From marine ecology to biological oceanography

HELGOI.~NDER MEERESUNTERSUCHUNGEN Helgol6nder Meeresunters. 49, 29-44 (1995)

From marine e c o l o g y to biological oceanography

Eric

L.

Mills

Department of Oceanography, Dalhousie University; Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4Jl Canada

ABSTRACT: Looking back from the 1990s it s e e m s natural to view the work done in the Biologische Anstalt Helgoland by Friedrich Heincke a n d his colleagues, b e g i n n i n g in 1892, as marine ecology or marine biology, and that done in Kiel, u n d e r Victor H e n s e n and Karl Brandt, as biological oceanography. But historical analysis shows this view to b e untenable. Biological oceanography, as a research category and a profession, does not a p p e a r until at least the 1950's. In the G e r m a n tradition of marine research, "Ozeanographie", originating in 19th century physical geography, did not include the biological sciences. The categories " M e e r e s k u n d e " and "Meeresforschung" covered all aspects of marine research in Germany from the 1890's to the present day. "Meeresbiologie" like that of Brandt. Heincke, and other G e r m a n marine scientists, fitted comfortably into these. But in North America no such satisfactory professional or definitional structure existed before the late 1950's. G.A. Riley, one of the first biological oceanographers, fought against descriptive, non- quantitative American ecology. In 1951 he described biological oceanography as the "ecology of marine populations", linking it with quantitative population ecology in the U.S.A. By the e n d of the 1960's the U.S. National Science Foundation had recognized biological o c e a n o g r a p h y as a research area supported separately from marine biology. There was no n e e d for the category "biological oceanography" in G e r m a n marine science b e c a u s e its subject matter lay u n d e r the umbrella of " M e e r e s k u n d e " or "Meeresforschung". But in North America biological o c e a n o g r a p h y - a funda- mental fusion of physics and chemistry with marine biology - was created to give this marine science a status higher than that of the conceptually overloaded ecological sciences. The sociologists Durk- heim and Mauss claimed in 1903 that, "the classification of things reproduces the classification of m e n " ; similarly, m science, the classification of professions reproduces the status that their prac- titioners hope to achieve.

" T h e m a r i n e b i o l o g i s t i n p a r t i c u l a r will c o n t i n u e to b e a p o w e r f u l ally to t h e o c e a n o g r a p h e r = for, in a n y e x p e d i t i o n h e m a y u n d e r t a k e s t r i c t l y o c e a n o g r a p h i c o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e e s s e n t i a l to his b i o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s . H e will. a s i n t h e p a s t , m a k e i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s to o c e a n o g r a p h y , a l t h o u g h e n g a g e d u n d e r t h e b a n n e r of m a r i n e b i o l o g y " (H. A. M a r m e r , 1934. p. 34)

D E F I N I N G O C E A N O G R A P H Y

V i e w e d f r o m 1992, 100 y e a r s a f t e r t h e f o r m a t i o n of t h e B i o l o g i s c h e A n s t a l t H e I g o - l a n d , it is e a s y to s e e H e l g o l a n d a s t h e l o c a t i o n of a s u c c e s s i o n of i m p o r t a n t s t u d i e s i n m a r i n e b i o l o g y , w h i l e , o n l y 150 k i l o m e t r e s to t h e e a s t , i n Kiel, a n e w s c i e n t i f i c d i s c i p l i n e , b i o l o g i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h y , w a s e v o l v i n g . B u t t h i s is a f a c i l e a n d p r e s e n t - c e n t e r e d v i e w t h a t is n o t b o r n e o u t b y h i s t o r i c a l a n a l y s i s . If w e l o o k at l a t e 19th c e n t u r y H e l g o l a n d a n d Kiel t h r o u g h t h e h i s t o r i c a l m i c r o s c o p e , d i s c i p l i n a r y b o u n d a r i e s b l u r a n d o u r l a t e 2 0 t h c e n t u r y

categories b e c o m e anachronistic, e v e n d a m a g i n g , to a full u n d e r s t a n d i n g of h o w a n d w h y professions evolved in m a r i n e sciences d u r i n g the late d e c a d e s of the 19th c e n t u r y a n d the first three d e c a d e s of our o w n century.

E x a m i n i n g the word " o c e a n o g r a p h y " gives us a clue a b o u t how n o t to p r o c e e d in u n d e r s t a n d i n g the relationship b e t w e e n m a r i n e biology a n d o c e a n o g r a p h y . Let m e b e g i n with a series of definitions or e x p l a n a t i o n s of that word, chronologically ordered, with the u n d e r s t a n d i n g that a definition is a n a t t e m p t to create a classification - t h a t is, to m a k e order by categorizing e v e n t s or t h i n g s i n the world - w h e t h e r that world b e of the p r e s e n t or of the past.

In late 19th c e n t u r y G e r m a n science, as Paffen a n d Kortum (1984) h a v e shown, " O c e a n o g r a p h i e " , the study of the oceans, was a b r a n c h of physical g e o g r a p h y . It is no a c c i d e n t that Otto Krfimmel (whose early collaboration with Georg v o n B o g u s l a w s k i led to the o u t s t a n d i n g texts " H a n d b u c h der O z e a n o g r a p h i e " (1887, 1907, 1911), w a s Profes- sor of G e o g r a p h y at the University of Kiel. A n d if we look at other books of the period (e.g. Jilek, 1857; Attlmayr, 1883), we find that they are largely descriptive a c c o u n t s of the s h a p e a n d disposition of the h y d r o s p h e r e , often for a p p h e d purposes (the e d u c a t i o n of n a v a l officers), a n d not accounts of oceanic dynamics. Only in K r t i m m e l ' s last v o l u m e (1911) did d y n a m i c a l physical o c e a n o g r a p h y , o r i g i n a t i n g in S c a n d i n a v i a . b e g i n to appear. Biology was not included.

The geophysical stamp is e v i d e n t also i n E n g h s h - l a n g u a g e writings. W. A. H e r d m a n , f o u n d e r of the first Chair of O c e a n o g r a p h y i n the E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g world (in 1919) ~ a n d its first i n c u m b e n t , who k n e w a n d u n d e r s t o o d G e r m a n work on the sea, wrote of " O c e a n o g r a p h y the Science of the S e a . . . " which to him i n c l u d e d "the s t u d y of the sea in all aspects - physical chemical a n d biological" (Herdman. 1923 p. 1). His successor in Liverpool, J a m e s J o h n s t o n e , a zoologist a n d fisheries biologist (Cole, 1934) r e m a i n e d well w i t h i n the G e r m a n tradition. J o h n s t o n e was c o g n i z a n t of the fact that m a r i n e b i o l o g y h a d contributed more to o c e a n s c i e n c e b y the 1920's than h a d physics a n d chemistry; n o n e t h e l e s s , his text "An i n t r o d u c t i o n to o c e a n o g r a p h y " (1923) dealt with o c e a n o g r a p h y descriptively, as physical g e o g r a p h y . In a later text, "A study of the o c e a n s " he wrote of "... the physical g e o g r a p h y of the o c e a n - that is, the m o d e r n science of o c e a n o g r a p h y " (Johnstone, 1926 p.v.), as o u t h n i n g k n o w l e d g e of the o c e a n s from the G r e e k s to the 19th c e n t u r y explorers. But more w a s at stake, for i n 1923 (p.xi) he h a d w r i t t e n that "... the science [of o c e a n o g r a p h y ] b l e n d s into m a r i n e biology in such a n i n t i m a t e m a n n e r that two h n e s of t r e a t m e n t are n o w quite necessary: Physical O c e a n o g r a p h y o n the o n e h a n d a n d H y d r o b i o l o g y on the other".

In a c o m m e m o r a t i o n of J o h n s t o n e ' s career, p u b h s h e d in 1934, the A m e r i c a n tidal expert H. A. M a r i n e r took a view of o c e a n o g r a p h y quite different from that of Johnstone. He v i e w e d it as "a congeries of sciences, h a ~ n g different v i e w p o i n t s a n d d e m a n d i n g diverse disciphnes" (Marmer. 1934, p. 24}, b u t a l t h o u g h m a r i n e biology h a d b e e n d o m i n - a n t in its early years, the e m p h a s i s h a d (deservedly) c h a n g e d : "the a p p h c a t i o n of m a t h e m a t i c s h a s c h a n g e d o c e a n o g r a p h y from a descriptive science i n t o a m a t h e m a t i c a l physical science" (Marmer, 1934, p. 28). T h e d a y of m a r i n e biology i n o c e a n o g r a p h y was over; the time h a d come to r e g a r d "... o c e a n o g r a p h y as a g e o p h y s i c a l science, s e p a r a t e from m a r i n e biology" (Marmer, 1934, p. 33).

