Central Pacific Salpidae — Yount 
125 
TABLE 1 
Distribution of Species of Salpidae (except I. magalhanica and T. longkauda ) 
SPECIES 
Atlantic 
Indian 
Japan 
Philip- 
pines 
East 
Indies 
Aus- 
tralia 
N. E. 
Pacific 
Central 
Pacific 
East 
Pacific 
Cyclosalpa pinnata . . . . 
+ 
4- 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
— i 
C. affmis 
4- 
+ 
+ 
— 
— 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
C. floridana 
+ 
+ 
- 
— 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
— 
C. bakeri 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
C. strongylenteron .... 
— 
— 
- 
— 
- 
— 
+ 
- 
+ 
Helicosalpa virgula . . . 
+ 
+ 
— 
— 
. — 
+ 
— 
+ 
— 
H. Komaii 
— 
— 
-b 
' — 
— 
— 
— 
4- 
— 
Brooksia rostrata 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
+ 
+ 
— 
4- 
— 
I hie a punctata 
4- 
- 
+ 
— 
4- 
— 
— 
4- 
— 
Salp a fusiformis 
4- 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
4- 
4- 
S. maxima. 
4- 
+ 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
4- 
4- 
+ 
Weelia cylindrica .... 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
Ritteriella amboinensis . 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
— 
R. picteti 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
+ 
— 
Metcalfina hexagona. . 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
+ 
+ 
— 
4- 
+ 
Thetys vagina 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
+ 
+ 
Pegea confoederata. . . . 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
Traustedtia 
multitentaculata . . . 
+ 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
+ 
— 
+ 
— 
Thalia democratica . . . 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
— 
lash zonaria 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
+ 
4- 
4- 
4- 
oceanic plankton organisms in the circum- 
global warm water zone. 
Seasonal , Latitudinal , and Longitudinal 
Variation 
Cruise 5 was carried out during June, July, 
and August of 1950, the northern summer, 
and cruise 8 was carried out during January, 
February, and March of 1951, the northern 
winter. A comparison of the two cruises 
should reveal seasonal variations, if any are 
present; therefore, an analysis of variance was 
calculated to determine seasonal differences. 
Longitudes and latitudes were analyzed simul- 
taneously with seasons by the method de- 
scribed by Snedecor (1946: 304-309). Vol- 
umes were used as the variate rather than 
numbers, as volume is a better measure of the 
organic material in a plankton tow. 
King and Demond (1953), who studied 
the total zooplankton volumes on cruises 5 
and 8, demonstrated no significant first- and 
second-order interactions and no significant 
differences between longitudinal means, but 
did demonstrate significant differences be- 
tween the means for seasons and for latitudes: 
No significant differences for the salp vol- 
umes, however, were demonstrated between 
either of the means for longitudes, for sea- 
sons, or for latitudes. Neither are there sig- 
nificant differences in the first- and second- 
order interactions, except that between 
longitudes and seasons. Therefore, there is 
probably (P = 0.03) an interaction between 
longitudes and seasons that produced the 
observed differences in volumes of salps at the 
11 compared latitudes. I am unable to offer 
any conjectures to explain this interaction; it 
must be borne in mind, however, that the 
analysis is based on a few samples and that 
the variation in distribution of plankters, as 
well as the limited sampling by towing, could 
easily distort the resultant picture. This analy- 
sis supports the conclusion noted earlier under 
the comparison of volumes of salps and of 
the remaining zooplankton, i.e., that varia- 
tion in salp volume does not necessarily relate 
to that of the total zooplankton, and was very 
different in the samples studied. 
