NOAA Technical Report NMFS Circular 433 

Synopsis of Biological Data on 

Striped Bass, Morone saxatilis 

(Walbaum) 

Eileen M. Setzler, Walter R. Boynton, 

Kathryn V. Wood, Henry H. Zion, 

Lawrence Lubbers, Nancy K. Mountford, 

Phyllis Frere, Luther Tucker, and 

Joseph A. Mihursky 

June 1980 

FAO Synopsis No. 121 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Philip M. Klutznick, Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Richard A. Frank, Administrator 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

Terry L. Leitzeli, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries 
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) does not approve, recommend or endorse any proprietary product or proprietary material 

mentioned in this publication. No reference shall be made to NMFS, or 

to this publication furnished by NMFS, in any advertising or sales promotion which would indicate or imply that NMFS approves, recommends 

or endorses any proprietary product or proprietary material mentioned 

herein, or which has as its purpose an intent to cause directly or indirectly 

the advertised product to be used or purchased because of this NMFS 

publication. 
CONTENTS 

Introduction ....................... . . . .......... .. . .. .. .. .. ... . .......... ..... ....... 1 

1 Identity ............. . ..................................................... ......... 2 

1.1 Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

1.11 Valid name ......... . ..................... .................................. 2 

1.12 Objective synonymy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

1.2 Taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

1.21 Affinities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

1.22 Taxonomic status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

1.23 Subspecies ............. ........... .. ........ .... ... .. ...................... 5 

1.24 Standard common names, vernacular names. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

1.3 Morphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

1.31 External morphology ......................................................... 5 

1.32 Cytomorphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

1.33 Protein specificity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

1.34 Aging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

1.35 Osteology ..... ...... ..................... .. .............. ... ... ............ 7 

1.36 Blood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

2 Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

2.1 Total area .. . .. .. ....... . .......................... ... ...... ..... ... ............ 8 

2.2 Differential distribution .......... ..... .. .. ..... ................................... 9 

2.21 Larvae and juveniles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

2.22 Adults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

2.3 Determinants of distribution changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

2.4 Hybridization . ......................... ... ......... .... ............... ..... ..... 11 

2.41 Hybrids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

2.42 Influence of natural hybridization in ecology and morphology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

3 Bionomics and life history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

3.1 Reproduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

3.11 Sexuality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

3.12 Maturity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

3.13 Mating ............ . ........ ... . ...... ...... ............................... 13 

3.14 Fertilization .... ........... . ............... . . .......... .. ................... 13 

3.15 Gonads .............................................. .... ............ ...... 13 

3.16 Spawning .... . .... .. ........ . ..... ......................................... 13 

3.17 Spawn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 

3.2 Preadult phase .................. ......... ... .................................... 15 

3.21 Embryonic phase ................................................... ......... 15 

3.22 Larval phase .. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 

3.23 Juvenile phase . . .. . .. .. . ...... ..... ..... .................................... 22 

3.3 Adult phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 

3.31 Longevity ..................................... .................. .. ......... 29 

3.32 Hardiness ........................................ ..... ............... ...... 29 

3.33 Competitors .............................................. ........ ... ....... 29 

3.34 Predators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 

3.35 Parasites, diseases, injuries, and abnormalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 

3.4 Nutrition and growth ............................... .... ................... ....... 33 

3.41 Feeding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 

-3.42 Food .... .. . .... . ....... . ..... .... ...... ... ................................ 33 

3.43 Growth rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 

3.44 Metabolism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

3.5 Behavior ................................................. ...................... 40 

3.51 Migrations and local movements ................ ...... .... ..... ...... ........... 40 

3.52 Schooling ................ .... ... ........................................... 42 

3.53 Responses to stimuli. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

4 Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

4.1 Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

4.11 Sex ratio ...... .. .. ........ .. .... .... ....................................... 43 

4.12 Age composition .......................... ................. ..... ............. 44 

III 
"L1:~ Size conlposition ............................•....................... 

4.2 Abundanc' and den ity (01 populutlonl ...... ....................•.... . 

4.21 A verngc a bund IIH" ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • ••••• 

·1.22 Changes in ubundllnc' ................. .......... . ....... . 

4.2:l Average densltv. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ., ............•. 

·1.24 (,hange in den ity .................... . .... . ......... . 

"I.:~ • 'nlnlity nnd ret'ruilment . ...•. .......... ... ... . ...... . 

1.:\1 Reprodul'tion raIl .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •.. . . .•.•. 

·1.~~2 FIll'lllr ulfer! Illg rl'produl'llllll ...........•. 

4.:1:\ Ht'CfUIlrnent ................... . 

4..1 !\1()rlaltt IIld morhldll ..... . 

.S 

1.41 

4. 2 

.4J 

. 4 

5 E. ploit Will. . •.•.... 

5.1 Fishtng qUlpmenl 

5.11 (, r ..... 

5.2 

6.2 

5 12 H t • 

6.2~ 

6.23 

6.24 

6.25 Fl h. creen ................................ . 

6.26 lmpro\ ement of p8.,.;ntng gr und • 

6.27 Habitat improv ment 

6.3 ontrol or alteration of the chemical featur ofth m,ronm nt ..... ...........•. . ..... . 

6.31 \\'ater pollution control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 

6.32 alinity control. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ...... . .......•............................. 

6.33 Artificial fertilization of water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . •......................... 

6.4 Control or alteratIOn of the biological feature ot the em. ironment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . .. 

6.41 ontrol of aquatic vegetation· 

55 

55 

55 

55 

6.42 Introduction of fi h food ...................... ............................... 56 

6.43 Control of para ite and di ea e • 

6.44 Control of predation and competition· 

6.45 Population manipulation· 

6.5 Artificial stocking ............................................................... 57 

6.51 Maintenance stocking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 

6.52 Transportation; introduction ................................................... 57 

7 Pond fish culture .................................................................... 57 

7.1 Use of cultured fish .......... ..... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 

7.2 Procurement and maintenance of stock .............................................. . 

7.3 Genetic selection of stock· 

iv 
7.4 Spawning ...................................................... ................ 5 

7.5 Pond management .................................................... ........... 59 

7.6 Foods; feeding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 

7.7 Diseases and parasites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 

7.8 Harvest ........... : .................... ........................................ 60 

7.9 Transport ................................................................... ... 60 

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 

Literature cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 

• As no information was available, these sections were omitted. 

v 
· Synopsis of Biological Data on 

Striped Bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum)l 

EILEENM. SETZLER,2 WALTERR. BOYNTON. KATHRYNV. WOOD,2 

HENRY H. ZION,2 LAWRENCE LUBBERS,2 NANCY K. MOUNTFORD,2 

PHYLLIS FRERE,4 LUTHER TUCKER,2 and JOSEPH A. MIHURSKy2 

ABSTRACT 

This synopsis reviews literature on the taxonomy, morphology, distribution , life history, population, ecology, recreational and commercial harvest, and culture of the striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum). 

The striped bass is an anadromous species distributed along the Atlantic coast from northern 

Florida to the St. Lawrence Estuary. Canada; along the Gulf of Mexico from western Florida to eastern Louisiana; and along the Pacific coast from Ensenada, Mexico, to British Columbia, Canada. 

Populations have been established in numerous inland reservoirs and lakes. Striped bass spawn from 

mid-February in Florida until June or July in Canadian waters, and from mid-March to late July in 

California waters. Spawning occurs at or near the surface in fresh or nearly fresh waters at temperatures from 10° to 23 °C; peak spawning usually occurs between 15 ° and 20°C. Yolk-sac larvae (prolarvae) range from 2.0 to 3.7 mm TL (total length) at hatching. Larval feeding is usually initiated from 

4 to 10 days after hatching. At about 13 mm TL, larval striped bass form small schools and move inshore; during their first summer, juvenile fish move downstream into higher salinity waters in many 

areas. Most estuarine stocks of striped bass along the Atlantic coast are involved in two types of migration: the upstream spring spawning migration and the offshore coastal migrations which apparently are not associated with spawning activity. Male striped bass reach sexual maturity at an 

earlier age than females; most males are mature in 2 yr and females in their fourth or fifth year. 

INTRODUCTION 

The necessity of assessing the effects of man's increasing perturbation of estuaries upon populations of 

anadromous fish, which utiliLoe the upper portion of estuaries as spawning and nursery grounds, has initiated 

much study and research by a myriad of governmental, 

university, and private consulting agencies in the 

United States. Much of this collective effort has aimed 

at a better understanding of both the basic biology and 

the population dynamics of the striped bass, Morone 

saxatilis (Walbaum), one of the most important commercial and recreational species along the mid-Atlantic 

coast. 

The widespread interest in this species has resulted in 

the publication of three excellent bibliographies within 

the last several years: Pfuderer et al. (1975); Rogers 

and Westin (1975); and Horseman and Kernehan 

1 Contribution No. 802, Center for Environmental and Estuarine 

Studies, University of Maryland . 

'University of Maryland CEES, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, 

Box 38, Solomons, MD 20688. 

' University of Maryland CEES, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, 

Solomons, Md.; present address: Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia , Benedict Estuarine Research Laboratory, Benedict, MD 20612. 

'University of Maryland CEES, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, 

Box 38, Solomons, Md .; present address: 1230 Sanders Street, Auburn, 

AL 36830. 

1 

(1976). There are no recent reviews of striped bass literature although a number of older, but excellent, reviews are available. One of the most intensive summaries of striped bass biology and life history was made 

by Raney (1952). Earlier life histories were written by 

Scofield (1931), Pearson (1938), and Merriman (1941). 

Even a cursory examination of the listings of published 

papers and reports in the bibliographies previously mentioned reveals a great need to review the current literature and put it into perspective. 

This literature review was initiated by the staff of the 

Hallowing Point Field Station, Chesapeake Biological 

Laboratory, in conjunction with a population dynamics 

study of striped bass eggs, larvae, and juveniles on the 

Potomac River, Md. The original intent of the review 

was to familiarize ourselves with the available literature so that we could better interpret and analyze the 

findings of our own study. But, as our review increased 

in both depth and scope, we realized that a formal presentation of our efforts would be appropriate. Thus, this 

striped bass literature review has evolved, a collective 

contribution from the Hallowing Point staff. 

This review follows the F AO species synopsis format 

prescribed by Rosa (1965). The primary purpose of these 

synopses is to make existing information readily available according to a standard pattern and to indicate 

gaps in knowledge of the biology of the species considered. 
1 IDENTITY 

1.1 Nomenclature 

1.11 Valid name 

Morone saxatilis (Walbaum 1792) 

1.12 Objective synonymy 

Perca Rock-fish vel triped Bass chopf 1788:160, • ew 

York. 

Perca saxatilis Walbaum 1792:::130, ew York, after 

Schopf. 

Morone saxatili (Walbaum) Berg 1949:101::1. 

1.2 Taxonomy 

1.21 Affinitie 

uprageneric 

Phvlum Chordata 

ubphylum Vertebrata 

Cia. 0 teichthye. 

ubc\a Actinopterygii 

Order Perciforme 

Family Percichthyidae ((;( line 1 

prior to 19 placed in Family 

erranidael 

Genu Morone 

pecies ."vforoneaxatili 

Generic 

Morone Mitchill 1 14. 

The generic concept u ed i that of Woolcott 1957. 

The following generic description i from Jordan and 

Evermann 1896:1127: 

"Anal spines 3, well developed . Dorsal fin 2; vertebrae 25 to 36, 11 to 15 in precaudal po ition. Maxillary 

without supplemental bone; teeth all pointed, pectoral 

unsymmetrical, its upper rays longest; dorsal X-14; 

skull without cavernous structure; preopercle trongly 

serrate; caudal fin forked; tongue with teeth, ventral 

fins inserted behind axil of pectorals; teeth all alike, 

usually villiform, without canines, preorbital narrow; 

lateral line normal, straight or bent upward at base; preopercle serrate; gill rakers moderately long and slender; 

species generally of large size and silvery-olive coloration, mostly inhabiting fresh or bracki9h waters. 

Preopercle without antrorse spines on its lower 

limb." 

The type-species designations given below are from 

Whitehead and Wheeler (1966) : 

Morone Mitchill 1814; a composite genus containing 

2 

(w(J , rranidR and a pecie each of Perea and Lppom~, 

o typ.d ignalion was made . 

M orone: (Milchill) GilllR60; name used in a restricted 

cnR' [()r se rranid fiRhe . Type-speci Dabrax mucronatus Rafin qu 1 18, by de ignation a yn(mym of 

Moron,. nm('ric:ana CGmelin 1788). 

Mitchill (J 14) prop< d th name Mor JnP on the 

mi tuk n impr' inn that th pelvi (v ntral) fin were 

ahdominal in p<) ition, in ontra t to their thoracic Ilion in lhe g nu Perea 

In Mitchill' full account of th fi h of 1 ' ew York, 

pubh her! a year later ( it hill 1 1 ,he placed the pecic whi h h had earli r ign d to Moron in the 

g nu H"dlanu bllt withou comment. How ver, it can 

h inf rr d, from hi, tr atm nt of th genu Rocc two 

pug earlier, that h r ulized hi error c nc ming pelvic 

fin p< ition in hi origin I diagn i of for n • and that 

the near I thoraci /It nu kno .... n to hIm at that time 

we Hodwnu (;ill 1 ) di u d thi err rand 

r n !med th t, 1itchill' 'pe i of Moronp 

",h \' th normal ventral of Perea) 

th refor [Moron,7 of 1iu:hill wa a mer ynon my of 

F'erca I inna u I" (\\ hit head and Wh ler 1 :25. 

I 11tchill tl"J4) li,ted four peci und r forone from 

\\hiteh d nd Wh I r 1 /: 

1) M palildo "GIll (l identified ,\f pallida 

r-.ht hill m t likely a Junio r yn nym of ,\1 am ricanil ((.m 1m) . • Jordan and Eigenmann (l ) and 

.J lrdan nd Evermann (1 ) 101101'.' ,ill ith ut comment; (,unther (l -9) and Boulenger 1 5) arrived at 

th ame c nc\u. ion." WhItehead and \\'heeler 1966: 

J. 

2) .\f. rufa. "0 Kay (l 

brax rufu and Gunther (1 

(l ;)) and .Jordan and Evermann (1 place it as a 

'nonym of Aforone americana ( melin)." (Whitehead 

and Wheeler 1966:27.) 

3) .\1. flave eeru = Perea flave ceru, yellow perch. 

4) M . mawlata = Lepomi gibbo u. pumpkineed. "DeKay (1 2) wa the first author to review all 

the specie included by Mitchill in the genu forone. 

but he did not u e Mitchill' genu, placing the two 

. erranid pecie in the genu Labra:c CUVler." Gill 

(1 60) di cu ed the y tematic tatu of Marone 5t 

length in a Monograph of the genus Labrax CUl;ier in 

which he con idered the six pecies placed in Labrax by 

uvier. "Gill recognized the compo ite nature of Mitchill's Marone," and employed the name Morone in a restricted sen e "for the serranid fishes M . rufa Mitchill 

and M . pallida Mitchill, both of which, together with 

the type of the genus which he had just proposed, M . 

macronatus (Raf.) he referred to the synonymy of M. 

amencana (Gmelin 1788)." (Whitehead and Wheeler 

1966:28.) 

The genus Marone comprises four American species 

(Berg 1949; Woolcott 1957; Bailey et al. 1970): 
Morone americana (Gmelin) white perch; Atlantic, 

fresh water. 

M. chrysops (Rafinesque) white bass, fresh water. 

M. mississippiensis (Jordan and Eigenmann) yellow 

bass, fresh water. 

M. saxatilis (Walbaum) striped bass, Atlantic, fresh 

water, Pacific. 

and two European species (Bailey et aI. 1954; Woolcott 

1957): 

M . labrax (Linnaeus) found along coast of Europe 

from Norway to the Black Sea. 

M . punctatus (Bloch) inhabits Mediterranean Sea and 

the Atlantic Ocean from Senegambia to the Bay of 

Biscay. 

Roccus Mitchill 1814 

(no type-species designated) 

Mitchill (1814) proposed the genus Roccus for the 

same reasons he had proposed Morone viz. on the basis 

of a mistaken appreciation of the pelvic fin position. He 

included two species in the genus Roccus: 

1) Roccus striatus, striped bass. 

2) R. comas-Mitchill (1815) later renamed this sciaenid fish as Labrus squeteague. Gill (1860) and Jordan 

and Evermann (1898) placed this species in the synonymy of Cynoscion regalis (Bloch) Schneider, weakfish. 

Morone verSus Roccus 

"The earliest revisers of these species were DeKay 

(1842) and Gunther (1859) who combined them in a 

single genus Labrax. Unfortunately neither author gave 

a generic synonymy, so that there is no indication of 

their views on the priority of one Mitchill name over the 

other." (Whitehead and Wheeler 1966:32.) Bleeker 

(1876:263) was the first reviewer to combine the two 

Mitchill names. He gave Morone Mitchill priority over 

Roccus Mitchill and cited Morone americana Gill = 

Morone ruia Mitchill as type species. Boulenger 

(1895:125) combined both European and American species in the genus Morone Mitchill and gave a full synonymy with Roccus Mitchill as a junior synonym. Berg 

(1949) and Bailey (1951) both gave priority to Morone 

versus·Roccus. 

Specific 

Type-specimens: None designated. 

Type-locality: New York State (Walbaum 1792). 

Table 1 summarizes meristic counts and proportional 

measurements of striped bass. 

The following species diagnosis for adult specimens is 

quoted from Hardy (1978:87). See also Figure 1. 

"Body elongate, moderately compressed; back slight3 

ly arched; nape not noticeably depressed; gape to middle of eye; gill rakers long and slender; teeth small, 

present in bands on jaws, vomer, palatines, and in two 

parallel patches on tongue; 2 sharp spines on margins 

of opercle; margins of preopercle clearly serrate. 

"Scales extended on to all fins except spinous dorsal. 

Dorsal fins clearly separated, approximately equal; 

caudal forked. 

"Light green, dark olive green, silvery green, silvery 

with brassy or coppery reflections, to steel blue or 

almost black above; lighter below. Sides silvery with 7 or 

8 usually uninterrupted horizontal dark stripes one of 

which always follows the lateral line and all but the lowest of which lie above the level of the pectoral fins. Three 

to four stripes above lateral line, 3 below. Belly whitish 

or silvery with brassy reflections. Vertical fins dusky 

green to black, ventrals white to dusky, pectorals 

greenish. " 

Subjective synonymy 

Sciaena lineata Bloch 1792:53, pI. 305. 

Perca septentrionalis Bloch and Schneider 1801:90, 

pI. 20, New York. 

Centropomis lineatus Lacepede 1802:257. 

Roccus striatus Mitchill 1814:25, New York; Bean 

1885:242-244, Alabama. 

Perca mitchilli MitchillI815:413, pI. 3, fig. 4, New York. 

Perca mitchilli interupta MitchillI815:I, 415, New York. 

Perc a mitchilli alternata MitchillI815:I, 415, New York. 

Lepibema mitchilli Rafinesque 1820:23. 

Labrax lineatus Cuvier and Valenciennes 1828:79-83. 

Roccus lineatus Gill 1860:112. 

Lepibema lineatum Steindachner 1962:504. 

Roccus lineatus (Bloch) Gill. Goode and Bean 1880:145; 

Jordan and Gilbert 1882:529. 

Roccus septentrionalis Jordan 1886:72-73. 

Table I.-Meristic counts and proportional measurements of striped 

bass, summarized by Hardy 1978. 

D1 VIll·IX 

D2 I, 9-14 (Chesapeake Bay Dl IX, 02 10-14 soft rays) . 

Mode D2 rays; 11 in Hudson River, 12 elsewhere. 

A Ill, 7-13 (Chesapeake Bay 9-12). 

Mode number anal rays; 11. 

C 17, 15 branched. 

P 13-19 (including Chesapeake Bay). 

V I, 5. 

Lateral line scales 50-72 (Chesapeake Bay 53-65, western Florida and 

Alabama 63-72, all other populations combined 50-67). 

Scales above lateral line: at midbody 9-13, below 13-16; at caudal 

peduncle 11-13, below 12-15. 

Total gill rakers first arch 19-29, upper arm 6-12, lower arm 12-15 

(mean number gill rakers, Chesapeake Bay, upper arm 9.49-9.77, 

lower arm 12.61-13.07). 

Branchiostegal rays 7. 

Total vertebrae 24-25 (usually 25; 12 + 13). 

Proportions as times in standard length: 

Greatest depth 3.45-4.20. 

Average depth at caudal peduncle 9.6, anus 3.9. 

Head length 2.9-3.25. 

Proportions as times in head length: 

Eye 3.0-4.9. 
Ro u 

1 

\1 r n 

c 

1. 3 mm. 

1.6 mm. 

hRun° 1.-\lurphololf\ of striped bas (Morone sa.ratilis); adult and prolarva: a. Adult (Goode 1884, plate 170). b. Unfcrt.llzl'd ('j(~, diameter 1.:1 mm c. Blastodisc, ca. 20-40 min. after fertilization, diameter 1.6 mm. d. Yolk-sac larva, 

n nth hlltd,l'd, :l.:\ mm. S, c, and d (!Io1ansueti 195 s, fig. 2, 3, 17). 

Ilfl atu (Bloch 1, .Jordan and Eigenmann 

23, .Jordan nd Evermann 1 96:1132-1133. 

lin ata Houlenger 1 95. at. I, 129. 

Wheeler 

nne 

trior x· 

ten ion, adults without black spots on upper part 

of body. 

Marone labrax (Linn. 1758) 

"b. Lateral line cales 57-65 (Mode 60); vomerine 

tooth patch anchor- haped; adults with small 

bla k pot on upper part of body. 

M. punctatus (Bloch 1792) 

"II. Lower border of preoperculum with mall denticulation directed downwards; Western Atlantic, eastern and southern orth America. 

"a, Dor;;al fin. "eparate; anal pine increa ingly 

ven in length; two :harp spine on hind border of 

() rculum: t th on b se of tongue (Raccus Mithilll. 
"i. Body elongate, its depth more than three 

times in its length; lateral line scales 57-67; 

teeth at base of tongue in two parallel 

patches; marine and, estuarine. 

M. saxatilis (W al b. 1792) 

"ii. Body deeper, its depth less than three times in 

its length; lateral line scales 52-58; teeth at 

base of tongue in a single series; fresh water. 

M . chrysops (Raf. 1820) 

"b. Dorsal fins connected; second anal spine almost 

equal in length to the third spine; a single sharp 

spine on the hind border of the operculum; teeth 

present along edges of tongue but not at base 

(Marone Mitchill). 

"i. Longest dorsal spine about half head length; 

faint streaks on flanks; marine and fresh 

water. 

M. americana (Gmelin 1788) 

"ii. Longest dorsal spine greater than half head 

length; seven distinct longitudinal lines on 

flanks, interrupted posteriorly; freshwater, or 

lower Mississippi valley. 

M. mississippiensis Jordan & Eigenmann 

1887." 

There appear to be major problems associated with 

he use of hatchery-raised striped bass as specimens in 

taxonomic keys. The available taxonomic keys give conicting descriptions of striped- bass larvae. Some of 

these descriptions (Ryder 1887; Mansueti 1958a; Dorohev 1970; Lippson and Moran 19745

; Hardy 1978) are 

ased on hatchery-raised fish. Using the available keys, 

ihursky et al. (1976)6 were not able to conclusively disinguish some Marone spp. (striped bass and white 

erch) between 8 and 14 mm TL (total length). 

1.22 Taxonomic status 

This is a morphospecies, and it is polytypic. 

1.23 Subspecies 

None. See section 1.31 for a discussion of populations. 

1,24 Standard common names, vernacular names 

Striped bass, rock, rockfish, striper, linesides, and 

sewer trout (New England). 

'Lippson, A. J., and R. L. Moran. 1974. Manual for identification of 

arly developmental stages of fishes in the Potomac River estuary. Md. 

ep. Nat. Resour., Power Plant Siting Program, PPSP-MP-13, 282 p. 

6Mihursky, J. A., W. R. Boynton, E. M. Setzler, K. V. Wood, H. H. 

Zion, E. W. Gordon, L. Tucker, P. Pulles, and J. Leo. 1976. Final 

eport on Potomac estuary fisheries study; ichthyoplankton and juvenile 

investigations. Univ. Md. CEES Ref. No. 76-12-CBL, 241 p. Chesaeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 20688. 

5 

1.3 Morphology 

1.31 External morphology 

See Table 1. 

A number of the morphological studies have been conducted on the genus Marone (Roccus). Based on skeletal examinations, Woolcott (1957) concluded that 

striped bass, Marone saxatilis; white bass, M, chrysops; white perch, M. americanus; yellow bass, M, interruptus (mississippiensis); and European bass, M, labrax (dicentrarchus) should all be in the same genus. 

Faulkner (1952) found that striped bass, yellow bass, 

white perch, and white bass were all interspecifically related based on retinal examination. 

Beitch (1963) concluded that striped bass and white 

perch belong to the same genus based on the histomorphological similarity of the urinary systems. 

Populations 

A number of distinct striped bass populations are 

found on the Atlantic coast based on fin ray counts 

(Table 2), morphometric characters, and electrophoretic differences. During spawning season many of the 

major rivers contain discrete populations of striped 

bass. However, during the remainder of the year a 

number of neighboring river populations may school together forming "cohorts" to use Morgan's terminology.7 

Striped bass populations described in the literature 

include the following: 

a. Alabama River, Ala. (Brown 1965). 

b. Appalachicola River, Fla. Differs from Alabama 

River population in number of soft dorsal and anal rays 

and from St. Johns River population in number of 

lateral line scales, soft dorsal, anal rays, and character 

index (Barkuloo 1970; Table 2). 

c. St. Johns River, Fla. (Barkuloo 1970). 

d. Santee-Cooper River system, S.C. Results of fin 

ray counts (Raney and Woolcott 1955) and tagging 

studies indicate there is little exchange between the 

downstream Cooper River striped bass which enter the 

brackish waters of the estuary and the reservoirs above 

Pinopolis Dam where the fish complete their entire life 

cycle in freshwater. The lower river population does not 

appear to make coastal migrations and probably does 

not mix with other stocks (Scruggs and Fuller 1955). 

Striped bass collected below Pinopolis Dam differed in 

body depths and caudal peduncle depths than fish collected upstream (Lund 1957). Striped bass from the 

Santee-Cooper River system have the lowest gill raker 

counts along the Atlantic coast (Lewis 1957; Table 2). 

e. Cape Fear, S.C. Based on lateral line counts, 

Murawski (1958) concluded that the Cooper, Cape Fear, 

and Satilla-St. Johns populations of the Southern 

Atlantic Bight were mutually distinct. 

' R. P. Morgan II, UMCEES - AEL, Frostburg State College, Gunter 

Hall, Frostburg, MD 21532, pers. commun. Winter 1975. 
Table 2.-Meristic characters (mean count ±2 standard errors) of striped bass from various populations. ND = no data. 

-- ---

Character index 

Dorsal fins (sum of soft rays of 

Gill rakers Lateral line 1st dorsal 2d dorsal dorsal, anal, and 

Station Total no.' scales' spines soft rays Anal rays both pectoral fi ns) 

St. Laurence River, 

Quebec ND 61.10±0.48 '11.7 ±0.10 310.8 ±0.04 ND 

Miramichi River, 

New Brunswick 23.71±0.22 60.42±0.50 11.8 ±0.10 10.4 ±0.12 56.0 ±0.20 

Philips and Shubenacadie 

Rivers, Nova Scotia 23.50±0.22 59.92±0.56 12.0 ±0.06 11.0 + 56.7 ±0.24 

Hudson River, N.Y. 25.77±0.08 59.95±0.34 '9.11±0.02 1l.27±0.04 '10.57 ±0.02 54.0 ±0.20 

Delaware River 

and Bay 24.99 ±0.18 61.78±0.40 ' 11.6 ±0.08 ' 10.8 ±0.06 55.6 ±0.40 

Upper Chesapeake Bay 

Maryland waters 24.48 ±0.06 62.55±0.16 'O.09±0.08 11.74±0.04 '10.90±0.01 56.4 ±0.12 

York River, Va. 24.02 ±0.20 60.72±0.28 9.02±0.02 11.93±0.02 10.96±0.02 '56.7 ±0.18 

Rappahannock River, Va. 24.02 ±0.20 6O.72±0.28 9.02±0.02 11.93±0.02 10.96±0.02 55.3 ±0.24 

.James River, Va. 25.22 ±0.20 61.66±0.26 9.3l±0.04 11.53±0.04 1O.74±0.04 '56.0 ±0.34 

Albermarle Sound, N.C. 24.51±0.30 6O.48±0.70 '11.8 ±0.10 10.9 ±0.06 '55.7 ±0.36 

Cape Fear, S.C. ND 56.94±0.76 ND :--1D ND 

Santee-Cooper, S.C. 23.33±0.24 58.59±0.54 11.6 ±0.16 10.9 ±O 0 55.2 ±0.36 

St. John's River, Fla. ND 54.33±0.44 11.9 ±0.12 11.0 ±O 14 56.9 ±0.36 

Appalachicola River, 

Fla. (Gulf of Mexico) ND 66.7 1l.55±0.12 9.8 ±0.50 54.3 ±0.96 

Alabama and Tallapoosa - Rivers, Ala. ND 666.30±0.58 8.9 11.84±0.18 '10.84±0.18 56.47±0.44 

Sacramento and San 

Joaquin Rivers, Calif. 25.98±0.14 59.53±0.46 '11.76±0.08 "10. 2±0.06 56.0 ±0.16 

'Lewis 1957. Raney 1957. Barkuloo 1970. 

' Murawski 1958. Raney et a1. 1954. Raney and de Sylva 1953. 

IRaney and Woolcott 1955. 'Brown 1965. 

f. Roanoke River-Albermarle Sound, N.C. This population apparently separates into two groups in the 

winter with t he smaller fish overwintering in Albemarle 

Sound and the larger fish (2.7-34.0 kg) overwintering in 

the ocean side of the outer banks (Chapoton and Sykes 

1961). Albemarle Sound striped bass are distinct from 

James River, Va., striped bass though closely related to 

the York River and the Rappahannock River striped 

bass on the basis of lateral line scales and morphometric characters (Murawski 1958; Lund 1957). They 

are also distinct from South Carolina and eastern Florida populations in fin ray counts and lateral line scales 

(Raney and Woolcott 1955; Table 2). 

g. Chesapeake Bay. Three distinct subpopulations- James River, York and Rappahannock Rivers, 

and upper Bay-are present within the Chesapeake 

drainage based on meristic studies (Raney 1957), gill 

raker counts (Lewis 1957), and lateral line scales (Murawski 1958). Lund (1957) concluded that four rivers 

within Chesapeake Bay-the James, York, Rappahannock, and Potomac-have separate subpopulations 

based on morphometric characters. The population of 

striped bass in the James River is apparently now nearly 

extinct (Merriner and Hoagman 19738 ). Through 

electrophoresis, Morgan et al. (1973) further delineated 

the upper Chesapeake Bay striped bass into a series of 

BMerriner, J. V., and W. J . Hoagman. 1973. Feasibility of increasing striped bass populations by stocking of underutilized nursery 

grounds. Completion Rep. Proj. FA-V f\-AFS 6, July 1, 1970-Sept. 30, 

1973, 197 p. Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences, Gloucester Point, VA 

23062. 

6 

discrete subpopulations. The most distinct subpopulation was in the Elk River. The Choptank and the 

Nanticoke Rivers, on the eastern shore of Chesapeake 

Bay, also had distinct populations although these fish 

appear to be closely related to the striped bass of the 

Patuxent and Potomac Rivers on the Bay's western 

shore. The Potomac River and the Patuxent River 

striped bass, although distinct from the other three river 

populations, could not be distinguished from one 

another. The authors attributed the formation of the 

various striped bass populations in the Chesapeake Bay 

to the homing mechanism of these fish and the geological history of the Bay. 

h. Delaware River. The Delaware River population 

is most closely allied with the James River population 

based on numbers of lateral line scales (Murawski 1958) 

and gill raker counts (Lewis 1957). 

i. Hudson River. Hudson River striped bass form a 

distinct population based on meristic counts (Raney 

and de Sylva 1953), gill rakers (Lewis 1957), lateral line 

scales (Murawski 1958), and morphometric measuremerts (Lund 1957). Within the Hudson River, striped 

bass caught upstream from Haverstraw differ in fin ray 

counts from fish from the lower Hudson River (Raney et 

al. 1954). The hereditary relationship between present 

day California and Hudson River striped bass populations is evidenced from similarity in lateral line scales 

(Murawski 1958), fin ray counts (Raney and de Sylva 

1953), and gill raker counts (Lewis 1957; Table 2). 

j . Nova Scotia; Annapolis and Shubenacadie Rivers 

(Merriman 1941). Raney et al. (1954) found Nova 

Scotia bass close in some fin ray counts to southern pop-
ulations from Albemarle Sound, N.C., and Edisto and 

Santee Rivers, S.C. 

k. St. Lawrence River (Magnin and Beaulieu 

1967). Striped bass from the Bt. Lawrence have a significantly higher lateral line scale count than bass from 

the Philips River, Nova Scotia (Murawski 1958). 

Marone spp. differentiation 

A recently developed cartilage staining technique 

[which permits identification of Marone spp. larvae 

through the use of species-specific diagnostic characters including osteology and internal pigmentation 

(Fritzsche and Johnson9

) 1 may be the solution to the inability to morphological distinguish between striped 

bass and white perch larvae from approximately 6 to 20 

mm (Mansueti 1964). 

1.32 Cytomorphology 

Striped bass have 48 chromosomes (Kerby 1972). The 

dominant karyotype from the Hudson River, N.Y., consisted of 38 acrocentric, 8 subtelocentric, and 2 submetacentric chromosomes; a second karyotype, occasionally found had 40 acrocentric, 6 subtelocentric, and 

2 submetacentric chromosomes (Rachlin et a1. 1978). 

Striped bass from an impounded freshwater environment, Kerr Reservoir, had larger glomeruli, 55.7/J-, than 

fish from an estuarine environment, 47.7 /J- (Beitch 1963). 

1.33 Protein specificity 

Sidell et a1. (1978) successfully distinguished between 

striped bass and white perch larvae from 7.0 to 51.0 mm 

using starch gel electrophoresis and enzyme specific 

histochemical stains. Species specific banding patterns 

were found for esterase (a-naphthyl-acetate or a-naphthyl-butyrate) and phosphoglucomutase, though the 

level of phosphoglucomutase activity is low making this 

system unsuitable for larvae 10 mm TL or less. The use of 

enzyme specific stains requires that larvae be frozen in 

liquid nitrogen, thus this technique is not applicable to 

routine field sampling. Electrophoretic differences between soluble muscle proteins of striped bass and white 

perch have been demonstrated by Morgan (1971, 1975). 

Striped bass muscle consists of two major proteins 

whereas white perch muscle is composed of three major 

proteins. After electrophoresis of soluble muscle proteins there remain seven minor proteins in striped bass 

and eight in white perch. 

1.34 Aging 

Methods used to determine the age of striped bass include: length-frequency distributions, scale analyses, 

' R. A. Fritzsche, Department of Biology, College of Liberal Arts, University of Mississippi, University, MI 38677, and G. D. Johnson, Marine 

Resources Research Institute, South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, P.O. Box 12559, Charleston, SC 29412, pers. commun. March 1976. 

7 

study of otolith growth bands, and study of opercle 

growth bands. Scofield (1931), who was the first to analyze the possible methods of striped bass age determination, concluded that age may be determined accurately 

in the first 8-10 yr using any of the four methods. The 

scale method is the most widely used. 

Descriptions of striped bass scales are given in Scofield (1931), Merriman (1941), and Tiller (1943) . Striped 

bass scales are ctenoid with radii in the anterior field. 

From 25 to 150 circuli form during a year's growth; circuli formation ceases in early winter (Scofield 1931). 

The best scales for age determination are from midbody 

just above the lateral line . Merriman (1941) found a 

linear relationship between scale growth and length in 

striped bass from 10.5 to 67 cm TL. 

1.35 Osteology 

Gregory (1918, 1933) described and illustrated the 

head skeleton of striped bass. Merriman's (1940) paper 

included detailed drawings of the trunk skeleton. Woolcott (1957) gave a detailed comparison of diagnostic 

osteological characters of the four American Marone 

species-saxatilis, chrysops, americana, interrupta 

(mississippiensis)-and the European species-M. labrax. With the exception of americana and interrupta, 

the species are readily separated using osteological 

characters. 

1.36 Blood 

Engel and Davis (1964), Courtois (1974), and Westin 

(1978) have examined striped bass hematology. Their 

results are summarized below: 

X±s n Range Author 

Hemoglobin 9.11± 1.63 31 4.0 -12.3 Westin 1978 

g/lOOml 8.04± 0.97 7 Sherk et al. 

1972' 

9.50 5 8.6 -10.4 Engel and Davis 

1964 

5 7.6 -12.1 Courtois 1974 

Hematocrit 47.90±lO.25 31 16-70 Westin 1978 

% packed 38.20± 6.46 7 Sherk et al. 

1972' 

38.70 5 36.0 -41.3 Engel and Davis 

1964 

Plasma 9.38± 1.67 20 6.1 -13.0 Westin 1978 

protein 4 6.4 - 7.4 

g/100ml (refractometer) 

6 4.2 - 5.8 Courtois 1974 

(chemical method) 

RBC 106/cc 3.79± 0.55 15 2.86- 4.49 Westin 1978 

3.95 5 3.42- 4.53 Engel and Davis 

1964 

2.35± 0.32 7 Sherk et iiI. 

1972 ' 

Serum total 

protein g% 5.18- 1.03 22 3.67- 8.32 Westin 1978 

Serum calciummg% 

(both sexes) 12.80± 4.01 13 4.5 -18.8 Westin 1978 

(Males only) 11.74± 3.36 11 4.5 -15.1 Westin 1978 
, t'nlllllhl"rltit 

III Eq 1111 r 

(lsllllll hI' 

1Il0 III 

2 

2 I 1 

\\ tin I 
Navesink River, N.J. (237), were taken across the continent by train and introduced into the lower Sacramento River. An additional 300 yearling striped bass 

from the Shrewsbury River, N.J., were planted into San 

Francisco Bay in 1881 (Scofield 1931). Ten years after 

the first plant, striped bass were caught in gill nets and 

offered for sale on the California market, and in 1899 the 

commercial net catch alone was 600,000 kg (Merriman 

1941). Today striped bass on the west coast are found 

from British Columbia (lNE) south to Ensenada, Mexico (lSE) (Forrester et a1. 1972). 

Numerous attempts have been made to establish 

striped bass populations in reservoirs and rivers 

throughout the United States. Successful reservoir and 

lake introductions include: Martin, Lay, Choctawhatachee River and Bay, Jones Bluff, and Jordan in Alabama; Norfork, Beaver, Greeson, Dardanella, and 

Maumelle in Arkansas (235); Hunter and Julianna in 

Florida (238); Sinclair in Georgia; Hartwell and Clark 

Hill in Georgia-South Carolina (238); Herrington in 

Kentucky (234); Toledo Bend and D'Arbonne in Louisiana (235); Ross R. Barnett in Mississippi (235); Bardin 

and Norman in North Carolina (238); Greenwood and 

Murray in South Carolina (238); Norris, Cherokee, and 

J. Percy Priest in Tennessee (235); and E. V. Spence and 

Navarro Mills in Texas (235) (Bailey 1975). Other 

successful reservoir introductions include the SanteeCooper in South Carolina (238) (Scruggs and Fuller 

1955; Scruggs 1957; Stevens 1958), Kerr in Virginia 

(237) and North Carolina (238), Keystone in Oklahoma 

(235) (Mensinger 1971), and Lake of the Ozarks in Missouri (Hanson and Dillard 1976). Striped bass were 

unsuccessfully introduced, or survival of the introduced 

populations is questionable, in the Sterling Reservoir in 

Colorado (233) (Imler 1976); Hawaii (660) (Anonymous 

1920); Kentucky (234) (Clay 1962); Ohio River (Schoumacher 1969); western Maryland and New Jersey (237) 

(Surber 1958); and Lake Ontario (L.21) (fry obtained 

from Havre de Grace, Md. (United States Commission 

of Fish and Fisheries 1889; Jordan and Eigenmann 

1890». 

Today, localized or landlocked populations exist in 

the Santee-Cooper Reservoir, S.C.; Keystone Reservoir, 

Okla.; St. Johns River, Fla.; Roanoke River, N.C.; the 

Kerr Reservoir, Va.; the Colorado River (St. Amant 

1959), and according to Morgan (see footnote 7) should 

be distributed throughout the continental United States 

within the next 20 yr. 

2.2 Differential distribution 

2.21 Larvae and juveniles 

Habitat 

Newly hatched striped bass live in open waters, and 

at approximately 13 mm form small schools and move 

inshore to stay through the first summer (Raney 1952). 

Abbott (1878) reported that at about 30 mm striped bass 

juveniles are found in very dense schools. Young-of-the9 

year are generally more abundant in areas with pronounced current (Rathjen and Miller 1957; Woolcott 

1962). Juvenile striped bass appear to prefer clean sandy 

bottoms (Merriman 1937; Raney 1954; Rathjen and Miller 1957; Woolcott 1962; Smith 1971). Raney (1952) 

found juveniles (50 mm) over gravelly beaches; juveniles 

71-85 mm were found over a mixture of mud, sand, 

gravel, and rock (Merriman 1941) and rarely over soft 

mud (Rathjen and Miller 1957). The largest catches of 

juveniles in the Hudson River generally occurred over 

sand or gravel bottoms (Texas Instruments, Inc., 

1974 1

°). In the Potomac River the majority of juveniles 

were seined over a sandy bottom which was covered by a 

1- or 2-inch layer of silt. A mixture of sand and gravel occurred toward the beach as the slope increased in elevation (Mihursky et a1. see footnote 6). 

Vertical Distribution 

The problem of entraining larval and early juvenile 

striped bass in cooling waters of power generating facilities has provided additional impetus for examining 

the vertical distributions of early life history stages. Several investigators have studied day versus night vertical 

distributions of striped bass larvae. In the Hudson 

River, yolk-sac larvae (prolarvae of some authors) are 

most abundant near the bottom during both day and 

night sampling (Lauer et a1. 1974), although in the 

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal there were no significant differences in surface, middepth, and bottom 

densities of yolk-sac larvae over a 24-h period (Kernehan et aLII). Morgan et a1. 12 stated that there is sufficient vertical mixing in the Chesapeake and Delaware 

Canal to keep striped bass eggs suspended in the water 

column. Mixing could also keep yolk-sac larvae 

suspended within the water column. In contrast, significant differences in yolk-sac larval densities related to 

both sampling time and depth were observed on the Potomac River (Boynton et a1. 13). Mean yolk-sac densities 

at all three depths-surface, middepth (4 m), and bottom (7 m)-were greater at night than during the day. 

Greater densities of yolk-sac larvae were found at 4 m 

and on the bottom during the day, and at 4 m in the 

evening and early morning hours. 

'"Texas Instruments, Inc. 1974. Fisheries survey of the Hudson 

River. March·July 1973, Vol. III; March-December 1973, Vol. IV. Pre· 

pared for Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. 

II Kernehan, R J., R E. Smith, S. L. Tyler, and M. L. Brewster. 1976. Ichthyoplankton. Volume II. In Ecological studies in the 

vicinity of the proposed Summit Power Station, January through 

December 1975, 669 p. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Box 286, RD # 1, 

Middletown, DE 19709. 

"Morgan, R P., II, R E. Ulanowicz, V. J. Rasin, Jr., L. A. Noe, and G. 

B. Gray. 1973. Effects of water movement on eggs and larvae of striped 

bass and white perch. In Hydrographic and ecological effects of enlargement of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. U.S. Army Corps Eng., 

Phila. Dist. Contract No. DACW-61-71-C-0062. Final Rep., Append. XII, 

28 p. 

"Boynton, W. R, E. M. Setzler, K. V. Wood, H. H. Zion, and M. 

