l£H 2-23 P~G tlQ.S16

"

De pa rtme nt 0 f_~!_ En v '!!.onme~n~t_~ ____ _ Mi n i s te re de] I EnJt..i~AA8Iem+lfe".fnl-ttc---­

Service des Peches et des Sciences de la mer Direction de la Rechereche et Developpement

Fisheries and Marine Service Research and Development Directorate

TECHNICAL REPORT No. 516

(Numbers 1-456 in this series were issued as Technical Reports of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. The series name was changed with report number 457)

RAPPORT TECHNIQUE NO. 516

(les numeros 1-456 dans cette serie_fUrent utilises comme Rapports Techniques de 1 ' office des recherches dur les pecheries du Canada

Le nom· de la serie fut change avec 1e rapport numero 457)

Marine phytoplankton production, distribution and species composition in Pendre11 and

Hotham Sounds, British Columbia

by

John G. Stockner and David D. Cliff

This is the seventeeth Technical Report from the

Resparch and Development Directorate Pacific Environment Institute

West Vancouver, B.C .

. ,

Ceci est 1e septieme Rapport Technique de la Direction de la

Recherche et Deve10ppement Institut de 1 'environnement du Pacifique

Vancou ver-Quest

--r---- - -- ---------.----.- --- -.--- - - - - -- - --- - -- -- - - - - - - -- - - - - ­._ - - ------- - ------ - - -

TABLE OF CONTENTS ,

'!... I

~ .. '

Abstract ;

Introduction

Rationale for station locations................. 2

Methods

Results

Discussion

2

6

· . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . •. 1 3

Acknow1edgemerts ................................ 16

References

Tabl es

• • • • . • • • • • • . • . . • . . • . • • . • • • . • • • • . . .• 1 7

· . . . . • • • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. 18

Appendi x Tabl es ................................. 32

Figures ......................................... 37

Appendi x Fi gures .•............................. 58

i

Stockner, John G., and David D. Cliff. 1975. Marine phytoplankton . production, distribution and species comoosition in Pendrell

·- --- ·---------- - - -----aflfr-He-iltam Sounds,-&rtttsn-€olttmbta-;-·--Pi-sh~~-.-5erv-; · -Res-. - -BeV";------ - -- -o Tech. Rep. 516. BOp.

,j

~ ..

ABSTRACT

Primary production and phytoplankton species composition and distribution are described for two British Columbia coastal embayments. Flushing is much reduced in both areas because each lacks significant river inflow. Observations of physical-chemical factors are presented and discussed in relation to their effects on phytoplankton production and distribution in the water column. Hotham Sound was about three times as productive as Pendrell dispite a similarity in numbers of phytoplankton. An abundance of large diatoms - Thalassiosira, Skeletonema, ii:nd Chaetoaerosfn Hotham Sound and a preponderance of ~ algae in Pendrell Sound resulted in average plankton volume estimates four times higher in Hotham. The interaction of nutrients, total light, and mixed layer depth are factors thought to account for differences in production between sounds. Subsurface phytoplankton maxima in the vicinity of the halocline are a common occurrence in Pendrell, where winds are light and surface waters nutrient poor. In Hotham Sound regional topography does not afford as much wind protection, with the resultant increase in variability of mixed layer depth and nutrient availability. Average daily areal production in Hotham is similar to adjacent Strait of Georgia averages, but the average in Pendrell is considerably lower.

/ " RESUME

On a etudie le production primaire de meme que la composition et la distribution des esp~ces de phytoplancton dans deux baies de la cote de la Columbie-Britannique. A cause du faible apport des cours d'eau, le courant de ces regions est tres faible. On presente les observations relatives aux facteurs physico-chimiques et on en discute en relation avec leur action sur la production et la dis­tribution du phytoplancton en fonction de la profondeur. Malgr~ une similitude dans le nombre de phytoplanctontes, le taux de pro­duction de la baie Hotham etait d'environ trois fois sup~rieur a celui de la baie Pendrell. L'abondance de grosses diatomes (Thalassiosira, Skeletonema et Chaetoaeros) dans la baie Hotham comparativement a la preponderance d'algues microscopiques dans la baie Pendrell fait que la premiere recele un volume moyen de plancton quatre ~ois plus important. L'interaction entre les matieres nutritives, la luminosite et 1 'epaisseur de la couche mixte sont des facteurs que 1 'on croit ~tre a 1 'origine des diff~rences de production entre les deux baies. Dans le baie Pendrell, ou les vents sont legers et les matieres nutritives peu abondantes en

i i

__ ___ ___ _ .. . __ surface,les concentrations maximales de phytoplancton se situent souvent -en -profondeur,--pres~cfe- Ta--co-ucne-oulasaTinrn-varfe -ra":-- --- ~~- -- --- -- - - - ~-- -

pidement avec cette derniere. La topographie de la baie Hotham n' offre pas une protection equivalente contre le vent et donne lieu a une plus forte variation de 1 'epaisseur de la couche mixte et de la quantite de matieres nutritives. La production quotidienne moyenne en surface de la baie Hotham se compare a celle du detroit voisin de Georgie et elle surpasse de beaucoup celle de la baie Pendrell.

- ,

, ~,

..

I NTRODUCTI ON

--- - --- - _.- --_ .- ---- - ----- - - -- - --- - - - -- ---- - --------- - - _. _-- - ---- - - .--- ----- - -- - - ---- -- - --- - - - - --- - - --- ----- - - - -

r

'.

The commercial Pacific oyster operation on the British Columbia coast

has for decades utilized Pendrell Sound for obtaining seed (spat) 'for

oyster production (Quayle, 1969). This coastal inlet has historically

provided good quality sustainable yields of spat, but in the last few

years (1972-73) larval failures have caused concern among both scientists

and managers. Hotham Sound, located near the mouth of Jervis Inlet, some

70 - 80 km to the south of Pendrell Sound, has been used as an alternative

source of oyster seed when failures were imminent in Pendrell. In 1974 a

normal spatfall occurred in Pendrel1 and Hotham Sounds.

In response to questions as to the cause(s) of Pendrell Sound's

spat failures a study was initiated by three agencies of the Fisheries

and Marine Service, Canadian Department of Environment. Agencies involved

were: 1) Pacific Biological Station (oyster autecology, light-nutrients),

2) Patricia Bay ,Ocean Institute (physical oceanography), and 3) Pacific

Environment Institute (primary production and phytoplankton succession).

This report will present results of the phytoplankton program,

which includes production, succession, light and related physical parameters

obtained on each of five cruises to Pendrell and Hotham Sounds by the M.V.

ACTIVE LASS, and CFAV ENDEAVOUR. The primary objective was a compar'ison

of phytoplankton growth and distribution between inlets and a consideration

of factors influencing production. The majority of material discussed

is our own; however, some information obtained by the other groups has I

been utilized, where necessary, to support our interpretations. No attempts

to sunmarize findings of other investigations win be made, as these sum­

maries will be the basis of separate reports of respective establishments.

2

RATIONALE FOR STATION LOCATIONS - --- - - -- - ---- - ------- ----- ---- - - - - ---- ---~~- -- - -- --- --- - --- - - - - - - -- . -- - - --------- -- - - - -- - -- ___ - - -_ 0

Two stations were selected in each inlet; one situated at the head

(Station 1), the other at the entrance (Station 2) (Figure 1). These two

locations provided assessment of communities occurring within the "closed"

inlet, and just outside in a more "active" or flushed situation. It was

intended from the outset that Station 2 would act as a control for Station

1 in each of the respective inlets.

METHODS

Physical and Chemical

Light

Total incident solar radiation (gram calories cm-2) was recorded

on a Belfort Pyrheliometer. Percent extinction of surface light with

depth was measured by a Montedoro-Whitney Underwater Illuminance meter

(Model LMT-8A). Intensity of surface radiation (in foot candles) was

measured by a hand held light meter. A standard 30 cm white Secchi disc

was used to measure water transparency at every bottle station.

Temperature

Temperature profiles to a depth of 60 meters were obtained with a

bathythermograph, and a bucket thermometer was used to measure surface

temperature for BT calibration.

Alkalinity & pH . ,

Water samples were collected from 1,3,5 & 20 m depths, and stored

in 100 ml polyethylene bottles. Samples were analyzed for pH and alka-

.

.(

3

linity using an Orion Digital pH meter (Model 801). The method of

__ __ ___ _ __ ___ ~S..tr: ic:kl.aru:L_anrl J:'a rs on S (J-96B-). -was--us.ed--to-d.e.te.m-i-Re---G-a-r-OO-nate a l-k-a-l--l-fTi-ty-.- - ---- -- .. - - --~

I)

1.\

However, if after acid addition, final pH values fell below 3.00, then

the sample was repeated using APHA (1971) standard titrimetric methods.

Sal inity/Density

Water samples were taken from 1,3,5 & 20 m depths, and analyzed

with an Auto-Lab (Model 601) Salinometer. From temperature and salinity

data, density was computed by nomographs.

Oxygen

Samples were analyzed from 1,3,5 & 20 m depths using the Winkler

titration method (Strickland & Parsons, 1968). These were usually done

on board ship within eight hours afrer being treated with the first two re­

agents and kept in the alkaline state.

Nutrients

Nutrient data presented here were obtained and analysed by the

analytical chemistry laboratories, Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo and

the Fisheries/EPS Analytical Laboratories, PEl, West Vancouver. Methods

used are as outlined by Stephens et ~ (1969) and by the Fisheries/EPS

Laboratory Manual (1974).

