Description of economic data collected with a random sample of commercial reef fish boats in the Florida Keys

This study summarizes the results of a survey designed to provide economic information about the financial status of commercial reef fish boats with homeports in the Florida Keys. A survey questionnaire was administered in the summer and fall of 1994 by interviewers in face-to-face meetings with owners or operators of randomly selected boats. Fishermen were asked for background information about themselves and their boats, their capital investments in boats and equipment, and about their average catches, revenues, and costs per trip for their two most important kinds of fishing trips during 1993 for species in the reef fish fishery. Respondents were characterized with regard to their dependence on the reef fish fishery as a source of household income. Boats were described in terms of their physical and financial characteristics. Different kinds of fishing trips were identified by the species that generated the greatest revenue. Trips were grouped into the following categories: yellowtail snapper (Ocyurus chrysurus); mutton snapper (Lutjanus analis), black grouper (Mycteroperca bonaci), or red grouper (Epinephelus morio); gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus); deeper water groupers and tilefishes; greater amberjack (Seriola dumerili); spiny lobster (Panulirus argus); king mackerel (Scomberomorus cavalla); and dolphin (Coryphaena hippurus). Average catches, revenues, routine trip costs, and net operating revenues per boat per trip and per boat per year were estimated for each category of fishing trips. In addition to its descriptive value, data collected during this study will aid in future examinations of the economic effects of various regulations on commercial reef fish fishermen.(PDF file contains 48 pages.

The Flow of South Carolina Harvested Seafood Products through South Carolina Markets

Marketing,

Report of the National Blue Crab Industry Workshop: September 10-11, 1977 Charleston, South Carolina

The National Blue Crab Industry Workshop was held on September 10-11, 1977 at the South Carolina Marine Resources Center of the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department in Charleston, South Carolina. The workshop was organized to address the blue crab industry\u27s major problem areas and stimulate innovative thinking for improving productivity. The problems faced by the blue crab industry are not necessarily unique compared to other food industries; consequently, methodology to mitigate these problems will probably be transferred from other industries. Much of what was discussed in the technology corrnnittees has been faced by other industries, although recent food processing and discharge regulations seem like an especially heavy load for the small blue crab entrepreneurs. The _Report does bring coherency to describing these problems by blending the opinions and expertise of industry members, researchers and public sector administrators. Interwoven with these problems is the increased strain upon the public sector to squeeze more out of the blue crab resource for different users. Admittedly, the connnonwealth resource nature does superimpose an uniqueness to rectifying some industry problems which hinder economic productivity

Investigating Marine Recreational Fishing Stakeholders\u27 Perspectives Across Three South Carolina Coastal Regions: The First Step Towards Collaboration

Collaborative endeavors are increasingly utilized to assure active involvement of local stakeholders in natural resource planning and management. In order to enhance collaborative capacity and involve marine recreational anglers in resource management, the South Carolina Sea Grant Extension Program conducted semi-structured interviews in three coastal regions of South Carolina in order to determine: 1) the main problems associated with marine recreation fishing and 2) key non-regulatory solutions to those problems. Top themes for problems and non-regulatory solutions across each region as well as implications for Extension and outreach opportunities are included

Molecular preservation by extraction and fixation, mPREF: a method for small molecule biomarker analysis and histology on exactly the same tissue

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Histopathology is the standard method for cancer diagnosis and grading to assess aggressiveness in clinical biopsies. Molecular biomarkers have also been described that are associated with cancer aggressiveness, however, the portion of tissue analyzed is often processed in a manner that is destructive to the tissue. We present here a new method for performing analysis of small molecule biomarkers and histology in exactly the same biopsy tissue.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Prostate needle biopsies were taken from surgical prostatectomy specimens and first fixed, each in a separate vial, in 2.5 ml of 80% methanol:water. The biopsies were fixed for 24 hrs at room temperature and then removed and post-processed using a non-formalin-based fixative (UMFIX), embedded, and analyzed by hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and by immunohistochemical (IHC) staining. The retained alcohol pre-fixative was analyzed for small molecule biomarkers by mass spectrometry.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>H&E analysis was successful following the pre-fixation in 80% methanol. The presence or absence of tumor could be readily determined for all 96 biopsies analyzed. A subset of biopsy sections was analyzed by IHC, and cancerous and non-cancerous regions could be readily visualized by PIN4 staining. To demonstrate the suitability for analysis of small molecule biomarkers, 28 of the alcohol extracts were analyzed using a mass spectrometry-based metabolomics platform. All extracts tested yielded successful metabolite profiles. 260 named biochemical compounds were detected in the alcohol extracts. A comparison of the relative levels of compounds in cancer containing <it>vs</it>. non-cancer containing biopsies showed differences for 83 of the compounds. A comparison of the results with prior published reports showed good agreement between the current method and prior reported biomarker discovery methods that involve tissue destructive methods.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The Molecular Preservation by Extraction and Fixation (mPREF) method allows for the analysis of small molecule biomarkers from exactly the same tissue that is processed for histopathology.</p

Modernization and Its Discontents

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67022/2/10.1177_000276427702100208.pd