Overview
Brief Summary
Biology
Trusted
Description
Trusted
Comprehensive Description
Biology
-
Compagno, L.J.V. 1984 FAO Species Catalogue. Vol. 4. Sharks of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Part 2 - Carcharhiniformes. FAO Fish. Synop. 125(4/2):251-655. Rome: FAO. (Ref. 244)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=244&speccode=763
Trusted
Description
Common names: shark (English), tiburón (Espanol)
|
Trusted
Distribution
-
North-West Atlantic Ocean species (NWARMS)
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=2901
-
Anon. (1996). FishBase 96 [CD-ROM]. ICLARM: Los Baños, Philippines. 1 cd-rom pp.
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=5909
-
Anon. (2000). FishBase 2000 [CD-ROM]. ICLARM: Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines. 4 cd-roms pp.
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=6542
-
Compagno, L.J.V. (1984). FAO Species Catalogue No. 4. Sharks of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Part 1. Hexanchiformes to Lamniformes. FAO Fish. Synop. (125) Vol 4, Part 1. 246 pp. FAO, Rome.
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=5947
-
Gordon, D. (Ed.) (2009). New Zealand Inventory of Biodiversity. Volume One: Kingdom Animalia. 584 pp
http://www.marinespecies.org/porifera/porifera.php?p=sourcedetails&id=145244
-
Felder, D.L. and D.K. Camp (eds.), Gulf of Mexico–Origins, Waters, and Biota. Biodiversity. Texas A&M Press, College Station, Texas.
http://www.marinespecies.org/porifera/porifera.php?p=sourcedetails&id=145245
-
van der Land, J.; Costello, M.J.; Zavodnik, D.; Santos, R.S.; Porteiro, F.M.; Bailly, N.; Eschmeyer, W.N.; Froese, R. (2001). Pisces, in: Costello, M.J. et al. (Ed.) (2001). European register of marine species: a check-list of the marine species in Europe and a bibliography of guides to their identification. Collection Patrimoines Naturels, 50: pp. 357-374
http://www.marbef.org/data/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=1411
-
Borges, P.A.V., Costa, A., Cunha, R., Gabriel, R., Gonçalves, V., Martins, A.F., Melo, I., Parente, M., Raposeiro, P., Rodrigues, P., Santos, R.S., Silva, L., Vieira, P. & Vieira, V. (Eds.) (2010). A list of the terrestrial and marine biota from the Azores. Princípia, Oeiras, 432 pp.
http://www.marinespecies.org/ascidiacea/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=149079
-
Ramos, M. (ed.). 2010. IBERFAUNA. The Iberian Fauna Databank
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=149024
-
Dyntaxa (2013) Swedish Taxonomic Database. Accessed at www.dyntaxa.se [15-01-2013].
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=165516
Trusted
-
Compagno, L.J.V. 1984 FAO Species Catalogue. Vol. 4. Sharks of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Part 2 - Carcharhiniformes. FAO Fish. Synop. 125(4/2):251-655. Rome: FAO. (Ref. 244)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=244&speccode=763
Trusted
Range Description
Trusted
-
North-West Atlantic Ocean species (NWARMS)
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=2901
Trusted
Trusted
Zoogeography
See Map (including site records) of Distribution in the Tropical Eastern Pacific
Global Endemism: All species, TEP non-endemic, Circumtropical ( Indian + Pacific + Atlantic Oceans), "Transpacific" (East + Central &/or West Pacific), All Pacific (West + Central + East), East Pacific + Atlantic (East +/or West), Transisthmian (East Pacific + Atlantic of Central America), East Pacific + all Atlantic (East+West)
Regional Endemism: All species, Eastern Pacific non-endemic, Tropical Eastern Pacific (TEP) non-endemic, Continent + Island (s), Continent, Island (s)
Residency: Resident
Climate Zone: North Temperate (Californian Province &/or Northern Gulf of California), Northern Subtropical (Cortez Province + Sinaloan Gap), Northern Tropical (Mexican Province to Nicaragua + Revillagigedos), Equatorial (Costa Rica to Ecuador + Galapagos, Clipperton, Cocos, Malpelo), South Temperate (Peruvian Province )
Trusted
Range
Trusted
Physical Description
Morphology
-
Myers, R.F. 1991 Micronesian reef fishes. Second Ed. Coral Graphics, Barrigada, Guam. 298 p. (Ref. 1602)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=1602&speccode=4306
Trusted
Size
Max. size
-
Randall, J.E., G.R. Allen and R.C. Steene 1990 Fishes of the Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 506 p. (Ref. 2334)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=2334&speccode=13770
-
IGFA 2001 Database of IGFA angling records until 2001. IGFA, Fort Lauderdale, USA. (Ref. 40637)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=40637&speccode=943
-
Smith, S.W., D.W. Au and C. Show 1998 Intrinsic rebound potential of 26 species of Pacific sharks. Mar. Freshwat. Res. 49:663-678. (Ref. 31395)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=31395&speccode=2535
Trusted
Diagnostic Description
-
Myers, R.F. 1991 Micronesian reef fishes. Second Ed. Coral Graphics, Barrigada, Guam. 298 p. (Ref. 1602)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=1602&speccode=4306
Trusted
Description
-
Anon. (1996). FishBase 96 [CD-ROM]. ICLARM: Los Baños, Philippines. 1 cd-rom pp.