Biological

Primary Production

The standard l4C,method, as initially proposed by Steeman Nielsen

(1952), was used, with some minor modifications incorporated. Water was

collected from 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 m depths by use of a 6

-------- ---n t re -p-olyVTnyTcFi1cfri ae -Van- Oorn Dottte--. -- i3ro-duct;-vttyiJOtt1-es --{-t-we-- -- ---- -- - - - ------- ----.- --

125 ml light and one 125 ml dark) were inoculated with 1 ml NaH14c03 radio-

lsotope stock (New England Nuclear) with an automatic pipette. For each

experiment, the number of OPMls/ml was determined by placing 1 ml of

the radio-isotope stock solution in three scintillation vials. In most

cases, samples were incubated for about four or five hours, from 0930 to

1430 hours. Water was filtered through 0.45 ~ BOH cellulose nitrate

filters, and placed in 10 ml of a specially prepared toluene based 1 Fluor.. Samples were analyzed for activity in a Packard Tri-Carb

Liquid Scintillation Spectrometer (Model 3375). The equation of

Strickland (1960) was used to convert OPMls to mg carbon fixed m- 3.

Profil es were integrated by a Hewl ett PaCkard r.a 1 ci.J1 ator Plotter (Model

9829A) to give phytoplankton production on an areal basis (mg C m~2 day~l).

Phytoplankton Standing Crop

Phytoplankton samples were preserved in Lugol IS solution and

enumerated using the Utermohl (1958) sedimentation method. Volumes were

determined by equating phytoplankton cells to known geometrical shapes.

Each phytoplankton sample was examined under 160 X & 400 X magnification

using a Wild M40 inverted plankton microscope. Results were expressed

as cells and total volume m- 3.

Chlorophyll a

One litre of seawater was taken from 1,3,5 & 20 meter depths and

1 POPOp, PPO, ethyleneglycolmonoethylether, & toluene

",

..

5

filtered onto a Wh atman GFjC glas_~ _ :~~~r_ !~~~e_~~ __ _ ~_ ~_~~~l ___ ~~~~~: __ O_f_ ~~_~~~ ____ __ _ - . ~ - ---- - --- _ .. -- - - .- - .--- - --- - - - --_. - -- -. -. - - - -- -- - - "- - -- -" - - -- - -- _ . - -

c was added to prevent acidification of filters on freezing. Filters were

macerated in a tissue grinder with 10 ml of 90% acetone, and the

filtrate analyzed for chlorophyll ~ and phaeophytin on a Carey (Model 15)

Recording Spectrophotometer. The equation of Strickland and Parsons (1968)

was used to calculate chlorophyll a.

Seston

One litre samples were obtained from 1, 3, 5 & 20 meter depths and

filtered through preweighed and ashed Whatman GF/C glass fiber filters.

Filters were dried to constant weight at 105°C, weighed, and ashed in a

muffle furnace at 500°C for four hours. Percent loss on ignition was used

to estimate particulate organic sestOh.

Zooplankton

Vertical hauls from 50 m to surface were made at each station

with a SCOR-UNESCO plankton net, with mouth diameter of 57 cm and screen

mesh size 350~. Samples were preserved in 5% formalin, returned to the

laboratory and split into two equal subsamples. Zooplankton volume was

determined from one portion in an Imhoff cone, and the other portion fil-

tered onto a preweighed GFjC filter and dried to constant weight at 90°C.

After dry weight determination they were reweighed, placed in a muffle

furnace at 500°C for four hours to estimate ash-free dry weight. Values -3 -3 are expressed as ml. m and mg. m .

f

RES ULTS

-- .- - -- ·-----·- 1'tIystcalF-eatures-- - - - ---.--- -- - -- -- -- --- --- --- - -- - -n - - - - - - -- - . - - - - - - - -- _ _ __ _ __ • _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Salinity & ""i t'mpe ra t ure. In March relatively uniform temperature

and salinity profiles in both Sounds indicated a well mixed condition

(Table 1) . By ear'ly ~Iiay, some stratification was evident in surface

waters of both Sounds, most notably at Station 1 in Hotham (Table 1).

By July, the waters of Pendrell and Ho':.ham Sounds were strongly statified

with both halo-and thermoclines occurr i ng at about 7 m depth. In

August, surface temperatures in Pendrell exceeded 20°C and surface sal­

inities were as low as 170/00. In Hotham, surface temperatures were

below 20°C with salinities about 19%0 . Well developed thermoclines

between 8 - 10 m occurred in both Sounds in August, but haloclines

were somewhat shallower. The thermal regimes in mid-September in both

Sounds were similar to August conditions, with the exception of higher

surface salinities and an upward movement of the ha10cline to 2 - 3 meters

in Pend re 11 .

A much more comprehensive treatment of the physical oceanography of

Pendrell Sound is currently in preparation (Farmer, personal communica­

tion).

Oxygen. Oxygen values in Pendrel1 ranged from lows of 4.9 to highs

-1 ) of 10.9 ml. 1 . The range in Hotham was similar, 5.3 to 10.8 (Table 2 .

In March under isotherma l conditions, surface wate rs t o a depth of 5 m I

had uniform concentrations in both Sounds , with slightly higher values . ,

noted in Pendrell. Th l~oug ho u t the year, oxygen values at 20 m tended to

be lower than surface values ; however , as surface oxygen values reached

7

their maximum in July and August, 20 meter oxygen values reached their

- ;: -- - -- --- - - -- - -mtnimllTn-ffairl e-ft :- - -A- -prominant-slIDsur-f-ac-e- -oxygen- max-imum-ar ~- ancI-S-m~l fj --- - -- - - -

;, \i

..

July and August occurred at both stations in Pendrell, but was not as

conspicuous at Stations in Hotham (Table 2).

pH and Alkalinity. Alkalinity and pH values were similar between

Sounds and between Stations within Sounds(Table 2). Values of pH varied

little from an average of 7.7. Alkalinity increased with increasing

depth and salinity, with lowest values noted in surface waters in July

and August, concomitant with low salinity and high temperatures.

Light. On most cruises to both Sounds, light conditions were poor,

the result of heavy overcast and rain showers. Clear weather occurred in

September on visits to both Sound~and on August 15 in Hotham Sound

(Table 3). Light penetration in surface waters of both Sounds was good

as evidenced by low mean extinction coefficients (Table 4). Water of

Pendrell Sound having a mean extinction coefficient of 0.227 tended to

be less turbid than Hotham Sound with a mean coefficient of 0.306. At

Station 2 in Hotham the water was consistently more turbid than at any of

the other stations, and accordingly, this station exhibited the highest

mean extinction coefficient (Table 4).

Secchi depths were in close agreement with light extinction data.

The average for Pendrell Sound was 9.4 while that for Hotham Sound was 7.0

(Table 4). The greatest transparencies occurred at Station 1 near the head . ,

of Pendrell, while the lowest were observed at Station 2 in Hotham Sound .

8

Nutrients. Two sources of nutrient information were available, but

- - --- - -- -- ---neither- -S-WGY -wa-s---lA-te-R-s+V-e-. - -f4lQ-S-pRQ-.te- ¥alues---in- sur.f...ace_.wat.er-.S_ nf_~endr~Ll ~ __ __ __ ___ _ _

Sound averaged 0.08 ~g-atom P liter-l "and varied from a low of 0.03 in

early August to a high of 0.16 in September (Table 5). Nitrate averaged

1 1 . -1 0.5, and varied from 0.3 to .3 ~g-at lter . Free ammonia was highest in

August, and only trace amounts of N02 were detected during summer months

(Table 5).

On April 30 and July 9, nutrients were sampled at intervals to a

maximum depth of 20 m. On both occasions nitrate in the 0 - 5 m layer

was very low, 0.7 ~g-atoms liter- l , but at 20 m was considerably higher,

especially in April (Tabl_e 6). Phosphate and silicate measurements showed

a similar depth distribution pattern (T~ble 6).

In Hotham Sound nutrients to a depth of 20 m were sampled in March,

May and July. Average values of nitrogen and phosphorus were consistently

higher than Pendrell averages, especially in March (Table 6) . In May

and July at both Stati~s, N03 was low in the 0 - 5 m layer, with the

exception of Station 2 in May which had moderate concentrations (Table 6).

At 20 m depth, nitrogen, phosphorus and silica concentrations were con­

siderably higher than surface values, and higher than concentrations at

a similar time and depth in Pendrell (Table 6) . Nitrate in Hotham varied

from 0.7 to 40 ~g-atoms liter- l , and phosphate from 0.1 to 5.0 between the

surface and 20 m.

Biological Features

Chlorophyll a. Pendrell Sound values ~anged from undetectable levels

in March to a high of -2:1 mg m- 3 at 3 m in August at Station 1 (Table 7).

Highest average values in Pendrell were at Station 2, with the greatest

amounts at this station occurring in September.

.

,r

9

In Hotham, chlorophyll concentrations at both Stations were double

_-; _-_ ~ --- - - -- ----- - --tRQ-S-e--oot-ee- i-rt -P-eA€l-to€l-l-,~ran-gtn-g- from -a~-tow- -oT ll--:i"at-nlltn --Statlorfs ,-rf Waren ---- - ­-3 to a high of 7.3 mg m at 5 m depth at Station 1 in AuguSt. Slightly

',. higher values occurred at the mouth of Hotham Sound than at Station 1

near the head.

The vertical profiles of chlorophyll concentration were similar in

both Sounds and showed subsurface chlorophyll maxima to be variable, but

common at 3 and 5 m depth in July and August (Table 7). Lowest values

were generally at 20 m. Surface chlorophylls were usually lower than

the 3 & 5 m values.

Particulate Organic Seston. There was little variation in organic

seston among Stations or between Sounds (Table 7). In both Pendrell and

Hotham,peaks of organic seston occurred most frequently at 3 and 5 m

depth, coincident with chlorophyll ~ subsurface maxima. Highest values

were noted in May at Stations in Hotham, and in July at Stations in

Pendrell (Table 7).

