Habitat. Changes to the habitat of the Hudson River estuary have diminished its runs of diadro-mous fishes. The southernmost dam on the river was constructed in 1832 near Troy (Brumbach, 1986). Prior to the building of this and other upstream dams, American shad and river herring ascended to at least the Battenkill River (Greeley and Bishop, 1933), Fish Creek (Brumbach, 1986), and possibly, Glens Falls (Boyle, 1969); eels penetrated considerably farther into the watershed (Greeley and Bishop, 1933). Today some fish pass upriver through the navigation locks or through the dam's hydroelectric turbines (at their peril -during their spawning migration wounded adult blueback herring often drift immediately downcur-rent of these turbines), but these obstacles create a bottleneck for fish movements in the upper river.
South of the Federal Dam but north of Manhattan, about half of the approximately sixty tributaries surveyed have manmade barriers that impede or prohibit fish passage (Schmidt, 1996). Artificial obstacles are also found on most tributaries entering greater New York Harbor (Durkas, 1992). Also, the degree of urbanization was shown to correlate negatively with runs of river herring in Hudson River tributaries (Limburg and Schmidt, 1990). Larger tributaries capable of supporting di-adromous fishes have also been compromised by contamination; the Passaic (Waldman, 1999) and Hackensack Rivers (Zeisel, 1995) once sustained runs of anadromous fishes.
It is reasonable to assume that the overall contraction of available habitat for diadromous fishes has resulted in a decrease in their abundance, albeit, one that is difficult to quantify. I am aware of only two locations in which available habitat has enlarged significantly in recent decades. One is the Mohawk River, which following improvements in water quality, now supports a large run of blueback herring which ascend from the Hudson River after moving past the Federal Dam. The other is the increase in water quality in the area of the Albany Pool, which suffered severe contamination and de-oxygenation from industry and sewage disposal. It is likely that passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972 helped offset fish losses due to habitat restriction.
The most beneficial proactive improvement to habitat for diadromous fishes would be the removal of dams on tributaries and, where not feasible, the construction of fish passage facilities. An attractive location for a fish ladder is the Eddyville Dam near Kingston, which would open up seven miles on the Rondout River, potentially large enough to sup-portAmerican shad reproduction. Many additional sites have been identified (Schmidt, 1996; Schmidt and Lake, 2000).
Also, the Hudson River estuary lost the last of its vast oyster reefs approximately a century ago (Waldman, 1999). Oyster reefs are not only sources of human food but perhaps more importantly, nursery and feeding grounds for many es-tuarine fishes, including diadromous forms (Coen, Luckenbach, and Breitburg, 1999). Construction of artificial oyster reefs in the Hudson River estuary, as is actively occurring in the Chesapeake Bay, would be beneficial to the river's ichthyofauna.
Ecological interactions. A focus of research on the Hudson's diadromous fishes should be to achieve a better understanding of their ecological interactions with each other, with non-diadromous fishes, and with other organisms. Much of the work that has occurred on the diadromous fishes has been autecological and abundance- and mortality-based. Comparatively little attention has been given to the competitive and predatory connections among Hudson River fishes. For example, is the recent decline in white perch abundance partly attributable to the increase in striped bass? Have striped bass reduced the stock size of American shad and alewife? Did the protection afforded the river's shortnose sturgeon population provide them with a competitive advantage over Atlantic sturgeon? Young bluefish appear to prey heavily on juvenile striped bass (Juanes, Buckel, and Conover, 1994). How significant are bluefish in modulating recruitment of the Hudson's anadromous fishes? How important are sometimes abundant juvenile menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus in the lower estuary to subadultstripedbass?Whatwould application of Haley's (1998) gastric lavage approach to shortnose sturgeon and Atlantic sturgeon caught contemporaneously from the same river reaches tell us about their trophic niches?
Strikingly little attention has been paid to the fishes of the Hudson River on the community level (see Gladden et al., 1988 for one exception). Daniels (1995) stated that "Although the Hudson River is among the most-studied aquatic systems in North America, data necessary to confirm population trends in its fish assemblage are scant." Although some changes in the relative abundances of particular species can be explained, many cannot. Moreover, how a dynamic community composition affects its individual components is not often clear.