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=5909
Trusted
Type Information
Catalog Number: USNM 50859
Collection: Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, Division of Fishes
Preparation: Illustration
Year Collected: 1902
Locality: Diamond Head, Oahu, Hawaii, Oahu, Hawaii, United States, Hawaiian Islands, Pacific
Vessel: Albatross
- Type: Snyder, J. O. 1904. Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission. 22 (for 1902): 513, fig. 1; pl. 1.; Howe, J. C. & Springer, V. G. 1993. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology. No. 540: 8.
Trusted
Ecology
Habitat
Environment
-
Riede, K. 2004 Global register of migratory species - from global to regional scales. Final Report of the R&D-Projekt 808 05 081. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany. 329 p. (Ref. 51243)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=51243&speccode=4683
-
Mundy, B.C. 2005 Checklist of the fishes of the Hawaiian Archipelago. Bishop Museum Bulletins in Zoology. Bishop Mus. Bull. Zool. (6):1-704. (Ref. 58302)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=58302&speccode=46
-
Florida Museum of Natural History 2005 Biological profiles: oceanic whitetip shark. Retrieved on 26 August 2005, from www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Gallery/Descript/OceanicWT/OceanicWT.html. Ichthyology at the Florida Museum of Natural History: Education-Biological Profiles. FLMNH, University of Florida. (Ref. 55185)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=55185&speccode=875
Trusted
Habitat and Ecology
This is a slow-moving but quite active shark, apparently equally active at daytime or night (Compagno in prep., Ebert 2003).
Development is viviparous and embryos have a yolk sac placenta that attaches to the uterine wall of the mother (Bigelow and Schroeder 1948). Born at about 60 to 65 cm TL after a gestation period of about 10 to 12 months (Compagno in prep.), males mature at about 170 to 96 cm and females at 170 to 190 cm TL (Seki et al. 1998). Oceanic whitetip sharks grow to a large size, with some individual reaching almost 4 m. However, most known specimens are <3 m in length. Litter sizes vary from about 1 to 14 (Bass et al. 1973, Stevens 1984, Seki et al. 1998), although 15 foetuses were recorded from a female of 245 cm TL from the Red Sea (Gohar and Mazure 1964) and larger females appear to carry more young, although there may be regional variation (Bass et al. 1973). Birth is thought to occur in early summer in the northwest Atlantic and south west Indian Oceans (Bass et al. 1973), and January to March off New South Wales (Stevens 1984), whereas Seki et al. (1998) found that parturition was February to July in the North Pacific. Pregnant females of this species are less frequently found in the Indian Ocean than other sharks of this genus (Gubanov 1978). In the Central Pacific, females with small embryos have been found throughout the year, suggesting a less tight seasonality of birth (and presumably mating) than the Western Atlantic (Compagno in prep). Also, non-breeding adult females have been found to outnumber gravid females in the equatorial Central Pacific (Compagno in prep). The location of nurseries has not been reported, but very young oceanic whitetip sharks have been found well offshore along the southeastern US, suggesting offshore nurseries over the continental shelves (Compagno in prep).