Phytoplankton

Species composition. A list of phytoplankton -identified from both

Sounds appears in Tables 8 & 9. Each table also gives a qualitative

evaluation of seasonal relative abundance. Diatoms, dinoflagellates,

silicoflagellates and cryptomonads were the major groups found in both

Sounds in 1974. Photomicrographs of selected phytoplankton species

appear in Figures i : 4.

In Hotham Sound, the most common species were Cerataulina bergonii,

10

Chaetoceros spp., LeptocyZindrus danicus~ SkeZetonema costatum and

--. - -- - - - ----4'ha),aS-8-i9s.i:v.a--pacificm. - -At StatiQn.2., - i...D _P..en.dr.eILS.a.umL •. _the_ .s..ame __ s'p-e.cJ.es ___ ___ . ____ ____ ._._

were common, but in addition ,there were large numbers of unidentified

cryptomonads, especially at Station 1 .(Appendix Figs. 1 & 2).

Standing Crop. Phytoplankton numbers were slightly higher in Hotham

than in Pendrell Sound, but phytoplankton volume was 3 to 4 times greater

in Hotham Sound (Figures 5 & 6). This discrepancy was largely due to the

importance of larger diatoms in Hotham and a preponderance of ~ algae at

certain times in Pendrell.

An interesting depth distribution was noted in both Sounds. Instead

of being concentrated at or just below the surface, distinct subsurface

concentrations (plates) were noted, sometimes to a depth of 10 meters.

In March, under isothermal condition~,phytoplantkon were sparse

at all depths in both Inlets. However,by early May the picture had

changed significantly, most notably in Hotham Sound. A bloom, predomin-

antly of ThaZassiosira spp. and to a lesser degree SkeZetonema costatum~

occurred with a subsurface maximum evident at both stations. In Pendrell

Sound, these same species occurred, but in greatly reduced numbers. In

fact, significant changes in phytoplankton numbers and volume did not occur

in Pendrell until mid-August when LeptocyZindrus danicus 3 SkeZetonema

costatum and a variety of nannoplankters occurred with no clear relation-

ship to depth. However, in Hotham Sound the bloom was still apparent in I

mid-July, being somewhat reduced in August . . . ,

There was no clear shift in dominants in either Sound but there was

considerable change in depth of phytoplankton maxima, moving from deeper

11

water in May toward the surface in July, and then slightly deeper again

in Au gus t (F:L~LJI~~ _ .§ _~ Ql. __ --IiY-illi d-:~e-ptembe.r~_(L bnth -inJ.ets-,--the·-Rwnber-s - - - - - - ---- -_ _ . _ ._ ;;:;- . _ _ - __ - - _ __ " _ _ __ - - - - _ • • 0 • • _· · _ _ _ _ . _ _ -

. ,

and volumes of phytoplankton at all depths were reduced to March levels.

Zooplankton. There was nearly twice the biomass of zooplankton in

Pendrell than in Hotham Sound. This difference was reflected in both

settled volume and dry weight measurements (Table la, Figure 7). The

greatest density was noted in tows from both Sounds in early May, notably

at Station 2 in Pendrell where biomass was 128 mg. m-3. Lowest biomass

was observed in both Sounds in March.

Primary Production

Volumetric Production Rates. Daily rates in Hotham Sound averaged

100 mg C m- 3 contrasted to an average in Pendrell of only 48 (see Figures

8 - 12, 13 - 17). The highest daily rate, 664 mg C m-3, occurred in

August at Station 1 in Hotham Sound at a depth of 5 meters. The greatest

rate in Pendrell (188) occurred in September at Station 2 at a depth of

3 meters. Values ranged from lows of 5 and 8, and highs of 188 and 664 in

Pendrell and Hotham, respectively.

On only one occasion did production attain maximum values in surface

waters (Figure 15). On all other occasions, the trend was toward increasing

production with increasing depth to a maximum at either 3 or 5 meters

with decreasing production at greater depths (Figure 8 - 17) .

Areal Productio~ Rates. The highest production in Pendrell was at

Station 1 in March, and at Station 2 in September (Table 11). Average

production during the season at Station 1 was 476 mg C m- 2 day -1, con-

12

trasted to 685 at Station 2. The maximum daily rate occurred at Station 2

--- - --- - --i fl-- &ep-toolhe-r--,- - -1~5-g- -Lm -~-. __ Iba _m1rrimum_ waS __ flQted_ ~1_~:La! 1QIl.J_ j_~ _ ~e~tl.!.. __ _____ __ __ _ _ -2 -2 -1 80 mg C m . Average production for the Sound was 580 mg C m day

Averages for Hotham Stations were nearly three times greater than

those in Pendrell. Station 1, situated at the head of the sound, was

consistently more productive than Station 2 at the mouth of the inlet. -2 Seasonal average production at Station 1 was about 1.6 9 C m , contrasted

with 1.3 g C for Station 1 (Table 11). The Sound average was 1.5 g C.

Maximum production at Station 1 occurred in A~gust, 3.1 g C, and in May

at Station 2, 2.1 gC. Lowest production was measured in March at both

Stations, 289 mg C m- 2.

Production/Chlorophyll a ratio. It is informative to normalize

values of production on a unit of chlorophyll ~ basis so that "in situ"

production efficiencies among stations can be compared. Values ranged

from a low of 8 to a high of 350. Since the extremely high values of the

ratio tended to occur most frequently when chlorophyll levels were near

the limits of analytical detection (see values for Pendrell in March

April, Table 7), little significance can be ascribed to them. Values in

July and August ranged 8 to 90. There was little variation among Stations

or between Sounds (Table 7). Greatest values in summer months were at 1 m

and values of the ratio tended to show an inverse relation to depth

(Table 7).

- \

,,--

_ ,. _ ..J!.. _ __ .- -- - - - - -- - -. - -_. _-" - ­- - - - - - _. - - - - - - - - ---

Primary Producti on

DISCUSSION - - -- - - - . - -- - -- ------- - - - - --- -

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 0"

- - -- - -- --_. -

We observed no distinct seasonal pattern in both phytoplankton pop­

ulations and production in Pendrell Sound. This may be partially due to

poor weather conditions that accompanied the majority of cruises to this

inlet, but more likely, it represents the strong controlling influence of

nutrients, rather than light, on production. There was no relation between

slopes of light penetration and production, which is indicative of nutrient-,

not light-limitation of growth in the euphotic zone. (Findenegg 1964).

Nitrate (N) was at very low levels in the summer months in surface waters

(.Tables 5 & 6), and average values were much lower than those reported by

Stephens et ~ (1969) in adjacent Strait of Georgia waters.

The topography of land masses and abundance of islands surrounding Pen­

drell precludes the development of strong sustained winds to mix surface

waters. This factor allows a greater stability to develop, and seldom are

surface layers mixed deeply enough to entrain sufficient nutrients to maintain

sizeable phytoplankton populations. Greatest phytoplankton biomass in summer

occurs in the vicinity of the pycnocline, where better nutrient and suffici­

ent light conditions occur. There were notably fewer large and heavily sili­

clfied diatoms in Pendrell than in Hotham lApp. Figs.l & 2), and the preponder-

ance of nannoplankton in Pendrell on most dates suggests greater seasonal

stability of the upper layer. Flushing as a factor influencing plytop~ank­

ton populations cannot be considered of significance in this inlet, which \

lacks significant freshwater inflow (Farmer, personal communication) . . ,

In contrast to Pendrell, Hotham Sound showed some seasonal patterns

in both phytoplankton biomass and production. Less cloud cover and gen-

14

erally improved weather conditions accompanied the majority of cruises

higher than in Pendrell (Table 3)~ It is unlikely, however, that this

factor alone could account for production differences of 3 X between

Sounds. Our data suggest three related factors strongly influencing

production in Hotham: a) mixed layer depth, b) nutrient supply, and c)

1 i ght.

Hotham Sound is geographically in a more exposed situation than

Pendrell,and sustained winds of considerable strength are not uncolT111on.

Mixed-layer depth is highly variable and consistently greater than in Pen­

drell. Our BT profiles show this clearly. This deeper and more variable

mixed layer provides a more favorable nutrient regime for phytoplankton by

increasing concentrations via entrainment during each mixing episode,

and by recycling in a deeper and more turbulent euphotic zone. Concen­

trations of nitrate at 20 m depth in early May and in July were double the

values at a similar depth in Pendrell on the same dates (Table 6). Phos­

phateconcentrations were only slightly higher in Hotham,which suggests

that nitrate supply may largely determine observed differences in produc­

tion between Sounds. The predominance of large, heavily silicified diatoms

in Hotham Sound is indicative of a well mixed euphotic zone.

Light extinction in Hotham was greater than in Pendrell, and there

was a good relation between slopes of light penetration and volumetric pro­

duction, most clearly seen in the July prof~le (compare appendix Figures

3 - 22 & Fi gures 8 - l}J. Surface i nhi biti on was corrrnon on most days of

production measurement, but data showing this are in part due to anomalies

produced by l4C methodology.

..

15

There was a good relation between areal producti on and the function:

.. . . ___ ________ _ 1:hL-:!_x _to.tal -Ligh-t/-Secc-n-i- dep-t-h- -{-F"-i-§tt¥'es- -1-8- &--'J-9-}: - - At- -both --~tatlOlrs ~;-n-- - --- ------- .

Hotham,the correlation was significant (P = 0.05), but in Pendrell it

was not significant. These data lend support to the assumption that light

may be as important as nutrients at certain times in regulating phytoplank­

ton growth in Hotham Sound, but in Pendrell, it is rarely a critical factor.

