USF Libraries

A comparison of deep reef foraminiferal assemblages in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
A comparison of deep reef foraminiferal assemblages in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico
Physical Description:
ix, 152 leaves : ill. ; 29 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Parker, Douglas M.
Publisher:
University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Florida
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Foraminifera -- Mexico, Gulf of   ( lcsh )
Dissertation, Academic -- Marine science -- Masters -- USF   ( fts )

Notes

General Note:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of South Florida, 1982. Bibliography: leaves 55-62.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida
Holding Location:
Universtity of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029720255
oclc - 09456976
usfldc doi - F51-00017
usfldc handle - f51.17
System ID:
SFS0040017:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

A ffilv'l..mRISON OF DEEP PEEF FORAMit-..TIF'ERAL ASSEMBlAGES IN THE EASTERN GULF OF MEXIffi BY )):)uglas M. Parker A thesis submitted in partial fulfilllrent of the requirement for the degree of Master of Scieoce in the Departrrent of t-B.rire Science in the University of South Florida r:Ecerrber, 1982 M:ljor Professor: Jolm C. Ste:inrretz

PAGE 2

Graduate Council University of South Florida Tanpa, Florida CERI'll'ICATE OF APPRJVAL MASTER Is 'IHFSIS This is to certify that the .Master's Thesis of D::mglas M. Parker with a major in Marine Science has been approved by the Examining Ccmnittee on 7/28/82 as satisfactory for the thesis requirenent for the M3.ster of Science degree. Thesis O::mni ttee: Major Professor: John C. Stei.nrretz r.enber: Nonnan J. Blake M:!nber: Albert c. Hine

PAGE 3

'!his project could not have been corrpleted without generous gifts of tirre and e:xpertise from rrany people. My sincere tha.nY...s to Dr. Jdm C. Steinrretz who helped in ways too nurrerous to rrention, inclu::ling my acceptance into the Marine Science program and the fornE.tion of the original ideas for this researdl. Drs. NornE.n Blake and Albert C. Hine earn ny thanks for their constructive comrents and advice. I appreciate the help given by Dr. Wayne Bock in identification of foraminifera. I "V.Ould also like to thank Tony Greco for his suggestions to irrprove ny S.E.M. results. I thank those S.C. U .B.A. divers, ike Weston, Steve Meyers, 01ap Garvey, and Bob Thursby, who voll.mteered their tirre to help take samples on the Tortugas Bank. 1-1j rrost sincere thanks g:> to ny parents, Walter W. and !-E.ry V. Parker, who provided generous financial supp::>rt when the rroney ran short, but especially for their caring about rre and the corrpletion of this project. Finally, I would like to the rroral supp:>rt given by the gentlerren of the Eeahkeek Coffee Clw: Gregg Brooks, Steve Wa]J(er, Steve Snyder, Bruce Barber, George Pauly, Jim Bannon, and others, who allc:Med rre to interrupt their work repeatedly to tell of ny frustrations and weekend adventures. ii

PAGE 4

TABLE OF COmENI'S LIS!' OF FIGJRES iv LIS!' OF TABLES v LIST OF APPENDICES vi ABSTRACT viii INIIDDlL'TION 1 PREVIOUS STUDIES IN '!HE EASI'ERN GULF OF MEXICO 7 DESCRIPT!ON OF STUDY AREAS 13 METHODS 17 RESULTS 21 DISCUSSION 36 SillMZ\RY AND COOCLUSIONS 51 LIST OF REFEREN:ES 55 APPENDICES 6 3

PAGE 5

Lisr OF FIGURES FIGURES 1 Cruise tracks from Parker (1954) and Bandy (1956) 2 2 Location map showing sampling areas ... 4 3 Generic predaminance map, from Poag (1981) .. 8 4 Sample lcx::ation map, Florida Middle Grounds Area 14 5 Sanple lcx::ation nap, Tortugas Bank Area 16 6 Interstation similarity derrlrograrn, Florida mdd.l e Gro'lll'lCis 2 3 7 Czekanowski similarity dendrogram CXJll"'flCii'ing sorre station totals frc:m the Florida Middle Grounds wi. th stations from the Tortugas Bank 33 8 Ternary diagram plot by percent of thanatocoe.rose in ea.ch Slll:x::>rd.er 3 5 9 CUrrents of the West Florida Continental Shelf 39 iv

PAGE 6

LIST OF TABLES TABLES 1 Florida Middle Grounds, percent of identifiable assemblage by family .............................. 25 2 grain size and standard deviation for Florida Middle Grounds stations ... 26 3 Grain size analysis Tbrtugas Bank Area 29 4 Percent of identifiable assemblage family, 'Ibrtugas arrl. Tbrtu.gas Ba.nk 31 5 Average percentage of thanatcx::oenose represented by each family 43 v

PAGE 7

Lisr OF APPDIDICES APPENDIX 1 Detailed bathyrretrics, Florida Middle Grounds ...... 63 2 Station totals data fran Florida Middle Grol..li'lds 6 7 3 Species occurring at Florida Middle Grormds during 1978-79 survey ................ 92 4 Ibmi.nant species, Florida Middle Grounds 95 5 On-sight sample station descriptions Tortugas Bank Area Cruise B-8027 . . 96 6 Inforrra tion surnnary tables, '!'ortugas Bank A.rea Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 7 Species occurring in the Tortugas Bank Area in this survey ......................... 108 8 Tortugas Area species abundance station totals ... 111 9 Intrastation similarity dendl:ograms Tortugas Bank .Area 129 10 Distribution of similarity Tortugas Bank !\rea s"tations ...................................... 137 11 Frequency of foraminieral tests per square rreter of sea floor Tortugas Bank Area stations .... 138 12 Frequency of species found living at 'I'c>rtugas stations ................................. 139 13 Florida Middle Grourds, station totals as t;:ercent in sul:x:>rder . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 0 14 Foraminiferal species peresent on one of the study stations only . . . . . . . . . . . . . .141 15 Electron micrographs of species which represent at least 0.5% of the thanatocoenose at one s-tation or 110re .................................... 142 vi

PAGE 8

A OF DEEP REEF ffi!WJ[Th"TIFERAL ASSEMBlAGES rn 'IHE EASTERN GLTLF OF BY Ibuglas M. Parker An Abstract A thesis sul::mitted in partial fulfill.rrent of the requirerent for the degree of .Master of Scien:e in the Departrrent of r."arine Science in the University of South Florida Decerrber, 1982 Major Professor: John C. Steil'11Tetz vii

PAGE 9

ABSTRACI' The foraminiferal thanatoooenoses of the Florida Middle Grotmds (lat. 2s010' to 2S040'N1 long. 84' to on the Western Florida continental shelf 1 and the Bank (lat. 24 'N 1 long. 83CW) 1 on tbe sout:.h\t.lestem Florida conti!Ental shelf 1 are corrpared. Eighty-nine species from 49 genera and 20 families were identified on the Middle Grounds and 101 species fran 47 genera and 26 families were identified in the as Bank area. The tJNo areas have many species in a:IllllOfl1 but have thanatocoenoses distinctive in several weys. Czekanc::Mski 's Quantitative Similarity In:::lex is used to rreasure the similarity (and thus dissimilarity) between the entire thanatocx:>enoses of the 'bwD areas. The relative abundances of the species Asterigerina carinata indicates a rrore profound influence of platform margin waters on the Tortugas Bank area than on the Florida Middle Grotmds. In'lf:Ortant differences are recognizable by differences in percent distribution anong families. The percent of the identifiable thanatocoenose represented by Arrphisteginidae1 Asterigerinidae, and Soritidae in the Florida Middle Grounds is 25. 851 1. 61 and 8. 81 respectively. '!be corresponding percentages in the Tort Bank area are 9. 2, 15. 71 and 27. 9. All Tortugas Bank area stations are higher in the suborder ratio Miliolina/lbtaliina than all Florida Middle Grounds stations for all seasons sampled. The cause is concluded to be a rrore consistent association in tbe 'lbrtugas Bank area with a water rmss1 the La:>p CUrrent -Gulf Stream system. viii

PAGE 10

The thanatocoenose of the Tortugas Bank area stations includes an abundnace of the four species considered to be the Caribbean-Antillean reef fatma. These species are Arrphistegina gibbosa, Asterigerina carinata, Archaias angulatus, and Rotorbinella rosea Bandy. The Florida Middle Grounds thanat:oc:::oeix:>se includes, of these four species, ?2 gibbosa in abundance, ?2 carinata in law frequ:ncies and ?2 angulatus in very low frequencies. This is consistent with fatmal distributions characteristic of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, reef foraminiferal subprovince. Walker' s technique for recognition of living benthic foraminifera by staining with Sudan Black B is concluded to have limitaticns soch that direct observation of protoplasm rnntent is reccmrended for recognition of living foraminifera. Abstract approved: MaJor Professor: John c. Stei..nrretz Assistant Professor, t-1arine Science ix

PAGE 11

INrror:ucrroN Foraminifera have been studied for centuries by curious persons with microscopes. It was H. B. Brady in the Challenger RefX)rts of 1884 who advanced the study of foraminifera significantly by sunmarizing the literature published prior to that tine and painstakingly illustrating the foraminifera recovered in the Challenger's dredges. R. J. Schubert published a second sumnary of progress in the early 1920's, about the tine Joseph August Cushman established his laboratory and began his extensive contributions to the science. Cushlnan' s key {Olshrnan, 1948) to the system of identification is the basis for nuch of present ta.IDI"llrey. In the 1940's and 50's, the practical value of foraminiferal research was realized and prorroted by corrpanies for petroleum. 'Ihese stulies provided the 1 data base by which foraminifera have cx:xre to be appreciated as "invaluable aids in the detenn:ination of the age as well as the dep:lsitional environrrent of strata" {Haq and Boe.rsrra, 1978). The environrrental indicator faunas identified and described by Fred Phleger, Orville Bandy, and Francis Parker in the 1950's from the Gulf of remain irrportant resources for interpreting dep::>sitional environrrents of ancient sed.inents {Haq and Boersrra, 1978) These very useful broad based stulies {Figure 1) did have their limitations. The y covered large areas of the shelf and slope and were not intended to thoroughly define rrore subtle local variations in foraminiferal fauna such as those one might e:xpect aroLIDd a coral reef or s ubrrerged bank.

PAGE 12

la

PAGE 13

Figure 1. Cruise tracks from Parker (1954) and Bandy (1956).

PAGE 14

2 30 FLORIDA 28 II 26 88 82 PARKER, 1954 86 84 82 30 FLORIDA 28 28 26 50 0 50 FAUNA 88 86 BANDY, 1956

PAGE 15

Wright and Hay (1971) brought attention to the lack of information available on the distribution and abundance of species of foraminifera in reef areas by erq::hasizing that this relationship has not been studied. Murray (1973) recognized that "IIU.lc:h rrore distributional and assenblage data are needed from ... ooral reef ... envirorurents." Weis and Steinker ( 19 77) said, "Fe;.; studies have concentrated on the foraminiferal asserrblages associated with rrodem ooral reefs, even th::>ugh foraminifera are important both as rrenbers of the biota and as skeletal oonsti tuents of the sedirrents." I::escribing nore specifically the area of this study, Weis and Steinker (1977) wrote "Pwlished data on the foraminifera of the South Florida reefs is scarce and alnost no infornation is available on the patch reef fauna." Except for the thorough study of living foraminifers of the West Flc:wer Garden Bank ooral reef (Poag and Tressler, 1981), very little infonna.tion has been supplied to fill the gap in knc:wledge of benthic foraminifera associated with ooral reefs in the Gulf of I>Exi.co. '!he purposes of this study are to ieentify the foraminiferal asserrblages found in reefal sedirrents of the eastern Gulf of M=xi.oo by examining those of the Florida Middle Grounds and the Tortugas Bank (Figure 2), and to note the distinctions between the asserrblages from these two different areas. By establishing a detailed description of the recent foraminiferal assenblages in these areas, this study rray yield information useful in the reconstruction of ancient envirorurents and the paleoeoological interpretation of fossil assenblages. 'Ib acconplish this purpose, the sanples frorr. the two areas 3

PAGE 16

3a

PAGE 17

Figure 2. location rrap shaving sampling areas.

PAGE 18

. 0 28 0 26 0 24 0 22 0 20 88 + .,>0 0 '? .. 0 84 ;:. :::: :rr:: Middle + GULF OF + + + + 86 84 Tortug?S Bank + ... ..... ; .... :.; 82 :+ E 0 0 "' + 80 4 78 0 0 26 0 24 22 0 20 78

PAGE 19

are compared by sul:order on ternary diagrams (f1urray, 1973) by percentage distribution arrong families, and by rretrics using Czekanowski' s Quantitative similarity index (Connack, 1971) to compare species within and arrong stations. The living and total r:opulation relationship is detennined qualitatively. The problem of patchiness within apparently horrogeneous sandy sedirrents will be addressed by analyzing closely spaced replicate samples. The qualitative similarities between foraminiferal asserrblages in areas of this study and nearby areas from literature sources is discussed. The r:ortion of this investigation dealing with the foraminifera of the Florida Middle Grounds was initiated in 1978 as part of a study supr:orted by the Bureau of Lan:i Ha.nagerrent (Ibyle et al., 1980). \Jhile gathering data on specifics and distribution of the t-1iddle Grounds foraminifera, it beca.rre apparent that there was a lack of comparable infonnation relating to deep reef foraminifera. The 'Ibrtugas Bank was selected for oontrast because of its geographic location on the southwestern r:ortion of the West Florida Continental Shelf, because its bathyrretry (14m to 30m) is similar to the Florida Grounds (25m to 40m), and because active coral grcMth described by SQ,'BA divers appeared to qualify at least parts of the bank as a ooral reef environment. The term "reef" in this paper shall be 5 defined as "ecologic reef" as defined in (1975): "A buildup fomed in part by a wave-resistant frame-work oonstructed by organisms. Comparing the 'Ibrtugas Bank foraminifera with the Florida Middle Grounds assemblage might also provide data to test the HAFIA (1975-1976) pror:osal that the recruitrrent of organisms to the

PAGE 20

Middle Grmmds area is by the Gulf Loop CUrrent, since the Tortugas Bank is exposed to the Loop CUrrent-Gulf Stream to a greater extent than the r-ti.ddle Grotmds 6

PAGE 21

PREVIOUS S'IUDIES IN THE EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO Early investigations on the foraminifera in the eastern Gulf of Mexico were published by Parker (1954), arrl. Bandy (1954, 1956) 'Ihese works discovered and specifically identified the makeup of extensive bands of foraminiferal associations wh:Jse boundaries roughly parallel the lines of bathymetry along the Texas-l.Duisiana and West Florida continental shelves (Figure 1, Figure 3). Pa!ker (1954) sampled from the Mississippi River to Cedar Keys, Florida, on and off the continental shelf, and from there southward on the upper slope to the Dry Tortugas. She identified six depth facies based on benthic foraminiferal species with the follcwing boundaries: Facies 1, 12m to 80-lOOm (swfacies boundary at 30m-50m); Facies 2, 80-lOOm to 130-150m; Facies 3, 130-150m to 180-220m; Facies 4, 180-220m to 350-600m; Facies 5, 350-600m to 900-lOOOm; Facies 6, 900-lOOOm to an \.li"lk.n:)..m depth. Parker listed two species whidJ. occur in sanples from this study as occurring in Facies 1 only, Elpridium advenum and Quin:p.Eloculina bic:ostata. Of those species she listed as occurring in fairly h igh concentrations in Facies 1 only, at least five, Asterigerina carinata, Bigenerina irregu1aris, Elr:hidium discoidale, Planulina exorna, and rrerrbers of the genus Peneroplis occur in significant nurrbers on the Florida Middle Ground. At least four of these sarre five also occur in significant nunbers on the 'Ibrtu:Jas Banlc. Parker (1954, p. 464) wrote of the area not sampled off Florida's west coast, "It is prc:bable that on the continental shelf along the Florida coast there is a further influx 7

PAGE 22

7a

PAGE 23

Figure 3. Generic predominance map, from Poag ( 19 81)

PAGE 24

96 94' 92' I I I.OUISIA:\A 30' ..... 28' ... --L .. 20" 18' 96' 94' 90' 88' 86' 84' 82' I I +. I I I ,.t"' 1 was.m ..... a .. f't .,., I I 1 -. I . \ 30' .., .. '(:. I .--.__--, .... .. _-..;/;.:.'\ \\ .L.\:.. 7 \ ') ............ u : 90" I I I I I I I I / I I RG' 26' 24' l'or,.,'ft i.O.III: f I d :tt : wn,1 "'' "''' to'l''", ',"J' .. ,.J .t \';.,,11 >t C'.JII ,,..,T J '' '" ,... ... .\."\I r.tt, t """ ,,,., ...... ,. f'l ,: : .: '. ,.. ... ... .... "' ....... .... .. \D Foct' 20 Ghml('ls r u a F 'Ht 'lt't)lundina fi)Ct'"' M ,:,..,hJ ,\r.:h.ltl'J tt'lt','htltlll F,h" tt' S U \Hl' u ... 9 ,., nJ r"'''' ---" ,'\' 84' 8 2 18 " 00

PAGE 25

of West Indian fo:rrrs such as are found in the Dry 'Ibrtugas" (a refernce to OJshrran, 1922). Parker (1954, p. 464) described the extent of these forrrs, "the fauna typical of calcareous areas", as being ''well established as far west as traverse VI" (south of Ch:>ctawhatdlee Bay, Florida). 'lhis fauna is "character ized by the abundance of Amphistegina, A<3terigerina carinata, and the Peneroplids These fo:rrrs are present, havever, as far west as traverse IV" (southwest from l>bbile Bay, Alabarra; Parker (1954, p. 464) 'lhese are three of the i.np)rtant forrrs in both areas sampled in this study. Bandy ( 1956) sampled the continental shelf and the upf,)er rontinental slope between l>bbile, Alabarra, an::l Fort ?1fers, Florida. He found "5 arbitrary faunal groups between the depths of 8 arrl 600 feet" and rea::>gnized the "patent intergradation of faunal groups". His depth zonation is as follc:MS: Fauna 1, 8-40 feet; Fauna 2, 41-105 feet; Fauna 3, 106-180 feet; Fauna 4, 181-250 feet; Fauna 5, 251-600 feet. "The cbminant species of fauna 2 included A<3terigerina carinata and Ardlaias angulatus in Bandy's southern profiles. 'Ihese fo:rrrs are present in lav percentages on the Florida Middle Grounds and abundant on the Tortugas Bank. Considering the depth and less abundant species rrentiored, both the sampling areas of this study would likely be loosely fitted within Bandy's fauna 2 zone. 'lhe conspicuous absence of Bandy's romrron Hanzawaia strattoni from this study probably represents a taxonomic inconsistency between the two studies. M:Jore (1957) studied the northern part of the Florida Keys area and found four different foraminiferal environnents. 'Ihe 9

PAGE 26

Florida Bay envirol1Irei1t is characterized by water 0-10 feet deep with the foraminiferal families Hiliolidcie, Peneroplidae (classified as Soritidae in this stt:rly after I.oeblich and Tappen, 1964), and Nonionidae dominant. The back-reef enviromrent is that area between the Florida Keys and the reef to the east, with a water depth of 20-30 feet. The foraminiferal families .rv"J.:iliolidae, Peneroplidae, Nonionidae and lbtaliidae daninate the back-reef fauna. This fauna is rrore diverse (that is, it consists of rrore families, genera and species) than the fauna of Florida Bay. 'Ihe reef environrrent lies east of the Florida Keys and is locally awash at low tide. M:>ore (1957, p. 732) states that "nothing is known of the live foraminiferal fauna" but the Peneroplidae are the dominant foraminifera in the sedi.rrent and the Arrphisteginidae and Asterigerina are characteristic of this environrrent. The forereef is that area seaward of the reef. Gradational envirol1Irei1ts present in the fore-reef are described as being "generally carparable with the deeper-water open-ocean envirol1Irei1ts proposed by other v.Drkers." f'.t:X)re found an apparent absence of live Peneroplidae in Florida Bay difficult to explain as they rrade up as nruch as 90% of the fauna at sare stations. The explanations considered the nost likely were 1) their tests are rerrains fran a fonrer envirol1Irei1t in Florida Bay in which peneroplids did live, and 2) they live in Florida Bay only during certain seasons. Peneroplidae were comron in sedilrents in both the areas stu:iied here and a conspicuously low percentage detennined to be alive at tirre of capture. 10

PAGE 27

Lynts (1962, 1965) studied the distribution of foraminifera in the upper parts of Florida Bay and concluded that sedi.nEnt size could be a dominant factor in controlling the distribution of soiTe foraminifers. Sale foraminifera rray require a certain size substrate to supply detrital organic canpounds or other need. !bck et al. (1971) described the "total fauna" from 108 stations in Florida Bay and the adjacent waters. '&o hundred thirty-five species belonging to 99 genera identified and divided into five faunal groups which were then correlated generally with areal changes in the physical envir:onm=nt. The faunal groups were called the 1) Straits fauna, 2) back-reef fauna, 3) brackish-water fauna, 4) bay fauna and 5) Gulf fauna. The discussion of results was limited in this YA:>rk, but the species descriptions, plates, and distributional data proved invaluable in the identification of the 'lbrtugas Bank foraminifera. This reference was also very useful for identification of the Hiddle Grounds taxa. !bck (1976) described the living and total foraminiferal assemblages from the Mississippi-Alabarra-Florida continental shelf area in conjunction with an environm=ntal rronitoring study referred to as MAFIA. The MAFIA project results are very relevant to this study for several reasons. First, samples were taken on the Florida Hiddle Grounds; second, the samples were preserved and examined wet for living spec.inens using the protoplasm content technique (no one is credited with developing this observation technique) used in this study on the 'lbrtugas Bank (cnnsidered 11

PAGE 28

by this author to be more reliable than other live recognition techniques), and third, taxonomic difficulties between this study and MAFLA should be minimal because Dr. Wayne Bock assisted in the identifications of the 1-ti.ddle Grounds foraminifera. 12

PAGE 29

DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ARFAS The Florida Middle Ground (lat. 28' to 28'N, long. 84' to 84 'W) is located on the western portion of the Florida platform and ranges from 25 to 40 rreters in depth (Figures 2, 4; Appendix 1) The Florida Platform is a southward thickening accumulation of Mesozoic and Cenozoic carbonates and evaPJrites reaching rrore than 19,000 feet thick beneath Cay Sal Bank (Price, 1954). 'Ihe Middle Ground Arch, a rrega structure forrred by broad unwarping during the late Tertiary, represents the northern boundary of this sedi.nent wedge and provides the foundation for the Middle Ground reef system (Antoine, et al., 1974). The West Florida Continental Shelf is a drc:Mned karst plain with a rolling topography having solution basins and sinkholes (Price, 1954; Brooks, 1974). This sinkhole topography has been ascribed to be of subaerial origin with nearshore sedi.nents infilling as sealevel rose during the late Pleistocene transgression (Price, 1954). The Florida Middle Ground is located on the outer part of this dro,.med karst plain approximately 160 kilareters westnorthwest of Tarrpa, Florida (Jordan, 1952; Back, 1972; Cheney and Dyer, 1974; Doyle et al., 1980; Brooks, 1981). The Middle Ground is characterized by two parallel ridges over 30 kilarreters in length, separated by a broad, flat valley up to seven kilometers wide which terminates to the south in numerous 13

PAGE 30

l3a

PAGE 31

Figure 4. Sarrple location rra.p, Florida Middle Grourrls Area.