From m a r i n e e c o l o g y to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y 31

w h i c h h a d b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d to m a k e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s on d e v e l o p m e n t of the m a r i n e sciences, H. B. B i g e l o w of H a r v a r d took a b r o a d e r view:

... in the further d e v e l o p m e n t of sea s c i e n c e the k e y n o t e must be physical, c h e m i c a l a n d biological unity, not diversity, for e v e r y t h i n g that takes place in the s e a within the r e a l m of a n y one of t h e s e artificially d i v o r c e d sciences i m p i n g e s u p o n all the rest of them. In a word, until n e w vistas d e v e l o p , w e b e l i e v e that our v e n t u r e s in o c e a n o g r a p h y will be m o s t profitable if w e r e g a r d the sea as dynamic, not as s o m e t h i n g static, and if w e focus our a t t e n t i o n on the cycle of fife a n d e n e r g y as a w h o l e in t h e sea, instead of confining our i n d i v i d u a l outlook to o n e or a n o t h e r restricted phase, w h e t h e r it b e biologic, physical, c h e m i c a l or geologic. This applies to e v e r y o c e a n o g r a p h e r : e v e r y o n e of us, if he is to d r a w the veil b a c k w a r d at all, must t h i n k a n d w o r k in s e v e r a l disciplines. H e m u s t be either s o m e t h i n g of a J a c k - o f - all-trades or so closely in t u n e with c o l l e a g u e s w o r k i n g in other disciplines that all can pull t o g e t h e r (Bigelow, 1930, p. 86).

Any other a p p r o a c h would h i n d e r s c i e n c e m B i g e l o w s v i e w by "setting us b a c k - w a r d to the s t a g e of simply g a t h e r i n g a n d a c c u m u l a t i n g facts in u n r e l a t e d c a t e g o r i e s " (Bigelow. 1930. p. 89).

T h e p r e e m i n e n t North A m e r i c a n o c e a n o g r a p h e r and m o u l d e r of the s c i e n c e w a s actually a E u r o p e a n , H. U, Sverdrup, director of the Scripps Institution of O c e a n o g r a p h y b e t w e e n 1936 a n d 1947. S v e r d r u p b r o a d e n e d the curriculum of the s t r u g g l i n g Institution, took its r e s e a r c h to sea (in collaboration w i t h state and federal agencies), a n d w o r k e d w i t h his c o l l e a g u e s Martin J o h n s o n a n d Richard F l e m i n g to publish the first m o d e r n text. " T h e oceans. T h e i r physics, c h e m i s t r y a n d g e n e r a l biology" (1942). S v e r d r u p h a d b e g u n his c a r e e r as a m e t e o r o l o g i s t w i t h V~ F. K. Bjerknes. Later he b e c a m e i n t e r e s t e d in o c e a n circulation as a result of his e x p e r i e n c e s on A m u n d s e n ' s " M a u d " in the Arctic, 1918-1925 (Mills. 1991, pp. 261-265). H e c r e d i t e d H e n r y B i g e l o w with c o n v i n c i n g h i m of the n e e d for unity in s t u d y i n g the oceans. As he w r o t e in i n t r o d u c i n g " T h e o c e a n s " : " O c e a n o g r a - p h y e m b r a c e s all studies p e r t a i n i n g to t h e s e a a n d i n t e g r a t e s the k n o w l e d g e g a i n e d in the m a r i n e s c i e n c e s that d e a l w i t h such subjects as o c e a n b o u n d a r i e s a n d bottom t o p o g r a p h y , the physics and c h e m i s t r y of sea water, the types of current, a n d the m a n y p h a s e s of m a r i n e biology", (Sverdrup et al.. 1942. p. 1; see also Sverdrup, 1947. p. 78). This was not a v i e w p o i n t he h a d b r o u g h t from Europe, w h e r e , as he said, " . . . t h e r e has b e e n a t e n d e n c y to d r a w a line b e t w e e n p h y s i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h y and the o t h e r m a r i n e sciences, a t e n d e n c y w h i c h m a y b e illustrated by the fact that t h e r e the t e r m o c e a n o g r a - p h y is g e n e r a l l y limited in m e a n i n g to the physics of the s e a only" (Sverdrup, 1955, p. 288).

b a c t e r i o l o g y to zoology, plus the c h e m i c a l a n d p h y s i c a l sciences. N e a r l y 50 y e a r s later, Gfinther Dietrich's influential text " A l l g e m e i n e M e e r e s k u n d e . Eine E i n f f i h r u n g in die O z e a n o g r a p h i e " (first edition 1957) i n t r o d u c e d " O z e a n o g r a p h i e " as a d i s c i p l i n e that h a d e v o l v e d from a c o m p o n e n t of g e o g r a p h y into a g e o p h y s i c a l science, by b e c o m i n g i n c r e a s i n g l y quantitative. In this a n d the s e c o n d edition (1965), Dietrich m a d e a conces- sion to b i o l o g y by i n c l u d i n g a c h a p t e r (written b y Kurt Kalle) on cycles of m a t e r i a l in the sea, but b i o l o g y p l a y e d a small part in his M e e r e s k u n d e . It is not t h a t " b i o l o g i s c h e M e e r e s k u n d e " does not exist in Dietrich's w o r l d of the o c e a n s - rather t h a t the p r o p e r study of m a r i n e s c i e n c e is the m e d i u m itself; sea w a t e r a n d its p r o p e r t i e s . " O z e a n o g - r a p h i e " g i v e s w a y to the m o r e i n c l u s i v e " M e e r e s f o r s c h u n g " ( e q u i v a l e n t to M e e r e s - kunde) w h i c h

... g e h t es u m d e n Stoff, n~mlich u m das M e e r w a s s e r u n d alle in i h m g e l 6 s t e n u n d s c h w e b e n d e n S u b s t a n z e n , es g e h t ihr f e r n e r u m d e n Raum, d e n das M e e r w a s s e r ausftillt, u m die L e b e w e s e n , die d i e s e n R a u m bev61kern, und u m d i e E n e r g i e , die d e m M e e r e zur V e r f ~ g u n g steht (Dietrich, 1970, p. 9).

Stoff, Raum, L e b e w e s e n , E n e r g i e - the c o m p o n e n t s of a c o m p r e h e n s i v e s c i e n c e of the sea - not O z e a n o g r a p h i e , but M e e r e s f o r s c h u n g or M e e r e s k u n d e .

T h e s e e x a m p l e s of definitions of o c e a n o g r a p h y {or its s e e m i n g cognates), w h i c h are not i n t e n d e d to b e a synoptic c a t a l o g u e , s h o w the futility of a t t e m p t i n g to i m p o s e strict definitions - or any rigid c I a s s i f i c a t i o n - u p o n s c i e n c e s that h a v e b e e n in constant d e v e l o p m e n t a n d in dispute since the 1880's. T h e r e are not s t a n d a r d definitions or classifications of s u c h disciplines as " o c e a n o g r a p h y " , " M e e r e s k u n d e " , " M e e r e s f o r - s c h u n g " , " m a r i n e biology" or "biological o c e a n o g r a p h y " , nor should w e i m p o s e them. Instead. e a c h is a nest of historical p r o b l e m s r e q u i r i n g investigation.

T H E C L A S S I F I C A T I O N O F T H I N G S A N D T H E C L A S S I F I C A T I O N O F M E N

This p a p e r is an a t t e m p t to outline the p a r a m e t e r s of a historical study, a n d it offers a m o d e l of d e v e l o p m e n t in the m a r i n e sciences. It is b a s e d on t h e fact that t h e w e l l - k n o w n a n d w i d e l y - u s e d [ate 20th c e n t u r y t e r m " b i o l o g i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h y " is virtually a b s e n t from the E u r o p e a n m a n n e s c i e n c e literature, a n d is v e r y s e l d o m u s e d in English- l a n g u a g e writings on the m a r i n e s c i e n c e s until after the m i d d l e of the 20th c e n t u r y 2. As m y e x a m p l e s of the u s e of t h e w o r d " o c e a n o g r a p h y " h a v e shown, definitions a n d classifications - any static t a x o n o m y of the m a r i n e s c i e n c e s - will not do. T h e u s a g e s a r e too v a r i e d a n d too d e p e n d e n t u p o n c o n t e x t - or p e r h a p s u p o n w h i m - to b e satisfying. A causal a n a l y t i c a l a p p r o a c h is n e e d e d to r e s o l v e the forces at w o r k g o v e r n i n g h o w professions in the m a r i n e sciences w e r e e s t a b l i s h e d , elaborated, m o d i f i e d a n d n a m e d .