The effects of zooplankton grazing cannot be discounted as possibly

influencing plytoplankton biomass, especially in May in Pendrell. Peak

densities of zooplankton were coincident with peak production in Hotham,

but not in Pendrell. Zooplankton densities in Pendrell were nearly

double those in Hotham, and the losses by grazing would be substantially

higher there than in Hotham.

It is informative to compare average production values presented here

with those obtained in other British Columbia inlets. Average daily means

for Pendrell and Hotham were 0.58 and 1.45 gC m- 2, respectively. In Indian

Arm, a fjord with only a small freshwater input, we observed subsurface

phytoplankton plates similar to those common in Pendrell, and estimated -2 daily production to be 0.58 g C m Production in Howe Sound, a fjord

with a large turbid freshwater inflow, averaged 0.70 mg C m- 2 at Station

5, adjacent to Anvil Island in mid-Sound (Stockner & Cliff, unpublished

data). Average spring and summer values off Lasqueti Island in the Strait -2 . of Georgia were 2.5 9 C m ,and to the south off Bowen Island dally aver-

age was 1.35. On the basis of these comparisons, Hotham is more productive

than Howe Sound anA Indian Arm. and nearly as producti ve as the adjacent

Strait of Georgia waters. Pendrell is slightly below the average for

Howe Sound but similar to Indian Arm.

16

- -- -- - -- - - --- --- - - - - --- - --- - --- -- -- - - ---- -A£~faGEM-EN1S - - -- - - -- - - ------- - - - ----- - --- - ------ -- - -- -- --- ---- -----,; -

The authors wish to thank the officers and crew of CFAV

ENDEAVOUR and Messrs. Ken Shortreed, Doug Buchanan and Sandy

Matheson for their assistance in the field aspects of the program.

We are grateful to Ms. Karen Monro for phytoplankton identifica­

tion, enumeration and data collation. Special thanks are ex­

tended to Dr. M. Waldichuk for critical review of the manuscript.

- ,

17

REFERENCES

- - - --- - - - - .. --- --Ap-l+6.-.- -- l9-7-L - - ~-aooa-r-tl- Metfle-EI-s- -fi7r- -t-h-e--e-x-anri-natio-n--of -water-arrd -WcfSreWn-er-. -13th ed. American Public Health Assoc. Inc. New York. 769 p.

Findenegg I. 1964. Types of planktic primary production in lakes of the eastern Alps as found by the radioactive carbon method. Verh. Int. Verein. Limnol. XV: 352-259.

Fisheries/EPS Laboratory Manual, 1974. Dept. of Environment, Fisheries/ Marine Service, Pacific Region.

Nielsen, E.S. 1952. The use of radioactive carbon 14C for measuring organic production in the sea. Journal du Conseil 18: 117-140.

Quayle,D.B. 1969. Pacific Oyster Culture in British Columbia. Bull. 169, Fish. Res. Bd. Canada, 192 p.

Stephens, K., J.D. Fulton, and 0.0. Kennedy. 1969. Summary of biological oceanographic observations in ~he Strait of Georgia, 1965 - 1968. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada Tech. Rept. No. 110.

Strickland, J.D.H. 1960. Measuring the production of marine phytoplankton. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada Bull. #122. 173 p.

Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons. 1968. A Practical Handbook of Seawater Analysis. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada Bull. #167 .

Utermohl, H. 1958. Fur vervollkommnung der quantitativen Phytoplankton­methodik. Mitt. Int. ver. Limno1. 9: 1-38.

- ,

TABLES

'.1

,I I

I

.Table 1. Physical parameters as a function of depth at Station 1 & 2, Pendrell and Hotham Sounds (Temperature °C, Salinity = ppt 0/00, Density = at)

P~NDRELL SOUND

Date 1974 March 19 April 30 July 9 August 14 September lr De~th T S °t T S °t T S °t T S °t T S lOt Stn .1

_.

1 . 6.0 26.1 20.6 10.0 25.3 19.4 19.2 19.9 13.5 20.3 16.9 11 .1 18.0 19.8 13 7 , . 1

3 5.7 26.8 21. 2 9.5 25.8 19.8 16.5 22 .3 15.9 17. 1 24.1 17.1 18.0 25.0 li7.7 5 5.7 27.5 21. 7 9.5 26.6 20.5 14.5 25.0 18.4 13.8 26.8 19.9 16.3 25.8 ·~ 8. 7

20 5.8 28 . 5 22.5 7.2 27.9 21.8 10.1 27.8 21.4 9.2 28 .7 22.2 9.8 28.3 21. 7 Stn.2 1 6.3 27.3 21 . 5 10.0 25.8 19 .8 18.6 18.6 12.6 19.0 17.4 11.7 16.7 19.9 114.1

1

3 6.1 27 . 5 21. 7 9.0 25.9 20 .0 15.9 22.1 15 .9 16.5 23.7 17.0 16 . 3 23.5 116.9 I

5 5.8 27.4 21.6 8.7 27.2 21.1 13.7 24.8 18.4 13.0 26.2 19.6 15.8 25.5 118.6 20 5: 8 28.4 22.4 7.2 28.2 22.1 11.1 27.4 20.9 9.5 28.5 22.0 10.1 28.1

I ~1 .5 I i

HOTHAM SOUND I I

Date 1974 March 20 May I July 10 August 15 September l~ 1

Stn.l 1 6.1 26.l 21. 0 11.6 23 .6 17.9 19.0 16.9 11.3 18.6 18.5 12.6 18.9 21.0 114.4

3 6.1 26.2 20.5 . 11.4 23.8 lB.1 17.B 17.9 12.3 17.3 19.1 13.3 1B.9 21.0 1\4.4 I

5 6.1 27.2 21.4 10.6 24.1 18.4 17.B 1B.4 12.7 13.B 21.4 15.8 lB.5 23 .6 I

l i6.4

20 6.3 28 . 3 22.3 7.5 27.4 21.4 9.5 26.5 20.4 11.0 28.0 21.4 10.3 2B.0 211 .5

Stn.2 1 6.3 24.9 19.6 9.6 24.9 19.2 17.4 17.0 11 .7 16.9 19.1 13.4 17.6 21. 7 115.3

3 6.4 26.4 20.8 B.7 25.1 19.5 17.5 1B.0 12.5 16.0 20.1 14.4 17.4 23.5 1~.7

5 6.3 27.0 21.2 B.6 26.6 20.6 17.3 19.2 13.4 14.7 21. 3 15.5 15.7 24.2 1V· 6

20 5.9 2B.2 22.2 7.7 2B.0 21. 9 10.0 26.5 20.4 11.3 2B.0 21.3 10.2 28.7 2~.0 ! T

I

, ~

\D

21

Date 1974 Total light Stn. 1 Stn 2 % %

March 19 432 89 78

March 20 384 90 81

April 30 361 87 79

May 1 540 73 67

July 9 271 64 64 July 10 244 54 57

August 14 292 41 48

August 15 688 93 50

Sept. 17 421 95 71 Sept. 18 405 79 79

. \

22

Table 4. Summary of mean extinction coefficients and Secchi depths ( ) in Pendrell and Hotham Sounds, British Columbia, (m-1).

~- -- - --~----- - - - ----- - -- ---- - - - - - - - --- - ---------- - --- - - -------- ------------ - --- - -- - -- ----- --- ----- ----- -

Pendrell Sound Hotham Sound

Date Stn. 1 Stn. 2 Stn. 1 Stn. 2 1974

March 19 0.421 (9.5) 0.374 (10 ) March 20 0.326 (10 )0.356 ( 8 ) Apri 1 30 0.125 (15 ) 0.129 (12 ) May 0.288 ( 5) 0.493 ( 4 ) July 9 0.219 ( 9 ) 0.210 (7.5) July 10 0.398 (4.8) 0.454 (4.3) August 14 0.264 (7.8) 0.267 (7.3) August 15 0.177 (8.5) 0.217 (8.5) Sept. 17 0.136 ( 8 ) o. 131 (7.5) Sept. 18 0.141 (10) 0.210 (6.8)

Stn. Ave. 0.233 (9.9) 0.222 (8.9) 0.266 (7.7) 0.346 (6.3)

Sound Ave. 0.227 (9.4) 0.306 (7.0)

., . ,

-----""------------- - -

23

Table 5. Nutrient analyses in Pendre1l Sound1 on selected dates, 1974. (Values in ~g atoms P and N liter-I).

- --- - - - -- --------~--------- - -- -- --- - -- - - -------------- -------- - ---

Date time P04 N03 N02 NH4

June 25 1000 hrs. 0.13 0.6 <0.04 <0.10 July 22 1100 0.10 0.3 <0.10 July 30 1100 0.05 0.6 0.23 August 5 0.03 0.3 <0.10 August 13 0.09 0.3 <0.10 August 19 0.06 0.4 0.15 August 26 0.04 0.4 0.35 Sept. 2 1200 0.08 0.3 <0.10 Sept. 9 1430 0.16 1.3 <0.10 Sept. 16 0.09 0.3 <0.10

Average 0.08 0.5

Pryce Channel 29 July 0.16 0.5 <0.04 0.12

All samples taken from 0.5 m depth at Station 1 (See Figure 1).

lData analysis by Mr. Ken Stephens, P.B.S., Analytical Laboratories, Nanaimo.

