Showing posts with label Whale Sharks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Whale Sharks. Show all posts

Tuesday, 26 January 2021

Citizen scientist network records a decline in Whale Shark deaths along the Venezuelan Caribbean coast.

At the beginning of this century, observations of the Endangered Whale Shark, Rhincodon typus, in Venezuelan waters comprised 20 opportunistic records spanning the previous 51 years, suggesting they were present infrequently. A decade later, there were sightings year-round, distributed all along the coast. News of killings of whale sharks also became more frequent. In 2014, the Centro para la Investigación de Tiburones de Venezuela began to systematically document Whale Shark observations and engage fishers linked to Shark encounters. They interviewed 222 people from 17 towns, spanning Maracaibo in the west to Margarita Island in the east. Reports included 142 sightings and 21 deaths of Whale Sharks during 2014-2017, the latter by entanglement in nets, harpooning or other capture methods. Although most encounters were opportunistic or incidental, they generally lead to the killing of Sharks and the sale of their fins.

 
A Whale Shark, Rhincodon typus, off the coast of Venezuela. Centro de Investigación para Tiburones.

In a paper published in the journal Orynx on 21 September 2020, Leonardo Sánchez, Yurasi Briceño, and Rafael Tavares of the Centro de Ecología at the Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas, and the Centro para la Investigación de Tiburones de Venezuela, Dení Ramírez-Macías of Tiburón Ballena México, and Jon Paul Rodríguez, also of the Centro de Ecología at the Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones, present the results of these documenting activities.

In 2016-2020 the organization visited the 17 coastal towns where reports were more frequent. Firstly, they contacted community leaders and fishers connected to Shark kills, built personal relationships, developed trust, and explained the work of the organisation. After one or two visits, workshops at schools, fisher cooperatives or local businesses expanded the visibility of and interest in the project. An invitation to share information on social media followed. Whale Shark sightings now reach the organisation within minutes. Fishers film untangling and releasing of Sharks instead of killing them. Others film themselves swimming with Whale Sharks. Diving operators offer Whale Shark watching tours, increasing their value from a one-time sale of fins to repeat visits with tourists.

The clearest success indicator, however, is a sharp decline in Shark killing. Prior to October 2017, interviews documented 21 Shark kills. In contrast, during 2018-2020, after implementation of workshops, relationship building, and establishment of the social media network, no Whale Shark killings were reported. Although underreporting is possible, it seems likely that the news would reach the organisation, in particular as news of captures of other Shark species rapidly spread. The evidence collected through this citizen scientist network suggests that the Whale Sharks seen are mostly juveniles
(with a mean length of about 7 m), and appear in a number of localities along the Venezuelan coast. Reports have mentioned the presence of 1-10 Sharks simultaneously and during several months. Additional field data would facilitate estimation of seasonality and abundance. Although past records suggest Whale Sharks were only present occasionally along the Venezuelan coast, they are now a common occurrence and perhaps are here to stay.

See also...














Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.

Follow Sciency Thoughts on Twitter


Saturday, 18 July 2020

Rhincodon typus: Understanding the eye protection mechanism of the Whale Shark.

The eye, which is the organ that obtains optical information from the external environment, must be located on or near the surface of the body. Thus, eyeballs face a potential risk of damage from mechanical, chemical and biological hazards. Many terrestrial and aquatic Vertebrates prevent this risk by the coverage of eye surfaces with eyelids. For example, Carcharhinid and Sphyrnid Sharks have nictitating membranes or 'third eyelids', which cover their eyes completely during their feeding activities. The outer surface of this membrane is covered with dermal denticles, which likely increases its protective ability. In contrast, many other Elasmobranchs that are not equipped with nictitating membranes have to protect their eyes in different ways, such as retracting the eyeballs into the head (e.g. Electric Ray, Guitarfish), or rotating the eyeballs back into the orbit (e.g. White Shark). However, the eye-protection mechanism in many Elasmobranch species remains largely uninvestigated.

In a paper published in the journal PLoS One on 29 June 2020, Taketeru Tomita of the Okinawa Churashima Research Center and the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium, Kiyomi Murakumo, also of the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium, Shinya Komoto of the Imaging Section at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Alistair Dove of the Georgia Aquarium, Masakatsu Kino, also of the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium, Kei Miyamoto, again of the Okinawa Churashima Research Center and the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium, and Minoru Toda, once again of the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium, present the results of a study in which they examined the eye protection mechanism of the Whale Shark, Rhincodon typus (Elasmobranchii, Orectolobiformes, Rhincodontidae).

