Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Marine and Freshwater Research Marine and Freshwater Research Society
Advances in the aquatic sciences
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Occurrence, home range and movement patterns of juvenile bull (Carcharhinus leucas) and lemon (Negaprion brevirostris) sharks within a Florida estuary

B. G. Yeiser A D , M. R. Heupel A B and C. A. Simpfendorfer A C
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Center for Shark Research, Mote Marine Laboratory, 1600 Ken Thompson Parkway, Sarasota, Florida 34236, USA.

B School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia.

C Fishing and Fisheries Research Centre, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia.

D Corresponding author. Email: byeiser@gmail.com

Marine and Freshwater Research 59(6) 489-501 https://doi.org/10.1071/MF07181
Submitted: 11 October 2007  Accepted: 27 March 2008   Published: 19 June 2008

Abstract

The movement patterns of large juveniles are poorly known for many shark species. With increasing pressure on shark populations these data are critical for the management of large coastal species. A series of acoustic receivers were positioned in Pine Island Sound, Florida, USA, to passively track the long-term movements of large juvenile bull (Carcharhinus leucas) and lemon (Negaprion brevirostris) sharks. Nineteen C. leucas and five N. brevirostris were monitored during 2003 and 2004. Individual C. leucas were present for 8 to 89 days, while N. brevirostris were present for 12 to 83 days. Weekly minimum convex polygons and kernel utilisation distributions were calculated to demonstrate the home range and core areas of use of both species. Spectral analysis demonstrated that several N. brevirostris showed repetitive diel north–south movement patterns over periods of up to 28 consecutive days. C. leucas demonstrated regular use of backwater habitats. Long-term use of estuarine areas by these large juvenile sharks suggests that estuarine coastal lagoons provide an important habitat for this portion of their life history and as such, protection of these habitats may assist in shark management and conservation.

Additional keyword: acoustic monitoring.


Acknowledgements

We thank the Mote Marine Laboratory staff that provided assistance with this project: J. Morris, J. Tyminski and T. Wiley and numerous student interns who participated in this fieldwork. A special thank you to M. Amato and A. Collins for their efforts throughout the project. This manuscript was improved by helpful feedback from three reviewers. Funding for this research was provided by the Mote Scientific Foundation and the J. N. ‘Ding’ Darling National Wildlife Refuge. All research was conducted under IACUC and sampling permits to M. R. Heupel.


References

Clark, E. , and Von Schmidt, K. (1965). Sharks of the central Gulf coast of Florida. Bulletin of Marine Science 15, 13–82.
Gruber S., and Sundstrom L. F. (2000). Negaprion brevirostris. In ‘IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species’. http://www.redlist.org (verified May 2008).

Gruber, S. H. , Nelson, D. , and Morrissey, J. (1988). Patterns of activity and space utilization of lemon sharks, Negaprion brevirostris, in a shallow Bahamian lagoon. Bulletin of Marine Science 43, 61–76.
Heupel M. R., and Hueter R. E. (2001). Use of an automated acoustic telemetry system to passively track juvenile blacktip shark movements. In ‘Electronic Tagging and Tracking in Marine Fisheries’. (Eds J. R. Sibert and J. L. Nielson.) pp. 217–236. (Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht.)

Heupel, M. R. , and Simpfendorfer, C. A. (2002). Estimation of mortality of juvenile blacktip sharks, Carcharhinus limbatus, within a nursery area using telemetry data. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59, 624–632.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Hooge P. N., and Eichenlaub W. M. (2000). ‘Animal Movements Extension to ArcView.’ (Alaska Biological Center, US Geological Survey: Anchorage.)

Klimley, A. P. , Butler, S. B. , Nelson, D. R. , and Stull, A. T. (1988). Diel movements of scalloped hammerhead sharks, Sphyrna lewini Griffith and Smith, to and from a seamount in the Gulf of California. Fisheries Biology 33, 751–761.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Nelson D. R. (1990). Telemetry studies of sharks: a review, with applications in resource management. In ‘Elasmobranchs as Living Resources’. (Eds H. L. Pratt, T. Taniuchi and S. H. Gruber.) National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Tech. Report 90, 245–262.

Nelson, D. R. , and Johnson, R. H. (1970). Diel activity rhythms in the nocturnal, bottom-dwelling sharks, Heterodontus francisci and Cephaloscyllium ventriosum. Copeia 1970, 732–739.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Simpfendorfer C., and Burgess G. H. (2000). Carcharhinus leucas. In ‘IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species’. http://www.iucnredlist.org (verified May 2008).

Simpfendorfer, C. A. , Heupel, M. R. , and Hueter, R. E. (2002). Estimation of short-term centers of activity from an array of omnidirectional hydrophones and its use in studying animal movements. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59, 23–32.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Tricas T. C., Deacon K., Last P., McCosker J., Walker T. I., and Taylor L. (1997). ‘Sharks and Rays.’ (Time-Life Books: Sydney.)

Voegeli, F. A. , Smale, M. J. , Webber, D. M. , Andrade, Y. , and O’Dor, R. K. (2001). Ultrasonic telemetry, tracking and automated monitoring technology for sharks. Environmental Biology of Fishes 60, 267–281.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Weng, K. C. , and Block, B. A. (2004). Diel vertical migration of the bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus), a species possessing orbital retia mirabilia. Fishery Bulletin 102, 221–229.


Wiley, T. R. , and Simpfendorfer, C. A. (2007). The ecology of elasmobranchs occurring in the Everglades National Park, Florida: implications for conservation and management. Bulletin of Marine Science 80, 171–189.


Worton, B. J. (1987). A review of models of home range for animal movement. Ecological Modelling 38, 277–298.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |