Literature DB >> 27774596

A novel field method to distinguish between cryptic carcharhinid sharks, Australian blacktip shark Carcharhinus tilstoni and common blacktip shark C. limbatus, despite the presence of hybrids.

G J Johnson1, R C Buckworth2, H Lee1, J A T Morgan3, J R Ovenden4, C R McMahon5,6.   

Abstract

Multivariate and machine-learning methods were used to develop field identification techniques for two species of cryptic blacktip shark. From 112 specimens, precaudal vertebrae (PCV) counts and molecular analysis identified 95 Australian blacktip sharks Carcharhinus tilstoni and 17 common blacktip sharks Carcharhinus limbatus. Molecular analysis also revealed 27 of the 112 were C. tilstoni × C. limbatus hybrids, of which 23 had C. tilstoni PCV counts and four had C. limbatus PCV counts. In the absence of further information about hybrid phenotypes, hybrids were assigned as either C. limbatus or C. tilstoni based on PCV counts. Discriminant analysis achieved 80% successful identification, but machine-learning models were better, achieving 100% successful identification, using six key measurements (fork length, caudal-fin peduncle height, interdorsal space, second dorsal-fin height, pelvic-fin length and pelvic-fin midpoint to first dorsal-fin insertion). Furthermore, pelvic-fin markings could be used for identification: C. limbatus has a distinct black mark >3% of the total pelvic-fin area, while C. tilstoni has markings with diffuse edges, or has smaller or no markings. Machine learning and pelvic-fin marking identification methods were field tested achieving 87 and 90% successful identification, respectively. With further refinement, the techniques developed here will form an important part of a multi-faceted approach to identification of C. tilstoni and C. limbatus and have a clear management and conservation application to these commercially important sharks. The methods developed here are broadly applicable and can be used to resolve species identities in many fisheries where cryptic species exist.
© 2016 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Offshore Net and Line Fishery; machine learning; shark identification

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27774596     DOI: 10.1111/jfb.13102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fish Biol        ISSN: 0022-1112            Impact factor:   2.051


  4 in total

1.  Artisanal shark fishing in Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea: biomass estimation from genetically identified shark and ray fins.

Authors:  S A Appleyard; W T White; S Vieira; B Sabub
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  'Genome skimming' with the MinION hand-held sequencer identifies CITES-listed shark species in India's exports market.

Authors:  Shaili Johri; Jitesh Solanki; Vito Adrian Cantu; Sam R Fellows; Robert A Edwards; Isabel Moreno; Asit Vyas; Elizabeth A Dinsdale
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Molecular tools for identification of shark species involved in depredation incidents in Western Australian fisheries.

Authors:  Seema Fotedar; Sherralee Lukehurst; Gary Jackson; Michael Snow
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Lost before found: A new species of whaler shark Carcharhinus obsolerus from the Western Central Pacific known only from historic records.

Authors:  William T White; Peter M Kyne; Mark Harris
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.