Some species behaviors and interactions pose interesting evolutionary questions. Is carrying capacity a factor in the abundances and behaviors of anadromous fishes? Why is it that shortnose sturgeon - the far more residential of the two sturgeons - appears to nearly stop growing at adulthood and at a small size for an acipenserid whereas the more marine Atlantic sturgeon continues to grow and to a potentially massive size? Is the short-nose sturgeon adapted to the finite resources of a highly discrete river system and the Atlantic sturgeon to the nearly infinite resources of a vast coastal range? Likewise, does the relative abundance of the marine-migrating contingent of striped bass increase with stock size as a means to exploit resources outside the river?
And how have the diadromous fishes responded to the many colonizations by non-native species? Do the nowhighly-abundant gizzard shad compete with alosines? How heavily do black bass compete with or prey on anadromous piscivores? What is the net effect on anadromous fish nursery habitats of the replacement in entire freshwater coves of native plants such as Vallisneria by the Asian water chestnut Trapa natans?
Fishing and fish mortality from power plants. Any complex fish community is affected by sharp changes in abundance or age structure generated by unnatural sources of mortality. Because of PCB contamination, the entire diadromous fish complex of the Hudson River is not subject to legal commercial harvest in the river, albeit at the price of any sublethal effects stemming from their PCB body burdens.
The effects of electric generation plants on the Hudson's anadromous fish stocks continue to be monitored but are not necessarily well understood. Much of the knowledge gained between 1963 and 1980 through studies conducted in the course of the controversies over the effects of existing and proposed power plants on the Hudson River was summarized in Barnthouse et al. (1988). However, comparatively little information learned over the next score of years has reached the peer-reviewed literature and much of it remains in narrowly distributed and thinly distilled reports. Although the Settlement Agreement included provisions to reduce power plant-mortality of anadromous fishes, fundamental issues persist, such as whether compensatory processes mitigate mortalities to significant degrees. The role of power plants in the population dynamics of Hudson River fishes is likely to remain unclear in the near-term future as a reshuffling of ownership because of deregulation of the power industry and the possible construction of a new generation of power plants that use less river water.
Climate change. Ashizawa and Cole (1994) analyzed long-term water temperature data from Poughkeepsie and found a statistically significant trend of a 0.12°C increase per decade from about 1920 to 1990, a change theybelievedwas consistent with suggested rates of global increases. The biological effects of warming are becoming more apparent as the physical changes become more pronounced and as the time spans monitored become lengthier. Oglesby (1995) showed evidence of significantly earlier blooming ofvegetation and spring arrivals of migratory birds in the Hudson Valley. However, he did not detect a change in the average arrival time of anadromous fish in the Hudson River, due, in part, to high interannual variances.
Nonetheless, the status of rainbow smelt at the limits of its southern distribution may be a bellwether. Decades ago smelt entered the Delaware River and its tributary, Brandywine Creek in Maryland; the last known capture in the D elaware system occurred in 1986 (Raasch andAltemus, 1991). Rainbow smelt now appear to be extinct in the Hudson River and, another cold-water species at the margin of its distribution, Atlantic tomcod, also maybe thermally stressed and could become extinct in the Hudson River Estuary.
Ashizawa, D., and Cole, J. J. 1994. Long-term temperature trends of the Hudson River: a study of the historical data. Estuaries 17(IB):166-71. ASMFC (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission). 1998. Final recovery plan for the shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum. Washington, D.C.
1999.1999 review of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Management Plan for shad and river herring (Alosa sp.). Washington, D.C.
2000. Interstate fishery management plan for American eel. Fishery Management Report 36. Washington, D.C. Bain, M. B. 1997. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeons of the Hudson River: common and divergent life history attributes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48:347-58.
Bain, M., Arend, K., Haley, N., Hayes, S., Knight, J., Nack, S., Peterson, D., and Walsh, M. 1998.
Sturgeon of the Hudson River. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Bain, M., Haley, N., Peterson, D., Waldman, J. R., and Arend, K. 2000. Harvest and habitats of Atlantic sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus Mitchill, 1815 in the Hudson River estuary: lessons for sturgeon conservation. Boletín. Instituto Español de Oceanografía 16:43-53.
Barnthouse, L. W., Klauda, R. J., Vaughan, D. S., and Kendall, R. L. (eds.). 1988. Science, law, and Hudson River power plants: a case study in environmental impact assessment. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4.
