Brock, V.E.

Gosline, W.A.

Moore, H.L.

Yamaguchi, Y.

Pacific Science

Gosline, W A

Brock, V E

Moore, H L

Biodiversity Heritage Library OAI Repository

Fishes Killed by the 1950 Eruption of Mauna Loa: I. The Origin and Nature of the Collections

ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i at Manoa

Fishes Killed by the 1950 Eruption of Mauna LoaI. The Origin and Nature of the CollectionsW. A. GOSLINE, V. E. BROCK, H. 1. MOORE,, and Y. YAMAGUCHI1THE GREAT VOLCANO MAUNA LOA playsmany parts in the Hawaiian community. Weare here concerned with its, role as a fishcollecting apparatus. The present paper, whichis the first of a series that will deal with thethe fishes made available to uS by the 1950eruption, is limited to an account of the gen-eral nature of our collections.The Mauna Loa lava flows of June, 1950,reached the sea on the Kona coast of theIsland of Hawaii at three main points (Fig. 1).The first two of these flows dwindled to al-most nothing a short time after entering thewater on the morning of June 2. The thirdflow has far greater significance for us. Itentered the ocean somewhat to the south ofthe other two (at 19°16'N., 155°55'W.) onthe afternoon of the same day. Surges of lavafrom this flow continued to pass into the seain quantity through June 4 and in lesseramounts through June 7.Whenever a heavy surge of lava hit the sea,a large amount of steam rose from the surface(Fig. 2). Between the peaks of the surges, Jatleast during the later stages of the flow, themoving column oElava entered the sea quietly,unexpectedly resembling an escalator disap-pearing through the floor of a departmentstore (Fig. 3). Apparently the failure to causesurface steam at such times was due to thecooling and hardening of the outer layer of1 Universiry of Hawaii; Terrirory ,of Hawaii, Divi-sion of Fish and Game; U. S. Fish andWildlife Service;and Terrirory of Hawaii, Division of Fish and Game,respectively. Manuscript received January 17. 1953.23the lava column into a water-impervious shellthrough which the rest of the lava flowed.(Such conduits, now hollow and sometimesextending for distances Of more than a mile,are well-known features of the Hawaiian ter-restriallandscape.) Since the molten materialflowed continuously without ever filling thisshell, it can be assumed that the lava wasbreaking out somewhere below. Such out-breaks presumably produced steam explo-sions which could be felt even in a skiffanywhere near the flow. However, no steamfrom these assumed outbreaks ever reachedthe surface, nor was this to be expected unlessthey had been very large or very near thesurface.The total amount of lava entering the seafrom the 1950 eruption was estimated byMacdonald and Finch (1950: 1) at over 100million cubic yards.19·IS'-f-----;r---+-I-+-+-++--±:'''bFIG. 1. Land areas covered by the Mauna Loa lavaBows of 1$>19 and 1950. Heights above and below sealevel given in rhousands of feet. Diagonally hatchedareas: 1950 Bows; those that entered the sea are num-bered in the sequence with which they reached sealevel. Stippled area: 1919 Bow. Redrafted in part fromMacdonald and Finch.24FIG. 2. Third lava flow reaching sea level on]une 3.Concerning sea conditions around the lavaflow on June 2, Finch and Macdonald (1950:6) state:By 5:00 P. M. a line of steaming water, markingthe sub-sea coutse of the flow, extended to sea forabout. half a mile from the point where the ... fl'owentered the ocean. Close to the shore and directlyover the submerged flow, the water was boiling,and a semicircular area of hot turbulent water ex-rended for a mile offshore. Many fish were killedand were seen drifring or were washed up on shoreduring succeeding days. The prevailing currentsdrifted the area of hot water southward.On the morning of J uf.le 3 there, was a"windrow" of dead fishes, 2, to 6 feet wideand extending as far as the eye could see,about 2 miles offshore from the flow. Insidethis windrow, which marked a border be-tween murky green and deep blue oceanicwater, were other smaller, linearly arrangedaggregations of dead fishes. At approximatelyhalf a mile from the point of entry of the lava,the water-cooled engine of the boat fromwhich these observations were made becameoverheated.By the afternoon of June 3 the windrowsof fishes had broken up.On June 6 the water in a roughly semi-circular area several miles in radius aroundthe point of entry of the lava was discoloredand of dirty appearance. The relatively rareand scattered fish carcasses were found mostlytoward the periphery of the disturbed area.Water a quarter of a mile from the flow washardly warm, though a slick of upwelled hotPACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. VIII, January, 1954water was still being formed closer in. Themolten lava was still pouring into the seacontinuously (Fig. 3), but in surges of greatlyvarying volume. The average width of thecolumn entering the water at this time wasperhaps about 30 feet.On June 7 lava was entering the sea ingreatly decreased volume and more or lessintermittently, ceasing completely on this dayor the next.Four collections were made of the fishesbrought to the surface of the sea by the 1950lava flows. On the morning or June 2 Brockflew over the area where the lava was enteringthe water and made awingements for collect-ing. In the .afternoon of the same day EugeneBurke and Homer Hayes of the TerritorialDivision ofFish and 'Game took a smallnumber of fishes. On June 3 the U. S. Fishand Wildlife Service vessel "Henry O'Malley,"with Moore as scientist in charge, sent intothe area a small boat from which collections'were made in both the morning and afternoon.On the morning of June 6 Yamaguchi col-,lected from a skiff. That afternoon Gosline,Homer Hayes, and Ed Keen took specimensfrom a sampan owned by Keen. On June 7Hayes and Gosline returned to the area butfound almost nothing. 