FISHERY BULLETIN: VOL. 80, NO. 3 



d beyond the expected starvation date, but I was 

 not able to maintain larvae much older than this. 



The growth of field-caught larvae collected off 

 California and stored in 80% ethanol was deter- 

 mined by otolith aging. Readings to 30 incre- 

 ments appear to clearly represent daily deposi- 

 tion of increments. However, after roughly 30 

 increments, dark bands appearing on the otoliths 

 were separated by several inner rings and it was 

 difficult to distinguish which were daily incre- 

 ments. R. Methot (Southwest Fisheries Center, 

 National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, 

 Calif.) who read many of these otoliths from 

 large larvae, felt that the larger bands were the 

 daily marks. For the large otoliths I read, I fol- 

 lowed this assumption. 



The growth of Pacific hake larvae in length 

 (not corrected for preservation effects) was fitted 

 with a Gompertz curve (Fig. 4); however, a 

 straight line provides a better fit for larvae <20 d 

 old (Fig. 4, insert). Pacific hake larvae grow 

 slowly in length for at least the first 30 d of post- 

 hatching life and then grow rapidly. 



Growth in weight was examined by determin- 

 ing a length-weight relationship for larvae (Fig. 

 5a) and then combining this information with the 

 age-length relationship described above (Fig. 

 5b). The weights used were from larvae pre- 

 served in 80% ethanol and uncorrected for pres- 



• 50 



.50 



: -1.00 



-1.50 



-2.00 



+ + 



.50 



.75 1 .00 



LOG LENGTH trim 



1.25 



Figure 5.— Growth in weight of Pacific hake larvae, a. 

 length-weight relationship of larvae off California (dry weights 

 are from larvae preserved in ethanol), b. age-weight relation- 

 ship. 



B.O 



25.0 50.0 75.0 100.0 



INCREMENTS (DAYS) 



125.0 



150.0 



Figure 4.— The growth of larvae caught off southern California determined 

 from otolith increments. A Gompertz curve was fit to the data, Y = 1.72 * 

 exp(3.15 * (1 - exp(-0.02624 * X))). Insert: daily growth for the first 20 d was 

 fit better with a straight line: Y = 2.75 + 0.16X 



592 



