and Water Management EWT/SF/kb



PAGE 1

iii. of dominant fishes each year (late winter-spring: Micropogon undulatus, Leiostomus xanthurus; summer-fall: Cynoscion arenarius; late fall: Anchoa mitchilli). Three of 4 dominant fish associations were strongly affected by time pulses of river flow. Generally, fish numbers and biomass peaked in spring and fall. During the five-year study period, total numbers of fishes reached a low point during the third year of sampling (3/74-2/75). Invertebrate numbers and biomass usually peaked during spring and fall months. In this case, reduced numbers occurred during the third and fourth years of sampling (3/74-2/76). Resource (food) partitioning of the dominant juvenile fishes of the Apalachicola Estuary was studied. Anchoa mitchilli fed primarily on copepods (Acartia sp.) during spring and summer. During fall and winter periods, anchovies switched from copepods to epibenthic and benthic organsims such as mysids and insect larvae. Polychaetes formed the basis of the diet of Micropogon undulatus which peaked during winter periods. This species fed primarily on infauna, detritus, shrimp, and juvenile fishes. Leiostomus xanthurus fed on a variety of items including harpacticoid copepods, polychaetes, insect larvae, and bivalves. Cynoscion arenarius fed primarily on fishes (including Anchoa mitchilli) and mysids. A size class analysis indicated trends in intraspecific trophic relationships within a temporal and spatial context. There was efficient partitioning of food resources in the Apalachicola Estuary with each of the dominaht species participating in a different trophic spectrum. The various biotic components were linked to a seasonal succession of energy inputs which were related to river flow, detritus influxes, phytoplankton blooms, and benthic macrophyte die-offs. The seasonal river flow pattern,as a major determinant of the physic6chemical environment of the bay, contributed to the seasonal succession of trophic phenomena. These data tend to clarify various aspects of the distinct temporal succession of biota in the Apalachicola Estuary as a fuaotion of energy input and physico-chemical limiting functions. The scientific data generated from this project have been used for various planning and management decisions. This has involved associated projects with Franklin County officials, state and federal agencies, and private concerns such as pulp mill interests and local developers. Personnel of this project have continued to work with the Florida agencies toward identification of environmentally sensitive portions of the system. This has resulted in the $8 million purchase of wetlands along the Lower-Apalachicola Valley. More than 28,000 acres have been purchased to date, and Sea Grant information has also been used in purchases of thousands of acres of St. George Island and Little St. George Island. Sea Grant personnel were also involved in the generatitonof a published compendium of data on the entire Apalachicola Valley to serve as a basis for further management decisions in this area. In addition, contributions were made to local planning functions including D.R.I. ev&auations, water hyacinth control programs, public educational programs, etc. Variouseducational applications of the data base through newspaper articles and public meetings allowed a translation of key scientific concepts for publicconsumption. In addition, direct interactions have been made with various federal agencies (Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Army Corps of Engineers). This has resulted in the current evaluation by the Office of Coastal Zone Management for designation of the Apalachicola Estuary as an Estuarine Sanctuary. Eventually, through local, state, and federal interactions, a comprehensive plan for the Apalachicola Valley may be developed which can serve as a model for futbre wetlands planning in other drainage systems. A six county planning group has been established which, with advice from various state agencies, will attempt to develop a set of guidelines for local planning (Zoning ordinances, etc.).



PAGE 1

Fig. 11! Bottom water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March 1977. APALACH SC;TTEF.GA.kS 70311 PAGE 35 FILE NONAME (CREATION DATE = 77/r3/11.) SCATTESGR:'CF (C3w;) CO" (ACROSS) OAYS l11.2.2.?1 293.67530 473.1Z5C b52.57503 832. 25f1011..7510119O.925S01371.37O5'0549. 82500729.2750D .*-+-.--+ --------------+---------*----+---+----*----+----------**--**---+************ 22.C* 220.CO I I III I \ I I I i I I I I I I I -I I I I I \ I I I I I Tf \ f S1I I I 172.: + I + 132.00 I I 11? I* tI I 1 10 5 u I \ I I I I SiI I II .Z II .0I ; I I I I I I 3/7. 6,/72 9/72 '2/72 3/73 5/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 AF J:T-.S-TIE IN MONTHS: March, I to February, 1977 I T IS,. --C-RLA:.-'( R).-?7-,4 R SQUARED -.-CJC4SIGNIFICANCE R -.4457 ST -5 I PT A) -72.2 9 ST E F A -15.8756 SI'.:FI -E A -.;CE'2 SLO ( (> -.0251 STO ERROR OF -.01338 F-'T-i, >'-.-53 EC:LU'-.ED V4LUESC MISSIN3 VALUES -52 ....... I F A COFFCIENT CANNOT EE COIPjTi'O.



PAGE 1

207. regulation of glycolysis, and other vital metabolic processes. ADP can be quantitatively estimated after incubation with phosphoenolpyruvate and pyruvate kinase as the additional ATP generated. This value minus the ATP value equals the ADP level. AMP is determined by adding myokinase to a portion of the ADP reaction. The difference of this value, minus the ADP, minus the ATP level, represents the AMP level. These procedures have been utilized in our laboratory (17). 3. Dipicolonic acid. Dipicolinic acid (DPA) is an amino acid uniquely found in the spores of bacteria and some fungi, where the presence seems to be related to the resistance to heat and drying (21). A method has been developed involving the extraction of DPA from detritus or sediments, its purification chromatographically and its detection by the gas-liquid chromatography of its isopropyl ester. This can lead to studies of the environmental conditions stimulating or repressing sporulation. B. Microbial activities. 1. Enzyme activities. Methodology that can be performed in the field in time periods short enough to obviate significant distortion by microbial growth after sampling involves a study of enzyme activities. Ecological studies of specific enzyme activities usually deal with a single enzyme activity rather than considering a variety of enzyme activities simultaneously. However a battery of enzyme indicators encompassing several classes of compounds can be used to define and assess the activity of functional groups within the microbial community. The distribution and role of some specific enzymatic acitvities of fungi, yeast, and bacteria in the marine environment are already well-documented indicating various relationships between environmental substrate and/or breakdown products availability and specific enzyme activity. Such enzyme studies have been published from this laboratory (2, 3, 22, 23).



PAGE 1

Fig. 18:' Surface' dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. "-ALIC1 5C'TT 3RACr. 1 77/03/11. PAGE 7 fT-N2%'.(.rUEATON ;'r? : 77/;3/11.) S.'-'TTE=";' L _e (LC ':) 37-L (ACROSS) DAYS :11.'.: ,*. , 2 .·'I.c -^ ..-'...;..,F 52.575"'3 93J2 .00 ,''11Ci .6750' 019g .925;42 ,373.375031549.825C01729.27500 *-------*------------*-----*-------------------*-** .72*-I * I * 12.03 I I SI I 5I I I I I •1 .' * I I + 1.3 I T I I : I I I 9i 56 SI I95 * 1 -----..-----------------.-. .-.. ... ..j ...-------------------------7.7 ! I I+.73 I I SI I I SI I I -*----i----*----»-------»---»----+--*--+---.----»----*----(----+----*------.---»----»----»--I i I I I STT:SI:S.. I I I f II -.LI I * O -S.S 1 I I ~IS I I I -*---***--*----+----+----+*--+-I---+**--+**--*----e***-+---** **-**-+ C3eE LATI3" ().22549 P SQUARD -.05C85 SIGNIFICANCE R -.56823 -TJ i< OF 6ST -1.79q. INrRC T (A) -8.531i STO ERROk OF A -.52971 t Ni.ICAC" E^ A -,..CC. SLOPE (B) -.C0069 STD ERROR OF B -.00C45 S:L-I;F:C3 VA 3 -X C V ^I-C.C v ALvES -45 EXCLUPEC VALUES6 MISSIN; VALUES -60 SIC.\F C.'JC~ -*



PAGE 1

190. Table 4 :(continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 11/75 7 T # 10 .0011 .0010 45.5 18 .0006 .0006 50.0 35 .0013 .0012 46.2 60 .0043 .0050 58.1 120 .0240 .0190 35.4 170 .0703 .0282 20.0 325 .4858 .0884 9.1 Total .1434 7 B # 10 .0012 .0031 91.7 18 .0007 .0008 42.9 35 .0015 .0017 40.0 60 .0080 .0154 67.5 120 .0394 .0386 34.3 170 .0602 .0383 22.2 325 .5845 .1785 10.7 Total .2764 8.M # 10 --18-35 .0018 .0028 77.8 60 .0057 .0046 40.4 120 .0191 .0070 18.3 170 .0174 .0086 24.7 325 .0813 .0382 23.5 Total .0612 12/75 7 T # 10 .0004 .0004 50 18 --35 .0021 .0008 19 60 .0114 .0058 25.4 120 .0420 .0164 19.5 170 .1539 .0214 6.9 325 1.0426 .0590 2.8 Total .1038 7 B # 10 .0042 .0086 71.4 18 .0025 .0051 72 35 .0040 .0072 62.5 60 .0148 .0180 42.6 120 .0939 .0349 13.0 170 .2345 .0360 5.3 325 1.4084 .1044 2.6 Total .2142 8M # 10 18 35 --60 .0013 .0006 23 120 .0026 .0008 15.3 170 .0038 .0018 23.7 325 .0175 .0094 26.8 Total .0126



PAGE 1

A Figure 30: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Trinectes maculatus in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SCATTERS FISH TOP TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE 19 FILE %ONAME (CREATION CATE = 77/C3/23.) ZCATTE;GR ? CF (OOwN) TRIMAC (ACROSS) DAYS 4..75?g0 2tb4.4250C 464.3!7503 644.25'" 824.275001t.225301184.175S1±364.1250G544. 075001724. C253 .*----+----. ---..*---+----+----+----+---------------+------+---------.. ---.-------...«.** -----------. 68.c: + I I + 6.03 I I I I I I I I I I I I 620I I + 6.2 II I I i I I I SI I I i-I I I I ------------.--------.-.-, -------------.. ...-. ... ..-------------......I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ........... I I 1 I 17.6S + + I 7.3. I I -----»----*------------*-----------------------.-------------------*-----»--------------I * * I I1 I II I I 6.5 I I 6. 840. I I I I I I I I i I I I .3/72 672 9/72 12/7 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/7 3176 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 I II SC TTFI FISH TOP TEN N ISTATISTICS.. CORRELATION (R),CZ22! R SQUARED -.OO049 SIGNIFICANCE R -.43316 STO ERR OF £ST -18.90055 INTERCEPT (A) -16.48600 STO ERROR OF A -4.T7718 SI3,IFICANCS 4 -.23065 SLOPE (B) -G .076 STO ERROR OF -.00463 SIGN:FICA&CF 3 -.43316 FLCT-E0 VALUES -63 EXCLUDED VALUES0 IISSIN; VALUES -C SI PRITEO I.F A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMFUTED. 3/726/7 9/2 1/72 /736/7 9/3 1/73 /746/7 9/4 1274 /756/1 r1 977512/5 3/6 676 976 2/763/I SC~fE~~ IS~fOP ENI ******** IS PRI)NTED If A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED.



PAGE 1

B Figure 31: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Arius felis in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SC.ITE.S FISH Tu° TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE. 21 FILE NO':HME (CPEATION DATE = 77/C3/23.) SC.TTESRý OF (30uN) ARIFEL (ACROSS) DAYS 1;-.'5 :E. 2.25? 164.375r?" 644.325C0 824.275'01C04.225;01183.1750136.12503 .75172.5 .C-------------------+---------------------------------------------+----+--------------. i I I I I I I SI I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 165.20 4 I 4165.20 SI I I 3/72 I 9 I 6 /73 1 i i I I I I I 7.0 + I I + 171.6 0 I I I I I I I I I I SI I I . 94.40 I 1 I 144 I I I 7.I I I 76a I 1 I I I I I 27.20 + I I I I I + * .44** * +*+----s****+---*****+----+--4---3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12176 3/77 SCATTE') r±uiur ItN N STATISTI;S.. CO(RELATOCN (R)-.13111 R SQUARED -C 1719 SIGNIFICANCE R -.15902 ST3 ERR OF EST -16.82515 INTERCEPT (A) -25.42017 STD ERROR OF A -9.50252 SIPGi-ICAN»E A -.CC485 SLOOE (B) --.0908 STD ERROR OF B -.0C902 SIGN:F:CANCE 9 -.15 2rLCTTE.o V~;itS -65 EXCL'GFOD VALUES0 HISSING VILUES -C



PAGE 1

156. VI. Detritus: Microand Macro-particulates Introduction In his review of the importance of organic matter in the marine environment, Perkins (1974) pointed to a considerable lack of knowledge concerning the fate and importance of macroscopic organic particulate matter in estuarine and coastal systems. Such matter often has its origin in terrestrial areas; subsequent transport, deposition, decomposition, and utilization by various organisms is not well understood. Allochthonous forms of plant litter can be of importance to the energy budget of aquatic systems; this function, however, has been more fully treated in freshwater habitats than estuarine and coastal areas (Willoughby, 1974). According to Odum and de la Cruz (1963) and Darnell (1967 a and b), the term "detritus" applies to various forms of biogenic material undergoing microbial decomposition. Lenz (1972) considered detritus as particles between 1 and 300 Pm, accounting for about 90% of the particulate matter in coastal systems. Odum and Heald (1975) have reviewed the concept, emphasizing that organic detritus includes freshly dead bodies of plants and animals through the finely disintegrated particles and sorbed materials such as bacteria, fungi, protozoans and dissolved organic and inorganic compounds. They noted the annual production (tons per acre) of plant detritus which provides energy for shallow estuarine systems. The degradation (and subsequent utilization) of organic detritus can be extremely complex, depending on the specific environmental variables involved (Perkins, 1974). Generally, the breakdown of leaf litter includes rapid leaching of soluble constituents (amino acids, sugars, aliphatic acids, etc.; Nykvist, 1959, 1962, 1963; Kaushik and Hynes, 1971;



PAGE 1

*i ,~1u e.? rs.6 Cf' A'AzYys 1f~o~ $rte~ F~ ARLU~e~s oa fB 4Pm,3psr m # I· *1 '.j ;·· >'!i i i ji:fpj$ V I i4. -i a ' fX '6/ 41tJ· L ·}fI ,I'i I '~ ' I: -.~ I: -1 .': I-. :. I! 'I I I I tI IIi Ii j: !:: : II! : i' r II' Ii .i' ' ii jil i[.f iiI I I j :· I~ci:. i 3S AI: 3 f, -4 .5 I: A 4·:: f··-; :!:'::i I,. I~~~~~~~~~&r T /.o...tJ rt S.-: il ~ ··t:L T ~



PAGE 1

STAi-E OF FLORIDA S Bpariment of Ab iuniration Division of State :-lanning Reubin O'D. Askew 680 Apaltchea Farkway -IBM Building evawa# TALLAHASSEE SRG Whittle. Jr 32304 Lt. Oov. J. H. *Jim" Wlliams STATE PUING OI SOUaAR MT o AO INISTaMTON (904) 488-4925 February 1, 1977 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Department of Biological Sciences Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Skip: I want to confirm your rescheduled briefing to the Division of State Planning on the Apalachicola River basin. The new meeting is now set for Wednesday, February 2, 1977, at 9 a.m. in our third floor conference room. Sincerely, Eastern W. Tin, Chief, Bureau of Land and Water Management EWT/SF/kb . ^


PAGE 1

72. Apalachicola Bay (Appendices I and II). Water temperature is a major factor which limits phytoplankton productivity in this estuarine system (Fig. 9). Chlorophyll a can be used to estimate phytoplankton biomass (Lorenzen, 1968). A comparison of surface chlorophyll a values reveals a general -decrease in maximum values for Apalachicola Bay (Fig..10)compared to East Bay (Fig. 11). Further data analysis will be required to determine the cause of this apparent decrease. REFERENCES Colberg, M.R., T.S. Dietrich, and D.M. Windham. 1968. The social and economic values of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Final Report to Fed. Water Pollution Contorl Admin. Contract No. 14-12-117. 58 p. Dawson, C.E. 1955. A contribution to the hydrography of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Inst. Mar. Sci. 4:13-35. Estabrook, R.H. 1973. Phytoplankton ecology and hydrography of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. M.S. Thesis, Florida State University. 166 p. Gorsline, D.S. 1963. Oceanography of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. In T. Clements (ed.). Essays in Marine Geology in Honor of K.O. Emery. p. 69-96. Lorenzen, C. 1968, Carbon/chlorophyll relationships in an upwelling area. Limnol. Oceanogr. 13:202-204. McNabb, C.D. 1960. Enumeration of freshwater phytoplankton concentrated on the membrane filter. Limnol. Oceanogr. 5:57-61. Menzel, D.W. and J.H. Ryther. 1961. Nutrients limiting the production of phytoplankton in the Sargasso Sea with special reference to iron. Deep Sea Res. 7:276-281. Menzel, D.W. and R.F. Vaccaro. 1964. The measurement of dissolved organic



PAGE 1

i. Summary of Results This report respresents an integration of the results of 5 years of study concerning shortand long-term changes in habitat structure, energy relationships, and biotic functions of the Apalachicola Estuary. Sediment analysis in the bay showed that seasonal variations, proximity to the river, spatial relationships with benthic macrophytes, and upland drainage patterns all influenced the qualitative characteristics of the surface sediments. There was a reduction in grain size and an increase in organic content from the outer portions of Apalachicola Bay to the upper reaches of East Bay. While seasonal variation of water temperature appeared relativelysstable from year to year, there was a long-term trend toward reduced salinity which could not be entirely explained in terms of river flow and local rainfall patterns. Seasonal salinity levels were determined by fluctuations of the Apalachicola River, proximity to land runoff, and local rainfall. Winter-spring flooding of the river was associated with reductions in salinity and light transmission, and increases in color, turbidity, and nutrients. Long-term changes in various water quality parameters were noted, and were particularly evident in East Bay. Spatial variability and long-term trends in major physico-chemical variables were thus determined by river flow, local rainfall (land runoff), basin configuration, and various meteorological phenomena. Apalachicola River discharge was the primary factor controlling nutrient concentration in the Apalachicola Estuary. Nitrates peaked during wihter periods of high river flow; phosphates increased during these periods although maxima resulted from episodic wind-mixing of the sediments. Phytoplankton productivity was maximal during spring months. During summer periods, phosphate was the primary nutrient limiting phytoplankton producttvity in East Bay and Apalachicola Baywith nitrates becomtig limiting in Apalachicola Bay with less freqency than phosphate. Overall, temperature was a major limiting factor for phytoplankton productivity. Phytoplankton productivity in this estuary was higher than that in other areas along the coast, and was considered to be a major source of organic carbon for various organisms in this area. A survey of macrodetritus in the Bay showed that there are spatial and temporal patterns of occurrence. During winter-spring periods of increased river flow and upland flooding, leaf matter and wood debris predominate at stations influenced by the river. Such matter comes from flood-plain thee associations including various species of oak, maple, water Tupelo, river birch, sweetgum, and cottenwood. Fall peaks of macrodetr-itus are dominated by benthic macrophytes such as Gracilaria foliifera, Halodule wrightii, and Ulva lactuca. The annual bimodal distribution of macroparticulates was evident o-ny during years when river flow exceeded certain flow rates, with bay-wide (conservative) estimates approximating 150 tons (dry weight) per month during such periods. Microdetritus (45 p-2mm) found at the mouth of the Apalachicola River had a similar relationship with river flow; the organic fractions (ash-free dry weight) approximated 900 tons/month duringperiods of peak river fTow. Although functions such as residence time , flushing rates, utilization patterns, etc remain unknown, the general relationship of detritus movement and availability in the bay appears to be closely associated with the seasonally pulsed patterns of river flow and flooding. Microand macroparticulate matter reached peak levels only at times when riverflooding exceeded 60,000 cubic feet per second. There was thus an association of the presence of particulate matter in the bay with a pulsed river system and periodic flooding of upland flood,plain areas.



PAGE 1

137. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Glycol ic acid uptake as a function of time was deter;mined over a wide range of concentrations in order to establish the p -c'tod (.lu 'irig! thih:h ini LLal ratt, c:onditions existed. The concntrations were chosen to approximate previously reported concentrations of glycolate in natural waters as well as those concentrations which could reasonably be expected to cause saturation effects. GLll segments were incubated in glycolic acid solutions ranging from 2 pM (164 i gl-1) to 133 pM (10, 171 vgl-1). The weight specific uptake of labelled glycolate over the range of weights of experimental tissue was constant due to the close agreement in size between tissue segments. Radioactivity was normalized to lyophilized total tissue dry weight. Uptake increased linearly with time for periods up to 90 minutes (Figure 1). Uptake velocity as a function oF concentration was also linear and exhibited no saturation effects. Double logarithmic plots of uptake velocity vs. concentration were prepared to determine the nature of the uptake kinetics. If the relations are linear, the plots will produce straight lines whose slope is the order of reaction (Laidler, 1965). The order with respect to concentration (nc) is 1 while the order with respect to time (nt) is 0, indicating that the uptake process for glycolic acid under these experimental conditions is diffusion (Figure 2a, 2b). This method of plotting also allows an accurate estimate of the rate constant of the equation v=kcn, which relates the rate of reaction to concentration. The y intercept (log v) is equal to log k and reveals k=0.108 (Figure 2a). 9



PAGE 1

INVITEES -APALACHICOLA MEETING SF. Leroy Bond °y Associate Deputy Chief ,? U.S. Forest Service Department of Agriculture South Building 12th and Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20250 Mr. William Butcher Director Office of Water Research and Technology Departmentof the Interior .(_ x S Washington, D.C. 20240 \. Robert Eastman Chief, Division of Resource Area Studies Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Department of the Interior "' .195j ýcqnstit"tipn .Avenue,,-. .W. " .._< }. Washingtdn* "D:C. 20240 ... " * .. Richard Gardner Deputy Assistant Administrator Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Lynn A. Greenwalt Directo .* ?7 L r f U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Rebecca Hammer, Director, Office of Federal Activities Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460



PAGE 1

267a. Table 2: Estimated productivity of Vallisneria beds in East Bay. Data were taken from November, 1975 through October, 1976. Round Bay (4a) West Bayou (4b) Max. summer biomass: 563 g/m2 (June) 568 g/m2 (July) 95% Confidence interval: a 122 ± 121 Mean winter biomass: 241 g/m2 (Dec. -Mar.) 215 g/m2 (Dec. -Feb.) 95% Confidence interval: ± 122 ± 54 new growth occurred in Mar @ 4B Change in biomass or Max. cumulative net 322 g/m2 353 g/m2 production: Productivity: 322 g/m2/yr. 353 g/m2/yr.



PAGE 1

23. some extent with the die-off of upper bay grass beds. Station 4A This station is in a shallow (4 m) Vallisneria bed in upper East Bay. The bottom is fairly loose, silty-sand. The monthly average grain size is 3.98 ý units and organic content averages 8.61%. A fall peak in organic content probably results from the die-off of Vallisneria blades. Station 5A This station is located off a sandy beach in upper East Bay. The bottom is firm, fairly coarse sand, and the nearby shore is fringed with Vallisneria. The average grain size is 1.82 ~ units and organic content averages 2.58%. Between-sample variation in grain size is low, but organic content increases from summer through winter, to some extent due to the Vallisneria die-off. Station 5B This station is located in an upper East Bay tributary. The bottom is loose silt with Vallisneria fringing the shoreline. The average grain size is 4.22 units and organic content averages 11.23%. Grain sizes exhibited low variability as did organic content, which was relatively high all year. In summary, grain size decreases and organic content increases moving from the outer Apalchicola Bay into the upper reaches of East Bay. The observed late summer-fall die-off of benthic macrophytes coincides generally with an increase in sediment organic content. The relationships between the above observations and the reactions of the infaunal and epibenthic organisms to both general sedimentary characteristics and the fall increase in organic content will be examined in other sections of this report.



PAGE 1

"0 3 o04 O00 006 01A 018 01C 05A SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 750315 T50415 750515 750615 750715 759815 750915 751015 751115 751215 760115 760215 TOTALS ANCHOA MITCHILLI 182 657 142 447 402 143 420 1334 1136 688 71 568 6178 7.85 23.12 7.1i 53.60 56.94 29.24 29tC1 69.09 73.43 68.46 11.27 14.99 31.71 MICROPOGON UNOULATUS 11C9 10C6 798 56 4 0 2 2 169 163 454 1131 4894 47.84 35.40 39.92 6.71 .57 U.dO .14 .10 10.92 16.22 72.06 30.26 25.12 LEIOSTOMUS XANTHURUS 727 617 243 4 0 0 4 1 0 8 7 1338 2949 31.36 21.71 12.16 .48 0.00 0.00 .28 .05 0.00 .8 1.11 35.80 15.14 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS C 2 319 212 93 125 726 329 18 9 8 0 1833 0.00 .07 15.96 25.42 13.17 25.56 50.14 17.09 1.16 .91 0.00 0.00 9.41 BREVOORTIA PATRONUS 85 251 34 9 0 0 0 3 0 10 15 526 930 3.67 8.83 1.70 1.08 0 0.0 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 1.O 2*38 14.08 4.77 MICROGOBIUS GULOSUS 22 121 49 9 3 35 82 64 2 7 3 56 453 .95 4.26 2.45 1.08 .42 7.16 5.66 3.32 .13 .70 .48 1.50 2.33 LUCANIA PARVA 26 56 227 1 4 30 0 4 11 1 0 0 360 1.12 1.97 11.36 .12 .57 6.13 0.00 .21 .71 .10 0.00 0.00 1.85 SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI 5 17 34 18 29 98 5 6 16 1 2 6 237 .22 .60 1.7n 2.16 4.11 2C.04 .35 .31 1.03 .10 .32 .16 1.22 ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 1 3 1 2 1 7 22 44 53 49 9 3 195 .04 .11 .05 .24 .14 1.43 1.52 2.29 3.43 4.88 1.43 .08 1.80 TRINECTES MACULATUS 68 7 39 7 0 8 10 6 6 2 2 18 173 2.93 .25 1.95 .84 0.00 1.64 .69 .31 .39 .20 .32 *48 *89 GOBIOSOMA BOSCI 9 9 0 0 0 13 19 37 14 7 3 37 148 .39 .32 0.00 O.O0 0.OC 2.66 1.31 1.92 090 .70 .48 099 .76 MENTICIRRHUS AMERICANUS 0 0 25 10 30 4 24 16 11 9 0 0 129 0.00 0.OO 1.25 1.20 4.25 *82 1.66 8.3 .71 .90 8.00 0.88 .66 SYMPHURUS PLAGIUSA 22 5 9 1 5 1 26 17 14 3 7 2 112 .95 .18 .45 .12 .71 .20 1.80 .88 .90 .30 1.11 .85 *57 . BAIROIELLA CHRYSURA 13 2 4 26 16 0 20 2 8 3 0 1 95 .56 .07 .20 3.12 2.27 0.00 1036 .10 .52 .30 0.08 .03 .49 ARIUS FELIS 1 3 4 5 33 6 4 2 6 8 8 0 64 *C4 .11 .20 .60 4.67 1.23 *28 .1l .39 0.00 0.00 0.88 .33 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS 3 1 2 0 0 0 1 5 33 10 3 1 59 *13 .04 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 .26 2e.3 1.01 .48 .*3 .30 GOBIONELLUS BOLEOSOMA 5 0 4 0 0 0 2 1 5 3 5 26 51 .22 0.00 .20 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 .05 .32 .30 *79 o78 *26 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CHRYSURUS 1 0 2 1 20 0 12 t1 2 0 0 8 49 .04 0.00 .10 .12 2.83 0.00 .83 .57 .13 8.00 8.00 0.00 .25 MENIDIA BERYLLINA 1 25 7 1 0 0 0 I 1 2 4 6 41 .04 .88 .35 .12 0.00 0.00 O0.00 .O0 .06 .20 .63 0.98 .21 CYNOSCION NEBULOSUS 1 ua 1 4 , 9 6 1 2 3 1 39 .04 .04 .05 0.00 .57 0. 1. .31 .06 .20 .48 .003 20 SYNOOUS FOETENS e0 0 2 13 7 1 7 1 2 14 8 8 0.00 .10 *1 1.84 1.43 .35 .06 .20 6320 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS 0 0 0 0 0 8 11 5 11 1 0 8 36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.001.64 .76 .26 .71 .16 0.00 0.08 .18 EUCINOSTOMUS GULA 2 0 1 0. 0 0 14 3 2 17 0 0 36 .09 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 097 0.00 .13 1.69 0.00 0.808 18 ANCHOA HEPSETUS 0 0 0 7 22 0 4 0 0 0 0. 33 0.00 0.00D 0.00 .84 3.12 0.00 .28 D0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 LAGOOON RHONMOIOES 1 8 5 0 C 0 0 2 3 0 4 18 33 .04 .28 .25 0.00 0.00 0.00 B.CO .10 .19 0.01 .63 .2 17 DASYATIS SABINA 2 1 3 0 4 1 2 1 11 0 5 a 3C .09 .04 .15 C.0O .57 .20 .14 .05 .71 co0. .79 08.0 .15



PAGE 1

X.,. 2' ..-. WEAST P~SAY *~8 GCO**'Sat SOUN ** .P L H..r O OUT Figure 1. Map of Apalachicola Bay



PAGE 1

418. characterized by the largest intake of copepods, and the 40-69mm group, characterized by decreased consumption of copepods and increased consumption of larger food items such as mysids and juvenile fish. Micropogon undulatus size classes also formed two clusters: an intense cluster of 10-69mm fish, whose diet included > 50% polychaetes, detritus, and insect larvae, and a loose cluster of 70-159mm fish, whose diet was composed of polychaetes, shrimp, crabs, or fish, usually with one of these items predominating. These two clusters were:only weakly linked. Leiostomus xanthurus size classes formed three clusters: a relatively intense cluster of 20-69rm fish, whose diet was composed of insect larvae, polychaetes, harpacticoid copepods, and detritus; a more intense cluster of 70-99mm fish, whose diet was mainly detritus, harpacticoid copepods, and polychaetes; and a unit cluster of 100109mm fish, whose main dietary item was bivalves. The first two clusters were relatively closely related, while the third was only loosely associated with the others. Cynoscion arenarius formed two main clusters which were distantly related: the 10-49mm fish appeared to be a loose grouping of two intense clusters, the 10-29mm class, consuming mainly mysids, and the 30-49mm class, consuming a mixture of mysids and fish. The second main cluster was 50-89mm fish, whose main food item was juvenile fish. The results of the cluster analysis thus appear to agree with the biological results. Cluster analysis by station for each species (Figure 2) indicated the variety of food found in various areas in the bay. Water column feeders such as Anchoa mitchilli do not seem to have different food habits with respect to location, since all stations appear to be relatively tightly clustered, It was expected that Cynoscion arenarius, also a water-column feeder, would behave similarly, but two loosely related station clusters appeared. However, when the original data were scanned, it was noted that Cynoscion consistently consumed more fish at stations 5,1A,1B, and 1C than at stations



PAGE 1

Table 11, continued 0.00 .01 0.o00 0.q0 n00 0.00 0.00 o00 00 0110 .00 0.00 0.00 ;TROSCOPUS Y-GRAECUM 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.o0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .15000 0o00000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 o.00 0.00 0.00 n.oo00 .00 0.00 0.00 .09 0.00 0.00 ;PECIES SAMPLE OATES 740315 740415 740515 740615 740715 740815 740915 741015 741115 741215 750115 750215 rPONGYLURA MARINA 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.g0000 o000000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 :CROPTERUS SALMOIDES 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0 00000 0.00000 00000 000000 0.00 0.00 0.00 n.00 0.00 0.00 0. o 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 iPALICHTHYS ALBIGUTTA 0.00000 O.00UO0 0.00000 0.00000 0.01000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000000000 .0 0.00000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 IRANX BARTHOLOMAEI 0.0000 OO 0.000 000000 0.00000 0.01000 0.00000 0.0000 .06000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 o.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTALS 16?7.7 2664.4 318.4 140.7 1098.7 2095.3 7883.5 1250.6 2172.4 175.7 471.4 524.7 U,



PAGE 1

Figure 14: coi tinued ... ..... .. -:': .;T 7 r: CL =Y 3 .Ai 7/3/27. P ,&L 5 r-.. NOVA.E ( .E. T-," .ATE = 77/13/ Z .) T*;(i FTEcr-s CF (i? PuALPUG (ACKOSS) DAYS 1JC4.475. 2a84.-t50u 4o.3753 5644.3-5'. 824.275a010.4. 225j3lLd74.175S33G4. 5jlS*4, 75tj1724.35uw .5 --+-----------------+ --------------S3.64 I 33.64 I I I 2I7 I I Si i I I I I I 3. I I IB I I L;. 1 2 I I + I, I I I 26.1i + 1 26.91 i-------------------------------------..------------------------«--------------------------_---«--«_---S1 I I I I I L 16.82 +f 1 I + 16.82 I I i SIT i i I i I I I I I I 4 23.55 I I .I " ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------SI I I I I I I I I I I I I I -I I I I I I Si I I I .I 1 -" 31 72 .5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3174 6/174 9/74 12/74 3/7S 6/75 9/7.5-12/15 3/76 7 /# 9176 12/76 3/77 . .INVERT. SCATT.Ra' TOP TEN M iOLE aAY BIOMASS .. " .. ":3 .PA, G .6" ' -.". STATISTICS. . CORkRELATION R,-.-.03353 R SQUAREO -.*iZ12 SIG$IFICANeC k -"_3996Z:" STO ERR OF EST ,6.33535 INTERCePT (A) 3.38688 .STO ERkOQ OF A -»b348t0 SiGNIFIGANCE A -.*2137 SLOPE (B) --.00040 ! -Q...R"OR OF 0 a ls S SSZNIFCAN 8 -996 . 9ý.JTTE, VALUES -60 EXCLUOEO VALUES0 MISIM. ; VALUE'S N T " ' -. NTf, Z ~I



PAGE 1

186. 7 7el P )3170 TO I !LS f1,nDt P-.0f0 i'.rn4PJi .* 17 0 n 0On~ 0 .i0 .I)r 3Fj_ v V 0A n 0 1) .OOu f, r") r 0."0 0 u ') .( . ACFOAP 4. 'l n o.o0o000o .0 'mon 0.00n 0.00U .0') .7YM ;or 3.001m0 0.a00"i0 .?'lqn 0.10 0.00 *I' JtUA'F 1 '. V I )Oflf u P '.a0M) fl."0 0.L*0 .0)7 J.00fl n m.000 nono 0 0.00 0*. .V) .IoJ) P.003 ..Imf n II o n ft.*I0 U. 0 11 3tE~EM ~3t)000 .OOu .0600 >!NFD 0.*P10 0.00o .1100 -I~n 1).( ji 00W n~no 2MI.OD W ~. 6 "In 1 .0000 fu. u I ( * oUoo .0I m~W. 0 C0 0 1) .0.?000 Dj_ A c oU:.09MVo n 1) W? j loon On In n9 0 49fl. ) 1 0.00 0.00 .00 P.) y n 14 .1.4 1'4 .7 -4/ 1 nT5Pv)r-) FP Ocll,,Ol rw IýIF



PAGE 1

434. XIV. PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT: APPLICATION OF SCIENTIFIC DATA It is appropriate that objective scientific information should form the basis of planning and management criteria in environmental matters. The data generated in this Sea Grant Project have been applied in various ways to promote constructive interactions among local fishermen, upland developmental interesti elected officials, state and federal agencies, and professional planners. This effort has been documented in a series of papers (Livingston, 1975, 1976, 1977; Livingston et al., 1974; Livingston and Joyce, 1977). 1. In response to the Franklin County Board of Commissioners and commercial fishing interests in the area, a project was initiated to determine the impact on the bay of upland clearcutting and draining practices in Tate's Hell Swamp. The combined field and laboratory program, supported by the Board of Franklin County Commissioners, the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, and the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, includes day/night field collections of infauna and epifauna, physico-chemical monitoring, and field experiments in areas of interest. This has developed into a full Sea Grant project which is a joint effort by Florida Sea Grant investigators, federal, state, and county agencies, and private pulp mill interests. The primary aim is to determine the feasibility of management practices for upland runoff due to clearcutting practices. 2. During the past year, project personnel have continued to work with the Florida Department of Natural Resources with regard to the purchase of sensitive wetlands areas of the lower Apalachicola River as



PAGE 1

Dr. R.J. Livingston / Jerry Krummrich December 20, 1976 Page 2 As for a specificprogram, we would like to spray as needed any.of the creeks along the Jackson River from Lake Wimico to the Apalachicola River. Other upland creeks which would need very little touch Up" maintenance spraying are Upper Chipley Creek, Big St. Mark's (above tressel), East River and East River Cutoff (above tressel). As I stated in last year's proposal we can accomplish our objectives and never spray on the marsh side of the railroad tressel. We feel that keeping the hyacinths under control at these times will keep down the rafts of hyacinths in the marsh and bay in the summer. We would like to spray these creeks described above in February, March and April and in September and October. Our spray schedule would probably be only two days per week and we could work this out more definitely If you felt it necessary. We do usually try to not spray when the fish are bedding and would certainly feel proud if we could satisfy ourselves that we put the hyacinths on maintenance in some creeks before April, but as you are well aware, it takes time to work on this problem. Last year you seemed satisfied that our operations and 2,4-D were not directly harmful to the commercial fishery and that restricting our efforts to help sport fishermen, if unwarranted, was not necessary. However, the Franklin County Commission was never convinced of this. If we are going to spray at all we will want to intelligently strive to be effective, as outlined by creeks and seasons. If we are going to spray I need to coordinate with you and the County Commission and plan now, otherwise our spray operation will be less effective. If we are not gding to spray at all, it would be best to determine that at this time also. I look forward to your reply and to working together on this matter. SSincerely, Jerry T. Krummrich Regional Aquatic Botanist JTK/bsp cc: Franklin County Commission Clayton Phillippy



PAGE 1

144. Gillespie, L., R.M. Ingle and W.K. Havens, Jr., 1966. Nutritioal studies with adult oysters, Crassostrea virginica (Cmelin). State of Florida Board of Conserv. Tech. Ser.5T. Hammen, C.S., 1969. Lactate and succinate oxidoreductases in macrine invertebrates. Mar. Biol., Vol. 4, pp. 233-238. tHawman, C.S., 1975. Succinate and lac ate oxidoreducta-s oF bivalve mollusks. Comp. Biochem. Pnysiol., Vol. 50B, pp. 407-412. Harrison, M.J., R.T. Wright and R.Y. Morita, 1971. Method for measuring mineralization in lake sediments. Applied Microiol., Vol. 21, pp. 698-702. Hellebust, J.A., 1974. Extracellular products. In, Algal Phys ology and Biochemistry, edited by W.D.P. Steward, Oxford: Blackwelli Scientific Publications, pp. 838-863. Hochachka, P.W., J. Fields and T. Mustafa, 1973. Animal life without oxygen: basic biochemical mechanisms. Amer. Zool., Vol. 13, pp. 543-55. Hubscher, G., 1970. Glyceride metabolism. In, Lipid Metabolism, edited by S.J. Wakil, Academic Press, New York. pp. 280-352. Idler, D.R., T. Tamura and T. Wainai, 1964. Seasonal variations in the sterol, fat and unsaponifiable components of scallop musclc. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., Vol. 21, pp. 1035-1042. Iverson, R.L., H.F. Bittaker, and V.M. Myers, 1976. Loss of radiocarbon in direct use of Aquasol for liquid scintillation counting of solutions containing C-NaHCO3.Limnol. Oceanogr., Vol. 21, pp. 756-758. Johannes, R.E., S.J. Coward and K.L. Webb, 1969. Are dissolved amino acids an energy source for marine invertebrates? Comp. Biochem. Physiol., Vol. 29, pp. 283-288. Johannes, R.E. and K.L. Webb, 1965. Release of dissolved amino acidcs by marine zooplankton. Science, Vol. 150, pp. 76-77. Johannes, R.E. and K.L. Webb, 1970. Release of dissolved organic compounds by marine and fresh water invertebrates. In, Symposium on organic matter in natural waters, edited by D.W. Hood, Inst. Mar. Sci. Univ. Alaska, Occ. Publ. #l, pp. 257-273. Johnson, C.K., E.J. Gabe, M.R. Taylor and I.A. Rose, 1965. Determination by neutron and x-ray diffraction of the absolute configuration of an enzymatically formed a-monodeuterio glycolate. J. Am. Chem. Soc., Vol. 87, pp. 1802-1804. 16



PAGE 1

7. Special Program for Ecological Science (SPECS): System Overview I. Introduction Long-term field studies in which diverse habitats are regularly sampled for a variety of organisms and physical-chemical factors are associated with the-accumulation of large amounts of data. Organization and presentation of such data in a useful form has been aided significantly by modern high-speed computers. At Florida State,we have designed and developed a computer software system specifically for use with long-term biological data. Primary design criteria have been storage of a large data base, retrieval of virtually any subset of the data, and rapid access to a diverse group of biological, statistical, and graphical data reduction and analysis capabilities. The SPECS system has been written mostly in the FORTRAN programminng language. A few subroutines are written in the Control Data Corporation (CDC) COMPASS assembly language. SPECS operates on a CDC 6500 or CYBER 73 computer under the KRONOS operating system. II. Organization of the System A. Data Storage. Field data on physical-chemical parameters and fish, invertebrate, and plant populations are assembled and punched on standard 80-column cards. As the formats for each type of data are slightly different, a set of four card-deck programs have been developed to add raw data to a data base tape. Two data base tapes are maintained, each with four files (one each for the four types of data). When a card-deck program is executed the old data base tape is read, the appropriate file is updated with raw data information, and all information is copied to the new data base tape (see figurel). For a subsequent addition of data, the data base tapes reverse roles. During addition of fish and invertebrate data, mean standard lengths, standard deviation of lengths, and dry weight biomass are calculated and added to the data base. For a repetitive samples data base figures represent sums of the overall samples. Card-deck programs also copy raw data information to a raw data tape. This tape is thus a backup for all card information and is not in data base format. B. Data Processing. User Programs All user programs, precedure files (predefined sets of oft-used operating system commands), program libraries, and active data files reside on computer center disk packs (for rapid access). Most of the SPECS system is stored as a single file on one of these disks.



PAGE 1

formalin. In the laboratory, theywere identified to species, counted, and weighed (wet weight). The surrounding areas were then trawled (16 foot otter trawl; 2 2-minute trawl-tows at 2-3 knots), and collections were typed to species and counted. Representative organisms were preserved (10% formalin) for stomach content analysis. This procedure was followed in subsequent sampling periods until all the leaf matter was gone. Using the data from the first series of samples, it was determined that in each case, 95% of the species were taken by sampling any four baskets. Consequently, further sampling was continued using four experimental baskets and appropriate controls. During each sampling period, certain physico-chemical parameters were monitored at the designated stations. Surface and bottom water samples were taken using a standard Kemmerer bottle. Water temperature (oC) and dissolved oxygen (ppm) were measured using a YSI Model 54 oxygen meter. Salinity was estimated with a temperature-compensated refractometer calibrated periodically with standard sea water. Water color (Pt-Co standard) was determined using a Hach colorimeter. Turbidity was measured using a Hach model 2100A laboratory turbidimeter (± 2% of scale). All physical data were compared with those from a long-term ecological survey of the Apalachicola Bay system (Livingston, 1974). The data were analyzed using an interactive computer program designed to handle comprehensive field data (Livingston, 1974). In addition to the usual richness (S, number of species) and enumerative (N, number of individuals) functions, several indices were used to evaluate the data. A modification (Pielou, 1966, 1967; Bechtel and Copeland, 1970; Borowitzka, 1972) of the Shannon-Weaver Index (Shannon and Weaver, 1963) was used



PAGE 1

91. (1971) or the spectrophotometric method given in Strickland & Parsons (1972). The total inorganic carbon ( C02) content of the water was either determined with a Total Carbon Analyzer (Oceanography International, Inc.) using an infrared detector or from a salinity vs CO2 standard curve determined from 2 years of data collected in the Bay System. Dissolved organic carbon was determined by the method of Menzel & Vaccaro (1964) using the Total Carbon Analyzer. Phytoplankton taxonomy was determined by the method of Holmes (1962). Cell carbon was estimated from cell volumes ( according to the method of Strathmann (1967). Two-factorial nutrient enrichment experiments with nitrogen and phosphorus were conducted with phytoplankton in water samples from stations in East Bay and Apalachicola Bay. General methods of nutrient enrichment experiments can be found in Scheleske, et al (1974) and Gerhart & Likens (1975). Water was collected in 20 1 polyethylene carboys and aliquots were placed in 500 ml glass incubation bottles. Samples from each station were treated with either 0, 5, or 50 ug-atm/1 nitrate-nitrogen or 0.0,0.2,0.5, or 5.0 ug-atm/1 phosphatephosphorus. Nutrients were added as 1 ml volumes. Duplicates were prepared for each concentration. A 4 hour acclimation period was begun about 10 hours and was followed by an incubation with either 2 or 4 uCi 14C labeled bicarbonate for approximately 4 hours. Incubation and acclimation were performed in situ .Two 100 ml aliquots from each bottle were filtered through Whatman GF/C glass fiber filters. The filters were placed in 5 ml of AquasolR and the activity was determined by liquid scintillation counting (LSC). Primary productivity was calculated by the method of Strickland and Parsons (1972). Phosphorus uptake was measured in the Apalachicola Bay System to determine phosphate dynamics and uptake rates of natural plankton communities.



PAGE 1

NCHOA HEPSETUS Table 10, o.0 0.08 V.08 0.08 0.08 ~8 .. DO .0..08 00.0 .60 SPECIE continued SAMPLE DATES 720315 720415 720515 720615 720715 720815 720915 721015 721115 721215 730115 730215 TOTALS IPLECTRUM FORHOSUH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.0L 0.009 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.J0 0.00 0.00 .02 0.09 0.00 3.90 .00 OROS30MA CEPEOIANUM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0.0( 0.00 0.0 0,0C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 .14 0.00 0.00 o.0 .UTJANUS GRISEUS C g .,g ..o3 .0 0 ..0 0 0.0 0OJ.00 0.Ou 0.00 0.00 0.30 O.0 .02 0.00 0.0! 0.00 3.0 A 1PHICHTHUS GOMESI 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 a0 0 a1 G0.0 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 3.0o 0.00 0.03 0.0 0.08 .00 'RIONOTUS RUBIO 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 .06 0.0 0o.00 .0o 0..0 .00 0.00 0. 0.00 0.00 o00 tHINOPTERA BONASUS C 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 J.00 0.00 .15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o·.0 .00 'RACHINOTUS FALCATUS 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 00 0 o.5 0.00 8.o8 0.00 0.00 *60 TOTALS 452.0 991.0 1811.0 1579.0 2804.0 681.0 925.0 5875.1 4800.0 708. 354.8 1544.0 22516.0



PAGE 1

NEi SUARY N HOLE BAY 2ND YEAR Table 8, continued >TA1IONS Jl 602 u33 064 JO5 6. 6 ýiA IB OC u5A TIMES OF DAY sPECIES SAMPLE 3ATES 73u315 73ý415 73U515 73u615 736715 N4udL5 73j915 73L41i 7LLi 7311>2 146115 7Vu215 TOTALS PALAEHONETE4 PUGIO 374 18 33 67 1 J 2 35 i543 b67 66.91 47.37 29o.2 54.92 .4 .0!8 .u J.3 ..j 484 1 6.41 72.79 37.2, CALLINECTES SAPIOUS A15 1u9 53 47 66 1,9 141 6a 75 6b 277 2,5 1358 20.57 47.61 46.9J 3u.33 17.d9 j.8d6 55.95 .*. 28.9o -52.o. bb.59 12.03 Z3.31 PENAEUS SETIFEIU. 8 1 2 4 28 163 1 52l 53 l1. 6 1.53 1.43 .44 1.77 OC.L 76.69 46.18 *4, 62.47 13.6-3 L2 .24 .29 19.79 LOLLIGUNCU.A BREVIS C 2 2 0 1ý 7 9. 117 9& 13 1 6 335 D.OC .8d 1.77 J.O. 3*.5 1.8a 3i.71 1L.7r 45.1 1..4' .*24 -o.0u .75 NERITINA REGLIVATA 46 j 3 11 u a 177 245 8.59 4.jj 2.65 9.j2 .27 ji. j.OJ j.JJ J.0' ..u l.Z 5.69 **21 PENAEUS DUORARUN 1 I 1 u 2 68 14 a8 21 5 Z. 9 2£7 .18 .44 .88 0.au .519.*6 5. 6 i.45 SO11 5.OW 5.29 .44 3.9. PORTUNUS G&IBESII C 1 L 1 J 31 5 a 27 33 99 0.6ii .44 .'C6 $82 i.JC *.8 1.19 3.12 1.93 .000 6.49 1.47 1.76 SQUILLA EMPUA a 0 0 u 0 C 1 .2 2 1 Id 7 45 C.Ou 0eO. u*LJ wubt U041 4J.4 04i L.2L .77 i.13 4.33 034 .69 RHITAROPANOPEUS HARRISII 8 .1. i( C j 2 3.13 2 7? 1*43 1 .0j 11000 082 L.JO O.JO ;.Oj }.ii .77 8.6d 3.13 .lu *i; NEOPANOPE TEXANA 0 23 3 j 2 G.OO 3J.UU 1.JJ o.*L L.ju J.Jf ).LO 2.31 .ij J9.4 *44d 0.0u .43 PENAEUS AZTECUa 1 15 4 1 u -L 1 2 j 1 25 5 U.0 U.04J 13.27 3.28 .27 .1C i.icl OLA .39 L.5i Co.. J45 4 TRACHYPENAEUS CONSTRICTUS C Q 1L L 4 i u 4 I 7 17 OdJ .u8 e iG L..L I. * joi *5J .77 j. ..48 *34 .29 CALLINECTES SIMILIS 0 3 j L i 3 u j 1 2 7 16 C.ou 1.32 COJj u.Lk LojL .65 Jo.b 4>33 J.Lj *3u .46 .34 .27 ALPHEUS rETEROCHAELIS 1 J U Q C 12 J3 13 *16 uo. -j.J Lt *J C *u L.u L.2Z J..J .ud G u J.ou .22 PALAEMONETES VULGARIS 1 2 0 0 J * 3 j 2 l2 .18 .da 0.0* u .ua W.t jilb j.6k *.4 L.tb j.3J *46 J.j *.21 MENIPPE HERCENARIA # 6 1< L .. 4 u. 1. f0 i... 6 jyu 4.uo W UL sUL .6 .J L t.L 1..1 .J .u L.tj J.iJ #17 PAGUIUS P3OIICAIS ..3 1 1 6 4 1 3 j . .Gk CG..j 2.65 .di Lo..U .jU j.L .ij 1.6o .*..j t. j.u *.14 NEOPANOPE PACKAR3ZII u 3 u 3 0 7 6 oC 6 ·l; L·*u 6·hC lk .L Jj^ o t a3w j3.1 *74 woý4 *l2 ACETES AMERICANUS L .1 3 I 4 6.OL 60CL Le8 la.Jt ial .arr o*u J4U 4Ij 2oJ; .4 .JJ J.O0u *ul BRACHIOOONTES EXUSTUs E ..L ..4 4 UC e uw' 6L Lu U U #.4 o b 3 e *a? PALAEMONEIES INTERtEDIUS 3 1 .... ....a 4 POLLiN.CEa 3UFLLGATU ...2 4 BUaYCO 3NT'


PAGE 1

SPECIES ,AMPLE DATiS 73e31c 734415 73u, M3t615 7TJ615 F33d15 73.915 f31415 73L115 7J3125 746115 4'JZ15 IOTALS CLIBANARIUM VITTATJS 1 L 2 0 HIPPOLYS14AIA .4UREDEANNi 6 6 . LUIuIA GLAIHrmTA I : A Jo,' .3~ L.uw J.gu~ hETAPORHAPHIS L.ACARATA r h 1 0.. o .u. G.* *.C Ok I0 dI oZ4 j OU HULINIA LATEmALLS C J 1 C Ci 0 i J 01 HEHIPHOLJS ELON;ATA L 3 L c.TALS .59. C .I 1 ..CL ;2. .uc L 0.U oil jJ 30. 04 4*U zsJoa ODE TO I A 6. 55 9oE k2d.6 3.c j.22 Ci b 3. 353* L 25k~ru 14. 1 ;·9*j IZSOD 4LLQoi 2035#4 i l8 o 0. two;



PAGE 1

It St;:FLE DATFS 770315 730415 /30515 731615 730715 730815 730915 731015 731115 731215 740115 740215 TOTALS ARCHOSARGUS PPOPATOCFOHALUS 0.00 U.ul O.CO 0.00 .00 0 0.00 59.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59.34 0.00 0.00 0o. 0 0.0 0.00 .o. 2.57 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .18 SYMPHUDUS PLArIUSA t1.i12.05 3.37 .40 1.05 4.25 0.00 5.64 n.00 4.24 9.85 7.80 50.51 1.1c .16 .14 .01 .34 .15 0.00 .23 0.00 .27 .18 .87 .16 ChLOPOSCOMJd°lS '"PYSU?'US 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2.19 .83 11.79 26.99 0.00 0.Of 0.00o 0.00 41.82 0.00 3.00 0.0ou .n0 .09 .01 .51 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 CHAETOIPTERUS FA3EP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.67 8.25 1.03 0.00 00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 40.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.1T .29 .04 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 PPIONOTUS TDIBULUS 1.49 0.00 0.00 O.00 0.00 0.00 .08 11.28 2.? 0.00 12.14 9.66 36.93 .15 0.00 U.00a 0.00 U. O n.00 .00 .46 .08 0.00 .22 1.07 .11 OPHICrHTHUS GOMESI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 0 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.31 0.00 33.31 0.00 .0 0 0. 00 0. n. 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .60 0.00 .10 UPOPHYJIS FLOPIDANUS 0.01 26.27 0.n fl O. .0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.39 29.66 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .38 .09 MENTDIA 3FRYLLINA 5.41 1.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.55 .88 1.55 11.44 24.69 .56 .14 0.00 0.00 0.0un 0.00 0. 00 0.00 .13 .06 .03 1.27 .08 ANCHOA hcPSETUS 0.00 .0o .0 0.00 0.00 4.04 1.6 7.36 .96 2.78 2.40 .90 0.00 20.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .06 .32 .04 .10 .15 .02 0.00 .06 MICROGOBIUS ,ULOU'; 3.57 5.51 .50 .46 .o8 .44 .49 .36 .22 1.08 1.76 3.59 18.86 .37 .42 .02 .01 .04 .02 .02 .01 .31 .07 .03 .40 .06 CENTROPRISTIS MtLLAN .OO0 0.00 0.00 18.43 0.000 000 0 0.00 00.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.43 0.00 0.00 0.30 .29 0.00 0.00 .o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 GOIONELLUS HASTATUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.On 0.00 0.'00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.76 0.00 17.76 0.0 0 0..00 0..00 .o 00 n.n00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .32 0.00 406 PORIC'THYS FOROSISSIMUS 0.0O 10.77 3.90 0.00 0.00 .36 0.00 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.40 0.00 .82 .13 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 OOROSOMA PETEMNENSE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.91 .79 1.72 4.71 1.25 13.37 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 .03 .11 .09 .14 .04 ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS d.30 0.00 4.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.03 .86 U.00 .16 0.00 .o00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 00 0000. U.00 0.00 *04 SPHOEROIDES NEPHELUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1U.00 0.00 0.00 5.76 0.00 .37 2.20 2.81 11.14 0.o0 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 0.00 .02 .04 .31 .03 PEPRILUS BURTI U.O 0.00 7.85 0.0U 3.24 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.13 .UO0 0.00 .27 0.00 .13 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 SCIAENCPS OCELLATA 0.00 10.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.78 0.00 .82 0.00 0..0 0.00 000 0.U .0.00 0.00 0000 0.00 0.00 .03 GOBIOSONA BOSCI 1.13 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 0.00 0.00. .04 .20 3.36 3.16 8.16 .12 .00 0.00 n.00 0.00 .01 0. o 0.00 .00 .01 .06 .35 .03 STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .53 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.53 8.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 n. 0 0.00 .84 .02 OPSANUS BETA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 000 0.00 .02 BREVOORTIA PATRONUS 0.0 0.00 3.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.48 5.53 0.00 0.00 .11 0.00 0. U 0.00 0.00 0 000 00 0.0 0.00 .28 .02 MONACAClTUS r.'SFPIOUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.O0 0.On 3.18 .10 1.24 .73 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. o .11 .00 .05 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 LUCANIA PARVA 0.00 .06 1.09 0.00 0.00 .13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.88 5.16 0.00 .00 .14 o.o0 0.00 .00 .0no 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .43 .02 ANGUILLA ROSTPATA 0.00 00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0 0.00 0.000 0.0 00 0 .0 00 5.15 5.15 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.00 0.00 0.00 O.00 0.00 .57 .02 PRIONCTUS SCITULUS .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 2.71 0.00 1.09 1.04 4.86 n.00 0.u 0.00 0.OO O.on 0.00 .o0 0.00 10 0.00 .02 .12 .02 MYROPhIS PUNCTATUS .94 0.00 0.00 n.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.84 .n 3j.J0 0.·0 n.nOn 1. 00 0.ou0 0. u 0.00 0.00 0.o0 o.00 0.00 .01