Seki et al. (1998) studied the age, growth and reproduction of the oceanic whitetip in the north Pacific. They found similar growth rates in both males and females with a Von Bertalanffy equation of: Lt = 299.58 * {1 - e-0.103 x (t + 2.698)} where Lt is expressed as precaudal length in cm at age t. They used Bass et al.?s (1973) transformation of TL = 1.397 x PL for conversions to total length. Using vertebral analysis they showed that annular formation occurred in spring. Both male and female oceanic whitetips matured at 4 to 5 years of age. Smith et al. (1998) investigated the intrinsic rebound potential of Pacific sharks and found that oceanic whitetips to be among a moderate rebound potential, because of their relatively fast growth and early maturation.
This pelagic species feeds mainly on bony fishes (including tunas, barracuda, white marlin, dolphinfish, lancetfish, oarfish, threadfish, swordfish) and cephalopods and to a lesser extent, seabirds, marine mammals, stingrays, and flotsam, including garbage.
Systems
- Marine
Trusted
-
North-West Atlantic Ocean species (NWARMS)
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=2901
Trusted
-
North-West Atlantic Ocean species (NWARMS)
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=sourcedetails&id=2901
Trusted
Water temperature and chemistry ranges based on 292 samples.
Environmental ranges
Depth range (m): 48 - 4655
Temperature range (°C): 1.478 - 27.155
Nitrate (umol/L): 0.553 - 39.498
Salinity (PPS): 34.796 - 36.454
Oxygen (ml/l): 1.033 - 6.302
Phosphate (umol/l): 0.110 - 2.960
Silicate (umol/l): 0.774 - 97.395
Graphical representation
Depth range (m): 48 - 4655
Temperature range (°C): 1.478 - 27.155
Nitrate (umol/L): 0.553 - 39.498
Salinity (PPS): 34.796 - 36.454
Oxygen (ml/l): 1.033 - 6.302
Phosphate (umol/l): 0.110 - 2.960
Silicate (umol/l): 0.774 - 97.395
Note: this information has not been validated. Check this *note*. Your feedback is most welcome.
Trusted
Inshore/Offshore: Offshore Only, Offshore
Water Column Position: Surface, Near Surface, Mid Water, Water column only
Habitat: Water column
FishBase Habitat: Pelagic
Trusted
Trusted
Migration
-
Riede, K. 2004 Global register of migratory species - from global to regional scales. Final Report of the R&D-Projekt 808 05 081. Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany. 329 p. (Ref. 51243)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=51243&speccode=4683
Trusted
Trophic Strategy
-
Sierra, L.M., R. Claro and O.A. Popova 1994 Alimentacion y relaciones tróficas. p. 263-284. In Rodolfo Claro (ed.) Ecología de los Peces Marinos de Cuba. Instituto de Oceanología Academia de Ciencias de Cuba and Centro de Investigaciones de Quintana Roo, Mexico. (Ref. 26338)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=26338&speccode=71
Trusted
Feeding
Diet: octopus/squid/cuttlefish, Pelagic crustacea, bony fishes, sea snakes/mammals/turtles/birds
Trusted
Life History and Behavior
Life Cycle
-
Breder, C.M. and D.E. Rosen 1966 Modes of reproduction in fishes. T.F.H. Publications, Neptune City, New Jersey. 941 p. (Ref. 205)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=205&speccode=1256
Trusted
Life Expectancy
Lifespan, longevity, and ageing
Trusted
Reproduction
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Molecular Biology
Barcode data: Carcharhinus longimanus
There are 21 barcode sequences available from BOLD and GenBank. Below is a sequence of the barcode region Cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 (COI or COX1) from a member of the species. See the BOLD taxonomy browser for more complete information about this specimen and other sequences.
