Table 7. --Summary of chl-aquaro analyses of herring bait 

 return and total catch by method of baiting 

 (single V3. double), John R. Manning cruise 14 

 (based on a total of 432 hooks per method of 

 baiting; table 29) 



y stations have been combined to give expected values greater 

 than 5. 



The results of the single vs. double hooking experiment (fig. 3a and 3e) 

 conducted on the Cavalierl cruise are presented in table 8. A significant advsm- 

 tage for double hooking appears in the bait returns but not in the catch. However, 

 an analysis of the catches resulted in a significant interaction chi-square of 

 14.34 (P<0.05), which can be traced to the reversals of catch on stations 11 and 

 12 (table 30). At present no explanation can be advanced for this discrepancy in 

 the catches. 



Table 8. — Summary of chi-square analyses of herring bait 

 return and total catch by method of baiting 

 (single vs. double), Cavalierl cruise (based on 

 a total of 1,308 hooka per method of baiting; 

 table 30) 



Another experiment was conducted on the Cavalierl testing five different 

 methods of baiting. Three of these were variations of single hooking and the 

 other two were different double hooking methods (fig. 3a, b, c, d, and e). As in 

 all of the other experiments, the bait returns showed a significant difference 

 with method of baiting (table 9), the double-hooked baits giving higher returns. 

 The catches of the two stations concerned were too small for analysis. 