Homer. 1977. Draft report on Potomac River fisheries study; ichthyoplankton and juvenile investigations. Univ. Md. CEES Ref. No. 77-169· 

CBL. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 20688. 
The highest density of post yolk-sac larvae was near 

the bottom of the Hudson River during the day though 

at night they were much more evenly distributed 

throughout the water column (Lauer et a1. 1974). Further studies on the Hudson River indicated no signifi-

, cant difference in day-night depth distributions for 6-10 

mm larvae in late June. However, by mid-July, a diurnal migration pattern was evident with 7-14 mm striped 

bass larvae and 15-30 mm juveniles occurring in significantly greater concentrations at night on the surface and 

middepths than on the bottom. Larger fish were caught 

at night than during the day (no variances presented); 

likewise, larger fish were caught at the surface and at 

midwater than on the bottom. The older larvae and early juveniles also moved shoreward and onto shoal areas 

(Texas Instruments, Inc. footnote 10, 197414 ). 

Evidence of a possible diurnal migration of finfold larvae on the Potomac River has been described (Boynton 

et a!. footnote 13). Greater densities of finfold larvae 

were captured at night at all three depths sampled. At 4 

m and on the bottom (7 m), greater densities of finfold 

larvae were found throughout the evening and at night, 

whereas on the surface significantly greater densities 

were present only during the 0300 sampling. During 

evening hours significant differences in the vertical distribution of finfold larvae were evident with greater 

densities occurring at mid depth and on the bottom. 

In the western portion of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in California young-of-the-year striped bass 

were generally concentrated near the bottom, while in 

the eastern portion the fish were more evenly distributed, although the greatest concentrations were frequently near the bottom. Young bass showed a general 

tendency to rise off the bottom during flood tide. The 

fish were concentrated along the shore rather than in the 

channel regions in the Delta; as they grew they became 

more evenly distributed (Chadwick 1964). 

Several studies have shown a downstream movement 

of the early developmental stages of striped bass [Mihursky 

et a!. (footnote 6) and Polgar et a!. (197515

, 1976) in the 

Potomac River; Texas Instruments, Inc. (footnotes 10 

and 14) in the Hudson River; Chadwick et a1. (1977) in 

the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary]. Work on the 

Hudson River indicated this downstream movement 

was a slight displacement and neither striped bass eggs 

nor yolk-sac larvae were transported at any velocity approaching that of the water. Although the Hudson River 

studies indicated a downstream displacement of postyolk-sac larvae from areas in which the yolk-sac larvae 

were concentrated, the highest densities of finfold and 

postfinfold larvae in the Potomac River were concen-

' Texas Instruments. Inc. 1974. Evaluation of the potential impact 

on the fisheries of the Hudson River by the Cornwall pumped-storage 

proJect. Prepared for Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. 

" Polgar. T. T .. R. E. Ulanowicz , D. A. Payne, and G. M . 

Krainak. 1975. Inve tigations of the role of physical-transport processes in determining ichthyoplankton distributions in the Potomac River. 

Interim report for 1974 spawning sea on data. Maryland Power Plant 

Siting Program, PPR:\I-ll and PPMP-14 (combined reports), 133 p. 

10 

trated upstream from the areas of highest densities of 

yolk-sac larvae (Mihursky et a1. footnote 6). Mihursky 

et a!. concluded that the finfold larvae, especially during 

the early part of the 1975 spawning season, were recruited from upriver. Postfinfold larvae, however, 

seemed to be able to maintain their position in the river, 

remaining within the same areas as the finfold larvae. 

2.22 Adults 

Striped bass are found in a variety of inshore, estuarine, and freshwater habitats depending upon latitude 

and season. In estuarine or marine environments they 

can be found along sandy beaches and in shallow bays 

(Bigelow and Schroeder 1953), along rocky shores (Pearson 1931), sometimes associated with submerged or 

partly submerged rocks or boulders (hence the common 

names rock or rockfish), in troughs and gullies hollowed 

out by wave action, and over sand bars during high tide. 

In New England, striped bass are found along the rock~ 

shoreline and surf swept beaches (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). These fish also frequent mussel beds and ma)\ 

hide under rafts of floating rockweed. Striped bass remain in near offshore waters and are usually found no 

more than 6-8 km offshore (Bigelow and Schroede~ 

1953). Few fish have been caught beyond 16 km offshore (Raney 1954). 

In fresh waters, striped bass are found in large rivers 

as well as small inflowing creeks (Abbott 1878). 

2.3 Determinants of distribution changes 

Pollution or alterations of the environment have destroyed or seriously harmed suitable striped bass habitat 

in a number of areas, including the Connecticut River 

(Merriman 1937), the Delaware River (Chittenden 

1971a), the Escambia River, Fla. (Bailey et a1. 1954), 

and Lake Ponchartrain, La. (Davis and Fontenoe6 ) 

where no striped bass were captured in 1969. These 

authors suggested that this serious decline or extinction 

of the striped bass population was due to extensive 

channelization of coastal streams in the 1940's and 

1950's which increased the silt load, destroyed riffle 

areas, and filled estuarine tributaries. 

One of the most extensive areas of striped bass habitat destruction has occurred in the Susquehanna River 

of Maryland and Pennsylvania which empties into the 

upper Chesapeake Bay. The Susquehanna River was 

formerly the site of the greatest striped bass egg production known (Dovel 1971) with spawning being recorded as far upriver as the fork at Northumberland or 

beyond (Baird 1855). However, the natural features of 

the river were altered with the construction of canal 

feeder dams commencing about 1826 and the construction of hydroelectric dams in 1904. From 1904 to 1928, 

" Davis, J. T., and B. J. Fontenot. 1969. Ecological factors affecting 

anadromous fishes of Lake Ponchartrain and its tributaries. La. Wild!. 

Fish. Comm., Rep. No. OAA-72070612, 96 p. 
four hydroelectric dams were constructed in the lower 

33.6 km of the river. Conowingo Dam, the fifth , the 

highest, and the last dam constructed, is located only 

5.8 km upstream from Havre de Grace, Md . (Dovel and 

Edmunds 1971). Pearson (1938) concluded that the 

lower Susquehanna River from Port Deposit to Octoraro Creek (below the Conowingo Dam) was the most 

important striped bass spawning area in the Chesapeake Bay. However, by the 1960's there was a shift in 

the major areas of striped bass egg occurrence from the 

lower Susquehanna River on the western side of Turkey 

Point to the Elk River and the Chesapeake Bay (Dovel 

and Edmunds 1971). 

2.4 Hybridization 

2.41 Hybrids 

The original cross, Marone saxatilis female X Marone 

chrysops male, was reported by Stevens (1965). A 

number of authors have reported successful hatching of 

striped bass(SB)-white bass(WB) hybrids (Smith et aJ. 

1967; Bayless 1968, 1972; Bishop 1968; Logan 1968; Kerby 1972). The resultant eggs and fry are similar to striped 

bass though the incubation time is generally 3-4 h longer. 

Bayless (1972) has published a series of photomicrographs of various stages of the embryological development of both the hybrid cross SB X WB and the reciprocal cross WB X SB; Bayless (1972) and Kerby (1972) give 

morphometric descriptions of the hybrids (Table 3). 

Hybrid larvae (SB X WB) do not feed until 5-7 days of 

age. 

Logan (1968) found striped bass hybrid larvae (SB X 

WB) had fa. ter growth and higher ur ivai than tn d 

ba .. larvae after 71 day. in 1 a re re uing J nd, H 

Spring Hatchery. S.C. Likewi. urviv I of h 'bnd 1 r 

vae was ignificantly greater th n ,trip d bin 

when relea ed into natural wat r. (B nn et al 1 7 ) ]n 

the Rappahannock River, Va., hybrid grew f tel' t n 

striped bass, at least for the fir. t 2.5-3) T (K rb\ 1 72) 

The reciprocal hybrid (WB X 'B) are ppr 'Imat 1\ 

one-third smaller than. triped ba .. larvae. 'I h 18T"a1 

development i de cribed bv Bayle s (1972). :\lolth 

parts of reciprocal hybrids are functional and th" gut I 

complete on the fourth day. Rearing. uc-ce. s 01 n'~ip -

cal hybrids has also been substantially greater than that 

of striped bass. Ware (l97f1) reported 46 ( mean survI\al 

ofreciprocaJ hybrids from the larval to the juvcOlle t ~ 

in six Florida ponds. Advantage. of the reciprocal h .• 

brids include the greater availability and relatIve ea e 

spawning white ba s compared to stnped ba~s. Slllll' 

white bass and most male striped bass mature In 2 \ r. 

under artificial propagation recIprocal h 'brids can be 

produced in 2 yr, wherea 4-5 yr are required to produ(l' 

the original hybrids (Bonn et aJ. 1976) . 

Production of various backcro se and second generations has been described in detail by Ba 'Iess (1972) 

Although the SB X WB hybrid i not tenle, Bonn et al 

(1976) stated that no uccessful reproduction of f()runt 

hybrids has been reported in natural habItat.. 

Hybrid striped bass are more adaptable to inland r servoir stocking than striped ba s and are reported to h 

of better food quality than white bas' (Bishop 1 ) 

Striped bass, white bass, and the re 'ultant hybnd. 

(SB X WB) can be distinguished from one another h . 

the following characteristics (William 1976): 

Table 3.-Description of meristic characters for Morone spp. and hybrids. From Bayl<,,, 1!!72. 

Fork Scales Scales 2d anal Head length 

length/ Lateral above below Soft 2d spine length/ 2d anal rch 

body line lateral lateral anal dorsal 8d anal ,pine [lor,al "f 

Species depth scales line line rays count spine length ~ng_th __ flO. bock T1 

Striped 3.7 .. t2 58-67 7·9 11-12 1-12 0.73·0. :1 44-5.:! :-.eparated '" 19ht 

bass usually usually usually mean 0.,-1 mean 

3.9 8 11 ~ .'i 

Whi te bass 2.4-2.8 153-61 7·9 '15 11-12 1·13·14 0.68·0.7.'; :!A-.l.! S~parat!'d \\. der t 

usually usually mean 072 mean 

2.6 9 2.9 

OriglOal 2.6·3.4 54-58 10·12 15·17 12·13 1-12-14 o 89·0.!l6 'U--IO:l _ eparated "Ioder t 

white bass usually usually u ually usually mean 0.92 mean 

hybrid 2.7 56 10 16 -I.Ul 

F 3.8-4.3 55-62 9-11 12- 1-1 11 1·12 0.: -0.91.1 i. - 7 eparst d 

usualJy 

4.1 mod r 

Original 3. -4.2 .52·5 9·11 12-14 11-12 I·12-l'3 o .,-n 9 lV parsl d 

backcross 

ReCiprocal 3.' .. !') 52- -8 ·10 12-J.l 8-11 1-12-13 0.60."3 -1014 P Sled 

buckcross 

Whit e ~l., -4.2 53-56 8-9 ll·U 10 1·12-11 0 1·111 -I COlUle(1 

perch usualJ) usuall) 

hybnd 3.9 12 

·Jordan and E\ ermann (1 '961. 

11 
The highest density of post yolk-sac larvae was near 

he bottom of the Hudson River during the day though 

at night they were much more evenly distributed 

throughout the water column (Lauer et a1. 1974). Furher studies on the Hudson River indicated no significant difference in day-night depth distributions for 6-10 

mm larvae in late June. However, by mid-July, a diurnal migration pattern was evident with 7-14 mm striped 

bass larvae and 15-30 mm juveniles occurring in significantly greater concentrations at night on the surface and 

middepths than on the bottom. Larger fish were caught 

at night than during the day (no variances presented); 

likewise, larger fish were caught at the surface and at 

midwater than on the bottom. The older larvae and early juveniles also moved shoreward and onto shoal areas 

(Texas Instruments, Inc. footnote 10, 197414 ). 

Evidence of a possible diurnal migration of fin fold larvae on the Potomac River has been described (Boynton 

et a1. footnote 13). Greater densities of finfold larvae 

were captured at night at all three depths sampled. At 4 

m and on the bottom (7 m), greater densities of finfold 

larvae were found throughout the evening and at night, 

whereas on the surface significantly greater densities 

were present only during the 0300 sampling. During 

evening hours significant differences in the vertical distribution of finfold larvae were evident with greater 

densities occurring at middepth and on the bottom. 

In the western portion of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in California young-of-the-year striped bass 

were generally concentrated near the bottom, while in 

the eastern portion the fish were more evenly distributed, although the greatest concentrations were frequently near the bottom. Young bass showed a general 

tendency to rise off the bottom during flood tide. The 

fish were concentrated along the shore rather than in the 

channel regions in the Delta; as they grew they became 

more evenly distributed (Chadwick 1964). 

Several studies have shown a downstream movement 

of the early developmental stages of striped bass [Mihursky 

et a1. (footnote 6) and Polgar et a1. (197515, 1976) in the 

Potomac River; Texas Instruments, Inc. (footnotes 10 

and 14) in the Hudson River; Chadwick et a1. (1977) in 

the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary]. Work on the 

Hudson River indicated this downstream movement 

was a slight displacement and neither striped bass eggs 

nor yolk-sac larvae were transported at any velocity approaching that of the water. Although the Hudson River 

studies indicated a downstream displacement of postyolk-sac larvae from areas in which the yolk-sac larvae 

were concentrated, the highest densities of finfold and 

postfinfold larvae in the Potomac River were concen-

"Texas Instruments, Inc. 1974. Evaluation of the potential impact 

on the fisheries of the Hudson River by the Cornwall pumped-storage 

project. Prepared for Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. 

" Polgar, T. T., R. E. Ulanowicz, D. A. Payne, and G. M. 

Krainak. 1975. Investigations of the role of physical-transport processes in determining ichthyoplankton distributions in the Potomac River. 

Interim report for 1974 spawning season data. Maryland Power Plant 

Siting Program, PPRM-ll and PPMP-14 (combined reports), 133 p. 

10 

trated upstream from the areas of highest densities of 

yolk-sac larvae (Mihursky et a1. footnote 6). Mihursky 

et a1. concluded that the finfold larvae, especially during 

the early part of the 1975 spawning season, were recruited from upriver. Postfinfold larvae, however, 

seemed to be able to maintain their position in the river, 

remaining within the same areas as the finfold larvae. 

2.22 Adults 

Striped bass are found in a variety of inshore, estuarine, and freshwater habitats depending upon latitude 

and season. In estuarine or marine environments they 

can be found along sandy beaches and in shallow bays 

(Bigelow and Schroeder 1953), along rocky shores (Pearson 1931), sometimes associated with submerged or 

partly submerged rocks or boulders (hence the common 

names rock or rockfish), in troughs and gullies hollowed 

out by wave action, and over sand bars during high tide. 

In New England, striped bass are found along the rocky 

shoreline and surf swept beaches (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). These fish also frequent mussel beds and may 

hide under rafts of floating rockweed. Striped bass remain in near offshore waters and are usually found no 

more than 6-8 km offshore (Bigelow and Schroeder 

1953). Few fish have been caught beyond 16 km offshore (Raney 1954). 

In fresh waters, striped bass are found in large rivers 

as well as small inflowing creeKS (Abbott 1878). 

2.3 Determinants of distribution changes 

Pollution or alterations of the environment have destroyed or seriously harmed suitable striped bass habitat 

in a number of areas, including the Connecticut River 

(Merriman 1937), the Delaware River (Chittenden 

1971a) , the Escambia River, Fla. (Bailey et a1. 1954), 

and Lake Ponchartrain, La. (Davis and Fontenoe S) 

where no striped bass were captured in 1969. These 

authors suggested that this serious decline or extinction 

of the striped bass population was due to extensive 

channelization of coastal streams in the 1940's and 

1950's which increased the silt load, destroyed riffle 

areas, and filled estuarine tributaries. 

One of the most extensive areas of striped bass habitat destruction has occurred in the Susquehanna River 

of Maryland and Pennsylvania which empties into the 

upper Chesapeake Bay. The Susquehanna River was 

formerly the site of the greatest striped bass egg production known (Dovel 1971) with spawning being recorded as far upriver as the fork at Northumberland or 

beyond (Baird 1855). However, the natural features of 

the river were altered with the construction of canal 

feeder dams commencing about 1826 and the construction of hydroelectric dams in 1904. From 1904 to 1928, 

" Davis, J. T., and B. J. Fontenot. 1969. Ecological factors affecting 

anadromous fishes of Lake Ponchartrain and its tributaries. La. Wild!. 

Fish. Comm., Rep. No. NOAA-72070612, 96 p. 
four hydroelectric dams were constructed in the lower 

33.6 km of the river. Conowingo Dam, the fifth, the 

highest, and the last dam constructed, is located only 

5.8 km upstream from Havr~ de Grace, Md. (Dovel and 

Edmunds 1971). Pearson (1938) concluded that the 

lower Susquehanna River from Port Deposit to Octoraro Creek (below the Conowingo Dam) was the most 

important striped bass spawning area in the Chesapeake Bay. However, by the 1960's there was a shift in 

the major areas of striped bass egg occurrence from the 

lower Susquehanna River on the western side of Turkey 

Point to the Elk River and the Chesapeake Bay (Dovel 

and Edmunds 1971). 

2.4 Hybridization 

2.41 Hybrids 

The original cross, Marone saxatilis female X Marone 

chrysops male, was reported by Stevens (1965). A 

number of authors have reported successful hatching of 

striped bass(SB)-white bass(WB) hybrids (Smith et a!. 

1967; Bayless 1968, 1972; Bishop 1968; Logan 1968; Kerby 1972). The resultant eggs and fry are similar to striped 

bass though the incubation time is generally 3-4 h longer. 

Bayless (1972) has published a series of photomicrographs of various stages of the embryological development of both the hybrid cross SB X WB and the reciprocal cross WB X SB; Bayless (1972) and Kerby (1972) give 

morphometric descriptions of the hybrids (Table 3). 

Hybrid larvae (SB X WB) do not feed until 5-7 days of 

age. 

Logan (1968) found striped bass hybrid larvae (SB X 

WB) had faster growth and higher 'un'ival than tTq d 

bas larvae after 71 days in l·acre rearing p nd., H 11th 

Spring Hatchery, S.C. LikeWise un'ival of h 'bnd larvae was significantly greater than striped bas larva 

when released into natural waters (Bonn et al. 1976). In 

the Rappahannock River, Va., hybrids grew faster than 

striped bass, at least for the first 2.5·3 yr (Kerb' 1972). 

The reciprocal hybrid (WB X SB) are appro. imatelv 

one-third smaller than triped ba larvae. The larval 

development is described by Bayle s (1972). :".louth 

parts of reciprocal hybrids are functional and the gut i: 

complete on the fourth day. Rearing succe of reciprocal hybrids has also been substantially greater than that 

of striped bass. Ware (1975) reported 46f( mean survival 

of reciprocal hybrids from the larval to the juvenile tage 

in six Florida ponds. Advantages of the reciprocal hybrids include the greater availability and relative ea e of 

spawning white bass compared to striped ba s. Smce 

white bass and most male striped bass mature in 2 yr, 

under artificial propagation reciprocal hybrids can be 

produced in 2 yr, whereas 4-5 yr are required to produce 

the original hybrids (Bonn et a!. 1976). 

Production of various backcrosses and second genera· 

tions has been described in detail by Bayles (1972). 

Although the SB X WB hybrid is not sterile, Bonn et a!. 

(1976) stated that no successful reproduction of Marone 

hybrids has been reported in natural habitat. 

Hybrid striped bass are more adaptable to inland res· 

ervoir stocking than striped bass and are reported to be 

of better food quality than white bass (Bishop 1968). 

Striped bass, white bass, and the resultant hybrids 

(SB X WB) can be distinguished from one another by 

the followi ng characteristics (Williams 1976): 

Table 3.-Description of meristic characters for Morone spp. and hybrids. From Bayless 1972. 

Fork Scales Scales 2d anal Head length/ 

length/ Lateral above below Soft 2d spine length/ 2d anal Arch 

body line lateral lateral anal dorsal 3d anal spine Oor,al of 

pecies depth scales line line rays count spine length length tIns hack !-.tnp 

Striped 3.7·4.2 58·67 7·9 11·12 ' ·12 0.73·0.83 4.4·.'\.2 Separated Slight lJ"tlnct 

bass usually usually usually mean 0.74 mean focca"'umal., 

3.9 8 11 4 5 hrohn} 

White bass 2.4·2.8 '53·61 7·9 1

15 11·12 '·13·14 0.68·0.75 2.4.:3.1 Separated \Ioderat~ Ind, t net 

usually usually mean 0.72 mean fomt 

2.6 9 2.9 

Original 2.6·3.4 54·58 10·12 15·17 12·13 '·12·14 0.89·0.96 3.4·4.0:1 Separated ~,">derate [), hnct 

while bass usually usually usually usually mean 092 mean (fr quenth 

hybrid. 2.7 56 10 16 4.01 hro en 

F, 3.8·4.3 55·62 9·11 12·14 11 ' ·12 0.58·0.90 3. ·57 Separated ~llght D"Unct 

u ually to (occB'lOnall 

4.1 moderate br en 

Original 3.8·4.2 52·58 9·11 12·14 11·12 '·12·13 0.77·0. 9 3 . .'\·5.4 Separated Slight DI tmet 

backcross 

Reciprocal 3.7·4.1 52·58 ·10 12·14 ·11 '·12·13 0.26·0 ~:l 40·143 Separated light 

backcross to acute 

While 3.8·4.2 53·56 8·9 11·13 10 1·12·13 O. 1·1.0 3.4 3.~ Conn ed Ight 0, IDC 

P r h usually usually 

hybrid 3.9 12 

I.Jordan and E\ermann (1896), 

11 
Fork lengthl Body depthl Teeth 

body depth head length on 

Species Mean and range Mean and range tongue 

Striped bass 4.440 0.893 Two patches 

(4.018-5.316) (0.731-0.983) 

,White bass 3.477 1.198 One patch 

(3.000-3.955) (1.015-1.473) 

Hybrid 3.468 1.158 Two patches 

(3.082-3.987) (1. 048-1.323) 

Smith et al. (1967) successfully crossed Marone saxatilis females and M. americana males. Kerby (1972) 

reported that the SB X WB hybrid growth apparently 

was somewhat less than that of natural striped bass populations, but was much greater than the growth of 

natural -white perch populations. Hybrid survival was 

much better than striped bass survival under the same 

experimental conditions. Hybrids were able to survive 

and grow in estuarine salinities and could probably survive in fresh water though Kerby's data is scant. SB X 

WP hybrids matured in 2 yr. 

Striped bass, yellow bass, Marone interruptus, hybrids have also been produced (Ware 1975). 

2.42 Influence of natural hybridization in ecology 

and morphology 

No natural hybridization has been reported. 

3 BIONOMICS AND LIFE HISTORY 

3.1 Reproduction 

3.11 Sexuality 

Striped bass are heterosexual. Female striped bass 

grow larger than males; most bass of 13.6 kg and heavier 

are females (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953). 

Several accounts of hermaphroditism are in the literature. Schultz (1931) described a 5.4 kg, 60.3 em SL 

(standard length) striped bass with a functional ovary 

on the left side of the body cavity and a testes containin well-developed spermatozoa on the right side of the 

body cavity. Schultz concluded that the fish would have 

spawned both sexual products. Morgan and Gerlach 

(1950) reported almost 3% of the striped bass sampled in 

Coos River, Oreg., were hermaphrodites. Occasionally 

both ovary and testes were ripe and in spawning condition at the same time. 

3.12 Maturity 

Sexual maturation of striped bass is dependent upon 

temperature; the warmer the water, the faster the sexual 

maturation. As in many fish, male striped bass reach 

sexual maturity at an earlier age than females. Minimum lengths at maturity are approximately 432 mm TL 

for females (Clark 1968) and 174 mm TL for males 

(Raney 1952). 

Males mature primarily at 2 yr (Raney 1954; Man12 

sueti 1956; Tagatz 1961; Mansueti and Hollis 1963). 

Ware (1971) found that 11-mo-old males in Florida may 

show "slight milt discharge"; all males were ripe at 23 

mo. Females in Florida, however, showed no signs of 

gonadal development during the first 2 yr of life. 

Lewis (1962) reported that 4% of the 3-yr-old female 

striped bass on the Roanoke River, N.C., were mature 

and capable of spawning subsequent to the 1957 and 1958 

fishing seasons; 78f>b and 94% of the 4-yr-old fish were 

mature in these same years. All 5- and 6-yr-old female 

striped bass were sexually mature although some fish, 7 

yr and older, did not spawn annually. 

Female striped bass first spawn in the Chesapeake 

Bay during their fourth or fifth year, at a length ranging 

from 45 to 55 em TL and a weight of 1.8-2.7 kg (Jackson 

and Tiller 1952). Although fish spawned up to the 14th 

year, a curtailment of spawning occurred after the 10th 

year. 

Jones et al. 17 reported the following percent maturity 

for striped bass collected on Potomac River, Md., 

spawning grounds from 1974 to 1976: 

Males Females 

Age Number c"c mature Number % mature 

2 14 92.9 one collected 

3 286 99.0 9 44.4 

4 448 99.8 28 78.6 

5 571 98.6 138 98.6 

6 All mature All mature 

Percent maturity of striped bass collected from Potomac River overwintering and migrating areas downriver from spawning grounds from 1974 to 1976 was: 

Males Females 

Age Number % mature Number % mature 

2 1 100 3 0.0 

3 73 91.8 36 16.7 

4 184 96.2 58 43.1 

5 All mature 7 85.7 

6 All mature All mature 

In the Delaware estuary, some 2-, most 3-, and all 4-

yr-old males were sexually mature; all females ~4 yr 

were sexually immature (Bason 1971). Merriman (1941) 

reported that 25% of 4-yr-old, 75% of 5-yr-old, and 95% 

of 6-yr-old females from Connecticut waters were sexually mature. 

Male striped bass in the San Francisco Bay area 

matured by their third year (Sasaki 1966); approximately 35CO of the females matured and spawned in 

their fourth year, 85% in their fifth year, and 98% or 

more in their sixth year (Scofield 1931). 

Some males matured at the end of their first year in 

Coos Bay, Oreg., 18% of the females matured in their 

17 Jones, P. W., J. S. Wilson, R. P. Morgan II, H. R. Lunsford, Jr. , and J. 

Lawson. 1977. Potomac River fisheries study; striped bass spawning 

stock assessment. Interpretive report 1974-1976. Univ. Md. CEES Ref. 

No. 77-56-CBL. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 

20688. 
third year, 68'(. by their fourth year, and all by their 

fifth year (Morgan and Gerlach 1950). 

3.13 Mating 

Polygamous. 

3.14 Fertilization 

External. 

3.15 Gonads 

Lewis (1962) described three developmental stages for 

striped bass eggs: 

1. 0.07-0.23 mm-translucent eggs, immature; 

2. 0.16-0.30 mm-translucent eggs in which yolk had 

had begun to form as opaque speckling; 

3. 0.33-1.00 mm--<>paque ova, mature. 

Striped bass with type 1 ova are immature, whereas 

those with types 2 and 3 ova are mature. Egg growth 

begins slowly in the summer and fall, but increases 

rapidly as the spawning season approaches. Ripe eggs 

range from 1.0 to 1.5 mm in diameter (Woodull 1947; 

Raney 1952; Lewis 1962); average egg size has been 

reported as 1.32 mm (Mansueti 1958a) and 1.35 mm 

(Raney 1952). Descriptons of unfertilized eggs have been 

summarized by Hardy (1978). 

Striped bass fecundity estimates vary widely and 

have ranged from 15,000 eggs in a 46 cm fish (Mansueti 

and Hollis 1963) to 40,507,500 in an age 13, 14.5 kg fish 

(no size given) (Jackson and Tiller 1952). Ten percent of 

these eggs (4,010,325) were large (mature) and potentially capable of being spawned the following season. 

De Armon (1948) suggested that eggs for three consecutive seasons are contained in the ovary simultaneously. 

Jackson and Tiller (1952) found approximately 15% 

large (mature) ova in 49 striped bass from the Chesapeake Bay. Mature ova are uniformly distributed 

throughout both ovaries. Production of mature ova can 

be estimated from the equation: 

Y = 555,182 + 75,858 (X -7.3) 

where Y = number of mature ova 

X = weight in pounds. 

The' 95 CO confidence interval for the mean large egg production of fish at a given weight is: 

CI(y) Y ± 2419 )00063 + (X -7.3) 2 

. . 1,770 

(Lewis and Bonner 1966). 

Holland and Yelverton (1973) estimated fecundity for 

35 female striped bass 77 .0-110.0 cm FL (fork length) 

13 

and 7-13 yr of age. Mean fecundity and range for each 

age group was: 

Age 

No. of 

fish 

Mean 

fecundity Range 

- - - - in thousands - - - . 

7 1 614 614 

8 4 1,703 1,044-2,222 

9 13 2,100 1,067 -3, 716 

10 4 2,922 1,996-4,058 

11 10 2,928 2,167-3,911 

12 2 3,408 3,304-3,511 

13 1 3,391 3,391 -

35 2,462 

They found the following linear relationship between 

fecundity and length, weight, and age: 

F = 9.33 X 104 FL - 6.24 X 106 r = 0.85 

F = 2.18 X 105 W - 1.17 X 104 r = 0.86 

F = 4.33 X 105 A - 1.78 X 106 r = 0.66 

where F = fecundity X 106 

FL = fork length in cm 

W = weight in kg 

A = age in years. 

In the Roanoke River, N.C., female striped bass ~27.2 

kg, the bulk of the female spawning population, produced between 138,000 and 497,000 ova; 105,600-215,600 

ova/kg of body weight. Striped bass between the ages of 

4-10 yr produced approximately 100,000 mature ova/yr 

of life (Lewis and Bonner 1966). For a summary of striped bass fecundity estimates based on weights of fish, 

the reader is referred to Hardy (1978). 

3.16 Spawning 

Spawning times and locations 

Striped bass spawn in fresh or nearly fresh waters. 

Along the Atlantic coast, spawning occurs from midFebruary in Florida through June or July along the 

southern shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the lower 

St. Lawrence River (Raney 1952; Bigelow and Schroeder 1953; Barkuloo 1970). Spawning along the Florida 

Gulf coast occurs from February through May (Barku1001961, 1970). Table 4 summarizes striped bass spawning times along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. 

The principal spawning and nursery areas of striped 

bass along the Atlantic coast are found in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries (Merriman 1941; Raney 

1957). Spawning sites on the major rivers along the 

Atlantic coast are given in Table 5. 

Spawning occurs at or near the surface (Woodhull 

1947; Calhoun et al. 1950; Raney 1952; Surber 1958); 

while spawning a single female may be surrounded by as 

many as 50 males (Worth 1903; Merriman 1941). Eggs 

are broadcast loosely into the water. "Spawning by an 
Table 4.-Striped bass spawning season, adapted from Hardy (1978). 

Location 

Gulf of Mexico 

Mississippi 

Alabama 

Eastern Florida 

South Carolina 

North Carolina 

Chesapeake Bay 

region 

Delaware 

Hudson River 

New England 

Canada 

California 

Time 

peaks in June 

mid-February to 

mid-March (on basis 

of well-developed roe) 

April 

mid-February to end 

of May 

"probably nearer midwinter in St. John 

River" 

April to mid-May 

late April and May 

mo tly April, May, 

early June 

late May to mid-July 

peak June 

mid-May to mid-June 

peak-last 2 wk of 

May 

June and early July 

.June and July 

mid-March to late July 

peak-May and June 

Author 

Raney 1952 

McIlwain 1968 

Raney 1952 

Barkuloo 1970 

McLane 1955 

Scruggs 1957 

Chapoton and Sykes 1961 

Chapoton and Sykes 1961; 

Dovel 1971 

Raney 1952 

Raney 1952 

Rathjen and Miller 1957 

Bigelow and Schroeder 1953 

Bigelow and Schroeder 1953; 

Pearson 1938; Raney 1952 

Scofield 1928 

Calhoun et a1. 1950 

individual striped bass probably is completed within 

a few hours" (Lewis and Bonner 1966:328). 

Spawning peaks are apparently triggered by a noticeable increase in water temperature and vary greatly 

from year to year. The number of spawning peaks in the 

Roanoke River, N.C., was one in 1963 (Neal I8 ), three in 

1966 (Neal I9 ), and four in 1961 and 1962 (Neal footnote 

18). There was one spawning peak in the Potomac River, 

Md., during 1974 and 1975, and two during 1976 (Boynton et al. footnote 12). 

In a study designed to determine optimal sampling 

frequency, Cheek (1961) collected striped bass eggs 

hourly for 15 days below the spawning area in the Roanoke River. Sampling every 3 h yielded the smallest 

vanance. 

Diel spawning patterns 

Based on observations made over many years at the 

Weldon Fish Hatchery, spawning in the Roanoke River, 

N.C., can be, and often is, explosive in development 

with sharp spawning peaks of relatively brief duration, 

generally at night (Fish and McCoy 1959). In several 

South Carolina rivers, however, when the spawning 

season is considered as a whole, the natural light regime 

seemed to have little influence on the hour spawning occurred. May and Fuller (1965) reported that spawning in 

the Congaree River was evenly divided between daylight and night hours; on the Wateree River 55.5% ofthe 

spawning occurred during the day and 44.6% at night. 

i'l\eal, W. E. 1964. Striped bass study. Virginia's Dingell-Johnson 

Proj., Job Completion Rep., F-5-R-9, Job No.8, 14 p. 

i'Neal, W. E. 1967. Striped bass study. Virginia's Dingell-Johnson 

Proj., Job Completion Rep., F-5-R-12, Warm water fisheries investigations, Job No.8, 69 p. 

14 

Table 5.-Striped bass spawning sites, adapted from Hardy (1978). 

Area 

Genrl(la. 

Savannah River 

South Carolina 

Conl(aree River 

Wateree Ri ver 

North Carolina. 

Tar River 

Roanoke River 

Virgmia. 

Stanton River 

York River 

Pamunkey River 

(tributary of York) 

Mattaponi River 

(tributary of York) 

.James River 

Rappahannock River 

Maryland: 

Potomac River 

Patuxent River 

Elk River 

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal 

"';anticoke River 

Bohemia River 

Wicomico River 

Chester River 

Delaware: 

Delaware River 

New York: 

Hudson River 

California. 

Sacramento River 

Distance 

(upriver from mouth, km) 

:30-40 

68.6-8:JA 

peak below 59.:3, but up 

to 107 .5-111.2 

55.6-148.2; 75', within:37 

km area 

161.2-25:1.9, peak 200-241 

-!1.0-9H.~ above Kerr 

ReserVOir 

64.9-111 2; peak 74.1 

peak-3l.fi above West 

Point 

14.8-:35.2 above West 

Point; peak 16 7 

mouth of C'hickahominy 

to Hopewell · 120.4 

i4.1-120A 

94 5-1'j7 .. ~ 

peak 97 5-1:39.0 

66.7-77.8 

5.6-16 .• 

throughout Canal :::::26 

14-28 

5.6 

22.2-25.9 

51.9 

107.5-231.6 

first 46 of freshwater 

37.1-315.0 

Author 

Dudley et al 1977 

May and Fuller 

1965 

Humphries 1966 

Fish and McCoy 

1959; Dovel and 

Edmund 1971 

'heridan et al 

1960' 

Rinaldo 1971 

Tre"selt 1952 

Tresselt 1952 

Kriete 1978' 

Boynton et a1.. 

1977 

Tiller 1955 

\Iaf)'land Boa'rd of 

"';atural Resources 

1957' 1958' 

:vIuraw ki 1969 

Rat hjen and :\1iller 

1957 

Farley 1966 

Sheridan, J., B. Domrose. and B. Wollitz. 1960. Striped bass 

spawning investigations. In Virginia Dingell-.Johnson Project, Annual 

Progre s Report , 1 July 1959-30 June 1960, p. 30-43. Fed. Aid Proj. 

F-5-R-6, Warm water fisheries management. 

'William H. Kriete, Jr., Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, \' A 23062, pers. commun. 16 Feb. 1978. 

'Boynton, W. R., E. M. Setzler, K. V. Wood. H. H. ZIOn, and M. 

Homer. 1977. Draft report on Potomac River fisherie study; ichthyoplankton and juvenile investigations. Univ. Md. CEES Ref. ,",,0. 77-169-

eBL. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 20688. 

'iMaf)'land Board of Natural Resources. 1957. Fourteenth Annual 

Report, Annapolis, Md., p. 35-38. 

"Maryland Board of 1 atural Resources. 1958. Fifteenth Annual 

Report, Annapolis, Md., p. 32-34. 

However, Sheridan et al. 20 reported that spawning 

occurred in Nort h Carolina during the late afternoon or 

early evening hours. Spawning times in Virginia waters 

appear to be highly variable . In the Staunton River 

"Sheridan, J. , B. Domrose, and B. Wollitz. 1960. Striped bass 

spawning investigations. In Virginia Dingell-Johnson Project, Annual 

Progress Report, 1 July 1959-30 June 1960, p. 33-43. Fed. Aid Proj. F-5-

R-6, Warm water fisheries manage!llent. 

Table 6.- Development of striped bass embryos at 16.7°-17.2°C. 

Time after 

fertilization 

0-5 min 

20-40 min 

1h 

1-2 h 

2h 

4h 

8h 

12 h 

16 h 

20h 

24 h 

36 h 

48 h 

From Mansueti (1958a). 

Perivitelline space began to form. 

Well-defined blastomeres; 2-, 4-, and 8-cell stages. 

4- and 8-cell stages predominated. 

Blastomeres evident; perivitelline space reached 

greatest capacity; chorion thin, transparent, and 

fragile. 

Some eggs 32-cell stage, though 16-cell stage predominated. 

Blastoderm well-formed, berrylike in its late cleavage 

stages. 

Blastoderm granular in appearance. 

Blastoderm grown halfway down over yolk. 

Blastocoel forming; germ-ring thickened around 

periphery of blastoderm. 

Embryo developed; neural ridges and eyes visible; 

pigmentation present around embryo and oildroplet. 

Embryo well-differentiated, extended about half-way 

around circumference of yolk; embryos pigmented 

on dorsolateral parts of body and adjacent blastoderm. 

Larvae within eggs 1.6-2.0 mm TL; eyes welldifferentiated but lacked pigment; posterior part 

of embryo free from yolk sac. 

Yolk-sac larvae hatching; 2.9-3.7 mm TL. 

crease hatching percentage and increase striped bass 

larval deformities. One hundred percent larval mortality within 70 h was obtained at these temperatures, although striped bass eggs survived either constant or fluctuating water temperatures from 12.8° to 

23.9°C. 

Temperature fluctuations affect spawning. In 1963, 

water warmed up slowly in the Sacramento River, 

Calif., and fish migrated past Scramento, Calif., while in 

1964 with a fast temperature rise, striped bass spawned 

well below the Sacramento River (Farley 1966). Sudden 

drops in temperature resulted in cessation of spawning 

(Calhoun et al. 1950; Mansueti and Hollis 1963; Boynton et al. footnote 13). Calhoun et al. (1950) observed 

t hat spawning ceased during storms. 

Salinity 

Albrecht (1964) has shown that low salinities, 1.69-

1.74'/_ (920-948 ppm cn, enhance egg and larval survival and moderate salinities, 8.32-8.58'/_ (4,595-4,740 

ppm cn, are not detrimental to survival. Turner and 

Farley (1971) have shown that egg survival in salinities 

>1.8'/-(1,000 ppm Cl-) especially at temperatures higher 

than 18°C was greatly reduced if the eggs were not water 

Table 7.-Tolerance (numerator) and optimum range (denominator) of some environmental factors for 

striped bass eggs, larvae and young. After Doroshev (1970). 

Develop- Flow 

mental rate Temp 

stage mls Light °C 

Eggs 0.3-5.0 + 14-23 

1.0-2.0 17-20 

Larvae up 0-5 ++ 12-23 

t020mm 0.3-1.0 16-19 

Young 0-5 + 10-27 

20-50mm 0-1 16-19 

Young 0-5 ?-30 

50-100 mm 0-1 18-23 

are summarized in Table 8. Morgan and Rasin21 could 

not hatch striped bass eggs maintained at temperatures 

of 10.5° and 11.0°C. They found optimal survival of 

striped bass eggs at temperatures between 16° and 23°C 

with a rapid decline in percent survival at temperatures 

above 23°C. Rogers et a1. (1977) reported that eggs incubated at 12°C seldom survived to hatching. Highest survival occurred between 15° and 18°C. Barkuloo (1970) 

found water temperatures below 13.4°C and above 

22.2°C to be lethal for fertilized striped bass eggs obtained from a Florida population. Shannon and Smith 

(1968) found temperatures of 23.4°C and above to de-

"Morgan, R. P., II, and V. J. Rasin, Jr. 1973. Effects of salinity and 

temperature on the development of eggs and larvae of striped bass and 

white perch. In Hydrographic and ecological effects of enlargement of 

the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. U.S. Army Corps Eng., Phila. 

Dist. Contract No. DACW-61-71-C-0062. Final Rep., Append. X, 38 p. 

16 

Salinity 0 , 

pH ("'-) mg/! Author 

? 0-10 1.5- Mansueti (1958a) 

1.5-3 

6-9 0-15 2-20 Albrecht (1964); 

7-8 5-10 5-28 Tagatz (1961); 

Regan et al. (1968) 

6-10 0-20 3-20 Bogdanov et al 

7-9 10-15 6-12 (1967) 

6-10 0-35 3-20 Bogdanov et al. 

7-9 10-20 6-12 (1967) 

hardened in fresh water [130 ppm total dissolved solids 

(TDS) or less]. Striped bass eggs water harden in 

approximately 1 V2 h at 18°C. The authors found no 

striped bass eggs survived in 22.2°C waters at salinities 

> 1.8'/_. However, Morgan and Rasin (footnote 21) found 

that the percentage hatch of striped bass eggs and survival after 24 h did not vary significantly with salinities 

in the ranges tested (0-8'1-) (25% survival at 0'/_ to 34% 

survival at 8'/_). 

Radtke and Turner (1967) reported that a critical 

concentration of 350 ppm TDS blocked spawning up the 

San Joaquin River, Calif. The largest number of eggs 

were found in waters with TDS of <180 ppm. Farley 

(1966) found no significant striped bass spawning areas 

in the Sacramento River where the TDS ex~eeded 180 

ppm (0.18'1-). Likewise, Murawski (1969) noted that 

spawning in the Delaware River was in waters with a 

dissolved solid concentration of 180 ppm or less. 
Table S.-Temperatures (OC) associated with striped bass spawning. 

Lowest 

14.4 

10,0 

15,0 

12.4(1972) 

10.5(1971) 

11.5 

10.9·12.4 

11.3·12.0 

15,0 

13,0 

15.5 

14.4 

16.5·17.8 

19.0 

14.4·15,0 

15.5·15,7 

16,0 

Peak 

15.6·1\l.4 

14'.0·18.0 

15,0·17,0 

13,9·14.6 

18.4·19,0 

17.0 

16,7·19.4 

18,0·19,0 

21.7 

16.1·20,6 

19.4 

19.0·20.0 

Highest 

21.1 

19,5 

20,0 

17.0 

18,8 

23,6 

23.4 

22,6 

23.8 

21.7 

22.2·23.4 

24,0 

22,2 

24,0 

Location 

Atlantic coast 

Hudson River, N,Y. 

Hudson River, N.Y, 

Chesapeake and Delaware 

Canal, Maryland 

and Delaware 

Chesapeake and Delaware 

Canal 

Potomac River, Md, 

Potomac River, Md, 

Smit h Mt Dam, 

Leesville, Va, 

Roanoke River, N.C. 

Albemarle Sound 

Tributaries, N,C, 

Congaree River, S,C, 

Santee Cooper 

Reservoir, S,C, 

Ogeechee and Savannah 

Rivers, Ga. 

Apalachicola River, 

Fla, 

Sacramento River 

Delta, Calif. 

Sacramento River, 

Calif. 

San Joaquin River, 

Calif. 

Sacramento·San Joaquin 

Rivers, Calif. 

Suisan Bay, Sacramento 

and San Joaquin 

Rivers, Calif. 

Author 

Talbot 1966 

Institute of Environmental 

Medicine, N,Y, Univ, Medical 

Center 19731 

Rathjen and Miller 1957 

Johnson and Koo 1975 

Kernehan et al. 1975,' 1976' 

Mihursky et al. 1976' 

Boynton et al. 19775 

Neal 1971 

Shannon and Smith 1968; 

Shannon 1970 

Trent 1962 

May and Fuller 1965 

Scruggs 1957 

Smith 1973 

Barkuloo 19676 

Farley 1966 

Calhoun et al. 1950 

Woodhull 1947 

Hatton 1942 

Scofield 1931 

1Institutes of Environmental Medicine. 1973, Hudson River ecosystem studies: Effects of entrainment by the 

Indian Point Power Plant on Hudson River estuary biota. New York Univ, Med, Cent., N,Y" 289 p. 