PAGE 32

14

PAGE 33

isolated knolls, pinnacles, and small ridges (Doyle et al., 1980) The shoal areas support a varied benthos which ultirrately is the rrajor sedirrent source as a result of skeletal breakdo.vn (Back, 19 72) Organisms contributing in{x:>rtant arrounts (greater than l% dry weight) of calcareous ma.terial to the sedirrent are: calcareous algae, foraminifera, ma.drefX)rian corals, Bryozoa, pelecypods and gastropods, and barnacles. Biogenic canponents contributing less than 1% sed.ilrent dry weight are sponge spicules, alcyonarian spicules, echinoid spines, ostracods, amphineura! plates, scaphopods, and polychaete annelid wonn tubes (Back, 1972). This author is aware of no studies dealing directly with the sediments or biota of the Tortugas Bank (lat. 24,39'N, long. 83l'W; Figure 5). 'lhis bank is located imrediately to the west of the Dry 'Ibrtugas National r-t:>nt.liTEnt and separated fran it by a 30m. deep channel. 'Ihe geology of the bank can be inferred sene what from the regional geology of the area. 'Ihe 'Ibrtugas bank is near the southern limit of the Florida li.rrestone shelf. 'Ihe shallowest bathymetry over the 'Ibrtugas Bank is about 17-2lm., the sane depth of the drCMned surface that forms the platfonn supporting the Dry Tortugas (Jindrich, 1972). The bank is apparently the >vesternrrost extreme. of the narrc:M, discontinuous high that forms the Florida Keys. This high is a prominent feature of the Pleistocene rock surface that regionally underlies the Holocene sedirrents of South Florida (Enos and Perkins, 1977) 15

PAGE 34

15a

PAGE 35

Figure 5. Sanple location nap, 'Ibrtugas Bank Area.

PAGE 36

16 83 SAMPLE LOCATION MAP DRY TORTUGAS AND .TORTUGAS BANK 24 40' SAMPLE STATION WATER DEPTH A 17 .4m 0 26.5m G 22.9m B 20.0m E 25.6m H 22.9m c 20.0m F 18.0m I 12.8m

PAGE 37

METHODS Significantly different techniques in sample procurement and handling were employed in the two areas of this study, so for clarity the methods discussion will be divided by sampling location into two parts. THE FIDRIDA MIDDLE GROUNDS Surface sediment samples ...ere taken in the Florida Middle Grounds on each of four cruises between October 1978 and July 1979. 'Ihe samples were collected by diver, Shipek grab sampler, or dredge. Appendix 2, which contains station totals for Florida Middle Grotmds stations, is coded for the benchmark station number, season of collection, and method of collection. Once aboard ship, sed.irrent samples taken by Shipek were i...rnrediately subsampled (by scooping dredged sediment into a P. v. C. tube) for micropaleootological analysis. Samples collected by divers, which ...ere scooped into P. V. C. tubes while tmderwater, were preserved in 40% fonnaldehyde and seawater onboard ship, and returned to the lab. Samples fran the dredge were processed in the same rranner as the Shipek grab samples. Tb allow determination of living assemblages of foraminifera, the sanples ...ere stained in the laboratory using the methcx:l of et al. ( 19 7 4) The sediments were suspended by stirring in a solution of ethanol saturated with Sudan Black B and heated to 40c for 30 minutes. They ...ere then washed in 70% ethanol and 0 allowed to dry on a hot plate at about 30 C. 17

PAGE 38

'Ihe foraminifera were picked from the sedirrent, identified, and cotmted using a dissecting microscope. "Living" foraminifera are defined for the Florida Middle Grounds as those staining blue black when subjected to the technique described above. Samples were picked of all carbonate particles recognizable as benthic foraminifera until total counts (living + dead) of 150-300 were attained. A cotmt of 150 foraminifera was determined to be the mini.murn necessary to detect with 95% assurance those species of foraminifera representing 3% of the natural population (Dennison and Hay, 1967). 'Ihree hundred foraminifera were identified in sare samples, but the increased tine necessary to pick larger nurrbers of individuals was considered tm.necessary because of the replication at each station in each sampling season. THE TORI'UGAS BANK AREA r.ore control was exercised in Sa!ll?ling the Tortugas Bank than was possible in the Florida Middle Grounds. '!his is because sampling on the Tortugas Bank was planned and acconplished only for this project. Ha.vever, the constraints of ship tirre granted by the Florida Institute of Oceanography on R/V BELLOWS did limit the number of stations sampled. Sedirrent sarrples were collected by SCUBA divers in 30nm. diarreter core tubes. These were pushed three centirreters into the surface sedirrents and a volurre of about 17 rnl. of sedllrent was recovered. Ten replicate short cores fran each of 7 stations armmd the Tortugas Bank and 3 stations near the Dry Tortugas were obtained. A transect was atterrpted off the Tortugas Bank to 18

PAGE 39

the NNE, but because of an inability to locate and cx:::cupy certain desired depths quickly, the transect becarre SOI'CE'What irregular (Figure 3). Inmediately after acquisition, the samples were treated with glutaraldehyde (approximately 15% by weight) and they were stored in a cool, dry place. 'Ihe effectiveness of the glutaraldehyde as a protoplasmic preservative is decreased if the samples becorre wann for an extended period of tirre (Gabriel Vargo, pers. conm. ) so the sanples were kept cool onboard ship and onshore until examination could be acCCJtll?lished. One hundred fifty individuals fran each of ten replicates were identified fran 9 stations. The classification by similarity coefficient of the replicates and station totals for this study was done with the aid of the Ordana section of a computer program written for the analysis of benthic communities by Field and Bloom (1975). Equations utilized within the program are taken from Horn (1966), Connack (1971), and Sneath and Sokol (1973). 'Ihe similarity index chosen to canpare foraminiferal ccmm.mi ties was the CzekanCMSki Index (Co:rnack, 1971). This index is really a quantitative extension 19 of the binary similarity coefficient used by Czekancwski (Boesch, 1971), but it is sorretirres referred to as the Bray-CUrtis Coefficient (Clifford and Stephenson, 1975), and is perhaps the rrost widely employed quantitative rreasure in ecology (Boesch, 1977). This index was chosen because of its wide acceptance and the tendency for this index not to give lew similarity values because of the

PAGE 40

occurrences of rare species. The index is as where: z1;. x .. xik 1 1] 2: x .. +xik 1 1] Sjk = the Czekanowski Similarity Coefficient representing the similarity between samples j and k. x .. = the nlllllbar of individuals of species i found in 1] sample j. xik = the nurrber of individuals of species i fotmd in sample k. = the summation of the expression which follows for 1 all species i. Expressed verbally, the Czekanowski Similarity beb.een collections j and k, Sjk' is equal to twice the mi.ninrum (lesser) number of individuals of a species in either j or k, summed for all species i, divided by the stm1'1'ation for all species i, of the 20 total nurrber of individuals of species i in both the samples j and k. Photographs of speciirens were taken using the ISI DS130 electron microscope facility at the University of South Florida.

PAGE 41

RESUL'IS The two regions under consideration in this sttrly, the Florida Middle Grounds and the Tortugas Bank, have sare strong similarities and dissimilarities. Characteristics of each of these regions will be rrost clear if data relevant to each are initially presented separately, then contrasted. THE FIDRIDA MIDDLE GroUNDS There were 89 species from 49 genera and 20 families of benthic foraminifera irentifiable on the Florida Middle Grounds. A rorrplete species list which indicates the 34 of these 89 species (from 29 genera) observed to be alive at time of collection is in Appendix 3. It should be restated here that the rrethai used to distinguish foraminifera alive at the tine of capture from dead or empty tests, was by staining, a technique considered to be faster but less accurate than the protoplasm content rrethod enployed in examination of the Tortugas Bank Area samples. Those species making up greater than 5 % of the thanatocoenose are listed in App:rrlix 4 and shall here b e referred to as the dominant species. One third of all the species irentified appear as cbrninant rnini.mally at one statim during at least one sarrpling cruise. Anphis tegina gibbosa is the p red:lrninant foraminifer in all samples, making up an average of 37.5% of each asserrblage. Anphistegina gibbosa, Planulina exorna, Quin:Jueloculina lanarck.i.ana and Textularia agglutinens are the four species that cbrninate at each of the stations durin g each o f the four cruises. Frequentl y one or rrore of the species Hoeg lundina elegans, Peneroplis carinatus, 21

PAGE 42

Quinqueloculina bosciana, Ibsalina sp., and Textularia conica are dominant. Species other than these were anong the dominants only occasionally. Those stations where 10 replicate sanples were taken during a season are incltrled in similarity classification. 'Ihose stations with fCYJer than 10 replicates were excluded to eliminate JX)Ssilile false dissimilarity or similarity resulting from corrparing station totals derived from sunming different nunbers of replicates. Eliminated fran consideration were station 247 and station 481 during the 11/78 cruise. The information on station totals utilized for inter-station similarity classification is in Ap_r:endix 2. 'Ihis infonnation includes all species identified from each statim for each season in decreasing order of abundance, and the _r:ercentage of the assemblage represented by each species with and without inclusion of the tmidentifiable foraminifera. The inter-station Czekanowski similarity classification with group average sorting is plotted as Figure 6. This plot shONs that rrany of the stations have a high level of similarity. 'Ihe five stations at the top of the dendrogram are similar at about the 80% level. Instead of grouping sanples taken at a station with others taken there during a different season, as might be expected, these five stations represent each of the four benchmark stations (and 247 twice) during the latter two cruises. The four stations at the bottom of the dendrogram are similar at about the 78% level, and represent 1 sarrple from each of the benc.hnark stations during the earlier two cruises. Dismissing 22

PAGE 43

22a

PAGE 44

Figure 6. Interstation similarity dendrogram, Florida Middle Grounds.

PAGE 45

23 FLORIDA MIDDLE GROUNDS INTERSTATION SIMILARITY 4 9 1 __ ........, 1-4 8 1 __ 247 06/79 t--247 01/79 15 1 01/79 1 5 1 06/79 1 5 1 10/78 491 11/7 8 491 10/78 15 1 1 1/7 8 247 10/78 481 10/7 8 100 75 50 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY

PAGE 46

the center three stations as "transitional", there are two rrajor groups of stations apparently rrore similar to one another because of date of sampling than because of either sanpling rrethod or possession of a unique foraminiferal asserrblage. 'Ihis trend is very subtle and the similarities may be rrore a reflection of different total cornts from the samples than any natural grouping. The significance of the dendrogram lies largely in the fact that sanples from the sarre station at different seasons aH?ear IX)t to be rrore similar to one another than they are to other stations. Table 1 shows the distribution of actual co1..n1ts and percentage of the total asserrblage represented by each of the 20 families in the taxonc:my of Loeblich and Tappan (1964). The family Arnphisteginidae is dominant conposing an average of 25.85% of the asserrblage. With respect to this study, Anphisteginidae is a rronogeneric family grouping; Anphistegina being the only genus represented. The Miliolidae, a multi-specific grouping, is a close second averaging 25.74% of the asserrblage. Cibicididae (ave. 10.08%), Textulariidae (ave. 9 .6%), and Soritidae (ave. 8. 8%) are all well represented on the Florida Middle Grounds. The distribution of grain size (after J:byle et al., 1980) at the benchrrark sanpling sites is Table 2. 'IHE TORI'UGAS BANK AREA The sarrpling of the Tortugas Bank Area was acconplished on only one cruise from October 21-23, 1980, on the R/V BELLOWS. Because no seasonal sanpling was done, any changes in foraminiferal assenblage with tirre remain undiscovered. But because all samples 24

PAGE 47

'l'JIBLF. I: Florida t-1iddle rcrnunds (Percent o+= TnPnti f"in.hle JlssPP'hhr:e 0 v F'.=unilvl Family Narre and Author 311 211 411 111 122 422 131 232 2 4 1 141 341 441 Acervulinidae (Schultz, 1854) Al veolinidae (Ehrenberg, 1939) Arrphisteginidae (Cushnan, 1922) 31.5 33.2 29.5 32.0 26.9 29.2 25.0 17.6 21.0 30.6 17.4 16.3 Asterigerini.dae (d 'Orbigny, 1839) 2.7 3.3 0.4 0.1 1.7 1.0 0.1 3.0 3.6 0.1 1.8 0.8 Ataxophragmiidae (Scmvager, 1877) Bo li vini tidae ( Cushnan, 1927) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.7 Bulimini.dae (Jones, 1875) 2.1 1.6 1.9 1.1 1.9 1.6 2.1 2.3 1.7 1.9 4.8 3.6 Caucasinidae (I3ykova, 1959) 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.6 1.3 2.2 1.1 1.6 1.8 0.5 0.6 1.9 Cera tobulimini.dae (Cushnan, 1927) 5.1 6.6 3.4 5.1 3.0 3.9 4.2 3.2 3.5 4.8 3.2 2.3 Cibicidi.dae ( Cushrran, 1927) 5.9 7.0 9.9 12.3 8.8 7.4 10.6 11.4 9.0 10.0 14.4 14.3 Cyrnbalopxidae (Cushnan, 1927) Discorbidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 1.7 2.5 6.0 7.0 3.5 3.3 8.8 7.1 7.7 7.5 4 5 8.9 Elphidiidae (Galloway, 1933) 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.1 3.1 4.0 3.2 1.5 1.3 2.6 EpJni.didae (Hofker, 1951) Glandulini.dae (Reuss, 1860) 0.1 0.1 0.1 Horrotrerratidae (Cushnan, 1927) Hormosinidae (Haeckel, 1894) Miliolidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 22.4 24.2 26.1 22.4 27.0 30.0 22.1 27.1 29.5 25.3 27.9 24.9 N:xlosariidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 t-bnioni.dae (Schultz, 1854) 0.3 0.4 1.1 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.3 0 4 1.0 l.'lul:eculariidae (Jones, 1875) 0.3 0.3 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.3 0.8 1.0 2.3 0.6 1.7 Nurrmulitidae (de Blainville, 1825) Planorbulini.dae (Scmvager, 1877) 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0 3 0.2 Polyrrorphininae (d'Orbigny, 1839) 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Siphoninidae (Cushm:m, 1927) 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.5 1.6 0.3 2.0 0.7 0.4 1.5 Soritidae (Ehrenberg, 1839) 12.7 9.7 7 1 6.3 11.8 7.2 7.4 10.1 7.4 5.7 .10.9 9.3 Textulariidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 13.3 9.2 9.6 8.4 9.8 9.4 10.9 9.4 6.8 7.9 10 9 9.6 Trochorrmini.dae (Schwager, 1877) Uni.gerinidae (!Iaeckel, 1894) 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3 N <.n 'TOTAL PEOCENT 99.9 100.0 99.5 99.6 100.1 99.9 99.8 99 9 100.2 99.7 99. 9 99.9

PAGE 48

TABLE 2 MEAN GRAIN SIZE AND STANDARD DEVIATION FDR FIDRIDA t-ITDDLE STATIONS 10/78 01 /79 06/79 MEAN STANUZ\RD t-1F..AN STANDARD t-lEAN STATION GRAIN SIZE DEVIATION GRAIN SIZE DEVIATION GRAIN SIZE 151 0. 27 (0 .87mm) 0 86 -0.62 (l.62mn) 0.45 -0.99 (l. 99mm) 247 1.21 (0 .45mn) 0 .23 -0.62 (l. 62rrm) 0 .45 -0.99 (1 .99mm) 481 1.37 (0 .4lmn) 0.66 0 .32 (0 .84mm) 491 0.89 (0.55mn) 0.15 0 13 (0 94nm) STANDARD DEVIATION 0.56 0.56 0.28 0.34 N 0'\

PAGE 49

were carefully diver collected in short cores of the sarre length, the bias introduced by using different sarrpling techniques is not a variable as it was in the Florida Middle Grounds. Ten replicate sanples at each of 9 staticns, 6 on arrl around the Tortugas Bank and 3 adjacent to the Dry Tortugas were cbtained. On-sight sampling station descriptions taken fran the cruise log are ApJ?eildix 5. These have proven very helpful in the interpretation of the results. One hundred and one species from 47 genera and 26 families were identified from the 'lbrtugas Bank Area. Arr{:histegina gi.lx:>sa is arrong the cbminant foraminifera (ave. 9 .19%) here as it was on the Florida Middle Grounds, but it is only the third rrost abundant species on the average. Asterigerina carinata averages 15.6% at these 9 stations and is the rro::;t abundant. Peneroplis carinatus is second rrost abundant with a 9 station average of 13. 8%. Also 27 occurring in frequencies greater than 5% at one or rrore stations are Archaias angulatus (ave. 7. 87%), Textularia agglutinens (ave. 6. 79%), Quinqueloculina larnarckiana (ave. 5.41%), Roto:rbinella rosea(ave. 2. 98%), Articulina !lExicana (ave. 2.68%), Articulina pacifica (ave. 2.64%), arrl Quinqueloculina bosciana (ave. 1.93%). The percentages of each of these dominant species occurring at each station (the surrs of the replicates) are given in the "Information Sumrrary" tables (Appendix 6). 'Ihe Infonnation Surrnnary Tables also inclu:ie water depth at each station, bottom descriptions from the cruise log, !lEan grain size, a calculation describing relative foraminiferal density expressed in units of forarrs/square meter, the Czekanowski

PAGE 50

Similarity Coefficient oorrparing eadl station to the other eight, and the distribution of the Czekanowski Similarity Coefficients calculated by canparing all replicates at a station to one another. The oorrplete species list for the Tortugas Bank Area stations is .Appendix 7 The species lists for the statim totals are Afpendix 8 .Appendix 8 species lists are organized in d=creasing order of abnndance with the percentage of the total thanatoooenose each species represents including and excluding the unidentifiable forms listed in adjacent columns. Results of the grain size analysis for seven of the nine stations where bag samples were taken is Table 3. Results of ar:plying Czekancwski 's Quantitative Index with group average sorting as a similarity test of the ten replicates at eadl station (only 9 replicates are tested at station F because one sanple appears to have been partially lost and had only 87 foraminifera in the entire sanple) are Appendix 9. This intrastation similarity testing yields information addressing the accuracy of atterrpting to represent a natural foraminiferal assenblage by identifying 150 foraminifera. It appears that in sorre cases 150 identifications are sufficient, but a larger nunber nay be rrore reliable. Another representation of the intra-station (or inter-replicate) similarity information based on Czekanowski's Quantitative Index is .Appendix 10. This figure shows station F to have the 28

PAGE 51

TABLE 3 GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS Bag Samples taken at stations sarrpled for Foraminifera, 'Ibrtugas Bank Area MJMENI' MEASURES STATION MF'..AN SIZE STANDARD SKEWNESS A 0. 775 (0 .58rnn) 1.097 -0.261 (pearly sorted) (coarse B 0.333(0.80mm) 0.957 -0.070 (moderately sorted) (near syrnretrical) c 1. 470 ( 0. 36mn) 0.612 -0.410 (rroderately sorted) (strongly coarse skewed) D 0.017 (0. 90rnn) 0.931 0.336 (noderately sorted) (strongly fine E 0.254 (0 .85mn) 1.031 -0.098 ( px>r 1 y sorted) (near symretrical) F -0 26 3 ( 1. 2nrn) 0.825 0.005 (moderately sorted) (near symnetrical) G H -0.109 (1.05mm) 1.104 -0.191 (px>rly sorted) (coarse KURTOSIS 1.076 M:!sokurtic 0.936 M:!sokurtic 1.437 Leptokurtic 1.064 Mesokurtic 1.014 Mesokurtic 0.985 M:!sokurtic 0.991 M:!sokurtic N 1.0

PAGE 52

the highest proportion of its inter-replicate similarity roefficients falling within the lo.vest range, the 50-60 range, and station C to to have the highest proportion of its inter-replicate similarity roefficients within a higher range, the 70-80 similarity range. 30 The remaining seven stations fall betWeen these T.-Ti th rrost stations showing the highest nurrbers of inter-replicate similarity roefficients in either the 60-70 or 70-80 ranges. Appendix 11 lists the values used to calculate the average number of foraminifera/square rreter of sedinent at each station. Station D had the greatest nunber per sauare rreter with 148.8 x 10(6) and station H had the least with 3.2 x 10 (6). These numbers represent only a rough estimate of relative density for o:::npa.rison purposes within this study. The pre&:mi.nant foraminiferal species identified in the 'Ibrtugas Area, Asterigerina carinata, was also the one rrost frequently determined to be alive at capture. OVer the entire 'Ibrtugas Area, A. carinata represented 67. 9% of all foraminifera detennined to be alive at capture. Only 18 of the 101 species identified in the 'Ibrtugas Bank Area had representatives ronsidered to have been alive when sanpled. Living species roilllted are listed in Appendix 12. Table 4 sho.vs data on species identified organized into percent of identifiable assemblage represented by each family. There are 26 families represented in the 'Ibrtugas Bank area. The Soritidae d:xninate the foraminiferal thanatoroenose averaging 27.88% for all 9 'Ibrtugas Bank Area stations. The Miliolidae (ave. 25.14%) and Asterigerinidae (ave. 15. 66%) are inportant families.

PAGE 53

'rn.BLE 4 PERCENI' OF IDENITFIABLE ASSEMBlAGE BY FAMILY 'IDRI'l.JGl1.S AND 'IDRTUGZ\S BANK Family Name andAuthor F B c H -Acervulinidae (Schultz, 1854) 0.1 Alveolinidae (Ehrenberg, 1839) 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.1 Arrphisteginidae (Cushamn, 1922) 14.7 8.4 6.8 13.1 31 A I E D G -1.3 1.6 0.2 0.3 6.3 6.6 13.4 4.0 9.4 Asterigerinidae (d 'Orbigny, 1839) 13.9 13.4 21.6 11.2 18.6 7.0 13.2 26.5 15.5 Ataxophragmiidae (Schwager, 1877) 0.2 0.1 0.2 Bolivinitidae (Cushm:m, 1927) 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 Bul.imini.dae (Jones, 1875) e 0.1 e e 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 caucasinidae (Bykova, 1959) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 Ceratobuliminidae (Cushm:m, 1927) 0.9 1.1 0.2 1.6 0.4 0.3 0.9 0.8 Cibicididae (Cushrran, 1927) 3.7 0.5 1.6 1.5 1.2 3.3 1.2 2.2 2.9 Cymbaloporidae (Cushrran, 1927) 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.2 Discorbidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 6.3 5.3 7.5 2.0 6.4 11.4 6.5 3.7 2.5 Elphidiidae (Gallaway, 1933) 0.2 0.9 0.7 2.5 1.0 1.7 0.6 1.8 2.2 Eponididae (Hofker, 1951) 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.7 0.4 0.4 1.4 Horrrosinidae (Haeckel, 1894) 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Miliolidae (Ehrenberg, 1839) 26.9 23.4 17.3 27.9 22.2 31.8 23.7 24.0 29.1 Nodosariidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 0.1 l'bnionidae (Schultz, 1854) 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.9 Nubeculariidae (Jones, 1875) 2.6 0.3 0.4 1.2 0.3 2.2 0.7 0.4 1.1 Nummulitidae (de Blainville, 1825) 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 Planorbulinidae (Schwager, 1877) 1.8 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 Polymorphininae (d'Orbigny, 1839) 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 Siphoninidae (Cushrran, 1927) 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.3 Sori tidae (Ehrenberg, 1839) 14.3 40.9 37.2 24.0 39.1 21.0 28.5 24.7 21.2 Textulariidae (Ehrenberg, 1838) 11.3 3.9 4.6 12.4 3.3 7.5 7.2 10.2 10.4 Trochamninidae (Schwager, 1877) 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3

PAGE 54

A!Tphisteginidae and Textulariidae are next rrost abundant with respective average percentages of 9.19 and 7. 87. The lower portion of Figure 7 the dendrogram plot of CzekanOYTski' s Quantitative Si.milari ty Index using group average sorting applied to the 9 station totals froiT' the Tortugas Bank Area. The classification of stations sha.vs A and C to re similar at the 0. 855 level, with station B nearly as similar at 0. 841. Similar to the group A, B, and C at the 0. 737 level is E, with station D similar to that group at 0. 702. Stations G and H are similar at 0. 77 4, with I similar to G and H at 0. 655. 32 All stations except F bea:Jre similar at the 0 623 level, with F finally similar to all others at 0.557. The reason F is surprisingly dissimilar to neighlx>r station E is probably tedmical rather than a result of changes in foraminiferal thanatocoenoses. The dissmilarity probably is a result of the sarrples being cnllected ove r a larger heterogeneous area (see descriptions of the sanple stations, P..ppendix 6). This station was the first to be sarrpled and sanpling procedure was subsequently rrodified. With this exception, sanpling did oot intentional! y cross apparent sediJrent type ooundaries. THE F1DRIDA MIDDLE GroUNDS COMPARED WITH THE TORrUGAS BANK AREA A dendrogram representing the CzekaiXJWSki Similarity Levels vli th group average sorting retween several Florida Middle Grounds stations chosen randomly and all the Tortugas Bank area stations is Figure 7. This netric cx::mparison can accurately distinguish retween the tw:::> area s even th:mgh IMny species cnmronl y occur in roth areas.