. ,

- ---------

2" -,

Table 6. Nutrients on selected dates from Pendrell and Hotham Sounds. - --- ---------------~l ues i-!l--+1-9--ato[J]£-.fiY-----SLliter -1 L ______________________________ ___ ~ __

HOTHAM SOUND

Station 1 Station 2

Depth (m) N03 P04 TP Si N03 PO 4 TP Si Date 1 21.4 2.21 2.20 53.6 21.4 2.21 2.20 53.2 20/3/74 3 23.6 2.21 2.20 54.6 17.8 1. 91 1.90 45.7

5 24.3 2.21 2.60 53.6 25.7 5.16 9.30 53.6 20 25.0 2.58 2.60 53.6 25.7 2.21 2.20 66.1 -x 23.6 2.30 2.40 53.9 22.7 2.87 3.90 54.7

1/5/74 1 0.70 0.16 0.52 1.00 0.25 0.71 3 0.70 0.16 0.64 0.70 0.25 0.54 5 0.70 0.25 0.67 7.00 1.00 1.84

20 40.00 2.00 2.38 27.10 2.58 2.58 - 10.50 0.64 x 1.05 8.95 1.02 1.42

10/7 /74 1 0.70 0.10 1. 22 0.70 0.10 0.96 7.40 3 0.70 0.10 0.74 7.40 5 0. 70 0.20 0. 64 7.40 0.70 0.10 0.61 7.40

20 14.30 1. 29 1.48 16.10 7.60 0.51 0.83 7.40 -x 4.10 0.42 1.02 10.30 3.00 0.24 0.80 7.40

PENDRELL SOUND

30/4/74 1 0.71 0.32 0.65 0.71 0.97 0.97 3 0.71 0.65 0.65 1.43 0.65 0.65 5 1.43 0.65 0.97 2.14 0.65 0.65

20 21.40 2.26 2.58 21.40 2.26 2.58 -x 6.06 0.97 1. 21 6.42 1.13 1. 21

9/7/74 1 0.71 0.16 1.60 7.14 0.71 0.52 1. 23 7.14 3 0.71 0.23 1. 52 7.14 0.71 0.23 1.03 7.14 5 0.71 0.19 2.65 7.14

20 6.00 0.55 2.03 14.30 7.43 1.13 1.87 23.20 -x 2.03 0.28 1. 95 8.93 ' 2.95 0.63 1.38 12.50

. ,

Table 7.

Date 1974

Stn.l

Stn.l

S-tn-: 2

1 ..

3

S

20

1

3

5

20

1

3

5

20

1

3

5

20

I I I

Biological parameters as a function of depth at Station 1 and 2, Pendrell and Hotham sound~ (OS = organic seston mg m- 3, Chl a = mg m- 3 m, PIC - Production/Chlorophyll a = mg C mg I Chl ~-1 day-l). - - I

March 19 OS Chla PIC

3.7 0

3.6 .12 710 . 5

3.5 a 3.7 o

2.9 .35 119.8 3.2 .59 79.S 2.9 .53 100. 1 3.3 0

March 20 .13 209.2 .29 88.0

.50 59.5 o

.11 352.5

.32 74.7

.30 68.4

o

April 30

OS Chl a PIC

1.6 .08171.9

2.6 .16 45.5 2.2 .15 37.0 S .1 o 2.5 .13 346.7 2. 7 . 11 296. 1 2. 8 . 1 8 1 20. 6

2.8 .69

May 1 4.0 1.35 145.5 5 . 4 1 . 54 1 0 . 8 5.4 2.17 76.3 3.6 3.13

3.9 2.59 10S.9 5.3 4.25 68.4 5.3 6.99 26.9 4.1 1.25

PENDRELL SOUND

July 9 OS Chla PIC

3.5 1.24 53.4 3.31.5528.1 3.S .78 23.0 3.1 .42 -

3.3 .78 45.4 3.7 1.73 24.2

3.7 1.73 15.6 3.8 .76-

HOTHAM SOUND July 10 2.7 2.12 90.2 3.4 2.44 43.5 3.7 3.09 lS.2 2.6 1. 43 -

3.0 3.01 94.3 2.8 3.60 47.3 2.7 4.33 17.6 1.9 2.17 -

August 14 OS Ch1a PIC

2.1 .75 38.3 2.0 2.12 48.9 2. 1 1. 08 1.4 .45

8.9

2.8 .63 68.8

4.S 1.63 47.4 2.0 .83 26.0 1.8 .44

August 15 0.2 .4488.3 1.9 .73 lS.l 4.3 7.31 91. 0 1.9 ' 6.26

1 .7 1.27 32.2 3.2 .. 63 43.8 4.5 3.3 3.65 21.7

\ I : I

September It OS Chla ~/C

I

I 3.0 .60 ,0 . 7

3.4 . S2 1 F.4

3.3 .61 J6.9 4.2 .49

2.9 1.07

2.8 1.32 3.7 2.06 3.4 .40

,S.S

~8.1 ~1.6 -\ I I

September 18\ 4.3 .99 7r. 3 2.9 1. 11 6~ . 3

3 • 4 1. 08 5F' 1 3.5 .78-i

2.8 1.99 3.9 3.85 3.8 4.21

I

7p.5 61. 5

4 .3 3.5 .61 - \

N lr1

"

26

._ - --------- ---- --- --------- ------ --- - - --- _._-----

Table 8a. Phytoplankton species list, Pendrell Sound - Station 1

Diatoms

Chaetoceros debilis *Chaetoceros spp. *Skeletonema costatum *Thalassiosira pacifica *Thalassiosira aestivalis

Corethron hystix Melosira moniliformis

*Rhizosolenia stolterfothii *Cerataulina bergonii Schroderella delicatula Planktionella sol

*Leptocylindrus danicus *Nitzschia seriata Nitzschia closterium Nitzschia sp.

*Navicula sp. Thalassionema nitzschoides Amphiprora sp. Fragilaria crotonensis Aahnanthes cf longipes Asterionella kariana Grammatophora sp. Pleurosigma elongatum Pleurosigma sr. CymbeUa sp.

Legend ** dominant * common

rare

Di nofl agell ates

* Gymnodinium s p. 1 Gymnodinium sp. 2

*Glenodinium danicum Glenodinium (small) Gonyaulax triacantha Gonyaulax cf catenella Dinophysis sp.

*Peridinium depressum Po ly krikos s P . Prorocentrum gracile

Silicoflagellates

*Distephanus speculum Ebria tripartita Dictyocha fibula

Miscellaneous flagellates

Eutreptia (Euglenoid) ** fl age 11 ate *large flagellate *Olisthodiscus luteus (Cryptomonad)

**large Chrysomonad **small Chrysomonad

27

----------- - - - - - ------------------ ------------

Table 8b. Phytoplankton species list, Pendrell Sound - Station 2

Diatoms Dinoflagellates

**Thalassiosira pacifica Thalassiosira nordenskioldii

*Thalassiosira aestivalis Chaetoceros debilis

*Chaetoceros spp. **Skeletonema costatum

Melosira moniliformis Corethron hystrix Rhizosolenia stolterfothii

*Cerataulina bergonii Schroderella delicatula Coscinodiscus (large)

*Leptocylindrusdanicum Thalassionema nitzschoides Nitxschia closterium

*Nitzschia seriata Nitzschia sp. Achnanthes cf longipes

*Navicula sp. Navicula (large) Pleurosigma cf elongatum Pleurosigma sp. Fragilaria crot6nensis Licmophora abbreviata Amphora sp. Amphiprora sp. Asterionella kariana Grammatophora sp.

Legend ** dominant

* cOlTlllon rare

*Gymnodinium sp.l Gymnodinium sp. 2

*Gonyaulax triacantha Gonyaulax cf catenella GZenodinium danicum

*Clenodinium (small) Dinophysis sp. Protoceratium reticuZaturn Ceratium fusus Peridinium depressum PoZykrikos sp. Oxytoxum dipZoconus Prorocentrum gracile Amphidinium crassa

Silicoflagellates

Ebria tripartita Distephanus speculum

Miscellaneous flagellates

**flagellate *large flagellate *small Chrysomonad

**large Chrysomonad Eutreptis (Euglenoid)

*Olisthodiscus Zuteus (Cryptomonad)

28

- - -- - - -- -------- -------- ---------- --- -----------

Table ga. Phytoplankton species list, Hotham Sound - Station 1

Diatoms

**Skeletonema costatum Chaetoceros debilis

**Chaetoceros spp. *Corethron hystrix

**Thalassiosira pacifica *Thalassiosira aestivalis Thalassiosira nordenskioldii Thalassiosira (tiny) Rhizosolenia setigera Rhizosolenia stolterfothii

*Ditylum brightwellii Melosira moniliformis

*Cerataulina bergonii Schroderella delicatula

*Leptocylindrus danicus C08cinodiscus (la~ge) Achnanthes sp. Achnanthes (large)

*Navicula sp. Navicula (large) Nitzschia seriata Nitzschia closterium Ni tzschia bi loba:f;a Nitzschia sp. Asterionella kariana Fragilaroia striatula Licmophora abbreviata Thalassionema nitzschoides Amphiprora Amphora Pleurosigma sp. Pleurosigma elongatum Tabellaria sp.

Legend

** dominant - • * common

rare

Di nofl agell ates

*Dinophysis *Gymnodinium sp.l Gymnodinium sp. 2

*Gonyaulax triacantha Gonyaulax cf catenella

*Peridinium depres8um Glenodinium danicum

*-Glenodinium ( small) Amphidinium crassa Polykrikos sp. Prorocentrum gracile Oxytoxum diploconu8 Noctiluca scintillans Protoceratium reticulatum Ceratium fusus

Silicoflagellates

Ehria tripartita Distephanus speculum

Miscellaneous flagellates

*small Chrysomonad *large Chrysomonad *flagellate *large flagellate

Eutreptia (Englenoid) Olisthodiscus lute us (Cryptomonad)

29

-------------------------------------~---

Table 9b. Phytoplankton species list, Hotham Sound - Station 2

Diatoms Dinoflagellates

*Chaetoceros debiZis **Chaetoceros spp.

