saury sets is puzzling. However, interpretation of the results requires the assumption that the 

 fishing in all of the 1 1 categories was similarly distributed in time and space. This probably 

 was not the case, but as a further check we have summarized the catch rates during a single 

 month in each of two linaited areas (table 2). We find considerable variations, but for these 

 sets of data the 100-percent saury baitings are not anonnalous, and the conclusion that neither 

 bait is superior is confirmed. 



Table 1. --Catch per 100 hooks of yellowfin and bigeye tuna arranged by the 

 relative amount of sauries and sao'dines used as bait (all ex- 

 peditions connbined) 



Table 2. --Summary of the yellowfin tuna catch rates (catch per 100 



hooks) by amount of saury used as bait for two limited area^ 



Percent saury used as bait 



20 



30 



40 



50 



60 



70 



"5o ri^ 



100 



Yellowfin 

 catch rate 



Boat /days of 

 fishing 



6 -7 N. latitude, 177 -179 E. longitude, October 1951 



3.24 



3. 14 



0.60 



0.70 



0.52 



0.90 

 3 



0.48 



0.77 



2 



0.57 

 5 



Yellowfin 

 catch rate 



Boat /days of 

 fishing 



1 -2 N. latitude, 160 -165 E. longitude, May 1951 



3.42 

 6 



2.47 



2. 16 



0.98 

 5 



2.24 



2.09 



56 