PAGE 55

32a

PAGE 56

Figure 7. Czekanowski s.imilari ty dendrogram c:x:IT'paring station totals from the Florida Middle C'u:mmds with stations from the Tortugas Bank.

PAGE 57

S IMILARITY DENDROGRAM COMP A R ING SOME FLORIDA MIDDLE GROUND S STATIONS W ITH ALL TORTUGAS BANK AREA STATIONS 491 F A L L '78 1 51 WINTER '79 11 5 1 FAL L 7 8 t----o 1 5 1 WINTE R '79 247 WINTE R '79 247 WINTER '7 9 247 FALL '78 481 FAL L '7 8 G H t-D E A r c B F 100 75 50 25 LEVEL OF S I M ILARITY 33

PAGE 58

'J\.;enty foraminiferal families are represented in the Florida tJiiddle Grounds and 26 in the Tortugas Bank Area. 'IWo families from the Florida Grounds, the r.landulinid.a.e (only 3 specific occurrences) and the Uvigerinidae are not found at Tortugas Area stations. The eight families vlhich have representatives at Tortugas Area sites but none in the Florida Hiddle Grounds are the 1\.cervulinidae, Al veolinidae, Ataxophragrniidae, CyrrbalO);X)ridae, Etx>nididae, Homosinidae, Nmmulitidae, and Trocharrminidae. None of these fa.JT'ilies are abundant at the Tortugas Area stations and none occurs at all nine stations, and only tv.o, Alveolinidae and Etx>nididae, ever a:nprise greater than 1% of the thanat.ocnenose at any station. Any distinction beU.Jeen the areas is not readily apparent based on a a::nparison of familial groups present. The of the station totals data suborder for the Florida t-ti.ddle Grounds is Appendix 13. The actual o:::>unts are listed first, then the percent in each sul::order is tabulated. These percentages are displayed graphically v.d.th data from the Tortugas Bank Area on a ternary diagram (Figure B). The Tortugas Bank Area samples all exhibit a larger percentage of Miliolids and lesser percentage of Ib tali ids than the Florida Middle ('..rounds. The percent rontribution of the Textulariina appears to be nearly the sarre in both these areas. Distinctions the Florida Middle Grounds and the Tortugas Bank Area are apparent by c::nrrparing the suborder distribution after totalling replicates within stations. The ratio of the sul::orders Miliolina/Fotaliina is ronsistently higher in the Tortugas Bank Area than in the Florida Middle Grounds. 34

PAGE 59

34a

PAGE 60

Figure 8. Ternary diagram plot by percent of thanatoooenose in each suborder.

PAGE 61

EDGE OF BAHAMA PLATFORM WEST O f AUDROS I SLAND NO NEARBY REEF 40' ROSE & LIDZ, 187 7 REEF MOORE, 19 5 7 MillO UNA PATCH REEF 20'l. FLA. KEYS FLA. KEYS TEXTULAAIINA 1 0'1. 10'\, ----/ 9 0"1. \ / \ I ----FLA. KEYS W E I S & STEINKER WEIS & STEINKER 1977 1977 ROSE & LIDZ, 1977 W. FLA. S HELF A T DEPTH OF F .M .G. [!ANDY, 1956 W FLA. SHELF AT DEPTH OF TORTUGAS OANK BANDY, 1956 ROTA LIINA OUTSIDE PLATFORM EDGE REEF NOIHH OF LITTLE ABACO I SLAND 3 0 ROSE & LID Z, 1977 L..J lJl

PAGE 62

DISCUSSION 'lhe stations in the 'lbrtugas Bank Area with higher similarity coefficient values distributed among rrore of the replicates are stations A and C (Appendix 10). Ti;lble 3 shews A to be "poorly sorted" and C to be "rroderately well sorted" by Folk's (1965) texture classifications. One cannot expect replicates to necessarily be rrore similar to one another when taken from well-sorted sands than when taken fran less well-sorted sands. There does exist a tendency for the stations having a courser rrean grain size to have lewer replicate similarity. This is interpreted as an increase in foraminiferal thantocoenose patchiness corresponding to increases 36 in exposure to higher current energies. In these areas of elevated, irregular bottom topography, current flew Irn.lSt be carrplex, causing local small-scale differences in the retention of smaller foraminiferal tests in the surface sediments. This is consistent with the relationship of foraminiferal thanatocoenose to grain size observed in other studies (Cushman, 1922; Illing, 1950; Lynts, 1962, 1965; Bandy, 1964; and Back, 1972). Even considering this patchiness, it seems that 300 foraminiferal identifications an each of two short-cored replicate sarrples could be totalled and expected to well represent the thanatocoenose at a station. A comparison of totals from sorre Florida Middle Grounds and all 'lbrtugas Bank Area stations is in Figure 7. This figure demonstrates that segregating these foraminiferal thanatocoenoses can be readily accanplished, despite having many species in carrmon, using the sarre

PAGE 63

index of similarity which is utilized throughout this study, Czekanowski's Quantitative Coefficient with group average sorting. The next step is to identify exactly what is different fran one area to another in tenus of foraminifera. Those species occurring in only me of the two study areas are listed in Appendix 14. Of those 12 occurring only on the Middle Grounds, Spirillina vi vi para is the rrost abundant averaging 0. 54% of the identifiable assemblage. The most abundant foraminifera occurring only in the Tortugas Bank Area sanples is Quinqueloculina bidentata with an average abundance of 0. 6 7% of the identifiable assemblage. The remaining in Appendix 14 occur only occasionally in any samples. Because even the m::>st abundant species present on only one of the sampling areas occur so infrequently, the likelihood of recx:>gnizing the real difference between these areas based on any one species is remote. There exists no numerically prominent species whose distributional limitations reflect the physiocochemical differences between these two study areas in te:rms of its own presence or absence. One good indicator of the differences between these two areas is the dominance by Asterige:tina carinata in the Tortugas Bank Area contrasted with its lesser abundance in the Florida Middle Grounds. Rose and Lidz (1977, p. 17) give the follaving discussion of its distribution: "Asterigerina carinata (d 'Orbigny}, a small sharp edged, trochoid is restricted to outer, :roc>re exposed parts of the platfonn. Although this is comronly w1 th. other foraminifera knavn to prefer reef hab1tats, 1ts occurrence is apparently related :roc>re to. the proximity of the platfonn edge and ocean1c waters 37

PAGE 64

waters than to reefs. For example, on the platfm:m edge west of Andros Island where essentially no reef grONth occurs, A. carinata reaches an abundance of 33 percent.-In Platform Margin samples the species commonly makes up 5-10 percent of total foraminiferal fauna. Landward, its abundance tends to decrease regular 1 y, and in South Florida it is not found more than about 5 kilometers behind the platfonn edge. In the broad, calm lees of the Bahamas, however, the species occurs as far as 22 kilometers fran the platfom edge, but the general pattern of its distribution is the sarre in both Florida and the Bahamas. It is an excellent indicator of the Platform Margin envirol"llreelt. Asterigerina carinata occurs at an average frequency of 1. 6% at the four Florida Middle Grounds stations (see AH:>endix 2), with a minimum of 2 individuals occurring at 3 stations and a maximum of 89 individuals occurring at station 2ll. A. carinata is thus rare-corrrron on the Florida Grounds and abundant in the Tortugas Bank Area, averaging 15.7% of the identifiable thanatocoenose (see Appendix 8). This distribution seems to reflect the proximity of the Tortugas Bank to the exposed southwest edge of the Florida Platfom, and the protection of the Florida Middle Grounds from open ocean conditions because of its rrore central location on the west Florida Platform. Austin and Jones (1974) describe the Florida Middle Grounds as being under the predominant influence of the West Florida Estuarine Gyre (Figure 9). This water is described as north-tropical in nature, clear, and of stable salinity (36 0.5%0) (Austin and Jones, 1974). In the spring, the waters beneath the thermocline found on the Nest Florida Shelf are considered to be Loop CUrrent waters (Austin and cruise, 1972). These waters cover an unspecified area of the shelf, but the Loop Current periodically 38

PAGE 65

38a

PAGE 66

Figure 9 CUrrents of the West Florida Continental Shelf (from Austin and Jones, 19 7 4)

PAGE 67

39 --

PAGE 68

has the strength to replace the Florida Estuarine Gyre in the surface waters over the Middle Grounds (Austin, 1971). The relative percentages of Asterigerina carinata in sed:llnents on the Florida Middle Grounds and the Tortugas Bank Area seems to reflect the periodic nature of the influence of platform margin waters on the Middle Grounds (manifest as the Gulf Loop CUrrent) contrasting with the nore pennanent influence of platform margin waters (the Gulf loop CUrrent-Florida CUrrent) on the Tortugas Bank Area. The frequency of occurrence of Archaias angulatus in the Tortugas Bank Area, where it represents an average of 7.9% of the identifiable thanatocoenose, is much greater than its frequency on the Florida Hiddle Grounds, where it averages only 0.26%. This is in itself an i.rrportant distinguishing trait between the two study areas. Perhaps of greater significance is the role this species 40 plays in defining the subdivisions of reef assemblages in the Antillean-caribbean foraminiferal province (Seiglie, 1968) 'nlis province extends frcm southern Brazil to the northern Gulf of Mexico and is dividend into three subprovinces partly on the frequency of occurrence of A. ancrulatus. 'Ihese are the Eastern Gulf of M:xico subprovince, the Antillean subprovince, and the Venezuelan subprovince. The largest subprovince, the Antillean subprovince, is dominated by the four reefal foraminifera Amphistegina gibbosa d' Orbigny, Archaias angulatus (Fichtel and Moll) Asterigerina carinata d 1 Orbigny, and Rotorbinella ( d 1 Orbigny) These fo;aminifera are the dcminant reef assemblage in Batabano Gulf, CUba

PAGE 69

(Bandy, 1964), in reefs off Puerto Rico (Seiglie, 1968), and in skeletal reef sands on beaches of the Ibrninican Republic (Seiglie, 1968). CUshman (.1922) identified these species from near the Dry Tortugas and Illing (1950, 1952) found them with sorre variation in assemblage in the Bahama Banks. All four of these reef-associated foraminifera are identified here in abundance around the Dry Tortugas and the Tortugas Bank. The Tortugas Bank may be the northernrrost limit of the Antillean subprovince in the Gulf of The Amphistegina dominated reef foraminiferal assemblage of the eastern Gulf of Mexico includes low percentages of Asterigerina carinata, no Rotorbinella rosea, and few Archaias angulatus. 'Ihe data reported here fran the Florida Middle Grounds is in good agreerrent with these occurrences. The Venezuelan subprovince is daninated by .Amphistegina, has lower percentages of carinata, rare angulatus, and no Rotorbinella rosea. The presence of this subfauna, which is very similar to that of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, is because UfMelling waters off eastern Venezuela produce lower temperatures and allow 41 the occurrence of cooler water species (Seiglie, 1968). The conclusion that an assemblage similar to that of the Florida Middle Grounds is from cooler waters than those of the Antillean subprovince is in agreement with the conclusions of this study; that differences in thanatocoenose between stu:iy areas result from a closer association in the Tortugas Bank Area than in the Middle Grounds with a mass of nore tropical water, the IDop Current-Florida Current system. Another way foraminiferal assemblages are sometimes distinguished

PAGE 70

is by tre overall number of species present. There are more species identified in the Tortugas Bank Area (101) than in the Florida Middle Grounds (89) This is considered to be an unreliable distinction between the two study areas. More than one thousand foraminifera were identified from each station (ten replicates totalled) to yield these species lists. This included many rare fonns. If fewer foraminifera had been identified at each station, sorre rare fonns might be excluded and the differnce 42 in numbers of species present rnight be rninirral. Carparing the m.nnber of species present/station is an unproductive method for distinguishing the real differences in the foraminiferal thanatocoenoses of these two areas. Problems relating to sample size and specific identification make the number of species present an especially useless criteria when dealing with ancient strata. There are irrportant differences in the percentage of the foraminiferal assemblage belonging to the dominant families in each of the study areas (Table 5). The Amphisteginidae dcminate the Florida Middle Grounds with an average of 25. 85% of the identifiable assemblage. Although abundant in the Tortugas Bank Area (9. 2% of the identifiable assemblage) there is a 16. 7% difference in average percentage of the identifiable assemblage represented by Amphisteginidae. In addition to the distinction between areas possible by abundance of Amphisteginidae, the tests frequently appear worn, broken, bored, and abraded in the Florida Middle Grounds Area. Contrastingly, those from the Tortugas Bank Area are less frequently broken, rarely bored, and less worn. The "relict" nature of much of the Florida Middle

PAGE 71

FAMILY Amphisteginidae Asterigerinidae Ceratobuliminidae Cibicididae Discorbidae Mi1io1idae Soritidae Textulariidae TABLE 5 AVERAGE PERCENrAGE OF 'IHANA'IDCX)EN)SE REPRESEN'IED BY EACH FAMILY 'IDRTIJQ\S FWRIDl-\. BANK AREA MIDDLE GROUNDS 9.2% 25.85% 15.7% 1.6% 0.7% 4.0% 2.0% 10.1% 5.7% 5.7% 25.1% 25.7% 27.9% 8.8% 7.9% 9.6% 43 DIFFERENCE 16.7% 14.1% 3.3% 8.1% 0.0% 0.6% 19.1% 1. 7%

PAGE 72

GrOtmds sedirrents (Doyle et al., 1980) seems to be apparent in the condition of the tests of the Arrphisteginidae. The Asterigerinidae average 15.7% of the identifiable thanatocoenose at Tortugas Bank Area stations and 1.5% at Florida Grounds stations. The signifiance of this has been discussed previously in reference to the only representative of the Asterigerinidae identified in this study, Asterigerina carinata. The Soritidae are a rnultispecific and rnultigeneric family with distinctly different frequencies in each of the study areas. The Soritidae make up an average of 27.9% of the identifiable thanatocoenose in the Tortugas Bank Area and 8. 3% in the Florida Middle Grounds. The species Peneroplis carinatus, a :rrerrber of the Soritidae, is arrong the daninants in both study areas, but occurs in greater numbers in the Tortugas Bank Area accounting for a part of the larger percent representation by the family Soritidae. The IIDre dramatic increase in abundance is by the Soritid Archaias angulatus, whose significance as part of the reef-indicating fauna has been discussed. The differences between the Florida Middle Grounds and Tortugas Bank Area foraminiferal thanatoex>enoses are then distinct and recognizable at the familial taxonanic level. It has been suggested that family fre:JUency is of greater importance for an ecological analysis than en\.lllErating genera and specifics (r.bore, 44 1957). His reasoning is that since ancient reefs are generally studied using thin sections through. hard, porous or cavernous lirrestones, specific identifications are extrerrely difficult. Because of this,

PAGE 73

literature more useful for camparison purposes is that expressed in familial percentages. The different nature of foraminiferal thanatoooenoses in these two areas is evident at the rrore basic taxonomic grouping, the suborder. Suborder classification of foraminifera is based largely on wall type. The Textulariina have agglutinated tests 45 (those cerrented fran nearby grains). '!he Miliolina have porcelaneous, calcitic tests and the Rotaliina have hyaline, perforate, calcareous tests. Classification of foraminifera into suborders causes fewer taxonomic difficulties investigators than does identification to the generic or specific levels. Wall type is the rrost readily recognizable foraminiferal characteristic, especially in thin section. For this reason, expressing data from studies of recent depositional systems in suborder percentages can be most useful to the paleoecologist. All stations at all seasons from the Middle Grounds have greater frequencies of foraminifera belonging to the suborder Rotaliina and lesser frequencies of foraminifera belonging to the suborder Miliolina than all stations fran the Tortugas Bank Area. The percentages of Textulariina vary from about 5 to 15%, except for the lower percentages fran stations A, B, and C located on the top of the Tortugas Bank. When vitwed together, the data f rom this and other studie s (Figure 8) shONS an interesting trend. Highest concentrations of Rotaliids are seen in Bandy's (1956) shelf data from a transect of Tampa Bay Florida. Percent suborder calculations were made

PAGE 74

for the depths of the two areas under investigation in this study. The minor depth differences between the areas studied here are not expressed significantly in the shelf thanatocoenose sampled from between the two study areas. The shelf samples are remarkably close to those stations sampled in the Florida Middle Grounds with regard to percent in suborder. Florida Middle Grounds station 111 has greater Rotaliid percentages than those of the shelf areas, but the majority of Middle Grounds stations are higher in percent Miliolina than the shelf stations. Intenrediate in Miliolina/Rotaliina ratio between these areas of study are sanples from outside a platform edge reef north of Little Abaco Island CRose and Lidz, 1977; Bahamas, 38 ft. depth) and a sample fran outside Molasses Reef on the platform edge east of Key Largo (Rose and Lidz, 1977; Florida, 30 ft. depth). These areas seaward of reefs exhibit a Miliolina/Rotaliina ratio slightly higher than the Florida Middle Grounds, but generally l<:Mer than the Tortugas Bank Area stations. One of the higher Miliolina/Rotaliina ratios COires fran a sanple fran the eastern edge of the Bahama PlatfoDTI west of Andros Island (Rose and Lidz, 1977; 40 ft. depth) where there is no nearby reef. A shallCM water patch reef (Weis and Steinker, 1977) and the "reef" assenblage from east of the north Florida Keys 1957) also had high Miliolina/Rotaliina ratios. It is apparent that reefs in the Gulf of M=xioo Caribbean area can be expected to have foraminiferal thanatocoenoses tending to be high in percentages of Miliolina and lo.ver in percentages of Rotaliina. 46

PAGE 75

The relationship is not that sinple, The high Miliolina/Rotaliina ratio of the sample from the eastern edge of the Bahama Platform (Rose and Lidz, 1977), where there is no adjacent reef, indicates that it is not necesscu:y for a coral reef to be present to have a high Miliolina/Rotaliina ratio. A diminished Miliolina/Rotaliina ratio is found, even near reefs, in sedirrents subject to frequ=nt reworking, such as those outside the protection of platfonn edge reefs. It is possible that the reworking of sediments by currents destroys or winnows out, and deposits elsewhere, a portion of the generally less robust Miliolid tests. Since the shelf sed.inents adjacent to, and south of, the Florida Middle Grounds have low Miliolina/Rotaliina ratios, the low ratio found on the Middle Grounds is likely the result of sc::nre characteristic of the local water mass reducing the availability of calcium carbonate to the foraminifera. This characteristic is 47 probably the interplay of temperature and salinity. If this is true, one soould see a decrease in relative abundance of the Miliolina as one proceeds north along the southern West Florida shelf. This is observed in the studies of Bandy (1956) and Bock (1976). 'fue nost likely cause of high Miliolina/Rotalinna ratios relates to the association of an area with a water mass. It is possible that those areas consistently influenced by the I.Dop CUrrent-Gulf Stream system have higher percentages of Miliolina r elative to Rotaliina than areas in the Gulf not influenced by the loop CUrrent-Gulf Stream system. Additional evidence for this cares from the Yucatan Platform where a zone o f very high Miliolid concentration exists (Figure 5).

PAGE 76

This zone tenninates to the southwest, possibly coincidental with the decline in effect of the loop CUrrent on the southern Gulf continental shelf. Greiner (1970) believes that the distributions of the three major groups of foraminifera, those with agglutinated (Textulariina), hyaline (Rotaliina) and porcelaneous (Miliolina) test walls, are consistent with the hypothesis that the availability of calcium carbonate for use in test construction is the controlling factor; this being detennined by the enviroi111E!1tal pararreters terrperature, salinity and depth. The infonnation gathered in this study is apparently also consistent with this idea. One can only speculate onthe accuracy of the MAFLA (1975-76) proposal that recruitrrent of organisms on the Florida Middle Grotmds is via the Gulf I.Dop Current. It seems that because benthic foraminifera apparently have free-swimning life stages measured only in days (I..oeblich and Tappen, 1964), the water rrass botmdary at the Florida Estuarine Gyre/Florida Bay Waters contact (Figure 9) might be less a hurdle to genetic exchange in foraminifera than the trip arotmd the northern Gulf shelf which is dominated by the Mississippi River effluent. There does appear to be a break in shelf faunas in the general area of the Mississippi River. The Nest Florida shelf currents nay be poorly organized with sufficient Florida Bay Water and foraminifera beccming entrained in the Florida Estuarine Gyre during the warm IIDnths to supply genetic rraterial from the southern Gulf reef. fauna to the Florida Middle Grounds. A better description of the physical oceanography of the eastern Gulf of would help decide whether genetic exchange fran the 48

PAGE 77

south via the Gulf loop Current or via West Florida Shelf cotm.tercurrents is rrore likely. 'Ihe probability that sare porcelaneous foraminifera may have enviro:niTEntal constraints similar to those of other calcium carbonate secreting organisms with known algal syrrbionts, including 49 the reef-building corals, is intuitively obvious. The redistribution of dead foraminiferal tests and their ability to live in unconsolidated sediments are IPajor reasons why a perfect correlation between the presence of specific foraminifera and coral reefs is not likely to be fotm.d. In this sense, the distribution of foraminiferal tests can be considered less physically limited than the distribution of reef-building corals. Herein also lies their usefulness. The foraminiferal thanatocoenose commonly associated with coral reefs in the Antilles-caribbean province is distributed rrore broadly and nore consistently than are the coral reefs themselves. Coral reefs have been to be discontinous even when environmental conditions seem favorable for their growth (Enos and Perkins, 1977) Foraminifera can be very useful as indicators of environrrental conditions similar to those in which coral reefs do grCM, even without the coral reefs present. They can also indicate that a reef, as in the Florida Middle Grounds, rray not have the environrrent necessary for its longterrn survival. This study shCMS the foraminiferal thanatocoenose in the 'lbrtugas Bank to be characteristic of water temperature and salinity ccnditions which exist arotmd m::>st tropical coral reefs in the caribbean and Gulf of 'Ihe fatm.a is typical of warm waters

PAGE 78

where actively growing hermatypic corals and associated reefal organisms thrive. The foraminifera indicating platfonn margin conditions are daninant on the Tortugas Bank. 'Ihe thanatocoenose associated with the Florida Middle Grounds is indicative of cooler temperatures where sorre foraminifera usually associated with reefs in the Gulf of Mexico and caribbean cannot survive. 'Ihe foraminifera of the Florida Middle Grounds also infer a lesser, but not absent, influence of platfonn margin waters on the area than is the case on the Tortugas Bank. 50 Literature sources from the western Atlantic show that the distinction between a rrore successful deep-water reef (such as the Tortugas Bank can sup};X)rt) and a relatively less successful deep water reef (such as the Florida Middle Grounds) based on foraminiferal thanatocoenose may be useful in examining other areas. It is likely that the sane foraminiferal species used here can be used to distinguish cooler from warrrer deep-reef envirorunents throughout the Gulf of Mexico and caribbean Sea, as far south as southern Brazil in the western Atlantic, and back through tirre to the Eocene. 'Ihe influence of platfonn nargin waters on a deep reef can probably be inferred from foraminiferal thanatocoenose over the sarre geographical range and geologic tinE. Studies defining the ecological niche requirenents of rrost species of living foraminifera have not been done. '!his painstaking research may greatly advance the precision possible in the interpretation of Recent and ancient foraminiferal assemblages.