Corethron hystrix **ThaZassiosi ra pacifica *ThaZassiosira nordenskioZdii ThaZassiosira condensata

*ThaZassiosira aestivaZis ThaZassiosira (tiny)

**SkeZetonema costatum RhizosoZenia setigera

*Cerat auZina bergonii SchrodereZZa deZicatuZa MeZosira moniZiformis

*DityZum brightweZZii *LeptocyZindrus danicus Eucampia zoodiacus Coscinodiscus (large)

*Navicula sp. Achnanthes cf Zon~ipes Achnanthes (large) ThaZassionema nitzschoides Ni tzsah.ia c lost.erium Nitzschia seriata Nitzschia biZobata Nitzschia sp. Amphora sp. Licmophora abbreviata Stauroneis sp. PZeurosigma elongatum Pleurosigma sp.

Legend ** dominant * common

rare

* Gyrrmodinium s p • 1 Gyrrmodinium sp. 2

*Dinophysis spp. GonyauZax triacantha GOnyaulax cf catenella

*Glenodinium danicum *GZenodinium (small)

Ceratium fUsus Amphidinium crassa Oxytoxum diploconus

*Polykrikos sp. Prorocentrum gracile Noctiluca scintillans Peridinium depressum Gyrodinium cf spirale Protoceratium reticulatum

Silicoflagellates

Ebria tripartita Dictyocha fibula Distephanus speculum

Miscellaneou~ flagellates

Eutreptia (Euglenoid) *small Chrysomonad *large Chrysomonad *fl age" ate large flagellate Olisthodiscus luteus (Cryptomonad)

30

Table 10. Zooplankton dry weight and settled volume ( ) Pendre11 and Hotham Sounds, 1974. {mg m- 3, (m1. m-3))

PENDRELL SOUND

Date Station 1 Station 2

March 19 2.40 (0.39) 3.10 (0.54)

April 30 114.49 (7.83) 128.05 (6.27)

July 9 8.32 (3.13) 17.35 (3 .13)

September 17 10.33 (2.50) 5.31 (0.78)

Average 33.88 (3.46) 38.45 (2.68)

HOTHAM SOUND

Date Station 1 Station 2

March 20 2.35 (0.23) 1.94 (0.23)

May 1 59.22 (3.90) 47.92 (2.35)

July 10 10.09 (3.13) 11.11 (2.35)

September 18 7.19 (2.50) 7.35 ~1. 88)

Average 19.71 (2.44) 17.08 (1.70)

- ,

31

Table 11. Summary of areal production rates in Pendrell Sounds, British Columbia (mgC m- 2 day-l).

and Hotham

-----------

Pendrell Sound Hotham Sound Date Stn. 1 Stn. 2 Stn. 1 Stn. 2 1974

March 19 681 468 March 20 312 289 April 30 80 524 May 2755 2140 July 9 489 386 July 10 1050 1675 August 14 563 532 August 15 3109 825 Sept. 17 569 151-6 Sept. 18 767 1527

Stn. Ave. 476 685 1599 1291

Sound Ave. 580 1445

. ,

---------._--

APPENDIX TABLES

. ,

33

Table 1. Phytoplankton numbers by depth and survey period in Pendrel1 1974. (cells x 106 m- 3)

Sound,

STATION 1

Date March 19 April 30 July 9 August 14 Sept. 17 1974 1974

Depth Sa 207.90 77 .05 1272.78 7252.10 746.64 0 294.36 86 .46 1547.76 6019.94 1275 . 10 1 414.02 157 . 25 1775.70 5705.88 903.82 2 394.14 328.60 1599.34 5596.44 717.22 3 237.32 6.29 1958.40 4658.78 422.57 5 266.80 17.29 2671 .22 3671.22 436.22

10 147.36 0 1862.10 4025.49 115.64 15 1247.32 1738.58 20 62.86 15.71 575.64 980.40 294.74 30 23.58 128.91 288.70 117.60 290.76

X :: 227.59 X :: 102.20 X = 1379.90 x = 3976.64 x = 578.02

- 5 x L = 1252.87

1

STATION 2

Date March 19 April 30 July 9 August 14 Sept. 17

Depth S 106.04 1150.25 1763.48 4533.46 2069.00

0 151 .20 1494.37 1500.92 3788.28 1662.10 1 213.98 2453.46 2243.62 5394.46 1713.20 2 192.42 1876.22 2023.34 2452.66 2112.06 3 141. 39 1555.66 2487.00 4664.04 994.24 5 255.38 892.78 2363.32 4427.96 968.74

10 155.22 1145.75 2280.74 7228.62 501 .06 \

15 7-00.84 2266.00

20 43.22 . , 1026.35 777.76 835.26 365.48 30 0 256.17 796.80 819.28 143.44

x = 157.36 x = 1316.78 x = 1693.78 x = 3641.00 x = 1169.92

a S = Surface incubation - 5 X I. = 1595.77 1

34

Table 2. Phytoplankton numbers by depth and survey period in Hotham Sound, 1974 (cells x 106 m- 3)

STATION 1

Date March 20 May 1 Ju1t 10 . August 15 Se~t. 18

Depth S 53.38 3443.25 1347.28 1885.50 1717.04

0 319.19 1430.46 2167.48 1248.44 1795.58

1 136.76 2271.09 1584.52 1689.26 1666.32

2 95.89 2942.53 1413.96 1687.54 1781.78

3 226.41 4436.94 3804.44 984.94 2011.92

5 216.99 2628 . 21 3803.60 3623.18 1314.44

10 157.23 4556.30 7567.18 1509.00

15 592.90 8261.16

20 300.33 3179.39 692.58 4011 .40 913.54

30 31.45 1965.67 930.36 712.16 626.68

Xx = 170.85 X = 2983.76 x = 1815.27 x = 3167.08 x = 1481 .8

_ 5

X L = 1923.75 1

STATION 2

Date March 20 Mat 1 Ju1~ 10 August 15 Se2t. 18 Depth S 33.02 4079.24 1267.94 1313.04 1317.88

0 66.03 4408.88 3938.20 1683.86 2091.46 1 28.30 3819.93 1807.04 1673.52 1659.06 2 56.61 4218.76 1954.68 1660.00 2131 .88 3 188.67 3970.63 1968.72 1933.20 2103.86 5 114.79 3036.38 4241.46 2608.34 1605. 66

10 18.87 2520.02 6202.84 4703.90 2244.68 15 1519.22 4889.92 20 26.71 596.65 62.S6 5009.18 361.32 30 25.15. . , 909.10 49.04 1260.60 416.28

x = 62.02 x = 3062.18 x = 2301. 20 x = 2673.56 x = 1548.01

_ 5 X L = 1929.39

1

.. ~

35

Table 3. Phytoplankton volume (mm3 m- 3) Pendrell Sound, 1974.

by depth and survey period in

S'fATWN ~

Date March 19 AEri 1 30 Jul~ 9 August 14 SeEt. 17 Depth S 1366 231 1470 7399 284

0 1312 256 2125 7536 534

1 2000 148 1775 7080 406

2 2022 484 924 4893 168

3 1084 88 1537 3587 187 5 1199 7 986 1974 89

10 378 0 1676 1834 125 15 944 665

20 32.1 131 302 225 78 30 2l. 2 103 124 247 172

x = 1046 x = 181 x = 1186 x = 3544 x = 227

- 5 X l: = 1257

1

STATION 2

Date March 19 AEri 1 30 .. Jul~ 9 August 14 SeEt. 17 Depth S 449 1007 1910 4097 523

0 380 913 1814 4067 759 1 353 919 961 6153 635 2 546 1118 1479 2319 844 3 293 738 1413 3762 266 5 200 541 1345 1957 194

10 205 2090 1480 8571 119 15 1127 1294

20 50 1427 658 309 121

30 0 817 ,670 343 44

x = 275 x = 1063 x =1286 x = 3287 x = 389 . ,

- 5 X l: = 1260

1

, --,.

36

Table 4: Phytoplankton volume Hotham Sound , 1974.

(mm3 m- 3) by depth and survey period in

STATION 1

Date March 20 May 1 Ju1i: 10 August 15 Sept. 17

Depth S 541 3414 8950 7200 1030

0 505 5131 11020 3130 950

1 242 9170 16600 5440 1160

2 187 9420 10960 3050 1230

3 147 12350 32900 4860 711

5 83 9000 5880 7250 495

10 379 11600 14900 539

15 849 8800

20 348 25520 917 6000 545

30 257 8660 1430 1020 195

x = 299 x = 10474 - 9945 x = 6165 x = 762 x =

- 5 X L = 5089

1

STATION 2

Date March 20 May 1 Ju1'y 10 August 15 Sept. 17 Depth S 682 10470 7400 2540 1130

0 30 10670 3640 3580 2600 1 43 12700 13070 3550 2470 2 400 13980 13740 3000 3380 3 92 12710 18720 3020 4220 5 68 21920 7140 5120 2470

10 4 19430 21140 9470 5320 15 2140 9410 20 29 3210 136 5130 378

30 114 2380 101 1070 475 - 162 x = 11941 x = 8722 .- x = 4589 -x = x = 2494 .

. \

- 5 X L = 5582

1

37

FIGURES

· ,

VANCOUVER ISLAND

BRITISH COLUMBIA

GEORGIA STRAIT

HOTHAM SOUND

1

39

Figures 2 - 4

LEGEND

A. Dinophysis and Distephanus (star-shaped) 175X

B. Peridinium depressum with spore 210X

c. Cerat i um !usus l75X

D. Corethron hystrix l75X

E. Chaetocerus sp. 2l0X

F. Ebria triparti to 350X

G. Thalassiosira aestivalis 420X

H. Oeisthodiscus luteus 2l0X

I. Skeletonema costatum bloom lO5X

J. SkeZetonema costatum bloom lO5X

. \

•

~A.

r~~/D ~ ;.