The Whale Shark is the largest Fish, reaching over 18 m in total length. Its eyes are located at the antero-lateral corner of the roughly square-shaped head, and are considerably projected from the orbit. These features are expected to increase the risk of injury to the eyes, during swimming through drifting/floating objects in water, for example. As far as Tomita et al. know, the only description about the eye protection mechanism of the Whale Shark was made in 2007 by Aiden Martin of the Fish Museum at the University of British Columbia and Banyan Tree Maldives Marine Lab, who reported as a personal observation, that the Whale Shark protects its eyes by rotating the entire eyeball back into the eye socket. However, no objective data was provided.

Eyes of the Whale Shark. (A) Anterior view of the whale shark, showing the locations of the eye (arrows). Note that Whale Shark eye is well projected from the orbit. Photo was taken in the sea near Saint Helena Island. (B) Close-up view of the left eye of a captive Whale Shark (Specimen A). Tomita et al. (2020).

Recent success in the care and maintenance of Whale Sharks in aquariums made it possible to study the eye protection mechanism in this species. The paucity of information on the eye protection mechanism of the Whale Shark may be attributed to the extremely low access to live specimens. In general, studies on large aquatic vertebrates are difficult because of their small population size, strong swimming ability, and pelagic habitat. Thus, most studies on these animals have been based on a small number of dead specimens. Tomita et al. aimed to describe, for the first time, the detailed kinematic and morphological features of Whale Shark eyes that are associated with eye protection. They did this by applying some recent techniques, such as underwater sonography and micro-computed tomography, to analyse both live and dead specimens, and to compare them with those of other Elasmobranchs.

Animal handing during ultrasound was done in strict accordance with the guidelines for Animal experiments of the Okinawa Churashima Foundation, with the same consideration for Animal care and welfare as that for 'higher' Vertebrates (Reptiles, Birds, and Mammals). However, as the guidelines stipulated, the approval from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Okinawa Churashima Foundation, required for higher Vertebrates, is waived for 'lower' Xertebrates including Fish.

Morphological observation was conducted on the formalin-preserved eyeball of a Whale Shark (OCF-F04248) in the collection at the Okinawa Churashima Research Center. This eyeball was extracted from a dead Whale Shark specimen during a dissection conducted by the aquarium staff at the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium in 2017. This specimen was originally caught as a bycatch in a net set by local fishermen in Okinawa, Japan, and was donated to the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium for scientific purposes. The anteroposterior diameter of the eyeball was 65.0 mm.

Computed tomography data were acquired from this specimen using a micro computed tomography scanner at an X-ray setting of 50 kV, at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology. Three-dimensional reconstructions were prepared using IMARIS software. The voxel size of the three-dimensional data was 18.2 μm for the observation of the entire eyeball morphology and 5.2 μm for the observation of the more detailed structure (i.e. the morphology of each denticle).

Two captive Whale Sharks (specimens A and B) were used for the external kinematical observations. Specimen A (male, 8.7 m in total length) and specimen B (female, 8.1 m in total length) have been maintained in an exhibition tank at the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium since 1996 and 2012, respectively. Kiyomi Murakumo swam with these specimens, and eye movement was recorded from approximately 30 cm away from the eye surface using a GoPro HERO5 video camera. 

Ultrasound experiments were also conducted on two captive Whale Sharks (specimens A–C). Specimens A and B were the same individuals that were used in the external kinematical observation described above, and specimen C (male, 5.54 m in total length) was maintained in an open water fish pen near the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium. A portable ultrasound device with pressure- and water-proof housing was used to document eye retraction. The transducer of the ultrasound was held 0.5 cm away from the surface of the eyeball, and acquired the ultrasound footage during eye retraction. This is possible because water conducts the ultrasound signal well, and direct contact with the skin is not required as it is in terrestrial Animals.

Numerous dermal denticles are distributed on the eye surface around the iris According to the object-counting option in the IMARIS software, the total number of eye denticles was about 2900 in OCF-P04248.