PAGE 79

SUMMARY AND mNCLUSIONS The data from this study supiX>rts the following: 1. Eighty-nine species fran 49 genera and 20 families of benthic foraminifera are associated with sedirrents in the Florida Middle Grotmds. Predorrrinant arrong these and representing greater than 5% of the thanatocoenose in all stations during all seasons are Amphistegina gibbosa, Planulina exotna; Quinqueloculina lamarckiana, and Textularia agglutinens. 51 2. The four Florida r.Uddle Grotmds stations \>/ere tested for similarity using Czekano..;ski' s Quantitative similarity index with group average sorting and fotmd to be very similar. The variation through seasons of the thanatoooenose over the entire Grotmds seems to be rrore significant than the variation bebAJeen the stations, although neither is great. 3. On the Florida rtiddle Grounds the family Arrphisteginidae is dominant representing an average of 25.85% of the identified thanatoooenose. Other inportant families are the tl!iliolidae, averaging 25.74%, Cibicididae, 10.08%, Textulariidae, 9.6%, and Soritidae, 8.8%. 4. One htmdred-one species from 4 7 genera and 26 families were identified from the Tortugas Bank Area. Preebminant foraminifera are Asterigerina carinata, averaging 15.6% of the identified thanatoa:>enOse over the nine stations; Peneroplis carinata averaging 13. 87%; Archaias angulatus! 7. 87%, Textularia agglutinens, 6. 87% and Quinoueloculina larnarckiana, averaging 5. 41%.

PAGE 80

5. ll.sterigerina carinata dominates the living assemblage of benthic foraminifera at the Tortugas Bank Area stations. Eighteen of the 101 species identified in this area had representatives ronsidered to have been alive. 6. The families Soritidae and Miliolidae dominate the foraminiferal thanatocoenose in the Tortugas Bank Area averaging respectively 52 27.88% and 25.14% of the identifiable thanatocx:>enose. other .irrportant families are the Asterigerinidae, averaging 15.66%, the Amphisteginidae, 9.19%, and the Textulariidae, 7. 87%. 7. Similarity testing of Tortugas Bank Area station totals using 1 s Quantitative Similarity Index with group average sorting yielded a dendrogram grouping stations A, B, and C together as being very similar \vi t.h stations E and D sorrewhat less similar to A, B, and C. Stations G, H, and I were grouped as similar to one another and less similar to stations A, B, C, D, and E. Station F is relatively dissi."'!lilar to all stations but this is probably a reflection of teclmique rather than uniqueness of thanatocx:>enose. 8. CzekanCMski 1 s Quantitative Similarity Index with group average sorting can readily distinguish bebveen station totals from the "bM::> areas 9. There are significant differences in the peroentages of the thanatoroenose represented by certain families in each of the two areas. In the Florida Middle Grotmds the Amphisteginidae, Asterigerinidae, and Sori tidae represent 25. 85%, 1. 6% and 8 8%, respectively' of the identifiable thanatoooenose. The rorresponding percentages in the 'lbrtugas Bank Area are 9. 2, 15. 7 and 27. 9.

PAGE 81

10. Significant differences exist between the Florida Middle Grounds and the Tortugas Bank Area stations at the suborder taxonomic level. 'file Tortugas Bank Area stations all have greater percentages of 1'-ti.liolina and lesser percentages of Rotaliina than Middle Grounds stations. 'file percentages of Textulariina are very similar in the two areas. 11. 'file following trends were observed when CXl!Iparing percent in suborder data from this study with that of other investigations: a) Shelf sarrples from the sarre water depth as the I-1..iddle Grounds from west of Tarrpa, FloriCia, have only slightly lower Miliolina/Ibtaliina ratios than .t-1..iddle Grounds sarrples. b) Sedirrents from outside platfonn edge reefs seem to be intemediate between the two areas of this study with respect to Miliolina/Rotaliina ratio. c) 'file Miliolina/Ibtaliina ratio in the Tortugas Bank Area stations is similar to that found in south Florida outer reef sedirrents. d) !-1..iliolina/Ibtaliina ratios higher than those found in the sedirrents of the areas in this study can be expected to be fm.md in sedirrents of shallow water subtropical patch reefs, the north Florida Key reef tract, and the edge of the Bahamas Platfonn west of Andros Island. 12. 'file distribution of relative abundances of Hiliolina and Rotaliina appear to result from the association of areas v1ith a t this study the water mass is apparently the Gulf wa er mass, 1n 53

PAGE 82

of Mexico Loop Current-Gulf Stream system. In high energy areas this distribution is apparently shifted in favor of the Rotaliina. 13. Sul::nrder distribution is apparently oonsistent with Greiner's {1970) hypothesis that the distribution of foraminiferal wall types in the Gulf of Mexico is detennined by availability of calcium carl:xmate, but is dependent upon terrperature, salinity and depth. 14. The thanatocnenose of the 'Ibrtugas Bank Area stations includes 54 an abundance of the four species Seiglie ronsiders the caribbeanAntillean reef fauna. These species are Amphistegina gibbosa, Asterigerina carinata, P..rchaias angulatus, and Ibtorbinella :rosea Bandy. .The Florida G:rotmds thanatoooenose includes, of these four species, !:. giboosa in abtmdance, carinata in law frequencies, and !: angulatus in very low frequencies. This is consistent with Seiglie' s description of the Eastern Gulf of foraminiferal subprovincial fauna.

PAGE 83

REFERENCES Antoine, J. W., B:ryant, W. R., and Pyle, T. E., 1974, Stru.ctural fraxrework of the west Florida continental shelf and rea::>mrenoations for further research, in Smith, R. E., Editor Procedures in -I marine envirorurent implications of offshore drilling, eastern Gulf of :rvrexico: State Univ. Syst. Fla. Inst. Oceanogr., St. Petersburg, p. 295-300. Austin, H., 1971, The characteristics and relationships bebMeen the calculated geostrophic current cx:::.rnponent and selected indicator organisro.s in the Gulf of M=xico llop CUrrent System, Ph. D. Dissertation, D=pt. of Oceanography, Florida State Uni v. Tallahassee. Austin, H., and Cruise, 1972, The West Florida Estuarine Gyre, 35th Ann. M=et. Amer. Soc. Lironol. Oceanogr., Tallahassee, Fla., March, 1972. Austin, H., and J. Jones, 1974, Seasonal variations of physical oceanographic pararreters on the Florida Grotmd and their relation to zooplankton biomass on the west Florida shelf: Quarterly Journal Florida Academy Science, 37: 16-32 Back R. M 1972 Recent dePOsitional envirornnent of the Florida I I I --Middle Grotmd ( .r-1. S. Thesis): Dept. of Oceanography, Florida State Univ., 237 pp. 55

PAGE 84

Bandy, 0. L., 1954, Distribution of sane shallow-"YTater foraminifera in the Gulf of U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 274-G, p. 179-204. ______ 1956, Ecology of Foraminifera in Northeastern Gulf of U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 274-G, pp. 125-204. Bock, W., 1976, Distribution and significance of Foraminifera in the MAFLA area, in Schafer, C. T. and Pelletire, B. R. , 1st International Syrrposium on Benthonic of Contiriental Margins, .M..ari time Sedllrents, Special Publication no. 1, p. 221-237. -------, W. W. Hay, J. I. Jones, G. W. Lynts, S. L. Smith, and R. C. Wright, 1971, A handbook of the benthonic Foraminifera of Florida Bay and adjacent waters: A Syrrposium of Recent South Florida Foraminifera, .Hiami Geological Society, 1, p. 245. Boesch, D. F., 1977, Application of nurrerical classification in ecological investigations of water pollution, Special Scientific Report No. 77, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, 114 pp. Brady, H. B., 1884, Report on the Foraminifera collected by H. M. S. Challenger during the 1873-76: Report on the Voyage of the Challenger, Zool. 9: 1-814. 56

PAGE 85

Brooks, G. R., 1981, Recent carlxmate of the Florida Middle Ground reef system; Northeastern Gulf of t13xico, r-1:. s. Thesis, Univ. of South Florida, 68 pp. Brooks, H. K., 1974, General and geotecl:mical characteristics of the surficial deposits on the west Florida shelf, in, Smith, R. E., Editor, Procedures in IT'.arine environrrent inplications of offshore drilling, eastern Gulf of :rvexico: State Univ. Syst. Fla. Inst. Oceanogr., St. Petersburg, p. 301-307. Cheney, D. P. and Dyer, J. P. III, 197 4, Deep water benthic algae of the Florida Hiddle Ground: Harine Biology, 185-190. 57 Clifford, H. T., and Stephenson, Y.7., 1975, An introduction to nurrerical classification, Academic Press, New York, 184 pp. Connack, 1971, A review of classification, Jour. R:>y. Statist. Soc. 134: 321-367 (Series A). Cushman, J. A. 1922, Shallow-i..rater Foraminifera of the Tortugas region. Carnegie Inst. Washington Publ. 311: 1-85. Cushman, J. A., 1948, Foraminifera, their classification and econcrnic use. Harvard Uni v. Press, Cambridge, Mass. 605 P

PAGE 86

r::ennison, J M., and Hay, W. W., 1967, Estiwating the needed sampling area for subaguatic eoologic studies: Jour. Sed. Petrol., 41: 706-708. r:oyle, L. J., Steirnretz, J. C., Brooks, G. R., and Parker, D. H., 58 1980, Gulf of Mexico TOJ;XJgraphic Features Study, Florida Middle Ground: Sedirrents and Foraminifera. BIN Contract No. AA551-CT8-35. Enos, P. and Perkins, R. D. 1977, Quaternary sedi.Irentation in South Florida, The Geological Society of Arrerica., Mem. 147. Field, J., and Bloom, S. A., 1975, A oonputer program for the analysis of benthic corrrnunities, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville, 26 pp. Folk, R. L., 1965, Petrology of sedirrentaJ:y rocks: Herrphills, Austin, 159 pp. G:miner, G. 0., 1970, Distribution of major benthonic foraminiferal groups on the Gulf of l\'l.eXico oontinental shelf: Micropaleontology, 16: 83-101. Haq, B. u., and A. Boersma, 1978, Introduction to marine micropaleontology: Elsevier North-Holland, Inc., New York, 367 p. Hom, H., 1966, Measurerrent of overlap in oonparative erol.gical studies: A:rrerican Naturalist 100: 419-423.

PAGE 87

Illinq, L. V. 1950, The rrechanical distribution of recent Foraminifera in Bahama Banks sed.i.Jrents. "--u .M.LLu. paq. Nat. (Ser. 12) 3: 757-761. Illing, Ill. A., 1952, Distribution of certain foraminifera within the littoral zone on the Bahama Banks, Ann. Maq. Nat. Hist., Ser. 12, 5: 275-285. Jindrich, V., 1972, Biogenic buildups and carbonate sedimentation, Dry Tortugas P.eef oonplex, Florida, (Ph.D. Dissertation): D:pt. of Geology, State Univ. of New York at Binghamton, 96 p. Jordon, G. F., 1952, Reef formation in the Gulf of M:xioo off Apalachicola Bay, Florida: C'-eol. Soc. Am. Bull., 63: 741-744. 59 I.oeblich, A. R., and Tappan, H., 1964, Saroodina; Chiefly "Thecam:::>ebians" and Foraminiferida, in r-t>ore, R. C., ed., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Uni v. of Kansas Press. Lynts, G. w., 1962, Distribution of recent Foraminifera in uo:oer Florida Bay and associated sounds: CUshman Found. Fbram. Pes. Contr. 13: 127-144. 1965, Observations on some Florida Bay foraminifera: ------Cushman Fo1md. Foram. Res. Contr. 16: 67-69.

PAGE 88

MAFIA, 1975-76, Base line rronitoring studies, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida outer a::mtinental shelf, BI14 tr ct oon a no. 08550-CT5-30, v.iv, 217 p. tbore, E., 1957, Eoology of recent Foraminifera in northern Florida Keys: Airer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 41: 727-741. Ivturray, J. W., 1973, Distribution and eoology of living benthic foraminiferids: Crane, Russak & Co. New York, 274 pp. Parker, F. L. 1954, Distribution of the Foraminifera in the northeastern Gulf of Mexioo : Harvard Col. Mus. Comp. Zool. Bull., 111: 453-588. Poag, C. W., 1981, Eoologic atlas of benthic Foraminifera of the Gulf of Mexioo: Hutchinson Jbss Publishing canpany, 1981. and W. E., Jr., 1972, Claypile Bank, Texas ------Continental Shelf, in Rezak, R. and Henry, V. J. eds Contributions on the geological and geophysical oceanography o f the Gulf of Mexioo. Texas A&M Uni v. Oceanogr. Ser. 3: 223 -261. and Tresslar, R. c., 1981, Living foraminifers of ------W est Flowe r Garden Bank, northernrrost ooral reef in the Gulf of Micropaleontology 27 {1): 31 70. 60

PAGE 89

Price, W., 1954, Shorelines and roasts of the Gulf of Jvf.exiro, in Galtsoff, P. S., Editor, Gulf of its origin, waters and marine life: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Bull., 87: 36-54. Pose, P. R. and Lidz, B. 1977, Diagnostic forarrdniferal assemblages of shallow-water rrodern envi:rol'1I1:'el1ts: South Florida and the Bahamas. Comp. Sed. lab., Rosenstiel School of and Atrrospheric Science, U. of Miami. Seiglie, G. A., 1968, Relationships between the distribution of Arrphistegina and the sul:rnerged Pleistocene reefs off western Puerto Rim. Tulane studies in C...eology, 6 (4): 139-147. Sneath, P. A., and R. R. Sokol, 1973, Nurrerical taxonomy, the principles and practice of ntm'erical classification: Freeroan, San Francisco, california 359 pp. Walker, D. A., A. E. Linton, and C. T. Schafer, 1974, Sudan black B: A superior stain to rose bengal for distinguishing 1i ving from non-living Foraminifera: J. Fbram. Res. 4: 205-215. Weis, B. R., and D. c. Steinker, 1977, Foraminifera from patch reef and outer sedirrents, lov1er Florida Keys: The Cor11Jass, v. 54, no. 4, p. 87-105. 61

PAGE 90

Wilson, J. L .. 1975, Carbonate facies in geoloqic history, Springer-Verlag, New York, 470 p. Winston, G. 0., 1969, A deep glinpse of. west Florida's platfonn.: Oil and Gas JourP-al, 67 (48): 128-133. R. C., and \. r-:r. F ... ay, 1971, The ahtmdance and distribution of foraroinifers in a ba.ck-reef environment, Reef, Florida: Miami Geol. Soc. Hem. 1 : 121-17 4. 62

PAGE 91

63 2 0

PAGE 92

APPUJCIX 1 (continued) N (X) LW 0'1 64 z

PAGE 93

65 38

PAGE 94

APPENDIX I (continued) 66

PAGE 95

APPENDIX 2 KEY TO THE NUl,ffiERING SYSTEM FOR STfi.TICN 'IDTALS DATl\. FFDM F1DHIDA fJIIDDLE GFOU!'Tffi ST.Z:\TION SEA..SON ---1 151 1 10/78 2 247 2 11/78 3 481 3 01/79 4 491 4 06/79 Exalm1e: Station 322 = IDeation Map Benchwark Station 481 Sarm1ed ll/78 METHOD 1 Diver 2 Shipe}<. Grab 3 Dredge by Shipek Grab 67

PAGE 96

APPENDIX 2 (continued) FI.DRIIlZ\ MIDDLE Grollt,i'DS SPEX:IES ABllt\"D.AN:E 'lbtals For Station 111 SPECIES OBSERVED Amphistegina gibbosa 476 Planulina exorna 152 Rosalina sp. 85 N::>t Identifiable 82 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 81 Hoeglundina elegans 76 Quinqueloculina bosciana 69 Textularia agglutinens 68 Peneroplis carinatus 58 Quinqueloculina auberiana 53 Textularia conica 49 Ydliolinella circularis 35 Cibicides sp. 31 Miliolinella subrotunda 19 Quinqueloculina polygona 19 Peneroplis proteus 18 Siphonina pulchra 17 Reussella atlantica 17 Cribroelphidiwn poeyanum 15 Pyrgo denticulata 13 Cancris oblonga 12 Articulina sagra 11 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 9 Weisnerella auriculata 9 Neoconorbina terquemi 7 6 Bigenerina textulareida Quinqueloculina af. Q. candeiana 6 Nonionella atlantica 6 Arcnaias angulatus Archaias compressus Spirillina vivipara Articulina mexicana Quinqueloculina bicostata Spiroloculina sp. Bolivina lanceolata Elphidium discoidale Nonion guadeloupi fichteliana Pyrgo subsphaerica Spiroloculina soldanii 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 % OF SAMPLE 30.396 0.706 5.428 5.236 5.172 4.853 4.406 4.342 3.704 3.384 3.129 2.235 1.980 1.213 1.213 1.149 1.086 1.086 0.958 0.830 0.766 0.702 0.575 0.575 0.447 0.383 0.383 0.383 0.319 0.319 0.319 0.319 0.319 0.255 0.255 0.192 0.192 0.192 0.128 0.128 32.075 10.243 5. 728 0.0 5.458 5.121 4.650 4.582 3.908 3.571 3.302 2.358 2.089 1.280 1.280 1.213 1.146 1.146 1.011 0.876 0.809 0.741 0.606 0.606 0.472 0.404 0.404 0.404 0.337 0.337 0.337 0.337 0.337 0.270 0.270 0.202 0.202 0.202 0.135 0.135 68

PAGE 97

69 APPENDIX 2 (continued) % % SPEX::IES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 2 0.128 0.135 Quinqueloculina co llumnosa 2 0.128 0.135 Articulina pacifica 2 0.128 0.135 Elphidium advenum 2 0.128 0.135 Asterigerina carinata 2 0.128 0.135 Planorbulina mediterranensis 1 0.064 0.067 Lagena laevis 1 0.064 0.067 Peneroplis pertusus 1 0.064 0.067 Quinqueloculina horrida 1 0.064 0.067 Peneroplis bradyi 1 0.064 0.067 Quinqueloculina poeyana 1 0.064 0.067 Bigenerina irregularis 1 0.064 0.067 Guttulina sp. 1 0.064 0.067 Articulina sp. 1 0.064 0.067 Quinqueloculina bicornis 1 0.064 0.067 Quinqueloculina "Big Tooth" 1 0.064 0.067 SA."PLE 'IO"'...AL = 1566

PAGE 98

70 APPENDIX 2 ( cx:mtinued) FIDRIDA MIDDLE GROUT-!DS SPB:IES ABUf\'!DAN:E 'Ibtals Fbr Station 211 % % SPB:IES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE T!-7/0 UNKI'M Amphistegina gibbosa 891 32.341 33.184 QuinqueZocuZina Zamarckiana 254 9.220 9.460 PeneropZis carinatus 178 6.461 6.629 HoegZundina eZegans 176 6.388 6.555 PZanuZina exorna 152 5.517 5.661 Textularia aggZutinens 116 4.211 4.320 Textularia conica 108 3.920 4.022 Asterigerina carinata 89 3.230 3.315 QuinqueZocuZina auberiana 74 2.686 2.756 QuinqueZocuZina bosciana 74 2.686 2.756 l'bt Identifiable 70 2.541 0.0 RosaZina sp. 58 2.105 2.160 MiZioZineZZa circuZaris 42 1.524 1.564 ReusseZZa atlantica 42 1.524 1.564 PeneropZis proteus 40 1.452 1.490 ArticuZina mexicana 35 1.270 1.304 Cibicides sp. 35 1.270 1.304 QuinqueZocuZ.1.:na poZygona 34 1.234 1.266 Archaias compressus 29 1.053 1.080 CribroeZphidium poeyanum 27 0.980 1.006 ArticuZina sp. 23 0.835 1.857 Pyrgo denticuZata 19 0.690 0.708 Siphonina puZchra 19 0.690 0.708 ArticuZina sagra 18 0.653 0.670 QuinqueZocuZina af. Q. candeiana 13 0.472 0.484 ArticuZina pacifica 13 0.472 0.484 NonioneZZa atlantica 9 0.327 0.335 Bigenerina textuZareida 9 0.327 0.335 Archaias anguZatus 8 0.290 0.298 QuinqueZocuZina 7 0.254 0.261 TriZocuZina tricarinata 7 0.254 0.261 Bigenerina irreguZaris 7 0.25 0.261 Pyrgo subsphaerica 6 0.218 0.223 ArticuZina mucronata 6 0.218 0.223 QuinqueZocuZina bicostata 6 0.218 0.223 fichteZiana 6 0.218 0.223 Cancris ob Zonga 5 0.181 0.186 Neoconorbina terquemi 5 0.181 0.186 Textu Zaria sp. 4 0.145 0.149 WeisnereZZa auricuZata 4 0.145 0.149

PAGE 99

APPENDIX 2 {continued) 71 % % SPEX:IFS OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 SpiriZZina vivipara 4 0.145 0.149 QuinqueZocuZina poeyana 4 0.145 0.149 SpiroZocuZina soZdanii 4 0.145 0.149 VirguZina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 4 0.145 0.149 PZanorbuZina mediterranensis 4 0.145 0.149 Quinque ZocuZina subpoeyana 3 0.109 0.112 QuinqueZocuZina tricarinata 3 0.109 0.112 Bolivina ZanceoZata 3 0.109 0.112 MiZioZineZZa subrotunda 2 0.073 0.074 SpiropZectammina floridana 2 0.073 0.074 QuinqueZocuZina sp. 1 0.036 0.037 Non ion guade Zoupi 1 0.036 0.037 Qui rzque Zocu Zi na "Big Tooth" 1 0.036 0.037 PeneropZis bradyi 1 0.036 0.037 SAfviPLE TOI'AL = 2755