'Circumstantial evidence' is rather strongthat most of the fishes taken were broughtto the surface during the early middle stagesof the third flow.'We know,that the first stagesof all three flows killed mostly inshore fishes,and we saw few of these. On the other hand,by June 6 relatively few fishes were comingto the surface, though live specimens werestill occasionally seen. Furthermore, speci-mens in the June 6 collections often showedsigns ofmore or less advanced decompo~ition.Some of the fishes in these collections, par-ticularly those taken on the first two dates,are in excellent condition. 'Others are not.Some of the latter were parboiled, some werepartially decomposed, and some were both.The myctophids collected on June 6 gave theimpression that if one looked at them in-Fishes Killed by 1950 Eruption - GOSLINE et at. 25tently their scales would fall off. Neverthe-less, the specimens in these four collectionsare probably in a better sfate of preservationthan is most deep-water fish material.Certain highly desirable data concerningour collections are unobtainable. For onething, little can definitely be said about the.depth from which these fishes came. Some ofour specimens, such as the brotulids, are deep-water bottom forms. Others like the mycto-phids arebathypelagic. A few probablynormally inhabit the surface layers of the openocean. A very few are obviously inshore formswhich had drifted into the area where we werecollecting. The maximum depth at which ourfishes were killed is likewise unknown. Themost that can be said is that the known depth.' records for .such fishes as Opisthoproctus, ofwhich we took five specimens, indicate thatat least some of our material is from ratherdeep water, presumably greater than half amile.We also do not know how representativeour collections af(~ of the total fish faunaliving in the area. Four types of selectivityhave probably restricted the representative-ness of our sample. Two of these are due to'our collecting methods and can be taken intoaccount. First, we made no effort to collectthe obviously inshore forms. Second, smallfishes were almost completely missed becausewe took only what we could see and catchwith a dip net from 'a boat.' The other possibleselective factors are: differential decimationFIG. 3. The third lava flow entering the watet sevetal days later. Photograph by Jack Matsumoto.26among the species in the area and differential 'flotation among the species killed. These lasttwo factors are impossible to evaluate, andthe best that can be done is to point out theirpossible effeds.Death ofthese fishes may have been broughtabout by one or more of four causes: (1) thefishes may have been killed by simple over-heating; (2) the lava entering the water mayhave introduced some directly or indirectlylethal chemical; (3) fishes with an air bladder·may have been carried upward so rapidly bythe upwelling water as to have caused over-expansion of this organ; and (4) the under-water explosions, caused by the breaking outof the molten lava from ;the conduits, mayhave caused some mortality. We do not haveevidence that would make profitable a dis-cussion of any of these possible causes ofdeath. With any of them, however, it wouldseem likely that large fishes would be betterable than smaller ones to move out of theway in time to avoid harm. The differentiaiin decimation between large and small fishesmay have been increased by the possibilitythat the water moving in to replace that. whichhad upwelled carried with it small, weakswimmers from the surrounding region intothe outbreak area.Concerning the possibility of differentialflotation, our only evidence is from the spec-imens we collected. With regard to these, twoquestions arise. What brought them to the .surface, and, once there, why did they notsink back to the bottom? As' to the first, onemight suspect that the water heated by thelava would make its way through the watercolumn above it to the surface, where it wouldspread out as a thin layer. Under such ahypothesis only the fishes from the areaaround. the outbreaks would be brought tothe top. Actually our collections contain epi-pelagic arid a large numb.er of bathypelagicfishes, as well as bottom forms. The presenceof these pelagic species can best be explainedby hypothesizing considerable mixing be-tween the rising water and that around it.PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. VIII, January, 1954It does seem apparent that, regardless oEtheamount of mixing, fishes with a high specificgravity would be less readily transported tothe surface than those with lighter bodies.Likewise, among fishes with the same spec-ific gravity, those with a higher surface-volume