Historical knowledge of sharks: ancient science, earliest American encounters, and American science, fisheries, and utilization

In western civilization, the knowledge of the elasmobranch or selachian fishes (sharks and rays) begins with Aristotle (384–322 B.C.). Two of his extant works, the “Historia Animalium” and the “Generation of Animals,” both written about 330 B.C., demonstrate knowledge of elasmobranch fishes acquired by observation. Roman writers of works on natural history, such as Aelian and Pliny, who followed Aristotle, were compilers of available information. Their contribution was that they prevented the Greek knowledge from being lost, but they added few original observations. The fall of Rome, around 476 A.D., brought a period of economic regression and political chaos. These in turn brought intellectual thought to a standstill for nearly one thousand years, the period known as the Dark Ages. It would not be until the middle of the sixteenth century, well into the Renaissance, that knowledge of elasmobranchs would advance again. The works of Belon, Salviani, Rondelet, and Steno mark the beginnings of ichthyology, including the study of sharks and rays. The knowledge of sharks and rays increased slowly during and after the Renaissance, and the introduction of the Linnaean System of Nomenclature in 1735 marks the beginning of modern ichthyology. However, the first major work on sharks would not appear until the early nineteenth century. Knowledge acquired about sea animals usually follows their economic importance and exploitation, and this was also true with sharks. The first to learn about sharks in North America were the native fishermen who learned how, when, and where to catch them for food or for their oils. The early naturalists in America studied the land animals and plants; they had little interest in sharks. When faunistic works on fishes started to appear, naturalists just enumerated the species of sharks that they could discern. Throughout the U.S. colonial period, sharks were seldom utilized for food, although their liver oil or skins were often utilized. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Spiny Dogfish, Squalus acanthias, was the only shark species utilized in a large scale on both coasts. It was fished for its liver oil, which was used as a lubricant, and for lighting and tanning, and for its skin which was used as an abrasive. During the early part of the twentieth century, the Ocean Leather Company was started to process sea animals (primarily sharks) into leather, oil, fertilizer, fins, etc. The Ocean Leather Company enjoyed a monopoly on the shark leather industry for several decades. In 1937, the liver of the Soupfin Shark, Galeorhinus galeus, was found to be a rich source of vitamin A, and because the outbreak of World War II in 1938 interrupted the shipping of vitamin A from European sources, an intensive shark fishery soon developed along the U.S. West Coast. By 1939 the American shark leather fishery had transformed into the shark liver oil fishery of the early 1940’s, encompassing both coasts. By the late 1940’s, these fisheries were depleted because of overfishing and fishing in the nursery areas. Synthetic vitamin A appeared on the market in 1950, causing the fishery to be discontinued. During World War II, shark attacks on the survivors of sunken ships and downed aviators engendered the search for a shark repellent. This led to research aimed at understanding shark behavior and the sensory biology of sharks. From the late 1950’s to the 1980’s, funding from the Office of Naval Research was responsible for most of what was learned about the sensory biology of sharks.

A marine biogeographic assessment of the northwestern Hawaiian Islands

The mission of NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) is to serve as the trustee for a system of marine protected areas, to conserve, protect and enhance biodiversity. To assist in accomplishing this mission, the ONMS has developed a partnership with NOAA’s Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Branch (CCMA-BB) to conduct biogeographic assessments of marine resources within and adjacent to the marine waters of NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuaries (Kendall and Monaco, 2003). Biogeography is the study of spatial and temporal distributions of organisms, their associated habitats, and the historical and biological factors that influence species’ distributions. Biogeography provides a framework to integrate species distributions and life history data with information on the habitats of a region to characterize and assess living marine resources within a sanctuary. The biogeographic data are integrated in a Geographical Information System (GIS) to enable visualization of species’ spatial and temporal patterns, and to predict changes in abundance that may result from a variety of natural and anthropogenic perturbations or management strategies (Monaco et al., 2005; Battista and Monaco, 2004). Defining biogeographic patterns of living marine resources found throughout the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) was identified as a priority activity at a May 2003 workshop designed to outline scientifi c and management information needs for the NWHI (Alexander et al., 2004). NOAA’s Biogeography Branch and the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument (PMNM) under the direction of the ONMS designed and implemented this biogeographic assessment to directly support the research and management needs of the PMNM by providing a suite of spatially-articulated products in map and tabular formats. The major fi ndings of the biogeographic assessment are organized by chapter and listed below.

St. John, USVI mission report, NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/CCMA/Biogeography Branch, July 6 - July 17, 2009

The intent of this field mission was to continue ongoing efforts: (1) to spatially characterize and monitor the distribution, abundance and size of reef fishes, and the abundance of macroinvertebrates (conch, Diatema, lobster) within and around the waters of the Virgin Islands National Park (VIIS) and newly established Virgin Islands Coral Reef National Monument (VICR), (2) to correlate this information to in-situ data collected on associated habitat parameters, (3) to use this information to establish the knowledge base necessary for enacting management decisions in a spatial setting and (4) to establish the efficacy of those management decisions. An additional focus this year, was to evaluate a new habitat data collection method for RHA sites (MSR and some Coral Bay sites). There are concerns that the cylinder habitat data are not reflective of the fish transect habitat. To address this, we collected habitat data at 5x4 m increments along the transect in addition to data collected using the cylinder method. We are currently assessing the potential differences between these methods and preliminary results indicate that the average difference of coral cover estimates between the two methods was 4.1% (range 0-11%) based on 16 sample sites. In addition, Erinn Muller, a Nancy Foster Fellowship recipient, collaborated with the Biogeography Branch to examine the spatial distribution of coral diseases, to provide baseline information on disease prevalence over varying spatial scales and to establish spatial distributions of coral diseases around St. John.

Historical nitrogen and phosphorus loadings to the northern Gulf of Mexico

Primary productivity in many coastal systems is nitrogen (N) limited; although, phytoplankton productivity may be limited by phosphorus (P) seasonally or in portions of an estuary. Increases in loading of limiting nutrients to coastal ecosystems may lead to eutrophication (Nixon 1996). Anthropogenically enhanced eutrophication includes symptoms such as loss of seagrass beds, changes in algal community composition, increased algal (phytoplankton) blooms (Richardson et al. 2001), hypoxic or anoxic events, and fish kills (Bricker et al. 2003).