PAGE 100

A'PPENDIX 2 ( cx:mtinued) FIDRIDA MIDDLE GROUNDS SPECIES ABUNDA..T'K:E Totals for Station 311 SPECIES OBSERVED gibbosa PenerooZis carinatus QuinoueZocuZina Zamarckiana Textularia aggZutinens Not Identifiable HoegZundina eZegans TextuZar1:a conica PZanuZina exorna QuinqueZocuZina auberiana PeneropZis proteus Asterigerina carinata QuinqueZocuZina bosciana ReusseZZa atlantica Cibicides sp. RosaZina sp. MiZioZinez"Za circuZaris ArticuZina mucronata Pyrgo denticuZata ArticuZina mexicana QuinqueZocuZina poZygona CribroeZphidium poeyanum ArticuZina pacifica Qu1:nqu.elocuZina af. Q candeiana irreouZaris Siphonina puZch;a Pyrgo subsphaerica ArticuZina sagra Textularia so. TriZocuZina tricarinata QuinqueZocuZina Bigenerina textuZareida SpiroZocuZina soZdanii ArticuZina SP. Neoconorbina terquemi VirguZina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. EZphidium advenum PZanorbuZina mediterranensis MiZioZineZZ.a fichteZiana QuinqueZocuZina horrida PeneropZis braayi Cancris ob Zanga NonioneZZa atlantica Nonion guadeZoupi Archaias anguZatus QuinqueZocuZina bicostata Archaias compressus SpiropZectammina floridana 753 219 183 176 131 122 115 98 81 77 64 54 50 44 32 28 28 27 24 21 19 18 17 14 13 11 11 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 % OF SAMPLE 29.845 8.680 7.253 6.976 5.192 4.836 4.558 3.884 3.210 3.052 2.537 2.140 1.982 1. 744 1.268 1.110 1.110 1.070 0.951 0.832 0.753 0. 713 0.674 0.555 0.515 0.436 0.436 0.277 0.198 0.198 0.198 0.198 0.198 0.198 0.198 0.198 0.159 0.159 0.159 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.079 0.079 0.079 % W/0 UNKNW 31.480 9.156 7.651 7.358 0.0 5.100 4.808 4.097 3.386 3.219 2.676 2.258 2.090 1. 839 1.338 1.171 1.171 1.129 1. 003 0.878 0.794 0.753 0. 711 0.585 0.543 0.460 0.460 0.293 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.209 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.084 0.084 0.084 72

PAGE 101

APPENDIX 2 ( oontinued) SPECIES .'.!i l io l ir.e Ua subrotunda f/eisnere Ua auriculata Quinqueloculina subpoeyana Quinoueloculina poeyana Bolivina lanceolata S oiroloculina antillarum Quinqueloculina bicornis sagra OBSERVED 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 % OF SAMPLE 0.079 0.079 0.079 0.079 0.040 0.040 0.040 0.040 % W/0 UNKNW 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 73

PAGE 102

APPENDIX 2 ( oontinued) 74 F'IDRIDA MIDDLE GID1:.1NIE SPECIES Totals For Station 411 SPECIES % % OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Amphistegina gibhosa 697 28.048 29.4 7l Quinoueloculina lamarckiana 187 7.525 7.907 Planulina exorna 165 6.640 6.977 Quinqueloculina bosciana 126 5.070 5.328 Textularia conica 123 4.950 5.201 Not Identifiable 120 4.829 0.0 Rosalina sp. 108 4.346 4.567 Textularia agglutinens 87 3.501 3.679 Peneroplis carinatus 83 3.340 3.510 Hoeglu.ndina elegans 81 3.260 3.425 Cibicides sp. 70 2.817 2.960 Mi lio line Zla circularis 62 2.495 2.622 Reussella atlantica 46 1.851 1.945 Quinqueloculina auberiana 43 1. 730 1. 818 Peneroplis proteus 38 1.529 1.607 Quinqueloculina polygona 37 1.489 1. 564 Pyrgo subsphaerica 27 1.087 1.142 Nonionella atlantica 27 1.087 1.142 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 27 1.087 1.142 Siphonina pulchra 25 1.006 1.057 Neoconorbina terquemi 24 0.966 1.015 Articulina sp. 24 0.966 1.015 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 20 0.805 0.846 Pyrgo denticulata 18 0.724 0.761 Articulina sagra 18 0. 724 0.761 Spirillina vivipara 14 0.563 0.592 Spiroloculina soldanii 14 0.563 0.592 Archaias angulatus 13 0.523 0.550 Bigenerina textulareida 13 0.523 0.550 Articulina pacifica 13 0.523 0.550 Quinqueloculina 12 0.483 0.507 Quinqueloculina bicostata 11 0.443 0.465 Peneroplis bradyi 11 0.443 0.465 Quinqueloculina poeyana 11 0.443 0.465 Cancris oblong a 10 0.402 0.423 Asterigerina carinata 9 0.362 0.381 Articulina mexicana 8 0.322 0.338 Archaias compressus 7 0.282 0.296 Weisnerella auriculata 7 0.282 0.296 Spiroloculina sp. 5 0.201 0.211 Spiroloculina antillarum 4 0.161 0.169 Planorbulina mediterranensis 4 0.161 0.169 Articulina mucronata 3 0.121 0.127 Spiroplectammina floridana 3 0.121 0.127 Spirillina obconica 3 0.121 0.127 Miliolinella fichteliana 3 0.121 0.127 Triloculina tricarinata 3 0.121 0.127

PAGE 103

APPENDIX 2 ( oontinued) SPECIES Bolivina lanceolata Bigenerina irregularis Guttulina sp. Lagena laevis Quinqueloculina subpoeyana Quinoueloculina collumnosa Quinaueloculina so. Quinqueloeulina bicornis Cancris saara oolina hexagona O'uinoueloculina "Big Tooth" Quinqueloeulina horrida Miliolinella subrotunda SA111PLE TOI'AL = 2485 OBSERVED 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 % OF SAMPLE 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.040 0.040 0.040 0.040 0.040 % W/0 UNKNW 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 75

PAGE 104

APPENDIX 2 ( rontinued) TIDRIDA MIDDLE GroUNI:'S SPECIES ABlJ'Nn\NCE Totals For Station 122 SPECIES OBSERVED gibbosa 629 QuinqueZocuZina Zamarckiana 250 PeneropZis carinatus 166 PZanulina exorna 155 NJt Identifiable 119 Textularia aggZutinens 107 Textularia conica 87 Quinqueloculina bosciana 86 HoegZundina eZegans 71 Archaias compressus 57 Cibicides sp. 52 Quinquelocu Zi na bicostata 50 Rosa Zina sp. 45 circuZaris 44 Reusse lZa atlantica 44 Asterigerina carinata 39 ArticuZina sp. 38 QuinquelocuZina auberiana 36 VirguUna sp. = Fur senkoina sp. 30 Peneroplis proteus 30 Articulina mexicana 25 CribroeZphidium poeyanum 22 Bigenerina irreguZaris 20 Cancris o bZonga 17 Neoconorbina terqu emi 17 Pyrgo subsphaerica 16 Pyrgo denticuZata 15 Nonion guadeZoupi 15 QuinqueZocuZina po lygona 14 Siphonina puZchra 14 ArticuZina sagra 13 Bigenerina t extuZareida 10 Archaias angulatus 10 NonioneZZa atZantica 10 SpiroZoculina soZdanii 9 Feisnere Z Z a auricuZata 8 Quinque Zocu Zina c r as sa 7 var. subcuneata QuinqueZocuZina af. Q candeiana 7 EZphidium discoidale 7 % OF SAMPLE 30.590 10.171 6.753 6.306 4.841 4.353 3.539 3.499 2 .889 2.319 2.116 2.034 1.831 1. 790 1.790 1.587 1.546 1.465 1.221 1.221 1.017 0.895 0.814 0.692 0.692 0.651 0.61 0 0.610 0.570 0.570 0.529 0.4 07 0.407 0.407 0.366 0.325 0.285 0.285 0.285 % W/0 UNKNW 26.892 10.688 7.097 6.627 0.0 4.575 3.720 3.677 3.035 2.437 2.223 2.138 1.924 1.881 1.881 1.667 1.625 1.539 1.283 1.283 1.069 0.941 0.855 0.727 0. 727 0.684 0.641 0.641 0.599 0.599 0.556 0.42 8 0.428 0.428 0.385 0.342 0.299 0.2 99 C..299 76

PAGE 105

APPENDIX 2 77 % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNI.Y fl.rticulina pacifica 6 0.244 0.257 Quir;qut: loculina suhpoeyana 6 0.244 0.257 Cuttulir;a s p 5 0.203 0.21 4 poeyana 5 0.203 0 214 PlaY'.m'aulina medi terranensis 5 0.2 0 3 0 .214 Per,:::rop lis bradyi 5 0.203 0.214 Spiroplectammina floridana 5 0 .203 0.214 Miliolinella fichteliana 4 0.163 0.171 Spiroloculina antillarum 4 0.163 0.171 vivipara 4 0.163 0 1 7 1 Penerop lis pert us us 4 0.163 0.171 Elphidium advenum 2 0 081 0.086 Bolivina lanceolata 2 0 081 0.086 Cancris sagra 2 0.08 1 0.086 Q"uirzque loculina sp. 1 0.041 0 0 43 1 0.04 1 0 0 43 Nodosaria sp. 1 0.041 0.043 Textularia s p 1 0 041 0.043 Quinque locu l ina horrida 1 0.04 1 0 0 43 Articulina mucr onata 1 0 .041 0 0 43 Quinqueloculina "Bi g Tooth" 1 0 041 0.043 Bulimina sp. 1 0.041 0.043 S M 'lPLE TOTAL = 2 458

PAGE 106

APPENDIX 2 ( oontinued) FlDRIDA MIDDLE GROUNI:::6 SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station 4 22 SPECIES OBSERVED Amphistegina gibbosa NJt Identifiable QuinqueZocuZina PlanuZina exorna MiZioZineZZa circuZaris PeneropZis carinatus Textularia aggZutinens HoegZundina eZegans Textularia conica QuinqueZocu Zina bosciana ArticuZina sp. Cibicides sp. QuinqueZocuZina bicostata QuinqueZocuZina auberiana VirguZina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. Bigenerina irreguZaris PeneropZis proteus R eusseZZa atlantica RosaZina sp. ArticuZina sagra ArticuZina mexicana Neoconorbina terquemi Asterigerina carinata Cancris ob Zanga WeisnereZZa auricuZata NonioneZZa atlantica poZygona Pyrgo denticuZata EZphidium discoidaZe Pyrgo subsphaerica Archaias anguZatus Siphonina puZchra Lagena Zaevis QuinqueZocuZina af. Q candeiana QuinqueZocuZina poeyana Nonion guadeZoupi CribroeZphidium poeyana MiZioZineZZa fichteZiana PeneropZis braayi PZanorbuZina mediterranensis 538 212 154 96 85 73 72 72 64 58 52 41 39 39 39 32 31 30 27 23 23 20 19 14 12 12 ll 10 10 10 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 7 6 6 % OF SAMPLE 26.180 10.316 7.494 4.672 4.136 3.552 3.504 3.504 3.114 2.822 2.530 1.995 1.898 1.898 1.898 1.557 l.50S 1.460 l.3H 1.119 1.119 0.973 0.925 0.681 0.584 0.584 0.535 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.438 0.438 0.438 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.389 0.341 0.292 0.292 % W/0 UNKNW 29.192 0.0 8.356 5.209 4.612 3.961 3.907 3.907 3.473 3.147 2.821 2.225 2.116 2.116 2.116 1.736 1.682 1.628 1.465 1.248 1.248 1.085 1.031 0.760 0.651 0.651 0.597 0.543 0.543 0.543 0.488 0.488 0.488 0.434 0.434 0.434 0.434 0.380 0.326 0 326 78

PAGE 107

79 APPENDIX 2 ( oontinued) % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW ArticuZina pacifica 6 0.292 0.326 Tr1: ZocuUna t ricarinata 5 0.243 0.271 SpiroZocuZina soZdanii 5 0.243 0.271 QuinqvZocuZina subpoeyana 5 0.243 0.271 Archaias compressus 5 0.243 0.271 SpiriZZina vivipara 4 0.195 0.217 SpiriZZina obconica 4 0.195 0.217 Textu Zaria sp. 3 0.146 0.163 Bolivina ZanceoZata 3 0.146 0.163 Mi lio line Ua subrotunda 3 0.14 6 0.163 EZphidium advenum 3 0.146 0.163 QuinqueZoculina crassa 2 0.097 0.109 var. subcunea t a Guttulina sp. 2 0.097 0.109 QuinqueZocuZina horrida 2 0.097 0.109 Bigenerina textuZar e ida 2 0.097 0.109 SpiropZectammina fZoridana 1 0.049 0.054 QuinqueZocuZina b icornis 1 0.049 0.054 QuinqueZocuZina sp. 1 0.049 0.054 Bulimina sp. l 0.049 0.054 Quinqu e ZocuZina coZZumnosa 1 0.049 0.054 SAMPLE 'IOr.AL = 2055

PAGE 108

APPENDIX 2 (oontinued) 80 F'IDRIDA MIDDLE Grot.JNI:S SPECIES .ABUNI:W'JCE Totals For Station 131 SPECIES % % OBSERVED OF SAMPlE W/0 UNKNW gibbosa 338 22.384 25.000 !'bt Identifiable 158 10.464 0.0 Planulina exorna 114 7.550 8 432 Quinqueloculina 103 6.821 7.618 Rosalina sp. 93 6 159 6 879 TextuLaria conica 81 5 .364 5 991 Textularia agglutinens 62 4 106 4.586 Miliolinella circularis 60 3.974 4.438 Hoeglundina elegans 57 3.775 4.216 Peneroplis carinatus 54 3.576 3 994 Quir4ueloculina bos ciana 47 3 113 3.476 Elphidium discoidale 40 2.649 2 959 Cibicides sp. 29 1.921 2.145 Reussella atlantica 2 9 1.921 2.145 N eoconorbina terquemi 2 3 1.523 1. 701 Spirillina vivipara 22 1.45'7 1.627 Quinqueloculina polygona 22 1.457 1.627 Siphonina pulchra 21 1.391 1.553 Qui nque locu Una auberiana 19 1.258 1.405 Virgu li na sp. = Fursenkoim sp. 15 0.993 1.109 Peneroplis proteus 14 0.927 1.036 Weisnerella auriculata 12 0.795 0.888 A rticulina sagra 9 0.596 0.666 Articulina sp. 8 0.530 Pyrgo denticulata 8 0 530 0.592 Nonionella atlantica 6 0.397 0.592 Bolivina lanceolata 6 0.397 0.592 Nonion guadeloupi 5 0.331 0 370 Archaias compressus 5 0.331 0.370 Quinque loculina af. Q candeiana 5 0.331 0.370 Quinqueloculina bicostata 4 0.265 0.296 Sagrina pulche lLa var. primitiva 4 0.265 0.296 Miliolinella fichteliana 4 0.265 0.296 Spiroloculina soldanii 3 0.199 0.22 2 Archaias angulatus 3 0.199 0.222 Pyrgo s ubsphaerica 3 0 199 0.222 Cancris ob Zanga 2 0.132 0.148 Bigenerina irregularis 2 0.132 0.148 Asterigerina carinata 2 0.132 0.148 Spiroloculina antillarum 2 0.132 0.148

PAGE 109

81 APPENDIX 2 ( oontinued) % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Quinque loeu l ina horrida 1 0.066 0.074 Cribroe l phidium poey a num 1 0.066 0.074 Gu.ttulina sp. 1 0.066 0.074 Elphidium advenum 1 0.066 0.074 Textularia sp. 1 0.066 0.074 Quinque loculi na ''Big Tooth" 1 0.066 0.074 Qui nqueloculina subp oe yana 1 0.066 0.074 Quinqueloeulina sp. 1 0.066 0.074 Oolina hexagona 1 0.066 0.074 Quinque loculina c ollumnosa 1 0.066 0.074 Spiroplectammina floridana 1 0.066 0.074 Articulina pacifica 1 0.066 0.074 A rticulina mexic ana 1 0.066 0.074 Cancr i s sagra 1 0.066 0.074 Penerop lis pe rtusus 1 0.066 0.074 Pene roplis bradyi 1 0.066 0.074 SAMPLE 'IDTAL = 1510

PAGE 110

APPENDIX 2 ( cnntinued) FIDRIDA MIDDlE GROtJNI:E SPECIE'S ABUNDANCE Totals For Station 232 SPECIES OBSERVED Amphistegina gibbosa 234 Not Identifiable 133 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 123 Planu l ina exorna 111 Peneroplis carinatus 92 Miliolinella circularis 61 Textularia conica 59 Quinqueloculina bosciana 49 Neoconorbina terquemi 47 Textularia agglutinens 46 Elphidiwn discoidale 42 Hoeglundina elegans 42 Cibicides sp. 41 Rosalina sp. 41 Asterigerina carinata 40 Reussella atlantica 31 Quinqueloculina auberiana 21 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 20 Quinqueloculina bicostata 20 Articulina sp. 19 Articulina sagra 16 Peneroplis proteus 15 Bigenerina irregularis 15 Archaias compressus 13 Quinqueloculina polygona 12 Nonione Ua atlantica 9 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 8 Articulina mexicana 8 Sagrina pulcheUa var. primitiva 8 Spirillina vivipara 7 Quinqueloculina poeyana 6 Triloculina tricarinata 6 Weisnerella auriculata 5 Pyrgo suhsphaerica 4 Pyrgo denticulata 4 Planorbulina mediterranensis 4 Discorbis mira 4 Siphonina pulchra 4 Bolivina Zanceolata 4 Quinqueloculina af. Q. candeiana 3 % OF SAMPlE 15.995 9.091 8.407 7.587 6.288 4.170 4.033 3.349 3.213 3.144 2.871 2.871 2.802 2.802 2.734 2.119 1.435 1.367 1.367 1.299 1.094 1.025 1.025 0.889 0.820 0.615 0.54 7 0.547 0.547 0.478 0.410 0.410 0.342 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.205 % W/0 UNKNW 17.594 0.0 9.248 8.346 6.917 4.586 4.436 3.384 3.534 3.459 3.158 3.158 3.083 3.083 3.008 2.331 1.579 1.504 1.504 1.429 1.203 1.128 1.128 0.977 0.902 0.677 0.602 0.602 0.602 0.526 0.451 0.451 0.376 0.301 0.301 0.301 0.301 0.301 0.301 0.226 82

PAGE 111

APPENDIX 2 ( a:mtinu=O.) SPECIES Elvhidiwn advenurn Textular>ia sp. Spir>illina obconica Cancr>is ob longa Quinaueloculina hor>r>ida Ar>chaias angulatus Spir>oloculina soldanii Ar>ticulina pacifica Spir>oloculina antillar>um Quinqueloculina "Big Tooth" Lagena laevis Quinqueloculina subpoeyana Quinqueloculina collwnnosa BigeneY'ina textular>eida Spir>oplectammina flor>idana Nonion guadeloupi Guttulina sp. Bulimina sp. Pener>oplis per>tusus OBSERVED 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 % OF SAMPLE 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.205 0.137 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.068t 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.068 % W/0 UNKNW 0.226 0.226 0.226 0.226 0.226 0.226 0.226 0.226 0.150 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 0.075 83

PAGE 112

APPENDIX 2 (continued) FIDRIDA .MIDDLE GROUNDS SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station 141 SPECIES OBSERVED Amphistegina gibbosa 424 Planulina exorna 109 Identifiable 78 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 75 Quinqueloculina bosciana 67 Hoeglundina elegans 66 Textu Zaria conica 52 Rosalina sp. 51 Neoconorbina terquemi 50 Quinqueloculina auberiana 49 T extularia agglutinens 46 Peneroplis ca rinatus 40 Miliolinella circuZaris 31 Cibicides sp. 30 Tleisne r eZZa a uriculata 29 Reussella atlantica 26 Quinqueloculina polygona 23 Peneroplis proteus 21 Articulina sp. 21 Articulina sagra 17 Elphidium discoidale 15 Quinqueloculina bicostata 12 Siphonina puZchra 10 Quinqueloculina af. Q candeiana 10 SpiriZZina vivipara 9 Vir gulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 7 MiZioZineZZa subrotunda 7 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 6 QuinquelocuZina po e yana 6 fichteZiana 6 Pyrgo d enticuZata 6 SpiropZectammina floridana 5 Quinqu eloculina horrida 4 Sagrina puZcheZZa var. primitiva 4 Pyrgo subsphaerica 4 PZanorbuZina mediterranensis 4 Archaias compr essus 4 Bigen erina irregularis 4 Cancris ob longa 3 P eneropZis bradyi 3 % OF SAMPLE 28.982 7.450 5.332 5.126 4.580 4.511 3.554 3.486 3.418 3.349 3.144 2.734 2.119 2.051 1.982 1.777 1.572 1.435 1.435 1.162 1.025 0.820 0.684 0.684 0.615 0.47 8 0.478 0.410 0.410 0.410 0.410 0.342 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.273 0.205 0.205 % W/0 UNI
PAGE 113

8 5 APPENDIX 2 ( oontin\al) % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Articulina pacifica 3 0 .205 0.217 Textularia sp. 3 0.205 0 217 Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 3 0.205 0.217 Triloculina tricarinata 2 0.137 0.144 Asterigerina carinata 2 0 13 7 0.144 Nonionella atlantica 2 0.137 0.144 Spiroloculina antillarum 2 0 137 0.144 Nonio n guade loupi 2 0 137 0.144 Quinqueloculina tricarinata 2 0.137 0.144 Oo Zina hexagona 1 0.068 0.072 Articulina mexicana 1 0 068 0.072 Archaias angulatus 1 0.068 0.072 Spirillina obconica 1 0 0 6 8 0 .072 Quinqueloculina crassa 1 0.06 8 0.072 var. subcuneata Guttulina sp. 1 0.068 0.072 Spiroloculina so ldanii 1 0 068 0.072 Bolivina lanceolata 1 0 068 0.072 SAMPLE TOTAL = 1463

PAGE 114

APPENDIX 2 ( rontinued) FlDRIDA MIDDLE SPECIF.S ABUNDANCE 'Ibtals For Station 241 SPECIES % % OBSERVED Amphistegina gibbosa 286 Not Identifiable 140 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 117 Planulina exorna 108 Miliolinella circularis 75 Peneroplis carinatus 62 Quinqueloculina bosciana 62 Rosalina sp. 61 Asterigerina carinata 49 Hoeglundina elegans 48 Textularia agglutinens 47 Textularia conica 40 Neoconorbina terquemi 36 Quinqueloculina auberiana 30 Siphonina pulchra 27 Elphidium discoidale 26 Virgulina Ep. = Fursenkoina so. 23 Reussella atlant-ica 23 Articulina sagra 17 Quinqueloculina polygona 16 Cibicides sp. 15 Articulina sp. 14 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 14 Pyrgo denticulata 13 Spirillina vivipara 12 Quinqueloculina poeyana 12 Quinqueloculina bicostata 10 Peneroplis proteus 10 Bolivina lanceolata 9 Weisnerella auriculata Pyrgo subsphaerica Archaias compressus Nonionella atlantica Spiroloculina soldanii Miliolinella fichteliana Quinqueloculina af. Q candeiana Spirillina obconica Bigenerina irregularis Cancris sagra Tri loculi m tricarinata 8 8 7 7 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 OF' SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW 18.991 9.296 7.769 7.171 4.980 4.117 4.117 4.050 3.254 3.187 3.121 2.656 2.390 1.992 1. 793 1. 72F5-1.52'i l.S27 1.129 1.062 0.996 0.930 0.930 0.863 0.797 0.797 0.664 0.664 0.598 0.531 0.531 0.465 0.465 0.332 0.332 0.332 0.332 0.266 0.266 0.266 20.937 0.0 8.565 7.906 5.490 4.539 4.539 4.466 3.587 3.514 3.441 2.928 2.635 2.196 1.977 1.903 1.684 1.684 1.245 1.171 1.098 1.025 1.025 0.952 0.878 0.878 0.732 0.732 0.659 0.586 0.586 0.512 0.512 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.293 0.293 0.293 86