From m a r i n e e c o l o g y to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y 33

(1974) m o d e l of scientific k n o w l e d g e , a c c o r d i n g to w h i c h our systematic k n o w l e d g e of the world is an i n t e r c o n n e c t e d n e t w o r k of i d e a s and r e s p o n s e s to nature, h e l d stable by social c o n v e n t i o n s ( c o h e r e n c e conditions). K n o w l e d g e , i n c l u d i n g our classification of the e x t e r n a l world, is n e i t h e r totally socially c o n t i n g e n t nor g o v e r n e d u n e q u i v o c a l l y by facts from nature. I n s t e a d it arises as a c o m p l e x i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n natural reality, p s y c h o l o g - ical p e r c e p t u a l factors, a n d the b o u n d s a n d forms i m p o s e d by the societies in w h i c h w e operate. T h e result is, as Bloor (1982, p. 293) has stated, that " k n o w l e d g e is a c h a n n e l w h i c h can c o n v e y two signals at o n c e " . Thus w e can e x p e c t scientists' classifications of their professions to r e p r e s e n t both the n a t u r a l reality dealt with by those professions and the n e e d s a n d aspirations of their practitioners. E x a m i n e d in this light, m a r i n e b i o l o g y a n d o c e a n o g r a p h y h a v e a g o o d d e a l to tell us a b o u t the d e v e l o p m e n t of s c i e n c e a n d its context.

KIEL, H E L G O L A N D , A N D T H E I N T E R N A T I O N A L C O U N C I L

By 1892 the scientific direction of m a r i n e r e s e a r c h in Kiel h a d p a s s e d from Victor H e n s e n to Karl Brandt. In 1888 Brandt a n d Carl A p s t e i n b e g a n the l e n g t h y series of cruises a n d p l a n k t o n s a m p l e s that w o u l d e v e n t u a l l y s h o w the u b i q u i t y a n d the u n i q u e - ness of the spring b l o o m a n d call for its e x p l a n a t i o n . But the P l a n k t o n - E x p e d i t i o n of 1889 to the o p e n Atlantic p r o d u c e d the most i n t r i g u i n g problems. Why, contrary to e x p e c t a - tion, was the o p e n o c e a n m o r e p l a n k t o n - r i c h in h i g h n o r t h e r n latitudes t h a n in the tropics? Within a few years (when h e h a d r e c o g n i z e d that the spatial v a r i a t i o n s of a b u n d a n c e o b s e r v e d in the o p e n o c e a n h a d the s a m e g o v e r n i n g factors as s e a s o n a l variations e v i d e n t n e a r Kiel), Brandt e m b a r k e d on a q u e s t for c h e m i c a l a n d physical controls of p l a n k t o n a b u n d a n c e s . C h e m i s t r y a n d the n i t r o g e n cycle w e r e t h e k e y s (Mills, 1989. Chs. 2-51.

Uniting t h e r e s o u r c e s of his Zoological Institute at Kiel. the Kiel C o m m i s s i o n . and the n e w G e r m a n commismon e s t a b l i s h e d to w o r k within the I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o u n c i l for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) b e g m n i n g in 1902. Brandt a n d his c o l l e a g u e s had w o r k e d out a coherent, c h e m i c a l l y a n d physically b a s e d t h e o r y of the control of p l a n k t o n a b u n d a n c e in the sea by 1910. And, as Brandt's s u m m a r y (1921) of his w o r k shows a lot else was g o i n g on at Kiel. r a n g i n g from h y d r o g r a p h y to m a r i n e b o t a n y a n d bacteriology. This b r o a d r a n g e of activities - M e e r e s f o r s c h u n g - a n s w e r e d q u e s t i o n s a b o u t the sea. classified m a r i n e organisms, and p r o v i d e d o c c u p a t i o n s for a r a n g e of i n v e s t i g a t o r s - from hireling c h e m i s t s to students, P r i v a t d o z e n t e n . a n d Professors such as B r a n d t himself. W e r e w e a n a c h r o n i s t i c a l l y inclined, w e could call Brandt a n d the Kiel School biological o c e a n o g r a p h e r s . This w o u l d m a k e p e r f e c t s e n s e in a m o d e r n context.

With the s u p p o r t of the Emperor. the Kultusminister a n d his officials, the A k a d e m i e der Wissenschaften, the D e u t s c h e F i s c h e r e i - V e r e i n (Sektion fiir Hochseefischerei), a n d others, a n advisory committee ( i n c l u d i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the Kiel Commission) com- pleted a p l a n for a laboratory on H e l g o l a n d by the s u m m e r of 1891 It was u n d e r w a y a n d g r o w i n g a y e a r later (Kofoid, 1910, pp. 221-222; H e i n c k e . 1893), despite some opposition (Werner, 1992). From the start, H e i n c k e h a d a m b i t i o u s p l a n s for the laboratory, which, like the M a r i n e Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole, the Plymouth Laboratory, a n d W.C. McIntosh's Gatty M a r i n e Laboratory in Scotland he c o n s i d e r e d to be a m a n n e agricul- tural station (Heincke, 1896. p.4). Using pure a n d applied biology, the H e l g o l a n d laboratory w o u l d p r o m o t e k n o w l e d g e of the G e r m a n North Sea fishery (Heincke, 1897, p. 579). H e i n c k e ' s first, b r e a t h t a k i n g l y ambitious list of aims r a n g e d from r e s e a r c h on the p r o d u c t i o n of c o m m e r c i a l fish, to p r o v i d i n g courses for fishermen (Heincke, 1896, p. 3). Publication would be eased b y e s t a b l i s h i n g a special section of the Kiel C o m m i s s i o n s

"Wissenschaftliche M e e r e s u n t e r s u c h u n g e n " .

T h e long history of the Biologische A n s t a l t H e l g o l a n d on the i s l a n d a n d in e x p a n d e d form on Sylt a n d the m a i n l a n d (outlined b y B i i c k m a n n , 1959; Bulnheim, 1989. 1990), its work easily c h a r a c t e r i z e d n o w as m a r i n e biology, was b a s e d on H e i n c k e ' s early aims of a d v a n c i n g k n o w l e d g e of the North Sea fishery 4 But in the early days, success r e q u i r e d cooperation a n d collaboration with other agencies, such as the Kiel C o m m i s s i o n w h i c h was a competitor for resources such as m o n e y , ship-time a n d personnel. From its start m 1894, H e i n c k e enlisted the support of the Deutsche Seefischerei-Verein a n d its President W a l t h e r Herwig, who later b e c a m e P r e s i d e n t of the Deutsche Kommission ffir inter- n a t i o n a l e M e e r e s f o r s c h u n g , the G e r m a n arm of ICES ISmed, 1990). H e i n c k e was a p p o i n t e d to the Kiel C o m m i s s i o n by the Minister of Agriculture i n 1893, in a n a t t e m p t to e n s u r e that H e l g o l a n d a n d Kiel collaborated rather t h a n competed To a g r e a t e x t e n t this succeeded, partly d u e to collaboration, a n d partly d u e to the different o r i e n t a t i o n s d e v e l o p e d by the two institutions. W h e n in 1901 Helgoland a n d Kiel d i v i d e d up the G e r m a n work for ICES, H e i n c k e a n d a colleague w e r e r e s p o n s i b l e for t h e food-fishes Brandt for the g e n e r a l biology, a n d Krfimmel for m e t e o r o l o g y a n d h y d r o g r a p h y (Brandt, 1921, p, 78). We k n o w little of how this actually worked, b u t there are i n d i c a t i o n s that H e l g o l a n d a n d Kiet did not always he d o w n together quietly; despite their division of labour, Brandt refers to a g r e e m e n t b e i n g n e c e s s a r y b e t w e e n the two to avoid "splinter- ing" G e r m a n m a r i n e research (Brandt. 1921, pp. 76-77). The Kiel C o m m i s s i o n after all, h a d b e g u n w o r k on the Baltic fishery a n d e x t e n d e d its work to the North Sea (Mills, 1989, Ch. 1) before the H e l g o l a n d laboratory w a s established. Only slowly, a n d after I892, did the work of the two institutions d i v e r g e significantly, into w h a t w e m i g h t n o w call m a r i n e biology, fisheries b i o l o g y a n d biological o c e a n o g r a p h y .