PAGE 1

-,0 v C DC *.O M UW -O U L0. c >-L0 4JC -0 0 U .U c 0 -() 30c / ,, ) 4 -0 A, it SUo 41 4 ) =A .'CEE\ \, I e, S 40 )0 41 2 4.4 *1/ * 1I * A 0 -/ \ " -, ' LE r * !\ 0a 3 0C 1 -> o 4 -'--o .i_ 11 0 c4. -L 0 -0 L.3 0 .Df u o41c1 -a LLCAr " U. l l c E OC -0 3 m < u c -< 120C 040 -C 4 .. E -3 -O ocC O -C 0CU . c 40 0( ).In a m 80E >-0 3 > .404"c T LM. l L L. '4u L( > 4 40= to U) -C, T E 4-M' N I 030 010 lTIME--MONTHS (3/72-2/76)



PAGE 1

249. Table 4: Comparison of Correlation Coefficients(and P values) of Major Physical and Biological Parameters Concerning Leaf Litter Associations (invertebrates) in the Apalachicola Bay System. Temperature Salinity Secchi D1 H' D S N ..ature -0.00 -0.43 -0.31 -0.10 0.12 0.13 .28 (0.50) (0.00) (0.03) (0.28) (0.22) (0.22) (0.04) ty 0.14 -0.06 0.19 .50 0.67 0.51 (0.19) (0.34) (0.13) (0.00) (0.00) ,,. -0.31 0.47 0.29 0.18 -0.08 (0.03) (0.00) (0.04) (0.13) (0.32) -0.91 -0.11 0.08 0.22 (0.00) (0.24) (0.31) (0.09) 0.24 0.03 -0.24 (0.07) (0.42) (0.07) 0.83 0.37 (0.00) (0.10) 0.75 (0.00) N



PAGE 1

S. .. .. .' .100 -. 0 .29000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .0.00 000000 0000 .39000 S. .. 0. .01 O. O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 SPECIES SiMPLE DATES 7?0315 720415 720515 7?7615 720715 720815 720915 721015 721115 721215 730115 730215 TOTALSANCIOA HEPSETUS 0.n 00n0 0.00000 0.0000 0. !0000 0oU.00 0.n0000 .oo000no .25000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .25000 u. n 0.00 U.00 0.00 d.OO 0.00) 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 H,.EN. UL. r'r-SAt,;.L Ai 0. J000 0.noo0000 .Ounfl O.nuo .0 0 oO q.0000 0 .00000 0. 00000 0. 00000 0.00000 0.o00 00000 .25000 .25000 r."nO .00 0.00 0.UO 0.00 U. 00 0.. n.0 o 0.00 0n. 0.00 .01 .00 GOBIOSOMA PORUSTUM 0.00000 0.00000 0.n000 U.000O 0.00000 0.000000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .20000 0.00000 0.O0000 .20000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 O.UO 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .00 MONACANTHUS CILIATUS 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .17000 .02000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .19000 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .O0 STRONGYLURA MARINA 0.00000 .03000 .09000 0.00000 0.0 000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .12000 o.on .01 .utr 0.00 .n 0.00 0.00 0. o0 000 .000 0.00 0o.00 .00 IICPOPTEPUS SALMOICES 0.03000 0.00000 .07000 0.00000 n0.0000 q.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00008 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .07000 O.0O 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 TOTALS 43b.8 6 02.8 1444.1 1160. .3935.8 1611.7 1936.1 3784.1 7775.9 1989.8 227.5 4775.6 39181.0 S4:S. *. -.*



PAGE 1

93. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results of nutrient enrichment experiments can be found in Table I. At station lA, phosphate enhanced phytoplankton carbon fixation more than nitrate. Phosphate enhanced carbon fixation during July and September 1975 and June and July 1976. No significant enhancement occurred during January and March 1976. Nitrate additions did not affect carbon fixation by: ( phytoplankton at this station and no significant phosphate-nitrate interactions were observed. Enrichment experiments at station 7 indicated both nitrate and phosphate enhanced fixation of carbon during certain times of the year. Significant nitrate enhancement occurred during September 1976; while significant phosphatenitrate interactions were found during July 1975 and July 1976. Nutrient enhanced phytoplankton carbon fixation occurred only when water temperatures were above 21.50C and nitrate and phosphate concehtrations were low (see Table II). Nitrate levels less than 0.47 ug-atm NO3-N/1 limited phytoplankton production in Apalachicola Bay; however, significant nitratephosphate interactions were observed at nitrate concentrations up to 3.49 ugatm N03-N/1 and phosphate concentrations as high as 0.43 ug-at P04-P/1. Phosphate enhanced phytoplankton carbon fixation in East Bay when concentrations were less than 0.35 ug-atm P04-P/1. The nutrient enrichment experiments suggest that at phosphate concentrations less than 0.35 ug-atm PO4-P/1 the internal functional phosphorus pools (Fuhs, 1969; Rhee, 1973) of the Bay phytoplankton were unsaturated. Phosphorus uptake data tends to support this hypothesis (see Table III). Planktonic phosphate uptake rates did not maximize until external phosphate concentrations



PAGE 1

164. This was followed during the subsequent year (March, 1977) by substantial increases in terms of concentration (mg/l) and total quantities of microparticulates. Unfortunately, the river flooding of 1975 was not sampled; consequently, there is relatively less information available to substantiate the relationship of river flow and microparticulates than in the previous (macroparticulate) analysis. However, the relatively high levels of microparticulates taken during the peak flooding of March, 1977 indicates that similar functional relationships are operational here. Mean river flow and peak river flooding conditions appear to play a critical role in the amount of microdetritus being delivered to the Apalachicola Estuary. Although the absolute quantities of allochthonous organic matter associated with river flooding (i.e., almost 900 tons, ash free dry weight of microdetritus and about 126 tons, dry weight, of macrodetritus in March, 1977) appears to be substantial, the exact meaning of such figures in terms of energetic input to the bay is still under study. Associated problems with respect to flushing rates in the bay, import-export factors, and mass balance functions have not been analyzed. Also, as pointed out above, the methods used here were restricted in terms of scope and duration of sampling effort. While the figures given would be viewed as quite conservative with respect to total influx of river-derived organic particulate matter in the bay, the general pattern of detrital movement appears to be well established and is closely associated with upland vegetational associations and periodic flooding of the Apalachicola River. Based on the above assumptions, work is now in process to delineate the functional significance of these findings. This will include a complete statistical analysis of the data and the development of a compartmental model for a comparison of the energetic interrelationships



PAGE 1

166. Literature Cited Adams, S.V. and J.W. Angelovic. 1970. Assimilation of detritus and its associated bacteria by three species of estuarine animals. Chesapeake Sci. 11(4): 249-254. Carr, W.E.S. and C.A. Adams. 1973. Food habits of juvenile marine fishes inhabiting seagrass beds in the estuarine zone near Crystal River, Florida. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 102(3): 511-540. Clewell, A.F. 1977. Geobotany of the Apalachicola River region. In, Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Eds., R.J. Livingston and E.A. Joyce, Jr. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ. (in press). Darnell, R.M. 1958. Food habits of fishes and larger invertebrates of Lake Ponchartrain, Louisiana, an estuarine community. Publ. Inst. Mar. Sci. Univ. Texas. 5: 353-416. S1967a. The organic detritus problem. In G.H. Lauff (ed.), Estuaries. Publ. Am. Assoc. Advan. Sci. 83: 374-375. .1967b. Organic detritus in relation to the estuarine system. In G.H. Lauff (ed.), Estuaries. Publ. Am. Assoc. Advan. Sci. 83: 376-382. Heald, E.J. (1969). The production of organic detritus in a south Florida estuary. Ph.D. dis., Univ. of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida. Jones, E.B.G. 1973. Aquatic fungi: Freshwater and marine. In Dickinson, C.H. and G.J.F. Pugh (eds.), Biology of Plant Litter Decomposition. Academic Press, New York. 2: 337-383. Kaushik, N.K. 1969. Autumn shed leaves in relation to stream ecology. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Waterloo, Canada. 188 p.



PAGE 1

420. of competition among the species when smaller size classes co-occur (this may have been obscured by the preliminary examination of average food consumption per size class), 3) the relationship between the temporal occurrence of each species and the abundance patterns of the prey organisms (data collected by other investigators but not yet available for analysis), 4) possible habitat partitioning by these fish species, particularly Leiostomus and Micropogon, and 5) possible reasons for the apparent exclusion of commercially important invertebrates from the diets of the four fish studied. These aspects will be considered in future work. In addition, further analysis will include a multivariate treatment of the potential interactions of key forcing functions such as river flow with some of the trophic relationships detailed above. It appears that detritivorous groups have well timed migrations into the bay which could be associated with river-borne influxes of detritus during certain times of the year. Literature Cited Carr, W.E.S. and C.A. Adams. 1972. Food habits of juvenile marine fishes: evidence of the cleaning habit in the leatherjacket, 0ligoplites saurus, and the spottail pinfish, Diplodus holbrooki. Fishery Bull. 70(4): 1111-1120. and .1973. Food habits of juvenile marine fishes occupying seagrass beds in the estuarine zone near Crystal River, Florida. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 102(3): 511-540. Clifford, H.T. and W. Stephenson. 1975. An introduction to numerical classification. Academic Press, New York. 229p. Livingston, R.J., G.J. Kobylinski, F.G. Lewis, III, and P.F. Sheridan. 1976. Long-term fluctuations of epibenthic fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Fishery Bull. 74(2): 311-322.



PAGE 1

257. Results and Discussion A list of species taken is presented in Table 1. The 11 most abundant species are described below: Leptochelia rapax (Crustacea, Tanaidaceans) This crustacean was the most abundant invertebrate taken from infaunal samples in Apalachicola Bay. It was almost entirely restricted to the Halodule wrightii beds on the inner side of St. George Island where it builds tubes on the substrate or attached to seagrass blades. In this area, the salinity ranged from 6.3 -26.80/oo and the water temperature ranged from 11.5 -32.50C. Peak abundances were noted in the spring (February -April) with lowest numbers found in September. Tanaidaceans in general are hermaphroditic (Barnes, 1968); ovigerous females were noted throughout the year, being most abundant in the spring, as were individuals showing male characteristics. Leptochelia apparently feeds on fine detrital matter, sand, and benthic diatoms, and is preyed upon by small carnivorous fishes (Odum and Heald, 1972). Grandidierella bonnieroides (Crustacea, Amphipoda) This species was the second most abundant organism taken in the core samples. It ranges from the Halodule beds on the inner side of St. George Island up into the freshwater areas of East Bay, where it was most abundant. It was found in salinities of 0 -26.80/oo and water temperatures of 6.0 -32.50C. Abundance peaks were noted in early spring (March) and late summer (August), with lowest numbers during early summer (May) and intermediate abundances in winter months. Ovigerous females were collected from November through April. Grandidierella feeds upon very fine detrital matter and is in turn con-



PAGE 1

213. Samples were critical point dried in a custom-made critical point dryer utilizing liquid C02, mounted on pedestals, and then coated with gold-palladium (60:40:W/W). Samples were examined using a Cambridge Stereoscan S4-10 microscope. D. Behavior and trophic efficiencies of primary eukaryotic detritivores. We have chosen as a primary detritivore to study Gammaridean amphipods. Gut Sanalysis amongst the dominant fish in the estuary (31) showed Gammaridean amphipods in 18 of 247 (7%) of Anchoa mitchilli; 31 of 81 (38%) of Leiostomus xanthurus; and 96 of 165 (58%) of Micropogon undulatus. Most of the amphipods found in the fish stomachs were between 30 to 50 mm in length (P. F. Sheridan, unpublished data). Amphipods have been reported in fish stomachs from California (32), Louisiana (33), Mississippi (34), South Florida (35) and Washington (36). Stickney and Shumway (37) in their review of the food habits of fish, show amphipods as a prominent component in the gut of numerous fish. We find Gammaridean amphipods as the predominant invertebrates in leaf baskets we place in Apalachicola Bay. These amphipods are excellent indicators of the "quality" of the detrital microflora as they have short, relatively simple, digestive tubes where the complication of endosymbiotic microorganisms is minimal (38-40). They survive well in the laboratory, have a relatively simple life cycle (41, 42) and show rapid responses to the environment (43-45). Preliminary experiments indicate that Gammaridean amphipods can determine if the effects of impacts on the detrital microflora are readily transferred through the food web. Experimental detritus samples will be offered to amphipods in an apparatus consisting of 8 identical small chambers arranged radially around a larger chamber. Since amphipods are photophobic, infrared sensors in the connecting passageways will be used to detect the amphipod flux in the apparatus.



PAGE 1

187. Table 3: Macrodetritus in the Apalachicola Estuary expressed in g, dry weight as wood debris/m2, claf debris/m2, benthic macrophyte debris/m2, total debris/m2, and total (bay-wide) debris (Kg, tons) on a monthly basis from January, 1975 through March, 1977. Wood Leaf Benthic Total Total Total debris debris macrophytes detritus detritus detritus g, dry g, g, g, in Bay in Bay Date wt./m2 dry wt./m2 dry wt./m2 dry wt./m2 Kg, dry wt. tons, dry wt. 1/75 0.00323 0.01485 0.02104 0.03794 20,321 22.4 2/75 0.00704 0.00173 0.00804 0.01682 9,008 9.9 3/75 0.01924 0.01041 0.02754 0.0572 30,636 33.7 4/75 0.01750 0.06957 0.02950 0.11656 62,428 68.7 5/75 0.15453 0.06552 0.03427 0.25432 136,218 149.8 6/75 0.00534 0.01418 0.01418 0.01988 10,648 11.7 7/75 -8/75 0.02497 0.00557 0.00634 0.03708 19,860 21.8 9/75 0.04649 0.00010 0.01992 0.06668 35,711 39.3 10/75 0.03084 0.00871 0.08602 0.12754 68,310 75.1 11/75 0.01928 0.00052 0.00711 0.03167 16,965 18.7 12/75 0.00279 0.00411 0.00373 0.01068 5,721 6.3 1/76 0.01104 0.00044 0.00796 0.01947 10,426 11.5 2/76 0.01431 0.01073 0.01546 0.04130 22,122 24.3 3/76 0.00828 0.00069 0.00897 0.01806 9,673 10.6 4/76 0.04538 0.00062 0.00168 0.04769 25,542 28.1 5/76 0.01993 0.00147 0.00576 0.02717 14,552 16.0 6/76 0.01200 0.00005 0.03576 0.04781 25,609 28.2 7/76 0.00050 0.00010 0.00527 0.00578 3,095 3.4 8/76 0.00003 0.00002 0.00102 0.00105 567 0.6 9/76 0.00078 0.00010 0.00271 0.00350 1,876 2.1 10/76 0.00142 0.00024 0.03423 0.03634 19,466 21.4 11/76 0.00171 0.00075 0.07300 0.08074 43,242 47.6 12/76 0.01365 0.01081 0.00937 0.03628 19,431 21.4 1/77 0.03961 0.03384 0.00724 0.08185 43,839 48.2 2/77 0.00281 0.00635 0.02451 0.03631 19,447 21.4 3/77 0.10886 0.05005 0.04707 0.21369 114,452 125.9



PAGE 1

-"1 0 Rangia cuneata A o Sciaenids B -----------ddeddo-oddddd \-rt ---h Fri **ddt \ddt -m aS m -7575 \ 0O 3 rt u Ix 2u "25 / m , " : S0 =.\ \( W -.i= 5 0 1 0 CLO ) -o i \ --m 00 0'-o -. B 0 h W (7 -* = -c D , n i i \ // A A \s 375 375 0. 0 C. 50 2500 .0,c •ndMc ropogon undulatus , ^ : -:3 -ho COO r r1. 12 -0. -0o rA \ ID -3 V) CD-. [ 1o-..--. -o -3 MN MAMJJ ASON DJ FM:AMJJ ASO NDJ FMAMJ n -A T * * ddM t STME--MONTHS (1972-74) P. I?~ / I 1 C O O r+ r+ Q .



PAGE 1

INtL 5JI4 ;UIOASS 4in3.E BAY IS4 v1y Table 3: Summary of iJry we y9;ii biomass by species, b; month, ,i pci .. .. .ace STA/TON5' '1 Z 3 ;3 u s 35.6 Hb A 13 iic .of epibenthic invertebrates taken in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1. 2, 3, ItES OF uAY o 4, 5, 6, IA, IB, 1C, 5A) from March, 1972 through February, 1977. SPECIES SAPFLE 3)TES 7.,J3l5 72zu:5 7C.215 7Z.5i1 72u7,5 rzjds 7E.ý Tl 71ji 7l'11.5 7212L5 730115 733215 TUTAL-S CALLIN;i AiU SAPIUS 16t.OL iiL.55 ...50j 97Q., i0.2i .2o..w ib.,. 5 4.. 3.2..0D 143.ý 89.53 176.,d j627.74 8C.:-7 8 .17 6/..1 91. t1 ao..4 d .. 31. 7 Lý7.53 19.jA 67.j 4 67.65 9i.2<» 5i. j. PENAiUj 3i IFi -L 3Z.11 .4 .ca .-.L .i'.54 L.( i..i L+1t. *7 1.,7F4. j G. 1.53 2.27 271i7.i7 15PALA PU 1 5.92 5.67 .13 .3 .J.i r.5 73.> 9.7* 1.2 l.16 37.93 PENAEU> ZTE;U 1.72 1.55 8J .61 6+.78 16.07 .,7 3.61 L3 i. A.j .9 .51 7475 .84 1.3* 23,.5 6..6 8.4 2 j J .92 ... .j.4 .ua u3j 3.1J PENAEUx OJUOIATrM u.uC 5.89 1.057 ..,. .,6 5.53; i .72 7t.u 38i.77 32.13 18.72 .1.&1 215.79 L.0i 4.25 l.o2 .u .. .29 i.5J9 .b5 .3 7 !.2+ 17.34 l.lo .92 28j LOLLIjUNCULA BROU ICS 4.OC .O; .7 19.1j 2.637 j..c3 *..7 1.973 3;.58 .;) .68 .i 157.48 64.. * il .2 1.78 Ib.J j2./j. 2.17 i. ?.w+** #.jj ..l Jbu C.d CALLINtCTEs SIMILIS u. .; U .., j **>: 0 6u o*6 .i L7.39 24. i.62bz 16.59 39.64 7,.36 5. *6 i.uj 3*L L.u .12 Jjr .s5 L*5i ..43 12.54 4+91 .99 PALAEMONETES PUGIO .44 14.54 8.92 5.67 .13 .1J J0..L .j$j .u6j .2 1.22 Lý, 3?.37 SQJILLA EAPUSA O.G> 0. ý i.OGG 3.0 ..7 .t J.uu L4.14 .J30 3.15 3.4'J 1.46 27.22 G0.O L.Cj 0.ju 3.O* ..4 s j j jJ0 .57 * .5d L.i u. .75 .38 PORTUNUS 31BCESII L.AC ..0j .j3 .L..U0 L8 ju u 1L.53 12. .2 .9e53 .77 26.59 C0.0C .J ..u l L.u .j5 .0L .5i *3J .13 .7? .3i .,r RANGIA CTuNATA 3.0; LR.43 ou' i7 4,.30 .88 43.39u 0uU ,9i. .86 .8 1. 72 3.Gu 6 15.57 L.,A0 w.J u.*u .4U 1.41 O1.J9 jU Us *.,J5 .* 1.3 J.4U .22 POLLINICES DUP.ICATUS C0.O0C .00U ;3.CL .u51 2.53 j.ji a .L1 43.34 1).3J 3. i) 2.0J3 ~ .Ju 7.3j9 0.JOC #0.j 1.j3 *,5 1.35 j.0 .54 .14 J.GJ .Jj3 t. i.u U .10 MENIPPE SIECENArIA C.UC 0.30 .0u0 .JijO L.0 kf.jb ;..u i .735 e.r i 1.&59S G .la ;.aj 3.35%8 L0.*u L*Cj ..uJ Jow2 .jsU J.O j.uow *L.3 a.uj .3L 0*4u J.44u *OJ5 0 UNEYCON CONTRAIUM 0 uOCOL 0 i3u 2.Ltj a3.6o u ;.JC ;.UU Ji.j)] 3J. 2.2O .0i .QUO 2.256 .ja U 0.03 J.0u 3. u.U 3.dG i .L. ). ).1J L.13 1..e j.64 .43 PALAEMONETES VJLSAFLS .84 .13 ..uu .16 uG.J .i6 i@.0 .332 .Ju3 j3 '.4 .Ou .43 1.33 H42 N F9 a0.·0 L 6 Cfj .j42 j.Ooj J o.. J .j 04 1d .a .A "32 NERITINA RECLIV4TA I RoR .2u .62 .23 i.ju JJK 1,.j 1.31 iud J1. .J 033 1..13 a*05 .18 *u8 .32 C.uh J.jb ) Ub I.aJ 3.11 ja h d *1L *i2 RhITHROPANOPEUS HARRISII 3.OCJO .*24054 .24637 .13448 .1336. ,ii349 *DL349 ).JJJj)4 3.*403j ).j). JO.UjJu .J1651u *947j7 u.uw .17 .l3 'ia .47 *SC *Ll 3.»J J.j jo. j 4.09 948 *Jl TRACHYPENAEUb C3MSTRICTUS 0.00G034 a.53U4 d.JLOUd u.Oud.J .u6672 *.7742 .35444 .63lo3 .38867 lu**ii 0.U44iuu CQ.uJjj .99338 tU'. 0 6J .. u *j4 .t 4 .2 .* 2 *.1 *. 1 0.j As ;A. t ANA3ARA BRASILLANA O.O0.O ..30^I3 3.030Jui u.uuJu.L J..Obu ..mtjtj , U.J Lu ...]JuJ i.iUdU aDlJj .5s56, 4juuJ4U .5LJ5, G.SU L.jJ u.Uf J.00 G.JU O.juJ.U j.J) .gjJ ) oJj 36 46iu oil DINO;ARDIJO ROB0USTJM u0Ul0j 3.00ujj 3.03uCO J.O0jJ L 4.JuJ4u u.aUJIC .uliuG .a}O)J3 j d.0B3J4 j.61dd .5#556u J.uji34 o5j55d .Q06 C.3J L.Cu J.U1 uWO0 3.a 1l J.uu ).3J1 .6) J.;) *38 JOU *Jl PAGUfUS P3LLICARIS .0 Ou u i .04330 0 .0 l.(Uj 0O O.bLJ0*uJjC La0 joo 4us wi 4*4;ja j.jjuJ ;. j JI 1 J.JJ.Ji i1.J1 u o44)J4w C.OJ OJ j.u6 30wd L.u6 3.jU j uu 022 ;.4 4 .31 Ctf Jou *J 1 SI;YONIA JORSA61S u.01035 5.OOGj O.QjjuL u.CJ66 3.Gii603 j4 a.I3 3a Ja.uwV .li5193 0.30.j i.uaiI1i a.Ub uI b.iIDJ .15o98 aO* L.J .J.ku * w U L Jo jGUa 4*Jl 0.qJ 0.J1 U * *ajl NEOPANOPE PACKARDIL r.C00L 0.6j uJ k .0aJJc J.uuOtC a.306G.C .j2U2 U U.ujau0 }.)3J33 o.iaua .02867 .15421 0.043f .153436 u U# 0.003 w.J Jw 0.L *2i &jb6 J.3u ..u I 2 8 .* *0jj PALAEMON FLORIOANUS 0.O y O.0OiJ'l i.3l6u3 G.vJuLu C.Ui33C .w6436 0ujDJU .J24J j.Jý5uj .l324t 0ULUOJ oUjJu %X296,. Cuo u .j 6 u. i i j. Coud * 2 Co * JU J'A 0i2 jZ *d J3 u *2b PALA£ONETES INTERMEDIJS *.ujUL Co.4:3. 0. 3 jw .092.ý, u.ujuul C.L.wu t.u.3;j .043ij j.jjjou J.6}]jJ J.*J590 S0.0r 0 .11.50a U. i.i 3iu 6 0 0j JCu -. 1uu %ai j J~J J 0 V) w .J HEAAPANOPEJS ANGUSTIFRuNs 0.0 C , I .0Uj .u e.3"05 > U.w-4% ..t»J -.+L, 0 I .Jk4 a i. .u >j i .J.. .4.0.J .1 to J. lip4 C,. -.. J L J. ..J .j3 .s. -J «. dd 05 * Ji PRSCAlBA JS PENAE& N ALA4Ji 4.0>.u. J J.· .J J 6t , i .6. 1*C U*-u. Ju.' i Jju .. U ) j.*j-; J.u)weu j i*Jea .j 98 se a ' .9 L3 w. wCJ .*u L... ... U .. ... U. r. 0 4 0



PAGE 1

115. Figure 1. LocaLion of sampling station in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. FLORIDA ST. MARKS .'. * AUC ILLA O C H L O C K O N E E .E C OF IA 0 IF E H H 0 L L 0 £ E A .. '. 'FE HOLLOVAY S..-. ,,.' ,: O cK-2 CAR.-ASEL..S .., .APALACHEE BAY ,--' 9*>^ c AP ALACH CLA . .. ... 'CAp3I,.7 7 -. -' GULF OF MEXICO 84v .3o' 29 30 N + 8so 8030'W +9 3 NI



PAGE 1

247. 3. Smmnary of organisms associated with artificial (reflon) leaves at station 3 (East Bay) from 15 July, 1975 to 15 November, 1975 SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 751015 751115 TOTALS CALSAP 5.69 41.71 47.40 89.90 74.07 75.67 RHIHAR .31 8.59 8.90 4.85 15.25 14.20 NERREC .20 2.65 2.85 3.12 4.71 4.55 PALPUG .07 1.07 1.13 1.03 1.90 1.81 PROPEN 0.00 1.13 1.13 0.00 2.00 1.80 PALINT .02300 .50600 .52900 .36 .90 .84 PALVUL .03240 .45360 .48600 .51 .81 .78 GAMMAC .01118 .07943 .09061 .18 .14 .14 GAMNSP .00162 .05400 .05562 .03 .10 .09 MUNREY 0.00000 .03441 .03441 0.00 .06 .05 MELINT .00032 .02048 .02080 .01 .04 .03 CASOVA 0.00000 .00649 .00649 0.00 .01 .01 CYAPOL 0.00000 .00468 .00468 0.00 .01 .01 GRABON .00060 .00396 .00456 .01 .01 .01 DICSPE .00024 .00189 .00213 .00 .00 .00 ,RLOU. ..00004 .00088 .00092 .00 .00 .00 AMPGUN 0.00000 .00042 .00042 0.00 .00 .00 GITSPE .00001 .00027 .00028 .00 .00 .00 TAPBOW. 0.00000 .00019 .00019 0.00 .00 .00 CERSPE 0.00000 .00012 .00012 0.00 .00 .00 TURSPE 0.00000 .00002 .00002 0.00 .00 .00 TOTALS 6.3 56.3 62.6 AIvvnTA. 13.43.22. 77/02/23.



PAGE 1

215. Analysis of esterase activities, oxygen utilization and ATP levels showed seasonal differences between oak and pine litter. Rates of oxygen utilization and B-D-galactosidase activity were higher on oak litter. The alkaline phosphatase activity and phosphodiesterase activities were related to the ambient temperature around 21°C. Alkaline phosphatase activity on the pine always either equalled or exceeded that found on oak, whereas at temperatures below 210C the activity on the oak always exceeded the pine. Esterase activities and respiration changed with time of exposure in the bay, suggesting a functional succession of the litter-associated microbial communities. 1-Dglucosidase, B-D-galactosidase on both oak and pine litter rose rapidly initially, but then showed progressively decreasing increments with longer incubation which correlated inversely with the weight loss. Overall esterase activities correlated well with.weight loss. Alkaline phosphatase in phosphate-limited situations of ambient concentrations less than 10-6 M showed good correlation with the ATP levels. The implication that there was a difference in microbial populations between pine needles and oak leaves is borne out by differences in the rates of synthecis of phospholipids and total lipids (1). The relative rates of lipid synthesis paralleled the ATP and muramic acid levels (1, 4) and in the ratios of neutral lipids, phospholipids and glycolipids in the population (4). Sweet gum leaves (which disintegrated most rapidly of those tested), when incubated in the bay showed a significantly more rapid rate of lipid synthesis, a different lipid composition and a higher level of ATP than pine or oak leaves. The relative rates of colonization differed between plant litter type and the surface observed by scanning electron microscopy. The needle structures of the slash pine needle were clearly visible, and there was little colonization at week zero, prior to placement of the litter in the estuary, but by the first week



PAGE 1

A Figure 24: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Leiostomus xanthurus in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SCA''EZS FISH TOP TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE 7 F:LE N3)%NA (C-E!ATION 04TE = 77/C3/23.) SC4G;'EGZ-G OF (3O2N) LEIxAN (ACROSS) OAYS 134.475.3 280.4250" 466.3753 644.325Z 824.275C1{C4.225001134.175001364.1251544 .075011724.&253C .*------,-....1. ... ---.----.----...--3'56..C 6 I I ** 3456.C: ±I I I SI I I II I I I I I I I I 311i.40 * I I i + 3112.4C I I I I 2 I I I I I I I I I I I 27:4.5. + I I + 2764.83 I I 1 i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2419.20 + I I 4 .2419.20 I .I I I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 17Z.I i 72$.0 I I I I I I I 2"773.60 I I + 2C73.6. I I I I 138 .I I 2:36, I I I I I I I I .. ..I R SUARED 6 SIGNIFICANCE R I 3451.0 A E D V -II V -6 0 I I A C C I I I 1 I I .I \ 4 .I A V \ /0 I .. ---*----*------------.--***-*4.--*-4.-*--»-4.-4--*.--*-4.*_--+*--..-..»-_-.t.-*-t----«-t*.--r 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SCATTERS FISH TOP TEN N STATISTICS.. C3KRRLATION (s).47517 R SQUAREO -..14076 SIGNIFICANCE R -.00157 STO ESR OF EST -6bC.31222 INTERCEPT (A) .-136.31498 STO ERROR OF A -154.9071.4 SISNIFICAiCE A -.19125 SLOPE (8) -.45318 STO ERROR OF B -.14702 S j;N:F;CA')CE 3 -.'0157 PLOTTIJALUES -6C EXCLUDED VALUES0 )ISSING VALUES -0 ^ r,..,.*. IS PPINTEO IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED.



PAGE 1

236. modification of a program described by Livingston et al., 1976. At each sampling period, fifty random draws were made of the 7 possible combinations of species. Numbers of species accumulated with each sample were averaged and plotted as a percentage of the total number of species taken for the 7 samples. The cumulative distribution function showed that at Station 3, between 90 and 95% of all species were taken by the fourth sample. At Station 5A, these figures ranged from 90 to 97% during the sampling period with asymptotes routinely established by the fourth sample. An analysis was also made of the variablility in the determination of total numbers of individuals (N) taken within a group of subsamples. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) results from Station 5A indicated no significant variation of N from week to week. A theoretical standard error was calculated with confidence limits established to determine variation by sample (S.E. x 100%) x for a given set of samples. This permitted a comparison of the true mean of any number of samples with the mean for the total number of samples (42). At Station 5A, four samples of a given time period were within ± 30.8% of the mean (p < 0.05). At Station 3, the ANOVA results indicated marked differences in N from week to week. Consequently, data were analyzed on a weekly basis. The four samples taken in each period were within ± 51.0% of the mean (p < 0.05). Thus, the data indicate that in terms of the number of species taken in a given set of samples, by the fourth sample, a representative S value was achieved at each site. At Station 5A, relatively uniform N values were noted from sample to sample so that four samples would again allow adequate sampling effort. However, at Station 3, due to higher variability of N, more samples were necessary to achieve the same confidence level. Based on these data, it was determined that four



PAGE 1

Fig. 10: Surface water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. APLHCý .iCiTTEG~AlS t 77/03/11. PAGE 27 FILE N:NA»E (Cr.ETION' LATE = 77/"!/11.) SLATTE.SC;" OF (3C.N) COT5 (ACROSS) OAYS L.225"j .93.'75: u.7Z.i25^; 652.755 S 832. 250 01011.7500119.9250137.3750C1549.825C1729.27530 *----------*------+--------------------------------------------+--------------+----------'6'. I I % .Z6.O . I I I I I I I I I I I I 27+. 1 ZT.2" I I I I I I I I I I .I I I 23. 2 + I I ÷ 238.d0 2 --: -------------------------------------------------------+ I I ' I Sf I I I I I I I I I I ST E.R CF ES -527 INTERCEPT (A 59.7875 ST ERROR OF A 1.9131.389 I II i I I I SSLOPE P) .01 ERROR OF -.130 . IS PRINTED I A COEICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED SI I I I I I I 7 I I I I 79.4 I I I1 I 1--.5. -2 * I 4 * * * * II I I 7 I 3 6 I I ? 12 3/. i: I I.4I I I7 27.I0 I I I TI I SI I I I I I II f I I .I I I u 0 COL'IO? ) (R).:169E .R SQUARED -, .02858 SIGNIFICANCE R -.3960 ST; ES CF E£ -52.17.13 INTERCEPT (A) -59.47875 STO ERROR OF A -14.9389S S:GNIFICA';E A -."'"I' SLOPE (P) -. .01718 STO ERROR OF S * .31304 . SI;IFICA;CE 3 -.:96. ^ FLT'"TJ VALUtS -ti EXCLUDEG VALUES0 MISSIN; VALUES -44 **»***** IS PRINTED IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED.



PAGE 1

116. Table 1. Summary of environmental, nutrient, and phytoplanktorn data. The first value under each parameter is the mean value of that parameter for a given station and the second value is the standard deviation of the values. Temp is temperature, Salin is salinity, Turb is turbidity, and Pri. Prod. is phytoplanktoit pr Lmar, production.



PAGE 1

Figure 22: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Anchoa mitchilli in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March 1972 through February, 1977. SCATT'ES F!SH TOP TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE 3 F:LE N:.N~E (CRZATIGN DATE = 77/C3/23.) TE-. (JC«N) A';CIT (ACROSS) GAYS L3.475'.3, 284.6250 464.3756 644.325G0 8242.75"01 04..225C118a4.175C01364.1ZSC3544. 075C3174.C250 .+----+----,---"----*------------------------* ------------.--------------------537".30 * I I + 5070.~0 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I w w + ~I I + 4061.45 I I I i I I I I I I I I 3557.I? I .I t 3557.1C i--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 32.5*) I I + 3052.80 I I I I I .I I I 1 1 3 II I h5.00 I I + 25I850 I I I I I I I I 254S3.S t I I t 2548.50 I I I I A I I I 1539.90 1539.90 I I I I 1;?5.66 + I + 1B35.69 SCATTERS FISH TOP TEN N I---------------------*******1--!-------------------------CA----------------------------STATISTICS.. CORRELATION (R)-.4205 R SQUARED -.00177 SIGNIFICANCE R -.37486 TJ EPcR OF EST -960.42Ci15 INTERCEPT (A) -764.39783 STO ERPOR OF A -247.83C93 SI5:FICANC A -.u0156 SLOPE (BE --.07539 STD ERROR OF B -.23521 SIGNIFTCANCE 8 -.37486 CLOTTEJ VALUES -60 EXCLUDED VALUES0 MISSING VALUES -0 S**3,*3** -i ; NTfn TF t FFFTCTENT CANNOT BE CONFUTED.



PAGE 1

167. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1971. The fate of dead leaves that fall into streams. Arch. Hydrobiol. 68(4): 465-515. Lentz, J. 1972. The size distribution of particles in marine detritus. In, Detritus and its role in aquatic ecosystems. pp. 17-35. Livingston, R.J. 1974. Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of various pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application to the management of the Apalachicola Bay System (North Florida U.S.A.). Final report, State University System of Florida. Sea Grant Program (R/EA-1). 1975. Resource Management and estuarine function with application to the Apalachicola Drainage System (North Florida, U.S.A.). Contribution to the National Estuarine Pollution Report (E.P.A.). 35 p. , R.L. Iverson, R.H. Estabrook, V.E. Keys, and J. Taylor, Jr. 1974. Major features of the Apalachicola Bay System: Physiography, biota, and resource management. Florida Sci. 37(4): 245-271. , G.C. Woodsum, and J.E. Jernigan. 1975. An interactive computer program for analysis of comprehensive (long-term) field data. (unpublished report). Newell, 1965. The role of detritus in the nutrition of two marine deposit feeders, the-prosobranch Hydrobia ulvae and the bivalve, Macoma baltica. Proc. Zool. Soc., London. 144: 25-45. Nykvist, N. 1959. Leaching and decompositon of litter. I. Experiments on leaf litter of Fraxinus excelsior. Oikos 10(2): 190-211. 1962. Leaching and decomposition of litter. V. Experiments on leaf litter of Alnus glutinosa, Fagus sylvatica and Quercus robur. Oikos 13(2): 232-248.



PAGE 1

193. Table 4 :(continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 5/76 7 T # 10 --18 .0009 .0014 77.7 35 .0009 .0008 44.4 60 .0036 .0054 75.0 120 .0132 .0128 48.5 170 .0196 .0146 37.2 325 .1697 .0598 17.6 Total .0948 7 B # 10 .0012 .0014 58.3 18 .0018 .0032 88.8 35 .0041 .0064 78.0 60 .0114 .0156 68.4 120 .0247 .0234 47.4 170 .0500 .0330 33.0 325 .2562 .0808 15.8 Total .1638 8 M # 10 18 .0007 .0010 71.4 35 .0002 60 .0019 .0020 52.6 120 .0049 .0056 55.1 170 .0078 .0078 50.0 325 .0446 .0438 49.1 Total .0602 6/76 7 T # 10 .0002 -18 -35 .0009 .0008 67 60 .0016 .0016 75 120 .0028 .0025 68 170 .0059 .0040 51 325 .0501 .0189 28 Total .0278 7 B # 10 18 -35 .0020 .0024 60 60 .0022 .0020 45 120 .0062 .0068 55 170 .0074 .0056 38 325 .1850 .0694 19 Total .0862 8 M # 10 -18 .0003 35 .0016 .0026 81 60 .0017 .0020 59 120 .0044 .0022 25 170 .0040 .0024 30 325 .0164 .0104 32 Total .0196



PAGE 1

30. features of the Apalachicola Bay system: physiology, biota, and resource management. Florida Sci. 37(4), 245-271 (1974a). -G.J. Kobylinski, F.G. Lewis, III and P.F. Sheridan: Long-term fluctuations of epibenthic fish and invertebrate populations in Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Fish Bull. 74, 311-321 (1976). -P.F. Sheridan, B.G. McLane, F.G. Lewis, III and G.G. Kobylinski: The biota of the Apalachicola Bay System: functional relationships. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Eds. R.J. Livingston and E.A. Joyce, Jr. (in press, 1977). 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. Caribb. 12: 322-332. Rhoads, D.C. and D.K. Young. 1970. The influence of deposit-feeding organisms on sediment stability and community trophic structure. J. Mar. Res. 28: 150-177. Sanders, H.L. 1958. Benthic studies in Buzzard's Bay. I. Animal-sediment relationships. Limnol. Oceanogr. 3: 245-258.



PAGE 1

B. Data Processing. (continued) This file contains one large program which has been structured in an overlay format. There is one main overlay and nine secondary overlays. Secondary overlays perform the majority of system functions, such as loading data, sorting, calculating biological indices, preparing for graphics and statistics, etc. The main overlay simply fields a SPECS system command and calls for the loading of a secondary overlay. Thus only two overlays are require in computer core storage at any one time -the main overlay and one of the secondary overlays. Library Programs The F.S.U. Computer Center program library contains many routines accessed by the SPECS system. Among these are the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS), the FSU plotting package, a mapping package (SYMAP), and a SORT/MERGE routine. The function of some SPECS secondary overlays is therefore to prepare data base information for input to these higher level routines. III. Operation of the System With the exception of programs in the data storage card decks, all programs in the system are designed to be operated from a remote teletype or CRT terminal. System operation is interactive in that there is twoway communication between the user and the program. The user guides the program through each step of analysis by entering commands or other information in response to questions displayed by the program. A. Terminal session. A terminal session with the SPECS system begins with a user call of the INIT (initiate) procedure file. This procedure first asks the user for the location of the data to be used in this run(possibly a data base tape or an active data file). It then gets the SPECS program and initiates its execution. The main overlay of SPECS writes a "COMMAND?" message to the terminal screen. In response the user enters a SPECS system command. The LOAD (retrieve) and SORT commands are used to create an active data file from a data base tape. If the user began this run with an active data file (created in a previous run), the LOAD and SORT commands are not needed. Once an active data file is available for use the user selects from among a group of commands that initiate execution of secondary overlays which perform analyses of active data. A summary of these commands and the operations performed is presented in Table 1. Following execution of a secondary overlay, the main overlay is calledand the "COMMAND?" message is again printed at the terminal. At this point the user may wish to load more data (create an additional active data file), request another type of analysis on the same data file, or terminate SPECS system operation. When system operation is



PAGE 1

412. XII. Trophic resource partitioning among juvenile fishes Introduction Estuarine areas provide a nursery ground for juveniles of many species of fish. The Apalachicola Estuary is characterized by the dominance of a small number of juvenile fish species: Anchoa mitchilli, Micropogon undulatus, Leiostomus xanthurus, and Cynoscion arenarius (in decreasing order of abundance). Seascnal and long-term fluctuations of these fishes have been documented (Livingston et al., 1976) and observations are continuing. Generally, seasonal peaks of abundance do not coincide, with the exception of M. undulatus, and L. xanthurus. Anchoa mitchill is usually most abundant in fall-early winter, M. undulatus and L. xanthurus peak in winter-spring, and C. arenarius peaks in summer-early fall. Analyses of the seasonal fluctuations of these species indicate that physico-chemical factors (including salinity and temperature) may not be as critical in determining the fishes' distribution as biological characteristics such as feeding and reproduction. The present study was designed to examine the food habits of these four species and to relate their seasonal utilization of the estuary to the seasonal availability of their food sources. Such aspects as trophic resource partitioning, interspeciefic competition, and atilization of abundant, commercially important macroinvertebrates are the subject of this study. Materials and Methods Fishes were collected by monthly trawling in various areas of the Apalachicola estuary (see Livingston et al., 1976, or other portions of this report for description and details of field methods). After field preservation in 10% formalin, fishes were washed and stored in 40% isopropanol until analysis. At such time, fishes were sorted into 10mm SL size classes (e.g. 10-19mm,



PAGE 1

183. 7' 'l 1 7.0f11 4 h-o 7Lu ,l 7 1 60001 7'.071l 76h401 76001 TAC1001 761119 76171 770I t l i ro 1 '.'')fn 0...f> i! n,11 111 I .(J. . .)0. t .000uo0 0o.00o 0 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000on 0.0n000 J. • )..01 ).U ' u.~t 0.009'! 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.f00 on 0.00 ArceA.r. .:.,r .IGIJ .ln.'oi 0.OrJ 0.0 C .1 (1.000o0 0.01nO 0.00000 0.0000 0.00t000 .26000 0.00000 r..r0 .t. *sJ u. I .n O.no0 0.( ,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0 0.00 Jr. .*F ·rr *. n .niur, u l.0 i j.fl t.1;,ln U.~ .'i .0 .,I .OO0o1 0.iOrn 000 O.Ion 0.000000 0.00000 .26h00 0.00000 0' (n.i.) ) -j.u I t.!)0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .os 0.00 'ii )no .j,' 1 .> .n(fijIf '1.'ij'. 1. 1.'.,0),r ) o '.(:04 U.fii0 0.000n0o 0.00O 01100000 0.00000 0 .00000 .t22nn0 .i ., 0. .0..0 .90 0 .n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo .n2 '< r.,"* n,.nr, I i .' 'i)ll I-.ruli fl.~a. :'i0 i.l00oii0 .li1O 0o.0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000 o 0.00on ..'i0 0 n .1f)0 0.00 0.00 %7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0n 0.00 r' .-*:o i ri.; i'." :).,.n( 0) .FUJI) l0n 0.00 0.00000, r0 .O0.0000 o .00 00 0.00000 O.n00on .0]000 .:,s u.,0 0.0 ! O.'Ir u On .0.00 000 .00n 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 vI, ,..'l'') 3 .0t'" ' , .0oi'j30. O..OuOi) 0.0 o.o0, n ;).0oon(o (.oinno 0o.000 no 000000 0.00000 .no0000 0.00000o i. . 1.v0 0. n ,".On 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 >,,ro)o .ni.', .i":t'u.v 0. ]"'nh O~.0'J' ' 0).(V*100 1.10 O .000 0 .000 .f 0.00 000 .on O.0n000 0.o0000 i .: :. ..,'0 ( ri O.i0 0.(IU 0.00 0.(0 0.nil "I .. ..... .i,.: ..*. ..-.I n;. .,,.:o .·:'" o. ' -. ..llillno n 0.u nn0000 0.00o 00 O. lOtO0 0.00'J00 000000 0.00)00 ..'., O.'n: '. ' 00 ,(1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 qi ''r. .i .'. 'ri e. ~, , ; .r l n, .in 'i. ),1 3 )o.innO ) U.Donian 0.0O0000 0.000u 0 OoO.naon O.o0110 s 0. , .....' ',,1' .n ) .0r, O.r00 0.00 0.00 o.o 0.00 |i ~.~lr '; .'n, , l."'l'l U.*Oull:o 0.01-,.0 0.000O o0 0.0000. 0.11000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00fl00 *. 0 1. ,.' .,n ..i *.1a ().00 0.0' .o 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ic ,.r11 l,'pI2) i'.i; 0 ',i o.0Jl"0n o0.o' 310 u.(ion0 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000 0.0000 0.00I 0.00000 i. ', S..0 i.nn .'J x.O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 r M , , i n n, u.r Oi'lnr) O.001"0 0.00'00 U,00n 0.00. 00 .0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000n0 0,00000 ,. .0l 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.<0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.l0 ; *· *' .*^ .-J"`'" S



PAGE 1

-SPEUIES 4AVPL JATES 72:1j75415 12.515 7djr615 726715 f2vdi5 72jg!5 f21313 r21115 r2LBii 734L15 73j215 rOTAS ALPHEUS ARMILLATJ~~b J j 6,; u. .u,, .u)35i3 *:Lai. 6 a ý; 0 60 j U u 4 6 u 5 4 J 60 i U6 u j .j j j 3 0 u .49j93 ALPHz-US NORMANN I Js..' ·*.I ·i~ i-J-u 1 .4. J 1 1, j J -u a 0 55d.0 u1 I·V~~) ..S-I U.0 ou .55d a XIPHOPEN-:Js KR4YERI L; L j,·~J L J. ui 'j j 0 4,1 if 9 j a 4 w 5 L i2 ·S~~i ·J~ju Y·JiL ·~i3 NEOPANOPE TEXAIA 6 0 6i J .%,uU 1 4 j L;. L L-T ·Lii L i u .0 k. 4 9 j j 0 U OW5235~r j~~~~ ·jij E 9 4 ..i .L i's i I~r rJJ·~ BRAN;NIOASICHUi AME-RICANA GEu~j6 0 .5 L 0 0L 3.0vJ~u .0 UJ 4, u su. L .u J 3 ~1·3rj J.3i; Jur j ..J 5jLL J,~ u C L C fiG a U 'j C A Ju 0 a 4 ul. MULINIA LATEPALIS D.~ OLLjw. J.6,pu~j J.JýVuu uouuJ-Lw O.Ju.1u J.;JuJi~uia ·Jqo J.033ij ovOZo i*4jjdiA 06114, PLRICLIME4ES LZ)N-IAUATJ j9 2L aý 1. 2 .6 44L o L L UIJ J j J A A i 4.4 0 Uilj ·iu3~j.~) j ru72 PER OL MEM.S Al:RI AN .,3 G. L.u .k 0 -j .0.0W'' L 46 uG j G a U 1 .6 j j j jw :· J 3 a i 3 w 3 3 ju L o T # ", .iu * .L 0 0U j .v i. 6 3 .j 4 A 1 0 ý j J 0 w OGYRiOEEb LIMIGJL.A L*OOJN. 3.50JýG aJacj.ý' .%,.J ou ..UU ýju 064'JiG uo Ijow 3'.,;Jg O.Luuw JOU443 oai4ý0' D094aOt 05365 TOTALS 2GI93 L38s7 776.8 iG 68. 8 183.a 3950 1 163 7 .5 Z& j.. 1530.,& '03.1 IU9·3 L35o6 7169*2



PAGE 1

365. Fig. 5: Changes in Margalef Richness (Mar), number of species (S), Shannon diversity (H'), and the number of individuals of invertebrates taken monthly from the combined stations (35 trawl tows) in the Apalachicola Estuary from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Dashed lines represent 6-month mean values of these indices are relative dominance of the top species. Also shown are the DDT-R residues found in Rangia cuneata during this period.



PAGE 1

27. system (Livingston et al., 1977). River flow generally dominated the seasonal.characteristics of parameters such as salinity, color, turbidity, and nutrient levels with increased flow associated with increases in the latter 3 functions. Generally, this is a highly turbid bay with considerable oyster bar development and little benthic macrophyte productivity except in shallow (fringing) areas. Tides in the Apalachicola Estuary are semi-diurnal (mixed, unsymmetrical) with a small small range (up to 1 m). Winds in the area follow no clear directional trend although during fall and winter there is a northerly flow which becomes southerly during the rest of the year. In June, 1972, Hurricane Agnes came ashore near the Apalachicola region with winds gusting to 55 knots and tides around 2 m above the norm. Statistical analysis of the physico-chemical data taken over the 4-year study period included simple linear regression and correlation for distribution with time. Significant changes in the regressions (original and loge units) were found for salinity, rainfall, and turbidity. The results of a 2-way (month x year) analysis of variance of these data are shown in Table 3. Since in a 2-way analysis with one observation per cell, the mean square is of necessity used as an error term, the occurrence of annually high significance levels probably indicates that considerable interaction exists. There was significant (p <.05) annual variation of river flow although no trend was apparent during the study period. There were reductions in salinity and turbidity in the Apalachicola system with time. The results of a factor analysis (Table 4) indicate that high riverflow is usually associated with increased color and turbidity and reduced Secchi readings, and low levels of salinity, temperature, and



PAGE 1

Figure 23.: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Micropogon undulatus in the Apalachicola. Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SCATTE S rISH TOP TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE 5 FIL N A·(laE (rCEATION' GATE = 77/03/23.) CLTd-E A3 mA CF (<00>) 3ICUNO (ACROSS) DAYS 10.4750 2~E.#.4?5CC 464.37506 6 4.3253V 824.275PlOC4.225014.i175i136'6.25C00154.3751724.C250Q .+----+--------+----.----.-------+-----.--------------------------*--,-**---*--+--*-, 3527.S; * I I A* 3674.3 SI I II I i I A I I I I I I 3jCE.5 4 I I + 3305.63 I I I I SI I I iI I I I I II t-69. I 257?.?. + I I + 2933.28 I I I I.------.....-.-.--...--..-.---.....-... -....-...-.-........-....--...-......-----I I I I I I I I I II II 257L.% I I I + 2571.86 I I.I I --------------------------------------------------------->-------.---------*********--------I I I I f I I Z034.4C I I + 22.46 I I I I ..-.... ..--„----.+-.-.-.-----------i ----I I I I T -I IER I I I I I A I 37.r P INTEO I T C T 1 37.i.C I I I I I I I I I I 1469.6C + I. * 1469.65 I A I I ------------------------------------------------------------------III I I li±Z.ZI + I I+ -i02.23 \I I I I I II I 367..c 4 I I + 367'.4 I I I I I 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SCATfESS FISH TO" TEN N STATISTICS.. CO' EtATION (C?.13632 R SQUARED -.01858 SIGNIFICANCE R -.14953 ST) ER OF EST -815.75657 INTERCEPT (A) -345.04621 STO ERROR OF A -21C.50132 SIGNIF:Cl'CE A -.u5330 SLOPE (8) --.23937 STO ERROR OF 8 -.1997& SMNIFIC.CE. 3 -..14950 0oL£'EO VALUES -6? EXCLUOED VALUES0 MISSING VALUES -C ******* IS PPINTEO IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED.



PAGE 1

238. during the summer ran counter to trends in other portions of the bay, and could be related to an entirely different set of variables related to storm water runoff in the area. Temporal variation of various community parameters is presented in Fig. 4. In terms of numbers of individuals(N), there was a general increase during the year of sampling at Stations 3 and 5A. At Station IX, there was a decrease of N with time. Other parameters such as number of species (S), Margalef richness (Ma), and Shannon-Weaver diversity (H') increased at all three stations with time. Such indices usually peaked during the fall. Associated with this, there was a general decrease in relative dominance. Correlation coefficients of physico-chemical and biological functions are shown in Table 4. Relative dominance was negatively correlated with H'. High positive correlations were found between S and two parameters (Margalef richness and log N). There were also significant correlations of salinity with S, log N, and species richness. It appears that salinity is a primary determinant of leaf litter assemblages. Interstation relationships of salinity, S, and log N are shown in Fig. 5. Regression analysis confirms these results (F = 30.4; R2 = 0.45 for salinity and S; F = 13.2; R2 = 0.26 for salinity and Loge N). The numbers of species and individuals taken at a given time vary directly with salinity rather than station location. General salinity increases in the fall did coincide with increased similarity coefficients so that even qualitative changes in leaf litter fauna were not unrelated to salinity. The data would thus indicate that salinity is an important parameter concerning the leaf litter assemblages in the Apalachicola Bay System. The allochthonous litter deposited in the Apalachicola Bay System thus attracts a considerable invertebrate fauna primarily composed of



PAGE 1

260. Dicrontendipes sp.. (Insecta, Diptera) Dicrontendipes was the tenth most abundant species collected. It was mainly found in oligohaline marsh embayments in East Bay in salinities of 0 -100/oo and temperatures of 6 -310C. Peak abundance was noted in late fall and winter (November -February). Chironomid larvae are generally herbivorous, feeding upon submerged plants, algae, and detritus, and being consumed by predatory invertebrates and fishes (Odum and Heald, 1972). Cerapus sp. (Crustacea, Amphipoda) Cerapus sp., apparently an undescribed species (E.L. Bousfield, pers. comm.), was the eleventh most abundant organism collected. Cerapus builds tubes attached to the substrate and often forms large colonies. It is also known to detach a small portion of the tube and enter the plankton of Apalachicola Bay (H. Lee Edmiston, pers. comm.). It was mainly found in riverine and oligohaline marsh embayments in East Bay at salinities of 0 -100/oo and temperatures of 10 -300C. Peak abundances were noted in late spring and summer months. Ovigerous females were noted in May through July. Although its food habits are unknown, Cerapus sp. may utilize its long antennae, which are abundantly covered by setae, either to filter the water column or scrape the surface of the substrate. Both small carnivorous fishes (Gobiosoma bosci) and planktivorous fishes (Anchoa mitchilli) are known to feed upon Cerapus in Apalachicola Bay. In general the polychaetes mentioned above were eurythermal and euryhaline species, and were composed largely of selective and non-selective deposit feeders. These species are usually preyed upon by predacious polychaetes, crustaceans, and benthic fishes.