Eye denticles of the Whale Shark. (A) Distal view of left eyeball (OCF-P04248). (B) Line drawing of OCF-P04248, showing the distribution of the eye denticles (gray area). (C) Three-dimensional image of eye denticle aggregation obtained from computed tomography data. Horizontal and vertical lines of no denticle area (arrowheads) are artifacts. (D) Posterior view of panel (C). Scale bar are 0.5 cm. Tomita et al. (2020).

The general morphology of each eye denticle is characterised by a central ridge running through the longitudinal axis of the denticle and several (usually 6–8) sub-ridges branching laterally from the central ridge. Due to these ornamentations, the eye denticle presents an oakleaf-like appearance from the apical view. The base of the eye denticle is oval-shaped in basal view and comprises multiple (generally more than 8) foramina of the neck canal in the lateral view. These features are in contrast to the denticles distributed over the rest of the body that have triple ridges arranged in parallel on the apical surface of the crown, rectangle- shaped base in basal view, and 4 foramina of neck canal in the lateral view.

3D reconstruction of eye denticle obtained from computed tomography data. Tomita et al. (2020).

Eye retraction behavior was observed in all Whale Sharks (specimens A–C) examined in this study. When an object approached (in this case the diver), the eyes were retracted into the orbit with a duration (from the onset of eye retraction to complete retraction) of less than 1 second. Ultrasound data showed that the maximum retraction distance was 3.3 and 2.8 cm (50.4 and 49.8% of the eyeball diameter) in specimens A and C, respectively. During retraction, the eyeball rotated ventrally, and white connective tissue from the retrobulbar space was displaced around the eyeball and partially filled the space where the eye used to be. In general, eye retraction occurs for a short duration only when an object approaches the eyes of a specimen. However, longerterm eye retraction behavior was observed once in a captive specimen (female, 5 m in total length at the time) at the Georgia Aquarium, which kept its eyes retracted for approximately 10 days in June, 2006, immediately following its transport to Atlanta from Taiwan.

Eye retraction of Specimen A. Tomita et al. (2020).

Tomita et al.'s study confirmed that the eyes of the whale shark are covered with eye denticles. In general, the superficial layer of the Elasmobranch eye, like in other vertebrates, consists of two specialised epithelial tissues, the cornea on the iris region, and the conjunctiva on the outer iris region. Considering that these tissues are exposed and that Whale Sharks lack eyelids; the eye surface is less protected from mechanical damage than other regions of the body that are covered with mineralised dermal denticles. Thus, the covering of the eye surface with denticles in the Whale Shark is probably useful in reducing the risk of mechanical damage to the eye surface. As far as we know, eye denticles have not been found in other Elasmobranchs, including species closely related to the Whale Shark, such as the Tawny Nurse Shark, Nebrius ferrugineus, and the Zebra Shark, Stegostoma fasciatum. It seems likely, therefore, that eye denticles are a characteristic unique to the Whale Shark. It should be noted that eye armor was previously described in some fossil Chondrichthyans. In 1894 Bashford Dean reported that the Devonian Shark Cladoselache has ring-like plates around the iris ('circum-orbital plates'), and assumed that this structure was derived from dermal denticles. However, this structure is now reinterpreted as a sclerotic ring, not a denticle-derived structure.

Ultrasound footage of eye retraction in Specimen A. Tomita et al. (2020).

Denticles on the eye are morphologically distinct from denticles distributed over the rest of the body. The apical surface of the eye denticle is ornamented with laterally branched ridges, resulting in an oakleaf-like appearance. Interestingly, a similar morphology is found in the body denticles of the Horn Sharks, Heterodontus spp. A previous study classified the morphology of Shark denticles into four groups based on presumed function: defense, protection from abrasion, bioluminescence, and hydrodynamic drag reduction. Following this classification system, the denticle of the Horn Sharks is a typical example of a protection-from-abrasion-type denticle. Morphological similarity between eye denticles of the Whale Shark and body denticles of the Horn Shark supports our hypothesis that the main function of the eye denticle is mechanical protection. The denticles on the rest of the Whale Shark’s body, such as the head, trunk and fins, are characterised by parallel, triple ridges on the upper surface, presenting a drag-reduction type morphology. Interestingly, the denticles that cover the nictitating membranes of Carcharhinid and Sphyrnid S|harks have also been thought to play a role in eye protection. Though the overall morphologies of the denticles in the nictitating membranes of Carcharhinid and Sphyrnid Sharks are different from those of Whale Sharks, they both have especially thick denticle crowns, which suggests that they have a similar function of mechanical protection.