Barse, A. M., and Secor, D. H. 1999. An exotic nematode parasite of the American eel. Fisheries 24(2):6-10.
Beamish, F. W H. 1980. Biology of the North American anadromous sea lamprey, Petromyzon mar-inus. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 37:1924-43.
Bean, T. H. 1903. Catalogue of the fishes of New York. New York State Museum Bulletin 60, Zoology 9.
Beebe, C. A., and Savidge, I. R. 1988. Historical perspective on fish species composition and distribution in the Hudson River estuary. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:25-36.
Berggren, T. J., andLieberman, J. T. 1978. Relative contribution of Hudson, Chesapeake, and Roanoke striped bass, Morone saxatilis, stocks to the Atlantic coast fishery. U. S. National Marine Fisheries Service Fishery Bulletin 76:335-46.
Blake, L. M. 1982. Commercial fishing for eel in New York State, in K. Loftus (ed.), Proceedings of the 1980 North American eel conference. Ontario Fisheries Technical Report Series 4:39-41.
Boreman, J., and Klauda, R. J. 1988. Distributions of early life stages of striped bass in the Hudson River estuary, 1974-1979. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:53-8.
Boyle, R. H. 1969. The Hudson River: a natural and unnatural history. New York: Norton.
Brown, B. L. 1996. Mixed-stock analysis of American shad in New Jersey's coastal intercept fishery. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Brumbach, H. J. 1986. Anadromous fish and fishing: a synthesis of data from the Hudson River drainage. Man in the Northeast 32:35-66.
Brussard, P. F., Collings-Hall, M., and Wright, J. 1981. Structure and affinities of freshwater sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) populations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 38:1708-1714.
Carlson, D. M., and Simpson, K. W. 1987. Gut contents of juvenile shortnose sturgeon in the upper Hudson estuary. Copeia 1987:796-802.
Clark, J. R. 1968. Seasonal movements of striped bass contingents of Long Island Sound and the New York Bight. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 97:320-43.
Coen, L. D.,Luckenbach, M. W., and Breitburg, D. L. 1999. The role of oyster reefs as essential fish habitat: a review of current knowledge and some new perspectives. American Fisheries Society Symposium 22:438-54.
Courtenay, S., Grunwald, C., Kreamer, G.-L., Fairchild, W.L., Arsenault, J. T., Ikonomou, M., and Wirgin, I. 1999. A comparison of the dose and time response of cytochrome P4501A1 mRNA induction in chemically treated Atlantic tomcod from two populations. Aquatic Toxicology 47:43-69.
Dadswell, M. J. 1979. Biology and population characteristics of the shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum LeSueur 1818 (Osteichthyes: Acipenseridae), in the Saint John River estuary, New Brunswick, Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology 57:2186-2210.
Dadswell, M. J., Melvin, G. D., Williams, P. J., and Themelis, D. E. 1987. Influences of origin, life history, and chance on the Atlantic coast migration of American shad. American Fisheries Society Symposium 1:313-330.
Daniels, R. A. 1995. Nearshore fish assemblage of the tidal Hudson River, in E. T. LaRoe, G. S. Farris, C. E. Puckett, P D. Doran, andM. J. Mac (eds.), Our Living Resources: A Report to the Nation on the Distribution, Abundance, and Health ofU. S. Plants, Animals, and Ecosystems. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Service, Washington, DC, pp. 260-63.
Daniels, R. A., and Lawrence, T. 1991. Stability offish assemblages in the lower Hudson River. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Daniels, R. A., Limburg, K. E., Schmidt, R. E., Strayer, D. L., and Chambers, R. C. In press. Changes in fish assemblages in the tidal Hudson River, New York. In Rinne, J. N., R. M. Hughes, and B. Calamusso (eds.). Historical Changes in Large River Fish Assemblages ofAmerica. American Fisheries Society Monograph.
Dew, C. B., and Hecht, J. H. 1994. Recruitment, growth, mortality, and biomass production of larval and earlyjuvenile Atlantic tomcod in the Hudson River estuary. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 123:681-702.
Dey, W P, Peck, T. H., Smith, C. E., and Kreamer, G.-L. 1993. Epizoology of hepatic neoplasia in Atlantic tomcod (Microgadus tomcod) from the Hudson River estuary. Canadian Journal ofFisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:1897-1907.
Dovel, W. L., and Berggren, T. J. 1983. Atlantic sturgeon of the Hudson estuary. New York Fish and Game Journal 30(2):140-72.
Dovel, W L., Pekovitch, A. W, and Berggren, T. J. 1992. Biology of the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser bre-virostrum Lesueur, 1818) in the Hudson River estuary, New York, in C. L. Smith (ed.), Estuarine Research in the 1980's. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 187-216.
Dunning, D. J., Ross, Q. E., Kirk, W L., Waldman, J. R., Heimbuch, D. G., and Mattson, M. T. 1992. Postju-venile striped bass studies after the Settlement Agreement, inC. L. Smith (ed.), Estuarine Research in the 1980's. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 339-47.
Dunning, D. J., Waldman, J. R., Ross, Q. E., and Matt-son, M. T. 1997. Use of Atlantic tomcod and other prey by striped bass in the lower Hudson River estuary during winter. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 126:857-61.
Durkas, S. J. 1992. Impediments to the spawning success of anadromous fish in tributaries of the NY/NJ Harbor watershed. American Littoral Society, Highlands, New Jersey.
Geoghegan, P, Mattson, M. T., and Keppel, R. G. 1992. Distribution of the shortnose sturgeon in the Hudson River estuary, 1984-1988, in C. L. Smith (ed.), Estuarine Research in the 1980's. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 217-41.
Gladden, J. B., Cantelmo, F. R.,Croom, J. M., and Shapot, R. 1988. Evaluation of the Hudson River ecosystem in relation to the dynamics offish populations. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:37-52.
Grabe, S. A. 1996. Feeding chronology and habits of Alosa spp. (Clupeidae) juveniles from the lower Hudson River estuary. Environmental Biology of Fishes 47:321-6.
Greeley, J. R. 1937. Fishes of the area with an annotated list, in: A Biological Survey of the Lower Hudson Watershed.Supplemental to Twenty-sixth Annual Report, 1936. New York State Conservation Department, Albany, pp. 45-103.
Greeley, J. R., and Bishop, S. C. 1933. Fishes of the upper Hudson watershed with an annotated list, in: A Biological Survey of the Lower Hudson Watershed. Supplemental to Twenty-second Annual Report, 1932. New York State Conservation Department, Albany, pp. 64-101.
Grunwald, C., Stabile, J., Waldman, J. R., Gross, R., and Wirgin, I.I. 2002. Population genetics of shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum based on mitochondrial DNA control region sequences. Molecular Ecology 11:1885-98.
Haley, N. J. 1998. Agastric lavage technique for characterizing diets of sturgeons. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 18:978-81.
Hoff, T. B., McLaren, J. B., and Cooper, J. C. 1988. Stock characteristics ofHudson River striped bass. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:59-68.
HRA (Hudson River Almanac). 1998. Volume IV, 19971998. Fleischmanns, NY: Purple Mountain Press.
Hurst, T. P, and Conover, D. O. 1998. Winter mortality of young-of-the-year Hudson River striped bass (Morone saxatilis): size-dependent patterns and effects on recruitment. Canadian Journal ofFish-eries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1122-30.
Juanes, F., Buckel, J. A., and Conover, D. O. 1994. Accelerating the onset of piscivory: interaction of predator and prey phenologies. Journal of Fish Biology 45(Supplement A):41-54.
Klauda, R. J., Moos, R. E., and Schmidt, R. E. 1988. Life history of Atlantic tomcod, Microgadus tomcod, in the Hudson River estuary, with emphasis on spatio-temporal distribution and movements, in C. L. Smith (ed.), Fisheries Research in the Hudson River. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 219-51.
Lake, T. R., and Schmidt, R. E. 1997. Seasonal presence and movement of fish populations in the tidal reach of Quassaic Creek, a Hudson River tributary (HRM 60): documentation ofpotamodromy, anadromy, and residential components. Section VII in W. C.Nieder and J. R. Waldman (eds.), Final Reports of the Tibor T. Polgar Fellowship Program,
1996. Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
1998. The relationship between fecundity of an alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) spawning population and egg productivity in Quassaic Creek, a Hudson River tributary (HRM 60) in Orange County, New York. Section II in J. R. Waldman and W C. Nieder (eds.), Final Reports of the Tibor T. Polgar Fellowship Program, 1997. Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Leggett, W. C., and Carscadden, J. E. 1978. Latitudinal variation in reproductive characteristics of American shad (Alosa sapidissima): evidence for population specific life history strategies in fish. Journal Fisheries Research Board of Canada 35:1469-78.
Limburg, K. E. 1996. Growth and migration of 0-year American shad (Alosa sapidissima) in the Hudson River estuary: otolith microstructural analysis. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53:220-38.
Limburg, K. E., Pace, M. L., Fischer, D., and Arend, K. E.
1997. Consumption, selectivity, and use of zooplankton by larval striped bass and white perch in a seasonally pulsed estuary. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 126:607-21.
Limburg, K. E., and Schmidt, R. E. 1990. Patterns offish spawning inHudsonRiver tributaries: response to an urban gradient? Ecology 71:1238-45.
LoBue, C., and McKown, K. A. 1998. A study of the striped bass in the Marine District of New York VII. Completion Report for P.L. 89-304, Project AFC 20, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Stony Brook, NY.
Loesch, J. G. 1987. Overview of life history aspects of anadromous alewife and blueback herring in freshwater habitats. American Fisheries Society Symposium 1:89-103.
MacNeill, D. 1998. Research needs for the blue-back herring: a new invader? Dreissena 9(2):5-6, New York Sea Grant, SUNY College at Brockport, Brockport, NY.
Mattes, K. C. 1989. "The ecology of the American eel, Anguilla rostrata (Lesueur), in the Hudson River." Doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York.
Mattson, M. T., Geoghegan, P, andDunning, D. J. 1992. Accuracy of catch per unit effort indices of Atlantic tomcod abundance in the Hudson River, in C. L. Smith (ed.), EstuarineResearch in the1980's. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 323-38.
McLaren, J. B., Cooper J. C., Hoff T. B., and Lander V 1981. Movements of Hudson River striped bass. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 110:158-67.
McLaren, J. B., Peck, T. H., Dey, W. P., and Gardinier, M. 1988. Biology of Atlantic tomcod in the Hudson River estuary. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:102-12.
Nelson, J. S. 1976. Fishes of the World. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Nolan, K., Grossfield, J., andWirgin, I. 1991. Discrimination among Atlantic coast populations of American shad (Alosa sapidissima) using mitochondrial DNA. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48:1724-34.
Oglesby, R. T. 1995. Timing of Phenological Events and Climate Change in the Hudson River Corri-dor.Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Pace, M. L., Baines, S. B.,Cyr, H., and Downing, J. A. 1993. Relationships among early life stages of Morone americana and Morone saxatilis from long-term monitoring of the Hudson River estuary. Canadian Journal ofFisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:1976-85.
Peterson, D. L., Bain, M. B., and Haley, N. 2000. Evidence of declining recruitment of Atlantic stur-geonintheHudsonRiver. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 20:231-8.
Raasch, M. S., and Altemus, Sr, V L. 1991. Delaware's Freshwater and Brackish Water Fishes: A Popular Account. Dover, DE: Dover Litho.
Raney, E. C., Woolcott, W. S., and Mehring, A. G., 1954. Migratory pattern and racial structure of Atlantic coast striped bass. Transactions North American Wildlife Conference 19:376-96.
Rose, F. P 1993. "Have all the smelt gone somewhere? Assessing changes in population size of the rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax)inthe Hudson River estuary." M. S. thesis, Bard College, New York.
Schmidt, R. E. 1996. A catalog of barriers to upstream movements of migratory fishes in Hudson River tributaries. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
1986. Zoogeography of the northern Appalachians, in C. H. Hocutt and E. O. Wiley (eds.), The Zoogeography of North American Freshwater Fishes. New York: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 137-159.
Schmidt, R. E., Klauda, R. J., andBartels, J. M. 1988. Distributions and movements of the early life stages of three species of Alosa in the Hudson River, with comments on mechanisms to reduce interspecific competition, in C. L. Smith (ed.), Fisheries Research in the Hudson River. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 193-215.
Schmidt, R. E., and Lake, T. R. 2000. Alewives in Hudson River Tributaries, Two Years ofSampling.Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Schmidt, R. E., and Limburg, K. 1989. Fishes Spawning in Non-tidal Portions of Hudson River Tributaries. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Scott, W B., and Crossman, E. J. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin 184.
