Smooth Bottom Net Trawl Fishing Gear Effect on - New England ...

Table 3.4-2. Numerically Dominant Species Little Tow
Massachusetts Bay <strong>Trawl</strong> Study 2002
Legend: LT= Little Tow
No code at the end= Pre-chronic trawling July 2002 02= year sampled 2002
P1= Post chronic trawling October 2002 1B= Lane 1, Station B
P2= Post chronic trawling November 2002 [following major northeasterly storm]
Station LT02-1B <strong>Trawl</strong> Lane July
No. of species 93 Avg. Sp. Per grab 62
No. of individuals 2432 Avg Indiv. Per grab 811
Rank Species Name Count % of Total Cummulative %
1 Prionospio steenstrupi 425 17.48 17.48
2 Spio limicola 303 12.46 29.93
3 Dipolydora socialis 245 10.07 40.01
4 Tharyx acutus 201 8.26 48.27
5 Nucula delphinodonta 172 7.07 55.35
6 Mediomastus californiensis 115 4.73 60.07
7 Thyasira gouldii 86 3.54 63.61
8 Anobothrus gracilis 75 3.08 66.69
9 Ptilanthrus tenius 74 3.04 69.74
10 Phoronis architecta 53 2.18 71.92
Station LT02-1B - P1 <strong>Trawl</strong> Lane October
No. of species 100 Avg. Sp. Per grab 64
No. of individuals 2428 Avg Indiv. Per grab 809
Rank Species Name Count % of Total Cummulative %
1 Prionospio steenstrupi 387 15.94 15.94
2 Spio limicola 282 11.61 27.55
3 Tharyx acutus 225 9.27 36.82
4 Nucula delphinodonta 217 8.94 45.76
5 Phoronis architecta 176 7.25 53.01
6 Anobothrus gracilis 132 5.44 58.44
7 Mediomastus californiensis 106 4.37 62.81
8 Thyasira gouldii 82 3.38 66.19
9 Ptilanthrus tenius 59 2.43 68.62
10 Apistobranchus typicus 51 2.10 70.72