PAGE 1

369. -* 0.9 0.5 0.1 -0.3 -0.5 r1-4 >S 4-0 Anchoa aitchilli "0 a* Etropus crossotus .lSymphurus plagiusa (0 o Oasyatis sabina 3 '0) Prionotus tribulus 40 >% in WI t 6 i.L Archosargus probatocephalus (0 0 0 -.0 8 Lepisosteus osseus C4U VDorosoma petenense (a 0 in 0. mJ Hicropogon undulatus -II Leiostomus xanthurus ( ->Trinectes j iaculatus j >Paralichthys lethostigma-E 4C i C Gobiosoma bosci ( 0 \I Microgoblus gulosus -C Hicrogobius thalassinus SC r.Gobionellus boleosoma -( C S 0 Syngnathus scovelli t 0 ILucanla parva* 0 -"-CU U -.0 Lagodon rhonboides 4n 1 0 1-.U Brevoortia patronus 04 . A) CL U S0-Menldia beryllina 0 4-' a0 t .E: v Urophycis floridanus 44 ) U4J u -o Ictalurus catus fn C CL (0 o tn Cynoscion arenarius -II | Arius felis -11 1 Mentlclrrhus americanus 0 -Synodus foetens E>. .Chloroscombrus thrysurus 0) II nV Chaetodlpterus faber c o * Peprilus paru 4J 4. w. C.0 0 U L 4. Syngnathus florldae-SLL( Eucinostomus argenteus-----_ L, O Syngnathus loulsianae a. 4J Cynoscion nebulosus 0) Prionotus scitulus lCM E 01% 1Bairdlella chyrusura 0' C-Sphoeroldes nephelus 0 -Orthopristis chrysoptera C L. o Porlchthus porosissinus E.ucnostomus gula ---ON Opisthonem oglinum --. ; Achoa hepsetus -" LL ofnacanthus hispidus .-Polydactylus octonemus --Bagre marinus --



PAGE 1

162. Tables 2 and 3. The qualitative and quantitative aspects of detritus composition appear to be related to spatial factors with certain common relationships appearing within various groups of stations. Detritus at stations in up-. pland portions of the bay (5A, 6) was characterized by benthic macrophytes such as Ruppia and Vallisneria with lesser amounts of wood and leaf litter. On the other hand, river-dominated stations (2, 3, 4, 5) were largely represented by wood debris and leaf litter with relatively little detritus of benthic macrophyte origin. Leaf matter was contributed by numerous species of terrestrial plants which commonly inhabit upland river and swamp areas. Dominant forms included Quercu, spp., Populus deltoides Liquidambar styraciflua, Nyssa aquatica, Betula nigra, and Acer rubum. Benthic macrophyte detrital matter was derived largely from Ruppia maritima, Ulva lactuca, Halodule wrightii, Vallisneria americana, and Gracilaria spp. Outer bay areas receiving river drainage (1, 1A, 1B) were characterized by lesser quantities of wood debris, leaf litter, and benthic macrophytes in nearly equal proportions. Outer bay stations which did not receive direct river runoff (IX, IE, 1C) were dominated by detritus of benthic macrophyte origin, notably Gracilaria foliifera, Halodule wrightii, and Ulva lactuca. The data indicate that various forms of detritus of terrigenous origin occur in the bay, and that areas associated with Apalachicola River runoff are typified by seasonally variable concentrations of allochthonous leaf and wood matter. In a qualitative and quantitative sense, the appearance of macroparticulate matter in the Apalachicola Estuary appears to be a function of river flow. River fluctuations during the sampling period (Fig. 2) re-



PAGE 1

Table 3: Stomach contents (% of total dry weight) of Micropogon undulatus, summed by size class. Food Item Size (mm) 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100-109 Sand Grains <.1 <.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 <.1 Sediment masses 0.2 2.4 1.5 3.3 3.3 8.2 Detritus 7.1 6.5 12.9 10.4 17.5 19.2 19.0 15.0 19.5 10.3 Plant remains <.1 0.3 0.4 <.1 0.4 0.1 <.1 0.6 0.7 Nematodes 0.8 0.4 <0.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Polychaetes -larval <.1 <.1 -juv./ adult 26.2 31.5 35.6 36.6 29.6 31.7 28.1 48.4 64.7 32.8 Gastropods <.1 <.1 0.3 Bivalve siphons 1.5 2.8 3.7 3.1 3.0 1.2 3.2 Bivalves 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.1 Cladocerans <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Ostracods 0.2 0.2 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Calanoid copepods 10.0 7.1 4.2 6.0 9.1 7.8 7.1 1.6 2.1 <.1 Harpacticoid copepods 12.2 8.6 2.7 1.9 4.3 2.4 0.7 0.1 Cumaceans 1.4 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Isopods 0.2 0.7 3.6 2.9 0.9 0.1 Amphipods 5.3 16.9 13.6 6.8 3.7 4.6 3.8 2.3 0.3 0.1 Mysids 8.0 5.7 5.0 8.2 10.4 11.3 11.0 2.3 5.6 Shrimp -postlarval <.1 <.1 -jub./adult 0.1 1.4 0.9 2.9 4.8 10.3 10.1 2.1 1.8 -juv./adult 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.5 Unassigned decapod larva <.1 Insect larvae 27.9 20.9 20.8 11.6 11.9 5.0 0.5 0.2 Ophiuroids 1.0 Unassigned invertebrate eggs 0.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Fish -eggs <.1 <.1 -larval 0.3 0.3 1.2 -juvenile 0.5 0.8 10.3 10.4 1.8 53.7 -bones, scales <.1 1.2



PAGE 1

90. MATERIALS & METHODS Sampling trips to Apalachicola Bay and East Bay (Fig. 1, Livingston et al.) were taken seasonally during 1975 and 1976 to determine the extent of nutrient limitation in the Bay System. A detailed description of the physiography and biota of the Apalachicola Bay System can be found in Livingston et al (1974). ( Water temperature and salinity were determined with a Beckman RS 5-3 Portable salinometer. Secchi disc measurements -were taken to estimate light attenuation with depth. Turbidities were analyzed with a Hach model 2100 A Turbidometer. Suspended solids were determined gravimetically. Inorganic suspended solids were also determined gravimetically after ashing the samples at 5500C for 4 hrs. 500 ml water samples were collected at stations 1A in East Bay and 7 in Apalachicola Bay, for nutrient analysis (Fig. 1, Livingston et al). Samples were immediately filtered through Whatman GF/A glass fiber filters upon collection. One ml of 2% HgCl2 solution was added to eliminate microbial processes and the samples were then placed on ice. All nutrients were analyzed within 48 hrs. Soluble reactive phosphate was analyzed by the method of Murphy and Riley as out lined in Strickland.& Parsons (1972). Total dissolved phosphate was analyzed by the persulfate oxidation method listed in Standard Methods (1971). Nitrite was determined by the method of Bendschneider & Robinson given in Strickland & Parsons (1972). Nitrate determinations were based on the method of Morris & Riley with modifications given in Strickland & Parsons (1972). Chlorophyll-a was determined by the method of Loftus & Carpenter



PAGE 1

228. 48. Gray, T. R. G. 1976. Survival of vegetative microbes in soil. Symp. Soc. Gen. Microbiol. 26: 327-364. 49. Gambaryan, M. E. 1966. Method of determining the generation time of microorganisms in benthic sediments. Microbiology 34: 939-943. 50. Gibbons, R. J., and B. Kapsimalis. 1967. Estimates of the overall rate of growth of the intestinal microflora of hamsters, guinea pigs, and mice. J. Bacteriol. 93, 510-512. 51. El-Shazly, K., and R. E. Hungate. 1965. Fermentation capacity as a measure of net growth of rumen microorganisms. Applied Microbiol. 13: 62-69. 52. Postgate, J. R. 1973. The viability of very slow-growing populations: a model for the natural eco-system. Bull. Ecol. Res. Comm. (Stockholm) 17: 287-292.



PAGE 1

1 I .1 ·~--,--+-~ ~-c)--+ -----~--~-+---------------------------1 T I T I TI TT I I I I T i I .I I T I I *5 I I 10.80 +I T I i I -----------------------------.-----~------...-.--.........--....... I I 1 I i 2 I T .2 q,.5 7 I I ".65 I I I I * I -I I 3.50 T 1 3 9.50 i 1 I T Si I I I I I I I S.20 + I 6.20 L T 3,90 I I I T II T I. I I I .T ~-----L---~--r~-+~r;+--r ~,,,+,c-+------------------~---,---------4 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 9/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 Figure 10. Surface chlrophyll a for Apalachicola Bay.



PAGE 1

SHU/L/ARY JAN 3 1978 .F. A.S. -Un Floria niv. of FloridENERGY RELATIONSHIPS AND THE PRODUCTIVITY OF APALACHICOLA BAY Robert J. Livingston1 Richard L. Iverson2 David C. White 1 Florida Sea Grant Technical Paper



PAGE 1

106. Phosphorus Limited Phytoplankton Productivity in Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Coastal Waters



PAGE 1

j ' i 745 74061 7471.5 7* d5 7j 9 71.1.5 74lL1 MYSIa SP. ."o. , 3.ue,#. OQ.Olui;a j.uJL G.k,4u .Ji J.J G U. l * ao .*iJ u j *dli U.UuJRANCSP0 j.L.Ui" eýjLJsu 2 0 w i.4eV I 1 J.jie. i jJ4iso oufl. diJouJeu h0J.6ju aifJsZ fIUJIBRANCi 5P. Z*UJ J *Jj t *:: )*j 2.*j,.J *.Uu J *Je J-wJ * Jj* ' .*4 e.B TOTALS 3Ji.5 18.1 -i3.8 33.8 tbl. 6.3.4 e.+. *L.i 5+4*. .52.T 55.3 Tle.j 672.6 rX



PAGE 1

182. CFTCIEc 4. l r iTFIp ?7h-)P" 7T01.J F ,l 7(lli / A' 7hu , 7hu/ ')i Th"~ 7o hu01 ?1001 761119 7T1 71 7701 ; inrED 0.100 0.') , 00'i 0.0 1.1 o.no0 0.0o0 o0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C'.O .. 0.40n I.n0 u.00 n 0. 00 0.00 0.0 0.00 .no 0.00 .* * i3 '4.D' .0'I ).0) 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 2. .A .11 .I0 t 0.0 ') .01 00 0..00 0.00 0.n0 0.00 0.00 oo ..nl 0'r"lF ." 0.0o O.,I 9.10 0 .0.l 0 ..o 0.00 0.00 h.h? o.n0 0.JO 0.l0 O.." U0.'0 U. nj 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.2l O.0n S.2' .01 0.00 0.00 .30,In 0. o 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 o .? .11 T 5f 0.A0 o.0. 0.3 .,A U 0.)0 0.00 0.00 o.no .IT 0.00 o.On o.01 0.00 0.0u o.no 1.11 C,. n O.n 0.00 0.00 .03 0.0o o.no 0.00 L'1o.l 0*00) 0.Jo 0.00' O.o .'v* 0.00 0.00o 0.00 0.00 .no0 0.00 O.n0 0.30 0.')0) 0o.n 0.0n .ln 0.o0 0.0n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 E4N't" "m 0S'' 0.0 .C.nn 0.00 o.0.n 0.90 0.00 2.ln 9.0n 0.o0 '.(U .)J 0.0() ).10 .U.l 0 u.o o. oo 000 0.00 .0.00 0.0oo V T 0 .'n 0.'0 n.0 0.0. n.O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.22 1.p,7 0. 0 0.)0 '.0) 0.') U0.) 0."o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .'9 .*1 SdAI AL * 0.0 0. 00 0.00 .1 .00 0. 0.00 0.00 .10 .O .24 .01 .1' 0.'O j.,0 o 0.0n 1.3 0.00 n0.0 0.00 .02 .04 .04 .n rlsI 00..0 0)00 3 0.1 O.:)n ..0 .0.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 .0 0.00 ..U.-.O I ' '.0 n .00 b.,0 0.00 n.n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .0 0.00 TY' -T 0.00 .O 0 .0o 0.0 :.0 It 0. 00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.on 0.00 o.0nn0 )0 0.0) i. .'0 I0 0,. 00 q .no O.t 0.t0n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0n r I, jq i.'") 0. o0 ) n.n o.nfi ,. In U.no0 on.n 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .0? 0 .Otin O.tn L) .nn C .1f) o.Mo l. oi o 0.00 0 O.Ou I :t In t0'NI .9, o.'ic 0.,n 0.00 I'.0 0.o0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0o.o .q1 .I ~ ..I 0.00 .0.') 0U.0N U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 , 0' .0 ac' .00 0.0 0.00 0. 1 , 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o0.00 0.00 N.0 O.I0I n. in 0 Ot.o n o.00, 0.0 o. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n.n0 0.01t) 0.10 0. 0..1 0 40.0 .,n .. 00 n0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 0n 0.00 nnf 0.'0 0.00 0.00 0.00 t.tA. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ..on £0.,z ).3 ,' .1.. 1 .'1) .:0i 0.00 01.nn 0.1)0 0.00 0n.00 .00l 0.00n 1. (VWC.C 0. 10 0.0n 1 0.00 0.01 0. '0 0.00 o.00 0.010 0.00 0.00 .W'k 0.On 0. V I .t 1.: '. Q 0 0.111 P.0 a 0.00 o .00 0.o0n 0.00 o.00 .1' 0.00) (I. -.I') ... 0.'n0 " .*, 0.00 (I0.00 0.00 o.00 0.00 0. O 0.00 0;.toDr n,(, .n." .*l. ..nn Q.i0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.nn ). ' 1.U !. o o:1 .0 .I 0o.0 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .nn LFP'.PF 4.i0 o O.u 0.0 0.11n 0 5.00 u.t0n n.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.30 U .0.0n0 '. u.n. O 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 .2 0.00 CFLLAE ".n''n0 o o.naoi) .,i(ln n.1no1,i.n 0o0, .00, 0 o.n0ono O.o00o 0.oo00000 0.00o000 0.00o00 .13000 o0.000o O." * 9.'0 i -).n, u.') 0.00o 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00o .0? 0.on rct.,RA J.fr'(P'l 1.ol1IJ 0.00 .0)1) (0.0o0i)i(' ) 0.(i, o .000 0.0011010 0.0o0000 n n.o00oo 0.0O00 .7Io200nt .1)0) 0. 00 0.01) 0 0.n .nn00 0. .0 0.00 n.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 .01 yvsioF I .n000'n n.0oj'tuI.0 O,'i;0llno 0n.o',1 t1).00ij .0) o.uu,0 0.00000 n0.0000 0.00o00oo0 0.1i0 R.r 000 n0.00'n0 3.,in It.vj 0.00 0.r00q .0 0.00 0..00o 0.0 00 0.00 .1, 0.00 3FupAL iO(UtI )'*l .OoojO t.0 0 .u.Ouo*(ln) i.ui n 0 (.00000 0.0000on 0.00ooa00 0.0000 00 0.0O)00 .0'000 .61'00n q.,)n U0.0 o0.00 u.0n (0.)O 0n.00 n. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .n06 Tl US'I ;,.nninto 0'.000') n.,;o>:tfn .0o10, 0.0.3 .'0o ,.ot0tinn O.nn0 0 .00000 On o.00ooo 0.00nn0o 0.n00no0 O.onn) 0.'0 'o.0 0o .0n .)i 'or; 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.nn T rATF. .009j.0 0. 1l000 3 a.i.'in o. 0.00U' 0.,I .10 u0.00(,n 0.onnno 0.0000l0 0.00000 0.00000 O.0On0 1o.nn0inn O.u0 0.o0 0o.0n o.00 0c.i0 o.nn0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0n.n onftonr .'.Ono000 n0.00ocu .t4nn 1) .ri) :' n I).0; ) oI0 oo0n o.o0 o .00on0000 0n.11000 0.00000 0.Qn0000 o.n000nn 0.00 0.oi) .0 1 1 3.0 .0.00 0n.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -ta .I 'n. n'.o' o) 0 .00 .n: 0.U fl( n.'ut U, .' ).U '3 , 0). i00 .l 01nnn U."00n0 0.0no0000 O.n0 n0 0.0non0 (i.00000 0.in 10 0.00 0.0f 1 0.10 '.0 0 0.0o .oo0 .o.oo 0.0 .0.00 0.0 .n00 Lti n(On ..3r')i'lq)' 1.9000) ) 1(..** :lnl 0. 9 *'') i'). ýi ) ; 0. 0no000 0.00000 0o.0 )oo0n 0.nn0 0 0.00000 0.n00ool0 0).0000.')0 S.(1) 0.. '.) ) .'. ' 0.0n 0.0 t0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0n0 0I.



PAGE 1

281. while maximal river flooding (winter and spring, 1973) coincided with the preeminence of Micropogon undulatus. Starting in the summer of 1973, a consistent pattern emerged whereby there was a regular (temporal) succession of dominants. During the fall months, Anchoa was the top species with lesser peaks occurring during the spring and summer. In winter and early spring months, Micropogon undulatus and Leiostomus xanthurus were dominant followed by Cynoscion arenarius in the summer and early fall. Other species such as Harengula pensacolae and Brevoortia patronus were dominant during the spring of each year. Although there were usally minor variations in this sequence from year to year, the general pattern prevailed subsequent to the spring and summer of 1973. The total number of species taken the first year was less than the following 3 years. Although more fish were taken during the first year, when the top dominants were removed from analysis, there was a substantial increase in the numbers of fishes taken during the succeeding 3 years of sampling. These data are consistent with the night collections, and provide a qualitiative basis for the observed patterns of temporal fluctuations of the community indices. A cluster analysisiwas used to determine the species groups which tended to co-occur in time during the sampling period. The 48 monthly totals of absolute abundance of each fish species were used to cluster species which tended to co-occur during the 4 years of sampling. The similarity coefficient P(F1, F2) = :fl (x) f2 (x)2 du (x); (Matusita, 1955; van Belle ad Ahmed, 1973) was used in conjunction with the flexible grouping cluster strategy (8 = -0.25). The use of this procedure has been described elsewhere (Sneath and Sokal, 1973; Boesch, 1973). The



PAGE 1

Fig. 16: Secchi disk readings (m) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. AP.LACn SCATTE -.A 77/33/11. PAGE 23 FIL -.N! -(CEr'IO4 "ATF = 77/"'/1-.) SCA~T£^G Ir OF (J)C SE: (ACROSS) DAYS :L'.2-' 23.675:; 477.1650c 652.575C3 832.25001B11.4750G1130.925001370.37501549.825SO1729.275;( .* *---,--r-t -------*--**--------------------------------------..... I I + I I I I 1.64 1.64 I.I I I& -iI I I. i-i6 / I \ . -----------------------------------.......----------....... I \ I I. I I 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 AALAC i SCATTERGRAMS I TIE IN MOTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977 STATISTICS.. COiRELATION (R).1:2« R SO'JUARLEO -i0C6 SIGNIFICANCE R -.219" 2 S T.. OF S -..65 INtERCEPT (A) -.7898S STD ERROR OF A -,C9136 ------A7-I It:S,:;I-w*C i -.I5Cl SLOPE (E) -*GOGI 7 STO ERROR OF l -.0C~9 313NIOFICR.CE 3 -.21g:2 L'**TJ VALUES -62 EXCLUDED VALUES9ISSING VALUES -43



PAGE 1

34. Table 1 (continued) STATION DATE METHOD 1 METHOD 2 % ORGANICS 1/76 4.05 7.97 2/76 4.10 8.30 5A 3/75 1.70 1.11 4/75 1.75 1.03 5/75 1.60 1.40 6/75 1.85 0.97 7/75 1.75 2.38 8/75 1.95 1.79 2.83 9/75 1.80 1.41 10/75 1.85 1.70 11/75 1.90 4.64 12/75 2.10 1.93 8.45 1/76 1.80 2.78 2/76 1.80 1.72 2.33 5B 5/75 4.20 11.45 6/75 4.45 10.61 7/75 4.25 12.32 8/75 4.20 12.51 9/75 4.15 11.95 10/75 4.20 12.20 11/75 4.20 12.21 12/75 4.20 9.39 1/76 4.20 9.19 2/76 4.20 10.52



PAGE 1

'' 6 : Sterwise recaession analysis involving predictive equations for independent variables (Listed in Table 1 ), dummy variables for months of the year, and the dependent (binlonical) functions. Variables were selected in order of entry with R values and siqnifica-ce probabilities. Several runs were made with different sets of variables for '-aximal use of the data. penendent variable Set 1: All variables Set 2: All varibles except Set 3: All variables nitrates, phosphates and except nitrates, chlorophyll A phosphates, chlorophyll A, ODT (RanPia and PCB (BPanjga, number of October R = 0.39 'ndividuals(N) --River flow p < 0.043 Number of October R = 0.54 October R = 0.59 October R = 0.63 species(S) p < 0.05 Low tide p < 0.019 Low tide p < 0.001 November November Soecies -DOP(dummy) R = 0.60 -DDP(dummy) R = 0.52 -DDP(dummy) R = 0.061 diversity(H') August p < 0.032 August p < 0.021 August p < 0.001 November Simpson DDP(dummy) R = 0.56 DDP(dummy) R = 0.56 DDP(dummy) R = 0.64. Index(Si) -November p < 0.024 -November p < 0.011 -November p < 0.0005 -October Margalef Low tide R = 0.56 Low tide R = 0.56 Low tide R = 0.62 Index(M) -River flow P < 0.024 -River flow p < 0.012 -River flow p < 0.0005 Relative DDP(dummy) R = 0.60 DDP(dummy) R = 0.60 DOP(dummy) R = 0.60 Dominance(D) p < 0.056 November p < 0.014 November p < 0.001 October October Anchoa October R = 0.65 October R = 0.65 October R = 0.73 group November p < .014 November p < 0.005 November p < 0.0005 DDT DDT -Year 2 -May Micropogon River flow R = 0.68 River flow R = 0.71 River flow R = 0.71 grou.p p < 0.001 p < 0.0001 -Temnerature P < 0.0001 Cynoscion -River flow R = 0.80 -River flow R = 0.80 -River flow R = 0.86 group -March p < 0.0001 -March p < 0.0001 -March p < 0.0001 -January -January -January Gobiosoma group ------------------Chloroscombrus -River flow R = 0.68 -Riverflow R = 0.68 -River flow R = 0.68 group October p < 0.002 October p < 0.001 October p < 0.0001



PAGE 1

100. 1A 3/29/76 7 3/29/7F, .3 3 0.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 21." 22.7 0.0 18.9 13.0 PO, PP s 23.7 20.5 .3.5 1 .1 .1 1A 6/10/76 7 6/10/76 *" " .*-:.. --, ,"! ",; ---.SN03 .3 IC 2 1_o.o5.________ 10.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 56.7 55.1 0.0 35.8 37.0 0.25 64.2 ---. 0.25 37.6 4PO POL -" 0.5 72.3 74L.7 :. -0.5 40.1 39.5 2.0170.9 71.3 2.0 39.5 3B .0 1A 7/5/75 7 7/5/7S fiN S0.0 5.0 0.0 5. 0.0 50.2 50.7 0.0 40.4 46.7 0.25 58.7 ---0.25 43.7 ---P0, POP -0.5 59.2 56.2 -0.5 149.2 50.2 2.0 55.2 57.2 2.0 47.L 5e.3 "!itrat c .oncentratio.3 in g-at' 'fC3-/1 a.r.. h.os-a.t concentrations in .itp-cati PO -P/11 .) Phcosy'ntht ic cch-irc;>nent in ur C hr'1 1 . JL A



PAGE 1

SPECiFS SAM PLE CTES 7F0313 7?r0415 7r,5 1 i60615 76;715 760815 7 0915 761011 761119 761213 770125 770220 TOTALS PODIL.-THYS POROSISISMUS 0.00 q0.0 26.591 .21 .75 .j2 2.25 1.11 n0.0 1 1 .3 0.00 31.23 u.O0 ij.00 1.P? .02 .05 .02 .19 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16OOROSnMA PrTFNENVF ".olu J.O0 0. .0 0.03 0u.00 0. 0 n 0.00 5.33 24.14 .49 .43 30.89 0.0j 0.00 0. )0 0.00 1. a u.io0 0.u0 n.00 .15 5.09 .09 .03 .15 nENT.: : rnHU3; ;:EF i AI.US 10.39 0.00 .11 2.06 1.00 1.77 1.73 5.48 1.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.41 ..)4 1.0n .DO .15 U.00O .07 .15 .3? .04 9.0 0.00 0.00 .11 MENIOTA PFRYLLINA 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.83 .77 11.20 6.45 0.00 22.25 .10 O.OU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .02 2.36 1.20 0.00 .11 PARALICHTHYS ALBIrUTTA 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.09 J.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.63 18.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 .59 0.00 O.OU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .83 .09 EUCINOSTOMIIS ARGENTLUS 0.00 n.00 0.00 0.00 .78 2.50 4.49 .01 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.92 o.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .13 .38 .00 .23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 SFHOEROIOrS NEPF-LUS 0.00 n.00 0.00 1.16 0.00 .82 0.00 0.00 6.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.un .04 0.n0o 0. o .22 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 ORTHOPPISTIS CHRYSOPTETEA 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.O0 0.0 00 0.0 0 0.0 0.00 3.00 0.00 3.59 0.00 6.59 u.00 0.0u 0.00 0.00 0.o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .39 0.00 .67 0.00 .03 DIPLECTRUM FOMOSUN 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.jn O.n0 0.00 0.00 6.53 0.00 0.0O0 0.00 6.53 0.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00o 0.00 0.00 0 .UO 0.00 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 GOBIONELLUS ROLE"SOMA t1.q 1.39 .23 .79 0.00 .18 0.o0 0.00 .02 0.00 .09 .75 5.14 .r9 .U6 .01 .06 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 .02 .06 .03 GOBIONELLUS MASTATUS 0.00 0.n0 0.00 1.78 0.000 0.0 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.91 0.00 0.n0 0.uo .13 0.00 0.00 0. 0 .18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 EUCIN.OSTOPUS GULA U.00 0.00 0. o 0.00 0.00 2.29 0. 00 2.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.41 n.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .12 0.00 .12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI .83 .09 .20 .50 0.00 .56 0.00 .06 .63 .57 .38 .23 4.05 W .P4 .00 .01 .04 0.00 .03 0.00 .00 .02 .12 .0 .02 .02 vi HARENGUIA PENSACOLAE 0.00 3.91 U. 0 0.00 ' 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.91 0.00 .16 0.00 0.00 0.00o 0.0 000 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 SYNGMATHUS LOUISIANAE 0.00 1.18 0.00 0.00 1.52 1.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.88. O0.00 .05 0.00 .0.00 .11 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.On 0.00 0.00 .02 PEPRILUS PARU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.47 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.47 o.on 0.00 0.0uo o.j .24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o000 0.00 .02 PRIONOTUS SCITULUS 0.00 .19 0.00 3.17 0.00 0.00 0.0 0. 0 0.00 0.00 0.0 O.O 0.00 3.36 0.00 .01 0.00 .23 U.J0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 GC9IOSOMA BOSCI 2.10 .48 0.00 O.On 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .02 0.00 .34 .09 3.20 .11 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .00 0.00 .06 .01 .02 SYNGNATHUS FLORIDAE 0.00 0.00 .?1 0.00 0.00 2.48 0.00 0.00 .9 0.00 0.00 0.0O 3.18 0.0P .00 .01 0.00 0.00 .13 U.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 CARAN. HIFPOS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.53 0.00 .37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.90 0.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.00 .13 0.no .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 LUCANI; PAkVA .27 0.00 .66 0.00 0.00 .15 0.00 .05 1..47 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.60 .01 0 .3 .0..00 .3 0 .. .o.o00 .oo .05 .o00 C.00 0.00 .01 CHLORCSCOMPR!US CHPYSUUS 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .25 .38 1.00 .12 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 .0 .2 .02 .08 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 LUTJANUS GRISEUS 0.uO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 1.71 0.00 0.0 0 0.0 0f.00 1.71 n.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 MICRObUBIUS THALASSINUS u.00 .67 .07 0.00 .04 .12 .06 .48 .03 .21 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.00 .03 .00 0.00 .00 .01 .01 .03 .30 .04 0.00 0.00 .01 ANCYCLLPSFTA QUADFOCELLATA 0.00 0.0 u.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 O.Jn 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0o0 0.00 0. 00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .12 .01 ANCAO HEPSEIUS 0.n0n 0.00 0U.JO .4 .91 0.00 0.00 0.00 P.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.40 0.0 ..0 0o .on .04 .06 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 .o00 0.00 0.00 .01 SELENF VOMER 0.0n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .29 .84 O.On 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.13 0.on 0.00 0.no 0.0on 0.o0 .01 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00o 00 0.00 .01



PAGE 1

.s ,a .n mon y n e pa ac co a .s uary a ons , , , ., , ,., .A, 6 rom arch, 19 to March, 19 7. SCATTGRAR5S NM,IOPASSNS 091,'02o0309 3. Oo5,09s06,1OAt, Ol01otC 77/03/22. -PAGE 3 FTLE MONAME (CREATTON DATE a 77/03/22.) SCAtTEDGRAM OF (rONN) N (ACROSS) DAYS 104.4.7900 284.42500 464.37500 644.3258 824.2750Ot1894.2250011O81. 175t 0164.125.00i544.758 7214.02500 ** --»* 4---+-÷«--+--, + ----»*---• ,4-.*--*'-"---f*-+ +---* *-·.-**..*».**.* + ------.» , 13123.00 * 13123.00 .I .123.30 I I 1187.36 1 n 11827.30 I I I I 10531.60 + I 1 l0531t6B I I I 105 I I I I 9235.90 I I235.90 I I I I I-----********* ** ---------------------------------------* * I I .. I .. 791.0-I Z I 796,a.20 I II I I I " I t T4 . I I I I I I I I I I I I 2757.48 2757.40 I II 4153.17 + i 4 r3.1t9 i I 1R II I / 57 I II I "1 Iv I I I II I 166.88 + -166.80 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 ! SC*TTISIGAMS N.8IOASSNS 001,02.003, 04., 005,006,01,18 OB.01C, 0 ST9TISTICS.. GC~'ELATICN (R).20786 'R SQUARED -.04321 SIGNIFICANCE R -.85550 STD rR" Cf EST -2020.19342 INTERCEPT (A) -1347.98851 STO ERROR OF A -521.29937 SINhIFIt*ANCE A -.00612 SLOPE (B) -.80072 STD ERROP OF B -.49476 SI'NIFICAWCE B -.U5550 DLOTTEO VALUES -60 EXCLUDED VALUES0 KISSING VALUES -0 "'" " IS ; 'I:;TCE IF A COLF-:CIENT C*,..OT BE CnlauiTD.



PAGE 1

Fig. 15: Bottom turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. LACPiCC SCATTEcGRA-S 1 77/03/11. PAGE 37 :CLE i'." (C E&TION "ATE z 77/tC/ii.) SCAT I .'E1.;. i' (OwCN,; -US (ACROSS) OAYS ll'..2 4C3 293.675 n73.1255... 652.57500 832.25301i1'..C75CC190. 92500137C. 350Ci549.82S5001729.Z .+-------------+-----------------------------------------------167.3" + I I * 160.00 SI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .0 I I I » _ I I I I I I I---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I SI I I I i ( I i 1 .I I i * . I I I i I I SI i i.4 I r . SI, / I I I .*»---------------------------------------------------^+ * S -^ r~E --.1 -4'FAri T (.) -35.2 7:5 17ERR.R CF A 9.7 0 S)S,8 * " '*l-tA -r.r cx TJcrVALUESY:SS5NNVALUES -4" ..Týr-711T IrrT.mrý',TP nPT,



PAGE 1

TABLE _ : Results of 2-way analysis of variance (b month, by year) for physicochemical and biological parameters of the Apalachicola Bay System taken over a 48 month period (March, 1972-February, 1976). Included are various indices used in the overall statistical analysis. Number Standard Deviations from the mean by year Significance (P) Parameter of cases Mean Deviation 192-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 Month Year Physicochemical River Flow (C.F.S.) 48 27,586 15,366 -2401 5369 -6088 3122 0.001 0.025 Secchi (m) 48 0.82 0.37 0.08 -0.19 0.10 0.01 0.172 0.194 Color (P+-Co units) 48 42.4 74.5 22.8 -11.7 -16.7 5.1 0.203 0.999 Turbidity (J.T.U.) 48 20.2 33.4 16.2 9.9 -13.7 -12.7 0.999 0.180 Temperature (oC) 48 20.2 6.3 1.6 -2.6 0.9 -0.2 0.016 0.240 Salinity (0100) 48 16.1 8.3 2.7 0.8 1.3 -5.5 0.003 0.114 Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 48 8.2 2.3 -0.4 0.1 -0.1 0.2 0.058 0.999 Nitrate (ug/L) 42 Phosphate (ug/L) 42 DDT (Rangia: PPB) 29 145 173 160 -125 -83 --0.303 0.001 PCB (Rangia: PPB) 29 85 85 79 -61 -41 --0.402 0.001 Chlorophyll A (mg/n3) 44 5.3 2.1 1.9 0.7 -0.9 -1.1 0.331 0.002 Rainfall 48 5.0 4.0 01.3 -1.1 0.5 2.0 0.398 0.999 Wind 48 ------------Tides 48 ---------DDP** 48 --------m1 mll*** 48 ---Invertebrates Number of individuals (N)* 45 647 763 -73 -170 25 224 0.999 0.999 -N-N1 (dominant species)* 45 209 125 -14 -39 -108 162 0.999 0.021 Margalef richness 45 1.78 0.56 0.02 -0.13 -0.01 0.16 0.999 0.999 Relative dominance (%) 45 56.4 16.6 -2.4 1.9 7.2 -4.9 0.358 0.999 Shannon diversity 45 1.34 0.36 -0.05 -0.14 0.04 0.16 0.999 0.257 Number of species (5) 45 11.7 3.8 .2 .0 0.8 1.6 0.999 0.255 Fishes Number of individuals (N)* 45 1670 1219 202 14 170 46 0.217 0.999 N-N1 (dominant species)* 45 663 221 -160 17 20 162 0.108 0.009 Margalef richness 45 3.52 0.71 -0.22 -0.09 -0.06 0.37 0.114 0.146 Relative dominance (%) 45 54.9 16.6 10.6 -1.0 -5.4 -4.2 0.099 0.041 Shannon diversity 45 1.48 0.33 -0.23 -0.03 0.11 0.08 0.051 0.030 Number of species (5) 45 26.4 5.9 -1.5 -0.9 -0.3 2.8 0.237 0.236 Anchoa group* 45 2.57 0.70 0.20 -0.22 -0.02 0.04 0.003 0.050 Micropogon group* 45 2.14 0.80 -0.15 0.37 -0.23 0.01 0.001 0.050 Cynoscion group* 45 1.58 0.94 0.11 -0.21 0.11 -0.01 0.001 0.095 Gobiosoma group* 45 1.12 0.57 -0.28 -0.24 -0.11 0.42 0.064 0.011 Chlororscombrus group* 45 0.59 0.86 0.19 -0.07 0.07 -0.18 0.001 0.204



PAGE 1

265. X. Grassbed (Vallisneria americana) Assemblages in East Bay Although there is limited benthic macrophyte development in the Apalachicola Bay System relative to contiguous areas along the Gulf coast (Zimmerman, 1974; Zimmerman and Livingston, 1975, 1976; Livingston et al., 1976), various shallow areas of St. George Island and East Bay are characterized by macrophyte associations. A project was thus designed to determine the seasonal variation of Vallisneria beds in East Bay in terms of plant biomass and the associated assembages of organisms. In addition, sampling sites were placed in such a way to determine the potential effects of storm water runoff from the clear-cut areas in the Tate's Hell Swamp. Methods and Materials Macrophyte samples were taken in two grassbed areas (stations 4a and 4b; Fig. 1). These were dominated by Vallisneria americana. A detailed analysis of sampling criteria is given by Livingston et al. (1976). Samples were taken monthly from November, 1975 to October, 1976. Vegetation was sampled by haphazardly throwing 8 0.25m2 hoops at each station and gathering all plant matter within each hoop. The plant matter was placed in plastic bags, and the samples were taken to the laboratory where they were washed, sorted to species, and identified. Collections were dried in ovens at 1050C for about 12 hours (until there was no further weight loss). Total (whole plant) dry weight for each species was determined and recorded by station, and data were entered into the computer files as biomass (dry weight)/m2. The species Vallisneria americana composed 99% (+) of the overall biomass. Consequently, an effort was made to estimate the productivity of this species from periodic standing crop measurements according to a



PAGE 1

S"EAST BAY a., 12 ST. VINCENT ; ST. GEORGE SOUND APALACHICOLA BAY 5 14.4 21.4 . PAS26.7 ES" CUT Contour Lines -50/oo NE & SE Winds -3-5 Knots Ebb Tide Figure 2. Surface salinity isopleths. East Bay and Apalachicola Bay sample locations are indicated asterisks.



PAGE 1

288. as river flow was closely associated with the temporal patterns of occurrence of three other fish groups of clusters. The use of time-related species associations in the multivariate analysis tended to dampen otherwise erratic annual variations in the numbers of individual species. Overall, the relatively consistent temporal distribution of fishes in the Apalachicola Estuary allowed the identification of river flow and a year 1 phenomenon (possibly the presence of organochlorine compounds) as primary determinants of community structure. This leads to the possibility that there are predictable temporal successions of dominant species in "undistrubed" estuaries which can be summarized as annual patterns or "fingerprints" of species associations despite broad seasonal variations in key physical forcing functions. Such patterns could serve as models to test the relative influence of discrete shocks to the system in the form of natural events or human activities.



PAGE 1

271. 1975), stream discharge (Bradshaw et al., 1972), and degradation functions (Brodtmann, 1976). This would indicate that the type and level of pesticide residues in a given estuary depend on various factors such as agricultural activity, regional rainfall and drainage characteristics, soil composition, movement of particulates, and metabolic activity. Although long-term fluctuations of estuarine biota have been described in various coastal systems (Dahlberg and Odum, 1970; McErlean et al., 1973; Oviatt and Nixon, 1973; Haedrich and Haedrich, 1974; Livingston, 1975, 1976; Livingston et al., 1976) and the importance of the steady (oscillatory) state to impact analysis has been considered (Duke and Dumas, 1974; Livingston et al., 1976), there are suprisingly few data concerning the actual effects of organochlorine compounds at the systems level. Field analyses of the acute impact of dieldrin (Harrington and Bidlingmayer, 1958) and DDT (Croker and Wilson, 1970) on salt marsh assemblages are available. Reimold (1974) and Reimold et al., (1974) described temporal changes in estuarine assemblages as a function of reduced toxaphene contamination in a Georgia (U.S.A.) system. However, the direct reaction of an estuarine system to organochlorine stress remains largely undocumented. There is a growing data base regarding biotic interactions in the Apalachicola Estuary (Livingston, 1974, 1976b; Livingston et al., 1974a, 1976, 1977). In addition, various short-term pesticide analyses indicated moderately high levels of organochlorine contamination in this system prior to 1973 (Breidenbach et al., 1967; Henderson et al., 1971; Giam et al., 1972; Butler, 1973). This portion of the report will describe recent changes in the organochlorine burden in the Apalachicola Drainage System, and will present data concerning long-term trends of the epibenthic assemblages in the Apalachicola estuary.



PAGE 1

105. APPENDIX 2



PAGE 1

88. INTRODUCTION The quantification of the extent of nutrient limitation in a marine ecosystem is critical for the prediction of the response of the system to various nutrient related stresses. To make sound environmental policy, the critical nutrients and the relationships between these nutrients and plant productivity must be known. ( In estuarine systems, patterns of nutrient limited phytoplankton production are complex and variable. It has been suggested that while nutrients can limit phytoplankton growth in stratified estuaries, shallow, well-mixed estuaries usually have nutrients, and especially phosporus, present in excess of phytoplankton demands (Pomeroy, et al, 1972). However, spatial and temporal variability in nitrogen and phosphorus limitation have been identified in both types of estuaries (Putnam, 1967; Flemer, 1970; Carpenter, 1971; Ryther & Dunstan, 1971; Thayer, 1971; Kraswick & Caperon, 1973). Nitrogen occurs in estuarine systems in various dissolved, and particulate forms. Nitrite, nitrate, molecular nitrogen, ammonium, urea, dissolved organic nitrogen, particulate organic nitrogen, and amino acids are nitrogen forms that can be used directly or indirectly by plankton in marine ecosystems (Dugdale & Goering, 1967; Riley & Chester, 1971; Carpenter, 1971; Thayer, 1971). The distribution of the different nitrogen forms in marine environments is controlled by complex interactions between biological, physical, and chemical processes. Phosphorus occurs in estuarine systems, in a variety of collodial, dissolved, and particulate forms (Taft, et al, 1975). The distribution of the A forms of phosporus in marine systems is controlled by physical, chemical, and biological processes. The residence time of phosphate in coastal systems is



PAGE 1

CkUvnB1US THALASSTIUS Table ,. .06 .u0 .un o.un0 0.00 0.o0 .06 0.00 O.00 1.36 .06 3.40 continued .19 .uo .0o 0.oo u.0o o.ou 0.10 .oo 0.oo 0.00 .02 .01 .01 IPECIES S MPLL DATES 730315 730415 730515 730615 730715 730815 730915 731015 731115 731215 740115 740215 TOTALS INGNATHUS SCOVLLLT .23 0.00 0.uO 0.00 .10 0.00 .18 n0.0 .09 .76 .16 1.55 3.07 .02 n.on 0.0o o.nn .00 o.o .01 0.00 .00 .o0 .00 .17 .01 09IONELLU:> qOLFOSOVA .77 0.00 .03 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 .18 0.00 .30 1.00 .84 3.07 .07 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .02 .02 .09 .01 YNGNATHUS LOUISTANAE 0.00 0.00 0.do 0.00 0.00 0.00 .39 1.52 -1.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.98 0.0n 0.00 0.00 n.o0 0.o0 o0.o .02 .06 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 UGIL CUREMA 0.00 .OO 0.00 2.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 000 0000 00 000 .01 ARANX HIPPOS U.Un 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.n00 0.00 .07 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 NCYCLOPSETTA QUAOROCELLATA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.52 1.52 0 .00 0.00 0.00 00.0 0.00 0.00 o. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .00 EPRILUS PARU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 .17 .96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.13 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 n.00 .01 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 LIGOPLITES SAUýUS 00000 0.00000 0.00 000000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .41000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .41000 0.00 0.00 0.00 n.00 0.00 0.O0 0. O 00 00 .01 .0 0.00 * 0.00 .00 ELENF VOMER 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .35000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .35000 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 .U2 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 YNGNATHUS FLORInAE 0.00000 0. 00on 0.00000 0.03000 0.00000 0.00000 0.0 0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .19000 0.00 0.00 0.00 000n 0.00 .ni 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 ARALTCHTHYS ALBIGUTTA 0.00000 0.00000 .09000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000,00 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .09000 U.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 00.00 .00 0.n0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 ;OPIOSOHA ROBUSTUM .05000 0.00000 0.OUOOO 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .05000 .01 n.o U,00 0.00 0.00 n0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 IICROPTEKUS SALMOIDES 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .05000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00030 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .05000 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0 ;TRONGYLUA MARINA 0.0i0000 0.00000 0.00000 .02000 0.0000 000000 000000 0.00000 00.000 0.00000 00 0.00000 0.00000 .02000 0.0O 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0Q TOTALS 9 9.9 1317.4 2894.9 6288.4 ?419.9 2872.5 2307.3 2447.5 2759.0 1583. 5508.6 900.7 32269.6



PAGE 1

SPEC!ES SAINPLL UATLS 76u312 76041ý 76m515 7buv65 7bb7.5 ruli,3 76491.5 FjiLj f61i 76L2L3 773L25 774220 [OTALS HIPPOLYTE PLEUPACANTHA L. u 0 pi aa u c tjý L L LJ L i u(,4 1 3 .59 oju 3* u .41 NUOIdRANCI SP* .29 L i ut ..6 LL 4 a 3 a s joj 44 MLMIP4OLJ3 EL1;ATA4 J 1 2 L *46 .*'JL vI -1Jr 6%o 04 jIs a.J U* I 4 PAGURiUS LONGIaAlPu S a 3 2 ALPHEUS HiTERO.AIAELIS C L a. L j C 006 0 3 3 L 4 v 40 J 06 .1 0 j r· 1 05? u~t EC4INARAC1N1Ua PARMA v 1 3 i LUIDIA CLATHRATA 3 a PAGUtJS aONAIRENSIS L u L j a. 50ow 1.0 j O av J; a U.. ... L io 04 ý jj J·5w ose sau PALAEMON FLOIIUANUS C .3 a ± ^4 C a u .11 3 .1 6 .3 u 16 j i*.s 1 4) j a d.1 65 ) BUSYtO' C04TRARIJM a u L u j I -a u PROCAMBAUaRU PENAENSALANUS C .0 0 aJ U 1 3 1 I U.Oiu 3.Coi D0601 0 0 G .L J1j& a 611 .Ai j a 05Z a oil Oa TOTALS 692og 331.6 578.j 286*b i O 2io 7?0. 543b.L dI.J 733.4 34)0) L94.0 £5$oU 792o1U



PAGE 1

262. Table 1: Invertebrates taken in cores, leaf-basket samples, and dredgenets in the Apalachicola Bay System (1975-1977) Mollusca Pelecypoda Tagelus plebeius Crassostrea virginica Amygdalum papyria Pseudocyrena floridana Ensis minor Mactra fragilis Tellina texana Macoma mitchelli Dosinia elegans Spisula solidissima Mulinia lateralis Congeria leucophaeta Rangia cuneata Abra aedualis Gastropoda Odostomia laevigata Prunum apicinum Odostomia bisuturalis Mitrella lunata Mangelia sp. Bittium varium Retusa canaliculata Neritina reclivata Anachis avara Epitonium rupicola Littoridina sphinctostoma Crepidula plana Polychaeta Sedentaria Amphicteis gunneri floridus Arenicola cristata Polydora ligni Melinna maculata Streblospio benedicti Aricidea fragilis Paraprionospio pinnata Magelona polydentata Mediomastus californiensis Diopatra cuprea Capitella capitata Fabricia sp. Heteromastus filiformis Spiophanes bombyx Capitellides jonesi Onuphis sp. Prionospio heterobranchia Errantia Glycinde solitaria Haploscoloplos fragilis Loandalia americana Eteone heteropoda Laeonereis culveri Scoloplos rubra Sigambra bassi Amphinome rostrata Neanthes succinea Marphysa sanguinea Phyllodoce fragilis Podarke sp. Polyodontes lupina Ancistrosyllis sp. Oligochaeta sp. 1 sp. 2 Arthropoda Branchiura Argulus sp.



PAGE 1

S. ...h S. .u ' a , 9 .PAtE 3 rILE pIyMEE (ZEATION 3ATE 77/L3/27.) CGAI A 4MF OF O(iN) PENSET (ACROSS) UAYS 13'-4.47530 2814.425CG 464.37500 644.32500 824.275,ui04. 22500 84.175ii13b6'. 150 J444 75J 1724.32500 .+---4___-+._-*.---^ +-----------------------------+-*------*---------............... l718.t7 + I I * 1418.47 I \ I I II * I * I .' I 1134.77 + I I .1134.77 I I I I I t I i I I I 'I I I 992.93 I I 992.93 1 i 1 I I --------------------------------------------------------------.---.-----*.-----..-----i I I I 709.Z3 * +I i 7g8.03 SII 7 I I I I I + I I I l I SI I I I I I I. i i : .1 567.39 I I I 567.39 I 1 1 1 I i-----------------------------------------------------------------------*--------------i I I .. 5 . 4e5.54 + 1 425.54 I I I I I SI I 1 I i i I 1i SI\ I \ i. | I .\ I \ a .I \ I \ I \ 23.9 1 I 1 .69 1,31 I I 1.5 * tl..-.---s----3-.---*-r t---------l------.-+----+.*--:^-----+-----*---r-----3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 -.NVT C .li'tiS TC? TE4 kAOLE zAY l810A3S 77e/3/Z7. PAGE 4 STATISTICS.. O R( J-.;L-1S R SGUA.. -*.iL:e SIGrFtIICAN; 4 -.21451 ~ O.i R 3F Er -258.72j96 INiERCEFT (A) -155.14.87 ST r0 3 3OF A -b6.761+6 1 , : -.1i1.3 SLOP. (E) --.3E47 SiD :ROk OF B -.,6336 -.L-'-X'JD.t':; VALU-StlsI j A4LU.S -



PAGE 1

159. Swamp-chestnut oak (Quercus prinus) Spruce pine (Pinus glabra) Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) Water oak (Quercus nigra) Sweetgun (Liquidambar styraciflua) Low terraces Overcup oak (Quercus lyrata) Water hickory (Caryantomentosa aquatica) Diamond-leaf oak (Quercus laurifolia Sweetgun (Liquidambar styraciflua) Ash (Fraxinus sp.) Sloughs and oxbow ponds Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) Water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica) A complete list of the terrestrial flora appears in Table 1. According to Clewell (personal communication), many of the deciduous species lose leaves during late fall and winter months. This coincides generally with periods of river flooding. This portion of the study was designed as a preliminary estimation of seasonal patterns of river-derived detrital influx into the Apalachicola Estuary. Methods and Materials Macroparticulate matter was sampled with otter trawls (16 foot; 3/4 in. wing mesh, 1/4 in cod end mesh liner) drawn at speeds of 2 -2.5 knots at monthly intervals (from January, 1975 to the present). Repetitive two minute trawl tows were made at the following stations (Fig. 1):



PAGE 1

A Figure 28: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Bairdiella chrysura in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SCýTTERS FISH TOP TEN N 77/C3/23. PAGE 15 F:!LT N'A.E (C.E4TIO.N CATE = 77/!3/23.) SCTTE'i3 0 (C00N) SAICHR (ACROSS) CAYS 1"L.47'1 28e.42500 46.3750 644.3'530 824.Z7501004.22501154.1751364. 51544.7501724.325 ., ----+----+----s--4---+----+------------+----------+---------------------------+. 237..O + I I * 237.00 Ii I 186.3I I 186.30 I I I I I I I I I I I I 65.0 +I + 165.6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 14+..0 + I I + 144.90 iI I I .* I I 12. I I I I ±2 .2t + I I + 124.20 I * i I I I I I 103.5S + I I 103.50 I I I I i. .. I I 62.1 I I 62.80 I I I ±i I I V I I I II--~. 6: E I 52 SLOP ) --2226 STO SIGNIFICANCE 3 -.11C2B PLOTTED3 VLUES -6r, EXCLUDED VALUESC MISSING VALUES -a SIF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE CPUTED 4 I I I I I II I I I I II I I .*---*************+-r.*****-r*we**'-+-~--.e----,'*****-e*+* ,--'"-*****~-~-rCr*******--******-***-A 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SCA:TT~E FINH TOP TEN N STATISTICS.. CORRELATION Ca)-.16050 R SQUARED -.02576 SIGNIFICANCE R -Xt±c28 ST3 ER9 OF EST -33.82285 INTERCEPT (A) -30.15862 STO ERROR OF A -8.72779 CIGfIC; N CA A -.00C52 SLOPE (9) --.0±C26 STO ERROR OF B -.00828 SIGNIFICANCE 3 -.112E PLTrTE3 VALUES -6I EXCLUDED VALUESC MISSING VALUES -0 ******** IS PRINTED IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COHPUTED.



PAGE 1

202. Fig. 2: Apalachicola River flow (monthly means and range in cubic feet per second), macrodetritus (wood debris, leaf debris, and benthic macrophytes in mg/m2), and microdetritus at the mouth of the river (total, Kg/month; concentrations in mg/l) from December, 1974 through March, 1977.



PAGE 1

229. VIII. Litter-Associated Organisms Introduction For the past 3 years, studies have been carried out concerning organisms associated with allochthonous forms of detritus in the Apalachicola Estuary. This litter fauna is composed primarily of isopods, amphipods, and decapods. Such organisms appear to utilize detritus as substrate for shelter and/or food. Various studies have indicated that these species often depend on the microbial components of detritus for food (Adams and Angelovic, 1970; Fenchel, 1970; Kaushir and Hynes, 1971; Odum and Heald, 1972). However, the actual details of the trophodynamic relationships of detritus-based systems are little known. The leaf litter associations are composed of omnivores and detritovores which ultimately become directly or indirectly available to higher trophic levels. The relative significance of autochthonous and allochthonous detritus in the overall energy budget of the Apalachicola Bay System is still in question. The ultimate importance of detritus is indicated by the major groups of detritus-associated organisms found in this estuary. This study was designed as a preliminary survey of the leaf-associated organisms in the Apalachicola Bay System with particular emphasis on seasonal variations and the relationship of the biotic associations with key physico-chemical parameters. Methods and Materials Stations were established on the basis of previously determined salinity regimes (Fig. 1). Station 5A, a predominantly freshwater habitat during spring and early summer, is characterized by salt water intrusion during late summer and fall periods. Station 3 is a river-dominated area with frequentincreases in benthic salinity during summer and fall periods.



PAGE 1

243. Stickney, R., P. McCaffrey, and M. McGee. 1969. Sediment patterns in Apalachicola Bay, Florida, in relation to penaeid shrimp distribution. In: R.W. Menzel and E.W. Cake, Jr. (eds.) Identification and analysis of the biological value of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Unpublished report to F.W.P.C.A. Tagatz, M.E. 1968. Biology of the blue crab, Callinectes sapidus Rathbun, in the St. John's River, Florida. Fishery Bull. 67: 17-33.



PAGE 1

291. MacGregor, J. S.: Changes in the amount and proportions of DDT and its metabolites, DDE and DDD, in the marine environment off shouthern California, 1949-72. Fish. Bull. 72, 275-293 (1974). McNaughton, S. J.: Structure and function in California grasslands. Ecology 49, 962-972 (1968). Margalef, D. R.: Information theory in ecology. Gen Syst. 3, 36-71 (1958). Matusita, K.: Decision rules based on the distance, for problems of fit, two samples and estimation. Ann. Math. Statist. 26, 631-640 (1955). Mosser, J. L., N. S. Fisher, and C. F. Wurster: Polychlorinated biphenyls and DDT alter species composition in Mixed cultures of algae. Science 176, 533-535 (1972). -, T. C. Teng, W. G. Walther and C. F. Wurster: Interaction of PCBs, DDT, and DDE in a marine diatom. Env. Cont. Tox. 12, 665-668 (1974). Nisbet, I. C. T. and A. F. Sarofim: Rates and routes of transport of PCBs in the environment. Environ. Health. Persp. 1, 21-38 (1972). Oviatt, C. A. and S. W. Nixon: The demersal fish of Narragansett Bay: an analysis of community structure, distribution, and abundance. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci. 1, 361-378 (1973). Peakall, D. B. and J. L. Lincer: Polychlorinated biphenyls-another long-life widespread chemical in the environment. Bioscience 20(17) (1970). Pielou, E. C.: Shannon's formula as a measure of specific diversity: its use and misuse. Letters to the Editors, The American Naturalist 100(914) (1966a). -The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J. Theor. Biol. 13, 131-144 (1966b). -The use of information theory in the study of the diversity of biological populations. Proc. Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability 4, 163-177 (1967). -An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley-Interscience, New York (1969). Reimold, R. J.: Toxaphene interactions in estuarine ecosystems. Georgia Sea Grant Rept. 746, 80 (1974). -, R. C. Adams and C. J. Durant: Effects of toxaphene contaminaticn on estuarine ecology. Univer. Ga. Mar. Inst. Tech. Rept. Swa 73-8, 100, (1973). Richard, J. R., G. A. Junk, M. J. Avery, N. L. Nehring, J. S. Fritz and H. J. Svec: Analysis of various Iowa waters for selected pesticides: atazine, DDE, dieldrin-1974. Pest. Mon. Jour. 9(3), 117-123 (1975).