For the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Council itself, after its formation in 1902, the p r o b l e m w a s n o t the division of l a b o u r b u t of b r i n g i n g the scientific work t o g e t h e r into t h e s y n t h e s i s e n v i s i o n e d b y its founders, T h e y h a d s t a t e d that

From m a r i n e ecology to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y 35

b e t w e e n these two m a i n d i v i s i o n s . . . (ICES, 1902, q u o t e d by Sverdrup et al., 1942, p. 1).

But as Sverdrup k n e w (see q u o t a t i o n earlier), in Europe this was easier to say t h a n to achieve. Despite the early exhortations of J o h a n Hjort a n d the later c o n v e n i n g of special m e e t i n g s to relate fisheries p r o b l e m s to physical o c e a n o g r a p h y (outlined b y Sinclair et al., 1987, Ch. 2 a n d App. 1-4), physical o c e a n o g r a p h e r s a n d m a r i n e biologists f o u n d it hard to ask the same questions, or e v e n to find ways of talking the s a m e scientific l a n g u a g e (Sverdrup, 1951). In 1950, after d e c a d e s of similar pleas, K. A. A n d e r s o n , the President of ICES, entitled his address at the a n n u a l m e e t i n g " C o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n biologists a n d h y d r o g r a p h e r s " , calling for "a still closer liaison b e t w e e n h y d r o g r a p h y a n d biology" to e x p l a i n the distribution of herring. O c e a n o g r a p h e r s a n d biologists in Europe still f o u n d it easier in 1950 - p e r h a p s p r e f e r a b l e - to m a i n t a i n their distinctiveness rather t h a n to form p e r m a n e n t liaisons or to fuse their interests.

O C E A N O G R A P H Y IN THE NEW WORLD

H e n r y Bigelow b e g a n work on the Gulf of M a i n e in 1912. T a k i n g time from his t e a c h i n g duties at Harvard, he d e l i n e a t e d c h a n g e s in the p l a n k t o n a n d n u t r i e n t c o n t e n t of the waters, a n d little b y little arrived at a qualitative description of their circulation (Bigelow, 1926a, b). G e t t i n g the work d o n e r e q u i r e d m e a n s b e y o n d his own: he was forced into a n alliance with the U.S. Fish Commission (later the B u r e a u of C o m m e r c i a l Fisheries) for ships a n d e q u i p m e n t . T h e relationship was n e v e r perfect, c h a n g e d with the political winds, a n d f r e q u e n t l y drew Bigelow into work that he r e g a r d e d as p e r i p h e r a l to his m a i n interests (Brosco, 1989). Bigelow's o p p o r t u n i t y to release his b r a n d of m a r i n e science from its reliance on g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s came in 1927, w h e n the U.S. N a t i o n a l A c a d e m y of Sciences established a C o m m i t t e e on O c e a n o g r a p h y (NASCO), chaired by F. R Lillie of the MBL in Woods Hole. to report on "the scope, economic i m p o r t a n c e a n d p r e s e n t status of o c e a n o g r a p h y , with r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s as to how this science m a y more effectively be e n c o u r a g e d in America" (Bigelow, 1930, pp. 84-85). Bigelow. as secretary of NASCO. wrote the report, m u c h of which w a s p u b l i s h e d u n d e r his n a m e , as " O c e a n o g r a p h y . Its scope, problems, a n d e c o n o m i c i m p o r t a n c e " in 1931. T h e i m m e d i a t e outcome of N A S C O ' s report was the f o u n d i n g of the Woods Hole O c e a n o g r a p h i c Institution in 1930, significant grants to the University of W a s h i n g t o n a n d the B e r m u d a Biological Station, a n d a modest g r a n t to the Scripps Institution of O c e a n o g r a p h y , d i s a p p o i n t i n g its director, T. W. V a u g h a n .

B i g e l o w ' s r e p o r t for N A S C O p r o v i d e d a p r o f e s s i o n a l raison d ' 6 t r e t h a t w a s not only s a n c t i o n e d b y the N a t i o n a l A c a d e m y of S c i e n c e s b u t g i v e n financial s u p p o r t b y the w e a l t h of the Rockefeller F o u n d a t i o n . O c e a n o g r a p h y w a s to b e a ' m o t h e r s c i e n c e ' : " e v e r y o c e a n i c biologist s h o u l d . . , b e g r o u n d e d in the p r i n c i p l e s of g e o p h y s i c s a n d g e o c h e m i s t r y ; e v e r y c h e m i c a l or p h y s i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h e r in s o m e of the a q u a t i c a s p e c t s of b i o l o g y " (Bigelow, 1931, p.4). A c c o r d i n g to Bigelow, w h o h a d e x p e r i e n c e d the p r a c t i c a l difficulty of trying to justify p u r e s c i e n c e to his p a t r o n s at the B u r e a u of F i s h e r i e s (Brosco, 1989), o c e a n o g r a p h y could only g r o w b y t h e fusion a n d i n t e g r a t i o n of p r e v i o u s l y s e p a r a t e disciplines. H e c o n c l u d e d his l e n g t h y a r g u m e n t a b o u t the s u p p o r t of one d i s c i p l i n e b y a n o t h e r b y a s s e r t i n g that t h e r e w a s

... no n e e d to quote m o r e e x a m p l e s to s h o w that the different d i s c i p l i n e s of o c e a n o g r a p h y i n e v i t a b l y interlock, or to p r o v e the i n t e l l e c t u a l n e c e s s i t y of not only r e c o g n i z i n g b u t i n d e e d a c t i n g u p o n this unity, if w e h o p e e v e r to g a i n a t h o r o u g h u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the sea a n d its i n h a b i t a n t s . A n y a t t e m p t s (conscious or u n c o n - scious) to h o l d t h e m a p a r t can result only in f r u s t r a t i n g this h i g h aim a n d in s e t t i n g us b a c k w a r d to the s t a g e of s i m p l y g a t h e r i n g a n d a c c u m u l a t i n g facts in u n r e l a t e d c a t e g o r i e s (Bigelow, 1930, p. 89; 1931, p. 263).

T h e " o c e a n i c biology" that w a s his s p e c i a l t y (Bigelow w a s a zoologist) r e q u i r e d little further justification. Classical d i s c i p l i n e s w i t h solid institutional f o u n d a t i o n s s u c h as t a x o n o m y a n d ecology, w e r e easily i n c o r p o r a t e d into "oceanic b i o l o g y " . They, a l o n g with p h y s i o l o g y a n d bacteriology, could be b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r to b u i l d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the m a r i n e p r o d u c t i o n cycle (Bigelow. 1931. p p 130-132). This, in turn. r e q u i r e d c h e m i c a l k n o w l e d g e , u n d e r s t a n d i n g of circulation, a n d p e r h a p s e v e n of t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n of o c e a n b a s i n s w h i c h u l t i m a t e l y controlled the n a t u r e of circulation a n d thus t h e n u t r i e n t s u p p l y a n d the d i s t r i b u t i o n of organisms. " O c e a n i c b i o l o g y " t o o k its p l a c e with t h e h a r d sciences.

From m a r i n e ecology to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y 37

As Scheiber (1988, p. 226) has written, "in sum, the ' n e w o c e a n o g r a p h y ' - which i n v o l v e d not only its c o n c e p t u a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n b u t also its e m e r g e n c e as part of Big Science in the o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d scale of s p o n s o r e d research - h a d t a k e n form a n d b e g u n to flourish". A l t h o u g h he credits Sverdrup with b r i n g i n g this v i e w p o i n t to A m e r i c a n science from Europe, it seems likely to me, b a s e d on S v e r d r u p ' s o w n statements, that we c a n look to Bigelow for the c o n c e p t u a l f o u n d a t i o n s a n d the p r o g r a m m a t i c o u t h n e of m a r i n e biology's i n t e g r a t i o n into o c e a n o g r a p h y in the U n i t e d States after World War 2, b e g i n n i n g in California.

Just after the war, with the exception of the major projects in Cahfornia d e s c r i b e d above, biologists f o u n d t h e m s e l v e s in u n c h a r t e d waters in relation to o c e a n o g r a p h y . A c c o r d i n g to S c h e i b e r (1988, p. 225),

although a few p r o m i n e n t m a r i n e biologists h a d b e g u n to e x a m i n e the ecological relationships b e t w e e n biological p h e n o m e n a a n d the chemical a n d physical aspects of o c e a n e n v i r o n m e n t s , there was no real u n i t y of o c e a n studies, either c o n c e p t u a l l y or in the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the profession.

What s e e m e d clear, however, to m a r i n e biologists, was that the post-war e x p a n s i o n of o c e a n o g r a p h y w a s p a s s i n g them by, both f i n a n c i a l l y a n d professionally.