-- end --
Download FASTA File
Trusted
Statistics of barcoding coverage: Carcharhinus longimanus
Public Records: 21
Specimens with Barcodes: 35
Species With Barcodes: 1
Trusted
Conservation
Conservation Status
IUCN Red List Assessment
Red List Category
Red List Criteria
Version
Year Assessed
Assessor/s
Reviewer/s
Contributor/s
Justification
This formerly widespread and abundant large oceanic shark is subject to fishing pressure virtually throughout its range. It is caught in large numbers as a bycatch in pelagic fisheries, with pelagic longlines, probably pelagic gillnets, handlines and occasionally pelagic and even bottom trawls. Catches, particularly in international waters, are inadequately monitored. Its large fins are highly prized in international trade although the carcass is often discarded. Fishery pressure is likely to persist if not increase in future. Outside of the areas detailed below, this species is under similar fishing pressure from multiple pelagic fisheries, there are no data to suggest that declines would and have not have also occurred in these areas, given there are similar fisheries throughout the range. As such, a precautionary global assessment of Vulnerable is considered appropriate for the oceanic whitetip. Efforts are underway to improve the collection of data from some regions and effective conservation and management of this species will require international agreements.
Northwest Atlantic and Western Central Atlantic:
The oceanic whitetip shark is assessed as Critically Endangered in the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic because of the enormous declines that have been reported. Two estimates of trends in abundance from standardized catch rate indices were made from independent datasets. An analysis of the US pelagic longline logbook data between 1992 and 2000, which covers the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic regions, estimated declines of 70%. An analysis of the Gulf of Mexico, which used data from US pelagic longline surveys in the mid-1950s and US pelagic longline observer data in the late-1990s, estimated a decline of 99.3% over this forty year time period or 98% over three generations (30 years). However, changes in fishing gear and practices over this time period were not fully taken into account in the latter analysis, and there is currently debate as to whether or not these changes may have resulted in an under- or overestimation of the magnitude of these declines.
History
- 2000Lower Risk/near threatened
Trusted
Status
Trusted
Trends
Population
The population dynamics and structure of this species are unknown. Distribution appears to depend on size and sex and the nursery areas appear to be oceanic (Seki et al. 1998). Larger individuals are caught deeper than smaller ones and there is geographic and sexual segregation (Anderson and Ahmed 1993). Longline catches in the Central Pacific show that this species definitely increases in abundance as a function of increasing distance from land, and, unlike the silky shark Carcharhinus falcifomis, it does not congregate around land masses (Compagno in prep.).
In the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic enormous declines are estimated to have occurred. Two estimates of trends in abundance from standardized catch rate indices have been made from independent datasets. An analysis of the US pelagic longline logbook data between 1992 and 2000, which covers the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic regions, estimated declines of 70% (Baum et al. 2003). An analysis of the Gulf of Mexico, which used data from US pelagic longline surveys in the mid-1950s and US pelagic longline observer data in the late-1990s, estimated a decline of 99.3% over this forty year time period (Baum and Myers 2004). When trends in abundance from the former analysis are extrapolated back to the mid-1950s, they match the latter analysis almost exactly (99.8%). Over a period of three generations (30 years), the estimated decline is 98%. However, the latter study has recently been criticized because temporal changes in fishing gear and practices over the time period were not taken fully into account and the study may, therefore, have exaggerated or underestimated the magnitude of the declines (Burgess et al. 2005, Baum et al. 2005).
Population Trend
Trusted
Threats
-
IUCN 2006 2006 IUCN red list of threatened species. www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded July 2006.
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=57073
Trusted
Few data are available on the catch rate of these sharks, and this is a serious hindrance to assessing the status of this species in regions other than the Northwest Atlantic and Eastern Central Pacific. Strasburg (1958) reported that the oceanic whitetip shark constituted 28% of the total shark catch in exploratory tuna longline fishing south of 100 N latitude in the central Pacific Ocean. According to Berkeley and Campos (1988), oceanic whitetip sharks constituted 2.1% of the shark bycatch in the swordfish fishery along the east coast of Florida in 1981 to 1983. Taniuchi (1990) analysed Japanese fishery statistics and noted that this species was most commonly taken by fishery boats in the Pacific, where they made up 20 to 30% of the number of sharks taken by tuna longliners, compared to about 3 to 4% in the Indian Ocean, because the boats are fishing for southern bluefin tuna in cooler waters. Guitart Manday (1975) demonstrated a marked decline in the oceanic whitetip shark landings in Cuba from 1971 to 1973. In the Maldives, Anderson and Ahmed (1993) reported that oceanic whitetip sharks were taken commercially by pelagic shark longliners and incidentally by tuna fishermen, and that in a previous exploratory fishing survey oceanic whitetip sharks constituted 23% of all sharks caught.
