Paper 20 



By January and February 1976^ Eddy had moved southwest ward from 

 the New York ji.iht to the positions shown in Figure 20.1. 



However^ in the Chesapeake bight Slope Water samples/' outside the 

 eddyr W. iyceoi and P. 2raciL.is had become absent by January. 



In Februaryr when Eddy arrived in the Chesapeake Bightr it 

 contained more j^ . iycens and £. 3£c£iii5 than either the 

 Chesapeake Bight Shelf or Slope Waters and more than the New York 

 iMght Slope Water through jhich it had come. rioueverr at this 

 time the abundance of M- iycens and P. araciijs was also 

 increasina in Chesapeake Biyht Shelf and Slope Waters. 



SUMMARY 



It is postulated: that Eddy D broke off from the Gulf Stream in 

 June 1975 containing P. aE.2cii.is but no 'A. Lucens; that Eddy D 

 was populated with ^^. iycens from entrained Shelf and Slope 

 Waters as it traveled to the west and southwest; that M. iu^ens 

 and P. oracilis reproduced more and/or survived longer in the 

 eddy than they did in the Slope or Shelf Water; and that it is 

 unlikely that M. Ly.9.&Qi accumulated in Eddy D by simple addition 

 of recruits from outside the eddy/^ because if this were the 

 reason for its abundance/' other Shelf and Slope Water species 

 would be expected to have accumulated in the same manner and this 

 was not the case. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



we thank the staffs of the U.S. Coast Guards Atlantic Area/' 

 i^arine Services Division; the U.S. Coast Guard Oceanog raph i c 

 Unit; and the officers and crews of the Coast Guard cutters 

 ^LslL' ^aki.sg./' Duane/' ia^Latin/' ReL.ieance/ and lane^. we also 

 thank the Sea Education Association/ the officers and crew of 

 their RV westward/ ana the personnel of the NOAA ship Oregon II.. 

 Without the help of these groups^ this survey would not have been 

 possille. 



340 



