WIGLEY and STINTON: REMAINS FROM MARINE SEDIMENTS 



preserving fluids soon render the otoliths use- 

 less, if they do not destroy them completely. 



Nearly all the otoliths had suflTered some ero- 

 sion that may have resulted from abrasion on 

 the sea bottom, possibly preceded by partial dis- 

 solution in the digestive system of predatory ani- 

 mals and later by the reworking of bottom sedi- 

 ments by deposit-feeding benthic invertebrates 

 such as polychaete worms, holothurians, starfish, 

 and many others. One or several of these agents 

 resulted in the destruction of the rostral area on 

 all percoid otoliths. The outer rims of some mer- 

 luccid otoliths were damaged sufficiently to make 

 identification difficult. 



DISTRIBUTION AND DENSITY 



Fish remains, all species combined, occurred 

 at 65% of the stations. The remains were not 

 uniformly distributed over the area but occurred 

 mainly in the southern, offshore sector (Figures 

 19 and 20). More than 90 Cf of all fish remains 

 were taken at depths greater than 150 m, where- 

 as less than 1 9r came from depths less than 50 m. 

 Only 369^ of the samples collected at depths less 



than 100 m contained one or more otoliths, 

 whereas all samples taken at depths greater than 

 100 m contained otoliths (Table 17). Highest 

 densities, 500 to 3,030/m-, were in a band par- 

 allel to the isobaths along the outer portion of 

 the continental shelf and upper part of the con- 

 tinental slope. 



Density of fish otoliths was correlated closely 



Table 17. — Density distribution of fish otoliths in re- 

 lation to water depth. 



Water 

 depth 



Samples 

 collected 



Samples 



containing 



otoliths 



Mean 

 number 



of 

 otoliths 



7,1 



ll I _ I I I 



, 7i0' 



■^-^— ' '. ^ 





41*- 



- 60' 



40* 



.BLOCK 



[island ' 



,-> 1 



MARTHA'S VINEYARD J 



NANTUCKET 



( 



( > 



'•.'■.V'i' 





-80 



20-500 ^ZZl 500 - 3.000 



T 1 1 — ■^m — I 1 1 1 1 ^t;^; — I 1 1 r 



41* 



-40* 



7'! 



7'0« 



Figure 19. — Geographic distribution and density of fish 

 otoliths, all species combined. 



- 20 



I ^1** I I I I I Zi2_ 



'-\-;' •' - 



I , I L. 



MARTHA'S VINEYARD J 



NANTUCKET 



T 1 f 



Figure 20. — Geographic distribution of fish bones. 



29 