Domingo (2004) reported that the Uruguayan longline fleet observer programme in 1998 to 2003 recorded catch rates of only 0.006 sharks/1,000 hooks in Uruguayan and adjacent high seas South Atlantic waters (latitude 26° to 37°, 16 to 23°C) and 0.09 sharks/1,000 hooks in international waters off the Atlantic coast of Africa. He notes that similarly infrequent records are obtained by Brazilian and Ecuadorian Atlantic longline fleets.
Trusted
Trusted
Management
Conservation Actions
Trusted
Conservation
Trusted
Relevance to Humans and Ecosystems
Benefits
Importance
-
Coppola, S.R., W. Fischer, L. Garibaldi, N. Scialabba and K.E. Carpenter 1994 SPECIESDAB: Global species database for fishery purposes. User's manual. FAO Computerized Information Series (Fisheries). No. 9. Rome, FAO. 103 p. (Ref. 171)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=171&speccode=2534
-
Allen, G.R. and R.C. Steene 1988 Fishes of Christmas Island Indian Ocean. Christmas Island Natural History Association, Christmas Island, Indian Ocean, 6798, Australia. 197 p. (Ref. 30874)
http://www.fishbase.org/references/FBRefSummary.php?id=30874&speccode=10294
Trusted
Wikipedia
Oceanic whitetip shark
The oceanic whitetip shark (Carcharhinus longimanus) is a large pelagic shark inhabiting tropical and warm temperate seas. Its stocky body is most notable for its long, white-tipped, rounded fins.
This aggressive but slow-moving fish dominates feeding frenzies, and is a danger to shipwreck or air crash survivors.[3] Recent studies show steeply declining populations because its large fins are highly valued as the chief ingredient of shark fin soup and, as with other shark species, the whitetip faces mounting fishing pressure throughout its range.[1][4]
Contents |
Taxonomy [edit]
The oceanic whitetip shark, or lesser white shark was first described by naturalist René-Primevère Lesson in his account of Louis Duperrey's 1822–1825 world-circling journey on the corvette Coquille. Lesson described two specimens found in the Tuamotu Archipelago in French Polynesia, and named the shark Squalus maou after a Polynesian word for "shark". However, Lesson's description and name were forgotten.[5][not in citation given]
It was next described by Cuban Felipe Poey in 1861 as Squalus longimanus.[5] The name Pterolamiops longimanus has also been used. The species epithet longimanus refers to the size of its pectoral fins (longimanus translates from Latin as "long hands").[6] The oceanic whitetip shark has many common names in English: Brown Milbert's sand bar shark, brown shark, nigano shark, whitetip whaler, and whitetip shark.[6]
The rules of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature are that in general the first-published description has priority; therefore the valid scientific name for the oceanic whitetip shark should be Carcharhinus maou. However, Lesson's name remained forgotten for so long that Carcharhinus longimanus, which means long-hands, remains widely accepted.[7]
Distribution and habitat [edit]
The oceanic whitetip is found globally in deep, open water, with a temperature greater than 18 °C (64 °F).[2] It prefers waters between 20 °C (68 °F) and 28 °C (82 °F) and tends to withdraw from areas when temperatures fall outside of this.[7] They were once extremely common and widely distributed, and still inhabit a wide band around the globe; however, recent studies suggest that their numbers have drastically declined.[4] An analysis of the US pelagic longline logbook data between 1992–2000 (covering the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic) estimated a decline of 70% over that period.[1]
They are found worldwide between 45° north and 43° south latitude.[5][2] In 2004, an oceanic whitetip was discovered dead on the west coast of Sweden—far beyond what was once considered the northern boundary of its range.[8]
The shark spends most of its time in the upper layer of the ocean—to a depth of 150 metres (490 ft)[2]—and prefers off-shore, deep-ocean areas. According to longline capture data, increasing distance from land correlates to a greater population of sharks.[6] Occasionally it is found close to land, in waters as shallow as 37 metres (120 ft), mainly around mid-ocean islands such as Hawaii, or in areas where the continental shelf is narrow and there is access to nearby deep water. It is typically solitary, though gatherings have been observed where food is plentiful.[7] Unlike many animals, it does not have a diurnal cycle, and is active both day and night.[6] Its swimming style is slow, with widely spread pectoral fins. Despite their habitual isolation from members of their own species, pilot fish, dolphinfish, and remora may accompany them.[6] In 1988, Jeremy Stafford-Deitsch reported seeing an individual accompanied by a shortfin pilot whale.[9]