PAGE 115

APPENDIX 2 87 % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW PZ anorbuZina mediterrane n s i s 4 0.266 0.293 A rticuZina pacifica 4 0.266 0.293 A rticuZina mexicana 4 0.266 0.293 EZphidium advenum 3 0.199 0.220 Nonion guad e Z oupi 3 0.199 0.220 Sagrina pu Z che ZZa var. p rimitiva 3 0.199 0.220 A r ch aias angu Zatus 3 0.199 0.220 SpiropZectammina fZoridana 2 0.133 0.146 Quinque Z ocuZina sub poeyana 2 0.133 0.146 Cancris obZonga 2 0.13 3 0.146 Lage na Zaevis 2 0.133 0.146 Quir4ue Z o c uZi na hor rida 2 0.133 0.146 QuinqueZoc u Zina "Big Tooth" 2 0.133 0.146 Disco rbis mir a 2 0.133 0.146 P e ne r opZis b radyi 2 0 133 0.14 6 Bulimina sp. 1 0.06 6 0.073 GuttuZina sp. 1 0.066 0.07 3

PAGE 116

APPENDIX 2 ( cx:>ntinued) FIDRIDA MIDDLE GROUNDS SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station 3 4 1 SPECIES OBSERVED Amphistegina gibbosa 248 PZanulina exorna 15 4 Peneroplis carinatus 115 Quinqueloculina lamarckian a 105 Textularia conica 78 Textularia agglutinens 7 2 Reussella atlantica 68 Identifiable 66 Quinque loculina bosciana 53 Cibicides sp. 52 Hoeglundina elegans 46 Quinqueloculina auberiana 44 Rosalina sp. 44 circularis 4 1 Articulina sp. 38 Asterigerina carinata 25 Peneroplis proteus 22 Quinqueloculina polygona 20 Articulina sagra 19 Neoconorbina terquemi 17 Quinqueloculina bicostata 15 Fyrgo denticulata 15 Fyrgo subsphaerica 13 Spirillina vivipara ll Elphidium discoidale ll Quinqueloculina af. Q candeiana 9 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 9 lveisn e r eUa auriculata 8 Siphonina pulchra 6 MilioZineUa subrotunda 5 Articulina m exicana 5 Miliolinella fichteliana 5 Bigenerina irregularis 5 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 5 Bolivina lanceolata 4 Planorbulina mediterranensis 4 Triloculina tricarinata 3 Elphidium advenum 3 Archaias compressus 3 N onionella atlantica 3 % OF SAMPLE 16.600 10.30 8 7.69 7 7.028 5.221 4.819 4.552 4.418 3.548 3.481 3.079 2.945 2.94 5 2 .74 4 2.544 1.673 1.473 1.339 1.272 1.138 1.004 1.004 0.87 0 0.736 0.736 0.602 0.602 0.53 5 0.4 0 2 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0 .335 0.268 0.368 0.201 0.201 0.201 0.201 % W / 0 UNKNW 17.367 1 0.78 4 8. 053 7 .353 5.462 5.042 4.762 0.0 3.711 3.64 1 3.221 3 .081 3.08 1 2.8 71 2.661 l. 751 1.54 1 1.401 1.3 31 1.190 1.050 1.050 0 .910 0.770 0 770 0.630 0 .630 0.560 0 42 0 0.350 0 .350 0.350 0.350 0 35 0 0 .280 0 .280 0.210 0 .210 0 2 1 0 0 2 10 88

PAGE 117

APPENDIX 2 ( contim.Ed) SPECIES OBSERVED N orl'io;;. :'ucu:elmpi 3 /rchaias rmgulatus 3 P eneT'Op li;; bradyi 2 Lagena lac?vis 2 :2 .-'irticuz z : na pacifica 2 Cancris ob longa 2 Quinqucloculina crassa 2 var. subcuneata Saqrina pulcheUa var. primitiva 1 Q..queloculina sub poeyana 1 Discmobis mira 1 Spiro Zocu Z so Zdani i 1 Marginulina bradyi 1 0L = 1494 % OF SkMPLE 0.201 0.201 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 % W/0 UNKNW 0.210 0.210 0.140 0.140 0.140 0.14 0 0.140 0.140 0.070 0 .070 0 .07 0 0.070 0.070 0.070 0.070 89

PAGE 118

APPENDIX 2 (a:mtinued) FIDRIDA MIDDLE GROUNIS SPECIES ABUNI:lA.NCE 'Ibtals For Station 441 SPECIES Amphistegina gibbosa Planulina exorna Quinqueloculina lamarckiana Rosalina sp. Peneroplis carinatus l\bt Identifiable Cibicides sp. Textularia conica Textularia agglutinens Quinqueloculina bosciana Reussella atlantica Miliolinella circularis Hoeglundina elegans Spirillina vivipara Neoconorbina terquemi Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. Articulina sp. Quinqueloculina auberiana Elphidium discoidale Siphonina pulchra Quinqueloculina polygona Weisnerella auriculata Articulina sagra Cribroelphidium poeyanum Quinqueloculina bicostata Asterigerina carinata Pyrgo subsphaerica Nonionella atlantica Quinque locu Zina af. Q. candeiana Quinqueloculina subpoeyana Bolivina lanceolata Pyrgo denticulata Peneroplis proteus Quinqueloculina poeyana Bigenerina irregularis Miliolinella fichteliana Spirillina obconica Spiroloculina soldanii Discorbis mira Sagrina pulcheUa var. primitiva Nonion guadeloupi OBSERVED 224 132 96 84 78 77 65 63 62 58 49 43 32 31 28 26 25 25 22 21 16 15 14 14 11 11 11 10 10 10 9 8 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 % OF SAMPLE 15.427 0.091 6.612 5.785 5.372 5.303 4.477 4.339 4.270 3.994 3.375 2.961 2.204 2.135 1.928 1.791 1. 722 1.722 1.515 1.446 1.102 1.033 0.964 0.964 0.758 0.758 0.758 0.689 0.689 0.689 0.620 0.551 0.482 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.413 0.344 0.344 0 .275 0.275 % W/0 UNKNW 16.291 9.600 6.982 6.109 5.673 0.0 4. 727 4.582 4.509 4.218 3.564 3.127 2.327 2.255 2.036 1.891 1.818 1.818 1.600 1.527 1.164 1.091 1.018 1.018 0.800 0.800 0.800 0. 727 0. 727 0. 727 0.655 0.582 0.509 0.436 0.436 0.436 0.436 0.364 0.364 0.291 0.291 90

PAGE 119

APPENDIX 2 (a:mtinued) % SPECIES OBSERVED OF PeneropZis bradyi 4 0.275 sagra 3 0.207 Cancris oblonga 3 0.207 SpiroZocuZina antiZZarum 3 0.207 PZanorbuZina mediterranensis 3 0.207 TriZocuZina tricarinata 2 0.138 Archaias compressus 2 0.138 QuinqueZocuZina horrida 2 0.138 Textularia sp. 1 0.069 SMPLE TOTAL = 1452 % W/0 UNKNW 0.291 0.218 0.218 0.218 0.218 0.145 0.145 0.145 0. 73 91

PAGE 120

92 APPENDIX 3 SP:ECIES OCOJRRING AT FlDRIDA MIDDLE GOOlJNI:B DURING 1978-79 SURVEY DEAD LIVE l. Amphistegina gibbosa X X 2. Archaias angulatus X X 3. Archaias compressus X X 4. Articulina sp. X X 5. Ar ticulina mexicana X 6. Articulina mucronata X 7. Articulina pacifica X 8. A rticulina sagra X X 9. Asterigerina ca rinata X 10. Bigenerina i rregularis X 11. Bigenerina textulareida X 12. Bolivina lanceolata X 13. Bore lis pulchra X 14. Canris oblonga X X 15. Cancris sagra X 16. C l a vulina tricarinata X 17. C ribroelphidium poe yanum X X 18. Cymbaloporetta squammosa X 19. Discorbis mira X 20 Elphidium advenum X 21. Elphidium discoidale X X 22. Eponides X 23 Hauerina bradyi X 24. Hauerina ornatissima X 25. Hoegl u ndina elegans X X 26. L agena laeV1:s X 27. Marginulina bradyi X 28. Miliolinella sub r otunda X X 29. MiliolineZZa circularis X X 30. Miliolinella fichteliana X X 31. Neoconorbina terqu emi X 3 2 Nodosaria sp. X 33. Nonion guadeloupi X 34. Nonionella atlantica X 35. Oo lina hexag ona X X 36. Peneroplis bradyi X X X 37. Peneroplis carinatus 3 8 Peneroplis pertusus X X X 39 P e n eroplis proteus X X 40. Planorbulina mediterranensis

PAGE 121

APPENDIX 3 (continued) SP:OCIES CCCURRING FLORIDA I'1IDDLE GROUNDS a.JR..TNG 197 8-79 SUR\iEY ,, DEAD 41. ?dr90 denticuZata X 42. PyPg o suhsphaerica X 43. Quinque ZocuZina bicornis X 44. Quinque ZocuZin bicos tata X 45. QuinqueZocuZina bosciana X 46. QuinqueZocuZina af. Q candeiana X 47. QuinqueZocuZina c r assa var. subcuneata X 48. QuinqueZocuZina coZZumnosa X 49. QuinqueZocuZina horrida X 50. QuinqueZocuZina Zamarckiana X 51. QuinqueZocuZina poeyana X 52. QuinqueZocuZina poZygona X 53. QuinqueZocuZina subpoeyana X 54. QuinqueZocuZina tricarinata X 55. Quinque ZocuUna X 56. ReusseZZa atlantica X 57. R osaZina sp. X 58. Rotor bineZZa rosea X 59. Sagrina puZcheZla var. primitiva X 60. SigmoiZina sp. X 61. SigmoiZopsis schZumbergeri X 62. Siphonina puZchra X 6 3 Siphoninoides echinata X 64. Sorites marginal-is X 65. SpiriZZina obconica X 66. Spir oZocuZina antiZZarum X 67. SpiroZocuZina sp. X 68. SpiroZocuZina soZdanii X 69. spiropZectammina fZoridana X 70. T extu Zaria sp. X 71. Textularia aggZutinens X 72. Textularia conica X 73. TriZocuZina tricarinata X 74. Troc hommina japonica X 75. VirguZina sp. X 76. Wies n ereZZa auricuZata X 77. Bulimina sp. X X 78. Cibicide s rugosa X 79. Cibicides sp. 80. GuttuZina sp. X L I V E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 9 3

PAGE 122

94 APPENDIX 3 (continued) SPELIES OCCURRING AT FIDRIDA MIIDLE GroUNDS DURING 1978-79 SURVEY DEAD LIVE 81. Plamdina e xorna X X 82. Quinqueloculina auberiana X X 83. Quinqueloculina "Big Tooth" X 84. Spirillina vivipara X 85. Lag e na sulcata X 86. Quinqueloculina laevigata X

PAGE 123

95 APPENDIX 4 OOMINANr SPEX:IFS Sampling Cruises a = 10/78 b = 11/78 c = 01/79 d = 06/79 STATIONS SPB:IES 151 247 481 491 Amphistegina gibbosa abed abed abd abd Archaias angulatus a Archaias compressus b b b Articulina sp. d b Asterigerina carinata ab a cd ab Bigenerina irregularis b Cancris oblong a b Cibicides rugosa a a d a d Cibicides sp. oc b Cribroelphidium poeyanum a be Elphidivm discoidale c c d Hoeglundina elegans abed abed a d abd circularis c bed b d abd subrotunda c terquemi a cd cd d Peneroplis carinatus abc abed abd abd Peneroplis proteus b a Planulina exorna abcd abcd abd abd Quinqueloculina auberiana a d a abd Quinqueloculina bicosta b Quinqueloculina bosciana abcd bed abd abd Quinqueloculina lamarckiana abcd abcd abd abd Reuss ella atlantica c oc d d Rosalina sp. abed bed d abd Siphonina pulchra c d Spirillina V&V¶ c b Textularia agglutinens abcd abe d abd abd Textularia conica abed abc abd abd Virgulina sp. b d ab Weisnerella auriculata d

PAGE 124

Station 1-l (E) Station l-2 (F) Station l-3 Station 2-l (A) APPENDIX 5 BELLOWS CRUISE B-8027 ON-SIGHT SAMPLE STATION DESCRIPI'IONS 24 41.83N; 82 59.53W Divers Doug Parker Steve Myers Salinity= 32 .5%; Temperature= 28.3 c Depth = 84 feet, Tirre of day: 10:15 A M IBscription -"Visibility 40 feet; no current flat, sandy bottom, no regular ripples on bottom; Udotea, Halirreda present; not much fish fauna. 24 42.13N; 82 59.21W Divers Mike Weston Bob Thursby 96 IBpth = 56 feet (by sounding); Temperature = 28 .l C Time of Day: 1:10 P.M. IBscription (Mike Weston) "60 feet by depth gauges; hard and soft coral growth; sorre algae; NJt as srrooth a bottom a s 1-l. Only scattered clear -sandy areas. Sampled from 4 clear areas spread over 70 feet. Some sanples from partially shaded environrrents Sorre large coral heads. N8 gulleys or drops 24 42 67N; 82 58 .96W Depth = 73 feet Lush variety of coral, nice dive, no sanples 24 38 50N; 83 0 2 .92W Divers -Mike Weston Steve Myers Depth= 57 feet; 28. 2 C Description -"Ripples with wavelength 70 em. Height of ripples about 15 em.; samples from all portions of ripples. -rrostl y OP=n -sandy bottom -small corals -gorgonians -sponges -no r elie f above l meter

PAGE 125

Station 2-2 (B) Station 2-3 (D) Station 2-4 (C) Station 3-1 (G) Station 3-2 (H) APPENDIX 5 (continued) 24 38 57N; 83 02.60W Divers10:16 A.M.; Depth= 65 feet; 40 feet visibility I::Escription -"flat sandy tottom, no ripples. 24 38 55N; 83 Ol.40W; Divers Mike Bob Thursby Chap Garvey Temperature= 28. 3 c. Depth = 87 feet; in water at 11:57 A.M. I::Escription -"flat, sandy tottom, not much current, no regular ripples." 24 37 83N; 83 Ol.69W DiversDoug Parker Bob Thursby 97 2:16 P .I'-1. Depth = 6 7 feet; temperature = 28 4 C. I::Escription "Samples taken on white, sandy (nothing much around on sand) tottom immediately adjacent to N-S trending reef flat area about 5 feet shallower. Lots of wrasses, blueheads gray ard queen angel fishes, rrany corals and soft corals. 24 43.42N; 82 48.38W; Divers Doug Parker Chap Garvey J:::pth = 7 5 feet Description -"Thin, sandy (coarse) venier of sedirrents, coral, very turbid. All samples taken between 3 foot relief of different coral. 1 to 2 knot current with suspended load apparently entrained. S edi.Irent barely 5 em. deep at rrany points. 24 43.33N; 82 47.00W; DiversSteve Myers Bob Thursby Depth= 75 feet; 'I'errqJerature = 28.3 C; 10:18 A.M. Descri ption Sandy, coral. Many tropical fish, some predators (grouper, drum). visibility 2 0 feet.

PAGE 126

Station 3-3 (I) APPENDIX 5 (continued) 24 40.08N; 82 47.02W; Divers-Chap Garvey Steve tyers = 42 feet "Patch reef; coarse, sandy bottom." 98

PAGE 127

APPE!:.JDIX 6 St:.J11.W\RY 'IORI'UGAS STATION A (Forams) Dominant Species** Percent of Bottom vlater Depth Description Mean Grain Size(O) ( ML. Similarity to Other Stations Replicate Similarity Species Na,re .n.ssemblage 17 .4m Ripples = 70cm, 0.775 37.5 X 106 c 0.855 0-10 0 P 15cm in height B 0.841 10-20 0 A small corals I E 0 737 20-30 0 A gorg:mians I D 0.70'2. 30-40 0 Q sr:onges H,I,G 0.623 40-50 0 A F 0.557 50-60 6 67 R 60-70 17. 78 A 70-80 57.78 T 80-90 17 78 A 90-100 0 Q A t.u1iform density to a depth of 5 em is assurred here; this is a conservative estimate. ** Any species rraking up>S% of t."l-)anatocoenose at any of the 'Ibrtugas area stations. car>inatus c ar>inata angulatus iana gibbos a r>osea mexicana agglutinens pacifica bosciana 20 1 % 18.6 16.1 7 4 6.3 5 2 5 0 3.1 2.1 0 1 1.0 1.0

PAGE 128

Water I:epth 20.0rn Bottom r::.escription Flat, sandy l:::ottom, no ripples APPENDIX 6 ( a::mtinue:::l) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UGAS STATION B l-Ean ( Forams) Grain Size (0) ( M2 ) 0.333 13.7 X 10f1 Similarj_ ty to Other Stations C,A 0.841 E 0.737 D 0.702 O.fi23 F 0.557 Replicate Similarity 0-10 0 10-?.0 0 /.n-3n 0 30-1!:0 0 40-5 0 0 50-60 0 COrninant Species** Percent of Species Name Assemblage P c arinatus 21.6% 4 angu Zatus 15.7 A c arinata 13.4 1 1. gibhosa 8.4 Q Zamar ckio:na 6.2 4 4 meX?.-a an a 4.4 60-70 46.67 R. r ose a 4.4 70-80 51.11 '.I'. 80-90 2.22 L 90-100 0 f' ::. *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assumed here; this is a conservative esti..nate **Any species making up >5% of thanatocoeoose at any of the 'Ibrtugas area stations. a q g Zutinens bosciana 3.4 3.2 0.4 f-' 0 0

PAGE 129

APPENDIX 6 ( oontinuerl) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UGAS STATION C Bottom z.Ean (Forams)* Similarity to Replicate Water Depth Description Grain Size ( M2 ) Other Stations Similarity 20.0m Sa:rrt>les f:rom 1.470 6 34.4 X 10 A o. 855 0-10 0 sandy bottom c 0.841 10-20 0 .imrediately E 0.737 20-30 0 adjacent to N-S D 0.702 30-40 0 trending reef H,I,G 0.623 40 0 flat area about F 0.557 50-60 0 5 ft. shallm..rer. 60-70 11.11 Corals and soft 7080 71.11 oora1s on reef 80 17.78 flat. 90-100 0 *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assured here; this is a oonservative estinate **Any species rraking up >5% of thana.toooeoose at any of the 'lbrtugas area stations. D:mri.nant Species** Sf.E=Cies Narre P carinatus A cal'inata A angulatus R J?osea A gibbosa Q lamarcl<.iana A mexicana T agglutinens A pacific a Q bosciana Percent of Assemblage 22.5% 21.6 12.0 6.8 6.8 6.8 4.4 3.6 1.7 1--' 0 1--'

PAGE 130

Water Depth 26.5m Bottom Description Flat, sandy bottom, not rrruch current, no regular ripples APPENDIX 6 (continued) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UCAS STATION n M=an (Forams)* Grain Size (0) ( M2 ) 0.017 148.75 X 106 Similarity to Other Sta lions E,A,B,C 0.702 G,H,I 0.623 F 0.557 Replicate Sirnilari ty Ibminant Species** Percent of Species Name Assemblage 0-10 0 A carinata 26. 5 % 10 20 0 P carinatus 15.5 20-30 0 T. aggZutinens 9.5 30-40 0 Q Z amarckiana 8.8 40 50 0 A angulatus 4.1 50 -60 6.67 A gibbosa 4 0 60-70 42.22 A pacifica 3.9 7051.11 A mexicana 2.7 80-90 0 R rose a 1.6 90100 0 Q bosciana 0.3 *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assurred here; this is a conservative estinate **'Any species naking up >5% of thanatocoeoose at any of the 'lbrtugas area stations. ...... 0 N

PAGE 131

APPENDIX 6 (continued) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UGAS STATION E Mean (Forams)* I:bminant Species** Percent of Water Depth Bottom Description Grain Size (0) ( M2 ) Similarity to Other Stations Replicate Similarity Species Narre Assemblage 25.6m 'No current, flat, sandy bottom, no regular ripples. Udotea and Halirreda. 0.254 6 9.76 X 10 A,C,B D G,H,I F 0.737 0-10 0.702 10-20 0.623 20-30 0.557 30-40 40--50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90100 0 P. 0 A. 0 A. 0 T. 0 A. 20.00 A. 44.44 R. 35.56 A 0 Q 0 Q *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assurred here; this is a conservative estirrate **Any species rraking up >5% of thanatocoeoose at any of the Tortugas area stations. carinatus gibbosa carinata agglutinens angulatus pacifica rose a mexicana Zarnarckiana bosciana 17.8% 13.4 13.2 6.5 6.4 5.0 4.1 2.9 2.6 1.4 f-' 0 w

PAGE 132

Water Depth l8.0m APPENDIX 6 (continued) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UCJ\S STATION F M2an Bottom Description Grain Size ( 0) Hard and soft coral growth, not as srrooth as E, only scattered clear sandy areas, sanpled from -0.263 four clear areas spread over 70 ft, some samples partially shaded environrrent I (Forams)* ( M2 ) fu data Sirnilari ty to Other Stations All others at 0.557 Replicate Similarity 0-10 0 10--20 0 20-30 0 30-40 13.89 40-50 19.44 50-60 50.00 60--70 13. 89 70-80 2.78 80-90 0 90 100 0 same larg e coral heads 1 no gulleys or drops *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assumed here; this is a conservative estimate **Any species rraking up >5% of thanatocoerose at any of the 'Ibrtugas area stations. DJminant Species** Percent of Species Name Assemblage A g i b bosa A c arinata T aggZu tinen.s P carinatus Q bosciana A anguZatus Q ZCO'narckiana A p a c ifica A m e::cicana R rosea 14.7% 13.4 10.0 7.5 5.5 2.3 2.0 0.6 0.4 0.2

PAGE 133

Water Depth 22 .9m APPENDIX 6 (continued) INFORMATION SUMMARY -TORI'UCAS STATION G M=an (Forarns)* Bottom Description Grain Size (0) ( M2 ) Similarity to Other Stations Thin, sandy Kb data 63.51 X 106 H,I 0.655 veneer of D,E,A, sedinents, B,C 0.632 very tn.lbid, coral F 0.557 All samples taken between coral w. 3 ft. relief, l-2 knot current Hi th suspended load entrained, sedirrent barely 5 an. deep at many points. Replicate Similarity 00 10-20 0 203() 0 30-40 0 40-50 13.33 Cominant Species** Percent of Species Name Assemblage A cm"inata 15.5% iJ cm'ina:tv.s 10.1 I. r. ..,. --: 9.4 /: {)1-DDOSa. T aeglutinens 8.0 Q. lama1'ckiana 5.6 50 15.56 A. 4.1 60-70 57.78 A. mex-z_cana 3.8 70-80 13.33 Q boseiana 3.4 800 A p 1-ca 0.7 90-100 0 R. rose a 0.4 *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assumed here; this is a conservative est.irre.te **Any species naking up >5% of thanatocoeoose at any of the 'lbrtugas area stations. t-' 0 Ul

PAGE 134

Water Depth 22. 9m Bottom rescription Sandy, with coral APPENDIX 6 ( a:mtinued) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UGAS STATION ij Grain Size (0) -0.109 (Forams)* ( M2 ) 63.51 X 106 Similarity to other Stations G 0.774 I 0.655 D,E,A B,C 0.623 F 0.557 Replicate Similarity Ibminant Species** Percent of Species Name Assemblage 0-10 0 A gibh o s a 13.1% 10--20 0 A .L car&nava 11.2 2030 0 n L carinatus 9.7 30--40 0 'J.'. agglutinens 9.7 40-50 0 A anguZatus 7.2 50-60 35.56 Q Zarr:a1''ckia:na 4.3 60--70 62.22 A vacifica l!.O 70-80 2.22 Q bosciana 2.1 80 90 0 A mexica na 1.3 90-100 0 R rose a 0.4 *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is ass\.l!led here; this is a conservative esti.nate **Any species rraking up >5% of thanatocoeoose at any of the 'Ibrtugas area stations.