This v i e w p o i n t was s u p p o r t e d b y h i g h - l e v e l committees e x a m i n i n g the state of o c e a n o g r a p h y in the United States i n the first d e c a d e or two after the war. A n e w N A S C O ( u n r e l a t e d to the first) was c o n v e n e d in 1949 to r e v i e w the post-war status of A m e r i c a n o c e a n o g r a p h y . T h e committee predicted a m o d e s t e x p a n s i o n of A m e r i c a n o c e a n o g r a p h y that should b e b a s e d on institutional c h a n g e s in laboratories a n d universities a n d on i n c r e a s e s of f u n d i n g . "Marine biology" was a special problem.

For several years it has b e e n difficult to o b t a i n the n e c e s s a r y financial support for m a r i n e biology, as the outcome of such investigations has b e e n u n c e r t a i n . In the past, data a c c u m u l a t e d so rapidly that m u c h of it was only superficially e x a m i n e d a n d reported upon. This was d u e to the slow a n d crude m e t h o d s both at sea a n d in the laboratory. N e w a n d more q u a n t i t a t i v e m e t h o d s are necessary. N e w g e a r for use at sea while a vessel is u n d e r w a y is m the d e v e l o p m e n t a l stages, a n d n e w laboratory p r o c e d u r e s to r e p l a c e the older t i m e - c o n s u m i n g m e t h o d s of c o u n t i n g a n d i d e n t i f y i n g the various species are b e i n g tested. With the n e w u n d e r s t a n d i n g of water move- ments, it will be possible to formulate the p r o b l e m s more exactly a n d thus obviate m u c h u n n e c e s s a r y collecting of data. In short, w h e n f u n d s b e c o m e available, m a r i n e biology s h o u l d m a k e greater strides t h a n h a v e b e e n possible in the last fifty years (NASCO/NRC. 1952, p. 11).

N A S C O m e m b e r s r e c o m m e n d e d that biological o c e a n o g r a p h y be given special funding, b e c a u s e , as they stated, it, with chemical o c e a n o g r a p h y , p r e s e n t e d " m a n y of the most c h a l l e n g i n g p r o b l e m s of the sea" (NASCO/NRC, 1952, p. 27).

A d e c a d e later the same c o m p l a i n t w a s voiced b y a third NASCO, w h o s e report was p u b l i s h e d in 1959/1962 after a d e c a d e of truly a s t o n i s h i n g growth in o c e a n o g r a p h y 5. Study of "the ways of life in the sea" ("biological o c e a n o g r a p h y " was not m e n t i o n e d ) was still u n d e r - f u n d e d , b u t the k i n d of m a r i n e biology d e s c r i b e d in the c o m m i t t e e s ' report h a d b e g u n to shift. Earlier reports h a d d e s c r i b e d the m a r i n e biology a p p l i e d to the o p e n o c e a n s as a k i n d of conglomerate, variously c o m p o s e d of t a x o n o m i c work, ecological a n d z o o g e o g r a p h i c studies, m a r i n e p h y s i o l o g y a n d microbiology. In 1959, a n e w m o d e of d o i n g oceanic biology a p p e a r e d , u n d e r the h e a d i n g of " O c e a n - w i d e surveys" (NASCO/ NRC, 1959, 1962, Ch. 9, pp. 5-6).

The u l t i m a t e objective of a biological s u r v e y m u s t b e to obtain as clear a picture as possible of the c o m m u n i t i e s of living m a r i n e organisms, p o p u l a t i o n sizes, a n d productivity. M e a s u r e m e n t s should b e m a d e of the fertility a n d p r i m a r y productivity in different o c e a n areas on a s e a s o n a l basis a n d s p e c i m e n s for t a x o n o m i c a n d z o o g e o g r a p h i c a l studies should b e collected.

The e x p o n e n t of this k i n d of p r o g r a m m e , a l r e a d y u n d e r w a y in H a w a i i a n d Califor- nia. was G o r d o n A. Riley, t h e n a m e m b e r of the B i n g h a m O c e a n o g r a p h i c Laboratory at Yale University, a n d m e m b e r of the third NASCO. His career shows that more t h a n f u n d i n g was at stake in the success with which m a r i n e biology a n d other o c e a n sciences c a m e together.

G. A. RILEY AND BIOLOGICAL O C E A N O G R A P H Y

Gordon Riley b e g a n his scientific c a r e e r as a n embryologist. As a n e w g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t at Yale in 1934 he m e t the limnologist a n d ecologist G. Evelyn H u t c h i n s o n , whose personality, work a n d ideas p e r s u a d e d Riley to leave embryology for limnology. T o w a r d s the completion of his doctoral thesis i n 1937, he w e n t to sea for the first t i m e on Woods Hole's research vessel "Atlantis". Riley d i s c o v e r e d that he liked w o r k i n g at sea. a n d that the q u a n t i t a t i v e approach to lake ecology he h a d d e v e l o p e d with H u t c h i n s o n ' s e n c o u r - a g e m e n t could b e a p p l i e d to a b i g g e r a n d more v a r i e d e n v i r o n m e n t t h a n lakes. D u r i n g the next 10 years, i n t e r r u p t e d b y the war, Riley b e g a n the d e v e l o p m e n t of statistical, t h e n analytical models of p r o d u c t i o n processes i n t h e sea (Mills, 1989, Ch. 10).

Riley's early work was n o t readily accepted, nor did it fit into a comfortable professional n i c h e i n A m e r i c a n science. Riley a n d H u t c h i n s o n r e g a r d e d t h e m s e l v e s as y o u n g Turks, b r i n g i n g q u a n t i t a t i v e reform to ecology, which in the U n i t e d States a p p e a r e d to h a v e d e g e n e r a t e d into a fruitless s e a r c h for u n i f y i n g principles w i t h o u t any philosophical basis u p o n w h i c h to b a s e t h e m (for a r e v i e w of A m e r i c a n ecology, see Kingsland, 1991). H. A. Mariner, e v e n with his m o n o c h r o m a t i c view of o c e a n o g r a p h y , h a d i d e n t i f i e d the p r o b l e m d u r i n g the 1930's:

From m a r i n e ecology to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y 39

properly s p e a k of it as a science. This latter stage of d e v e l o p m e n t i n o c e a n o g r a p h y has t e n d e d to limit its scope, a n d more especially, has shifted its focus from m a r i n e biology (Marmer, 1934, p. 28).

But there was a n e x a m p l e to be followed from within ecology - m a t h e m a t i c a l p o p u l a t i o n biology of the k i n d d e v e l o p e d by R a y m o n d Pearl a n d A. J. Lotka, Vito Volterra a n d G. F. Gause, which a t t e m p t e d to u s e rigorously m a t h e m a t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s to describe, if not to explain, p o p u l a t i o n growth a n d the competitive relations of organisms (Kingsland, 1991, pp, 7-10). It was in this sense, in 1952, that Riley d e f i n e d biological o c e a n o g r a p h y as "the ecology of m a r i n e populations". He a g r e e d that m u c h of o c e a n o g - r a p h y was overly descriptive b u t that,

there h a v e b e e n attempts to go further, to u n d e r s t a n d the g e o g r a p h i c a l a n d seasonal variations of p o p u l a t i o n s in terms of basic e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors, to follow the transfer of m a t t e r a n d e n e r g y through the food chain from g r e e n p l a n t s to successive trophic levels of a n i m a l s a n d b a c k to the reservoir of the e n v i r o n m e n t , a n d to u n d e r s t a n d the physiological processes a n d f e e d i n g habits that m a k e this transfer possible. T h e s e are some of the aims of biological o c e a n o g r a p h y (Riley, 1952, p. 80).

A n d these w e r e Riley's o w n aims, realized in his q u a n t i t a t i v e models, a n d p r o m o t e d i n a l e n g t h y series of p u b l i c a t i o n s (including, especially, Riley, 1953). For Riley, biological o c e a n o g r a p h y o r i g i n a t e d in ecology, b u t a l t h o u g h it could not b e divorced from ecology, the flaws in ecology (including n o n - q u a n t i t a t i v e m a r i n e biology) required r e o r i e n t a t i o n from a g r a b - b a g of s e m i - d e f i n e d concepts to clear, stepwise analytical a p p r o a c h e s to variation in n a t u r e . O c e a n o g r a p h y provided the appropriate home for this k i n d of science, rather t h a n ecology, b e c a u s e of its q u a n t i t a t i v e n a t u r e 6. The order in w h i c h he listed the f o u n d a t i o n a l disciplines of o c e a n o g r a p h y was not r a n d o m :

O c e a n o g r a p h y m a y be roughly d e f i n e d as the application of certain basic disciplines - m a t h e m a t i c s , physics, chemistry, biology a n d geology to a n y a n d all oceanic p r o b l e m s (Riley, 1960. p. 20).