Anatomy and appearance [edit]
C. longimanus' most distinguishing characteristics are its long, wing-like pectoral and dorsal fins. The fins are significantly larger than most other shark species, and are conspicuously rounded. The shark's nose is rounded and its eyes are circular, with nictitating membranes.[6]
C. longimanus has a 'typical', although somewhat flattened requiem shark body, often with a mildly humpbacked aspect. It is bronze, brown, bluish or grey dorsally (the colour varies by region), and white ventrally (although it may occasionally have a yellow tint). The oceanic whitetip shark is a medium-sized requiem shark. The largest specimen ever caught measured 4 m (13 ft), an exceptionally large size considering few specimens are known to exceed a length of 3 m (9.8 ft). The maximum reported weight is 170 kg (370 lb). The female is typically larger than the male by 10 cm (3.9 in). Males attain sexual maturity at 1.7 to 1.9 m (5.6 to 6.2 ft) and females about 1.8 to 2 m (5.9 to 6.6 ft).[6][7] In the Gulf of Mexico in the 1950s, the mean weight of oceanic whitetip sharks was 86.4 kg (190 lb). In the 1990s, the sharks of the species from the same area averaged only 56.1 kg (124 lb).[10]
Most of its fins (dorsal, pectoral, pelvic, and caudal) have white tips (juvenile specimens and some adults may lack these). Along with white tips, the fins may be mottled, and in young specimens can have black marks. A saddle-like marking may be apparent between first and second dorsal fins.[6] The shark has several kinds of teeth. Those in the mandible (lower jaw) have a thin serrated tip and are relatively small and triangular (somewhat fang-like). There are between 13 and 15 teeth on either side of the symphysis. The teeth in the upper jaw are triangular, but much larger and broader with entirely serrated edges—there are 14 or 15 along each side of the symphysis.[6] The denticles lie flat and typically have between five and seven ridges.[6]
Diet [edit]
C. longimanus feeds mainly on pelagic cephalopods and bony fish.[2] However, its diet can be far more varied and less selective—it is known to eat threadfins, stingrays, sea turtles, birds, gastropods, crustaceans, and mammalian carrion. The bony fish it feeds on include lancetfish, oarfish, barracuda, jacks, dolphinfish, marlin, tuna, and mackerel. Its feeding methods include biting into groups of fish and swimming through schools of tuna with an open mouth. When feeding with other species, it becomes aggressive.[7] Peter Benchley, author of Jaws, observed this shark swimming among pilot whales and eating their faeces.[11]
Behaviour [edit]
The oceanic whitetip is usually solitary and slow-moving, and tends to cruise near the top of the water column, covering vast stretches of empty water scanning for possible food sources.[6] Until the 16th century,[12] sharks were known to mariners as "sea dogs"[13] and the oceanic whitetip, the most common ship-following shark,[7] exhibits dog-like behaviour when its interest is piqued: when attracted to something that appears to be food, its movements become more avid and it will approach cautiously but stubbornly, retreating and maintaining a safe distance if driven off, but ready to rush in if the opportunity presents itself. Oceanic whitetips are not fast swimmers, but they are capable of surprising bursts of speed. Whitetips commonly compete for food with silky sharks, making up for its comparatively leisurely swimming style with aggressive displays.[7]
Groups often form when individuals converge on a food source, whereupon a feeding frenzy may occur. This seems to be triggered not by blood in the water or by bloodlust, but by the species' highly strung and goal-directed nature (conserving energy between infrequent feeding opportunities when it is not slowly plying the open ocean). The oceanic whitetip is a competitive, opportunistic predator that exploits the resource at hand, rather than avoiding trouble in favour of a possibly easier future meal.[7]
There does not seem to be segregation by sex and size. Whitetips follow schools of tuna or squid, and trail groups of cetaceans such as dolphins and pilot whales, scavenging their prey. Their instinct is to follow baitfish migrations that accompany ocean-going ships. When whaling took place in warm waters, oceanic whitetips were often responsible for much of the damage to floating carcasses.[7]
Reproduction [edit]