Secor, D. H. 1999. Specifying divergent migrations in the concept of stock: the contingent hypothesis. Fisheries Research 43:13-34.
Secor, D. H., Stevenson, J. T., and Houde, E. D. 1997. Age Structure and Life History Attributes of Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus) in the Hudson River. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Secor, D. H., and Waldman, J. R. 1999. Historical abundance of Delaware Bay Atlantic sturgeon and potential rate of recovery. American Fisheries Society Symposium 23:203-216.
Smith, C. L. 1985. The Inland Fishes of New York State. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY.
Smith, C. L. (ed.). 1988. Fisheries Research in the Hudson River. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Smith, C. L. (ed.). 1992. EstuarineResearch in the1980s. Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Smith, T. I. J. 1985. The fishery, biology, and management ofAtlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrhynchus, inNorth America. Environmental Biology of Fishes 14:61-72.
VanEenennaam, J. P, Doroshov, S. I., Moberg, G. P, Watson, J. G., Moore, D. S., and Linares, J. 1996. Reproductive conditions of the Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus) in the Hudson River. Estuaries 19:769-77.
VanWinkle, W., Kumar, K. D., and Vaughan, D. S. 1988. Relative contributions of Hudson River and Chesapeake Bay striped bass stocks to the Atlantic coast population. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:255-66.
Vargo, J. H. 1995. Hudson River Stripers: The Guide. Beacon, NY: Beacon Publishing Corporation.
Waldman, J. 1999. Heartbeats in the Muck: The History, Sea Life, and Environment of New York Harbor. New York, NY: Lyons Press.
Waldman, J. R., Dunning, D. J., and Mattson, M. T. 1990b. A morphological explanation for size-dependent anchor tag loss from striped bass. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 119:920-23.
Waldman, J. R., Dunning, D. J., Ross, Q. E., andMattson, M. T., 1990a. Range dynamics of Hudson River striped bass along the Atlantic coast. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 119:910-19.
Waldman, J. R., Hart, J. T., and Wirgin, 1.1., 1996a. Stock composition of the New York Bight Atlantic sturgeon fishery based on analysis of mitochondrial DNA. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 125:364-71.
Waldman, J. R., Nolan, K., Hart, J., and Wirgin, I. I. 1996b. Genetic differentiation of three key anadromous fish populations of the Hudson River. Estuaries 19:759-68.
Waldman, J. R., and Vecchio, V. J. 1996. Selected biocharacteristics of hatchery-reared striped bass in New York ocean waters. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16:14-23.
Waldman, J. R., and Wirgin, I. I., 1998. Status and restoration options for Atlantic sturgeon in North America. Conservation Biology 12:631-8.
Walsh, M. G., Bain, M. B., Squiers, Jr., T., Waldman, J. R., and Wirgin, I. 2001. Morphological and genetic variation among shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum from adjacent and distant rivers. Estuaries 24:41-8.
Wells, A. W., Randall, D. M., Dunning, D. J., and Young, J. R. 1991. Dispersal of young-of-the-year hatchery striped bass in the Hudson River. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 11:381-92.
Wirgin, I. I., Grunwald, C., Courtenay, S., Kreamer, G.-L., Reichert, W. L., and Stein, J. 1994. A biomarker approach in assessing xenobiotic exposure in cancer-prone Atlantic tomcod from the North American Atlantic coast. Environmental Health Perspectives 102:764-70.
Wirgin, I., Maceda, L., Waldman, J. R., and Crittenden, R. N. 1993. Use of mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms to estimate the relative contributions of the Hudson River and Chesapeake Bay stocks to the mixed fishery on the Atlantic coast. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122: 669-84.
Wirgin, I. I., Waldman, J. R., Maceda, L., Stabile, J., and Vecchio, V J. 1997. Mixed-stock analysis of Atlantic coast striped bass (Morone saxatilis) using nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA markers. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54:2814-26.
Zeisel, W.1995. Angling on a Changing Estuary: the Hudson River, 1609-1995. Final Report to the Hudson River Foundation, New York, NY.
Zlokovitz, E. R., and Secor, D. H. 1999. Effect of habitat use on PCB body burden in Hudson River striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 56(Supplement 1): 86-93.
Was this article helpful?