PAGE 1

S-----------------+-------------I 3 I I -I T SI T --7. I ..... ..---------....--.-.----...-. -.. I I T I I II T l7¾2" iI I 4 t73.2 II .4 IIi T T I STT ?0' 0 " 1 I I S\ I I I I I T Ti I T I I T T I ----... .----t· I I II I I / I +



PAGE 1

.(.-.--+_-.+-~-------4.---)~-.1---------4-+ ------+ »-+-+ ----t --. -, q9.0 0 + I 99.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I -I 89.20 + I I * 89.20 I I T I I I I T I I I .I I I I I /1.40 + I 79.40 II I I I T I I I I I I I I I I. 69.60 + I I + 69.60 I I I T ]-------------------------------------* --------------------T I I I I I I I I 59.80 + I I + 9.80 I T I I I I I I I I I T. I T T I, 5~0.00 + I 50.00 SI I I I I I I T '40.20 + I T + 40.20 Co I I I 30.40 + I I + 0.40 I I I I I ) SIT I ' I I I I I I I T T 20.60 t + 20.60 I I I I T I T I 1 .1 I I .8 3/7 + / / 0.0 S I T I g I I I 1.0 I I I+ i00 ----------------*------------+--+----------------+* ----------------+--+------*--C----+. 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 Figure 8. Surface primary productivity in Apalachicola Bay.



PAGE 1

FISH S'IM1ARY iIO'ASS ZNO Y AD Table 11, continued DATrS 30301-74022" STAThiJS 001 002 003 nu4 dO-, ob 1A 01R 01C 05A TIMES OF CAf 0 SPECIES 7A'APLE CATFe 73U31; 730415 730515 770<15 731715 730815 730915 731015 731115 73121, 740115 740215 TOTALS ARIUS FELIS .56 49.05 A4. 7 P55./9 1210.76 851.70 624.47 449.43 993.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 5099.12 .Oo 3.65 2.44 17.29 50.03 79.65 27.07 18.36 36.n01 0.0 0.00 0.01 15.80 M ICPOPOGON UNPULAILS 294.56 5N4.89 95/.58 15)4.19 147.24 249.07 21.96 .12 7.93 17.21 116.46 205.02 4116.11 5J.5/ 38.63 3.07 25.35 6.58 t.b7 .95 .On .14 1.39 2.11 22.76 12.76 LEPISGSTFUS OSSEUS 92.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 d. 0 0.00 0. o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3736.06 237.38 4065.73 9.52 0.O U.00 0.00O O 0 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 67.82 26.35 12.60 DASYATIS SARINA 30-,.54 244.89 0.00 4a9.78 393.60 0.00. 0.00 497.76 742.29 644.43 137.25 200.96 3747.50 41.19 18.59 O.JO 7.79 16.14 0. 0 0.00 20.34 26.30 40.70 2.49 22.31 11.61 ANCHOA MITCHTLLI 31.65 36.96 477.64 14.61 28.23 1107.06 .78 156.77 138.46 183.85 259.47 ?8.49 2467.97 3..2 2.81 16.50 .30 1.17 38.54 .03 6.41 5.02 11.61 4.71 3.16 7.65 SBAGRF MARINUS u.O0 0.00 0.00 2043.42 254,2U 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 2297.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 T2.50 10.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.12 LEIOSTOMUS XANTHURUS 75.39 68.83 336.02 612.02 18.27 0.00 18.27 154.50 388.20 54.40 48.33 31.15 1805.38 * 7.77 5.22 11.51 9.73 .75 0.00 .79 6.31 14,07 3.44 .88 .3.46 5.59 FOLYDACTYLUS OCTONEMUS 12.23 34.83 959.20 618.91 37.55 4.47 1.25 5.44 0.00 0.00 6.27 0.00 1680.15 1.26 2.64 33.13 9.84 1.55 .16 .05 .22 000 .0.00 11 0.98 5.21 BAIRDIFLLA CHRYSURA 1.78 62.91 0.00 4.19 36.92 8.72 0.00 180.55 165.42 505.83 611.74 17.79 1595.85 .18 4.78 0.00 .u7 1.53 .30 0.00 7.38 6.03 31.95 11.11 1.9q 4.95 PARALICHTHYS LETnOSTIGMA .24 71.15 32.33 15.90 112.61 557.36 277.09 276.99 47.93 0.00 64.81 16.36 1472.77 .02 5.40 1.12 .25 4.65 19.40 12.01 11.32 1.74 0.00 1.18 1.82 4.56 RHINOPTERA BONASUS O.Ou O.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1240.10 0.oo 000 0.00 0.00 .00 1240.10 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.On 0.00 0.00 53.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.93 3.84 SPHYRNA TIBURO U.O0 q.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 323.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 323.57 i 0.00 0.O0 0.00 n.o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 ICTALLRUS LATUS • 0.00 0.00 0.30 .15 7.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 228.05 19.36 255.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 .32 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.14 2.15 79 TPINECTES MACULATUS 22.29 10.64 16.15 10.67 15.10 15.98 14.13 65.53 1.77 0.00 29.96 25.41 227.63 2.30 .81 .56 .17 .62 .56 .61 2.68 .05 0.00 .54 2.82 .71 SYNOOUS FOETENS 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 .29 .96 10. 0 149.85 1.?7 5.24 0.00 0.00 167.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 .44 6.12 .05 .33 0.00 0.00 .52 hARENC-ULA PENSACCLAE 0.00 155.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.38 0r.00 11.79 0.00 0.00 .-0.0 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .48 CYNOSCION NEBULOSUS 0.00 8.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .30 15.29 44.47 65.04 18.32 0.00 152.02 0.00 .65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .62 1.61 4.11 .33 0.00 -.47 SLAGOON RHOMBOIOES 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.39 0.00 10.07 0.00 36.97 6.26 54.96 6.84 6.43 130.92 0.00 0.00 d.00 .12 1.00 .35 0.00 1.51 .23 3.47 .16 .71 .41 POCONIAS CROMTS 0.00 0.00 0.9O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 47.33 0.00 82.08 0.00 129.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.72 6.00 1.49 0.03 .40 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 1.52 7.07 2.44 5.86 10.47 26.55 5.52 31.39 18.53 6.34 0.00 1.03 116.78 .16 .54 .09 .09 .43 .92 .24 1.28 .57 .40 0.00 .11 .36 ECHENEIS NAUCRATES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 103.68 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 103.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.28 0. 00 .0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .32 * ETRGPUS CQOSSOTUS 0.00 1.78 3.54 0.00 1.38 9.27 7.56 4.84 6.38 8.63 9.61 36.19 89.09 0.OU .14 .12 0.00 .06 .32 .33 .20 .23 .55 .17 4.01 .28 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS O.On 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .73 2.68 7.27 59.09 15.23 0.00 2.13 87.13 P .0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .12 .30 2.14 .96 8.00 .24 .27 OQTHOPRISTTS CHRYSOPTE.. U.O0 1.00 O.nu 0.00 .61 0.00 0. O 0.00 10.23 0.00 59.98 5.97 76.79 U.on 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 n. 00 .37 0.00 1.09 .66 .24 EUCINOSTOMUS GULA 0.o0 ).Uq 0.00 0. q'1 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.09 31.65 6.48 0.00 0.00 62.23 P."n l 1.1)0 0.10 3.00 0.00 0.OO 0.00 .98 1.15 .41 0.00 0.00 .19 MENTTfIRn ., &M r I'.'.ie *.. M .1, I 5. 3 o 3 62 * * * '1* i .S



PAGE 1

92. General methods of planktonic phosphorus uptake as a function of concentration can be found in Halmann & Stiller (1974) and Taft et al (1975). Water was collected in 20 1 polyetheylene carboys and aliquots were placed in 500 ml glass incubation bottles. Samples were treated with 0.0, 0.2, 0.5, or 2.0 ug-atnm/ phosphate-phosphorus. Half of the samples were poisoned with 1 ml of 2% HgC12 solution. Between 500,000 and 1,000,000 dpm/ml of carrier free 32P phosphoric acid was added to the samples. Samples were incubated in situ. Fifteen 15 ml subsamples were periodically ( removed from all bottles and filtered thru Whatman GF/A glass fiber filters. Ten ml of filtrate was then pipetted into on LSC vial for counting. The 32p was counted by measuring Cerenkov radiation of the filtrate (Curtis & Toms, 1972; Fric & Palovickova, 1975) with a liquid scintillation spectrometer. Planktonic phosphate uptake rates were estimated from linear regression slopes of total minus HgCl2~treated phosphate uptake vs time. (



PAGE 1

95. BIBLIOGRAPHY Barsdate, R.J., R.T. Prentki, and T. Fenchel (1974) Phosphorus cycle of model ecosystems: significance for decomposer food chains and effect of bacterial grazers. Oikos, 25, 239-251. Carpenter, E.J. (1971) Annual phytoplankton cycle of the Cape Fear River Estuary, North Carolina. Ches. Sci., 12, 95-104. Carritt, D.E. and S. Goodgal (1954) Sorption reactions and some ecological implications. Deep Sea Res., 1, 224-243. ( Correll, D.L., M.A. Faust, and D.J. Severn (1975) Phosphorus flux and cycling in estuaries, pp. 108-136 In: Estuarine Research, Vol. I, L.E. Cronin, editor, Academic Press. , Curtis, E.J.C. and I.P. Toms (1972) Techniques for counting carbon-14 and phosphorus-32 labelled samples of polluted natural waters, pp. 167179 In: Liquid Scintillation Counting, Vol. II, M.A. Crook, P. Johnson, D. Scales, editors, Heyden & Sons Ltd. Dugdale, R.C., and J.J. Goering (1967) Uptake of new and regenerated forms of nitrogen in primary productivity. Limnol. Oceanogr., 12, 196-206. Estabrook, R.H. (1973) Phytoplankton ecology and hydrography of Apalachicola Bay. M.S. Thesis, Dept. of Oceanogr., Florida State University, 166 pp. Flemer, D.A. (1970) Primary production in the Chesapeake Bay. Ches. Sci., 11, 117-129. Eric, F. and V. Palovickova (1975) Automatic liquid scintillation counting of 32P in plankt extracts by measuring the Cherenkov Radiation in aqueous solutions. Int. J. App. Rad. Iso., 26, 305-315. Fuhs, G.W. (1969) Phosphorus content and rate of growth in the diatom Cyclotella nana and Thalassiosira fluviatus. J. Phycol., 5, 315-321. Gerhart, D.A. and G.E. Likens (1975) Enrichment experiments for determining nutrient limitation, four methods compared. Limnol. Oceanogr., 20, 649-653. Hale, S.S. (1975) Estuarine nutrient cycles: the role of benthic communities. Personal Communication 10 pp. Halmann, M. and M. Stiller (1974) Turnover and uptake of dissolved phosphate in freshwater. A study of Lake Kinneret. Limnol. Oceanog., 19, 774-783.



PAGE 1

70. International carbon analyzer using the method of Menzel and Vaccaro (1964). Nutrient samples were filtered through pre-washed Whatman GF/A glass fiber filters and poured into nalgene bottles. After addition of 1 ml of a 2 percent (w/v) solution of mercuric chloride, the samples were placed on ice where they were kept until analyzed. Molybdate-reactive phosphorus was measured using the Murphy and Riley method (Strickland and Parsons, 1972). Nitrate was analyzed with a modification of the Morris and Riley method (Strickland and Parsons, 1972) Nitrite was measured with the Bendschneider-Robinson method (Strickland and Parsons, 1972). Reactive silicate was measured according to the Mullin-Riley method with modifications as given in Strickland and Parsons (1972). Five hundred milliliters of water were passed through a Whatman GF/A glass fiber filter for chlorophyll analysis with the spectrophotometric method given in Strickland and Parsons (1972). Phytoplankton productivity was measured with the carbon-14 method (Steeman-Nielsen, 1952). Samples were incubated in situ for about three hours after which the contents of the 180 ml incubation bottles were filtered through Whatman GF/C scintillation grade glass fiber filters. Radiocarbon activity on the filters was measured by liquid scintillation spectrometry using Aquasol as the scintillation cocktail. One hundred milliliter aliquotes of bay water were filtered through Millipore 0.45 micron filters for analysis of phytoplankton species composition by the method of McNabb (1960). Nutrient enrichment experiments were conducted with water from East Bay and from Apalachicola Bay using modifications of the methods of Ryther and Guillard (1959) and Menzel and Ryther (1961). (See appendices I and II for details of the methods).



PAGE 1

Table 4: continued. # of occurences 22 8 2 1 5 4 2 2 1 1



PAGE 1

NVtxIT SUMMARY N »hOL 34Y 4n TcAR QATES 75j301-760228 STATIONS u1l GC2 rC3 CGC 0.5 LlA u1a 3 iC t5A TIMES OF EAY 0 SPECIES SAhPLE JATE5 75u315 75u415 75,515 75L615 750715 75usib 75o915 75L;i5 731115 75121 7oO 1L 76d215 IOITLS PENAEUS SETIFERUS 18 5 24 62 d eI51 913 5133 1j 2 1 2 2121 8.78 4.35 5.8i 47.33 19.72 76.i9 o3.95 73.s5 53.58 13..3 .3o i.34 48. i PENAEUS OUURARUH 2 11 49 1> 4 '47 3 49 1 2 614 S98 9.57 11.86 7.o3 (.1 1.23 31.32 *. 1. LS. 4 .3> 2.3a 2.34 1**.7 CALLINECIES SAPIOUS' 155 22 o0 33 53 51 19 35 3 _ Ii 35 533 75.61 19. 13 16.46 25.19 12.3C 15.o4 L.3a 4.53 3.73 2I.oL Z5.i1 3.*71 i. 3. PALAEONETES PUGIO .39 41 2 33 u 1 33 7 13 16 35 22i .49 33.9i G.93 1. 3 7.6b J..G s.? 4.92 2.72 I.*J. 38.1, 3:.71 5.oc PENAEUS AZIECUS 0 1 772 E 3 6 35 L 4 ' 23 C.00 L.J 42.b 1.53 3.25 .oZ L. 1 .55 1o. .97 D.U* *.Lj 5015 TRACHYPNAEUS CONSTRICTUS J L 153 2 I 7 *0.0 .u j u.3o J.C& a 5.5u J.0 .14 .13 A.j .-3 j9u. 3*eJ 3*76 LOLLIGUNCULA BREVIS C 3 3 .16 36 7 b 18 23 3 1* 3 43 G.Lb 2.61 .73 12.21 8.35 2.15 .42 2.33 7.78 Z3.93 i.4, .Ub6 3.3, RHITHROPANuPEUS HARRISII 2 4 31 0 2o 2 2 11 5 2 o 15 j5j .98 3.48 7.51 ..5b 6.ý3 .ol .4 L*4 Loa L..74 14*29 o153 2.*5 CALLINECTES SIhILIS 1 4 2 1 7 4 18 1i 12 A a 65 .49 3.48 .48 .76 l.o2 1.23 1.26 1.i i.b7 5.22 a.0,0 Jo.4 1*5. NERITINA RECLIVATA b 4 l. L 7 1 1 3 J .1 Z4 0.0C 3.48 2.66 D.. 1.o2 .31 $'.LL .3 J.j .aj.i 1*.J2 0 :> PAGURUS POLLICARIS 3 9 1 L 3 G 4 u 1.46 7.83 .2,+ 3.LC .7u ..JL a.6u j.ij ,.tJ .87 9.52 9j.0 .*8 PALAh'ONETES VULGARIS 1C 8 u u 0 a 2 2 4.88 6.96 ..ju J.u L.w.L ..U i.uu j.J ..J 4 J ..u E &.4 *4b CLIBANAkIUJ VITTATUS 5 1 .1 4 1 1 0 18 2.44 .87 L.Lu .76 .93 .31 Ja7 .52 .39 *.) .u *** *42 PORTUNUS SIBBESII a 7 u 5 1 3 . .98 C.Gi L.j2 C.Ou 1.62 .jL .o67 .65 .3J ;.-* OGou J06u *37 TRACHYPENAEUS SINILIS 3 1 3 . 0.. 2.61 .<4 J.LU I.u. U tia.U ju )*.j 0.*a **0 a*u 3666 .16 SQUILLA EMPUSA C 2 0 3 1 * » 6 u.1.0 1.7t E.ju0 .... .*U3 T.ja .L u .33 .339 ju.j ..UU I.bu *14 PERIGLINENES AnERICANUS 3 6 aJ .3 OJL L... .EJ 2.Z9 0.U .. u : t, a .. o..* :.11 0.3ii *47 POLLINICES DUPLICATUS u 1 L 1 U u , 1 3 L.Ji 6o.J .24-, 0.LJ .44 L*.6 3.u J«* .< i. -.& 3 i0 j 293b I*-u *0U ACETES AMERICANUS 1 3 u 1 d0 .0 .49 i4..a C.0 .76 C.ou j .L *uw i J i;.1 .0 auUj Joao *03 .ALPHEUS NETEROCHALLIS C 1 L U u L .J .1 .0 2 0.0 a .u 4. 3.uU b.u J.i o j .3..J J.uJ 2»*0 2.308 J. *IJo NEOPANOPE TEXANA 1 C 1 u ,a U2 .49 .0 -.. 6k .2l 3 J. U l * j ..0 1..J us*"J .*L. J*U *»3 PAGURUS B3NAikENSIS .a 1 C u U 1 u .0 2 Ja· L C.» a .*>u 60l *** -.H. *t. L** ***v r*-4 .**u ..j5 CRASSOSTREA VIrSINICA -1 .. ,.Coi. Lust wo ...-*C «>l .ui 3. .Jo ·J * « ** ^ «JU * XIPH3PENEUS KROYERI ., 1 0.CC Lc.C CJ.0, 6.i. .23 u J u aj. *J3 #e* **4 r** 1 PERICLIMENES LfNGISAUDATUS l. a a . u PETROLLSLH J ARL a U *51 aJ J d U ..0 PETROLISTHES ARMATUS 1 0 0 0 G .4 0 1 4 O .LDo ..C. Uti 0 t U L .av }A o* 4..J 300 ws J du



PAGE 1

150. TABLE 1. Radioactivity in lipid fraction of gills. M. campechiensis Number of Samples 6 Radioactive precursor sodium glycolate-l-14C Specific activity 116 pCi mg-I Dose 0.10 pCi ml-1 Concentration 855 Pg 1-1HOCH2COOH Incubation time 2 hours Lyophilized weight 365.7 mg. Total lipids 27.49 mg. (% Dry wt.) 7.52% Radioactivity in lipid fraction 51 dpm mg 22



PAGE 1

253. Figure 3: Species accumulation curve of leaf litter invertebrates taken at stations 3 and 5A in Apalachicola Bay during the spring (1974). Each point represents a mean of the number of species taken in each sub-sample over the period of collection. in.~~ .-"--'-*----* 10 .. -* * --/*--O 9*F-* < 8-* ,-" <8 7*\ I 3 6/i I I 7 WI I 61 I I CI) 0 i! 1)4 I1 r wI -I LU 3 r 02/ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SAMPLE NO. ----station 5a ** station 3



PAGE 1

148. FIGURE LEGENDS Figure 1. Uptake of glycolic acid at various concentrations as a function of incubation time. The error bars represent the mean of triplicate samples ± two s.d. Linear regression lines calculated by the method of least square. T=300C, hybrid bivalves. 3.56 pM y = 0.46 + 0.38 x r2 = 0.93 8.82 PM y = 0.51 + 1.11 x r2 = 0.93 15.4 pM y = 0.26 + 1.49 x r2 = 0.92 68.0 pi y = 0.26 + 6.65 x r2 = 0.93 133. PM y = -32 + 16.2 x r2 = 0.95 20



PAGE 1

Fig. 25r Bottom pHat Station .5 (East Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977APALACH SCATTE£GRA'S 2, 77/03/11. * PAGE -9 FTI NJNA-E (CREATION DATE = 77/03/11.1 SeATTEPGaAH OF (CDWN) QH_5 (ACROSS) DAYS 221.575~1 389.725.C 557.875, 0 726.025,0 $94. 175G10tI2.3250C1233.475C±1398.625C31566.77500 734. 92500 .-----------*-----------------4-+-----+-*---*------------------*-------------------+----*. f I1 i i I.39 8.39 11 I i I "" I I I * .I I I i I i I I I I I I i I I 9 I 1 7.9 SI I ------------------------------------------------?.?6* + I ' \ 7.76 I I I I 7.13 * I 713 I I \.I I .5 I 1 + 6.50 I---------------------------------------------------+--+ ----*--*---****-----------------------3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 000 SPILAC "JCATT*';GRANS STATIST:";.. iL; 0 i.52I Sa EC -.CCZ75 SIGN.IFICANC R -.39546 7 : ' : -.T.r*^7 fL P t (A) -7. IhA 9 F Is0 rp q or A -u!-;7T 7.S13Z: C-S~-". 3.? 4 ...4 L'T.? S -CLULIC VALUES0 MISSI'I VALU:S -I ...." ' p:',' IF -C9ErFICjIT CANO'T CFPUT ____ __ .--____ _,--. ^L---\»-.^-<--. -*»»l»'-*»""(*»**-'»****» *»*-* ..>""~L ' C:.1·)T ·Co~Frr:c:Yr CA.(Yr i·: C~I~T3



PAGE 1

United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 17 EXECUTIVE PARK DRIVE, N. E ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30329 September 10, 1975 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Dept. of Biological Sciences Florida State Universtiy Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: I sincerely enjoyed our telephone conversation of this date, and appreciate your enthusiastic response to possibilities for cooperative efforts in fishery work which we might initiate in the Apalachicola River System in the future. As a result of phasing out our study of striped bass stocking in the Choctawhatchee River System, Florida, we-have potential to divert limited effort to fishery studies in the Apalachicola. Our immediate interest is in formulating a project proposal which addresses the broadest possible range of interests and improves our efficiency in generating that data which is most meaningful to the resources. As mentioned, the September 18, 1975 Meeting with representatives from several State agencies is toward. this end. We regret very much that other commitments preclude your meeting with us, however, you may rest assured that we will be visiting you in the near future for your input prior to finalizing our proposal. It is our firm intent to coordinate and interact with you and your work under the Sea Grant Program to the fullest possible degree in any study effort which we contemplate in the Apalachicola River. Your concurrence in such interaction and cooperation toward avoiding duplication and maximizing'the returns for the efforts expended is solicited. I wish to thank you for the information which you provided in our brief discussion. I will look forward to meeting with you personally at some future date to discuss the River and your work in the Bay in more detail. Sincerely, Alex B. Montgomer Regional Supervisor Division of Fishery Services CONSERVE AMERICA'S ENERGY Save Energy and You Serve America! \ , .·., -.y -



PAGE 1

136. tissue was homogenized with 5 nil of chloroform:methanol:wa:tcr (1:2:0.8) in a glass tissue homogenizer equipped with a teflon pestle (Thomas tissue grinder, #3431-E15). The tissue was homogenized at roc(-~; temperature (220C) for 2 minutes usinr a hand held variable speed drill as a power source. The homogen .-e w-; centrifuged and the supernatant decanted irnto a 30 ml glass sep.aratory funnel. The supernatant was then diluted with equal volum-aes of chloroform and water to a final composition of 2:2:1.8 (chlocoform:methanol:water). The mixture was agitated after each additior. The lower chloroform layer was withdrawn into a tared mini LSC vial and evaporated to dryness under a stream of nitrogen at room temperiture. The vials containing the lipid extract were furth<ý dried in an evacuated dessicator for 12 hours at room temperature. The vacuum was broken by introduction of nitrogen and the vials were immediately capped and weighed on an analytical balance. Total radioactivity oF the tissue extract was determined with a liquid scintillation s.pectrometer after addition of 4.5 ml scintillation cocktail containing K1 BBOT dissolved in 1 liter toluene. Extractions were performed on seawater spiked with labelled glycolate. Radioactivity remaining in the chloroform fraction after extraction averaged 0.1% of that added as spike. This value was much lower than that obtained after, extraction of tissue incubated in radioactive glycolate. 8



PAGE 1

STATE OF FLORIDA uiepartment of Amimistidratwn Division of State Planning Reubin O'D. Askew 660 Apalachee Parkway -IBM Building covenson TALLAHASSEE RQ Whittle. Jr 32304 Lt. Gov. J. H. "Jim" Williams STATE PULANENG DIRECR StcIrTr Of ADMINISTRATION (904) 488-1115 January 17, 1977 Dr. Gib DeBusk Chairman Department of Biological Sciences 212 Conradi Building The Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Lr. DeBusk: I have invited Dr. Robert J. Livingston of your department to meet with representatives of each of the bureaus of the Division of State Planning in a division-wide meeting on Friday, January 21 at 10:00 a.m. The Division of State Planning is going to be coordinating a Resource Management and Planning Program for the Apalachicola River and Bay and we feel that Dr. Livingston's attendance at this meeting is of crucial importance. Sincerely, .· / .. ., .1-. KR. G. Whittle, Jr. State Planning Director RGWjr/EL/km bc: Dr. Robert J. Livingston 7



PAGE 1

Figure 29, continued SCATTFkS TOP TEN FISH SICMASS "HOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 17 FILE ONAME (C"EATION CATE = 77/03/23.) SCATTEPGRAM OF (COKN) CHLCHR (ACROSS) OAYS 1t.4.7500 2A.425nu 464.37500 644.32500 824.275001004.22SB118i4.17S01364. 12500154.075001724..2500 .----+---------+--------÷----+----*--.+------------+.-----* ----*----+ -------4b.07 + I .46.07 I I I I I I I i I I I I I 1.6 + I I . I I I I i I I I I I I I T I I 36.6& + I I 3£.6 I I I I I I I I '7.25 + T ' I + 32.25 T I IT t --------.-----------.-----------^--_ -----.„----------.-----_---.---.-----.-i I I I I I T I I 27.64 + I I • 27.64 I I I I I I I I I SI I I SI I I 237.0 I I »4 23.04 I I I TI SI I I *-I -I T :..'2 + 4 I I 13.82 I I I I I I 9.21 I + 9.21 I I . SI\I I SI I -I 6 I I 6.21 + I.61 I I .e------------------+--------------s-----ý-----+---+ ----ý -----------. 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72-3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 0 SCa'T-'SS TOP TEN FISH BIOnASS WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE Is STaTISTICS.. CCr,'LATI3G {C)-.22475 R SQUARED -.05051 SIGNIFICANCE P -.04214 STC PFR OF LST -7.49597 INTERCEPT (A) -5.87623 STD ERROR OF A -1.93429 SIGCMCaE 4 -.0017s SLOFF (2) --.00322 ST ERFOP OF P -.031.4 Fi: .-, -.0421t. FL --" -3 EXCLUDED VAt lUES0 n! S3IN5 VALUES " "'"i' IS , 'u T * rr 'Tr, "*',"Tr "" A" -'tf



PAGE 1

Attendance List Forum on Apalachicola River Name Organization Phone Ann H. Berger OCZM 634-4235 Frank T. Carlson OWRT-DOI 343-2101 Lillian F. Dean The Research Group (404)577-1341 Thomas S. Talley USFWS-DOI (904Y769-0552 Lawrence R. Green COE -Mobile (205)690-2777 Hugh A .McClellan COE -Mobile (205)690-2724 William Simms COE-Wash., D.C. 0X3-1590 Rice Odell CF 797-4351 Jeff Zinn CF 797-4342 Cdr. Phillip C. Johnson OCZMMarine Sanctuaries (202)634-4243 Tim Maywalt HUD-FIA (202)426-1891 Michelle Lodge Apalachicola Times (904)653-8868 Robert L. Eastman Bur. of Outdoor gec.(202)343-4793 R.M. Housley Forest Service (202)447-7465 Ken Tucker FIA Attorney General's Office (904)488-7033 Dan Dunford Fla. Game &FReshwater Fish Comm.(904)488-6661 Vicki Tschinkel Fla. Department Env. Regulation (904)488-4807 Margarita Castellon. Treasurer of Fla. (904)488-5796 Charles R. Futch Fla. Dept. of Natural Resources (904)487-1715 Eastern W. Tin Fla., Bur. of Land & Water Mqt. (904)488-4925 Charles L. Blalock COE (605)690-2511 John R. Hill, Jr. Office, Chief of Eng. (202)693-7093 .Louis J. Atkins NW Fla. Water Mgt. Distirct (904)487-1770 :'ilan Hersch FWS 343-8095 Joe Yovino FWS, Atlanta, Ga. (404)881-5781 Richard Gardner OCZM/NOAA 634-4241 John Banta CF 797-4337 John Clark CF 797-4360 Robert J. Livingston Fla. State Univ. (904)644-1466 T.T. (Trux) Moebs EPA Region 4 (404)881-4727 Vance Hughes EPA, Wash., D.C; (202)426-2704 Robert L. Howell Franklin County, Fla.(904)653-8861 Bill Millhouser OCZM-NOAA 634-4235



PAGE 1

113. were analyzed within 48 hours. Soluble reactive phosphate, nitrate, and nitrite were determined by the methods given in Strickland and Parsons (4). 8. Chlorophyll-a was determined by the method given in Strickland and Parsons (4). Phytoplankton taxonomy was determined by the technique of R. Holmes (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Spec. Rep. Fish, 433 (1962)). 9. R. H. Estabrook, M. S. Thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, 166p (1973); V. B. Myers and R. L. Iverson, Florida Dept. Nat. Res. Publication, in press (1977); H. F. Bittaker, V. B. Myers, and R. L. Iverson, manuscript. 10. V. B. Myers and R. L. Iverson, manuscript. 11. Significant differences in species composition and size fraction exist between M. L. and E-12 stations and Ock and Apal stations. The phytoplankton communities at stations M. L. and E-12 had a greater proportion of individuals in the larger size fraction (35% of total numbers had log cell volumes between 4.0 and 5.0) than did station Ock and Apal (15% of total numbers were in this larger size fraction). Cyclotella meneghiniana was the dominant diatom at all stations and comprised 18 to 38 % of the total phytoplankton cell numbers. 12. A stepwise regression method was used to enter independent variables into the model. The lower limit of the change of R2 for addition of a variable to the model was set at 0.05. Soluble reactive phosphate was the first variable entered into



PAGE 1

f/ UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE \ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Zone Management Advisory Committee 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 202/634-6791 February 1, 1977 Dr. Robert Livingston Associate Professor Biological Sciences Conradi Building, Room 213 Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: This is to confirm your recent phone cdnversation with members of the Office of Coastal Zone Management staff requesting you to address the Coastal Zone Management Advisory Committee at its next meeting in Tallahassee. We are pleased that you will be able to join us on February 23 and welcome you to attend the entire meeting. We are interested in hearing your presentation on the proposed Corps of Engineers' dam project along the Apalachicola River. Enclosed for your information are an agenda and a list of the Committee membership. Thank you for your assistance. We look forward to a productive meeting. The Committee staff will be in touch with you regarding final arrangements. Sincerely, William C. Brewer NOAA General Counsel Chairman, CZM Advisory Committee Enclosures



PAGE 1

130. up from solution at low concentrations by Pisidium, a freshi water bivalve (Efford and Tsumura, 1973). Pequignat (1973) found signi[ri cant uptake of labelled amino acids and glucose from sea water by different organs of the mussel Mytilus edulis. He concluded that uptake of organic solutes would constitute a significant Dart of the diet of the mi;sel if continually supplied in the environment. Glucos'e can be removed from solution in seawater and may be an important nutritional supplement for oysters (Gillespie, et al., 1964., 1966). The ciliated epithelium of the bivalve gill plays a major role in the direct absorption of organic solutes. The gill epithelium was one of the most active tissues involved with the uptake of dissolved amino acids and glucose in Mytilus edulis (Pequignat, 1973). Gills have been shown to exhibit an active role in the.uptake of labelled glucose and amino acids in bivalves such as Mya arenaria (Ste-wart and Bamford, 1975), Crassostrea gigas (Bamford and Gingles, 1974) and Cerastoderma edule (Bamford and McCrea, 1975). This investigation was designed to determine the capability and mechanism of absorption of glycolic acid from solution by gills of the bivalve Mercenaria sp. Experiments were conducted to determine whether or not glycolic acid was incorporated into the energy yielding and biosynthetic pathways of the gill. 2



PAGE 1

206. regardless of the environmental strains. Under specialized and stringent conditions we have been able to change the level of cellular ATP in the bacteria Haemophilus parainfluenzae and Staphylococcus aureus by a factor of two by manipulation of the state of the electron transport system (17). The assay of ATP in the nanogram ranges typical of ecological studies requires the use of the luciferin-luciferase enzyme system from firefly tails. Methods for standardization of the enzyme have been well worked out (18). Problems with detritus of sediments lie in the quantitative extractibility of the nucleotides. In our laboratory cultures, cellular reactions may be stopped and the nucleotides extracted with ice-cold 1.92 M perchloric acid. Neutralization with ice-cold KOH and precipitation of potassium perchlorate yields a solution that can be measured reproducibly by luciferin-luciferase phosphorescence at.sufficient dilution of 1.0 nmole./ml so there is essentially no salt effect on the enzyme. Environmental samples are usually at concentrations where dilutions of the potassium perchlorate are insufficient to remove salt effects from the assay conditions. Extraction from filtered microorganisms by boiling in 0.02 M tris-hydroxyamino methane buffer, pH 7.75, is quantitative. Karl and LaRock (19) have shown that boiling is not satisfactory for microorganisms in sediments, and they have developed a sulfuric acid-ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid extraction procedure that quantitatively extracts ATP from marine sediments yet does not interfere with the enzymes that are essential for the assay. A liquid scintillation counter operating in the non-coincident mode is satisfactory for detection of the phosphorescence. ATP then is a measure of microbiomass. The metabolic state of the cells may be better reflected in the so-called energy charge of the total adenylate pool ( 13, 20). The value ATP + 0.5 ADP is of primary importance in total adenylate



PAGE 1

38. Fig. 1: The Apalachicola Bay System showing assigned (permanent) stations for all research operations. \ \ S" -... Tr 0-0 ,i. .\ < .CaP~s& (· ~ tr~ell < o b co r Y WY



PAGE 1

A 7J67a:.-7 OL7 d TH YA Table 8, continued STAT ONS 061 ja2 L,3 0.4 J.5 uL6 ulA L193 CC L;5 I'IE, uF UAY 0 SPECIES SAtPLE DAT.i 76S.P5 IE b. bl 76.515 7b.6x5 76 715 76, .! 7o.-.5 7U.jiL 1l11i1 761213 773125 77;226 IOTL.S PLNAEuS Sil31F-tRU i i Z 25 9-01 17.b 3.J LA 1*, 1 u 365 ;.4ý 4.L3 1.5 j.74 8 .)5 54.,7 > .3 73i.I 2. 11.75 4*91 6**4 48**< CALLINECIiS 3AIJUj 13b .71 .6b it e 4 475 L I 142 35 174, 19.65 46.bs 9. 50 2-..98 5.s s*t 7.17 5. * a .6. 51.73 .6s1 be.1 21.97 PALAEMONNTES PJIO 5u 46 56 r 4 o 7 7 7 23 767 72. 5 13.9j 9.69 3.39 .27 1.ý5 .17 La.t 3.55 2.j6 11.86 .65 9*.6 NEkITINA RCLiVATA 9 15 5d 135 29 j9 29 57 14 99 D. 4 a 2, i.3R 4L53 1j.Co 47.2u 2.57 .12 *z9:i 5. L.91 2 a.2 30u9 i2.1 6.i5 ACETES A..RICANJS .6 2 .145 1 .J .2 2 3 PENAEUS AZTECU " 14, 14 1 7 5 3 2 j 6 .Z63 .n0C .30 24.2. 4.9E ..9 ;..79 .85 .3i .07 J.J 56Ma 4.d* 256o LOLLIGUNGULA 3REVIS 3 6 77 15 18 7 7 I 2 4 2 142 .43 1.5. 13.32 5.i4 1.:9 .J4 1.19 .*L .L7 LO1S 4.Jj 1.31 1.79 PENAEUS JUORAýUJ io 32 Z+ 1 14 5 1 17 I+ B 117 1.88 9.57 .:,i .a5 1.4 .*, .*17 ?3 5 *bd LL ,52 J.dd 1.4B CALLINECTES SIMILIS 6 c7 47 3 7 1 2 5 L1 1 6 lu .87 8.ib 8.14 1.5 .02 .j5 .*34 .73 .b8 .23 .52 4»o» 1*34 RHITIROPANOPEU3 lA(RISII 3 15 2 7 9 8 3 ) 11L 4 5 7g .43 4.53 .35 2.45 .du .39 .51 3.UJ *41 3.24 2.66 3.27 .ea XIPHOPENEUS KROYERI , w 12 23 2 3 47 000, ..u4 C.u 3. UJ 1.36 1.11 4j .i 45 3.5J j** i*4 i0ai *59 PAGURUS P3LLIGA4IS 1 0 0 3 L 5 -z a .14 u6 1 3. J a.U .0 j0 *51 L 6 a 1 0 d Lois a a4 J*0m *3c RANGIA CJNEATA 1 1 2 .u 3 l * .2 L .14 .3u 0 .0 .7 L..au j..U 1.L71 .30 htJ 1.18 0*au *.a *i27 PALAEMONETES VJL3ARIS 1 u .7 u 3 5 J 2 0 u 1 tOL .3u U, U.Ou .62 ..,u .51 .ol 3*UJ .53 0.OU .51. .23 TRACm~PMNAEUS IlMILIS 4 2 U u , 0 Li U 16L .58 .6D C .C .ta0 5L^ L*C J.0a 1*21 J.uK 0n* U1di 3 .a *20 SQUILLA EMPUSA L 1 6 1 Q IL 1 3 a a | 15 .006 3..4 a.0u ju C O9 G.3u .17 3.3k 3.61 w4 1.55 4.cii .19 POLLINICES JUPLICATUS 0 U 0 C U ; a 2 4 5 13 0.0, 5.00 G.uu ,. ..,u 3. a .EZ4 .j L.75 2.J6 .65 *16 PALAEnONETES INIERMEDIJS U 0 i G 3 a 3 U 9 u.0L 0.u a .U j0.uk ti.uu aUo .i.J )U.J J.uj 2.60 3»uU .aU *.11 METAPORHAPPIS CALCARATA 0 U u 0 6 0 6 J J L 5 6 0.0L U.4u 6.C0 0.30 L.jO 4.j j .ua a.J 3.. I .23 QU4A a. 27 * 8 OGYRIDES .IMIi3LA 1 3 0 0 a 2 J 3 3 u 6 .14 C.6J Bo.. J.uL .u .3 .0GU .o24 b.J .tau 1.*55 A*Uu *38 CRASSOSTREA VIRGINICA C 0 C u .1 6 .uJ u.oj t .u-, J.. ...uJ jU *17 ..24 .14 .59 ot.uu iu * NEOPANOPE TEXANA u U C GC C 3 4 U 15 0.O1, u.G00 .u 3j.C C.au w su iiu «2.3J ,.J 1.19 «3 .65 .32 CLIBANARIJS VIiTATJS 1 1 C 2 u U 1 J . .14 .uj .17 4obb .Lbt :.G .&6 .12 .6Ua a.d 9j 0.ui aB *a PORTUNUS GBESII J ...2 2 a T1.OC C..J O. -J.L» L. J. L .· * .24 k J1UJ ..3 ,*, J5Ba *u TRACHYPENAEUS COISIRiCTU. .' , 2 a u 3 .A.j .. ..J. *C9 .p u7 4« .nw r .; .... a ..a .«A



PAGE 1

98. ACKNOWLEDGEENTS Field collections were funded by grants from NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce (Grant Number 04-3-158-43), and the Board of County Commissioners of Franklin County, Fla.



PAGE 1

Fig. 22: Surface pH at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from November, 1974 to March, 1977. "> -.* -j * -r' U._'' "A : I,' u C "U 7. U. ..' 7 .-* .-.: ** 77/ s-/511 i. P-, 31 0 (A SPOSS) OATS -F.7. S .: 7 ^.25-l 34.17S 1 62. Jt25 .1?!?.475ý; 393.5 tS** 566 7. 7ý5j:007 .92; ---------------------------+----4 ----------------+-----+--------Si i a.53 5 1 ? II .I I 7.99 SI --I II 1 --------------------------j----------.-.--.-----------------.------------------.----------.---i I I I I i I6 I I SI* I I \ I *---_+---+----------------------------*--------t-------+------------------i-------3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 -*,1L4C"C.^TTEPGRA'HS ? S::;'*._ 1-.17272 R aU -.02983 SIGNIFICANCE R -.21533 *. P--ST -.'-2 INTERCEPT (A) -6.82676 STO EPPOR OF A -.7516 -.:,:A' -.)..,1 SLOPE (2) -.0,042 STO ERROR OF 8 -.00r52 '"" .LU.L!-23 EXCLUDEC VALUES0 MISSIN, VALUE3 -86 .'**'*.*' IS I'TT IF A 0OEFFICIENT CANN.GT EE ^O'FUTED.



PAGE 1

221. TABLE II Estimates of the Estuarine Detrital Bacterial Growth Rates Method 1. Incorporation of 32P into phospholipid into biomass (assume 50 pmoles lipid per g dry wt) a. 0.22% of biomass in 2 hrs (muramic acid) b. 0.1% of biomass in 2 hrs (ATP) Biomass determined by total muramic acid (a) or extractible ATP (b) 2. Muramic acid turnover T 1/2 = 72 hrs 3. Glycolipid turnover T 1/2 = 78 hrs 4. Saturation of cardiolipin precursors T 1/2 GPG Lag in CL Doubling time Monoculture 47 min < 10 min 40 min Detritus 110 hrs > 40 hrs ?



PAGE 1

205. weight for seven species of gram-negative bacteria and 9.6 ± 1.9 (X ± a) for five species of gram-positive bacteria with the data expressed as pg muramic acid per mg dry weight (12 ). Spores from gram-positive bacilli averaged 38Lg muramic acid/mg dry weigbh ± 6.2 (X ± a) pg/mg dry weight. The hydrolysates of these spores also contain the amino acid dipicolinic acid, an amino acid that has not yet been found in vegetative bacteria, other prokaryotes or eukaryotes (13 1. Our Methodology (see below) allows for the detection of this amino acid. As yet dipicolinic acid has been undetectable in estuarine samples. In addition the rates of incorporation and turnover (loss of 14C-labeled wall during incubation in the medium not containing radioactivity)have been shown to serve as indicators of bacterial growth. Our methodology has recently been reported in the literature (3). 2. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Adenosine triphosphate is the energy currency of the cell -the ultimate product of catabolism. Elegant studies by EolmHansen and Booth (14) and Holm-Hansen (15, 16) have established that for 30 species of unicellular algae, seven strains of marine bacteria grown in batch cultures, marine phytoplankton under conditions of nitrogen, phosphorus or silicon deficiency, algal cells exposed to alternating periods of light and dark, natural phytoplankton populations grown in nutrient-enriched media, as well as micro and macro-zooplankton from laboratory cultures or isolated from the water column, the levels of extractible ATP correspond to 0.04% of the total particulate organic carbon. The total particulate organic carbon correlates directly with the dry weight of the cells. In these and many other experiments the microorganisms were concentrated on Millipore filters with 0.45 pm pores. ATP is present in all living cells thus far examined. It rapidly hydrolyzes in dead material or cells deprived of metabolizable substrate ( 17 ). At least in the water column the ATP exists in reasonably uniform concentrations in all cells,



PAGE 1

419. 2,6,1,4,5A, and 3. Distinct station-to-station differences were noted for the bottom-feeding Micropogon undulatus and Leiostomus xanthurus. Micropogon clusters into three groups, stations 3-5-5A-6, 1-4-1A-IC, and 2-1B. Leiostomus clusters into two groups, stations 3-5-5A-6 and 1A-1B-1-4-2-1C. The distinctions in these cases probably are related to station characteristics. Thus, the cluster of stations 3-5-5A-6, occurring for both species are characterized as shallow, low salinity areas with nearby beds of benthic macrophytes, while the other stations are relatively remote from land and have, in general, higher salinities and muddy bottoms with little or no macrophyte development. Resource Partitioning and Competition The general evidence presented above indicates that the various resources of Apalachicola Bay are well partitioned among the fish species. The most commonly examined resource dimensions are habitat, food, and time. In this case, habitat has not yet been examined in detail. Temporal partitioning has already been documented, with the four main species generally occurring in peak abundances during different seasons, the exception being Micropogon and Leiostomus (Livingston et al., 1976). Food resources appear also to be well divided among the species: Cynoscion feeds on mysids and juvenile fishes, Anchoa on calanoid copepods, and polychaetes. The obvious competitive interactions would, on a temporal basis, appear to be between Micropogon and Leiostomus. However, competition is ameliorated between these two benthic feeders via differentiated food habits as demonstrated above. Future analyses A number of important aspects have yet to be considered. These include: 1) the extent to which spatial and temporal differences in food availability affect the observed variability in food habits of each species, 2) the extent



PAGE 1

366 a. FIGURE 6 MAR. .° 4.0 -°'% °4 • , \/ [..... .......... 3.0 -* * \ ---...... ' I • ..1 °0 0, 0 -----------.... ......... 0 4U 200024T -H' HS( %DOM. --------FISHES ---.. V... E AGE %DOM.o....... FISHES •... ....AVERAGE



PAGE 1

PECIES 15 750515 750615 750715 750815 750915 751015 DPHYCIS FLORIOANUS 8 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8 27 .35 0.00 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1*43 .21 .14 GIL SPECIES 0 25 1 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 C.OC .88 .05 .00 .O 00 0. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0o.00 0.0 0.00 .13 CROGOBIUS THALASSINUS 5 13 p C 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 24 .22 .46 CG.O 0.00 .14 .20 .07 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .12 CROPTERUS SALMOIDES 0 0 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 21 0.00 0.00 .90 .24 &.OQ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 0.08 .11 iRALICHTHYS LETHOSTIGMA 1 2 4 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 19 .04 .07 .20 .48 .28 .20 .07 .00O 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .10 'NGNATHUS FLORIOAE 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1t 7 0 0 0 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 0.00 0.00 .52 .45 0.080 .00 0.00 .09 ;TALURUS CATUS 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 14 .35 0.0d 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .06 .10 .16 .05 .07 3POSOuA PETENENSE 3 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 13 .13 .07 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 0.00 0.00 o0.0 .95 0.00 .07 EPRILUS PARU 0 0 4 0 2 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 12 0.00 0.CO .20 0.00 .28 .20 0.00 .21 .06 0.00 0.00' 0.00 .06 EPISOSTEUS OSSEUS 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 -10 .09 .04 0.00 .12 .0.0 0.00 .00 ..00 .10 .79 0.00 .5 ORICHTHYS POROSISSIMUS 0 0 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0.00 0.00 .10 .48 .57 0.00 0.00 0.03 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 RCHOSARGUS PROBATOCEPHALUS 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 2 0 1 0 9 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 *16 .13 0.00 .16 0.00 .05 PHOEROIDES NEFHELUS 1 1 0 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 .04 .04 0.00 .36 .42 0.00 .07 O.D0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 IPLECTRUH FORMOSU 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 7 0.00 .04 .05 0.00 0.00 00 .. 14 .05 .06 .10 0.00 0.00 .04 :HAETODIPTERUS FABER 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 6 0.00 0.0 0 0.0 .0 .14 0.0D .35 0.0J 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 o .OBIOSOMA ROBUSTU 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .12 .14 0.00 0.00 3.03 0.00 5.00 0.00 .11 .03 IUGIL CEPHALUS 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1. 6 0.0 .0C7 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 .16 .03 .03 'EPRILUS BURTI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 1 6 O.OC 0.C0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 .40 0.00 .03 .03 rUNDULUS GRANOIS 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 O.O0 O.CO 0.00 0.00 .71 0.00 0.CO 3.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .EPOMIS MICROLOPHUS 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0.00 0.00 .25 .OO0 0.00 0.30 0 .00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 'RIONOTUS SCITULUS 1 1 0 C 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 .04 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 0.00 * 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 %NCYCLOPSETTA QUADROCELLATA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 .04 .04 0.00 O.OC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 0.00 0.00 .02 O0NACANTHUS HISPIDUS 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0.0 0.00 D 0.00 0.00 .14 0.00 0.00 .10 B5.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 SCIAENOPS OCELLATA 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 .04 0.00 O.O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 .16 0.00 .02 BAGRE MARINUS 0 1 0 00 3 *o* .o 0.00 0.080 .12 14 0.00 .07 6.00 .00 D.c 0.00 0.00 .02 ANGUILLA ROSTRATA 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 GGBIONELLUS HASTATUS 0 1 1 C 0 C 0 0 0 8 0 2 C.Ob .04 .05 0.OC C.GG 0.00 0.0 0 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.0 .01



PAGE 1

303. TABLE 1: Results of 2-way analyses nf variance (by month, by year) for physico-chemical and biological parameters of the Apalachicola Bay System taken over a 48-month period (March, 1972 to February, 1976). Included are various indices used in the overall statistical analysis. Number Standard Deviations from the mean by year Significance (P) Parameter of cases Mean Deviation 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 Month Year PHYSCICO-CHEMICAL River flow (CFS) 48 27,586. 15,366. -2401. 5369. -6088. 3122. 0.001 0.025 Secchi (m) 48 0.82 0.37 0.08 -0.19 0.10 0.01 0.172 0.194 Color (Pt-Co units) 48 42.4 74.5 22.8 -11.7 -16.7 5.1 0.203 0.999 Turbidity (JTII) 48 20.2 33.4 16.2 9.9 -13.7 -12.7 0.999 0.180 Temperature (°C) 48 20.2 6.3 1.6 -2.6 0.9 -0.2 0.016 0.240 Salinity (0/oo) 48 16.1 8.3 2.7 0.8 1.3 -5.5 0.003 0.114 Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 48 8.2 2.3 -0.4 ..-0.1 0.2 0.058 0.999 Nitrate ( g/L) 42 113.0 62.7 49.5 25.1 -42.4 -7.4 0.172 0.002 Phosphate 42 12.3 7.9 2.2 1.2 -3.0 0.7 0.999 0.395 DDT (Rangia: PPB) 29 145. 173. 160. -125.0 -83. --0.303 0.001 PCB (Rangia: PPB) 29 85. 85. 79. -61. -41. --0.402 0.001 ChlorophyTT A (mg/m3) 44 5.3 2.1 1.9 0.7 -0.9 -1.1 0.331 0.002 Rainfall 48 5.0 4.0 1.3 -1.1 0.5 2.0 0.398 0.999 Wind 48 --------Tides 48 ----------DDP** 48 ------ml ml 48 -------.. INVERTEBRATES Number of individuals (N)* 45 647. 763. -73. -170. 25. 224. 0.999 0.999 N-N (dominant species)* 45 209. 125. -14. -39. -108. 162. 0.999 0.021 Maralef richness 45 1.78 0.56 0.02 -0.13 -0.01 0.16 0.999 0.999 Relative dominance (%) 45 56.4 16.6 -2.4 1.9 7.2 -4.9 0.358 0.999 Shannon diversity 45 1.34 0.36 -0.05 -0.14 0.04 0.16 0.999 0.257 Number of species (S) 45 11.7 3.8 1.2 -1.0 0.8 1.6 0.999 0.255 FISHES Number of individuals (N)* 45 1670. 1219. 202. 14. 170. 46. 0.217 0.999 N-N 45 663. 221. -160. 17. 20. 162. 0.108 0.009 Mar alef richness 45 3.52 0.71 -0.22 -0.09 -0.06 0.37 0.114 0.146 Relative dominance (%) 45 54.9 16.6 10.6 -1.0 -5.4 -4.2 0.099 0.041 Shannon diversity 45 1.48 0.33 -0.23 -0.03 0.11 0.08 0.051 0.030 Number of species (S) 45 26.4 5.9 -1.6 -0.9 -0.3 2.8 0.237 0.236 Anchoa group* 45 2.57 0.70 0.20 -0.22 -0.02 0.04 0.003 0.050 Micropogon group* 45 2.14 0.80 -0.15 0.37 -0.23 0.01 0.001 0.050 Cynoscion group* ^4 1.58 n.A 0.11 -l.21 .11 -0.01 0.001 0.095 Gobiosoma group* 45 1.12 0.57 -0.28 -0.24 -0.11 0.42 0.064 0.011 Chloroscombrus group* 45 0.59 0.86 0.19 -0.07 0.07 -0.18 0.001 0.204 *Logarithms used **Dummy variable for DDT and PCB ***Dummy variables for month of the year in analysis of variance



PAGE 1

SREUSIN O'D. ASKEW Governor f BRUCE A.SMATHERS a Of JE Secretary of State State of Florida RB ROBERT L. SHEVIN Attorney General GERALD A. LEWIS Comptroller DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SLE DOYLE CONNER Commissioner of Agriculture HARMON W. SHIELDS CROWN BUILDING / 202 BLOUNT STREET / TALLAHASSEE 32304 RALPH D. TURLINGTON Executive Director Commissioner of Education December 15, 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Associate Professor Department of Biological Science Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Skip: Thanks very much for your letter of November 30, 1976 offering your services for aiding in designating Apalachicola Bay and environs as an estuarine sanctuary. We very much appreciate your offer and we never take significant action involving this area without consulting with you. Pursuant thereto, please find enclosed a 1st draft of a preliminary preapplication to OCZM for such a sanctuary. Your comments or advice are solicited. We are expecting Bob Kifer from OCZM downhere shortly and if convenient, would:'like to have you with us when we meet on this subject. We will keep you advised. ., Sincerely, Bre Johnson, Chief Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning BJ/rh enclosure cc: Harry McGinnis ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES * LAW ENFORCEMENT * MARINE RESOURCES DIVISIONS I RECREATION AND PARKS * RESOURCE MANAGEMENT



PAGE 1

264. Table 2: Biomass (ash-free dry wgt., G/M2) of benthic infauna in the Apalachicola Estuary (excluding Calinectes sapidus, Penaeus spp., and Rhithropanopeus) STATIONS DATE IX 1 3 4 4A 5A 5B 6 2/75 0.592 1.205 7.211 1.359 3/75 19.508 0.241 4.753 1.227 1.468 7.781 0.526 4/75 56.378 1.074 5.129 1.074 0.898 5.019 0.613 5/75 13.743 1.644 2.608 1.994 0.460 7.277 0.416 0.153 6/75 15.957 1.512 4.384 0.197 0.065 6.334 0.306 1.293 7/75 4.690 0.635 1.709 0.328 0.767 1.161 0.109 0.569 8/75 7.365 0.854 3.265 2.301 0.504 1.950 0.021 1.008 9/75 7.832 1.490 1.994 1.841 2.082 2.717 0.065 1.205 10/75 9.314 3.068 2.321 0.679 2.520 4.690 2.476 0.152 11/75 7.080 0.635 2.586 0.460 1.446 0.591 0.372 1.249 12/75 9.074 1.337 2.338 0.920 0.876 9.469 3.178 0.328 1/76 13.261 4.932 1.578 1.534 0.723 9.359 2.564 0.964 2/76 27.354 0.197 2.410 0.109 0.766 6.554 2.630 0.613 3/76 1.139 0.438 4.186 0.679 4/76 2.783 0.153 2.411 0.742 5/76 1.753 0.372 1.578 0.350 6/76 1.424 0.175 0.591 0.043 7/76 0.854 0.284 1.490 0.087 8/76 0.394 3.441 1.885 0.175 9/76 0.591 1.753 0.131 0.043 12 month means 15.96 1.45 2.92 1.06 1.05 5.24 1.21 0.72



PAGE 1

259. This species of polychaete was the sixth most abundant form of benthic infauna in the bay. This worm utilizes a variety of habitats in the Apalachicola Bay System including Halodule beds on the bay side of St. George Island and fine mud flats in East Bay. Ranging from 10 20mm in length, this species secretes a thin membranous tube in salinities from 0 -26.50/oo and temperatures from 6 -320C. Amphicteis gunneri floridus (Polychaeta, Sedentaria) As the seventh most abundant form of benthic invertebrate in the Apalachicola estuary, this polychaete is found throughout the bay from the grassbeds of St. George Island to oligohaline mud flats in East Bay. It was found in salinities ranging from 0 -26.80/oo and temperatures from 6 -32.50C, peak abundance was noted in September with low numbers observed in the summer (May -August). Oligochaete sp. 2 This unidentified oligochaete was found to be the eighth most abundant form of infauna in the Bay. This organism was restricted to a Halodule bed on the inside of St. George Island. It ranges from 20 -40 mm in length. Salinity varies in this area from 6.3 -26.80/00 and temperatures range from 11.5 -32.5 C. Peak numbers occurred in winter and early spring with low numbers in August and September. Aricidea fragilis (Polychaeta, Sedentaria) This polychaete species was the ninth most prevalent form of benthic infauna and was largely restricted to the St. George Island Halodule grass beds. It ranges from 10 -20 mm in length and was found in salinities from 6.3 -26.80/oo and temperatures from 11.5 -32.50C. Peak numbers occurred in April with low numbers taken during the fall (September -October).