Mating season is in early summer in the northwest Atlantic Ocean and southwest Indian Ocean, although females captured in the Pacific have been found with embryos year round, suggesting a longer mating season there.[7] The shark is viviparous—embryos develop in utero and are fed by a placental sac. Its gestation period is one year. Litter sizes vary from one to 15 with the young born at a length of about 0.6 metres (24 in).[1] Sexual maturity is reached at close to 1.75 metres (69 in) for males and 2 metres (80 in) for females.[1]
Relation to humans [edit]
It is a commercially important species for its fins, its meat and oil. It is eaten fresh, smoked, dried and salted and its hide is used for leather.[7] It is subject to fishing pressure throughout virtually its whole range[1]—although it is more often taken as by-catch than by design, since it is drawn to longline bait that is intended for other species.[7]
Famed oceanographic researcher Jacques Cousteau described the oceanic whitetip as "the most dangerous of all sharks".[14] Despite the greater notoriety of the great white shark and other sharks habitually found nearer the shore, the oceanic whitetip is suspected to be responsible for many fatal attacks on humans, as a result of predation on survivors of shipwrecks or downed aircraft.[3][15] Such incidents are not included in common shark-attack indices for the 20th and 21st centuries, and as a result of this, the oceanic whitetip does not have the highest number of recorded incidents; only 5 recorded attacks as of 2009.[16] [17] In one incident, the torpedoing of USS Indianapolis on 30 July 1945, oceanic whitetips are believed to be responsible for many of the attacks on sailors who survived the initial sinking,[15] though most reportedly died from exposure to the elements rather than from shark attacks.[18]
Also during World War II, the Nova Scotia, a steamship carrying approximately 1,000 people near South Africa, was sunk by a German submarine. With only 192 survivors, many deaths were attributed to the whitetip.[3]
One particularly infamous oceanic whitetip was implicated in several attacks on tourists in the Red Sea near Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt in 2010, and was featured in a Shark Week episode called "Rogue Sharks". This oceanic whitetip was recognized individually by the bite mark taken out of its upper tail lobe. Accumulating evidence revealed this shark to have been conditioned to being hand fed. Upon associating the divers with an easy supply of food, it attacked the divers and snorkelers where it had seen the fish being kept; fanny packs the divers carried. This caused the shark to target the divers' buttock and thigh regions in the hope of obtaining a meal. These attacks were further worsened by the overfishing in that area of the Red Sea, effectively forcing the shark closer to shore where the attacks took place.[19]
Captivity [edit]
As the oceanic whitetip is an open water species, it fares poorly in captivity, like the mako and blue shark. Only one oceanic whitetip is known to reside in captivity, currently housed in the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Outer-Bay exhibit, making the aquarium the only known institution to successfully keep one alive in captivity.[20] This same whitetip was featured briefly in the Shark Week special "Sharks Under Glass".[21]
Conservation status [edit]
In 1969, Lineaweaver and Backus wrote of the oceanic whitetip: "[it is] extraordinarily abundant, perhaps the most abundant large animal, large being over 100 pounds [45 kg], on the face of the earth".[22] There was little further population study until 2003 when the numbers were estimated to have dropped by as much as 70% in the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic between 1992 and 2000.[1] Another study focusing on the Gulf of Mexico, using a mix of data from US pelagic longline surveys from the mid-1950s and observations from the late-1990s, estimated a decline in numbers in this location of 99.3% over this period.[4] However, changes in fishing practices and data collection methods complicate estimates.[23]
As a result of these findings its status on the IUCN Red List was moved to "Vulnerable" globally (from "Lower Risk/Near Threatened") and "Critically Endangered" in the Northwest and Western Central Atlantic areas.[1]
Under the 1995 UN Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UNFSA), coastal and fishing states are specifically required to adopt measures to conserve listed species, but little progress is visible on the oceanic whitetip.[1]
From early 2013 the shark will receive full protection in New Zealand territorial waters under the Wildlife Act 1953.[24][dated info]
See also [edit]
References [edit]
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Baum, J., Medina, E., Musick, J. A. & Smale, M. (2005). "Carcharhinus longimanus". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Retrieved 17 June 2012.