' Kernehan, R J" B, E. Beitz, and S, 1. Tyler, 1975, Ichthyoplankton, Volume II, In Ecological studies in the 

vicinity of the Summit Power Station, January 1974 through December 1974, 618 p, Ichthyological Associates, Inc, 

Box 286, RD # 1, Middletown, DE 19709, 

' Kernehan, R J., R E. Smith, S. L, Tyler, and M, L, Brewster. 1976. Ichthyoplankton, Volume II, In Eco· 

logical studies in the vicinity of the proposed Summit Power Station, January through December 1975, 669 p. Ich· 

thyological Associates, Inc" Box 286, RD # 1, Middletown, DE 19709. 

'Mihursky, J. A., W. R Boynton, E. M. Setzler, K. V, Wood, H, H, Zion, E. W, Gordon, 1. Tucker, P. Pulles, 

and J. Leo, 1976. Final report on Potomac estuary fisheries study; ichthyoplankton and juvenile investigations, 

Univ, Md" CEES Ref. No, 76·12·CBL, 241 p. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 20688, 

5Boynton, W, R, E. M, Setzler, K. V, Wood, H , H, Zion, and M, Homer, 1977, Draft report on Potomac River 

fisheri es study; icht hyoplankton and juvenile investigations, Univ, Md" CEES Ref. No, 77·169·CBL, Chesapeake 

Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 20688, 

6Barkuloo, J . M, 1967, Florida striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum), Fla. Game Fresh Water Fish Comm" 

Fed, Aid Proj, No, F·I0·R, 24 p. 

Turbidity 

Striped bass are adapted to silt-laden and turbid 

waters (Mansueti 1962: Talbot 1966); heavy sediment 

loads do not seem to adversely affect striped bass 

hatching, Schubel and Auld (1974) reported that finegrained sediments at a concentration of 500 mg/liter had 

no affect on striped bass eggs. Hatching success did decrease at sediment concentrations above 1,000 mg/liter, 

but such high concentrations are not found even in 

dredge areas. Morgan et al. 22 concluded that the hatch 

of striped bass eggs as percent of control hatch was not 

significantly affected by suspended sediment levels 

17 

ranging from 20 to 2,300 ppm (mg/liter). However, the 

developmental rate of eggs was significantly lowered at 

sediment levels over 1,500 ppm. 

River flow 

Fish and McCoy (1959) concluded that the rapids sec2' Morgan, R P., II, and V, J. Rasin, Jr., and 1. A, ;-.Joe 1973. Effects 

of suspended sediments on the development of eggs and larvae of stTlped 

bass and white perch. In Hydrographic and ecological effects of enlarge· 

ment of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. U,S, Army Corps Eng., 

Phila. Dist. Contract No, DACW·61·71·C·OO62. Final Rep .. Append. XI 

21 p. 
tion of the Roanoke River became progressively more attractive to spawning striped bass as sustain minimum 

flows increased above 156 cm/s (4 m stage at Weldon, 

N.C.). Most of the spawning stock left the rapids when 

river flow was 110 cm/s or less. The greater the river dis-

, charge and the more uniformly it was regulated, the 

greater the utilization of the rapids section by spawning 

striped bass. 

The effects of currents on striped bass egg distribution has been demonstrated in the Potomac River 

(Polgar et al. footnote 15, from a study by Mihursky et 

aI. 2:!) Although the probability of encountering eggs in 

channel and shoal areas (when equal amounts of water 

strained were considered) was not significantly different, egg densities were higher and more variable in shallow waters «2 m) than in channel areas (>2 m). Polgar 

et al. (footnote 15) concluded that eggs deposited in the 

shallow-water areas were little affected by the dispersion processes of the Potomac River. Yolk-sac larval 

densities, however, were nearly the same in shallow and 

in channel waters. Thus over the relatively long residence time of the yolk-sac stage (approximately 6 days) 

the dispersion process of the Potomac River distributed 

the larvae about equally in the shallows and in the channel areas. 

Oxygen concentrations 

Striped bass egg survival decreased as oxygen concentrations decreased, even under the least rigorous test 

conditions (18.4°C and 5.0 mg/liter O2), (Turner and 

Farley 1971). At 4.0 mg/liter O2 the mean survival of 

eggs at 22.2°C was ~50% of the survival of the controls 

(saturated oxygen concentrations) at exposure times of 

6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 40 h (time required for hatching). 

At 5.0 mg/liter O2 egg survival was ~50% of the controls 

at exposure times of 6, 12, 18, 30, and 38 h (hatching 

time). Hatching time was slightly longer with lower DO 

(dissolved oxygen) concentrations. The longer striped 

bass eggs were exposed to lower oxygen concentrations, 

the lower the percentage survival of larvae after 6 days. 

Chittenden (1971a) reported that low DO concentrations in the freshwater tidal zone of the Delaware River 

have eliminated this area as a striped bass spawning 

ground. Likewise, Murawski (1969) contended that low 

DO concentrations (2.0-3.5 ppm) in the lower Delaware 

River may explain the absence of striped bass eggs in 

some areas. 

Egg distribution 

Several investigators have examined the vertical distribution of striped bass eggs within the water column 

with varying results. Egg densities in the Chesapeake 

" Mihursky, J. A., R. N. Block, K. Wood, R. Prince, and E. W. Gordon. 1974. Potomac estuary fisheries study; ichthyoplankton investigations. Univ. Md., Cent. Environ. Estuarine Stud., Nat. Resour. Inst., 

N.R.I. Ref. No. 74-127, 160 p. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, 

Solomons, MD 20688. 

18 

and Delaware Canal increased with depth (Johnson and 

Koo 1975). Likewise, Kernehan et al. (1975,2. footnote 

11) found striped bass egg densities from midwater and 

bottom samples in the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal 

to be significantly greater than densities from surface 

samples. The percentage of viable eggs increased from 

surface to bottom in all 4 yr of sampling. However, on 

the Potomac River egg densities did not significantly 

differ with depth (Boynton et al. footnote 13). 

Albrecht (1964) concluded that striped bass egg distribution within the water column depended upon current velocities. A minimum current velocity of30.5 cm/s 

was required to maintain eggs in suspension, an important factor for egg survival. At velocities of ~30.5 cm/s, 

eggs were concentrated near the bottom; egg distribution at greater velocities appeared to be random. Talbot 

(1966) suggested that tidal turbulence may be as important as river runoff for egg suspension. 

The effects of thermal pollution, entrainment, 

impingement, and chemical toxicity on striped bass 

eggs are considered at the end of section 3.23. 

3.22 Larval phase 

Larval development and behavior 

At hatching, striped bass range in length from 2.0 to 

3.7 (X = 3.1 mm TL) (Fig. 1d). The mouth has not 

formed and the eyes are unpigmented. Nourishment is 

derived from a very large yolk sac with a large oil globule (Mansueti 1958a, 1964). The rate of absorption of the 

yolk is highly variable; a temperature difference of 1.5°-

2.5°C has a significant effect upon the rate of absorption. Reported durations of the yolk-sac stage include: 

Temperature Time 

(OC) (days) Author 

12 9.0 Rogers et al. 1977 

15 8.3 Rogers et al. 1977 

16.7-17.8 6.0 Albrecht 1964 

18 7.8 Rogers et al. 1977 

18.4 (range 16.9-19.4) 5.0 Eldridge et al. 1977 

21 5.1 Rogers et al. 1977 

24 3.8 Rogers et al. 1977 

24 3.0 Albrecht 1964 

Duration of the yolk-sac stage has also been estimated 

at 7-14 days with traces of yolk sometimes remaining 

until the 22d day (Doroshev 1970)_ Doroshev reported 

that by 2 days the yolk sac had decreased 20% in 

volume, the oil globule had decreased 11 %, and the larvae were 4.5-5.2 mm TL. At 5 days, 50% of the yolk was 

utilized and the larvae were 5.8 mm TL; by 8 days, the 

yolk was 75% absorbed and the larvae were 5.8-6.5 mm 

TL. Rogers et al. (1977) found the efficiency of yolk utilization greatest in larvae reared between temperatures of 

"Kernehan, R. J., B. E. Beitz, and S. L. Tyler. 1975. "Ichthvoplankton Volume II. In Ecological studies in the vicinitv (. "er 

Station, January 1974 through December 197' ,1 

Associates, Inc., Box 286, RD # 1, Middletr 
of 

(0 I IIIn/til 

a 

b ./ 

. . 

62mm 

• • of • 

120 mnl 
tion of the Roanoke River became progressively more attractive to spawning striped bass as sustain minimum 

flows increased above 156 cm/s (4 m stage at Weldon, 

N.C.). Most of the spawning stock left the rapids when 

river flow was 110 cm/s or less. The greater the river discharge and the more uniformly it was regulated, the 

greater the utilization of the rapids section by spawning 

striped bass. 

The effects of currents on striped bass egg distribution has been demonstrated in the Potomac River 

(Polgar et a1. footnote 15, from a study by Mihursky et 

a1.2:l) Although the probability of encountering eggs in 

channel and shoal areas (when equal amounts of water 

strained were considered) was not significantly different, egg densities were higher and more variable in shallow waters «2 m) than in channel areas (>2 m). Polgar 

et a1. (footnote 15) concluded that eggs deposited in the 

shallow-water areas were little affected by the dispersion processes of the Potomac River. Yolk-sac larval 

densities, however, were nearly the same in shallow and 

in channel waters. Thus over the relatively long residence time of the yolk-sac stage (approximately 6 days) 

the dispersion process of the Potomac River distributed 

the larvae about equally in the shallows and in the channel areas. 

Oxygen concentrations 

Striped bass egg survival decreased as oxygen concentrations decreased, even under the least rigorous test 

conditions (18.4 °C and 5.0 mg/liter O2), (Turner and 

Farley 1971). At 4.0 mg/liter O2 the mean survival of 

eggs at 22.2°C was ~50% of the survival of the controls 

(saturated oxygen concentrations) at exposure times of 

6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 40 h (time required for hatching). 

At 5.0 mg/liter O2 egg survival was ~50 % of the controls 

at exposure times of 6, 12, 18, 30, and 38 h (hatching 

time). Hatching time was slightly longer with lower DO 

(dissolved oxygen) concentrations. The longer striped 

bass eggs were exposed to lower oxygen concentrations, 

the lower the percentage survival of larvae after 6 days. 

Chittenden (1971a) reported that low DO concentrations in the freshwater tidal zone of the Delaware River 

have eliminated this area as a striped bass spawning 

ground. Likewise, Murawski (1969) contended that low 

DO concentrations (2.0-3.5 ppm) in the lower Delaware 

River may explain the absence of striped bass eggs in 

some areas. 

Egg distribution 

Several investigators have examined the vertical distribution of striped bass eggs within the water column 

with varying results. Egg densities in the Chesapeake 

'l\1ihursky, ,J. A. , R. N. Block, K. Wood, R. Prince, and E. W. Gor. 

don. 1974. Potomac estuary fisheries study; ichthyoplankton investi. 

gations. Univ. Md. , Cent. Environ. Estuarine Stud., Nat. Resour. Inst. , 

N.R.I. Ref. No. 74·127, 160 p. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory 

Solomon , MD 20688. ' 

18 

and Delaware Canal increased with depth (Johnson and 

Koo 1975). Likewise, Kernehan et a1. (1975,24 footnote 

11) found striped bass egg densities from midwater and 

bottom samples in the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal 

to be significantly greater than densities from surface 

samples. The percentage of viable eggs increased from 

surface to bottom in all 4 yr of sampling. However, on 

the Potomac River egg densities did not significantly 

differ with depth (Boynton et a1. footnote 13). 

Albrecht (1964) concluded that striped bass egg distribution within the water column depended upon current velocities. A minimum current velocity or'30.5 cm/s 

was required to maintain eggs in suspension, an important factor for egg survival. At velocities of ~30.5 cm/s, 

eggs were concentrated near the bottom; egg distribution at greater velocities appeared to be random. Talbot 

(1966) suggested that tidal turbulence may be as important as river runoff for egg suspension. 

The effects of thermal pollution, entrainment, 

impingement, and chemical toxicity on striped bass 

eggs are considered at the end of section 3.23. 

3.22 Larval phase 

Larval development and behavior 

At hatching, striped bass range in length from 2.0 to 

3.7 (X = 3.1 mm TL) (Fig. 1d). The mouth has not 

formed and the eyes are unpigmented. Nourishment is 

derived from a very large yolk sac with a large oil globule (Mansueti 1958a, 1964). The rate of absorption of the 

yolk is highly variable; a temperature difference of 1.5°-

2.5°C has a significant effect upon the rate of absorption. Reported durations of the yolk-sac stage include: 

Temperature Time 

(OC) (days) Author 

12 9.0 Rogers et al. 1977 

15 8.3 Rogers et al. 1977 

16.7-17.8 6.0 Albrecht 1964 

18 7.8 Rogers et al. 1977 

18.4 (range 16.9-19.4) 5.0 Eldridge et al. 1977 

21 5.1 Rogers et al. 1977 

24 3.8 Rogers et al. 1977 

24 3.0 Albrecht 1964 

Duration of the yolk-sac stage has also been estimated 

at 7-14 days with traces of yolk sometimes remaining 

until the 22d day (Doroshev 1970). Doroshev reported 

that by 2 days the yolk sac had decreased 20% in 

volume, the oil globule had decreased 11%, and the larvae were 4.5-5.2 mm TL. At 5 days, 50% of the yolk was 

utilized and the larvae were 5.8 mm TL; by 8 days, the 

yolk was 75% absorbed and the larvae were 5.8-6.5 mm 

TL. Rogers et a1. (1977) found the efficiency of yolk utilization greatest in larvae reared between temperatures of 

"Kernehan, R. J., B. E. Beitz, and S. L. Tyler. 1975. Ichthvoplankton Volume II. In Ecological studies in the vicinitv ,. ~ ver 

Station, January 1974 through December 197' .I 

Associates, Inc., Box 286, RD # 1, Middletr 
18° and 21°e. Maximum length of yolk-sac larvae has 

been reported as 5-7 mm for laboratory-reared fish 

(Mansueti and Mansueti 1955; Rogers et al. 1977) and 7-

8 mm for wild populations (Mihursky et al. footnote 6). 

Hardy (1978) reviewed and summarized available literature on the physiological and anatomical development of striped bass larvae. 

Early larval behavior has been described by a number 

of authors. In open waters yolk-sac larvae attempted to 

swim to the surface (Raney 1952) but sank between 

swimming efforts (Pearson 1938; Mansueti 1958a; Dickson 1958). Newly hatched larvae require sufficient 

turbulence to keep them from settling to the bottom; 

otherwise, they will be smothered (Barkuloo 1970). In 

aquaria, larvae may be suspended perpendicularly in 

the water column with the head near the surface. At 1 or 

2 days of age larvae were near the surface and occasionally attached to floating objects (Mansueti 

c 

195 a); at 2 day larvae laid on the tt m or t1 t d; 

between 2 and 3 day trip db. Ian: 

ously (Doro.·hev 1970; R. E. Steven. 1 

days, larvae reared in aquaria 'warn horiz nt II , " r 

positively phototaxic, and came to the ur a(' to ~ d 

(McGill 1967). LikeWise 'and07. and .J( hn ton 1 

and Doroshev (1970l . tated that yolk- ae larv e 5.' -5. 

mm were po itively phototaxlc and remained 

tantly suspended in the water column. 

After yolk-sac ab orption, triped bas' spend an a\ erage of 11 day in the finfold (metamorpho.ing) tng 

(Fig. 3a) (Polgar et al. footnote 15). Minimum length of 

finfold larvae has been reported as 5 mm [laboratoryreared fish (Mansueti 1964) I and from 6 to 7 mm for larvae captured from the Potomac River; maximum length 

was approximately 12 mm (Mihursky et al. footnote 6). 

An estimate of the duration of the po, tfinfold ,'tage 

(Fig. 3b; full development of econd dor al fin) can be 

290mm 

Figure 3.-Morphology of striped bass (Marone a.ratilis); po llana", and ju\enil ,: a . Yinfold lan, ~ mm (tlutl\ 

197). b. Pastfinfold lan'a. 12 mm (;\Iansueti 19- a. fig. 2-). c, JU\ nile. 29 mm ;\tan u tI 1 - ,fi. - . 

19 
made from the length of postfinfold and juvenile 

striped bas (Fig 3c) caught in the Potomac River during 1975 and 1976 (Mihursky et al. footnote 6; Boynton 

et al. footnote 13). Twenty to thirty days is a good 

approximation of the duration of the postfinfold stages 

of striped bass. Detailed de~cription~ of the early 

'developmental stages are presented in Hardy (I 978), 

Doro hev (1970), and Mansueti (1958a). Other accounts 

of egg and larval development include: Ryder (1887). 

Hildebrand and Schroeder (1928), Pearson (19:~8), and 

Bigelow and Schroeder (1953). Original illustrations of 

striped bass larvae are given in Ryder (1887), Pearson 

(1938), and Man ueti (1958a). 

The duration of finfold and post fin fold stages (collectively termed larval stage by some authors: postlurval 

stag by others) is temperature dep ndent. Rogers et al. 

(1977) f JUnd the following durations for the larval. tage: 

1.,>« 

" day 

1,°(, 3,~ da 

21°C :-!4 da\ 

:-!4°C ~:3 da ~. 

Food and feeding habit 

Doro hev (19701 discu ed feeding behavior, food pre· 

feT('nt.::es, prey ize, and prey concentration utilized for 

reaTing the early developmental tage of striped bas 

(Table 9) Striped bas feed only on mobile planktonic 

food. Their feeding behavior con i ted of characteristic 

pas e in which they were observed aiming and ru hing 

at the comparatively large prey. Doroshev utilized an 

initial prey concentration of 15,000 Cyclop.~ nauplii and 

copepodites per liter (150-300 Jl.) in the ucce sful first 

feeding of9-day-old larval striped bl! s in aquaria 16.7 0 -

Table 9.-Feeding of young striped bas in earl) de\dopmental 

stages. Adapted from Doroshe\ (1970) 

Days 

after 

hatchmg 

9 

15 

22 

32 

45 

65 

100 

Age in 

days 

9 

11-12 

16-18 

Food Item 

Length Weight 

mmTL mg Preferred 

6-7 1-5 (\ clop .• : • 'aupl" I, 

ll; BrachlOnu.,. 

Ar/emla nauplii 

9-15 ·14 C\ctup., III·\' .\I'1lna 

sp. I Cladocerang) 

18-22 15-80 Cyclop., ..... [OIna: 

Chaoboru., 

20-30 40-220 My"i." Chironomidae 

30-50 220-1,000 M)'.,~" Chironomidae, 

Gammaridae 

50-70 1,000-3,500 Mysis, Gammaridae; 

fish fingerlings 

80-120 5,000-20,000 Maml} fish 

fingerlings 

Food concentrations - Aquana 

No./liter 

15,000 

2,000-5,000 

1,000-1,500 

Cyclops nauplii 

Cyclops II, III, IV 

Cyclops IV, V - Moina 

Diameter or 

length mm 

n.! :;·03 

(t30 lOO ~I 

0.1·0 h 

OOO·tlOO ~I 

O. -1 :; 

1800·1.';00 1') 

4·; 

10·15 

15·20 

up to 30 

Comments 

Successful 

rearing of 

stri ped bass 

larvae 

20 

17,fi o e. H· reduced prey concentrations to between 

2,000 and fl,OOO/liter by day 11 to day 12 when the air 

bladder of most larvae wa filled, energy expenditures 

w!'re harpl reduced, and the effectivene of the food 

I'llrch incrI'aHNI, Although the prey den iti utilized by 

Doro hov IIr' not minimal, it i obviou that the availa· 

hilltyof ufficient concentration of uilable prey which 

lire r 'quired for th fi t vera I day of triped ba feed · 

109 i a critical fnctrJr in the ucc of any larval year 

ria , By age 40.r,o day, 22·35 mm 'r L, triped ba feed 

r('udilv nn plunkton and eplbenthr including mysid 

Ilnd chironomid I TVlle . triped b8 will take any food 

Including dry no ting fnod t gc 50· 30 day; by -90 

day, trip d bll 5().) mm 'r L pr ferred f include 

ny id , gammnrid , and fi h up to 20 mm in length 

(J) ,rf) hey 1970). 

numh'r of th r inv tigato have d ril, d the 

initiatIOn of r .ding In lri d b larvae 

r lIy 0 curr -d fr m I to 10 dilY aft r hatching 

r 'vi w by Hardy II 7), Ithough 

r' orr:!ed II tiv I 'f ding triped ba th)u ht 0 be 24 h 

old Although the mouth i not evid nt in newl 'hat hed 

trip d b I ,it I formed tan fr m 2 to da. o r at 

a length from .5 to 5.2 mm (M n ueti 1 - ; Tatum et 

al 1 : D h 1 70) thou h it i ibly not fune· 

rnu h 10 d y after hatching Logan 

1. 1 ob rvcd yolk- e laTVae 

d >\'eloping mouth pa m da at temperature trom 

22 to 2 . 0 and feedmg on zooplankton during the 

lindoz nd John ton (1 ) .tated that at a 

teml rutur of 21. DC th )\ Ik ~a c i. ab rbed during 

th Ixth day, f n taltic wave began in the body CB",t . 

during the venth day nd by the eighth day inge tion 

w fir t oh rv d (larva about mm TL). Larvae took 

early op pod In t which appeared to pa . through 

the ahmentary canal untouched by dige ti\'e juice. 

During the ninth day, the gut content were darker and 

obvlOu.'ly altered h. dige tion . Tatum el al. (1966) 

ob erved larvae to be po itively phototrophic, although 

Rathjen and 1iIler (1957) found both larvae and p<btlarvae concentrated near the bottom of the wBter 

column a feeding began. ~1Bn ueti (19 a) tated that 

2 wk after hatching larvae foraged at the bottom of 

aquaria. 

:-"liller (1977) attempted to a certain minimal feeding 

requirement of first-feeding triped ba in the laboratory and estimated that a minimum prey concentration 

of 1,864 nauplii (Artemial/lite r wa required to e tablish 

first-feeding, Thi prey den ity might be the maximum 

food den ity required during the critical period of changing from an endogenou to an exogenou food supply, 

since the prey concentration required to meet the minimum metabolic demands of the striped bass could be 

expected to decrease with increasing larval length and 

prey capture efficiency. Using the equation 

where 

W=V 

W = volume of water (liters) searched per hour 

L = TLincm 
established by Hunter (1972), Miller estimated that 

first-feeding striped bass larvae (5.7-6.3 mm TL) would 

be expected to search out a volume of 0.185-0.250 

liters/h. He further estimate~ strike efficiency to be between 2.0 and 2.6% for first-feeding striped bass. 

Environmental conditions 

(both larval and juvenile stages) 

A number of studies have ascertained optimal conditions for survival and growth of striped bass larvae and 

juveniles. Table 7 summarizes tolerance and optimum 

range of some of these environmental conditions. 

Salinity 

As Table 7 indicates striped bass larvae do better in 

low salinity waters than in fresh water. Shell25 reported 

a significantly higher mean survival rate (9%) for striped 

bass larvae in rearing ponds with 1%. salinity than in 

freshwater rearing ponds (2%). Adding CaC04 to rearing 

ponds did not increase striped bass larval survival 

(Reeves and Germann 1972). Davies (1973) found 80% 

survival contours shifted toward higher temperatures as 

TDS (mg/liter NaCl) were increased from 100 to 900 

mg/liter (0.1-0.9%.). Tatum et a1. (1966) reported 24-h 

median tolerance limits of 4,830 ppm NaCI (4.83%.) and 

a pH of 5.3 for yolk-sac larvae. Lal et a1. (1977) demonstrated that for optimal survival and growth, striped 

bass larvae should be reared in diluted seawater, and 

juveniles in seawater (Table 10); they stated that "The 

high rate of mortality of larvae reared in fresh water 

which continues even after metamorphosis has not occurred in our experiments with sea water." Bayless 

(1972) reported better growth and survival of larvae held 

in salinities of 3.5, 10.5, and 14.0%. than in freshwater 

controls. Best growth was obtained at a salinity of 

14.0%.; best survival occurred at 10.5% •. Critical salinity 

for striped bass larvae was between 21 and 28% •. Rathjen and Miller (1957) concluded that on the Hudson 

River young-of-the-year striped bass grew more rapidly 

" Shell, E. W. 1974. Factors limiting the survival and growth of fry 

and fingerling striped bass, Marone saxatilis. U.S. Dep. Commer., 

NOAA, Nat!. Mar. Fish. Serv., Annu. Prog. Rep., Proj. AFC-7, Seg. 1, 54 

p. 

Table to.-Optimum salinities for rearing of striped bass larvae. 

From Lal et al. (1977). 

Optimal growth Optimal survival 

Age: Days after Salinity Age : Days after Salinity 

hatching %0 hatching %0 

1-9 6.75 1-6 3.37 

10-19 13.49 7-13 6.75 

20-29 20.24 14-20 13.49 

30-35 26.98 21-29 20.24 

36 ... Sea water 30-35 Sea water 

(Metamorphosis) (La Jolla 

sea water 36 ... Sea water 

= 33.73) (Metamorphosis) 

21 

in brackish water than did those upstream. Mihursky et 

a1. (footnote 6) presented evidence which indicated that 

juvenile striped bass do in fact migrate to the saltier portions of the estuary after reaching a size larger than 70 

mmTL. 

Temperature 

Davies (1970) found striped bass larvae able to acclimate to temperature changes faster than juveniles 

although the temperature range for larval survival is 

much less, 10°-25°C, than for juveniles, 4.4°-35°C. 

Acclimation to lower temperatures was a slower process 

than acclimation to higher temperatures: 30-35 h versus 

4 h for larvae; 8 days versus "rapidly" for juveniles. 

Tern perature-salinity interaction 

Otwell and Merriner (1975) reared larval and juvenile striped bass in various temperature-salinity experiments and found significant effects due to temperature, 

salinity, and age. The greatest mortalities were at the 

lowest temperature and highest salinity combinations. 

Mean mortality at 20%. (23.6%) was higher than at 

either 12%. (15.4%) or 4%. (11.8%). Likewise mean 

mortalities at the lowest temperature, 12°C were >50% 

in contrast to a mean mortality of 3_5% at 18°C and 

7.2<:0 at 24°C. Age was a significant factor in mortality; 

fish younger than 28 days had mean mortalities ranging 

from 3.6 to 11.0%; fish older than 28 days had mean 

mortalities >20% and as high as 40%. 

Acclimation 

Tagatz (1961) has shown that juvenile striped bass 

can survive transfer between salt (34%.) and fresh water 

at temperatures from 12.8° to 21.1°C but not at 7_2°C. 

Loeber (1951), however, found that although young-ofthe-year and yearling striped bass could be transferred 

directly from fresh to salt water, the reciprocal transfer 

caused a shock reaction. In transfers conducted within 

freshwaters, Tagatz (1961) found that juvenile striped 

bass suffered mortalities upon transfer from 12.8° or 

21.1°C water to 7.2°C water. However, no mortalities 

resulted by transfer from cooler to warmer waters. This 

agrees with the well-established conclusion that fish 

acclimate more rapidly to increasing temperatures than 

to decreasing temperatures (Meldrim et a1. 1974). 

Oxygen 

McBal6 observed that 47-day-old striped bass held in 

a rearing pond at 30°C, 3 ppm DO, and 44 ppm CO2 

were distressed; however, 31- to 33-day-old striped bass 

held in a pond at 27.8°C, 3 ppm DO, and 40 ppm CO2 

2·McBay, L. G. 1971. Report on fry production and rearing of fingerling striped bass, Morone saxatilts (Walbaum) at Richmond Hill Fi.h 

Hatchery, Georgia. Ga. Game Fish Comm , port Fi h. Di\" .. Atlanta 

Ga., 39 p. 
did not visually appear to be distressed. Chittenden 

f1971b), in a study of the oxygen requirements of juvenile triped bass (81-108 mm TL), described behavior at 

low oxygen concentrations. At a temperature range of 

16°-19°C, Chittendon found that t he following oxygen 

concentrations (±99CO confidence limits) caused these 

'behavior patterns: 1.81 ± 0.10 mg/liter- restlessness, 

1.28 ± 0.10 mg/liter-inactivity, 0.95 ± 0.06 mg/literequilibrium loss, and 0.72 ± 0.04 mg/liter--death. He 

(1971b:1829) concluded that, "dissolved oxygen concentrations of about 3.0 mg/liter may represent the minimum that enables striped bass to exist normally at 

water temperatures near 16-19° C. Even this amount 

may be insufficient to maintain optimum populations." 

Klyashtorin and Yarzhombek (1975) concluded t hat 

the critical oxygen concentration for juvenile striped 

bass weighing 0.3-22 g was between 4.0 and 4.5 mg/liter 

at 22°C. Decrease in oxygen levels to this critical 

concentration (for standard metabolism) does not result 

in the death of the fish but does restrict motor activity 

and leads to a reduction in food consumption, increased 

energy expenditure for respiration, and a reduced 

growth rate. See also section 3.44. 

Suspended sediments 

Exposure to suspended sediment concentrations of 

500 and 1,000 mg/liter for 48-96 h significantly reduced 

(P<0.05) the survival of striped bass yolk-sac larvae 

(Auld and Schubel 1978). 

Sherk et al. (1975) reported LC50 concentrations of 

uspended sediments (0.78 IJ. median size, 72% <2 IJ.) for 

striped bass larvae; 24 h--4.85 g/liter; 48 h-2.80 g/liter. 

The effects of thermal pollution, entrainment, 

Impingement, and chemical toxicity on striped bass larvae are considered at the end of section 3.23, competitIOn in section 3.33, and predation in section 3.34. 

3.23 Juveniles phase 

See also sections 3.22, 3.43, 3.44, 3.51, 3.52, 3.53, and 

I ·t.3 

Calhoun (1953) noted the following concerning juveniles collected in San Francisco Bay: a) Shallow bays 

t nded to "trap" juveniles on strong flood tides; b) juvenIle avoIded deep bay areas until they were good swimIller~ (> 50.8 mm); c) juveniles <25.4 mm did not school, 

Ilrger juveniles did; d) juveniles moved to saltier areas 

I they grew older 

Food and feeding habits 

:\1 rkle and Crant (1970) inve tigated the summer 

f, d h bit of young-of-the-year striped bass in several 

\ Irglnl rive~ :"1'. ids dominated the diet of fish <70 

mm In the York River where alinities were usually 

> 10·'_. In. eel. dominated the diet of fish of the same 

Ill: In the .lame. River where alinities were <5% •. 

triP d ha ,0·1- mm TL fed on fish (primarily yolk22 

sac stage naked gobies, Gobiosoma bosci) in the York 

River and decapod shrimp, Palaemonetes, in the James 

River. 

Bason (1971) examined the diet of young striped bass 

(50-100 mm FL) in the Delaware River, Salinity was the 

determining factor of the striped bass diet. Neomysis 

americana was the basic food of young bass in the Delaware River; Crangon septemspinosa was second in importance , In the tidal creeks, fish and decapods, primarily Palaemonetes pugio, were the most important 

food item volumetrically during summer, and the 

amphipod, Corophium, the most numerous, D~ring the 

fa ll, Corophium was most numerous; Palaemonetes 

pugio, mysids, and fish supplemented the diet. In the 

Elk River, during summer, amphipods ranked first in 

importance and cope pods second, In fall the bay 

anchovy, Anchoa mitchilli, and the Atlantic silverside, 

Menidia menidia, dominated the diet. The diet of the 

subadults (1-3 yr) indicated they feed primarily on or 

near the bottom. During 1968, crustaceans dominated 

t he diet; amphipods were most common during summer, 

and mysids in the fall ; fish ranked second. In 1969; bay 

anchovy and weakfis h, Cynoscion regalis, were the primary food ; mysids ranked second during the summer 

months while t he grass shrimp, Palaemonetes, ranked 

second during fall. 

J uvenile striped bass from the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal consumed a similar diet. Striped bass from 

40 to 100 mm FL fed primarily on Neomysis americana, 

Gammarus spp., and Corophium spp, Juveniles over 100 

mm consumed some fish, primarily bay anchovies, and 

larger invertebrates (Bason et al. 27 ). During the previous year Neomysis americana was the principle food of 

young bass < 100 mm, whereas fish, mainly the Atlantic 

menhaden, Breuoortia tyrannus, formed a more important part of the diet of fish up to 270 mm FL (Bason et 

al./8 footnote 27). 

Young-of-the-year striped bass collected in the 

Hudson River fed primarily on calanoid copepods, amphipods, isopods, and chironomid larvae. Cope pods 

were an important food item for fish between 50 and 75 

mm; Gammarus were often consumed by larger youngof-the-year fish. Yearling striped bass fed primarily on 

calanoid copepods and Gammarus. Striped bass >150 

mm TL were generally piscivorous (Texas Instruments, 

Inc, 1973/9

.

30 footnote 10). 

. Ba on, W. H., S. E. Allison, L. O. Horseman, W. H. Keirsey, P. E. 

LaCivita, R D. Sander, and C. A. Shirey. 1975. Fishes. Volume L In 

Ecological studie in the vicinity of the proposed Summit Power Station . 

. Jan.-Dec. 1975,392 p. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Box 286, RD Il l , 

i\ltddletown, DE 19709. 

" Bason, W. H., S. E. Allison, L. O. Horseman , W. H . Keirsey, and C. 

A Shirey. 1975. Fishes. Volume I, Part A. In Ecological studies in 

the viCinity of the proposed Summit Power Station. Jan.-Dec. 1974,327 p. 

Ichthyological Associates, Inc., Box 286, RD #1, Middletown, DE 19709. 

"Texas Instruments, Inc. 1973. Hudson River ecology study in the 

area of Indian Point. First Annual Report to Consolidated Edison Co. of 

'\'ew York, Inc .. :148 p. 

"Texas Instruments, Inc. 19n. Hudson River ecological study in 

the area of Indian Point. 2d 'emi-Annu. Rep. ,Jan. 1 to June 30, 

19,:1 Prepared for Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. 
Numerous authors have examined the food habits of 

striped bass in the California Delta region. The mysid 

shrimp, Neomysis mercedis ( = N. awatschensis), was 

the most important food of young-of-the-year striped 

bass, with tubed amphipods, Corophium stimpsoni and 

C. spinicorne, ranking second, especially where Neomysis was scarce. If both were present, the bass selected 

Neomysis (D. E. Stevens 1966). During the second summer of life, young striped bass began feeding on small 

fish. Stomach contents of the striped bass depended 

upon position of the fish within the water column; fish 

caught on the bottom had been feeding on Neomysis 

and Corophium, whereas those caught in midwater had 

consumed threadfin shad (D. E. Stevens 1966). 

Heubach et al. (1963) examined the food of young-ofthe-year striped bass in the Sacramento-San Joaquin 

River System. During the summer, bass fed on: Neomysis (59CO occurrence) ; cope pods (59%); cladocerans 

(23CO); Corophium, tubed amphipod, (12%). Percent 

frequency occurrence of copepods was greater in fish 

<2.5 cm than in fish 2.8-7.6 cm; percent frequency of 

Neomysis and Corophium was greater in the large fish. 

Occurrence of planktonic species in striped bass stomachs generally agreed with the plankton distributions in 

the environment. Salinity was suggested as the principle 

determining factor of striped bass diet as it determined 

copepod distributions. Copepods most commonly utilized as prey were Eurytemora affinis, Acartia clausii, 

and Pseudodiaptomus euryhalinus in the saline area of 

the Sacramento River, and further upstream, the freshwater genera Diaptomus and Cyclops. Diet in the fall 

depended upon location. Chief constituents of the 

winter and spring diet were Neomysis (73% occurrence), 

copepods (58%), and Corophium (23%). Striped bass 

did not feed on available benthic fauna with the exception of Corophium, Nereis, and tendipedid larvae. 

A catastrophic decline in prey populations and a 

subsequent crash of the juvenile striped bass population occurred in the California Delta region in 1972 

(Chadwick 1974). Mid-June populations of striped bass 

larvae in the California Delta region were approximately the same for the years 1970-72. Near the end of 

June 1972 salt water entered the system resulting in a 

13-yr low density of Neomysis mercedis. By midsummer, numbers of juvenile striped bass were the lowest in 13 yr of recording. Chadwick (1974) concluded 

that the depressed Neomysis population contributed to 

the unusually poor survival of the 1972 striped bass year 

class.. 

The rates at which Neomysis, copepods, and Corophium are digested are not identical. This can lead to an 

overemphasis on the importance of the amphipod, Corophium, and an underestimation of the importance of 

cope pods in the striped bass diet. Heubach et al. (1963) 

found most cope pods still identifiable to genus after 1 h 

of digestion, Neomysis identifiable after 6 h, and Corophium identifiable after 8 h. 

Visual cueing plays an important role in feeding. 

Feeding sequences observed by Bowles (1976) suggested 

that foraging was repeated in the same location until no 

23 

food was available. Juveniles reduced interfish distances 

during feeding. 

See section 3.41 for food conversion ratios and maintenance requirements. 

See section 7.6 for a discussion of prey species utilized in striped bass culture and section 3.22 for 

consideration of environmental factors. 

Thermal pollution 

The discharge of heated waters from power plants into 

fish spawning or nursery areas of many marine, estuarine, anadromous, and freshwater fish species has 

prompted numerous investigations into the effects of 

thermal pollution. The effects of increased water 

temperature on striped bass are summarized in Table 11 

and briefly discussed below. 

Several investigators have attempted to ascertain the 

effects of exposing striped bass eggs and larvae to elevated temperatures (~T) for periods of time consistent 

with the ~ T expected during entrainment and subsequent passage through a power plant. Schubel et al. 

(1976) in a series of experiments summarized in Table 

11 found striped bass eggs and larvae to be more resistant to increased water temperatures than eggs and larvae of either American shad or blueback herring. 

The striped bass egg and larval stages most sensitive 

to increased temperatures are shown in Figures 4 and 5. 

Ambient water temperatures for these experiments 

(18.9° -20°C) were similar to those encountered at the 

end of the spawning season on the Hudson River. A ~ T 

of 8.3°C would exceed the maximum safe temperature 

of the late blastula, the most sensitive striped bass egg 

stage, by approximately 2.8°C for a 30-min exposure 

and by about 1.7°C for a 15-min exposure. The 6O-min 

tolerance of young striped bass larvae (up to about 12 

days of age) would likewise be exceeded by a rated capacity ~ T of 8.3°C (Fig. 5). 

Coutant and Kedl (1975) reported that approximately 2-wk-old, 4-6 mm striped bass larvae could tolerate a temperature of 29°C for 30 min without mortalities; however, temperatures of 31 ° and 33°C resulted in 

50c;o mortalities within a 5- or 6-min period. 

Extensive thermal investigations have been undertaken by Kerr (1953) at the Contra Costa Steam Plant in 

the California Delta region. Exposure times to ~ T during 

these experiments were for 10 min or less. The mortalities cited in Table 11 were after a 5-day observation 

period. Striped bass utilized in the condenser experiments were subjected to an operating condenser at the 

Contra Costa Steam Plant while the unit was on full 

load. 

Striped bass seem unable to discern lethal temperatures. Dorfman (1974), in a series of temperature gradient experiments, found that juvenile striped bass did 

not avoid heated waters that proved to be fatal to some 

fish . 

The importance of dividing fish acclimation and 

avoidance data into responses during periods of rising 

field temperatures and responses during times of falling 
Table H.-Effects of increased temperatures on striped bass, Morone soxatilis. DO dissolved oxygen; llT elevated temperatures; 

ND =no data. 

Size Accl. Test MorSalinity DO range temp Exp. llT temp tality 

pH (%.) (mg/!) (mm) (OC) time (OC) (OC) (%) Comments Author 

,7.5 0.9 Egg and 13.3-13.9 ND Optimum temperature Davies 1973 

larvae for rearing 

Eggs 16.6-19.6 4-60 min 7-20 23.6-29.6 0-2 Period of cooling Schubel et al. 

to ambient 1976 

temperature 60-300 

min 

15 31.6-34.6 0-2 Hatch not significantly 

affected 

36.6 32 

20 393 100 Total mortality 

within 2 min 

Yolk-sac 19.3-21.1 4-30 min 7-20 26.3-41.1 Given Percent mortality 

larvae below 24 h after 

19-111 exposure to II T 

hold 

up to 29.3-31.1 0-67 Return to within 1°C 

10 Notsig- of ambient within 

nificant 180 min 

15 35.0-36.1 48-77 Return to within 1°C 

Signifi- of ambient within 

cant 95 min 

15 34.3-36.1 0-56 Return to within 1°C 

Notsig- of ambient within 

nificant 120 min 

15 34.3-36.1 3-100 Return to within 4°C 

Signifi- of ambient within 

cant 140 min 

19.3-21.1 5-10min 20 39.3-41.1 Virtually Return to within 1°C 

total of ambient within 

100-130 min. 

Fresh Sat. Eggs and 18.9-19.5 30-60-120 up to 27.2 Varied See Figs. 4,5 Institute of Enlarvae min 8.3 vironmental 

Medicine 1973 ' 

4.0-6.0 21 (±2) 6and30 min 8 29 0 Simulated condensor Coutant and Kedl 

6min 10-12 31 and 33 50 tube 1975 

Fresh 47-83 22.2 10min 11 33.3 15 Test flume Kerr 1953 

Fresh 47-83 22.2 10min 10 32.2 10 Test flume 

Fresh 21-46 22.2 3"2-5 min 8.9 31.1 6 Actual condensor 

passage 

3 21-46 22.2 3l!,-5min <6 

Juvenile 21.1 up to 36.7 and Some Temperature Dorfman 1974 

18.1 others preference 

7 -7.8 1-7 Sat. 34-129 5-27.2 6.6-16 12.8-34.4 Avoidance temperature Meldrim and Gift 

1971 

7.3·7.4 8 Sat. 72-78 26.1 15min 5.5 31.7 No apparent 

stress 7.3-7.4 4 Sat. 70-168 15-26.1 15min 5.5+8.3 max. of 4 dead at 

34.4 8.3°C 

llT-ali 

stressed at 

both llT 

7.0-8.0 0-4 Sat. 34-173 21-27 Summer up to 32-34 0 Avoidance temperature ; Meldrim et al. 

12.2 differing tempera- 1974 

ture water bath. 7.0-8.0 0-7 Sat. 87-146 10-16 Fall up to 23-29 0 Avoidance temperature 

16 

7.0-8.0 4-4.5 Sat. 76-129 5-6 Winter upto 13-19 0 Avoidance temperature 

12.7 

70-8.0 2.5 Sat. 82-201 5 Early 13.3 18 Avoidance temperature 

spring 

5-38 48 h 30-33 50 Kelly E)nd Chad5-38 2-4-6 min up to 30-32 Equilibrium wick 1972 

10 loss 30°C 

24 
Table II.-Continued. 

Size Acc!. 

Salinity DO range temp Exp . 

pH (%.) (mglI) (mm) (OC) time 

8 16.7 4-6 min 

8 20.6 6min 

4min 

6min 

4 min 

27 21.1 2 min 

4min 

6min 

Fingerling 

Eggs and 16-24 

fry 

Around 

40.6 cm 

Test 

t>T temp 

(OC) (OC) 

10 26.7 

7 27.6 

10 30.6 

10 30.6 

n.6 32.2 

10 31.1 

10 31.1 

10 31.1 

35 

27 

n.5 

Mortality 

(%) 

Probably 

signifiComments 

Percen t mortali ty 

48 h after 

cant exposure to t> T's 

mortality 

58 

n 

28 

63 

35 

16 

46 

ND 

Significant 

Upper maximum 

tolerated 

Winter sport 

fishery in 

power plant 

discharge canal 

Author 

Chadwick 1974 

Loeber 1951 

Shannon 1969 

Marcy and Galvin 

1973 

iInstitute of Environmental Medicine. 1973. Hudson River ecosystem studies: Effects of entrainment by the Indian Point Power Plant on Hudson 

River estuary biota. ew York Univ. Med. Cent., N.Y., 289 p. 

