OCEANOGRAPHY, BIONOMICS, AND AQUICULTURE. 



443 



sure that I have taken better netfuls than this both in the Irish Sea and 

 on the west of Scotland. 



In order to get another case on different ground, not of my own choos- 

 ing, on- the first occasion after the publication of\)r. Murray's volumes, 

 when I was out witnessing the trawling observations of the Lancashire 

 sea fisheries steamer John Fell, I counted, with the help of my assist- 

 ant, Mr. Andrew Scott, and the men on board, the results of the first 

 haul of the shrimp trawl. It was taken at the mouth of the Mersey 

 estuary, inside the Liverpool Bar, on what the naturalist would consider 

 very unfavorable ground, with a bottom of muddy sand, at a depth of 

 G fathoms. The shrimp trawl (IJ-ineh mesh) was down for one hour, 

 and it brought up over 17,000 specimens, referable to at least 30 spe- 

 cies, 1 belonging to 34 genera. These numbers have been exceeded on 

 many other hauls taken in the ordinary course of work by the fisheries 

 steamer in Liverpool Bay — for example, on this occasion the fish num- 

 bered 5,943; and I have records of hauls on which the fish numbered 

 over 20,000, and the total catch of individual animals must have been 

 nearly 50,000. Can any of Br. Murray's hauls on the deep mud beat 

 these figures % 



The conclusion, then, at which I arrive in regard to the distribution 

 of animals in deep water and in water shallower than 50 fathoms, from 

 my own experience and an examination of the Challenger results, is in 

 some respects the reverse of Murray's. I consider that there are more 

 species and more individuals in the shallower waters, that the deep 

 mud as dredged has a poor fauna, that the Coralline zone has a much 

 richer one, and that the Laminariau zone, where there is vegetable as 

 well as animal food, has probably the richest of all. 



In order to come to as correct a conclusion as possible on the matter, 

 I have consulted several other naturalists in regard to the smaller 

 groups of more or less free swimming Crustacea, such as Copepoda and 

 Ostracoda, which I thought might possibly be in considerable numbers 

 over the mud. I have asked three well-known specialists on such 

 Cretaeeans, viz, Prof. G-. S. Brady, F. K. S,, Mr. Thomas Scott, F. L. S., 

 and Mr. I. C. Thompson, F. L. S., and they all agree in stating that, 

 although interesting and peculiar, the Copepoda and Ostracoda from 



1 Solea vulgaris 

 Pleuroneetes platessa 

 limanda 

 Gadus morrlma 

 oeglefinus 

 merlangus 

 Clupea spratta 



harengus 

 Trachinus vipera 

 Agonus cataphractus 

 Golrius minutus 

 Bala clavata 

 maculata 



Mytilus edulis 

 Tellina tenuis 

 Mactra stultorum 

 Fusus antiquus 

 Carcinus mocnas 

 Portunus, sp. 

 Eupagurus bemliardus 

 Crangon vulgaris 

 Sacculina, sp. 

 Some Amphipoda 

 Longipedia coronata 

 Ectinosoma sjrinijies 

 Sunaristes paguri 



Dactylopus roslratus 

 Cletodes limicola 

 C aligns, sp. 

 Flusira foliacea 

 Aphrodite aculeata 

 Pectinaria belgica 

 Nereis, sp. 

 Asterlas rubens 

 Hydractinia eehinata 

 Sertularia abietina 

 Hydrallmania falcata 

 Aurelia aurita 

 Cyancea, sp. 