PAGE 1

Figure 28, continued. SCATTERS TOP TEN FISH 9IOMASS WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 15 FILE 'ONAmE CPFrATIOHN 04TDF 77/03/23.) SCATTERGRAM OF (CVw4) BAICHR (ACROSS) DAYS 104..7503 284.42500 454.37500 644.32500 824.275001004.225001184.175001364.1 5001544.075001724.02500 .-----------------------------------------------------------------------1101.80 + I I 1101.84 I I T I I I ! II 991.62 * I I 91.62 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7F1.26 + 1 771.26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I T I 7bF1.26 4 I 4 771.26 I I I I I -I 0T I I I I I I I +r1.o6 + I 5I 61.08 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 440.72 I + 441.72 I I II I I I I 1-----------------------------------------------------------------~~-*------------------I I I I ?C.3 + 4 220I.36 I I t s T Ir SCATIFS TCP TEN FIS? LO'AS1 HOLE SAY 77/03/23. PAGE 15 SAT T T C .. CCP`LATIIC4 (2)-.14471 R SQUAPED -.02194 SIGNIFICANCE R -.13499 S3' .5r EST 84 INTERfEFT (A) -t28.81507 fO ERROR OF A -45.6394. 11*.36 + B 110.13 7LCPE (3) --4911 1IC FR-) OF P -.4 7 'T.. i -EC 7 A'-, HMISSING VALUrS ---------------'-+----P --T+--' t---t--+F------N--+ + --C----O-3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SC6TTFS TCP TEN FISH BIONASC -HOLE BAr 77/03/23. PAGE 15 S-ATT TIC?.. CCP:tLATION


PAGE 1

235. summer and early fall. Such rainfall was correlated with increased levels of color at inshore stations (3 and 5A). Color appeared to be more variable than turbidity and often had a direct relationship with salinity. Color was uniformly low at Station IX which, after a period of low salinity during the early spring of 1974, also was characterized by uniformly higher salinities than the other two stations. Station 5A had a low mean salinity over the study period with considerable seasonal variation. During spring months, salinity was not detected in this area. Increases in salinity occurred during summer and fall periods with significant variation due to local rainfall and runoff conditions. During the fall, there was a significant increase in color at Station 5A which was not evident elsewhere to any degree. This factor will be studied in more detail in an analysis of clearcutting operations. Station 3, with somewhat higher mean salinities, reflected the same pattern although variation was somewhat less extreme and there were generally higher salinity levels during the spring than in more upland portions of the bay. The reduced influence of contiguous land areas on Station 3 was also reflected in the color data. Thus, the physical parameters at the three primary collection stations were based primarily on physiographic location, temporal variations of river flow and meteorological phenomena, and local rainfall and land runoff conditions. Sampling efficiency Multiple samples (7) were used to evaluate the method of collection. A composite species accumulation is shown in Fig. 3. Each point represents the mean number of species found in the 6 subsamples taken at weekly intervals from 9 April to 14 May. In each instance, an asymptotic relationship was reached by the fourth sample. Further analysis was carried out using a



PAGE 1

Table 4: Identified food items in stomachs of Micropogon undulatus (165 sets of samples) Polychaetes Amphipods Shrimp (127/165 total occurrences) # of occurrences (99/165 occurrences) # of occurrences (45/165 occurrences) Paraprionospio pinnata 20 Grandidiereua bonnieroides 39 Ogyrides limicola Amphicteis gunneri 20 Gammarus sp. 1 27 Callianassa Jamaicense Glycinde solitaria 19 Cerapus sp. 12 Penaeus spp Laeonereis culveri 5 Haustoriid sp. 10 Alpheus heterochaelis Neanthes succinea 4 Ampelisca vadorum 7 Capitellid sp. 3 Corophium louisianum 4 Crabs (5/165 occurrences) Loandalia americana 2 Gammarus macronatus 4 Streblospio benedicti 1 Melita sp. 3 Rhithropanopeus harrisii Haploscolopios fragilis 1 Gammarus sp. 2 3 Sigambra bassi 1 Cymadusa compta 1 Fish (13/165 occurrences) Caprellid sp. 1 Mysids Isopods Micropogon undulatus (95/165 total occurrences) (20/165 occurrences) Anchoa mitchilli Cynoscion arenarius Mysidopsis bahia 15 Cyathura polita 18 Microgobius gulosus s Taphromysis bowmani 10 Edotea montosa 8 Leptocephalus Mysidopsis almyra 1 Cassidinidea ovalis 2 Mysidopsis bigielowi 1



PAGE 1

'-E7T ..,iTE'RS T P FEN HnOL: A. N 77/j 3/27. PA;E 13 -I.E '3;AE (CREATIOn ATE. = 77/1.3/27.) .L-fti(,Er Ari OF (OdiW) LOLBRE (GCROSS) DAYS iJ4.475.0 28..4250su 464.375ýi 644.3250C 824. 75JC16~4. 250 184. 1753.136. 253154, u7563 & i2 325i .***t ---+ -------+--------------------+ -----+-------------------------i..17.L ' , t+ I I .11.7.U I I L I I I I I I I I 1 1-5. * .I X .I * 15.40 93. 4 .1 3A .6 1 < I I I I I I I I I .I 8;.i9 + I I + 7L.9G -'2 .+ ..I4I I I I--~-I----******-***-----** -------------* --* * * -----* ---* * * * * i i 95 i 1 f 58.5j + i I * * 58*i.5 I I I I I 74.6 4 I I 6. 7J.2 I f ] I I I 11 11 7 I I 0 U:;.`l'----L-L--L A R----,-.-.--.G---.A -15566 I I I O : i i i S1 i Ii I \ \ I I" i I I I S\ I / I II I I , .I I \ 5 L t I i I I I -I I I I I I I I 1 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 "6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 j " Ii/;cRT .,lTT,'cRS TCP TEN ririOLE BAY N 77/03/2.7. PA3E 14 ST1TIST II S. CJ.-:LATiO, (R)-,i637 rt S'JAFtDO .j58Q SiG1;-.'F,. ANC , -.13566 jT3 £,; OF ,ST -26.2355f INTEC£PT (<& -£4.8919 SID iRO: OF A -6.76992 4I I j.I,: ..I .... -.: 56b 1i-_T.) .;LU -61 cCLULi1 vALU1S1 .IiNi vLU-. -I RLDfTE2 vAt.UE -6.. E/CLUULD vALUES.bl~iN, VALIJa -U



PAGE 1

101. TABLE II Enviro i.'n nctal nd utrient rData?-' Sta t .oTermp Sal M02 iO PO4 urb Ch.l2 31.7/11/75 27.2 0.0 0.09 0.86 0.32 12.4 5.22 7 7/13/75 26.3 4.2 0.03 0.57 0.27 6.3 3.46 1A 9/25/75 21.7 .3.2 ---1.67 0.28 12.4 5.32 7 9/26/75 22.1 11.3 --0.45 0.34 .7.4 3.10 ( A 1/13/76 11.2 0.0 --4.05 0.38 18.7 4.54 7 1/13/76 10.3 1.8 0.27 4.52 0.40 7.3 3.35 1A 3/29/75 20.3 2,3 --11.24 '.0.64 21.0 2.72 7 3/29/7C 21.1 2.1 0.31 12.41 0.47 12.4 2.35 1A 5/10/75 25.0 4.9 0.04 9.62 0.35 I0.S 5.76 7 6/10/75 25.1 6.9 0.17 12.71 0.41 12.0 3..84 I LA 7/5/75 28.7 0.3 0.07 2.81 0.32 14.0 6.07 S 7 7/5/76 28.4 2.4 0.17 3.49 0.43 7.8 4.09 T Tep is temperature in *C; Sal is Salinty in ; E in ug-atrNO3 in I:-atn'.NO3 -/1; PO is soluble reactive phosphate in uc-2. t. Turh is turbidity in FTU; Chl-a is chlorophoyll-. in }.'1; Carbon ipl. kton ca rb in ; ... .' -:Cr1 p =,ui--,car on n )'-,/ "



PAGE 1

------.------------------i-+ -+-_----------+----------+-------+-----+---------+----------+-_--t HT I r I + I I 79.20 i7q.20? .6015.60 SI I I T " I I / 2 .C : I n , H I C r ( 3 I I I I j 76. G 1 4 7 .G TI I ..------------------------s I I T 7 I I I I \ i -5 iT I / 'I ' \ /i T \ Figure 4. Surface nitrate-nitrogen in East Bay. * .-~---,, --, , ; ----. j I I-i , I I * I r 3,'2 072 9/7 11723/3 973~/7 '/733/4 574 /7 12743/7 675 /7 12753/7 676 /T Figure 4. Sufc nitat-ntrge inastBay



PAGE 1

FISH SUMMHAY 3IOMA.S 4TH VLAq Table 11, continued OATLS 750301-760?bO STATIO'I 01 l n02 003 004 005 nn0 nOl 11H i01. o',A TIMES OF OAY p SPECIES SAMPLE CATES 750315 750415 750515 750615 750715 750815 750915 7515 551 751115 751215 760115 760215 TOTALS OASYATIS SABINA 274.50 98.22 '20.01 O.0U 909.64 67.57 164.35 244.89 201R.51 J.00 326.61 0.00 4324.30 ?j.04 6.71 8.25 0.00 49.59 11.31 11.62 10.61 66.7? 0.0C 7.70 0.00 20.76 LEPISOSTEUS OSSEUS 244.53 264.37 0.U0 40.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 f0.00 0.00 40.44 3354.84 0.00 3944.62 20.53 Id.05 0.00 4.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 79.05 0.00 18.94 ARIUS FELIS 36.94 438.54 274.49 135.43 485.98 347.75 114.40 77.10 608.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 2519.40 3.10 29.94 10.30 14.04 ?2.49 r8.22 8. 9 3.34 20.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.10 ARCHOSARGUS PRORATOCEPHALUS 0.00 0.00 19.11 0.01 0.00 0.00 246.30 1109.53 21.70 0.00 9.66 0.00 1405.30 0.00 U.0n .72 .0On J.0 0.00 17.42 48.06 .72 0.00 .20 0.00 6.75 MICROPOGON UNDULATUS 162.77 25b.70 477.8d 92.93 41.48 0.00 85.60 .08 4.73 10.87 37.53 68.65 1239.19 13.66 17.52 17.93 9.b3 e.26 0.00 6.05 .00 .16 1.61 .88 15.50 5.95 BREVOCRTIA PATPONUS 2.71 11.23 090.27 .66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .25 .45 21.10 1026.67 .23 .77 37.15 .07 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .01 4.76 4.93 ANCHOA MITCHILLI 22.04 67.,7 28.88 26.60 90.15 1b.17 49.95 299.40 139.16 114.50 2.68 59.60 916.50 1.85 4.bO 1.08 2.76' 4.91 2.71 3.53 12.97 4.50 16.98 .06 13.46 4.40 PAPALIHTHYS LET-OSTIGMA 49.59 20.87 15 .nb 281.17 126.92 112.07 37.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 64.29 852.49 4.17 1.42 6.00 29.15 t. 92 18.76 2.66 0.00UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.51 4.09 LEIOSTOMUS XANTHURUS' 125.90 189.11 250.36 39.59 0.00 0.00 16.20 33.09 0.00 39.65 8.83 47.54 750.27 10.57 12.91 9.J9 4.11 0.00 0.00 1.15 1.43 0.00 5.88 .21 10.73 3.60 BAGRE MARINUS 0.00 0. 0 0.00 254.20 79.37 0.00 405.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 738.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.36 .4.27 0.00 28.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.54 ICTALURUS CATUS 39.24 0.00 0.00 0 .On d.00 0.00 0.00 2.15 17.53 341.70 142.98 101.71 645.31 3.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.OO 0.00 .09 .58 50.68 3.37 22.96 3.10 CYNOSCION AKENARIUS O.no 3.22 51.1i 59.37 21.73 16.66 129.03 80.39 7.22 8.09 0.00 0.00 377.32 I 0.00 .22 1.34 6.16 1.18 2.79 9.13 3.48 .24 1.20 0.00 0.00 1.81 BAIROIELLA CHPYSURA b4.09 6.22 4.77 11.66 2.39 0.00 51.12 .12 63.51 28.85 0.00 14.76 237.59 4.54 .42 .18 1.21 .13 0.00 3.62 .01 2.10 4.28 0.00 3.33 1.14 TRITECTES MAGULATUS 9.30 6.75 50.01 2.66 U.O0 4.15 12.61 5.60 10.99 3.36 .70 37.27 218.40 7.50 .46 1.o0 .28 0.00 .69 .89 .24 .35 .50 .02 7.29 1.05 SCIAENOPS OCELLATA 2.46 n.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 195. 3 0.00 0.00 1.37 0.00 198.86 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.45 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .95 HORONE CHRYSOPS 0.00 0.00 0.uq 0.00 0.00 0.OU 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 188.39 0.00 188.39 0.00 0.00 0.U0 0.00 .0un 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.44 0.00 .90 ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 2.25 10.29 2.39 2.79 .52 2.76 26.41 51.73 55.53 25.39 4.71 1.71 187.08 .19 .70 .11 .29 .03 .46 1.87 2.24 1.34 3.77 .11 .39 .90 SYNODUS FOETENS 0.00 0.00 .08 .09 8.80 9.78 9.12 59.26 1.53 2.71 8.12 0.00 99.49 0.00 n.00 .00 .01 .48 1.64 .U5 2.57 .05 .40 .19 0.00 .48 CYNOSCION NE9ULOSUS 7.47 13.20 10.06 0.00 .26 0.00 2.46 18.69 1.62 7.32 33.26 2.11 96.45 .63 .90 .38 0.00 .01 0.00 .17 .81 .05 1.09 .76 .48 .46 MICROCOBIUS i-ULOSUS 6.47 35.47 12.30 2.03 .49 2.37 7.73 8.76 .50 1.99 1.09 15.56 94.76 .34 2.42 .45 .21 .03 .40 .55 .38 .02 .30 .03 3.51 .45 MULIL CEPhALUS 0.00 .38 .19 U.00 n.00 u.00 0.0U 75.57 0.00 0.00 .07 .04 76.25 0.00 .03 .01 0.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 3.27 0.00 0.00 .00 .01 .37 POGONIAS CROMIS 0.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 .O .0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0" 75.74 0.00 75.74 0.30 1.00 0.00 0.o 0 ".10 0.00 0. 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.78 0.00 .36 HFNTIFIRRHIIS AMEPICANUS "n.0U 0.J0 .34 5.74 10.;6 ,2# 5. 8 7.04 13.59 15.75 0.00 0.00 67.64 0.00 u.00 .03 .0 1I.n1 .04 .42 .n .'j5 2.74 0.00 0.00 .32 SYMPHURUS PLAGIUSA 14.11 ..53 7.46 1.l 6 .61 .25.96 7.63 9.13 3.48 7.60 .49 61.53 1.18 .31 .?, .13 .25 .04 .42 .33 .30 .52 .06 .11 .30 LAuOCO RHOMBOIDLS .0' 1.17 1.18 o.o10 .00 0.n0 0.00 9.74 26.22 0.00 7.03 .3t 45.22 .00 .08 .04 0.0 0u.00 0.00 0.no .40 .17 0.0n .17 .07 .22 SLEPOtI: hICROLUPrUS ..4 .... .40.



PAGE 1

'faar ^ificts (CRAWFORDVitLE OFFICE) (TALLAHASSEE OFFICE) COURTHOUSE SQUARE June 11, 1976 836 EAST LAFAYETTE STREET P. O. BOX 566 TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 CRAWFOPOVILLE. FLORIDA 32327 (904) 878-2193 1904) 926-3647 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Biology Department Florida State University Conradi Building Tallahassee, Florida 32313 Subject: Optimist Program Dear Dr. Livingston: The response from your presentation of the Blue Crab habits and ecological effects -if the Apalachicola River is altered by Alabama and Georgia interest was tremendous. I feel sure Ray Wheeler, Program Chairman for the Wakulla Chamber of Commerce, will contact you for a presentation before that association, since the survival of the blue crab directly affects 27% of the work force in the county. I look forward to receiving the advance copy of your group's study, the past and future newspaper articles, and further communication in:.this respect. Enclosed is a copy of the Blue Crab Festival program similar to that which we will use this'year and any article explaining your research will be appreciated and well distributed. Please stop by to see me if you are in Crawfordville and again, thank you in behalf of the Optimist Club. Si cerely, J. Michael Carter Optimist Club Program Committeeman JMC/hmt cc: Mr. Bob Morgan, Optimist President Mr. John Burke, Program Chairman Mr. Walter Dodson, Wakulla Chamber of Commerce President Wakulla News Mr. Ray Wheeler, Wakulla Chamber of Commerce Program Chairman bnumpson, gilitanb & aBrttr, .1.



PAGE 1

DPM MG~ I: -CI I 0 o -1 0D Ll·



PAGE 1

241. Literature Cited Adams, S.V. and J.W. Angelovic. 1970. Assimilation of detritus and its associated bacteria by three species of estuarine animals. Chesapeake Sci. 11(4): 249-254. Bechtel, T.J. and B.J. Copeland. 1970. Fish species diversity indices as indicators of pollution in Galveston Bay, Texas. Contrib. Mar. Sci. 15: 103-132. Borowitzka, M.A. 1972. Intertidal algal species diversity and the effect of pollution. Aust. J. Fresh. Res. 23: 73-84. Carr, W.E.S. and C.A. Adams. 1973. Food habits of juvenile marine fishes inhabiting seagrass beds in the estuarine zone near Crystal River, Florida. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 102(3): 511-540. Fenchel, T. 1970. Studies on the decomposition of organic detrius derived from the turtle grass Thalassia testudinum. Limnol. Oceanogr. 15(1): 14-20. Horn, H.S. 1966. Measures of "overlap" in comparative ecological studies. Amer. Natur. 100: 419-424. Kaushik, N.K. and H.B.N. Hines. 1971. The fate of dead leaves that fall into streams. Arch. Hydrobiol. 68(4): 464-515. Kofoed, J.W. and D.S. Gorsline. 1963. Sedimentary environments in Apalachicola Bay and vicinity, Florida. J.Sed. Petrol. 33: 205-223. Livingston, R.J. 1974. Field and laboratory studies concerning the effects of various pollutants on estuarine and coastal organisms with application to the management of the Apalachicola Bay System (North Florida U.S.A.). Final report, State University System of Florida. Sea Grant Program (R/EA-1).



PAGE 1

298. Fig 5: Changes in Margalef Richness (Mar), sumber of species (S), Shannon diversity (H'), and the number of individuals of invertebrates taken monthly from the combined stations (35 trawl tows) in the Apalachicola Estuary from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Dashed lines represent 6-month mean values of these indices and relative dominance of the top species. MAR. 3.0 " 2.0 .---..... 1.0," 10S I 2.00 0 -00 2 * * * 1.6 " 1 8 .* *. * .* * 8. .-* * I 1.2 -60 ,.. ..60 .... 1 i ......... .. .. 0.8 3000No S20001000 .i .e. I .I.S .1 .1_ §8 I .2I all / 6I MAMJ JAS ONDJ F MAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJ FMAMJJASONDJFM TIMEMONTHS(1972-76) %DOM. ----------INVERTEBRATES-----------AVERAGE



PAGE 1

110. coastal waters (14). Shallow, clear waters overlie sandy sedi,:er.nti. which remain in the water column for only short periods after suspension (15) in contrast to the silty, turbid waters of the nearshore Georgia coast. Pomeroy (16) suggested that phosphorus does not seem to be a limiting nutrient for phytoplanktonr growth in any except some of the clearest, sediment-free estuaries. The Apalachicola Bay water column contains high turbidity for several days following periods of high winds. Phytoplankton are not phosphate limited under these conditions but become phosphate limited after sediments settle to the bottom (10). The observitio-i that phosphorus is important as a limiting nutrient for phytoplank-ton in the nearsiTore Northeastern Gulf of Mexico sugges-l that water quality plinning for the coastal zone is bcst done on a regional basis, with consideration given to the bio-geo-physical characteristics vwhich control nutrient cycling. Vernon B. Myers Richard L. Iverson Department of Oceanography Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306



PAGE 1

169. TABLE A. Terrestrial Plants Known to Occur in the Apalachicola Valley (Clewell, 1977) River. Acer saccharinum L. Carex cephalophora Muhl. Carex frankii Kunth Clematis viorna L. Cornus amomum Mill. Corydalis flavula (Raf.) DC. Cryptotaenia canadensis (L.) DC. rare Dentaria laciniata Muhl. Helianthus strumosus L. Hypericum frondosum Michx. Impatiens capensis Meerb. rare Lysimachia ciliata L. rare Nemophila aphylla (L.) Brummitt Scrophularia marilandica L. Sicyos angulatus L. ehs Treptocarpus ^thusae Nutt. A



PAGE 1

287. The 2-way ANOVA tested the main effects of month and year using year-month interaction as an error term. This resulted in a conservative test so that significant main effect differences were not revealed when substantial interaction was present. To check this, the postulated measures were calculated separately for Stations 1, 5, and 6 thus allowing a 4 x 12 x 3 analysis of variance using the three-way interaction as an error term. Using year, month, and station as factors with three-way interaction, significant differences among years and months existed for almost all measurements at the 3 stations indicating that significant annual (main) effects calculated from the entire data base for various parameters were due to small year-by-month interactions. This interpretation is complicated by the fact that trends in parameters taken at Stations 1 and 5 differed from the composite results. Overall, significant levels of variation for annual changes were found for such factors as relative dominance and species diversity of the pooled fish data. The use of dummy variables for representation of months (M1 to M12) and years (DDP, year 2, year 3, year 4) in the stepwise multiple regression analysis (Table 6) allowed certain generalizations concerning the identification of significant variables. This was possible despite the relatively large number of candidate predictors. The fact that the late summer-fall period is characterized by high productivity, considerable biological activity, and peaks in various community parameters is consistent with past studies (Livingston, 1976; Livingston et al., 1976). The first year of data, characterized as the DDP variable, showed fundamental differences in terms of fish diversity, species richness, and relative dominance. The dominance of the Anchoa group at this time coincided with these observations just



PAGE 1

Fig. 19: Bottom dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. S.r.i.i.u lr A ,UCrr ILtNi LANNUl Bt LUMPUltU. AFAL.AcH SCATTFRGRAf S 1 77/03/11. PAGE 15 F:ILA N3'.A(COýET:ON DATE = 77/~3/11.) SCITTEIG:AM OF (CO-N) D081 (ACROSS) DAYS 11:.225-' 293.67500 473.125rT 652.57530 832. 25C01C11.4753ull9C.92501370.375001549. 825CO1729.275C0 ..*-----------**--.----------* ------+----.----.---.--. ------.--12.65 * I I * 12.60 I I I I I I SI I I I I I I .Z-* I I + 11.80 I I I I I I I I I 1.00 I I I i r I I "'" --------------------------------.. . S / I .I I 1. 4+ 1.20 I I I SI\ / ! \ Iv i I I45.40 I I SI I .I I **-----------------------------+----+---------------------------------+--------3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 -=:.C ?--.3.: T;IE IN MOTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977 : -: -T -I.?;7. ITEtCPT (A) -7.71122 ST0 ERROR OF A -.714 . ::-.: :I ' -'.' C --.1 ?SL'. (-) -.'.-' 25 STC ERR.OR OF e -.^J^61 I I : *T.;.: -s-5 vCLUPE VLS7 C:SS;GI VIaLUS -6: ...*... .S .:'.;IF a COLFF.CI NT CGAN.O" Fi COM4PUTED.



PAGE 1

QHATTAHOOCHEE ROTARY CLUB Charter No. 4548 CHATTAHOOCHEE, FLORIDA U. S. A. December 13, 1976 Dr. R. J. Livingston Bradfordville Road Tallahassee, Florida Dear Dr. Livingston: Our local Rotary Club is very interested in the proposed dam site that would be located at Blountstown, Florida. We have heard many points that lean towards having the dam. I have read in the paper many times of your concern over the propects of having another dam on the Apalachicola River. I would like to hear your comments and many of our members would also. We plan on having two programs on this subject and would appreciate your being part of this series. Would you please see if you could meet with our Club on January 17 or January 2hk These dates are Monday. We have a lunchon meeting at 1:00 PM at the Gate Resturant here in Chattahoochee. We would like you to present us with a 30 minute program if you could. Would you inform me if you could meet with us on Monday, January 177 Au in advance, Norman S. James, resident Chattahoochee Rotary Club Chattahoochee, Florida 0 ' ,,*qo ,, s



PAGE 1

125. 75 .VNotes causes less chemiluininescence than DvNC.-N:otu, W'. C., AND T. J. Rxstc.. 1969. NaOH, which has been used to retain "C Scintillation counting of "CO. from in vitro activity in liquid scintillation cocktails system: A compriso o trapping agents. Anal. Biochein. 30: 275-279. (Waite et al. 1973). Organic bases or orFR,.-CIS, C. E., AND J. D. H.AWKIS.. .1967. Liganic base-containing compounds that quid scintillation counting of aqueous 'I and have been used by other investigators to "C-protein solutions at room temperature. retain inorganic '"C in toluene-based liquid Int. J. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 18: 223-230. NEw ENxcL-NU NUCLE.tR CORORATION. 1975. scintillation cocktails include Bio-Sol Catalog 1975. (Beckman), NCS tissue solubilizer (AmerPAR.1ENT-ER, J. H., AND F. E. L. TEN HAAF. sham/Searle), and monethylanine. Inor1969. Developments in liquid scintillation gancic "C retention of all premixed liquid counting since 1963. Int. J. Appl. Radiat. scintillation cocktails designed to accept Isot. 20: 305-334. i ot s Ldes d o e PETERSON, J. I. 1969. A carbon dioxide collecaqueous solutions should be assessed before tion accessory for the rapid combustion apthe cocktails are used for counting inorganic paratus for preparation of biological samples '"C. Through conversations with several for liquid scintillation analysis. Anal. Bioinvestigators, we find that this is not widely chem. 31: 204-210. understood. SMITa, D. W., C. B. FLIER.MANS, ASD T. D. BRocK. 1972. Technique for measuring Richard L. Iverson "CO: uptake by soil microorganisms in situ. Henry F. Bittaker Appl. Microbiol. 23: 59.5-600. Henry F. Bittake STcKLAD, J. D. H., AND.T. R. P.ASONS. 1972. Vernon B. iMyers A practical handbook of seawater analysis, 2nd ed. Bull. Fish. Res. Ed. Can. 167. I)epartment of Oceanography WAIrE, D. T., H. C. DUTHnE, AND J. R. MATFlorida State University THEWS. 1973. A note on two liquid scintilTallahassee 32306 lation fluors useful for primary production work. Hydrohiology 43: 231-234. WOELLER, F. H. 1961. Liquid scintillation References counting of "CO2 with phenethylanine. Anal. Biochem. 2: 508-511. DAVIS, R. A., J. P. SfLHWALT.ER, AND F. KaNR, JR. 1975. A simple method for trapping and Subitted: 16 December 1975 ie.surirg expired "CO... Anal. Biochern. S ited: 16 Dr &4: 281-28&j. Accepted: 7 April 1976 7ý»



PAGE 1

PEPRILUS PARU 0.no 0.00 U.01 .17 .09 OOu 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .1? .01 0.00 0.00 O.no .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 SPECIES SAMPLE CATES 740315 740415 741515 7' 0611; 741715 740815 740915 741015 741115 741215 750115 750215 oEFRILUS BURT1 U.00 0.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00o 0.n o.nu o.oo o0.00 0o.o .04 o.o0 0.00 0.00 SYNGNATHUS LOUISIANA 0.00O 1.16 0.00 0.00 .80 .69 1.59 1.13 .62 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 0. 0 0.00 .07 .03 .02 .09 .03 .04 0.00 0.00 OIPLECTRUM FORHOSUM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .61 0.00 4.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 000 0.0003 0.00 .39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ALOSA ALABAMAE 0.00 n0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,.uo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HICROrOBIUS ThALASSINUS .12 .47 .08 .01 0.00 .11 1.71 .08 .24 0.00 0.00 .13 .01 .02 .,3 .01 0.00 .01 .02 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 .02 MONACA ITHUS t!ISPIOUS 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0. 00 0., 0.00 0.00 .60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 000 0 0.00 .o 0 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 SYNGNATHUS FLORIDAE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 2.30 .64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .nu .11 .01 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 OPSANUS FBTA O.U0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 .19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ANGUILLA ROSTRATA 0.0 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0.00 0 0.000.00 0.00 , 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ~OBIONEiLUS BOLEOSOMA 1.01 0.00 0.00 .09 0.00 .07 .36 .03 .38 0.00 .35 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 0.00 .07 0.00 HYKOPHIS PUNCTATUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0U 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CADANX HIPPOS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.17 0.00 .33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIPLOCUS HOLBROOKI O.00 o.no 0o, 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0..00 000 .00 0.0 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HUGIL CUREMA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.3n 0.00 u.00 .o00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0o LUTJANUS 6RISEUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.12 0.00 0.0 0.0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0. 0 0.00 0.00 .45 0.00 GOBIOSOMA RORUSTU4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.96 0. no 0.00 .23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.OU 0. 0. U.00 0.00 .09 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 AtCYCLOPSETTA QUiDOOCELLATA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .68 0.00 0.00 O.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 0.00 PRIONOTUS RUBIO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.UO 0. 0. 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 J .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OLIGOPLITES SAURUS .O 0 0.00000 U.0. 0 .O030 n.J 0000 0.03000 0.00000 0.00000 0.000n0 .50000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.U 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 HYPSORLENNIUS HENTZI 0.000On 0.00000 0.00000 0.90000 0.00000 n0.0nno 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .74000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00 0.00 U.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .42 0.00 0.00 SELENE VOMER 0.00000 0. 00000 0.00 .0.00000 000 .00000 0.00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 00000 0.00 0.00 u.00 n.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 u.00 0.00 0.00 SAROINELLA ANCHOVIA 0.0n000 0.00000 0.0o 0 o 0.oo00000 000000 .68000 0.00000 0.00000 0.n0000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 p.00 0.0 .n00 0.o0 .00o .03 0.o0 o0.o o 0.0 0.0 o00.00 0.00 ALUTEPUS SCHOEPFI 0.00000 O000 ..O000 0 .00000 0. OOo 0.00o OnUO 0.00000 0 O.UOOn 0.00000 0.0000 0.00000 0.n0010 0.00n 0.00 o.nl0 0.0 0.00 u.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 n.00 SP:iYRAENA POPEALI1 0.00000 0.0n00oo 0 o0.nouo00 0. 0 90.00000 .31000 0o.000n 0.00000 0.00000 n.ooo000 0.0000 0.00000 S0.00 0.00 0.00 n.0 0 100 .01 0. 00 0.00 0. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 POMATOMUS lALTATRIX 0.0000 0.00000 0.001Ou 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 .29000 0.(00 .0.00000 0.00090 0.00000 O.U0 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MONACAMITHU) CILIATUS .00 0.00oon n.inn u.n0n00 n.uno) o0no.0 0 o0.no00oo n0. 00nno o. oono onnn.o00 .00 0.0 0. 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.nn n0.0n u.0n 0.00 0.00 n.no .on n



PAGE 1

123. Loss of radiocarbon in direct use of Aquasol for liquid scintillation counting of solutions containing "C-NaHCOa' Abstract-Carbon-14 activity was lost Premixed cocktails which accept aqueous when "C-NaHCO. in aqueous solution was samples have gained popularity for use in added to Aquasol. Phenethylamine can be liuid scintillation counting of carbon-14 used to form carbuinates which are stable in ii ii ii Aqua.sol in order to achieve complete retenii phytoplankton productivity measuretion of "C in the liquid scintillation cocktail. nients. Aquasol, a product of New England Fiaa wNuclear Corporation, was one of the first ' Financial support was provided by the Florida cocktails developed for such use. Since Sea Crant Prograiii under NOAA contract 04-3SG18-13 Aquasol will accept up to a third of its vol*5 -.3



PAGE 1

194. Table 4 :(continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 7/76 7 T # 10 .0003 -18 .0014 .0012 64 35 .0018 .0016 67 60 .0043 .0031 53 120 .0076 .0053 53 170 .0043 .0029 51 325 .0498 .0234 35 Total .0375 7 B # 10 18 .0021 -35 .0018 .0016 44 60 .0034 .0030 44 120 .0147 .0158 54 170 .0301 .0256 43 325 .1312 .0518 20 Total .0978 8 M # 10 .0007 -18 .0024 .0023 71 35 .0037 .0036 73 60 .0101 .0068 50 120 .0067 .0032 36 170 .0061 .0029 36 325 .0028 .0088 29 Total .0276 8/76 7 T # 10 .0020 -18 .0030 .0018 60 35 .0030 .0025 83 60 .0089 .0033 37 120 .0121 .0040 33 170 .0050 .0018 36 325 .0555 .0157 28 Total .0291 7 B # 10 18 .0015 -35 .0026 .0020 58 60 .0050 .0027 40 120 .0186 .0158 64 170 .0333 .0179 41 325 .1219 .0330 20 Total .0714 8 M # 10 .0010 .0009 9C 18 .0092 .0050 54 35 .0052 .0040 77 60 .0161 .0054 34 120 .0095 .0045 47 170 .0072 .0028 39 325 .0308 .0090 29 Total .0316



PAGE 1

223. TABLE IV Distribution of Microbial 14C on Oak Leaf Detritus After Feeding by Gammarus Amphipods. Oak leaf discs 6.5 mm diameter were incubated in Apalachicola Bay for 4 weeks, recovered and then incubated in the presence of sodium acetate-l-14C for 24 hours at 25°C allowing for the incorporation of approximately 10,000 cpm 14C/disc. Thorough washing of the discs removes the acetate. Using 80 Gammarus amphipods recovered from the Bay and starved (removed from detritus) for 24 hours, half were exposed to leaves containing 14C label. In another the amphipods were prevented from contacting the leaves by a nylon mesh. Proportion of the 1C recovered Aa Bb Open discs Excluded Waterc 72% 55.5% Discd 17 42 Total Gammaruse 3.14 0.29 Fecal pelletsf 0.3 0.05 Purge waterg 8 2 a Column A. Discs on which the amphipods could feed directly (Fed) b Column B. Discs enclosed in nylon mesh (Excluded) c The water in which the experiment took place d Discs after 24 hours of feeding e Total Gammarus f Fecal pellets of Gammarus (after 24 hours feeding on labeled detritus). g Water in which amphipods are purged for 24 hours after removal from labeled detritus.



PAGE 1

217. differences on the artificial plastic needle microflora. The artificial pine needle microflora formed lipids containing 20% higher glycolipid ratios than the flora on the pine needles. Scanning electron microscopy showed a sparser population on the artificial surface of organisms with distinctly different shapes. These microbial data correlate with the recovery of animals from the baskets. There significantly less detritivores and their predators associated with the artificial needles than with the natural substrate. C. Evidence for succession on the detrital leaf surface. Scanning electron microscopy, the ATP to muramic acid ratio, the initially high turnover numbers for the heterotrophic potential, the lipid composition of the growing microbial community with a high phospholipid proportion, all support an initial bacterial colonization. There is a more rapid increase in muramic acid in both pine and oak leaves than in the ATP level, suggesting the bacteria (containing muramic acid) colonize the surface more rapidly than do the nonmuramic acid-containing eukaryotes (containing ATP but no muramic acid) (2). This has been confirmed by the scanning electron microscope. D. Rate of growth. Estimates of the growth rate using several parameters show that the growth of the detrital microflora is slow, even in this rich estuary (Table II). Use of a pulse of sodium acetate-l-14C followed by growth in non-radioactive medium has allowed study of the population dynamics of the detrital bacterial population. The bacterial (muramic acid-containing) component has been shown to contain a small community of rapidly growing heterotrophs (T 1/2 = 3.2 hr) while the bulk of the population has a relatively slower average growth rate (T 1/2 = 72 hr). Using the same pulse chase technique, the bacterial lipids lost 14C most rapidly



PAGE 1

220. TABLE I Additions Elasticity b Inertia c Resi1iency d Glucose (10-1'l) + 13.7% (1 hr + NalPO4 (10-1) + 1 + Tannin water after aging + 23.5% K 1 hr + Salinity (7 ppt) -12.2% -1 hr + Penicillin ) -n (50 vg/ml) -39.6% 20 hr Streptomycin ) a A column containing 0.77 gm of oak leaf discs, recovered after 11:eeks in Apalachicola Bay, 6 x 150 nm (8 ml volume) was perfused at a flow rate of 0.6 nl/ min (exchange time of 13 min). Oxygen utilization was measured with Clark teflon-coated microclectrodes at the input and exit of the column, and the changes in decrement of oxygen concentration recorded continuously. There were no diurnal variations. Since oak leaves last at least 14 w'eeks in the Bay, with a 18 -30% dry weight loss but little change in shape, and are a principal detrital component detected in the Bay, they form an ideal substrate. b Elasticity indicates the maximal change in the respiratory activity c Inertia indicates the time necessary to read the maximum change in activity d Resiliency measures the ability of the microbial system to recover the control respiratory activity in less than 4 hours after the removal of the stress.



PAGE 1

135. with a liquid scintillation spectrometer. Pheiethylamine is necessary to prevent loss of inorganic 14C from Aquasol (Iverson, et al.,1976). The gill segments were frozen and lyophilized to obtain dry weights. An exp-riment was conducted to assess uptake and minealization of labelled glycolic acid by bacteria adhering to gill surfaces. Half the experimental organisms were treated with an antibiotic mix consisting of 200 mg 1-1 Streptomycin (Nutritional Biochemicals Corp., Cleveland) and 159,000 units 1-1 Penicillin (Benzylpenicillin, K-salt, 1590 units mg-l; Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis). These concentrations are similar to those used by Anderson and Stephens (1969) to eliminate uptake of glycine by microbial epiflora present on marine crustaceans. Twelve hours before the experiment was to begin the experimental bivalves were thoroughly scrubbed and placed in a separate glass container with aerated membrane filtered sea water and antibiotic mix. -After 12 hours in the filtered sea water and antibiotic mix the animals were opened and the experiment started. Antibiotics were added to all glycolic acid solutions of antibiotic treated animals.during the course of the experiment. Radioactivity in lipids fraction of gill tissue Gill segments were pre-incubated for 30 minutes in a solution of ASW and antibiotic mix. Following pre-incubation the gill segments were transferred to a 14C glycolate solution (0.01 jCi ml-, 855 pg 1-1) containing the antibiotic mix. After incubation for two hours in the radioactive solution the tissue was quickly frozen by transfer to glass vials held in an alcohol-dry ice mixture. Segments were lyophilized ard the lipids extracted by the method of Bligh and Dyer (1959). Approximately 60 mg of freshly lyophilized 7



PAGE 1

268. Table 3: Top dominants (fishes and invertebrates) at Stations 4a and 4b (East Bay) in terms of biomass (dry weight) taken over the 12 month sampling period (November, 1975 -October, 1976) Species Percentage of total Neritina reclivata 95.67 Callinectes sapidus 0.79 Palaemonetes pugio 0.73 Menidia beryllina 0.43 Syngnathus scovelli 0.43 Zygoptera sp. 0.41 Lucania parva 0.26 Taphromysis bowmanni 0.24 Gammarus macromucronatus 0.18 Odostromia sp. 0.11



PAGE 1

STATIONS Li 11Z 013 004 015 006 01A CiB 01C 05A Table 10 continued TI-E£S OF DA 0 SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 76L315 760415 760515 760615 760715 760815 760915 761011 761119 761213 770125 778220 TOTALS f MICROPOGON UNOULATUS 3599 3674 1302 309 37 71 14 4 428 223 1113 793 11567 27.43 62.24 38.40 17.61 4.14 1.49 2.42 *26 13.62 31.86 47.75 12.60 26.05 ANCHOA MITCHILLI 517 163 227 335 545 3916 232 477 2101 384 509 1271 10677 3.94 2.76 6.69 19.09 61.03 82.*8 43.U7 31.51 66.85 54.86 21.84 20*19 24.05 LETOSTOMUS XANTHURUS 2994 1664 939 279 2 59 1 63 308 14 509 3456 10295 22.81 28.19 27.69 15.90 *22 1.45 *17 3.96 9*88 2.00 21.84 54.91 23.19 BREVOORTIA PATRONUS 5716 187 495 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 131 651 7184 43.56 3.17 14.60 .11 0.00 0.00 .17 .07 0.00 0.00 5.62 10.34 16.18 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 2 9 181 726 193 462 144 634 29 7 0 3 2390 *02 .15 5.34 41.37 21.61 9.68 24.87 4L.88 .92 1.00 0.00 .05 5.38 TRINECTES HACULATUS 54 53 54 16 19 37 28 53 0 1 0 0 315 *41 .90 1.59 .91 2.13 .78 4.84 3.50 0.OO .14 0.00 0.00 *71 SYMPHURUS PLAGIUSA 12 23 54 5 8 8 33 80 22 1 1 0 247 C.9 .39 1.59 .28 .90 .17 5.70 5.28 .70 .14 .04 0.00 .56 BAIRDIELLA CHRYSUPA 6 1 57 16 31 13 6 14 84 5 2 6 241 .05 .02 1.68 *91 3.47 .27 1.4 .92 267 .71, .09 .10 .54 ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 11 17 15 1 3 8 17 64 32 5 4 3 180 .08 .29 .44 .06 .34 .17 2.94 4.23 1.C2 .71 .17 .05 .41 MICROGOBIUS GULOSUS 83 21 5 6 4 2 1 2 3 0 1 0 128 .63 .36 *15 .34 .45 .04 .17 .13 .10 0.00 *04 DO00 .29 PARALICHTHYS LETHOSTIGHA 19 14 15 18 10 6 6 9 1 3 3 12 116 .14 .24 .44 1.03 1.12 .13 1.04 .59 .03 .43 .13 .19 .26 ARIUS FELIS 0 1 3 1 8 10 52 22 7 4 0 0 108 0.00 .02 .09 .06 .90 .21 8.98 1.45 .22 *57 0.00 0.00 o24 LAGOON RHOMBOIOES 30 9 10 10 1 6 3 6 2 1 5 15 98 .23 .15 .29 .57 .11 .13 .52 .40 .06 .14 .21 .24 .22 STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS 0 0 0 0 11 76 8 2 0 0 0 0 97 * 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 1.59 1.38 .13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .22 UROPHYCIS FLORIOANUS 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 61 91 .05 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 *69 *97 *20 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS 11 1 2 0 0 2 9 29 9 2 0 2 67 *08 .02 .06 o000 O.c0O 04 1.55 1.92 .29 _29 0.00 .03 .15 GOBIONELLUS BOLEOSOMA 24 17 3 5 0 2 0 0 2 0 3 7 63 .18 .29 .09 .28 0.00 .04 0.00 D.00 .06 0.00 .13 .11 .14 SYNGNATHUS FLORIDAE 0 0 2 0 0 37 0 0 18 0 0 0 57 0.00 0.00 .06 G*.0 0.OO .78 1.00 .O00 .57 0.0e 0.00 0.00 .13 SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI 7 1 3 8 0 4 0 2 3 7 5 2 42 .05 .02 .09 .46 0.00 .c8 0.00 .13 .10 1.l3 .21 .03 .09 CYNOSCION NEBULOSUS 1 1 0 0 6 0 12 15 0 1 1 37 .01 *02 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 0.00 .79 .48 0.00 .04 .02 .08 LUCANIA PARVA 2 0 3 0 0 0 1 29 0 0 0 37 .02 o0.0 .09 0.00 0.0O .o0 0.40 .0 * .9 D 0.0 0.00 0.00 .08 MICROGOBIUS THALASSINUS C 8 1 1 1 3 .3 13 1 4 0 0 35 0.00 .14 *03 .06 .11 .06 .52 .86 .03 .57 8.00 0.00 .08 MENTICIRRHUS AMERICANUS 2 0 2 6 0 4 3 13 4 0 0 0 34 .02 0.00 .U6 .34 0.00 .08 .52 .86 .13 0.00 0 00 0.00 .08 OASYATIS SABINA 6 6 2 0 1 0 2 2 5 2 4 2 32 .05 .10 .06 O.0O 11 0.00 .35 .13 .16 029 .17 .03 *07 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 1 24 0 0 0 31 O.OC C.Go00 .Ou .00 .34 .02 .35 .07 .76 O.CO 0.00 000 .07 MENIDIA BERYLLINA 2 0 G U O 0 3 1 16 a 0 30 t__2 .C_ O.C CC.0 o.C .CC.C 0.00 .20 .03 2.29 .34 0.00 .07



PAGE 1

..REUBIN O'D. ASKEW Governor z A-BRUCE A. SMATHERS State of Florida .State S' ROBERT L. SHEVIN c oo Attorney General GERALD A. LEWIS Comptroller DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FTrasrHLERr DOYLE CONNER Commissioner of Agriculture HARMON W. SHIELDS CROWN BUILDING / 202 BLOUNT STREET / TALLAHASSEE 32304 RALPH D. TURLINGTON Executive Director Commissioner of Education January 28, 1977 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Department of Biological Science Florida State University Room 213, Conradi Building Tallahassee, Florida 32601 Dear Skip: On February 3 and 4, Dr. Robert Kifer and Mr. Richard Gardner, of NOAA will be in Tallahassee to discuss the proposal for the designation of the Apalachicola River-Bay System as a Louisianian National Estuarine Sanctuary. We wish to thank you for your offer to serve as tour guide and especially for providing a boat for a field trip of the River and Bay system on Thursday afternoon, February 3. Also, we would like to request that you serve as our tour guide for an aerial field trip of the area on Friday morning, February 4, from 8 a.m. until 12 noon if this is convenient to your schedule. Many thanks again for your help in this matter. With best regards, Bruce Johnson, Chief Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning BJ/hmg Attachment cc: Charles M. Sanders Charles Futch David R. Worley Harry McGinnis ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES * LAW ENFORCEMENT * MARINE RESOURCES DIVISIONSRECREATION AND PARKS * RESOURCE MANAGEMENT



PAGE 1

210. Perhaps the most general indicator of activity is enthalpy. To measure enthalpy we propose to build a chamber containing columns in a water bath/air bath container whose temperature is regulated to 10-40C. The temperature of the flow stream will be monitored to measure the activity of the population. Possible temperature sensors include commercial thermopiles, custom-built dielectric constant devices, or thermistors. An elementary thermistor device was constructed to determine the feasibility of the measurements. The addition of 10-M glucose resulted in about a 25 pW/gram of detritus increase in heat production. The apparatus was only suitable for short-term measurement (< 1 hour) because of external thermal inputs. A commercially available temperature regulator (Tronac) is expected to remedy these problems.'. -' C. Population dynamics. 1. Lipid classes and lipid metabolism. Methods to reproducibly fractionate the lipids derived from the detrital microfloral assembly have been developed and used to study the metabolism of this community (4). Lipid composition was first used with taxonomic classification of microorganisms by Abel et al (26),using qualitative fatty acid analysis. These workers showed it was possible to differentiate between different groups of bacteria by their fatty acid composition. An elegant compilation of the qualitative lipid composition of various genera and species of bacteria has been prepared by Norman Shaw (27), who points out that the lipids are universally present in bacteria, they are easily and specifically extracted, and can be readily identified. There are a great variety of complex lipids, some of which are unique to prokaryotes and they average about 3-5% of the cellular dry weight. There are four major types of lipids in bacteria, the apolar lipids, neutral lipids, phospholipids and glycolipids. Each class contains distinctive features which form useful measures of microbial diversity and thus can be used to measure microbial succession.



PAGE 1

218. from the glycolipids with a T 1/2 equal to that of the slow component of the muramic acid (72 hr). Neutral lipids and phospholipids were slower. Examination of the phospholipids after deacylation and separation of the glycerol esters showed a phospholipid pattern typical of gram-negative bacteria, although 0.58% of the 14C was found in phospholipids not deacylated under mild alkaline conditions, suggesting a complex assortment of microbes. The metabolism of the glycerol phosphate esters shows most rapid turnover of glycerol phosphoryl glycerol (derived from phosphatidyl glycerol) typical of bacteria and a lag in the saturation of the precursor,pool of cardiolipin, again typical of bacterial metabolism (4). The activity of the bacterial component of the detrital microflora measured by the various techniques used in our laboratory is summarized in Table I. These give estimates of 100-1000 hr for average doubling times of the bulk of the bacterial microflora. The organisms divide slowly as is typical of soil (46-48) or lacustrine muds (10 -280 hr)(49). Even in the relatively rich and warm vertebrate gastrointestinal system doubling rates of 0.5 to 1.4 divisions per day were measured (50) or 1.72 doublings per day in the bovine rumen (51). It is well known that slow-growing microorganisms are remarkably subject to stress (52). Estimates of the microbial mass (Table III) indicate it represents about 1% of the dry weight of the litter. The sediment taken from the bay shows about a tenth the activity and muramic acid content of the detrital particles (3). E. Analysis of impacts. Preliminary investigations show changes in elasticity, inertia and resiliency of the detrital microflora as water with various pollutional insults is pumped through the glass tubes loosely filled with detritus. Changes in



PAGE 1

A Figure 21: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Harengula pensacolae in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977: SC4TTERS F;SH TOP TEN N 77/C3/23. PAGE 13 FILE NINAE (C'EATION CArE = 77/C3/23.) SCATTETRGRA OF (COhN) HAPPEN (ACROSS) DAYS 14..475:0 284.4251~ 466.375t0 644.32500 824.275CO104.O225rO114.175C01364.125COi544.075CO1724. 250C .+----+----*----+------*---------*-------------------------+-------*-***-*---*------*****----* 1379.00 + I * 1879." I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1591.ie * I I 1691.C1 I i I I I I I i I I I i2 ?.ZG 4 I + 15:3.23 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 315.I .I + 1315.3C T .....---.---....... .--.. ----... .. ..-....-^-..-----------... .. -. I I I I C I ------I -1127.4C-----------------------------------I I I I I I I I I 12/.72 + 2 I + 1127.40 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5,60+ I I + 751.6 I I 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I S67.7C .I I .1 5&3.7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCATTEOS FISH TOP TEN N 77/V3/23. PAGE 14 STATISTICC.. COORLATIO4 (R)-.12428 R SOUAREO -,015'r5 SIGNIFICANCE 2 -.17265 STJ RR OF EST -242.75299 INTERCEPT (A) -6 83.13589 STO ERPOROF A -6?,6tiJ2 SI7NIFICANCE A -SLOPE () --.056?7 STO EROR OF B -185959 SIi i NI -.1;20 PL3TTEn VALUES -6C EXCLUOCO VALUESC MISSIN3 VALUES -0 "*****' 5l"S FPIlTFO IF A COEFFICIENT CAN~0D' E COXPUTED.



PAGE 1

302. S0.9 0.5 0.1 -0.3 -0.5 (0 o E -o cS> .Anchoa mitchilli -0 Etropus crossotus >. | Symphurus plagiusa -.-Dasyatis sabina ---i tO( ( Prionotus tribulus -------S4 0 wJ tn Q Archosargus probatocephdlus (0 0 -E E Lepisosteus osseus UO0 u = 0 _ _ -C 4Dorosoma petenense U •w '0 u' -4-1 ( O n Micropogon undulatus 4L I4 I L Leiostomus xanthurus-------' S4Trinectes maculatus ) 0 > Paralichthys lethostigma-----: 4.J Ut " c 4J V Gobiosoma bosci *O) 0 Microgobius gulosus -W E V Mcrogobius thalassinus c Gobionellus boleosoma 0o c-' c 40 Syngnathus scovelli n L Lucanla parva----CU (U in 0 u Lagodon rhomboides o00 4w I 0Brevoortia patronus ----o0-r 4C SQ. u M.enidia beryllina 0 *' 4cO '-' Urophycls floridanus -4J 0 O > .Ictalurus catus Un -0 (m 0 ° Cynoscion arenarus-.. < III Arius felfs--------. SI Mentlcirrhus americanus -*. T O 0 Synodus foetens -----0 i-"' -" ! 0.4J E4-' 0 Chloroscombrus chrysurus > r-V Chaetodipterus faber ---C -v Peprilus paru --}-j-44-3 LC 0 Q) Syngnathus floridae Q) li Eucinostomus argenteus-0) 3 Syngnathus louisianae L 0 -Cynoscion nebulosus .~'c+ Prionotus scitulus L 04 C '0 ,SBairdiella chyrusura S j0 Sphoeroides nephel us --0 ": t Orthoprlstis chrysoptera 0 U Pgrichthus porosissinus .( L L Eucinostomus gula --Opisthonema oglinum . -Achoa hepsetus -.. LL Monacanthus hispldus Polydactylus octonemus '. .. Bagre marinus



PAGE 1

292. Robins, C. R.: Effects of storms on the shallow-water fish fauna of southern Florida with new records of fishes from Florida. Bull. Mar. Sci., Gulf Carib. 7(3), 266-275 (1957). Shannon, C. E. and W. Weaver: The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana (1963). Simpson, E. H.: Measurement of diversity. Nature 163, 688 (1949). Smith, R. M. and C. E. Cole: Chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide residues in winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 27, 2374-2380 (1972). Sneath, P. H. A. and R. R. Sokal: Numerical Taxonomy. W. H. Freeman and Company-, San Francisco (1973). Tabb, D. C. and A.' C. Jones: Effect of Hurrican Donna on the aquatic fauna of north Florida Bay. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 91, 375-378 (1962). Thompson, N. P., P. W. Rankin and D. W. Johnston: Polychlorinated biphenyls and p, plDDE from Ascension Island, South Atlantic Ocean. Bull. Env. Cont. Toxicol. 11(5), 399-406 (1974). van Belle, B. and I. Ahmad: Measuring affinity of distributions. In: Reliability and biometry: statistical analysis of lifelength. Eds. F. Proschan and R. J. Serfling (1973). Walsh, G. E.: Insecticides, herbicides, and polychlorinted biphenyls in estuarines. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 62, 122-139 (1972). Wershaw, R. L. P. J. Burcar and M. C. Goldberg: Interaction of pesticides with natural organic material. Env. Sci. Tech. 3, 271-273 (1969). White, D. H.: Nationwide residues of organochlorines in starlings, 1974. Pest. Mon. Jour. 10(1), 10-17 (1976). Wilson, A. J.: Effects of suspended material on measurement of DDT in estuarine water. Bull. Env. Cont. Toxicol. 15(5), 515-521 (1976). Zimmerman, M. S. and R. J. Livingston: The effects of kraft mill effluents on benthic macrophyte assemblages in a shallow bay system (Apalachee Bay, North Florida, U. S. A.) Mar. Biol. 34, 297-312 (1976).



