Comparative studies of high performance swimming in sharks I. Red muscle morphometrics, vascularization and ultrastructure.

Tunas (family Scombridae) and sharks in the family Lamnidae are highly convergent for features commonly related to efficient and high-performance (i.e. sustained, aerobic) swimming. High-performance swimming by fishes requires adaptations augmenting the delivery, transfer and utilization of O(2) by the red myotomal muscle (RM), which powers continuous swimming. Tuna swimming performance is enhanced by a unique anterior and centrally positioned RM (i.e. closer to the vertebral column) and by structural features (relatively small fiber diameter, high capillary density and greater myoglobin concentration) increasing O(2) flux from RM capillaries to the mitochondria. A study of the structural and biochemical features of the mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus) RM was undertaken to enable performance-capacity comparisons of tuna and lamnid RM. Similar to tunas, mako RM is positioned centrally and more anterior in the body. Another lamnid, the salmon shark (Lamna ditropis), also has this RM distribution, as does the closely related common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus; family Alopiidae). However, in both the leopard shark (Triakis semifasciata) and the blue shark (Prionace glauca), RM occupies the position where it is typically found in most fishes; more posterior and along the lateral edge of the body. Comparisons among sharks in this study revealed no differences in the total RM quantity (approximately 2-3% of body mass) and, irrespective of position within the body, RM scaling is isometric in all species. Sharks thus have less RM than do tunas (4-13% of body mass). Relative to published data on other shark species, mako RM appears to have a higher capillary density, a greater capillary-to-fiber ratio and a higher myoglobin concentration. However, mako RM fiber size does not differ from that reported for other shark species and the total volume of mitochondria in mako RM is similar to that reported for other sharks and for tunas. Lamnid RM properties thus suggest a higher O(2) flux capacity than in other sharks; however, lamnid RM aerobic capacity appears to be less than that of tuna RM.