North Atlantic surface waters. The average 2**:249Pu/8’Cs ratio of 0.0032 for Kwajalein Lagoonis also in good agreementto the averagevalue for open ocean,in contrast to the ratio of 0.07-0.12 in the Bikini and Enewetak Iagoons?. This illustrates that both the 7°*-24¢Puy and the !27Cs content of the lagoon are derived from worldwide fallout. Weare still without an obvious explanation for the discrepancyin thefish-tissue data; that is, why should the Kwajalein fish, in a region of the equatorial Pacific contaminated only by worldwide fallout, have significantly higher body burdens of plutonium than fish in the North Atlantic which is also contaminated only with worldwide fallout? Furthermore, why do the Kwajalein Atoll fish have the same or even higher body burdens than the fish at Enewetak Atoll, where higher levels of plutonium are found in the lagoon? And why were the concentrations in Enewetak Lagoon fish not correlated with those in the specific local environment where they were sampled, or with feeding habit or trophic level? A cursory search of the literature surprisingly revealed only one other relevant fallout report—the plutonium level in the body of a single marine fish in fallout-contaminated waters of the Pacific!?. The plutonium concentration in this sample and the computed concentration factor are closer to those from the North Atlantic fish than to those from Kwajalein. On the other hand, plutonium levels in tissues from catfish from Trombay"’, in plaice from the vicinity of Windscale"4, and in several species from areas of Thuleare higher than those in the tissues of the North Atlantic fish, and close in value to those from Kwajalein and Enewetak. But as the last three sets of data are from areas known to have local plutonium contamination from reprocessing plants (and one nuclear accident), they support our argument that levels of plutonium in fish reflect local environmental levels. To sum up,it appears that available plutonium data from fish tissues are inconsistent. If we accept the available Enewetak and Kwajalein Atoll data as correct, then we can only conclude that the availability to all fish and invertebrates of plutonium from fallout, or for that matter from any local source, depends more on the type of environment than on the plutonium levels in that environment. The data could also suggest that coralatolls may have specific biogeochemical processes that regulate the availability of plutonium regardless of levels in the environment or in food. On the other hand, if we assume that concentrations in fish and invertebrates are proportional] to those in the environment, then we can only conclude that many of the atoll fish data from the laboratories involved in analytical programmes!" are in error. Since there is no other evidence at this time to refute the analytical results from the atolls, we can only urge caution in applying concentration factors measured in one marine area to predict approximate plutonium levels in fish from other marine areas. In addition, it seems, on the basis of the published data!-* and the summary assembled in Table 1, that individuals on Kwajalein Atoll who supplementtheir diet with foods from the local marine environment may have plutonium body burdens similar to the low levels predicted5 for individuals at Enewetak on similardiets. This work was performed under the auspices of the US Energy Research and Development Administration. Received Apni 14; accepted June 26, 1976. 1 Enewetak Radiological Survey, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, Nevada, Rep. NVO-140, I-IIE (1973). . . 2 Miyake, Y., and Sugimura, Y., in /nt. Symp. on Transuranium Nuclides in the Environment, 1975 (int. Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, in the press). 3 Noshkin, V. E., Wong, K. M., Eagle, R. J.,and Gatrousis, C., Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Rep., UCRL-51612 (1974). 4Schell, W. R., and Watters, R. L., Hlth Phys., 29, 589-597 (1975). 5 Wilson, D. W., Ng, Y. C., and Robison, W. L., Hith Phys., 29, 599-611 (1975). 6 Noshkin, V. E., Hlth Phys., 22, 537-549 (1972). 7 Bowen, V. T., Livingston, H. D., and Burke, J.C., in Jat. Symp. on Transuranium Nuclides in the Environment, 1975 (Int. Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, in the Press}. 8 Livingston, H. D., and Bowen, V. T., in Symp. interaction between Water and Living Matter, 1975 (publisher, in the press). 9 Wong, K. M., Analytica chim. Acta, 56, 355-364 (1971). 10 Marsh, K. M., Wong, K. M., Holladay, G., Noshkin, V. E., and Buddemeter, R., Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Rep., CCRL-51913 (1), (1975}. 11 Hardy, E. P., Krey, P. W., and Volchok. H. L., Vature, 241, 444-445 (1973). 12 Pillai, K. C., Smith, R. C.. and Folson, T. R.. Nature, 203, 568-571 (1964). 13 Pillai, K. C., and Mathen, C., in /ar. Symp. Transuranium Nuclides in the Environment, 1975 (int. Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, in the press). 14 Hetherington, J. A., Jefferies, D. F., Mitchell, N. T., Pentreath, R. J., and Woodhead, D. S., in Jat. Symp. Transuranium Nuclides in the Environment, 1975 (Int. Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, in the press). 15 Aarkrog, A.. Hith Phys., 20, 31-47 (1971).