FOURTEEN TELEOSTEAN FISHES AT BEAUFORT, N. C. 
427 
It seems rather certain, as pointed out elsewhere (p. 397), that many of the 
larger representatives of the O class (becoming the I class during the winter) leave 
the shallow waters along with the adult fish upon the approach of cold weather. 
This is thought to be the case because the average size of the young fish, now the 
I class, taken during the winter months is smaller than it was in October and 
November. For example, the average size of 1,140 fish of the O class taken in 
November is 139.3 millimeters, while the average for 2,329 fish of the same year 
class taken during December is only 115.7. The average size of 4,310 fish of the 
same year class taken in January is 116.9 and for 1,660 fish taken in February it is 
115.8. Such a decrease in size, since the methods and places of collection did not 
change and occurred each winter from 1927-28 to 1929-30, inclusive, apparently 
can be explained only on the basis that the larger fish were not properly represented 
(although some large ones were present) on the collecting grounds. 
An increase in the average size occurs in March, as shown by Table 8, but it is 
not until June when the November average is exceeded. While the data are not 
sufficient for a definite conclusion, they do indicate that many of the larger repre- 
sentatives of the I class probably fail to reoccupy the shallower waters, where the 
collections were made, after their early winter departure. 
Small fish, presumably of the O class, are reported from Chesapeake Bay for 
December and January by Hildebrand and Schroeder (1928, p. 273). The average 
size of these fish was notably smaller than that of specimens of the same year class 
taken in October and November. The authors came to the tentative conclusion 
that the fish taken in Chesapeake Bay during the winter probably were the “runts” 
of the last spawning season which had remained in the bay, while the larger 
representatives of the same year class had departed. This contention certainly is 
strongly supported by the behavior of the fish at Beaufort, as shown by the present 
investigation. 
Growth appears to progress fairly rapidly in young spots. The largest fish 
taken in January, when probably only a little more than a month old, was 21 milli- 
meters long and many examples exceeded a length of 15 millimeters. The largest 
specimen of the recently hatched fish caught in February was 27 millimeters and 
many had reached a length of over 20 millimeters. In March the largest fish was 
39 millimeters long and numerous specimens had attained a length of over 25 milli- 
meters. The average length of the fish of this year class taken during January, 
February, and March, as shown by comparatively large series of measurements was, 
respectively, 12.6, 18.5, and 20.3 millimeters. These averages were held down by 
the continued presence of very small fish, presumably resulting from recent hatchings, 
for in January and during the early part of February many larvae under 10 milli- 
meters in length appeared in the collections. However, none under that length was 
taken in March, and thereafter the average size of the specimens increased rapidly. 
Although the growth of young spots during their first several months, regardless 
of the winter weather, is fairly fast, development proceeds even more rapidly in the 
spring when the water becomes warmer, for in April the average length of 526 fish 
was 29.8 millimeters and in May for 1,020 fish the average length had increased to 
45.8 millimeters. This rapid rate of increase in length continues until September, 
when the fish, according to measurements of 543 fish, had attained an average length 
of 115.5 millimeters. It is a well-known fact, of course, that when fish attain a 
fairly large size the rate of increase in length decreases, and this is what takes place 
in the spot when an age of about 8 to 10 months and a length of about 115 millimeters 