Fertilization Hatch ± 1 Hour !, I Blastula Gastrula ! '+--4·----+-------+---- Egg ----. ---larvae----+ 

90 

u: 

~ 80 27 E exposure in min. ~ ~ 5 0-015 5 e t::r-f:. 60 (; 

~ Q; a. 0-0 120 a. E E .! 70 21 ~ 

~ 

- - - - - Ambient Temperature - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

60 0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 128 288 768

16 

Time in Hours 

Figure 4.-Maximum safe tempertures (no apparent increase in mortality or abnormal behavior compared to controls) 

relative to exposure times for striped bass eggs and larevae from Monck's Corner, S.C. hatchery stock. From Lauer 

et al. (1974). 

ambient temperatures has been demonstrated by Meldrim and Gift (1971) and Meldrim et a1. (1974) who 

foun-d significant seasonal differences in fish responses 

at a given temperature. A direct relationship between 

ambient acclimation temperatures (temperatures of 

Delaware River water at the time the experiments were 

conducted) and upper avoidance temperatures for juvenile striped bass was reported by Meldrim and Gift 

(1971). Fish acclimated to 27°C waters in late August 

avoided 34°C waters, whereas bass acclimated to 5°C 

ambient temperatures in December avoided 13°C 

waters. Thermal stress was noted in temperature shock 

experiments wit.h a 15-min exposure to 5.5° and 8.3°C 

25 

t.T. Juvenile striped bass acclimated to 19°C suffered 

mortalities in two experiments with a 8.3°C t.T. These 

authors concluded that striped bass were more sensitive to thermal shock than white perch. Additional 

temperature avoidance and acclimation studies have 

been undertaken by Meldrim et a1. (1974) and are 

summarized in Table 11. 

The effects of prolonged exposure to t. T have been examined by several investigators. Kelly and Chadwick 

(1972) reported that larval and juvenile striped bass 

held for 48 h at t. Thad LCso temperatures ranging from 

30° to 33°C. Variations within this temperature range 

were not related to either acclimation temperatures or to 
25 14.0 

O,~ mean 

I = range 

LA: }J .Q..... 20 11.0 

"E "E Q) Q) 

15 15 

E E 

< < Q) 15 8.3 Q) 

> > 

..8 ..8 

< < <II 

Q) '" Q) 

~ Q) 

Ol 10 5.6 m Q) Q) 

0 0 

5 2.8 

200 

Period of Exposure (minutes) 

Figure 5.-Upper safe temperature limits relative to exposure time for 4- a nd 36-h striped bass embryos (ambient temperature 

= 18.9°C). From La uer et al. (1974). 

the size of the fish. Chadwick (1974) concluded that generally mortalities did not exceed 50% until water t emperatures approached 32.2°C irrespective of the 1:;, T or 

duration of exposure. He recommended that maximum 

water temperatures be kept below 30°C to minimize losses due to thermal shock. Likewise, Loeber (1951) 

reported that the upper maximum temperature tolerated by striped bass juveniles was approximately 35°C. 

Shannon (1969), however, found significantly lower survival of 2-day-old striped bass larvae hatched from eggs 

incubated at temperatures from 16° to 24°C and then 

exposed to 27°C than from larvae hatched from eggs 

incubated at temperatures from 16° to 24°C and subsequently kept at these same temperatures. 

It is well known that the warmer waters of power plant 

discharge canals in temperate latitudes attract fish during the colder months. Marcy and Gavin (1973), for example, reported a substantial winter sport fishery for 

striped bass in the heated discharge canal of a Connecticut power plant. 

Impingement and entrainment 

The terms "entrainment" and "impingement" are, on 

occasion, incorrectly used. Coutant (1974) defined entrainment as "the incorporation of small organisms into 

the cooling water flow," whereas impingement " refers to 

the physical blockage of larger organisms from joining 

this entrainment through placement of barrier screens." 

He further differentiated between two types of entrainment: "intake (or pumped) entrainment referring to 

organisms that enter the intake and are pumped 

through the condensers; and plume entrainment where 

organisms are part of the dilution water that con26 

tributes to turbulent mixing and cooling of the discharge ." (Coutant 1974:3, 4.) 

Extensive impingement studies on juvenile striped 

bass have been undertaken at the Contra Costa Steam 

Plant in California. Striped bass sensed a screened obstruction in a channel before they reached it. If the current speed was equal to their swimming ability, the fish 

would move laterally in front of the obstruction, seeking 

a refuge or area of lower velocity that they could negotiate. Only when a fish became exhausted or the current 

was beyond its swimming ability did the fish become 

impinged upon a screen (Kerr 1953). 

Results of Kerr's (1953) impingement studies in a test 

fl ume with 10-min exposure to varying water velocities 

are summarized below. Eighty percent of 19-38 mm 

striped bass (90 fish) avoided impingement at a current 

velocity of 30.5 cm/s; only 5% avoided impingement at 

43 cm/s. All impinged fish of this size range died. 

Ninety-five percent of 26-76 mm striped bass (55 fish) 

avoided impingement at a velocity of 61 cm/s. All 127-

178 mm juvenile striped bass tested resisted a 61 cm/s 

velocity; one fish was impinged at a velocity of 84 cm/s 

(maximum attainable velocity in the test flume). Kerr 

(1953) concluded that striped bass 127 mm and larger 

could swim at will in a velocity of 84 cm/s. 

Impingement velocities for striped bass eggs, larvae, 

and smaller juveniles have also been ascertained (Skinner 1974). Water velocity appears to be a more important determinant of swimming performance than time, 

although survival of impinged fish is related to impingement time as well as water velocity. Skinner found 

90'10 of larval striped bass 12-15 mm able to avoid impingement at water velocities of 6 cm/s for 6 min or less. 

In general, survival was <90% for striped bass <40 mm 
at velocities over 15 cm/s. Ninety percent of juvenile 

striped bass 40-50 mm were able to swim for up to 6 min 

at velocities not exceeding 24 cm/s. However, almost all 

fish of this size range tested were impinged at velocities 

over 49 cm/s. Survival of impinged striped bass eggs is 

generally related to impingement times. Although 

striped bass eggs may survive impingement for up to 6 

min at water velocities not exceeding 24 cm/s, large variances were found in the survival rates and hatching 

percentages of impinged eggs (Skinner 1974). 

Increased water velocity (range 0-27 cm/s) reduced 

the swimming range of 10, 25, and 50 mm TL striped 

bass (Bowles 1976). Magnitude of area covered was directly proportional to fish size. Distance between fish decreased as water velocity increased, though most fish 

maintained a minimum spacing equal to at least 0.5 

body lengtlis. Rheotaxis, the orientation of a fish with 

respect to flow direction, was variable at low velocities. 

Positive rheotaxis, swimming against the current, frequently occurred at velocities of 15 and 27 cm/s; lateral 

and negative rheotaxis, swimming perpendicular to, and 

with the current, seldom occurred (Bowles 1976). 

Kerr (1953) has examined the impingement of fish in 

a test flume equipped with interchangeable screens. 

Although striped bass as small as 28 mm could be stopped by a No.4 mesh screen with a clear opening of 5 

mm, the survival rate of impinged larval and small 

yearling striped bass was extremely low, even for short 

periods of impingement. Kerr concluded that the smaller striped bass would have a higher survival rate if allowed to pass through the power plant with its subsequent thermal shock. When the previously discussed 

velocity experiments are taken into account, a traveling 

screen of 0.95 cm mesh clear openings appeared to be 

optimal provided that there are escape avenues for the 

fish. 

Coutant and Kedl (1975) considered the impact of a 

single passage through a typical power plant condenser 

tube on striped bass larvae. Mechanical damage of 2-

wk-old, 4-6 mm larvae appeared to be minimal. No 

synergistic effect between thermal and mechanical 

stresses was apparent. Observed mortalities were similar on both control and experimental fish and were attributable to thermal exposure. 

Larval and juvenile striped bass may be more susceptible to entrainment/impingement during feeding 

(Bowles 1976). 

Screens have been developed to minimize entrainmen~ of fish larvae and juveniles in water diversions for 

power plant utilization and agricultural irrigation. Skinner (1974) evaluated the Delta Fish Protective Facility, 

a large louver facility completed in 1968, and reported a 

69c;;, efficiency in diverting striped bass from entering 

the California State Pumping Station in 1970. There 

were no apparent differences between daytime and 

nighttime efficiencies of the louvers at approach velocities <76 cm/s; however, at velocities >76 cm/s, efficiencies were better during the daytime. Skinner found 

the relationship between approach velocity and fish 

27 

lengths critical and concluded that the following factors 

are paramount to louver design: 

1. The sizes of fish encountered and their swimming 

capacities must be known. 

2. The facility must be designed with sufficient capacity and adequate control structures to provide 

rigid velocity control. 

Fisher et al. (1977) described behavior of juvenile 

striped bass; chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha; and American shad, Alosa sapidissima, which 

would influence fish screen design for the proposed Peripheral Canal around the Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Estuary. Perforated plates with 3.96 mm holes or woven 

wire mesh with 3.55 mm square openings would prevent 

juvenile striped bass 17.6-37.6 mm FL, from entering 

the proposed Peripheral Canal. The same screen aperture sizes would protect 32-50 mm FL chinook salmon 

and 22-44 mm FL American shad. Interested readers are 

referred to Jensen (1977) for a series of papers on stateof-the-art entrainment and impingement studies. 

Pressure 

Ulanowicz (1975) estimated the following LCso's for 

time shear exposure experiments on striped bass eggs 

and larvae: 

Exposure time LCso's (dy nes/cm2

) 

eggs 1 min 450 

2min 290 

4min 170 

2 days 70 

larvae 1 min 540 

2min 435 

4min 310 

Beck et al. (1975) determined the effects of exposing 

striped bass eggs and larvae to hydrostatic pressure 

regimes calculated for the proposed Cornwall-Pumped 

Storage Plant on the Hudson River. Exposure of 4-h 

striped bass eggs to subatmospheric pressure (5.7 psia) 

for 15 s resulted in a 9.6% reduction in hatching success; 

exposure of 106-h larvae to 5.6 psia for 5 s decreased survival by 20e; immediately and by 32% after 24 h. Exposure of 7V2-day-old larvae to 6.1 psia for 3 s resulted in a 

20-22% decrease in survival over control fish after 24-72 

h. In order to simulate potential pressure changes that 

could be experienced by organisms during the pumping 

mode of the Cornwall plant, striped bass eggs and larvae 

were exposed to a sudden reduction in pressure to 2 psia 

for approximately 2 s, followed by a 10-s return to 

atmospheric pressure (14.7 psia), and a sudden increase 

in pressure to 481 psia. Return to atmospheric pressure 

was approximately 12 min later. The following results 

were obtained: 

45-h eggs - 20% reduction in survival from controls 

after 48 and 72 h 
81-h larvae - 54% reduction in survival after 24 h 

15-18 day larvae - 70-80'0 reduction in immediate survival; 

56-64'0 reduction after 24 h. 

Striped bass larvae, 13-17 days old, exposed to 45 psia 

pressure for 3 days suffered 36-64% reduction in 

immediate survival and a 38-58% reduction after 24 h. 

Chemical toxicity 

Studies have been undertaken to ascertain the effects 

of various chemicals on striped bass. Bonn et a!. (1976) 

summarized the toxicity (24- and 96-h LC50) of 61 pesticides, heavy metals, and pharmaceutical drugs on 

striped bass eggs, larvae, and juveniles. 

Sublethal concentrations of benzene increased the 

respiratory rate of juvenile striped bass after exposure of 

24 h. Fish exposed to 10 ppm benzene for longer periods 

exhibited a narcosis that was reversible when fish were 

placed in fresh water and kept longer than 6 days 

(Brocksen and Bailey 1973). Tricon oil spill eradicator 

was toxic to striped bass at 10 ppm after 48 h; however, 

no stress was observed at 5 ppm (Chadwick 1960). Hazel 

et al. (1971) determined the toxicity of undissociated 

ammonia to juvenile striped bass (20-93 mm TL) in a 

static system. Ninety-six-hour median tolerance limits 

(TLm) of NH.OH were: 

at 15°C freshwater 2.8 mg/liter 

11 ppt salinity 2.8 mg/liter 

33 ppt salinity 2.0 mg/liter 

at 23°C freshwater 1. 9 mg/li ter 

11 ppt salinity 2.1 mg/liter 

33 ppt salinity 1.5 mg/liter. 

Benville and Korn (1977) reported the following acute 

toxicities of monocyclic aromatics to 6 g juvenile striped 

bass: 

24h 96h 

Static broassays LCso LCso at 16°C, 25% ppm 95% C.L. ppm 95% C.L. 

Benzene 6.9 (1 ) 5.8 (1 ) 

Toluene 7.3 (1) 7.3 (1) 

Ethylbenzene 4.3 3.9- 4.7 4.3 3.9- 4.7 

m-xylene 9.2 8.3-10.0 9.2 8.8-10.0 

o-xylene 11.0 9.4-12.0 11.0 9.4-12.0 

p-xylene 2.0 (1) 2.0 (1) 

'No confidence limits were calculated from tests without partial mortalities. 

Korn et al. (1976) exposed 18 cm SL juvenile striped 

bass to two benzene concentrations, 3.5 ± 1.4, and 6.0 ± 

1.6 ~ll1iter, for 4 wk. Initial reactions to benzene exposure were pronounced hyperactivity at the low concentration. Fish exposed to 6.0 ~ll1iter benzene attempted to feed, but were unable to locate and consume 

their ration; fish exposed to 3.0 ~ll1iter benzene consumed approximately 50% of their ration; control fish 

consumed all their ration within 5 min. Feeding success 

28 

of experimental fish gradually improved; after 4 wk, 

control and low level fish fed normally, high level fish 

consumed 50("~ of their ration. There was a significant 

decrease in wet weight, dry weight, and percent fat of 

experimental fish. 

There is limited work on the effects of heavy metals on 

striped ba s eggs and larvae. O'Rear (1972, 1973) found 

yolk-sac larvae more sensitive to both zinc and copper 

than striped bass eggs. However, copper did retard 

hatching at each concentration tested (0.01-5.0 

mgl1iter). Rehwoldt et al. (1971) ascertained the 24,48, 

and 96 h TLm's for Cu ++, Zn ++ , Ni + +, Cd + . , Hg+ . , and 

Cr++. Tatum et al. (1966) concluded that Zn concentration of 0.07 ppm may have cau ed mortalities in hatchery experiments. 

The production of HlS ha been blamed for Casquiney 

Straight, Calif., striped bas kills (Silvey and Irwin31 ). 

Low tides and high temperature resulted in anaerobic 

conditions in the hallow bay. 

Chlorine toxicity to triped bas eggs and larvae has 

been investigated by Morgan and Prince 1977). All 

experiments were conducted at salinities of 2.8 ± 0.9'/_. 

One hundred percent mortality was reported for striped 

ba eggs <13 hold ubjected to 0.43 ppm total residual 

chlorine (TRC); for egg between 24 and 40 hold, expoure to 0.50 ppm TRC, re ulted in 100CO mortality. LC~ 

concentration for eggs <13 h old were approximately 

0.22 ppm; for eggs between 24 and 40 h, approximately 

0.27 ppm. Higher chlorine concentrations produced a 

blistering of the chorion in addition to some swelling of 

the eggs. At intermediate chlorine concentrations, larval 

development proceeded at least to the formation of a 

well-defined embryo in 70-8510 of the eggs. Chlorine CODcentration near the LC'5-LC90 range generally prevented striped bass development before embryo formation. One hundred percent mortality of yolk-sac larvae 

<1 day old resulted after exposure to a TRC concentration of 0.55 ppm; total mortality of larvae >70 h old was 

obtained at a TRC of 0.40 ppm. LC50 concentrations (24-

h exposure) for both larvae <24 h old and larvae >70 

hours were approximately 0.20 ppm. 

The toxicity of total residual chlorine (all experiments were conducted at salinities from 1 to 3'/_) to 

striped bass eggs and larvae was also determined by 

Middaugh et al. (1977). Beginning 8-9 h after fertilization, developing embryos were exposed continuously to 

TRC in flowing water with the following results: 

TRC (ppm) Effect 

0.21 No larvae hatched. 

0.07 3.5% hatched. Many larvae had curvatures of 

vertebral column, 3-7 somites posterior to oil 

globule. 

0.01 23% hatched. Many larvae had difficulty detaching themselves from chorion as they hatched. 

<0.01 Survival of developing embryos and emergence 

of larvae similar to controls. 

"Silvey, W. D., and C. Irwin. 1969. Relation of water quality to 

triped bass mortalities in the Carquinez Strait in California. Open-file 

rep. , U.S. Dep. Inter. , Ceol. Surv .. Water Resour. Div., 12 p. 
Estimated incipient LCso concentrations were 0.04 ppm 

for both 2-day-old yolk-sac larvae and 30-day-old juveniles, and 0.07 ppm for 12-day-old larvae . Histological 

examination of 30-day-old juveniles which survived 

exposure in the incipient LC~o bioassay revealed gill and 

pseudobranch damage in fish exposed to TRC concentrations between 0.21 (71-min exposure) and 2.36 ppm 

(7-min exposure). 

3.3 Adult phase 

3.31 Longevity 

Bigelow and Schroeder (1953:390) stated t hat "The 

bass grows to a great size, the heaviest of which we have 

found definite record being several of about 125 pounds 

[56.7 kg] that were taken at Edenton, N. C., in April 

1891." Striped bass of 27 -32 kg are not exceptional "although the average is probably not over 4 or 5 pounds; 

fish weighing 11/2 pounds are numerous in the southern 

markets" (Raney 1958:5). A 29- to 31-yr-old striped bass 

weighing 29.5 kg was caught in Rhode Island (Merriman 1941). Female striped bass live longer than males; 

most fish 11 yr of age and older are females (KOO32 ). 

3.32 Hardiness 

Oxygen 

Meldrim et al. (1974) concluded from a series of 

avoidance tests that striped bass avoided waters of 44% 

or less oxygen saturation. These authors also concluded 

n T. S. Y. Koo, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 

20688, pers. commun. February 1978. 

that striped bass could tolerate higher temperatures under conditions of oxygen saturation than under conditions of reduced oxygen levels. 

3.33 Competitors 

Although direct information is lacking, large piscivorous species such as the bluefish, Pomatomus saltatrix, 

and weakfish probably compete with striped bass in the 

Atlantic since all feed on forage species including Atlantic menhaden and other clupeid species, bay anchovies, 

and silverside, Menidia spp. 

Larval and juvenile striped bass and white perch 

utilize a common nursery area and may feed on similar 

prey species. White perch are usually present in greater 

numbers and would probably compete with striped bass 

for available food. For example, estimated instantaneous abundances from the portion of the Potomac River, 

Md., used as a common nursery during 1975 were: 1,484 

X 106 white perch, 651 X 106 striped bass (Mihursky et 

al. footnote 6). 

3.34 Predators 

Again, direct information is lacking but large bluefish and weakfish probably prey on small striped bass in 

the Atlantic; likewise, large striped bass probably prey 

on smaller bluefish and weakfish. Adult and juvenile 

white perch probably consume large numbers of striped 

bass larvae. 

3.35 Parasites, diseases, injuries and abnormalities 

See also section 7.7. 

Striped bass parasites are summarized in Table 12. 

Table 12.-Parasites of striped bass. (From Paperna and Zerner 1976 unless otherwise indicated.) 

Host Percent 

Parasite age infected 

Protozoa 

Trichodina dauisi 0+ 45 

1+ 33 

2+ 20 

3+ 33 

Trichodinella sp. 3 0+ <1 

1+ <1 

Epistylis sp. 1+ 12 

2+ 10 

Glossatella sp. 0+ 40 

1+ 2 

2+ 2 

Scyphilida sp. 0+ 7 

1 +(rare) <1 

Colponema sp. 0+ 63 

1+ 3 

Trichophrya sp. 0+ 11 

0+ (rare) <1 

Locality 

range ' 

O,M,E 

O,M 

O,M 

O,M,E 

° 

O,M,E 

O,M 

29 

Gills 

Organ 

affected 

Skin and gills 

Gills 

Gills 

Gills 

Gills 

Heaviest 

infection 

found 

10 per field ' 

2 per field ' 

All gills densely 

covered 

All gills densely 

covered 

10 per field' 

2 per field ' 

Author 

Papema and Zwemer 

1976; Bonn et a!. 

1976 
Table 12.-Parasites of striped bass. (From Paperna and Zerner 1976 unless otherwise indicated.) 

Parasite 

Myxosoma morone 

n. sp. (Johnson 

and Papema in prep.) 

Kudoa cerebralis 

Nosema sp. 

Godinium sp. 

Myxobolus morone 

Paratnchodina 

Ambiph'.a' 

Bodomonas' 

l e hthyophthin us' 

Costia" 

Chtlodon' 

Trichodina 

EPLstylis' 

Platyhelminthes 

Cestoda 

Rhynehobothrium 

speciosium 

Proteocephalid 

larvae Type A 

Proteocephdlid 

larvae Type B 

Scolex pleuronectis 

Trypanorhynchid 

pleurocercoid 

Trematoda 

Monogenea 

G)rodoctylus sp. 

Ancyrocephalinae 

unidentified 

Microcotyle macura 

Oiplectonum J 

~igenea 

Leporreadium setiferiodes 

Cuculanus sp. 

Sptnithectus sp larvae 

Goc:w sp. 

(larva) 

'llhocephalu 

l''Jmpll ,rh) IJehu> 

l' mph ,rh\ Ilchw 

(lnr.8t') 

Host 

age 

0+ 

1+ 

1+ 

1+ 

2+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

D 

0+ 

0+ 

0+ 

1+ 

2+ 

1+ 

2+ 

0+ 

0+ 

1+ 

2+ 

0+ 

2+ 

0+ 

1+ 

1+ 

1+ 

1+ 

0+ 

1+ 

2+ 

:3+ 

u+ 

Percent 

infected 

55 

15 

<1 

<1 

<1 

o 

Locality 

range I 

M,E 

M 

M 

73% in July to 0 

31 % in Oct. Gradually disappeared 

at 6-7 mo of age 

NOS 

NO 

o 

ND 

ND 

ND 

ND 

ND 

ND 

76 

46 

79 

<1 

1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

2 

3 

NO 

10 

8 

<1 

<1 

<1 

14 

25 

29 

67 

34 

o 

o 

O,M,E 

M 

o 

o 

M,E 

M,E 

O,M 

M,E 

M 

Isolated from 4 

Florida lakesMarine herring 

fed as dietary 

supplement 

probable source 

of infection 

O,M 

o (M rare) 

30 

Organ 

affected 

Cartilage, 

bone 

Heaviest 

infection 

found 

88 cysts per fish 

Meninges of the brain 80 cysts per fish 

and spinal cord 

Gills 

Gills 

Cartillage of gills, cranium, dorsal and anal 

fin rays 

1 cyst per fish (rare ) 

1 per fish 

Gills ND 

Gills and skin ND 

Gills ND 

Gills and skin ND 

Gills and skin ND 

Gills and skin ND 

Gills and skin ND 

Skin ND 

Elongated cysts in 

viscera 

Mesenteries 

Mesenteries and liver 

Intestine 

Mesenteries 

Gills 

Gills 

Gills 

ND 

Intestine 

Intestine 

Intestine wall 

Intestine wall 

Cyst enlarged to pea 

size in severe cases, 

became ulcerated, 

severe tissue damage, may penetrate stomach wall 

into body cavity. 

Encepted on external wall of stomach 

few in mesentary 

40 per fish 

9 per fish 

5 per fish 

3 per fish 

1 seen 

1 seen 

6 per fish 

ND 

5 per fish 

4 per fish 

1 per fish 

Within 30 days 

(one-half of infected 

fish died) 

Intestine; intensive 42 per fish 

infections caused fi- 130 per fish 

brosis of liver and 

spleen 

Visceral 

Author 

Papema and Zwemer 

1974 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Bonn et a!. 1976 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Bonn et a!. 1976 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Linton 1901 

Bonn et a1. 1976 

Papema and Zwerner 

1976 

Ware 1971 

Gaines and Rogers 

1972; Bonn et a1. 

1976 

Paperna and Zwemer 

1976; Bonn et a1. 

1976; Cordonnier 

and Ward 1967; 

Johnson and Harkern a 1970; Linton 

1901 
Table 12.-Continued. 

Host Percent Locaiity Organ 

Parasite age infected range I affected 

Ecinorhynchus proteus Intestine 

E. acus Intestine 

Annelida 

Hirudinea 

Myzobdella 

lugubris 2+ <1 M Skin 

Lepocreadium 

areolatum 2+ 14 M,E Intestine 

Stephanostomum 

tenue 2+ 14 M,E Intestine 

Immature opecoelids 2+ 9 E Intestine 

Digenea sp. 1 0+ <1 0 Intestine 

Digenea sp. 2 1+ <1 M,E Intestine 

2+ 3 

Distomum ND ND E Intestine 

Neochasmus sogan- Intestine and pyloric 

daresi coeca 

Postodiplostomum3 

m!nlmum 0+ ND ND 

Clinostomum3 0+ ND Muscle 

Uvulifer sp. 3 0+ ND ND 

Diplostomulum3 

flexicaudum 0+ ND ND 

Neascus sp. 0+ 3 0 Skin 

Diplostomulum sp. 0+ <1 0 Spleen 

Ascocotylid type sp. 0+ <1 0 Viscera 

Aschelminthes 

Nematoda 

Philometra rubra 0+ 39 O,M,E Visceral cavity 

mesentenes6 

1+ 64 O,M,E 

2+ 77 

3+ 100 

Mollusca 

Pelecypoda 

Glochidia 0+ 0 Gills 

Arthropoda 

Crustacea 

Liron ica ovalis 

(isopod) 1+ 4 M 4th gill arch 

2+ 3 

1+ Freshwater tidal Inside operculum 

2+ portion Long IsIsland and Staten 

Island streams 

Aegathoa ocula 

(isopod) 2+ <1 M Skin 

Ergasilus labracis 3 0+ 19 O,M,E Gills 

(copepod) 

1+ 80 

2+ 83 

3+ 100 

Argulus bicolor 1+ 5 M Skin and gills 

(copepod) 2+ 5 

Ler~aea'(copepod) ND ND Black Creek, Fla. 

Caligus sp. (copepod) 1+ <1 M Gills 

Pisces 

Rissola marginata, 

stri ped cusk eel Rare New Jersey Coelom 

I Locality range key: E = euryhaline 30-40%. = mesohaline 5-18%.; 0 = oligohaline 0.5-5% •. 

'Counts made at 100. 

' Encountered in striped bass culture. 

'Counts made at 970. 

'ND = no data. 

and 

Heaviest 

infection 

found Author 

45 per fish 

Linton 1901 

1 per fish (rare) 

10 per fish 

3 per fish 

1 per fish (rare) 

1 per fish (rare) 

ND Linton 1898, 1901 

Overstreet 1971 

ND Bonn et al. 1976 

ND Bonn et al. 1976 

ND Bonn et al. 1976 

ND Bonn et al. 1976 

105 per fish 

Rare 

Rare 

14 per fish 

11 perfish 

12 per fish 

Paperna and Zwerner 

1976; 

Alperin 1966 

1 per fish 

2,757 per fish{l +) Paperna and Zwerner 

1976; 

Bonn et al. 1976 

19 per fish Paperna and Zwerner 

1976; Barkuloo 1972' 

Barkuloo 1972' ; Bonn 

et al. 1976 

1 per fish 

Hammer 1966 

' Infections accompanied by visceral oedema, granuloma, and extensive visceral adhesions resulted in advanced fibrosis of liver and spleen. 

' Barkuloo, J. M. 1967. Florida striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum). Fla. Game Fresh Water Fish Comm., Fed. Aid Project No. F-lO-R. 24 p. 

31 
Diseases 

Fin rot disease 

This disease results in necrosis of one or more of the 

fins. As the disease advances, fin edges become frayed, 

'the rays separate, gaps in the fins appear, and frequently complete fin destruction occurs. Hemorrhaging, 

especially in the skin, often accompanies severe fin erosion (Mahoney et al. 1973). These authors noted that 

diseased fish were missing scales over extended portions 

of their bodies and, in advanced cases of skin erosion, 

the underlying muscle layers were exposed. During a 2-

wk interval the disease progressed from only slight fin 

necrosis to increased fin necrosis, skin hemorrhages, and 

blindness. Seventy-five cultures of bacteria were isolated from fish affected with fin rot disease. Sixty of 

these cultures belonged to the genera Aeromonas, Pseudomonas, and Vibrio. Although isolates of all three 

genera produced necrosis of the caudal fins of experimental mummichogs, Fundulus heteroclitus, the Vibrio 

isolates caused most of the mortalities. Mahoney et al. 

concluded that dense bacterial populations combined with 

environmental stress contributed to form "epizootics" (epidemics) of fin rot disease. The disease paralleled seasonal temperatures with the rate of infection being lowest in the winter, increasing in spring, at its peak 

from July through September, and decreasing in the fall. 

Pasteurellosis 

The bacteria, Pasteurella sp., has reportedly caused 

extensive and selective mortalities of white perch and, 

to a lesser extent, of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay 

in 1963 (Snieszko et al. 1964). Papema and Zwemer 

(1976) reported mass mortalities of 1 + and 2 + striped 

bass due to pasteurellosis. An early indication of this 

pathological condition was the appearance of numerous 

necrotic foci visible as white spots in the spleen. In moribund fish, progressive liquefaction necrosis extended 

into the liver, kidneys, and finally into the intestine. 

Bacteria isolates were similar to the Pasteurella sp. 

implicated by Snieszko et al. (1964) in a 1963 summer 

fish kill in upper Chesapeake Bay. 

Columnaris 

This disease is caused by Flexibacter (Chondrococcus or Bacillus) columnaris and was first noted by 

Davis (1922) who recognized it as a "mold-like" growth 

on fish skin and fins. The disease was named for short 

columns or dome-shaped masses which form around 

scale debris. 

Kelley (1969) found hematocrit values depressed 12-

15C:O in striped bass infected with columnaris disease. 

Lymphocystis 

This virus disease of marine and freshwater fish produces nodules on the skin (Krantz 1970). Each nodule is 

32 

a single infected cell which has enlarged several hundred times its normal cell size. Although nodules may 

reach a size of 2 mm in striped bass, the disease is rarely 

fatal. Papema and Zwemer (1976) reported five cases of 

lymphocystis in 2-yr-old striped bass collected during 

January and March. Lymphocystis warts usually covered the entire fish, and often the fins were frayed and 

damaged. Electron microscopy confirmed the presence 

of virus particles on hypertrophied cells. 

Kudo cerebralis 

(Myxosporidea, Chloromyxidae) 

Cysts are formed in the connective tissue associated 

with the nervous system in infected striped bass. 

Papema and Zwemer (1974) found embedded cysts, up 

to 2.2 mm in diameter, on the ventral and lateral surfaces of the brain, usually around the posterior end of 

the cerebellum and medulla. The growing cysts caused 

distortion and displacement at the infection site and 

also in adjacent nerves and ganglia. Additionally, smaller cysts were found inside distal cranial nerve branches. 

No tissue necrosis was observed. 

Epi theliocystis 

Papema and Zwemer (1976) found epitheliocystis lesions on both gill filaments and arches of striped bass 

and white perch. Small nodules, 0.05-0.1 mm in 

diameter, were found on juvenile fish from the upper 

York River, Va.; large nodules, 0.4-0.8 mm in diameter, 

were found on fish over 1 yr old from the lower York 

River. Wolke et al. (1970) first reported epitheliocystis 

from striped bass and white perch in Connecticut 

waters. 

Striped bass, like other teleosts, are subject to neoplasia. Tumors from striped bass recorded in the Registry of Tumors in Lower Animals, U.S. National 

Museum (Harshbarger33) include a nephroblastoma, a 

probable leiomyoma from viscera and infestous granulomas from liver and spleen. 

Abnormalities 

Pugheadedness 

This foreshortening of head and face area may be 

caused by either a germinal defect in the embryo or an 

oxygen deficiency in the microenvironment of early 

embryonic stages of development (Mansueti 1958b). 

However, both pugheaded and normal striped bass have 

been hatched from phenotypically normal parents 

which may imply that both environmental and genetic 

factors are involved. Pugheadedness does not hinder 

survival, although it may somewhat stunt growth 

(Mansueti 1960; Hickey et al. 1977). Pugheadedness had 

" HarshQarger, J. C. (Director). 1975. Activities report. Registry of 

tumors in lower animals: 1975 Supplement. U.S. Nat!. Mus. Nat. Hist., 

Contract No. N01-CB-33874, p. 11, 20, 2l. ' 
been reported in bass from postlarvae (Mansueti 1958a) 

up to a 7.4 kg adult caught in Massachusetts in 1948 

(Lyman 1961). Hickey et al. (1977) summarize occurrences of pugheaded stripe<;l bass. 

Blindness and partial blindness 

Denoncourt and Bason (1970) caught four blind 

stripers (fish with completely opaque lenses) near Artificial Island in the Delaware River estuary. These blind 

2-yr-old fish were stunted in growth, weighing less than 

normaI2-yr-old fish, but more than normal1-yr-old fish. 

Merriman (1941) found that 10% of the stripers in the 

Thames and Niantic Rivers in Connecticut had cataracts; blindness was more common among the older fish 

and rare in 2-yr-old striped bass. Merriman suggested 

that a dietary deficiency may account for this high 

percentage of blindness. 

Other striped bass abnormalities 

Harelipped fish, scoliosis (lateral spinal curvature), 

one fish with a hole in the body near the ventral (pelvic) 

fm (Talbot 1966), cross-bite, lordosis (vertical spinal flexure), and a fish with five spiny rays in the first dorsal fin 

(Hickey et al. 1977) have been reported in the literature. 

3.4 Nutrition and growth 

3.41 Feeding 

The striped bass is not a steady feeder; members of 

the school normally feed at about the same time (Raney 

1952). Striped bass apparently follow and feed on 

schools of fish (Scofield 1928); schooling species are 

dominate prey (section 3.42). The extensive northward 

migration of striped bass (section 3.51) may be due in 

part to the movement of prey species. Hollis (1952) concluded that the southward fall migration within Chesapeake Bay results from pursuit of migrating fishes which 

leave the Bay at that time. 

The amount of feeding varies with both time of day 

and season. Striped bass are known to feed avidly in the 

evening just after dark; they may also feed just before 

dawn (Raney 1952). Hollis (1952) found seasonal differences in the extent of striped bass feeding in Chesapeake Bay. About 50% of the stomachs examined were 

full during the summer-fall period whereas approximately 70% were full during the winter and early spring. 

However, Scofield (1931) noted that California striped 

bass feed most heavily during the spring and summer 

months. Feedings ceases during spawning (Hollis 1952; 

D. E. Stevens 1966; Trent and Hassler 1966; Manooch 

1973; Woodull1974). 

Powell (1973) reared juvenile striped bass in cage 

culture for 2 mo in Alabama. Mean food conversion 

ratios (food fed/weight gained) were 2.0-2.1 for fish fed 

commercial trout chow and 5.8 for fish fed a ground fish 

diet (ground industrial fish-70% by weight; soybean 

meal-30% by weight). Valenti et al. (1976) reported 

33 

food conversion ratios of 1.40-1.81 for juvenile striped 

bass reared in floating cages in a seawater lagoon off 

Shelter Island, N.Y., from June to October and fed commercial trout chow. These conversion ratios included 

production from consumption of natural foods, i.e., 

Menidia menidia and Palaemonetes sp., found in and 

around the cages. 

Kelley (1969) reported conversion ratios of 1.07-2.81 

for juvenile striped bass reared in freshwater troughs 

and fed commercial trout foods; conversion ratios 

depended upon feeding rate and brand of food utilized. 

He recommended a feeding rate of 3.5% body weight of 

commercial trough chow per day. Catchings (1973), 

however, recommended daily feeding rates of 4-5% body 

weight of trout chow for most efficient food utilization. 

Redpath (1972) reported growth of 5-10 cm juvenile 

striped bass at five temperatures (8°, 12°, 16°, 20°, and 

24°C) and five feeding levels (1, 3, 5, and 8% of body 

weight and repletion) of sludge worms (Tubificidae). 

Maintenance requirements were 3.37,21.0,7.5, and 11.5 

mg/g fish per day at 8°, 12°, 16°, and 20°C respectively. 

Highest growth rates and best food conversion efficiency occurred at 16°C. 

3.42 Food 

See also sections 3.22 and 3.23. 

Numerous studies have been made of the food habits 

of striped bass. As with many fish, striped bass are "generalists" in feeding, though several investigators (Stevens 1958; Ware 1971; Manooch 1973) have suggested 

that striped bass select soft-rayed fishes. The dominant 

prey consumed in a particular habitat depends upon 

availability, which, in turn, is regulated by environmental factors (e.g., salinity and temperature). 

The dependence of diet on size of the striped bass was 

aptly demonstrated by Shapovalov (1936), who examined the stomach contents of 47 striped bass that had 

schooled together in one deep hole for over a month in 

Waddell Creek, Calif. His findings are summarized 

below: 

25 fish, 20-40 cm 

Small crustaceans: Gammarus, 

Corophium, and Exophaeroma 

Young trout and salmon 

Gobies 

Sticklebacks 

Unidentified fish remains 

22fish,41-49cm 

Sculpins 

Young trout and salmon 

Unidentified fish remains 

Caddisfly cases 

Small crustaceans 

Food occurrence (%) 

62.8 

2.9 

25.7 

5.7 

2.9 

34.6 

30.8 

19.2 

3.9 

11.5 

Ware (1971) examined the food habits of striped bass 

51-483 mm TL from Florida waters. Fish comprised the 

major portion of the diet as is seen below: 
Species 

orosoma petenense. threadfin shad 

Gambusia affinis. mosquitofish, and 

Molliem;ia 

epomis 

Pundulus seminolis. Seminole killifish 

Notropis 

Labidesthes sicculus, brook silverside 

Unidentified fish remains 

Ifendipedid larvae 

Occurrence (%) 

46.6 

9.3 

5.9 

4.7 

3.8 

1.3 

5.1 

3.4 

Bass <152 mm fed mainly on mosquitofish, molhes, and 

shrimp, whereas threadfin shad was the dominant food 

item of larger stripers. 

Hollis (1952) found striped bass in the Chesapeake 

Bay were primarily piscivorous with fish comprising 

95.5('0 by Yo eight of the total diet. The changes in striped 

bass diet throughout the year reflected the seasonal 

changes in the bay fish populations. During summer and 

fall, bay anchovy and menhaden were the dominant 

prey; by winter larval and juvenile spot, Leiostomu.~ 

xanthurus. and Atlantic croaker, MicropogonLas undulatus, which utilize the bay as a winter nursery grounds 

dominated the striped bass diet. White perch were the 

most prevalent prey consumed in the early spring and 

alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus. and blueback herring. 

Alosa aestiualis. were the most abundant prey in the 

late spring and early summer. 

Manooch (1973) investigated the seasonal food habit 

of striped bass in Albemerle ound, .C. Fish occurred 

in 96.2 C'Q of the striped bass examined during the summer, with clupeid species dominating. Although clupeids still dominated during the fall, with 64CO occurrence, 

engraulids reached their maximum occurrence in the 

diet with bay anchovies in 37.7cro of tl)e stomachs. During the winter months the frequency of forage fish decreased and invertebrates, primarily amphipods. occurred more frequently in the diet. Blue crabs, Callinectes 

sapidus, constituted the major prey during the spring in 

the eastern portion of the sound. The size of forage fish 

consumed was dependent upon striped bass size as indicated in the equation: Y = 0.22 X -0.25 where X equals 

striped bass total length and Y equals forage species 

total length. Manooch suggested that the optimum size, 

gregarious behavior, and availability of young clupeids 

and anchovies accounted for the low predation rate on 

spiny rayed fish. 

Stevens (1958) has shown that clupeid fish (gizzard 

shad, threadfin shad, alewife and blueback herring) 

supported the striped bass population in the SanteeCooper Reservoir in South Carolina except during April, 

May, and June when mayfly nymphs, Hexogenia bilineata, were the dominant food items. 

Trent and Hassler (1966) found striped bass feeding 

extensively on blueback herring and alewives in the 

Roanoke River. Other fish consumed included golden 

shiners, Notemigonus crysoleucas; minnows; and gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum. 

The largest deviation from the primarily piscivorous 

diet was noted by Schaefer (1970) in the surf waters of 

34 

Long Island Sound. Eighty-five percent of the food volume of striped bas <399 mm FL consisted of invertebrates, with amphipods, Gammarus spp. and Haustorius canadensis, (45(;') and mysid shrimp, Neomysis 

amencana (33( ~), the dominant species consumed. 

Medium-sized striped bass, 400-599 mm FL, fed almost 

equally on fish (46';( ) (pnmarily bay anchovy, Anchoa 

mitchillL. Atlantic silver Ide, MenLdw menLdw; and 

scup, StPnolomus chrysops) and invertebrates (53'JC) 

(mainly amphipods). The large t striped bass examined 

(600-940 mm) consumed more fish than the smaller 

stnper; (65(, of stomach content by volume) but still 

fed upon sub tantial number of invertebrate, chiefly 

amphipods, mysids, and the lady crab, Oualipps ocellatus. Other fish consumed by thee large striped ba 

were the quirrel hake, Urophycis chuss; tautog, 

Tauto{fa onitis; northern puffer, . phoeroide maculalu.~; and striped mullet, Mugil cephalus . • chaefer uggested that the importance of invertebrate. in the diet, 

especially in theummer month. may be attributed t() 

the frequent turbidity of the urf environment which 

would make it more difficult to pur ue and kill fast 

wimming vertebrate. 

:~ . .n Growth rate 

Growth rate for triped ba' up to 70 cm can be calculated from scales with the formula; 

I = (L-1)/1 + 1 

L1 

where L = total length of fi. h, L1 = cale radiu , I = unknown total length, and /1 = ratio of radiu to annulus 10 

que tion ( cofield 1931; Merriman 1941). Man ueti 

(1961) and Robin on (1960) gave body length- cale 

radiu relation hip . 

Roger.:; et al. (1977) concluded that temperature between 18° and 21°C were optional for larval growth between hatching and yolk absorption. Larvae reared at 18° 

and 21 °C had greater dry weights, excluding oil globule 

at yolk absorption (0.15 and 0.16 mg) than larvae reared 

at 15° and 24°C (0.10 and 0.12 mg, respectively). 

Juvenile 

A number of studies have been made to determine the 

growth of Juvenile striped bass. In lab studies using 

juveniles from the Chesapeake Bay, Koo and Ritchie 

(1973) found that monthly growth was 8.8CO (Oct.), 3.8CO 

(Nov.), OCO (Dec.-Apr.), 4.6CO (May), and 9.1 % (June). 

Growth in the fall, winter, and spring months was only 

29C'Q of the total yearly gain. There was no growth or 

feeding below lOoC; maximum growth occurred around 

20°C. Patuxent River, Md, striped bass grew most 

rapidly in July, followed by August, June, September, 

May, and October. No growth occurred from November 

to ApriL Total lengths increased 74% between the first 

and second summers. Similar seasonal growth rate 

trends (low winter rates) for Chesapeake Bay striped 
bass are evident in data presented by Vladykov and 

W&llace (1952) and in data for California striped bass 

from Scofield (1931) (Fig. 6). 

Trent (1962) found growth to be roughly linear between June and October for 'young-of-the-year in Albemarle Sound, N.C. Daily growth during this period averaged 0.35 mm/day. Total length at the end of the first 

season of growth was about 100 mm. Trent also reported 

that his data indicated no density dependence on 

growth rates, i.e., in years when juvenile recruitment 

was high, the growth rate was not lower than in years 

when fewer fish were present. Similar total lengths at 

the end of the first season have been reported for the 

Hudson River. However, daily growth in the Hudson 

River was larger (0.46 mm/day) but extended over a 

shorter period of time (Rathjen and Miller 1957). Juveniles from the Potomac River had similar growth rates 

(0.45 mm/day in 1975 and 0.46 mm/day in 1976) and 

reached lengths of approximately 100 mm TL by the end 

of the first summer (Boynton et a1. footnote 13). 

The relationship of both temperature and salinity to 

the growth of juvenile striped bass has been examined 

by Otwell and Merriner (1975). Mean relative growth 

(final fork length expressed as a percent of initial fork 

length) during a 7 -day experimental period exceeded 

20CO at 24°C, equalled 14.6% at 18°C, and was <1% at 

12°C. Growth at the intermediate salinity tested, 12%0, 

was significantly higher (10.7%, P = 0.05) than at either 

4%0 (9.8SO ) or 20%0 (9.4%). 

Mansueti (1958a) reported growth rates for young 

bass observed under a variety of conditions (Table 13). 