W h e n Riley wrote these lines, m a r i n e biologists h a d b e g u n to have f i n a n c i a l success in hitching their w a g o n s to the harder o c e a n sciences as biological o c e a n o g r a p h y . The U.S. National S c i e n c e F o u n d a t i o n (NSF) (created in 1950 - see Lomask, t976; E n g l a n d , 1983) first d e s i g n a t e d biological o c e a n o g r a p h y a "critical area" in 1960 ( a p p o i n t i n g an "Ad Hoc C o m m i t t e e " on the subject the s a m e year), a n d b y 1970 had c r e a t e d a special p r o g r a m m e in biological o c e a n o g r a p h y w i t h i n its Division of E n v i r o n m e n t a l Sciences. M a r i n e biology r e m a i n e d b e h i n d in the Division of Biological a n d M e d i c a l Sciences, where the two subjects previously h a d coexisted 7, Riley's solution a d d r e s s e d a p r o b l e m that was more professional t h a n financial: how to c o n d u c t a q u a n t i t a t i v e ecological science u n d e r a discredited b a n n e r . Biological o c e a n o g r a p h y provided the a n s w e r to both p r o b l e m s (Riley, I960, p. 20).

THE C ~ S S I F I C A T I O N OF SCIENCES AND T H E C L A S S I F I C A T I O N O F M E N

Office, 1967) a n d b e i n g d e f i n e d exphcitly in a w a y that gave identity a n d prestige to the k i n d s of s c i e n c e - a n d k i n d s of scientists - s u p p o r t e d from the public p u r s e . As a n e w l y - c o n s t i t u t e d third N A S C O wrote:

biological o c e a n o g r a p h y . . , is c o n c e r n e d primarily with m a r i n e o r g a n i s m s as part of the total o c e a n i c system a n d with the o c e a n as a habitat for hfe. It seeks to u n d e r s t a n d the interactions of o r g a n i s m s with their e n v i r o n m e n t a n d with each other. It seeks to u n d e r s t a n d h o w oceanic e n v i r o n m e n t s affect the distribution, b e h a v i o u r , evolution, a n d life processes of the o r g a n i s m s a n d h o w the o r g a n i s m s modify the e n v i r o n m e n t . It is particularly c o n c e r n e d with the flux of e n e r g y a n d m a t t e r t h r o u g h the m a r i n e b i o s p h e r e (NAS/NRC, 1967, p. 52).

To m a r i n e biology a n d m a r i n e biologists, the sea was s e c o n d a r y (NASCO u s e d the word "incidental") to its organisms; to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y a n d to biological o c e a n o g r a p h e r s the sea came first, u n i t i n g the various sciences that w e r e n e e d e d to u n d e r s t a n d it.

As I h a v e shown, a n y a t t e m p t to u n d e r s t a n d the relationship b e t w e e n m a r i n e biology a n d biological o c e a n o g r a p h y is d e s t i n e d to fail if it is b a s e d only u p o n definitions of those scientific disciplines. This is so b e c a u s e definitions provide only a fixed point of refer- ence: my essay has shown that only a historical e x a m i n a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s of the m a r i n e sciences c a n explain the realities of our c u r r e n t classifications of professions in them. Definitions c h a n g e b e c a u s e they reflect more t h a n the realities of n a t u r e : they are built in r e s p o n s e to c h a n g i n g n e e d s a n d aspirations. It is in this sense a n d this context that D u r k h e i m a n d M a u s s ' s hypothesis applies not just to h u m a n ordering of the n a t u r a l world b u t to the way professions fall into relation o n e to the other.

I have s h o w n that "biological o c e a n o g r a p h y " arose a n d was first u s e f u l primarily in a special context, the U n i t e d States of the 1950's a n d 1960's. where a n e w system of f u n d i n g s c i e n c e was g r o w i n g rapidly. M a r i n e biologists a n d ecologists, who h a d contri- b u t e d i n o r d i n a t e l y to the origins of o c e a n o g r a p h y , felt n e g l e c t e d , not just as scientists, b u t especially in the e x t e n t to which they could find m o n e y for their research. Their liaison with o c e a n o g r a p h y as biological o c e a n o g r a p h e r s provided not o n l y a satisfying i n c r e a s e m the b r e a d t h a n d d e p t h of their work, b u t an i n c r e a s e in their ability to find research funds. I n c r e a s e d status, m o n e y a n d scientific power came with m a r i n e biology s m a r r i a g e to o c e a n o g r a p h y as biological o c e a n o g r a p h y d u r i n g the 1950's a n d early

1960's.

F u n d i n g was not the only imperative. M a r i n e ecology, t h o u g h successful, was not particularly h i g h l y r e g a r d e d i n the h i e r a r c h i e s of A m e r i c a n science b e t w e e n t h e 1930's a n d 1960's. M a t h e m a t i c a l ecology was a w a y out for those like G o r d o n Riley, who r e g a r d e d t h e s e m a n t i c excesses of A m e r i c a n ecology with scorn. T h e m a t h e m a t i c a l ecology of the oceans, to Riley, w a s biological o c e a n o g r a p h y .

From m a r i n e e c o l o g y to biological o c e a n o g r a p h y 41

a n d federal funds to t h e m a r i n e s c i e n c e s in G e r m a n y until at least the 1960's, a n d their c o n c e n t r a t i o n on a p p l i e d p r o b l e m s like the fisheries, c o m p e t i t i o n and the s e n s e of b e i n g at a d i s a d v a n t a g e a p p e a r to h a v e b e e n at a m i n i m u m in that setting. Biological o c e a n o g - r a p h y was not n e e d e d .

If in G e r m a n y M e e r e s k u n d e or M e e r e s f o r s c h u n g p r o v i d e d an u m b r e l l a for all the m a r i n e sciences, biological o c e a n o g r a p h y in the U n i t e d States was a fusion of e c o l o g i c a l a n d physical sciences. M a r i n e biologists a t t e m p t e d to b e t t e r their positions - and certainly s u c c e e d e d financially a n d professionally - by incorporating m a r i n e c h e m i s t r y a n d e s p e c i a l l y physical o c e a n o g r a p h y into their r e c o n s t i t u t e d r e a l m of study d u r i n g the late 1950's a n d early 1960's. Biological o c e a n o g r a p h y w a s the result, a n d a l t h o u g h the n a m e was not n e w it h e l d n e w s i g n i f i c a n c e to a g r o u p of professional m a r i n e scientists in t h e U n i t e d States b e g i n n i n g in the 1960's. T h e n a m e stuck for g o o d reasons a n d has since s p r e a d well b e y o n d its original bounds. Biological o c e a n o g r a p h y r e p r e s e n t e d t h e realities of life in the o c e a n - but it also r e f l e c t e d the status, financial, p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d scientific, that m a r i n e biologists w o r k i n g on o c e a n i c p r o b l e m s h o p e d to a c h i e v e .

N O T E S

1. H e r d m a n ' s Chair. e s t a b l i s h e d in 1919. was o c c u p i e d by him for only o n e year; h e w a s s u c c e e d e d by J a m e s J o h n s t o n e (1920-1934L T h e first chairs of o c e a n o g r a p h y any- w h e r e w e r e c r e a t e d in Paris in 1906 by Albert the First of Monaco. T h e y w e r e i n c o r p o r a t e d into his Institut O c e f i n o g r a p h i q u e w h e n it was formally i n a u g u r a t e d m

1911.

2. For e x a m p l e . "biological o c e a n o g r a p h y " is u s e d in a variety of contexts by H e r d m a n , 1920 p. 3: W. E. Allen, 1927: Harvey, 1928. p. 3; K n u d s e n et al.. 1950 Riley, 1952. p. 79, 1960. p. 20; a n d only f l e e t i n g l y or indirectly in N A S C O / N R C , 1951 a n d N A S C O / NRC 1959/1962. The G e r m a n hydrobiologist Ernst H e n t s c h e l u s e d the t e r m " b i o l o g i s c h e O z e a n o g r a p h i e " in a r e c o g n i z a b l y m o d e r n w a y in a l e c t u r e to the Officers Mess on " M e t e o r " in S e p t e m b e r 1926. M y thanks to Prof. H j a l m a r T h i e l for this i n f o r m a t i o n a n d for s h o w i n g m e t h e outline of H e n t s c h e l ' s lecture. In 1989 I i m p o s e d the term u p o n all the m a r i n e r e s e a r c h i n v o l v i n g plankton d y n a m i c s from Victor H e n s e n ' s first w o r k in the 1880's t h r o u g h the 1960's (Mills. 1989; see esp. pp. 1-6).

