SEA-FISHERIES LABORATORY. 301 
The figures speak for themselves, but we may just 
point out that the results on April 13th and 22nd, if 
they stood alone, might be taken to support the view that 
the stern net was under special conditions, whereas the 
otter nets, kept clear of the sides of the ship, and well 
in front of the propeller, gave a more normal catch. But 
the evidence of April 15th, 19th (both Station I and 
Station V), 20th and 21st (Station I) tell in exactly the 
opposite direction, and show that the two otter nets may 
differ more from one another than either does from the 
stern net. The rest of the experiments show in some 
cases a close similarity between the catch at the stern 
and that of one (e.g., on April 14th) or both (April 21st, 
Station III) of the otter nets. 
In some cases the details show a close similarity 
between the catches of the two otter nets. For example: 

COPEPODA. 
c.c.  Diatoms. Dinoflag- Adult. juv. nauplii. 
ellates. 
April 13 Stat. V. 43-0 5,129,500 14,000 1,472 4,000 18,000 
45-5 4,417,200 9,000 1,248 2,000 16,000 
22 Stat. HI. 63 1,295,500 4,575 29 50 1,500 
6-0 1,523,605 3,525 46 25 1,000 

In fact, one cannot escape from the conclusion that 
these nets give similar catches when the plankton is 
evenly distributed; and that when the nets differ much 
in their results it is an indication that the organisms are 
in swarms or banks or otherwise scattered unequally. 
When a pair of hauls are fairly alike, as in the two 
instances given above, the figures probably give us a 
good idea of the degree of resemblance to be expected 
between two similar hauls taken through a uniformly 
distributed plankton. 
These figures are useful and sufficient as an indica- 
