100 
Fishery Bulletin 106(1 ) 
Table 3 
Catch per unit of effort (CPUE, with standard error in parentheses) and mean size (mm, with standard error in parentheses) for 
species captured during mid-summer otter trawl sampling for 2001-06. Station assemblages were determined with canonical 
correspondence analysis as shown in Figure 6A. Taxa were measured to total length (f) or fork length (*). A dash indicates that 
no data were available. 
Assemblage 
Species 
Inshore 
Near-ridge 
Offshore 
CPUE 
Size 
CPUE 
Size 
CPUE 
Size 
Syngnathus fuscus t 
0.64 (0.20) 
116(9) 
0.03 (0.03) 
127 (6) 
— 
— 
Prionotus carolinus t 
0.18 (0.18) 
47(2) 
0.38(0.13) 
189(13) 
0.75(0.26) 
224 (8) 
Scophthalmus aquosos t 
0.18 (0.12) 
62 (19) 
0.25 (0.07) 
129 (12) 
0.08 (0.04) 
270(7) 
Sphoeroides maculatus t 
0.18 (0.18) 
38(23) 
0.61 (0.28) 
71(3) 
— 
— 
Anchoa mitchilli * 
0.09 (0.09) 
30 (-) 
16.11 (9.15) 
68(1) 
— 
— 
Etropus microstomus t 
0.09 (0.09) 
95 (-) 
0.88 (0.24) 
93(3) 
0.38(0.10) 
94(10) 
Menidia menidia * 
0.09(0.09) 
55 (-) 
— 
— 
— 
— 
Anchoa hepsetus * 
— 
— 
1.92(0.98) 
65(2) 
— 
— 
Pomatomus saltatrix * 
— 
— 
0.03 (0.02) 
123 (7) 
— 
— 
Peprilus triacanthus * 
- 
— 
26.55 (15.8) 
40(1) 
9.8 (3.2) 
37(1) 
Urophycis regia t 
— 
— 
1.2 (0.35) 
173 (4) 
0.08 (0.04) 
157 (32) 
Stenotomus chrysops * 
— 
— 
0.47 (0.14) 
111 (5) 
0.05(0.05) 
106(3) 
Cynoscion regalis t 
— 
— 
0.12 (0.14) 
131 (11) 
— 
— 
Prionotus evolans t 
— 
— 
0.28(0.12) 
179(13) 
0.6 (0.41) 
215(6) 
Menticirrhus saxatilis t 
— 
— 
0.03 (0.02) 
279(25) 
— 
— 
Centropristis striatus t 
- 
— 
0.02 (0.02) 
114 (-) 
0.03 (0.03) 
265 (-) 
Paralichthys oblongus t 
— 
— 
0.05(0.03) 
29(2) 
0.03 (0.03) 
181 (-) 
Urophycis chuss t 
— 
— 
0.02 (0.02) 
70 (-) 
0.03(0.03) 
92 (-) 
Hippocampus erectus t 
— 
— 
— 
— 
0.03 (0.03) 
53 (-) 
Merluccius bilinearis t 
— 
— 
— 
— 
0.05 (0.03) 
175 (±21) 
Citharichthys arctifrons t 
— 
— 
— 
— 
0.03(0.03) 
68 (— ) 
Discussion 
Species abundance and richness 
The dominant fish families (Engraulidae, Paralichthy- 
idae, Gadidae, Triglidae, Serranidae, Sciaenidae, and 
Stromateidae) and to some degree species (butterfish, 
spotted hake, northern searobin [Prionotus carolinus], 
black sea bass [ Centi'opristis striatus ], weakfish) captured 
by the two gears in the study area were similar to those 
previously found in inner continental shelf waters off of 
the northeast United States (Colvocoresses and Musick, 
1984; Mahon et ah, 1998) and southeast United States 
(Walsh et al., 2006). Previous comparisons between beam 
and otter trawls similar in size to those used in our study 
have shown that otter trawls collect more species and 
more individuals and that beam trawls catch smaller 
fish (Vasslides, 2007). This difference is reflected in the 
length-frequency histogram for all species (Fig. 4), as well 
as for the dominant species collected in both gears. 
Overall species abundance (CPUE) and richness 
(RPUE) displayed a hi modal distribution across the 
inlet to the offshore transects, and the highest values 
occurred on either side of the ridge regardless of gear 
type (Fig. 3). This bimodal pattern has been previously 
suggested for fish (Martino and Able, 2003) and deca- 
pod crustaceans (Viscido et ah, 1997) at Beach Haven 
Ridge but is in contrast to the findings from a number 
of studies of larger scale cross-shelf transects, where 
abundance has been shown to decrease linearly with 
depth in the Mid-Atlantic Bight (Colvocoresses and 
Musick, 1984), Chukchi Sea (Barber et al., 1997), and 
Mediterranean Sea (Colloca et al., 2003), but not in the 
Bering Sea (Mueter and Norcross, 1999). 
The species composition and richness, and thus as- 
semblage structure, varied between sampling gears. 
This was expected because beam trawls sample fishes 
on the bottom better than otter trawls (Wennhage et 
al., 1997) and thus capture more demersal species, in- 
cluding small, recently settled fish and small juveniles. 
This selectivity may explain the differences at certain 
sampling stations in regard to both abundance and spe- 
cies richness between the two trawl types. In the beam 
trawl, both abundance per tow and richness per tow at 