3. Bloor's e l a b o r a t i o n of D u r k h e i m and M a u s s in support of an interests m o d e l of scientific k n o w l e d g e has b e e n no less contentious: see the e x t e n s i v e c o m m e n t a r v following his paper.

4. H e i n c k e ' s early scientific contributions h a v e b e e n e c l i p s e d (at least in the English- s p e a k i n g worId) by his directorship at H e l g o l a n d . S e e Sinclair & Solemda] (1988). 5. T h e 1952 N A S C O c o m m i t t e e p r e d i c t e d m o d e s t g r o w t h in t h e funding a n d p e r s o n n e l

6. A c u r i o u s t r a n s i t i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n i l l u s t r a t i n g t h i s p o i n t is t h e " T r e a t i s e o n m a r i n e e c o l o g y a n d p a l e o e c o l o g y " . V o l u m e 1 ( H e d g p e t h , 1957). C o n c e i v e d of p a r t l y as a m o d e r n i z a t i o n of t h e b i o l o g i c a l s e c t i o n of " T h e o c e a n s " , it c o v e r e d all t h a t w o u l d l a t e r b e c a l l e d b i o l o g i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h y , w a s u s e d b y o c e a n o g r a p h e r s , a n d c o n t a i n e d a d i d a c t i c c h a p t e r o n s t a t i s t i c s i n e c o l o g y a i m e d a t r e s o l u t e l y n o n - q u a n t i t a t i v e p r a c - t i t i o n e r s of m a r i n e e c o l o g y .

7, T h e b e s t g u i d e to t h e i n t r i c a c i e s of U.S. g o v e r n m e n t f u n d i n g of t h e m a r i n e s c i e n c e s t h r o u g h N S F a f t e r W o r l d W a r 2 w i l l b e Dr. T o b y A p p e l ' s f o r t h c o m i n g a c c o u n t of t h e U.S. N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e F o u n d a t i o n ' s s u p p o r t of m a r i n e b i o l o g y a n d r e l a t e d s c i e n c e s , I a m g r a t e f u l to Dr. A p p e l for l e t t i n g m e r e a d p a r t s of t h e m a n u s c r i p t a n d f o r d i s c u s s i o n s of t h i s p a p e r . A s k e t c h of d e v e l o p m e n t s a t t h i s t i m e f r o m t h e v i e w p o i n t of a n o c e a n o g r a p h e r ( n o n - b i o l o g i c a l ) is K n a u s s (1988). V i e w s f r o m i n s i d e t h e p o l i t i c a l p o w e r s t r u c t u r e a r e g i v e n b y W e n k (1972), a n d P r i c e (1965, p p . 2 0 9 - 2 6 9 ) s h o w s h o w c o m p l e x w a s t h e g r o w t h of U.S. o c e a n o g r a p h y i n p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d p o l i t i c a l t e r m s d u r i n g t h e 1960's.

L I T E R A T U R E C I T E D

Allen. W. E., 1927. Pressing n e e d s in the field of biological oceanography. - Bull. Scripps Instn. Oceanogr. INon-tech. Set.) I3, 1 - t 5 ,

Attlmayr, F. lEd.), 1883. H a n d b u c h der O z e a n o g r a p h i e u n d m a r i t i m e n Meteorologie. K.-K. Hof- & Staatsdr.. Wien. I-2. 1-990.

Bigelow. H. B. 1926a. Physical o c e a n o g r a p h y of the Gulf of Maine. - Bull. Bur. Fish.. Wash. 40 (2), 5 1 1 - 1 0 2 7

Bigelow. H. B.. 1926b. Plankton of the offshore waters of the Gulf of Maine. - Bull. Bur. Fish., Wash.

40 (2), 1-509.

Bigelow. H. B.. 1930, A d e v e l o p i n g view-point in oceanography. - Science N.Y 71, 84-89. Bigelow. H. B.. 1931 Oceanography, its scope, problems, and economic importance. H o u g h t o n

Mifflin. Boston. 263 pp.

Bloor, D.. 1982. D u r k h e i m & Mauss revisited. Classification a n d the sociology of k n o w l e d g e . - Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 13, 267-297.

Boguslawski. G. yon & O. Krfimmel, 1887. H a n d b u c h der O z e a n o g r a p h i e . II,: Die B e w e g u n g s f o r m e n des Meeres. E n g e l h o r n Stuttgart, 592 pp.

Brandt. K. 1921. Die zootogischen Arbeiten der Kieler Commission 1870-],920. In: Festschrift der Preussischen Kommismon zur wissenschaftlichen U n t e r s u c h u n g e n der d e u t s c h e n M e e r e zu Kiel. Lipsius & Tischer. Kiel. 76-194.

Brosco J. P.. 1989, Henry Bryant Bigelow, the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries. and i n t e n s i v e a r e a study. - Soc. Stud. Sci. 19. 239-264~

Bfickmann. A, (Ed.), 1959, Die Wieder6ffnung der Biologischen Anstalt Helgoland auf der Insel Helgoland. - Helgol~nder wiss. M e e r e s u n t e r s . 7, 1-50,

Bulnheim, H.-P., 1989. T h e Biologische Anstalt H e l g o l a n d - some historical events. - Dt. hydrogr. Z Erg.-H. (Reihe B), 21, 99-110,

Bulnheim, H, P., 1990. A century of m a r i n e zoological a n d ecological research a r o u n d H e l g o l a n d Island. Dt. hydrogr. Z. Erg.-H. (Reihe B) 22, 84-93.

Cole, F. J., 1934. "J,J." A biographical note. In: J a m e s J o h n s t o n e memorial volume. Ed. b y R. J. Daniel. Liverpool Univ. Press. Liverpool, 1-11.

Dietrich, G., 1957. A l l g e m e i n e M e e r e s k u n d e . B o m t r a e g e r , Berlin, 492 pp.

Dietrich. G. (Hrsg.), 1970. Erforschung des Meeres. U m s c h a u VerL Frankfurt, 318 pp. Durkheim. E. & Mauss. M., I963. Primitive classification. C o h e n & West, London, 96 pp.

F r o m m a r i n e e c o l o g y t o b i o l o g i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h y 4 3 F l e m i n g , R. H., 1957. P r e s e n t s t a t u s a n d f u t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t of o c e a n o g r a p h y . - Proc. Pacif. Sci.

C o n g r . 8 (3A), 1 1 7 7 - t 1 9 6 .

F l e m i n g , R. H., 1968. T h e history of e d u c a t i o n in o c e a n o g r a p h y . Dept. of O c e a n o g r a p h y , Univ. of W a s h i n g t o n , Seattle, 14 pp.

H a r v e y , H. W., 1928. Biological c h e m i s t r y a n d p h y s i c s of s e a w a t e r . C a m b r i d g e Univ. Press, C a m b r i d g e , 194 pp.

H e d g p e t h , J. W. (Ed.), 1957. T r e a t i s e o n m a r i n e e c o l o g y a n d p a l e o e c o l o g y . Geol. Soc. A m . , N e w York, 1, 1-1296.

H e i n c k e , F., 1893. Die B i o l o g i s c h e A n s t a l t a u f H e l g o l a n d . - Bot. Zbl. 54, 139-142.

H e i n c k e , F., 1896. Die B i o l o g i s c h e A n s t a l t a u f H e l g o l a n d u n d i h r e T/itigkeit im J a h r e 1893. - Wiss. M e e r e s u n t e r s . ( H e l g o l a n d ) i, 1-33.

H e i n c k e , F., 1897. Die T h / i t i g k e i t d e r Kgl. B i o l o g i s c h e n A n s t a l t a u f H e l g o l a n d . - Wiss. M e e r e s u n - ters. ( H e l g o l a n d ) 2, 5 3 7 - 5 7 9 .

H e r d m a n , W. A., 1920. O c e a n o g r a p h y a n d t h e s e a - f i s h e r i e s . - Rep. Br. Ass. A d v m t Sci. 88, 1-33. H e r d m a n , W. A., 1923. F o u n d e r s of o c e a n o g r a p h y a n d t h e i r work. Arnold, L o n d o n , 340 pp. H e s s e , M. B., 1974. T h e s t r u c t u r e of scientific i n f e r e n c e . M a c m i l l a n , L o n d o n , 309 pp.