PAGE 135

APPENDIX 6 (continued) INFORMATION SUMMARY TORI'UGAS STATION I Cominant Species** Bottom M2an (Forams)* Similarity to Replicate Percent of Water Depth Description Grain Size (0) ( M2 ) Other Stations Similarity Species Narre Assemblage 12.8m Coarse, 1\b data 23.0 X 10 6 H,G 0.655 0-10 0 P. carinatus 10.6% sandy :bottom, D,E,A,B, 10--20 0 A carinata 7.0 patch reef. c 0.623 20-30 0 A gibbosa 6.6 F 0.557 30-40 0 T. agglutinens 6.5 40 -50 0 Q lamarckiana 5.8 50-60 48.89 Q bosciana 3.8 6051.11 R rose a 3.7 70-80 0 A. a:11.gulatus 2.9 80-0 0 A. pacifica 2.6 90--100 0 A mexicana 0.0 *A uniform density to a depth of 5 em is assumed here; this is a conservative estinate **l'ill y species rraking up >5% of thanatocoenose at any of the 'Ibrtugas area stations.

PAGE 136

APPENDIX 7 SPEX:IES OCCURRING IN THE TORI'UGAS BANK AREA IN 'lliiS SURVEY 1. Amphistegina gibbosa 2. Archaias angulatus 3. Archaias compressus 4. Articulina antillarum 5. Articulina sp. 6. Articulina mexicana 7. Articulina muoronata 8. Articulina pacifica 9. Articulina sagra 10. Asterigerina carinata 11. Bigenerina irregularis 12. Bigenerina textulareida 13. Bolivina lanceolata 14. Bolivina pulchella var. primitiva 15. Borelis pulchra 16. Bulimina sp. 17. Cancris oblonga 18. Cancris sagra 19. Cibicides sp. 20. Clavulina difformis 21. Clavulina tricarinata 22. poeyanum 23. Cymbaloporetta squammosa 24. Discorbis mira 25. Elphidium advenum 26. Elphidium discoidale 27, Elphidium sagrum 28. Eponid e s sp. 29. Guttulina sp. 30. Gypsina vesicularis 31. Hauerina bradyi 32. Hauerina ornatissima 33. Heterostegina depressa 34. Hoe glundina e legans 35. Lagena laevis 36. Miliolinell a circularis 37. Miliolinella fichteliana 38. Miliolinella subrotunda 39. Monalysidium politum 40. N eoconorbina terquemi DFAD X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X LIVE X X X X X X X X X X X 108

PAGE 137

APPENDIX 7 (continued) SPECIES OCCURRING IN THE 'IDRIUGAS BANK AREA IN 'lliiS SURVEY 41. NodobacularieUa cassia 42. Nonion guadeloupi 43. NonioneUa atlantica 44. Peneroplis bradyi 45. Peneroplis carinatus 46. Peneroplis pertusus 47. Peneroplis proteus 48. Planorbulina acervalis 49. Planorbulina mediterranensis 50. Planulina exorna 51. Pyrgo denticulata 52. Fyrgo elongata 53. Fyrgo subsphaerica 54. Quinqueloculina agglutinens 55. Quinque loculina auberiana 56. QuinquelocuUna bicarinata 57. Quinqueloculina bicornis 58. Quinqueloculina bicostata 59. Quinqueloculina bidentata 60. QuinquelocuUna '$ig Tooth" 61. Quinqueloculina bosciana 62. Quinque loculina a. Q. candeiana 63. Quinqueloculina collumnosa 64. Quinque loculina crassa var. subcuneata 65 Quinque loculina horrida 66. Quinque loculina lamarckiana 67. QuinquelocuUna parkeri var. ocaidentaUs 68. Quinque loculina poeyana 69. Quinqueloculina polygona 70. Quinqueloculina quadrilateralis 71. Quinqueloculina seminulum 72. Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 73. Quinqueloculina tenagos 74. Quinqueloculina tricarinata 75. Roephax difflugiformis 76. Reussella atlantica 77. Rosalina sp. 78. Rotorbinella rosea 79. Schlumbergerina alveoliniformis var. occidentalis 80. Siphonina pulchra DFAD X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X LIVE X X X X X X 109

PAGE 138

110 APPENDIX 7 ( oontinued} SPEX::IES OCClJRRIN:; IN 'IHE TORTUGAS BANK AREA IN THIS SURVEY DFAD LIVE 81. Sorites marginalis X 82. Spirolina arietinus X 83. Spiroloculina antillarum X 84. Spiroloculina arenata X 85. Spiroloculina caduca X 86. Spiroloculina soldanii X 87. Spiroplectammina f1oridana X 88. Textularia sp. X 89. Textularia agglutinens X 90. Textularia conica X 91. Trioloculina bassensis X 92. Triloculina bermudezi X 93. Triloculina bicarinata X 94. Tri loculina carinata X 95. Triloculina Zinneiana X 96. Triloculina rotunda X 97. Triloculina tricarinata X 98. TriZoculina trigonula X 99. Trochammina japonica X 100. Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. X 101. Weisnerella auriculata X X

PAGE 139

APPENDIX 8 'IDRIU;AS ARm SPECIES ABUNDAN:E 'Ibta1s For Station A % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SN1PLE Not Identifiable 365 24.317 Penerop ris carinatus 228 15.190 carinata 211 14.057 l:rchaias angulatv.s 183 12.192 QuinqueZoculina lamarckiana 84 5.596 Amphistegina gibbosa 71 4.. 730 ?otorbinella rosea 59 3.931 Articulina mexicana 57 3.797 Textularia agglutinens 35 2.332 Articulina pacifica 24 1.599 Articulina sagra 22 l.%f Archaias compressus 20 1.332 Quinqueloculina auberiana 18 1.199 Cibicides sp. 14 0.933 ?eneroplis proteus 12 0.799 Elphidium discoidale 10 0.666 Rosalina sp. 8 0.533 Articulina mucronata 7 0.4F6 Discorbis mira 6 0.400 Quinaueloculina bidentata 6 0.400 Hoegiundina elegans 5 0.333 Triloculina bassensis 5 0.333 Ui lio line Ua circularis 4 0.26fi Eponides 4 0.266 !'lodobaculariella cassis 3 0.200 Triloculina bermudezi 3 0.200 Quinoueloculina tricarinata 3 0.200 Triloculina carinata 3 0.200 Quinqueloculina horrida 3 0.200 Bulimina sp. 2 0.133 Bore lis pu lchra 2 0.133 Pyrgo subsphaerica 2 0.133 Pyrgo denticulata /. 0.133 2 0.133 Quinqueloculina t e nagos 2 0.133 Guttulina sp. Bigenerina irregularis 2 0.133 1 0.067 Peneroplis p ertus u s 1 0.067 EZphidium sagrwn 1 0.067 Mi lio line Ua fich te liana 1 0.067 Quinqueloculina bosciana 1 0.067 Het erostegina depressa 1 0.067 Hauerina bradvi 1 0.067 Nonion 1 0.067 Elphidium advenum 1 0.067 Triloculina bicarinata 1 0.067 Trochammina japonica 1 0.067 Quinqueloculina a gglutinens 111 % w;o tJNI
PAGE 140

APPENDIX 8 ( o:mtinued) SPECIES Quinqueloculina quadrilateralis Quinqueloculina polygona Planorbulina mediterranensis OBSERVED 1 1 1 % OF SN-1PLE 0.067 0.067 0.067 112 % W/0 UNKNW 0.088 0.088 0.088

PAGE 141

113 APPENDIX 8 (continued) 'IDRI'UGAS AREA SPECIES ABUIDANCE Totals For Station B % % SPECIES OBSERVED oF SAMPLE Not Identifiable 308 20.506 0.0 Peneroplis carinatus 258 17.177 21.608 Archaias angulatus 188 12.517 15.745 Asterigerina carinata 160 10.652 13.400 Amphistegina gibbosa 100 6.658 8.375 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 74 4.927 6.198 Potorbinella rosea 53 3.529 4.439 Articulina mexicana 52 3.462 4.355 Textularia agglutinens 40 2.663 3.350 Articulina pacifica 38 2.530 3.183 Quinoueloculina auberiana 25 1.664 2.094 Archaias compressus 17 1.132 1.424 Peneroplis proteus 16 1.065 1.340 Hoeglundina elegans 13 0.866 1.089 Quinqueloculina bosciana 12 0.799 1.005 Peneroplis bradYi 8 0.533 0.670 Quinqueloculina bidentata 8 0.533 0.674 Pyrgo denticulata 8 0.533 0.674 Triloculina carinata 7 0.466 0.586 Miliolinella circularis 7 0.466 0.586 Neoconorbina terquemi 6 0.399 0.503 Cibicides SP. 6 0.503 Triloculina-bassensis 6 0.399 0.503 Planorbulina mediterranensis 5 0.333 0.419 Triloculina tricarinata 5 0.333 0.419 Elphidium advenum 5 0.333 0.419 Textularia sp. 5 0.333 0.419 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 5 0.333 0.419 Quinqueloculina horrida 4 0.266 0.335 Discorbis mira 4 0.266 0.335 Quinqueloculina tricarinata 4 0.266 0.335 Quinqueloculina tenagos 4 0.266 0.335 Eponides 4 0.266 0.335 Articulina nrncronata 4 0.266 0.335 Borelis pulchra 4 0.266 0.335 Guttulina sp. 3 0.200 0.251 Articulina sp. 3 0.200 0.251 Quinaueloculina bicarinata 3 0.200 0.251 alveoliniformis 2 0.133 0.168 var. occidentali 0.133 0.168 Gymbaloporetta squammosa 2 Quinqueloculina quadrilateral&s 2 0.133 0.168 Weisnerella auriculata 2 0.133 0.168 Bolivina pulchella var. primitiva 2 0.133 0.168 2 0.133 0.168 Pyrgo subsphaerica 2 0.133 0.168 Quinqueloculina polygona 2 0.133 0.168 Quinqueloculina collumnosa

PAGE 142

APPENDIX 8 ( oont:inued) SPECIES Quinaueloeulina bicostata Textularia conica Bigenerina irregularis Elphidium discoidale Articulina sagra Spiroculina antillarum Nodobaculariella cassis Peneroplis pertusus Nonionella atlantica Reussella atlantica Bulimina sp. Miliolinella fichteliana Tri loeulina bermudezi OBSERVED 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 % OF SAliPLE 0.133 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 114 % W/0 UNKNW 0.168 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084

PAGE 143

APPENDIX 8 (oontinued) 115 'IDRI'UGAS AREA SPECIES l>.BUNDANCE Totals For Station c % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Not Identifiable 351 23.541 0.0 Peneroplis carinatus 256 17.170 22.456 Asterigerina carinata 246 16.499 21.579 Archaias angulatus 137 9.188 12.018 Rotorbinella rosea 78 5.231 6.842 Amphistegina gibbosa 78 5.231 6.482 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 68 4.561 5.965 Textularia agglutinens so 3.353 4.386 Articulina mexicana 41 2.750 3.596 Articulina pacifica 20 1.341 1. 754 Cibicides sp. 18 1.207 1.579 Archaias compressus 17 1.140 1.491 Quinqueloculina auberiana 10 0.671 0.877 Peneroplis proteus 8 0.537 0.702 Quinqueloculina tricarinata 8 0.537 0.702 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 7 0.469 0.614 Peneroplis bradYi 6 0.402 0.526 Quinoueloculina bosciana 5 0.335 0.439 Pyrgo subsphaerica 5 0.335 0.439 Discorbis mira 5 0.335 0.439 Triloculina bassensis 5 0.335 0.439 Triloculina carinata 4 0.268 0.351 circularis 4 0.268 0.351 Borelis pulchra 4 0.268 0.351 Schlumbergerina alveoliniformis 3 0.201 0.263 var. occidentali Quinqueloculina bidentata 3 0.201 0.263 Triloculina trigonula 3 0.201 0.263 Pyrgo denticulata 3 0.201 0.263 Articulina mucronata 3 0.201 0.263 Nodobaculariella cassis 3 0.201 0.263 Quinqueloculina tenagos 3 0.201 0.263 Siphonina pulchra 3 0.201 0.263 Quinqueloculina horrida 3 0.201 0.263 Planorbulina medite rranensis 3 0.201 0.263 Bigenerina irregularis 2 0.134 0.175 2 0.134 0.175 Hoeglundina elegans 2 0.134 Triloculina tricarinata 2 0.134 0.175 Rosalina sp. 2 0.134 0.175 Hauerina bradYi 2 0.134 0.175 Quinqueloculina bicostata 2 0.134 0.175 Eponides 1 0.067 0.088 Quinqueloculina parkeri var. occidentalis 1 0.067 0.088 Nonion ella atlantica 1 0.067 0.088 Quinqu eloculina collumnosa 1 0.067 0.088 Heterostegina depressa

PAGE 144

APPENDIX 8 ( oontinued) SPECIES HauePina ornatissima Guttulina sp. TPiZocuZina biaaPinata CanaPis ob Zanga TPiZoauZina Zinneiana Bolivina puZcheZZa var. primitiva Bolivina ZanaeoZata EZphidium advenum WeisnereZZa auricuZata QuinqueZoauZina poZygona Artiaulina sp. QuinqueZoauZina crassa var. subcuneata OBSERVED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 % OF SAMPLE 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 116 % W/0 UNI
PAGE 145

APPENDIX 8 (oontinued) 117 'IDRI'UGAS AREA SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station D SPECIES % % OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Not Identifiable 329 22.036 0.0 Asterigerina carinata 308 20.630 26.460 Peneroplis carinatus 180 12.065 15.464 Textularia agglutinens 111 7.435 9.536 Quinoueloculina lamarckiana 102 6.832 8.763 Archaias angulatus 48 3.215 4.124 Amphistegina gibbosa 46 3.orn 3.952 Articulina pacifica 45 3.014 3.866 Archaias compressus 37 2.478 3.179 Articulina mexicana 32 2.143 2.749 Cibicides sp. 26 1.741 2.234 Quinqueloculina auberiana 24 1.608 2.062 Rotorbinella rosea 19 1.273 1.632 Elphidium discoidale 11 0.737 0.945 Discorbis mira 11 0.737 0.945 Peneroplis proteus 10 0.670 0.859 Rosalina sp. 10 0.670 0.859 Triloculina bassensis 9 0.603 0. 773 Siphonina pulchra 9 0.603 0.773 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 9 0.603 0. 773 Quinqueloculina tenagos 8 0.536 0.687 Peneroplis bradyi 7 0.469 0.601 Reussella atlantica 6 0.402 0.515 Quinqueloculina polygona 6 0.402 0.515 Triloculina carinata 5 0.335 0.430 Quinqueloculina bidentata 5 0.335 0.430 Peneroplis pertusus 5 0.335 0.430 Pyrgo subsphaerica 5 0.335 0.430 Miliolinella circularis 5 0.335 0.430 Eponides 5 0.335 0.430 Bigenerina irregularis 4 0.268 0.344 Pyrgo denticulata 4 0.268 0.344 Neoconorbina terquemi 3 0.201 0.258 Bigenerina textulareida 3 0.201 0.258 Quinqueloculina bosciana 3 0.201 0.258 Articulina mucr-onata 3 0.201 0.258 Hauerina bradyi 3 0.201 0.258 Quinqueloculina horrida 3 0.201 0.258 Guttulina sp. 3 0.201 0.258 Hauerina ornatissima 3 0.201 0.258 Planorbulina mediterranensis 2 0.134 0.172 Schlumbergerina alveoliniformis 2 0.134 0.172 var. occidentali 2 0.134 0.172 Triloculina tricarinata Quinqueloculina tricarinata 2 0.134 0.172 2 0.134 0.172 Borelis pulchra 2 0.134 0.172 Nodobaculariella cassis

PAGE 146

118 APPENDIX 8 ( a:mtinued) % % SPECIES OBSERVE D OF SA!v1PLE UNKNW Spiroloeulina arenata 2 0.13 4 0 172 Articulina sagra 2 0.134 0.172 Quinqueloculina a f Q candeiana 2 0.134 0.172 Triloculina bicarinata 1 0.067 0.08 6 Quinqueloculina collumnosa 1 0.067 0.086 Nonionel l a atlantica 1 0.067 0.086 Nonion guadeloupi 1 0.067 0.086 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 1 0.067 0.086 Spiroloculina antillarum 1 0.067 0.086 MiliolineUa fichteliana 1 0.067 0.086 T extularia conica 1 0.06 7 0.08 6 Elphidium advenum 1 0.067 0.086 Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 1 0.067 0.086

PAGE 147

APPENDIX 8 ( oontinued) 119 'IDRI'UGAS AREA SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station E % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Not Identifiable 291 19.400 0.0 Peneroplis carinatus 215 14.333 17.783 Amvhistegina gibbosa 162 10.800 13.399 Asterigerina carinata 160 10.667 13.234 Textularia agglutinens 79 5.267 6.534 Archaias angulatus 77 5.133 6.369 Articulina pacifica 61 4.067 5.045 Rotorbinella rosea 49 3.267 4.053 Articulina mexicana 35 2.333 2.895 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 32 2.133 2.647 Archaias compressus 31 2.067 2.564 Quinqueloculina auberiana 25 1.667 2.068 Discorbis mira 22 1.467 1. 820 Bore lis pulchra 19 1.267 1.572 Quinqueloculina bosciana 17 1.133 1.406 Schlumbergerina alveolinifor.mis 17 1.133 1.406 var. occidentali Cibicides sp. 14 0.933 1.158 Peneroplis proteus 12 0.800 0.993 Pyrgo denticulata 12 0.800 0.993 Hoeglundina elegans 11 0.733 0.910 Quinqueloculina bidentata 10 0.667 0.827 Pyrgo subsphaerica 9 0.600 0.744 Quinqueloculina tricarinata 8 0.533 0.662 Hauerina bradyi 7 0.467 0.579 Miliolinella circularis 7 0.467 0.579 Triloculina bassensis 7 0.467 0.579 Peneroplis bradyi 6 0.400 0.496 Quinqueloculina tenagos 6 0.400 0.496 Hauerina ornatissima 6 0.400 0.496 Articulina mucronata 6 0.400 0.496 Siphonina pulchra 6 0.400 0.496 5 0.333 0.414 Eponides 5 0.333 0.414 Rosalina sp. 5 0.333 0.414 NodObaculariella cassis Elphidium discoidale 4 0.267 0.331 4 0.267 0.331 Bigenerina textulareida 4 0.267 0.331 Triloculina carinata 4 0.267 0.331 Bigenerina irregularis 4 0.267 0.331 Triloculina bermudezi 3 0.200 0.248 Peneroplis pertusus 3 0.200 0.248 Quinoueloculina af. Q cande1-.ana 3 0.200 0.248 bicostata 3 0.200 0.248 Triloculina tricarinata 3 0.200 0.248 N e oconorbina terquemi 3 0.200 0.248 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 3 0.200 0.248 Planorbulina mediterranens1-.s

PAGE 148

120 APPENDIX 8 (continued) % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SN.PLE W/0 I lN.'Kt-W -----Heterostegina depressa 3 0.200 0.248 Weisnerella auriculata 2 0.133 0.165 Quinqueloculina collumnosa 2 0.165 Quinqueloculina polygona 2 0.133 0.165 Sorites marginalis 2 0.133 0.165 Bolivina lanceolata 2 0.133 0.165 Spiroloculina antillarum 2 0.133 0.165 Planulina exorna 1 0.067 0.083 Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 1 0.067 0.083 Reophax 1 0.067 0.083 Nonionella atlantica 1 0.067 0.083 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 1 0.067 0.083 Guttulina sp. 1 0.067 0.083 Trochammina japonica 1 0.067 0.083 Clavulina 1 0.067 0.083 Reussella atlantica 1 0.067 0.083 Nonion guadeloupi 1 0.067 0.083

PAGE 149

APPENDIX 8 (oontinued) 121 'IORI'UGAS AREA SPECIES Jl.BUNDANCE 'Ibtals For Station F % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 llNKNW Amphistegina gibbosa 250 13.103 14.741 Asterigerina carinata 227 11.897 13.384 NJt Identifiable 212 11.111 0.0 Textularia agglutinens 169 8.857 9.965 Peneroplis carinatus 128 6.709 7.547 Quinqueloculina bosciana 93 4.784 5.483 Quinqueloculina auberiana 63 3.302 3.715 Cibicides sp. 59 2.092 3.479 MiZioZineZZa circularis 52 2.725 3.066 Neoconorbina terquemi 46 2.411 2. 712 RosaZina sp. 44 2.30fi 2.594 Archaias angulatus 39 2.044 2.300 Peneroplis braayi 35 1.834 2.064 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 33 1. 730 1.946 Weisnerella auriculata 32 1.677 1.887 Planorbulina mediterranensis 30 1.572 1. 769 Pyrgo subsphaerica 21 1.101 1.238 Eponides 20 1.048 1.179 Peneroplis pertusus 17 0.891 1.002 Pyrgo denticulata 16 0.839 0.943 Nonion guadeloupi 16 0.839 0.943 Quinqueloculina polygona 16 0.839 0.943 Articulina mucronata 16 0.839 0.943 Hoeglundina elegans 16 0.839 0.943 Discorbis mira 13 0.681 0.767 Archaias compressus 12 0.629 0.708 MiZiol.ineZZa subrotunda 11 0.577 0.649 Quinqueloculina bicostata 11 0.577 0.649 Triloculina bassensis 11 0.577 0.649 Peneroplis proteus 11 0.577 0.649 Textularia sp. 10 0.524 0.590 Articulina pacifica 10 0.524 0.590 Quinqueloculina bidentata 10 0.524 0.590 Quinqueloculina bicornis 10 0.524 0.590 Miliolinella fichteliana 9 0.472 0.531 Quinqueloculina horrida 8 0.419 0.472 7 0.367 0.413 Quinqueloculina tenagos 7 0.367 0.413 Bigenerina irregularis 7 0.367 0.413 Articulina mexicana 7 0.367 0.413 Siphonina pulchra 7 0.367 0.413 Trochammina japonica 6 0.314 0.354 Quinqueloculina collumnosa 6 0.314 0.354 Spiroloculina antillarum 6 0.314 0.354 Textularia conica 5 0.262 0.295 QuinquelocuZina "Big '-:both" 5 0.262 0.295 Quinqueloculina quadrilateral&s 5 0.262 0.295 Triloculina tricarinata

