33 There is, however, enother factor which appears to be considerable imrortance. of This is the effect of distribution of activity in the water with depth on the activity in the plankton semple. The plankton samrle ia taken from 4& water layer at a depth of 200 meters to the surface. The water sam- ples are taken at discrete depths down to 150 meters. lowing uncertainties sre therefore method. First, inherent The fol- in the sampling there is not a uniform decrease of activity with depth (Pigs. 8 and 9). There are, indeed, changes with depth which range from & sharp decrease from the surface to 25 meters to the other extreme where there are sharp increases at aderth of 100 metars. are taken et discrete Secondly, intervsls since the weter samples of 25 to 50 meters, the pre- sent data do not permit ruling out the possibility that extremes of activity in narrow regions cietort the total picture at a given station elther by being missed completely or being overemphasized. And thirdly, there is no guarantee that the plankton is uniformly distributed throughout the depth which is sam;led by the plankton net. There is, for example, some evidence that a change in the vertical distribution of the plankton population occurs from hours of daylight to hours of darkness. The diurnal-nocturnal difference in ratio of activ- DOE ARCHIVE {ty in surface plankton (material on filter papers) to that in the surface water is significant at stations 1-30, which for the most part show a sharp decrease in activity in the water from the surface to 25 meters, and no subsequent increase. WNo such significant difference was found at the remaining stations, 37

Select target paragraph3