It is apparent from Table 13 that hatchery-raised fish 

were stunted in growth. Crowding and lack of food were 

suggested as reasons for the low growth rates. 

Chadwick34 found some variations between mean 

length of young-of-the-year fish collected in various subareas of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. He suggested that the observed variations in size could be 

either a function of food intake, which would indicate 

that food was a limiting factor, or be a function of age. 

Mean annual growth rates of young-of-the-year fish 

were approximat.ely the same for many years even 

though runoff and many other factors varied greatly. 

Striped bass population densities have been, at times, 

sufficient to depress growth rates. Shearer et a1. (1962) 

found no increase in the size of 2-yr-old Patuxent River, 

Md. , striped bass from July to November 1960. Mean 

lengths and weights of 2-yr-old striped bass caught by 

anglers during that time period were: 

Month N XFLmm Xwtkg 

July 37 313 0.42 

Aug. 61 311 0.35 

Sep. 39 330 0.45 

Oct. 46 330 0.44 

Nov. 63 314 0.47 

1 Chadwick, H. K. 1966. Variation in the growth of young triped 

bass (Raccus saxatilis) in the Sacramento-San Joaquin System. Calif. 

Dep. Fish Game, Resour. Agency, Inland Fish. Admin. Rep. No. 66-11, 6 

p. (Mimeogr.) 

35 

E 

E 100 

..c 

OJ 

c 

QJ 80 -' 

0 

0 

~ 60 

20 

o J 

Month 

Figure 6.-Growth patterns for young-of-the-year striped bass 

(points indicate sample means). 

Table 13.-Growth data, based on average sizes for various ages, of 

larval and young-of-the-year striped bass, Morone saxatiliB. (From 

Mansueti 1958a.) (ND = no data.) 

Patuxent River 

Hatchery-reared fish Pond-reared fish 

fish (seine collections) Pearson (1938) 

Av. Av. Av. 

Ob- total Et. total Ob- total 

served length age in length served length 

age (mm) weeks (mm) age (mm) 

Hatching 2.9 ND ND Hatching 3.2 

1 day 3.6 ND ND ND 1\ID 

11/, days 1\ID ND ND 1', days 4.4 

2 days 5.1 ND D 2 days ~D 

3 days 5.6 ND ND 3 days 5.2 

4 days ND ND ND 4 days 5.8 

6 days ND ND ND 6 days 6.0 

8 days ND ND ND 8 days 9.0 

2wk 8.1 ND D 16 days 13.0 

3-4wk ND ND ND 3-4wk 36.0 

4wk 11.5 4 42.0 ND ND 

6wk 13.3 ND ND D ND 

8wk 20.1 8 68.0 ND ND 

10wk 23.3 D ND ND ~D 

12wk 25.0 ND ND ND ND 

14wk 29.0 14 75.0 ND ~D 

Trent (1962) determined the following linear relationships between standard, fork, and total lengths of 

20-100 mm TL striped bass: 

FL = 0.93835 TL - 0.077817 

SL . 0.80388 TL + 0.55750 

SL = 0.85675 FL + 1.22099. 
Adults 

Growth and annual length increments of juvenile and 

ldult striped bass are given in Figures 7 and 8. Table 14 

mmmarizes average lengths for year classes from differmt areas. After age IV, female striped bass from the 

J hesapeake Bay were larger than males (Fig. 7). 

rhrough age III annual increments were about 120 mm; 

Jetween ages IV and VII annual growth increments were 

lpproximately 60-70 mm; and after age VIII annual 

ncrements were generally about 50 mm. 

Robinson (1960) reported that although there were an-

:mal fluctuations in the growth of striped bass from the 

San Francisco Bay area, growth rates were similar to 

;hose on the Atlantic coast (Fig. 8). Note that female 

bass did not grow appreciably faster than males until 

year V in contrast to the differential growth rates 

Jbserved for Chesapeake Bay fish after age ill (Fig. 7). 

Robinson found 6-yr-old female striped bass as much as 

28c;, longer and 2500 heavier than the values recorded for 

5-yr-old females in the same area prior to 1931. Suggested causative mechanisms included a decline in competition for available prey because of a decline in the 

number of striped bass. Miller and Orsi35 also reported 

similar results for California fish. 

In the Delaware River, Bason (1971) reported that 

bass grew at a relatively constant rate through age VI. 

Yearly increments were about 100 mm which is in contrast to other bass populations where a sharp reduction 

in yearly increments has been noted after the second or 

third year. Bason concluded that Delaware River bass 

grew somewhat more slowly than Chesapeake and California bass during the first 3 yr, somewhat faster for the 

next 3 yr, and about the same for older bass (Table 14). 

Several papers have considered the compensatory 

growth phenomenon, which tends to reduce the size 

variation within age classes with increasing age. Tiller 

(1943) found that smaller yearling individuals had more 

rapid growth rates in their second year. Nicholson 

(1946), in a study of striped bass in Albemarle Sound, 

N.C., found that compensatory growth occurred most 

frequently in year class II and to some extent in year 

class III. 

In considering possible difference in the amount of 

compensatory growth in year 2 between four different 

year classes, Nicholson (1964) found a progressive decrease in slope of the regression (y, growth increment in 

year 2; x, growth increment in year 1) between the 1953 

and 1954 year classes. While no explanation was given 

by the author he noted the similarity of the above with 

Lee's phenomenon. 

Mensinger (1971) reported successful introductions of 

striped bass in Oklahoma. Growth rates greatly exceeded those of Chesapeake stocks, especially through 

the first few years (Table 14). 

~tiller . L. W., and J . J. Orsi. 1969. Catch of striped bass (Marone 

,axutl'I") in the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary from 1961-1965. Calif. 

Dep. Fish Game. Resour Agency, Anadromous Fi h. Admin. Rep. No. 69-

6,7 p. (l\hmeogr.l 

36 

IV '"

L 

u 

..s: 

40 

~ 30 

0, 

c: 

IV 

-' 

~ 

.E 20 -0 

IV 

o 

3 

u 

o 10 V 

o I 

A. Size of Fish 

0-0 females & 

unknown sex 

t:r---{:, males 

Age Group 

1000 ~ IV 

Qj 

~ 800 ~ 

~ 

L 

0, 

600 c: 

IV 

-' 

~ 

(; 

u... 400 -0 

IV 

0 

3 

u 

200 0 

V 

Figure 7.-Growth of striped bass, Morone saxatilis as calculated 

from scale samples of fish caught ill 1957 from Chesapeake Bay, 

Maryland. From Mansueti (1961a). 

on 30 762 Q) 

.J::. 

u E c E 

.J::. 20 508 .:s= ..... ..... 0> 0> c c Q) Q) 

-' -' 

~ 10 254 ~ 

.... .... 0 

u... B J! - ...... _-.--

00 2 4 6 

0 8 10 

Age Closs 

Figure S.-Growth of Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, Calif., 

striped bass as calculated from scales: (A) Mean size per age class; 

(B) annual increments. From Robinson (1960). 

Ware (1971) reported average yearly growth rates for 

striped bass taken in Florida lakes, which were among 

the highest recorded (Table 14). In Florida growth was 

more rapid during the cooler months. Accelerated 

growth was apparent in the young-of-the-year fish after 

sufficient size (150 mm) was attained to use shad as 

food. The increasing size of striped bass along a northsouth gradient is obvious from Table 14; warmer 

climates apparently increase the duration of optimal 

growth periods. 

Table 14 summarizes mean lengths of 2- to 20-yr-old 

males and 2- to 14 yr-old females from the Potomac 

River, Md. Jones et a1. (footnote 17) found that female 

striped bass, 4 yr and older were significantly larger 

than males. Most fish were caught on the spawning 

grounds. Sexually mature males, which mature by age 

II, dominated the catch of 2- to 5-yr-old fish; females, 

which mature by age V, dominated the catch of older 

fish. 

Table 14.- Continued. 

Age Area 

Sacramento· San Joaquin 

Rivers, Calif. 

Coos Bay, Oreg. 

VII Maine 

Connecticut 

Delaware River, Del. 

Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

Pamlico River and 

Sound, N.C. 

Santee-Cooper, S.C. 

Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Rivers, Calif. 

Coos Bay, Oreg. 

VIII Connecticu t 

Delaware River, Del. 

Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

Pamlico Sound and 

IX 

River, N.C. 

North Carolina coast 

Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Rivers, Calif. 

Coos Bay, Oreg. 

Connecticut 

Delaware River, Del. 

Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac R,ver, Md. 

Pamlico Sound and 

River, N.C. 

North Carolina coast 

Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Rivers, Calif. 

Coos Bay, Oreg. 

X Delaware River, Del. 

Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

Pamlico River and 

Sound, N.C. 

North Carolina coast 

Xl Delaware River, Del. 

Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

Pamlico River and 

Sound, N.C. 

North Carolina coast 

XII Delaware River, Del. 

Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

North Carolina coast 

Xli Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

North Carolina Coast 

XIV Chesapeake Bay 

Potomac River, Md. 

'Measured length. 

Both sexes Increment Males Increment 

635' 

658 

686 

708 

614 

767TL 

693' 

749 

795 

668 

732' 

820 

869 

840 

762 

919 

872 

992 (1 fish) 

973 (1 fish) 

1,045 (1 fish) 

58 

41 

76 

78 

58 

43 

58 

63 

87 

(1 fish) 

54 

39 

71 

74 

30 

50 

32 

73 

53 

622 

704 

742 

671 

754 

784 

716 

831 

864 

762 

876 

839 

907 

56 

110 

108 

49 

50 

42 

45 

77 

80 

46 

45 

31 

2 SB = striped bass; WB = white bass. 

Females 

683 

724 

779 

747 

782 

826 

837 

800 

856 

888 

896 

836 

899 

924 

978 

935 

936 

1,002 

1,006 

973 

1,245 (2 fish) 

983 (3 fish) 

1,098 (2 fish) 

1,450 (1 fish) 

1,044 (1 fish) 

1,038 (2 fish) 

Increment Author 

99 

79 

120 

64 

58 

47 

53 

74 

62 

59 

36 

43 

36 

82 

36 

12 

24 

71 

37 

Robinson 1960 

Morgan and Gerlach 1950 

Davis 1966 

Merriman 1941 

Bason 1971 

Mansueti 1961 

Jones et al. 1977' 

Marshall 1976' 

Stevens 1958 

Robinson 1960 

Morgan and Gerlach 1950 

Merriman 1941 

Bason 1971 

Mansueti 1961 

J ones et al. 1977' 

Marshall 1976' 

Holland and Yelverton 1973 

Robinson 1960 

Morgan and Gerlach 1950 

Merriman 1941 

Bason 1971 

Mansueti 1961 

Jones et al. 1977 3 

Marshall 1976 4 

Holland and Yelverton 1973 

Robinson 1960 

Morgan and Gerlach 1950 

Bason 1971 

Mansueti 1961 

Jones et al. 1977 3 

Marshall 1976' 

Holland and Yelverton 1973 

Bason 1971 

Mansueti 1961 

J ones et al. 1977 ' 

Marshall 1976' 

Holland and Yelverton 1973 

Bason 1971 

Mansueti, 1961 

Jones et al. 19773 

Holland and Yelverton 1973 

Mansueti 1961 

Jones et al. 1977' 

Holland and Yelverton 1973 

Mansueti 1961 

Jones et al. 19773 

'Jones, P. W., J. S. Wilson, R. P. Morgan II, H. R. Lunsford, Jr., and J. Lawson. 1977. Potomac River fisheries study; striped bass 

spawning stock assessment. Interpretive report 1974-1976. Univ. Maryland CEES Ref. No. 77-56-CBL. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 20888. 

'Marshall, M. D. 1976. Anadromous fisheries research program; Tar River, Pamlico River and northern Pamlico Sound. Completion 

Rep. Proj. AFCS-I0, 15 May 1974-30 June 1976, 90 p. North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, Moorehead City, NC 28557. 

38 
Tahle 15 summarize. length-weight relation. hip of 

male and female triped has from variou area, _ After 

maturity male striped ba. of a given length weigh Ie 

than females of the same length (Merriman 1941; Man -

sueti 1961). 

Mansueti (1961) used the factor 0.93 to convert total 

length to fork length, the factor 1.07 to convert fork 

length to total length, and the factors 1.0 and 0.92 to 

convert standard length to total length and total length 

to standard length. 

Dorfman and Westman~G found the growth rate of 

striped bass significantly impaired by daily expo ure to 

diurnal oxygen fluctuation when the average concentration wa <4.0 ppm. 

3.44 Metabolism 

The dependence of metabolic rate on temperature wa 

inve tigated by Klyashtorin and Yarzhombek (1975) using triped bas weighing between 1 and 3 g and acclimatized to 22°C. QIO values varied from 2.1 to 1.8 between 15° and 30°C. Oxygen consumption ranged from 

250 to 1,000 mg kg I h I. Oxygen consumption per unit 

weight also decrea ed in proportion to the increase in 

weight of the fish and could by described by 5l = aWk, w 

\ . 

\ • I 

In"lIre 

I' 

• 7 , 

I' 'I r-

\- . • 1 r· 

( h,_peRK" Ii \' \Id 

r· 2 7 

r· 2 • I, 

• It ~ wt In 07 

X - 10 FL In In ht 

PotomllC I{,\~r, \ld 

I!r~ ) - -110: <t + 

r - -110941 + 

HI,i) 

r • 

r • 

r • 

where Q is oxygen consumption, W the weight of the r .. 

• 144 ,. 

- I 4 rfi h, and a and k coefficients having value of 0.36 and 

-0.25, respectively. Oxygen consumption of larger fish 

(8-20 g) varied sharply with temperature and averaged 

0.15 gO/kg per hand 0.45 gO/kg per h at 10° and 

26° . 

There appeared to be a sharp threshold in oxygen consumption dependent on ambient oxygen concentration . For mall fi h (1-2 g) oxygen utilization decreased 

harply when ambient cont-entrations reached 3-4 ppm. 

Oxygen uptake of 22 g fi h went to zero at approxImately 1 ppm . Oxygen con umption required for active 

metaboli m is undoubtedly greater, thre hold oxygen 

levels are probably in the range of 4-4.5 ppm for young 

striped bass. Only temporary oxygen con umption rate 

change were ob erved when alinitie were increa ed 

from 0 to 10'/_. (Klya htorin and Yarzhombek 1975.) 

hittenden (l971b) al 0 ob erved negligible rate 

changes In oxygen con umption of young-of-the-year 

stnpedbas ,'1.1-11.7g, from 0,10'/_ alinity ( eealsooxygen subsection in :1.22l. 

Kruger and Brock en (197 ) reported tandard 

metabolic rate for 22.11- .4 g, 13,0-17.5 em 'triped ba 

at the following temperature : 

) - In ,,1 n ~ 

.\ - In I'L In mm 

- I "In mg • I fI In 

:--'1eanrt ofoygencn 

ba ~ at thH 

temperatur 

12 

o f f~h /rm 

tnJ 

r 
These authors derived the following regressions between swimming speed and rate of oxygen consumption: 

8° LogY = 0.6452 + 0.03454X 

12° LogY = 0.8537 + 0.02152X 

16° Log Y = 1.1778 + 0.01117X 

20° LogY = 1.2279 + 0.02002X 

24° LogY = 1.3322 + 0.02112X. 

Scope for activity (difference between standard 

metabolic rate and active metabolic rate at a swimming velocity of 10 cm/s) at 8°,12°, 16°,20°, and 24°C 

was 55, 44, 45, 99, and 143 mg a / kg per h. Metabolic 

cost of swimming at a sustained speed of 10 cmls was 

130% of the standard metabolic rate at 8°C, 66% at 

12°C, 29('0 at 16°C, 59% at 20°C, and 63% at 24°C. 

Kruger and Brocksen (1978) concluded that the optimal 

temperature for swimming, metabolism, and scope for 

activity for juvenile striped bass may be at ~16°C. 

Sherk et al. 37 reported oxygen consumption rates for 

100 g striped bass swimming at the following speeds at 

16°C: 

cm/s O2 consumption mg/h 

8.5 26.1 

31 34.0 

48 50.4. 

Oxygen consumption increased to 47.3 mg/h with a 

swimming speed of31 cmls at 25 °C. 

Striped bass are not strong swimmers; juvenile 

striped bass are unable to swim at velocities commonly 

sustained by a variety of species for comparable time 

periods (Kruger and Brocksen 1978). Painter and Wixom38 recorded a maximum swimming speed of 60 cmls 

for 24 cm juvenile striped bass. 

3.5 Behavior 

3.51 Migrations and local movements 

Juvenile migrations 

The initiation and extent of juvenile striped bass migrations seems to vary somewhat with location. Markle 

and Grant (1970) stated that during the first summer 

young striped bass in several Virginia rivers migrated 

downstream into waters of high salinity; likewise, 

Mihursky et al. (footnote 6) presented evidence that 

juvenile striped bass left the mid-Potomac spawning 

area before reaching lengths > 70 mm TL.1n the Hudson 

River a downstream and shoreward movement of young-

'Sherk, J. A., J. M. O'Connor, and D. A. Neumann. 1972. Effects of 

suspended and deposited sediments on estuarine organisms. Phase 

II. Annu. Rep. U.S. Army Corps Eng., Proj. Year II, at. Resour. Inst. 

Ref ~o. 72·9E, 106 p. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, 

~ID 20688. 

'Painter. R. E., and L. H. Wixom. 1967. Striped bass fishery and 

sWImming endurance test. In Delta fish and wildlife protection study, 

p. :11-47 Re ource Agency of the State of California. 

of-the-year began in July; the shoreward movement of 

young was indicated by the increasing catches of juveniles in beach seine collections and the generally declining densities of striped bass juveniles in the shoal 

and channel areas in many regions of the river after midJuly. This downstream migration continued through 

late summer; by fall the juveniles had started to move 

offshore into Long Island Sound (Texas Instruments, 

Inc, footnote 10; Carlson and McCann39). Raney (1952) 

stated that small schools of larval striped bass 12-13 mm 

TL moved inshore where they remain at least during 

their first summer. During their second summer, 15 cm 

juvenile striped bass schooled in rivers or moved down 

into the lower estuary. The concentration of juvenile 

striped bass in shallow waters has also been noted in the 

Potomac River (Mihursky et al. footnote 6) and 

Delaware Bay (Shuster 1959). 

Tagged young-of-the-year striped bass released at the 

mouth of the Patuxent River (Maryland) remained in 

the shoal area during the summer months; 5-16 mo later 

some fish were recaptured 80 km or more up the Chesapeake Bay. Young-of-the-year relp-ased 27-53 km up the 

Patuxent River during the fall and winter months 

remained more or less stationary; however, there were 

some indications of net upriver movement into virtually 

fresh water_ During their second summer, juvenile 

striped bass moved downriver into Chesapeake Bay 

(Ritchie and Koo40). Ritchie (1970) found that ' fish 

hatched in the Patuxent River moved up the Chesapeake Bay in their second to fourth years. 

Sasaki (1966) reported that juvenile striped bass in 

the lower San Joaquin River were more concentrated 

over shoal areas than in deeper waters. In the fall these 

juveniles migrated downstream from the delta into San 

Pablo Bay; the 2-yr-old sexually maturing males migrated back into the delta the following spring, followed 

by the immature females during the summer. 

There is little evidence that striped bass <2 yr undertake migrations along the Atlantic coast (Merriman 

1941). Mansueti (1961) stated that striped bass spawned 

in the Potomac River remained within the river during 

the first 3 or 4 yr of life. There is little exchange between river and Chesapeake Bay populations of 

Maryland striped bass with the probable exception of 

the Patuxent River juveniles. From a tagging study conducted on the Chesapeake Bay, Vladykov and Wallace 

(1938) concluded that striped bass under 2 yr of age were 

not migratory. Massmann and Pacheco (1961) concluded that in Virginia rivers, almost all striped bass 

<30.5 cm TL remained within the river system in which 

they were spawned. 

39Carlson, F. T., and J. A. McCann . 1969. Report on the biological 

findings of the Hudson River fisheries investigations, 1965-1968. In 

Hudson River Fisheries Investigations, 1965-1968: Evaluations of a 

proposed pump storage project at Cornwall, New York, in relation to fish 

in the Hudson River, 50 p. Hudson River Pollut. Comm .. N.Y. Conserv. 

Dep. 

.oRitchie, D. E., and T. S. Y. Koo. 1968. Movement of juvenile 

striped bass in the estuary as determined by tagging and recapture. Chesapeake BioI. Lab., Rep. No. 68-31 , 1 p. 
Adult migration 

Striped bass from the Gulf of Mexico and from both 

extremes of its range along the Atlantic coast rarely 

undertake coastal migrations. Along the Atlantic coast 

there is an apparent lack of coastal migrations from 

southern North Carolina to northern Florida (Raney 

1957). Populations in the St. Johns River, Fla. 

(Barkuloo 1970); Savannah River, Ga. (Dudley et a1. 

1977); and Cooper River, S.C. (Scruggs and Fuller 1955; 

Scruggs 1957) are essentially riverine, as is the striped 

bass population in the St. Lawrence River, Canada 

(Vladykov 1947; Murawski 1958). Striped bass from the 

Quebec River, the Canadian provinces of Nova Scotia 

and New Brunswick, and some contingents from the 

Hudson River are probably isolated and do not move 

great distances after spawning (Bigelow and Schroeder 

1953; Whitworth et a1. 1968; Clark 1968). But from Cape 

Hatteras, N.C., north to New England substantial 

numbers of striped bass leave their birthplaces when 

they are two or more years old and migrate in groups 

along the open coast, moving generally north in summer 

and south in winter (Vladykov and Wallace 1938, 1952; 

Merriman 1941 ; Chapoton and Sykes 1961 ; Clark 1968). 

Coastal migrations, which apparently are not associated with spawning activity (Merriman 1937, 1941; 

Vladykov and Wallace 1938), begin in early spring and 

are augmented by spent striped bass after the spawning 

season. Bigelow and Schroeder (1953) found t hat 

approximately 90% of all striped bass captured in northern waters were females. They suggested that the 

dominance of female striped bass in northern waters 

may be attributed to the faster growth rate and larger 

size of female striped bass. Large striped bass migrate 

farther. Striped bass catches from coastal waters of 

Rhode Island (Oviatt 1977) and North Carolina (Holland and Yelverton 1973) also consisted of approximately 90% females. 

Likewise Schaefer (1968b) reported that 85.7% of 

striped bass inhabiting the surf zone along with the 

south shore of Long Island, N.Y., from April-November 

1964 were females. These migrating striped bass, most 

of whictt originated in the tributaries of the Chesapeake 

Bay or other southern areas (Merriman 1941; Raney 

1952; Clark 1968), are intensively fished off southeastern Long Island, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine. Some coastal migrants may enter and overwinter in northern coastal 

rivers such as lower Hudson, Mullica, and Delaware. 

Howe~er, these overwintering fish are a small percentage of the total migrating population. A successful 

spawning and survival of young in the Chesapeake Bay 

area may have a pronounced effect in following years on 

the number of older striped bass present at distant 

northern localities along the coast (Tiller 1950; Raney 

1952; Mansueti 1961). More than one-half of the striped 

bass catch of the Atlantic coast is derived from the 

Chesapeake region. Koo (1970) concluded that Chesapeake Bay striped bass between age II and age ill 

contributed significantly to the Atlantic coast stock. 

41 

Sykes et a1. 41 reported that most (75%) of the Atlantic 

coast striped bass catch was composed of 2- to 4-yr-old 

fish . Kohlenstein (1978) presented evidence tha t 

approximately 50% of 3-yr-old female striped bass migrated from t he Chesapeake Bay in early spring and that 

a much smaller proportion of 2-yr-old and 4-yr-old 

females migrate. In contrast very few males of this age 

range participate in the migration . 

Examination of sport and commercial landings from 

the York River, Va., likewise shows an exodus of age ill 

striped bass from the river (Merriner and Hoagman 

footnote 8). Fish probably migrate to the lower Chesapeake Bay and become part of the migrating coastal 

population (Merriman 1941; Nichols and Miller 1967; 

Grant et a1. 1970). The inshore zone (0-10 fathoms) between Cape Henry, Va., and Cape Lookout, N.C., serves 

as wintering grounds for the migratory segment of the 

Atlantic coast striped bass population. Three groups of 

fish congregate off the North Carolina coast from 

November to March : stri ped bass which enter 

Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds, N.C. (mostly small 

fish; range 40.0-88.5 cm FL, X = 57.5 cm); fish from the 

Chesapeake Bay (mixed sizes; range 32.0-94.5 cm FI, X = 48.0 cm); and predominately large (range 33.0-112.0 

cm FL, X = 80.2 cm) striped bass which spend the summer from New Jersey northward (Holland and Yelverton 

1973). Adult striped bass (4 yr and older) tagged on the 

North Carolina coast in the late fall or winter were 

recovered in the commercial fisheries of North Carolina 

and the Chesapeake Bay prior to or during spawning 

season and were caught by sport fishermen along the 

Atlantic coast north to New England and Canada during t he summer and fall months (Miller 1969; Chapoton 

and Sykes 1961). 

It is generally thought that Hudson River striped bass 

contribute little to the Atlantic coast migratory stock 

though Clark (1968) considered the Hudson River the 

major source of recruitment of striped bass populations 

of Long Island Sound and the New York Bight (coastal 

area from Montauk Point, Long Island, to Barnegat 

Bay, N.J.). Clark (1968) concluded that five contingents (separate components of the Atlantic population) occupy Long Island Sound area at different 

times of the year. Three contingents-Hudson-West 

Sound, Hudson Estuary, and Hudson-Atlantic~ccur 

in the Hudson River during the spring and presumably 

spawn there. The Hudson-West Sound contingent occurs in Long Island Sound from summer to fall, moves 

into the Hudson River to overwinter and spawn in the 

spring, and returns to the sound in the summer via inland waters. The Hudson Estuary contingent confines 

its seasonal movements within the Hudson Estuary 

system, overwintering and spawning in the Hudson 

River, and moving downriver into bays to feed during 

the summer. This contingent was first identified as part 

of the Hudson River race by Raney et a1. (1954). There is 

'1 Sykes, J. E., R. J. Mansueti, and A H. wartz. 1961. tnped bar 

research on the Atlantic Coast. 20th Annu. Conf., Atl. tate ~1ar . Fish . 

Comm. (Mimeogr.) 
some evidence of a Hudson-Atlantic contingent (Merriman 1941; Raney 1952) which moves into the river to 

spawn, spends the summer offshore in the New York 

Bight area and in southern New England, and overwinters in New Jersey or Delaware rivers, Chesapeake 

,Bay, or offshore. 

Additionally, the Long Island Sound contingent, 

which resides in the western portion of the sound, and 

the southern contingent, which passes through during 

annual migrations, may be found in these waters. 

Schaefer (1968a) concluded that the abundance of 

striped bass inhabiting the south shore surf areas of 

Long Island was directly dependent upon contributions 

from Chesapeake Bay stocks. Only in years when this 

contribution was low did the influence of the Hudson 

River stock on the south shore become evident. 

Austin and Custer (1977) evaluated an extensive tagging program conducted in Long Island Sound by the 

American Littoral Society. Their data indicated there 

was: a spring influx from both ends of Long Island 

Sound, but primarily from the east (Hudson River 

striped bass would enter the sound from the west, 

Chesapeake area fish from the east); a stable summer 

population; and a fall migration out through the eastern passages. An intra-Long Island Sound fall migration was apparent as striped bass along the Connecticut 

coast migrated to the central part of the sound, crossed 

to the Long Island shore, and then migrated out of the 

sound via the eastern passages. The majority of the 

winter tag returns were from southern waters, 72% from 

the Chesapeake Bay area and 11l'O from North Carolina. 

Berggren and Lieberman (1978) estimated the relative 

contribution of Hudson, Chesapeake, and Roanoke 

stocks to the 1975 Atlantic coast striped bass fishery 

based on discriminant analysis of five morphological 

characters. The Chesapeake stock was the major contributor (90.8% iterative estimate, 90.2% adjusted estimate) to the coastal fishery from southern Maine to 

Cape Hatteras, N.C. Contribution of Hudson stock to 

the coastal fishery was greater in areas adjacent to the 

Hudson River than in remaining areas. Mean estimates 

of relative contribution of the Hudson River stock to 

western Long Island Sound, New York Bight, and northern New Jersey (inner zone-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission) were 16% iterated and 15% adjusted; 

mean contribution estimates to remaining waters from 

Cape May, N.J., to Maine (outer zone-USNRC) were 

2.8CO iterated and 0.0% estimated. Sublegal-sized 

striped bass from western Long Island Sound and New 

York Bight, and striped bass overwintering in the 

Hudson River were predominantly of Hudson origin. 

Striped bass in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, 

Calif., undergo annual migrations (Calhoun 1952; 

Chadwick 1967; Orsi 1971). Striped bass tagged during 

the early spring in the western delta (1958-61) migrated 

to salt water by late spring. During the summer, adults 

were generally centered in San Francisco Bay though 

substantial numbers were caught in the Pacific Ocean 

from Tomales Bay, 64 km north of the Golden Gate 

Bridge, to Monterey, 161 km south of the bridge. Fish 

began returning to the delta in the fall although many 

overwintered in the San Francisco Bay area. By spring 

fish had moved into the delta or its tributaries to spawn 

(Chadwick 1967). 

The following variations in the above migration pattern were reported by Orsi (1971) from a 1965-67 tagging study: 

1. Adult striped bass shifted from San Francisco Bay 

to San Pablo Bay during the winter. 

2. Small-sized (38-51 cm FL) and medium-sized (53-

61 cm FL) fish moved downstream into San Francisco Bay during the fall. 

3. Striped bass spend less time and had a reduced 

range in the ocean. 

Orsi correlated the upstream winter displacement of 

striped bass from San Francisco to San Pablo Bays with 

a decline in herring abundance in San Francisco Bay. 

Bass feed on spawning herring during the winter. 

3.52 Schooling 

During the first 2 yr, juvenile striped bass are primarily found in small groups. In subsequent years striped 

bass, especially up to a weight of about 4.5 kg are likely 

to congregate in large schools. Although larger fish often 

school, individuals of 13.6-18.1 kg are more often found 

singly or in small groups (Raney 1952; Bigelow and 

Schroeder 1953). 

The first attempts to determine the movements of 

striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay through tagging 

studies were made by Pearson (1933, 1938). From the 

results of these studies, Pearson suggested that adult 

striped bass showed a preference for fresh or slightly 

brackish water. An extensive tagging study was undertaken in the Chesapeake Bay by Vladykov and Wallace 

(1938). They found adult fish schooling near the surface 

in the open portions of the bay from June to midSeptember. Likewise Pearson (1938) concluded that 

adult striped bass moved into open waters during the 

summer months. Schools of striped bass move inshore 

from mid-October to late November, and southward, 

generally along the western shore of the bay. The 

stripers overwintered in the deeper portions of the bay 

[young adults ages ll-IV overwintered at 24-37 m according to Mansueti (1956)] and moved northward again 

during the spring spayming migration (Mansueti and 

Hollis 1963). Dovel (1968) described prespawning 

schools of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay during 

January, February, and March. Vladykov and Wallace 

(1938) concluded that the striped bass movements were 

based on migration of prey fish populations rather than 

on variations in salinity or temperature. Pearson (1938) 

suggested that striped bass overwinter in deep river 

channels. Murawski (1969) observed striped bass overwintering in the upper portion of a number of New 

Jersey tidal streams. The fish chose deep areas out of the 

main current, remained tightly schooled, and moved 

only slightly when water temperatures were 1°C or less. 
Raney (1952) stated that in New Jersey and Delaware 

striped bass overwintered in deep pools and remained 

relatively inactive whereas in the Chesapeake Bay 

feeding and movement continued throughout the 

winter. Talbot (1966) concluded that striped bass 

generally overwintered in deep holes within channels, 

bays, estuaries, delta regions, or rivers. 

A large striped bass population is present throughout 

the year in the Potomac River, though the adult population is not rigidly self-contained within the river. Miller 

(1969), in noting the number of striped bass tagged in 

winter in the Potomac River and recaptured in other 

tributaries the following spawning season, suggested 

that striped bass from other areas overwinter in the 

lower Potomac River. Striped bass exhibit a "homing 

tendency," returning to the same area within the river 

each year to spawn. Murphy (1959) described a sizesalinity gradient in overwintering striped bass on the 

Potomac. 

3.53 Responses to stimuli 

Also see sections 3.32 and 4.42. 

A number of investigators have examined striped bass 

movement and behavior. Striped bass appeared to move 

en masse during tidal flows from one locality to another, 

apparently riding the flow (Kerr 1953). Results from 

sonic tracking in the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal 

indicated that the movements were made typically in a 

"rest and go" manner, often with lengthy rest periods. 

When the current flowed in the direction in which the 

fish wanted to move, the fish swam or drifted along with 

the current. However, when the current flowed in the 

opposite direction, striped bass seemed to prefer to remain stationary rather than swimming actively against 

it. There was not much difference between day and 

night activity of prespawning fish. Spent striped bass, 

however, did not move as actively as prespawning adults 

(Koo and Wilson 1972). 

The behavior of juvenile striped bass in currents with 

velocities from zero to several feet per second has been 

observed in holding tanks and confirmed in flume 

experiments at the Contra Costa Steam Plant in California. In quiet waters fish moved in all directions, but 

with the first water movement they oriented into the 

flow. As the velocity increased this orientation became 

more positive with little tendency to deviate from it. 

Fish rarely swam with the current unless frightened or 

exhausted and looking for a refuge. They avoided areas 

of high turbulence and would not cross through vertical 

stream lines having a wide differential in velocity (Kerr 

1953). 

A variety of methods have been utilized to divert fish 

from intake areas of power plants. Lights were used to 

attract fish into areas where they could be rescued at the 

Contra Costa Steam Plant. The lights had an attraction 

for the larger fish, but it was only of a secondary nature 

(Kerr 1953). Meldrim and Gift (1971), however, found 

no definitive effects of light level in avoidance experiments. Noisemakers and vibrating contraptions were 

43 

also unsuccessfully employed to frighten fish from the 

intake areas at the Contra Costa Steam Plant (Kerr 

1953). 

To ward off fish from the intake area, fish collectors 

utilizing 20 cm bladeless impeller pumps were designed 

and placed in front of the traveling screens in the screen 

approach channel at the Contra Costa Steam Plant. 

From the results of the experimental collectors, Kerr 

(1953) concluded that 98% of the fish entering the screen 

structure, from the smallest size stopped by the screen 

to fish approximately 36 cm in length, would be safely 

returned to the river. 

Other behavioral observations: There have been a 

number of observations made on larval and juvenile 

striped bass kept in aquaria. Larvae are positively 

phototropic according to observations made by Sandoz 

and Johnston (1966). Tatum et al. (1966) concluded that 

artificial light appeared to have a tranquilizing effect 

upon striped bass in aquaria at the Weldon Hatchery, 

N.C. However, Kerr (1953) found that larval and small 

young-of-the-year striped bass were easily frightened 

into a state of shock, often resulting in death, by the 

movement of personnel in the aquaria area. Shock was 

less serious with older young-of-the-year and juvenile 

bass. 

4 POPULATION 

4.1 Structure 

4.11 Sex ratio 

The patterns of movement, and consequently distribution, of striped bass depend strongly on age and sex. 

Young males do not leave the Chesapeake Bay in significant numbers. A substantial proportion of immature 

females leave the Chesapeake Bay for coastal waters 

where they remain until they mature (Kohlenstein 

1978). Consequently the stocks in coastal waters, composed largely of fish from the Chesapeake Bay, are 

dominated by females. Typically 90% of a sample taken 

in coastal waters are females (Bigelow and Schroeder 

1953; Holland and Yelverton 1973; Oviatt 1977). 

Within the Chesapeake Bay the sexual composition of 

a group of striped bass depends on location, season, and 

age. Males mature at age 2 or 3 and join in the spring 

movement on to the spawning grounds. Most females do 

not mature until age 5 or 6 and immature females do not 

move onto the spawning grounds. Consequently, the sexual composition of stock on the spawning grounds varies 

dramatically with age. The age specific sexual composition found in the Potomac River spawning grounds by 

Jones et al. (footnote 17) went from total dominance by 

males at age 3 to strong dominance by females at age 7: 

Age 

Male proportion 

of the stock 

3 

0.97 

4 

0.94 

5 6 7 

0.81 0.31 0.19 
Often there are in aggregate more males than females 

on the spawning grounds (Pearson 1938; Merriman 

1941; Trent and Hassler 1968; and others). Males spend 

more time on the spawning grounds than females 

(Chadwick 1967). Morgan and Gerlach (1950) reported 

that males dominated the commercial catch of Coos 

'Bay, Oreg., during early April, the latter part of May, 

and throughout June, whereas females predominated in 

late April and early May. However, this sex ratio is 

dependent on the relative strength of the age classes in 

the stock. For example, the sex ratio of all striped bass 

sampled on the Potomac River, Md., spawning grounds 

was 4 to 1 female in 1974, 3.44:1 in 1975, and 1:1.3 in 

1976. This transition was primarily due to the production of a dominant year class in 1970 and low spawning 

success from 1971 through 1973. Recruitment from the 

1971-73 year classes did not compensate for the exploitation of the 1970 year class; thus the male to female 

ratio shifted from male dominance in 1974 to female 

dominance in 1976 (Jones et al. footnote 17). 

The sexual composition of the stock remaining in the 

Chesapeake Bay in a given year is best reflected in samples obtained during the summer and fall. The 1936 and 

1937 striped bass population in the Maryland portion of 

the Chesapeake Bay was dominated by the 1934 year 

class and consisted of 55% males; similar ratios were 

found in Virginia and North Carolina (Vladykov and 

Wallace 1952). Kohlenstein (1978) reports the age 

specific sexual composition from samples in the Chesapeake Bay in the fall of 1976. 

Age 

Male proportion 

of the stock 0.5 

2 

0.44 

3 4 

0.53 0.43 

He notes that the changes in sexual composition with 

age are due to the combined influence of female migration and spring fishing pressure which is far heavier on 

males than on females. See also section 3.51 for sex of 

coastal migrants. 

4.12 Age composition 

Maine waters were dominated by the 1961 year class 

during 1964 and 1965 (4- and 5-yr-olds); numerous 

striped bass of the 1958 year class were also collected 

(Davis 1966). Schaefer (1968a) sampled the south shore 

of Long Island, N.Y., with a commercial seine in 1962 

and 1963. The 1958 year class (4-yr-olds) dominated in 

1962 and comprised ~60% of the catch (age range 2-15 

yr). This year class was abundant as 5-yr-olds in 1963; 

however, by October and November the 1958 year class 

was being replaced as the dominant group by the 1961 

year class. Two-year-old fish comprised over 40% of the 

catch in 1963. The commercial catch of Long Island and 

New England was dominated by 2-yr-olds in 1936 (85% 

of the catch) and 2- and 3-yr-olds in 1937 (Merriman 

1941). 

Tiller (1950) examined the age composition of striped 

bass from commercial pound net catches in Chesapeake Bay from 1941 to 1945. The 1940 year class, which 

entered the fishery in the fall of 1941, dominated catches 

during 1942-43, and comprised a significant portion of 

the 1944-45 harvest. The 1942 year class, though not as 

large as the 1940 year class, significantly contributed to 

the catch during fall of 1943 and 1944, but was almost 

completely utilized by 1945. Sport fishermen caught 

predominantly 2- (47.7-85.3%) and 3-yr-olds in the 

Potomac River, Md., during 1959-61 (Frisbie and 

Ritchie 1963), and 2-yr-olds in the Patuxent River during 

1960 (Shearer et al. 1962). 

Age composition of the commercial catch of striped 

bass from Potomac River, 1974-76, is summarized below 

('lones et al. footnote 17). 

Year 

1974 

1975 

1976 

Age range 

ll-XlV 

ll-Xlll 

ll-XlV 

Domuwnt ages 

IV-59.75CC; ill-V-85.19"C 

V-75.09'G; ill-V-96.56'c 

VI-54.91 <:c; ill- VI-95.40'c 

The dominance of the 1970 year class (also section 

4.11) is apparent. 

Grant and Jo eph (1969) determined age composition 

of sport and commercial catches from the Rappahannock, York, and James Rivers, Va., during June 1967-

March 1968. The 1965 year class dominated the James 

River catch during thi period whereas the 1966 year 

class dominated the Rappahannock and the York River 

catch. Striped bass of age groups I-ill dominated the 

pound and fyke net catch (nonselective gear) from these 

three rivers during July 1967-June 1971 comprising 84.3-

99.4C~ of the total catch (Grant 1974). The 1966 year 

class dominated the 1969 and the 1970 winter gill net 

fishery in the Rappahannock River. An approximate 

tripling of landings in 1970 resulted from selection for 

the dominant 1966 year class (Grant et al. 1971). 

Table 16 summarizes striped bass age composition of 

Table 16.-Total number and percent of sample by age group 

of striped bass from the Albermarle Sound (North Carolina) 

commercial fishery, 1975-76. From Johnson et aJ. 1977'. 

~umber Percent of sample 

Age 1975 1976 1975 1976 

II 60 28 17 4 

III 73 295 21 43 

IV 88 109 26 16 

V 87 162 25 24 

VI 18 64 5 9 

VII 10 13 3 2 

VIII 6 10 2 l.5 

IX 2 <1 

X <1 

XI <1 

Total 345 683 

'Johnson, H. B., B. F. Holland, Jr., and S. G. Keefe. 1977. 

Anadromous fisheries research program, northern coastal area. 

N.C. Div. Mar. Fish., Completion Rep., Proj. AFCS-Il, 97 + 

41 p. Available from U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, 

NMFS, Federal Office Building, 144 First Street, South, St. 

Petersburg, FL 3370l. 
the Albemarle Sound, N.C., commercial fi he 'during 

1975-76. Two- to five-year-old triped ba ompried R9', of the catch during 1975, and 3- to 6-yr·old fi h, 

92(, of the catch during 1976. Table 17 ummarize mean 

age and length of striped ba caught in the Albe- to 

marie Sound re reationa) fishery during 1974-75. The 

dominance of the 1972 year cia i. seen by the dominance of 2·yr·old in 1974 (37") and 3-yr-old. in 1975 

(46("0). Three- to four-year-old males and 4- to 5-yr-old 

females dominated the Roanoke River, N.C., gill net 

catches during springs of 196.3-65 (Trent and Ha ler 

1968). 

Table 17. Total numlx>r. percent of sample. and mean fork lenlfth 

by alfe of triped ban from Allx>marle Sound (!'iorth Carolina) r('Creational fishery ampled during the Elizalx>th (ity Striped Sa 

Tournament, 1971-75. From Johnson I't al. 1977'. 

~1ean lork length 

• umh~r Percent 01 ample (mm) 

Age 1971 1975 1974 197.1 1974 1975 - rr 1\·1 12 37 7 :lll\ 290 

III t:l HI\ :l0 46 .101 :129 

IV ;IR :19 26 21 .( t :196 

V II 2.1 6 1:1 .~·}4 .'>09 

VI 2·1 l:l 695 1\78 

VII <I 720 6.')5 

11.'\ IR6 

'.John,on. H H . H. F Holland .. Jr .. and '. G. Keele. 1977. AnadromOlls Ihhenes research prol(Tam. northern coastal area ~.('. DI\ ~1ar. 

Fish. Completwn Rep .. Proj AFC'S·II. 7 + 11 p. Available from 

l S. Department of Commerce. OAA. :--I.\1FS. Federal Office BuildlIll(. 

141 First Street. South. St Petersburg. FL :1:l701. 

Three-year-old striped bass dominated the port fishery in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Calif., during 

1957-58 (RoblO on 1960). 

4.13 Size composition 

Length-frequency di tribution are given by cofield 

(19:31), Merriman (1941), Tiller (1950)' Morgan and 

Gerlach (1950)' ladykov and Wallace (1952), Trent 

and Has ler (1968), Schaefer (1968a), and others. 

See section 3.4::J for length compo ition of the population; Tables 14,16, and 17 for the length compo ition of 

the catch from various location; Tables 16 and 17 and 

section 5.42 for size at first capture; ection 3.12 for size 

at maturity; .ection 3.:n for maximum ize: and Table 

15 for length.weight relationship. 

4.2 Ahundance and density (of population) 

4.21 Average abundance 

'incl' the main river ystems along the AtlantiC coa t 

from th St Lawrence River, Quebec. to the.·t .1ohn. 