PAGE 1

157. Willoughby and Archer, 1973), and subsequent colonization by bacteria and fungi (Jones, 1973). This, in addition to various mechanical stresses, eventually leads to a physical breakdown of the leaf matter to smaller particles (Willoughby, 1974). Such particles can then be reworked, aggregated in the form of fecal pellets, etc., and repeatedly run through the system (Odum and Heald, 1975). During intermediate stages of microbial leaf colonization, leaf litter forms a transient form of microhabitat that is capable of supporting various forms of aquatic organisms. Kaushik and Hynes (1971) found that amphipods (Hyalella azteca, Gammarus lacustris) and an isopod (Asellus communis) consume leaf matter, showing distinct preferences for certain forms of leaves. Odum and Heald (1972) noted that the amphipod Melita nitida grazes on the microbial biota of mangrove leaves, and that M. nitida and the xanthid crab Rhithropanopeus harrisii consume leaf fragments. Although it is widely assumed that much of the utilizable energy resource of such detritus is derived from the microbial component (Newell, 1965; Kaushik, 1969; Odum and Heald, 1972), the ability to digest cellulose has been demonstrated in at least one amphipod (Orchestia gammarella) by Wildish and Poole (1970). Adams and Angelovic (1970) found that gastropods (Bittium varium), crustaceans (Palaemonetes pugio) and polychaetes (Glycera dibranchiata) can assimilate Zostera detritus, and that P. pugio and B. varium derived more nourishment from the detrital substate than from its associated bacteria. Considerable amounts of vascular plant detritus are found in the digestive tract of various organisms such as mussels, harpacticoid, cyclopoid, and calanoid copepods, mysids, cumaceans, isopods, decapods, and various forms of fishes (Pennak, 1953; Darnell, 1958; Tagatz, 1968; Odum and Heald, 1972; Carr and Adams, 1973). Although the nutritional



PAGE 1

283. with minor discrepancies, the results of the three data sets were consistent. Numbers of species and individuals generally peaked during October or November. The relative dominance and Shannon diversity were inversely related to the DDP variable with increases in both functions occurring during late summer and fall periods. In addition, the Simpson Index (Livingston, 1976) was computed with similar results. The Margalef Richness Index was associated with tidal characteristics, and was high during periods of low river flow. The results with the various fish clusters were largely consistent with the previous analysis. The Anchoa group , dominant during fall periods, was associated with DDT residues in the bay. Three of the four remaining clusters showed strong associations with river flow thus confirming the importance of this parameter to the estuarine fishes. The use of stepwise regression is not without problems. The relatively large number of variables increases the potential for obtaining significance, thereby tending to affirm postulated associations. Such analysis should thus be viewed within the context of the study as a whole. Long-term Fluctuations of Individual Populations The total numbers and biomass (dry weight) of epibenthic invertebrates taken at stations in the Apalachicola Estuary are given in Figs. 10 and 11 and Tables 8 and 9. Although there were some differences in peak values between numbers and biomass figures, peak placement was similar in both. of There was a general pattern increased numbers and biomass of invertebrates during spring (February -May) and fall (Septemter -November) periods. In terms of numbers, there was no long-term trend although the lowest cumulative figures occurred during the third and fourth years of sampling (3/74 -2/76). Spring peaks were generally due to Palaemonetes pugio and Callinectes sapidus



PAGE 1

Fig. 26: Surface orthophosphate levels (pg/f) at Station 2A (Apalachicola Bay) from June, 1972 to September, 1976. --------------------------.... ---1 I I t f' ., SI I I 1 1 1 I ' T I I I I T I I T i I i r I t 4, -? + I I 4 ,7.82 I I I T • I I I 1 4 t T I I I I '1.3 + I fI 41.93 SI I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I I I 1 I I I I 1I 1 T (M C.T + I o1 + d.30 SI I I I I # . I 1 1\ I 11 1 I T I 3 24.*k * I1 + 24.46 I I I t I I I I i T T I I I I' I I I I .»--------.------------------------------»---------V--+. -. ..-------_ -------------7 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 97612.78 I I. IYS I SI R -.0331 I -.03731 fLC'ED ^LUEF 4 1 EXCLUVED VALUES0 P1l1Slr VALUES1 5 7 !IS IrNT CANNOT "FI COMPUT I I I I I 1I 1.10 ' 1 I 1.10 *.. ...... ---*----+ -* +.-..--.-+--+-+ .. ( -... ------.. .. *-----..---+----------*--------. 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75. 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 SCATTIL.'S IvFRSCN PIYSGFM 77/0'V23. Par;E 10 STAITTSICS., trcrrLA U ().2 i4.8 F SQUAPED -.071923 SIGNIFICANCE R -.03731 STU L,,F LST -1.?·4320 INTEPCEFT (A) -3.97436 SiT ERROR OF A -4.74980 '.'IlFICANLE A -.20T92VLOFE (t) -.00829 sTD ERROR OF B -.0045 lGhlFTCMNCE , -.03731 LO'L0ED , ALUL. -41 EXCLUI'ED VALUES0 tISSI4I, VALUES -5 '*'"*'' IS FRINTFO TF A Cr.FFICIrNT CANNOT EIE COMPUTLD.



PAGE 1

Figure 2.



PAGE 1

.. -Fgure 18*Numbe .(.aandaR d(-fy-h _-_ght)-iemafss-B-) of " -"ai;'-.ct-t 1r t -Ap cMM ".. 4, 5, 6, IA, IB, IC, 5A) From March, 1972 througin february, 197/.7" //7. .P 17 E17 7 r TCP T OLE JAY N ,_ :A (CL4ATION LATt = 77/; 3/27.) l.4.475.4 254.4Z5 ' 464.375.1 644.325jC 824. 275:3 b .225 3.1d4. 17506 1356. 1?5 1544. 1 75u 1 172 4. 1 250o .----------------------------------47.tj * I it 7.J r I I I I I I iI I 7.j; + I I * 4Z.3k SI I I I I l I 7.2 I I + 37.6u I i I 1. I I 1 I I I I I I I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------**-** -*** I I I I I I I I I .4 + I +3 4;. I Il I I I I I I I I 2/733/74 I I I I I I I I I 1| l I I I \ I I COI 1 1RELATION (R232 R SQUARE Z SIGFIANCE -37 STi-----------------------'' --INTERCEPT (A) -3989 T O OF A -19956 . SI I I I O E O I I t I I I I I I .C 1 I 1 I ' 7 » .-.--. 2/-_72 3/73 6/73 9/__1273 3 ;---^~--.' 0 S..3/72..--.--/74 6/74 9/74 I/7/ INVERT SCATTERS TOP TEN WHOLE BAY N 77/03/27. PAiE 16 -'. STATISTICS.. CORRELATION (Ri.23221 R SQUAREO -.U5392 .SIGXIFICANCE -»u3710 STJ EKR OF EST -.7.67<54 INTERCEPT (A) -1.34989 STU iao0 OF A -1.97936 SIGNIFICANCE A -.249U4 SLOPE (8) -.0C342 STO £RIOR OF 6 -»auiS SIGNIFICANCE 3 -.03710 PLT':-CJ VALUES -b6 EXCLUDOE VALUESMISSIN; VALUE> ff4 J.. , p .... .. ..,



PAGE 1

S -ep en h c inv rt b ates a en in he -pa a h o a cs uary <.Eat os . : ...3 004 005 U06 niA ud oic 05A 5,6, IA, IB, IC, 5A) from March, 1972, through February, 1977. SPtCIES S'4PLE DATS 120315 720415 720515 7?70t1 '20715 720815 720915 721015 721115 721215 730115 730215 TOTALS OASYTITS SAbINA 219.69 174..5 77d.39 q76.39 2212.58 0.00 359.54 1581.23 781.53 634.51 0.00 244.89 7564.05 Su .4 13.51 26.21 i,7.', 56.27 u.0 20.64 41.79 10.05. 31.89 0.00 5.13 25.06 ANGHGA MITC-ILLI C9./1 ?/.0T 60.00 71.3' "4.5.60 18.99 69.00 974.09 422..68 72.61 23.06 17.92 5864.09 13.69 6.71 4.15 S.dr 6.24 1.18 3.56 25.74 54.33 3.65 10.13 .38 19.43 LEPISOSTEUS jSSEUS O.un 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.OU 0.00 92.29 237.38 493.95 0.00 4262.90 5086.52 0.00 0..0 0 0.00 0.0no .0 0 U.00 0.0 2.44 3.05 24.82 0.00 89.26 16.85 ARIUS FELIS 1.12 0.00 7.82 299.03 366.96 704.11 481.82 282.66 679.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 2813.17 .26 0.00 .54 15.53 9.T2 43.69 24.89 7.47 8.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.32 HICROPOGON LUNULATUS 47.54 186.30 476.06 158.1 58?.95 .49 8.24.93 51.02 18.91 15.57 7.37 113.57 2482.81 n1.88 46.26 32.97 8.50 14.81 .03 4Z.61 1.35 .24 .78 3.24 2.38 8.23 BAIRDIELLA CHRYS!RA 8.56 0.uO 44.J? 36.79 2.04 1.29 0.00 196.20 1101.80 176.85 10.80 17.61 1595.96 1.AF 0.00 ,.n5 1.93 .05 .08 0.00 5.18 14.17 8.89 4.75 .37 5.29 LETOSTOMUS XANTh'PUS E5.97 0.00 242.67 112.07 243. 77 53.42 12.63 18.28 68.16 22.40 16.49 5.33 891.09 5.42 0.00 10.30 9.78 , 6.19 3.31 .65 .48 .5s 1.13 7.25 .11 2.95 RHINOPTFRA BONASUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.o0 0.00 610.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 610.54 n.U0 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.00 37.88 0.00 0 0.00 000.00 000 .0.0 2.02 PAPALICHThYS LETHOSTIGMA 0.00 0.00 35.53 14.29 162.68 192.4? 76.23 64.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 545.39 U.00 0.00 2.47 .77 4.13 11.94 3.94 1.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.81 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 0.00 .64 147.51 15.21 64.76 9.18 11.04 46.03 229.31 16.26 2.32 0.00 542.36 0.00 .16 10.22 .o? 1.65 .57 .57 1.22 2.95 .82 1.02 0.00 1.80 DOROSCHA CEPEDIANUM u.00 0.00 00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.no 0.00 0.00 406.03 0.00 0.00 406.03 n.00 0.00 0.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. OU 0.00 0.00 20.41 0.00 0.00 1.35 CYNOSCION iE 3ULOSUS 0.00 .13 0.00 2.52 0.00 .53 .04 108.17 75.35 79.96 44.23 0.00 310.94 0.00 .03 0.00 .14 0.00 .03 .00 2.86 .37 4.02 19.44 0.00 .1.03 *ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 2.42 .89 7.36 5.00 4.55 4.11 11.64 70.44 74.17 7.60 11.20 3.96 203.34 .55 .22 .51 .27 .12 .26 .60 1.86 .3i .38 4.92 .08 .67 TRINECTES MACULATUS 39.75 14.86 30.02 8.14 11.09 1.37 7.13 31.07 6.19 0.00 0.00 21.46 170.0 9.10 3.44 2.09 .44 .28 .09 .37 .82 .08 0.00 0.00 .45 .56 MFNTICIRRHUS A.EPICANUS O.U0 0.00 1.00 2.94 18.27 6.83 1.75 25.71 75.78 9.33 0.00 12.52 154.53 0.00 0.00 .10 .16 .46 .42 .09 .68 .97 .47 0.00 .26 ' 51 LAlODCt KHOM3OIOES u.00 2.91 1.48 2.83 11.76 .0.00 0.00 51.28 25.39 5.98 16.96 2.*3 120.72 0.00 .72 .10 .15 .30 0.00 0.00 1.36 .32 .30 7.45 *05 .40 SYMPHURUS PLAGIUSA .13 1.63 2.26 4.06 .90 .55 2.88 54.21 13.44 5.53 3.35 7.44 96.40 .03 .40 .16 .Z? .02 .03 .15 1.43 .17 .28 1.47 .16 .32 SYNOOUS FOETENS 0.00 0.00 .57 1.55 1.31 .10 4.69 24.76 50.80 9.72 : 0.00 0.00 93.80 I 0.00 0.00 .36 .08 .03 .01 .24 .65 .65 .49 0.00 0.00 .31 HENIDIA BERYLLINA 13.84 0.00 .69 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 3.47 .69 0.00 22.94 36.60 78.23 3.17 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.0 000 .09 .01 0.00 10.08 .77 .26 CMLOROSCO14RUS C-RYSUqUS .15 0.00 1.75 0.00 .34 3.42 17.56 46.07 4.11 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 73.40 .03 0.00 .12 0.00 .01 .21 .91 1.22 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 CHILOh1YCTERUS SC--OEPFI 0.00 0.00 0.00 69.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 .2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 PRIONOTUS TRIBULIS 0.00 0.00 0.00 .43 1.11 .19 2.73 18.99 30.31 1.10 .23 2.81 58.50 0.00 0.00 O.UO .02 .03 .01 .14 .50 .40 .06 .10 .06 .19 'ARChOSARGUS PRORATOCLDALUS 12.74 8.00 0.00 .38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.24 0.00 0.00 15.25 52.61 2.92 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 00.00 .31 0.00 0.00 .32 .17 EUCINOSTOMUS GULA 0.U0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.77 1.48 1.8k 24.67 0.00 2.19 34.15 n.n0 0.0 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 .19 .04 .02 1.25 0.00 .05 .11 ICTALI1RUS PUNLTATUS U.OO 0.00 0.00 O.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 23.71 0.00 23.71 U.On 0.00 0.00 u.un .1O .0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.42 0.00 .08 SPHOLKOIOFS 'r"f L t; o.nf O.00 .34' 1.97 ..OU0 .58 9.26 0.0C 0.00 10.15 0.0 22.80 0.i 0.03 ..11 ..11 u 0.00 .0.00 o .46 0.00 .08



PAGE 1

227. 32. Hobson, E. S., and J. R. Chess. 1976. Trophic interactions among fishes and zooplankters near shore at Santa Catalina Island, California. Fishery Bull. 74: 567-598. 33. Thomas, J. D. 1976. A survey of Gammarid amphipods of the Barataria Bay, Louisiana region. Contrib. Mar. Sci. 20: 87-100. 34. Farrell, D. H. 1970. Ecology and seasonal abundance of littoral amphipods from Missisdippi. M. S. Thesis, Mississippi State University, State College, Miss. 35. Odum, W. E. 1970. Pathways of energy flow in a South Florida estuary. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Miami, Coral Gables. 36. Levings, C. D. 1973. Intertidal benthos of the Squamish estuary. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada ms. rep. 1218: 60 p. 37. Stickney, R. R., and S. E. Shumway. 1974. Occurrence of cellulase activity in the stomachs of fish. J. Fish. Biol. 6: 779-790. 38. Schmitz, E. 1969. Visceral anatomy of Gammarus lacustris. Amer. Midland Natur. 78: 1-54. 39. Martin, A. L. 1964. The alimentary canal of Marinogammarus obtusatus. Proc. Zool. Soc. London 143: 525-544. 40. Martin, A. L. 1966. Feeding and digestion of the intertidal Gammarids, Marinogammarus obtusatus and M. pirloti. J. Zool. London 148: 515-525. 41. Martin, A. L. 1965. The histochemistry of the molting cycle in Gammarus pulex. J. Zool. London 147: 185-200. 42. Kaestner, A. 1970. Order Amphipoda. In: Invertebrate Zoology, Vol. III, pp. 470-502. Interscience Publishers, New York. 43. Kinne, 0. 1961. Growth, moulting frequency, heart heat, number of eggs and incubation time in Gammarus zaddachi exposed to different environment. Crustaceana 2: 26-36. 44. Sutcliffe, D. 1966. Sodium regulation in the fresh-water amphipod, Gammarus pulex. J. Exp. Biol. 46: 499-518. 45. Werntz, H. D. 1963. Osmotic regulation in marine and fresh water Gammarids Biol. Bull. 124: 225-239. 46. Siala, A., and T. R. G. Gray. 1974. Growth of Bacillus subtilis and spore germination in soil observed by a fluorescent-antibody technique. J. Gen. Microbiol. 81: 191-198. 47 Gray, T. R. G., R. Hissett and T. Duxbury. 1974. Bacterial populations.of litter and soil in a deciduous woodland. II. Numbers, biomass and growth rates. Revue d'ecologie et de biologic du sol. 11: 15-26.



PAGE 1

230. Station IX has relatively high salinities throughout the year except during periods of high river discharge when intermediate salinity levels prevail. Experiments in the field were carried out with specially designed detritus baskets. These baskets were constructed of plastic-coated hardware cloth (6.5 mm2 mesh) shaped into cubes (30.5mm/side) with hinged tops. An inner fiberglass screen liner (2 mm2) covered the sides and bottom of each basket. This allowed organisms access to the inside of the basket; when the basket was pulled to the surface, organisms were trapped inside. Baskets were weighted for stability. Leaf litter was collected along the banks of the lower Apalachicola River. Species composition of such litter was mixed, but consisted primarily of water oak (Quercus nigra), over-cup oak (Q. lyrata), red maple (Acer rubrum), and sweetgun (Liquidambar styraciflua). The leaves were air dried and placed in baskets (400 g. dry weight per basket) which were then situated at the various sampling sites. Sampling times were set according to seasonal fluctuations of key environmental parameters in the Apalachicola Bay System. Three periods were chosen (spring, April-May; summer, August-September; fall, OctoberNovember). During the spring series, seven baskets (containing leaves) and two controls (containing no leaves) were placed at stations IX, 3, and 5A. At weekly intervals over a four to six week period, the baskets were retrieved, and rinsed in a bucket of sea water. During each sampling, leaf matter was removed, placed into the water for a second time, and swirled to remove all organisms. The leaves were then placed in the respective baskets and returned to the bay. Organisms in the buckets were strained through a 2971 sieve, washed into jars, and preserved in 10%



PAGE 1

140. in operation. The enzyme lactate dehydrogenase is commonly found in higher animals and occurs in mollusks and M. mercenaria at lowactivities (Hammen, 1975). This enzyme catalyzes the conversion of lactate to pyruvate and in vertebrates is specific for L-lactate It will also act on glycolic acid to produce glyoxylate. The enzyime acts upon the stereochemically corresponding a-hydrogen of L-lactate and glycolate (Rose, 1958; Johnson et al., 1965). Recent evidence indicates D-lactate specificity for the enzyme in mollusks (HamrJnn, 1969). The presence of lactate dehydrogenase provides a mechanism by which glycolate can be incorporated into animal metabolism after entering the cells. If lactate dehydrogenase can convert glycolic acid to glyoxylate, then through the transamination reaction pos;tulated by Hochachka et al. (1973) glycolic acid can be included into amino acid metabolism and ultimately into the tricarboxylic acid cycle (Figure 5). A mechanism similar to this maly occur in marine bacteria (Wright and Shah, 1975). Another mechanism for inclusion into oxidation pathwaiys wo:;ld be incorporation of glycolate into the complex system of lipid metabolism. Bivalves can synthesize fatty acids from acetate and some may incorporate it into such components as the sterol fraction, although evidence for the latter pathway is contradictory (Tamura et al., 1964; Walton and Pennock, 1972; Voogt, 1975 a,b). Since glycolic and acetic acids are chemically similar, experiments were conducted to determine if glycolic acid was incorporated into the lipid f'ractions of the gill tissue. Lipid extracts of tissue incubated in ci glycolic acid solution with the antibiotic mix showed incorpora tion 12



PAGE 1

270. XI. ASSOCIATIONS OF EPIBENTHIC FISHES AND INVERTEBRATES* Introduction This analysis will include 5 years of information concerning longterm fluctuations of epibenthic assemblages in the Apalachicola Estuary. Portions of this report have been statistically analyzed and cover the first 4 years of sampling (March, 1972 -February, 1977). Data analysis includes trends in the movement of organochlorine compounds through the system during first 3 years of study. Laboratory effects of organochlorine compounds such as DDT and the polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) on aquatic organisms have been well documented (Johnson, 1968; Walsh, 1972; Livingston, 1976). Such chemicals are noted for environmental persistence, a capacity for bioaccumulation and biomagnification, and species-specific patterns of acute toxicity. While earlier work stressed the ubiquitous nature of organochlorine residues in aquatic biota (Butler, 1969), more recent work (Butler, 1973; Johnston, 1974) noted declines in DDT residues during the early 1970's which were attributed to the total ban of DDT use in the U.S. by the end of 1972. This.was accomplished by serious restriction of PCB use during the same period (Nesbit and Sarofim, 1972). In addition to marked variations of pesticide occurrence from one estuarine system to the next (Butler, 1973), seasonal variation in residue peaks in estuaries can be considered due to temporal patterns of pesticide application (Bradshaw et al., 1972; Butler, 1973), rainfall (Richard et al., *Portions of this section of the report are included in a paper currently in review for publication in Marine Biology. The authorship of this paper is as follows: R.J. Livingston, N.P. Thompson, and D.A. Meeter.



PAGE 1

Table 3: continued. 110-119 120-129 150-159 Avg. 10-159 2.1 0.2 1.4 6.8 14.1 9.7 13.6 <.1 0.3 0.2 2.1 0.3 <.1 4.4 40.1 34.0 34.1 <.1 1.4 0.3 <.1 <.1 0.1 4.2 <.1 2.5 0.2 0.6 1.8 0.2 4.6 2.7 2.2 5.6 <.1 46.0 43.3 10.9 10.4 45.1 3.6 <.1 1.2 7.7 <.1 <.1 <.1 0.1 32.7 8.5 <.1



PAGE 1

r -rAnchoa --.micropo n i Leiostomus ...................... Brevoortia ------micropogon 3-1 ...n Harengula .................. Chloroscombrus--3 o ,0 Cynoscion :·:·:: :::: -§ = o -*. C O 7C r_ -r h w9 , -1 i-'72-73 '73-74 '74-75 '75-76 1oo S=60 N=22,458 S=68 N=20,199 S=66 N=17,957 S=65 N=19,473 C a I, ·-o-0 ":3 N-n1=7,881 N-n1=15,439 N-n,=12,432 N-n1=13,295 .5. 100C _ 1 r. C. N-(n,-n2)=5,159 IN-(n+n2)=7,312 N-(nl+n)=7,610 N-(n,+n )= 8,401 I -.A .o ..: -n 3 SI '.' .; 60 .. -i -A.' ;.:t <0 S. -: .. ." ... ...o-o! .rS -40 , -o 0w"> :" ""g '," ; ! • " : : 00 -:'"'i / *. , i --" '"h L '; "I rtr l s< .LU 0 o O 4 .5 6 7 .9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101 12 1 2 .4 5 6 7 ' 1.0 11 1 1 .2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 0 -"m ' : ' " ." " i " :a:.1j•::, .:. * :. .. .; ., .. .." .: .: , ;. , 0 o c r 20 n T;H: *:(3 /722/76)i O. *O , " "-'-M :7 ) ." ."'" ' 0 -' , .*.-. , : .-l.; : ....{ ,} t. .? • .'. :'' -, .---*C» {S & * ...-2 4 5 7 .. .. .. T .f -2 , -..-0 0--TEIME--MONTHS (3/72-2/76) .



PAGE 1

21. Apalachicola, Florida) and the East Bay Forestry tower. Turbidity was determined using a Hach Model 2100-A turbidimeter and was expressed as Jackson Turbidity Units (J.T.U.). Water color was measured using an A.P.H.A. platinum-cobalt standard test. Light penetration was estimated with a standard Secchi disk. Data concerning chlorophyll A, orthophosphate (inorganic, soluble, reactive), nitrite, nitrate, and silicate were provided through a Florida Sea Grant Program directed by Dr. Richard L. Iverson (Department of Oceanography, Florida State University); these parameters were measured according to standard procedures (Livingston et al., 1974). A. Sediments: Results of sediment analyses are presented in Table 1. Station 1 This is a mid-bay station approximately 2 m in depth. The bottom is somewhat loose, barren of vegetation, with occasional large wood and shell fragments. There are scattered coarse, sandy deposits in an otherwise fine sand area. The monthly average grain size is 2.60 4 units and contains 6.52% organic matter. There was considerable variation between samples both for grain size and organic content, with no obvious trends. The concurrent decrease in grain size and increase in organic content noted in February, 1976, coincided with maintenance dredging activities nearby. Station IX This station is situated in a shallow (1 m) protected grass bed, composed mainly of Halodule wrightii. The bottom is very firm sand with scattered oyster bars in the area. The average monthly grain size is 2.02 units and the organic content averages 2.06%. There was a little



PAGE 1

3. vegetation (38,106,000 m2 or 9,380 acres) and about 14% is emergent (marsh) vegetation (85,000,000 m2 or 21,300 acres). Oyster beds account for about 24,374,840 m2 or 4.6% of the total bay (Rockwood et al., 1973). Mean depth approximates 2.7 m while the total volume is about 1,446,120,000 m3.This project was designed to study various aspects of the energy system in the Apalachicola Estuary. The following objectives were part of the program. 1. Determination of the river derived input of organic plant nutrients, and particulate and dissolved organic carbon into the bay system. 2. Analysis of phytoplankton assemblages and phytoplankton productivity of the Apalachicola Bay System. 3. Determination of the role of phytoplankton productivity in the overall energy budget of the bay, including nutrient limitation studies of key driving functions. 4. Analyses of the significance, source, and role of allochthonous and autochtonous forms of detritus in the Bay including a preliminary evaluation of the role of microorganisms in detrital breakdown and energy transfer. 5. Continuation of the application of scientific data for the development of a management program for the Apalachicola Drainage System. As an outgrowth of the original program, a long-term impact analysis is being carried out to determine the potential influence of clearcutting practices in the Tate's Hell Swamp on the Apalachicola Bay System. Preliminary observations will be made concerning these data preparatory to the completion of the first stage of this project in December, 1977. In some instances, data analysis will be carried out within the context of the full 5-year data base which dates back to March, 1972. This report represents a preliminary analysis of the data base. This will be followed by a more sophisticated review of the data base for publication in a series of scientific papers.



PAGE 1

216. colonization was well in progress and continued to increase in time. In the case of the live oak leaves, the stellate hair-covered ventral surface was rapidly covered by microorganisms and accumulated debris, while the relatively smooth dorsal surface was patchily colonized in the early periods with a complete microbial distribution on the surface not observed until weeks 4 and 5. A variety of microorganisms were observed at different times on both pine needles and oak leaves. Bacteria were commonly observed on most samples; the majority of organisms were cocci, either smooth or rough-surfaced, though bacilli were occasionally observed. The organisms were often seen in colonies, were observed during various stages of divisions, and were frequently attached to the plant litter surface by mucoid-type attachments or mesh-like networks. A variety of diatoms were attached to the plant litter of both types, and while they were present in the early stages, their abundance increased noticeably in the latter stages. The presence of fungi was confirmed by the observation of conidia on week 4 pine needles. Filamentous forms were most extensive during weeks 4, 5 and 6. Other organisms observed suggested the presence of occasional blue-green algae and other algae. The sequence is illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. B. Comparison between natural degradable substrate, pine needles, and non-degradable surface. Pine needles and extruded polyvinyl chloride needles from an artificial Christmas tree were analyzed for a 14 weekly period of incubation in Apalachicola Bay. Respiration (rate of oxygen utilization), alkaline phosphatase and phosphodiesterase activities, the rate of incorporation of 14C-acetate into the lipids and the ATP level were 2 to 5 fold higher on the natural surface compared to the plastic. The difference in the microfloral composition was reflected in at least a three order of magnitude difference between the activities of a-D-mannosidase, B-D-galactosidase and 6-D-glucosidase on the pine needles compared to the plastic needles. The lipid composition also showed significant



PAGE 1

S.-----"-*---+---+ --+----*-----"-------*-+---+-----+-+----.--------+---.----------+----. *?. I T I ?4 72.00 1 I I T I I T I I I I T I I I I i.90 a + 64.90 I T I I I I I I II I I I57 S7. 80 + i I 4 57.80 I I I I I I I T T T T I i I I .7u I I 50070 I I .I TT T I I I I l I I i I I r + I I+ 36.50 T T I I I I I I I I .29.40 * 29.40 T I I" I ku.30 I I 22.30 FI I r I I I I I I I I I I Vr-.20 I 15.20 I T I i 8.10 .r I + 8.10 I I I I r I I I I I I TT 1.00 + .I "-8 ·,·---~--~-,-------------------------------------------, i 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 on Figure 7. Surface primary productivity in East Bay.



PAGE 1

204. mycoplasma or PPLO organisms. The murano peptide polymer is the main supporting material of the microbial wall and gives the cell its characteristic shape. Chains of alternating residues of N-acetylglucosamine and N-acetyl muramic acid are covalently linked by amide bonds at the muramic acid by peptide bridges. This polymer apparently completely encloses the cell. Muramic acid (3-0-carboxyethyl-D-glucosamine) does not occur in other prokaryotic or eukaryotic cells. Of the 300 or so PPLO,mycoplasma or L-formsdescribed, many are intracellular parasites of plants and animals, although they may survive in high osmotic environments like sewage. They form a minute percentage of the bacterial mass in vertebrates. One thermoplasma has been isolated from a high temperature acidic coal mine gob pile. Others have recently been detected in the sea. No estimate of the number of PPLO organisms detected on estuarine detritus or marine environnmnts has yet been made ( 5, 6). Batch cultures of organisms grown to the stationary phase concain organisms of all ages in a relatively poorly controlled environment when compared with organisms grown in a nutrient-limited chemostat (7). Studies of numerous species of bacteria have shown that the proportion of muramic acid in the cell wall and the ratio of muramic acid to glucosamine are essentially invariant (7 -9), However, differences in the sensitivity to the wall of lytic enzyme lysozyme heat-killed Bacillus subtilis W-23 grown in chemostats with different limiting nutrients have been shown ( 10 ). On isolation of the walls after removal of the teichoic acids and analyses of the mucopeptide, the maximum variability in the ratios of glucosamine to muramic acid varied between 0.5 for sulfate-limited growth to 1.07 for NH3-limited cells, possibly a variation by a factor of 2. No changes in muramic acid levels have been induced with other strains of Bacillus subtilis, however (11). The direct analysis of laboratory-grown batch cultures which showed an average of 3.44 ± 0.5 (X ± o) vg/mg dry



PAGE 1

S2' Table 10: Summary of total numbers by species, by month, and percent dominance of fishes 10 .3 004 O05 006 I0A CIB 01C 05A taken in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, IA, IB, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 720315 720415 720515 720615 720715 720815 720915 721015 721115 721215 730115 730215 TOTALS . ANCHOA MITCHILLI 3F4 181 289 1077 2189 393 507 5070 3867 455 176 74 14582 67.26 18.26 15.96 68.21 78.07 57.71 54.81 86.30 80.56 65.00 49.72 4.79 64.76 MICROPOGON UNDULATUS 84 548 421 4 25 1 19 1 259 -48 1267 2770 18.58 55,30 23.25 .25 .89 .i5 2.05 .02 5.40 13.29 13.56 82.06 12.30 CYNOSCION ARENARIUS 0 9 750 127 394 66 135 141 249 23 2 0 1896 0.00 .91 41.41 8.84 14.05 9.69 14.59 2*.4 5.19 3.29 .56 0.00 8.42 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CHRYSURUS 3 0 2 0 3 27 146 265 14 0 0 0 460 .66 0.00 .11 0.~O .11 3.96 15.78 4.51 .29 .O00 0.80 0.00 2.04 BAIRDIELLA CHRYSURA 2 0 8 207 8 23 0 37 125 33 2 3 448 .44 0.00 .44 13.11 .29 3.38 P.0C .63 2.60 4.71 .56 .19 1.99 LEIOSTOMUS XANTHURUS 2 0 208 6 12 2 1 2 7 7 59 66 372 *44 G(.00 11.49 .38 .43 .29 .11 .03 .15 1.60 16.67 4.27 1.65 ARIU4 FELIS 1 0 2 9 55 73 30 53 30 0 0 0 253 .22 0.GC .11 .57 1.96 10.72 3.24 .90 .62 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.12 HENTICIRRHUS APERICANUS 0 0 9 16 54 23 14 53 46 21 a 2 238 0.00 0.00 .50 1.01 1.93 3.38 1.51 .90 *96 3.00 0.00 .13 1.06 TRIN4CTES MACULATUS 23 17 62 17 11 3 4 10 4 0 0 4 155 5.09 1.72 3.42 1.08 .39 .44 .43 .17 .08 000 0.00 *26 *69 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS U 0 0 3 3 4 20 54 58 2 1 4 149 0.00 0.C0 0.00 *19 .11 .59 2.16 *92 1.21 .29 .28 *26 .66 ETROPUS CROSSOTUS 1 5 8 6 12 8 9 49 36 4 7 3 143 .22 .50 .44 .38 .43 1.17 .97 .83 .75 .57 1.98 e19 .66 SYhPHURUS PLAGIUSA 1 2 2 5 3 2 6 55 18 10 4 20 128 02? .20 11i .32 .11 .29 .65 .94 .1T 1.43 1.13 1.30 o57 LUCANIA PARVA 2 114 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 122. o44 11.50 *11 *06 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 014 .28 0.00 .54 HENIOIA BERYLLINA 21 0 3 0 0 O 0 6 1 0 27 56 114 4.65 O.0C .17 9.00 0.00 0 0.00 .10 .02 0.00 7.63 3.63 .51 GOBIOSOMA BOSCI 1 21 8 5 1 2 3 8 24 2 0 7 82 o22 2.12 .44 .32 .04 .29 .32 .14 *50 .29 0.00 .45 .36 LAGOOON RHOMBOIDES 0 38 3 4 2 0 0 6 4 3 7 1 68 0.00 3.83 *17 *25 007 0.00 8.00 SiB .08 *43 1.98 .06 *30 MICROGOBIUS GULOSUS 1 6 9 8 1 2 0 it 13 0 0 0 51 *22 .61 o50 .51 .04 .29 8.0 *19 .27 0.00 0.00 0.00 .23 CYNOSCION NEBULOSUS 0 3 0 1 0 7 1 8 6 12 5 8 43 0.00 .30 0.00 .06 0.00 1.03 .11 .14 .12 1.71 1.41 0.00 *19 DASYATIS SABINA 1 3 3 6 1 0 1 10 3 4 0 1 33 .22 .30 .17 .38 .04 0.00 .11 .17 *06 .57 0.00 .06 .15 ORTHOPPISTIS CHRYSOPTERA e 0 6 24 0 0 0 0 1 1. 0 0 32 0.00 0.00 .33 1.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 .14 0.00 0.00 .14 SYNGNATHUS SCOVELLI 0 9 3 13 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 32 0.00 .91 .17 .82 .04 .59 o.1 0.00 8.00 0.00 o.00 *06 o14 EUCINOSTOMUS ARGENTEUS 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 5 , 3 0 30 0.00 0.C0 0.00 0.00 .00 3.23 0.00 9.0l0 *10 8.a5 .8 0.00 .13. BREVOORTIA PATRONUS C 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 29 0.00 2.93 OO 0. 0 0 0.0 000 .00 0.0 0.009 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 *03 EUCINOSTOHUS GULA 0 0 0 8 0 0 4 2 1 19 8 1 27 0.00 0.0C 0.C0 L.00 C.00 0.00 .43 .03 .02 2*71 90.0 .06 *12 SYNO3US FOETENS 0 .3 4 3 1 2 5 5 1 0 0 24 0.00 0c.~ .17 .25 .11 .15 .22 .09 *10 .14 0.00 3.00 .11 SPHOiROIZES NEPHELUS u 0 1 11 3 C 2 5 0 0 1 C0·. G.FP .06 ,70 .11 C.JC .22 .09 3.00 0.83 .28 0



PAGE 1

212. the Clostridia (plasmalogens), the Bacteroides (sphingophospholipids) or halophilic-thermophilic bacteria (ethers). Our preliminary data indicates 50% of the lipid phosphate was in lipids not made water-soluble by mild alkaline methanolysis (4). Thus these three lipid classes could possibly suggest significant details about the microfloral population. For each component we assay, we can also measure its synthesis and turnover rates to get an idea of its metabolism. Our preliminary studies on gross separations show a surprising uniformity of turnover times for a large proportion of the community (Table II) and these methods show good (for environmental studies at least) agreement for various estimates of the microbial mass (Table III). 2. Endogenous storage materials. Work as yet unpublished has yielded methods of measuring the rates of synthesis and utilization of the bacterial endogenous storage polymer poly B-hydroxy butyrate (PBHB). PBHB is formed when bacteria are deprived of a growth-limiting substrate in the presence of both energy sources and carbon. Limitations of sulfate, nitrogen, phosphate, pH, trace metals or oxygen lead to its synthesis (29, 30). We have developed an assay for the quantitative extraction, purification and assay of PBHB from environmental samples, and shown that impacts which affect other activity parameters also affect the metabolism of their endogenous storage products. 3. Scanning electron microscopy. The progressive colonization of the degrading plant litter in East Bay was followed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). This procedure enables one to determine the extent of colonization of the plant litter surface as well as the classes and relative density of various microbial forms present. Samples were prepared by a fixation procedure utilizing glutaraldehyde, osmium tetroxide in s-collidine buffer, and ethanol as the dehydrating agent.



PAGE 1

INdiRT SJiAr1kY 3;1OASS nn3J.BAY 3.k YTAP OATj 7-ý .j -7)2 STAi0JNS J, 1 ..2 ý3 .J.5 u.6 .iA L13 LIG 35 Table 9, continued TIMES OF JAY D SPECIES SAt'FTL 36TE / ..3. 1t4o41: 7 w>15 74., 71 h 21> IFO is4. DALLINECGIE >4PIJUS 28i.. .17l.;b i-B.d .a6,.1l o10. D1o.*9 -i..j 9-4.12 133 .7d .l12 41.91 5..51 Li54.6c 92. 1L 93.'2 5 .> -j 7.;. 1 ;L. J4 1 .iI.76 U2. i..7a 31..7 73.71 6+.5i 43.2? PENAEUS SETIFERJ) 18.54 ;.d .u< .51 r.Jo *«4..5 7+.43 27S.75 idf.97 ., 4..cd 3.5d l&33.51 5.9) I..7i .55 1.79 1 .<6 7-.-.. 3..95 a.7 53..43 j.?2 7.53 i.995 ti.41 LOLLIGUNCULA BREiI .o.uC L.L 39.37 4.,7 27.53 9.5u 12.22 .9.57 3.5 1.35 jkow .ob L33.uo T.^ i. 41.96 #I...4 5.j5 1.>7 ,..9 ?.i7 L.51 2.57 4.ua .87 4.36 PENAEUS 3UOkA+UM i.64 4.73 ..,3 .38 *..3 5.5 *.l1 3.7. i 4.2 13.32 4.59 >.45 129.15 1.17 r.57 ...J 2.75 7.13 i.t ..od .l. 11.9jJ S o.l .o6 .OZ 4.083 PENAiUS AZTECUS 6.u. ... ..1u 1.54 .. -6.j2 > .-t5 Z.52 3.a1. 3.;i .66 L.5. 4i4.1l4 L.uk r. L.'j 4.U54 ... 2 2.b -. 7 ..u 27.4i .a1 1. 2. .9 1. 7 1.6 CALLVNECTE.a SIIILIS L.Cu 3.42 .86 .67 .bb 1..8 i.839 1.1 2i.ai 3.33 .95 1.44 42.5* j,. 1.66 *92 1.97 1.;a .L8 .79 .i 4.78 7.,+ 1.67 L.83 1.5l PALAEMONETES PUGIO ..13 .46 G.L L .u .,*4 .55 .b6 j::. io.LU 3.L4 3.42 2.3l 1i.L 1 oU4 .25 Cu o.Jb .71 .1 ..l1 ji.. j .. 5.9i .jd .95 .4i PO.1 .U. .. 2.12 5. 5 .29 ..Lu ..Ub L. J lj ...2 j .a j0u.a 2.71 .31 SQUILLA E4PUSA u. .5S %.C0 3.360 U.C .34 j..0Q ,,* *.u, 1.23 3.u, 3.78 O.1; U.fj ' .43 *j 0 J ui u JO C * uu }6 J *1 j uJ 2.31 w*iu +.6; .23 PALAEhONcTES VUL;3AS .1C J.L ;.0u j.u0 u.u ..2 0.j .lj LL.3 1.2 .58 *liJ .*9 .33 .J0 1. j jUu j 0C .)14 iaU .j .e26 i.27 iJ3 *12 .IV PASU:ZUS PJLLICAkIS J. 6 .15 .15 .. ..a .38 1. ..;J *4 J.ob .i. 1.61 u.L6 *ad .16 .J *u .1j Jauu .ou8 .. uJ j d Ji;J *j j TRACHYPENAEUS ýImlIS .97 C.ru .3 .1b <..j 1 J*J .IJu t.ou 1.13 .31 .*^ J0 0uU vaL L. Jjjl *07 d .0s j Jj J*J u *o4 . NERITINA LECLIVATA C.GOJGL .D045. J.ujajC j.uaud u.u.Ou U. O4Jju U.Jjwu. ).J.Jj 3.jibj .25331 .1974i .31124 .846ub L.jC *05 j.lU 3 .U0 i. u 'J a.aU j.u J.0u 4.bj 1 j a .35 e 4. *0 3 OVALIPES ;UAOULPENSIS .OOJJC O.OCu3j 0a.CýuU J.CGJvL u.oGOJ e.GaJju Qo.Jju o.Ujr) 0.Q)0u .6j*25 *3.3jJi J. 00Gu .6i25 t. C u.:C0 i. L J.LL u.JU ..j 1. 6.I. wul *Js L· i1 i*UJ a00 *Je METAPORHADHIS 3A.CARATA .27262 i.GCU i G6.ODjOc j3.iJ30 u..JL.u , j7b5 J.usowu J.~~JuJ 0., 0jj .J75. .4JsiJu .7i755 .49777 .39 U.ýu L.uG 3.uL L uU *11 )0a ·.°I Jj oJ *I* J.aU *.1 .j2 TRACHYPENAEUS' ^0S1STRICTUS O.C0 434 0.utJOJ j.LGJOC j.}3 jL a.LujwU u. UjjJ .2L2.a ).jpIaj J.uids w ) 1 3 ; 4. aditu *234* .44652 L* .. 3. O U.uu j.u u.jG u.ju *~9 i.J) }.aj" j.j) J.0. .3 .2Z PEISEPHON4 4EDITEkRANE4 J.0OUbU J*.OfiL j. u'Ju U.UCUJu C.aiýUý ..41i13 J.JlubLL J.ojjj J.3LUJJ 09.90aii JS.;ju. 3-*JJiJ4 .41333 00OL .06 0 u0 J1obL ubj *J7 Jwi 2.a3 0juj so 4 .u .u RHITHROPANOPEUý HAKRISII 6.C~OU6 0.00 u. i.UOJ00 3..j4JC .G67),L .ueJO0 .%)833 .15333 u.j}a. .aj953i .21+66 ;.LaJLu .3942. I,[ G.4j i.o10 .30 o.1 3.30 .L. *1 }a.1 0La *&3d 0 ju *jl HEXAPANOPEUS AN;USTIFRONS 000jbU. 0.03JOJ J.0JO0O .uJLb C06.0lQ uc.ujJ 0 0.C'0 3.00 5 .13 44 3.tjr 3 ~Li i G.6 L O.uiubu .18144 G jj 40CJ 3.U 3.kL .0L JLM j b Iauu j.Ij .U3 j. ) ;JIJ J.ud *0ll PAGURUS LONGICARPUS G.C ubL3 .u.u: j3.A;0 iuju L u9ujuv a v uiu .0. l* .j].) J G*j 4u )1 Di. I I*jaJ3 *iBi *. 145B a.;L aJ.Cj C. L 3.JL iuf ;0 G I a tI 6 J.JJ ; J0 **Q& 4 *;19 *O 1 NEOPANOPL TEXA'JA LC.OLOUL .11938 .Oj.j Je.0uj0 uJ 3. .. OJ .D J3 o .J0 IJG1a 4.3 10J J.u3 i 4~~JJ a.j3. 1 i .11935 d *i6 t uu o Lt LJC J.+ b 0 1uu J,° .a.,w 0*. .* ý J a *J4L EUIYPANOPEUS DOPRESSUS 0.e0tu. G.liww }.j ' a,.U a .. ..u. L .a j 1 .v .u. .j .J.u-; J*·* *,324. «d .J i ..32k4 .-.I. ...J* ..,.a Aad a.w *. J`J *.e s0a.j as « .. .-* ed , * * * **^ *** « * *** * **s e J *ea de **M *fdr .^e«d



PAGE 1

9. ended file disposition is under user control. Printer output files created during SPECS operation may be listed on a line printer. Active data files or other intermediate files may be saved if they will be used again in the near future. This is especially valuable if an important file has taken a long time to generate (that time need not be invested again, for the file may be kept indefinitely). This allows a person with limited computer background to use an interactive computer system with immediate access to a broadbased data file containing diverse forms of information. Using the various options, this facilitates a rapid, relatively inexpensive yet comprehensive analysis with great flexibility regarding access to data and forms of analysis. All operations are carried out at the terminal, and new options can be added easily in addition to routine periodic updates of the data base. This gives the biologist the use of a sophisticated computerized software system as a research tool. IV. SUMMARY The SPECS system consists of a collection of programs written expressly for the storage, retrieval, and analysis of long-term ecological data. It provides a wide range of analytic approaches and data reduction capabilities. Some programs perform direct calculations or data manipulations while others serve as interface programs which prepare data for higher level (and widely available) program packages. The system is operated from a remote computer terminal or teletype, from which the user supervises program execution in a step-by-step manner. Operation is interactive in that the program prompts the user for informational input required before each step is executed. Output consists of terminal display, printed listing, and electrostatic plots. Theorizing(the fun part) is left to the user.



PAGE 1

83. 0 --Oct-Feb 70 -------Feb-Sep / -,,/ 60 0 / 50/ CO 40 0.0 0 30.,0/, Y) A// , E /. .d 20 10 / /^> 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 WATER TEMP (0C.) Figure 9. Productivity as a function of temperature.



PAGE 1

Fig. 21: Bottom dissolved oxygen (PPM) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. S^= C 5ZAr t'S 1 77/P3/11. PAC.E 33 I':(:iC LATIO N "'E -77/7 / 1' ..) S-. -:-.'" -t C.) 1-5 .(ACROSS) OAYS 11. *. ; 23.5 75; ' 7 .I .? 652.573rC 832..25ýcio ...; 7>5 1l' .92s71 2 3?t .3'7Ols79.825sG3179.2,7' 5"0 *------.------.------.......-.....-... ...--....-.... 1 ;. : I I + 12.LD I I I I | j i i i SI I i .I I " ... ----------------T ---" A --------"7 ---------------------------------/ ----r------+-----Y ------------\. "i " I + t 2/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 * 0 I II I.S. -.,--------I ...I.r..-.. .. ..... .'----,>3I----/T ------'6 IA-4 5.5k.---.-~-V , *--: i.'.: v,-.2J1. -~-------jF/: ---* I *



PAGE 1

129. INTRODUCTION Excretion and extracellular loss of metabolites by phytoplankton and macrophytes is a significant source of soluble organic carbon compounds in the sea (Parsons and Takahashi, 1973). Photosynthetically fixed carbon excreted by marine phytoplankton communities varies in magnitude, with increased proportion of fixed carbon excreted by communities growing under oligotrophic conditions (Anderson and Zeutschel, 1970; Thomas, 1971; Samuel, et al., 1971; Berman and Holm-Hansen, 1974). Glycolic acid is probably quantitatively the most important component of phytoplankton extracellularly released carbon (Hellebust, 1974). Algal and bacterial species exhibit variability in their ability to take up and use exogenous glycolate for growth. Bacterial species which took up.glycolate were unable to grow using glycolate as the sole carbon source but could metabolize it with greater efficiency than other organic acids, sugars, or amino acids -taken up from solution (Wright and Shaw, 1975). Excreted glycolate may be reassimilated to serve as an energy source for phytoplankton populations during conditions limiting photosynthesis (Fogg, 1963). Marine invertebrates, including mollusks, have been shown to remove dissolved organic compounds from solution, yet the uptake and significance of glycolic acid in the metabolism of marine animals has not been established. Six genera of marine mollusks, including Mercenaria mercenaria, removed amino acids from seawater (Stephens and Shinskc, 1961). Sorokin and Wyshkwarzev (1973) reported uptake of 14C -labelled algal hydrolysate by 15 species of marine invertebrates, including a bivalve mollusk. Glucose and glycine were taken



PAGE 1

200. Detritus, Ash Free Detritus, Ash Total, Ratio of Dry Weight (7 m) Free Dry Dry Organic A: total (Kg/month) Date Station Weight (g/l) Weight (g/1) detritus B: total (tons/month) 7T 0.0000948 0.2079 A. 324,822 5/76 7B 0.0001638 0.3494 B. 357 7M 0.0001293 0.2786 2.15 8 0.0000602 0.0601 7T 0.0000278 0.0615 A. 118,868 6/76 7B 0.0000862 0.2028 B. 131 7M 0.0000570 0.1321 2.91 8 0.0000196 0.0284 7T 0.0000378 0.0695 A. 90,776 7/76 7B 0.0000978 0.1833 B. 100 7M 0.0000577 0.1264 2.09 8 0.0000276 0.0525 7T 0.0000291 0.0895 A. 59,898 8/76 7B 0.0000714 0.1829 B. 66 7M 0.0000503 0.1362 1.59 8 0.0000316 0.0790 7T 0.0000573 0.1643 A. 90,973 9/76 7B 0.0001152 0.4214 B. 100 7M 0.0000863 0.2928 1.64 8 0.0000525 0.0906 7T 0.0000189 0.0507 A. 37,155 10/76 7B 0.0000467 0.1911 B. 41 7M 0.0000328 0.1371 2.42 8 0.0000135 0.0208 7T 0.0000109 0.0193 A. 11,112 11/76 7B 0.0000065 0.0146 B. 12 7M 0.0000087 0.0169 0.47 8 0.0000185 0.0366 7T 0.0000742 0.1956 A. 353,483 12/76 7B 0.0001614 0.5291 B. 389 7M 0.0001178 0.3623 0.67 8 0.0001770 0.4295 7T 0.0001216 0.7362 A. 467,504 1/77 7B 0.0001968 1.3660 B. 514 7M 0.0001592 1.0511 1.28 8 0.0001244 0.7964 7T 0.0000628 0.2723 A. 166,158 2/77 7B 0.0001410 0.7613 B. 183 7M 0.0001019 0.5168 2.45 8 0.0000416 0.2269



PAGE 1

126. APPENDIX 4



PAGE 1

69. INTRODUCTION Apalachicola Bay is a shallow, bar-built estuary approximately 12 miles long and 7 miles wide with a mean depth of 2.7 meters (M.L.W.). The bay is protected to the south by a line of barrier islands adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 1) and receives an average daily freshwater input of 22,000 cfs from the Apalachicola River (U.S. Geological Survey, 1971). Apalachicola Bay supports the major Florida oyster fishery (Colberg, et al., 1968.; Menzel and Cake, 1969). Dawson (1955) investigated the hydrography of the bay while Gorsline (1963) described hydrographic and submarine geological features of the bay. Less than 7 percent of the bay bottom supports macrophyte growth (National Estuarine Study, 1970) suggesting that phytoplankton are the primary autotrophs in Apalachicola Bay. The investigation reported here was designed to determine patterns of phytoplankton standing crop and productivity as well as factors controlling phytoplankton productivity in Apalachicola Bay. MATERIALS AND METHODS Stations were set at various locations in Apalachicola Bay (Fig. 2) and sampling was started July, 1972. Water temperature and salinity were measured with a Beckman RS5-3 in situ CSTD. Solar radiation data was obtained from a pyrheliometer located at the FSU Marine Laboratory. Apalachicola River discharge, measured at a gauging station near Chattahoochee, Florida, was obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey. Samples for chemical and biological analysis were taken at the surface and bottom of the water column. Turbidity was measured with a Hach Model 2100A turbidimeter. Total carbon dioxide for use in computing phytoplankton productivity data was measured with an Oceanography



PAGE 1

Figure 26: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Brevoortia patronus in the Apalachicola Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1A, 1B, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. A . SCAT'E'S FISH TOP TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE 11 FIL= :hu(CREATION DATE = 77/03/23.) SCAT=TERGYG OF (DOWN) SREPAT (ACROSS) DAYS 124.475C3 284.425C0 464.375 0 64..3253C 2.275018.225llt.1750136'.1250S14.075V 17?. C25 .+-----------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------571-0.G I I 5716.0 I I 514..-C + I I + 5144.43 I I I I I I I I I I I |I I I I 7.?. I I I * 4572.8C I I I I I I I I i---------., .--.-.-.-----------------..-L.--..--------------------------------....,.-..--.---------i I I I I I I 3-29.60 + I I + 3429.65 I I I I I I I I I I I .+ I I 2858.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11e6.4. * I I * 2286143 I----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I 1714.8C + I I + 17t14.G 571.5CI I I 71.6 I I I I I I I AI FC A---8 -----(----t--------.------~-. .--..»^56 ) T RO F-»-.-»^89 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SCTTES FISH TOP TEN57.6 H STATISTICS.. CORSELATION (P).19621 R SQUARED --03850 SIGNIFICANCE R -*C6649 STO eiR OF EST -*738.66993 INTERCEPT (A) --1.01.12293 STO ERIOR OF A -t90.61472 SIGNIFICANCE A -.29889 SLOPE (0) -.27568 STO ERROR OF 8 -.18C91 SIGNIF:CANCE 3 -.06649 PLOTTE3 VALUES -6C EXCLUOEO VALUES0 MISSING VALUES -8 ..*rr* .IS FFINTED IF A COEFFICIENT CHNNOT BE CO-PUTEC.



PAGE 1

176. Table.E, continded Overcup Q. lyrata Walt. Post Q. stellata Wang Red Q. falcata Michx. Runner Q. pumila Walt. Swamp-chestnut Q. prinus L. Turkey Q. laevis Walt. Water Q. nigra L. Pine, Loblolly Pinus taeda L. Longleaf P. palustris Mill. Sand P. clausa (Chapm.) Vasey Shortleaf P. echinata Mill. Spruce P. glabra Walt. Planer-tree Planera aquatica (Halt.) Gmel. Reedgrass Phragmites australis (Cab.) Trin. Rice, Wild Zizania aquatica L. Rosemary Ceratiola ericoides Michx. Rush Juncus spp. St. Johns-wort Hypericum fasciculatum Lam. Saw palmetto Serenoa repens (Bartr.) Small Sawgrass Cladium jamaicense Crantz. Silverbells Halesia diptera Eillis Sweetbay Magnolia virginiana L. Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua L. Sycamore Platanus occidentalis L. Titi Cyrilla spp., Cliftonia moncphylla (Lam.) Sar,.