.....

••

@

A~ ,., r;;.

• . ~- ~, j'.

" 'P " .

«

•• Ii . ~

C .t>'Q

, '.'f'~ ", J

" '

a

-' ,!r • • ~.}:

t)

.. ..

.i

~

*'

';M

...

, ..... ..

~ ~

~

,

~~ . '"" ~; !.f'

-

, . •

D 2

G •

( ".

". .. t · "~ .'t6--i . . ", , o •

7 ..

I'lli .. .. ..• "" :;-0 • . • ":i

.. -~

' .. . -,. ..

. .

4

~ .! • E

J: .... Il. W a

~ ~ • E

J: .... Il. W

o !

20-1

so .. MAR. 19

?

a 20

10 MAR . 19

10

20

so~ APR . 30

o • , I

4

0, I •.

10

20

30

CELLS m-' xlO' (-----) o 4 , !

TOTAL VOLUME mm l m-I x 10· (--) 0, , ....... ' ~ , 0, ~

10 10

10 20

so-u, JULY 9 so

CELLS m-' x 10' (-----) o 4. e , ,"

TOTAL VOLUME mm' m-' x 10· (-) z 7 •

0,

"" ~.,. <.

" , I I

10 ~ , "

10

" ,,"

20 20

so JULY 9 30

",'" /

I I

","

" I , I I 1

AUG. 14

.""..,..-~ ,," \ \ \

" ,,"

,-

~ ~ t 'T

• a •

o. < <'

" , I I

... /'

10 .1

20

so

10

20

10

o ,

SEPT. 17

'" \ ... ,.-.-_:::a I I I , ,

I I I , I , I , I , , 5 , , ,

If

SEPT. 17

.~ w

, ~

\ ~

CELLS m- 5 x 10' (-----)

4 , , • • , , 1

TOTAL VOLUME mm' m-' xlO' (--) 4 12 4 12 I. 20 24 2p 12 4 12 II 20 24 U 52 M 12 Ie 20 24 2. 32 • 0_ 1 I o • ... I

~ . 1 I 1 I 0 0 0

....."> I

" I \ -- --- " , -- .... ,

-~ .... .... ' -- ........ ( < ,/ ..... " -- ,

" ,/ -- , ..... '-• ~u Gl '7 10 " G -... 10 \ ~ ,/ \ I !! I ,/ \ • " I E " \ I

I ,/ _ ..... ) I

~ Jli ~1 I ,

I I

_ ..... I ~ I

_ ..... I

I 10 10 ..... - I I , " ..... 20 I

I ,/ I / "

, / ,/

, ,/ I

I ,/ , I / ,

I ,/ I

" , 10-- MAR. 20 !OJ MAY I I 10 JULY 10 30 / AUG. 15 !O 'SEPT. 18

..::::.

.~

CELLS m-'KIO' (------) 4 i 4 , I I

TOTAL VOLUME mm' m- I xlO' (-) 4 12 4 12 I. 20 24 .. 5Z 4 • If Ie 20 24 ! 32 M

I I 1 I , --=;a. 1 """

-.... 1,\ -"<> ... )

~ \ \

1011

10

1 ,

/ 10

1 ~ '~ 10

1 1 "

Gl 1) ... I -- I ~ , .......... !! / ...... I • E I ~ .......... I I

:z:

_-'I J 1/ Jj,// J / ,

J{ ~ , a.. , w

\ 0

I 6 I I I I ,

50 J JULY 10 50J / ,-

50 JI ISEPT. 18 /

JO"MAR.20 30~ " MAY "AUG.15

;0;-I

E CIt E

90

...: 40

~

)-30 a: o

II

It) 7 I

E E 6

w :i S :::) ..J g 4

o W 3 ..J l-I­W 2 en

M

~ ./

PENDRELL SOUND

5TH. I

A ,

5TH. 2

o~~ 19/5 30/4 .n rr It 19/3 30/4 9/7 17/'

DATE

HOTHAM · SOUND

5TH. 1 2

20/3 I/S '0/7 I." 20/3 I/S 10/7 I."

AVERAGE

PEN DR ELL

HOTHAM

7

.j:>. c...,

, ~

lSI

Q f'l 11 ; I

A

I v

-lSI

ttl lSI

I 2121 22121

46

MG C/M3/DRV

~2I2J

olNTEGRRL I~ 681 .~6 MG C/M2 DRV

.INTEGRRL:2~ ~68.61 ME C/M2 DRY

MRR 19 197~ \

. \

STNS. I + 2

PENDRELL SOUND 8

Q PI 11 -i I A

1 v

I fJfJ :2fJlZI

47

MG C/M3/DRY

S'2J1ZI

oINTE:GRAL I~ 821.:38 MG C/M:2 I>RY

AINTE:GRAL 2~ S'2Y.7S MG C/M:2 DAY

. \

APR 321 197Lf \

STNS. I + :2

P£NDR£LL SDUNI>

9

Q PI 11 -i I 1\

:I v

-lSI

ttl lSI

12121 22121

48

MG C/M3/DAY

S'2J2I

olNTrGRRL I~ ~89.72 MG C/M2 DRY

AINTEGRRL 2i 38S.~9 MG C/M2 DRY

. ,

LlUL 9 I97Lf \

5TNS. I + :2

PENI>RELL SDUNI> ·

10

Q rt 11 -f I

1\

1 v

12121 22121

49

MG C/MJ/DAY

~pJ2J

olNTLGRRL I~ ~62.71 MG C/M2 ~AY

& I NTEGRRL 2~ ~J I .97 MG C/M2 ~RY

. ,

RUG I Lf 197Lf

STNS. I ... 2

PENDRE:LL SDUND

l'

Q fit 1] -f I 1\

:t v

-lSI

. \

50

MG CIM3/DRV

~2I2I

•

o INTEGRRL I~ ~6B.SE MG (1M2 DRY

A INTEGRAL 2~ 1~IS.6S MG (1M2 DRY

SEP 17 197Lf

STNS. I . + 2 PE:NDRE:LL SDUNI>

. 12

Q PI 1) -1 I

J 2121 :22121

51

ME C/M3/I>AY

S212J

o I NTLGRAL I ~ :3 12. 16 MG C/M2 DAY

A INTEGRAL:2~ 289.~2J MG C/M2 DAY

. ,

MAR 2JZ1 197'-1

STNS. I + :2

HCTHRM SOUND

13

g

Q JTl "'0 -f I )\

I v

ttl g

52

MG C/M3/DRY

S:2121 I ~! I: a~ , : I

oINT£GRRL l~ 27~~.89 MG C/M2 DRY

A1NTEGRRL 2~ 214~.~S: MG C/M2 DRY

. \

MRYI I !37~ \

STNS. I+-2

HOTHRH SDUND

-14

Q f'J 1l -4 I A

1 v

lSI

ttl lSI

53

MG C/M3/DRY

S'El2J

OINTLGRRL I~ I2JYS.7S MG C/M2 I>AY

A INTEGRRL 2~ 167~.E3 MG C/M2 ~RY

. ,

&..IUL 121 '87~ \

STNS. J f 2

HCTHRH SOUND

15

lSI

Q J'1 11 ; I 1\

1 v

lSI

tal lSI

J 2121 22121

54

MG C/M:3/DFlY

S"2Jfl

OINTLGRAL I~ 31218.71 MG C/M'2 DRY

.INT£GRRL ~~ 8~.S2 MG (1M2 DAY

. ,

AUG IS" IS7Li \

STNS. I of :2

HCTHRM SOUND

16

IS}

Q PI 11 -I I 1\

1 v

IS}

hJ IS}

J 2121 :22121

55

MG C/M:3/DRY

S'2121

o INTEERAL I~ 767.21S MG C/M2 DRY

• INTEERAL 2~ 1S'26.81 MG C/M2 DRY

. \

SE:P \ 18 J 97"i

STNS. I .. 2

HCTHRM SOUND

17

56

... f • ••• • • • . I . • .1.. . • . It

r -2 1'1 :II

n 21 ::r - 21 d2 PI )C riI

21 - • PI -. ·m m :r Dl .. -"- D

'" - 2 CD til '" '" IS1 I ::r -. -I

-< 2 + -f\

C N lJ

11 m PI II r • :II IS1 • -t 151 - m c + z ...

UJ • •

bI UJ 1'1 151

. , m -151 1Il ~ m 00

x •

57

•

r z P.l ]] II

n II :::r PI - iii 10 II

PI )C m - m --U2 D :::r W Z ... "

El IS1 m CI' ; CD

Z ft ft :::r ru -- (}

n m lJ lJ hi 1'1 VI r .r :n .; w -n + z '" w

rn In ttl . \ IS1 W .r IS1 ...J VI

~ .... -0

58

APPENDIX FIGURES

· \

"

(/)

5", 0; E

:t: I­a. IU Cl

:~ MAR." "' ~. °a JULY 9

I < ~ .. g ..

-• • • UG

5 6

f g

7 8

is

Cih

!!! r

2

!Ill SEPT. 17

LEGEM) STN. I PENDRELL SOUND

OIilthodilCUS luteus

Cerataulina bergonii

laroeChrysomonad

Leptocylindruldanicus

Thalaltiolira pacifica

RhizolOlenia stolterfothii

Others

LEGEND STN.2 PENDRELL SOlJIID

1

OIisthodiscus luteus

Cerataulina berOonii

larOi Chrysomonad

L.ptocylindrus danicus

Thalassiotira pacifica

Skeletonema costatum

Others

0 ~

rl

~ Q; E

:r ..... Q.

UJ 0

~ .. E

:r

4 8

'" (5

(;

2!

