4.7 Article

Retrospective genomics highlights changes in genetic composition of tiger sharks (Galeocerdo cuvier) and potential loss of a south-eastern Australia population

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-10529-w

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Danish Council for Independent Research [DFF-6108-00583]
  2. Australian Research Grant [DP170102043]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over the last century, shark populations have declined due to overexploitation and the use of shark control programs. A study in eastern Australia found a significant change in the genetic composition of tiger sharks born between 1939 and 2015, suggesting a shift in the relative contribution of two cryptic populations.
Over the last century, many shark populations have declined, primarily due to overexploitation in commercial, artisanal and recreational fisheries. In addition, in some locations the use of shark control programs also has had an impact on shark numbers. Still, there is a general perception that populations of large ocean predators cover wide areas and therefore their diversity is less susceptible to local anthropogenic disturbance. Here we report on temporal genomic analyses of tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) DNA samples that were collected from eastern Australia over the past century. Using Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) loci, we documented a significant change in genetic composition of tiger sharks born between similar to 1939 and 2015. The change was most likely due to a shift over time in the relative contribution of two well-differentiated, but hitherto cryptic populations. Our data strongly indicate a dramatic shift in the relative contribution of these two populations to the overall tiger shark abundance on the east coast of Australia, possibly associated with differences in direct or indirect exploitation rates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available