PAGE 1

237. samples per station at a given time would be adequate for the purpose of this study. All further analysis was based on this sampling regime. Leaf Litter Associations The results of the leaf basket experiments are shown in Tables 1 and 2. In every instance, there was a significant difference (in terms of numbers of species and individuals) between empty baskets and those containing leaf litter. The presence of organisms in empty sampling devices indicates that such enclosures could perform a shelter function in some instances. In terms of biomass (dry weight), more was associated with pine needles than oak leaves and a considerable amount was found in the baskets filled with teflon leaves indicating that the leaf matter itself may simply serve as a substrate for shelter and/or microbial accumulation. More information is needed here before a difinitive statement can be made. Within and between station comparisons of species assemblages are shown in Table 3. There was usually a consistent within-station similarity with time. With one exception (3-1X), marked interstation similarity coincided with moderate to high salinity levels. Although there was station to station variation in species associations, increased salinity was associated with interstation similarity which superceded geographic variation. Such changes were often characterized by increased dominance of species such as Gammarus mucronatus, Melita sp., Ericthonius brasiliensis, and Gitanopsis sp. Since such associations were most prevalent during the fall period of sampling, it is quite likely that factors other than salinity are also involved in the determination of species composition of the leaf litter associations. The most obvious seasonal function in this case would be water temperature. The low numbers of individuals at Station 5A



PAGE 1

20. Two methods were used (the second method represents a standard geological analysis which eliminates biological functions). At monthly intervals, a sample of 50-150 g was wet-sieved through a series of U.S. Standard sieves. Each fraction was dried at 1000C for 24 hours and weighed. Sieve-class weights were then used to construct cumulative percent particle size curves (Inman, 1952) on arithmetic probability paper. A second analysis involved a supplementary subset of the above samples (Ingram, 1971). A 30-50 g sample was dried at 1000C for 24 hours and then treated with 10% HC1 for 12 hours to remove carbonates. After redrying the sample, organic matter was removed by treatment with 30% H202 for 12 hours. The sample was then dried, and dry-sieved through a series of sieves on a mechanical shaker for 30 minutes. Sieve class weights were analyzed by the method of moments (Folk, 1966) using a computer program developed by J. P. May (Dept. of Geology, Florida State University). Sediment organic matter was analyzed monthly by drying a subsample at 1000C for 24 hours and ashing at 5000C for 4 hours (Cummings and Waycheck, 1971). Physico-chemical Functions: Surface and bottom water samples were taken monthly at fixed stations in the Apalachicola Estuary (Fig. 1) with a 1 a Kemmerer bottle. Dissolved oxygen and temperature were measured with a Y.S.I. dissolved oxygen meter and a stick thermometer. Salinity was taken with a temperature-compensated refractometer calibrated periodically with standard sea water. River flow data taken at Blountstown, Florida were provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Mobile, Alabama) while local rainfall data were provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Environmental Data Service,



PAGE 1

Fig. 2: Changes, by month, of Apalachicola River flow (cubic feet per second) and two major physical functions (temperature, in ocentigrade; salinity in parts per thousand) monitored at station 1 (bottom) in the Apalachicola Estuary from March, 1972 to February, 1976. The monthly means and ranges of river flow at Blountstown (Florida), as measured by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Mobile, Alabama), are represented.



PAGE 1

ay :.ycr0 itruno Ntn. Iv;: (O Dss*r*'. . _307_A_ 307.ri ; .'.t: Wholea body 3172 0.017 0.0C7 I.'" .-ft' oy 7V72 0.031 0 .)) 4/72 0.3.1 0.0.4 AI.A' ,.i', i ol. body GO.' , /1/2 1.3 O.4O A t * 0.sc.c OS C U.'» 6/72 0. 0.20:3 O.00 whole body O.;".4 0W I' 7/72 0.C27 0.016 9/72 0.910 0.5..7 Lt-..T. .nr_.ru. nol. body 1/72 0.010 0.c. 10/72 0.133 0.271 .i,-u-i.,:.,. nole b~oy 0.00 0 1 11/I 0.011 0.029 Ar f.'1 isn c:e 0.01 0 :,7 17/72 0.1O 8 1.0731 Tri .e: .-la'ts .hole body 0.029 0 .1) 1/73 0.2 9 O. I"P . 3/73 0.0:2 0.00.0 Pffrt.l:.i c'.r..r viole body 3/72 O.C01 0 , : $/73 0.0:LS 0.:11 A6-.. .I. .*cle O.. 7/73 0.01 0.0271 r-.%rtr rclu ole body 0.050 C ..O 1/71 0.017 0.010 SI) 0./7 0 0.021 > I-r.«:r »Irr6rtM.r nole tif 412 0.123 C.0:3 10/71 0.013 0.000 I.*r;-=.f'o n'eali:u» -votle bJody O.0C1 3 ':.) 11/73 0.002 C..44 Arli.. s.!:. s .ncl 0.008 0 0.1S 12/73 O.GLO 0.010 II74 0.002 0.0:14 lTloktn %*amt uru«e almpra asl 7172 0.0;. 0 -: 2174 0.069 0.0.19 EAnr. ca t i.l Itil b-dy 0.6O 0 0 .j 3/7. 0.021 0.024 AtI,, f;" , .WueetSO.e 0.. C .. 0 5/74 0.015 0.033 rti'.t -.'.*.ust u;e f4ya 0.OCJ 0 Z.. 4/74 0.101 O.Cti 11/74 0.04 C.01 Trf r it:.ntru« uolce body 1/72 0.216 0C.J3 Cott1r.--t *oITfu. %hal.40e body 3/72 O.C5) 0.0;4 rsc:r 0.1W3 0.39!2 Ar ch.o It ole body 10/7l 0.07 C . u1tWatcst 0.168 0.4.5 I r .us wholo borf ..t.019 C .< sble body 4/72 0.030 0.050 ptrlC'tlI ch ursa vholo body 11/72 0. ýI .0.1,J ucle 0.035 O.C38 .m s W. C3 .L·ca:rers 4O.59 0.S '0 m stP0ra3s o.iu 0.204 zfirdlctll v'.r-s.r rhoale body 12/1 0.071 0 , whtle body 5/72 0.019 0.008 ?Tcr .-,i.. sh wolc btl 0.022 0 C.,'7 r.u:lt0.017 0.088 1,.rtclrrg, j...r.-us V.ole týIy 0.201 , 0 :; gipanc


PAGE 1

242. .1975. Resource Management and estuarine function with application to the Apalachicola Drainage System (North Florida, U.S.A.). Contribution to the National Estuarine Pollution Report (E.P.A.). 35 p. , R.L. Iverson, R.H. Estabrook, V.E. Keys, and J. Taylor, Jr. 1974. Major features of the Apalachicola Bay System: Physiography, biota and resource management. Floirda Sci. 37(4): 254-271. , G.C. Woodsum, and J.E. Jernigan. 1975. An interactive computer program for analysis of comprehensive (long-term) field data. (In review). , R.S. Lloyd, and M.S. Zimmerman. 1976. Determination of sampling strategy for benthic macrophytes in polluted and unpolluted coastal areas. Bull. Mar. Sci. 26, 569-575. Margalef, R. 1958. Information theory in ecology. Gen. Syst. 3: 36-71. Morisita, M. 1959. Measuring of interspecific association and similarity between communities. Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyusha Univ. 3: 65-80. Nixon, S.W. and C.A. Oviatt. 1973. Ecology of a New England salt marsh. Ecol. Monogr. 43(4): 463-498. Odum, W.E. and E.J. Heald. 1972. Trophic analyses of an estuarine mangrove community. Bull. Mar. Sci. 22(3): 671-738. Pielou, E.C. 1966. The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J. Theor. Biol. 13: 131-144. .1967. The use of information theory in the study of the diversity of biological populations. Proc. Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability 4: 163-177. Shannon, E.C. and W. Weaver. 1963. The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Simpson, E.H. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: 688.



PAGE 1

Figure 24, continued B SC-T'r-S TOP TEN FISH BIU1AS9 WHOLE BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 7 FItE .?O3MN ICrEATION DATE = 77/03/23.) SCATTE,'?A" OF (COhN) LEIXAN (ACPOSS) DAYS 1i4..7500 284.42500 464.37500 644.32500 824.27580014.22S00i±i4. 175001364. I 25001544. 075 00172. 02500 .------+--------------------+---.---------------------+-------------------**-----. 1172.66 * I I + 1172.66 I I I I I .I I I i I ] i I T I I T I I i I I I r I II I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I o2e.6 + I I 20.86 1 I I I I -----------------------------------------------------I I I I I I I '"3.60 * I T T 703.60 I I I T I I I I I I I Ii I 526.33 7 I 4 586. 3 3 T T I T V. I I I 3?1. 1 4 351.80 I I T T T Si I I I 1 +I I I ad? I I I 234.I3 i I I 1I'.27 + 117.27 I | --------*--------+-----.----+---+------------+--------ws,--*-+,--->--_---_-. 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 l SL'TT ES TCP TrH FeIH "TO'ASS uwOLF BAY 77/03/23. PAGE 8 STATLIICS.. -.--FlzT:T, , ,o0-.19hOF R SQUAREP -.03462 SIGNIFICANCE R -.07732 C ?T CF FST -21'.53T26 TNTERCEPT (A) -59.43388 STO FRROCF A -s2.53504 Ti-rtFICA;,t -.13120 LOFE (C) -.07191 ST5 ERn0 'or P. -.94?,S SI-"Ir: :. ..7-?e -'C" "!LU-6 EXCLUDFO VALUES0 MISSING VALUES -0 *****^*T r'Y-c.T CF I C'C C:FCIET CANN'TKE COMPUTro.



PAGE 1

417. mitchilli represented 78% of those identified. Generally, shrimp, particularly Penaeus spp., and blue crabs which are seasonally very abundant in the bay are not heavily preyed upon. Preliminary results of cluster analyses Initial investigations concerning the similarity coefficient clustering strategy to be used for the final data analysis were conducted with the data for Micropogon undulatus as given in Table 3. In a comparison of group averaging vs. flexible grouping (B = -0.25) and concurrent comparisons of Bray-Curtis vs. Canberra metric vs. rho, group average clustering appeared to form weaker clusters with a higher degree of chaining than did flexible grouping over all similarity coefficients. Of the similarity coefficients, rho appeared to give the most obvious and strongest clusters in terms of interpretable biological information concerning Micropogon size classes. The apparent "best" choices were rho combined with flexible grouping, although further analyses will be conducted. Secondary investigations considered the choice of B values (clustering intensity coefficient) used in flexible grouping. Four values of B (0.25, 0.00, -0.25, -0.50) were compared using the Micropogon data, rho, and flexible grouping. Compaction of clusters increased as B increased from -0.25 to 0.25, while negative values in the similarity matrix occurred with 6 = -0.50. Thus, the best performance was chosen for 6 = -0.25 in flexible grouping, as has been noted by others (Sneath and Sokal, 1973). The final stage in these preliminary analyses was to use the data in Tables 1,3,5 and 7 in conjunction with rho and flexible grouping (s = -0.25) to investigate the dietary similarity of size classes within each species (Figure 1), and to examine station similarities with respect to food availability to each species (Figure 2). Anchoa mitchilli size classes were highly interrelated but seemed to form two distinct clusters; the 10-39mm group,



PAGE 1

114. the model and it gave an R2 of 0.54. Salinity was added next to the model and it increased the R' by 0.10. The other variables did not meet the constraints of the method an:! therefore were not entered in the model. The final regressiot model was: P.P. = 32.1 + 48.4 S.R.P. -0.54 Sal. where: P.P. is phytoplankton primary productivity in pg C 1hr S.R.P. is soluble reactive phosphate in pg-atm PO-P 1-1; and Sal. is salinity in parts per thousaiLd. This final model was significant at o 0. 0.001. 13. The high positive correlation coefficients between phosphate uptake and both chlorophyll-a (r = +0.83) and phytoplankton primary production (r = +0.77) during the summer suggests thai phytoplankton are the primary phosphate uptake fraction of the plankton in these coastal systems. This conclusion is consist.ent with results of J. L. Taft, W. R. Taylor, and J. J. McCarthy (Mar. Biol. 33,21 (1975)), who found that phytoplankton were the main fraction taking up phosphate in the Chesapeake EB.y. 14. J. H. Ryther and W. R. Dunstan (3) 15. Median phi values of 3 (125 p) were observed for sediment samples obtained from stations Apal-lA, M. L., and E-12. 16. L. R. Pomeroy, L. R. Shenton, R. D. H. Jones, and R. J. Reimold, Limnol. Oceanogr. Special Symp. Vol 1, 274 (1972). 17. Financial support was provided by the Florida Sea Grant Progr',:! under NOAA contract 04-3-158-43. We thank D. Menzel for commenrit.ng during preparation of the manuscript and R. Harriss for critically reading the manuscript.



PAGE 1

Page 2 impossible. I look forward to discussing possible goals and directions informally at this early stage in the area's growth process. Please let us know whether or not you plan to join us on the seventh by calling Laura O'Sullivan at (202) 7974362. With best wishes for the holiday season, Sincerely, William K. Reilly President End. ***%-*



PAGE 1

OCLt. Col. John Hill Office of the Chief of Engineers Department of the Army Forrestal Building Room 4G065 A 6fCoeC 1000 Independence Avenue Washington, D.C. 20314 Dr. Allan Hirsch, Chief -CoQ Office of Biological Services Fish and Wildlife.Service Department of the Interior o1 oCC"'r Washington, D.C. 20240 -0 Vance Hughes Environmental Protection Agency -0O 401 M Street, S.W. Room 737,.East Tower WH551 Washington, D.C. 20460 Robert Knecht, Administrator Office of Coastal Zone Management $41L National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. »Washington, D.C. 20235 Richard Krimm n m. Assistant Administrator for Flood Insurance \tv q Federal Insurance Administration 75c-€ 451 Seventh Street, S.W. Room 5266 Washington, D.C. 20410 Jay Landers TC\\Secretary, Department of Environmental .4SJ c Regulation 2562 Executive Center Circle East Tallahassee, Florida 32301 qo? -.o O.B/Gen. Kenneth E. MacIntyre Division Engineer \, « " Corps of Engineers 510 Title Building 30 Pryor Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 4-0c -aL I -g\



PAGE 1

DPM MG-1 0 0 Fn D,, 'r,, I-fl I Y m* 0



PAGE 1

B Figure 30: continued SCATTFRS TOP TE4 FISn 31GMASt W.tQLE PAY 77/03/Z3. PAGE 19 FILE NOA471E tCQEATION nAT = 77/03/23.) SCATTE;CZ:fl CF tCW) TRIMAC (ACROSS) MIYS * lrz.47 5g0 284.Z.25 0t.6I..3750 0 6,4. 32500 8Z4.275 0010(1.?250 0i1.174 5881364.123 00i544. 0?50P0 1T24. 2500 .~---~--~ ---~---+---r-r~-,-*~~*------+----C----~---, --------,----,-----------~-----118.72 * I * 118.7? I I I I T I n4.qR +~ I 94.9R10.0 I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I49 I I Ii949 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I -----------------------------------231 I 83.101 fI II ·I .I \II I r I I I' SIr i I0 IifII I5.3 I I I I I I 3 4 7 .--I r I 35.6 + II *35.62 I iiiIII I I I II I I. 3, I I I I 56 T I T TI SI I 23.74 + ?13.74 I I I. T0 to 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 ScT:'3 in. TE F:S21a'7s+ -*'ýLE lBAY 77/03/23. RAGE 20 S'IrcSTC's.. .19 558 R SCUARED -.03825 SIGNIFICACE R -.06712 STC ERý fF ýST -'ý. !22" I'T E RCrOT () -11.24572 ST'! FrO R OF A -r.317,3 .'LGCZ SLOFE (1) -.00911 `TD ERROR OF 8 -.00599 YISST14G VALUFS -0 ·' 'rr7 tEN'':"" I;.i 3.'~r Ch 3'P IrE".



PAGE 1

IN~~~t& 1541;348ML 6A S LAR Table -urnma ry o tota num ers y SP C .. .. .. UA S, 1?cS #,I1:e 1 l..z o r LIA ** * .u epibenthic invertebrates taken in the palachicola Estuary (Stations 1. 2, 3, 4, TIMEi OF DAY 05, 6, IA, lB. IC, 5A) from March, 1972 through February 1977. SPECIEs SArPLc OATLS 74631j 7Ze,41. 72,515 7c5j15 7Zu7i! 7ci!5 IZL.15 7jLL. 7di2135 ?3u115 ?3*215 rOFALS 2'.lcUS jLTIFtkU J 24 3 .3 14 ./ L'5 J32 i344 ..& 7 033 --.d.L L, Z.L. b J~ 1.·6 7!.73 SL-7? 3:1. 1 i#89 i. 55 41*,4 PALAEMONEhz. PUGI11U 66 5..,9 bo. b 6 1 5b 4b 147% 16.0& 85.E6c 49. ot 3o.93 3. -2. j 7. 73 5e..83 14. Z9 21.C6 CALLINECTES SAPIOUS 47 1 1.52 281 3b b6 41 173 113 ea 1s 255 &253 39.5L 6.55 1601, 33*91 19.b7 33.:9 Jb.94 i*ýJ T.06 dL.'3 12.26 73.19 18.19 PENAEJ5i 3UOirAkU L 16 45 U 1 44 L143 5o 40 i0 2 4L1 004U 5.13 50'.9 .ý.Lu i.73 60j: d3.b3 3.33 3$03 31.75 9.'. ..2 5.39 PENAEUS AZT-.CUS 1 152 1ie. Lb 3 3 L 4 3 J 314 1.68 .13 2Z*.;. 14.49 ts.74 10,9 2071, OJi )6.4 'eal 3.5i ]3aiu 4.8 LOLLIGUNi;ULA 6:tVIS 6 28 'P 14 bei #d I 1 E3Z 0dL, L..#J o73 3.48 24.L4 c9oS 5.4;1 Lo4L 2.9,# a... .94 dS66 3o35 PORTUNUS GiSSSII L J L I L 4 4 4 9 e .*Q%, .06. V+ Z 04ý -.Uu 0 4 Ji a O:A& ergI 3977 &L LO33 SQU1LLA QMPUSA 6 J C 1 L 33 13 1 a05 5a .0 0 4,GJ ý$U. V 6 *55 i ., v 0 0 tb L.Tj Oda 979 Java 1055 07a GALLINECTES SIMILIS 6 u q; w 1 6 2 48 4 a %i L Lo u WOL U.u 040 ýca L4L J1 LA S66 OZ 059 NERITINA R-CLIvArA L 9 z2 a u +5 J i I a 4i L.Cu 1.16 2.68 1.14 1 ; ,.uu 2.a J.to .....3 4.011 .31 o58 PALAEN0NETES VULGARIS 26 4 0 5 2 6 1 a 1 40 21*85 *,1 J .01 h.A O19 ijoul i .65 lea) i.6a f .31 *58 TRACHYPENAEUS C0NSTRiCTUS 0 0 3 0 1 1 12 VE 9 24,, RHITHROPANOPEUS HARRIS1I a 4 1 3 7 1i 2 0 21. 540L .51 Ole. o43 3*8.ý .41.. 096 304 1033 3001 9O3a 1*24 *3, RANGIA CUNEATA 5 4 5 u L L L 2 U Is foiL jo1u .;in *71 1.64 1.i8 .0.sU0 35 .0 *79 1.59 i.3 Be 0 POLLINICES DUPLICATUS 5 J 6 1 5 z it 64 G.01 0.00 0.60 .14 2.73 0.ai L180 #31+ 63.3 3.00 3.66 !AiM .21 MUL1NIA LATERALIS -C C a 1W 9 3 2 a11. L..1C 0.Lu 0.ýu )J.. s.061 ijoi Ja.u ioaj .5i dooa 1.89 ..96 B1e PALAEMONETES INTERMEDOIS 0 0 0 4 a a j. w 6 5 bou3 6.LJ 3 aUi oi7 t..4 isih I aO &e2 )*;.4 J.Ji Jai& 1046 .3? BRANCtltOASY:HUS AMERiCANA 0U 6 a 3 I S a Q 0.00 GOaId 0.00 1.0 Lib u0,U )duo ).JJ J.. DO 4.72 k .0 PALAENON FLORIDANUS 0 i 0 i U 2 J a L 4 Goal. L.cO C L 10 .*-. te.a .79 3.00 0..5 JO6 v7a 07 agog Gil 98b . MENIPPE HERCENARIA .Ii J Q U k. L L a 2 a m 3 G.0O 1a.0i 5.00 b.uU Utu.. 0...ia 1*06 .3 L3.6 1.53 3.G. 31.6 * NEOPANOPE PACKARDII C u i 1 b 1 h L 3 G·6 oa. 0w u 9 QV A v kfd a 4 lu ova 1*3; J*4 03 0980 Ioiis OV NEOPANOPE TEXANA U -5 a a -C G a a 3 U.Ou Co.05 te.00 .14 00.#u 0.0 ..r Ou *Li ....J **J) Jodi JJ J.dm PMUiIUS POLLICARIS 9 a U. i1 3 a J a 3 lioUt, U.63 C.Ja LOIj 60.. oiji )3.a. 01? 3.e. ý061 8.Do ug JO AO'4 HEXAPANOPEU4 ANGJbT1FRONi S .t 2 3 3 079 0 1. w 0 3 J .0 0 ua .0 a i a doom 'aid·5 P1RiaLMLNES LO'4!IZAUOATUS 2 0 C ALPHEUS N3.IA4', I b I ,.9 r @9' a lo all



PAGE 1

74. TABLE I CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF LINEAR REGRESSIONS OF NITRATE, ORTHOPHOSPiATE, SILICATE, AND AMMONIA ON SALINITY Date NO3 P04 Sio3 N"3 Oct 14, 1972 T -.70 -.73 B +.12 -.14 Dec 2, 1972 T -.88 -.20 -.98 B -.75 -.55 -.85 Jan 6, 1973 T -.55 -.89 -.99 B -.84 -.82 -.87 Feb 17, 1973 T +.002 -.95 -.33 -.02 B +.58 -.11 -.002 -.15 Mar 19, 1973 T -.95 -.78 -.98 -.85 B -.97 -.60 -.998 -.45 Apr 22, 1973 T -.76 -.77 -.93 --.67 B -.62 -.62 -.80 -.93 May 19, 1973 T -.88 -.54 -.998 -.48 B -.96 -.65 -.99 -.81 Jun 11, 1973 T -.60 -.01 -.995 -.55 B -.94 -.61 -.93 +.06 Jul 12, 1973 T -.82 -.10 -.97 -.82 B -.80 +.42 -.93 +.03 Aug 22, 1973 T -.90 +.04 -.95 -.50 B -.91 -.84 -.94 -.91 Sep 10, 1973 T -.99 -.29 -.995 -.83 B -.98 +.15 -.99 -.98



PAGE 1

104. Synedra ful!ens -++ Thallasioner-a ni'zhoro ds ++---+ Th-llasiorvna spoo ----'Under each date the left column rLpr'eso-its sta-ti-cn lan di t:-, -i colurinre'esants stato.on 7. SPeci-S absent --; Snzc ,reater than 5000/1 but less than 100,000/1 +-; sie0./ nt'.z1rt greater than 100,000/1. ++.



PAGE 1

222. TABLE III Estimates of the Detrital Microfloral Biomass Method % of dry wt litter 1. Muramic acid 2 -17% (assume 4-10 mg/g dry wt) 2. Extractible ATP 0.2 -0.8% (assume 1 mg/g dry wt) 3. Oxygen uptake 1.4 -2.2% (assume Q02 = 100 l/h/g dry wt) 2 4. Phospholipid recovered 2 -4% (assume 50 Pmoles lipid/g dry wt) 5. Glycolipid 0.3% (assume 2.6 pg glycosyl diglyceride/g dry wt) (gram + organisms)



PAGE 1

A Figure 29: Numbers (A) and Biomass (B) of Chloroscombrus chrysurus in the Apalachicola Estuary Estuary (Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, IA, B1, 1C, 5A) From March, 1972 through February, 1977. SCATTERS FISH TOP TEN N 77/03/23. PAGE 17 FIL t :;N:AvE (CREA'ION "ATE = 77/r.3/23.) SC-;T--;A' CF (CCWN) CHLCHR (ACROSS) DAYS '.475:3 254.4250G 464.37500 644.325C 824.275301004. 2250011t. 75G01364.125S51544.075C01724.02530 265.0C + I I + 265."'. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3.5; I I 238.50 I I I I I 21z. I I 212.0. I iI I I I I I I I I .I I I I I I 185.50 + I I + 185.5-3 I I I i 1 I I i I I I I i I I 137.50 + I I + 159.S3 I I I I ie6.;I T I I o I I I I I I 0 86.: * t I I 4 106.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I 7 I I I I S 53.TT I I I + 3. SIGNIFICANCE A -.ý093 SLOPE (5) "-02392 STO ERROR OF 8 .01156 1 * I i I II 26.5C + *0 26.50 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/75 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 SCATERS FISH TOP TEN N STATIjTICS.. CODRELATION (R)-.26217 R SQUARED -.06873 SIGtIFICANCE R -.02151 STO £RR OF EST -47.20457 INTERCEPT (A) -39.70446 * STD ERROR OF A -12.18087 SI3NIFICANCE A -."0093 SLOPE () --.02392 STO ERROR OF B * .01156 SITNIFICANCE 3 -.32151 FLOTTE) V4LUES -60 EXCLUDED VALUESHMISSING VALUES -0 _ .**..* IS PRINTED IF A COEFFICIENT CANNOT BE COMPUTED.



PAGE 1

173. TABLE D. Noteworthy Plants Known in Florida from the Apalachicola River Region and Other Areas. Adiantum capillus-veneris L. rare Anemonella thalictroides (L.) Spach rare Arnoglossum diversifolium (T. & G.) Pippen threatened Asclepias viridula Chapm. threatened Aster spinulosus Chapm. threatened Calamintha dentatum Chapm. threatened Carex baltzellii Chapm. threatened Conradina glabra Shinners endangered Dirca palustris L. rare Frythronium umbilicatum Parks & Hardin rare Gentiana pennelliana Fern. endangered Hedeoma graveolens Chapm. endangered Heterotheca flexuosa (Nash) Harms threatened Hexastylis arifolia (Michx.) Small rare Hypericum l-issophloes Adams rare Isoetes flaccida Schuttlw. threatened Isopyrum biternatui (Raf.) T. & G. rare Laportea canadensis CL.) Weddell rare L.iatris provincialis Godfrey endangered Linum westii Rogers endangered Lithospermum tuberosum Rugel rare Magnolia ashei Weatherby threatened Malaxis unifolia Michx. rare Manisuris tuberculosa Nash threatened Mediola viroiniana L. rare MyriophylIlumn laxium Shuctlw. thractoned



PAGE 1

Table 1. Stomach contents (% of total dry weight) of Anchoa mitchilli, summed by size class. Food Item Size (mm) 10-99 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 Avgr. 10-69 Sand Grains <.1 <.1 0.1 0.1 <.1 Detritus 2.2 2.5 2.3 2.4 1.6 Diatoms 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.5 Plant remains <.1 0.7 0.2 1.0 0.5 0.4 Scyphozoans <.1 <.1 <.1 Polychaetes -larval 1.1 0.3 0-2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 -juv./adult 0.2 -0.2 2.2 0.3 0.5 Gastropod veligers <.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 Gastropods <.1 0.4 1.2 1.0 1.6 0.7 Bivalve veligers 0.3 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.5 Bivalves 1.3 <.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.4 Unassigned mollusc larvae <.1 0.1 <.1 Hydracarinids <.1 <.1 <. Cladocerans 2.8 3.9 1.5 0.8 3.1 2.0 Ostracods 0.4 1.0 0.9 1.8 2.6 1.1 Calanoid copepods 97.8 82.3 72.7 60.6 52.7 49.3 69.2 Cirripede nauplii 0.2 4.8 4.2 1.2 0.6 1.8 Cumaceans <.1 <.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 <.1 Isopods <.1 <.1 <.1 Amphipods <.1 0.5 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.6 Mysids 1.1 1.7 3.1 17.0 16.5 15.3 9.1 Shrimp -zoeal 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 -postlarval 2.1 1.6 0.4 0.2 0.7 -juv./adult 0.2 0.3 2.3 0.7 0.6 Crabs -zoeal 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.3 -megalopal <.1 2.1 0.4 Unassigned decapod larval 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 Insects -larval 4.5 2.6 2.2 4.3 12.0 4.3 -adult 0.4 <.1 <.1 <.1 <.1 Chaetognaths 0.6 0.1 Invertebrate eggs 2.0 3.2 2.1 1.5 0.6 1.6 Fish -eggs 0.1 0.4 1.0 0.6 0.4 -larval 1.0 <.1 -juvenile 0.2 2.6 6.7 1.6



PAGE 1

132. Segments of gill tissue approximately 0.75 cm2 were dissected out using clean stainless steel surgical scissors and tweezers and were transferred to a beaker containing 100 ml of artificLal se, water (ASW) at the experimental temperature and salinity. Each animal yielded 8 to 12 gill tissue segments which were pooled with segments randomly selected for each experiment to minimize effects of individual variability. Artificial sea water used in experiments was a modified Lyrran and Fleming (1940) formula made with distilled water and membrane filtered before use. Its composition was: NaC1, 0.40166 M; MgCl6H20, 0.05231 M; Na2S04, 0.02758 M; CaCl2-2H20, 0.00993 M; NaC03, 0.00238 M; KC1, 0.00891 M; H3B03, 0.00042 M. Salinity was adjusted to 28.30/oo with distilled water. All unlabelled glycolic acid solutions were made using this ASW. Labelled sodium glycolate (S.A. 116 v Ci mg-1, Amersham/Searle) was prepared as a stock solution (1.0 .Ci ml-1) with glass distilled water and stored at 4°C. Since fatty acids have been observed to stick to untreated gla;s surfaces (Testerman, 1972) experimental glassware was silicone coated with "Siliclad" (Clay-Adams, Inc.) to reduce the possibility of glycolic acid absorption onto the glass walls. Accumulation of 14C-labelled glycolic acid For each kinetic experiment a single segment of gill tissue was placed in a 30 ml siliconized beaker with 5 ml ASW containing a known concentration of unlabelled glycolic acid and 0.1 ml 14Clabelled glycolic acid (0.02 pCi ml-1). Experiments were conducted with six different concentrations run simultaneously for different time intervals. Triplicate samples were taken at. each time period for each concentration. 4



PAGE 1

102. TABJ3L III Phosphate uptake rates: n-.t. 1 hrStation S Date Phosohatc'additions:~ -.-.-. -?/!0.00 -' 0.25 0.50 2.00 1A 9/25/75 40.51 -79.40 7 .7 0 7 9/26/75 43.48 --51.33 .4L9 1A 1/13/76 53.17 --3.83 54.07 7 1/13/76 26.51 ---32.20 27.69 1A 3/29/75 s1.01 ---67.43 69.79 7 3/29/76 25.60 --30.55 29. 1A .6/10/76 86.11 101.87 116.3; 125.53 7 5/10/75 44.47 42.52 41.09 43.17 1A 7/5/76 53.55 65.46 75.55 72.19 7 7/5/76 52.76 67.83 67.23 64.07 :" Phosphate uptake rates we-re estinated fro-. the slo-e o linear regre-ssions dr,-?-plan:ktoCn phosn'-te u .ta:. vs tiL. All R2were greater than 0.90.



PAGE 1

421. Sneath, P.H.A. and R.R. Sokal. 1973. Numerical taxonomy. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco. 573p. Van Belle, G. and I. Ahmad. 1974. Measuring affinity of distributions. in Proschan, F. and R.J. Serfling (eds.), Reliability and Biometry: Statistical Analysis of Lifelength. S.I.A.M., Philadelphia. pp. 651668.



PAGE 1

REUBIN O'D. ASKIW Governor OBRUCE A.SMAT11ERS State of Florida sre rstvse ROBER'I' L. SIIEVIN SAttorney General GERALD A. LEWIS Comptroller DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 'I"IS .ASILEr DOYLE CONNER Commissner of Agriculture IARMON W. SHIELDS CROWN BUILDING / 202 BLOUNT STREET / TALLAHASSEE 32304 RALPH D. TURLINGTON Executive Director Commisioner of Education September 11, 1975 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Biology Department Conradi Building Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Skip: As one of my first duties as newly appointed Research Coordinator for the Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning, I am happy to acknowledge receipt of a copy of the compilation of the results of your field and laboratory studies (Sea Grant Project #R/EM-1). The delay in response reflects the lack of an encumbent in my position; Bruce judged it best that the new Coordinator restore our close relations. It will certainly be my pleasure to resume and maintain a close working relationship, for your efforts have been the best representation of the letter and spirit of te Sea Grant Program. Hope to see you soon. -.Si rely, Savage esearch Coordinator Bureau of Coastal Zone Planning TS/ses cc: Bruce Johnson



PAGE 1

161. water. Odum and Heald (1975) found that much of the exported detritus in the North River (Florida) was in the form of particles between 50 and 35011 in size. Accordingly, between 250 and 1000 liters of river water were pumped through a series of standard mesh sieves ( 45p, 88p, 125p, 250p, 5001, l.Omm 2.0mm). Detritus was washed from each sieve into separate glass vials and preserved in a 3% mercuric chloride solution to inhibit bacteriological decompositon. In the laboratory, each sieve fraction was filtered onto preweighed, pre-combusted glass filter pads and oven dried at 1050C for 48 hours to determine dry weight. Ignition of the sieve fractions and filters in a muffle furnace for 1 hour at 5500C (Heald, 1969) allowed determination of the ash-free dry weight. Weight loss after ashing was used to estimate total organic content although such loss does not constitute the true (total) organic content and remains an estimate. The shortcomings of these methods of collection are recognized. Otter trawling is a very approximate way to sample detritus, and the trawling patterns could have caused a sampling bias when extending the data for baywide estimates. The macroparticulate data are therefore highly conservative and are most valuable with respect to qualitative temporal changes of individual constituents and the spatial distribution of these components. The microdetrital analysis was problematic due to inadequate cross-sectional analysis (length and depth) of the river and the low (monthly) sampling frequency. These data should be construed as conservative since nothing below 45p was sampled. Thus, the data tend to be highly conservative with respect to mass flows in time. Results and discussion Results of the macrodetrital sampling program are shown in Fig. 2 and



PAGE 1

133. Afte~r incubltion, segments were removed from the radioactive solut-ion and rinsed twice by transfers to beakers of clean unlabelled ASW. Following the final rinse the segments were quickly frozen in siliconized glass vials held in an alcohol-dry ice mixture. I'm.froram end of incubation to freezing for each set of triplicates averaged 1.5 minutes. Frozen samples were stored in a Revco Ultra Low freezer at minus 600C until lyophilization. All segments were lyophilized within 72 hours after incubation and were stored in a dessicator until radioactivity assay. The lyophilized samples were weighed in tared polycarbonate capsules (Teledyne-Intertechnique) on an analytical balance and processed for liquid scintillation counting with a high temperature combustion technique (Peterson, 1969). This technique utilizes c-talyst enhanced dry combustion at 6000C, followed by collection of evolved 1-4C02 with a phenethylamine based liquid scintillation cocktail in a spinning band collector. Composition of the cocktail was: 430 ml redistilled toluene, 300 ml redistilled methanol, 270 ml redistilled (flash evaporated) B-phenethylamine, 50 ml distilled water; 5.0 grams PPO and 0.5 grams POPOP per liter of cocktail. Combustion of gill tissue was enhanced by addition of approximately 10 mg of highly combustible finely ground (Tekman Model A-10 Analytical Mill) lyophilized plant tissue (Thalassia testudinum) to each capsule. After combustion and collection of the 4CO2 containing cocktail in scintillation vials, the vials were tightly capped with polyethylene lined screw down caps and kept in the dark at least 12 hours to reduce chen~u.luminescence caused by phenethylamine. Carbon -14 activity was measured with a Picker Nuclear Liquimat 220 liquid scintillation spectrometer calibrated with the external standards channels ratio method. 5



PAGE 1

SAMPD-N 24 May 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston informal workshop meetings with agencies and affected interests knowledgeable of both economic and environmental needs of the area. Through this effort we would hope to develop an overall plan to meet navigation and other needs while also utilizing the economic and environmental values of the river. In this endeavor we would appreciate any suggestions you may have regarding our approach at this time and solicit your participation in our forthcoming meetings. We will advise you further of our proposed meetings when we have firmed up a schedule. If you desire further information regarding our study plans, please contact Mr. Walter Burdin of my staff at telephone (205) 690-2772. Sincerely yours, WILSON Brigadier General, USA District Engineer -12 p. " ,' -*..



PAGE 1

416. shrrmp. Commerically important shrimp, Penaeus spp., were aaeely found, and blue crabs, Callinectes sapidus, were not found at all. Of the fishes eaten, 40% were identified as juvenile Micropogon, indicating some degree of cannibalism. lIiestomus xanthurus A total of 903 Leiostomus xanthurus stomachs were examined, formi~g81 SDS combinations. Stomach contents are summarized by size class, ober all stations, and dates in Tabbe 5. Larger identifiable food items are presented in Table 6. Generally Leiostomus does not depend heavily on one or two main food items, as do the other species examined. Detritus (22.5%), harpacticoid copepods (18.2%), polychaetes '(18%), insect larvae (12.4%), and bivalves (12%) are the main food sources. Trends across size classes are not as clear as those determined for other species. Insect larvae are most important to the middle size classes (40-69mm). Detritus and polychaetes are relatively more abundant in fish 70-89mm, while bivalves become important to the 90-109mm individuals. Harpacticoid copepods are quite variable. Cynoscion arenarius A total of 1,545 Cynoscion arenarius stomachs were examined, forming 122 SDS combinations. Stomach contents are summarized by size class over all stations and dates in Table 7. Larger identifiable food items are presented in Table 8. Cynoscion feeds mainly on fishes (62%) and mysids (25.7%). Smaller size classes depend heavily upon mysids (73% in the 10-19mm class) and to a lesser extent upon calanoid copepods (48%). There is aclear trend in the reduction of mysids and copepods, and a rapid, concurrent change to juvenile fish as the main food item. Juvenile fish become dominant by the 40-49n1n class and reach 100% by the 80-89mm class. Of the fishes consumed, Anchoa



PAGE 1

199. Table 4: Detritus taken in the Apalachicola River in a series of sieves (#10-436) on a monthly basis and expressed as organic matter (ash free dry weight) and total dry weight. Stations sampled included the main portion of the river(surface and bottom: 7T, 7B and a tributary to East Bay, Little St. Marks, mid-depth: 8) with figures adjusted for total flow per month using mean values at station 7 (7m). The organic detritus ratio reflects relative levels (ash free dry weight) at the two stations (7m/8). Detritus, Ash Free Detritus, Ash Total, Ratio of Dry Weight (7 m) Free Dry Dry Organic A: total (Kg/month) Date Station Weight (g/l) Weight (g/l) detritus B: total (tons/month) 7T 0.0000964 0.0727 A. 305,915 8/75 7B 0.0001816 0.1707 B. 337 7M 0.0001392 0.1217 1.57 8 0.0000644 0.0446 7T 0.0000172 0.0075 A. 40,011 9/75 7B 0.0000440 0.0295 B. 45 7M 0.0000306 0.0185 2.07 8 0.0000148 0.0112 7T 0.0001800 0.3201 A. 269,903 10/75 7B 0.0001816 0.7030 2.20 B. 297 7M 0.0001420 0.5115 8 0.0000644 0.1640 7T 0.0001434 0.5874 A. 344,227 11/75 7B 0.0002764 0.6955 B. 379 7M 0.0002099 0.6414 3.43 8 0.0000612 0.1253 7T 0.0001038 1.2524 A. 269,445 12/75 7B 0.0002142 1.7623 B. 296 7M 0.0001590 1.5073 3.36 8 0.0000126 0.0252 7T 0.0001658 0.6927 A. 442,533 1/76 7B 0.0002180 1.0600 B. 487 7M 0.0001919 0.8763 3.02 8 0.0000636 0.1719 7T 0.0001290 0.3235 A. 377,030 2/76 7B 0.0002096 0.6328 B. 415 7M 0.0001693 0.4781 1.20 8 0.0001406 0.4014 7T 0.0000230 0.0818 A. 138,420 3/76 7B 0.0000866 0.3037 B. 152 7M 0.0000551 0.1927 0.65 8 0.0000853 0.3569 7T 0.0000104 0.0380 A. 48,253 4/76 7B 0.0000259 0.0420 B. 53 7M 0.0000182 0.0400 0.41 8 0.0000449 0.1672



PAGE 1

300. Fig. 7: A. Numbers of individuals and species of fishes taken at night from Stations 1 and 4 (14 trawl tows) in the Apalachicola Estuary from April, 1972 to March, 1974. Also shown is the top dominant for each month so that total numbers (N-NI) appear as a function of time. B. Comparison of Shannon diversity/% dominanceNN of fishes taken at night from Stations I and 4 (14 trawl tows) in the Apalachicola Estuary from April, 1972 to March, 1974. 17 A 1200tS=# DOMINANTc.3 14 14 800 15 * * Anchoa : 80015 ! ··II 15 S* * Micropogon S 400 13 11 IS 1A O IO 0 * I , 1 1 i ynoscionT S\a 5 * * Menticirrhus *Polydactylus 4 56 78 9 1011 12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91011 12 2 3 2.0* TIME-months S * B > 1.5S I *I* ® I * * * " B* 1972-73 ** -.s1973-74 ** I I I I I I I I 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % DOMINANCE



PAGE 1

233. Apalachicola Bay System is characterized by sand, silt, and shell components in various mixtures; St. Vincent Sound and northern portions of Apalachicola Bay are silty areas that grade into sand/silt and shell gravel as St. George Island is approached. Relic coarse (quartz) sands are covered by fine-grained material deposited by the Apalachicola River. East Bay is composed of silty sand and sandy shell. Relatively high turbidity and sedimentation have significantly reduced benthic macrophyte distribution in all but the shallowest (fringing) portions of the bay. Station 5A, approxiamtely 1 km south of the upper marshes of East Bay, has a monotonous silty-sand bottom with sparse (scattered) growth of Ruppia maritima. Trawl catches indicate the presence of Gracilaria foliifera. The upper coastline is fringed by beds of Vallisneria americana and upland marshes. Station 3, approximately 0.5 km north of the Gorrie Bridge, is a shallow area (1-1.5 m) subject to strong river action and tidal currents. Various forms of rubble (branches, logs, leaves, etc.), brought in by seasonally variable river flow are commonly found here. A sparse covering of Ruppia maritima is present. During summer months, there is extensive colonization and deposition of various species of blue-green and green algae. Water hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes) is found along the shore. Marsh grasses in this area include Phragmites communis, Typha latifolia, and Juncus roemerianus. Station IX, located just north of St. George Island, is dominated by Halodule wrightii. Various forms of benthic macrophytes such as Ulva lactuca and Gracilaria spp. are found here. A barrier oyster bar lies just offshore; inside this reef, detritus is deposited in the protected embayments by northerly and westerly winds. Considerable amounts of such detritus are found in this area. Various



PAGE 1

.225. IV. LITERATURE CITED: 1. White, D. C., R. J. Bobbie, S. J. Morrison, D. K. Oosterhof, C. W. Taylor and D. A. Meeter. 1977. Determination of microbial activity of estuarine detritus by relative rates of lipid biosynthesis. Limnol. Oceanogr. (in press). 2.Morrison, S. J., J. D. King, R. J. Bobbie, R. E. Bechtold and D. C. White. 1977. Evidence for microfloral succession on allochthonous plant litter in Apalachicola Bay, Florida, USA. Marine Biol. (in press). 3. King, J. D,, and D. C. White. 1977. Muramic acid as a measure of microbial biomass in estuarine and marine samples. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 33: (April). 4. King, J. D., D. C. White and C. W. Taylor. 1977. Use of lipid composition and metabolism to examine structure and activity of estuarine detrital microflora. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 33: (May). 5. Razin, S. 1970. Physiology of mycoplasmas. Adv. Microbial Physiol. 10: 2-80. 6. Smith, P. F. 1964. Comparative physiology of the pleuropneumonia-like and L-type organisms. Bact. Rev. 28: 97-125. 7. Reaveley, D. A., and R. D. Burge. 1972. Walls and membranes in bacteria. Adv. Microbial Physiol. 7: 2-84. 8. Rogers, H. J., and H. R. Perkins. 1968. Cell Walls and Membranes. E and F. N. Spon Limited, London. 9. Salton, M. R. J. 1960. Surface layers of the bacteria± cell. In: The Bacteria, Vol. I: Structure, I. C. Gunsalus and R. Y. Stanier (eds), Academic Press, New York, pp. 97-114. 10. Ellwood, D. C., and D. W. Tempest. 1972. Effects of environment on bacterial wall content and composition. Adv. Microbial Physiol. 7: 83-117. 11. Young, F. E. 1965. Variation in the chemical composition of the walls of Bacillus subtilis during growth in different media. Nature 207: 104-105. 12. Millar, W. N., and L. E. Casida, Jr. 1970. Evidence for muramic acid in the soil. Canad. J. Microbiol. 18: 299-304. 13. Chapman, A. G., T. Fall and D. E. Atkinson. 1971. Adenylate energy charge in Escherichia coli during growth and starvation. J. Bacteriol. 108: 1072-1086. 14. Holm-Hansen, 0., and C. R. Booth. 1966. The measurement of adenosine triphosphate in the ocean and its ecological significance. Limnol. Oceanogr. 11: 510-519. 15. Holm-Hansen, 0. 1973. Determination of total microbial biomass by measurement of adenosine triphosphate. In: Estuarine Microbial Ecology, L. H. Stevenson and R. R. Colwell (eds.), Univ. South Carolina Press, Columbia, pp. 73-88. 16. Holm-Hansen, 0. 1973. The use of ATP determinations in ecological studies. Bull. Ecol. Res. Comm. (Stockholm) 17: 215-222.



PAGE 1

Table 4 : P .ta residus of DDT-R and Arochlor 1254 (pg/g) in selected species of aquatic organims taken above and below the Jim Woodruff Dam from April, 1972 to January, 1974 k^e Sem.nole (sttiots 1-6), Apalachicola River (station 7) Soen es Tissue Dte DDT Arochlor 1234 Specie Tissue Date DDT--R Arochlr 1254 ctsluru c.tus muscle 4/72 0.165 0.145 Horone chryso-.s liver 4/72 1.419 1I. ..L.. -'n.se muscle 0.052 0.088 Brevoortia r.'tr^~' 0.366 ' Sr."r .~a-ide$ mu:i. le 0.183 0.063 r. ura na nscl 0.129 0.200 Dorosoma peteense muscle 5/72 0.008 0.063 s'-: s.,. muscle 0.515 0.377 s. hole body 5/72 0111Strongylura rnrina whole body 3/73 0.133 0.2&& Ce'cr l n sr. whole body 5/72 0.171 0.104 pro.soa ceedinnusm usc le 4/73 0.173 0.118 Cý:rbicul rn-rilensis whole body 8/72 0.105 0.138 Dorosor.s entr-rcnse uscle 0.171 0 137 tutroits vho ustrus -i.sc le 0.236 0036 Ccrbi-*ua manilensis whole body 1/73 0.201 0.073 CrDocroLsr cri h b /!.num muscle 7/73 0.024 0 C30 PDrcr .t lense whole body 3/73 0.349 0.090 Dcroso:N, netepeise muscle 0.063 . 10 EoLrordc vnu tr __us au-scle 0.304 C 310 C-ir s-nsls whole body 4/73 0.056 .0C04 Triectes r:culatus whole body 0.106 0. 20 Ccr:bicul slicnsis whole body 8/73 0.081 0.125 Dora r pITi-es t whscole 8b73 0.015 0 0 .2 Botrvcs cl W.0 0 0 13 L m uscle 10/73 0.008D5 nuscle C.16 1 r. 7" CbaLcuL 1 r..len.s a whole body 10/73 0.110 0.071 liror:tes rcl-oides muscle 0.!33 0 i.03 .c:; is sp. muscle 0.088 0.038 Trlnuctes raculrtus whole body 0.057 0.32' Perciha r~.rOfrIsat.tus role body 0.077 0.251 .cr:c.uS salmoides muscle 11/73 0.044 0.025 -.:rc ;j ,'.nustra:s muscle 0.060 0.132 Lcpui r'. muscle 10/73 0.008 0, 034 -__ 2liver 1.7+7 1.530" Dorvror a cecdinuj -usct l 11/73 0.003 U. 093 IAp1 ni Ep. muscle 0.012 0.058 Dorosos cepedi.'num ru-cle 1/74 0.027 0 Q1 NotreCis ven-istrus muscle 0.228 .2 Trinec't:s ra:'-0Jlatus muscle O. 01 0 243 Prcina nijrofasclata muscle 0.151 0. 76



PAGE 1

PEPRILUS BUSTI 3 17 7 0 0 6 0 a z a 0 1 30 *02 .29 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 s.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 .02 .07 GOBIOSOIA BOSCI 13 3 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 4 2 26 .10 .C5 0.00 0.00 0.00 L.00 .17 .13 .03 0.00 .17 .03 *06 DOROSONA PETENENSE U 0 1 C 0 C 0 0 5 17 i 1 24 0.00 0.CO C.O0 0.00C .CO 0 .30 0.00 0.00 .16 2.43 .04 .82 .05 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CHRYSURUS 0 0 G C 2 6 7 2 0 0 0 0 17 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.OU .22 .13 1.21 .13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 PORICHTHYS POROSISSIMUS C 0 3 2 7 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 16 0.0G 0.00 .09 .11 .78 .04 .17 .07 0c.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 BAGRE MARINUS 0 0 2 1 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 11 0.00 0.00 .06 .06 0.00 .08 .69 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .02 PUGIL CEPHALUS 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .0GG 0.00 .000 0.00 .43 0.00 .02 ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0.00 .05 .03 .11 0.oo 00 00 .0 000 D0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 SPHOEROIOES NEPHELUS 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 6 0.00 0.00 C.00 .06 0.00 .56 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 SYNODUS FOETENS 0 0 0 0 1 2. 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 0.OC 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .04 0.00 .07 .03 0.09 0.00 0.00 .01 ARCHOSARGUS PROBATOCEPHALUS 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .02 D.00 0.00 .03 .14 0.00 0.00 ,01 ICTALURUS CATUS 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 .02 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 .1 0.00oo .02 .01 ANCHOA HEPSETUS 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .22 0.00 0.00 0.00 D0.00 000 000 0000 .01 ANCYCLOPSETTA QUADROCELLATA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 I 0 3 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 000 .05 .01 CARANX HIPPOS 0 0 0 a0 2 a0 0 0a a 0 3 0.oC 0.00 0.00 0 00 .04 0008 .00 .0 0.00 0000 0.00 0.00 .01 EUCINOSTOMUS GULA 0 0 0 0 0 2 a 1 0 0 0 0 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 .07 0.00 0.00D 0.00 0.00 .01 MICROPTERUS SALMOIDES 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.00 0.00 .09 0.005 0.0 0 .00000 0. 0.o00 0.00 000 0.00 0.0 .01 SYNGNATHUS LOUISIANAE a 1 0 1 0 0 0 9 0 0 3 0.00 .0 0.00 0.00 .1 .02 0o.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0o 0.00 .01 GOBIONELLUS HASTATUS 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 o0.00 0.CO 0.00 .06 0.00 0.0 000 0.07 0.00 0.00 .00 0.00 .00*O 0.00 .02 o0.00 0.00o 0.00 0.00 0.00 .o00 .03 0.0 0.00 0.00 .0 ORTHOPRISTIS CHRYSOPTERA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.o. 0.00 o0.00 0.00 0.00 .3 0.00 .s04 0.0 .o PARALICHTHYS ALBIGUTTA 0 0 0 1 0 0C 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.OO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0G *02 .00 PRIONOTUS SCITULUS C1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.00 .02 0.00 .06 o000 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.0o 0 0 0.0 0 0.00 00 SELENE VOMER 0 0 .0 .1o .1i S00 00 0a 2. 0.00 c 0.0 0.c00 0.00 0 .O0 0.0o .0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 PEPQiLUS PARU 0 a0 2 0 2 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.0o e22 0.08 0.000 goal .O c 0.03 0.08 s 00 CHAETO3IPTERUS FABER G 0 0 0 0 1 0 a 0 0 0 a0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 .32 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 CHASMOOES SABURRAE 0 0 C 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 1 D.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.JU 000 0O.00 oOO. .14 0.0r 0.00 oOG



PAGE 1

124. Notes 757 ume of aqueous sample, it is a simple process to standardize "1C-NaHlCO3 solutions o100, for primary productivity measurements by adding aliquots of dilutions of "C-NaHCO3a . solutions directly to Aquasol. After chemi. luminescence caused by NaOH in the ra< so I diocarbon solution (Strickland and Parsons _ 1972) has decreased, 1"C activity of the so? lution can be measured with a liquid scin-----_ tillation spectrometer. 6o We observed lower than expected 4"C activity during standardization of "4CNaHCO3 solutions using Aquasol as the 200 400 600 liquid scintillation cocktail. It is difficult M.utes to interpret pH measurements in a nonFig. 1. Carbon-14 activity uf an aquieous soaqueous medium; however, the Aquasollution of "C-NaHCO: in 10 ml of Aquusol (0) water emulsion was strongly acidic with and in phenethylamine plus 10 ml of Aquasol pH-Hydrion paper. To assess the magni("). Error bars are ±2-r for each point (N = 2). tude of the 1"C activity losses, we added 1.0-ml aliquots of a 1: 50 dilution of soluphenethylamine in glass liquid scintillation tion containing 1 fiCi of 1C ml-1 as Cvials. NaHCO3 to 10.0 ml of Aquasol in glass The carbon dioxide absorption capacity liquid scintillation vials: carbon-14 activity of phenethylamine is about 0.2 g (4.5 decreased with time to a value 367 less n les pe (New England Nucea than the amount of activity initially added orp. 1 ). We used a an o to the Aquaso (Fig. 1). Corp. 1975). Ve used a quantity of phenRapidto the losquasol (Fig. 1)ocarbon from the cock ethylamine in excess of stoichiometric reRapid loss of radiocarbon from the cock.' ., ., , , , tail immediately after addition of 14Cquirements to ensure rapid carbamate fortail immiediately after addition of "C-NaHCO, solution precludes immcdiate mation. After adding 10.0 ml of Aquasol to the vials, we measured the "C activity liquid scintillation counting as a solution of the saples wie measured the ld scititl to the problem. We added duplicate 1-ml of the samples with a Picker liquid scintilto the problem. WVe added duplicate 1-ml tin speteter. C activity volumes of the diluted 'C-NaHCOz solulation spectrometer. Carbon-14 activity voIWlles of the diluted "C-Nal-ICO z solui.dfe o the extion to 5-ml and to 15-ml volumes of Aquas not si differet over the xsol in glass liquid scintillation vials to test perimental period (Fig. 1). In the phenz' , ethylamine-Aquasol cocktail it was stable the effects of variation in Aquasol volume ethylamine-Auas cocktail it was stable on retention of 1C. After 500 min, the samat 25 h and has been reported stable up to pie containing 5 ml of Aquasol contained 72 h in a phenethylamine-toluene-methanol 40% less activity and that containing 15 ml cocktail (Davis et al. 1975). contained 26% less activity than the amount Unless scintillation grade phenethylainitially added. mine is used, it may be necessary to redePhenethylamine reacts rapidly with CO, still phenethylamine by flash evaporation to form carbamates which are stable in before use to remove colored compounds liquid scintillation cocktails (Woeller that cause quenching during liquid scintil1961). Phenethyamine absorbs 99.5 of lation counting (Francis and Hawkins ava196).e C0 Duncombe ad Rn 1967). Aquasol is a xylene-based cocktail. avai e (Duncob When phenethylamine is used in toluene1969) and is used as the CO, absorber in based cocktails, a small amount o methseveral methods where "4C-C0 is capanol is added to the cocktail to aid in solutured in liquid scintillation cocktails (Petbilizing the phenethylamine (Smith et al. erson 1969; Smith et al. 1972). We added 1972). Phenethylamine has greater trap1.0-ml aliquots of the diluted '"C-NaHCO: ping capacity than hyamine-hydroxide aqueous solution to 2.0 ml of redistilled (Parmentier and Ten Ilaaf 1969) and