Morphology of each eye denticle of the Whale Shark. (A) Close-up of aggregated eye denticles. (B)–(D). 3D reconstruction of eye denticles obtained from computed tomography data, showing the morphological variations. (E) Dermal denticle from the skin just above of the eyeball. In (B)–(E) apical, basal, lateral, and posterior views from left to right. Scale bars 500 μm in (A) and 100 μm in (B)–(E). Tomita et al. (2020).

Tomita et al.'s study also revealed that the eye protection mechanism of the Whale Shark involves active eye retraction with partial ventral rotation. Maximum retraction distances were calculated to be approximately half (49.8% and 50.4%) of the eyeball diameter. These values are comparable to Vertebrates with highly retractable eyes, such as the Northern Leopard Frog, Rana pipiens (50%, calculated by X-ray), and Bottlenose Dolphin ,Tursiops sp. (40%–60%), The Batoid Giant Guitarfish, Rhynchobatus djiddensis, demonstrates the highest eye retraction of any Vertebrate, at 101%. Among Elasmobranchs, eye retraction ability has been well described in Batoids, but not in Sharks. Among Elasmobranchs, eye retraction ability has been well described in Batoids, but not in Sharks. As far as Tomita et al. know, the only published record of eye retraction behavior in Sharks is for the Sixgill Shark, Hexanchus griseus, which retracts the eyeball during biting behavior. However, eye retraction distance could not be calculated from this footage. It is likely that Whale Sharks maintain their vision during eye retraction because the pupils of the Whale Sharks in this study were not completely covered with surrounding white tissues when their eyes had retracted, though their visual field would be much more restricted than when their eyes are positioned normally. In fact, the Animal that kept its eyes retracted for approximately 10 days at the Georgia Aquarium appeared to have no problem navigating the exhibit space, until its eyes returned to their normal positions suddenly and, apparently spontaneously.

Eye retraction of the whale shark (Specimen A). Relaxed (A) and retracted (B) phases of the Whale Shark eye. The lower left of each panel is a schematic diagram showing the location and rotation of the eyeball. Tomita et al. (2020).

Tomita et al.'s data also revealed that eye retraction in the whale shark is accompanied by eye rotation. Eye rotation ability of the Whale Shark was previously documented although the rotating direction is different between the previous and Tomita et al.'s observations (rotating posteriorly in the previous study and ventrally, in Tomita et al.'s study). Eye retraction and rotation together was also observed in the Sixgill Shark.

Eye retraction of the Whale Shark in ultrasound data. (A) Left lateral view of the Whale Shark head, showing the location where the ultrasound data was obtained in this study. Ultrasound data are shown in the cross section passing through the maximum height of the eyeball (a–a’). (B) Relaxed (left) and retracted (right) phase of the Whale Shark eye (specimen C). Scale bar is 1 cm. (C) Schematic illustration of panel (B). Dotted line represent the distalproximal axis of the eyeball. Tomita et al. (2020).

The present study provides novel information on the visual capacity of the Whale Shark. Because of the relatively small eyes (eye diameter less than 1% of total length), it has been assumed that the Whale Shark depends little on vision compared with other senses such as olfaction. This notion was supported by the small proportional size of the midbrain (mesencephalon), which is a division of the brain that is responsible for processing the visual information. However, the highly protected features of the Whale Shark eye, in contrast to the traditional view, seems to suggest the importance of vision in this species. Interestingly the previous study showed that Whale Shark eyes actively track divers swimming 3–5 m away from the animal, suggesting that vision of the Whale Shark plays an important role in short-range perception. Such active visual tracking is also seen in the captive Whale Sharks at Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium and at the Georgia Aquarium. Future research should focus on the optical sensory capacity (e.g., visual field, acuity, colour range, and sensitivity) of the Whale Shark vision system.

See also...

https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/squalus-shiraii-new-species-of-dogfish.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/titanichthys-termieri-possible.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/07/sharks-from-early-silurian-of-tarim.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/05/californian-surfer-dies-after-being.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/04/australian-park-ranger-killed-by-shark.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/12/human-remains-found-inside-shark-caught.html
Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.

Wednesday, 13 May 2020

Californian surfer dies after being bitten by Great White Shark.

