284 



Fishery Bulletin 102(2) 



Females 



Males 



a 



60 



40  



20  







80 



i- 60 

 CD 

 ~ 40 



| 20 



D- 



80 



60 



40 



20 







Spnng I 



J_i Q_m 



In rfi J1 



&' ,5? & & 



Spnng 



mmer 



It 



rail 



IL 



n 





resident nearshore 

 resident offshore 



Figure 4 



The percentage of gametogenic tissue of resident nearshore and resident offshore 

 queen conch iStrombus gigas) by sex and season. The dotted line separates the cat- 

 egories that were combined for statistical analyses. 



Nearshore females 



Nearshore males 



100 



80 



60 



40 



20 

 100 



80 • 



60  



40 



20 

 



An 



L 



n n 



L 



?*/ 



& 8 



<? s* 



6* 







resident 

 translocated 



Figure 5 



Gonadal maturity of resident nearshore and translocated nearshore queen conch 

 iSlrombus gigas) by sex and season. The dotted line separates the categories that 

 were combined for statistical analyses. 



a higher percentage of translo- 

 cated nearshore females in some 

 stage of gonadal development than 

 resident nearshore females during 

 the summer; in fact, about 30% of 

 the translocated females were ripe 

 (Fig. 5). By fall, the differences 

 were even more extreme; over 60% 

 of the translocated nearshore fe- 

 males were ripe, whereas all of the 

 resident nearshore females were 

 incapable of reproducing (Fig. 5). 

 Although there was a significant 

 difference in gonadal maturity be- 

 tween translocated nearshore and 

 resident nearshore females during 

 the summer, there was no signifi- 

 cant difference in the percentage 

 of gametogenic tissue (Table 5 and 

 Fig. 6). However, by fall, there 

 were significant differences in the 

 percentage of gametogenic tissue 

 between translocated nearshore 

 and resident nearshore females 

 (Table 5 1. Most translocated near- 

 shore females had developed >75' i 

 of the gonad, whereas most resi- 

 dent nearshore females still had 

 <259c gametogenic tissue (Fig. 6). 



Histology: males 



There were marked differences in 

 gonadal condition of resident near- 

 shore and resident offshore male 

 conch (Fig. 2, D and E). There were 

 significant differences in gonadal 

 maturity between resident offshore 

 and resident nearshore male conch 

 during the spring, summer, and fall 

 (Table 4). During the spring and 

 summer, the gonads of most resi- 

 dent offshore males were catego- 

 rized as ripe; by fall most were spent 

 (Fig. 3). In contrast, at least half of 

 the resident nearshore males were 

 not capable of spawning during 

 the spring and summer, although 

 some were in the early stages of tes- 

 ticular development and some were 

 even ripe (Fig. 3). However, all the 

 sampled resident nearshore males 

 were incapable of spawning by fall 

 and none were identified as spent 

 (Fig. 3). Histological examinations 

 also revealed significant differ- 

 ences in the percentage of game- 

 togenic tissue between resident 

 offshore and resident nearshore 

 males during the spring, summer. 