ratio, e.g., small fishes, would bemore easily carried in the upwelling waterthan those with a lower surface-volume ratio.It is possible, however, that not all the fisheswe collected were originally brought to thesurface by upwelled water, but rather that,some of them were forced up after death bygases of decomposition.This possibility leads into the question ofwhy fishes were at the surface when we gotthere. Evidence from some of our specimensindicates that their air bladders became over-expanded and remained so after death, servingas floats. However, others show no expansionof an air bladder, and a large number of ourspecimens presumably do not even possessthis organ. The presence of such fishes at thesurface can best be explain~d by hypothesiz-ing the formation of gases in parts of the bodyother than the air bladder. For example, thetwo brotulids we took on June 6 had thebelly (but not the air bladder) greatly dis-tended and empty. Most of our specimens,however, showed no abdominal distension.Whether decomposition gases and air bladderexpansion can explain the presence of all ourfishes at the surface seems open to question.Whatever the full explanation is, it must takeinto account the fact that, with the exceptionof two jellyfishes, we found no organismsother than fishes at the surface.Our four collections together probably to-tal 300 to 500 specimens distributed amongmore than 20 families. Perhaps a third of theindividuals are myctophids. Except' for theMyctophidae, and to a lesser extent the Ster-noptychidae, none of the families is repre-sented by more than a few specimens. Amonggroups unrepresented in our collections aresharks, flatfishes, and angler fishes.In number of species our material wouldFishes Killed by 1950 Eruption - GOSLINE et al. 27seem to be much richer than the number ofindividuals might indicate. For example, eachof the five brotulid specimens represents adifferent species. Such a representation indi-cates the variety of fish life that must existin the deeper waters around Hawaii. Anotherpiece of evidence bears on this same point.In 1922 Jordan reported on seven speciescollected from the sea around the point ofentry of the 1919 lava flow (Fig. 1), six ofwhich he described as new. Of these sevenspecies, at least three and probably six werenot taken by us.There appear to be only two extensive re-ports on the deep-water fishes of the CentralPacific (Gilbert and Cramer, 1896; Gilbert,1905). Both of these are based on dredgehauls made by the "Albatross" in Hawaiianwaters. In the later paper, which summarizesthe results, Gilbert recognizes 111 speciestaken below the 100-fathom line. Since 1905occasional deep-water forms, mostly takenby fishermen, have been added to the Ha-waiian fauna from time· to time. The onlyprevious paper based on Hawaiian fisheskilled by a lava flow is that by Jordan (1922)mentioned above.After the "Albatross" material, the 1950lava-flow collections constitute the most im-portant deep-water fish material yet taken inthe Central Pacific. Their value is enhancedby the fact that, though there is some overlap,the 1950 collections by no means duplicatethose taken by the "Albatross." For example,we took five species of brotulids whereasGilbert did not record any; conversely, inanother bottom-fish group-the flatfishes-Gilbert reported 13 species and we did nottake any. Such examples, though extreme,again indicate the tremendous size of thefauna from which our samples wete drawn.It is planned to publish reports on the va-rious groups in our collections in this journalas they are completed. The section on bro-tulids has been finished and appears elsewherein this issue. Specimens of certain groups havebeen sent out to be worked up by others:the zeoids by Dr. George Myers, the myeto-phids and gonostomatids by Dr. R. L. Bolin,both of Stanford University, and the sterno-ptychids by Miss Janet Haig, of the AllanHancock Foundation.For constructive criticism and help in pre-paring the present paper we wish to thankDr. R. L. Bolin, Dr. C. K. Wentworth, Mr.T. Cromwell, and various members of theUniversity of Hawaii faculty.REFERENCESFINCH, R. H., and G. A. MACDONALD. 1950.The June 1950 eruption of Mauna Loa.Part 1. Narrative of the eruption. The Vol-cano Letter (Honolulu) 508: 1-11.GILBERT, C. H: 1905. The aquatic resourcesof the Hawaiian Islands. Part II. SectionII. The deep-sea fishes. U. S. Fish Comm.,Ett!' for 1903, 23(2): i-xi, 577-713, pIs.66-101.--- and F. CRAMER. 1896. Report on thefishes dredged in deep water near the Ha-waiian Islands, with descriptions and fig-ures of twenty-three new species. U. S. Natl.Mus., Proc. 19: 403--435, pIs. 36--48.JORDAN, D. S. 1922. Description of deep-seafishes from the coast of Hawaii, killed bya lava flow from Mauna Loa. U. S. Natl.Mus., Proc. 59: 643-656.MACDONALD, G. A., and R. H. FINCH.. 1950.The June 1950 eruption of Mauna Loa.Part II. Special features. The Volcano Letter(Honolulu) 509: 1-6.

http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/9057/1/vol8n1-23-27.pdf

Fishes Killed by the 1950 Eruption of Mauna Loa: I. The Origin and Nature of the Collections

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Biodiversity Heritage Library OAI Repository

ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i at Manoa