PAGE 150

122 APPENDIX 8 ( oontinued) SPECIES % % OBSERVED OF S!INPLE V.l/0 UNKNW Articulina sagra 5 0.262 0.295 Triloculina bicarinata 5 0.262 0.295 Quinqueloculina poeyana 4 0.210 0.236 Planulina exorna 4 0.210 0.236 Hauerina bradyi 4 0.210 0.236 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 4 0.210 0.236 Rotorbinella rosea 3 0.157 0.177 Reophax difflugiformis 3 0.157 0.177 Triloculina carinata 2 0.105 0.118 Spiroloculina arenata 2 0.105 0.118 Spiroloculina caduca 2 0.105 0.118 Quinqueloculina crassa 2 0.105 0.118 var. subcuneata Schlumbergerina alveoliniformis 2 0.105 0.118 var. occidental Spiroloculina soldanii 2 0.105 0.118 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 2 0.105 0.118 Quinqueloculina seminulum 2 0.105 0.118 Hauerina ornatissima 2 0.105 0.118 Bolivina puchella var. primitiva 2 0.105 0.118 Nonionella atlantica 1 0.052 0.059 Triloculina rotunda 1 0.052 0.059 Heterostegina depressa 1 0.052 0.059 Spiroplectammina floridana 1 0.052 0.059 Sorites marginalis 1 0.052 0.059 Quinqueloculina agglutine ns 1 0.052 0.059 Elphidium discoidale 1 0.052 0.059 Cancris oblong a 1 0.052 0.059 Triloculina linneiana 1 0.052 0.059 Gypsina vesicularis 1 0.052 0.059 Bore lis pulchra 1 0.052 0.059 Quinqueloculina af. Q. candeiana 1 0.052 0.059

PAGE 151

APPENDIX 8 (cx:>ntinued) 123 'IDRI'UGAS AREA SPECIES Jl.BUNDANCE 'Ibtals For Station G % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Not Identifiable 304 18.905 0.0 Asterigerina carinata 202 12.562 15.491 Peneroplis carinatus 132 8.209 10.123 Amphistegina gibbosa 122 7.587 9.536 Textularia agglutinens 104 6.468 7.975 Quinqueloculina lamarckiana 73 4.540 5.598 Archaias angulatus 54 3.358 4.141 Archaias compressus 54 3.358 4.141 Articulina mexicana 49 3.047 3.758 Quinqueloculina bosciana 44 2.736 3.374 Quinqueloculina bicostata 44 2.736 3.374 Cibicides sP. 36 2.239 2.761 Quinqueloculina auberiana 30 1.866 2.301 Quinqueloculina bidentata 25 1.555 1.917 Miliolinella circularis 23 1.430 1. 764 Eponides 18 1.119 1.380 Rosalina sp. 17 1.057 1.304 Peneroplis proteus 16 0.995 1.227 Quinaueloculina horrida 15 0.933 1.150 irregularis 14 0.871 1.074 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 13 0.808 0.997 Elphidium discoidale u 0.746 0.920 Bigenerina textulareida 11 0.684 0.844 Hoeglundina elegans 10 0.622 0.767 Hauerina bradyi 9 0.560 0.690 Weisnerella auriculata 9 0.560 0.690 Articulina pacifica 9 0.560 0.690 Nonionella atlantica 8 0.498 0.613 Sorites marginalis 8 0.498 0.613 Articulina sp. 8 0.498 0.613 Schlumbergerina alveoliniformis 7 0.435 0.537 var. occidentali 0.435 0.537 Peneroplis bradyi 7 Neoconorbina terquemi 6 0.373 0.460 Articulina mucronata 6 0.373 0.460 Rotorbinella rosea 5 0.311 0.383 Triloculina bassensis 5 0.311 0.383 Planorbulina mediterranensis 5 0.311 0.383 5 0.311 0.383 Pyrgo subsphaerica 4 0.249 0.307 Trochammina japonica 4 0.249 0.307 Siphonina pulchra 4 0.249 0.307 Pyrgo denticulata 4 0.249 0.307 Nonion guadeloupi 4 0.249 0.307 Quinqueloculina polygona 4 0.249 0.307 Borelis pulchra 4 0.249 0.307 Triloculina carinata 4 0.249 0.307 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp.

PAGE 152

124 APPENDIX 8 (oontinued) SPECIES % % OB....<::ERVED OF SJIWLE W/0 UNKNVJ Gymbaloporetta squammosa 3 0.187 0.230 Triloculina tricarinata 3 0.187 0.230 Textularia conica 3 0.187 0.230 Clavulina tricarinata 3 0.187 0.230 Spiroplectammina floridana 3 0.187 0.230 spiroloculina antillarum 3 0.187 0.230 Peneroplis pertusus 3 0.187 0.230 Reussella atlantica 3 0.187 0.230 Quinqueloculina tricarinata 3 0.187 0.230 Miliolinella fichteliana 3 0.187 0.230 Elphidium advenum 3 0.187 0.230 Discorbis mira 3 0.187 0.230 Quinqueloculina crassa 2 0.124 0.153 var. subcuneata Cancris sagra 2 0.124 0.153 Monalysidium politum 2 0.124 0.153 Planulina exorna 2 0.124 0.153 Bolivina tanceolata 1 0.062 0.077 Articulina sagra 1 0.062 0.077 Elphidium sagrum 1 0.062 0.077 Bulimina sp. 1 0.062 0.077 Nodobaculariella cassis 1 0.062 0.077 Guttulina 1 0.062 0.077 Quinqueloculina tenagos 1 0.062 0.077 Spiroloculina soldanii 1 0.062 0.077 Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 1 0.062 0.077 Triloculina bermudezi 1 0.062 0.077 Quinqueloculina poeyana 1 0.062 0.077 Heterostegina depressa 1 0.062 0.077 Reophax difflugiformis 1 0.062 0.077

PAGE 153

APPENDIX 8 (oontinued) 125 'IDRI'UGAS AREA SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station H SPECIES % % OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 tlNKNW Not Identifiable 401 27.242 0.0 Amphistegina gibbosa 140 9.511 13.072 Asterigerina carinata 120 8.152 11.204 Textularia aggZutinens 104 7.065 9. 711 PeneropZis carinatus 104 7.065 9. 711 Archaias anguZatus 77 5.231 7.190 Quinque locuZina Zamarckiana 46 3.125 4.295 ArticuZina pacifica 43 2.921 4.015 Archaias compressus 41 2.785 3.828 QuinqueZocu Zina bicostata 39 2.649 3.641 QuinqueZocuZina auberiana 31 2.106 2.894 QuinqueZocuZina bosciana 22 1.495 2.054 PeneropZis proteus 22 1.495 2.054 HoegZundina eZegans 17 1.155 1.587 Cibicides sp. 16 1.087 1.494 QuinqueZocuZina bidentata 15 1.019 1.401 ArticuZina mexicana 14 0.951 1.307 EZphidium discoidaZe 14 0.951 1.307 QuinqueZocuZina horrida 14 0.951 1.307 RosaZina sp. 13 0.883 1.214 Mi Zio line Ua circuZaris 13 0.883 1.214 Textularia conica 13 0.883 1.214 PeneropZis bradYi 11 0.747 1.027 Bigenerina irregularis 10 0.679 0.934 ArticuZina mucronata 10 0.679 0.934 Nonion guadeZoupi 8 0.543 0.747 CribroeZphidium poeyanum 7 0.476 0.654 SchZumbergerina aZveoZiniformis 7 0.476 0.654 var. occidentaZi 0.560 Bigenerina textuZareida 6 0.408 NodobacuZarieZZa cassis 5 0.340 0.467 EZphidium sagrum 5 0.340 0.467 TriZocuZina bassensis 5 0.340 0.467 Pyrgo denticuZata 5 0.340 0.467 WeisnereZZa auricuZata 5 0.340 0.467 Pyrgo subsphaerica 4 0.272 0.373 Eponides 4 0.272 0.373 Neoconorbina terquemi 4 0.272 0.373 QuinqueZocuZina poZygona 4 0.272 0.373 PZanorbuZina mediterranensis 4 0.272 0.373 TriZocuZina carinata 4 0.272 0.373 QuinqueZocuZina seminulum 4 0.272 0.373 4 0.272 0.373 RotorbineZZa rosea 3 0.204 0.280 TriZocuZina beTmUdezi 3 0.204 0.280 PeneropZis pertusus 3 0.204 0.280 QuinqueZocuZina subpoeyana 3 0.204 0.280 TriZocuZina tricarinata

PAGE 154

126 APPENDIX 8 (mntinued) % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF W/0 UNKNW ------Triloculina bicarinata 3 0 204 0.280 Bolivina lanceolata 2 0 136 0.187 Trochammina japonica 2 0 136 0 .187 Quinqueloculina parkeri 2 0 136 0 187 var. occidentalis Hcruerina bradyi 2 0 136 0 .187 Spiroloculina 2 0.136 0:187 Articulina sagra 1 0.068 0.093 Heterostegina depressa 1 0.068 0 093 Elphidium advenum 1 0 068 0.093 Bolivina pulchella var. primitiva 1 0 068 0 093 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 1 0 068 0.093 Discorbis mira 1 0.068 0.093 Quinaueloculina af. Q candeiana ]_ 0 068 0.093 Spiroloculina soldanii 1 O.Ofi8 0.093 Cymbalopor etta squammosa 1 0 068 0 093 Borelis pulchra 1 0 068 0 093 Nonionella. atlantica 1 0.068 0.092 Quinqueloculina t e nagos 1 0.068 0.093

PAGE 155

APPENDIX 8 (oontinued) 127 TORI'UGr>.S AREA SPECIES ABUNDANCE Totals For Station I % % SPECIES OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Not Identifiable 490 32.732 o.o Peneroplis carinatus 107 7.148 10.626 Asterigerina carinata 70 4.676 6.951 Amphistegina gibbosa 66 4.409 6.554 Textularia agglutinens 65 4.342 6.455 Quinoueloculina lamarckiana 58 3.874 5.760 Miliolinella circularis 44 2.939 4.369 Rosalina sp. 38 2.538 3.774 Quinqueloculina bosciana 38 2.538 3. 774 Rotorbinella rosea 37 2.472 3.674 Cibicides sp. 33 2.204 3.277 Archaias compressus 30 2.004 2.979 Archaias angulatus 29 1.937 2.880 Articulina pacifica 26 1. 737 2.582 Quinqueloculina polygona 26 1. 737 2.582 Quinqueloculina auberiana 23 1.536 2.284 Peneroplis bradYi 20 1. 336 1.986 Discorbis mira 18 1.202 1. 787 Neoconorbina terquemi 18 1.202 1. 787 Eponides 17 1.136 1.688 Hauerina bradYi 16 1.069 1.589 Peneroplis pertusus 15 1.002 1.490 Bore Us pu lchra 13 0.868 1.291 Quinqueloculina bidentata 12 0.802 1.192 Hauerina ornatissima 10 0.668 0.993 Bigenerina irregularis 10 0.668 0.993 Quinqueloculina tenagos 10 0.668 0.993 Weisnerella auriculata 10 0.668 0.993 Elphidium discoidale 10 0.668 0.993 Articulina mucronata 9 0.601 0.894 Quinqueloculina horrida 9 0.601 0.894 Peneroplis proteus 8 0.534 0.794 Pyrgo subsphaerica 7 0.468 0.695 Spiroloculina arenata 6 0.401 0.596 Cymbaloporetta 6 0.401 0.596 Schlumbergerina 5 0.334 0.497 var. occidentali 4 0.267 0.397 Planorbulina medite rranensis Cancris sagra 4 0.267 0.397 4 0.267 0.397 Pyrgo denticulata 4 0.267 0.397 Triloculina carinata 4 0.267 0.397 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 4 0.267 0.397 Siphonina pulchra 4 0.267 0.397 Quinqueloculina subpoeyana 4 0.267 0.397 Spiroloculina antillarum 4 o.2n7 0.397 Quinqueloculina bicostata 4 0.267 0.397 Quinqueloculina tricarinata

PAGE 156

APPENDIX 8 ( oontinued) 128 SPECIES % % OBSERVED OF SAMPLE W/0 UNKNW Hoeglundina elegans 3 0.200 0.298 Quinqueloculina quadrilateralis 3 0.200 0.298 Elphidium sagrum 3 0.200 0.298 Triloculina bermudezi 3 0.200 0.298 Bolivina lanceolata 3 0.200 0.298 Quinqueloculina crassa 3 0.200 0.298 var. subcuneata Reussella atlantica 2 0.134 0.199 Clavu lina tricarinata 2 0.134 0.199 Nonionella atlantica 2 0.134 0.199 Triloculina bassensis 2 0.134 0.199 Nonion guadeloupi 2 0.134 0.199 Virgulina sp. = Fursenkoina sp. 2 0.134 0.199 Trochammina japonica 2 0.134 0.199 Sorites marginalis 2 0.134 0.199 Lagena laevis 1 0.067 0.099 Spirolina arietinus 1 0.067 0.099 Planorbulina acervalis 1 0.067 0.099 Articulina antillarum 1 0.067 0.099 NodObaculari ella cassis 1 0.067 0.099 Guttulina sp. 1 0.067 0.099 Quinqueloculina seminulum 1 0.067 0.099 Quinqueloculina agglutinens 1 0.067 0.099 Heterostegina depressa 1 0.067 0.099 Quinqueloculina bicarinata 1 0.067 0.099 Miliolinella fichteliana 1 0.067 0.099 Triloculina bicarinata 1 0.067 0.099 Reophax difflugiformis 1 0.067 0.099 Spiroloculina soldanii 1 0.067 0.099 SAMPLE Tal'AL = 1497

PAGE 157

128a Appendix 9. Intrastation similarity dendrograms, Tortugas Bank Area.

PAGE 158

APPENDIX 9 CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES STATION A 10 1 9 2 5 4 8 7 6 3 100 75 50 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY 129

PAGE 159

APPENDIX 9 {continued) 10 CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES STAT ION B t-1 9 t-8 1---1 r6 7 t3 2 5 4 100 L E V E L O F SIMI L ARI T Y 130

PAGE 160

131 APPENDIX 9 (continued) CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES STATION C 10 t-3 9 7 8 h 6 5 4 1-2 1 100 75 50 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY

PAGE 161

APPENDIX 9 (continued} CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES-STATION D 10 9 3 4 5 1 8 7 2 6 132 100 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY

PAGE 162

APPEr\lJ)IX 9 (continued) CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES-STATION E 10 8 7 6 1-----1 ......., 1 4 3 r5 2 9 100 75 50 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY 133

PAGE 163

APPENDIX 9 (continued) 134 CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES -STAT ION F 9 4 6 8 r-5 r-2 r--1 1 7 3 100 75 50 25 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY

PAGE 164

APPENDIX 9 (continued) CLASSIFICATIO N OF REPLICATES-S TATION G 10 9 t"8 r6 r 4 7 r2 1 5 3 100 25 135

PAGE 165

APPENDIX 9 (continued) CLASSIFICATION OF REPLICATES STATION I 10 8 r 4 t--t2 5 1 9 3 6 7 L. 75 100 LEVEL OF SIMILARITY 136

PAGE 166

w (!) 100 z < a: :I: 90 (.) < w z 80 C/) w :::l 70 ...J < > X 60 w 0 >50 !:: a: < ...J 40 C/) u. 30 0 ... z w 20 (.) a: w Q.. 10 0 0-10 TORTUGAS BANK AREA DISTRIBUTION OF SIMILARITY COEFFICIENTS AMONG THE TEN REPLICATES FROM EACH OF NINE STATIONS STATION KEY A --B c D ---------E -F G ---H ..... ........... I ----10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 CZEKANOWSKI SIMILARITY INDEX VALUES GROUPED IN RANGES OF TEN 70-80 80-90 90-100

PAGE 167

APPENDIX 11 Frequen::y of foraminiferal tests per square meter of sea floor* in the Tortugas Bank area x 106 Replicate Number A B c D E F G H I 1 37.5 9.4 18.8 37.5 12.5 5 : o 4.2 37.5 2 37.5 12.5 37.5 150.0 9.4 3.8 4.2 37.5 3 50.0 12.5 25.0 150.0 9.4 7.5 2.9 37.5 4 25.0 7.5 37.5 250.0 9.4 2.4 3.0 37.5 5 37.5 6.3 37.5 150.0 9.4 7.5 2.1 15.0 6 37.5 12.5 37.5 150.0 7.5 12.5 2.4 15.0 7 37.5 10.7 37.5 150.0 10.7 5.0 5 4 9.4 8 37.5 30.0 37.5 150.0 7.5 2.9 2.5 9.4 9 37.5 10.7 50.0 150.0 12.5 6.3 3.0 25.0 10 37.5 25.0 25.0 150.0 9.4 10.7 2.5 6.3 Average 37.5 13.7 34.4 148.8 9.8 6.4 3.2 23.0 *Assuming the density of tests is uniform to at least 5 em of sediment depth and ignoring all below 5 em (a conservative estimate). ....... w 00

PAGE 168

APPENDIX 12 Frequency of Species Found Living at Tortugas Stations SPECIES A B c D E F G H I Amphistegina gibbosa 3 2 Archaias angulatus 1 1 Archaias compressus 1 Asterigerina carinata 24 11 24 5 15 61 21 38 4 Bulimina sp. 1 Cancris oblonga 1 1 Cancris sagra 1 Cibicides sp. 2 1 10 7 2 1 3 2 Cribroelphidium poeyanum 1 1 Discorbis mira 1 1 Hoeglundina elegans 1 3 2 Nonion guadeloupi 1 2 8 8 Peneroplis bradyi 1 1 1 1 Peneroplis carinatus 1 1 4 Reussella atlantica 1 1 Rotorbinella rosea 2 1 Rosalina sp. 2 3 2 2 Trochmmina japonica 1 'Ibta1 :NJ Living at Station 28 20 42 12 21 89 21 55 11 'Ibtal :NJ Counted at Station 1501 1502 1491 1493 1500 1908 1608 1472 1497 Percent Living at Station 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.01

PAGE 169

APPENDIX 13 FIDRIDA MIDDLE GROUNDS Station Totals as Percent in Sul::order STATIONS 111 211 311 411 122 422 131 232 141 241 341 441 Miliolina Conn ted 440 919 84H 815 924 702 416 505 461 516 563 494 Percent 29.6 34.2 35.4 34.5 39.5 38.1 30 8 38.0 33.3 37.9 39.4 35.9 Rotaliina Conn ted 920 1520 1225 1321 1185 969 789 700 8121 757 709 749 Percent 62.0 56.6 51.2 55.9 50.7 52.5 58.4 52.6 58.8 55.6 49.6 54.5 Textulariina Oonnted 124 246 319 228 230 174 147 125 110 93 156 132 Percent 8.4 9.2 13.3 9.6 9.8 9.4 10.9 9.4 7.9 6.8 10.9 9.6

PAGE 170

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. APPENDIX 14 FORAMINIFERAL SP:OCIFS PHESENT ON ONE OF THE STUDY STATIONS ONLY Only on the Florida Middle Grounds bradyi 1. Only on the Tortugas Bank Area Stations Artieulina antillarum 141 Nodosaria sp. 2. Bolivina pulehella var. primitiva Oo Zina bexagona 3. Clavulina difformis Quinque Zoeu Zina 4. Elphidium sagrum Q. Zaevigata 5. Gypsina vesieularis Sagrina pulehel la 6. Heterostegina depressa var. primitiva 7. Monalysidium politum Sigmoilina 8. Nodobaeulariella eassis Sigmoilopsis sehlumbergeri 9. Planorbulina aeervalis Siphoninoides eehinata 10. Pyrgo e Zongata Spirillina obeoniea 11. Quinqueloeulina agglutinens s. vivipara 12. Q. biearinata Spiroloeulina sp. 13. Q. bidentata 14. Q. parkeri var. oeeiden taUs 15. Q. quadrilateralis 16. Q. seminulum 17. Q. tenagos 18. Reophax difflugiformis 19. Sehlumbergerina alveoliniforms 20. spirolina arietinus 21. spiroloeulina arenata 22. s. eaduea 23. Triloeulina bassensis 24. T. bermudezi 25. T. biearinata 26. T. earinata 27. T. Zinneiana 28. T. rotunda 29. T. trigonula

PAGE 171

Appendix 15. Electron rrj_crographs of species which represent at least 0. 5 % of the thanatocoenose at one station or rrore. 1 4.2

PAGE 172

l>ppendix 15 PlATE 1 Figures A1B 1C Amphistegina gibbosa Figures D1E1F Hoeglundina elegans Figures G1H1I1J Arehaias angulatus Figures K1L1M Arehaias eompressus Figures N101P1Q Peneroplis carinatus Figure R Peneroplis proteus Figure s Peneroplis pertusus Figure T SpiriZZina vivipara 143 scale bar A1C = 100 1 B = 200 scale bar D1F = 100 1 E = 200 scale bar = 100 scale barK = 200 1 L1M = 50 scale bar N = 50 1 0 = 100 P1Q = 200 scale bar = 100 scale bar = 50 scale bar = 50

PAGE 173

144

PAGE 174

Figures A,B,C,D Figures E,F Figures G,H Figure I Figures J,K Figures L,M Figure N Figures O,P Figures Q Figures R,S Figure T l4S Appendix lS (continued) PLATE 2 Textularia agglutinens scale bar = 100 Textularia scale bar E = F = Bigen erina textulaPeida scale bar = 200 Bigenerina sp. scale bar = 200 Quinqueloculina hoPrida scale bar = 100 Quinque loculina lamaPckiana scale bar L = 100 M = SO Quinqueloculina bicostata scale bar = 100 Quinqueloculina bosciana scale bar = SO Quinqueloculina auberiana scale bar = 100 Bolivina l anceolata scale bar = SO Reussella atlantica scale bar = 50

PAGE 175

146

PAGE 176

147 Appendix 15 (a:mtinU2d) PlATE 3 Figure A WeisnereLLa auriculata scale bar = 50 Figures B,C Articulina pacifica scale bar B = 100 C= 50 Figures D,E,F,G Articulina mucronata scale bar D,E,F = 100 G= 50 Figures H,I Hauerina ornatissima scale bar H = 25 I= 50 Figures J,K Hauerina b radyi scale bar = 50 Figures L,M,N Nonion guadeloupi scale bar L,M = 50 N= 100 Figure 0 NonioneLLa atlantica scale bar = 50 Figures P,Q,R Neoconorbina terquemi scale bar = 50 Figures S,T Eponides scale bar S = 50 T = 25

PAGE 177

148

PAGE 178

Figures A,B Figures C,D,E Figures F,G,H Figure I Figures J Figure K Figure L Figures M,N Fi. gures o, P Fi. gures Q, R Figures S,T Appendix 15 ( cnntinUed) PLATE 4 CribroeZphidium poeyanum EZphidium discoidaZe Cibicides sp. Discorbis mira Cancris ob Zanga RotorbineZZa rosea Rosalina sp. circuZaris fichteZiana subrotunda Pyrgo denticuZata scale bar = 50 scale bar C = 100 D,E = 50 scale bar = 50 scale bar = 50 scale bar = 50 scale bar = 50 scale bar = 50 scale bar = 50 scale bar 0 = 100 p = 50 scale bar Q = 50 R = 100 scale bar = 100 149

PAGE 179

150

PAGE 180

Figure A Figures B,C Figures D,E,F,G,H Figure I Figures J,K,L 151 Appendix 15 ( mntinued) PlATE 5 Spiroloculina antillarum scale bar = 100 Spiroloculina soldanii scale bar = 100 BoreUs pulchra scale bar = 50 Planorbulina mediterranensis scale bar= 100 PlanuUna exorna scale bar J,K = 100 L = 50

PAGE 181

152