FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 69, NO. 3 



data were presented. In his review of cleaning 

 symbiosis, Feder (1966: 368), basing his con- 

 clusion on Limbaugh's work, similarly stated: 

 "In all probability, many good fishing grounds 

 are such primarily because they are cleaning 

 stations." I believe that this contention is un- 

 founded. Seiioritas are the major cleaners in 

 California inshore waters, so that if cleaning 

 symbiosis does account for most concentrations 

 of reef fishes in this region, as Limbaugh sug- 

 gested, then seiioritas would be the cleaner large- 

 ly responsible. Cleaning occurs wherever seii- 

 oritas are concentrated but clearly is not a major 

 activity of the population, even though it may 

 be so for a relatively few individuals. In any 

 event, it seems safe to conclude that cleaning 

 is not among the major factors determining the 

 distribution of seiioritas. And if cleaning does 

 not determine the distribution of seiioritas them- 

 selves, it seems unlikely that it would determine 

 the distribution of other species. 



Undoubtedly many factors contribute to cre- 

 ating situations that draw concentrations of 

 fishes to certain locations. Where a number of 

 different species have similar requirements, as- 

 semblages will develop where conditions satis- 

 fying these requirements are optimum. The 

 presence of these fishes increases the complexity 

 of the environment, thus creating situations that 

 support still other species, and so on. Often 

 it is apparent that certain features are especially 

 significant as a basis for these concentrations. 

 Consider, for example, the rocky points that Lim- 

 baugh included in his list of "well-known Cali- 

 fornia sport-fishing grounds." The flora and 

 fauna of these locations are generally rich, a 

 fact probably related to such local features as 

 converging currents that frequently produce up- 

 welling and nutrient-rich waters. Plankton is 

 commonly abundant here, along with plankton- 

 feeding fishes like the blacksmith. Seiioritas 

 and other species frequently are numerous here 

 too, but the main attraction seems to be a gen- 

 erally rich food supply rather than available 

 cleaning. Similarly it is unrealistic to attribute 

 concentrations of fishes around sunken ships to 

 cleaning activity. Where a wreck has settled 

 on an open expanse it becomes a haven for fishes 

 that require a nearby structure for cover or a 



spatial reference point. Obviously such fishes 

 will center themselves here, because the sur- 

 rounding featureless substrate does not meet 

 their requirements. I am describing a well- 

 known phenomenon, one that is the rationale be- 

 hind constructing artificial fishing reefs. Thus 

 food and a suitable substrate often appear to be 

 key features in a habitat that supports large 

 numbers of fishes. Of course to cite just one or 

 the other would be an oversimplification, as re- 

 quirements in both must be satisfied, along with 

 many other perhaps more subtle needs. The var- 

 ious s])ecies assembled at such locations inter- 

 act in a variety of ways; cleaning symbiosis is 

 one such interaction, and undoubtedly an impor- 

 tant one, but hardly the prime reason for them 

 being there. 



CHANGES IN HABITS WITH TIME 



Uncertainty remains regarding changes in 

 habits with time. The picture of activity devel- 

 oped in this report was derived directly by ob- 

 serving activity and also indirectly by examining 

 both digestive-tract contents and the specific 

 ectoparasites that infest the various fishes. But 

 these methods only define situations that exist 

 over a relatively brief span of time. Data on 

 individual activity over longer periods are need- 

 ed. Certainly habits of individuals change with 

 time, but how much change and over how much 

 time? The fact that material in the digestive 

 tracts frequently occurs in sharply delimited 

 homologous blocks indicates that these fishes 

 often feed heavily or even e.xclusively on one 

 particular type of prey, and then abruptly shift 

 to something else. Are habits such as a relative 

 tendency to clean and to clean members of just 

 one species immutable characteristics of indi- 

 viduals, or have the observations described in 

 this report simply defined temporary situations 

 that the various individuals just happened to be 

 experiencing at the time they were singled out 

 for study? It is possible that all seiioritas clean 

 at one time or another, though not all at once, 

 and only a few at a time. It is also possible that 

 a seiiorita, which tends to clean members of just 

 one species during a given period of cleaning, 

 may select members of another species during 



520 