River. Fla , along the Gulf coa. t from Apalachlctlla Bay, 

Fin .. to Luke I ontchartrain. La .. and along the Pa ifi 

toast from C lifomi to \\'ashinglon upport their O\'>Tl 

tript·d ha population', it is im ible to obt in n 

overall estimnte of populati n iz. The term "a\ ra 

5 

Age r..v In 1 q o In 1 i2 

3 

5 

Ij 

7 

4.22 hange in ahund nce 
Reduction in young-of-the-year abundance as the 

season progresses (Rathjen and Miller 1957; Trent 1962) 

has been attributed to three factors: mortality 

(primary), dispersion out of the sampling area, and gearselectivity. Sasaki (1966) described downstream migrations of young-of-the-year and juvenile striped bass from 

'the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Turner and Chadwick (1972) demonstrated that survival of striped bass 

up to 38 mm was directly related to summer river flow 

through the delta. See section 4.33 for a discussion of 

losses of young-of-the-year striped bass through water 

diversions in the delta. 

4.23 Average density 

The term "average density" is a relative term which 

depends upon locality and time of year under consideration, year class success, migratory patterns, and numerous other factors. Egg and larval densities for the Hudson River are given in the papers by Lawler et a1. (1974), 

Texas Instruments (footnote 14), and Lauer et al. (1974); 

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal by Kernehan et al. 

(footnotes 24, 11); Potomac River by Mihursky et al. 

(footnote 6) and Boynton et al. (footnote 13); Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary by Turner (1976). Juvenile 

densities from the Hudson River are available in the 

papers by Lawler et a1. (1974) and Texas Instruments 

(footnote 10); Potomac River by Boynton et a1. (footnote 

13) and Mihursky et a1. (footnote 6); James, York, and 

Rappahannock Rivers by Grant and Merriner44 and 

and Merriner and Hoagman (footnote 8); Albemarle 

Sound by Trent (1962); Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary by Calhoun (1953), Chadwick (1964), Sasaki (1966), 

and Turner and Chadwick (1972). 

4.24 Changes in density 

Vertical distribution of striped bass larvae and 

juveniles is discussed in section 2.21. 

4.3 Natality and recruitment 

4.31 Reproduction rates 

The intensive quantitative ichthyoplankton studies 

that have been undertaken in recent years have enabled 

estimates of striped bass egg and larval production to be 

made with varying degrees of accuracy and precision. 

Striped bass egg, yolk sac, finfold and postfinfold larval 

densities and estimates of abundance and production 

from the Potomac River for the years 1974 through 1976 

have been given in the following papers: 1974-

Mihursky et a1. (footnote 23), Polgar et a1. (1976); 

" P. W. Jones, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD 

20688, pers. commun. February 1978. 

"Grant, S. C., and J. V. Merriner. 1971. Feasibility of increasing 

striped bass populations by stocking underutilized nursery 

grounds. Anadromous Fish Act, Annu. Prog. Rep. , AFS-6-1, 89 

p. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA 23062. 

1975-Mihursky et a1. (footnote 6); 1976-Boynton et a1. 

(footnote 13), and are summarized in Table 18. These 

production estimates assumed uniform age distribution 

for the egg and larval stages. One consequence of this assumption is that production is likely to be underestimated due to the short mean life expectancy of each 

stage. This has led to the development of two production 

models assuming an exponential age distribution of 

each stage (Polgar 1977). Estimates of striped bass egg 

production on the Potomac River during 1974 ranged 

from 5.71 X 109 (Polgar 1977) and 8.11 X 109 (Table 17), 

both based on an arithmetic model with uniform age 

distribution, to 26.9 X 109 (exponential age distribution). A concurrent study of the adult swimming population indicated a potential egg production of73 X 109 . 

Table 18.-Estimated striped bass production from the Potomac 

River (Maryland) calculated from an arithmetic model assuming unjform age distribution for egg and larval stages. From Boynton et 

al. (1977).' 

_ ______________ ~1~97~4 _________ 1.~97~5~ ______ ~1~76~_ 

Eggs 11')9.33 X 10" - .03 X 10' 

( mortality 6.3.62 92.99 

Yulk·,ac larvae 7171 XIO 421.69 X 10' 62.07 X 10' 

r mortality 96.15 94.02 170 

Finfold lan'ae 2,49 X Iry 26. 7 X 10" 11.36 X 10' 

( mortalit} 165 80.59 93.94 

Postfinfnld Ian ae 0,46 X 10' 469 X 10' 0.73 X 10' 

Bomton, \\'. R E. ~I Setzler. K \' Wood, H. H Zion, and ~1 

Homer 19i" . Draft report on Potomac River fi hene studY,lchthyoplankton and jU\'enile In\estlgations. lJllIV . ~ld. CEE Ref • '0. 

77 169-CBL. Chesapeake BiolOgical Laboratory, ' lomons, ;\lD 20688 

Sampling lonce per week) mis ed peak 'pawn 

Hassler4s made quantitative estimates of striped bass 

spawning in the Tar River, N.C., for 1967-69. As estimated 17 X 107 eggs were spawned in 1967, 2.8 X 107 in 

1968, and 0.1 X 107 in 1969. Egg vitality declined from 

85c(' in 1967 and 1968 to 58lQ in 1969. 

4.32 Factors affecting reproduction 

Van Cleve (1945) in California and Hassler (1958) in 

the Roanoke River, N.C., suggested water flow (both 

velocity and volume) to be very important in developing 

successful spawns. Hassler suggested that the number of 

spawning striped bass in the Roanoke River was directly 

related to river flow . High and regular flows resulted in 

the most successful spawns. 

In addition to water flow, colder than normal winter 

temperatures have been associated with successful 

striped bass spawns. Heinle et a1. (1976) related the 

pulsed input of detritus in the late winter in an upper 

Patuxent River, Md., marsh to the production of the estuarine copepod, Eurytemora affinis, and suggested that 

the enrichment of the detritus food chain was directly 

" Hassler, W. W. 1970. The status, abundance, and exploitation of 

striped bass (Raccus saxatilis) in Roanoke River and Albemarle Sound, 

North Carolina. N.C. State Univ., Zool. Dep ., Completion Rep. Proj. 

AFC-1, 63 p. 
related to the severity of the winter. Heinle and Flemer 

(1975) hypothesized a relatively simple food chain in the 

upper Patuxent River during April and May consisting 

of detritus, E. affinis, Neomysis americana, and 

anadromous fish larvae. They attributed the increased 

mortality rate and observed population decline of E. affinis in the Patuxent River during April and May to 

predation. Heinle et al. (1976) noted that E. affinis 

production in the Patuxent River was about 4.5 times 

greater during a spring (1970) that led to a strong year 

class of striped bass than during one (1969) that did not. 

Merriman (1941) observed that the occurrence of strong 

year classes of striped bass was related to low water 

temperatures. Strong year classes occurred only (but not 

always) after severe winters; mild winters never 

produced a strong year class. Koo (1970) identified the 

dominant year classes between 1934 and 1964 in the 

Chesapeake region and proposed a 6-yr cycle with three 

unexpectedly low year classes: 1946, 1952, and possibly 

1928. Using data from Merriman (1941) and Koo (1970), 

Heinle et al. (1976) summarized the deviations from 

long-term mean temperatures during the years from 

1892 to 1970 when dominant year classes were observed 

or expected. During this time strong year classes of 

striped bass were always associated with subnormal 

winter temperatures. Boynton et al. (footnote 13) 

demonstrated that dominant year classes of striped bass 

of the Potomac River were preceded by colder than normal winters and greater than normal spring flows. 

In the California Delta large year classes of striped 

bass result from years of high river flow. Turner and 

Chadwick (1972) demonstrated that in the Sacramento-San Joaquin System survival of young striped 

bass up to 3.8 cm TL (first 2 mo oflife) is related to summer river flow through the delta, which controls the 

transport of young bass to suitable nursery areas. 

Stevens (1977a) and Chadwick et al. (1977) have shown 

that these flows impact recruitment to the sport fishery 

several years later and are largely responsible for population abundance fluctuations (for further discussion of 

this topic see section 4.33 of this review). 

.4.33 Recruitment 

Attempts at forecasting recruitment have used the 

following indices as a basis for a forecast: a) beach seining for young-of-the-year fish, b) age and size composition analysis, and c) winter trawl sampling for the 

young -of-the-year. 

Schaefer (1972) developed a short-range forecast for 

striped bass fishing in New York waters. To obtain catch 

projections, he plotted the New York harvest versus the 

average 4-yr brood production from Maryland waters of 

the Chesapeake Bay 3-6 yr prior to the harvest (Fig. 9). 

Thus, if the average brood stock index for a 3-yr period 

3-6 yr prior to a harvest date was 10 fish/seine haul, 

Schaefer's model would predict a commercial harvest of 

45,360 kg. While this method is somewhat attractive, 

the mechanism is not stated and could be misleading if 

other factors, not in the model, change. For instance, 

47 

-u '" 

c 

~ 

o 

1500 

~ 1000 

-u 

c 

~ :::> 

o 

;::: 500 

• • 

• 

Y--519.77 + 151.91X 

4 8 12 

Av. No. Young-of-the-Yeor/Stondord Seine Haul 

681 

E 

~ 

en 454 .2 

'" (; 

-u '" 

c 

227 ~ ~ 

0 

..r:. 

>-

0 

16 

Figure 9.-Relationship of New York commercial landings of striped 

bass to average brood production in the Maryland waters of Che&apeake Bay 3-6 yr prior to harvest. From Schaefer (1972); ,. = 0.85. 

Briggs (1965) reported a large increase in Long Island, 

N. Y., fishing effort that did not appear to be related to 

larger bass stocks. Social factors, such as demand for 

recreation, seemed more important than the size of the 

stock. 

Modal length of sublegal II + striped bass collected in 

the Long Island, N.Y., commercial fishery during 1972 

(1970 year class) was smaller, 245 mm FL, than in 1974 

(1972 year class), 295 mm FL (Austin and Hickey 1978). 

The 1970 year class was the most abundant Chesapeake 

Bay year class on record (Schaefer 1972). Correlation 

analysis between eight annual modal lengths of age II + 

fish and their respective Chesapeake Bay year class 

strengths 2 yr earlier (number of juveniles per seine 

haul) indicated that 90"0 of the annual variation in 

modal lengths of age 11+ striped bass in New York 

waters could be explained by annual fluctuations in year 

class strength of striped bass from Maryland waters of 

Chesapeake Bay 2 yr earlier. Correlation analyses between New York striped bass landings and a 4-yr and a 

5-yr mean of computed modal lengths of age II + fish 1-4 

yr and 1-5 yr prior to harvest were highly significant: 1-4 

yr, r2 = 0.74; 1-5 yr, r2 = 0.69. Austin and Hickey noted 

that striped bass apparently migrate by size rather than 

by age. During 1972,100% of the 454 sub legal fish tagged 

were age II; whereas in 1974, 28<0 of 696 sublegal fish 

tagged were age II, 6500 age III, and 7<0 age IV. 

Studies in the San Joaquin Delta, Calif., have ascertained that the success of a striped bass year class i 

determined within the first 2 mo of life (Chadwick et al. 

1977). Abundance indices based on the number of surviving juvenile striped bass when the population mean 

length reaches 38 mm have been developed (Chady,;ck 

1964; Turner and Chadwick 1972; Stevens 1977b). 

Turner and Chadwick (1972) reported correlation coefficients of +0.889 and -0.904 between thi juvenile index, mean daily June-July delta outflow. and mean percent of June-July inflow diverted for local con umption 

and export. Similarly. about 70<0 of the variation of the 

1956-71 abundance indices for age II striped bass was 
correlated to the June-July outflows 3 yr earlier 

(Chadwick et a1. 1977). Stevens (1977a) concluded that 

delta outflow controlled the spatial distribution and survival of young-of-the-year striped bass. As flows increased, more striped bass were transported out of the 

delta to the larger downstream embayments, particularly Sui san Bay (Turner and Chadwick 1972). 

From 1959 through 1970 an average of 25% of the May 

delta inflow, 51 c:o of the June inflow, and 65% of the July 

inflow was diverted for local use and exported via two 

large pumping plants in the southwestern delta. From 

1971 through 1976 water diversions increased to an 

average of 41 % in May, 59% in June, and 69% in July. 

The flow patterns created by water exports subject 

many larval and juvenile striped bass to loss from the 

delta region. Although fish screens have been installed 

at the pumping plant intakes, there are still substantial 

losses to the young-of-the-year population. For example, 

Skinner (1974) estimated that 31 % of the striped bass 

approaching the state pumping plant in 1970 were exported from the delta. Chadwick et a1. (1977) concluded 

that density-independent processes, particularly mortality due to losses in water diversions from the delta, 

playa major role in controlling the size of the striped 

bass population. 

Density independence of a successful year class: Years 

of higher river flow in the California Delta resulted in 

large year classes. However, virtuall)- all the eggs 

produced in the early and mid portion of the spawning 

season, in these years of high river flow, are swept into 

the lower bays of the delta where survival is extremely 

low. The midsummer size distribution of the young-ofthe-year fish indicates that these striped bass were 

produced from a small fraction of late spawning fish 

(Chadwick 1974). Likewise in the Potomac River, most 

of the 1974 striped bass larval production was attributed to spawning activities during the latter portion of 

the season (Polgar et a1. footnote 16). Such results would 

seem to indicate that the production of a successful year 

class is a density-independent phenomenon, a conclusion first alluded to by Vladykov and Wallace (1952). 

4.4 Mortality and morbidity 

4.41 Mortality rates 

Also see sections 4.31, 4.32, and 4.5. 

Mortality rate estimates of various striped bass populations are given in Table 19. Mortality rates for the 

California population were calculated from disk-dangler 

tag returns. Mortality rates for the Virginia rivers were 

based on internal anchor tag returns; North Carolina 

rates were based on Floy dart tag returns. 

Several studies have evaluated tags suitable for 

striped bass population dynamics investigations. Chadwick (1963) evaluated disk-dangler, spaghetti, hydrostatic, dart, and streamer tags. Although no tag was 

completely successful, disk-dangler and hydrostatic tags 

produced the most satisfactory results. Subsequent 

48 

California studies (Chadwick 1968; Sommani 1972; Miller 1974) have used disk-dangler tags. Lewis (19(31) compared Petersen disk, nylon streamer, and jaw ring tags. 

Streamer and jaw ring tags were equally suitable; 

streamer tags were chosen because they were easier to 

obtain. Streamer tags were the most satisfactory of the 

three tags (streamer, Petersen, and spaghetti) tested by 

Davis (1959). Miller (1974) discussed the biases inherent 

in estimating population parameters from markrecapture data. 

Street et a1. 46 estimated a total annual mortality of 

51 P~ for triped bass age 3 through 6 yr in Albemarle 

Sound, N.C., from 1972 through 1974. However, total 

annual mortalities apparently decreased to 33 P e, in 1975 

and 25( ~ in 1976 (,Johnson et aI. 47 ). Holland and 

Yelverton (973) projected a mean monthly fishing mortality rate of 3.6 P -;' to an annual harvest rate of 35'(; for 

triped ba . tagged in the ocean off orth Carolina and 

recaptured from orth Carolina to Maine. 

Sykes et a!. (footnote 41) concluded that about 40% of 

the available striped bas were taken in the Potomac 

River, Md .. pring fi hery. Thi left approximately 60'0 

for the recreational fi hery and recruitment in brood 

tock. Kohlen tein (1978) e timated a 35"C mortality of 

3-yr-old males from the Chesapeake Bay spring commercial fisher),. 

Salla and Lorda (1977: 320) ummarized the following 

survi\aJ probability from studie of the Hudson River, 

'.Y., triped ba population: 

Probabilit) of,wt'lval 

.4./?e das., DuratIOn through life stage 

and lIfe stage (da).,) or age cia 

0 

Egg and yolk- ac 10 0.06 

Po tyolk-sac :-!4 0.04 

JU\'enile 1 30 0.20 

Juvenile 2 145 0.51 

JU\'enile 3 156 0.16 

Total 365 

365 0.40 

II 365 0.60 

4.42 Factors causing or affecting mortality 

See sections 3.22, 3.23, 3.32, 3.34, 4.32, 4.5, 5.4, and 

6.1. 

Striped bass apparently migrate by size rather than 

by age (section 3.51). Austin and Hickey (1968) concluded that faster growing individuals of any given year 

class or larger individuals of a less abundant year class 

would be subject to earlier exploitation in Chesapeake 

Bay and along the Atlantic seaboard. Slower growing 

"Street, M. W., P. P. Potts, Jr., B. F. Holland, Jr .. and A. B. 

Powell. 1975. Anadromous fisheries research program, north coastal 

region. N.C. Diy. Mar. Fish., Completion Rep., Proj. AFCS-8, 173 + 62 

p. 

'-Johnsun, H. B., B. F. Holland, Jr., and S. G. Keefe. 1977. Anadromous fisheries research program, northern coastal area. N.C. Div. 

Mar. Fish., Completion Rep., Froj. AFCS-l1, 97 + 41 p. 
Area 

\,irg-inia; 

York River 

Rapphannork River' 

;-';orth Carollna: 

Roanoke River 

North Carolina 

California 

Year ,'urvival rate 

196.3 0.33 

1966 0.04 0.02 

1967 

1970 

1971 

1966 

1967 

1972 

1958 

1959 

1960 

1961 

1962 

1963 

1964 

1965 

1966 

1967 

1968 

1969 

1970 

1971 

0.02 

0.07 

0.02 

0.319 

0.534 

0.601 

0.662 

0.592 

0.511 

0.577 

'0.655 

0.628 

0.647 

0.687 

0.614 

0.688 

0.660 

om 

0.14 

O.lii 

'0.316 

0.535 

0.590 

0.672 

0.675 

0.632 

0.705 

0.664 

0.678 

0.703 

0.750 

Expert.Hmn 

Exploitation of deat h from 

rate 

0260 

0.245 

0.372 

0.247 

0.243 

0.190 

0.200 

0.281 

0.235 

'0.142 

0.179 

0.160 

0.120 

0.193 

0.119 

0147 

"0.372 

0.255 

0.253 

0.202 

0.200 

0.246 

0.167 

0.136 

0.176 

0.148 

0.096 

natural cau e 

0.:109 '0.312 

0.~19 0.~10 

0.156 0.157 

0.148 0.126 

0.208 0.126 

0.208 0.122 

0.208 0.128 

'0.203 0200 

0.193 0.147 

0.193 0.149 

0.193 O.1.~4 

0.193 

0.193 

0193 

Tal 

0.27 n.lI:)h 024 

114 "l.l'i tl.tl:? '0 "l ,) 2 

D.6:1 u.(};1 0.33 o J4 t) ~ 02-

OJ,1 O.S.l 0.31 0J3 o _u 1)20 

0.41 0.40 0.23 0.25 Oh 01') 

0.52 0.:19 0.25 024 0"'- _I I) 1~ 

0.67 OA6 0.39 0.31 0.2' I) 1~ 

0.67 U.:1S 0.36 0.20 031 1~ 

"0.42 0.-11 0.17 0.17 11.2;; I) 24 :\hl r 1 -~ 

0.46 0 .. 19 0.22 0.21 0.24 I) 1 

0.-l4 (U.~ tUO 0111 0.24 ,) 1~ 

o.:n 0.29 n 14 Oll n.21 01 

0.-19 024 0"'--) 

0.37 014 o 2;l 

0.-11 0.1:-; 032 

'Chadwick (1968) ratio of 1962 to 1961 returns used as e timate of 1961 survi\'a); annual expectation of deaths trom nat ral au I.' from 1 2 1 

to 1958-1961 mean. 

'Miller (1974) a 'sumed expectation of natural death was equal to mean for 1959. 1960. and 1965. 

' Grant. G. C .. and J. V. Merriner. 1971. Feasibility of increasing striped bass population. b, stock.ng of underutlhled r.arSH\ gro d n d 

mous Fish Proj .. Annu. Prog. Rep., AFS·6·1, 89 p. \'irginia Institute of Marine SCience, Gloucester Point. \'A ~:1062. 

'Merriner .. J. V., and W. J. Hoagman. 1973. Feasibility of increasing stnped bass populatIOn, hy stocking oi underutlhz('d nurs 1'\ gr< nd \a 

Comm. Game Inland Fish .• Annu. Prog. Rep .. AF ·06-02.66 p. 

'Hassler. W. W .. W. L. Trent. and B. J. Florence. 1966. The status and abundance of the stnped ba., In the Ruanok« H HI' 

Report to the North Carolina Department of Conservation and Development. Oi\'isinn of Commercial and ~p()rt F',ht'ne- R.l gh 

hHassler. W W .. W. T. Hogarth. and H. L. Liner III 1967. The status and a

'

)undal1le of t e ,t!'lped bass In the R, ano l Ri\ r 

for 1966. Report to the ;-';orth Carolina Department of Conservation and De\·elopment. Divisic"l of Commerc'al and ~port FI her 

p. (Mlmeo.) 

- Chadwick 1968. 

'Sommani 1972. 

l\liller 197~. 

fish or smaller fish from a dominant year class might be 

recruited several months later than normal in the 

Chesapeake and not perhaps until a full year later in 

northern Atlantic states. Thus. late recruitment in the 

Chesapeake could result in a greater availability of 

triped bass to other coastal states. 

4.43 Factors affecting morbidity 

See section 3.35. 

4.5 Dynamics of population 

1 umerou models have been developed to evaluate 

the impact of power plant operation on population of 

commercially and recreationally important fi h specie 

spawnin~ upriver or in the nei~hborhood of a power 

plant. wartzman et al. (1977) evaluated the follo .... ing 

e\'en modeL which Imulate the entrainment of triped 

bas egg, and larvae through the cooling y terns of 

power plants: 

49 

Hudson River ~triped Bas. :\lodeb (B .... Ime. Indian 

Point. and Ro eton Power ,'tatlOn ). 

1. 1972 Lowler. :\latuskv nd. kelly 

(L:\1S) model With no longitudinal 

tion or vertical .tratili atlOn of th 

F..ngm 

egm ntaHud n 

River. 

2. 1972 L:\I' model with longltudmal gm nt 

tion but no vertical. tratlficatlon of the Hud n 

Ri\er. 

:L 1973 Oak Ridge . 'ational Lab ratol) 

model with longitudinal egmentatl n 

vertical ~tra: Ificati n of the Hud on Ri\ er 

4. 1975 L:\h model WIth both Ion Itudmal 

mentation ,,'Id vertical 

Hud. on Ri\er. 

Che. pe ke nd Dela.... re I 

~I(>dd ( ummlt 'uclear P 

5. l mt d EngIn 

). OR. '1. model. 

7. John Hop -in 

• (' n tru m 

B 
Major differences in biological assumptions in the 

striped bass young-of-the-year models were the choice of 

life stage durations and the inclusion of compensatory 

mortality at both high and low fish densities. 

Six of the models reviewed by Swartzman et a1. (1977) 

included a life cycle model, in the form of a modified 

, Leslie matrix, to translate the effect of power plant mortality into a long-term impact on the adult population 

and fishery. Major differences in predictions of yield and 

population from these models resulted from using 

density-dependent versus density-independent fishing 

mortality and from using different values for the probability of natural survival of 1- to 3-yr-old fish. The interested reader is referred to Swartzman et a1. (1977) for 

further detail. 

Saila .and Lorda (1977) utilized a Leslie matrix model 

to conduct a sensitivity analysis of the effects of changes 

in the survival rates of five striped bass young-of-theyear life stages due to entrainment and impingement, on 

the short-term dynamics of the population. 

Durations .of young-of-the-year life stages were: eggs 

and yolk-sac, 10 days; post yolk-sac , 24 days; juvenile 1, 

30 days; juvenile 2, 145 days; and juvenile 3, 156 days. 

Sensitivity analysis results by Saila and Lorda (1977: 

331) included: 

"3. If only one of the five life stages in age class 0 is 

subjected to increased mortality, the population 

seems capable of tolerating losses up to 20% 

before being reduced to about 50% of its initial 

size in 20 years. 

"4. If each of the five life stages in age class 0 is subjected to increased mortality, the percent loss per 

life stage must be less than 5% in order to not 

have the size of the adult population reduced by 

50% or more in 20 years. 

"5. Any reduction in the fishing mortality in one or 

several of the age classes 3 to 20 will permit a 

higher tolerance for additional mortality in the yo-y [young-of-the-year] life stages." 

Several models of early life history stages of Potomac 

River striped bass populations have been formulated. 

Warsh48 modeled entrainment of striped bass eggs and 

larvae by a proposed power plant at Douglas Point. He 

predicted that the proposed plant, operating at an intake rate of 2.3 cm during the spawning season would 

probably destroy about 0.6% of the spawn in an average 

year, about 1% of the spawn in a bad year, and most 

probably no more than 1.2% of the spawn even if serious 

errors were made in the selection of values for model 

parameters. 

Polgar (1977) developed two models with an exponential 

,. Warsh, K. L. 1977. Final summary of estimates of the entrainment rate of spawn of the striped bass (Marone saxatilis) into the 

proposed power plant at Douglas Point. SHU, PPSE-T-2. Prepared 

for the State of Maryland Power Plant Siting Program by the Johns 

Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins Road, 

Laurel, MD 20810. 

50 

age distribution with each early life history stage (eggs, 

yolk-sac, finfold, and postfinfold larvae) which allowed estimation of mortality rates within each stage. One model 

used a uniform age distribution model to obtain an independent estimate for one of the mortality rates and "guesstimated" remaining mortality rates. The second model 

assumed an equal mortality rate in the finfold and postfinfold stages. Both models assumed constant mortality 

rates within each early life history stage. 

A major difficulty in the derivation of any model 

which attempts to calculate mortality rates is the 

limitation imposed by the state-of-the-art sampling 

design for the population in question. Thus, it is 

simplistic to assume that mortality rates are constant 

over the duration of the striped bass spawning season on 

the Potomac River. Additionally, mortality rates are 

probably dependent upon position within the river (upstream versus downstream) and possibly upon horizontal distribution across the river (channel versus shoal 

areas). Superimposed upon the differential mortality 

question are the effects of possible diurnal-spawning activity on egg production estimates, the unrealistic assumption of constant developmental times for the yolksac, finfold, and postfinfold stages, and the complex 

physical transport processes that continually redistribute ichthyoplankton. Such problems warrant attempts 

at resolution before more realistic production models 

can be formulated. 

Chadwick (1969) developed a mathematical 

equilibrium model for San Francisco Bay stocks. From 

the modeling effort Chadwick reported that recruitment was not closely related to the parent stock size. 

Highest recruitment was found to be at stock sizes 

slightly less than the equilibrium size (equilibrium size 

is that size of stock where recruitment equals parent 

stock). 

4.6 The population in the community and the ecosystem 

See also sections 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.16, 3.22, 3.23, 3.32, 

3.35,3.42,3.51,4.12,4.13, and 4.32. 

Species composition and seasonal abundance of communities associated with striped bass have been 

reported for the surf zone (Schaefer 1967); Hudson River 

estuary (Texas Instruments footnotes 10, 14); Delaware 

River estuary (Smith 1971; de Sylva et a1. 1962); Chesapeake and Delaware Canal (Bason et a1. footnotes 28, 

27); Potomac River (Mihursky et a1. footnote 6; Boynton 

et a1. footnote 13); North Carolina coastal waters (Holland and Yelverton 1973); and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary (Turner and Kelly 1966). 

5 EXPLOITATION 

Historical perspectives 

The striped bass is mentioned early in American 

literature, undoubtedly due to its great abundance and 

availability to the early colonists. Captain John Smith 
wrote: "The Basse is an excellent fish, both fresh & 

saltE' . . .. They are so large, the head of one will give a 

good eater a dinner, & for daintinesse of diet they excell 

the Marybones of Beefe. There are such multitudes that 

I have seene stopped in the river close adjoining to my 

house with a sande at one tide as many as will loade a 

ship of 100 tonnes. " (Jordan and Evermann 1902:374.) 

William Wood in his New England's Prospect 

(1634:35) describes how to catch a really large bass: 

"The Basse is one of the best fishes in the countrey, . . . 

the way to catch them is with hooke and line: the fisherman taking a great cod-line, to which he fastneth a 

peece of lobster, and throwes it into the sea, the fish 

biting at it he pulls her to him, and knockes her on the 

head with a sticke ... the English at the top of an high 

water do crosse the creekes with long seanes or Basse 

netts, which stop in the fish; and the water ebbing from 

hem they are left on the dry ground, sometimes two or 

three thousand at a set . . .. " 

Striped bass were also caught and dried in great 

umbers by the Indians in New England (Fearing 1903). 

Striped bass and codfish were the first natural resources 

in Colonial America that were subject to conservation 

measures enacted by statute. In 1639, the General Court 

of the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed a law that 

either fish could be sold as fertilizer. But the catch increased, and by 1776 New York and Massachusetts had 

passed laws prohibiting sales of these fish in winter 

months (Bayless 1964). 

Another distinction shared by the striped bass was an 

act of the Plymouth Colony in 1670 t hat stated that all 

'ncome accrued annually to the colony from the fishries at Cape Cod for striped bass, mackerel, or herring 

e used for a free school in some town of the jurisdicion. As a result of this act the first public school of the 

New World was made possible through moneys derived 

'n part from the sale of striped bass. A portion of this 

fund was also utilized in aiding the widows and orphans 

f men formerly engaged in the service of the colony 

(Pearson 1938). 

Striped bass continued to be rather plentiful in 

Massachusetts Bay during the early 1800's, but by the 

middle of the 19th century the abundance there had 

declined markedly. The 1865-1907 catch records of the 

Cuttyhunk Club, a striped bass club located south of 

Cape Cod, Mass., showed a steady decline with some 

fluctuations (Merriman 1941). Jordan and Evermann 

(1902) noted that the striped ba s, though till abundant, was less common and continuing to decrea . 

Raney (1952) summarized the overall declining trend in 

striped bass fisheries from the 1800' ; a trend off. et 

periodically with greatly increa ed catche. from a doml· 

nant year class 2-3 yr earlier. 

5.1 Fishing equipment 

5.l1 Gear 

The commercial fishery employs a variety of gear including stationary and drift gill nets, haul eine, fyke 

nets, pound nets, fish traps, and hoop nets. Choice of 

gear depends upon geographical area and state regulations. In North Carolina, anchor gill nets, haul eine. 

and pound nets are popular in inland waters; haul eine 

are used along the outer banks. Anchored gill net 

[monofilament gill nets are only legal in Virginia waters 

and the Potomac River (Merriner49)] are now most effective in Chesapeake Bay and in the Chincoteague area; 

drift gill nets, pound nets, and haul seines are also 

utilized. Pound nets catch most stripers in New Jersey 

where it is illegal to fish exclusively for striped bass. The 

haul seine is the most productive gear in New York. Fish 

traps are the only legal gear in Rhode Island. In Massa -

chusetts waters the largest catches are made with rod 

and reel (Nicholson and Lewis'o). 

Changes in striped bass fishing gear have been discussed by Scofield (1931), Raney (1952) , Vladykov and 

Wallace (1952), and Koo (1970). Table 20 summarize« 

percentage of striped bass landings by gear type along 

the Atlantic coast. 

5.12 Boats 

Variety of small wooden vessels-usually <8 m (26 ft) 

in length. Many bay-built boats are utilized in Chesapeake Bay area . 

i9 J. \ '. Merriner. Virginia In titute of :Vlarine ·clence. Glou e ter Pnnt. 

VA 23062. pers. commun :'.Iarch 1978 

"'Nicholson. \\'. R.. and R.:\1 Lewis. 19n Bnefmg paper on the 

status of striped bass. U.S. Dep. Commer., • 'OAA atl "'Iar FI h 

erv. Atl. EstuarIne Fi h. Cent .. Beaufort •. C, 42 P 

Table 20.- Percentage of striped bass landings by state and by gear type along the Atlantic coast from 1962 to 19fi1). 

(From Koo 1970.) 

Rhode New , ew Dela- :\lary- Vir- . 'orth 

Maine Island York Jersey ware land gmia CarolIna Total 

Handline 93.2 33.8 2.4 0.6 3.7 

Floating trap 0.2 56.2 1 _ 

Pound net 6.0 3.5 2.2 6.1 303 ~3 1 1 

Otter trawl 6.4 14.6 75.9 3.3 0.4 03 

Haul seines 2.4 71.6 3.2 9.0 ~9.1 173 

Fixed gill net 5.3 9.0 96.7 55.3 ~.3 9 5 

Drift and runabout gill net 2.6 6.0 25,4 35 o ~ 119 

Fyke net and 

other 0.6 1.2 3.1 0.1 7.5 0 
5.2 Fishing areas 

5.21 General geographical distribution 

See section 2.1. 

5.22 Geographic ranges 

Also section 2.1. Areas of greatest abundance as determined by commercial landings per state are discussed in 

section 5.4. 

Areas heavily fished for striped bass by recreational 

fishermen (Nicholson and Lewis footnote 50) include: 

ATLANTIC COAST 

Florida 

St. Johns River 

Georgia 

Savannah River 

Ogecchee River 

Altamaha River 

North Carolina 

Albemarle Sound and Tributaries 

Pamlico Sound and Tributaries 

Roanoke River 

Outer Banks 

Kerr Lake 

Virginia 

Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries 

Maryland 

Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries 

Delaware 

Delaware Bay 

Rehobeth Bay 

Indian River 

South Carolina 

Santee River 

Cooper River 

Lake Marion 

Lake Moultrie 

New Jersey 

Coastline 

All major rivers and bays 

Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts 

Coastline 

All major rivers and bays 

New Hampshire, Maine 

Most major rivers 

• ew Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec 

Coastal rivers north to St. Lawrence 

River 

(,ULF OA T 

Alabama 

~1obile Bay 

Alabama Bay 

Florida 

Rivers West of Apalachicola 

]> CIFIC 'OAST 

Caltfnrnia 

San Francisco Bay and Tributaries 

52 

Oregon 

Umpqua River 

Coos Bay 

5.23 Depth ranges 

See section 2.3. 

Striped bass are pelagic fish. Fishing depths depend 

upon geographical location and gear utilized. 

5.24 Condition of the grounds 

Pollution has forced the closure of commercial fisheries on the James River, Va.-Kepone, and the Hudson 

River, N.Y.-PCB's. Recreational fishermen are advised against consumption of their catch from these 

rivers. Water diversions for hydroelectric power generation have altered flow through spawning grounds on the 

Roanoke River, N.C. (Fish and McCoy 1959). Deterioration of spawning grounds as a result of poor water 

quality on the Delaware River, and dam construction on 

the Susquehanna River, was discussed in section 2.3. 

Water diversions for irrigation playa major role in determining the size of the striped bass population in the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary (Chadwick et a1. 

1977). 

5.3 Fishing seasons 

Seasons for the commercial striped bass fishery are 

summarized in Table 23 of section 6.1; seasons for the 

recreational striped bass fishery are summarized in 

Table 24 of section 6.1. Fishing off most Middle Atlantic 

and New England states is seasonal and directed by migrations of the fish. 

5.4 Fishing operations and results 

5.41 Effort and intensity 

Commercial striped bass landing per unit effort by 

various gear types for the four Atlantic coast regions are 

summarized in Table 21. The state which landed the 

most striped bass in each of the four regions and the 

most important gear type or a combination of several 

important gears were used for this summary. 

Entry of a dominant year class into the stock results 

in increased fishing effort. Dominant year classes represented in catches several years later were 1934 (Merriman 1941), 1940 (Tiller 1950), 1958 (Mansueti and 

Hollis 1963; Shearer et a1. 1962), 1964 (increased landings by 1966, Koo 1970), and 1970 (Schaefer 1972). 

5.42 Selectivity 

Nonselective gear used to estimate age and length-frequency composition of various striped bass populations 

include pound nets (Tiller 1950), pound and fyke nets 

(Grant and Joseph 1969), and bow nets (Trent and Hassler 1968). Selective gear include gill nets, which select 
Table 2J.-Commercial striped bass catches per unit effort of various gear types from selected areas along the Atlantic coasl. 

(Summarized from tabular data presented by Koo 1970) 

Massachusetts - New England Region Mean Massachusetts handline catches 

Year No. lines No. hooks Catch X 103 kg Catch kg/l hook 

1947·49 638 793 26 32 

1950·59 780 837 32 40 

1960·66 1,967 2,352 178 74 

1947·66 total catch by handlines = 1,644,300 kg, 90.8% of total landings by all gears. 

New York - Middle Atlantic Region 

Year 

1947·49 

1950·59 

1960·66 

Length of nets 

70,568 

49,025 

8,937 

Mean New York haul seine catches 

Catch 103 kg 

149 

187 

263 

Catch (kg)/lOO m 

206 

638 

5,801 

1947·66 total landings by haul seines = 4,155,611 kg, 76.8'< of total landings by all gears. 

Maryland '- Chesapeake Region Mean Maryland landings by pound nets, haul seines, fixed gill nets, and drift gill nets 

Pound nets Haul seines Drift gill nets Fixed gill nets 

Equivalent Equivalent Equivalent Landings/ 

Catch Nets Cat.ch pound net Nets Catch pound net Nets Catch pound net fishing 

Year No. 10" kg 10' m 103 kg units'" m' X 103 103 kg units 3 m' X 103 103 kg units' unit 

1930·39 588 202 278 ll5 280 250 66 210 236 101 269 377 

1940·49 581 315 650 218 655 481 125 405 685 243 780 412 

1950·59 506 176 682 278 688 947 242 797 1,099 476 1,251 368 

1960·66 266 121 438 262 442 660 440 555 1,509 887 1,718 578 

1930·66 total landings by 4 gears = 36,625,478 kg, 98.0°0 of total landings by all gears. 

North Carolina - South Atlantic Region 

Pound nets 

Mean North Carolina landings by pound nets, haul seines, and fixed gill nets. 

Haul seines Fixed gill nets 

Equivalent Equivalent Landings/ 

Catch Nets Catch pound net Nets Catch pound net fishing 

Year No. 103 kg lO' m 10' kg unit' m' X 10' 103 kg units 6 unit 

1950·59 1,282 134 467 57 750 625 129 1,304 96 

1960·66 754 65 196 56 314 773 163 1,613 108 

1950·66 total landings by 3 gear = 5,184,194 kg, 89.6% of total landings by all gears. 

I Pound net arbitrarily chosen as basic fishing unit; other gears were converted into equivalent pound net units by comparison of mean 

catches between pound net and gear in question. 

' 91.44 m of haul seine = 0.922 pound net units. 

3836.1 m' of drift gill nets = 0.703 pound net units. 

'836.1 m' of fixed gill nets = 0.952 pound net units. 

for size dependent upon mesh size utilized (Tiller 1950; 

Vladykov and Wallace 1952; Mansueti 1961; Trent and 

Hassler 1968; and others), and haul seines, which select 

for larger sized fish (Vladykov and Wallace 1952) and 

may make almost pure catches of a single year class 

(Tiller 1950). Sport fisheries are selective primarily due 

to seasonality of effort and schooling behavior of striped 

bass (Grant and Joseph 1969). 

Trent and Hassler (1968) found the following linear 

relationship between gill net mesh size and mean length 

of male striped bass caught: 

Y = 3.41 X + 2.24 inches 

where Y = FL in inches 

X = stretched mesh size in inches. 

Their estimates of the most efficient mesh size for 

capturing various age groups of striped bass are 

presented below: 

53 

'91.44 m of haul seine = 1.469 pound net units. 

6 836.1 m' of fixed gill nets = 1.744 pound net units. 

Male Female 

Age XFL Mesh size XFL Mesh size 

group (em) (em) (em) (em) 

ill 42 11 46 12 

N 46 12 51 13 

V 50 13 54 14 

VI 55 15 60 16 

Mansueti (1961) demonstrated that the lengthfrequency distribution of aged IT-IV striped bass was not 

identical for 7.6-10.1 cm and 10.1-12.7 cm stretched 

mesh (S.M.) gill net. Modal length of age IT striped bass 

caught in the 7.6-10.1 cm S.M. gill net was 30.5 em 

versus a modal length of 35.6 cm for fish caught in the 

10.1-12.7 em net. Modal length of age ill striped bass 

were 39.4 and 40.6 em for the 7.6-10.1 and the 10.1-12.7 

cm nets, respectively. Data were too fragmentary for 

modal estimates of age group IV. Mansueti concluded 

that gill nets with 7.6-12.7 cm S.M. principally harvest 

age groups IT and ill. 
Jones et al. (footnote 17) summarized mean lengths years 1963-73, Maryland and Virginia landings were beand weights of striped bass caught over a 3-yr period tween 48 and 68% of the total catch. See Koo (1970) for a 

with various sized stretch mesh gill nets. detailed analysis of the catch from 1888 to 1966. 

Female 

Commercial landings of striped bass from 1974 to 1977 

Mesh Male are summarized below: 

sIze XTL Xwt XTL Xwt 

New Jersey- Total (em) (mm) (kg) (mm) (kg) MaineNew New North New U.S. 

9.5 394 0.9 424 1.3 Year York ' York Carolina , Jersey eateh2 

11.4 442 1.4 527 3.0 - - - - - - - -in metric tons - - - - - - - - 13.0 500 2.1 615 4.1 

15.3 574 3.1 693 6.3 1974 841 626 3,662 324 5,085 

20.3 717 6.0 815 9.1 1975 3

685 516 2,724 155 ' 3,903 

1976 2,648 

5.43 Catches 1977 2,331 

'McHugh 1977. 

Table 22 summarizes commercial striped bass 'u.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA, NMFS, 1974-78. "Unavailable landings in New Hampshire, Connecticut, and 

landings by state along the Atlantic coast. During the Delaware = average of recent years. 

Table 22.-Commercial striped bass landings by state (in thousands of kg).' 

New North 

Hamp- Rhode Connec- New New Dela- Mary- Vir- CaroYear shire Maine Island ticut York Jersey ware land ginia lina Total 

1930 12 27 1 30 17 46 557 193 207 1,090 

1931 22 18 2 29 8 24 288 218 148 757 

1932 14 3 2 15 5 4 197 269 230 739 

1933 9 18 9 4 5 142 235 424 

1934 151 141 164 456 

1935 2 7 17 4 8 421 170 629 

1936 12 845 236 348 1,442 

1937 55 144 6 60 109 15 912 456 323 2,080 

1938 37 95 4 63 67 11 777 524 237 1,816 

1939 29 97 4 83 110 9 784 437 154 1,707 

1940 34 29 4 77 78 19 535 299 245 1,320 

1941 555 392 947 

1942 4 44 43 8 121 43 27 1,138 353 1,780 

1943 9 45 33 11 144 73 17 332 

1944 5 87 55 8 229 117 18 1,216 845 2,579 

1945 4 84 43 12 137 190 29 701 961 276 2,437 

1946 73 98 9 219 733 945 2,077 

1947 25 24 5 III 27 49 1,060 782 2,085 

1948 35 29 5 161 19 164 1,202 1,112 2,727 

1949 33 37 4 284 10 116 1,192 868 2,543 

1950 21 51 3 235 49 123 1,378 1,268 362 3,490 

1951 60 51 10 284 64 98 1,060 818 318 2,762 

1952 57 23 5 220 243 54 985 563 293 2,445 

1953 48 37 3 219 197 48 1,045 364 343 2,304 

1954 31 53 199 23 66 956 431 509 2,268 

1955 33 15 230 16 40 1,167 406 334 2,194 

1956 32 12 <1 179 23 13 975 451 347 2,032 

1957 25 10 <1 251 60 7 843 421 271 1,890 

1958 23 19 1 181 27 10 1,408 597 497 2,763 1959 37 14 4 244 89 5 1,973 951 396 3,712 

1960 59 35 2 332 52 11 2,000 1,033 355 3,878 

1961 95 76 9 413 125 30 2,453 841 249 4,291 1962 267 28 15 298 224 49 1,805 882 339 3,906 1963 218 32 14 305 342 22 1,701 1,246 334 4,213 1964 237 34 16 451 452 14 1,497 857 324 3,881 1965 4 210 27 336 345 15 1,338 1,004 220 3,497 1966 4 265 113 476 143 29 1,518 1,271 296 4,116 1967 4 300 60 739 148 30 1,882 761 824 4,749 1968 5 396 44 685 27 22 2,056 732 867 4,835 1969 5 471 60 696 141 19 2,308 1,212 711 5,623 1970 6 610 38 607 101 24 1,804 808 1,051 5,051 1971 7 340 59 537 132 18 1,244 554 657 3,548 1972 7 533 140 379 169 112 1,465 1,206 572 4,584 1973 7 629 283 790 347 266. 2,257 1,310 795 6,335 1974 2 571 152 639 324 96 1,589 1,163 461 4,997 

'Fishery Statistics of the United States 1930-1974. 