- ^ a b c d e Froese, Rainer and Pauly, Daniel, eds. (2013). "Carcharhinus longimanus" in FishBase. February 2013 version.
- ^ a b c Bass, A.J., J.D. D'Aubrey & N. Kistnasamy (1973). "Sharks of the east coast of southern Africa. 1. The genus Carcharhinus (Carcharhinidae)." Invest. Rep. Oceanogr. Res. Inst., Durban, no. 33.
- ^ a b c Baum, J.K. and Myers, R.A. (2004). "Shifting baselines and the decline of pelagic sharks in the Gulf of Mexico". Ecology Letters 7 (3): 135–45. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2003.00564.x.
- ^ a b c "Carcharhinus longimanus (Poey, 1861)". Integrated Taxonomic Information System. Retrieved 18 August 2008.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Cathleen Bester. "Oceanic Whitetip Shark". Florida Museum of Natural history. Retrieved 22 July 2006.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Leonard J. V. Compagno (1984). Sharks of the World: An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Vol. 4, Part 2. Carcharhiniformes. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. pp. 484–86, 555–61, 588. ISBN 92-5-101383-7.
- ^ Eli. "Fishwatcher". Fishwatcher. Retrieved 6 February 2006.
- ^ Stafford-Deitsch, Jeremy (1988). Shark: A Photographer's Story. Sierra Club Books. ISBN 0871567334.
- ^ "Consideration of Proposals for Amendment of Appendices I and II (CoP15 Prop. 16)". Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). March 2010.
- ^ Benchley, Peter (2002). Shark Trouble. Random House. ISBN 0812966333.
- ^ "Online Etymology Dictionary". Retrieved 2006-08-08.
- ^ RF Marx (1990). The History of Underwater Exploration. Courier Dover Publications. p. 3.
- ^ Cousteau, Jacques-Yves & Cousteau, Philippe (1970). The Shark: Splendid Savage of the Sea. Doubleday & Company, Inc.
- ^ a b Martin, R. Aidan. "Elasmo Research". ReefQuest. Retrieved 6 February 2006.
- ^ "ISAF Statistics on Attacking Species of Shark". Flmnh.ufl.edu. 2009-05-20. Retrieved 2010-07-05.
- ^ "Oceanic Whitetip". howstuffworks.com.
- ^ Stanton, Doug (2003). In Harm's Way: The Sinking of the USS Indianapolis and the Extraordinary Story of Its Survivors (1st Owl Books ed.). New York: H. Holt. ISBN 978-0-8050-7366-9.
- ^ Rogue Sharks
- ^ "Explore Our History, 2000–2001". Monterey Bay Aquarium. Retrieved 30 March 2013.
- ^ Sharks Under Glass
- ^ Thomas H. Lineaweaver III and Richard H. Backus (1969). The Natural History of Sharks. Lippincourt.
- ^ Baum, J.K., Kehler, D. and Myers, R.A. (2005). "Robust estimates of decline for pelagic shark populations in the northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico". Fisheries 30: 27–30.
- ^ "Endangered whitetip sharks to be protected". New Zealand Government. 27 September 2012. Retrieved 27 September 2012.
Further reading [edit]
- Leonard J. V. Compagno, Sharks of the Order Carcharhiniformes, Princeton University Press, 1988, ISBN 0-691-08453-X
- Leonard J. V. Compagno, FAO Species Catalogue, Vol. 4, Parts 1 and 2, Sharks of the World, 1984, Rome: FAO
- William N. Eschmeyer, Special Publication of the Center for Biodiversity Research and Information, no. 1, vol 1–3, California Academy of Sciences, 1998, ISBN 0-940228-47-5
- Richard H. Backus, Stewart Springer and Edgar L. Arnold, Jr. A contribution to the natural history of the white-tip shark, Pterolamiops longimanus (Poey), 1956, Deep-Sea Research vol. 3
- Richard Ellis, The Book of Sharks, 1976, New York: Grosset & Dunlap
- Reader's Digest, Sharks: Silent Hunters of the Deep, 1989, Sydney: Reader's Digest
- Froese, Rainer and Pauly, Daniel, eds. (2005). "Carcharhinus longimanus" in FishBase. 09 2005 version.
Unreviewed
Disclaimer
EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.
To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!