Jilek, A. (Hrsg.), 1857. L e h r b u c h d e r O c e a n o g r a p h i e z u m G e b r a u c h e d e r k.k. M a n n e - A k a d e m i e . K.-K. Hof- & Staatsdr., Wien, 298 pp.

J o h n s t o n e , J., 1908. C o n d i t i o n s of life in t h e sea. C a m b r i d g e Univ. Press, C a m b r i d g e , 332 pp. J o h n s t o n e , J., 1923. A n i n t r o d u c t i o n to o c e a n o g r a p h y , w i t h s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e to g e o g r a p h y a n d

g e o p h y s i c s . H o d d e r & S t o u g h t o n , L o n d o n , 351 pp.

J o h n s t o n e , J., 1926. A s t u d y of t h e o c e a n s . Arnold, L o n d o n , 215 pp.

King, L. R. & J e n n i n g s , F. D., 1988. T h e e x e c u t i v e a n d t h e o c e a n s : t h r e e d e c a d e s of U n i t e d S t a t e s m a r i n e policy. - J . mar. T e c h n o l . Soc. 22, 17-32.

K i n g s l a n d , S., 1991. D e f i n i n g e c o l o g y a s a s c i e n c e . In: F o u n d a t i o n s of ecology. Ed. b y L. A. Real & J. H. Brown. Univ. of C h i c a g o Press. C h i c a g o , 1-13.

Kitsos T. A.. 1988. C o n g r e s s a n d t h e o c e a n s : s h a p i n g m a r i n e policy for t h r e e d e c a d e s . - J. Mar. T e c h n o l . Soc. 22. 33-49.

K n a u s s , J. 1988. A c a d e m i c o c e a n o g r a p h y : h o w w e got f r o m t h e r e to h e r e . - J . Mar. T e c h n o l . Soc. 22

5 - 1 1

K n u d s e n . V O., Redfield, A. C. Revelle. R. & S h r o c k R. R.. 1 9 5 0 E d u c a t i o n a n d t r a i n i n g of o c e a n o g r a p h e r s . - S c i e n c e N.Y. 111, 7 0 0 - 7 0 3

Kofoid C. A.. 1910. T h e biological s t a t i o n s of E u r o p e . U.S. B u r e a u of E d u c a n o n . W a s h i n g t o n , 360 pp. Krfimmel. O.. 1907. H a n d b u c h d e r O z e a n o g r a p h i e . B d h D i e r / i u m l i c h e n c h e m i s e h e n u n d p h y -

s i k a l i s c h e n V e r h f i l t n i s s e d e s M e e r e s . E n g e l h o r n . Stuttgart, 526 pp.

K r i i m m e l . O. 1911. H a n d b u c h d e r O z e a n o g r a p h i e . Bd. II: Die B e w e g u n g s f o r m e n d e s M e e r e s . E n g e l h o m S t u t t g a r t . 766 pp.

L o m a s k . M.. 1976. A m i n o r m i r a c l e - a n i n f o r m a l h i s t o r y of t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e F o u n d a t i o n . N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e F o u n d a t i o n . W a s h i n g t o n , 285 pp.

M a r m e r . H. A.. I934. T h e s c o p e of o c e a n o g r a p h y . In: J a m e s J o h n s t o n e m e m o r i a l volume_ Ed. by R. J. D a n i e l . Liverpool Univ. Press. Liverpool. 2 2 - 3 4 .

Mills. E. L.. 1989. Biological o c e a n o g r a p h y . C o r n e l l Univ. Press. Ithaca. 378 pp.

Mills. E. L.. 1991. T h e o c e a n o g r a p h y of t h e Pacific: G e o r g e F. M c E w e n H.U. S v e r d r u p a n d t h e origin of p h y s i c a l o c e a n o g r a p h y o n t h e w e s t c o a s t of N o r t h A m e r i c a - A n n . Sci. 48, 2 4 1 - 2 6 6 . N A S C O ( N a t i o n a l A c a d e m y of S c i e n c e s - N a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h Councill. 1952. O c e a n o g r a p h y 1951

N a t i o n a l A c a d . of S c i e n c e s W a s h i n g t o n , 36 pp.

N A S C O ( N a t i o n a l A c a d e m y of S c i e n c e s - N a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l / , 1959-1962. O c e a n o g r a p h y 1960 to 1970. N a t i o n a l A c a d . of S c i e n c e s , W a s h i n g t o n , 240 p p .

N A S C O {National A c a d e m y of S c i e n c e s - N a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h Councfl), 1967. O c e a n o g r a p h y 1966. A c h i e v e m e n t s a n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s . N a t i o n a l A c a d . of S c i e n c e s . W a s h i n g t o n , 183 pp.

P a f f e n . K.-H. & K o r t u m . G., 1984. Die G e o g r a p h i e d e s M e e r e s . - K i e l e r Geogr. Schr. 60,1-293.

Price. D. K. 1965. T h e scientific estate. H a r v a r d Univ. Press. C a m b r i d g e , 323 p p .

Riley, G. A., 1952. Biological o c e a n o g r a p h y . In: S u r v e y of bioloclical Droclress. Ed. b y G. S. A v e r y . A c a d . Press. N e w York. 2. 7 9 - 1 0 4 .

Riley, G. A, 1953. T h e o r y of g r o w t h a n d c o m p e t i t i o n in n a t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n s - J. Fish. Res. Bd C a n .

Riley, G. A., 1960. E d u c a t i o n a n d m a n p o w e r p r o b l e m s in o c e a n o g r a p h y . In: Papers: 8th C o n f e r e n c e on Scientific M a n p o w e r . National Science Foundation, W a s h i n g t o n , 20-24 (Publ. N S F 60-34). Scheiber, H. N., 1986. Pacific o c e a n resources, science a n d the law of the sea: Wilbert M. C h a p m a n

a n d the Pacific Fisheries, 1945-1970. - Ecol. Law Q. 13, 381-534.

Scheiber, H. N., 1988. Wilbert C h a p m a n a n d the revolution in U.S. Pacific O c e a n s c i e n c e a n d policy, 1945-1951. In: N a t u r e in its g r e a t e s t extent. Ed. by R. MacLeod & P. F. Rehbock. Univ. of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, 223-244.

Scheiber, H. N., 1990a. California m a r i n e r e s e a r c h a n d the f o u n d i n g of m o d e r n fisheries o c e a n o g r a - phy: CalCOFI's early years, 1947-1964. - Calif. coop. oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 31, 63-83. Scheiber, H. N., 1990b. Pacific fishery studies, 1945-1970, o c e a n o g r a p h y , geopolitics, a n d m a r i n e

fisheries e x p a n s i o n . - Dt. hydrogr. Z. Erg.-H. (Reihe B) 22, 417-421.

Sinclair, M., Loder, J. W., Gascon, D., H o m e , E. P., Perry, I. & S a n d e m a n , E. J., 1987. F i s h e r i e s n e e d s for physical o c e a n o g r a p h i c information within the Atlantic zone. - Can. tech. Rep. Fish. aquat. Sci. I568, 1-166.

Sinclair, M. & Solemdal, P., 1988. T h e d e v e l o p m e n t of "population t h i n k i n g " in fisheries biology b e t w e e n 1878 a n d 1930. - Aquat. living Resour. 1, 189-213.

Smed, J., 1990. W a l t h e r Herwig: the first p r e s i d e n t of t h e International Council for t h e Exploration of the Sea (ICES). - Dt. hydrogr. Z. Erg.-H. (Reihe B) 22, 323-329.

Sverdrup, H. U., 1947. N e w international a s p e c t s of o c e a n o g r a p h y . - Proc. Am. phil. Soc. 91, 75-78. Sverdrup, H. U., 1951. Some r e m a r k s o n the place of h y d r o g r a p h y in fisheries research. - Rapp. P.-v.

R~un. Cons. perm. int. Explor. Mer. I3I, 7.

Sverdrup, H. U., 1955. T h e place of physical o c e a n o g r a p h y in o c e a n o g r a p h i c research. - J. mar. Res.

14, 287-294.

Sverdrup, H.U., J o h n s o n , M W. & Fleming, R. H., 1942. T h e oceans. Prentice-Hall, E n g l e w o o d Cliffs, 1087 pp.

U.S. Naval O c e a n o g r a p h i c Office, 1967. Science a n d t h e sea. U.S. G o v e r n m e n t Print. Office, W a s h i n g t o n , 80 pp.

Wenk, E., 1972. T h e politics of the ocean. Univ. of W a s h i n g t o n Press, Seattle, 590 pp.