54 
The distance of the commercial catch off United 

States shores from 1973 to 1977 is given below (U.S. 

Dep. Commer., NOAA, NMFS, 1974-78): 

Year 0-4km 4-19km 19-322km 

- - - - - - - - - -in thousands of kg - - ----- - - - -- -

1973 5,655 464 6.4 

1974 4,628 444 13.6 

1975 3,682 212 9.1 

1976 2,566 79 2.7 

1977 2,266 66 (4-322 km) 

Canadian commercial catches of striped bass were 9 X 

103 kg in 1974, 7 X 103 kg in 1975, and 10 X 103 kg in 

1976; Japanese commercial catches were 9 X 103 kg in 

1974 and 22 X 103 kg in 1976 (FAO 1977:56). 

In addition to commerciallandmgs, recreational fishermen along the Atlantic coast caught an estimated 17 

X 106 kg in 1960 (Clark [1963]), 25.7 X 106 kg in 1965 

(Deuel and Clark 1968), and 33.2 X 106 kg in 1970 (Deuel 

1973). Sport catches on the Pacific coast for the same 3 

yr were estimated at 8.9,6.4, and 4.7 X 106 kg/yr, respectively. Commercial fishing for striped bass on the 

Pacific coast is illegal in California and Washington. 

The 1970 U.S. marine recreational catch by region is 

given below: 

Region 

North Atlantic; Maine-New York 

Middle Atlantic; New Jersey-Cape Hatteras 

South Atlantic; Cape Hatterassouthern Florida 

North Pacific; Point Conception, 

Calif. -Washington 

Catch X 103 kg 

20,795 

12,366 

86 

4,757 

Elser5l estimated that the sport fishery catch of 

striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay during 1962 was 

4,200 X 103 kg in comparison to a commerical catch of 

1,800 X 103 kg (based on extrapolation of recreational 

catch from study area to the whole Maryland tidewater). 

Kohlenstein (1978) estimated the Maryland 

recreational striped bass catch from the two major creel 

surveys in the Chesapeake Bay waters: 1962 by Elser 

(footnote 51) and 1976 by Speir et a1. 52 His analysis 

indicated that the 1962 recreational fishery took approximately the same harvest by weight as the reported 

commercial landings. The 1976 recreational fishery was 

taking primarily the 1970 year class in the vicinity of the 

Chesapeake Bay bridge and much smaller fish in other 

study areas. The 1976 recreational cat.ch in pounds was 

approximately one-third of the reported commercial 

landings; in numbers, approximately 60% of reported 

commercial landings. 

'lEiser, H. J. 1965. Chesapeake Bay Creel census, 1962. Univ. 

Md ., Nat. Resour. Inst., Chesapeake BioI. Lab. , Ref. No. 65, 26 p. 

"Speir, H. J ., D. R. Weinrich, and R. S. Early. 1977 . 1976 Mary· 

land Chesapeake Bay sport fishing survey. Maryland Department of 

Natural Resources, Fisheries Administration, Tawes State Office 

Building, Anapolis, MD 21401. 

55 

6 PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT 

6.1 Regulatory measures 

6.ll Limitation or reduction of total catch 

Table 23 summarizes regulations on commercial 

harvesting of striped bass in the United States; Table 24 

summarizes regulations on the striped bass sport fishery in various states. 

6.12 Protection of portions of population 

See Tables 23 and 24. 

6.2 Control or alteration of physical features of the 

environment 

6.21 Regulation of flow 

The Santee-Cooper Reservoir, S.C., was created by 

waters impounded through completion of the Pinopolis 

Dam on the Cooper River. Striped bass trapped in the 

reservoir plus those using the navigation lock at the 

Pinopolis Dam have established a successfully reproducing, landlocked population (Scruggs and Fuller 1955). 

The effects of water flow on spawning success of 

Roanoke River, N.C., and California striped bass populations are discussed in section 4.32. 

6.22 Control of water levels 

Section 4.33 discusses diversion of Sacramento-San 

Joaquin Delta waters and its influence on year class success. 

Striped bass are anadromous fish which utilize the 

upper portions of estuaries as nursery grounds. In many 

coastal areas more than 50% of the original marshland 

and other shallow areas important to striped bass have 

been altered or destroyed through dredging, filling, or 

pollution. Clark (1967) reported that between 1955 and 

1964, 45,000 acres of tidal marshland were destroyed between Maine and Delaware. Dredging destroyed 34% of 

that total acreage; housing developments, 27%; parks, 

beaches and marinas, 15%; bridges and roads, 10%; industrial development, 7%; dumping sites, 6%; other 

causes, 1 C:O. See Clark (1967) for information on what 

Atlantic coastal states are doing to protect their remaining marshes. 

6.23 Control of erosion and silting 

Construction of hydroelectric impoundments on the 

Roanoke River, N.C., has decreased water turbidity 

downstream from the dams (Hassler 1958). 

6.24 Fishways at artificial and natural obstructions 

Some migrating striped bass apparently utilize the 
Table 23.-Summary of regulations on commercial harvesting of striped bass. (Adapted from Reintjes 1974.') 

State Type gear Season Illegal areas Minimum size Maximum size Source 

Rhode Sept. I-Oct. 14 406 mm (16 in) FL None Island 

New York 

Fish traps only2 

Seines, fyke, and 

hoop nets prohibited3 

Hudson River Delaware 406 mm (16 in) FL None 

below Barrier River 

Dam, Troy, N.Y. 

Mar. 16-Nov. 30' 

Delaware Haul seinesstretch mesh at 

least 51 mm (2 

in). Drifting 

Nov. I-Apr. 30 All areas ex- 305 mm (12 in) FL 9.1 kg 

gill nets-stretch 

mesh at least 70 

mm (2'/2 in)' 

cept Delaware 

Bay and River 

(20Ib) 

Maryland All gear except 

purse seines and 

otter trawls. 

Minimum size of 

netting mesh-4 

mm (2'/2 in) for 

gill nets and 

No restrictions. Severn and 305 mm (12 in) TL 6.5 kg Mansueti 

haul seines; 57 mm 

(2'" in) for 

pound and fyke nets. 

Gill netting in 

Potomac from 

Mar. I-May 26 

only-gill net 

max. length 366 

m (1,200 ft) . 

Magothy Rivers (15Ib) and Hollis 

certain parts (1963) 

of Susquehanna 813 mm (32 in) 

River flats effective 

1/1/78 

Virginia No restrictions No restrictions None 356 mm (14 in) TL 18.1 kg 

(40Ib) 

North Carolina Gill nets limited No restrictions New Hanover 305 mm (12 in) FL7 None 

Oregon 

to 91.4 mm (100 

yd) in length; must 

be at least 45.7 m 

(50 yd) from any 

other fixed net.' 

Gill nets only; 

no monofilament. 

County 

otknown. 406 mm (16 in) FL None 

'J. W. Reintjes. Atlantic Estuarine Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Beaufort, N.C. 28576, pers. commun. 10 June 1974. 

' Rhode Island laws relating to striped bass, fish traps, seines, nets, and weirs, Part of Rhode Island Laws, Chapters 14, 18, and 19, 22 p. Department 

of Natural Resources, Veteran's Memorial Building, Providence, RI. 02903. 

'New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Commercial Inland Fisheries Pamphlet, FW-P35. Department of Environmental 

Conservation, Division ofFish and Wildlife, Albany, NY 12201. 

' 1976-commercial harvesting prohibited due to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) contamination. 

' 1974. Striped bass fishing laws. Part of Delaware Fishing Laws, Sections 933, 1120, and 1123. Department of atural Resources and Environmental Control, Dover, DE 19901. 

' 1974. North Carolina Inland Fisheries Regulations, 47 p. Wildlife Resources Commission, Department of Natural and Economic Resources, Raleigh, 

NC27602. 

7No more than 5°;' of catch may be <305 mm (12 in) FL. 

navigation lock at the Pinopolis Dam, Cooper River, 

S.C. (Scruggs and Fuller 1955; Scruggs 1957). 

6.25 Fish screens 

See section 3.23 for a discussion of the louver facility 

used to prevent fish from entering the California State 

Pumping Station on the Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Delta. Kerr (1953) discussed the successful use of fish 

screens and collectors in diverting striped bass from the 

Contra Costa Steam Plant in California. 

6.3 Control or alteration of chemical features of the 

environment 

6.31 Water pollution control 

See section 5.24 for a discussion of effects of water pollution on striped bass populations. 

56 

6.32 Salinity control 

High total dissolved solids (350 ppm) apparently 

blocked the striped bass block spawning migrations in 

the San Joaquin River, Calif. (Radtke and Turner 1967). 

6.33 Artificial fertilization of waters 

See section 7.5 on pond management. 

6.4 Control or alteration of the biological features of 

the environment 

6.42 Introduction of fish foods (plant, invertebrate, forage fish) 

Striped bass have been stocked in some lakes and 

reservoirs to control gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum, and threadfin shad, D. petenense, populations. 
Table 24.-Summary of regulations on sport fishery of striped bass (from Reintjes 1974'). 

State 

Maine 

ew Hampshire 

Massachusetts 

Rhode Island 

Connecticut 

New York 

ew Jersey 

Delaware 

Maryland 

\'irginia 

North Carolina 

outh Carolina 

Georgia 

Florida 

Alabama 

Alabama 

Mississippi 

Louisiana 

Texas 

California 

Minimum size 

406 mm (16 in) FL' 

406 mm (16 in) FL 

406 mm (16 in) FL 

406 mm (16 in) FL 

406 mm (16 in) FL 

406 mm (16 in) FL 

457 mm (18 in) TL 

None 

305 mm (12 in) TL 

356 mm (14 in) TL 

305 mm (12 in) TL 

None 

381 mm (15 in) FL 

381mm (15 in) FL 

None 

None 

381 mm (15 in) FL 

None 

None 

406 mm (16 in) TL 

Daily 

creel 

limit 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

10 

one 

one 

one 

None 

10 

5 

6 

5 

6 

3 

2 

2 

3 

Sale offish 

No restrictions 

No restrictions 

No restrictions 

No restrictions 

Not permitted 

No restrictions 

No restrictions 

No restrictions 

o restrictions 

No restrictions 

Sale from inland 

waters 

prohibited 

ot permi tted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Not permitted 

Oregon 406 mm (16 in) TL 5 Not permitted 

Remarks 

Rod and reel license required to sell daily catch over 

45.4 kg (100 lb). 

Closed season; 1 Mar.-19 Apr.3 

Closed season in Hudson and Delaware Rivers from 

1 Dec. to 15 Mar. 

Closed season in saltwater 1 Jan.-28 Feb; no closed 

season in freshwater. Tidal Delaware River-minimum 

size 254 mm (10 in) TL; maximum weight 9.1 kg (20 

lb). In Delaware River between New Jersey and Pennsylvania fish >305 mm (12 in) TL but <4.5 kg (10 lb) 

can be taken from 1 Mar. to 31 Dec. 

Maximum size 6.8 kg (15 lb) 1 Mar.-27 May; sport fishermen allowed 1 fish/day above 6.8 kg from 28 May to 

29 Feb.' 

No more than 2 fish/day over 1,016 mm (40 in). Fish 

from inland waters at least 508 mm (20 in) TL limit 

of 4 fish/day except for Buggs Island and Gaston Lake 

where 305 mm (12 in) TL fish are legal, limit of 8 

fish/day .' 

Creel limit in reservoirs and their tributaries 8 fish/day; 

25 fish/day in all other waters. Dip, bow, and gill nets 

permitted in inland public waters from 1- Dec . to 

5 June' 

Creel limit 5 or 2 fish/day in some lakes. 

No creel limit in salwater. 

No creel limit in saltwater. 

Not present in coastal waters; land locked only. 

Spear, harpoon, bow and arrow illegal in San Francisco 

Bay. One line with maximum of3 hooks. 

Washington None one No restrictions No regulations. 

Reintje , .J. W. 1974. State regulations. Private letter, 10 June 1974; Atlantic Estuarine Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries ervice, NOAA, Beaufort, .C. 28516. 

-Flagg, . 1974. Striped bass in Maine. Private letter, 12 June 1974; Department of Marine Resources, Augusta, ME 04330. 

1973-1974. Fishing. Part of Connecticut Hunting, Trapping and Sport Fishing, Abstract of Laws and Regulations, p. 26-32. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, Conn. 

'1974. triped bass laws. Part of Compendius of New Jersey Fish Laws including regulations of 1974 Fish Code, p. 13, 15, 18. Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Fish, Game, and Shellfisheries, Trenton , NJ 08625. 

' 1970. Tidal waters. Annotated Code of the Public General Laws of Maryland 1957 (1970 Replacement Volume), Artic. 66c, Part 2, 

Sect. 263-264, p. 636-639. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD 21401. 

';1974. Virginia Fishing Laws. Digest A-6, Game Commission Form (6-73-600M). Virginia Commission of Game and Inland Fisheries, P.O. Box 11104, Richmond, VA 23230. 

' 1974. North Carolina Inland Fishing Regulations, 47 p. Wildlife Resources Commission, Department of Natural and Economic 

Resources, Raleigh, C 27602. 

6.5 Artificial stocking 

6.51 Maintenance stocking 

Most hatchery-produced striped bass are used to 

provide sport fishing and/or control shad populations in 

inland waters. 

6.52 Transportation; introduction 

See section 2.1. 

57 

7 POND FISH CULTURE 

The Striped Bass Committee of the Southern Division, American Fisheries Society, has recently compiled 

an authoritative text, Guidelines for Striped Bass 

Culture (Bonn et al. 1976). Included in this publication 

are discussion of hatching facilities; broodstock sources; 

capture and handling; spawning, incubation, and transportation of eggs and larvae; pond culture; intensive 

culture; hybrids; and parasites and diseases. 
7.1 Use of cultured fish 

See section 6.51. 

Striped bass stocking is undertaken by State and 

Federal hatcheries and agencies. States producing 

striped bass include Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, 

'Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Federal 

hatcheries producing striped bass for stocking are 

located in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and South Carolina (Texas lnstruments53 ). 

Merriner and Hoagman54 attempted to stock underutilized brackish water nursery areas of the Mobjack 

Bay system, Va., with 3-day-old yolk-sac larvae (1971) 

and 20-65 mm FL young-of-the-year (1972) striped bass 

Stocking was apparently unsuccessful. Approximately 1 

million yolk-sac larvae (40.5 larvae/acre) were stocked 

in Mobjack Bay during 1971. To obtain a juvenile density of 1 per acre by December, 32,500 larvae/acre or 

~8oo million yolk-sac larvae would have to be released 

in early June (assuming a 5.2CO daily mortality rate) 

(Turner and Chadwick 1971). Merriner and Hoagman 

estimated that approximately 31 striped bass were 

added to the Mobjack Bay population by December 

from the 1 million yolk-sac larvae stocked. Four thousand 50-day-old juvenile striped bass were stocked in 

Mobjack Bay during 1972 (0.16 per acre for depths <6 

m). Total contribution to Mobjack Bay from the 1972 

stocking effort was 1.4 fish, assuming a 5.2% daily 

mortality rate from day 50 to day 200, or 9 fish, assuming a 4CO daily mortality rate for the same period. A target density of 1 fish/acre in Decemher would require the 

stocking of 69 million 50-day-old fish (2,800 per acre) 

assuming 5.2% daily mortality, or 11.2 million fish (454 

per acre) assuming 4.2% daily mortality. The authors 

concluded that stocking of striped bass to augment or 

utilize available tidal nursery areas had little hope of 

success. 

7.2 Procurement of stocks 

Striped bass broodstock capture methods include 

electrofishing, stationary and drift gill nets, bow nets, 

trap nets, fyke nets, hoop nets, and hook-and-line fishing when all other methods have failed. Broodfish 

should be transported in 100 ppm Furacin and 0.3 to 1.0 

ppt NaCI or reconstituted seawater (Bonn et a1. 1976). 

Smith et a1. (1967) kept females anesthetized with 7 

ppm quinaldine until injection with chorionic gonadotropin. However, Bonn et a1. (1976) stated that brood-

'''Texas Instruments, Inc. 1977. Feasibility of culturing and stock· 

ing Hudson River striped bass. An overview, 1973-1975. Prepared for 

Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., June. 

f>.I Merriner, J. V., and W. J. Hoagman. 1973. Feasibility of increasing striped bass populations by stocking of underutilized nursery 

grounds. Completion Rep. Proj. FA-VA-AFS 6, 1970-1973, 197 p. 

Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Goucester Point, VA 23062. 

58 

fish should be injected with gonadotropin at the time of 

capture. Either human or veterinary chorionic gonadotropin can be used to induce ovulation; various workers 

have recommended dosages from 125 to 300 international units (lU)/lb (McBay footnote 26; Smith et a1. 

1967; R E. teven 1966; Wirtanen and Ray 1971). 

Bishop (1975) recommended hormone injection of male 

brood fish at a dosage of 50-75 IU/lb of chorionic gonadotropin for obtaining maximum milt production. As a 

precaution against fungal infections, fish have been immersed for 30 in a 1:15,000 part solution of malachite 

green ( mith et a1. 1967). 

7.4 pawning 

Egg procurement ha been di cu ed by Bayles 

(1972), McBay (footnote 26), mith et a1. (1967), and R. 

E tevens (1966) and is summarized by Bonn et a1. 

(1976). After hormone injection a female is held from 

20 to 28 h, depending upon water temperature. and the 

egg ampled by catheter (Bayle s 1972). Eggs taken 

more than 15 h prior to ovulation c.annot be accurately 

aged. Bayle (1972) published photographs depicting 

hourly change in unfertilized eggs. As ovulation occurs 

ova become detached from the ovarian ti ue. The re ultant lack of oxygen re ult in anoxia in a short period of 

time if the egg remain in the body. Stevens (1967) indicated the maximum period between ovulation and 

overripeness is approximately 60 min. Bayless (1972) 

found the optimum time for egg removal to be between 

15 and 30 min following the first indication of ovulation. Overripeness and abortion due to stress were the 

major causes of egg mortality ( mith et a1. 1967). Ripe 

female are anesthetized with MS-222 or quinaldine and 

manually tripped. 

Bi hop (1975) pawned triped ba in circular tanks. 

Fi h were injected with chorionic gonadotropin before 

being placed in the tanks, but were not stripped. Tank 

spawning reduced handling and impo ed less stress on 

broodfi h. 

After fertilization, eggs are incubated in McDonald 

hatching jars, aquaria, circular tanks, or swimming 

pools. Eggs are kept suspended within the water 

column. A velocity of 0.3 m/s is sufficient for suspension 

(Bardach et al. 1972). Bayless (1968) evaluated the effects of sedimentation on hatching success of striped 

bass eggs. Based on looCO hatching success for the 

agitated controls, mean hatching rates were : 35.7CO for 

eggs placed on coarse sand; 36.4CO for eggs on plastic; 

13.1 CO for eggs on a silt-sand substrate; 3.2CO for eggs on 

a silt-clay-sand substrate; and OCO for striped bass eggs 

over a muck-detritus substrate. The percent hatch 

improved as the time of egg suspension increased (up to 

15 h at temperatures from 17.8° to 20.0°C) prior to sedimentation. Low salinities provided the best egg survival: 2-3%. (Lal et a1. 1977); 1.5-3.0·/_ (Mansueti 

1958a). Shannon (1969) found no significant differences 

in percent hatch at incubation temperatures between 

16° and 24°C though Shannon and Smith (1968) 

reported that at temperatures of 23°-27°C no striped 
bass fry survived >70 h after hatching. For a summary 

of tolerance and optimum ranges of salinity and 

temperature on striped bass eggs and larvae see Table"7 

in section 3.21 of this review. 

Rogers et al. (1977) found hatching success of striped 

bass eggs in static systems enhanced by antibiotic treatment of 50,000 IU/liter of penicillin G and 50 mg/liter of 

streptomycin sulfate. 

Yolk-sac larvae from 1-4 days old can be held at high 

densities provided the water currents are sufficient to 

keep the larvae suspended. Bonn et al. (1976) stated 

that as many as 1.5 million yolk-sac larvae can be 

successfully held in a 30-gal aquarium provided the rate 

of water exchange is 1 gal/min. 

Rhodes and Merriner (1973) successfully reared 3-

day-old yolk-sac larvae to 20-25 mm fish in a 3 m diameter, 0.6 m deep, circular wading pool. They recommended the following procedures for successful closed 

system culture: 

1. Initial numbers should not exceed 100,000/3 m 

diameter pool (3,409 liter capacity). 

2. Salinity should be increased from 0.2 to 4.0°/_ after 

feeding has begun. 

3. Larger, potentially canibalistic fish should be 

removed and isolated from the population. 

7.5 Pond management 

Braschler (1975) summarized the development of 

pond culture techniques. Bonn et al. (1976) presented a 

detailed summary of the state of the art of striped bass 

pond culture. Harper and Jarman (1972) tested various 

stocking rates of striped bass larvae in Oklahoma 

culture ponds over a 3-yr period. Stocking rates ranged 

from 10,000 to 160,000 larvae/acre. Bonn et al. (1976) 

stated that 100,000 fish/acre was the accepted optimum 

stocking rate. 

Predation can be a problem in the densely stocked 

culturing ponds. Tatum et al. (1966) reported phantom 

midge larvae , Chaoborus spp., and mosquitofish, Gambusia affinis, preyed upon yolk-sac larvae in rearing 

ponds at the Weldon Hatchery, N.C. 

Water quality for fry rearing recommended by Davies 

(1973) included temperatures from 140 to 21°C, pH of 

7.5, and low dissolved solids. Bonn et al. (1976) summarized optimum conditions for the rearing of striped 

bass larvae. For further consideration of water quality 

and food requirements for larval survival see section 3.22 

of this review. 

7.6 Foods; feeding 

Striped bass larvae are usually fed brine shrimp, 

Artemia salina nauplii, from initiation of feeding until 

introduction into rearing ponds. Larvae feed on 

zooplankton in rearing ponds. 

The prime importance of copepods in the diet of larval 

striped bass has been aptly demonstrated. Harper et al. 

59 

(1969) in a study of striped bass cultured at the State 

Fish Hatchery in Durant, Okla., showed that striped 

bass <30 mm TL consumed greater volumes of copepods 

than other organisms. Cope pods in the rearing ponds included Diaptomus sp. and Cyclops sp. The culicid 

Chaoborus was a significant food item in the 10-19 mm 

striped bass, comprising 14% by volume of food consumed. Early instar stages of cope pods and cladocerans 

were required for first-feeding fish; striped bass (10-15 

mm TL) began feeding on adult cope pods and cladocerans. Percent frequency occurrence of food items for 

the smallest striped bass in Oklahoma culture ponds 

was presented by Harper and Jarman (1972): 

Food 

organisms 5-9mm TL 10-14 mm TL 15-19mm TL 

Cladocera 69.23% 43.47% 25.00% 

Copepoda 15.38% 73.91 % 50.00% 

Diptera 13.04% 25.00% 

Amarphoris 7.69% 8.69% 

Cladocerans were extensively utilized by striped bass 

between 20 and 110 mm from Oklahoma culture ponds 

(Harper and Jarman 1972). Diaphanosoma, Moina, and 

Ceriodaphnia were the most prevalent genera. Striped 

bass between 120 and 160 mm fed primarily on insects 

(Harper and Jarman 1972). 

Humphries and Cumming (1972) examined the 

stomach contents of 213 striped bass, 11.4-80.0 mm TL, 

from culture ponds at the Front Royal Fish Cultural Station in Virginia. Cladocerans of the families Sididae, 

Daphnidae, and Bosminidae constituted the major portion of the diet. Daphnidae were mainly represented by 

Daphnia, Ceriodaphnia, and Scapholeberis; Bosminidae 

by the genus Bosmina. Cope pods of the family Cyclopidae and insects of the family Chironomidae were also 

important. After the fish reached 30-40 mm, copepod 

consumption increased and insects remained stable in 

the diet. The striped bass negatively selected Brachionida (rotifers) and cope pod nauplii (small in size in 

relation to fish). The cladoceran families Daphnidae and 

Bosminidae were positively selected; the genus 

Diaphanosoma was positively selected when present in 

small numbers and eaten in proportion to its abundance 

when present in large numbers. Cope pods were consumed in proportion to their abundance. 

Meshaw (1969) determined the feeding selectivity of 

juvenile striped bass in relation to natural zooplankton 

populations in hatchery ponds at the Edenton Natural 

Fish Hatchery, Edenton, N.C. Young striped bass were 

highly selective for Cyclops while they ignored Bosmina, 

Ceriodaphnia, Daphnia, copepod nauplii, and rotifers. 

Although chironomid larvae and ostracods were occa, 

sionally consumed in large numbers by the fish, selectivity for these taxa could not be ascertained because of 

the inadequacy of the sampling method for these 

organisms. 

Supplemental feeding in pond culture is discussed by 

Bonn et al. (1976) and Harper and Jarman (1972). 
7.7 Disease and parasite control 

Diseases 

Columnaris, caused by the flexibacterium, Flexibacter columnaris, is the most frequent and serious 

, bacterial disease of striped bass (Bonn et al. 1976). It is 

characterized by macroscopic external lesions on the gill 

filaments and body of infected fish. Other diseases include: red vent disease, a form of bacterial hemorrhagic 

septicemia caused by Aeromonas sp. and Pseudomonas 

sp.; and vibriosis, caused by Vibrio sp., which can infect 

striped bass cultured in brackish water. 

Bonn et al. (1976) summarized recommended treatments for the following pathogenic bacteria: Flexibacter, Aeromonas, Pseudomonas, and Vibrio, and the 

fungus, Saprolegnia. 

Blue-sac disease symptoms include: hemorrhaging in 

the head and thoracic region; blistering on the sides of 

the body above the pectoral fins and yolk sac; a fluidfilled coelom light blue in color (hence the name of the 

disease); kyphosis; general circulatory system damage 

including deterioration of blood vessels and formation of 

blood clots; lockjaw; lighter anemic coloration than 

usual; and white spot formation in the yolk sac. Death is 

presumably due to immobility and suffocation. See 

Mansueti (1958a) for a detailed account of the advancing stages of this disease. 

Mansueti (1958a) reported the following abnormalities of cultured striped bass eggs; eggs that did not 

fully water harden, eggs with the oil globule disengaged 

from the yolk, and cloudy eggs with coagulated fluid . 

None of these eggs were viable. Mansueti also found the 

following larval deformities and aberrant conditions: 

a) Pugheadedness. 

b) Larvae with heads bent backwards, eye perpendicular to the body and very little pigmentation on 

the body and eyes. In these larvae the yolk had settled into an odd-shaped mass in the posterioventral portion of the yolk sac. 

c) Humpbacked larvae. 

d) Gas embolism-gas bubbles are attached to larvae 

or are swallowed (visible in the intestine), and 

white spots develop on the yolk sac. This fatal condition is apparently associated with waters supersaturated with atmospheric gases. 

Parasites 

Parasites found under culture conditions are noted in 

Table 12 by footnote 3. Bonn et al. (1976) summarized 

recommended treatments. 

7.8 Harvest 

For maximum production, striped bass juveniles 

should be harvested from ponds when they reach 1,540-

60 

2,200 individuals/kg. Fish have been harvested by dip 

net in smaller ponds or by partial drainage in large 

ponds and use of glass V traps and/or seining. It is 

recommended that juveniles be held in tanks for 24 h for 

recovery from stress, disease treatment, and flushing of 

the digestive system. During this time, treatment with 

100-500 ppm Furacin and 10 ppt NaCl for a 2- to 5-h 

period is advised (Bonn et al. 1976). 

7.9 Transport 

Striped bass larvae have been successfully transported in concentrations of 9,OOO-13,OOO/liter in plastic 

bags in an oxygen atmosphere (McGill 1967; Bayless 

1972; Braschler 1975). 

Harper and Jarman (1972) reported that juveniles 

were successfully transported in agitator tanks filled 

with dechlorinated tap water containing 1% NaCI (10 

ppt) and 0.25 ppm quinaldine. The anesthetic MS 222 

at a concentration of 21 ppm can also be used in transport to slow down fish metabolism and thus reduce the 

chance of shock and injury. Schoumacher (1969) 

successfully transferred ad1.llt striped bass after anesthetization with 1-3 ppm quinaldine. Fish were transported for 15.5 h in 125-gal tanks in water containing 2 

ppm quinaldine, 0.410 NaCl, and a little antifoam-A 

(Dow). Pumps circulated and aerated the water; oxygen 

was added as a precautionary measure during the latter 

half of the trip. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The authors have received much assistance from 

other people in the preparation of this literature review 

and wish to thank the following: Carolyn Essex, David 

Hardy, George Drewry, Douglas Martin, David 

Johnson, Ronald Fritzsche, Raymond Morgan II, Phil 

Jones, Cathy Dodson, Sally Trigger, Fran Younger, 

Alice Viverette, Virginia Nickelson, and Joan Gateau. 

David Hardy, Ted S. Y. Koo, Martin Wiley, and Raymond P. Morgan II, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, 

Solomons, Md., and John Merriner, Virginia Institute of 

Marine Science, Gloucester Point, Va., critically 

reviewed early drafts of this manuscript. 

Support was provided through the Power Plant Siting 

Program of the State of Maryland, Grant # P2-72-02, 

and the United States Department of Energy Contract 

No. AT-(40-1)-4328. We wish to acknowledge the support and encouragement of Joseph A. Mihursky, principal investigator on the above contracts. 

Victor Springer, U.S. National Museum, Fish Division, graciously allowed access to his personal library. 

Appreciation is also extended to the two anonymous 

reviewers from Fishery Bulletin for their thorough 

review and constructive criticism of the manuscript, and 

to Bruce Rogers and Deborah Westin, Graduate School 

of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island. for their 

extensive review of the manuscript. 
LITERATURE CITED 

ABBOTI, . C. 

1 78. Notes on some fishes of the Delaware River. Rep. .. Fish 

Comm. 4(1875-1876): 25-845. 

ALBRE HT, A. B. 

1964. orne observations on factors a ociated With survival of 

stnped bass eggs and larvae. Calif Fish Game 50: 100-113. 

ALPERI ,1. M. 

1966. A new parasite of striped bass. N.Y. Fish Game J 13:121-

123. 

ANDER 0 "J C. 

1966. Production of striped bass fingerlings. Prog. Fish-Cult. 

28:162-164. 

ANONYMOUS. 

1920. California furnishes striped bass to Hawaiian Islands. Calif. Fi h Game 6:18-19. 

AULD, A. H., and J. R. SCHUBEL. 

1978. Effects of suspended sediment on fish eggs and larvae: a 

laboratory assessment. Estuarine Coastal Mar. SCI. 6: 153-164. 

AU TIN, H. M., and O. CUSTER. 

1977. Seasonal migration of striped bass in Long Island 

Sound. N.Y. Fi h Game J. 24:53-68. 

AUSTIN, H. M., and C. R. HICKEY, Jr. 

1978. Predicting abundance of striped bass, Morone saxatilts, in 

New York waters from modal lengths. Fish . Bull., U.S. 76:467-

473. 

BAILEY, R. M. 

1951. A check-list of the fishes of Iowa, with keys for identification. In J. R. Harlan and E. B. Speaker, Iowa fish and fishing, p. 

185-238. Iowa State Conservation Commission, Des Moines. 

BAILEY, R. M., J. E. FITCH, E. S. HERALD, E. A. LACHNER, C. C. 

LI DEY, C. R. ROBINS, and W. B. SCOTI. 

1970. A list of common and scientific names of fishes from the 

United States and Canada. Am. Fish. oc., Spec. Publ. 6, 150 p. 

BAILEY, R. M., H. E. WIN ,and C. L. SMITH. 

1954. Fishes from the Escambia River, Alabama and Florida, with 

ecologic and taxonomic notes. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 

106:109-164. 

BAILEY, W. M. 

1975. An evaluation of striped bass introductions in the southeastern United States. Proc. 28th Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. 

Game Fish Comm. 1974:54-68. 

BAIRD, S. F. 

1855. Fishes observed on the coasts of New Jersey and Long Island 

during the summer of 1854. 1 inth Annu. Rep. Smithson. Inst., 

p. 317-355. 

BARDACH, J. E., J. H. RYTHER, and W. O. McLARNEY. 

1972. Culture of miscellaneous anadromous fishes (shad and 

triped bass). In Aquaculture. The farming and hu bandry of 

freshwater and marine organisms, p. 528-530. Wiley-Intercience, N.Y. 

BARK LOO. J. M. 

1961 DistributIOn and abundance of triped bass (Roccus saxatills, \\'albaum) on the Florida Gulf Coast. Proc . 15th Annu . 

Conf. outheast. As oc. Game Fish Comm. 1961 :223-226. 

1970. Taxonomic statu and reproductIOn of striped bass (~[orone 

,axatihs) in Florida U. '. Bur. 'port Fish. \\'ildl., Tech Pap,44, 

16 p. 

BASO:-'. \\' H 

19,1 Ecology and early life hHorv of triped ba , J[orone. axatilL., In the Delaware Estuary. Ichthyol ,-OC. Bull. 4. 122 p. 

BAYLE'S. J. D. 

1964. Tall tales. \\ ildl "C 28(5):4-6. 

196 Stnped ba~s hatching and hybndlzatlOn e penment~ Proc, 21·t Annu. Conf. ..: uthea't. oc. Game FI"h 

omm 1967.2JJ-244 

[1972.1 ArtifiCial propagatIOn and hybndlzat10n of .tnped b8.& 

M 'ront' .• lUaClII .• (\\ "Ibaum) ,'C Wlldl ~18I . Re Dep .. 135 p. 

BEA'. T H 

1.;; On the lXCurrenle ot the Striped bas in the lo\\er \b" p. 

PI \ aile,. Prot l atl. ~tu, 7ll ). _4~-_44 

BE 

1949 Freshwater I hI!» 01 the l. .. R dJa nt 

(Ryb} presnykh vod . R I 8Opredel'n h tr n I 

Improved and augmented. tran I by lsr Progr • I I ran I 

vols (Available from the OUlce nl T chmcal 

Commer., Wash . D.C. a, U'[':, 61 .. H:!1 ). 

BERGGRE;-";. T. J .. and .J. T. LIEBER\I •. 

1978. Relative contnbutlon of Hud,on, Ch 

striped bass, M orone saxatlils. toe, to th 

ery. Fih. Bull, U. 76: \:l5-.145 

BIGELOW. H B. and W. C ::'CHROEDER 

1953. Striped ba" Roccu ,axaetl, (\\albsum ) 17 2 In h h 

the Gulf of Mame. p. 9·404 F"h \\ Iidl f\ FI h Bu I 

53. 

BI HOP, R. D 

1968. 

The u,e of CIrcular tank lor PS'\nlDg 

saxaeills}, Proc. 2 th Annu. Conf. out he t 

Comm. 197435-44. 

BLEEKER, P 

1876. Systema percarum rHhum. ATlh . 

1l(1):2~7-2 

BLOCH, M. E. 

1792 ;-";aturgc chlchte der au.landbchen f che. Bcrl n 

305. 

BLO H. ~1 E .. and.J G. ' H. EIDER 

lS01. Sistema Ichthyoluglae HerIt.I. 5 p 

BOGDA.."\O\', A ",::' I DORU~HE\'. and A F 

1967 

BO:--' 

197ti. JuideItne, lor . tnped be 

'oclet\', 'tnped Ba,. l'ommllt 

BOl'LE. 'GER, t, A 

1'905. Catalogue 

eum. ~d. ed Tru~t .. - Hr 

BOWLE '. R. R. 

Hl76. EII"ct- of Voater \el 

,mped ba Proc _ th 

FI,h l{)mm 1975 1 :!-151 

BRAse HLER E \\ 

~--

BR 

01 

p 
of oil spills, p. 783-791. [Am. Pet. Inst., Environ. Prot. Agency, 

U.S. Coast Guard, Wash., D.C.] 

BROWN, B. E. 

1965. Meristic counts of striped bass from Alabama. Trans. Am. 

Fish. Soc. 94:278-279. 

CALHOUN, A. J. 

1952. Annual migrations of California striped bass. Calif. Fish 

Game 38:391-403. 

1953. Distribution of stiped bass fry in relation to major water diversions. Calif. Fish Game 39:279-299. 

CALHOUN, A. J., C. A. WOODHULL, and W. C. JOHNSON. 

1950. Striped bass reproduction in the Sacramento River system in 

1948. Calif. Fish Game. 36:135-145. 

CATCHINGS, E. D. 

1973. The effects of increased salinity and of feeding treatment on 

the survival and growth of striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), fry in hatching jars, and fmgerling striped bass in 

troughs. M.S. Thesis, Auburn Univ., Auburn, Ala., 61 p. 

CHADWICK, H. K. 

1960. Toxicity of tricon oil spill eradicator to striped bass (Roccus 

saxatilis). Calif. Fish Game 46:371-372. 

1963. An evaluation of five tag types used in a striped bass mortality rate and migration study. Calif. Fish Game 49:64-83. 

1964. Annual abundance of young striped bass, Roccus saxatilis, in 

the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California. Calif. Fish Game 

50:69-99. 

1967. Recent migrations of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River 

striped bass population. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 96:327-342. 

1968. Mortality rates in the California striped bass population. Calif. Fish Game 54:228-246. 

1969. An evaluation of striped bass angling regulations based on an 

equilibrium yield mode!. Calif. Fish Game 55:12-19. 

1974. Entrainment and thermal effects on a mysid shrimp and 

striped bass in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. In L. D. 

Jensen (editor), Second workshop on entrainment and intake 

screening, p. 23-30. Elec. Power Res. Inst., Palo Alto, Calif., 

Pub!. 74-049-00-5. 

CHADWICK, H . K., D. E. STEVENS, and L. W. MILLER. 

1977. Some factors regulating the striped bass population in the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, California. In W. Van Winkle 

(editor), Proceedings of the conference on assessing the effects of 

power-plant-induced mortality on fish populations, Gatlinburg, 

Tennessee, May 3-6, 1977, p. 18-35. Pergamon Press, N.Y. 

CHAPOTON, R. B., and J. E. SYKES. 

1961. Atlantic coast migration of large striped bass as evidenced by 

fisheries and tagging. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 90:13-20. 

CHEEK, R. P. 

1961. Quantitative aspects of striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum), spawning in the Roanoke River, North Carolina. M.S. 

Thesis, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, 99 p. 

CHITTENDEN, M. E., Jr. 

1971a. Status of striped bass, Morone saxatilis, in the Delaware 

River. Chesapeake Sci. 12:131-136. 

1971b. Effects of handling and salinity on oxygen requirements of 

the striped bass, Morone saxatilis. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 

28: 1823-1830. 

CLARK, J. R. 

[1963.] The 1960 salt-water angling survey. U.S. Fish Wild!. 

Serv., Circ. 153, 36 p. 

1967. Fish & man. Conflict in the Atlantic estuaries. Am. Litt. 

Soc., Spec. Pub!. 5, 78 p. 

1968. Seasonal movements of striped bass contingents of Long Island Sound and the New York Bight. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 

97:320-343. 

CLAY, W. M. 

1962. A field manual of Kentucky fishes. Ky. Dep. Fish Wildl. 

Resour., Frankfort, 147 p. 

CORDONNIER, L. M., and H. L. WARD. 

1967. Pomphorphynchus rocci sp. n. (Acanthocephala) from the 

rock bass, Roccus saxatilis. J. Parasito!. 53:1295-1297. 

COURTOIS, L. A. 

1974. Physiological responses of striped bass, Roccus saxatilis 

(Walbaum), to changes in diet, salanity, temperature, and acute 

copper exposure. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. California, Davis, 11 

p. 

COUTANT, C. C. 

1974. Evaluation of entrainment effect. Opening remarks at 

Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop. In L. D. Jensen 

(editor)' Second workshop on entrainment and intake screening, 

p. 1-11 . Elect. Power Res. Inst., Palo Alto, Calif., Pub!. 74-049-

00-5. 

COUTANT, C. C., and R. J. KEDL. 

1975. Survival of larval striped bass exposed to fluid-induced and 

thermal stresses in a simulated condenser tube. Oak Ridge Nat. 

Lab., Environ. Sci. Div. Pub!. 637, 37 p. . 

CUVIER, G., and A. VALENCIENNES. 

1828. Histoire nature lie des Poissons, II. Paris, 490 p. 

DAVIES, W. D. 

1970. The effect of temperature, pH and total dissolved solids on 

the survival of immature striped bass, Marone saxatilis (Walbaum). Ph.D. Thesis, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, 100 p. 

1973. The effects of total dissolved solids, temperature, and pH on 

the survival of immature striped bass: A response surface experiment. Prog. Fish-Cult. 35:157-160. 

DAVIS, H . S. 

1922. A new bacterial disease of fresh-water fishes. Bull. U.S. 

Bur. Fish. 38:261-280. 

DAVIS, R. H., Jr. 

1966. Population studies of striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum), in Maine based on age distributions and growth 

rate. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Maine, Orono, 50 p. 

DAVIS, W. S. 

1959. Field tests of Petersen, streamer, and spaghetti tags on 

striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum). Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 

88:319-329. 

DeARMON, 1. A., Jr. 

1948. Sampling techniques on the ovary of the striped bass, Roccus 

saxatilis (Walbaum). M.S. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Inst., 

Blacksburg, 40 p. 

De KAY, J. E. 

1842. Zoology of New York; or, The New York fauna. In Natural 

history of New York geographical survey, Vo!. I, Part 4, Fishes, 415 

p. 

DENONCOURT, R. F., and W. H. BASON. 

1970. Blind striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum), from the 

Delaware River estuary. Chesapeake Sci. 11:132-134. 

de SYLVA, D. P., F. A. KALBER, Jr., and C. N. SHUSTER, Jr. 

1962. Fishes and ecological conditions in the shore zone of the Delaware River estuary, with notes on other species collected in deeper 

water. Univ. De!. Mar. Lab., Inf. Ser., Pub!. 5, 164 p. 

DEUEL, D. G. 

1973. 1970 salt-water angling survey. U.S. Dep. Commer., 

NOAA, Nat!. Mar. Fish. Serv., Curro Fish. Stat. 6200, 54 p. 

DEUEL, D. G., and J. R. CLARK. 

1968. The 1965 salt-water angling survey. U.S. Bur. Sport Fish. 

Wild!. Resour. Pub!. 67, 51 p. 

DICKSON, A. W. 

1958. The status of striped bass (Roccus saxatilis) (Walbaum) in 

North Carolina waters. Proc. 11th Annu . Conf. Southeast. Assoc. 

Game Fish Comm. 1957:264-268. 

DORFMAN, D. 

1974. Responses of striped bass to temperature gradients. Underwater Nat. 8(1):42-43. 

DOROSHEV, S. 1. 

1970. Biological features of the eggs, larvae and young of the 

striped bass [Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum)] in connection with the 

problem of its acclimatization in the USSR. J. Ichthyo!. 10:235-

248. 

DOVEL, W. L. 

1968. Predation by striped bass as a possible influence on population size of the Atlantic croaker. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 97:313-

319. 

1971. Fish eggs and larvae of the upper Chesapeake Bay. Univ. 

Md., Nat. Resour. Inst., Spec. Rep. 4, 71 p. 

DOVEL, W. L. , and J. R. EDMUNDS IV. 

1971. Recent changes in striped bass (Morone saxatilis) spawning 

62~ __________________________________________ ___ 
ltea and commercial Ii hin, an!" In upper Cheupeake Be ,poe. 

ible mfluencln, ractorl. (hesapeake I. 1233·39 

)l DLEY. R n, A W Ml.'U.1 ,and J W TERRF.JJ. 

1977. Mov menU of adult tnped b (Moron#' a;ratl/~1 In th 

• avannah River, e ,eorglB Tran Am FI h 1 314 22 

LDR/DGE, M B., D . • J. KINe:. fl. E~(:. and M ./ ROWF.R! 

1977. Role of the 011 glohule In urvlVal and growth of tnped b 

(MoronI' aXQlltl ) larvae. Proc. 57th Annu Conf W t 

State Game Fi h Comm .• p. 303·313 

'NGEI •• J) W. and E. M. DAVIS. 

