FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 73, NO. 4 



provide most fish w^ith only a minor dietary 

 supplement. 



CONCLUSIONS 



In and about kelp beds off Santa Barbara, the 

 kelp perch, the senorita, and to a lesser extent the 

 white seaperch, belong to a foraging guild of 

 picker-type microcarnivorous fishes. Throughout 

 the year, the kelp perch and senorita, which com- 

 monly pick ectoparasites from larger fish, spend 

 most of the day in the sun-lit upper waters in and 

 about the kelp canopy. Here they can discern and 

 pick small prey from various surfaces and from the 

 open water. A more generalized picker, the white 

 seaperch, occurs a bit deeper in the water column 

 and, unlike the two cleaner fishes, eats substantial 

 amounts of benthic prey. 



Even though the two co-occurring cleaner fishes 

 have superficially similar feeding mechanisms, 

 they seem to minimize mutual interference in 

 resource use by foraging in somewhat different 

 ways. Thus their total overlap in resource use is 

 relatively small because the kelp perch feeds ac- 

 tively all day and does not eat substantial amounts 

 of plant-encrusting bryozoans, the predominate 

 staple of the senorita and white seaperch. 



Within the kelp-bed area, the senorita has the 

 widest habitat breadth. It broadly overlaps the 

 white seaperch's range below the canopy and near 

 the bottom. Their sharing of food and habitat 

 would seem to make these species the greater po- 

 tential competitors. But even so, they may seldom 

 actually interfere with one another because the 

 white seaperch is not limited to the kelp bed and 

 occurs there less frequently than the senorita. 



None of the three species forages at night, when 

 all are relatively inactive and the senorita buries 

 itself in soft substrates on the reef. 



Neither the kelp perch nor the senorita obtains 

 substantial amounts of food from cleaning, 

 although some individual senoritas may. Of the 

 two species, the senorita is more specialized in its 

 diel behavior and may be somewhat more nutri- 

 tionally dependent on cleaning. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



We thank Stevan Arnold, Edmund Hobson, 

 Michael Neushul, and two anonymous reviewers 

 for critically reading the manuscript and offering 

 many helpful suggestions. We thank Ralph'Lar- 

 son, Fred Steinert, and James Cook for assisting 



the diving operations; Sharon Horn for drafting 

 the illustrations; and Norm Lammer for his in- 

 valuable technical assistance with equipment and 

 boating operations. This study was supported by 

 the following grants: NSF GA 38588 and Sea 

 Grants GH 43 and GH 95; and USDC Sea Grants 

 2-35208-6 and 04-3-158-22, R-FA-14. 



LITERATURE CITED 



Alexander, R. M. 



1967. Functional desig^n in fishes. Hutchinson and Co., 

 Lond., 160 p. 



BORTONE, S. A. 



1971. Studies on the biology of the sand perch, Diplcctrum 

 forrniisum (Perciformes: serranidae). Fla. Dep. Nat. 

 Resour. Tech. Serv. 65;l-27. 

 Brown, D.W. 



1974. Hydrography and midwater fishes of three contiguous 

 oceanic areas off Santa Barbara, California. Los Ang. 

 Cty. Mus. Contrib. Sci. 261:1-30. 

 Chao, L. N. 



1973. Digestive system and feeding habits of the cunner, 

 Taufogolahruf: adspersus, a stomachless fish. Fish. Bull., 

 U.S. 71:565-586. 



Clarke, W. D. 



1971. Mysids of the southern kelp region. In W. J. North 

 (editor). The biology of giant kelp beds (Macrocystis) in 

 California, p. 369-380. Nova Hedwigia 32. 



COLLETTE, B. B., AND F. H. TaLBOT. 



1972. Activity patterns of coral reef fishes with emphasis on 

 nocturnal-diurnal changeover. In B. B. Collette and S. A. 

 Earle (editors). Results of the Tektite program: Ecology 

 of coral reef fishes, p. 98-124. Bull. Los Ang. Cty. Mus. 

 Nat. Hist. Sci. 14. 



DeMartini, E. E. 



1969. A correlative study of the ecology and comparative 

 feeding mechanism morphology of the Emhiotocidae 

 (surf-fishes) as evidence of the family's adaptive radia- 

 tion into available ecological niches. Wasmann J. Biol. 

 27:177-247. 

 Ebeling, a. W., W. Werner, F. A. Dewitt, .Jr., and G. M. 

 Cailliet. 



1971. Santa Barbara oil spill: Short-term analysis of 

 macroplankton and fish. U.S. Dep. Commer., Environ. 

 Prot. Agency Off. Water Qual. Proj. 15080 EAL, 68 p. 

 Hobson, E. S. 



1965. Diurnal-nocturnal activity of some inshore fishes in 

 the Gulf of California. Copeia 1965:291-302. 



1968. Predatory behavior of some shore fishes in the Gulf of 

 California. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Res. Rep. 73, 92 p. 



1971. Cleaning sybiosis among California inshore fishes. 

 Fish. Bull., U.S. 69:491-523. 



1972. Activity of Hawaiian reef fishes during the evening 

 and morning transitions between daylight and dark- 

 ness. Fish. Bull., U.S. 70:715-740. 



1974. Feeding relationships of teleostean fishes on coral 

 reefs in Kona, Hawaii. Fish. Bull., U.S. 72:915-1031. 



Horn, H.S. 



1966. Measurement of "overlap" in comparative ecological 

 studies. Am. Nat. 100:419-424. 



HUBBS, C. L., AND L. ('. HUBBS. 



1954. Data on the life history, variation, ecology, and rela- 

 tionships of the kelp perch, Braclu/isfiux frenatus, an 



828 