~ MAR.20

Ii: 0 UJ o

iii

'" o

l'!1 MAR. 20

o . "' 0h

'" .. ° iii

lII .

~

J

,

, o

, '" ,

'" '" ,

i o

i iii t. :. ~

!!i

12 18

MAY I

MAY I

20 !,"' 28 !1 0 0 0

.. '"

~ 0 ~

(mm3'm-3 ~ 103) 4 • 12 Ie 20 24 • !2

~ -JULY 10

0 4 •

°1 iii

2!

~lI AUG. 15

.. 0 ..... ' _---' __

iii 1 ..

2!

!!i AUG. 15

12 I.

LEGEND STN.I HOTHAM SOUND

Carataulina bergonii

Thalassiosira sp.

Chaatoceras !p.

SkeIItonama costatum

-r IIII!iI Others

LEGEND STN. 2 HOTHAM SOlH)

Laptocylindrul danicus

"Cera'aulina beroonii

Chaetoe"os Ip.

Thakmiosira pacifica

Skeletonema costa tum

Others 2!

~I SEPT. 18

2

61

l ....,... UIiI Dr ,. urrDIil,..,

t J

I .. 2 . .

J I <

lfl I - IV i lSI 1

_1'1 fT1

I U1 Zll 1] PI -fZ

PIp) .; " ~

~ I1x I 1: ~;

1). "-Q -fi\

.0 PI n 1) 111"1 lfl tlJ -f . "1 .; 'D lSI 1: lSI· f11 • Z z -

Q - m· lJ lSI mill N PI ~

• kJ r 151 r ~ 11

m -c Ul c z "-Q . ,

W W lSI "-

~ .r

3

62

f ....,... 1m ~ .. Ui'roIIln

" 1

, !

.. 2

I -

I < lfl

I 1 Q J _1'1 f11

) In Z:D 11 PI ~Z ~ PI 1'1 ~ • ~ llX I :r ~~ - 11· \. 0 ~~ +0 1'1 1'1 11 .r'l lfl

1] f\J ~ . 'I -I lSI :r my (11 + Z z -0 to ~.

lJ m.r • ~ -PI LI1 r -r :I l'1

•

m tJ

ill c z \. 0 . ,

w W lSI \.

~ .I

4

63

" 1 J

I .. 2

I -, <

tn I - Q I IS1 1

_1'1 r.1

I m ZD 1] 1'1 -I Z

1\ 1'11'1 -f " 1\ 11)( I

I ~-I - 1J" \. Q -ft\ .D 1'1 PI

1J ..["1 111 ttl -f • "I -f 11 IS1 I ..,JY f'1 .. Z z m

0 - 10" II 1I1

..,J-M -PI " PI r lSI -r :I

10 W tl lSI c z \. 0 . \ .r W

IS1 \. ~ .r

5

64

I ....... LIB .... ,. ...,..,'"

'0

1 ,

I -2

J -

t < 111

I - Q I 6J 1 -,. fT1

I In Zll 11 1'1 -I Z 1'1,. -f " t\

t\ ]IX I J: ('\-1 - M 11· \. Q -In ~D PI 1'1 11 .["1 LI1

1] ttl -I " "1 -f f11 lSI J: ~. • Z Z lSI Q - ttl" II -f'1

hi -

'" N r " ID

lSI r :I .r

In W tl C lSI z \. Q . \

W .r lSI \.

~ .r

6

I -2

I

w IS)

. \

65

-< 11l

" f'l 11 -i I

" 11l -i Z

7

66

f " r J 1 Z

I .. 2

I -

I < Ln

I - Q i EI :l _1'1 fT1

J U1 2D 11 1'1 .;2 t\ 1'11'1 -i " t\ lIx I I ~.;

11" \. Q .;t\ +D 1'1 P1 11 .["1 Ln .; " "1 -i I 61~ + Z ttl

" --J -IOU " N -L11 61 :1 D1

ill \. ~

w - \

\. 61 ~

.r

8

~

1 !

I !E .. 2

J I I I

I .,

-lSI

W lSI

l

67

.."..., UII Dr 'TtfC II"GIUTY

. ,

. "

< Ul

1 CJ _1'1 f11

U1 ZD 11 1'1 -I Z I'll'] -I " " llx I :r ~-I - 1]"

" 0 -In .D 1'1 1'1 1] I"1 Ul

-I " "1 -I :r ~. • Z ~

~ UI" _ttl " D1 -m It) ~ Ul

9

1

I , I i ) "

) .. 2

I -lSI

ttl lSI

W lSI

68

U1 1'1 (\ (\ I

0 1'1 11 -I I .. ~ • W :I

. ,

1 _1'1 ZIl -I Z 1'11'1 lIx ~-I 1Ii\ -10 +1'1 .["1 • "1 ~y ttl m· 01'-1

D1 81 to

•

< tfl

Q r1 11 -; I

" 111 -; Z

N

I

" rn " ~ I

10

69

..,... LiII Dr 'I1fC' III'IIMIIT"I

. . "

1 , I

.. 2

J -

J < Lfl

I - Q i lSI 1 _1'1 f1l

I In Zll 11 M -fZ t\ MI'] -f " .. t\ lJ x I I ~-f - 1].

'\ Q -f" .D M I'] 1] .r'l Lfl

11 r\J -f • "1 -f lSI I my PI + Z Z ttl Q m m· lJ . m-f'l 1\1

ILl r II r :I ..c In -tl

~ C z '\ Q W ill lSI \

~ I

I I

70

71

~ r ~ • z .. !I , .. 2

I ! t < ~ In I - \I ) lSI :I

_I"J Pl

I lfl Z:D 11 1'1 -t Z tl f1ll"J -; .. tl 1X I I ~-f

l' \. • Q -tr'\ -+0 1'1 I"J

I 1l 1"'1 In 0 t\J -f ."'1 -; -f lSI I \Jl~ I oJ, Z -:n m' :I ... wW lSI ~ In . (J) 0 IS) N C :I Z ttl \}

~ \.

w W lSI \. . \ ~

L

13

> "1

72

1 tfiI'ftIfIL IJII Dr THr INTo.l,.,

",

• ; "

! .. 2

J of

t < ~ m !. - Q i liI :I _M fT1

I m Z:n 1] fI1 ; Z (\ M 1"1 -I .. (\ l X I :r A-i ,.

" Q ;tt +0 fI1 1"1 1] .r"'1 111

ttl -f ."'1 -I :r lSI :r m;, 0 "" Z -f ~

I III m · ~W :n . IJl f\.J :I lSI IJl

:I ...J m 0

t\J c z lSI Q

" W W lSI

" " \ ~ J:

14

15

74

1 ~ , .. 2

I -9

J < m

I - tV a lSI :I

_rrJ fT1

I III z:O 1] P1 -i Z

rlrrJ -1 ., f\ f\ lX I 1: A-I - ,.

" Q -ill +0 PI M 1) l' lJl

N -I ., -1 lSI :r 1O~ • Z N 111 WO

...,N ° m 61 ..oJ

III :I m

0 c z " Q Vl

W " lSI ...J . \ .r

16

> ' 1

75

I t

.......... UIf Dr Tt£ IN'l'DaITY

'-,

; r 1 Z

! .. 2

I J

< tn

I :I TV

a _M J11

i U1 z:n 11 P1 ; z .. f\ f1l M -I

f\ ] x I I fl ~ _ f1J

'" \. Q ; tt P1 .. ~

tn 11 1"1) :r tal i""1) -f m 0 + w-+ Z -i -:r .r 1"

NW :n " UI l m m :I IJl m

0 c z lSI Q

\. w ~ lS1 \. , , ~

1:

17

76

tfI'I'lRIL t.m' Dr TIC unDeUTI

J r z ..

2

I < 111

:l tV _rt f1l

In Zll 1] PI ;2

.. " Art -;

" :u x I :r ~-I - ,.

\. Q -Itt .. 0 f'J rt 1] 1'1J Ul

:r ru -I .'1J -; IS) :r laJ-+ 0 ~ Z -i 1 • :r .r -UlJ: :n • tt.I l W IJ1 J:

m :I fiiI 0 C z lSI Q

\. w ~ IS) \.

. \ ~.

.r

18

19

1 ,

I ~

2

I J I i

I ..,

:r D -i :r 11 1

-lSI

f\] lSI

W lSI

l

. \

78

...,..... ... Dr THr JN1IMun

:I _f1l

U1 2:0 PI ;2 (\ rlf1l (\ :Ox :r ~-i - 1J. Q ;f1

+D PI M 11 1"1) -i ."1) :r to+ + -m S·

_N • -111 ~ 3. .!

< tn

\} (T1 1] -t I

" Ul -t Z

rtl

Vl

" [[]

" ~ .r

20

79

1 j

I ... 2

I -

J < m

I - IV J lSI :I -M rr1

I U1 Z:JJ 1] PI -12 ' r. rIM -i • r. :II X I I ()-i _ f1l

1J. \.

Q ;{\ -.0 PI rJ 1] 1"'1 Ul

hi -f ."11 -i I S I m+ 0 • Z -f 61 I - 1· II lSI N-

.! -~ • -tn

lSI ~

W 0 C -z III Q

\. w lD s \.

~ L

21

1

I , ~

I i

I •

:r 0 -f :r :n 1

J .. 2

I -lSI

hJ lSI

W lSI

80

...,.".., UII Dr TIC unoe,,.,

:I _rJ

U1 z::O PI ;2 (\ f1lrJ (\ lIX I ~-t - 11· Q ; t\ PI + ~ 1) I"1J i·"1J • lB +

lB OJ : N • -m iii 1 lSI

-< Ln

tV f1l "U -i I

\.

tn -i Z

ttl

m \. to \. ~ .r

22