PAGE 1

Preliminary estimates of the total contribution of allochthonous particulate matter to the energy budget of the bay indicate that such detritus is comparable to the phytpolankton productivity as a source of energy. Methods to assess the mass, activity, and population structure of the estuarine detrital microflora have and are being developed. These methods could provide data with which to initiate correlations between the activities of these heretofore unstudied microbes and the rest of the estuarine food web. The methods were designed to preserve the community associations and interactions with as little selectFve pressure as possible. Measures of mass such as the muramic acid level, the total phospholipid formed from H332P04, and ATP level, correlate with the expected respiratory activity. Measures of growth by pulse chase experiments show correlations between rates of phospholipid synthesis, muramic acid turnover, glycolipid turnover,and saturation of the cardiolipid precusor pool. Initial comparisons show when microbial mass and activity increase, so do the species diversity and numbers of the detrital benthic fauna. Comparison of types of detritus, or between pine needles and teflon mimics of pine needles, show coordination of microbial activities and the benthic food webs By analysis of the components of the newlyformed lipids, it has been possible to document successional sequences on detrial surfaces that coordinate with scanning electron micrographs. With these and subsequently.developed methods,we hope to determine the role of microfloral communities in the trophodynamics of the estuarine food web with speciallemphasis on controlli.ng extermal functions such as pollution. Litter-associated organisms were surveyed in a series of field experiments. This fauna was dominated by isopods, amphipods,and decapods. Preliminary experiments indicated that macrodetritus such as leaf matter may serve as a substrate for shelter and/or microbialhaccumulation. Numbers of individuals and species and species richness generally increased with increases in salinity at all stations. The allochthonous leaf matter was associated with a distinctive biota which subsequently serves as a source of food for various dominant juvenile fishes in the area. The benthic infauna in the Apalachicola Bay System was surveyed for seasonal distribution and spatial relationships of biomass, species composition, and community struetivee. This was dominated by euryhaline and eurythermal crustaceans (Tanaidaceans, amphipods) and polychaete worms which tend to reach peak abundance during late winter and spring months. Many such species, as selective and nonsi&ective deposit feeders, feed on fine detrital matter and, in turn, are fed upon by predacious polychaetes, crustaceans, and benthic fishes. There were considerable differeneesein biomass distribution in the bay with a range from 0.065 to 56.378 g (Ash-free dry weight)/ m2.The highest such values were found off St. George Island and portions of East Bay in areas associated with grassbeds. Grassbed (Vallisneria americana) productivity was estimated from 322 to 353 g/m2/yr with standing crops between 500-600 g/mZ peaking during summer and fall months. Die-offs of such grasses occurred during fall periods of reduced water temperature, and were associated with fall peaks of secondary productivity in the bay. Certain East Bay grassbeds were dominated by the gastropod, Neritina reclivata. Other organisms such as crustaceans and fishes were also represented. Peak animal biomass occurred during spring (March-May) and late fall (November-December) periods, and such changes seemed to be timed in a general way with spring peaks of epibenthic organisms and fall increases in macrophyte-derived detritus. Long-term (5 year) trends of epibenthic fishes and invertebrates were noted. After the first year, there were regular seasonal patterns of fish abundance, species representation, and community structure. There was a regular succession



PAGE 1

415. Calanoid copepods, probably Acartia sp., are the major food item for A. MitchiUi. although dependence upon copepods decreases from 97.8% in the 10-19mn class to 49.3% in the 60-69mm class. The change in diet is mainly due to increased consumption of mysids (up to 17%), insect larvae (up to 12%), and juvenile fishes (up to 6.7%). Seasonally, copepods are usually the main food item for spting through fall for fishes 49mm SL. Larger fishes utilize:cppepods mainly during spring and summer. Mysids become important in the fall and occasionally in the ppring. Winter feeding encompasses a wide variety of organisms, including copepods, insect larvae, cladocerans, barnacle nauplii, and plAnt matter. Although detrital matter was not found to any extent in Anchoa stomachs (<2.6%), anchovies do utilize the detrital food web as they switch from copepods to epibenthic and benthic organisms such as mysids and insect larvae. Micropogon undulatus A total of 2,215 Micropogon undulatus stomachs were examined, forming 165 SDS combinations. Stomach contents are summarized by size class, oVer all stations and months, in Table 3. Larger, identifiable food items are presented in Table 4. Polychaetes form the basis 6t M. undulatus' diet, averaging 34.1% over all size classes examined (10-159mm SL). The main species of polychaetes encountered were Parapripnospio pennata and Glycinde solitaria in outer bay stations, and Amphicteis gunneri in inner bay stations. Other important food items include detritus (13.6%0), shrimp (10.4%),mainly Ogyrides limicola), and juvenile fishes (8.5%). Across the range of size classes, smaller fishes (10-39mm) consumed relatively larger amounts of insect larvae, mid-range fishes (40-99mm) consumed relatively iergedetritus, mysids and isopods, while larger fish (<100mm) increased intake of juvenile fishes, crabs, and infaunal



PAGE 1

289. LITERATURE CITED Bechtel, T. J. and B. J. Copeland: Fish species diversity indices as indicator of pollution in Galveston Bay, Texas. Contrib. Mar. Sci., Texas 15, 103-132 (1970). Berger, W. H. and F. L. Parker: Diversity of planktonic formaminifera in deepsea sediments. Science. 168, 1345-1347 (1970). Bittaker, H. F.: A comparative study of the phytoplankton and benthic macrophyte productivity in a polluted versus an unpolluted coastal area. M. S. Thesis. Florida State University, Tallahassee (1975). Boesch, D. F.: Classification and community structure of macrobenthos in the Hampton Roads area, Virginia. Mar. Biol. 21, 226-244 (1973). Bradshaw, J. S., E. L. Loveridge, K. P. Rippee, J. L. Peterson, D. A. White, J. R. Barton and D. K. Fuhriman: Seasonal variations in residues of chlorinated hydocarbon pesticides in the water of the Utah Lake drainage system-1970 and 1971. Pest. Mon. Jour. 6(3), 166-170 (1972). Breidenbach, A. W., C. G. Gunnerson, K. F. Kawahara, J. J. Lichtenberg, and R. S. Green: Chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides in major river basins, 1957-65. Publ. Health Rept. 82(2), 139-156. Brodtmann, N. V., Jr.: Continuous analysis of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides in the lower Mississippi River. Bul. Env. Cont. Toxicol. 15(1). 33-39 (1976). Brongeersma-Sanders, M.: Mass mortality in the sea. Mem Geol. Soc. America Mem. 67(1), 941-1010 (1957). Butler, P. A.: Monitoring pesticide pollution. Bioscience. 19(10), 889-896. Organochlorine residues in estuarine mollusks, 1965-72 National Pesticide Monitoring Program. Pest. Mon. Jour. 6(4), 238-363 (1963). Copeland, B. J. and T. J. Bechtel: Species diversity and water quality in Galveston Bay, Texas. Wat. Air Soil Pol. 1, 89-105 (1971). Croker, R. A. and A. J. Wilson: Kinetics and effects of DDT in a tidal marsh ditch. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 94, 152-159 (1970). Dahlberg, M. P. and E. P. Odum: Annual cycles of species occurrence, abundance, and diversity in Georgia estuarine populations. Amer. Mid. Nat. 83, 382392 (1970). Dawson, C. E.: A contribution to the hydrography of Apalachicola Bay, Florida. Publ. Texas. Tnst. Mar. Sci. 4, 15-35 (1955). Duke, T. W. and D. P. Dumas: Implications of pesticide residues in the coastal environment. In: Pollution and Physiology of Marine Organisms. Ed. F. J. Vernberg and W. B. Vernberg. pp. 137-164 (1974). Fisher, N. S.: Chlorinated hydrocarbon pollutants and photosynthesis of marine phytoplankton: a reassessment. Science 189, 463-464 (1975).



PAGE 1

------------------------------------t.o? n I T * 10.20 I I I I T r T T I I T .T T I I I I I : .4 I r / 4 I T r r ST T I.91 T + r 7.41 ST I I r--I --------------.-.-.--.-.-.------------------------l----------I ----I I r r 6.48 -t I I 4 6.48 SI I i T T I I I I I (II I I 2 I I I i I I I 4.62 1 4.62 I I I I i I I I-------------------------------------------------------------------------01 I T I I 23.* + I + 23.69 T I I I I I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I 1 r I I T I 1.8 + I 4 1.61 T I I I I I.. I -------------------------# --* * * * --* 0 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 Figure 11. Surface chloropyt3 -r--1sf E ay.r



PAGE 1

-I. Special Program for Ecological Science (SPECS): Summary of Capabilities I. Data Storage A. Physical-chemical data (by area, station, date, time of day, and depth) Sdissolved oxygen, color, turbidity, Secchi disk depth, temperature, salinity, pH, river flow, rainfall, bottom type B. Fish and invertebrate data (by area, station, date, and time of day) Sgenus and species, number of individuals, mean size (with standard deviation), biomass (ash free dry wet.), sex (invertebrates only) C. Plant data (by area, station, date, and time of day) Senus and species, total wet and dry weight, stems and roots wet and dry weight), tops (wet and dry weight) II. Data Processing A. Retrieval for any area, station or group of stations, date or range of dates B. Sorting Sby area, date, station, time of day, or any combination of these Sbiological data sorted by species C. Calculation of biological indices (Based on numbers of individuals or biomass per species for any area, station or group of stations, date or range of dates, or time of day) Species Richness (Number of species, Margalef Index) Species diversity (Simpson Index, Brillouin Index, Shannon Index, McIntosh/indices, Hurlbert's E (Sn)) Species equitability (Brillouin J, Shannon J') D. Graphics (for any area, station or group of stations, range of dates, or time of day) : plotted as a function of time. Sall physical chemical variables fish and invertebrates 1) number of individuals (single species or collective total) 2) average size 3) dry weight biomass (single species or collective total) 4) number of species plants 1) dry weight biomass(single species or collective total) 2) number of species any of the biological indices (see "C" above) E. Statistics (for virtually any set(s) of numbers that can be generated by any other routine in the system) linear regression, Student's t-tests, nonparametric correlations, discriminant analysis, factor analysis, scattergrams, analysis of variance (one, two, and three-way), multivariate ANOVA, canonical correlation, etc. * This portion of the report has been carried out with support from the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (number R-803339).



PAGE 1

Fig. 14: Surface'turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 5 (East Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. clCLAC" -CATTLCGRtS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 29 FILE 4N-'A (C PT :A N 4;7T = 77/1:?/i.) SCTAi7ER1; -OF (JO'N) TUT; (ACPOSS) DAYS 1;..22F ' 293.t75-, 0.125C 652.57590 852. 25;0111.75C01190.925?C37 375001549.S25031729.Z75CC ----------+--------4------------*------------+----------.*» * 2.r + 92.10 I I I I I 36.85 -I --I ----------SI I I I I I I 1 I I SI 36/72 12/72 3/73 /73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/7 I I I I I SIAP I I S .-: I I .6.40 i 4 I I i ------------------------------------------i---------..----4----------------^^ 6 B 557 .... .IS I IA CO CIENT T E COMPUTED. "" I I n I I ,I , I II v, I.I APLAC SCATIERRS TIME IN ONTHS: March, 972 to February 1977 STATISTICS.. . ---------------------------------------------'------------------------------------SIS:FIC E -."'1 SLOPE ( -69 SiO ERROR OF B -65 S piTEO IF COEFCINT CANNOT E COPUTE.



PAGE 1

S ..0 * 0.0 0.0 .0 0.0 .0 00. 0.0 0.0 .0, SPECIES continued SAMPLE DATES 750315 750415 750515 750615 750715 750815 750915 751015 751115 751215 760115 760215 TOTALS NOTROPIS PETERSONI 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.OC 0.00 .10 0.00 0c .00 0.00 0.00 3 0.00 0.00 a0.00 .01 POGONIAS CROIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0.00 0.c0 0.OO 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.CO 0 .00 00.0 .32 0.00 .01 MORONE CHRYSOPS 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 *0 0 a 2 0 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. .00 3.00 0.00 0.88 .32 0.00 .0 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00o 0.0 0.0ol 0.0 .a.0 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 0.00 0.0 D.00 0o0 0.00 0.0 0.00 .01 HONACANTHUS CILIATUS a 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 O.Oa 8.00 .01 SYNGNATHUS LOUISIANAE 0 a0 0 0 0 a0 1 0.00 0.00 ..12 0.00 0. ..00 0.0 0.08 0.0 0o ..81 TOTALS 2318.0 2842.0 1999.0 834.0 706.0 489.0 1448.0 1925.0 1547.8 1005.8 630.0 3737.0 19480.0 \-i c



PAGE 1

Table 11, continued SPECIES SAMPLE VATES 740315 740415 740515 740615 740715 740815 740915 741015 741115 741215 750115 750215 STELLIFER LANCEOLATUS 0 0.00 0O.U 0.00 0.00 50.92 122.08 3.61 3.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.00 2.43 1.55 .29 .14 0.00 0.00 0.00 1AREN.ULA ODEISACCLAE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.uO 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0D.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 EUCINOSTOHUS GULA 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 16.29 24.*5 1.32 9.98 0.00 .16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.13 .75 2.12 0.00 CHLOROSCOMBRUS CPRYSURUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 .67 4.32 12.90 1.45 7.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 .48 .39 .62 .02 .57 0.00 0.00 0.00 .78 POGONIAS CROMIS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRIONOTUS TRIBULUS 3.34 0.00 .10 .03 0.00 0.00 2.31 1.16 1.28 .33 .49 0.00 .21 0.00 .03 .02 0.00 0.00 .03 .09 .06 .19 .10 0.00 ECHENEIS NAUCRATES U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ORTHOPRISTIS CHRYSOPTERA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.35 2.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 1.47 0.00 0.00 HENTICIRRHUS SAXATILIS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 J..00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BREVOORTIA PATRONUS .13 68.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 3.98 .01 2.57 0.00 U.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .76 CHILOMYCTEFUS SC-OEPFI 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 .00 00 0.00 0.00 1.29 0.00 0.3] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 O.UO .02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DOROSOMA PETENENSE 1.39 3.95 0.00 .11 3.39 1.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.14 19.20 1.00 .09 .15 0.00 .08 .31 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.34 4.07 .19 CHAETOOIPTERUS FABER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .78 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 .09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UPOPHYCIS FLORIDANUS 7.17 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 7.65 8.37 .44 .08 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.62 1.60 MICROGOBrUS GULOSUS 8.00 9.18 0.0o 0.00 0.00 5.89 .81 0.00 1.22 .38 1.57 4.27 .49 .34 0.00 0.00 0.00 .28 .01 0.00 .36 .22 .33 .81 OPHICHTHUS OMHESI 0.00 3.84 u.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 n. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .RPHOEROIDES NEPHELUS 0.00 0.00 .02 0.00 0.00 .61 0.00 0.00 8.90 0.00 1.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 .41 0.00 .39 0.00 CENTROPRISTIS PECANA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 U.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ICIALURUS PUNCTATUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 n.00 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U..u 0.uo 0.00 0.00 .0 .000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ANChOA HtPSETUS 0.00 0.00 1.48 f.17 1.12 O.Ofu 0. U 1.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .46 4.38 .10 0.00 0. 0 .12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PORICHTHYS POKOSTSSITUS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 1.67 0.00' 0.00 0. 000 .O.UO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 .01 .08 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 0.00 LUCANIA PARVA .42 .36 0.00 0.UO 0.00 0.0U 0.00 .07 0.00 3.59 .67 .69 .nj .01 0.00 0.0 .00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 2.04 .14 .13 GOBIOSUMA 80SCI .92 .31 0.0 0.00 0. O U.O0 .06 0.00 .94 q.00 2.55 1.10 .06 .01 U.10 n .3n 1.0 0.00o .00 0.00 .01 0.0I .54 .21 GOBIONELLUS HASTATUS 0.00 J.OO O..PO 0.0 0.00 C.00 U. d0 0.00 U.00 1.10 3.00 0.30 0.00 :.U0 0.00 J.nu i.On U.00 90.0 0 o.00 u.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 SYNGNRTHUS SCOVELLT 1.11 .4' U. 00 .01 1.08 2.83 .37 .87 2.2', 1.68 .67 .61 .J7 .02 0.00 .31 .10 .14 .0 .07 .in .9F .14 .12 PRIONOTUS SCITULUS 0.00 ..00 0.0f0 .0.00 .23 .97 .36 1.64 O.no 1.77 o0.0 0.00 0.00 U.30 O.J 0.00 .0101 1 .0J .08 .n00 .29 0.00 SCTAEhuP 0, T I. 0.00 n



PAGE 1

276. that the Apalachicola Bay System is a shallow barrier island estuary dominated physically by the Apalachicola River which has a highly variable discharge (Fig. 2). During the first four years of the study period, river flow usually peaked from January to April at which time the range of extreme diurnal flows was usually maximal. The range and mean flow reached low levels during late summer and fall. This pattern was usually out of phase with local rainfall which often peaked during the summer and early fall. There was considerable annual variation of river flow with relatively low levels during the first and third years of sampling. During the winter and spring of 1973, there was especially pronounced river flow and flooding throughout the Apalachicola Valley. Water temperature (Fig. 2) followed seasonal patterns with no substantial variation from year to year. At any given time, there was usually little vertical or horizontal variation in water temperature throughout the bay system (Livingston et al., 1977). River flow generally influenced other environmental parameters. Increased flow caused increased water color, turbidity, detritus, and nutrients. Generally, this is a highly turbid bay with considerable oyster bar development and relatively little benthic macrophyte productivity except in shallow (fringing) areas. Tides in the Apalachicola Estuary are semi-diurnal (mixed, unsymmetrical) with a small tidal range (up to 1 m). Winds in the area follow no clear directional trend although during fall and winter there is a northerly flow which becomes southerly during the rest of the year (Dawson, 1955). Statistical analysis of the physico-chemical data taken over the 4-year study period included simple linear regression and correlation for distribution with time. Significant changes in the regressions (original and loge units) e



PAGE 1

o CO -0 Su 12 * A O c 0 u3 0-S= U," C. I" OMINANT-4J iE c In 1 -c o 0 ----14 14 1 -1 80-''-' 5 *A nchoroa c c. -c 4< c 80 5 -0 0 3,4v o 1 II I 0 15 = 01 iI" o a, cl ..= 4 * Micropogon C 0 ,4. / i () U 4J to (V c -II S*a) CZ -** m" 0 400-13 1 2 16 17 *2 2oSciOr m -W * oS 15. 13 S ~m4 -, 201* TIMMen-mnthti -e -o 48g E wa -C Oo sB M m zn -S-~E 0* u r.CO UU4*-Ol LL< >0 c O ( -0 -4-J 4-J (M 4J la a ( v iu 4 ) _ -L% r-,o -0 X( > c -o *0 0 C 0 -o> .c < .> a c-4E L c 0 o E * 1.0* 0 sp tn 0 *0 4'-* .w cf C ,'--) C ,. In 4-* u 4tn a L0 a( ..c > ZO" L 1 O -O -00 -.n 4z 440 w 0 0.51973-74 e .I I I I I I 1973-74 <* 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % DOMINANCE



PAGE 1

163. lected relatively high mean monthly values during the winter and spring of 1975 and 1977 with relatively low mean flow rates during 1976. Peak flooding occurred during January, February, March, and April of 1975 and March of 1977. During such periods, there were considerable increases in the leaf and wood matter found in the Bay (Table 3, Fig. 2). There was also an increase in benthic macrophyte debris at these times, although major shifts to such macrophyte detritus usually occurred during fall periods. This was probably due to kills of macrophytes as a function of reduced water temperature. The low levels of macroparticulate matter in the bay during 1976 coincided with the relatively low levels of mean river flow as well as reductions in the peak flooding levels. It would appear that both functions are operable in controlling the seasonal appearance of macroparticulate matter in the Apalachicola Estuary. During a given year, when river flooding exceeds 60,000 C.F.S., there was an increased level of allochthonous detritus in the bay during spring months. This led to a bimodal.pattern of total macroparticulate detritus in the bay during such a year, with peaks occurring during spring and fall months. These data indicate that there is a direct relationship between river flooding and the appearance of macroparticulate matter in the Apalachicola Estuary, and that if such flooding does not reach a certain level, allochthonous detritus does not appear in the bay at any appreciable level. The sieved fractions of detritus (the so-called microdetritus) found at the mouth of.the Apalachicola River and one of its primary offshoots, Tables 4 and 5 the Little St. Marks River, are shown in ^ and Fig. 2. Once again, river flow and flooding appear to be controlling factors. Moderately high levels of microdetritus appeared during the winter and spring of 1976.



PAGE 1

437. The Conservation Foundation of Washington, D.C. has initiated a series of meetings among local, state, and federal agencies to develop an organized setting for coordinated research and management processes in the Apalachicola Valley. In short, the Apalachicola Bay Sea Grant research is now serving as a nucleus for what could eventually become a national model for the integration of research and planning techniques in important natural drainage systems. Literature Cited Livingston, R.J. 1975. Resource management and estuarine function with application to the Apalachicola Drainage System. Estuarine Pollution Control and Assessment, Proceedings of a Conference, Vol. 1 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), pp. 3-17. Livingston, R.J. 1976. Environmental considerations and the management of barrier islands: St. George Island and the Apalachicola Bay System. In. Barrier Islands and Beaches. (O.C.Z.M., Nat. Ocean. Atmos. Ad. -The Conservation Foundation, Wash. D.C.), pp. 86-102. Livingston, R.J. 1977. (in press). Application of scientific data for wetsland management: the Apalachicola System. National Wetland Protection Symposium (Environmental Law Institute, Fish and Wildlife Service). Livingston, R.J. and E.A. Joyce, Jr. Eds. 1977,(in press). Proceedings of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System. Flor. Mar. Res. Publ. Livingston, R.J., R.L. Iverson, R.H. Estabrook, V.E. Keys, and J. Taylor, Jr. 1974. Major features of the Apalachicola Bay System: Physiography, Biota, and Resource Management. Florida Sci. 37(4): 245-271.



PAGE 1

Tt;VRT S;GATTERS TOP TEN nmOLE DAY BIOMASS 77r/3/27. PAj, 15 Ft.IL NO.h.nE (CREATION CATE = 77/CJ/27.) .CAfT£ERG.An .OF (tCnN) PENAZT (ACROSS) DAYS 104.475a3 284.4Z50i 464.375.u 644.3250 624. Z75C'JtlO.,2250Uti4.17mL336. 1 ~,01544. 375G7l74. J250U -+----+---+----+* -+------------+------------------------------------------186.95 + I 1 + 186.95 i I I I I I I i 168.25 + I I B 1 358.z5 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I .a9.56 I I I 1456 I I I I I I I I 7 4. .1 I i3 6 I I I I I I i I I I 3.7 + I I + I 7-.75 I*' 74,78 I I I I -----------------------------------------------------------------------*----**-*--,--**---------I I I I I I I II .7 1 I , .I I I I I I I I I I S7-.I i I I93.7 1 1 1 I I I .1---'---------------I I I 1 0x .I .9 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 ,M :*.. " ...l"^-. TCP TE"N hOL£ 2AfY 3: 0MASS 770.3127. PAOc. 16 S I I 1 I I I I I I -F 3 795 I I I799 T OF A --.-,.-=-. .... = .: -..?.7'. St b--" (i) --..; 5 -.T, E,<0OF 3 -L.u35(S54, O -LI I VAES', VLUS i 1 I * S; I. 1, I I I I -I II I I I I I I I 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 :ST. -icks TCP TEN4 -h3LE )AY 3-0M.S 77/3k3/27. PA e 16 lN.3j84 R SCjAbRL .C.23j aibvFiQ4ACE < -.3*1C3 E .5 OF -ST -3J.o79b INTE.rGPT (A) j4.4'799 sT) £RR3O OF A -9.jua5 S I:;,t A -..572 -E (P) --.351 aT& £RkOi OF E -.ut834 sItNIFICANCG i -*341 4 U2OE 'A.ULS -6. EXCLUDiD VALUES1 MI.SI4, VALuES -0



PAGE 1

Fig. 5: Bottom salinity °/oo at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. APF'LC'-f 3CATTERSR.fS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 21 FILE L N~(C:EATION CA'E = 77/C7/11.) SCAT-ERG=, CF toGCN) SAS1 (ACROSS) DAYS 1-.?25.' 2n3.r75r '~73.125P3 652.F7510 832.02OZSOO11.47i30.950C09201370.375001549.825C01729.27500 .*---------+-------+----4---------**-** ---* -------------*--*---**+. I I I i 33.i I I I 33.33 I I 33.33 I I I I I I I S1 II I I 2,9 I + I I 26.96 I -..... .--------..---. ---------------------------. -----.........-2.2 I 23.22 : , I I±I » SI I i I I S-"iI -I II÷* I I I . I I ' I Ii*6.74 I I *-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+. 3/72 6/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 3/75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 12/76 3/77 is-.:>3.-'LTT^ ' S 1 TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977 2-LI:T' (-).-.?2251 o SQUARED -.04929 SIGNIFICANCE R -C4 ST: Cr i-ST -e.44 INTERCEPT (A) -19.116'6 STO EROR OF A -2.09143 S.;'.:-" ,E --."'.SLOPE (2' --.:'".4? 7 STO E'P0O CF C -.12200 -.-.. -' ,X'LUD.E VALUESr MISSING VALUES -45 IS I :nT. :r A COEzFICIENT ZA';'OT EE EC0PUTE .



PAGE 1

196. Table 4 :(continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 11/76 7 T # 10 .0014 .0011 93 18 .0022 .0021 73 35 .0034 .0016 35 60 .0034 .0012 26 120 .0025 .0012 36 170 .0031 .0015 35 325 .0033 .0016 36 Total .0109 7B # 10 18 .0009 -35 .0014 .0005 29 60 .0018 .0016 67 120 .0028 .0013 36 170 .0016 .0012 56 325 .0061 .0019 23 Total .0065 8M # 10 -18 .0012 .0013 83 35 .0052 .0037 54 60 .0043 .0029 51 120 .0056 .0021 29 170 .0030 .0016 40 325 .0173 .0069 30 Total .0185 12/76 7 T # 10 -18 .0028 .0032 57 35 .0024 .0026 54 60 .0038 .0040 53 120 .0080 .0068 43 170 .0146 .0084 29 325 .1640 .0492 15 Total .0742 7 B # 10 .0025 .0030 60 18 .0010 .0012 60 35 .0029 .0034 59 60 .0066 .0086 65 120 .0292 .0218 37 170 .0506 .0178 18 325 .4363 .1056 12 Total .1614 8 M # 10 .0034 .0060 88 18 .0007 .0008 57 35 .0028 .0032 57 60 .0064 .0090 70 120 .0196 .0190 48 170 .0374 .0232 31 325 .3592 .1158 16 Total .1770



PAGE 1

286. fluctuations (Smith and Cole, 1970; Bradshaw et al., 1972; Butler, 1973; Brodtmann, 1976) and long-term variation (Butler, 1973; Johnston, 1974; White, 1976), the relatively steep decline of such residues in the Apalachicola Estuary during 1973 could have been associated with the extreme river flooding during this period. Decreased upland use undoubtedly contributed to this phenomenon; this is corroborated by increased DDE:DDT ratios subsequent to the first year of sampling (Table 7); this could result from contined DDT without replenishment (MacGregor, 1974). The relatively low levels of organochlorine compounds found in sediments throughout the Apalachicola System could be associated with solubilization of such compounds by humates (Wershaw et a., 1969) and/or transport out of the immediate drainage system via suspended particulate matter. Peakall and Lincer (1970) showed that DDT and PCB compounds often undergo similar routes of dispersion with transport through riverine systems. This has been described as a function of solution and readsorption to particulate matter (Nisbet and Sarofin, 1972). Such accumulation of organochlorines by suspended matter (Wilson, 1976) together with detrital ingestion by certain estuarine organisms could account for the observed distribution of such compounds in the Apalachicola Estuary. Seasonal migratory movement of the juvenile populations out of the bay could contribute to the net transport of organochlorine compounds out of the system. The relatively rapid decline of such compounds in this instance is thus viewed as a function of the peculiar ecological characteristics of this river-dominated estuarine system. Various statistical applications were used in this study to test environmental relationships in the Apalachicola Estuary beyond those already established by Livingston (1974, 1976) and Livingston et al., (1976, 1977).



PAGE 1

0.0 0.0 0.0 %.CC 3.. o* 3.0 0.0 0.! 0.0 .36 .0 SPECIES SAMPLE DATES 730315 730415 730515 73G615 730715 730815 730915 731015 731115 731215 740115 740215 TOTALS ARCHOSARGUS PROBATOCEPHALUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 .24 0.00 0.00 0.00 .o 30O00 o80 ;ARANX HIPPOS 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 . H0. u00 0.00 0 .0 oo oo0 ..0oD .18 0.00 0.00 B0.00 0. .0 90.0 .00 HCHENEIS NAUCRATES .0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.O0 0.0O 0.00.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 3OBIOSO A ROBUSTUM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .03 0.0o0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 v.o .od 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 RMROPHIS PUNCTATUS 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 1 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00O O.O 0.00 0.00 .80 DLIGOPLITES SAURUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 3 1 0 0 G0.00 0.00 0.00 C.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 D08O .0o IPSANUS BETA 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 3 3 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .18 .00 .00 .00 0.00. 0.00 0.00 .00 ARALIGHTHYS ALSIGUTTA O 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 THINOPTERA BONASUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .00 CIAENOPS OCELLATA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 .0 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELENE vO9ER 0 a .0 0 0 1 0 a a 01 80 1 R0.0 0.00 0.0c 0.00 0.00 C.00 .24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 *00 TRO0NGYLURA MARINA 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 a a 0 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 Cc.00 0.De co 0 000 0 0 0.00 C 0.0 0.00 .00 ':NGNATHUS FLORIDAE 0 0 0 0 0 i a a a a 0 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 .*18 3.00 e.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 *00 ;PHYRNA TISURO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0.00 .0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 co5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .80 TOTALS 2968.0 3849.0 2412.0 1956.0 536.0 552.0 410.0 1899.0 1192.0 1196.0 1570.0 1676.0 202±0.0



PAGE 1

258. sumed by small carnivorous fishes (Odum and Heald, 1972). Heteromastus filiformis (Polychaeta, Sedentaria) This polychaete ranked third in the bay in terms of overall abundance of numbers even though it was largely restricted to grass beds (dominated by Halodule wrightii) just inside St. George Island (IX). Peak abundance was noted in April with low numbers taken during October and November, corroborating the findings of Santon and Simon (1974). This species was collected over a range of salinities from 6.3 -26.8°/00 and temperatures from 11.5 -32.50C. Mediomastus californiensis (Polychaeta, Sedentaria) As the fourth most prevalent species of infauna, this polychaete inhabits fine mud bottoms throughout the bay, ranging in length from 20 40 mm. It occurred in salinities from 0 -18.80/oo and temperatures from 6 -31 C. Peak abundance occurred in March with lows in the summer (July -August). Ampelisca vadorum (Crustacea, Amphipoda) Ampelisca vadorum was the fifth most abundant organism collected. It was almost entirely restricted to the St. George Island grass flats, where it builds weak tubes on (or slightly within) the substrate. This crustacean was found to be nocturnally active. It was found at salinities of 6.3 -26.80/oo and water temperatures of 11.5 -32.50C. Peak abundance was noted in the spring (February) with a minor peak in early fall (October). Ovigerous females were noted in all months of the year (except August), with a peak in February. This organism is probably omnivorous, feeding mainly on detrital particles: it is preyed upon by small carnivorous and (at night) planktivorous fishes. Streblospio benedicti (Polychaeta, Sedentaria)



PAGE 1

366. Fig. 6: Changes in Margalef Richness (Mar), number of species (S), Shannon diversity (H'), and the number of individuals of fishes taken monthly from the combined stations (35 trawl tows) in the Apalachicola Estuary from March, 1972 to February, 1976. Dashed lines represent 6-month mean values of these indices and relative dominance of the top species. Also shown are the DDT-R residues found in Rangia cuneata during this period.



PAGE 1

VIII. Litter-Associated Organisms ................... .229 Robert J. Livingston Peter F. Sheridan Robert L. Howell Kathryn G. Winter IX. Benthic Infauna ............................256 Bradford G. McLane Peter F. Sheridan Robert J. Livingston X. Grassbed (Vallisneria Americana) Assemblages ............. 265 Bruce Purcell Robert J. Livingston XI. Associations of Epibenthic Fishes and Invertebrates ......... .270 Robert J. Livingston Peter F. Sheridan Gerard G. Kobylinski F. Graham Lewis, III XII. Trophic Resource Partitioning Among Juvenile Fishes ......... 412 Peter F. Sheridan Robert J. Livingston XIII. Compartmental Model of the Apalachicola Bay System ..... .. In Richard L. Iverson Robert J. Livingston David C. White XIV. Application of Data to Planning and Management ............434 Robert J. Livingston



PAGE 1

139. invertebra'etes can excrete considerable quantities of organic matter and thus !my exhibit no net gain even though there is accumulation of radioactive label (Johannes, et al., 1969; Johannes and Webb, 3965, 1970). Small particles or organic solutes can enter the ostia of the eulamanllibranchian gill so that labelled material can be physically trapped rather than incorporated into gill tissue cells. Therefore, the metabolic significance of uptake of a compound where kinetics are diffusion controlled must be clarified. Stephens (1968) considered 1ICO2 evolution good evidence that a compound enters oxidation pathways. Experiments were performed demonstrating the evolution of 14CO2 by II. mercenaria and M. campechiensis (Figure 3,4). The low activity of the control tissues eliminates the possibility that the 14CO evolved was due to volatilization of absorbed glycolic' acid or NaHCO3 contamination. The CO2 evolved over the experimental period represented approximately 10% of the total uptake of labelled carbon by gill tissue. Glycolic acid taken up from the surrounding environment enters into the metabolism of Mercenaria sp. gill tissue although the mechanism by which this occurs is unknown. The metabolism of glycolic acid in phytoplankton and higher plants occurs by way of the glycolate oxidizing enzyme glycolate oxidase (higher plants) or glycolate dehydrogenase (algae) (Merrett and Lord, 1973). Glycolate oxidase will oxidize lactate as well as glycolate; however, it is stereochemically specific for L-lactate and does not oxidize the enantiomer D-lactate (Zelitch and Ochoa, 1953). Glycolate dehydrogenase oxidizes D-lactate preferentially to L-lactate (Nelson and Tolbert, 1970). Neither of these two enzymes has been reported in higher organisms but there is the possibility that another enzyme is II



PAGE 1

108. Water samples were collected for chlorophyll-a and phytopljnkc ton species composition determinations (8). This discussion of nutrient limited phytoplankton productivity in the coastal waters of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico will be limited to months where water temperatures are greater than 25 C. Previous investigations of the phytoplankton ecology of these systems suggest.that during the rest of the year nutrient concentr'ýttions are either high enough to meet phytoplankton demands or temperatures are low enough to be the primary factor limiting phytoplankton productivity (9). Light and temperature did not vary widely between the variou. sampling dates and locations (Table 1). Significant differences were observed in salinity, turbidity, nutrient concentration, and phytoplankton productivity between stations. The relatively low mean salinity values observed at the Apalachicola and Ochlockonee estuarine stations are the result of river drainage. The higher turbidity values at the Apalachicola stations relative to the other stations are probably a result of river discharge and mixing processes (10). The Apalachicola and Ocklochnee stations exhibited higher nutrient concentrations and higher primary productivity and chlorophyll-a than the other stations. Phytoplankton species diifferences were observed between the high and low salinity stations (11). Phytoplankton and nutrient data were treated with linear regression techniques. Linear correlation coeffitcients were determined between phytoplankton productivity and soluble reactive phosphate, soluble nitrate, and soluble nitrite concentrations. Phytoplankton productivity was more strongly correlated with soluble



PAGE 1

414. The clustering strategies included the following: 1) group average, S(TJ,)= bk ,) = n,/7, +)n 2) flexible grouping, where x = biomass off food item in sample x, y = biomass of Pfood item in sample y, N = total number of food items in samples x + y, P = X/iL l = proportion of biomass of the food item in total biomass of sample x, P = , jt = proportion of biomass of the food item in total biomass of sample y, hI = number of samples in cluster 1 h2 = number of samples in cluster 2 I, J, K = unit clusters (single entities) IJ = fused cluster D(A,B) = distance generated by similarity index matrix between samples A and B B = clustering intensity coefficient (-1 to 1). The choice of these similarity indices and clustering strategies were based on discussions of methods in Sneath and Sokal (1973) and Clifford and Stephenson (1975). The rho index is discussed by man Belle and Ahmed (1974). Results and Discussion Anchoa mitchilli A total of 3,448 A. mitchilli stomachs were examined, forming 276 station x date x size class (SDS) combinations. Stomach contents are summarized by size class, over all stations, and months in Table 1. Larger, identifiable organisms are presented in Table 2.



PAGE 1

134. Evolution of 14C02 Gill segments were excised in the manner previously descri:bed and held in ASW until pre-incubation. Pre-incubation consisted of incubation of all segments, including the controls, in a known concentration of 14C glycolate solutio-n for 60 minutes. After. pre-incubation all controls were placed in a saturated HgC12 solution for 15 minutes to poison the tissue. The evolution of 14C02 from gill tissue was measured using a technique modified from Harrison et al., (1971). After poe-incu.bation, experimental samples were removed from the labelled glycolI'te solution and thoroughly rinsed in ASW before being placed in serum bottles containing 5 ml of unlabelled glycolate solution at the pre-incubation concentration. The HgCl2 poisoned controls were rinsed separately. The bottles were then sealed with a rubber stopper fitted with a center well and filter paper assembly (FHar.i-son et al., 1971). Duplicate samples and controls were usd for incubation periods of 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 60 minutes. ImmedJiatLly before the end of each incubation period 0.2 ml B-phenethyla,2r.in was placed on the accordian folded filter papers with a syringe. At the end of each incubation period replicate samples and controls were poisoned by injecting 2 ml of saturated HgC12 solution into the bottle. 10% HCL was added dropwise with a syringe to lower the pH to below 3 to release CO2 from the incubation solution. After acidification the bottles were left for one hour to permit absorption of 14CO2.The filter paper was removed and placed in a solution of 10 ml Aquasol (New England Nuclear) plus 2 ml freshly distilled B-phenethylamine for determitnation of carbon-14 activity 6



PAGE 1

19. IV. Physico-chemical Relationships: Sedimentology and Habitat Structure Livingston et al. (1975) showed that the aquatic environment in the Apalachicola Estuary is affected to a considerable degree by seasonallydirected fluctuations of the Apalachicola River. Variables such as local rainfall, tides, wind-induced currents, temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, color, and pH, are important determinants of the population and community structure of this bay system; together, these parameters define the array of habitats in the area. The sediments determine to a considerable degree the forms of benthic organisms which occur in a given area. This is particularly true of the benthic infauna, where feeding types are often correlated with sediment forms. This includes direct sedimentary control of trophic distribution (Sanders, 1958), coincidental correlation between water movement factors and trophic distribution (Sanders, 1958; McNulty et al., 1962), and trophic group amensalism mediated by the sediments (Rhoads and Young, 1970). Support for these observations is available (Bloom et al., 1972). Thus, sediment analysis was conducted concurrently with the analysis of the infauna of the Apalachicola Estuary. Materials and Methods: Sediment Analysis Sediment samples were taken with a corer (d., 7.62 cm) monthly from March, 1975 through February, 1976. This was carried out at fixed stations around the bay (Fig. 1). These analyses were conducted on the top 5-10 cm of each core.



PAGE 1

188. Table 4: Microdetritus (g) taken at 2 stations in the Apalachicola Drainage System (7,8). Surface and bottom samples were taken on station 7 while mid-depth areas were sampled at station 8. New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 8/75 7 T # 10 -.0032 18 .0006 .0028 35 .0007 .0036 60 .0030 .0088 73.3 120 .0075 .0132 44.0 170 .0096 .0160 41.7 325 .0513 .0488 23.8 Total .0964 gm 7 B # 10 -.0020 18 -.0028 35 .0007 .0060 60 .0079 .0116 36.7 120 .0096 .0168 43.8 170 .0161 .0220 34.2 325 .1364 .1204 22.1 Total .1816 gm 8 M # 10 --18 -35 .0005 .0028 60 .0033 .0088 66.7 120 .0049 .0052 26.5 170 .0060 .0088 36.7 325 .0299 .0388 32.4 Total .0644



PAGE 1

211. Methods currently in use in our laboratory include: a. Microbial prokaryote/eukaryote ratios. Preliminary experiments have shown that the detrital microflora synthesizes about 20% of its total fatty acids as C18-, C20-, C22-, and C24-polyenoic fatty acids. These are clearly formed by eukaryotic organisms (28). We.will contrast the proportion of polyenoic fatty acids with a characteristic prokaryotic fatty acid such as C-15 isobranched to develop prokaryotic-eukaryotic ratio and contrast the ratio to that between the triglyceride, steroid, glycerosphingolipid (eukaryotic lipids) versus a typical bacterial lipid such as phosphatidyl glycerol in test systems where we know we would stimulate fungal or algal growth. The proportion of major classes of lipids was a function of the time of incubation with sodium acetate-l-14C. The length of the incubation with 14C shows good correlation with what we expect for the growth rates of different components of the detrital microflora. Slower growing organisms contain more glycolipid and neutral lipid than phospholipid, which is what would be expected for fungi versus bacteria, for example (4). Consequently a study of the proportion of key lipids versus time of incubation with 14C could give correlations to the relative impacts of toxicants on prokaryotes and eukaryotes. b. Gram-positive to gram-negative ratio. Preliminary evidence indicates the usefulness of the ratio of phosphatidyl glycerol aminoacyl derivatives, or glycosyl diglyceride to a universal microbial lipid like phosphatidyl ethanolamine to determine a gram-negative to gram-positive ratio among the bacteria. Phosphatidyl glycerol aminoacyl derivatives or glycosyl diglycerides are typical components of gram-positive microbes and are not found in classical gram-negative heterotrophs. c. Distinctive prokaryote-phospholipid markers. The composition of the non-diacyl phospholipids can be used to follow the relative activities of



PAGE 1

179. I' I T 1 1'0i 0* 1 K I | 1 1 I |i|I I.r ; lr I 'Y II S*, ( S '' i : I |.TF 7" ;lI ~~" I 'l 'i tt 7-. ') 7'1 " 1 7",oI 7 o50 ni 750901 751001 751101 752I01 760101 T'" '. ;, ..1 .. ) i 'l. 71..1S ' .CC ,, 1.-'ln ??7.0o 4,19.1P 7P.56 194.36 A5.54 1lI9.44 I.. .1 '.. I -. i 4r). 4 , *f, .ni 4'3.50 17.13 44.A9 36.57 41.34 [IF 'a. f .I ."' I I-.' .'1 7. ) '. -,.?l 3e. r A 1'i3. 1 2? 5.75 IA9.?1 118.30 17.10 67.79 1 .'' I1 .r 13., .1. .I 21 .9.' 0 31.02 30.33 H.9 277.32 9.54 23.46 F"',C .1.).. 4to. j I4 .) n I~I. *'l 1;. ' 0 7 .3 3RQ 1?22.24 527.83 43.64 22.90n 49.Q ." 0. , i .i1 1..1 .l


PAGE 1

26. winter of 1976. This remains unexplained at this time. The East Bay data will be more thoroughly reviewed in another report involving potential impact of clearcutting on the Bay. Orthophosphate and nitrate levels in the Apalachicola Estuary are shown in Figs. 26-29. These data will be analyzed in detail by Iverson and Myers (Section V of this report). Analysis and Discussion: A statistical treatment was carried out with the first four years of physico-chemical data. The seasonal changes in various physico-chemical variables in the Apalachicola Bay System have already been described (Livingston, 1974, 1976; Livingston et al., 1974a: Livingston et al., 1976) and will not be reviewed in detail here. Overall, this is a shallow barrier island estuary dominated physically by the widely fluctuating Apalachicola River (Fig. 30). During the 4-year period of study, the river flow usually peaked during the period from January to April. At these times, the range of extreme diurnal flows usually was maximal. The range and mean flow usually reached low levels during late summer and fall periods. This pattern was almost completely out of phase with local rainfall which ordinarily peaked during the summer and early fall. There was considerable annual variation of river flow with relatively low levels during the first and third years of sampling. During the winter and spring of 1973, there was especially pronounced river flow and flooding throughout the Apalachicola Valley. Water temperature followed seasonal patterns with no substantial variation from year to year. At any given time, there was usually little vertical or horizontal variation in water temperature throughout the bay



PAGE 1

Fig. 9: Bottom water color (Pt-Co units) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. AoALAG4 SCATTERGRAPS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 17 FILE N(JAME (CREATION LATE = 77/r3/11.) SCATTERGRC3 OF (OOWN) .COI (ACROSS) DAYS i,..22533 293.675CG 473,125L5 652.57530 832.025C01011.475201190.925001370.375001549.8250B1729.27500 .+----+ ---.-----..+------, ...*** *******...-+-4.+* -----. -***--**** *** .--**** * 3'.: + .I 368.60 T I I I I SI I 3Z'.* I .I * 3243.0 I I I I I I I I * I I I S1\ I I I 2e.2 +* I I + 2z88.C00 I I I I I I I SI l I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I SI I I 16.t' c + I I + 216.00 ------------------------------------------------.----------------------I I I I I I I I I I I 1I'.3' M I I * 10.C3 c | I I I I I I i i i i I I 14-.3: I I 146.00 I I I I I II I I I I \ I I I I I I SI I :I J I I I -eLACZ, Sr-~T-.E RG. S .TIME IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977 ST AIST:S S.. ' CORtELS'IIN (0)-.2'.76 A SQUARED -.05797 SIGNIFICANCE R -.C3693 S-; -:: C STS -5'. 33'' INTER7CPT (A) -6r,.C596 STO EPFOR OF A -.1.78659 3"S':F:C -."' 3.0 E () --.02513 STO ERROR OF B -.21379 .s:;:r-.:F N: 3 -'. toP 2TE -'*IL.. -56 vaC."'j'.7 vALUES9 ?'ISSING VALUES -49 ..-...S0' " ;1S D, S :F A COeFFICiENT CANN'OT 0 E CO"PurTF.



PAGE 1

118. Table .2. Summary of analysis of variance of carbon uptake and phosphate uptake nutrient enrichment bioassays. The symbols under P04 and NO3 indicate the statistical signrificnce of the effect of that nutrient on either carbon uptake or phosphate uptake. An F test was used to determine the values N indicates no data, " indicates cC0.05, and -indicates cC _ 0.05. When doC _ 0.05 the effect of the nutrient additions was always stimulatory to the physiological process measured.



PAGE 1

Fig. 12,: Surface turbidity (J.T.U.) at Station 1 (Apalachicola Bay) from March, 1972 to March, 1977. .,...,,* 1 riliveCu lr *a overrjACttt ^aIt'IUtI oC urfU itcy APLLLCH SCATTFRGRA3PS 1 77/03/11. PAGE 11 F ILE N !:;' (C:E£TIO3L17T = 77/13/11.) SC;-' .CF (JCrN) TUTi (ACOOSS) DAYS 1-.?-Z; 3 2-3.575^: 473.i?'L 552.575C 32."25:i011 .475I1JG.925O1370.375301549.O25031729.2750C .--------------!5-----------------»----+--------------L--------------+--------------+---------+---------+----+----------------*-----. SI I i 2.C 61.3p 1 1 + 61.51 I I I I I I 1 **.L I I 4 16 .*C I I I SI I I I I I I1 II II 1Z2.3; I I * z3.C0 II I I I I I I fI 12iSz. I I ? 123.50O I I I I I I SI I I 3/ I 1 + 312.50 SI I I SIII PLOT --J -------V--LULS EXCLU VALUESMISSG VALUES ---------------------------5----61.;C I I + 61.5I 4 I I I I 4 2.fl I I I I I I I I .---------**---*------*------------+*-------------+-**********-****-***------------*-----*-*-***AACrt-SCi S TIE IN MONTHS: March, 1972 to February, 1977 I I 2'-OTTEJ VALUJLS -R EXCLUCItC VALUESr MISSING VALUES -45 r T '



PAGE 1

,-t--. --;-----~--+----+-----+-+----+ -----+--C *------+-------------+-+--------+ . 59.57 I + 59.50 1 I. -I I I 535.66 * I ? 13'66 I I I I I I I I I i II ..T I I I I I .I I I I T .. ---------------------I------0 I I I ---------------------------„-------_----_----------------------------------------------------------I SI 950.6. I ( I 1 '0.30 ST Si r .I \+ SI I.I 1 2.96 I + 16.9 T T i I I .1r I +.1 I + + -.-. ----.+ ----+--,, --+ +--+-+--" --+ +_-+ --.-..----+.--. 3/72 5/72 9/72 12/72 3/73 /6/73 9/73 12/73 3/74 6/74 9/74 12/74 /75 6/75 9/75 12/75 3/76 6/76 9/76 Figure 6. Surface Phosphate-P in Apalachicola Bay.



PAGE 1

149. FIGURE CAPTIONS Figure 2. Double logarithmic plots of uptake velocity vs. concentration. The slope represents the order of reaction n. (A) The order with respect to concentration, nP. Upt-ake velocities calculated from slope of regression. line of uptake vs. time at each concentration (Figure 1). y= -0.967 + 1.00 x,r2 = 0.99,nc = 1 (B) The order with respect to time, nt. Uptake velocities at each time during an experiment for a single concentration of glycolic acid. The logarithm of the rate at each time is plotted against the logarithm of the concentration of glycolic acid in the tissue at that time. Each point represents the mean rate of three replicates. 0 3.56 UM, 08.82 p M, 015.4 vM, A68.0 pM, A133. VM. Figure 3. Evolution of labelled carbon dioxide by M. mercenaria. No significant difference between slopes-of regression lines for antibiotic treated vs. untreated tissue (p<0.05). T=200C ountreated tissue, Aantibiotic treated tissue DHgCL2 poisoned control tissue. Figure 4. Evolution of labelled carbon dioxide by M. campechiensis. No significant difference between slopes of regression lines for antibiotic treated vs. untreated tissue (p<0.05). T=200C ountreated tissue, Aantibiotic treated tissue nHgC12 poisoned control tissue. Figure 5. Possible mechanism for inclusion of glycolic acid into bivalve metabolism and evolution of labelled carbon dioxide. 1 lactate dehydrogenese catalyzed reaction. 2 transaminase reaction postulated by Hochachka (1973). 0 unlabelled a carbon of glycolic acid. 0 labelled carboxyl carbon of glycolic acid. 21



PAGE 1

195. Table 4: (continued) New Dry Net Ash-free Sieve Weight Dry Weight % Date Station Fraction Per Sample Per 1000 L Organics 9/76 7 T # 10 .0021 .0021 76 18 .0065 .0057 66 35 .0144 .0072 38 60 .0057 .0033 44 120 .0079 .0017 16 170 .0074 .0021 22 325 .1203 .0352 22 Total .0573 7 B # 10 --18 .0041 .0028 34 35 .0018 .0018 50 60 .0052 .0020 19 120 .0207 .0042 10 170 .0280 .0058 10 325 .3616 .0986 14 Total .1152 8 M # 10 .0025 .0020 60 18 .0041 .0048 88 35 .0100 .0105 79 60 .0063 .0053 63 120 .0068 .0032 35 170 .0051 .0017 25 325 .0558 .0250 34 Total .0525 10/76 7 T # 10 --18 .0015 .0012 60 35 .0035 .0015 31 60 .0072 .0015 15 120 .0039 .0021 41 170 .0029 .0017 45 325 .0317 .0109 26 Total .0189 7 B # 10 .0005 18 .0030 .0029 73 35 .0022 .0021 73 60 .0033 .0013 30 120 .0087 .0021 18 170 .0125 .0043 26 325 .1609 .0340 16 Total .0467 8M # 10 18 .0002 -35 .0024 .0021 67 60 .0022 .0009 32 120 .0037 .0015 30 170 .0031 .0013 32 325 .0208 .0077 28 Total .0135



PAGE 1

LAWtoN CHILES COMMITYm FLAOIDA APPROPRIATIONS BUDGET GOVLENMENT OPERATIONS SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING nItrrufe~ ^tcafez oenate JOINT COMMITTEE ON CONGRESSIONAL OPERATIONS WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 DEMOCRATIC STEETING COMMITTEE October 5, 1976 Dr. Robert J. Livingston Department of Biological Science Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Dear Dr. Livingston: Just a note to let you know I appreciate your sending me a copy of the transcript of the Conference on the Apalachicola Drainage System from earlier this year. I hope to have the opportunity to read the study in its entirety and will certainly give this research thorough consideration in my future dealings with planners from the Army Corps of Engineers. Once again, your thoughtfulness is most appreciated. Since ely your LAWTON CHILES LC/dr/SF4e-3/H



PAGE 1

170. TABLE * Plants Known in Florida only from the Bluffs of the Apalachicola River, or Some of Them also from the Floodplain. Actaea pachypoda Eli. rare Arnoglossum atriplicifolium (L.) Pippen Baptisia megacarpa Chapm. Carex gracilescens Steud. Cornus alternifolia L. f. rare Croomia pauciflora (Nutt.) Torr. threatened Cynoglossum virginianum L. rare Dioclea multiflora (T. & G.) Mohr Hepatica americana (DC.) Ker. rare Hydrangia arborescens L. Luzula acuminata Raf. Luzula echinata (Small) F. J. Hermann Matelea baldwyniana (Sweet) Woods. Matelea flavidula (Chapm.) Woods. Phlox carolina L. Silene polypetala (Walt.) Fern. endangered Smilacina racemosa (L.) Desf. Trillium lancifolium Raf. rare Uvularia sessilifolia L. rare Veratrum woodii Robbins endangered Verbesina alternifolia (L.) Britt. Viola affinis LeConte Woodsia obtusa (Spreng.) Torr. Zizia aurea (L.) Koch



PAGE 1

?-.U*US s3NAIIt SI O bJ ublO E..tJ.u e iCJ aod J.eo l e u oij$i Ad 0 93. 1 d; 3dj u * tlO4 *«. *... .. -*. e * *. .. .*. * * ud fld J us t teddd **kl.d *4ad U01NA. ... * .I.. .* ***; ... .s. ....s ...aA .Oad .dOd A .ke *01d *Ju .... * * JJ Le.* .U * ..u $.1 *.* .*I ..6t 9. . IOALV d7. 31o9 3Zp..o 177. 6. c.4.« 56.d »3. 27.5 1 a3 C Sibe? a 5d Sa 0 0 40to L S C3 3220 11 b 3 .3 L SLO J0,40