A surfer has died in California after being bitten by a Shark on Saturday 9 May 2020. Ben Kelly, 26, of Aptos in Santa Cruz County, was bitten on the leg below the knee once by the Shark, which did not continue the attack, and climbed back on his board and attempted to paddle back to the shore at off Sand Dollar Beach, but died of blood loss due to a severed popliteal artery, despite attempts at first aid by his companions. The attacking Shark was identified as probably being a subadult Great White Shark, Carcharodon carcharias, 3-4 m in length, by Shark expert Sean Van Sommeran of the Pelagic Shark Research Foundation, based upon the nature of the wound. The area is known to be home to a population of as many as 24 subadult Great Whites.

Californian surfer Ben Kelly, 26, killed in a Shark attack on 9 May 2020. Baker Carroll/The Mercury News.

Despite their fearsome reputation, attacks by Sharks are relatively rare, with only one other fatal attack ever being recorded in Santa Cruz county, Lewis Boren, 24, who died in December 1981 after being bitten while kiteboarding. Most attacks on Humans by Great White Sharks are thought to be mistakes. The species feeds principally on Marine Mammals, which we superficially resemble when we enter the water, gaining the majority of their nutrition from the thick adipose (fat) layers of these animals, which we lack. Due to this, when Great Whites do attack Humans these attacks are often broken off without the victim being consumed. Such attacks frequently result in severe injuries, but are seldom immediately fatal, with victims likely to survive if they receive immediate medical attention.

 Emergency workers on Manresa State Beach in Santa Cruz County, California, following a fatal Shark attack on a surfer on 9 May 2020. Terri Tucker/The Mercury News.

See also...

https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2020/04/australian-park-ranger-killed-by-shark.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/12/human-remains-found-inside-shark-caught.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/11/two-english-tourists-injured-in-shark.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/10/tourist-badly-imjured-in-shark-attack.html
https://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/08/sharks-and-rays-from-eocene-of.htmlhttps://sciencythoughts.blogspot.com/2019/06/mollisquama-mississippiensis-new.html
Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.

Friday, 29 August 2014

Satellite tagging Whale Sharks in the Red Sea.

Whale Sharks (Rhincodon typus) are the largest extant Shark species, and indeed the largest living Fish species of any kind, often exceeding 10 m in length. They are found in tropical and subtropical waters across the world, but there life-cycle and biology are poorly understood;  they are filter feeding planktivores, however unlike the slightly smaller Basking Sharks (Cetorhinus maximus) they do not feed directly on phytoplankton, instead actively feeding on zooplankton and small fish. Whale Sharks are listed as Vulnerable on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species. They have a long life cycle, a slow reproductive rate and a migratory lifestyle that moves them across many political boundaries, making them hard to protect for their entire life cycles. They appear to change their movement patterns at different stages in their life-cycles, with observed aggregations of Whale Sharks typically consisting of individuals of similar age. Whale Sharks have been targeted by fisheries in many parts of the Indo-Pacific region, and while many countries have now introduced laws to limit or ban exploitation, these are seldom enforced. Tellingly several countries have reported a drop in catch without a reduction in fishing effort, which is usually a sign of a declining population.

In a paper published in the journal PLoS One on 30 July 2014, a team of scientists led by Michael Berumen of the Red Sea Research Center of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology discuss the results of a satellite tagging program carried out on Whale Sharks at an aggregation site near Al-Lith, on the Saudi Arabian Red Sea coast, and the data this revealed about the biology and movements of the Sharks.

A diver approaching a Whale Shark, Rhincodon typus. Red Sea Research Center.

The study was initiated after a number or reported Shark sightings by commercial dive boats, carrying tourists to popular locations on the reefs of the southern Red Sea. Juvenile Whale Sharks (2.5-7.0 m in length) were found to be gathering on the northern Shi’b Habil Reef, about 4 km off the coast of Al-Lith during the spring period, which is roughly March to May in the southern Red Sea. Sharks were approached by divers in 2009, 2010 and 2011, who attempted to assess their size and sex before attaching a satellite tag to the dorsal fin with a long pole. 47 of the 59 tags deployed operated for 11-135 days, with a failure rate of 20.4% (12 tags that did not work at all); such a failure rate is typical for such experiments, though why it occurred is unclear.

