CO 

 0- 



o 



cr 

 o 



CO 



UJ 



o 



UJ 

 0. 

 CO 



I 

 I 



\j 



— I 1 1 — 



-06 -0.2 0.4 



SIMILARITY 



— i — 



04 



-1.0 -06 -0.2 



SIMILARITY 



FALL 



STATIONS 



A 

 B 



J003 



J00I 



C003 



C004 



C002-C00 













c 













E U 























F 



£&■:■£■': 



£Sws$3 f " 



CONSTANCY 



^■>07 VERY HIGH 

 ITHm >0. 5 HIGH 

 E23>.0.3 MODERATE 



J003 JOOI C003 



EM20.I LOW 



I l <O.I VERY LOW 



C004 C002-C00I 



FIDEL 



■i 23 HIGH 

 jill>2 MODERATE 



TY 



imni >i low 



I I < I VERY LOW 



CO 



0. 



o 

 cr 

 o 



CO 

 UJ 



o 

 ui 

 a. 



CO 



i 1 1 1 — 



1.0 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 



SIMILARITY 



i 1 1 1 — 



-1.0 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 



SIMILARITY 



WINTER 



STATIONS 



J003 JOOI C003 C004 C002-C00I 



A 













B 













C 













D 













E 













F 













CONSTANCY 



120.7 VERY HIGH 



120.5 HIGH 



j> 3 MODERATE 



CZl2°.l LOW 



I KO.I VERY LOW 



J003 JOOI C003 C004 C002-C00I 





FIDELITY 



H2 3 H|GH irrm > i low 



HH22 MODERATE I l< I VERY LOW 



Figure 2.— Two-way coincidence tables of constancy and fidelity which compare species associations among sampling stations in the Cooper River-Charleston Harbor for fall, 



winter, spring, and summer collections, 1973-77. See Table 6 for species group lists. 