1964. Relat"," hip between actiVIty and blood compositIOn 10 cer· 

tain marine t('lensts. rnpeia 1964:f\i\6· 7 

ARLEY. 1'. ('. ' 

1!I6fi. Striped hR • H(JcclJ axalllts. p8wnoog 10 the Sacrllmento· 

San .Joaquin Riv~r y lem. durong l!lf~'land 1%4 In .1 . J. Turner 

nnd II. W. Kelley (compilefll). F.cologlc I tudie of thl' • Rerl! ' 

mento,SAn .)oaqulO e luary Pari II Fi h~ of the d~lt8. p. 2'" 

4:1 . C .. lof. Dpp. Fi h e;ame. Fish Hull. laG. 

'AULKNEH. H. C. 

1!/;,2 A comparallv(' tudy o( th~ retlOoe of four errsnid Ii h,·,. 

I.l'fllh,·ma chr..w,p., (Hafine que). Aforum' Inlerrupta ((~dll . 

AforcJn,' am"rirana (Gmel1n). ond H(lcclJS ,o.ntll .. (Wol . 

hilum) M.S. Th'·SIS. I'ni,·. Oklahoma , :"'orman, 41 p 

'EAHI:"'(:, \) H. 

1!l<1:I . Somt' early noll's on strip,'d hass. Trons. Am Fi h Soc 

:12:!I<)·9H, 

'ISH. F F, and E. n. ;\1 c(' 0)'. 

l!l!i!/ TI1l' river discharges required for eftective pAy,nlng by 

slrip,'d bass 10 th,' rAJllds of Ihe Hllanoke Ri\er of , '"rth Caft) 

lina . ;-.;r. Wild\. Res. Comm .. HaleiRh, :l p 

ISHER. F W., n A. OIlE;-';WELLER. and .r E. SKI;-';:"'ER. 

1!l77. Hecent pr"l\'r~ss in fish facihty re.earch for CalifornIa water 

d,version pro]erh. In L. D . . Jensen (edltorl, Third national work 

. hop on entralOmenl and impinl( men! Section :l1ti(h)r ,,,arch 

and cllmplionre. p . :lAI ·40:1. EcoloRical Analysis. Int' . \leh-ille. 

:>I.Y. 

'0(1) A;\iJ) A(:RICLILTl'HE OR(:A:-\IZATIO;-'; OF THE l ' :--;ITEIl 

:>IAT ()N~ 

1977 Yearhook 01 fishery statist,,:, . \'o\. 42 . 

'ORHE~TER. C. H .. A K PEDE:"' , and H \1 \\'[LSO:"' 

1972. Firsl record, o( the slriped be.s, .\/()mn,"a:ratiils. 10 Broil h 

C"lumbia wlIte". , .J. Fish . Res. Bnard Can . 29:l3'i 3~9 

'HI~AIE, C. M .. und [) E. RITCHIE. ,Jr. 

1!l6:1 . ~port n,hinJ( "lr\'e~' 01 Ihe lower P,)tomac Estuan. 19.:;9· 

Will Chesapeake Sro 417f>·\!'l1, 

(,AI:\ES .. r I. .. . fr .• Hnd \\' A RO(~EHS . 

19;2 Fish mortAitti", a"ol'leted wllh (, /}/,Z/Q ,po :\"motoda 

,\s .. anlldeal in ccntnll Flonda . Pr<>c. 2,'>lh Annu . C .. nf South· 

"U,I "'0,'. Gam,' Fish Comm. 19.1496-49 • . 

(aLI.. T :"' 

Hili! ;\\onoJn'tlph "I'I he ~"nu, I.ahm' of e'l\ ler p"". Acnd :"'at 

!'in . Philn. 10~·119 

(.tlOnE. (~ . H 

1 >l.\ . rI", f(loKi It,h,'s of the l 'nlt('d StRte, In to H Good and 8 

~llllt " "\s"'<'IaICs. Th" fishene, Bnd fi,hen' Il1dU5tn of th 

t 'nit"i Stili"" Sedlon I 'atural hl,ton of u clul oquollc 

1I1111llRIs, p. H>3·\i.-<2 , l ',S . G l\ . Pnnt l)tt, \\'ash • D.l' 

GOOIW, (; H, lind r H HE\ • 

1 C8tal,,~u,' of a coli ... t,on of fi,h .. , 'o'nt fr m P n 

FI"n<ia nd \lllnll\ , b\ :\Ir -'II <::-1 arns, "lth d. cnpll 

('roc t' ,,;; • atl \\u 2(l~ ):121 ·15 

M) 

bcKi\ (0\1t\ 

i 14 21:> 

HA-.(I , \\ D 

]t ih 

HI 

Ht 

• B RREII 
HOLLIS, E. H 

1952. Variations In the feeding hohlts of the striped bUMR, Rnrcu. 

,oxolll" (Walbaum), In (,he,apeake Hay, Bull Aln~h8m 

Oceonogr ('ollect, Yale L'ni, 1·1(1)'111·1:11 

HOR EMA ,L. 0, and R ,J, KP,R;-.JP,HAN, 

1976. An indexed bibliography of the striped ha ,Moron. ~axa 

I,ll." 1670· 1976 lchthvol Asso(', Aull. la, Ill! p 

HUl\lPHRIES, E T 

1966. Spawning grounds of the stripeo ba.s, /{'WfIl IIto/li.s (\\'"1. 

baum) in the Tar Riwr. :--;orth Caro\'nll \l,S The I , Ell t ('arn 

lina llni' , Greenville, ;'0 p , 

HUMPHRIES, E. T., and K. B. Cl';\I~lI;-';C: 

197:! Food habIts und feeolng ,ell'ctl\'ltv of stnpl'd btl ling ·rllnK 

in culture ponds Pro," ~.'jth Annu ('onC SoutheuMt A 'lC 

Game Fish ('omm, 197Ui2:!·,··Hi. 

Hl' TER, ,J R. 

1972 SWImming and feeding hehll\lor of IlIr ... alanch,)\ ,I: nll'lIul, 

mordax Fish Bull, l' S. iO: 21·~ .~ 

IMLER R L. 

1976. Striped bass Introdurllon. 1010r8do FI h"rI" l{evl"'" 

197:!·1975, ,0. ,p. I~:!(). 

JACKSO. H. W., ano R. E TILLER 

195:!. Preilmlnary observation, on p.1\\11Ing I'()( ntlOl 

striped bass, Ruccu, ,ara',/, (\\alboum) \10 [hp H( 

"In !:rl l'i P 

.JA"<ssE:-o. 1\ A, ano (' [) .\IEVEH· 

In th 

Educ 

1967 Antlbnd\ agulnst an antigen In h~l'f he/lrt m 

:triped bass ,erun and ab,ent III \\rute perch 

peake "< i :6ti 

1(' found In 

rum Ib 

.JE ·SF:.·, L D. led,tor) 

1977 Third n tlOMI v.orbhop rm ntr IIlment nd Impingement 

Sectlm Jl6tb) reo earch and complian e r ologlcol noh 

Inc, :'>Ieh ille '\, .2;; p 

JOH. ·SO.·, C. A., and H HARKE\!.-\ 

19,0 A preliminary repNt on the lafe hHOf) of l'omphorh,n hw 

rocCI. an acanthucephalan para'lte 01 the' tnped b J Eil ho 

'!Ilchell SCI Snc 1\6 1'>-1 5 

JOH".;SO. R. K , and T 1 KOO 

1975 Production and dIStribution 01 stflped ba (\foron axa· 

t,/I.,) eggs III the Chesapeake and Dcla\\are I anal Chc peaklSCI 16:19-55. 

JORDA' D S. 

1 6. • 'otes on the sCientific name c,1 the yellow perch, th tnped 

bass, and other. 'orth Amencan fi he- l>roc Lat. \Iu 

81l )'/2·73. 

JORDA~, D. <, and C H. EIGE ';\IA 

1890. A revIew of the genera and. peCle, of erranaoae found III the 

waters of America and Europe Bull rbh ('omm 

8(1888);329·441. 

JORDA:-;, D. S. and B \\' E\'ER\IA.·.· 

1896, The fishes of ~orth and :\hddle America l.S. :-;atl \Iu 

Bull 47tPart 1), 1240 p. 

1898. The fishes of "<orth and :\-!iddle America \., - \:atl :\111" 

Bull 47(Part 2):1241·2183. 

1902. American food and game fhhes. Doubleday, Page & Co, 

~ Y ,572 p. 

JORDAN, D. S., and C. H. GILBERT. 

1882. Synopsis of the fishes of North Amenca Bull lJ •. atl. 

Mus. 16, 1018 p. 

KELLEY, J. R., Jr. 

1969. Investigations on the propagation of striped bass, Roccus 

saxatilLS (Walbaum). Ph.D. Thesis, Auburn Univ., Auburn, 113 

p. 

KELLEY, R., and H. K. CHADWICK. 

1972. Some observations on striped bass temperature tolerances. Calif. Dep. Fish Game, Anad. Fish Br., Admin. lUlp. 71·9, 

11 p. 

KERBY, J. H. 

1972. Feasibility of artificial propagation and introduction of hy· 

brids of the Marone complex into estuarine environments with a 

meristic and morphometric description of the hybrids. Ph.D. 

Thesis, Univ. Virginia, Richmond, 172 p. 

64 

KEHH, ,J. r .. l' .'..1 Sturlw on Ii h pr <vatum 8t th ('mtra (".ta tum fllant 

01 th~ Pucdie Cit nd Elc< tfle C',mpany. Calif fJep f I h (,amf, 

h h Hull • L, hI> p 

KLYASII'IOHI. , L. B , nd A A 'r'AHZH()~IH.K 

1'17,~ :-i<Jm of th tnped b • MOrfln 

r('('nlD • p 3'7· 2 

Publ 74049 .;') 

LA \\ LEH, J P, R. A • 'ORRl ,G GOLD"'Y.', K. A_ ABOOD, and T 

L. E. LLERT. 

1~,4 Hud n Ranr ,tflped b ,hfe cycle model, In L. D. Jen.e 

(edltorJ, cond work. hop on entrainment and intake ,creenmg 

p. 3·' -I Elec. Power Re, In t , Palo Alto, Calif. Publ. ,4· 9· 

t.X)·5 

LE\\\' , R, !'-1. 

195, Comp8ra(ivetud) of populatioll.> of the tripe<! bass. (; ~ 

Fl. h. Wlldl en, pec 'ci. Rep. FISh. ~ ,54 p, 

1 til. ('ompaTl»on of three tag>- on (riped bass in the Che:>apeake 

Bay area. Chesapeake 'ci 23· . 

1962. -e_ ual maturity as determmed from o''Um diameters m 

striped ba from :-;orth Carolina Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 91:279-

282. 

LEvVI , R. M., and R. R. BONNER, Jr. 

1966. Fecundity of the striped bass, Roccus saxatillS (WaIbaum) Trans. Am. Fish. oc 95:32 -331. 

LINTON, E 

1898. Notes on trematode parasItes of fishes. Proc. U.S. Natl. 

Mus. 20:407·548. 

1901. Parasites of fishes of the Woods Hole region. Bull. U.S. Fish 

Comm. 19:405·492. 

LOEBER, T. S. 

1951. A report of an investigation of the temperature and salinity 
relationship of striped bass and salmon in connection with the 

Reber plan. Calif. Dep. Fish Game, Inland Fish Br., Rep. Bur. 

Fish Conserv., 40 p. 

LOGAN, H. J. 

1968. Comparison of growth and survival rates of striped bass and 

striped bass X white bass hy,brids under controlled environment. Proc. 21st Annu . Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish Game 

Comm. 1967:260-263. 

LUND, W. A. , Jr. 

1957. Morphometric study of the striped bass, Raccus saxatilis. U.S. Fish. Wildl. Serv., Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. 216, 24 

p. 

LYMAN, H. 

1961. A sixteen pound pugheaded striped bass from Massachusetts. Chesapeake Sci. 2:101-102. 

MAGNIN, E. , and G. BEAULIEU. 

1967. Le Bar, Raccus saxatilis (Walbaum), du Fleuve Saint-Laurent. Nat. Can. (Que.) 94:539-555. 

MAHONEY, J. B., F. H. MIDLIGE, and D. G. DEUEL. 

1973. A fin rot disease of marine and euryhaline fishes in the New 

York Bight. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 102:596-605. 

MANOOCH, C. S., III. 

1973. Food habits of yearling and adult striped bass, Marane saxatili (Walbaum), from Albemarle Sound, North Caro -

lina. Chesapeake Sci. 14:73-86. 

MANSUETI, R. J. 

1956. Recaptures of tagged striped bass, Raccus saxatilis (Walbaum), caught in deep waters of Chesapeake Bay, Maryland. Md. Dep. Res. Educ. Resour. Study Rep. 10, 9 p. 

1958a. Eggs, larvae and young of the striped bass, Raccus saxatilis. Chesapeake BioI. Lab. Contrib. 112, 35 p. 

1958b. The development of anal spines and soft-rays in young 

striped bass, Raccus saxatilis. Chesapeake BioI. Lab. Contrib. 

113, 12 p. 

1959. Exploratory trawling for striped bass in Potomac River, 

1959. Md. Tidewater News 15(1):3, 4. 

1960. An unusually large pugheaded striped bass, Raccus saxatilis, from Chesapeake Bay, Maryland. Chesapeake Sci. 1:111-

113. 

1961. Age, growth, and movements of the striped bass, Raccus 

saxatilis, taken in size selective fishing gear in Maryland. Chesapeake Sci. 2:9-36. 

1962. Effects of civilization on striped bass and other estuarine 

biota in Chesapeake Bay and tributaries. Proc. Gulf Caribb. 

Fish. Inst. , l4th Annu . Sess., p. 110-136. 

1964. Eggs, larvae, and younb of the white perch, Raccus americonus, with comments on its ecology in the estuary. Chesapeake 

Sci. 5:3-45. 

MANSUETI, R. J., and A. J. MANSUETI. 

1955. White perch eggs and larvae studied in lab. Md. Tidewater 

News 12(7):1-3 . 

MANSUETI, R. J., and E. H. HOLLIS. 

1963. Striped bass in Maryland tidewater. Univ. Md., Nat. Res. 

Inst. , Educ. Ser. 61, 28 p. 

MARCY, B. C., Jr., and R. C. GALVIN. 

1973. Winter-spring sport fishery in the heated discharge of a 

nuclear power plant. J. Fish. BioI. 5:541-547. 

MARKLE, D. F., and G. C. GRANT. 

1970. The summer food habits of young-of-the-year striped bass in 

three Virginia rivers. Chesapeake Sci. 11:50-54. 

MASSMAN, W. H. , and A. L. PACHECO. 

1961. Movements of striped bass tagged in Virginia waters of 

Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Sci. 2:37-44. 

MAY, O. D" Jr., and J. C. FULLER, Jr. 

1965. A tudy on striped bass egg production in the Congaree and 

Wateree Rivers. Proc. 16th Annu. Conf. out he a t . Assoc. Game 

Fi h Comm. 1962:285-301. 

McCOY, E. G. 

1959. Quantitative sampling of striped bass, Roccus axatlitS (Walbeum), eggs in the Roanoke River, orth Carolina. M .. The is, 

, .C. State College, Raleigh, 136 p. 

McGILL. E. 1\1 " Jr. 

1967. Pond water for rearing striped ba fry, Roccus . axatllis 

65 

(\\'alhauml. in aquaria 

soc. Game F"h romm 

1\lcHCGH .. J. L. 

1977. Fi,hene, and fisher.' r 

Dep. Cammer.. OAA Tech 

MclLWAI:\,. T. D 

1968. 

in :'>1"s"sippl waters. 

Game Fish Comm . 196,:254-2.57. 

McLAN E. \V 1\1 

1955. The fi'hes of the St. .John·, River \ tern Ph 0 Th 

l'niv Florida. ,ainesvllie. :l61 p. 

MELDRIM, .J W ., and.J .J. GlIT 

1971. Temperature preference. aVOidance and ,hock penm nt 

with estuarine fishes. Ichthvol. A"oc. Bull. '. 75 p . 

MELDRIM . . J. W ... J .J GIIT. and B. R PETRO. K't 

1974. The effect of temperature and cheml('al pollutant on the 

behavior of several estuarine or!(ani. ms. Ichthynl A"oc Hu I 

11. 129 p. 

MENSl GER. G. C. 

1971. Observation, of the <triped bass. Aforonc .'amt,1L . In Ke\ 

stone Reservoir. Oklahoma Proc 24th Annu Cnnl. ~outh('a t 

Assoc . Game Fish Comm. 1970:447-463. 

MERRIMAN. D. 

1937. Notes on the life history of the striped he s, Roccu 

lineatus Copeia 1937 '15-36. 

1940. The osteology of the striped bass (Roccu.- .,oxat,l,sl Ann 

Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 11, 5:55-64. 

1941. tudies on the striped bass (Roccu., .,axatll,., I (It the Atlantic 

Coast. U.S. Fish Wildl 'erv, Fish Bull 50:1-71 

MESHAW, J. C .. Jr. 

1969. A study of feeding selecti\;ty of striped ba" Ir) and fin~~rlings in relation to zooplankton availability. :\1.~ The,,'. (' 

State Univ .• Raleigh, 58 p 

MIDDAUGH, D. P . J. A. COUCH. and A.:'>1 RA;-';E 

1977. Responses to early life history stages of the striped he 

M arone saxatilis to chlorination Chesapeake CI. 18:141-153 

MILLER. L. W. 

1974. Mortality rates for California striped bass (.\[oronl' <axat/I, 

from 1965-1971 Calif. Fish Game 60:157-171. 

MILLER, P. E. 

1977. Experimental study and modeling of striped bass egg and lar 

val mortality. Ph.D. Thesis, The .Johm Hopkin, l 01\ • Bolt· 

more, 99 p. 

MILLER, R. \' 

1969. Continental migrations of fishes L'nderwater at !I. 15· 

23, 44, 45. 

MITCHILL, S. L 

1814. Report, in part, of amuel L. \litchlll \1 D I'rofe r of 

Natural History, & C .. on the fishes of • e" York [) Carit I, • 

KY. 28 p. 

15 The fishes of • 'ew York. described and arran ,'<i Tra 

Lit. Philos. Soc. :--;.Y. 1:355-492. 

MORGAN, A R .. and A R GERLACH. 

1950. Striped bass studies on Coo, Bay In 1949 and I 50 Ore 

Fish. Comm. Contrib. 14. 31 p. 

MORGAN, R P., II. 

19,1. Comparative electrophorellc ,(udle on the nped ba 

Marone .axatili.,. and white perch, .\[ omn'lCana and el t 

phoretic identification of five population, of ,tnperl b In the up 

per Chesapeake Ba) Ph .D The'I' lOl\ \lar.lnnd C I 

Park. 92 p 

1975. Distinguishin!( laryal white pHlh and tnperl b b e 

trophoresis. Chesapeake. 'ci 1b: ·-o 

;\lORGA:\. R P, II, and R D. PRL 'CE 

1971 Chlorine to.iClt)' to egg, and lanae of fh Ch opea 

fishes. Tran. Am Fi h I 

:0.10 RGA.'\' , R P. II. T, Y KOO. and G r: KRA.:TZ 

19,3 Electrophoretic determlnatl n of populatl f th 

bllS-s, .\forune axatll In the t pper Ch pe Sa 

Am. FI. h 102:21-J:! 

tnped 

Tr 
MURAWSKI, W. S. 

1958. Comparative study of populations of the striped bass, Roccus 

saxatilis (Walbaum), based on lateral-line scale counts. M.S. 

Thesis, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, 80 p. 

1969. The distribution of striped bass, Roccus saxatilis, eggs and 

larvae in the lower Delaware River. N.J. Dep. Conserv. Econ. 

Dev ., Div. Fish Game, Nacote Creek Res. Stn., Misc. Rep. 1M, 39 

p. 

, MURPHY, G. J . 

1959. Exploratory trawling for striped bass in Potomac River, 

1959. Maryland Tidewater News 15(1):3-4. (Md. Dep. Res. 

Educ., Chesapeake BioI. Lab.) 

NEAL, W. E. 

1971. Landlocked striped bass of John H . Kerr Reservoir, a ten year 

summary of research and management activities. Va. Comm. 

Game Inland Fish. Proj. F-5, 41 p. 

NICHOLS, P. R, and R V. MILLER 

1967. Seasonal movements of striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum), tagged and released in the Potomac River, Maryland, 

1959-61. Chesapeake Sci. 8:102-124. 

NICHOL ON, W. R 

1964. Growth compensation in four year cla es of striped bass, 

Roccus saxatilis, from Albemarle ound, North Carolina. Chesapeake Sci. 5:145-149. 

O'REAR, C. W., Jr. 

1972. Some environmental influences of the zinc and copper content of striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum). Ph.D. Thesis, 

Virginia Poly. Inst., Blacksburg, 78 p. 

1973. The toxicity of zinc and copper to striped bass eggs and fry 

with methods for providing confidence limits Proc 26th Annu. 

Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1972:484-489 

ORSI, J. J. 

1971. The 1965-1967 migrations of the acramento-San Joaquin estuary striped bass population. Calif. Fish Game 57:257-267. 

OTWELL, W. S., and J. V. MERRINER 

1975. Survival and growth of juvenile striped bass, Morone saxatrlis, in a factorial experiment with temperature, sahnity and 

age. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 104:560-566. 

OVERSTREET, R M. 

1971. Neochasmus sogandaresi n. sp. (Trematoda: Cryptogonimidae) from the striped bass in Mississippi. Trans. Am. Microsc. 

Soc. 90:87-89. 

OVIATT, C. A. 

1977. Menhaden, sport fish and fishermen. Univ. RI., Mar. 

Tech. Rep. 60. 

PAPERNA, 1., and D. E. ZWERNER 

1974. Kudoa cerebralis sp. n. (Myxosporidea, Chloromyxidae) from 

the striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum). J. Protozool. 

21:15-19. 

1976. Parasites and diseases of striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), from the lower Chesapeake Bay. J. Fish. BioI. 9:267-281. 

PEARSON, J. C. 

1931. Sport fishing in Chesapeake Bay. U.S. Bur. Fish Fish. Circ. 

1, 19 p. 

1933. Movements of striped bass in Chesapeake Bay. Md. Fish . 

22:15-17. 

1938. The life history of the striped bass, or rockfish, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum). U.S. Bur. Fish. Bull. 49:825-860. 

PFUDERER, H. A., S. S. TALMAGE, B. N. COLLIER, W. VAN 

WINKLE, Jr., and C. P. GOODYEAR. 

1975. Striped bass - a selected annotated bibliography. Oak 

Ridge Natl. Lab., Environ. Sci. Div., Publ. 615, 158 p. 

POLGAR, T. T. 

1977. Striped bass ichthyoplankton abundance, mortality, and 

production estimation for the Potomac River population. In W. 

Van Winkle (editor), Proceedings of a conference on assessing the 

effects of power-plant-induced mortality on fish populations, Gatlinburg, Tennessee, May 3-6, 1977, p. 110-126. Pergamon Press, 

N.Y. 

POLGAR, T. T., J. A. MIHURSKY, R E. ULANOWICZ, R P. 

MORGAN II, and J. S. WILSON. 

1976. An analysis of 1974 striped bass spawning success in the 

66 

Potomac estuary. In M. Wiley (editor), Estuarine processes, Vol. 

I. Uses, stresses, and adaptation to the estuary, p. 151-16.5. Acad. 

Press, N.Y. 

POWELL, M. R 

1973. Cage and raceway culture of striped bass in brackish water In 

Alabama. Proc. 26th Annu. Conf. outheast. Assoc. Game Fish 

Comm. 1972:345-356. 

RACHLI "J. W., A. P. BECK, and ,J. M. O'CO NOR 

1978. Karyotypic analysis of the Hudson River stnped bass, 

Morone saxatths Copeia 1978:343-345. 

RADTKE, L. D., and J . L. TURNER. 

1967. HIgh concentratIOns of total disRolved solids block spawning 

mIgratIOn of striped bass, ROCCLL' .,axattits, in the an Joaquin 

River, California. Trans. Am. Fi hoc. 96:405-407, 

RAFI E QUE, C S 

1820. Ichthyologia Ohlensls, or natural h,story of the fiahea inhabIting the river OhIO and Ita tributary atream , preceded by a 

phYRlcal descriptIOn of the Ohio and its branches Lexington, 

Kentucky, 23 p 

RANEY, E 

1952 The life history of the striped baos, Roccus sa:rattiis (Walbaum) Bull. Bingham Oceanogr_ Collect., Yale Univ. 14(1):5-

97_ 

1954. The striped ba in ew York waters. Conservationist 

8(4):14-17. 

1957. Subpopulations of the striped bass Roccus axattlis (Walbaum), in tributanes of Chesapeake Bay In J. C Marr (coordinator), Contnbutions to the study of subpopulation of fishes, p. 

5-107 U. Fi h Wildl. erv., pec ci. Rep Fi.h. 208, 

19.5. The tnped bass. . Fish Wildl erv, Fish . Leafl. 451, 

6 p 

RANEY, E. C. and D. P de YLVA. 

1953. Racial Investlgatlons of the triped bass, Roccus saxatilis 

(Walbaum). ,J Wild\. Manage. 17:495-509. 

RANEY, E. C and W WOOLCOTT. 

1955. Races of the striped bass, Roccus sa:ratilLS (Walbaum), in 

outheastern United tates. J, Wild!. Manage 19:444-450. 

RANEY, E. C. W WOOLCOTT, and A. G MEHRING 

1954 M,gratory pattern and racial structure of Atlantic coast 

striped bass. Tran. 19th ~orth Am. Wildl. Nat Resour. Conf., 

p. 376-396. 

RATH.JEN, W. F, and L. C MILLER. 

1957. Aspects of the early life history of the striped bass (Roccus 

saxattlis) in the Hudson River. N.Y. Fish Game J. 4:43-60. 

REDPATH, G. 

1972 Temperature and its effect on the growth and production of 

juvenile triped ba , Morone sa:ratilis. M.S. The is, niv. 

California, Davis, 37 p. 

REEVES, W. C., and J. F. GERMAN . 

1972. Effects of increased water hardness, ource of fry and age at 

stocking on survival of striped bass fry in earthen ponds. Proc. 

25th Annu . Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1971:542-

548. 

REGA ,D. M., T. L. WELLBORN, Jr., and R G. BOWKER 

1968. Striped bass, Roccus sa:ratilis (Walbaum), development of 

essential requirements for production. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., 

Bur. Sport Fish. Wildl., Div. Fish. Hatcheries, Atlanta, Ga., 133 

p. 

REHWOLDT, R, G. BIDA, and B. ERRIE. 

1971. Acute toxicity of copper, nickel and zinc ions to some Hudson 

River fish species. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 6:445-448. 

RHODES, W., and J. V. MERRINER 

1973. A preliminary report on closed system rearing of striped bass 

sac fry to fingerling size. Prog. Fish-Cult. 35:199-201. 

RINALDO, R G. 

1971. Analysis of Morone sa:ratilis and Morone americana spawning and nursery area in the York and Pamunkey Rivers, 

Virginia. M.S. Thesis, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, 56 p. 

RITCHIE, D. E., Jr. 

1970. Striped bass tagging study shows results. Chesapeake Bay 

Affairs 3(2):1-2. 
ROBINSON, J. B. 

1960. The age and growth of striped bass (Roccus saxatilis) in California. Calif. Fish Game 46:279-290. 

ROGERS, B. A., and D. T. WESTIN. 

1975. A bibliography on the biology of the striped bass, Morone 

saxatilis (Walbaum). Univ. RI:, Mar. Tech. Rep. 37, 134 p. 

ROGERS, B. A., D. T . WESTIN, and S. B. SAILA. 

1977. Life stage duration studies on Hudson River striped 

bass. Univ. RI., Applied Mar. Res. Group, NOAA Sea Grant, 

Mar. Tech. Rep. 31, 111 p. 

ROSA, H., Jr. 

1965. Preparation of synopses on the biology of species of living 

aquatic or!J8.nisms. FAO (Food Agric. Organ. U.N.) Fish. BioI. 

Synop. 1, Rev. 1, 75 p. 

RYDER, J . A. 

1887. Roccus lineatus (Bloch) Gill: (The striped bass, or rockfish) . In On the development of osseous fishes, including marine 

and freshwater forms. Rep. U.S. Fish.Comm. 1885, 13:502-505. 

3AILA, S. B., and E. LORDA. 

1977. Sensitivity analysis applied to a matrix model of the Hudson 

River striped bass population. In W. Van Winkle (editor), 

Proceedings of a conference on assessing the effects of power-plantinduced mortality on fish populations, Gatlinburg, Tennessee, 

May 3-6, 1977, p. 311-332. Pergamon Press, N.Y. 

ST. AMANT, J . A. 

1959. Striped bass introduced into the Colorado River. Calif. Fish 

Game 45:353. 

SANDOZ, 0 ., and K. H. JOHNSTON. 

l

1966. Culture of striped bass Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum). Proc. 

19th Annu . Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1965:390-

394. 

ASAKI, S. 

l

1966. Distribution of juvenile striped bass, Roccus saxatilis, in the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. In J. L. Turner and D. W. Kelley (compilers), Ecological studies of the Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Delta. Part II. Fishes of the delta, p. 59-67. Calif. Dep. Fish 

Game, Fish Bull. 136. 

CHAEFER, R H. 

1967. Species composition, size and seasonal abundance of fish in 

the surf waters of Long Island. N.Y. Fish Game J. 14:1-46. 

1968a. Size, age composition and migration of striped bass from the 

surf waters of Long Island. N.Y. Fish Game J . 15:1-51. 

1968b. Sex composition of striped bass from the Long Island 

surf. N.Y. Fish Game J. 15:117-118. 

1970. Feeding habits of striped bass from the surf waters of Long 

Island. N.Y. Fish Game J. 17.1-17. 

1972. A short-range forecast function for predicting the relative 

abundance of striped bass in Long Island water. N.Y. Fish 

Game J. 19:178-181. 

CHOPF, J. D. 

1788. Beschreibung einiger nord-amerikanischen Fische vorzuglich 

aus den neu-yorkischen Gewiissern. Schrift Ges Naturf Freunde 

Berlin, 8: 138-194. 

CHOUMACHER, R 

1969. Transportation of adult striped bass. Prog. Fish-Cult. 

31:230. 

SCHUBEL, J. R., and A. H . AULD. 

1974. Hatching success of blueback-herring and striped bass eggs 

with various time vs. temperature histories. In J. W. Gibbons 

and R R Sharitz (editors), Thermal ecology. Proceedings of a 

symposium held at Augusta, Georgia, May 3-5, 1973, p. 164-

190. Tech. Inf. Cent., Off. Int. Serv., U.S. AEC, Oak Ridge, 

Tenn. 

SCHUBEL, J. R, T. S. Y. KOO, and C. F. SMITH. 

1976. Thermal effects of power plant entrainment on survival of 

fish eggs and larvae: A laboratory assessment. John Hopkins 

Univ., Chesapeake Bay Inst. , Ref. 76-5, Spec. Rep. 52, 37 p. 

SCHULTZ, L. P. 

1931. Hermaphroditism in the striped bass. Copeia 1951:64. 

SCOFIELD, E. C. 

1928. triped bass studies. Calif. Fish Game 14:29-37. 

1931. The life history of the striped bass. In The striped bass of 

67 

California (ROCCU8 lineatus). Div_ Fish Game Calif., FI h Bull 

29, p. 26-60 

SCRUGGS, G D., Jr. 

1957. Reproduction of re'ident stnped ba. in Santee-Cooper 

Re ervoir. outh Carolina. Trans. Am_ Fi.h. ,·oc. • 144·159 

SCRUGG , G. D, .Jr, and J. C. FULLER .Jr. 

1955. Indications of a freshwater population of. tnped ba ,"Roc· 

cus .,aratilis" (Walbaum), in Santee-Cooper Re,ervOlr Proc 

Southea t. Assoc. Game Fish Comm 191;-164-70 

SHA NON, E. H. 

1969. Effect of temperature changes upon developing. tnped ba, 

eggs and fry. N.C. Wildl. Res. Comm .. Div. Inland Fish .. 6 p 

1970. Effect of temperature changes upon developing striped bas. 

eggs and fry. Proc. 23d Annu. Conf. Southeast. A,soc Game Fish 

Comm. 1969:265-274. 

SHA NON, E. H., and W. B. SMITH. 

1968. Preliminary observations on the effect of temperature on 

striped bass eggs and sac fry Proc. 21st Annu . Conf 'outheast 

Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1967:257-260. 

SHAPOVALOV, L. 

1936. Food of the striped bass. Cahf. Fish Game 22:261-271. 

SHEARER, L. W., D. E. RITCHIE, Jr., and . M. FRI 'BlE. 

1962. Sport fishing survey in 1960 of the lower Patuxent e. lUaT) 

and the 1958 year-class of striped ba s. Chesapeake Sci 3'1-17. 

SHERK, J. A., J. M. O'CONNOR and D. A. NEUMA;-.JN 

1975. Effects of suspended and deposited sediments on estuarine 

environments. In L. E. Cronin (editor), Estuarine re"earch Vol. 

II. Geology and engineering, p. 541-558. Acad. Press, ;-.J .Y. 

SHUSTER, C. N., Jr. 

1959. A biological evaluation of the Delaware River estuary. Univ. Del. Mar. Lab., Inf. Ser. Publ 3, 77 p. 

SIDELL, B. D., R G. OTTO, and D. A. POWER 

1978. A biochemical method for distinction of striped bass and 

white perch larvae_ Copeia 1978:340-343. 

SKINNER J. E. 

1974. A functional evaluation of a large louver screen Installation 

and fish facilities research on California water diversion proJects. In L. D. Jensen (editor), Second workshop on entrainment 

and intake screening, p_ 225-250. Elec Power Res. Inst , Pain 

Alto, Calif. , EPRI Publ. No. 74-049-00-5 . 

SMI"'H, B. A. 

1971. The fishes of four low-salinity tidal tributaries of the Dela -

ware River estuary. M.S. Thesis. C lrnell Cniv . Ithaca , 304 p. 

SMITH, L. D. 

1973. Life history studies of striped ba.s. Dep. :-;'at Re . . , Gam~ 

and Fish Dlv .. Fish. Sect., Sport Fish. Di\,. BrunSWick, Ga .. 14.3 p 

SMITH, W. B., W R BONNER and B L TATe:'>1 

1967. Premature egg procurement from striped bass. Proc 20th 

Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1966:324-330. 

SNIESZKO, S. F., G. L. BULLOCK, E. HOLLIS, and J G BOO:-;'I-: 

1964. Pastuerella sp. from an epizootic of white perch (Roccus 

americanus) in Chesapeake Bay tidewater areas. J _ Bactenal 

88:1814-1815. 

SOMMANI, P. 

1972. A study on the population dynamics of striped ba" (J/urone 

soratilis Walbaum) in the an FranCISco Bay estuaTV. Ph D 

Thesi , Uni\'. Washington, Seattle, 145 p. 

STEINDACH;-.JER, F. 

1862. Ichthyologische :l.littheilungen (IV) \ "erh. Zool -Bot. Ge 

Wien. 12:497-504. 

STEVENS, D. E. 

1966. Food habits of striped bass, Roccus ,aratill . In the c aera -

mento- an Joaquin delta. In J. L. Turner and 0 \\ . Kelley 

(compilers), Ecological studies of the -acramento- an .Joaquln 

Delta. Part II. Fi hes of the delta, p. -96 Calif Oep Fish 

Game. Fish. Bull . 136. 

1977a 'triped bass ('\forone saratlll,) year cia , -trength In r 18 

tlon to nver flow in the acramento·San Joaquin E,tu8T). California Trans Am. Fish. oc 106 34--l~ 

1977b. triped ba s (.\forone aratllLS) momtonng technlq In 

the acramento-. an Joaquin E.-tuary_ In W \ an Wm e 

(editor) Proceedings of the conference on In~ the effec of 
power-plant-induced mortality on fish populations, Gatlinburg, 

Tennes ee, May 3-6, 1977, p. 91-109. Pergamon Press, N.Y. 

TEVE:'-i , R. E. 

19". The striped bass of the Santee-Cooper Reservoir. Proc. llth 

Annu. ConI. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1957:253-264. 

1965. A report on the operation of the Moncks Comer striped bass 

hatchery. South Carolina Wildlife Marine Resources Department. 21 p. 

1966. Hormone-induced spawning of striped bass for reservoir 

stocking. Prog. Fish-Cult. 28:19-28. 

1967. A final report on the use of hormones to ovulate striped bass, 

Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum). Proc. 18th Annu. Conf. Southeast. 

As oc. Game Fish Comm. 1964:525-538. 

SURBER, E. W. 

1958. Results of striped bass (Roccus saxatilis) introduction into 

freshwater impoundments. Proc. 11th Annu. Conf. Southeast. 

Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1957:273-276. 

SWARTZMAN, G., R. DERISO, and C. COWAN. 

1977. Comparison of stimulation models used in assessing the effects of power-plant-induced mortality on fish populations. In 

W. Van Winkle (editor), Proceedings of a conference on assessing 

the effects of power-plant-induced mortality on fish populations, 

Gatlinburg, Tennessee, May 3-6, 1977, p. 333-361. Pergamon 

Press, N.Y. 

TAGATZ, M. E 

1961. Tolerance of striped bass and American shad to changes of 

temperature and salinity. U.S. Fish Wild!. Serv., Spec. Sci. Rep. 

Fish. 388. 8 p. 

TALBOT, G. B. 

1966. Estuarine environmental requirements and limiting factors 

for striped bass. In A symposium on estuarine fisheries, p. 37-

49. Am. Fish. Soc., Spec. Pub!. 3. 

TATll\1, B. L., J. D. BAYLESS, E. G. McCOY, AND W. B. SMITH. 

1966. Preliminary experiments in the artificial propagation of 

striped bass, Roccus saxatilis. Proc. 19th Annu . Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1965:374-389. 

TILLER, R. E. 

1943. Indications of compensatory growth in the striped bass, Roccus saxatilis Walbaum, as revealed by a study of the 

scales. Chesapeake Bio!. Lab. Pub!. 57, 16 p. 

1950. A five-year study of the striped bass fishery of Maryland, 

based on analyses of the scales. Chesapeake Bio!. Lab. Pub!. 85, 

30 p. 

1955. Spawning areas of striped bass in Patuxent River explored. Md. Tidewater News 12(6):1, 4. 

TRENT, L., and W. H. HASSLER. 

1966. Feeding behavior of adult striped bass, Roccus saxatilis, in 

relation to stages of sexual maturity. Chesapeake Sci. 7:189-

192 

1968. Gill net selection, migration, size and age composition, sex 

ratio, harvest efficiency, and management of striped bass in the 

Roanoke River, North Carolina. Chesapeake Sci. 9:217-232. 

TRE.'T, W L. 

1962. Growth and abundance of young-of-year striped bass, Roccus 

,\axatllis (\\'albaum), in Albemarle Sound, North Carohna :\1.S. TheSIS, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, 66 p. 

TRES 'EL T, E F. 

195~, pawning grounds of the striped bass or rock, Roccus saxat 'lWalbaum) in Virginia. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Collect., 

1 ale Cni\'. 14:9 -110. 

ITR ER J. L. 

1',6. Striped bas spawning in the acramento and San Joaquin 

m'e" in central California from 1963 to 1972. Calif. Fish Game 

G:!:106-11 . 

Tl R ER,.J. L., and H. K CHADWICK 

1972. Distribution and abundance of young-of-the-year striped 

bllS> .\f. ,r' ne saxatilis. in relation to river flow in the Sacrament) 'an .Joaquln e ·tuary. Tran. Am. Fish. Soc. 101:442-452. 

n H ER.J L. and T C FARLEY 

Ul71 Effetts of temperature. salinity. and dissolved oxygen on the 

unl\'al 01 striped bass eggs and larvae. Calif. Fish Game 57:268-. 

2,3. 

68 

TURNER, J. L., and D. W. KELLEY (compilers). 

1966. Ecological studies of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. 

Part II. Fishes of the delta. Calif. Dep. Fish Game, Fish. Bull. 

136, 168 p. 

ULANOWlCZ, R. E. 

1975. The mechanical effects of water flow on fish eggs and larvae. In S. B. Saila (editor)' Fisheries and energy production: A 

symposium, p. 77-87. Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass. 

UNITED STATES COMMISSION OF FISH AND FISHERIES. 

1889. The rockfish or striped bass, Roccus lineatus. Rep. Comm. 

Fish Fish. 1886, 14:XXX-XXXl. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. 

1974-78. Fisheries of the United States, 1973-1977. U.S. Dep. 

Commer., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., Curro Fish. Stat. 6400, 

6700, 6900, 7200, 7500. . 

VALE TI, R. J. , J. ALDRED, and J. LIEBELL. 

1976. Experimental marine cage culture of striped bass in northern waters. Proc. 7th Annu. Meet. World Mariculture Soc., p. 99-

108. 

V AN CLEVE, R. 

1945. A preliminary report on the fishery resources of California in 

relation to the Central Valley project. Calif. Fish Game 31:35-52. 

VLADYKOV, V. D. 

1947. Rapport du biologiste du department des percheries Cont. 

Que. Dep. Fish. 22:1-89. 

VLADYKOV, V. D., and D. E. McALLISTER. 

1961. Preliminary list of marine fishp.s of Quebec. Nat. Can. 

88:53-78. 

VLADYKOV, V. D. , and D. H. WALLACE. 

1938. Is t he striped bass (Roccus lineatus) of Chesapeake Bay a migratory fish? Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 67th Annu. Meet., August 

23, 24 and 25, 1937:67-86. 

1952. Studies of the striped bass, Roccus saxatilis (Walbaum), with 

special reference to the Chesapeake Bay region during 1936-

1938. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Collect., Yale Univ. 14:1:'2-177. 

WALBAUM, J. J. 

1792. Petri Artedi suici genera Piscium in qui bus systema totum 

ichthyologiae proponitur cum classibus ordinibus generum characteribus, specierum differentiis, observationibus plurimis. 

Ichthyologiae Pars III. Grypeswaldiae, (ed. II), 723 p. 

WARE, F. J. 

1971. Some early life history of Florida's inland striped bass, 

Morone saxatilis. Proc. 24th Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. 

Game Fish Comm. 1970:439-447. 

1975. Progress with M arone hybrids in fresh water. Proc. 28th Annu. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1974:48-54. 

WESTIN, D. J. 

1978. Serum and blood from adult striped bass, Morone saxatilis. Estuaries 1:126-128. 

WHITEHEAD, P. J. P ., and A. C. WHEELER. 

1966. The generic names used for the sea basses of Europe and 

North America (Pisces: Serranidae). Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. 

Genova 76:23-41. 

WHITWORTH, W. R , P. L. BERRIEN, and W. J. KELLER. 

1968. Freshwater fishes of Connecticut. State Geol. Nat. Hist. 

Surv. Conn ., Bull. 101, 134 p. 

WILLIAMS, H. M. 

1976. Characteristics for distinguishing white bass, striped bass 

and their hybrid (striped bass X white bass). Proc. 29th Annu. 

Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 1975:168-172. 

WIRTANEN, L. J., and R. H. RAY. 

1971. Striped bass, M arone saxatilis (Walbaum); 1970 report on 

the development of essential requirements for production. U.S. 

Fish Wildl. Serv., Bur. Sport Fish. Wildl., Div. Fish Hatcheries, 

Atlanta, Ga., 37 p. 

WOLKE, R E., D. S. WYAND, and L. H. KHAIRALLAH. 

1970. A light and electron microscopic study of epitheliocystis disease in the gills of Connecticut striped bass (Marone saxatilis) and 

white perch (M orone americanus). J. Compo Pathol. 80:559-

563. 

WOOD, W .. 

1634. New England's prospect. Tho. Coates for John Bellamie, 

Lond .• 98 p. 
7 .. WDlai habita 01 the Itriped buI (Rocc," JG.IatllU) In 

CeUIDmia _ten c.ut P'iIb Game 33:97 102 

LCOTI'. 

1.7 Comparative oet.oIotIY of IUNIIid fiabee 01 the PU\18 Racc," 

ltc:biIl) CopeIa 1967 1·10 

1 Infrupeclllc venation In the white perch. Racc," amm 

CGIIW (Gmelin) Cheupeake . 3:94·113 

R11I. G. 

1903 tripecl but hatc:hina in orth Carolina. Trana Am FISh . 

. 32:1J8.102.