Study sites for Rhincodon typus in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. (A) Location of the study area within the Red Sea. (B) Locations of 59 satellite tag deployments on juvenile Rhincodon typus near Al-Qunfudhah (n = 2) and Al-Lith (n = 57). (C) Detail of tag deployments around Shi’b Habil near Al-Lith (n = 55). Symbol color indicates the year of tag deployment. Berumen et al. (2014).


The Sharks were found to have a roughly evenly balanced sex ratio (18 male, 21 female and 18 undetermined individuals). Studies of older Whale Sharks in aggregations have found these gatherings to be heavily skewed in favour of one sex or the other, though at what point in their lives the Sharks segregate, or why they do so, remains unknown.

The majority of the Sharks remained within the southern Red Sea, at least for as long as the tags remained operational, apparently following a regular cycle in which they spend spring on the Saudi Arabian coast, then move to the Sudanese coast during the summer, then south to the Eritrean Coast in autumn, before recrossing the Red Sea to spend winter off the coast of Yemen, moving northwards back into Saudi Arabian waters in the spring again.

Movements of 47 Rhincodon typus tagged with satellite tags in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea: Most individuals (n = 39) made basin-scale movements within the southern Red Sea. Berumen et al. (2014).

Three of the tagged individuals moved northwards, reaching as far as Sharm el-Sheikh on the Egyptian Coast. Exactly why they did this is unclear; the waters of the southern Red Sea are considered to be more productive, and therefore presumably present better feeding opportunities to Whale Sharks, and were clearly favoured by the majority of individuals.

Movements of 47 Rhincodon typus tagged with satellite tags in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea: Three individuals performed excursions into the northern Red Sea as far as Sharm el-Sheikh. Berumen et al. (2014).

Five individuals moved out of the Red Sea altogether, moving through the Gulf of Aden then northward into the northern Indian Ocean. These individuals were in the 3-5 m size range (roughly in the middle of the sample size range, rather than at the upper end which might imply an age-related change in behaviour), and four of the individuals were of indeterminate sex, the remaining one being male, making it impossible to determine if this movement related to sexual segregation in maturing individuals. It does, however, imply that the population of Whale Sharks in the Red Sea is not separate from that in the western Indian Ocean, and that individuals move between the two groups.

Movements of 47 Rhincodon typus tagged with satellite tags in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea: Five sharks departed the Red Sea and moved into the Gulf of Aden and northern Indian Ocean. Berumen et al. (2014).

The Sharks were all spotted and tagged close to the surface, and spent the majority of their time in the upper 50 m of the water column, though only 16% of their time within 2 m of the surface. The Sharks occasionally went through periods of deeper foraging and would spend about 80% of their time in the 200-400 m zone. Deeper excursions were also fairly common, with Sharks making individual dives below 400 m, and in the case of three individuals, below 1000 m (maximum recorded depth 1360 m). The waters of the Red Sea are unusual in that there is little vertical temperature differentiation, with waters ranging from up to 34˚C at the surface to about 21.7˚C at 400 m, then remaining constant to a depth of about 3 km. This meant that diving Sharks within the Red Sea were never encountering temperatures lower than 21.7˚C, and that the depth to which they dove was probably more influenced by oxygen availability. This is interesting, as it has been suggested that the movements of Whale Sharks are largely influenced by water temperature. However the Sharks which left the Red Sea continued to dive regularly, encountering a minimum temperature of 8˚C in the Gulf of Aden, suggesting that the Sharks are able to tolerate at least short periods at much lower temperatures.

It is not clear exactly why the Whale Sharks congregate around the Shi’b Habil Reef in the spring, though it may be associated with Coral spawning, which in the southern Red Sea takes place around the full moons in April to June. This is supported by the presence of Manta Rays in the area at the same time (also large plankton feeders), though the Mantas spend the majority of their year in inshore waters around Al-Lith, and do not engage in deep-diving behaviour, suggesting there is only a limited overlap in diet between the two species.

See also…


Sawsharks (Pristiophoridae) are highly specialized...


Eagle Rays (Myliobatidae) are large Batoid Fish (bilaterally symmetrical fish with cartilaginous skeletons descended from Sharks), that predominantly live as free swimming animals in the water column rather than on the sea bottom. They are strong swimmers, and some...



Manta Rays, or Devilfish (Manta birostris) are the worlds largest Batoid Fish (bilaterally symmetrical fish with cartilaginous skeletons descended from Sharks)...


Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.